SERMON
VIII
Christian
Affinity
Amos
3:3---"Can two walk together except they be agreed?"
In the holy
scriptures, we often find a negative thrown into the form of an interrogation.
The text is an instance of this kind: so that we are to understand the prophet
as affirming that two cannot walk together except they be agree.
For two to be agree,
implies something more than to be agreed in theory, or in understanding:
for we often see persons who agree in theory, but who differ vastly in feeling
and practice. Their understandings may embrace the same truth, while
their hearts and practice will be very differently affected by them. Saints and
sinners often embrace in theory the same religious creed, while it is plain
that they differ widely in feeling and practice.
We have reason to
believe that holy angels and devils apprehend and embrace intellectually
the same truths, and yet how very differently are they affected by them!
These different
effects, produced in different minds by the same truths, are owing to the
different state of the heart or affections of the different
individuals. Or, in other words, the difference in the effect consists in
the different manner in which the person receives these truths, or feels and
acts in view of them. It is to be observed also, that the same things and
truths will affect the same mind very differently at different times.
This too is owing to the different state of the affections at these times. Or
rather this difference consists in the different manner in which the mind
acts at these times. All pleasure and pain---all happiness and misery---all
sin and holiness---have their seat in, and belong to, the heartor affections.
All the satisfaction or dissatisfaction, pain or pleasure, depends entirely
upon the state of our affections at the time, and consists in these
affections. If it fall in with, and excite, and feed pleasurable
affections, we are pleased of course; for in these pleasurable
affections our pleasure or happiness consists. The higher, therefore, these
affections are elevated by the presentation of any thing or any truth to our
minds, the greater our pleasure is. But if the thing or truth do not fall in
with our affections it cannot please us; if it be aside from our present
state of feeling, and we refuse to change the course of our feelings, we shall
either view it with indifference, our affections being otherwise engaged, or if
it press upon us we shall turn from and resist it. If it be not only aside
from the subject that now engages our affections, but opposed to it, we shall
and must(our affections remaining the same) resist and oppose it.
We not only feel
uninterested or displeased and disgusted when a subject different from that
which at present engages our affections is introduced and crowded upon us, but
if any thing even upon the same subject that is far above or below our
tone of feeling is presented, and if our affections remain the same, and we
refuse to be enlisted and brought to that point, we must feel
uninterested, and perhaps grieved and offended. If the subject be exhibited in
a light that is below our present tone of feeling, we cannot be interested
until it come up to our feelings; and if the subject in this cooling and
to us degraded point of view is held up before our mind, and we struggle to
maintain these high affections, we feel displeased because our
affections are not fed but opposed. If the subject be presented in a manner
that strikes far above our tone of feeling, and our affections grovel and refuse
to arise, it does not fall in with and feed our affections, therefore we
cannot be interested; it is enthusiasm to us; we are displeased with the warmth
in which we do not choose to participate, and the farther it is above our
temperature the more we are disgusted.
These are truths
to which the experience of every man will testify, as they hold good upon every
subject, and under all circumstances; and are founded upon principles
incorporated with the very nature of man. Present to the ardent politician his
favorite subject in his favorite light, and when it has engaged his affections
touch it with the fire of eloquence, cause it to burn and blaze before his
mind, and you delight him greatly. But change your style and tone---let down
your fire and feeling---turn the subject over---present it in a drier
light---he at once loses nearly all his interest, and becomes uneasy at the
descent. Now change the subject---introduce death and solemn judgment---he is
shocked and stunned; press him with them, he is disgusted and offended.
Now, this loss of
interest in his favorite subject is the natural consequence of taking away from
before the mind that burning view of it that poured fire through his
affections; this disgust that he feels at the change of the subject, is the
natural consequence of presenting something that was at the time directly opposed
to the state of his feelings. Unless he chooses to turn his mind as you
change the subject he cannot but be displeased.
A refined musician
is listening almost in rapture to the skilful execution of a fine piece of
harmony---throw in discords upon him; he is in pain in a moment. Increase and
prolong the dissonance, and he leaves the room in disgust. You are fond of
music; but you are at present melancholy---you are in great affliction---you
are inclined to weep---the plaintive tones of an Eolian harp softly upon your
ear, and melt around the heart---your tears flow fast---but now the din of
trumpets, drums, and cymbals, and the piercing fife in mirthful quicksteps
breaks upon your ear, and drowns the soft breathings of the harp---you feel
distressed---you turn away and stop your ears. The plaintive harp touched you
in a tender point, it fell in with your feelings; therefore you were
gratified. The martial music opposed your state of feeling, you were too
melancholy to have your affections elevated and enlivened by it; it therefore necessarily
distressed you.
Your heart is
glowing with religious feelings---you are not only averse to the introduction
of any other subject at this time, but are uninterested with any thing upon the
same subject that is far below the tone of your affections. Suppose you hear a
cold man preachor pray; while he remains cold and you are warm
with feeling you are not interested, for your affections are not fed and
cherished unless he comes up to your tone; if this foes not happen you are
distressed and perhaps disgusted with his coldness. This is a thing of
course. Suppose, like Paul, "you have great heaviness and continual
sorrow in your heart" for dying sinners; that "the Spirit helpeth
your infirmities, making intercessions for you, according to the will of God,
with groanings that cannot be uttered; "in this state of mind you hear a
person pray who does not mention sinners---you hear a minister preach who says
but little to them, and that in a heartless, unmeaning manner; you are not
interested, you cannot be, feeling as you do, but you are grieved and
distressed. Suppose you are lukewarm, and carnal, and earthly in your
affections; you hear one exhort, or pray, or preach, who is highly spiritual,
and fervent, and affectionate; if you cling to your sins, and your affections
will not rise; if through prejudice, or pride, or the earthly and sensual state
of your affections, you refuse to kindle and to grasp the subject, although you
admit every word he says, yet you are not pleased. He is above your
temperature, you are annoyed with the manner, and fire, and spirit of
the man. The higher he rises, if your affections grovel, the farther apart you
are, and the more you are displeased. While your heart is wrong the
nearer right he is, the more he burns upon you; if your heart will not
enkindle, the more you are disgusted.
Now, in both these
cases, they, whose affections stand at or near the same point with him who
speaks or prays, will not feel disturbed but pleased. Those that are
lukewarm will listen to the dull man, and say, "'Tis pretty well."
Their pleasure will be small, because their affections are low; but upon the
whole they are pleased. Those who have no affections at the time will of
course not feel at all. All who have much feeling will listen
with grief and pain. These would listen to the ardent man with great interest.
Let him glow and blaze and they are in a repture. But the carnal and
cold-hearted, while they refuse to rise, are necessarily disturbed and
offended with his fire.
From these remarks
we may learn,
First, why persons
differing in theory upon doctrinal points in religion, and belonging to
different denomination, will often, for a time, walk together in great harmony
and affection. It is because they feel deeply, and feel alike.
Their differences are in a great measure lost or forgotten while they fall in
with each other's state of feeling; they will walk together while in heartthey
are agreed.
Again---We see why
young converts love to associate with each other, and with those other
older saints who have most religious feeling; these walk together
because they feel alike.
Again---We see why
lukewarm professors and impenitent sinners have the same difficulties
with means in revivals of religion. We often hear them complain of the manner
of preaching and praying. Their objections are the same, they find fault
with the same things, and use the same arguments in support of their
objections. The reason is, that at that time their affections are nearly the
same; it is the fire and the spirit that disturbs their frosty hearts. For the
time being they walk together, for in feeling they are agreed.
Again---We see why
ministers and Christians visiting revivals, often, at first, raise objections
to the means used, and cavil, and sometimes takes sides with the wicked. The
fact is, coming, as they often do, from regions where there are no religious
revivals at the time, they frequently feel reproved and annoyed by the warmth
and spirit which they witness. The praying, preaching, and conservation, are
above their present temperature. Sometimes, prejudice on account of its being
amongst a different denomination from them, or prejudice against the preacher
or people, or perhaps pride or envy or worldliness, or something of the kind,
chains down their affections that they do not enter into the spirit of the
work. Now, while their hearts remain wrong, they will, of course, cavil;
and the nearer right any thing is, the more spiritual and holy, so much the
more it mustdisplease them, while their affections grovel. (We do
not mean to justify anything that is wrong and unscriptural in the use
of means to promote revivals of religion. Nor do we pretend that everythingis
right, that may, and often does, give offence. We know that many things may
exist, and while human nature remains as it is, will exist in
revivals, that are to be lamented, and ought, as carefully as possible, to be
corrected. But we do hold it as a certain truth, that while any heart is wrong,
any thing that falls in with it, and pleases it, must be wrong also, as
certainly as that one false weightcan be balanced only be another just
as false: and while a heart in this state, the best things will be
the most certain to offend. And if this heart, remaining wrong,
could be brought in view of a state of things as perfect as heaven, it
would blaspheme, and be filled with the torments of hell. The only remedy is to
call upon him to "repent and make to him a new heart,"
and when he has done this, right things will please him, and not before.)
Again---We see why
ministers and private Christians differ about prudential measures. The
man who sees and feels the infinitely solemn things of eternity, will necessarily
judge very differently of what is prudent or imprudent, in the
use of means, from one whose spiritual eye is almost closed. The man whose
heart is breaking for perishing sinners, will, of course, deem it prudent,
and right, and necessary, to "use great plainness of speech," and to
deal with them in a very earnest and affectionate manner. He would deem a
contrary course highly imprudent, and dangerous, and criminal. While he
who feels but little for them, and sees but little of their danger, will
satisfy himself with using very different means, or using them in a very
different manner, and will, of course, entertain very different notions of what
is prudent. Hence we see the same person having very different notions
of prudence, and consequently practising very differently, at different
times. Indeed, a man's notions of what is prudent as to means and
measures in revivals of religion, will depend, and, in a great measure, ought
to depend, on the state of his own affections, and the state of feeling with
which he is surrounded. For, what would be prudent under some circumstances,
would be highly imprudent in others. What would be prudent for a man in a
certain state of his affections, and under certain circumstances, would be the
height of imprudence, in the same person, in a different state of
feeling, and under other circumstances. It is, in most cases, extremely
difficult to form, and often very wrong publicly to express, an opinion
condemning a measure as imprudent, (which is not condemned by the word
of God,) without being in a situation to enter into the feelings and
circumstances of the individual and people at the time the measure was adopted.
If Christians and ministers would keep these things in mind, a great many uncharitable
and censorious speeches would be avoided, and much injury to the cause of
truth and righteousness would be prevented.
Again---We see why
lukewarm Christians and sinners are not disturbed by dull preaching or praying.
It does not take hold on their feelings at all, and therefore does not
distress nor offend them. Hence we see that if, in a revival of religion, when
cold and wicked hearts are disturbed with plain and pungent dealing, a dull
minister is called upon, and preaches to the people, the wicked and
cold-hearted will praise his preaching. This shows why, in seasons of revival,
we often hear sinners and lukewarm Christians wish that their minister would
preach as he used to; that he would be himself again. The reason of this is
plain; he did not use to move them, but now his fire, and spirit, and
pungency annoy them, and disturb their carnal slumbers.
Again---We may
here learn how to estimate the opinions of ministers and Christians, and our
own opinions, when our affections are in a bad state. How does such
a man approve of what was said or done? What is his opinion as to means and
measures?&c. are questions often asked, and answered, and the answer
depended upon as high authority, without any regard to the state of that man's
affections at the time. Now, in most cases, we do utterly wrong to place much
confidence in our own opinions, or in the opinions of others, as to prudential
measures, unless we have evidence of the right state of our or their
affections; for it is almost certain, that should our affections alter, we
should view things in a different light, and consequently change our opinion.
Christians would do well to remember and adopt the resolution of President
Edwards, "that he would always act as he saw to be most proper when he had
the clearest views of the things of religion."
Again---We learn
why churches are sometimes convulsed by revivals of religion. In most churches
there are probably more or less hypocrites, who, when revivals are in a measure
stripped of animal feeling, and become highly spiritual, are disturbed by the
fire and spirit of them, and inwardly and sometimes openly oppose them. But
when a part only of the real Christians in a church awake from their slumbers
and become very spiritual and heavenly, and the rest remain carnal and
earthly in their affections, the church is in danger of being torn in sunder.
For as those who are awake become more engaged, more spiritual and active, the
others, if they will not awake, will be jealous and offended, and
feeling rebuked by the engagedness of others, will cavil, and find themselves
the more displeased, as those that are more spiritual rise farther above them.
The nearer to a right state of feeling the engaged ones arrive, the farther
apart they are; and as they ascend on the scale of holy feeling, if others
will not ascend with them, the almost certain consequence will be
that these will descend, until they really have no community of
feeling, and can no longer walk together, because they are not agreed. This
state of feeling in a church, calls for great searchings of heart in all its
members, and although greatly to be dreaded and deeply to be lamented, when it
exists, is easily accounted for, upon these plain principles of our nature, and
is what sometimes will happen, in spite of the sagacity or angels to prevent
it.
Again---We see why
ministers are sometimes unsettled by revivals. It will sometimes happen,
without any imprudence on the part of the minister, that many of his church and
congregation will not enter into the spirit of a revival. If his own affections
get enkindled, and he feels very much for his flock and for the honor of his
master, he will most assuredly press them with truth, and annoy them by his
spirit, and pungency, and fire, until he offends them. If they feel wrong,
the more powerfully and irresistibly he forces truth upon them, so much the
more, of course, unless their feelings alter, he will offend them, and
in the end, perhaps, find it expedient to leave them. All this may happen, and
be as right and necessary in a minister as it was for Paul to leave places and
people, when divers were hardened, and contradicted, and blasphemed, and
spoke evil of this way before the multitude.
Another case may
occur, where the church and people may awake while the shepherd sleeps and will
not awake. This will inevitably alienate their affections from him, and destroy
their confidence in him. In either of these cases, they may find themselves
unable to walk together, because they are not agreed. In the former case, let
the minister obey the command of Christ, and "shake off the dust of his feet,
for a testimony against them." In the latter, let the church shake off
their sleepy minister; they are better without him than with him. "Wo to
the shepherds that do not feed themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the
flocks? Ye feed not the flock. Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the
Lord. Thus saith the Lord God, Behold I am against the shepherds, and I will
require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock,
neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my
flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them." Ezek.
34:2,3,9,10.
President Edwards
says---
"Though
ministers preach never so good doctrine, and be never so painful and laborious
in their work, yet if they show to their people that they are not well affected
to this work, but are doubtful and suspicious of it, they will be very likely
to do their people a great deal more hurt than good. For the very frame of such
a great and extraordinary work of God, if their people were suffered to believe
it to be his work, and the example of other towns, together with what preaching
they might hear occasionally, would be likely to have a much greater influence
upon the minds of their people to awaken and animate them in religion, than all
other labors with them. Besides, their minister's opinion will not only beget
in them a suspicion of the work they hear of abroad, whereby the mighty hand of
God that appears in it, loses its influence upon their minds; but it will also
tend to create a suspicion of every thing of the like that shall appear among
themselves, as being something of the same distemper that is become so
epidemical in the land. And what is this, in effect, but to create a suspicion
of all vital religion, and to put the people upon talking against and
discouraging it, wherever it appears, and knocking it on the head as fast as it
rises. We, who are ministers, by looking on this work from year to year with a
displeased countenance, shall effectually keep the sheep from their pasture,
instead of doing the part of the shepherds by feeding them; and our people had
a great deal better be without any settled minister at all, at such a day as
this.
"We who are
in this sacred office had need to take heed what we do, and how we behave
ourselves at this time; a less thing in a minister will hinder the work
of God, than in others. If we are very silent, or say but little about
the work, in our public prayers and preaching, or seem carefully to avoid
speaking of it in our conservation, it will be interpreted by our people, that
we who are their guides, to whom they are to have their eye for spiritual
instruction, are suspicious of it; and this will tend to raise the same
suspicions in them; and so the aforementioned consequences will follow. And if
we really hinder and stand in the way of the work of God, whose business above
all others it is to promote it, how can we expect to partake of the glorious
benefits of it? And, by keeping others from the benefit, we shall keep them out
of heaven; therefore those awful words of Christ to the Jewish teachers, should
be considered by us, Matthew 23:13. "Wo unto you, for ye shut up the
kingdom of heaven; for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that
are entering to go in." If we keep the sheep from their pasture, how shall
we answer it to the great Shepherd, who has bought the flock with his precious
blood, and has committed the care of them to us? I would humbly desire of every
minister that has thus long remained disaffected to this work, and has had
contemptible thoughts of it, to consider whether he has not hitherto been like
Michael, without any child, or at least in a great measure barren and
unsuccessful in his work: I pray God it may not be a perpetual barrenness, as
hers was."
Again---We may see
that carnal professors and sinners have no difficulty with animal feeling.
It is not uncommon in revivals of religion to hear a great deal of opposition
made to what they term animal feeling. That much of this kind of feeling
is sometimes excited in revivals of religion is not denied, nor is it strange,
nay, it is impossible that real religious affections should be excited to any
considerable degree, without exciting the animal sympathies and sensibilities;
and to wonder at this, or to object to a revival on this account, is palpably
absurd. But, in most cases, it is not the animal feeling that can give
offence, for so far as these feelings are concerned, there is a perfect
community of feeling between saints and sinners, and carnal and spiritual
Christians. Sinners have as much animal feeling as saints: cold
professors have as much of the animal as warm and spiritual Christians.
So far, then, as animal feeling goes, they can all sympathize, and indeed we
often see that they do. Adopt a strain of exhortation or preaching that is
calculated to awaken mere sympathy and animal feeling, and you will soon see
that there is a perfect community of feeling amongst cold and warm hearted
Christians and sinners; they will all weep and seem to melt, and no one will be
offended, and I may add, no one will be convicted or converted. But change your
style, and become more spiritual and holy in your matter, and throw
yourself out in the ardent and powerful manner, in direct appeal to the
conscience and the heart---their tears will soon be dried, the carnal and cold
hearted will become uneasy, and soon find themselves offended. So far as animal
feeling goes, they walk together, for in this they are agreed; but as
soon as feeling becomes spiritual and holy, they can go together no farther;
for here they are not, (and while sinners remain impenitent, and cold hearts
remain cold,) they cannot be, agreed.
Again---We may see
why impenitent sinners cannotlike pure revivals of religion. It
is because God is in them. They hate God, and this is the reason
why God commands them to make to themselves a new heart. This is the reason,
and the only reason, why sinners need a new heart. Now, while they are
under the influence of "a carnal mind, which is enmity against God,"
they do, and must, self-evidently, hate everything like God, precisely
in proportion as they see it to bear his image. Hence we see, that the more a
revival is stripped of animal feeling and of everything wrong,
the more it will necessarily offend wrong hearts. The more of God, and
the less of human imperfection, there is to be seen in them, the more they will
and must excite the enmity of carnal hearts.
Again---We learn
how to estimate apparent revivalswhere there is no opposition from the
wicked. If persons under the dominion of a carnal mind do not oppose, it must
be owing to one of three causes. 1st. Either they are so convicted that they
dare not openlyoppose; (and even then they are opposed in heart;) or,
2dly, there is nothing of the Holy Spirit in them; or 3dly, which often
happens, from an injudicious application of means to the sympathies of the
multitude, the operations of the Holy Spirit are kept out of the sinner's view
and covered up in the rubbish of animal feeling. Any thing that keeps
out of the sinner's view the work of the Holy Spirit, tends to prevent
opposition. And every thing that exposes to the sinner's view the hand of God,
will certainly excite the opposition of his unregenerate heart. That excitement,
therefore, which does not call out the opposition of the wicked and wrong
hearted, is either not a revival of religion at all, or it is so conducted that
sinners do not see the finger of God in it.
Hence we see, that
the more pure and holy the means are that are used to promote a revival
of religion, the more they are stripped of human infirmity and sympathy, and
the more like God they are, so much the more, of necessity, will they excite
the opposition of all wrong hearts. For, while a man's heart is wrong
upon any subject, it is self-evident that he cannot heartily approve of
what is right upon that subject; for this would involve a contradiction. It
would be the same as to say that he could feel both right and wrongupon
the same subject at the same time.
Hence it appears,
that other things being equal, those means, and that preaching, both as
to matter and manner, which call forth most of the native enmity
of the heart, and that are most directly over against wrong hearts, are
nearest right (Let it not be thought that we advocate or recommend preaching,
or using other means, with design to give offense. Nor that we suppose
that the gospel cannot be preached, and that means cannot be used in a wrong
spirit, and in a manner that is highly objectionable, and may justly give
offence. All such things are to be condemned. But still we do insist that holythings
are offensive to unholy hearts, and while heartsremain unholy,
they cannot be pleased but with that which is unholy like themselves. The
understanding my approve, the conscience may approve, but the heart will
not, and, remaining unholy, cannot approve of that which is holy. If,
therefore, a sinner who is under the dominion of a "carnal mind,"
which is "enmity against God," is pleased with preaching, it must be
either because the character of God is not faithfully exhibited, or the sinner
is prevented from apprehending it, in its true light, by inattention, or by
being so taken up with the style and manner as to overlook the
offensiveness of the matter. If, therefore, the matter of
preaching is right, and the sinner is pleased, there is something
defective in the manner; either a want of earnestness, or holy unction,
or something else, prevents the sinner from seeing, what preaching ought to
show him, that he hates God and his truth).
Hence, we see the
folly of those who are laboring to pleasepersons whose affections are in
a wrong state upon religious subjects. They cannot be pleased with any
thing right and holy while their hearts are in this wrong state,
for this we have just seen would involve a contradiction.
This shows why so
much wrong feeling stirred up in revivals of religion.
It is the natural
effect of pure revivals to stir up wrong feeling in wrong hearts.
Revivals of religion on earth, stir up wrong feeling in hell; they will disturb
the same spirit, and stir up the same feelings, whenever they come in contact
with rebellious hearts, whether in the church or out of it. Whenever the Holy
Spirit comes, or is seen to operate, the opposite spirit is disturbed of
course. A great degree of right and holy feeling among saints, will naturally
stir up a great degree of unholy and wicked feeling in all those hearts that
are determinately wrong. The more right and holy feeling there is, the more
wrong and unholy feeling there will be, of course, unless sinners and carnal
professors bow and submit. They cannot walk together, because they are
not agreed: and the more holy and heavenly the saints become in their
affections and conduct, the farther apart they will be, until the light of
eternity will set them, in feeling and affections, as far asunder as heaven and
hell.
This shows that
the difference between heaven and hell, as it regards moral character, and
happiness and misery, consists in the different state of the hearts or
affections of their respective inhabitants.
This demonstrates,
beyond all contradiction, that sinners cannot be saved unless they are born
again. In other words, it is plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that
sinners should walk and be happy with saints and holy angels, without an entire
change in their affections. Sinners cannot walk with the saint here. As
soon as the saints cease to walk "after the course of this world,"
sinners think it strange that they run not with them to the same excess
of riot, "speaking evil of them." As soon as Christians awake and
become spiritual and active, holy and heavenly, and break off from their vain
and wicked associations with the world, sinners are uniformly distressed and
offended. They try to imagine that it is something wrong in the saints,
and in revivals, that offends them. But the truth is, it is the little that is rightin
the saints, and that in which there is the most of God in revivals,
that offends them most. And were the saints as holy as angels are, or as
holy as they will be in heaven, sinners must of course be so much
the farther from having any community of feeling with them: and as saints rise
in holiness, and sinners sink in sin, they will go farther and farther apart
for ever and ever.
I remark, lastly,
that this shows why the lives and preaching of the prophets, of Christ and his
apostles, and the revivals of the early ages of the church, met with so much
more violent oppositionfrom carnal professors of religion, and
from ungodly sinners, than is offered to preachers and revival in these days.
It is not to be
denied, that the saints in those days "had trials of cruel mocking and
scourging, yea, of bonds and imprisonment; they were stoned, they were sawn
asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in
sheep-skins and goat-skins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; (of whom the
world was not worthy;) they wandered in deserts, in mountains, and in dens and
caves of the earth."
It is not and
cannot be denied, that the preaching of the prophets, of Christ and his
apostles, and of primitive ministers, was opposed with great bitterness
by many professed saints, and by multitudes of ungodly sinners, more than that
of any preachers of the present day. Nor is it to be concealed, that professors
of religion were often leaders in this opposition; that they stirred up the
Romans to crucify Jesus, and afterwards to persecute and destroy his saints,
and crucify his apostles. That even the religious leaders, and learned doctors
of the law, endeavored to prejudice the multitude against the Savior, and to
prevent their listening to his discourses: "He hath a devil and is
mad," said they, "why hear ye him?" They led the way in opposing
the apostles in the revivals in which they were engaged. We must admit
too, that those revivals made a great deal of noise in the world,
insomuch that the apostles were accused of "turning the world upside
down:" and that sinners were often greatly hardened by the
preaching of Christ and his apostles; "were filled with great wrath,"
and opposed with such bitterness, that Christ told his apostles to "let
them alone." In some places where the apostles preached, "divers
were" so "hardened," that they "contradicted and
blasphemed, and spake evil of this way," insomuch that the
apostles were forced to leave, and go to other places, and sometimes to leave
under very humiliating circumstances, but just escaping with their lives. Now
these are facts that we need not blush to meet; as they are easily accounted
for, upon the principle contained in the text, and illustrated in this
discourse. All these things afford no evidence that the prophets, and Christ
and his apostles, were imprudent and unholy men; that their preaching
was too overbearing and severe; or that there was something wrong in the
management of revivals in those day. The fact is, that the prophets were
so much more holy in their lives, and so much bolder, and more faithful in
delivering their messages; that Christ was so much more searching, and plain,
and pungent, and personal in his preaching, and so entirely "separate from
sinners" in his life; the apostles were so pungent and plain in their
dealing with sinners and professed saints, and so self-denying and holy in
their lives, that carnal professors and ungodly sinners could not walk with
them. The means that were then used to promote revivals were more holy and
free from alloy than they now are. There was less of mere sympathy, and of that
hypocritical suavity of manner, and of those embellishments of language, that
are calculated and designed to court the applause of the ungodly.
"Renouncing the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness,
nor handling the word of God deceitfully," they preached, "not with
the enticing words of man's wisdom," but "with great plainness of
speech," so that the ungodly, in the church and out of it, were filled
with wrath.
Stephen was so
holy and searching in his address, that the elders of Israel
"gnashed upon him with their teeth." But this is no evidence that he
was imprudent. The fact, that the revivals of the present day so much
more silent and gradual in their progress, than they were on the day of
Pentecost, and at many other times and places, and create much less noise and
opposition among cold professors and ungodly sinners, does not prove that the
theory of revivals is better understood now than it was then, nor that those
ministers and Christians who are engaged in these revivals are more prudent than
the apostles and primitive Christians; and to support this, would evince great
spiritual pride in us. Nor are we to say that the human heart is changed, or
that the character of God is become less offensive "to the carnal
mind." No! the fact is, the prophets, and Christ, and his apostles, and
the primitive saints, were more holy, more bold and active, more plain and
pungent in their preaching, less conformed to this crazy world; in one word,
they were more prudent and more like heaven than we are; these are the
reasons why they were more hated than we are, why their preaching and praying
gave so much more offence than ours. Revivals, in their days, were more free
from carnal policy, and that management that tends to keep out of the sinner's
views the naked hand of God: these are the reasons why they made so much noise
than the revivals that we witness in these days, and stirred up so much of
earth and hell to oppose them, that they convulsed and turned the world upside
down. It was known then, that "men could not serve God and
mammon." It was seen to be true, that "if any man will live
godly in Christ Jesus, he shall suffer persecution." It was understood
then, that if "ministers pleased men, they were not the
servants of Christ." The churchand world could not walk
together, for thenthey were not agree. Let us not be puffed up,
and imagine that we are prudentand wise, and have learned how to
manage carnal professors and sinners, whose "carnal mind is enmity against
God," so as not to call forth their opposition to truth and holiness, as
Christ and his apostles did. But let us know that if they have less difficulty
with us, and with our lives, and preaching, than they had
with theirs, it is because we are less holy, less heavenly, less like God than
they were. If we walk with the lukewarm and ungodly, or they with us, it
is because we are agreed. For two cannot walk together except they be agreed.