IV. CRITICISM OF THE CAMBUSLANG AND KILSYTH REVIVALS.
(Continued from Vol. XLVII., p. 213).
Perhaps the severest critics of the Cambuslang and Kilsyth Revivals were the Seceders. Mr. Whitefield came in for severe castigation but as we have under discussion at present the Cambuslang and Kilsyth revivals we need not enter into the various phases in connection with the Whitefield case. The language of the Seceders, especially, Ralph Erskine, James Fisher and Adam Gib cannot be justified in view of the overwhelming evidence with all the short-comings alleged against the awakening, that the Holy Spirit was working savingly in the hearts of hundreds. Nine years after the Revival Mr. MacCulloch wrote to Mr. Robe giving an account of the exemplary conduct of those who had been subjects of the awakening. Mr. Robe, also, while acknowledging that many grew cold and indifferent and that others who had not come under a saving change went back, yet there were abundant evidences in the lives of the converts of the genuineness of the work wrought in their hearts. The elders and deacons of Kilsyth congregation bear testimony in 1751 in regard to a hundred persons who were awakened in 1742: “That all those of them who are now alive have been from year to year admitted by the Kirk-session to the Lord’s Table . . . and so far as is known to the said members, they have had their conversation such as becometh the gospel.”
The Seceders, however, were not satisfied simply with criticising the work but an Act was passed by the Associate Presbytery calling a fast in which unduly strong language was used in condemnation of the revival. Mr. Robe characterised the Act as “the most heaven-daring paper” that had been published by any set of men in Britain during a hundred years past. “Therein,” he says, “you declare the work of God to be a delusion, and the work of the grand Deceiver. Now, my dear brethren, for whom I tremble, have you been at due pains to know the nature and circumstances of this work, have you taken the trouble to go to any of these places where the Lord hath appeared in His glory and majesty and informed yourselves anent it from ministers, some of whom I can assure you would have concealed nothing from you? Have you ever so much as written to any of them to receive information from them, and have they declared or refused to give it? It is not consistent with common justice to condemn them as deceivers, without inquiry or trial, to pronounce that to be the work of the Devil which, for anything you know, may be the work of the infinitely good and Holy Spirit?”
It is only fair to add that whatever criticism may be passed on the Seceders of this date that one would not be justified in bringing later Seceders under this condemnation; for the conduct of their fathers in this matter has been repudiated by their later brethren. Rev. Donald Fraser, Kennoway, the biographer of Ebenezer and Ralph Erskine says in the Life and Diary of the Rev. Ebenezer Erskine: “Candour requires us frankly to acknowledge, that, whatever provocation was given to the ministers of the Secession, and whatever irregularities deserving reprehension had been committed by their ecclesiastical opponents, they expressed themselves in their public deeds, and some of them in their sermons and writings, in terms of unqualified severity respecting Mr. Whitefield’s ministry, and those ministers and people by whom he was countenanced, which Seceders have, for a long time past, almost universally regarded with feelings of sincere regret” (p. 428). Rev. John McKerrow in his History of the Secession Church is no less emphatic. “To call that a delusion,” he says, “or a work of Satan, which produced such effects as these upon hundreds of individuals, is language which cannot be justified: and that the Associate Presbyterian should, by a solemn deed, have called upon the congregations under their charge to fast and humble themselves in the sight of God, on account of such a work being carried on, is conduct which their historian will not attempt to vindicate” (History of the Secession, I. 222). The Rev. John Willison who was a warm friend of the Erskines though he did not see his way to follow them in the step they took in 1733 says in his Fair and Impartial Testimony: “We are grieved in our very hearts, that our brethren [i.e. the Seceders] should have adventured upon such a daring step, as by a judicial sentence to ascribe to the devil such a gracious god-like work, as that before described; when they cannot bring an instance from Scripture, or any other history of the devil being permitted to work in the like manner before. Surely it may make us tremble to think what kind of sin it must be to make the devil the reprover of sin, and minister of righteousness, and so assign the office and work of the Spirit to that wicked one” (Willison’s Works, p. 935). If one may be allowed to appropriate the language of Adam Gib in reference to his own pamphlet against Whitefield and which in his old age he wished he could collect every copy and burn it, “my blood at that time was too hot, and I was unable to write with becoming temper” (Fraser’s Life and Diary of the Rev. Ralph Erskine, p. 351). Ralph Erskine’s biographer refers to what he considered objectionable passages in Erskine’s pamphlet Fraud and Falsehood Detected and in sermons he preached at different places in 1742 particularly those on Luke, xxii. 31, 32; Heb. xiii. 8; and Rev. v. 9.
In view of Ralph Erskine’s opinion in reference to the outward manifestations accompanying many cases which were found fault with by himself and others this opinion as expressed in a letter to the Rev. John Wesley before he was aware of his Arminian views may be quoted. “As to the outward manner you speak of” he writes “wherein most of these were affected, who were cut to the heart by the sword of the Spirit, no wonder that they were at first surprising to you, since they are indeed so very rare that have been thus wounded; yet some of the instances you give, seem to be exemplified in the outward manner, wherein Paul and the jailor were at first affected, as also Peter’s hearers (Acts, ii.). The last instance you give of some struggling as in the agonies of death, this is to me somewhat more inexplicable, if it do not resemble the child spoken of (Mark. ix. 26 and Luke, ix. 42) of whom it is said, that when he was yet a coming, the devil threw him down and tore him. I make no question Satan, so far as he gets power, may exert himself on such occasions, partly to mar and hinder the beginning of the good work, in the persons that are touched with the sharp arrows of conviction, the enemy being unwilling to quit his old possessions, and partly also to prevent the success of the gospel on others; while he seeks thus to disparage the work of God, and bring it under contempt and reproach, as if it tended to lead people only to madness and distraction; and a holy sovereign God may permit it, for trying the faith and constancy of His own children, whom He has called effectually” (Fraser’s Life and Diary of Rev. Ralph Erskine, p. 291-2).
Reference may now be made to Ralph Erskine’s Faith no Fancy; or a Treatise of Mental Images. In defence of the visionary representations with which some of the converts in the revival considered themselves favoured it was argued that images of spiritual things might be represented more or less to the imagination. Ralph Erskine and James Fisher argued that such imaginary ideas are contrary to the faith or to put it in Erskine’s words: “An imaginary idea of Christ as man (when supposed to belong to saving faith, whether in its act or object) imports nothing but ignorance, atheism, idolatry, great falsehood or gross delusion.” The thesis is developed with great acumen by Erskine. It was followed by Appendix to Faith no Fancy and afterwards by Third Proof Faith no Fancy.
These controversies which burned with such vehemence are now forgotten but the work wrought by the Holy Ghost at Cambuslang, Kilsyth and other places bore evident fruit in the souls of many who came under the power of the truth and was like a reviving shower from heaven upon the parched land.
We cannot do better in closing these articles than quote Jonathan Edward’s words in his Revival of Religion in New England and apply them to the awakenings in Scotland in the 18th century. “Whatever imputations,” he says, “there have been and whatever singular irregularities, whatever vehemence of the passions, and heats of the imaginations, transports and ecstasies; and whatever error in judgment, and indiscreet zeal; and whatever outcries, and faintings, and agitations of body; yet it is manifest and notorious that there has been of late a very uncommon influence upon the minds of a very great part of the inhabitants of New England, from one end of the land to the other, that has been attended with the following effects, viz. a great increase of a spirit of seriousness, and sober consideration of the things of the eternal world; a disposition to hearken to anything that is said of things of this nature, with attention and affection; a disposition to treat matters of religion with solemnity, and as matters of great importance; a disposition to make these things the subject of conversation; and a great disposition to hear the Word of God preached, and to take all opportunities in order to it; and to attend on the public worship of God, and all external duties of religion in a more solemn and decent manner; so that there is a remarkable and general alteration in the face of New England in these respects; multitudes in all parts of the land, of vain, thoughtless, regardless persons are quite changed, and become serious and considerate; there is a vast increase of concern for the salvation of the precious soul, and of that inquiry. What shall I do to be saved? The hearts of multitudes have greatly taken off from things of the world, its profits, pleasures and honours; and there has been a great increase of sensibleness and tenderness of conscience; multitudes in all parts have had their consciences awakened, and have been made sensible of the pernicious nature and consequences of sin, and what a dreadful thing it is to lie under guilt, and the displeasure of God, and to live without peace and reconciliation with Him; they have also been awakened to a sense of the shortness and uncertainty of life, and the reality of another world and future judgment, and of the necessity of an interest in Christ; they are more afraid of sin, more careful and inquisitive that they may know what is contrary to the mind and will of God, that they may avoid it, and what He requires of them, that they may do it; more careful to guard against temptations, informed what are the means that God has directed to, for their salvation, and diligent in the use of the means that God has appointed in His Word, in order to it. Many very stupid, senseless sinners, and persons of a vain mind, have been greatly awakened. There is a strange alteration almost all over New England amongst young people; by a powerful, invisible influence on their minds they have been brought to forsake those things in a general way, as it were at once, that they were extremely fond of, and greatly addicted to, and that they seemed to place the happiness of their lives in, and that nothing before could induce them to forsake; as their frolicking, vain company keeping, night walking, their mirth and jollity, their impure language, and lewd songs; in vain did ministers preach against those things before, and in vain were laws made to restrain them, and in vain was all the vigilance of magistrates and civil officers; but now they have almost everywhere dropped them as it were of themselves. And there is a great alteration amongst old and young as to drinking, tavern haunting, profane speaking, and extravagance in apparel” (Edwards’ Works, iii. 296). What Jonathan Edwards said about the awakenings in New England and their effects might with equal truth be said about the revivals in Scotland in the 17th and 18th centuries.