May 2, 2012

After his conversion at age twenty-nine, Charles Grandison Finney brought his legal training and his own theological views to bear on the landscape of American Protestantism. In Lectures on Revival, 1 he advocates the lessons he learned during a decade spent conducting revivals during America’s Second Great Awakening. The openness and candidness of these lectures have made them both fodder for theological debate and a procedure manual for conducting revival meetings.

Beginning with the definition of revival (15), he discusses at length the importance of prayer in revival. Finney then presents the “means” which God has blessed to bring about revival and responds to attacks which opponents of his revival work had made. In the lecture “Winning Souls Takes Wisdom” (105-115) he begins to focus on the second part of his definition of revival, “the awakening and conversion of sinners” (15). The remaining lectures deal directly with this theme. He points out the wisdom of winning souls, gives pastors pointers in preaching for the purpose of winning souls and gives pointers for laymen in supporting and encouraging their minister in the work of winning souls. After a discussion on particular strategies for promoting revivals including a strong defense of his “new measures” he focuses the remainder of the book on the work of dealing with the “awakened” and “convicted” sinner. Finney gives meticulous instructions on how to counsel those who respond to the gospel. He distinguishes between those who are attracted by their new found claims of the gospel from those who are actively dealing with the guilt of conviction, giving details on how to respond to each.  He concludes by applying many of his principles used on sinners to the backslidden in the church and encouraging others to grow in God’s grace by obeying Him.

Finney argues against what he sees as worldliness and evil in the culture of his day and concludes that the spiritual fervor awakened in a revival is necessary to cut through the noise of society and seize the attention of the populace. He sees himself, and other “wise ministers” (116), as agents of God’s work in bringing revival to the land. Revival is God’s chosen instrument to cause “spiritually sluggish” people to pay attention to Him and thus provide the knowledge necessary to overcome the world’s forces. Like many in his day, he believed that man possesses the means to usher in the millennium (191) reign of Christ. The argument follows that, if individuals are confronted by the claims of the gospel, its logic will prevail and, they will be convinced of its rightness. If, in this “awakened” state, sinners are handled properly (226) they will come to submit to God and be converted. If this process is accomplished (248) by wise ministers the converts will mature and grow in God’s grace. (278) As this process is repeated the world will eventually get better and better, and then Christ will come. Revivals are to be the catalysts which, if handled properly, can lead the lost to be converted and set the stage for Christ’s kingdom coming to the earth.

Finney states in the preface of the lectures that his purpose is “to reach and arouse the church” (7). His view is that revival is the supreme work of the church. He contends that the fervor of revival could and should be maintained by the church if proper attention is given to his list of twenty-four hindrances. Although Finney’s ultimate goal, mankind’s ushering in the millennium, was not accomplished the means he explains have been used widely in the church and by evangelists up to the present.

Finney’s fervor is best understood in light of his surroundings and his deeply held postmillennialist views. He lived and was converted in the same upper part of New York that he later referred to as the “burned-over district” for the numerous revivals in that region during his ministry. He clearly believed that what he had experienced will work anywhere in the world if properly directed. This enthusiasm for the future and belief in the individual’s ability to greatly assist God in ushering in the kingdom clearly forms a bias through which he must be understood.

In points of theology, Finney places too much emphasis on human means in accomplishing God’s ends. In his discussion of the “Necessity and Effect of Union” (193), he says that “humans are as indispensable to spiritual renewal as God” (198). This disregards God’s use of a whale to deliver Jonah to Nineveh in spite of the prophet’s objections and he opened the mouth of Balaam’s donkey to rebuke him. In his discussion on winning souls, he understates the role of the Holy Spirit in convicting of sin while he emphasizes the roles of those counseling the one convicted and the convicted himself (110). In truth God, through the Holy Spirit, gives the faith to believe the gospels’ claims. Finney does not totally discount the Spirit’s role in conversion; however, he de-emphasizes it. While it is true that when a person is under conviction, there is a “favorable moment”(109) which needs to be handled appropriately. Finney claims that if, the moment passes and the person does not become converted, “it can never be recovered” (109). While that moment may not be recovered, if they are one of the elect, God’s Spirit, because of his grace, will move on them again. Finney also suggests that the counselor is to bring up the specific sins of the person being convicted. This shows clearly the movement of his emphasis from the Holy Spirit’s role to human means, not to mention the problems of judgementalism which individuals would have in trying to identify the specific sins of someone else.

As a shepherd Finney is mired in the legalism of his time. Finney’s tone, with all of his lists of proper responses to a host of circumstances, sounds legalistic and pharisaical. For example, he asserts that the need of a bookmark in one’s Bible shows that one reads God’s word as a “chore rather than from love” (32). Again, in his discussion of ministering to convicted sinners, Finney says that the fact that the refusals of some to use the “anxious seat” (111) have entrenched them in a material point, and they refuse to yield. He is a stern task master who has confused the letter for the spirit of the law.

Charles Finney has positively influenced those who have come after him in two important ways. First, as an innovator in the development and acceptance of the “new measures” (162) which he used in preparation for and during revival meetings and, secondly for his pioneering thought in what would later be known as the church growth movement.

Even though he suffered much personal anguish and eventually left his denomination, Finney brought many innovations into common practice of the church. His use of the anxious seat accomplished publicly what today’s counseling rooms attempt to accomplish privately. His understanding of the progression of new measures in music (164) is applied today by those who are bringing contemporary music into American worship. His reputation as an innovator does not seem to have suffered greatly in spite of his opponents. Instead, the controversy gained him notoriety which propelled the discussion of his new methods to larger circles.

Four church growth methods have arisen from Finney’s thought. First, in lecture eight he discusses that prayer meetings should not only be well planned but should be kept to a size so that “everyone . . . has the opportunity to pray and express the feelings of” their heart. (93) This is one of the underlying principles in vital small group ministries. Second, his thought that ministers ought to be trained in how “ordinary people think” (124) and learn by people trained in business is similar to George Barna’s view that church’s should utilize business strategies marketing and in choosing a location. Third, he states preaching needs to speak to the “points people need most” (132). He then discusses the need to be applying what is preached to the need of repentance. This is to Rick Warren’s suggestion that the applications a minister wishes to persuade people to use should be the points in their sermon. Finally, in his observation that revival prevails outside the church in the “same niche in society as those revived within the church” (202), there is an affinity with what would later be expressed by McGavran as the homogeneous unit principle. As a technician of providing the human means suitable to allow the Spirit to work among people, Finney was excellent and ahead of his time.

The force of his personality is evident in the fierceness with which he hates sin. It is apparent that he could hold an audience spellbound with his ability to turn a phrase (88) or choose a dramatic illustration. (65) For example, in his lecture on backsliding he gives thirty-two marks of a backslidden heart (267-273), followed by twenty-one consequences of backsliding (273-276). His listeners wait until his final two sentences before they finally hear him mention God’s love (276). Any person in Finney’s audience who thought it possible that he was ever a backslider would have gladly occupied the anxious bench to find assurance of their salvation as this lecture ended. Finney’s style of preaching taken with his “new measures” and his considerations of the frame of mind (106) of those whom he addressed show that his was a formidable force in the church of his day.

End Notes

1. Finney, Charles G. Lectures on Revival.  Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1988. 288 pp.