with him. But here as elsewhere, he condemns without mercy all dissentients. Having spoken of a public examination at a theological seminary, in the course of which his peculiar opinions on this subject were controverted, he says, "Now, to teach such sentiments as these, is to trifle with the word of God." And he declares, that all persons who have not known by experience the truth of his enthusiastic views of this matter, "have great reason to doubt their piety," and adds, "this is by no means uncharitable." Everything which has, at any time, or in any quarter of the land, been said or done that seems adapted to operate to the prejudice of his measures, is dragged into the pulpit, and made the occasion of denunciation against the transgressors. "Some young men in Princeton came out a few years ago with an essay on the evils of revivals." We cannot see what necessity there was for Mr. Finney to tell the people of Chatham-street Chapel, that the young men in Princeton, some years before, had published their opposition to the new measures. But he does tell them, and adds, “I should like to know 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?" We can inform Mr. Finney, that that "piece" affords "no place for repentance," though it should be sought "carefully with tears." He tells his people again, that "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;" and in these letters the new measures were condemned. This incident is made the occasion of a tirade, in the course of which he breaks out with the exclamation, it is a "shame and a sin that theological professors, who preach but seldom, who are withdrawn from the active duties. of the ministry, should sit in their studies, and write their letters, advisory or dictatorial, to ministers and churches who are in the field, and who are in circumstances to judge what needs to be done." And he says it is "dangerous and ridiculous for our theological professors, who are withdrawn from the field of combat, to be allowed to dictate in regard to the measures and movements of the church." We shall see whether his theological professorship will put a bridle on his tongue. It will be seen that no venerableness of years or wisdom or Christian excellence can turn aside the fulminations of his displeasure. To disapprove of his measures, no matter with what otherwise excellent qualities this disapproval may be associated, is to give decisive evidence of wickedness, and not

*It was our purpose, had our limits permitted, to notice at length his wild opinions on this subject. We the less regret the necessary exclusion of our intended remarks on this topic, as we are able to refer the reader to a very excellent discussion of it, in two Lectures, lately published, from the pen of Dr. Richards, of the Auburn Seminary. Since the publication of these Lectures, Mr. Finney no doubt has another argument for proving that this venerable servant of Christ is not "such a man as is needed for training our young ministers in these days of excitement and action."

only to offend him, but to insult God. Nor is he ever startled by the number of his victims. All, whether a few individuals or a whole church, who will not fall down and worship the golden image which he has set up, are doomed to the fiery furnace. The General Assembly, a few years since, issued a Pastoral Letter, in which the new measures were condemned. But neither Mr. Finney's modesty nor his tenderness is at all troubled by the array of the whole church against him. When he saw their pastoral letter he says, "My soul was sick, an unutterable feeling of distress came over my mind, and I felt that God would visit the Presbyterian church for conduct like this." How to the very life is the fanaticism of this sentence, this turning from general opposition to solace and strengthen himself in the singular prerogative which he enjoys of a back-door entrance into the court of Heaven, and of unquestioned access to its magazines of wrath. In a like spirit he says of the "Act and Testimony warfare," that "the blood of millions who will go to hell before the church will get over the shock, will be found in the skirts of the men who have got up and carried on this dreadful contention." And of the General Assembly, that "No doubt there is a jubilee in hell every year about the time of meeting of the General Assembly." Of all ministers, be they few or many," who will not turn out of their tracks to do anything new," he says, "they will grieve the Holy Spirit away, and God will visit them with his curse." At the close of these extracts, for we must put a period to them from other causes than lack of materials to furnish more like them, we would ask, was there ever a fanatic who was more intelligible in his claim to a close relationship of his own with the Most High, or more indiscriminate and wholesale in his condemnation of those who refused submission to his peculiar dogmas? Was there ever a Dominic who was more exclusive or more fierce?

There remains one more feature of Mr. Finney's spirit to be noticed, his irreverence and profaneness. This is a topic which we would gladly have avoided. It is painful to us to contemplate this trait of character, and we would not willingly shock the minds of others, as we have been shocked by some of the passages which we must quote under this head. But it is necessary to a correct understanding of the spirit of the new measures, that this feature should be exhibited. It has been seen all along that Mr. Finney's theology is not a barren vine, and we trust it has at the same time been seen, that its fruit is the grapes of Sodom and the clusters of Gomorrah. We will now show what are the practical results of his theory of the divine government; though for reasons just hinted, we shall give no more illustrations under this allegation than are necessary distinctly to sustain it. In urging the necessity of new measures to the production of revivals, he says, " Perhaps it is not too much to say, that it is impossible for God himself to bring about reformations but by new measures." Here we might pause, for the man who is capable of uttering such a sentence as

66

this, is capable of almost any degree of profaneness. But lest it might be urged that this may be a solitary instance of unpremeditated rashness, we must furnish a few more. He says of a certain class of people that "they seem determined to leave it to God alone to convert the world, and say, If he wants the world converted let him do it. They ought to know," he continues, "that this is impossible: so far as we know, neither God nor man can convert the world without the co-operation of the church." Again, when speaking of the duties of church members "in regard to politics," he says, "God cannot sustain this free and blessed country, which we love and pray for, unless the church will take right ground." In rebuking those who do not "exhibit their light," he tells them, "God will not take the trouble to keep a light burning that is hid." To cast ridicule upon a certain kind of prayers, he says, that they who offer them pray in such a manner, that "everybody wishes them to stop, and God wishes so too, undoubtedly." And in reference to the subscribers to the New York Evangelist, who have neglected to pay in their dues, he says, "Why, it would be disgraceful to God to dwell and have communion with such persons. We will close these extracts with two passages of a still more extraordinary character. Speaking of the Saviour, he says, "He was afraid he should die in the garden before he came to the cross." And yet again, and more astounding still, he says "Jesus Christ when he was praying in the garden, was in such an agony that he sweat as it were great drops of blood, falling down to the ground;-I have never known a person sweat blood, but I have known a person pray till the blood started from the nose" ! ! Who that has ever dwelt in holy contemplation over the sacred mysteries of his Saviour's sufferings, does not feel indignant at this unhallowed, vulgar profanation of them? And what extremes can appal the mind that could perpetrate this without shrinking?

Let it be noted that the spirit which we have here pictured, is not the spirit of Mr. Finney alone. Had it belonged to the man, we should not have troubled ourselves to exhibit it. But it is the spirit of the system, and therefore deserves our careful notice. And it is seen to be, as Dr. Beecher called it eight years ago, “a spirit of fanaticism, of spiritual pride, censoriousness, and insubordination to the order of the Gospel."* It is prurient, bustling and revolutionary-harsh, intolerant and vindictive. Can the tree which produces such frnit be good? The system from which it springs is bad in all its parts, root, trunk, branches, and fruit. The speculative error of its theology and religion is concrete in its measures and spirit. Let it prevail through the church, and the very name revival will be a by-word and a hissing. Already has it produced, we fear, to some extent this deplorable result. Such have already been its effects, that there can be no doubt, if it should affect still larger masses, and be relieved from the opposing influ

* See Dr. Beecher's Letter in the pamphlet on New Measures, before referred to.

ences which have somewhat restrained its outbreakings, it will spread desolation and ruin, and ages yet to come will deplore the waste of God's heritage. To the firm opposition of the friends of truth, in reliance upon the Great Head of the Church, and prayer for His blessing, we look for protection from such disaster.

We have spoken our minds plainly on this subject. We intended from the beginning not to be misunderstood. It is high time that all the friends of pure doctrine and of decent order, in the house of God, should speak plainly. Mr. Finney was kindly and tenderly expostulated with at the commencement of his career. Mr. Nettleton, than whom no one living was better qualified or entitled to give counsel on this subject, discharged fully his duty towards him. Others did the same. But their advice was spurned, their counsels were disregarded. To envy or blindness did he impute their doubts of the propriety of his course. He had a light of his own, and by it "he saw a hand they could not see." All the known means of kindness and expostulation have been tried to induce him to abandon his peculiarities, but without success. It is the clear duty of the Church now to meet him and his co-reformers with open and firm opposition. Let us not be deluded with the idea that opposition will exasperate and do harm. Under cover of the silence and inaction which this fear has already produced, this fanaticism has spread, until now twelve thousand copies of such a work as these Lectures on Revivals are called for by its cravings. And there is danger that this spirit will spread still more extensively. The elements of fanaticism exist in the breast of every community, and may be easily called into action by causes which we might be disposed to overlook as contemptible.

We conclude this article, as we did our former, by pointing out to Mr. Finney his duty to leave our church. It is an instructive illustration of the fact that fanaticism debilitates the conscience, that this man can doubt the piety of any one who uses coffee; and call him a cheat, who sends a letter to another on his own business, without paying the postage; while he remains, apparently without remorse, with the sin of broken vows upon him. In this position we leave him before the public. Nor will we withdraw our charges against him until he goes out from among us, for he i not of us.

ESSAY VI.

DR. BEECHER'S THEOLOGY.*
.

THIS work had its origin in the prosecution of Dr. Beecher upon charges of heresy, before the presbytery, and subsequently before the synod of Cincinnati. By both these bodies he was acquitted; but the synod at the same time requested him to publish, at as early a day as possible, "a concise statement of the argument and design of his sermon on native depravity, and of his views of total depravity, original sin, and regeneration, agreeably to his declaration and explanation before the synod." In compliance with this request, Dr. Beecher published his Views in Theology, which is an enlarged and illustrated edition of the defence made upon his trial. The opinions of a man so eminent in abilities and in station would be matter of public interest, independent of the peculiar circumstances which in this case imparted to them additional importance; and we intended, therefore, at the time when his work appeared, to make it the subject of examination and remark. But this purpose was then laid aside, for reasons with which it is not necessary to trouble the public; and it is now resumed, because recent events and discussions have again broken the silence which had begun to prevail in relation to Dr. Beecher and his opinions, and rendered it important to ascertain how much ground he has really given for the doubts and suspicions which many seem to entertain. We have therefore recurred to his Views in Theology, in contrast with his other publications, and the result of this comparison we are about to lay before our readers.

We cannot sympathize with Dr. Beecher in the complaints which he makes that he should be called upon to defend his orthodoxy before an ecclesiastical tribunal. He speaks of "the necessity of explanation imposed on him by unfounded accusations;" and compares himself with "an aged merchant of long-established reputation called upon to prove his honesty by the exhibition of his books; or a physician of age and experience to repel the suspicion of quackery by publishing an account of his cases and his practice."

Originally published in 1837, in review of "Views in Theology," by Lyman Beecher, D.D., President of Lane Theological Seminary.