on this question; to consider my facts on this subject ; and either to answer my defence with more powerful evidence, or submit to my conclusion. V. You assert that those who oppose orthodox revivals are enemies to the cause of Christ. I think a plain statement of facts will prove your assertion untrue; and also convince you, that the opposers to your excitements are wholly devoted to the promotion of pure and undefiled religion. 1. In the first place, who have been the opposers of orthodox revivals? The most distinguished of the orthodox themselves. Yes; read the history of our pious fathers. They knew nothing of such excitements until the days of Whitefield. They resolutely opposed his new and unscriptural measures. tinued until within a few years, except by a minority. Their opposition conAnd at the present moment, no small number of your more judicious professors are unwilling to adopt your singular modes of operation, and do not hesitate to express their decided disapprobation of your proceedings. I wish it were in my power to present you with an extract from a discourse, delivered at the ordination of Mr Albro, by the Rev Mr Withington. A more decided attack upon your whole system of revivals was never uttered. Not only so. Look to the Episcopal denomination. You will allow their creed to be sufficiently evangelical. But you know they have opposed your revivals with an almost unanimous voice. Above all, look to Scotland. From the days of Knox to the present reign of Chalmers, you find no revivalists in that most learned and pious orthodox denomination. I could refer you to multitudes more who adhere to the articles of your creed, but who are open opposers to your excitements. And will you rank all these orthodox christians of past and present generations among the enemies of Christ? Will you not admit that many of this number have done more for the cause of what you consider pure religion, than any of 6 your revival leaders? Is not your assertion altogether untrue and slanderous. But you meant to condemn Unitarians. Very well. 2. In the second place, why do Unitarians oppose your revivals? I answer for myself. I have been in the midst of your excitements. I have experienced something of their power and influence. I have had a fair view of their operation on human beings. I have witnessed their pernicious effects on many individuals. I believe they are produced by unscriptural measures. I believe they yield unchristian fruit. I believe they are the special work of men and women. I know that many of the best and ablest orthodox divines have entertained this same belief on these several questions. I must therefore act in consistency with my convictions. I conscientiously oppose their existence and prevalence. I do this from the best of motives; from a regard to the plain instructions of my Saviour. I wish to banish all such unhallowed commotions from the land. I believe this can be done in one way, and in but one way. Convince people that their experiences in seasons of excitement are not the special work of the holy spirit, and the desired work is accomplished. Convince them that God does not exert a supernatural influence in the conversion of sinners, and the reign of fanaticism will have received a death blow. Convince them that all their thoughts and feelings in times of a revival are the natural effect of the means used and measures adopted, and your papers will forever be filled with lamentations for the withdrawal of divine, miraculous influences. To effect this object, has been the design of my present undertaking. I have presented evidence enough to satisfy any rational and candid mind. But I do not expect complete success at present. There is great ignorance in the community. Many dare not look into the facts on this question. Many will be deterred by your leaders from reading this and similar publications. But the increasing evil of these excitements will become more and more evident as the difficulty in producing them increases. Look into the Western States, and see what this very principle of special agency, is doing for the Mormornites. Unless this error is banished from christendom, many most alarming transactions will be made the occasion of christian lamentation. Having stated my views fully and distinctly, I now say that I am not opposing a revival of pure and undefiled religion. No. This is the grand object of all my thoughts, desires, prayers and exertions; and may God crown them with desired success. 3. In the third place, how can a revival of pure and undefiled religion be produced. In but one way, The work must be accomplished by christians. A great and mighty reformation must begin at the house of God. First, the Bible and the Bible alone, must be made the standard, and the only standard, of christian faith and practice; and all human creeds, confessions, formularies of faith must be banished from the world. Secondly, all who profess to be followers of Christ must be contented with the single name of Christian; and all the appellations which have been derived from human invention of doctrinal opinions must be forgotten. Thirdly, all Christians must judge each other by the christian rule; by their fruits, their conduct, and not by their party names or sentiments; and acknowledge all as brethren who receive Jesus as their Master, and exhibit a virtuous character. Fourthly, all Christians must obey the commands of the Saviour, and endeavor to do towards each other in all things as they would have others do unto them; and in this way cause all to forget their differences of opinion and unite on the common ground of salvation. Until these things have taken place, christendom will experience no very valuable or extensive revival of pure religion; and when these things are accomplished, the irreligious and unbelieving world will be drawn into the fold, by the example and writings of such consistent followers of the meek and lowly Je sus. 4. I have thus given you my honest reasons for believing your five assertions untrue. If you wish for certificates to establish any of my positions, they shall be readily furnished. I hope you will seriously consider my statements and arguments, and either acknowledge the conclusion to which they lead, or return a satisfactory answer. I have endeavored to speak with great plainness of language; for the subject and occasion demand frankness and honesty. I suppose you will call some of my remarks severe; but are they more severe than truth and justice exact? Is not the following extract from the pious Richard Baxter somewhat applicable to certain professors? 'It is one of the most dangerous diseases of professors, and greatest scandals of this age, that persons taken for eminently religious, are more impatient of plain, though just reproof, than many a drunkard, swearer, or fornicator. And when they have spent hours or days in the seeming earnest confession of their sin, and lament before God and man that they cannot do it with more grief and tears; yet they take it for a heinous injury in another that will say half so much against them, and take him for a malignant enemy of the Godly who will call them as they call themselves. They wish that the chief business of a preacher should be to praise them, and set them above the rest, as the only people of God; and they take him for an enemy that will tell them the truth. But the scandal is greatest in those preachers themselves, who cannot endure to hear that they are sinners. So tender and impatient of reproof are some, yea, some that for their learning, and preaching, and piety, are ranked in the highest form, or expect to be so, that almost nothing but flattery or praise can please them; and they can hardly bear the gentlest reproof, no, nor a contradiction of any of their opinions. Yours respectfully. Waltham, May, 1831. BERNARD WHITMAN. A FAITHFUL REPORT OF THE Theological Debate HELD AT MILFORD, NEW-JERSEY, DECEMBER, 1830, BY REV. W. L. M‘CALLA, OF THE PRESBYTERIAN, AND ELDER W. LANE, OF THE CHRISTIAN CONNEXION, CAREFULLY COLLECTED FROM NOTES TAKEN BY DIFFERENT BY ISAAC C. GOFF, One of the Moderators. NEW-YORK: Printed at the Office of D. Mitchell, No. 23, Harman-Street. |