66

He is very careful to disabuse the public of the "impression" which he thinks somewhat prevalent," that Presbyterians of the Old School" are opposed to true and genuine revivals. He has no objections even to "meetings which last several days," and does not, with any particular emphasis, criticise what are called measures. In the course of his reflections we learn what are the characteristics of true revivals. "True revivals, then, result from a divine and supernatural agency." "True revivals occur in connection with means divinely appointed." When true revivals occur, believers, some of them at least, are greatly quickened and divinely led to seek after them as blessings inexpresssibly great and desirable." "True revivals are attended with alarming apprehensions of sin and misery." "The miraculous changes which a true revival of religion supposes, must be common to the Church in all ages." It had been well to have added with greater distinctness, that in "true revivals," sinners are generally converted to God. We can assure the author that we do not deny, and we know of no New School" man that does, any of the above conceptions of a true revival, if we except the last; and in respect to this we charge him with using the term "miraculous" in a manner contrary to the usus loquendi of the word. If this description is meant to imply, as we fear it is, that " New School" Presbyterians do not hold to "true revivals," according to the above model of ideas, we can only say that it is a gross misrepresentation. It would be a testimony than which nothing can be more foreign to the truth.

Passing by these incidental matters, we present the author's main idea in regard to "revivals" in "New School" churches. It is, that these so-called revivals are spurious, the "work of man and not of God." This he infers from the assumed fact, that the "New School" are heretics. Hence revivals among them are nothing but "a revival of old heresies:" "they are not the result of divine influences." His position is, not that there are some false conversions, but that the revivals themselves bear this character. He more than intimates their affinity with "Mormonism," "Christianism," and "Popery." If, among them, there happen to be a few "genuine conversions to Christ," this fact is not to be considered as having any connection with "New School" men or doctrine. They do not hold gospel doctrine enough to have a revival of true religion, that is to say, in plain words, they are not Christians. When the martyrs shall be re-produced in the persons of the millenial witnesses, "Finney, and Barnes, and Beman, and Beecher, will surely make but a sorry appearance in the hands of these sons of Abraham." This, in the compass of a nut shell, is what he tells the world about revivals among " New School" Presbyterians.

'p. 156-159.

2 p. 167.

66

His chapter on "Revivals" is not a narrative of facts showing the alleged spuriousness, but purely a process of a priori reasoning from the pseudo-orthodoxy of his own mind, against the clear evidences of God's grace. It is a repudiation of the Holy Spirit in the fruits of that Spirit. Confident in the assumption of his own exclusive orthodoxy, he gravely concludes, that the rumored works of God's grace are not what they appear to be. We are not mistaken in imputing to him this style of reasoning. The new divinity, being a most glaring and wide. departure from the ancient faith, is undoubtedly an apostasy, not a progress is a revival of false religion, and not of the true.' 991 The new divinity then is another gospel, an apostasy from the faith, and the revivals connected with its progress, are revivals of a spurious Christianity." At the close of the chapter he sums up his views by declaring, that these revivals "are a revival of old heresies," "not the result of divine influences." The converts, if they think they love Christ, and trust him for salvation, are certainly mistaken: for Mr. C. has an orthodox way of telling a priori, whether, they are Christians or not. First, to assume that all orthodoxy is with himself; next, that there is not enough of truth among "New School" Presbyterians to have a revival according to the truth; and finally, to declare that the appearances of such a revival, are all deceptive; this we deem a very singular mode of settling a plain question of fact. Its injustice must be palpable to every eye.

The author's sole argument is the doctrinal one, and that too as it exists in his own mind. He seeks to disprove the possibility of a true revival among "New School" Presbyterians, by the doctrinal test. To show then, his total want of truth, his gross misrepresentation of others, we take a single point-a point very intimately connected with the subject of revivals. One of his assertions is, that" New School" Presbyterians teach" that a supernatural agency is not necessary to produce them :" and since this is an error, and God does not promote works of grace by error, therefore the revivals "are not the result of divine influences." " The proof of the aforesaid teaching is, that "God," according to Mr. Barnes, "requires a service strictly according to our ability, and to be measured by that;" that Dr. Duffield does not hold that a total and absolute natural inability to obey God (for this is the point and the only point of the Dr.'s allegation) is the ground for the necessity of divine influences; and that, Mr. Finney, who is not a Presbyterian, and is no authority one way or the other, has said, "if the sinner wants a new heart, he must go and make it himself." The author fails to make the distinction, which he ought to know is made by Mr. Barnes and Dr. Duffield, between natural and moral ability and inability and because of this failure, he imputes to them a 'p. 167. p. 172. p. 183

3

sentiment they do not hold. This is the amount of his proof. He does not quote their language denying "a supernatural agency:" but infers the denial, and makes them hold all the inferences he chooses to make. This is a violation not less of the laws of reasoning than of candor and justice, in stating the sentiments of others. The very least he could have done, was to furnish the denial in their very words.

971

The assertion as to what the "New School" teach on this point, is a great departure from the truth. We might show this by an indefinite array of authorities. Even Dr. Taylor of New Haven, that heresiarch in the true line of heresiarchs from President Edwards, holds no such sentiment as the one imputed. We quote his own words: "I believe That this moral change, (regeneration) is never produced in the human heart by moral suasion, i. e. by the mere influence of truth and motives as the Pelagians affirm, but is produced by the Holy Spirit, operating on the mind through the truth, and in perfect consistency with the nature of moral action, and the laws of moral agency. See the heresy vitiating all the revivals in which Dr. Taylor preaches; namely, that God converts men by His Spirit, using His own truth as the instrument of the same, in the language of the Confession of Faith, "enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God;" that men in being "born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God," are "born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth forever." If regeneration occurs in revivals, then Dr. Taylor does not hold or teach that so far revivals do not proceed from divine influences, but exactly the contrary sentiment: neither does he hold that they are "effected" simply "by moral suasion," as Mr. C. represents "New School" men to believe.

Dr. Beecher has shared quite largely in the castigations of the author's pen. Let us see what he believes in regard to "supernatural agency." "The author, or efficient cause of regeneration is God." "The power of God concerned in regeneration is supernatural; as compared with the power of any created agent; as above the power of any law of nature, or natural efficacy of truth and motive, in the ordinary operation of cause and effect, natural or moral; as distinguished from the stated operations of divine power; as being an interposition to accomplish unfailingly a change in the will and affections of men, which never takes place without it; as it is an act of God's almighty power." Is this venerable pa"Is triarch in Israel at fault on the question of "supernatural agency?"

'Dr. Taylor's Letter to Dr. Hawes, in the Christian Spectator for March, 1839.

p. 172.

Chap. ix. Sect. 1. 3 John 1: 13. I. Pet. 1; 23. "Beecher's Views in Theology, p. 200-202.

and are all the revivals with which God has honored his former days, to be set down as "a revival of old heresies?" We feel that our common Christianity is insulted by the author's impeachment. And if this be his "able discrimination and sound reasoning," we hope the day is far distant when we shall see the like again.

Mr. Barnes is also in the list of those who deny the "supernatural agency." Let him speak for himself. "This doctrine, that God by his Spirit prevents or goes before a sinner in his efforts, or commences and carries forward the work of his own power, I deem of cardinal value in the work of religion. If it be true, then it is of the utmost importance that it should be seen and felt to be true, and that the Holy Ghost should have the glory. I have no sympathy with any scheme that divides the honor with man." If this be denying the "supernatural agency" of God in the production of revivals and the regeneration of men, then it is difficult to see what it would be to affirm it. But, it may be said, Mr. Barnes holds, that "God requires a service strictly according to our ability, and to be measured by that." This is very true; and God Himself holds the same doctrine in the most explicit manner: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind." Does it hence follow that Mr. Barnes does not believe "a supernatural agency" necessary to conquer the aversions of depravity, and bring sinners to love God with all their heart, soul, strength and mind? Just as if a man, in order to believe and preach the great fact and necessity of Divine influence in revivals, must take every iota of Mr. Č.'s strange metaphysics!

Again, Dr. Skinner, an eminent "New School" divine, who has labored much in revivals, and is now one of the Professors in the Union Theological Seminary, in a volume entitled "Preaching and Hearing," devotes two chapters to "Preaching on Ability." Although he holds most distinctly to the doctrine of man's natural ability to obey the requirements of God, and vindicates the same with a strength of argument not easily answered; yet he as distinctly holds the doctrine of man's moral inability or total aversion to true holiness, so great that nothing but the Divine influence. and operation of the Holy Ghost can ever subdue his heart and make him willing to serve his Maker. "When the call to repentance is obeyed, it is obeyed indeed under the renewing influence of the Spirit of God, whose work herein is doubtless one of the most glorious of all the instances of divine power and goodness; but still, it is obeyed by the human mind itself, in the exercise of its own faculties." "The work of divine power and grace, which has human obedience as its result, is one of surpassing glory and

1

1 Barnes' Defence, p. 30. It is worthy of notice, that these statements, cum multis aliis, of the same type, were preached in a revival, and not drawn out by the exigencies of a doctrinal controversy. "Matt. 22: 37.

excellence, which excites angelic admiration, and will be celebrated for ever in the praises of eternity. All that God does in performing this work, no one beside himself can know." Here, also, without further quotation, we ask, Is Dr. Skinner to be denied the benefit of his own solemn and explicit language? to be judged by what he says, or by what Mr. C. chooses to infer?

We refer the reader to an article by Erskine Mason, D. D., entitled "The Promise of the Spirit," in the Bib. Repository for Jan. 1848. From it we select two or three passages, as specimens of a large number. "The best method, perhaps, of arriving at the meaning of the promise, and the nature of the agency it respects, is to turn our attention to some scenes which the Bible represents as proving the fulfillment of the promise, and to some facts which are admitted to be the results of the agency in question." "The point which seems established from this analysis of Pentecostal scenes, is, that the office-work of the promised Comforter consists in giving new and spiritual views of truths already revealed, and in bringing the heart and life under their controlling influence; and what was needed then to secure these views and their results, is no less needed now." "Of the reality of this agency, and its absolute necessity in order to anything like spiritual apprehension, we can never have too distinct or firmly-settled ideas." Upon this influence, as promised by Jesus Christ to his disciples, is dependent the success of the gospel in the world." "No mere exhibition of truth, no outward means or appliances, no system of external instrumentality, however wisely constructed and faithfully used, can, independently of this direct and special agency of the Holy Ghost, avail to build up the kingdom of Christ, or change a human being from a carnal into a spiritual state." And yet, Dr. Mason is a "New School" Presbyterian, holding, contrary to the representations given by Mr. C., to the doctrine of the "direct and special agency of the Holy Ghost."

We might in the same way take up every item of his a priori argument against the soundness of "New School" revivals, and convict him of mis-stating the opinions of "New School" men; or, what amounts to the same thing, of making inferences which neither they nor their published sentiments authorize. We cannot, however, devote more space to this chapter. The reader has before him its main point, namely, that Mr. C. is orthodox; that the "New School" are heretics and apostates; and therefore that the revivals among them are nothing but "a revival of false religion," like the revivals of " Mormonism." The thousands and tens of thousands who have professed their faith in Christ, some of whom are now preaching the gospel in our own country, and others in pagan lands; some of whom have already rested from their labors, giving good evidence of piety in their last moments: these 'pp. 196, 203. Bib. Rep. for Jan. 1848, pp. 67, 70, 75.