Listen
Add to Collection
Help
| Listen |
Add to Collection |
Help |
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
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
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.
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