revival4

LECTURE XIII

HOW CHURCHES CAN HELP MINISTERS

And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and

when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. But Moses’ hands were heavy;

and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron

and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the

other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. And

Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword . –

Exodus 17:11-13.

You who read your Bibles will recollect the connection in which these

verses stand. The people of God, in subduing their enemies, came to battle

against the Amalekites, and these incidents took place. It is difficult to

conceive why importance should be attached to the circumstance of

Moses holding up his hands, unless the expression is understood to denote

the attitude of prayer. But then his holding up his hands, and the success

attending it, will teach us the importance of prayer to God, for His aid in

all our conflicts with His enemies. The cooperation and support of Aaron

and Hur have been generally understood to represent the duty of Churches

to sustain and assist ministers in their work, and the importance of this

cooperation to the success of the preached gospel. I shall make this use of

it on the present occasion. As I have spoken of the duty of ministers to

labor for revivals, I shall now consider the importance of the cooperation

of the Church in producing and carrying on a revival.

There are various things, the importance of which in promoting a revival

have not been duly considered by Churches or ministers – things which,

if not attended to, will make it impossible that revivals should extend, or

even continue for any considerable time. In my last two Lectures, I have

been dwelling on the duties of ministers, for it was impossible for me to

deliver a course of lectures on revivals, without entering more or less

extensively into that department of means. I have not done with that part

of the subject, but have thought it important here to step aside and discuss

some points, in which the members of the Church must stand by and aid

the minister, if they expect to enjoy a revival. In discussing the subject, I

propose to mention:

I. Several things which Christians must avoid, if they would support

ministers.

II. Some things to which they must attend.

I. THINGS THAT MUST BE AVOIDED.

1. By all means keep clear of the idea, both in theory and practice, that a

minister alone is to promote revivals. Many professing Christians are

inclined to take a passive attitude on this subject, and feel as if they had

nothing to do. They have employed a minister, and paid him to feed them

with instruction and comfort, and now they have nothing to do but to sit

and swallow the food he gives. They are to pay his salary and attend on

his preaching – and they think that is doing a great deal. And he, on his

part, is expected to preach good, sound, comfortable doctrine, to bolster

them up, and make them feel comfortable. So, they expect to go to heaven.

I tell you THEY WILL GO TO HELL if this is their religion! That is not

the way to heaven!

Rest assured that where this spirit prevails in the Church, however good

the minister may be, the Church has taken the course to prevent a revival.

Be the minister ever so faithful, ever so devoted, ever so talented and

eloquent, though he may wear himself out, and perhaps destroy his life, he

will have little or no revival.

Where there are very few members, or none, a revival may be promoted

without any organized effort of the Church, because there is no Church to

organize; and in such a case, God accommodates His grace to the

circumstances, as He did when the apostles went out, single-handed, to

plant the Gospel in the world. I have seen instances of powerful revivals

where such was the case. But where there are means, God will have them

used. I had rather have no Church in a place, than attempt to promote a

revival in a place where there is a Church which will not work. God will be

inquired of by His people, to bestow His blessings. The counteracting

influence of a Church that will not work, is worse than infidelity. There is

no possibility of occupying neutral ground, in regard to a revival, though

some professors imagine they are neutral. If a professor will not give

himself to the work, he opposes it. Let such a one attempt to take middle

ground, and say he is “going to wait and see how affairs shape” – why,

that is the very ground the devil wants him to take. Professors can in this

way do his work a great deal more effectually than by open opposition. If

they should take open ground in opposition, everybody will say they

have no religion. But, by taking this middle course they retain their

influence, and thus do the devil’s work more effectually.

In employing ministers Churches must remember that they have only

employed leaders to lead them on to action in the cause of Christ. People

would think it strange if any country should propose to support a general,

and then let him go and fight alone! This is no more absurd, or destructive,

than for a minister to attempt to go forward alone. The Church

misconceives the design of the ministry, if the minister is left to work

alone. It is not enough that they should hear his sermons. That is only the

word of command, which the Church is bound to follow.

2. Do not complain of your minister because there is no revival, if you are

not doing your duty, for if you are not doing your duty, that alone is a

sufficient reason why there should be no revival. It is a most cruel and

abominable thing for Church members to complain of their minister, when

they themselves are fast asleep. It is very common for professors of

religion to take great credit to themselves, and quiet their own consciences,

by complaining of their ministers. And when the importance of ministers

being awake is spoken of, such people are always ready to say: “We never

shall have a revival with such a minister”; when the fact is that their

minister is much more awake than they are themselves.

Another thing is true in regard to this point, and worthy of notice. When

the Church is sunk down in a low state, professors of religion are very apt

to complain of the Church, and of the low state of religion. That intangible

and irresponsible being, the “Church,” is greatly complained of by them,

for being asleep. Their complaints of the low state of religion, and of the

coldness of the Church or of the minister, are poured out dolefully,

without any seeming realization that the Church is composed of

individuals, and that until each one will take his own case in hand,

complain of himself, and humble himself before God, and repent, and wake

up, the Church can never have any efficiency, and there never can be a

revival. If, instead of complaining of your minister, or of the Church, you

would wake up as individuals, and not complain of him or them until you

can say you are pure from the blood of all men, and are doing your duty to

save sinners, the minister would be apt to feel the justice of your

complaints, and if he would not, God would either wake him up or remove

him.

3. Do not let your minister kill himself by attempting to carry on the work

alone, while you refuse to help him. It sometimes happens that a minister

finds the ark of the Lord will not move unless he lays out his utmost

strength, and he has been so desirous of a revival that he has done this, and

has died. And he was willing to die for it. I could mention cases in which

ministers have died in consequence of their labors to promote a revival

where the Church hung back from the work.

A minister, some years since, was laboring where there was a revival; and

was visited by an elder of a Church at some distance, who wanted him to

go and preach there. There was no revival there, and never had been. The

elder complained about their state, and said they had two excellent

ministers, one of whom had worn himself completely out, and died; and

the other had exhausted himself, grown discouraged, and left them. They

were a poor and feeble Church, and their prospects very dark, unless they

could have a revival, and so he begged this minister to go and help them.

The minister at last replied by asking: “Why did you never have a

revival?” “I do not know,” said the elder; “our minister labored very hard,

but the Church did not seem to wake up, and somehow there seemed to be

no revival.” “Well, now,” said the minister, “I see what you want; you

have killed one of God’s ministers, and broke down another so that he had

to leave you; and now you want to get another there and kill him; and the

devil has sent you here to get me to go and rock your cradle for you. You

had one good minister to preach for you, but you slept on, and he exerted

himself till he absolutely died in the work. Then the Lord let you have

another, and still you lay and slept, and would not wake up to your duty.

And now you have come here in despair, and want another minister, do

you? God forbid that you should ever have another while you do as you

have done. God forbid that you should ever have a minister till the Church

will wake up to duty.”

The elder was affected, for he was a good man. The tears came into his

eyes, and he said it was no more than they deserved. “And now,” said the

minister, “will you be faithful, and go home and tell the Church what I

say? If you will, and they will be faithful, and wake up to duty, they shall

have a minister, I will warrant them that.” The elder said he would, and he

was true to his word; he went home and told the members how cruel it

was for them to ask another minister to come among them, unless they

would wake up. They felt it, and confessed their sins, and wakened up to

duty, and a minister was sent to them, and a precious and powerful revival

followed.

Churches do not realize how often their coldness and backwardness may

be absolutely the cause of the death of ministers. The state of the people,

and of sinners, rests upon their mind; they travail in soul night and day;

and they labor in season and out of season, beyond the power of the

human constitution to bear, till they wear out and die. The Church knows

not the agony of a minister’s heart, when he travails for souls, and labors

to wake up the members to help, but still sees them in the slumber of

death. Perhaps they will sometimes rouse up to spasmodic effort for a few

days, and then all is cold again. And so many a faithful minister wears

himself out and dies, and then these heartless professors are the first to

blame him for doing so much.

I recollect a case of a good minister, who went to a place where there was a

revival, and while there heard a pointed sermon to ministers. He received it

like a man of God; he did not rebel against God’s truth, but he promised

God that he never would rest until he saw a revival among his people. He

returned home and went to work; the Church would not wake up, except a

few members, and the Lord blessed them, and poured out His Spirit; but

the minister laid himself down on his bed and died, in the midst of the

revival.

4. Be careful not to complain of plain, pointed preaching, even when its

reproofs fasten on yourselves. Churches are apt to forget that a minister is

responsible only to God. They want to make rules for a minister to preach

by, so as to have his discourses fit them. If he bears down upon the

Church, and exposes the sins that prevail among the people, they call it

“personal,” and rebel against the truth. Or they say: “He should not

preach so plainly to the Church before the world, for it exposes religion;

he ought to take members by themselves and preach to the Church alone,

and not tell sinners how bad Christians are.” But there are cases where a

minister can do no less than show the house of Jacob their sins. If you ask:

“Why not do it when we are by ourselves?” I answer: “Just as if sinners

do not know you do wrong! I will preach to you by yourselves, about

your sins, when you will get together by yourselves to sin. But as the

Lord liveth, if you sin before the world, you shall be rebuked before the

world. Is it not a fact that sinners do know how you live, and that they

stumble over you into hell? Then do not blame ministers, when they see it

to be their duty to rebuke the Church openly, before the world. If you are

so proud that you cannot bear this, you need not expect a revival. Do not

call the preaching ‘too plain,’ simply because it exposes the faults of the

Church. There is no such thing as preaching too plainly.”

5. Sometimes professors take alarm lest the minister should offend the

ungodly by plain preaching. And they will begin to caution him against it,

and ask him if he had not better alter a little so as to avoid giving offense,

and the like. This fear is specially excited if some of the more wealthy and

influential members of the congregation are offended, lest they should

withdraw their support, no longer give their money to help to pay the

minister’s salary, and so cause the burden to come the heavier on the

Church. They can never have a revival in such a Church. Why, the Church

ought to pray, above all things, that the truth may come on the ungodly

like fire. What if they are offended? Christ can get along very well without

their money. Do not blame your minister, or ask him to change his mode

of preaching so as to please and conciliate the ungodly. It is of no use for a

minister to preach to the impenitent, unless he can preach the truth to

them. And it will do no good for f hem to pay for the support of the

Gospel, unless it is preached in such a way that they may be searched and

saved.

Sometimes Church members will talk among themselves about the

minister’s imprudence, and create a party, and get into a very wrong spirit,

because the wicked are displeased. There was a place where there was a

powerful revival, and great opposition. The Church became alarmed, for

fear that if the minister was not less plain and pointed, some of the

impenitent would go and join some other congregation. And so one of the

leading men in the Church was appointed to go to the minister, and ask

him not to preach quite so hard, for, if he continued to do so,

such-and-such persons would leave the congregation. The minister asked:

“Is not the preaching true?” “Yes.” “Does not God bless it?” “Yes.” “Did

you ever see the like of this work before in this place?” “No, I never did.”

“Then, ‘get thee behind me, Satan.’ You have come upon the devil’s

errand! You see God is blessing the preaching, the work is going on, and

sinners are converted every day; and now you come to get me to let down

the tone of preaching, so as to ease the minds of the ungodly.” The man

felt the rebuke, and took it like a Christian; he saw his error and submitted,

and never again was heard to find fault with plainness in preaching.

In another town where there was a revival, a woman who had some

influence (not pious) complained very much about “plain, pointed,

personal preaching,” as she called it. But, by and by, she herself became a

subject of the work. After this some of her impenitent friends reminded

her of what she used to say against the preacher for “preaching so hot.”

She said her views were altered now, and she did not care how hot the

truth was preached; not even if it was red hot!

6. Do not take part with the wicked in any way. If you do it at all, you

will strengthen their hands. If the wicked should accuse the minister of

being imprudent or personal; and if the Church members, without

admitting that the minister is so, should merely agree that “personal

preaching is wrong,” and talk about “the impropriety of personal

preaching,” the wicked would feel themselves strengthened by such

remarks. Do not unite with them at all, for they will feel that they have

you on their side against the minister; you adopt their principles, use their

language, and are understood as sympathizing with them. What is personal

preaching? No individual is ever benefitted by preaching until he is made to

feel that it means him. Such preaching is always personal. It often appears

so personal to wicked men that they feel as if they were just going to be

called out by name before the congregation. A minister was once preaching

to a congregation, and, when describing certain characters, he said: “If I

were omniscient, I could call out by name the very persons that answer to

this picture.” A man cried out: “Name me!” And he looked as if he were

going to sink into the earth. He afterwards said that he had no idea of

speaking out; but the minister described him so perfectly that he really

thought he was going to call him by name. The minister did not actually

know that there was such a man. It is common for men to think their own

conduct is described, and they complain: “Who has been telling him about

me? Somebody has been talking to him about me, and getting him to

preach at me!” I suppose I have heard of five hundred or a thousand just

such cases. Now, if the Church members will admit that it is wrong for a

minister to mean anybody in his preaching, how can he do any good? If

you be not willing your minister should mean anybody, or preach to

anybody, you had better dismiss him. To whom must he preach, if not to

the persons, the individuals before him? And how can he preach to them,

when he does not mean them?

7. If you wish to stand by your minister in promoting a revival, do not, by

your lives contradict his preaching. If he preaches that sinners are going to

hell, do not give the lie to it, and smile it all away, by your levity and

unconcern. I have heard sinners speak of the effect produced on their

minds by levity in Christians after a solemn and searching discourse. They

feel solemn and tender, and begin to feel alarmed at their condition; and

they see these professors, instead of weeping over them, all light and easy:

as much as to say: “Do not be afraid, sinners, it is not so bad, after all;

keep cool and you will do well; do you think we would laugh and joke if

you were going to hell so fast? We would not laugh if only your house

were on fire; still less if we saw you burning in it!” Of what use is it for a

minister to preach to sinners in such a state of things?

8. Do not needlessly take up the time of your minister. Ministers often

lose a great deal of time by individuals calling on them, to talk, when they

have nothing of importance to talk about, and have come on no particular

errand. The minister, of course, is glad to see his friends, and often too

willing to spend time in conversation with his people, as he loves and

esteems them. Professors of religion should remember, however, that a

minister’s time is worth more than gold, for it can be employed in that

which gold can never buy. If the minister be kept from his knees, or from

his Bible, or from his study, that they may indulge themselves in his

conversation, they do a great injury. When you have a good reason for it,

you should never be backward to call upon him, and even take up all the

time that is necessary. But if you have nothing in particular to say that is

important, keep away.

9. Be sure not to sanction anything that is calculated to divert public

attention from the subject of religion. Often, when it comes the time of

year to work, when the evenings are long, and business is light, and the

very time to make an extra effort; at this moment somebody in the Church

will “give a party,” and invite some Christian friends, so as to have it a

religious party. And then some other family must do the same, to return

the compliment. Then another, and another, till it grows into an organized

system of parties that consumes the whole winter. Abominable! This is

the grand device of the devil, because it appears so innocent, and so

proper, to promote good feeling, and increase the acquaintance of

Christians with each other. And so, instead of prayer meetings, they will

have these parties.

The evils of these parties are very great. They are often got up at great

expense; and the most abominable gluttony is practiced in them. 48 I have

been told that in some instances professed Christians have made great

entertainments, and excused the ungodly prodigality in the use of Jesus

Christ’s money, by giving what was left, after the feast was ended, to the

poor! Thus making it a virtue to feast and riot, even to surfeiting, on the

bounties of God’s providence, under pretense of benefitting the poor. This

is the same in principle with a splendid ball which was given some years

ago, in a neighboring city. The ball was got up for the benefit of the poor,

and each gentleman was to pay a certain sum, and after the ball was ended,

whatever remained of the funds thus raised, was to be given to the poor.

Truly this is strange charity: to eat, and drink, and dance, and when they

have rioted and feasted until they can enjoy it no longer, they deal out to

the poor the crumbs that have fallen from the table. I do not see, however,

why such a ball is not quite as pious as such Christian parties. The evil of

balls does not consist simply in the exercise of dancing, but in the

dissipation, and surfeiting, and temptations connected with them.

But it is said they are Christian parties, and that they are all, or nearly all,

professors of religion, who attend them. And furthermore, that they are

concluded, often, with prayer. Now I regard this as one of the worst

features about them; that after the waste of time and money, the excess in

eating and drinking, the vain conversation, and nameless fooleries, with

which such a season is filled up, an attempt should be made to sanctify it,

and palm it off upon God, by concluding it with prayer. Say what you

will, it would not be more absurd or incongruous, or impious, to close a

ball, or a theatrical performance, or a card party with prayer.

Has it come to this; that professors of religion (who profess to desire the

salvation of the world), when calls are made upon them from the four

winds of heaven, to send the Gospel, to furnish Bibles, and tracts, and

missionaries, to save the world from death, should waste large sums of

money in an evening, and then go to the Missionary Meeting and pray for

the heathen?

In some instances, I have been told, they find a salve for their consciences

in the fact that their minister attends their parties. This, of course, would

give weight to such an example; for if one professor of religion made a

party and invited the minister, others would do the same. The next step

they take may be for each to give a ball, and appoint their minister a

manager! Why not? And perhaps, by and by, he will do them the favor to

play the fiddle. In my estimation he might quite as well do it, as go and

conclude such a party with prayer. I should advise any congregation that

is calculating to have a circle of parties, in the meantime to dismiss their

minister, and let him go and preach where the people would be ready to

receive the Word and profit by it, rather than have him stay and be

grieved, and killed, by attempting to promote religion among them, while

they are engaged, heart and hand, in the service of the devil.

Professors of religion should never arrange anything that may divert public

attention from religion, without having first consulted their minister, and

made it a subject of special prayer. And if they find it will have an adverse

effect, they ought never to do it. Subjects will often come up before the

public which have this tendency; some course of Lectures, some show, or

the like. Professors ought to be wise, and understand what they are about,

and not give countenance to any such thing until they see what influence it

will have, and whether it will hinder a revival. If it will do that, let them

have nothing to do with it. Every such thing should be estimated by its

bearing upon Christ’s Kingdom.

II. SEVERAL THINGS WHICH CHURCHES MUST DO.

That is to say, things which they must do if they would promote a revival

and aid their minister.

1. They must attend to his temporal wants. A minister who gives himself

wholly to his work cannot be engaged in worldly employments, and of

course is entirely dependent on his people for the supply of his temporal

wants, including the support of his family. I need not argue this point

here, for you all understand this perfectly. It is the command of God, that

“they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel” (1 Corinthians

9:14). But now look around and see how many Churches do in this matter.

For instance, when they want a minister, they will cast about and see how

cheaply they can get one. They will calculate to a farthing how much his

salt will cost, and how much his flour, and then set his salary so low as to

subject him to extreme inconvenience to pay his way and keep his family.

A minister must have his mind at ease, to study and labor with effect, and

he cannot screw down prices, and barter, and look out for the best chances

to buy to advantage what he needs. If he be obliged to do this, his mind is

embarrassed. Unless his temporal wants are so supplied, that his thoughts

may be abstracted from them, how can he do his duty?

2. Be honest with your minister. Do not measure out and calculate with

how much salt and how many bushels of grain he can possibly get along.

Remember, you are dealing with Christ, and He calls you to place His

ministers in such a situation, that, with ordinary prudence, temporal

embarrassment may be out of the question.

3. Be punctual with him. Sometimes Churches, when they are about to

welcome a minister, have a great deal of pride about giving a salary, and

they will get up a subscription list, and make out, in the total, an amount

which they never do pay, and very likely never expected to pay. And so,

after one, two, three, or four years, the society gets three or four hundred

dollars in debt to the minister, and then they expect him to forego it. And

all the while they wonder why there is no revival! This may be the very

reason – because the Church has LIED. They have faithfully promised to

pay so much, and have not done it. God cannot consistently pour out His

Spirit on such a Church.

4. Pay him his salary without being asked. Nothing is so embarrassing to a

minister as to be obliged to dun his people for his salary. Often he creates

enemies and gives offense by being obliged to call, and call, for his money

• even then not getting it as he was promised. They would have paid it if

their credit had been at stake; but when it is nothing but conscience and the

blessing of God, they “let it lie along.” If any one of them had a note due

at the bank, you would see him careful and prompt to be on the ground

before three o’clock, lest he should lose his character. But they know the

minister will not ask them for his salary, so they are careless, and then let

it run into arrears, and he must suffer the inconvenience. This is not so

common in the city as it is in the country. But in the country I have

known some heartrending cases of distress and misery, by the negligence

and cruelty of congregations in withholding that which was due. Churches

live in habitual lying and cheating, and then wonder why they have no

revival. How can they wonder?

5. Pray for your minister. Even the apostles used to urge the Churches to

pray for them. This is more important than you imagine. Ministers do not

ask people to pray for them simply as men, nor that they may be filled

with an abundance of the Spirit’s influences, merely to promote their own

personal enjoyment. But they know that unless the Church greatly desires

a blessing upon the labors of a minister, it is tempting God for him to

expect it. How often does a minister go into his pulpit, feeling that his

heart is ready to break for the blessing of God, while he also feels that

there is no room to expect it, for there is no reason to believe that the

Church desires it! Perhaps he has been for hours on his knees in

supplication, and yet, because the Church does not desire a blessing, he

feels as if his words would bound back in his face.

I have seen Christians who would be in an agony, when the minister was

going into the pulpit, for fear his mind should be in a cloud, or his heart

cold, or he should have no unction, and so a blessing should not come. I

have labored with a man of this sort. He would pray until he got an

assurance in his mind that God would be with me in preaching, and

sometimes he would pray himself ill. I have known the time when he has

been in darkness for a season, while the people were gathering, and his

mind was full of anxiety, and he would go again and again to pray, till

finally he would come into the room with a placid face, and say: “The

Lord has come, and He will be with us.” And I do not know that I ever

found him mistaken.

I have known a Church bear up their minister in prayer from day to day,

and watch with anxiety unutterable, to see that he had the Holy Ghost

with him in his labors! When Christians feel and pray thus, oh, what

feelings and what looks are manifest in the congregation! They have felt

anxiety unutterable to have the Word come with power and take effect;

and when they see their prayer answered, and when they hear a word or a

sentence come WARM from the heart, taking effect among the people,

you can see their whole souls look out of their eyes! How different is the

case where the Christians feel that the Minster is praying, and so there is

no need for them to do so. They are mistaken. The Church must desire and

pray for the blessing. God says He will be inquired of by the house of

Israel. I wish you to feel that there can be no substitute for this.

I have seen cases in revivals, where the Church was kept in the background

in regard to prayer, and persons from abroad were called on to pray in all

the meetings. This is always unhappy, even if there should be a revival,

for the revival must be less powerful and less salutary in its influences

upon the Church. I do not know but that I have sometimes offended

Christians and ministers from other places, by continuing to call on

members of the Church to pray, and not on visitors. It was not from any

disrespect, but because the object was to get that Church which was

chiefly concerned, to desire, and pray, and agonize for a blessing.

In a certain place, a “protracted meeting” was held, with no good results;

but, on the contrary, great evils were produced. I was led to make inquiry

for the reason, and it came out that throughout their meetings not one

member of their own Church was called on to pray, but all the prayers

were made by persons from elsewhere. No wonder there was no good

done. The leader of the meeting meant well, but he undertook to promote a

revival without getting the Church into the work. He let a lazy Church lie

still and do nothing, and so there could be no good result.

Churches should pray for ministers as the agents for breaking down

sinners with the word of truth. Prayer for a minister is often made in a set

and formal way, and confined to the prayer meetings. They will say their

prayers in the old way, as they have always done: “Lord, bless Thy

ministering servant whom Thou hast stationed on this part of Zion’s

walls!” and so on; and it amounts to nothing, because there is no heart in

it. The fact often is that they never thought of praying for him in secret;

they never have agonized in private for a blessing on his labors. They may

not omit it wholly in their meetings, for if they do that, it becomes evident

that they care very little indeed about the labors of their minister. But that

is not the most important place. The way to present effectual prayer for

your minister is, when you are in secret, to wrestle with God for success

to attend his labors.

I knew a case of a minister in ill-health, who became depressed and cast

down in his mind, and was very much in darkness, so that he did not feel

as if he could preach any longer. An individual of the Church was

awakened to feel for the minister in such a situation, and to pray that he

might have the Holy Ghost to attend his preaching. One Sabbath morning,

this person’s mind was very much exercised, so that he began to pray as

soon as it was light, and prayed again and again for a blessing that day.

And the Lord in some way directed the minister within hearing of his

prayer. The person was telling the Lord just what he thought of the

minister’s situation and state of mind, and pleading, as if he would not be

denied, for a blessing. The minister went into the pulpit and preached, and

the light broke in upon him, and the Word was with power, and a revival

commenced that very day.

6. A minister should be provided for by the Church, and his support

guaranteed, irrespective of the ungodly. Otherwise he may be obliged

either to starve his family, or to keep back a part of the truth so as not to

offend sinners. I once expostulated with a minister whom I found was

afraid to come out fully with the truth. I told him I was surprised he did

not bear upon certain points. He told me he was so situated that he must

please certain men, who would be touched thereby. It was the ungodly

that chiefly supported him, and this made him dependent and temporizing.

And yet perhaps that very Church which left the minister dependent on

the ungodly for his bread, would turn round and abuse him for his want of

faith, and his fear of men. The Church ought always to say to the minister:

“We will support you; go to work; let the truth pour down on the people,

and we will stand by you.”

7. See that everything is so arranged that people can sit comfortably in the

meeting. If people do not sit in ease, it is difficult to get or to keep their

attention. And if they are not attentive, they cannot be converted. They

have come to hear for their lives, and they ought to be so situated that

they can hear with all their souls, and have nothing in their bodily position

to call for attention. Churches do not realize how important it is that the

place of meeting should be made comfortable. I do not mean showy. All

your glare and glory of rich chandeliers, and rich carpets, and splendid

pulpits, make for the opposite extreme, taking off the attention just as

effectually, and defeating every object for which a sinner should come to a

meeting. You need not expect a revival there.

8. See that the house of God is kept clean. The house of God should be

kept as clean as you want your own house to be kept. Churches are often

kept excessively slovenly. I have seen them where people used so much

tobacco, and took so little care about neatness, that it was impossible to

preach with comfort. Once, in a protracted meeting, the thing was charged

upon the Church (and they had to acknowledge it), that they paid more

money for tobacco than they did for the cause of Missions. There is an

importance in these things, which is not realized. See that man! What is he

doing? I am preaching to him about eternal life, and he is thinking about the

dirty pew.

9. It is important that the house should be just warm enough, but not too

warm. Suppose a minister comes into a house and finds it cold; he sees, as

soon as he gets in, that he might as well have stayed at home; the people

are shivering, their feet are chilled, and they feel as if they should take

cold; and the minister wishes he were at home, for he knows he cannot do

anything; but he must preach, or the congregation will be disappointed.

Or, he may find the house too warm, and the people, instead of listening

to the truth, are fanning themselves and panting for breath. By and by a

woman faints, and makes a stir, and the train of thought and feeling is all

lost, and so a whole sermon is wasted. These little things take off the

attention of people from the words of eternal life. And very often it is so,

that if you drop a single link in the chain of argument, you lose the whole,

and the people are damned, just because the careless Church does not see

to the proper regulation of these little matters.

10. The house should be well ventilated. Of all houses, a church should be

the most perfectly ventilated. If there be no change of the air, it passes

through so many lungs that it becomes bad; its vitality is exhausted, and

the people pant, they know not why, and feel an almost irresistible desire

to sleep; the minister preaches in vain; the sermon is lost, and worse than

lost. I have often wondered that this matter should be so little the subject

of thought. The elders and officials will sit and hear a whole sermon, while

the people are all but ready to die for the want of air, and the minister is

wasting his strength in preaching where the room is just like an exhausted

receiver; there they sit and never think to do anything in the matter. They

should take it upon themselves to see that this is regulated rightly; that the

house is just warm enough, and the air kept pure. How important it is that

they should be awake on this subject; that the minister may labor to the

best advantage, and the people give their undivided attention to the truth

which is to save their souls.

It is very common, when things are wrong, to have it all laid to the sexton,

or caretaker. Often, however, the sexton is not to blame. If the building is

cold and uncomfortable, very often it is because the fuel is not good, or the

stoves not suitable, or the place is so open it cannot be warmed. If it is

warm, perhaps somebody has intermeddled, and heaped on fuel without

discretion. Or, if the sexton is in fault, perhaps it is because the Church

does not pay him enough for his services, and he cannot afford to give the

attention necessary to keep the place in order. Churches sometimes screw

down the sexton’s salary to the lowest point, so that he is obliged to slight

his work. Or they will select one who is incompetent, for the sake of

getting him cheap. Let an adequate payment be made for the work, and it

can be done, and done faithfully. If one sexton will not do it rightly,

another will, and the Church must see that it is done aright. What

economy! To pay a minister’s salary, and then, for the want of a small

sum added to the sexton’s wages, everything is so out of order that the

minister’s labors are all lost, souls are lost, and your children and

neighbors go down to hell!

Sometimes this uncleanliness, and negligence, and confusion, are chargeable

to the minister. Perhaps he uses tobacco, and sets the example of defiling

the house of God. Perhaps the pulpit will be the filthiest place in the

house. I have sometimes been in pulpits that were too loathsome to be

occupied by human beings. If a minister has no more piety and decency

than this, no wonder things are “at loose ends” in the congregation. And

generally it is even so.

11. People should leave their very young children at home. I have often

known children to cry just at that stage of the services that would most

effectually destroy the effect of the meeting. If children weep, they should

instantly be removed. I have sometimes known a mother, or a nurse, sit

and toss her child, while its cries were diverting the attention of the whole

congregation.

12. The members of the Church should aid the minister by visiting from

house to house, and trying to save souls. Do not leave all this to the

minister. It is impossible he should do it, even if he were to give all his

time, and neglect his study and private prayer. Church members should

take pains and qualify themselves for this duty, so that they can be useful

in it.

13. They should hold Bible classes. Suitable individuals should be selected

to hold Bible classes, for the instruction of the young people, and where

those who are awakened or affected by the preaching, can be received and

be converted. As soon as persons are seen to be touched, let them be

invited to join the Bible class, where they will be properly treated, and

probably they will be converted. The Church should select the best men

for this service, and should all be on the look out to fill up the Bible

classes. It has been done in this congregation. It is a very common thing

when persons are impressed, that they are observed by somebody, and

invited to join the Bible class. They accept the invitation, and there they

are converted. We want more teachers, able and willing to take charge of

such classes.

14. Churches should sustain Sabbath Schools, and in this way aid their

minister in saving souls. How can a minister attend to this and preach?

Unless the Church will take off these responsibilities, and cares, and

labors, he must either neglect them, or be crushed. Let the members be

WIDE AWAKE, let them watch and bring in children to the school, teach

them faithfully, and lay themselves out to promote a revival in the school.

15. They should watch over the members of the Church. They should visit

each other, in order to stir each other up, know each other’s spiritual state,

and “consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works”

(Hebrews 10:24). The minister cannot do it, he has not time; it is

impossible he should study and prepare sermons, and at the same time

visit all the members of the Church as often as is necessary to keep them

advancing. The members are bound to watch over each other’s spiritual

welfare. But how is this done? Many do not know one another. They

meet and pass as strangers, and never ask about one another’s spiritual

condition. But if they hear anything bad of one, they go and tell it to

others. Instead of watching over them for their good, they watch for their

halting. How can they watch for good when they are not even acquainted

with each other?

16. The Church should watch for the elect of preaching. If the members are

praying for the success of the preached Word, they will watch for it, of

course. They should keep a look-out, and when any in the congregation

give evidence that the Word of God has taken hold of them, they should

follow it up. Wherever there are any exhibitions of feeling, those persons

should be attended to, instantly, and not left till their impressions wear

off. They should be spoken to, or visited, or got into the anxious meeting,

or into the Bible class, or brought to the minister. If the members do not

attend to this, they neglect their duty. If they attend to it, they may do

incalculable good.

There was a pious young woman, who lived in a very cold and wicked

place. She alone had the spirit of prayer, and she had been praying for a

blessing upon the Word. At length she saw an individual in the

congregation who seemed to be affected by the preaching, and as soon as

the minister came from the pulpit, she came forward, agitated and

trembling, and begged him to go and converse with the person

immediately. He did so, the individual was soon converted, and a revival

followed. Now, one of your stupid professors would not have seen that

that individual was awakened, but would have stumbled over half a dozen

such without noticing. Professors should watch every sermon, and see

how it affects the congregation. I do not mean that they should be

stretching their necks and staring about the house; but they should

observe, as they may, and if they find any person affected by preaching,

they should put themselves in his way, and guide him to the Savior.

17. Beware, and do not give away all the preaching to others. If you do not

take your portion, you will starve, and become like spiritual skeletons.

Christians should take their portion to themselves. Though the sermon

should be quite searching to them, they should still make the honest

application, lay it alongside their heart, and practice it, and live by it.

Otherwise, the preaching will do them no good.

18. Be ready to aid your minister in carrying out his plans for doing good.

When the minister is wise to devise plans for usefulness, and the Church

ready to execute them, they may carry all before them. But when the

members hang back from every enterprise until they are actually dragged

into it – when they are opposing every proposal, because it will cost

something, they are a dead weight upon a minister.

I was once attending a “protracted meeting,” where we were embarrassed

because there were no lamps to the building. I urged the people to get

them, but they thought the expense would be too much! I then proposed

to get them myself, and was about to do it, but found it would give

offense, and we went without. But the blessing did not come, to any great

extent. How could it? The Church began by calculating to a nicety how

much it would cost, and they would not go beyond that exact figure to

save souls from hell.

So, where a minister appoints such a meeting, such people object, because

it will cost something. If they can offer unto the Lord that which costs

nothing, they will do it. Miserable helpers they are! Such a people can

have no revival. A minister might as well have a millstone about his neck,

as such a Church. He had better leave them, if he cannot teach them better,

and go where he will not be so hampered.

19. Church members should make it a point to attend prayer meetings, and

attend in time. Some will always attend the preaching, because they have

nothing to do but to sit and hear and be entertained, but they will not

attend prayer meetings for fear they should be called on to do something.

Such members tie up the hands of the minister, and discourage his heart.

Why do they employ a minister? Is it to amuse them by preaching? Or is

it that he may teach them the will of God, that they may do it?

20. Church members ought to study and inquire what they can do, and

then do it. Christians should be trained like a band of soldiers. It is the

duty and office of a minister to train them for usefulness, to teach and

direct them, and lead them on in such a way as to produce the greatest

amount of moral influence. And then the Christians should stand their

ground and do their duty, otherwise they will be right in the way. But I

could write a book as large as this Bible before me, in detailing the various

particulars which ought to be attended to.

REMARKS.

1. You see that a minister’s want of success may not be wholly on account

of a want of wisdom in the exercise of his office. I am not excusing

negligent ministers; I never will spare ministers from the naked truth, nor

apply flattering titles to men. If they are blameworthy, let them be

blamed. And, no doubt, they are always more or less to blame when the

Word produces no effect. But it is far from being true that they are always

the principal persons to blame. Sometimes the Church is much more to

blame than the minister; if an apostle or an angel from heaven, were to

preach, he could not produce a revival of religion in that Church. Perhaps

they are dishonest to their minister, or covetous, or careless about the

conveniences of public worship. Alas! what a state many country

churches are in, where, for the want of a small expenditure, everything is

inconvenient and uncomfortable, and the labors of the preacher are lost.

They “dwell in ceiled houses” themselves, and let “the house of God lie

waste” (Haggai 1:4). Or the professors of religion counteract all the

influence of the preaching by their ungodly lives. Or perhaps their worldly

show (as in most of the Churches in this city) annihilates the influence of

the Gospel.

2. Churches should remember that they are exceedingly guilty, to employ a

minister and then not aid him in his work. The Lord Jesus Christ has sent

an ambassador to sinners, to turn them from their evil ways, and he fails of

his errand, because Churches refuse to do their duty. Instead of

recommending his message, and seconding his entreaties, and holding up

his hands in all the ways that are proper, they stand right in the way, and

contradict his message, and counteract his influence, and souls perish. No

doubt, in most of the congregations in the United States, the minister is

often hindered so much that for a great part of the time he might as well be

on a foreign mission as be there, for any effect of his preaching in the

conversion of sinners, for he has to preach over the heads of an inactive

and stupid Church.

Yet these very Churches are not willing to have their minister absent a few

days to attend a “protracted meeting.” “We cannot spare him; he is our

minister, and we like to have our minister here”; while at the same time,

they hinder all he can do at home. If he could, he would tear himself right

away, and go where there is no minister, and where the people would be

willing to receive the Gospel. But there he must stay, though he cannot get

the Church into a state to have a revival once in three years, to last three

months at a time. It. might be well for him to say to the Church:

“Whenever you are determined to take one of these long naps, I wish you

would let me know it, so that I can go and labor somewhere else in the

meantime, till you are ready to wake again.”

3. Many Churches cannot be blessed with a revival, because they are

“sponging” out of other Churches, and out of the treasury of the Lord, for

the support of their minister, when they are abundantly able to support

him themselves. Perhaps they are depending on the Home Missionary

Society, or on other Churches, while they are not exercising any self

-denial for the sake of the Gospel. I have been amazed to see how some

Churches live. One Church, as I have said, actually confessed that the

members spent more money for tobacco than they gave for Missions. And

yet they had no minister, because “they were not able to support one”!

There is actually one man in that Church who is himself able to support a

minister, but still they have no minister and no preaching!

The Churches have not been instructed in their duty on this subject. I

stopped in a place where there was no preaching. I inquired of an elder in

the Church why it was so, and he said it was “because they were so

poor.” I asked him how much he was worth; he did not give me a direct

answer, but said that another elder’s income was about five thousand

dollars a year; and I finally found out that this man’s was about the same.

“Here,” said I, “are two elders, each of you able to support a minister, and

because you cannot get outside help, you have no preaching. ‘Why, if you

had preaching’ it would not be blessed.” Finally, he confessed that he was

able to support a minister, and the two together agreed that they would do

it.

It is common for Churches to ask for help, when in fact they do not need

any help, and when it would be a great deal better for them to support

their own minister. If they get funds from the Home Missionary Society,

when they ought to raise sufficient themselves, they may expect the curse

of the Lord upon them, and this will be a sufficient reason for the Gospel

proving to them a curse, rather than a blessing. Of how many might it be

said: “Ye have robbed God, even this whole Church (Malachi. 3:9).

I know a Church which employed a minister for half the time, and felt

unable to pay his salary for that. A Women’s Working Society in a

neighboring town appropriated their funds to this object, and assisted this

Church in paying the minister’s salary. The result was, as might be

expected; he did them little or no good. They had no revival under his

preaching, nor could they ever expect any, while acting on such a

principle. There was one m an in that congregation who could support a

minister all the time. I was informed by a member, that the Church

members were supposed to be worth two hundred thousand dollars. Now

if this be true, here is a Church with an income, at seven per cent., of

fourteen thousand dollars a year, who felt themselves too poor to pay two

hundred dollars for the support of a minister to preach half the time, but

would suffer the women of a neighboring town to work with their own

hands to aid them in paying the sum. Among the elders of this Church, I

found, too, that several used tobacco; two of them, however, subsequently

signed a covenant, written on the blank leaf of their Bible, in which they

pledged themselves to abandon that sin for ever.

It was in a great measure simply for want of right instruction that this

Church was pursuing such a course, for, when the subject was taken up,

and their duty laid before them, the wealthy man of whom I am speaking

said that he would pay the whole salary himself, if he thought it would not

be resented by the congregation, and do more hurt than good; and that if

the Church would procure a minister, and go ahead and raise a part of his

salary, he would make up the remainder. They can now not only support

a minister half the time, but all the time, and pay his salary themselves.

And they will find it good and profitable to do so.

As I have gone from place to place laboring in revivals, I have always

found that Churches were blessed in proportion to their liberality. Where

they have manifested a disposition to support the Gospel, and to pour out

their substance liberally into the treasury of the Lord, they have been

blessed both in spiritual and in temporal things. But where they have been

parsimonious, and let the minister preach for them for little or nothing,

these Churches have been cursed instead of blessed. And, as a general

thing, in revivals of religion, I have found it to be true that young converts

are most inclined to join those Churches which are most liberal in making

efforts to support the Gospel.

The Churches are very much in the dark on this subject. They have not

been taught their duty. I have, in many instances, found an exceeding

readiness to respond, when the subject was laid before them. I knew an

elder who was talking about getting a minister for half the time, because

the Church was poor, although his own income was considerable. I asked

him whether his income would not enable him alone to support a minister

all the time? He said it would. And on being asked what other use he could

make of the Lord’s money which he possessed, that would prove so

beneficial to the interest of Christ’s Kingdom, as to employ a minister not

only half, but all the time, in his own town, he concluded to set himself

about it. A minister has been obtained accordingly, and I believe they find

no difficulty in paying him his full salary.

The fact is, that a minister can do but little by preaching only half the

time. If on one Sabbath an impression be made, it is lost before a fortnight

comes round. As a matter of economy, a Church should lay itself out to

support the Gospel all the time. If they get the right sort of a minister, and

keep him steadily at work, they may have a revival, and thus the ungodly

will be converted, and come in and help them; so that in one year they

may have a great accession to their strength. But if they employ a minister

only half the time, year after year may roll away, while sinners are going

to hell, and no accession be made to the strength of the Church from the

ranks of the ungodly.

The fact is, that professors of religion have not been made to feel that all

their possessions are the Lord’s. Hence they have talked about giving their

property for the support of the Gospel! As if the Lord Jesus Christ were

a beggar, and they were called upon to support His Gospel as an act of

almsgiving!

A certain merchant was paying a large part of his minister’s salary: one of

the members of the Church was relating the fact to a minister from another

place, and spoke of the sacrifice which this merchant was making. At this

moment the merchant came in. “Brother,” said the minister, “you are a

merchant. Suppose you employ a clerk to sell goods, and a schoolmaster

to teach your children; and you order your clerk to pay your

schoolmaster, out of the store, such an amount, for his services in teaching.

Now, suppose your clerk gave out that he had to pay this schoolmaster

his salary, and should speak of the sacrifices that he was making to do it:

what would you say to this?” “Why,” said the merchant, “I should say it

was ridiculous.” “Well,” said the minister, “God employs you to sell

goods as His clerk, and your minister He employs to teach His children,

and He requires you to pay the salary out of the income of the store.

Now, do you call this your sacrifice, and say that you are making a great

sacrifice to pay this minister’s salary? No: you are just as much bound to

sell goods for God as he is to preach for God. You have no more right to

sell goods for the purpose of laying up money than he has to preach the

Gospel for the same purpose. You are bound to be as pious, and aim as

singly at the glory of God, in selling goods, as he is in preaching the

Gospel. And thus you are as fully to give up your whole time for the

service of God as he does. You and your family may lawfully live out of

the profits of this store, and so may the minister and his family, just as

lawfully, If you sell goods from these motives, selling goods is just as

much serving God as preaching; and a man who sells goods on these

principles, and acts in conformity to them, is just as pious – just as much

in the service of God – as he is who preaches the Gospel. Every man is

bound to serve God in his calling; the minister by teaching; the merchant

by selling goods; the farmer by tilling his fields; and the lawyer and the

physician by plying the duties of their professions. It is equally unlawful

for any one of these to labor for the meat that perisheth. All they do is to

be for God, and all they earn, after comfortably supporting their families,

is to be dedicated to the spread of the Gospel and the salvation of the

world.”

It has long enough been supposed that ministers must be more pious than

other men, that they must not love the world, that they must labor for

God: that they must live as frugally as possible, and lay out their whole

time, and health, and strength, and life, to build up the Kingdom of Jesus

Christ. This is true. But although other men are not called to labor in the

same field, and to give up their time to public instruction, yet they are just

as absolutely bound to consider their whole time as God’s; and have no

more right to love the world, or accumulate wealth, or lay it up for their

children, or spend it upon their lusts, than ministers have.

It is high time for the Church to be acquainted with these principles. The

Home Missionary Society may labor till the Day of Judgment to convert

people, but will never succeed, till the Churches are led to understand and

feel their duty in this respect. Why, the very fact that they are asking and

receiving aid in supporting their minister from the Society while they are

able to support him themselves, is probably the very reason why his

labors among them are not more blessed.

I would that the American Home Missionary Society possessed a hundred

times the means that it now does, of aiding feeble Churches that are unable

to help themselves. But it is neither good economy nor piety to give funds

to those who are able, but unwilling, to support the Gospel. For it is in

vain to attempt to help them, while they are able, but unwilling, to help

themselves.

If the Missionary Society had a ton of gold, it would be no charity to give

it to such a Church. But let the Church bring in all the tithes to God’s

storehouse, and He will open the windows of heaven and pour down a

blessing (Malachi 3:10). But let the Churches know assuredly that, if they

are unwilling to help themselves to the extent of their ability, they show

the reason why such small success attends the labors of their ministers.

Here they are, “sponging” their support from the Lord’s treasury! How

many Churches lay out their money for tea, and coffee, and tobacco, and

then come and ask aid from the Home Missionary Society! I will protest

against aiding a people who use tea and tobacco, and live without the least

self-denial, wanting to offer God only that which costs them nothing (2

Samuel 24:24).

Finally: if they mean to be blessed, let them do their duty – all their duty,

put their shoulder to the wheel, gird on the Gospel armor, and come up to

the work. Then, if the Church is in the field, the car of salvation will move

on, though all hell oppose, and sinners will be converted and saved. But if

a Church will leave all the labor to the minister, and sit still and look on

while he is working, and themselves doing nothing but complain of him, they

will not only fail of a revival of religion, but, if they continue slothful

and censorious, will, by and by, find themselves in hell for their

disobedience and unprofitableness in the service of Christ.

LECTURE XIV

MEASURES TO PROMOTE REVIVALS

These men, being Jews, do exceedingly trouble our city, and teach customs,

which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being Romans.

• Acts 16:20, 21.

“These men,” here spoken of, were Paul and Silas, who went to Philippi

to preach the Gospel, and very much disturbed the people of that city,

who supposed that the preaching would interfere with their worldly gains.

And so they arraigned the preachers of the Gospel before the magistrates

of the city, as culprits, and charged them with teaching doctrines, and

especially employing measures, that were not lawful.

In discoursing from these words I design to show:

I. That, under the Gospel dispensation, God has established no

particular system of measures to be employed, and invariably adhered

to, in promoting religion.

II. That our present forms of public worship, and everything, so far as

measures are concerned, have been arrived at by degrees, and by a

succession of New Measures.

I. GOD HAS ESTABLISHED NO PARTICULAR MEASURES.

Under the Jewish dispensation, there were particular forms enjoined and

prescribed by God Himself, from which it was not lawful to depart. But

these forms were all typical, and were designed to shadow forth Christ, or

something connected with the new dispensation that Christ was to

introduce. And therefore they were fixed, and all their details particularly

prescribed by Divine authority. But it was never so under the Gospel.

When Christ came, the ceremonial or typical dispensation was abrogated,

because the design of those forms was fulfilled, and they were therefore of

no further use. He being the Antitype, the types were of course done

away at His coming. THE GOSPEL was then preached as the appointed

means of promoting religion; and it was left to the discretion of the Church

to determine, from time to time, what measures should be adopted, and

what forms pursued, in giving the Gospel its power.

We are left in the dark as to the measures pursued by the apostles and

primitive preachers, except so far as we can gather from occasional hints in

the Book of Acts. We do not know how many times they sang, how many

times they prayed, in public worship, nor even whether they sang or

prayed at all in their ordinary meetings for preaching. When Jesus Christ

was on earth, laboring among His disciples, He had nothing to do with

forms or measures. He did from time to time in this respect just as it

would be natural for any man to do in such cases, without anything like a

set form or mode. The Jews accused Him of disregarding their forms. His

object was to preach and teach mankind the true religion. And when the

apostles preached afterwards, with the Holy Ghost sent down from

heaven, we hear nothing about their having a particular system of measures

for carrying on their work; nor do we hear of one apostle doing a thing in a

particular way because others did it in that way. Their commission was:

“Go and preach the Gospel, and disciple all nations.” It did not prescribe

any forms. It did not admit any. No person can pretend to get any set of

forms or particular directions as to measures, out of this commission. Do

it – the best way you can; ask wisdom from God; use the faculties He

has given you; seek the direction of the Holy Ghost; go forward and do it.

This was their commission. And their object was to make known the

Gospel in the most effectual way, to make the truth stand out strikingly,

so as to obtain the attention and secure the obedience of the greatest

number possible. No person can find any form of doing this laid down in

the Bible. It is preaching the Gospel which there stands out prominently

as the great thing. The form is left out of the question.

It is manifest that in preaching the Gospel there must be some kind of

measures adopted. The Gospel must be presented before the minds of the

people, and measures must be taken so that they can hear it, and be

induced to attend to it. This is done by building churches, holding stated or

other meetings, and so on. Without some measures, the Gospel can never

be made to take effect among men.

II. PRESENT FORMS ARRIVED AT BY DEGREES.

Our present forms of public worship, and everything so far as measures

are concerned, have been arrived at by degrees, and by a succession of

New Measures.

1. I will mention some things in regard to the ministry.

Many years ago, ministers were accustomed to wear a peculiar habit. It is

so now in Roman Catholic countries. It used to be so here. Ministers had a

peculiar dress as much as soldiers. They used to wear a cocked hat, bands

(instead of a cravat or stock), small clothes, and a wig. No matter how

much hair a man had on his head, he must cut it off and wear a wig. And he

must wear a gown. All these things were customary, and every clergyman

was held bound to wear them, and it was not considered proper for him to

officiate without them. 50 All these had doubtless been introduced by a

succession of innovations, for we have no good reason for believing that

the apostles and primitive ministers dressed differently from other men.

But now all these things have been given up, one by one, in America, by a

succession of innovations or new measures, until now, in many places, a

minister can go into the pulpit and preach without attracting special

notice, although dressed like any other man. And in regard to each of these

alterations the Church complained as much as if it had been a Divine

institution given up. It was denounced as an innovation. When ministers

began to lay aside their cocked hats, and wear headgear like other men’s, it

grieved the elderly people very much; it looked so “undignified,” they

said, for a minister to wear a round hat. When, in 1827, I wore a fur cap, a

minister said: “That is too bad, for a minister.”

When ministers first began, a few years since, to wear white hats, it was

thought by many to be a sad and very undignified innovation. And even

now they are so bigoted in some places that a clergyman lately told me

how, in traveling through New England last summer, with a white hat, he

could perceive that it injured his influence. This spirit should not be

looked upon as harmless; I have good reason to know that it is not

harmless. There is at this day scarcely a minister in the land who does not

feel himself obliged to wear a black coat, as much as if it were a Divine

institution. The Church is yet filled with a kind of superstitious reverence

for such things. Thinking men see this to be mere bigotry, and are

exceedingly in danger of viewing everything about religion in the same light

on this account.

So, in like manner, when ministers laid aside their bands, and wore cravats

or stocks, it was said they were becoming secular, and many found fault.

Even now, in some places, a minister would not dare to be seen in the

pulpit in a cravat or stock. The people would feel as if they had no

clergyman, if he had no bands. A minister in this city asked another, but a

few days since, “if it would do to wear a black stock in the pulpit?” He

wore one in his ordinary intercourse with his people, but doubted whether

it would do to wear it in the pulpit.

So in regard to small clothes: they used to be thought essential to the

ministerial character. Even now, in Roman Catholic countries, every priest

wears small clothes. Even the little boys there, who are training for the

priest’s office, wear their cocked hats, and black stockings, and small

clothes. This would look ridiculous amongst us. But it used to be practiced

in America. The time was when good people would have been shocked if a

minister had gone into the pulpit wearing pantaloons instead of small

clothes. 51 They would have thought he was certainly going to ruin the

Church by his innovations. I have been told that, some years ago, in New

England, a certain elderly clergyman was so opposed to the “new

measure” of a minister’s wearing pantaloons that he would, on no account,

allow them in his pulpit. A young man who was going to preach for him

had no small clothes, and the old minister would not let him officiate in

pantaloons, but said: “My people would think I had brought a fop into

the pulpit, if they saw a man there with pantaloons on; and it would

produce an excitement among them.” And so, finally, the young man was

obliged to borrow a pair of the old gentleman’s clothes, and they were too

short for him, and he made a ridiculous figure enough. But anything was

better than such a terrible innovation as preaching in pantaloons! Reason,

however, has triumphed.

Just so it was in regard to wigs. I remember one minister, who, though

quite a young man, used to wear an enormous white wig. And the people

talked as if there were a Divine right about it, and it was as hard to give it

up, almost, as to give up the Bible itself. Gowns also were considered

essential to the ministerial character. And even now, in many

congregations in this country, the people will not tolerate a minister in the

pulpit, unless he has a flowing silk gown, with enormous sleeves as big as

his body. Even in some of the Congregational churches in New England,

they cannot bear to give it up.

Now, how came people to suppose a minister must have a gown or a wig,

in order to preach with effect? Why was it that every clergyman was held

obliged to use these things? How is it that not one of these things has been

given up in the Churches, without producing a shock among them? They

have all been given up, one by one, and many congregations have been

distracted for a time by the innovation. But will any one pretend that the

cause of religion has been injured by it? People felt as if they could hardly

worship God without them, but plainly their attachment to them was no

part of their religion, that is, no part of the Christian religion. It was mere

superstition. And when these things were taken away, they complained,

as Micah did: “Ye have taken away my gods” (Judges 18:24). No doubt,

however, religious character was improved by removing these objects of

superstitious reverence. So that the Church, on the whole, has been greatly

the gainer by the innovations. Thus you see that the present mode of a

minister’s dress has been gained by a series of new measures.

2. In regard to the order of public worship.

The same difficulties have been met in the effecting of every change,

because the professing Christians have felt as if God had established just

the mode which they were used to.

(a) Psalm Books. Formerly it was customary to sing the Psalms. By and

by there was introduced a version of the Psalms in rhyme. This was “very

bad,” to be sure. When ministers tried to introduce them, the Churches

were distracted, the people displayed violent opposition, and great trouble

was created by the innovation. But the new measure triumphed.

Yet when another version was brought forward, in a better style of poetry,

its introduction was opposed, with much contention, as yet a further new

measure. Finally came Watts’s version, which is still opposed in many

Churches. No longer ago than 1828, when I was in Philadelphia, I was told

that a minister there was preaching a course of Lectures on Psalmody, to

his congregation, for the purpose of bringing them to use a better version

of psalms and hymns than the one they were accustomed to. And even

now, in a great many congregations, there are people who will rise and

leave, if a psalm or hymn is given out from a new book. If Watts’s version

of the Psalms should be adopted, they would secede and form a new

congregation, rather than tolerate such an innovation! The same sort of

feeling has been excited by introducing the “Village Hymns” in prayer

meetings. In one Presbyterian congregation in New York, within a few

years, the minister’s wife wished to introduce the Village Hymns into the

women’s prayer meetings, not daring to go any further. She thought she

was going to succeed. But some of the careful souls found out that it was

“made in New England,” and refused to admit it.

(b) “Lining” the hymns. Formerly, when there were but few books, it was

the custom to “line” the hymns, as it was called. The deacon used to stand

up before the pulpit, and read the psalm or hymn, a line at a time, or two

lines at a time, when then the rest would join in. By and by, they began to

introduce books, and let every one sing from his own book. And what an

innovation! Alas, what confusion and disorder it made! How could the

good people worship God in singing without having the deacon to “line”

the hymn in a “holy” tone; for the holiness of it seemed to consist very

much in the tone, which was such that you could hardly tell whether he

was reading or singing.

Choirs. Afterwards, another innovation was brought in. It was thought

best to have a select choir of singers sit by themselves, so as to give an

opportunity to improve the music. But this was bitterly opposed. How

many congregations were torn and rent in sunder by the desire of ministers

and some leading individuals, to bring about an improvement in the

cultivation of music, by forming choirs! People talked about

“innovations,” and “new measures,” and thought great evils were coming

to the Churches, because the singers were seated by themselves, and

cultivated music, and learned new tunes that the old people could not sing.

It used not to be so when they were young, and they would not tolerate

such novelties in the Church.

(d) Pitchpipes. When music was cultivated, and choirs seated together,

then the singers wanted a pitchpipe. Formerly, when the lines were given

out by the deacon or clerk, he would strike off into the tune, and the rest

would follow as well as they could. But when the leaders of choirs began

to use pitchpipes for the purpose of pitching all their voices on precisely

the same key, what vast confusion it made! I heard a clergyman say that

an elder in the town where he used to live, would get up and leave the

service whenever he heard the chorister blow his pipe. “Away with your

whistle,” said he; “what, whistle in the house of God!” He thought it a

profanation.

(e) Instrumental music By and by, in some congregations’ various

instruments were introduced for the purpose of aiding the singers, and

improving the music. When the bass viol was first introduced, it made a

great commotion. People insisted they might just as well have a fiddle in

the house of God. “Why, it is a fiddle, it is made just like a fiddle, only a

little larger; and who can worship where there is a fiddle? By and by you

will want to dance in the meeting-house.” Who has not heard these things

talked of as though they were matters of the most vital importance to the

cause of religion and the purity of the Church? Ministers, in grave

ecclesiastical assemblies, have spent days in discussing them. In a synod in

the Presbyterian Church, it was seriously talked of by some, as a matter

worthy of discipline in a certain Church, that “they had an organ in the

house of God.” This was only a few years ago. And there are many

Churches now that would not tolerate an organ. They would not be half so

much excited on being reminded that sinners are going to hell, as on hearing

that “there is going to be an organ in the meeting-house.” 52 In how many

places is it easier to get the Church to do anything else than work in a

natural way to do what is needed, and wisest, and best, for promoting

religion and saving souls? They act as if they had a “Thus saith the Lord”

for every custom and practice that has been handed down to them, or that

they have long followed themselves, even though it is absurd and injurious.

(f) Extemporary prayers. How many people are there who talk just as if

the Prayer Book was of Divine institution! And I suppose multitudes

believe it is. And in some parts of the Church a man would not be

tolerated to pray without his book being before him.

(g) Preaching without notes. A few years since a lady in Philadelphia was

invited to hear a certain minister preach, and she refused, because he did

not read his sermons. She seemed to think it would be profane for a man to

go into the pulpit and talk, just as if he were talking to the people about

some interesting and important subject. Just as if God had enjoined the

use of notes and written sermons. They do not know that notes

themselves are an innovation, and a modern one too. They were introduced

in a time of political difficulty in England. The ministers were afraid they

should be accused of preaching something against the Government unless

they could show what they had preached, by having all written

beforehand. And, with a time-serving spirit, they yielded to political

considerations, and imposed a yoke of bondage upon the Church. And

now, in many places, extempore preaching is not tolerated.

(h) Kneeling in prayer. This has made a great disturbance in many parts of

the country. The time has been in the Congregational Churches in New

England, when a man or woman would be ashamed to be seen kneeling at a

prayer meeting, for fear of being taken for a Methodist. I have prayed in

families where I was the only person that would kneel. The others all

stood. Others, again, talk as if there were no other posture but kneeling,

that could be acceptable in prayer.

3. In regard to the labors of laymen.

(a) Lay prayers. Much objection was formerly made against allowing any

man to pray or to take a part in managing a prayer meeting, unless he was

a clergyman. It used to be said that for a layman to pray in public, was

interfering with the dignity of ministers, and was not to be tolerated. A

minister in Pennsylvania told me that a few years ago he appointed a

prayer meeting in the Church, and the elders opposed it and “turned it out

of house.” They said they would not have such work; they had hired a

minister to do the praying, and he should do it; and they were not going to

have common men praying.

Ministers and many others have very extensively objected against a

layman’s praying in public, especially in the presence of a minister; that

would let down the authority of the clergy, and was not to be tolerated. At

a synod held in this State, there was a synodical prayer meeting

appointed. The committee of arrangements, as it was to be a formal thing,

designated beforehand the persons who were to take part, and named two

clergymen and one layman. The layman was a man of talent and

information equal to most ministers. But a Doctor of Divinity got up and

seriously objected to a layman being asked to pray before that synod. It

was not usual, he said; it infringed upon the rights of the clergy, and he

wished no innovations! What a state of things!

(b) Lay exhortation. This has been made a question of vast importance,

one which has agitated all New England and many other parts of the

country, whether laymen ought to be allowed to exhort in public meetings.

Many ministers have labored to shut up the mouths of laymen entirely. 54

Such persons overlooked the practice of the primitive Churches. So much

opposition was made to this practice, nearly a hundred years ago, that

President Edwards had actually to take up the subject, and write a labored

defense of the rights and duties of laymen. But the opposition has not

entirely ceased to this day. “What, a man that is not a minister, to talk in

public! It will create confusion; it will let down the ministry: what will

people think of ministers, if we allow common men to do the same things

that we do?” Astonishing!

But now all these things are gone by in most places, and laymen can

preach and exhort without the least objection. The evils that were feared,

from the labors of laymen, have not been realized, and many ministers are

glad to induce laymen to exercise their gifts in doing good.

4. Women’s prayer meetings. Within the last few years women’s prayer

meetings have been extensively opposed. What dreadful things! A minister

said that when he first attempted to establish these meetings, he had all the

clergy around opposed to him. “Set women to pray? Why, the next thing,

I suppose, will be to set them to preach!” Serious apprehensions were

entertained for the safety of Zion if women should be allowed to get

together to pray, and even now it is not tolerated in some Churches.

So it has been in regard to all the active movements of the Church.

Missions and Sunday Schools have been opposed, and have gained their

present hold only by a succession of struggles and a series of innovations.

A Baptist Association in Pennsylvania, some years since, disclaimed all

fellowship with any minister that had been liberally educated, or that

supported Missions, Bible Societies, Sabbath Schools, Temperance

Societies, etc. All these were denounced as New Measures, not found in

the Bible, and that would necessarily lead to distraction and confusion in

the Churches. The same thing has been done by some among the German

Churches. And in many Presbyterian Churches there are found those who

will take the same ground, and denounce all these things, with the

exception, perhaps, of an educated ministry, as innovations, new

measures, “going in your own strength,” and the like, and as calculated to

do great evil.

5. I will mention several men who, in Divine providence, have been set

forward as prominent in introducing innovations.

(a) The apostles – who were great innovators, as you all know. After the

Resurrection, and after the Holy Spirit was poured out upon them, they

set out to remodel the Church. They broke down the Jewish system of

measures, and rooted it out, so as to leave scarcely a vestige.

(b) Luther and the Reformers. You all know what difficulties they had to

contend with, and the reason was, that they were trying to introduce new

measures – new modes of performing the public duties of religion, and

new expedients to bring the Gospel with power to the hearts of men. All

the strange and ridiculous things of the Roman Catholics were held to by

Rome with pertinacious obstinacy, as if they were of Divine authority;

and such an excitement was raised by the attempt to change them, as well-

nigh involved all Europe in bloodshed.

Wesley and his coadjutors. Wesley did not, at first, break from the

Established Church in England, but formed little classes everywhere,

which grew into a Church within a Church. He remained in the Episcopal

Church; but he introduced so much of new measures as to fill all England

with excitement, and uproar, and opposition; and he was everywhere

denounced as an innovator and a stirrer up of sedition – a teacher of new

things which it was not lawful to receive.

Whitefield was a man of the same school, and, like Wesley, was an

innovator. I believe he and several individuals of his associates were

expelled from College for getting up such a new measure as a social prayer

meeting. They would pray together and expound the Scriptures, and this 55

was such a daring novelty that it could not be borne. When Whitefield

came to America what an astonishing opposition was raised! Often he well

nigh lost his life, and barely escaped by the skin of his teeth. 56 Now,

everybody looks upon him as the glory of the age in which he lived. And

many of our own denomination have so far divested themselves of

prejudice as to think Wesley not only a good, but a wise and

pre-eminently useful man. Then, almost the entire Church viewed them

with animosity, fearing that the innovations they introduced would

destroy the Church.

(d) President Edwards. This great man was famous in his day for new

measures. Among other innovations, he refused to baptize the children of

impenitent parents. The practice of baptizing the children of the ungodly

had been introduced into the New England Churches in the preceding

century, and had become nearly universal. President Edwards saw that the

practice was wrong, and he refused to do it, and the refusal shook all the

Churches of New England. A hundred ministers joined and determined to

put him down. He wrote a book on the subject, and defeated them all. It

produced one of the greatest excitements there ever was in New England.

Nothing, unless it was the Revolutionary War, ever produced an equal

excitement.

The General Association of Connecticut refused to countenance

Whitefield, he was such an innovator. “Why, he will preach out of doors,

and anywhere!” Awful! What a terrible thing that a man should preach in

the fields or in the streets! Cast him out!All these were devoted men,

seeking out ways to do good and save souls.

And precisely the same kind of opposition was experienced by all,

obstructing their path and trying to destroy their character and influence.

A book, still extant, was written in President Edwards’ time, by a doctor

of divinity, and signed by a multitude of ministers, against Whitefield and

Edwards, their associates and their measures. A letter was published in

this city by a minister against Whitefield, which brought up the same

objections against innovations that we hear now. In the time of the late

opposition to revivals in the State of New York, a copy of this letter was

taken to the editor of a religious periodical with a request that he would

publish it. He refused, and gave for a reason, that if published, many

would apply it to the controversy that is going on now. I mention it

merely to show how identical is the opposition that is raised in different

ages against all new measures designed to advance the cause of religion. 58

6. In the present generation, many things have been introduced which have

proved useful, but have been opposed on the ground that they were

innovations. And as many are still unsettled in regard to them, I have

thought it best to make some remarks concerning them. There are three

things, in particular, which have chiefly attracted remark, and therefore I

shall speak of them. They are: anxious meetings, protracted meetings, and

the anxious seat. These are all opposed, and are called ” new measures.”

(a) Anxious meetings. The first that I ever heard of under that name were

in New England, where they were appointed for the purpose of holding

personal conversation with anxious sinners, and to adapt instruction to the

cases of individuals, so as to lead them immediately to Christ. The design

of them is evidently philosophical, but they have been opposed because

they were new. There are two modes of conducting an anxious meeting,

either of which may effect the object in view.

(1) By spending a few moments in personal conversation, in order to learn

the state of mind of each individual, and then, in an address to the whole

meeting, to take up their errors and remove their difficulties.

(2) By going round to each, and taking up each individual case, and going

over the whole ground with each one separately, and getting them to

promise to give their hearts to God. Either way the meetings are

important, and have been found most successful in practice. But

multitudes have objected against them because they were new.

(b) Protracted meetings. These are not new, but have always been 59

practiced, in some form or another, ever since there was a Church on earth.

The Jewish festivals were nothing else but protracted meetings. In regard

to the manner, they were conducted differently from what they are now.

But the design was the same: to devote a series of days to religious

services, in order to make a more powerful impression of Divine things on

the minds of the people. All denominations of Christians, when religion

prospers among them, hold protracted meetings. In Scotland they used to

begin on Thursday, at all their Communion seasons, and continue until

after the Sabbath. The Episcopalians, Baptists, and Methodists, all hold

protracted meetings. Yet now, in our day, they have been opposed,

particularly among Presbyterians, 60 and called “new measures,” and

regarded as fraught with all manner of evil, notwithstanding that they have

been so manifestly and so extensively blessed. I will suggest a few things

that ought to be considered in regard to them.

(1) In appointing them, regard should be had for the circumstances of the

people; whether the Church is able to give attention and devote time to

carrying on the meeting. In some instances this rule has been neglected.

Some have thought it right to break in upon the necessary business of the

community. In the country they would appoint the meeting in the

harvest-time, and in the city in the height of the business season, when all

the men are necessarily occupied, and pressed with their temporal labors.

In defense of this course it is said, that our business should always be

made to yield to God’s business; that eternal things are of so much more

importance than temporal things, that worldly business of any kind, and at

anytime, should be made to yield and give place to a protracted meeting.

But the worldly business in which we are engaged is not our business. It is

as much God’s business, and as much our duty, as our prayers and

protracted meetings are. If we do not consider our business in this light,

we have not yet taken the first lesson in religion; we have not learned to do

all things to the glory of God. With this view of the subject – separating

our business from religion, we are living six days for ourselves, and the

seventh for God.

REAL DUTIES NEVER INTERFERE WITH EACH OTHER.

Weekdays have their appropriate duties, and the Sabbath its

appropriate duties, and we are to be equally pious on every day of the

week, and in the performance of the duties of every day. We are to plow,

and sow, and sell our goods, and attend to our various callings, with the

same singleness of view to the glory of God, with which we go to Church

on the Sabbath, and pray in our families, and read our Bibles. This is a first

principle in religion. He that does not know and act on this principle, has

not learned the “A B C” of piety, as yet. Now, there are particular seasons

of the year, in which God, in His providence, calls upon men to attend to

business, because worldly business at the time is particularly urgent, and

must be done at that season, if done at all; seed-time and harvest for the

farmer, and the business seasons for the merchant. And we have no right

to say, in those particular seasons, that we will quit our business and have

a protracted meeting. The fact is, the business is not ours. And unless

God, by some special indication of His providence, shows it to be His

pleasure that we should turn aside and have a protracted meeting at such

times, I look upon it as tempting God to appoint one. It is saying: “O

God, this worldly business is our business, and we are willing to lay it

aside for Thy business.” Unless God has indicated it to be His pleasure to

pour out His Spirit, and revive His work at such a season, and has thus

called upon His people to quit, for the time being, their ordinary

employments, and attend especially to a protracted meeting, it appears to

me that God might say to us in such circumstances: “Who hath required

this at your hand?”

God has a right to dispose of our time as He pleases, to require us to give

up any portion of our time, or all our time, to duties of instruction and

devotion. And when circumstances plainly call for it, it is our duty to lay

aside every other business, and make direct and continuous efforts for the

salvation of souls. If we transact our business upon right principles, and

from right motives, and wholly for the glory of God, we shall never object

to go aside to attend a protracted meeting, whenever there appears to be a

call for it in the providence of God.

A man who considers himself a steward or a clerk, does not consider it a

hardship to rest from his labors on the Sabbath, but a privilege. The selfish

owner may feel unwilling to suspend his business on the Sabbath. But the

clerk who transacts business, not for himself, but for his employer,

considers it a privilege to rest on the Sabbath. So we, if we do our business

for God, will not think it hard if He makes it our duty to suspend our

worldly business and attend a protracted meeting. We should rather

consider it in the light of a holiday. Whenever, therefore, you hear a man

pleading that he cannot leave his business to attend a protracted meeting

• that it is his duty to attend to business, there is reason to fear that he

considers the business as his own, and the meeting as God’s business. If

he felt that the business of the store or the farm was as much God’s

business as attending a protracted meeting, he would, doubtless, be very

willing to rest from his worldly toils, and go up to the house of God and

be refreshed, whenever there was an indication on the part of God, that the

community was called to that work. It is highly worthy of remark, that the

Jewish festivals were appointed at those seasons of the year when there

was the least pressure of indispensable worldly business.

In some instances, such meetings have been appointed in the very pressure

of business seasons, and have been followed with no good results,

evidently for the want of attention to the rule here laid down. In other

cases, meetings have been appointed in seasons when there was a great

pressure of worldly business, and have been signally blessed. But in those

cases the blessing followed because the meeting was appointed in

obedience to the indications of the will of God, and by those who had

spiritual discernment, and understood the signs of the times. In many

instances, doubtless, individuals have attended who really supposed

themselves to be giving up their own business to attend to God’s business,

and in such cases they made what they supposed to be a real sacrifice, and

God in mercy granted them the blessing.

(2) Ordinarily, a protracted meeting should be conducted throughout, and

the labor chiefly performed, by the same minister, if possible. Sometimes

protracted meetings have been held, and dependence placed on ministers

coming in from day to day, and there has been no blessing. The reason has

been obvious. They did not come in a state of mind which was right for

entering into such work; and they did not know the state of people’s

minds, so as to know what to preach. Suppose a person who is sick

should call a different physician every day. Neither would know what the

symptoms had been, what was the course of the disease or of the

treatment, what remedies had been tried, or what the patient could bear.

The method would certainly kill the patient. Just so in a protracted

meeting, carried on by a succession of ministers. None of them get into the

spirit of it, and generally they do more harm than good.

A protracted meeting should not, ordinarily, be appointed, unless they can

secure the right kind of help, and get a minister or two who will agree to

stay on the ground till the meeting is finished. Then they will probably

secure a rich blessing.

(3) There should not be so many public meetings as to interfere with the

duties of private prayer and of the family. Otherwise Christians will lose

their spirituality and let go their hold of God; and the protracted meeting

will prove a failure.

(4) Families should not put themselves out so much, in entertaining

strangers, as to neglect prayer and other duties. It is often the case that

when a protracted meeting is held, some of the principal families in the

Church, I mean those who are principally relied on to sustain the meetings,

do not get into the work at all. And the reason is, that they are “cumbered

with much serving.” They often take needless trouble to provide for guests

who come from a distance to the meeting, and lay themselves out very

foolishly to make an entertainment, not only comfortable but sumptuous.

It should always be understood that it is the duty of families to have as

little working and parade as possible, and to get along with their

hospitality in the easiest way, so that they may all have time to pray, and

go to the meeting, and to attend to the things of the Kingdom.

(5) By all means guard against unnecessarily keeping late hours. If people

keep late hours, night after night, they will inevitably wear out the body;

their health will fail, and there will be a reaction. They sometimes allow

themselves to get so excited as to lose their sleep, and become irregular in

their meals, till they break down. Unless the greatest pains are taken to

keep regular, the excitement will get so great, that nature will give way, and

the work will stop.

(6) All sectarianism should be carefully avoided. If a sectarian spirit breaks

out, either in the preaching, or praying, or in conversation, it will

counteract all the good of the meeting.

(7) Be watchful against placing dependence on a protracted meeting, as if

that of itself would produce a revival. This is a point of great danger, and

has always been so. This is the great reason why the Church in successive

generations has always had to give up her measures – because Christians

had come to rely on them for success. So it has been in some places, in

regard to protracted meetings. They have been so blessed, that in some

places the people have thought that if they could only have a protracted

meeting, they would have a blessing, and sinners would be converted of

course. And so they have appointed their meeting, without any

preparation in the Church, and have just sent for some minister of note

and set him to preaching, as if that, would convert sinners. It is obvious

that the blessing would be withheld from a meeting got up in this way.

(8) Avoid adopting the idea that a revival cannot be enjoyed without a

protracted meeting. Some Churches have got into a morbid state of feeling

on this subject. Their zeal has become all spasmodic and feverish, so that

they never think of doing anything to promote a revival, only in that way.

When a protracted meeting is held, they seem to be wonderfully zealous,

but then sink down to a torpid state till another protracted meeting

produces another spasm. And now multitudes in the Church think it is

necessary to give up protracted meetings because they are abused in this

way. This ought to be guarded against, in every Church, so that they may

not be driven to give them up, and lose all the benefits that protracted

meetings are calculated to produce.

The anxious seat

By this I mean the appointment of some particular seat in the place of

meeting, where the anxious may come and be addressed particularly, and

be made subjects of prayer, and sometimes be conversed with individually.

Of late, this measure has met with more opposition than any of the others.

What is the great objection? I cannot see it. The design of the anxious seat

is undoubtedly philosophical, and according to the laws of mind. It has

two bearings:

(a) When a person is seriously troubled in mind, everybody knows there is

a powerful tendency to conceal it. When a person is borne down with a

sense of his condition, if you can get him willing to have it known, if you

can get him to break away from the chains of pride, you have gained an

important point towards his conversion. This is agreeable to the

philosophy of the human mind. How many thousands are there who will

bless God to eternity, that, when pressed by the truth, they were ever

brought to take this step, by which they threw off the idea that it was a

dreadful thing to have anybody know that they were serious about their

souls.

(b) Another bearing of the anxious seat is to detect deception and delusion,

and thus prevent false hopes. It has been opposed on the ground that it

was calculated to create delusion and false hopes. But this objection is

unreasonable. The truth is the other way.

Suppose I were preaching on the subject of Temperance; and that I should

first show the evils of intemperance, and bring up the drunkard and his

family, and show the various evils produced, till every heart were beating

with emotion. Then I portray the great danger of moderate drinking, and

show how it leads to intoxication and ruin, and that there is no safety but

in TOTAL ABSTINENCE, till a hundred hearts are ready to say: “I will

never drink another drop of ardent spirit in the world; if I do, I may expect

to find a drunkard’s grave.” Now I stop short, and let the pledge be

circulated, and every one that is fully resolved is ready to sign it. But how

many will begin to draw back and hesitate, when you call on them to sign a

pledge of total abstinence! One says to himself: “Shall I sign it or not? I

thought my mind was made up, but this signing a pledge never to drink

again – I do not know about that.” Thus you see that when a person is

called upon to give a pledge, if he is found not to be decided, he makes it

manifest that he was not sincere. That is, that he never came to that

resolution on the subject, which could be relied on to control his future

life.

Just so with the awakened sinner. Preach to him, and, at the moment, he

thinks he is willing to do anything; he thinks he is determined to serve the

Lord; but bring him to the test; call on him to do one thing, to take one

step, that shall identify him with the people of God or cross his pride, and

his pride comes up, and he refuses; his delusion is brought out, and he

finds himself a lost sinner still; whereas, if you had not done it, he might

have gone away flattering himself that he was a Christian. If you say to

him: “There is the anxious seat, come out and avow your determination to

be on the Lord’s side,” and if he is not willing to do so small a thing as

that, then he is not willing to do anything, and there he is, brought out

before his own conscience. It uncovers the delusion of the human heart,

and prevents a great many spurious conversions, by showing those who

might otherwise imagine themselves willing to do anything for Christ that

in fact they are willing to do nothing.

The Church has always felt it necessary to have something of the kind to

answer this very purpose. In the days of the apostles baptism answered

this purpose. The Gospel was preached to the people, and then all those

who were willing to be on the side of Christ were called on to be baptized.

It held the precise place that the anxious seat does now, as a public

manifestation of a determination to be a Christian.

In modern times, even those who have been violently opposed to the

anxious seat, have been obliged to adopt some substitute, or they could

not get along in promoting a revival. Some have adopted the expedient of

inviting the people who are anxious for their souls, to stay, for

conversation, after the rest of the congregation have retired. But what is

the difference? This is as much setting up a test as the other. Others, who

would be much ashamed to employ the anxious seat, have asked those

who have any feeling on the subject, to retain their seats when the rest

retire. Others have called the anxious to withdraw into a Lecture-room.

The object of all these is the same, and the principle is the same – to

bring people out from the refuge of false shame. One man I heard of, who

was very far gone in his opposition to new measures. In one of his

meetings he requested all those who were willing to submit to God, or

desired to be made subjects of prayer, to signify it by leaning forward and

putting their heads down upon the pew before them. Who does not see

that this was a mere evasion of the anxious seat, that it was designed to

answer the same purpose, and that the plan was adopted because it was

felt that something of the kind was important?

Now, what objection is there against taking a particular seat, or rising up,

or going into the Lecture room? They all mean the same thing; and they are

not novelties in principle at all. The thing has always been done in

substance. In Joshua’s day he called on the people to decide what they

would do, and they spoke right out in the meeting: “The Lord our God

will we serve, and His voice will we obey” (Joshua 24:24).

REMARKS.

1. If we examine the history of the Church we shall find that there never

has been an extensive reformation, except by new measures. Whenever the

Churches get settled down into a norm of doing things, they soon get to

rely upon the outward doing of it, and so retain the form of religion while

they lose the substance. And then it has always been found impossible to

arouse them so as to bring about a reformation of the evils, and produce a

revival of religion, by simply pursuing that established form. Perhaps it is

not too much to say, that it is impossible for God Himself to bring about

reformations but by new measures. At least, it is a fact that God has

always chosen this way, as the wisest and best that He could devise or

adopt. And although it has always been the case, that the very measures

which God has chosen to employ, and which He has blessed in reviving

His work, have been opposed as new measures, and have been denounced,

yet He has continued to act upon the same principle. When He has found

that a certain mode has lost its influence by having become a form, He has

brought up some new measure, which would BREAK IN upon lazy

habits, and WAKE UP a slumbering Church. And great good has resulted.

2. The same distinctions, in substance, that now exist, have always

existed, in all seasons of reformation and revival of religion. There have

always been those who particularly adhered to their forms and notions,

and precise way of doing things, as if they had a “Thus saith the Lord” for

every one of them. They have called those that differed from them, who

were trying to roll the ark of salvation forward, “Methodists,” “New

Lights,” “Radicals,” “New School,” “New Divinity,” and various other

opprobrious names. And the declensions that have followed have been

uniformly owing to two causes, which should be by no means overlooked

by the Church.

(a) The Old School, or Old Measure party, have persevered in their

opposition, eagerly seizing hold of any real or apparent indiscretions in

the friends of the work In such cases the Churches have gradually lost

their confidence in the opposition to new measures, and the cry of

“innovation” has ceased to alarm them. Thus the scale has turned.

(b) But now mark me: right here, in this state of things, the devil has, again

and again, taken the advantage. When the battle has been fought and the

victory gained, the rash zeal of some well-meaning, but headstrong

individuals, has brought about a reaction, that has spread a pall over the

Churches for years. This was the case, as is well known, in the days of

President Edwards. 62 Here is a rock, upon which a lighthouse is now built,

and upon which if the Church now run aground, both parties are entirely

without excuse. It is now well known, or ought to be known, that the

declension which followed the revival in those days, together with the

declensions which have repeatedly occurred, were owing to the combined

influence of the continued and pertinacious opposition of the old School,

and the ultimate bad spirit and recklessness of some individuals of the

New School.

The note of alarm should be distinctly sounded to both parties, lest the

devil should prevail against us at the very point, and under the very

circumstances where he has so often prevailed. Will the Church never learn

wisdom from experience? When will it come to pass that the Church will

be revived, and religion prevail, without exciting such opposition in the

Church as eventually brings about a reaction?

3. It is truly astonishing that grave ministers should really feel alarmed at

the new measures of the present day, as if new measures were something

new under the sun, and as if the present form and manner of doing things

had descended from the apostles, and were established by a “Thus saith

the Lord”; when the truth is, that every step of the Church’s advance from

the gross darkness of Popery, has been through the introduction of one

new measure after another. We now look with astonishment, and are

inclined to look almost with contempt, upon the cry of “innovation” that

has preceded our day; and as we review the fears that multitudes in the

Church have entertained in bygone days, with respect to innovation, we

find it difficult to account for what appear to us the groundless and

absurd, at least, if not ridiculous, objections and difficulties which they

made. But, is it not wonderful, at this late day, after the Church has had so

much experience in these matters, that grave and pious men should

seriously feel alarmed at the introduction of the simple, the philosophical,

and greatly-prospered measures of the last ten years? As if new measures

were something not to be tolerated, of highly disastrous tendency, that

should wake the notes and echoes of alarm in every nook and corner of the

Church.

4. We see why it is that those who have been making the ado about new

measures have not been successful in promoting revivals.

They have been taken up with the evils, real or imaginary, which have

attended this great and blessed work of God. That there have been evils,

no one will pretend to deny. But I believe that no revival ever existed since

the world began, of as great power and extent as the one that has prevailed

for the last ten years, which has not been attended with as great or greater

evils. Still, a large portion of the Church have been frightening themselves

and others, by giving constant attention to the evils of revivals. One of the

professors in a Presbyterian Theological Seminary felt it his duty to write

a series of letters to Presbyterians, which were extensively circulated, the

object of which seemed to be to sound the note of alarm through all the

borders of the Church, in regard to the evils attending revivals. While men

are taken up with the evils instead of the excellences following a blessed

work of God, how can it be expected that they will be useful in promoting

it? I would say all this in great kindness, but it is a point upon which I

must not be silent.

5. Without new measures it is impossible that the Church should succeed

in gaining the attention of the world to religion. There are so many exciting

subjects constantly brought before the public mind, such a running to and

fro, so many that cry “Lo here!” and “Lo there!” that the Church cannot

maintain her ground without sufficient novelty in measures, to get the

public ear. The measures of politicians, of infidels, and heretics, the

scrambling after wealth, the increase of luxury, and the ten thousand

exciting and counteracting influences that bear upon the Church and upon

the world, will gain men’s attention, and turn them away from the

sanctuary and from the altars of the Lord, unless we increase in wisdom

and piety, and wisely adopt such new measures as are calculated to get the

attention of men to the Gospel of Christ. I have already said that novelties

should be introduced no faster than they are really called for; they should

be introduced with the greatest wisdom, and caution, and prayerfulness,

and in a manner calculated to excite as little opposition as possible. But

new measures we must have. And may God prevent the Church from

settling down in any set of forms, or getting the present or any other

edition of her measures stereotyped.

6. It is evident that we must have more arousing preaching, to meet the

character and wants of the age. Ministers are generally beginning to find

this out. And some of them complain of it, and suppose it to be “owing to

new measures,” as they call them. They say that such ministers as our

fathers would have been glad to hear, cannot now be heard, cannot get a

pastorate, nor secure an audience. And they think that new measures have

perverted the taste of the people. But this is not the difficulty. The

character of the age is changed, but these men retain the same stiff, dry,

prosing style of preaching, that answered half a century ago.

Look at the Methodists. Many of their ministers are unlearned, in the

common sense of the term – many of them taken right from the shop or

farm, and yet they have gathered congregations, and pushed their way, and

won souls everywhere. Wherever the Methodists have gone, their plain,

pointed and simple, but warm and animated, mode of preaching has

always gathered congregations. Few Presbyterian ministers have gathered

such large assemblies, or won so many souls. Now, are we to be told that

we must pursue the same old, formal mode of doing things, amidst all

these changes? As well might the North River be rolled back, as the world

converted under such preaching. Those who adopt a different style of

preaching, as the Methodists have done, will run away from us. We must

have powerful preaching, or the devil will have the people, except what

the Methodists can save! Many ministers are finding out already, that a

Methodist preacher, without the advantages of a liberal education, will

draw a congregation around him which a Presbyterian minister, with

perhaps ten times as much learning, cannot equal, because he has not the

earnest manner of the other, and does not pour out fire upon his hearers

when he preaches.

7. We see the importance of having young ministers obtain right views of

revival. In a multitude of cases I have seen that great pains are taken to

frighten our young men, who are preparing for the ministry, about “the

evils of revivals,” and the like. Young men in some theological seminaries

are taught to look upon new measures as if they were the very inventions

of the devil. How can such men have revivals? So when they come out,

they look about and watch, and start, as if the devil were there. Some

young men in Princeton a few years ago came out with an essay upon the

“Evils of Revivals.” I should like to know, now, how many of those young

men have enjoyed revivals among their people, since they have been in the

ministry; and if any have, I should like to know whether they have not

repented of that piece about “the evils of revivals”?

If I had a voice so loud as to be heard at Princeton, I would speak to those

young men on this subject. It is high time to talk plainly. The Church is

groaning in all her borders for the want of suitable ministers. Good men are

laboring, and are willing to labor night and day, to assist in educating

young men for the ministry, to promote revivals of religion; and yet when

young men come out of the seminary some of them are as shy of all the

measures that God blesses as they are of Popery itself.

Shall it be so always? Must we educate young men for the ministry, and

have them come out frightened to death about new measures? They ought

to know that new measures are no new thing in the Church. Let them go to

work, and keep at work, and not be frightened. I have been pained to see

that some men, in giving accounts of revivals, have evidently felt it

necessary to be particular in detailing the measures used, to avoid the

inference that new measures were introduced; evidently feeling that even

the Church would undervalue the revival unless it appeared to have been

promoted without new measures. Besides, this caution in detailing the

measures in order to demonstrate that there is nothing new, looks like

admitting that new measures are wrong because they are new, and that a

revival is more valuable when it is not promoted by new measures. In this

way, I apprehend that much evil has been done; and if the practice is to

continue, it must come to this, that a revival must be judged of by the fact

that it occurred in connection with new, or with old, measures. I never will

countenance such a spirit, or condescend to guard an account of a revival

against the imputation of old or new measures. I believe new measures are

right; that is, that it is no objection to a measure, that it is new, or old.

Let a minister enter fully into his work, and pour out his heart to God for

a blessing, and whenever he sees the want of any measure to bring the

truth more powerfully before the minds of the people, let him adopt it and

not be afraid, and God will not withhold His blessing. If ministers will not

go forward, if they will not preach the Gospel with power and

earnestness, if they will not turn out of their tracks to do anything new for

the purpose of saving souls, they will grieve the Holy Spirit away, and

God will visit them with His curse, and raise up other ministers to do His

work in the world.

8. It is the right and duty of ministers to adopt new measures for

promoting revivals. In some places the Church members have opposed

their minister when he has attempted to employ those measures which

God has blessed for a revival, and have gone so far as to give up their

prayer meetings, and give up laboring to save souls, and stand aloof from

everything, because their minister has adopted what they call “new

measures” – no matter how reasonable the measures are in themselves,

nor how seasonable, nor how much God may bless them. It is enough that

they are called “new”; they will not have anything to do with new

measures, nor will they tolerate them among the people. And thus they

fall out by the way, and grieve away the Spirit of God, and put a stop to

the revival, when the world around them is going to hell.

Finally, this zealous adherence to particular forms and modes of doing

things, which has led the Church to resist innovations in measures, savors

strongly of fanaticism. And what is not a little singular, is, that fanatics of

this stamp are always the first to cry out “fanaticism.” What is that but

fanaticism in the Roman Catholic Church, which causes them to adhere

with such pertinacity to their particular modes, and forms, and

ceremonies, and fooleries? They act as if all these things were established

by Divine authority; as if there were a “Thus saith the Lord” for every one

of them. Now, we justly style this a spirit of fanaticism, and esteem it

worthy of rebuke. But it is just as absolutely fanatical for the Presbyterian

Church, or any other, to be sticklish for her particular forms, and to act as

if they were established by Divine authority. The fact is that God has

established, in no Church, any particular form, or manner of worship, for

promoting the interests of religion. The Scriptures are entirely silent on

these subjects, under the Gospel dispensation, and the Church is left to

exercise her own discretion in relation to all such matters. And I hope it

will not be thought unkind, when I say again, that to me it appears that the

unkind, angry zeal, for a certain mode and manner of doing things, and the

overbearing, exterminating cry against new measures, SAVOR

STRONGLY OF FANATICISM.

The only thing insisted upon under the Gospel dispensation, in regard to

measures, is that there should be decency and order. “Let all things be done

decently and in order”(1 Corinthians 14:40). We are required to guard

against all confusion and disorderly conduct. But what is meant by

decency and order? Will it be said that an anxious meeting, or a protracted

meeting, or an anxious seat, is inconsistent with decency and order? I

should most sincerely deprecate, and most firmly resist, whatever was

indecent and disorderly in the worship of God’s house. But I do not

suppose that by “order,” we are to understand any particular set mode, in

which any Church may have been accustomed to perform its service.

LECTURE XV

HINDRANCES TO REVIVALS

I am doing a great work, so that I cannot come down: why should the work

cease, whilst I leave it, and come down to you.? – Nehemiah. 6:3.

This servant of God had come down from Babylon to rebuild the temple

and re-establish the worship of God at Jerusalem, the city of his fathers’

sepulchers. When it was discovered by Sanballat and certain individuals

who were his allies, who had long enjoyed the desolations of Zion, that the

temple and the holy city were about to be rebuilt, they raised a great

opposition. Sanballat and the other leaders tried, in several ways, to divert

Nehemiah and his friends, and prevent them from going forward in their

work; at one time they threatened them, and then complained that they

were going to rebel against the king. They found, however, that they could

not frighten Nehemiah, and then they sought to delude him by artifice and

fraud, and draw him off from the vigorous prosecution of his work. But

the words sum up his position: “I am doing a great work, so that I cannot

come down: why should the work cease, whilst I leave it, and come down

to you?”

It has always been the case, whenever any of the servants of God do

anything in His cause, and there appears to be a probability that they will

succeed, that Satan by his agents regularly attempts to divert their minds

and nullify their labors. So it has been during the last ten years, in which

there have been such remarkable revivals through the length and breadth of

the land. These revivals have been very great and powerful, and extensive.

It has been estimated that not less than TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND

persons have been converted to God in that time. And the devil has been

busy in his devices to divert and distract the people of God, and turn off

their energies from pushing forward the great work of salvation.

In remarking upon the subject, I propose:

I. To show that a revival of religion is a great work.

II. To mention several things which may put a stop to it.

III. To show what must be done for the continuance of this great revival.

I. A REVIVAL OF RELIGION IS A GREAT WORK.

It is a great work, because in it are great interests involved. In a revival of

religion, there are involved both the glory of God, so far as it respects the

government of this world, and the salvation of men; two things, therefore,

that are of infinite importance are involved in it. The greatness of a work is

to be estimated by the greatness of the consequences depending on it; this

is the measure of its importance.

II. THINGS WHICH MAY STOP A REVIVAL.

Some have talked very foolishly on this subject, as if nothing could hinder

a genuine revival. They say: “If your revival is a work of God, it cannot be

stopped: can any created being stop God?” Now I ask if this is common

sense? Formerly, it used to be the established belief that a revival could

not be stopped, because it was the work of God. And so they supposed it

would go on, whatever might be done to hinder it, in the Church or out of

it. But the farmer might just as well reason so, and think he could go and

cut down his wheat and not hurt the crop, because it is God that makes

grain grow. A revival is the work of God, and so is a crop of wheat; and

God is as much dependent on the use of means in one case as the other.

And therefore a revival is as liable to be injured as a wheat field.

1. A revival will stop whenever the Church believes it is going to cease.

The Church is the instrument with which God carries on this work, and

Christians are to work in it voluntarily and with their hearts. Nothing is

more fatal to a revival than for its friends to predict that it is going to stop.

No matter what the enemies of the work may say about it, predicting that

it will come to nothing, they cannot stop it in this way; but the friends

must labor and pray in faith to carry it on. It is a contradiction to say they

are laboring and praying in faith to carry on the work, and yet believe that

it is going to stop. If they lose their faith, it will stop, of course. Whenever

the friends of revivals begin to prophesy that the revival is going to stop,

they should be instantly rebuked, in the name of the Lord. If the idea

should once begin to prevail, and if you cannot counteract it and root it

out, the revival will infallibly cease; for it is indispensable to the work that

Christians should labor and pray in faith to promote it, and it is a

contradiction to say that they can labor in faith for its continuance while

they believe that it is about to cease.

2. A revival will cease when Christians consent that ii should cease.

Sometimes Christians see that the revival is in danger of ceasing, and that if

something effectual is not done, it will come to a standstill. If this should

distress them, and drive them to prayer, and to fresh efforts, the work will

not cease. When Christians love the work of God and the salvation of

souls so well that they are distressed at a mere apprehension of a decline,

it will drive them to agony and effort to prevent its ceasing; but if they see

the danger, and do not try to avert it, or to renew the work, they consent

that it Should stop. There are many people who see revivals declining, and

that they are in great danger of ceasing altogether, and yet they manifest

but little distress, and seem to care but little about it. Whole Churches see

the position that must ensue unless there can be an awakening; and yet

they are at ease, and do not groan and agonize in prayer that God would

revive His work. Some are even predicting that there is now going to be a

great reaction, and a great dearth come over the Church, as there did after

the day of Whitefield and Edwards. And yet they are not startled at their

own foreboding. THEY CONSENT TO IT. It seems as if they were the

devil’s trumpeters, sent out to scatter dismay throughout the ranks of

God’s elect.

3. A revival will cease whenever Christians become mechanical in their

attempts to promote it. When their faith is strong, and their hearts are

warm and mellow, and their prayers full of holy emotion, and their words

with power, then the work goes on. But when their prayers begin to be

cold and without emotion, and they begin to labor mechanically, and to use

words without feeling, then the revival will cease.

4. The revival will cease, whenever Christians get the idea that the work

will go on without their aid. They are co-workers with God in promoting a

revival, and the work can be carried on just as far as the Church will carry

it on, and no farther. God has been for one thousand eight hundred years

trying to get the Church into the work. He has been calling and urging,

commanding, entreating, pressing and encouraging, to get Christians to take

hold. He has stood all this while ready to make bare his arm to carry on

the work with them. But the Church has been unwilling to do her part,

seeming determined to leave it to God alone to convert the world, and

saying: “If He wants the world converted, let Him do it.” The Church

ought to know that this is impossible. Sinners cannot be converted

without their own agency, for conversion consists in their voluntary

turning to God. Nor can sinners be converted without the appropriate

moral influences to turn them; that is, without truth and the reality of

things being brought full before their minds either by direct revelation or

by men. God cannot convert the world by physical omnipotence, but He

is dependent on the moral influence of the Church.

5. The work will cease when the Church prefers to attend to selfish

concerns rather than God’s business. I do not admit that men have any

business which is properly their own, but they think so, and in fact prefer

to attend to what they consider as their own, rather than work for God.

They begin to think they canoe afford sufficient time from their worldly

employments, to carry on a revival. They pretend they are obliged to give

up attending to religion, and they let their hearts go out again after the

world. And the work must cease, of course.

6. When Christians get proud of their “great revival,” it will cease. I mean

those Christians who have been instrumental in promoting it. It is almost

always the case in a revival, that a part of the Church proves too proud or

too worldly to take any part in the work. They are determined to stand

aloof, and wait, and see what it will come to. The pride of this part of the

Church cannot stop the revival, for the revival never rested on them. It

began without them, and it can go on without them. They may fold their

arms and do nothing but look out and find fault; and still the work may go

on. But when the part of the Church that does the work begins to think

what a great revival they have had, how they have labored and prayed,

how bold and how zealous they have been, and how much good they have

done, then the work will be likely to decline. Perhaps it has been published

in the papers what a revival there has been in that Church, and how

absorbed the members have been, so they think how high they will stand

in the estimation of other Churches, all over the land, because they have

had such a great revival. And so they get puffed up, and vain, and they can

no longer enjoy the presence of God. The Spirit withdraws from them, and

the revival ceases.

7. The revival will stop when the Church gets exhausted by labor.

Multitudes of Christians commit a great mistake here in time of revival.

They are so thoughtless, and have so little judgment, that they will break

up all their habits of living, neglect to eat and sleep at the proper hours,

and let the excitement run away with them, so that they overdo their

bodies, and are so imprudent that they soon become exhausted, and it is

impossible for them to continue in the work. Revivals often cease from

negligence and imprudence, in this respect, on the part of those engaged in

carrying them on, and declensions follow.

8. A revival will cease when the Church begins to speculate about abstract

doctrines, which have nothing to do with practice. If the Christians turn

their attention away from the things of salvation, and go to studying or

disputing about abstract points, the revival will cease, of course.

9. When Christians begin to proselytize. When the Baptists are so

opposed to the Presbyterians, or the Presbyterians to the Baptists, or

both against the Methodists, or Episcopalians against the rest, that they

begin to make efforts to get the converts to join their Church, you soon see

the last of the revival. Perhaps a revival will go on for a time, and all

sectarian difficulties are banished, till somebody circulates a book,

privately, to gain proselytes. Perhaps some over-zealous deacon, or some

mischief-making woman, or some proselytizing minister, cannot keep still

any longer, but begins to work the work of the devil, by attempting to gain

proselytes, and so stirs up bitterness; and, raising a selfish strife, grieves

away the Spirit, and drives Christians into parties. No more revival there!

10. When Christians refuse to render to the Lord according to the benefits

received. This is a fruitful source of religious declensions. God has opened

the windows of heaven to a Church, and poured them out a blessing, and

then He reasonably expects them to bring in the tithes into His storehouse,

and devise and execute liberal things for Zion; but they have refused; they

have not laid themselves out accordingly to promote the cause of Christ,

and so the Spirit has been grieved, and the blessing withdrawn, and in

some instances a great reaction has taken place, because the Church would

not be liberal, when God had been so bountiful. I have known Churches

which were evidently cursed with barrenness for such a course. They had

a glorious revival, and afterwards perhaps their buildings needed repairing,

or something else was needed which would cost a little money, and they

refused to do it, and so for their niggardly spirit God gave them up.

11. When the Church, in any way, grieves the Holy Spirit.

(a) When Christians do not feel their dependence on the Spirit. Whenever

they get strong in their own strength, God curses their blessings. In many

instances, their sin against their own mercies, because they get lifted up

with their success, and take the credit to themselves, and do not give all

the glory to God. As He says: “If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it

to heart, to give glory unto My name, saith the Lord of hosts, I will even

send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed

them already, because ye do not lay it to heart” (Malachi 2:2). There has

been a great deal of this, undoubtedly. I have seen many things in the

newspapers that suggested a disposition in men to take credit for success

in promoting revivals. There is doubtless a great temptation to this, and it

requires the utmost watchfulness, on the part of ministers and Churches,

to guard against it and not to grieve the Spirit away by vainglorying in

men.

(b) The Spirit may be grieved by a Spirit of boasting of the revival.

Sometimes, as soon as a revival commences, you will see it blazed out in

the newspapers. And most commonly this will kill the revival. There was

a case in a neighboring State, where a revival commenced, and instantly

there came out a letter from the pastor, telling that he had a revival. I saw

the letter, and said to myself, “That is the last we shall hear of this

revival.” And so it was. In a few days the work totally ceased. I could

mention cases and places, where persons have published such things as to

puff up the Church, and make the people so proud that little more could

be done for the revival.

Some, under pretense of publishing things to the praise and glory of God,

have published things that savored so strongly of a disposition to exalt

themselves – making their own agency stand out conspicuously – as

were evidently calculated to make an unhappy impression. At a protracted

meeting held in this Church, a year ago last fall, there were five hundred

hopefully converted, whose names and places of residence we knew. A

considerable number of them joined this Church. Many of them united

with other Churches. Nothing was said of this in the papers. I have several

times been asked why we were so silent on the subject. I could only reply,

that there was such a tendency to self-exaltation in the Churches, that I

was afraid to publish anything on the subject. Perhaps I erred. But I have

so often seen mischief done by premature publications, that I thought it

best to say nothing about it. In the revival in this city, four years ago, so

much was said in the papers that appeared so much like self-exaltation,

that I was afraid to publish. I am not speaking against the practice itself, of

publishing accounts of revivals. But the manner of doing it is of vast

importance. If it be done so as to excite vanity, it is always fatal to the

revival.

So, too, the Spirit is grieved by saying or publishing things that are

calculated to undervalue the work of God. When a blessed work of God is

spoken lightly of, not rendering to God the glory due to His Name, the

Spirit is grieved. If anything be said about a revival, give only the plain and

naked facts, just as they are, and let them pass for what they are worth.

12. A revival may be expected to cease, when Christians lose the spirit of

brotherly love. Jesus Christ will not continue with people in a revival any

longer than they continue in the exercise of brotherly love. When

Christians are in the spirit of a revival, they feel this love, and then you

will hear them call each other “Brother” and “Sister,” very affectionately.

But when they begin to get cold, they lose this warmth and glow of

affection for one another, and then this calling “Brother” and “Sister” will

seem silly, and they will leave it off. In some Churches they never call

each other so; but where there is a revival Christians naturally do it. I

never saw a revival, and probably there never was one, in which they did

not do it. But as soon as this begins to cease, the Spirit of God is grieved,

and departs from among them.

13. A revival will decline and cease, unless Christians are frequently

re-converted. By this I mean, that Christians, in order to keep in the spirit

of revival, commonly need to be frequently convicted, and humbled and

broken down before God, and “re-converted.” This is something which

many do not understand, when we talk about a Christian being

re-converted. But the fact is, that in a revival, the Christian’s heart is

liable to get crusted over, and lose its exquisite relish for Divine things;

his unction and prevalence in prayer abate, and then he must be converted

over again. It is impossible to keep him in such a state as not to do injury

to the work, unless he passes through such a process every few days. I

have never labored in revivals in company with any one who would keep

in the work and be fit to manage a revival continually, who did not pass

through this process of breaking down as often as once in two or three

weeks.

Revivals decline, commonly, because it is found impossible to make

Christians realize their guilt and dependence, so as to break down before

God. It is important that ministers should understand this, and learn how

to break down the Church, and break down themselves when they need it,

or else Christians will soon become mechanical in their work, and lose their

fervor and their power of prevailing with God. This was the process

through which Peter passed, when he had denied the Savior, and by which

breaking down, the Lord prepared him for the great work on the day of

Pentecost. I was surprised, a few years since, to find that the phrase

“breaking down” was a stumbling block to certain ministers and professors

of religion. They laid themselves open to the rebuke administered to

Nicodemus: “Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?”

(John 3:10.) I am confident that until some of them know what it is to be

“broken down,” they will never do much more for the cause of revival.

14. A revival cannot continue when Christians will not practice self-denial.

When the Church has enjoyed a revival, and begins to grow fat upon it,

and to run into self-indulgence, the revival will soon cease. Unless they

sympathize with the Son of God, who gave up all to save sinners; unless

they are willing to give up their luxuries, and their ease, and devote

themselves to the work, the Christians need not expect that the Spirit of

God will be poured out upon them. This is undoubtedly one of the

principal causes of personal declension. Let Christians in a revival

BEWARE, when they first find an inclination creeping upon them to

shrink from self-denial, and to give in to one self-indulgence after another.

It is the device of Satan, to “bait” them off from the work of God, and

make them dull and gross, lazy and fearful, useless and sensual; and so

drive away the Spirit and destroy the revival.

15. A revival will be stopped by controversies about new measures.

Nothing is more certain to overthrow a revival than this.

16. Revivals can be put down by the continued opposition of the Old

School, combined with a bad spirit in the New School. If those who do

nothing to promote revivals continue their opposition, and if those who

are laboring to promote them allow themselves to get impatient, and get

into a bad spirit, the revival will cease. When the Old School write letters

in the newspapers, against revivals or revival men, and the New School

write letters back again, in an angry, contentious spirit, revivals will cease.

LET THEM KEEP ABOUT THEIR WORK, and neither talk about the

opposition, nor preach upon it, nor rush into print about it. If others

choose to publish “slang,” let the Lord’s people keep to their work. None

of the slander will stop the revival, while those who are engaged in it mind

their business, and keep to the work.

In one place where there was a revival, certain ministers formed a

combination against the pastor of the Church, and a plan was set on foot

to ruin him, and they actually got him prosecuted before his Presbytery,

and had a trial that lasted six weeks, right in the midst of the revival; but

the work still went on. The praying members of the Church laid

themselves out so in the work, that it continued triumphantly throughout

the whole scene. The pastor was called off, to attend his trial, but there

was another minister that labored among the people, and the members did

not even go to the trial, but kept praying and laboring for souls, and the

revival rode out the storm. In many places, opposition has risen up in the

Church, but a few humble souls have kept at their work, and our gracious

God has stretched out His naked arm and made the revival go forward in

spite of all opposition.

But whenever those who are actively engaged in promoting a revival get

excited at the unreasonableness and pertinacity of the opposition, and feel

as if they must answer the cavils, and refute the slanders, then they get

down to the plain of Ono (Nehemiah 6:2) and the work must cease.

17. Any diversion of the public mind will hinder a revival. In the case I

have specified, where the minister was put on trial before his Presbytery,

the reason why it did not ruin the revival was, that the praying members

of the Church would not suffer themselves to be diverted. They kept on

praying and laboring for souls, and so public attention was kept to the

revival, in spite of all the efforts of the devil.

But whenever Satan succeeds in absorbing public attention in any other

subject, he will put an end to the revival. No matter what the subject is. If

an angel from heaven were to come down, and preach, or pass about the

streets, it might be the worst thing in the world for a revival, for it would

turn sinners off from their own sins, and turn the Church off from praying

for souls, to follow this glorious being, and gaze upon him, and the revival

would cease.

18. Resistance to the Temperance reformation will put a stop to revivals

in a Church. The time has come that it can no longer be innocent in a

Church to stand aloof from this glorious reformation. The time was when

this could be done ignorantly. The time has been when ministers and

Christians could enjoy revivals, notwithstanding that ardent spirit was

used among them. But since light has been thrown upon the subject, and it

has been found that the use is injurious, no member or minister can be

innocent and stand neutral in the cause. They must speak out and take

sides. And if they do not take ground on one side, their influence is on the

other. Show me a minister that has taken ground against the Temperance

reformation who has had a revival. Show me one who now stands aloof

from it who has a revival. Show me one who now temporizes upon this

point, who does not come out and take a stand in favor of Temperance,

who has a revival. It used not to be so. But now the subject has come up,

and has been discussed, and is understood, no man can shut his eyes upon

the truth. The man’s hands are RED WITH BLOOD who stands aloof

from the Temperance cause. And can he have a revival?

19. Revivals are hindered when ministers and Churches take wrong ground

in regard to any question involving human rights. Take the subject of

SLAVERY, for instance. The time was when this subject was not before 63

the public mind. John Newton continued in the slave trade after his

conversion. 64 And so had his mind been perverted, and so completely was

his conscience seared, in regard to this most nefarious traffic, that the

sinfulness of it never occurred to his thoughts until some time after he

became a child of God. Had light been poured upon his mind previously to

his conversion, he never could have been converted without previously

abandoning this sin. And after his conversion, when convinced of its

iniquity, he could no longer enjoy the presence of God without abandoning

the sin for ever.

So, doubtless, many slave dealers and slave holders in our country have

been converted, notwithstanding their participation in this abomination,

because the sinfulness of it was not apparent to their minds. So ministers

and Churches, to a great extent throughout the land, have held their peace,

and borne no testimony against this abomination, existing in the Church

and in the nation. But recently, the subject has come up for discussion,

and the providence of God has brought it distinctly before the eyes of all

men. Light is now shed upon this subject, as it has been upon the cause of

Temperance. Facts are exhibited, and principles established, and light

thrown in upon the minds of men, and this monster is dragged from his

horrid den, and exhibited before the Church, and it is demanded of

Christians: “IS THIS SIN?” Their testimony must be given on this subject.

They are God’s witnesses. They are sworn to tell “the truth, the whole

truth, and nothing but the truth.” It is impossible that their testimony

should not be given, on one side or the other. Their silence can no longer be

accounted for upon the principle of ignorance, that they have never had

their attention turned to the subject. Consequently, the silence of

Christians upon the subject is virtually saying that they do not consider

slavery as a sin.

The truth is, this is a subject on which they cannot be silent without guilt.

The time has come, in the providence of God, when every southern breeze

is loaded down with the cries of lamentation, mourning, and woe. Two

millions of degraded heathen in our own land stretch their hands, all

shackled and bleeding, and send forth to the Church of God the agonizing

cry for help. And shall the Church, in her efforts to reclaim and save the

world, deafen her ears to this voice of agony and despair? God forbid! The

Church cannot turn away from this question. It is a question for the

Church and for the nation to decide, and God will push it to a decision. It

is in vain for us to resist it for fear of distraction, contention, and strife.

It is in vain to account it an act of piety to turn away the ear from hearing

this cry of distress.

The Church must testify, and testify “the truth, the whole truth, and

nothing but the truth,” on this subject, or she is perjured, and the Spirit of

God departs from her. She is under oath to testify, and ministers and

Churches who do not pronounce it sin, bear false testimony for God. It is

doubtless true, that one of the reasons for the low state of religion at the

present time is that many Churches have taken the wrong side on the

subject of slavery, have suffered prejudice to prevail over principle, and

have feared to call this abomination by its true name.

20. Another thing that hinders revivals is, neglecting the claims of

Missions. If Christians confine their attention to their own Church, do not

read even their Missionary Magazine, or use any other means to inform

themselves on the subject of the claims of the world, but reject the light,

and will not do what God calls them to do in this cause, the Spirit of God

will depart from them.

21. When a Church rejects the calls of God upon it for educating young

men for the ministry, it will hinder and destroy a revival. Look at the

Presbyterian Church. Look at the two hundred thousand souls converted

within ten years: consider that there are resources sufficient to fill the

world with ministers, and yet observe that the ministry is not increasing

so fast as the population of our own country; so that unless something

more can be done to provide ministers, we shall become heathen ourselves.

The Churches do not press upon young men the duty of going into the

ministry. God pours His Spirit on the Churches, and converts hundreds of

thousands of souls, and if then the laborers do not come forth into the

harvest, what can be expected but that the curse of God will come upon

the Churches, and His Spirit will be withdrawn, and revivals will cease?

Upon this subject no minister, no Church, should be silent or inactive.

22. Slandering revivals will often put them down. The great revival in the

days of President Edwards suffered greatly by the conduct of the Church

in this respect. It is to be expected that the enemies of God will revile,

misrepresent, and slander revivals. But when the Church herself engages in

this work, and many of her most influential members are aiding and

abetting in calumniating and misrepresenting a glorious work of God, it is

reasonable that the Spirit should be grieved away. It cannot be denied that

this has been done to a grievous and God-dishonoring extent. It has been

estimated that in one year, since the revival commenced, ONE

HUNDRED THOUSAND SOULS were converted to God in the United

States. This is undoubtedly the greatest number that were ever converted

in one year, since the world began. 65 It could not be expected that, in an

excitement of this extent, among human beings, there should be nothing to

deplore. To expect perfection in such a work as this, of such extent, and

carried on by human instrumentality, is utterly unreasonable and absurd.

Evils doubtless did exist and have existed. They were to be expected of

course, and guarded against as far as possible. But I do not believe the

world’s history can furnish one instance in which a revival, approaching to

this in extent and influence, has been attended with so few evils, and with

so little that is honestly to be deplored.

But how has this blessed work of God been treated! Admitting all the evils

complained of to be real, which is far from being true, they would only be

like spots upon the disc of the glorious sun; things hardly to be thought of

in comparison with the infinite greatness and excellence of the work. And

yet how has a great portion of the Presbyterian Church received and

treated this blessed work of God? At the General Assembly, that grave

body of men that represent the Presbyterian Church, in the midst of this

great work, instead of appointing a day of thanksgiving, instead of praising

and glorifying God for the greatness of His work, we hear from them the

voice of rebuke. From the reports that were given of the speeches, it

appears that the house was filled with complainings. Instead of devising

measures to forward the work, their attention seemed to be taken up with

the comparatively trifling evils that were incidental to it. And after much

complaining, they absolutely appointed a committee, and sent forth a

“Pastoral Letter,” calculated to excite suspicion, to quench the zeal of

God’s people, and to turn them from giving glory to God for the greatness

of the blessing into finding fault and carping about “the evils.” When I

heard what was done at that General Assembly, when I read their

speeches, when I saw their Pastoral Letter, my soul was sick, an

unutterable feeling of distress came over my mind, and I felt that God

would “visit” the Presbyterian Church for conduct like this. And ever

since, the glory has been departing, and revivals have been becoming less

and less frequent – less and less powerful.

And now I wish it could be known whether those ministers who poured

out those complainings on the floor of the General Assembly, and who

were instrumental in getting up that Pastoral Letter, have since been

blessed in promoting revivals of religion; whether the Spirit of God has

been upon them; and whether their Churches can witness that they have

an unction from the Holy One.

23. Ecclesiastical difficulties are calculated to grieve away the Spirit, and

destroy revivals. It has always been the policy of the devil to turn off the

attention of ministers from the work of the Lord to disputes and

ecclesiastical litigations. President Edwards was obliged to be taken up for

a long time in disputes before ecclesiastical councils; and in our days, and

in the midst of these great revivals of religion, these difficulties have been

alarmingly and shamefully multiplied. Some of the most efficient ministers

in the Church have been called off from their direct efforts to win souls to

Christ, to reply to charges preferred against them, or against their

fellow-laborers in the ministry, which could never be sustained. Oh, tell it

not in Gath! When will those ministers and professors of religion, who do

little or nothing themselves, let others alone, and let them work for God?

24. Another thing by which revivals may be hindered is censoriousness, on

either side, and especially in those who have been engaged in carrying

forward a revival. It is to be expected that the opposers of the work will

watch for the halting of its friends, and be sure to censure them for all that

is wrong, and not infrequently for that which is right, in their conduct.

Especially is it to be expected that many censorious and unchristian

remarks will be made about those who are the most prominent instruments

in promoting the work. This censoriousness on the part of the opposers of

the work, whether in or out of the Church, will not, however, of itself put

a stop to the revival. While its promoters keep humble, and in a prayerful

spirit, while they do not retaliate, but possess their souls in patience,

while they do not suffer themselves to be diverted, to recriminate, and

grieve away the spirit of prayer, the work will go forward.

Censoriousness in those who are opposed to the work is but little to be

dreaded, for they have not the Spirit, and nothing depends on them, for

they can hinder the work only just so far as they themselves have

influence personally. But the others have the power of the Holy Spirit,

and the work depends on their keeping in a right temper. If they get

wrong, and grieve away the Spirit, there is no help: the work must cease.

Whatever provocation, therefore, the promoters of the blessed work may

have had, if it ceases, the responsibility will be theirs. And one of the most

alarming facts in regard to this matter is that, in many instances, those who

have been engaged in carrying forward the work appear to have lost the

Spirit. They are becoming diverted; are beginning to think that the

opposition is no longer to be tolerated, and that they must come out and

reply in the newspapers. It should be known, and universally understood,

that whenever the friends and promoters of this greatest of revivals suffer

themselves to be called off to newspaper janglings, to attempt to defend

themselves, and reply to those who write against them, the spirit of

prayer will be entirely grieved away, and the work will cease. Nothing is

more detrimental to revivals of religion (and so it has always been found)

than for the promoters of it to listen to the opposition, and begin to reply.

This was found to be true in the days of President Edwards, as those who

are acquainted with his book on Revivals are well aware. 66

II. THINGS WHICH OUGHT TO BE DONE.

I proceed to mention some things which ought to be done to continue this

great and glorious revival of religion, which has been in progress for the

last ten years.

1. There should be great and deep repentings on the part of ministers. WE,

my brethren, must humble ourselves before God. It will not do for us to

suppose that it is enough to call on the people to repent. We must take the

lead in repentance, and then call on the Churches to follow.

Especially must those repent who have taken the lead in producing

feelings of opposition and distrust in regard to revivals. Some ministers

have confined their opposition against revivals and revival measures to

their own congregations, and have created such suspicions among their

own people as to prevent the work from spreading and prevailing among

them. Such ministers will do well to consider the remarks of President

Edwards on this subject:

“If ministers preach never so good doctrine, and are never so painful and

laborious in their work, yet, if at such a day as this, they show to their

people that they are not well-affected to this work, but are very doubtful

and suspicious of it, they will be very likely to do their people a great deal

more hurt than good; for the very fame of such a great and extraordinary

work of God, if their people were suffered to believe it to be His work,

and the example of other towns, together with what preaching they might

hear occasionally, would be likely to have a much greater influence upon

the minds of their people, to awaken and animate them in religion, than all

their labors with them. And besides, their minister’s opinion would not

only beget in them a suspicion of the work they hear of abroad, whereby

the mighty hand of God that appears in it loses its influence upon their

minds, but it will also tend to create a suspicion of everything of the like

nature, that shall appear among themselves, as being something of the

same distemper that has become so epidemical in the land; and that is, in

effect, to create a suspicion of all vital religion, and to put the people upon

talking against it, and discouraging it, wherever it appears, and knocking it

on the head as fast as it rises. And we that are ministers, by looking on

this work, from year to year, with a displeased countenance, shall

effectually keep the sheep from their pasture, instead of doing the part of

shepherds to them by feeding them; and our people had a great deal better

be without any settled minister at all at such a day as this.” 67

Others have been more public, having aimed at exerting a wider influence.

Some have written pieces for the public papers. Some men, in high

standing in the Church, have circulated letters which were never printed;

others have had their letters printed and circulated. There seems to have

been a system of letter-writing about the country calculated to create

distrust. In the days of President Edwards, substantially the same course

was pursued, in view of which he says, in his work on Revivals:

“Great care should be taken that the press should be improved to no

purpose contrary to the interest of this work. We read that when God

fought against Sisera, for the deliverance of His oppressed Church, they

that handled the pen of the writer came to the help of the Lord (Judges

5:14). Whatever class of men in Israel they were that are intended, yet as

the words were indicted by a Spirit that had a perfect view of all events to

the end of the world, it is not unlikely that they have respect to authors,

those that should fight against the kingdom of Satan with their pens.

Those, therefore, that publish pamphlets to the disadvantage of this work,

and tending either directly or indirectly to bring it under suspicion, and to

discourage or hinder it, would do well thoroughly to consider whether this

be not indeed the work of God; and whether, if it be, it is not likely that

God will go forth as fire, to consume all that stand in His way, and so burn

up those pamphlets; and whether there be not danger that the fire that is

kindled in them will scorch the authors.”

All these must repent. God never will forgive them, nor will they ever

enjoy His blessing on their preaching, or be honored to labor in revivals,

till they repent. This duty President Edwards pressed upon ministers in

his day, in the most forcible terms. There doubtless have been now, as

there were then, faults on both sides. And there must be deep repentance,

and mutual confessions of faults on both sides.

“There must be a great deal done at confessing of faults on both sides: for

undoubtedly many and great are the faults that have been committed, in

the jangling and confusions, and mixtures of light and darkness, that have

been of late. There is hardly any duty more contrary to our corrupt

dispositions and mortifying to the pride of man; but it must be done.

Repentance of faults is, in a peculiar manner, a proper duty, when the

kingdom of heaven is at hand, or when we especially expect or desire that

it should come; as appears by John the Baptist’s preaching. And if God

does now loudly call upon us to repent, then He also calls upon us to

make proper manifestations of our repentance.

“I am persuaded that those who have openly opposed this work, or have

from time to time spoken lightly of it, cannot be excused in the sight of

God, without openly confessing their fault therein: especially if they be

ministers. If they have in any way, either directly or indirectly, opposed

the work, or have so behaved in their public performances or private

conversation as to prejudice the minds of their people against the work; if,

hereafter, they shall be convinced of the goodness and divinity of what

they have opposed, they ought by no means to palliate the matter, and

excuse themselves, and pretend that they always thought so, and that it

was only such and such imprudences that they objected against; but they

ought openly to declare their conviction, and condemn themselves for

what they have done; for it is Christ that they have spoken against, in

speaking lightly of, and prejudicing others against, this work. And though

they have done it ignorantly and in unbelief, yet when they find out Who

it is that they have opposed, undoubtedly God will hold them bound

publicly to confess it.

“And on the other hand, if those who have been zealous to promote the

work have, in any of the aforementioned instances, openly gone much out

of the way, and done that which was contrary to Christian rules, whereby

they have openly injured others or greatly violated good order, and so

done that which has wounded religion, they must publicly confess it, and

humble themselves, as they would gather out the stones, and prepare the

way of God’s people. They who have laid great stumbling-blocks in

others’ way by their open transgression, are bound to remove them by

their open repentance.”

There are ministers in our day, I say it not in unkindness, but in

faithfulness, and I would that I had them all here before me while I say it,

who seem to have been engaged much of their time, for years, in doing

little else than acting and talking and writing in such a way as to create

suspicion in regard to revivals. And I cannot doubt that their Churches

would, as President Edwards says, be better with no minister at all, unless

they will repent and regain God’s blessing.

2. Those Churches which have opposed revivals must humble themselves

and repent. Churches which have stood aloof, or hindered the work, must

repent of their sin, or God will not go with them. Look at those Churches

which have been throwing suspicion upon revivals. Do they enjoy

revivals? Does the Holy Ghost descend upon them, to enlarge them and

build them up? There is one of the Churches in this city, where the

Session has been publishing in the newspapers what it calls its “Act and

Testimony,” calculated to excite an unreasonable and groundless suspicion

against many ministers who are laboring successfully to promote revivals.

And what is the state of that Church? Have they had a revival? Why, it

appears from the official report, that it has dwindled in one year

twenty-seven per cent. And all such Churches will continue to dwindle, in

spite of everything else that can be done, unless they repent and have a

revival. They may pretend to be mighty pious, and jealous for the honor

of God, but God will not believe they are sincere. And He will manifest

His displeasure by not pouring out His Spirit. If I had a voice loud enough,

I should like to make all those Churches and ministers that have slandered

revivals, hear me, when I say that I believe they have helped to bring the

pall of death over the Church, and that the curse of God is on them

already, and will remain unless they repent. God has already sent leanness

into their souls, and many of them know it.

3. Those who have been engaged in promoting the work must also repent.

Whenever a wrong spirit has been manifested, or they have got irritated

and provoked at the opposition, and lost their temper, or mistaken

Christian faithfulness for hard words and a wrong spirit, they must repent.

Those who are opposed can never stop a revival alone, unless those who

promote it get wrong. So we must repent if we have said things that were

censorious, or proud, or arrogant, or severe. Such a time as this is no time

to stand justifying ourselves. Our first call is to repent. Let each one

repent of his own sins, and not fall out about who is most to blame.

4. The Church must take right ground in regard to politics. Do not

suppose that I am going to preach a political sermon, or that I wish to

have you join in getting up a Christian party in politics. No, you must not

believe that. But the time has come that Christians must vote for honest

men, and take consistent ground in politics. They must let the world see

that the Church will uphold no man in office who is known to be a knave,

or an adulterer, or a Sabbath-breaker, or a gambler, or a drunkard. Such is

the spread of intelligence and the facility of communication in our country,

that every man can know for whom he gives his vote. And if he will give

his vote only for honest men, the country will be obliged to have upright

rulers. All parties will be compelled to put up honest men as candidates.

Christians have been exceedingly guilty in this matter. But the time has

come when they must act differently. As on the subjects of Slavery and

Temperance, so on this subject the Church must act rightly or the country

will be ruined. God cannot sustain this free and blessed country, which we

love and pray for, unless the Church will take right ground. Politics are a

part of a religion in such a country as this, and Christians must do their

duty to the country as a part of their duty to God. It seems sometimes as

if the foundations of the nation are becoming rotten, and Christians seem

to act as if they think God does not see what they do in politics. But I tell

you He does see it, and He will bless or curse this nation, according to the

course they take.

5. The Churches must take right ground on the subject of Slavery. Here the

question arises, What is right ground?

(a) I will state some of the things that should be avoided.

(1) First of all, a bad spirit should be avoided. Nothing is more calculated

to injure religion, and to injure the slaves themselves, than for Christians to

get into an angry controversy on the subject. It is a subject upon which

there needs to be no angry controversy among Christians. Slave-holding

professors, like rum-selling professors, may endeavor to justify

themselves, and may be angry with those who press their consciences, and

call upon them to give up their sins. Those proud professors of religion,

who think a man to blame, or think it is a shame to him, to have a black

skin, may allow their prejudices so far to prevail, as to shut their ears and

be disposed to quarrel with those who urge the subject upon them. But I

repeat it, the subject of Slavery is a subject upon which Christians,

praying men, need not and must not differ.

(2) Another thing to be avoided is an attempt to take neutral ground on

this subject. Christians can no more take neutral ground on this subject,

since it has come up for discussion, than they can take neutral ground on

the subject of the sanctification of the Sabbath. It is a great national sin. It

is a sin of the Church. The Churches, by their silence, and by permitting

shareholders to belong to their communion, have been consenting to it. All

denominations have been more or less guilty, although the Quakers have of

late years washed their hands of it. It is in vain for the Churches to

pretend it is merely a political sin. I repeat, it is the sin of the Church, to

which all denominations have consented. They have virtually declared that

it is lawful. The very fact of suffering slave-holders quietly to remain in

good standing in their Churches, is the strongest and most public

expression of their view that it is not sin. For the Church, therefore, to

pretend to take neutral ground on the subject, is perfectly absurd. The fact

is that she is not on neutral ground at all. While she tolerates slave-holders

in her communion SHE JUSTIFIES THE PRACTICE:. And as well might

an enemy of God pretend that he was neither a saint nor a sinner, that he

was going to take neutral ground, and pray, “good Lord and good devil,”

because he did not know which side would be the most popular!

(3) Great care should be taken to avoid a censorious spirit on either side. It

is a subject on which there has been, and probably will be for some time to

come, a difference of opinion among Christians, as to the best method of

disposing of the question: and it ought to be treated with great forbearance.

(b) I will mention several things that, in my judgment, the Church is

imperatively called upon to do, on this subject:

(1) Christians, of all denominations, should lay aside prejudice, and inform

themselves on this subject, without any delay. Vast multitudes of

professors of religion have indulged prejudice to such a degree, as to be

unwilling to read and hear, and come to a right understanding of the

subject. But Christians cannot pray in this state of mind. I defy any one to

possess the spirit of prayer while he is too prejudiced to examine this or

any other question of duty. If the light did not shine, Christians might

remain in the dark upon this point, and still possess the spirit of prayer.

But if they refuse to come to the light, they cannot pray. Where ministers,

individual Christians, or whole Churches, resist truth upon this point,

when it is so extensively diffused and before the public mind, I do not

believe they will or can enjoy a revival of religion.

(2) Writings, containing temperate and judicious discussions on this

subject, and such developments of facts as are before the public, should be

quietly and extensively circulated, and should be carefully and prayerfully

examined by the whole Church. I do not mean by this, that the attention of

the Church should be so absorbed by this as to neglect the main question

of saving souls in the midst of them; I do not mean that such premature

movements on this subject should be made, as to astound the Christian

community, and involve them in a broil; but that praying men should act

judiciously, and that, as soon as sufficient information can be diffused

through the community, the Churches should meekly, but firmly, take

decided ground on the subject, and express, before the whole nation and

the world, their abhorrence of this sin.

The anti-Masonic excitement which prevailed a few years since made such

desolations in the Churches, and produced so much alienation of feeling

and ill-will among ministers and people, and the introduction of this

subject has been attended with such commotions, that many good

ministers, who are themselves entirely opposed to slavery, dread to

introduce the subject, through fear that their people have not religion

enough to consider it calmly, and decide upon it in the spirit of the

Gospel. I know there is danger of this. But still, the subject must be

presented to the Churches. Let there be no mistake here. William

Morgan’s expose of freemasonry was published in 1826; the subsequent

discussion continued until 1830. In the meantime the Churches had very

generally borne testimony against freemasonry, and resolved that they

could not have adhering masons in fellowship. As a consequence, the

Masonic lodges generally disbanded. There was a general stampede of

Christians from the lodges. This prepared the way, and in 1830 the

greatest revival the world had then seen commenced in the center of the

anti-Masonic region, and spread over the whole field where the Church

action had been taken.

Perhaps no Church in this country has had a more severe trial upon this

subject, than this, which was a Church of young, and for the most part,

inexperienced Christians. And many circumstances conspired, in my

absence, to produce confusion and wrong-feeling among them. But so far 70

as I am now acquainted with the state of feeling in this Church, I know of

no ill-will among the members on this subject. There are doubtless those

who feel upon this subject, in very different degrees: and yet I can

honestly say that I am not aware of the least difference in sentiment

among them. We have from the beginning taken the same ground on the

subject of Slavery that we have on Temperance. We have excluded

slave-holders, and all concerned in the traffic, from our communion. By

some, out of this Church, this course has been censured as unwarrantable

and uncharitable, and I would by no means make my own judgment, or the

example of this Church, a rule for the government of other ministers and

Churches. Still, I conscientiously believe that the time is not far distant,

when the Churches will be united in this expression of abhorrence against

this sin. If I do not baptize slavery by some soft and Christian name, if I

call it SIN, both consistency and conscience conduct to the inevitable

conclusion, that while this sin is persevered in, its perpetrators cannot be

fit subjects for Christian communion and fellowship.

To this it is objected that there are many ministers in the Presbyterian

Church who are shareholders. And it is said to be very inconsistent that

we should refuse to suffer slave-holders to come to our Communion, and

yet belong to the same Church with them, sit with them in ecclesiastical

bodies, and acknowledge them as ministers. To this I answer, that I have

not the power to deal with those ministers, and certainly I am not to

withdraw from the Church because some of its ministers or members are

slave-holders. My duty is to belong to the Church, even if the devil should

belong to it. When I have authority, I exclude slave-holders from the

Communion, and I always will as long as I live. But where I have no

authority, if the table of Christ be spread, I will sit down to it in obedience

to His commandment, whoever else may sit down or stay away.

I do not mean, by any means, to denounce all those slave-holding ministers

and professors as hypocrites, and to say that they are not Christians. But

this I say, that while they continue in this attitude, the cause of Christ and

of humanity demands that they should not be recognized as such, unless

we mean to be partakers of other men’s sins. It is no more inconsistent to

exclude shareholders because they belong to the Presbyterian Church, than

it is to exclude persons who drink or sell ardent spirit. For there are many

rum-sellers belonging to the Presbyterian Church.

I believe the time has come – although I am no prophet, I believe it will

be found to have come, that the revival in the United States will prevail no

further and no faster than the Church takes right ground upon this subject.

The Church is God’s witness. The fact is, that Slavery is, pre-eminently,

the sin of the Church. It is the very fact that ministers and professors of

religion of different denominations hold slaves, which sanctifies the whole

abomination, in the eyes of ungodly men. Who does not know that on the

subject of Temperance, every drunkard in the land will skulk behind some

rum-selling deacon, or wine-drinking minister? It is the most common

objection and refuge of the intemperate, and of moderate drinkers, that it is

practiced by professors of religion. It is this that creates the imperious

necessity for excluding traffickers in ardent spirit, and rum-drinkers, from

the Communion. Let the Churches of all denominations speak out on the

subject of Temperance; let them close their doors against all who have

anything to do with the death-dealing abomination, and the cause of

Temperance is triumphant. A few years would annihilate the traffic. Just

so with Slavery.

It is the Church that mainly supports this sin. Her united testimony upon

the subject would settle the question. Let Christians of all denominations

meekly, but firmly, come forth, and pronounce their verdict; let them wash

their hands of this thing; let them give forth and write on the head and

front of this great abomination, “SIN,” and in three years, a public

sentiment would be formed that would carry all before it, and there would

not be a shackled slave, nor a bristling, cruel slavedriver, in this land.

Still it may be said, that in many Churches, this subject cannot be

introduced without creating confusion and ill-will. This may be. It has

been so on the subject of Temperance, and upon the subject of revivals

too. In some Churches, neither Temperance nor revivals can be introduced

without producing dissension. Sabbath Schools, and missionary

operations, and everything of the kind, have been opposed, and have

produced dissensions in many Churches. But is this a sufficient reason for

excluding these subjects? And where Churches have excluded these

subjects for fear of contention, have they been blessed with revivals?

Everybody knows that they have not. But where Churches have taken

firm ground on these subjects, although individuals, and sometimes

numbers, have opposed, still they have been blessed with revivals. Where

any of these subjects are carefully and prayerfully introduced; where they

are brought forward with a right spirit, and the true relative importance is

attached to each of them; if in such cases, there are those who will make

disturbance and resist, let the blame fall where it ought. There are some

individuals, who are themselves disposed to quarrel with this subject, who

are always ready to exclaim: “Do not introduce these things into the

Church, they will create opposition.” And if the minister and praying

people feel it their duty to bring the matter forward, they will themselves

create a disturbance and then say: “There, I told you so; now see what

your introducing this subject has done; it will tear the Church all to

pieces.” And while they are themselves doing all they can to create a

division, they are charging the division upon the subject, and not upon

themselves. There are some such people in many of our Churches. And

neither Sabbath Schools, nor Missions, nor Antislavery, nor anything else

that honors God or benefits the souls of men, will be carried on in the

Churches, without these careful souls being offended by it.

There might infinitely better be no Church in the world, than that she

should attempt to remain neutral, or give a false testimony on a subject of

such importance as Slavery, especially since the subject has come up, and

it is impossible, from the nature of the case, that her testimony should not

be in the scale, on the one side or the other.

Do you ask: “What shall be done? Shall we make it the all-absorbing topic

of conversation, and divert attention from the all-important subject of the

salvation of souls in the midst of us?” I answer: “No.” Let a Church

express its opinion upon the subject, and be at peace. So far as I know, we

are entirely at peace upon this subject. We have expressed our opinion; we

have closed our Communion against slave-holders, and are attending to

other things. I am not aware of the least unhealthy excitement among us on

this subject. And where it has become an absorbing topic of conversation

in places, in most instances, I believe, it has been owing to the pertinacious

and unreasonable opposition of a few individuals against even granting the

subject a hearing.

6. If the Church wishes to promote revivals, she must sanctify the

Sabbath. There is a vast deal of Sabbath breaking in the land. Merchants

break it, travelers break it, the Government breaks it. A few years ago an

attempt was made in the western part of this State, to establish and

sustain a Sabbath-keeping line of boats and coaches. But it was found that

the Church would not sustain the enterprise. Many professors of religion

would not travel in these coaches, and would not have their goods

forwarded in canal-boats that would be detained from traveling on the

Sabbath. At one time, Christians were much engaged in petitioning

Congress to suspend the Sabbath mails, and now they seem to be ashamed

of it. But one thing is most certain, that unless something is done, and

done speedily, and done effectually, to promote the sanctification of the

Sabbath by the Church, the Sabbath will go by the board, and we shall not

only have our mails running on the Sabbath, and post-offices open, but, by

and by, our courts of justice, and halls of legislation, will be kept open on

the Sabbath. And what can the Church do, what will this nation do,

without any Sabbath?

7. The Church must take right ground on all the subjects of practical

morality which come up for discussion from time to time.

There are those in the Churches who are standing aloof from the subject of

moral reform, and who are afraid to have anything said in the pulpit

against lewdness. On this subject, the Church need not expect to be

permitted to take neutral ground. In the providence of God, it is up for

discussion. The evils have been exhibited; the call has been made for

reform. And what is to reform mankind but the truth? And who shall

present the truth if not the Church and the ministry? Away with the idea,

that Christians can remain neutral, and yet enjoy the approbation and

blessing of God!

In all such cases, the minister who holds his peace is counted among those

on the other side. Everybody knows that it is so in a revival. It is not

necessary for a person to rail out against the work. If he will only keep

still and take neutral ground, the enemies of the revival will all consider

him as on their side. So on the subject of Temperance. It is not needful

that a person should rail at the Cold-water Society, in order to be on the

best terms with drunkards and moderate drinkers. Only let him plead for

the moderate use of wine, only let him continue to drink it as a luxury, and

all the drunkards account him on their side. On all these subjects, when

they come up, the Churches and ministers must take the right ground, and

take it openly, and stand to the cause, and carry it through, if they expect

to enjoy the blessing of God in revivals. They must cast out from their

communions such members as, in contempt of the light that is shed upon

them, continue to drink or traffic in ardent spirit.

8. There must be more done for all the great objects of Christian

benevolence. There must be much greater effort for the cause of Missions,

and Education, and the Bible, and all other branches of religious enterprise,

or the Church will displease God. Look at it. Think of the mercies we have

received, of the wealth, numbers, and prosperity of the Church. Have we

rendered unto God according to the benefits we have received, so as to

show that the Church is bountiful, and willing to give money, and to work

for God? No. Far from it. Have we multiplied our means and enlarged our

plans, in proportion as the Church has increased? Is God satisfied with

what has been done, or has He reason to be? After such a revival as has

been enjoyed by the Churches of America for the last ten years, we ought

to have done ten times as much as we have for Missions, Bibles,

Education, Tracts, Churches, and for all causes that are designed to

promote religion and save souls. If the Churches do not wake up on this

subject, and lay themselves out on a larger scale, they may expect that the

revival in the United States will cease.

9. If Christians expect revivals to spread and prevail, till the world is

converted, they must give up writing letters and publishing pieces

calculated to excite suspicion and jealousy in regard to revivals, and must

take hold of the work themselves. If the whole Church, as a body, had

gone to work ten years ago, and continued it as a few individuals, whom I

could name, have done, there might not now have been an impenitent

sinner in the land. The millennium would have fully come into the United

States before this day. Instead of standing still, or writing letters, let

ministers who think we are going wrong, just buckle on the harness and go

forward, and show us a more excellent way. Let them teach us by their

example how to do better. I do not deny that some may have made

mistakes and committed errors. I do not deny that many things which are

wrong have been done in revivals. But is that the way to correct them,

brethren? So did not Paul. He corrected his brethren by telling them kindly

that he would show them a more excellent way. Let our brethren take hold

and go forward. Let us hear the cry from all their pulpits: “To the work!”

Let them lead on where the Lord will go with them and make bare His arm,

and I, for one, will follow. Only let them GO ON, and let us have the

people converted to God, and let all minor questions cease.

If not, and if revivals do cease in this land, the ministers and Churches will

be guilty of all the blood of all the souls that shall go to hell in consequence

of it. There is no need that the work should cease. If the Church will do all

her duty, the millennium may come in this country in three years. But if it

is to be always so, that in the time of revival, two-thirds of the Church

will hang back and do nothing but find fault, the curse of God will be on

this nation, and that before long.

REMARKS.

1. It is high time there should be great searchings of heart among Christians

and ministers. Brethren, this is no time to resist the truth, or to cavil and

find fault because the truth is spoken out plainly. It is no time to

recriminate or to strive, but we must search our own hearts, and humble

ourselves before God.

2. We must repent and forsake our sins, and amend our ways and our

doings, or the revival will cease. Our ecclesiastical difficulties MUST

CEASE, and all minor differences must be laid aside and given up, to unite

in promoting the great interests of religion. If not, revivals will cease from

among us, and the blood of lost millions will be found on our skirts.

3. If the Church would do all her duty, she would soon complete the

triumph of religion in the world. But if a system of insinuation and

denunciation is to be kept up, not only will revivals cease, but the blood of

millions who will go to hell before the Church will get over the shock, will

be found on the skirts of the men who have got up and carried on this

dreadful contention.

4. Those who have circulated slanderous reports in regard to revivals, must

repent. A great deal has been said about heresy, and about some men’s

denying the Spirit’s influence, which is wholly groundless, and has been

made up out of nothing. And those who have made up the reports, and

those who have circulated them against their brethren, must repent and

pray to God for His forgiveness.

5. We see the constant tendency there is in Christians to declension and

backsliding. This is true in all converts of all revivals. Look at the revival in

President Edwards’ day. The work went on till thirty thousand books and

pamphlets, on one side and the other, that they carried all by the board,

and the revival ceased. Those who had opposed the work grew obstinate

and violent, and those who promoted it lost their meekness, and got

ill-tempered, and were then driven into the very evils that had been falsely

charged upon them.

And now, what shall we do? This great and glorious work of God seems to

be indicating a decline. The revival is not dead – blessed be God for that

• it is not dead! Now, we hear from all parts of the land that Christians

are reading on the subject, and inquiring about the revival. In some places

there are now powerful revivals. And what shall we do, to lift up the

standard, to move this entire nation and turn all this great people to the

Lord? We must DO RIGHT. We must all have a better spirit, we must get

down in the dust, we must act unitedly, we must take hold of this great

work with all our hearts, and then God will bless us, and the work will go

on.

What is the condition of this nation? No doubt God is holding the rod of

WAR over the heads of this nation. He is waiting, before He lets loose His

judgments, to see whether the Church will do right. The nation IS under

His displeasure, because the Church has acted in such a manner with

respect to revivals. And now suppose war should come, where would be

our revivals? How quickly would war swallow up the revival spirit. The

spirit of war is anything but the spirit of revival Who will attend to the

claims of religion when the public mind is engrossed by the all absorbing

topic of war. See now how this nation is, all at once, brought upon the

brink of war. God brandishes His blazing sword over our heads. Will the

Church repent? It is THE CHURCH that God chiefly has in view. How

shall we avoid the curse of war? Only by a reformation in the Church. It is

in vain to look to politicians to avert war. Perhaps they would generally be

in favor of war. Very likely the things they would do to avert it would run

us right into it. If the Church will not feel, will not awaken, will not act,

where shall we look for help? If the Church absolutely will not move, will

not tremble in view of the just judgments of God hanging over our heads,

we are certainly nigh unto cursing, as a nation.

6. Whatever is done must be done quickly. The scales are on a poise. If we

do not go forward, we must go back. Things cannot remain as they are. If

we do not have a more powerful revival than we have had, very soon we

shall have none at all. We have had such a great revival that now small

revivals do not interest the public mind. You must act as individuals. Do

your own duty.

7. It is common, when things get all wrong in the Church, for each

individual to find fault both with the Church, and with his brethren, and to

overlook his own share of the blame. But, as individual members of the

Church of Christ, let each one act rightly, and get down in the dust, and

never speak proudly, or censoriously. GO FORWARD. Who would leave

such a work, and go down into the plain of Ono? Let us mind our work,

and leave the issue with God. 71

LECTURE XVI

THE NECESSITY AND EFFECT OF UNION.

Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching

anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is

in heaven. – Matthew 18:19.

I have already used this text in preaching upon the subject of prayer

meetings. At present I design to enter more into the spirit and meaning of

the words. The evident design of our Lord, in this text, was to teach the

importance and influence of union in prayer and effort to promote religion.

He states the strongest possible case, by taking the number “two,” as the

least number between whom there can be an agreement, and says that

“where two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they

shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven.” It is

the fact of their agreement upon which He lays the stress; and mentioning

the number “two” appears to have been designed merely to afford

encouragement to the smallest number between whom there can be an

agreement. But what are we to understand by being “agreed as touching”

the things we shall ask? I will answer this question under the two

following heads:

I. We are to be agreed in prayer.

II. We are to be agreed in everything that is essential to obtaining the

blessing that we seek.

I. AGREEING IN PRAYER.

In order to come within the promise, we are to be agreed in prayer.

1. We should agree in our desires for the object. It is necessary to have

desires for the object, and to be agreed in those desires. Very often

individuals pray in words for the same thing, when they are by no means

agreed in desiring that thing. Nay, perhaps some of them, in their hearts,

desire the very opposite. People are called on to pray for an object, and

they all pray for it in words, but God knows they often do not desire it;

and perhaps He sees that the hearts of some are, all the while, resisting the

prayer.

2. We must agree in the motive from which we desire the object. It is not

enough that our desires for an object should be the same, but the reason

why must be the same. An individual may desire a revival, for the glory of

God and the salvation of sinners. Another member of the Church may also

desire a revival, but from very different motives. Some, perhaps, desire a

revival in order to have the congregation built up and strengthened, so as to

make it more easy for them to pay their expenses in supporting the

Gospel. Another desires a revival for the sake of having the Church

increased so as to be more numerous and more respectable. Others desire a

revival because they have been opposed or evil spoken of, and they wish

to have it known that whatever may be thought or said, God blesses them.

Sometimes people desire a revival from mere natural affection, so as to

have their friends converted and saved. If they mean to be so united in

prayer as to obtain a blessing, they must not only desire the blessing, and

be agreed in desiring it, but they must also agree in desiring it for the same

reasons.

3. We must be agreed in desiring it for good reasons. These desires must

not only be united, and from the same motives, but they must be from

good motives. The supreme motive must be to honor and glorify God.

People may even desire a revival, and agree in desiring it, and agree in the

motives, and yet if these motives are not good, God will not grant their

desires. Thus, parents may be agreed in prayer for the conversion of their

children, and may have the same feelings and the same motives, and yet if

they have no higher motives than because they are their children, their

prayers will not be granted. They are agreed in the reason, but it is not the

right reason.

In like manner, any number of persons might be agreed in their desires and

motives, but if their motives are selfish, their being agreed in them will

only make them more offensive to God. “How is it that ye have agreed

together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?” (Acts 5:9). I have seen a great

deal of this, where Churches have been engaged in prayer for an object, and

their motives were evidently selfish. Sometimes they are engaged in prayer

for a revival, and you would think by their earnestness and union that they

would certainly move God to grant the blessing, till you find out their

reason. And what is it? Why, they see their congregation is about to be

broken up, unless something can be done. Or they see some other

denomination gaining ground, and there is no way to counteract this but by

having a revival in their Church. All their praying is therefore only an

attempt to get the Almighty to help them out of their difficulty; it is

purely selfish and therefore offensive to God. A woman, in Philadelphia,

was invited to attend a women’s prayer meeting at a certain place. She

inquired what they met there for, and for what they were going to pray?

She was answered that they were going to pray for the outpouring of the

Spirit upon the city. “Well,” she said, “I shall not go; if they were going to

pray for our congregation, I would go, but I am not going there to pray for

other Churches!” Oh, what a spirit!

I have had a multitude of letters and requests that I would visit

such-and-such places, and endeavor to promote a revival, and many

reasons have been urged why I should go; but when I came to weigh their

reasons, I have sometimes found every one of them to be selfish. And God

would look upon every one with abhorrence.

In prayer meetings, too, how often do we hear people offer such reasons

why they desire certain blessings, as are not right in the sight of God;

reasons which, if they are the true ones, would render their prayers not

acceptable to God, because their motive was not right.

There are many things said in favor of the cause of Foreign Missions,

which are of this character, appealing to wrong motives. How often are we

told of six hundred millions of heathens, who are in danger of going to hell,

and how little is said of the guilt of six hundred millions engaged as rebels

against God, or of the dishonor and contempt poured upon God our

Maker by such a world of outlaws. Now, I know that God refers to those

motives which appeal to our mere natural sympathies, and compassion,

and uses them, but always in subordination to His glory. If these lower

motives be placed foremost, it must always produce a defective piety, and

a great deal that is false. Until the Church will look at the dishonor done to

God, little will be done. It is this which must be made to stand out before

the world, it is this which must be deeply felt by the Church, it is this

which must be fully exhibited to sinners, before the world can ever be

converted.

Parents never agree in praying for the conversion of their children in such a

way as to have their prayers answered, until they feel that their children

are rebels. Parents often pray very earnestly for their children, because

they wish God to save them, and they almost think hardly of God if He

does not save their children. But if they would have their prayers prevail,

they must come to take God’s part against their children, even though for

their perverseness and incorrigible wickedness He should be obliged to

send them to hell. I knew a woman who was very anxious for the salvation

of her son, and she used to pray for him with agony, but still he remained

impenitent, until at length she became convinced that her prayers and

agonies had been nothing but the fond yearnings of parental feeling, and

were not dictated at all by a just view of her son’s character as a willful

and wicked rebel against God. And there was never any impression made

on his mind until she was made to take strong ground against him as a

rebel, and to look on him as deserving to be sent to hell. And then he was

converted. The reason was, she never before was influenced by the right

motive in prayer – desiring his salvation with a supreme regard to the

glory of God.

4. If we would be so united as to prevail in prayer, we must agree in faith.

That is, we must concur in expecting the blessing prayed for. We must

understand the reason why it is to be expected, we must see the evidence

on which faith ought to rest, and must absolutely believe that the blessing

will come, or we do not bring ourselves within the promise. Faith is

always understood as an indispensable condition of prevailing prayer. If it

is not expressed in any particular case, it is always implied, for no prayer

can be effectual but that which is offered in faith. And in order that united

prayer may prevail, there must be united faith.

5. So, again, we must be agreed as to the time when we desire the blessing

to come. If two or more agree in desiring a particular blessing, and one of

them desires to have it come now, while others are not quite ready to have

it yet, it is plain they are not agreed. They are not united in regard to one

essential point. If the blessing is to come in answer to their united prayer,

it must come as they prayed for it. And if it comes, it must come at some

time. But if they disagree as to the time when they shall have it, plainly it

can never come in answer to their prayer.

Suppose a Church should undertake to pray for a revival, and should all be

agreed in desiring a revival, but not as to the time when it shall be.

Suppose some wish to have the revival come now, and are all prepared,

with their hearts waiting for the Spirit of God to come down, and are

willing to give time and attention and labor to it NOW. But others are not

quite ready, they have something else to attend to just at present, some

worldly object which they want to accomplish, some piece of business in

hand, wanting just to finish this thing, and then they would have the

revival come. They cannot possibly find time to attend to it now; they are

not prepared to humble themselves, to search their hearts, and break up

their fallow ground, and put themselves in a posture to receive the

blessing. Is it not plain that there is no real union, for they are not agreed

in that which is essential? While some are praying that the revival may

come now, others are praying, with equal earnestness, that it may not.

Suppose the question were now put to this Church, whether you are

agreed in praying for a revival of religion here? Do you all desire a revival,

and would you all like to have it now? Would you be heartily agreed now

to break down in the dust, and open your hearts to the Holy Ghost, if He

should come tonight? I do not ask what you would say, if I should

propose the question. Perhaps if I should put it now, you would all rise

up and vote that you were agreed in desiring a revival, and agreed to have it

now. You know how you ought to feel, and what you ought to say, and

you know you ought to be ready for a revival now. But, I ask: “Would

GOD see to it to be so in your hearts that you are agreed on this point?

Have any two of you agreed on this point, and prayed accordingly? If not,

when will you be agreed to pray for a revival? And if this Church cannot

be agreed among themselves, how can you expect a revival? It is of no use

for you to stand up here and say you are agreed, when God reads the

heart, and sees that you are not agreed. Here is the promise: ‘Again I say

unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that

they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven.’

Now this is either true or false. Which ground will you take? If it is true,

then it is true that you are not agreed, and never have been, except in those

cases where you have had a revival.”

But we must agree, not only on a time, but it must be the present time, or

we are not agreed in everything essential to the work. Unless we agree to

have a revival now, we shall not now use the means, and until the means

are used it cannot come. It is plain, then, that we must be agreed on the

present time; that is, we are not agreed, in the sense of the text, until we

are agreed that now we will have the blessing, and act accordingly. To

agree upon a future time is of no use, for when that future time comes we

must then be agreed upon that present time, and use means accordingly; so

that you see you are never properly agreed, until you agree that now is the

time.

II. AGREEMENT IN ESSENTIAL THINGS.

You see the language of the text: “If two of you shall agree as touching

anything that they shall ask.” Many people seem to read it as if it referred

merely to an agreement in asking, and they understand it to promise, that

whenever two are agreed in asking for any blessing, it shall be given. But

Christ says there must be an agreement “as touching” the thing prayed for.

That is, the agreement or union must comprise everything that is essential

to the endowment and reception of the blessing.

1. If Christians would enjoy the benefits of this promise in praying for a

revival, they must be agreed in believing revivals of religion to be realities.

There are many individuals, even in the Church, who do not in their hearts

believe that the revivals which take place are the work of God. Some of

them may pray in words for an outpouring of the Spirit and a revival of

religion, while in their hearts they doubt whether there are any such things

known in modern times. In united prayer there must be no hypocrisy.

2. They must agree in feeling the necessity of revivals. There are some

who believe in the reality of revivals, as a work of God, while at the same

time, they are unsettled as to the necessity of having them in order to the

success of the Gospel. They think there is a real work of God in revivals,

but, after all, perhaps it is quite as well to have sinners converted and

brought into the Church in a more quiet and gradual way, and without so

much excitement. Whenever revivals are abroad in the land, and prevail,

and are popular, they may appear in favor of them, and may put up their

cold prayers for a revival, while at the same time they would be sorry, on

the whole, to have a revival come among them. They think it is so much

safer and better to indoctrinate the people, and spread the matter before

them in a calm way, and so bring them in gradually, and not run into the

danger of having “animal feeling” or “wild fire” in their congregations!

3. They must be agreed in regard to the importance of revivals. Men are

not blessed with revivals, in answer to prayers that are not half in earnest.

They must feel the infinite importance of a revival, before they will pray

so as to prevail. Blessings of this kind are not granted but in answer to

such prayers as arise from a sense of their importance. As I have shown

before, on the subject of prevailing prayer, it is when men desire the

blessing with UNUTTERABLE AGONY, that they offer such prayer as

will infallibly prevail with God. Those who feel less as to the importance

of a revival may pray for it in words, but they will never have the blessing.

But when a Church has been united in prayer, and really felt the

importance of a revival, it has never failed of having one. I do not believe a

case can be found, of such a Church being turned empty away. Such an

agreement, when sincere, will secure an agreement also on all other subjects

that are indispensable.

4. They must be agreed also, in having correct Scriptural views about

several things connected with revivals.

(a) The necessity of Divine agency to produce a revival. It is not enough

that they all hold this in theory, and pray for it in words. They must fully

understand and deeply feel this necessity; they must realize their entire

dependence on the Spirit of God, or the whole will fail.

(b) Why Divine agency is necessary. There must be an agreement on

correct principles in regard to the reason that Divine agency is so

indispensable. If they get wrong ideas on this point they will be hindered.

If Christians get the idea that this necessity of Divine influence lies in the

inability of sinners, or if they feel as if God were under obligation to give

the Holy Spirit, in order to make sinners able to obey the Gospel, they

insult God, and their prayers will not avail. For in that case they must feel

that it is a mere matter of common justice for God to pour out His Spirit,

before He can justly require Christians to work, or sinners to repent.

Suppose a Church gets the idea that sinners are poor unfortunate

creatures, who come into the world with such a nature that they cannot

help sinning, and that sinners are just as unable to repent and believe the

Gospel as they are to fly to the moon, how can it be felt that the sinner is

a rebel against God, and that he deserves to be sent to hell? How can they

feel that the sinner is to blame? And how can they take God’s part when

they pray? If they do not take God’s part against the sinner, they cannot

expect God will regard their prayers, for they do not pray with right

motives. No doubt one great reason why so many prayers are not

answered, is, that those who pray do in fact take the sinner’s part against

God. They pray as if the sinner were a poor unfortunate being, to be

pitied, rather than as if he were a guilty wretch, to be blamed. And the

reason is, that they do not believe sinners are able to obey God. If a

person does not believe that sinners are able to obey their Maker, and

really believes that the Spirit’s influences are necessary to make them able,

it is impossible, with these views, to offer acceptable and prevailing

prayer for the sinner; and it is not wonderful that persons with these

views should not prevail with God, and should doubt about the efficacy of

the prayer of faith.

How often do you hear people pray for sinners in this style: “O Lord,

help this poor soul to do what he is required to do; O Lord, enable him to

do so-and-so.” Now this language implies that they take the sinner’s part.

and not God’s. If it were understood by those who use it, as it is

sometimes explained, and if people meant by it what they ought to mean

when they plead for sinners, I would not find so much fault with it. The

truth is, that when people use this language, they often mean just what the

language itself would be naturally, at first sight, understood to mean,

which is just as if they should pray: “Lord, Thou command these poor

sinners to repent, when, O Lord, Thou knowest they cannot repent,

unless Thou givest them Thy Spirit to enable them to do so, though Thou

hast declared that Thou wilt send them to hell if they do not, whether they

ever receive Thy Spirit or not; and now, Lord, this seems very hard, and

we pray Thee to have pity upon these poor creatures, and do not deal so

hardly with them, for Christ’s sake.”

Who does not see that such a prayer, or a prayer which means this, in

whatever language it may be couched, is an insult to God, charging Him

with infinite injustice, if He should continue to exact from sinners a duty

which they are unable to perform without that aid which He will not

grant! People may pray in this way till the Day of Judgment, and never

obtain a blessing, because they take the sinner’s part against God. They

cannot pray successfully, until they understand that the sinner is a rebel,

and obstinate in his rebellion – so obstinate, that he never will, without

the Holy Spirit, do what he might, as well as not, instantly do, and that

this obstinacy is the reason, and the only reason, why he needs the

influence of the Holy Spirit for his conversion. The only ground on which

the sinner needs Divine agency is, to overcome his obstinacy, and make

him willing to do what he can do, and what God justly requires him to do.

And Christians are never in an attitude in which God can hear their united

prayers, unless they are agreed in so understanding their dependence on

God, as to feel it in perfect consistency with the sinner’s blame. If it is the

other way, they are agreed in understanding it wrongly, and their prayers

for Divine help to the unfortunate, instead of Divine favor to make a rebel

submit, are wide of the mark, are an insult to God, and they never will

obtain favor in heaven.

They must be agreed in understanding that revivals are not miracles,

but that they are brought about by the use of means, like other events. No

wonder revivals formerly came so seldom and continued so short a time,

when people generally regarded them as miracles, or like a mere shower of

rain, that will come on a place, continue a little while, and then blow over;

that is, as something over which we have no control. For what can people

do to get a shower of rain? Or how can they make it rain any longer than it

does rain? It is necessary that those who pray should be agreed in

understanding a revival as something to be brought about by means, or

they never will be agreed in using them.

(d) They must be agreed in understanding that human agency is just as

indispensable to a revival as Divine agency. Such a thing as a revival of

religion, I venture to say, never did occur without Divine agency, and

never did occur without human agency. How often do people say: “God

can, if He pleases, carry on the work without means.” But I have no faith

in it, for there is no evidence for it. What is religion? Obedience to God’s

law. But the law cannot be obeyed unless it is known. And how can God

make sinners obey but by making known His commandments? And how

can He make them known but by revealing them Himself, or sending them

to others – that is, by bringing THE TRUTH to bear on a person’s mind

till he obeys it? God never did, and never can, convert a sinner, except

with the truth. What is conversion? Obeying the truth. He may Himself

directly communicate it to the sinner; but then, the sinner’s own agency is

indispensable, for conversion consists in the right employment of the

sinner’s own agency. And ordinarily, He employs the agency of others

also, in printing, writing, conversation, and preaching. God has put the

Gospel treasure in earthen vessels. He has seen fit to employ men in

preaching the Word; that is, He has seen that human agency is that which

He can best employ in saving sinners. And if there ever was a case (of

which we have no evidence), there is not one in a thousand, if one in a

million, converted in any other way than through the truth, made known

and urged by human instrumentality. And as Christians must be united in

using those means, it is plainly necessary that they should be united in

understanding the true reason why means are to be used, and the true

principles on which they are to be governed and applied.

5. It is important that there should be union in regard to the measures

essential to the promotion of a revival. Let individuals agree to do anything

whatever, yet if they are not agreed in their measures, they will run into

confusion, and counteract one another. Set them to sail a ship, and they

never can get along without agreement. If they attempt to do business, as

merchants, when they are not agreed in their measures, what will they do?

Why, they will only undo each other’s work, and thwart the whole

business of the concern. All this is preeminently true in regard to the work

of promoting a revival. Otherwise, the members of the Church will

counteract each other’s influence, and they need not expect a revival.

(a) The Church must be agreed in regard to the meetings which are held, as

to what meetings, and how many, and where and when they shall be held.

Some people always desire to multiply meetings in a revival, as if the more

meetings they had, the more religion there would be. Others are always

opposed to any new meetings in a revival. Some are always for having a

protracted meeting; and others are never ready to hold a protracted

meeting at all. Whatever difference there may be, it is essential that the

Church should come to a good understanding on the subject, so that they

can go on together in harmony, and labor with zeal and effect.

(b) They must be agreed as to the manner of conducting meetings. It is

necessary that the Church should be united and cordial on this subject, if it

is expected to offer united prayer with effect. Sometimes there are

individuals who want to adopt every new thing they can hear of or

imagine, while others are totally unwilling to have anything altered in

regard to the management of the meetings, but would have everything done

precisely in the way to which they are accustomed. They ought to be

agreed in some way, either to have the meetings altered, or to keep them

on in the old way. The best possible way is, for the Church to agree in

this, that they will let the meetings go on and take their course, just as the

Spirit of God shapes them, and not even attempt to make the two

meetings just alike. The Church never will give the fullest effect to the

truth, until there is agreement in this principle: That, in promoting a

revival, they will accommodate their measures to circumstances, and not

attempt to interrupt the natural course which pious feeling and sound

judgment indicate, but cast themselves entirely upon the guidance and

direction of the Holy Spirit, introducing any measure, at any time, that

shall seem called for in the Providence of God, without laying any stress

upon its being new or old.

6. They must be agreed in the manner of dealing with impenitent sinners.

It is a point immensely important that the Church should be agreed as to

the treatment of sinners. Suppose that there is no agreement, so that one

will tell a sinner one thing and another. What confusion! How can they

agree in prayer, when it is plain that they are not agreed as to the things

for which they shall pray? Go among such a people, and hear them pray

for sinners; attend a prayer meeting and listen. Here is one man who prays

that the sinners present may repent. Another prays that they may be

convicted; and perhaps, if he be very much concerned, will go so far as to

pray that they may be deeply convicted. Another prays that sinners may

go home solemn and pensive, and silent, meditating on the truths they

have heard. Another prays in such a manner that you can see he is afraid

to have them converted now. Another prays very solemnly that they may

not attempt to do anything in their own strength. And so on. How easy it

is to see that the Church is not agreed as touching the things they ask for;

hence they have no interest in the promise.

If you set such people to talk with sinners, they will be just as discordant,

for it is plain that they are not agreed, and have no clear views in regard to

what a sinner must do to be saved, or of what ought to be said to sinners

in order to bring them to repent. The consequence is, that sinners who are

awakened and anxious presently get confounded, and do not know what to

do; and perhaps they give up in despair, or conclude that in reality there is

nothing rational or consistent in religion. One will tell the sinner he must

repent immediately. Another will give him a book (Doddridge’s “Rise and

Progress of Religion in the Soul,” perhaps), and tell him to read it. Another

will tell him to pray and persevere, and then, in God’s time, he will obtain

the blessing. A revival can never go on for any length of time, amidst such

difficulties. Even if it should begin, it must soon run out; unless, perhaps,

the body of the Church will keep still and say nothing, letting others carry

on the work. And even then the work will suffer materially for want of

cooperation and support. A Church ought to be agreed. Christians ought

to have a clear understanding of this subject, and all speak the same thing

and give the same directions; then, the sinner will find no one to take his

part, but will get no relief or comfort till he repents.

7. They must be agreed in removing the impediments to a revival. If a

Church expects a revival, it must clear the stumbling blocks out of the

way.

(a) In the exercise of discipline. If there are rotten members in the Church,

they should be removed, and the Church should agree to cut them off. If

they remain, they are such a reproach to religion as to hinder a revival.

Sometimes when an attempt is made to cast them out, this creates a

division, and thus the work is stopped. Sometimes the offenders are

persons of influence, or they have family friends who will take their part,

and make a party, and thus create a bad spirit, and prevent a revival.

(b) In mutual confessions. Whenever wrong has been done to any, there

should be a full confession. I do not mean a cold and forced

acknowledgment, such as saying: “If I have done wrong, I am sorry for it;”

but a hearty confession, going the full length of the wrong, and showing

that it comes out of a broken heart.

Forgiveness of enemies. A great obstruction to revivals is often found

in the fact that active and leading individuals harbor a revengeful and

unforgiving spirit towards those who have injured them, which destroys

their spirituality, makes them harsh and disagreeable in their manner, and

prevents them from enjoying either communion with God in prayer, or the

blessing of God to give them success in labor. But let the members of the

Church be truly agreed, in confessing their faults, and in cherishing a

tender, merciful, forgiving, Christ-like spirit toward any who, they think,

have done them wrong, and then the Spirit will come down upon them not

by measure.

8. They must be agreed in making all the necessary preparations for a

revival. They should be agreed in having all necessary preparation made,

and in bearing their part of the labor or expense involved. There should be

an equality, a few should not be burdened while the rest do little or

nothing, but every one should bear his proportion, according to his ability.

Then there will be neither envying nor jealousy, nor any of those mutual

recriminations and altercations and disrespectful remarks about one

another, which are so inconsistent with brotherly love, and put such a

stumbling block in the way of sinners.

9. They must be agreed in doing heartily whatever is necessary to be done

for the promotion of the revival. Sometimes a slight disagreement about a

very little thing will be allowed to break in and destroy a revival. A

minister told me that he once went to labor in a place as an evangelist, and

the Spirit of God was evidently present, and sinners began to inquire, and

things looked quite favorable, until some of the members of the Church

began to agitate the inquiry: how they should pay the evangelist. They

said: “If he stays among us any longer, he will expect us to give him

something”; and they did not see how they could afford to do so. And

they talked about it, until the minds of the brethren got distracted and

divided, and the preacher went away. Look at it. There God stood in the

door of that Church, with His hands full of mercies, but these

parsimonious and wicked professors thought it would cost something to

have a revival, and their expenses were about as much as they felt willing

or able to bear; and so they let the preacher depart, and the work ceased.

He would not have left, at the time, whether they gave him anything or

not; for what he should receive, or whether he should receive anything

from them, was a question about which he felt no concern. But the

Church, by its parsimonious spirit, got into such a state as to grieve the

Spirit, and he saw that to stay longer with them would do no good. Oh,

how will those professors feel when they meet sinners from that town in

judgment, when it will all come out, that God was ready and waiting to

grant them a blessing, but they allowed themselves to get agitated and

divided by inquiring how much they should have to pay!

10. They must be agreed in laboring to carry on the work. It is not enough

that they should agree to pray for a revival, but they should agree also in

laboring to promote it. They should set themselves to it systematically, to

visit and converse and pray with their neighbors; to look out for

opportunities of doing good; to watch the effect of the preaching, and

watch the signs of the times, that they may know when anything needs to

be done, and do it. They should be agreed to labor: they should be agreed

how to labor: they should be agreed to live accordingly.

11. They must agree in a determination to persevere. It will not answer for

some members to begin to move and bluster about, and then as soon as the

least thing happens that seems unfavorable, to get discouraged, and faint,

and one-half of them give over. They should be all united, and agreed to

persevere, and labor, and pray, and hold on, until the blessing comes.

In a word, if Christians expect to unite in prayer and effort, so as to

prevail with God, they must be agreed in speaking and doing the same

things, in walking by the same rule, and maintaining the same principles,

and in persevering till they obtain the blessing, so as not to hinder or

thwart each other’s efforts. All this is evidently implied in being agreed as

touching the things for which they are praying.

REMARKS.

1. We see why it is that so many of the children of professing parents are

not converted.

It is because the parents have not been agreed as touching the things they

should pray for in behalf of their children. Perhaps they never had any

kind of agreement respecting them. Perhaps they were never agreed even

as to what was the very best thing they could ask for them. Sometimes

parents are not agreed in a anything, but their opinions clash, and they are

perpetually disagreeing, and their children see it. Then it is no wonder that

the children remain unconverted.

Or perhaps they may not be agreed as touching the salvation of their

children. Are they sincere in desiring it? Do they agree to seek it, and agree

from right motives? Do they agree in regard to the importance of it? Are

they agreed how the children ought to be dealt with, so as to effect their

conversion; what shall be said to them; how it shall be said; when; and by

whom? Probably few cases will be found where children remain

unconverted, but where inquiry would prove that the parents were never

truly agreed as touching these things. In many cases, indeed, it is quite

evident that they are not agreed.

Often there is such disagreement that we could not expect any good to

result, or, indeed, anything but ruin to the children. The husband and wife

often disagree entirely and fundamentally in regard to the manner of

bringing up their children. Perhaps the wife is fond of dress, and display,

and visiting; while the husband is plain and humble, and is grieved and

distressed, and mourns and prays to see how his children are puffed up

with vanity. Or it may be that the father is ambitious, and wants to have

his daughters fashionably educated and make a display, and his sons

become great men; so he will send his daughters to a fashionable school,

where they may learn anything but their duty to God, and will be all the

while pushing his sons forward, and goading their ambitions; while the

mother grieves and weeps in secret to see her dear children hurried on to

destruction, her influence counteracted, and her sons and daughters trained

up to serve the God of this world, and to go to hell.

2. We see the hypocrisy of those who profess to be praying for a revival

while they are doing nothing to promote it. There are many who appear to

be very zealous in praying for a revival, while they are not doing anything

at all to bring it about. What do they mean? Are they agreed as touching

the things they ask for? Certainly not. They cannot be agreed in offering

acceptable prayer for a revival until they are prepared to do what God

requires them to do to promote it. What would you think of the farmer

who should pray for a crop and neither plow nor sow? Would you think

such prayers pious, or an insult to God?

3. We see why so many prayers that are offered in the Church are never

answered. It is because those who offered them never were agreed as

touching the things they asked for. Perhaps the minister never laid the

subject before them, never explained what it is to be agreed, nor showed

them its importance, nor set before them the great encouragement which

the promise before us affords to Churches that will agree. Perhaps the

members have never conferred together, to compare views, to see whether

they understood the subject alike – whether they were agreed in regard to

the motives, grounds, and importance of being united in prayer and labor

for a revival. Suppose you were to go through the Churches and learn the

precise views and feelings of the members on this subject. How many

would you find who are agreed even in regard to the essential and

indispensable things, concerning which it is necessary Christians should be

agreed in order to unite in prevailing prayer? Perhaps no two could be

found who are agreed, and if two were found whose views and desires are

alike, it would probably be ascertained that they are unacquainted with

each other, and, of course, neither act nor pray together.

4. We see why it is that the text has been generally understood to mean

something different from what it says. People have first read it wrongly.

They have read as if it were: “If any two of you shall agree to ask

anything, it shall be done.” And as they have often agreed to ask for

things, and the things were not done, they have said: “The literal meaning

of the text cannot be true, for we have tried it and know it is not true. How

many prayer meetings have we held, and how many petitions have we put

up, in which we have perfectly agreed in asking for blessings, and yet they

have not been granted.” Now the fact is, that they have never yet

understood what it is to be agreed as touching the things they are to ask

for. I am sure this is no strained construction of the text, but is its true

and obvious meaning, as a plain, pious reader would understand it, if he

inquired seriously and earnestly the true import. They must be agreed not

only in asking, but in everything else that is indispensable to the existence

of the thing prayed for. Suppose two of you agree in desiring to go to

London together. If you are not agreed in regard to the means, what route

you shall take, and what ship you will go in, you will never get there

together. Just so in praying for a revival: you must be agreed in regard to

the means and circumstances, and everything essential to the existence and

progress of a revival.

5. We may ordinarily expect a revival of religion to prevail and extend

among those without the Church, just in proportion to the union of prayer

and effort within. If there is a general union within the Church, the revival

will be general. If the union continues so will the revival. If anything

outside breaks in upon this perfect union in prayer and effort, it will limit

the revival. How great and powerful would be the revival in a city, if all

the Churches in the city were thus united in promoting it.

Here is another fact, which I have witnessed, worthy of notice. I have

observed that a revival will prevail outside the Church, among persons in

that class of society, amongst whom it prevails within the Church. If the

women in the Church are most awake and prayerful. the work may

ordinarily be expected to prevail mostly amongst women out of the

Church, and more women will be converted than men. If the young people

in the Church are most awake, then assuredly the work is most likely to

prevail among the youth. If the heads of families and the principal men in

the Church are awake, the revival is, I have observed, more likely to

prevail among that class out of the Church. I have known a revival mostly

confined to women, with few men converted, apparently because the men

within the Church did not take active part. Again, I have repeatedly

known the greatest number of converts to be among men, owing

apparently to the fact that the men within the Church were the most

active. When the revival does not reach a particular class of the impenitent,

pains should be taken to arouse that portion of the Church who are of

their own age and standing, to make more direct efforts for their

conversion.

There seems to be a philosophy in this fact, which has often been

illustrated. Different classes of professors naturally feel a sympathy for

the impenitent of their own sex and age and rank, and more naturally pray

for them, and for more influence over them; and this seems to be at least

one of the reasons why revivals are apt to be the most powerful and

general in that class without the Church who are most awake within the

Church. Christians should understand this, and feel their responsibility.

One great reason why, in revivals, so few of the principal men are

converted, doubtless is that class in the Church are often so worldly

that they cannot be aroused. The revival will generally prevail mostly in

those families where the professors belonging to them are awake; and the

impenitent belonging to those families where the professors are not awake

are apt to be left unconverted. One principal reason obviously is that

when the professors in a family or neighborhood are awake, there is not

only prayer offered for sinners in the midst of them, but there are

corresponding influences acting on the impenitent among them. If they are

awake, their looks and lives and warnings all tend to promote the

conversion of their impenitent friends. But if they are asleep, all their

influence tends to prevent such conversions. Their coldness grieves the

Spirit, their worldliness contradicts the Gospel, and all their intercourse

with their impenitent friends is in favor of impenitence, and calculated to

perpetuate it.

6. We see why different denominations have been suffered to spring up in

the Church, and under the government of God.

Christians often see and deplore the evils that have arisen to the Church of

God, from the division of His people into jarring sects; and they have

wondered and been perplexed to think that God should suffer it to be so.

But in the light of this subject we can see that, considering what diversities

of opinions and feelings and views actually exist in the Church, much good

results from this division. Considering this diversity of opinion, many

would never agree to pray and labor together, so as to do it with success,

and so it is better they should separate, and let those unite who are agreed.

In all cases where there cannot be a cordial agreement in labor, it is better

that each denomination should labor by itself, so long as the difference

exists. I have sometimes seen revivals broken up by attempting to unite

Christians of different denominations in prayer and labor together, while

they were not agreed as to the principles or measures by which the work

was to be promoted. They would undo each other’s work, destroy each

other’s influence, perplex the anxious, and give occasion to the enemies of

God to blaspheme; and soon their feelings would get soured, and, the

Spirit being grieved away, the work would stop, and perhaps painful

confusion and controversy follow.

7. We see why God sometimes suffers Churches to be divided. It is

because He finds that the members are so much at variance that they will

not pray and labor together with effect. Sometimes Church communities

that are in such a state will still keep together from worldly considerations

and worldly policy, because it is so much easier for the whole to support

public worship; and so they continue, jealous and jangling, for years,

accomplishing little or nothing for the salvation of sinners. In such cases

God has often let something occur among them, that would tear them

asunder, and then each party would go to work in its own way, and

perhaps both would prosper. As soon as they were separated, everything

settled down in peace. I have known some cases where this has been done

with the happiest results, and both Churches have been speedily blessed

with revivals.

8. It is evident that many more Churches need to be divided. How many

there are that hold together, and yet do no good, for the simple reason that

they are not sufficiently agreed. They do not think alike, nor feel alike, on

the subjects connected with revivals, and while this is so, they never can

work together. Unless they can be brought to such a change of views and

feelings on the subject as will unite them, they are only a hindrance to each

other and to the work of God. In many cases they see and feel that this is

so, and yet they keep together, conscientiously, for fear a division should

dishonor religion, when in fact the division that now exists may be making

religion a by-word and a reproach. Far better would it be if they would

agree to divide amicably, like Abraham and Lot. “If thou wilt take the left

hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I

will go to the left” (Genesis 13:9). Let them separate, and each party work

in its own way; and they may both enjoy the blessing.

9. We see why a few individuals, who are perfectly united, may be

successful in gathering and building up a new Church, and may prosper

much more than a much larger number who are not agreed among

themselves. If I were going to gather a new Church, I would rather have

five persons, or three, or even two, who were perfectly agreed as to the

things they were to pray for, and the manner in which they should labor

for all that is essential to the prosperity of a Church, and who would stand

by me, and stand by each other, than begin with a Church of five hundred

members, who were not agreed.

10. We see what glorious things may be expected for Zion, whenever the

Churches generally shall be agreed on these subjects. When ministers shall

lay aside their prejudices, and their misconstructions, and their jealousies,

and shall see eye to eye; and when the Churches shall understand the Bible

alike, and see their duty alike, and pray alike, and shall be “agreed as

touching the things that they shall ask,” a nation shall be born in a day.

Only let them feel as the heart of one man, and be agreed as to what ought

to be done for the salvation of the world, and the millennium will come at

once.

11. There is vast ignorance in the Churches on the subject of revivals.

After all the revivals that have been enjoyed, and all that has been said and

written and printed concerning revivals, there are very few who have any

real, consistent knowledge on the subject. And when there is a revival,

how few are there who can take hold to labor and promote it as if they

understood what they were about. How few persons are to be found who

have ever taken up revivals of religion as a subject to be studied and

understood. Everybody knows that in a revival Christians must pray, and

do some things which they have not been in the habit of doing. But

multitudes know nothing of the REASON WHY they should do this, or

why one thing is better than another, and, having no principles to guide

them, when anything occurs which they did not expect, they are all at

fault, and know not what to do.

If men should go to work to build a house of worship, and know as little

how to proceed as many ministers and professors know how to build the

spiritual temple of God, they never would get a house up; and yet people

make themselves believe that they are building the Church of God, when

they know not what they are about, but are utterly unable to give a reason

why they are doing as they do, or why one thing should be done rather

than another. There are multitudes in the Church who never seem to

suppose that the work of promoting revivals of religion is one that

requires study, and thought, and knowledge of principles, and skill in

applying the Word of God so as to give every one his portion in season.

And so they go on, generally doing little or nothing, because they are

attempting nothing; and if they ever do awaken, they go headlong to work,

without any system or plan, as if God had left this part of our duty out of

the reach of sound judgment and good sense.

12. There is vast ignorance among ministers upon this subject, and one

great reason of this ignorance is that many get the idea that they already

understand all about revivals, when in reality they know next to nothing

about them. I once knew a minister come in where there was a powerful

revival, and bluster about and find fault with many things, speaking of his

“knowledge of revivals,” that he had “been in seventeen of them,” and so

on, when it was evident that he knew nothing as he ought of revivals.

13. How important it is that the Church should be trained and instructed,

so as to know what to do in a revival. Members should be trained and

disciplined like an army; each one having a place to fill, and something to

do, knowing where he belongs, and what he has to do, and how to do it.

Instead of this, how often do you see a Church in a time of revival take

hold of the work to promote it, just like a troop of children thinking to

build a house. How few there are who really know how to do – what?

Why, the very thing for which God suffers Christians to live in this world,

the very thing for which ALONE He would ever let them remain away

from heaven a day; and this is the very thing, of all others, that they do

not study, and do not try to understand.

14. We see why revivals are often so short, and why they so often

produce a reaction. It is because the Church does not understand the

subject. Revivals are short, because professors have been stirred up to a

kind of spasmodical action. They have gone to work by impulse, rather

than from deliberate conviction of duty, and have been guided by their

feelings rather than by a sound understanding of what they ought to do;

they did not know either what to do, what they could do, what they could

not, or how to husband their strength, or what the state of things would

bear. Perhaps their zeal led them into some indiscretions, and they lost

their hold on God, and so the enemy prevailed. The Church ought to be so

trained as to know what to do, so as never to fail, and never to suffer

defeat or reaction, when an attempt is made to promote a revival.

Christians should understand all the tactics of the devil, and know where

to guard against his devices, so that they may know him when they see

him – and not mistake him for an angel of light come to give them lessons

of wisdom in promoting the revival – and so that they can cooperate

wisely with the minister, and with one another, and with the Holy Ghost,

in carrying on the work. No person who has been conversant with revivals

can overlook the fact that the ignorance of professors of religion

concerning revivals, and their blunders in the matter, are among the

common things that put revivals down, and bring back a fearful reaction

upon the Church. How long shall this be so? It ought not to be so; it need

not be so; shall it always be so?

15. We see that every Church is justly responsible for the souls that are in

its charge. If God has given such a promise, and if it is true that where so

many as two are agreed, as touching the things they ask for, it shall be

done, then certainly Christians are responsible, and if sinners are lost, their

blood will be found upon the Church.

16. We see the guilt of ministers, in not informing themselves, and rightly

and speedily instructing the Churches, upon this momentous subject.

Why, what is the end of the Christian ministry? What have they to do, but

to instruct and marshal the sacramental host, and lead them on to

conquest? What, will they let the Church remain in ignorance on the very

subject, and the only point of duty, for the performance of which they are

in the world – the salvation of sinners? Some ministers have acted as

mysteriously about revivals as if they thought Christians were either

incapable of understanding how to promote them, or that it was of no

importance that they should know. But this is all wrong. No minister has

yet begun even to understand his duty, if he has neglected to teach his

people to work for God in the promotion of revivals. What is he about?

What does he mean? Why is he a minister? To what end has he taken the

sacred office? Is it that he “may eat a piece of bread”? (1 Samuel 2:36).

17. We see that pious parents can render the salvation of their children

certain. Only let them pray in faith, and be agreed as touching the things

they shall ask for, and God has promised them the desire of their hearts.

Who can be agreed so well as parents? Let them be agreed in prayer, and

agreed what to do, and agreed in doing all their duty; let them thus train up

their children in the way they should go, and when they are old they will

not depart from it.

And now, do you believe you are agreed, according to the meaning of this

promise? I know that where a few individuals may be agreed in some

things, they may produce some effect. But while the body of the Church

is not agreed, there will always be so many things to counteract, that they

will accomplish but little. THE CHURCH MUST BE AGREED. Oh, if

we could find but one Church perfectly and heartily agreed in all these

points, so that they could pray and labor together, all as one, what good

would be done! Oh, what do Christians think, how can they keep still,

when God has brought down His blessings so that if any two were agreed

as touching the things they ask for, it would be done? Alas! alas! how

bitter will be the remembrance of the jangling in the Church, when

Christians come to see the crowds of lost souls that have gone down to

hell, because we were not agreed to labor and pray for their salvation.

Finally, in the light of this promise we see the awful guilt of the Church.

God has given it to be the precious inheritance of His people at all times,

and in all places, that, if His people agree, their prayers will be answered.

We see the awful guilt of the members of this Church, who listen to

Lectures about revivals, and then go away and have no revival; and also the

guilt of members of other Churches who hear and go home and refuse to do

their duty. How can you meet the thousands of impenitent sinners around

you at the bar of God, and see them sink away into everlasting burning?

Have you been united in heart to pray for them? If you have not, why

have you disagreed? Why have you not prayed with this promise until

you have prevailed.

You will now either be agreed, and pray for the Holy Ghost, and receive

Him before you leave the place, or the anger of the Lord will be upon you.

Should you now agree to pray in the sense of this promise, for the Spirit

of God to come down on this city, the Heavenly Dove would fly through

this city in the midst of the night and would rouse the consciences and

break up the guilty slumbers of the wicked. What, then, is the crimson

guilt of those professors of religion who are sleeping in sight of such a

promise? They seem to have skipped over it, or entirely to have forgotten

it. Multitudes of sinners are going to hell in all directions, and yet this

blessed promise is neglected; yea, more, is practically despised by the

Church, There it stands in the solemn record, and the Church might take

hold of it in such a manner that vast numbers might be saved – but they

are not agreed, therefore souls will perish. And where is the

responsibility? Who can take this promise and look the perishing in the

face at the Day of Judgment?

---

Please backup one page to read the next section.

Series Navigation

Previous in Series: revival3Next in Series: revival5