Ohio History Journal

RUSSELL D. PARKER

The Philosophy of Charles G. Finney:

Higher Law and Revivalism

As it related to the antislavery crusade in the United States, the "higher law" doc-

trine involved an insistence that slavery was contrary to the principles upon which

the nation was established, in that there were rules of right existing in the public

mind prior to the framing of the Constitution. These rules were expressed in the

Declaration of Independence, the true basis of government. In American history

the doctrine derives its importance from the refusal of the Supreme Court and

southern states' righters to recognize the Declaration of Independence or the Pre-

amble of the Constitution as a part of fundamental law. In its most common appli-

cation, as an appeal to conscience to justify violation of human legislation, "higher

law" thinking should be viewed in context with certain other individualistic phe-

nomena of mid-nineteenth century America-Arminianism in religion, Romantic-

ism in literature, and Transcendentalism in philosophy-as a significant factor in the

agitation pattern that drove the sections to civil war.'

An early contributor to the fashioning of a "higher law" doctrine as an instrument

in antislavery agitation was Charles G. Finney, whose role has been obscured by at-

tention to his evangelistic activities. The purpose of this paper is threefold: first, af-

ter laying a necessary background, to set forth Finney's "higher law" philosophy

contained in resolutions presented to the Ohio Antislavery Society in 1839; second,

to examine his philosophy in the context of other "higher law" expressions, espe-

cially in the tense decade preceding the outbreak of civil war; and, finally, to weigh

a charge leveled at Finney by contemporaries and present-day critics alike that his

preoccupation with revivalism compromised an activist posture on his part beyond

initial lip-service to the principle of "higher law."

Most Americans, regardless of their views on slavery, venerated the Constitution;

challenges to the institution of slavery were generally effective only at those points

where the Constitution did not apply or where its meaning lacked certainty. Such

points were to be found in provisions pertaining to the interstate slave trade, obliga-

tions to return fugitives, and slavery in the territories. By 1839, Charles G. Finney

1. Stanley M. Elkins, Slavery; A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life (Chicago,

1968), 142, 150. See Elkins, "Slavery and Ideology," in Ann J. Lane, ed., The Debate over Slavery; Stan-

ley Elkins and His Critics (Chicago, 1971), 361, where the author defends-and compromises somewhat-

his indictment in the earlier work of a rampant individualism and anti-institutionalism that characterized

the antislavery crusade in the three decades prior to the Civil War.

Mr. Parker is Associate Professor of History at Maryville College.

142

144                                                                    OHIO HISTORY

roads into the membership of the Presbyterian and Congregational churches.

These two denominations had been bound together in a cooperative program by the

Plan of Union of 1801. "Taylorism" or the "New Haven theology" denied that

God is the author of sin and repudiated the doctrine of election. Man was viewed

as responsible for his own sin; salvation depended upon his free agency to accept or

reject. Unitarians charged, with some logic, that this was a denial of the peculiar-

ities of Calvinism-an open Arminian, if not Unitarian position. Some Congrega-

tionalists likewise held that this was a radical departure, not-as Taylor claimed-a

more acceptable and convincing explanation of Calvinist doctrines. The implicit

incursion on Presbyterian orthodoxy obliged Finney to acknowledge conversion to

Methodism or to relegate sanctification to natural ability. With some modification

he chose the latter course and became associated with the "holiness" or "per-

fectionist" movement, a dominant strain in American Protestantism for a quarter of

a century.⁶ According to Finney, "entire sanctification" consisted in "perfect obe-

dience to the law of God, and as the law requires nothing more than the right use of

whatever strength we have . . . a state of entire sanctification is attainable in this life,

on the ground of natural ability."⁷

The root of contention was the Calvinistic insistence upon man's depravity and

inability to save himself. Finney's theology proposed that moral depravity consists

of self-love, while its opposite is holiness, the product of "disinterested ben-

evolence." The latter will sacrifice the interest of the individual for the greater pub-

lic interest.⁸  Repudiation of the Calvinist system-election, predestination, in-

ability-had the effect of releasing a mighty impulse toward social reform, rendering

Christianity a practical affair, and encouraging Christians to work as well as be-

lieve.⁹ Finney led the way in applying evangelical insight into the social evil of

slavery-to a realization that the lot of the slave was as worthy of Christian consid-

eration as business honesty. Abolitionist zeal was fed by the doctrine that outward

perfection revealed inward grace; out of the revivalistic spirit the abolition crusade

emerged, a combination of the concepts of personal responsibility for salvation and

natural-rights humanitarianism. Since slavery was an obstacle to the attainment of

human perfection, it must be swept aside.¹⁰

Three early converts to Finney's preaching played critical roles in his later agoniz-

ing over agitation of the slavery issue. At a revival meeting in Utica in 1825, Theo-

dore Dwight Weld was converted and became his protege and associate. Weld en-

6. Roy A. Cheesebro, "The Preaching of Charles G. Finney" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale

University, 1948), 349, 361, considers Finney's theology a sort of amalgam of Taylorism, Wesleyan teach-

ing, "New School" theology and his own perfectionist thought derived from Bible study.

7. Charles G. Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology (Oberlin, 1846), 407. John Opie, "Finney's Fail-

ure of Nerve: The Untimely Demise of Evangelical Theology," Journal of Presbyterian History, LI (Sum-

mer 1973), 157, 160, 173, takes the position that Finney cut the nerve of evangelical theology when he

adopted entire sanctification, since that action destroyed the "paradox" between individual free will and

the unmerited gift of divine grace. Consistent with his debatable contention that Finney's effectiveness

as an evangelist was ended by 1835. Opie does not take account of his developing caution regarding the

doctrine of perfection; Finney came to stress growth rather than crisis of experience. See Finney, Mem-

oirs, 349-351; Lectures on Systematic Theology, 3, 500; Lectures on Revivals of Religion (New York,

1868), 401, 410, 416, 429-433. This elaboration is critical if the considerable influence of Finney in shap-

ing the Awakening of 1857-58 is acknowledged.

8. Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, 450, 537.

9. William W. Sweet, Religion in the Development of American Culture, 1765-1840 (New York, 1952),

284.

10. Nelson R. Burr, A Critical Bibliography of Religion in America (James W. Smith and A. Leland

Jamison, eds., Religion in American Life, IV, Princeton, 1961), 683.

Charles Finney                                                               145

tered the abolitionist ranks with a vigor in 1834 when he became a lecturer for the

American Antislavery Society. Following closely Finney's methodology in the area

of evangelism, he organized a nucleus for antislavery activity at the community

level. Weld hit the lecture trail with abolition as his theme and gained the doubtful

distinction of being the most mobbed man in America." During an 1830 meeting

in New York City, Lewis Tappan, a Boston Unitarian visiting his brother Arthur, a

wealthy dry goods merchant, was converted. The Tappans subsequently lent their

considerable moral and financial support to myriad benevolent and abolitionist ef-

forts. Arthur Tappan helped maintain William Lloyd Garrison's outspoken Liber-

ator, established in 1831, and was elected president of the American Antislavery

Society when it was organized in 1833. After differences with Garrison, the broth-

ers were among the founders of the rival American and Foreign Antislavery Society

(1840). They were also associated with the American Tract Society, American Bible

Society, and American Home Missionary Society. While these benevolent bodies

would have preferred a more compromising line on the issue of antislavery, they

were obliged to pursue an activist policy because they coveted the funds the Tap-

pans and other infiltrating abolitionists could supply.12 The Tappans secured Chat-

ham Street Chapel in New York-with Finney as pastor-to serve as a convention

site for various benevolent societies, and the New York Evangelist was founded as a

vehicle for Finney's views and an extension of his Great Revival.¹³

A crucial action on Finney's part was his break with the Presbyterian church. He

had just published what was perhaps his most significant work, Lectures on Revivals

of Religion (1835), when Professor Albert Dod, in a scathing review contained in the

Princeton Seminary organ, Biblical Repertory and Theological Review, accused him

of heresies and invited him to leave the church.¹⁴ Finney did so in March 1836; he

gave up his Chatham Street Chapel pastorate (Second Free Presbyterian Church) to

become pastor of the Congregational Tabernacle in New York City, where Lewis

Tappan was a dominant force. Simultaneously he was prevailed upon by John J.

Shipherd, a missionary with Congregational ties who had founded a colony and a

college (1834) in Ohio's Western Reserve thirty miles southwest of Cleveland, to be

an instructor in theology. Finney was to come to Oberlin and the Tappan brothers

would finance the venture.15

Coincidentally, and conveniently, a student exodus from Lane Seminary in Cin-

cinnati supplied the new theologian with a host of eager listeners. At Lane in early

1834, the students had applied to President Lyman Beecher for permission to hold

discussions on the subject of slavery. He gave his enthusiastic permission, but when

an adverse reaction developed his ardor cooled. In his absence the exectuive com-

mittee of the seminary's board of trustees resolved to abolish the students' anti-

slavery society, censor the students involved, and assume the summary power of dis-

missal-Theodore Weld was marked for expulsion. With Beecher still in absentia,

11. Benjamin P. Thomas, Theodore Weld; Crusader for Freedom (New Brunswick, 1950), 14-18; Hazel

C. Wolf, On Freedom's Altar; The Martyr Complex in the Abolition Movement (Madison, 1952), 54-56.

12. Clifford S. Griffin, "The Abolitionists and the Benevolent Societies, 1831-1861." Journal of Negro

History, XLIV (July 1959), 195-216; Louis Filler, "Liberalism, Anti-Slavery, and the Founders of the In-

dependent." New England Quarterly, XXVII (September 1954), 296; Lewis Tappan, The Life of Arthur

Tappan (New York, 1870), 164-165, 175.

13. L. Tappan to Finney, March 16, 22; April 11, 19, 1832. Finney Papers, Oberlin College Library.

14. McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, 83, fn. 34.

15. Finney, Memoirs, 333-334; Finney to George Whipple and Henry B. Stanton, January 18, 1835,

Finney Papers. He agreed to come to Oberlin on the twin conditions that the trustees leave internal

regulation of the school to the discretion of the faculty and that there should be no color discriminiation.

146                                                             OHIO HISTORY

the whole board in the fall of 1834 approved the executive committee action, and a

large part of the student body soon moved to the more favorable climate of Ober-

lin.¹⁶ That community was at first hostile to the openly abolitionist atmosphere of

the college and its practice of admitting Negroes, but soon Oberlin College became

a station for the Underground Railroad, and the attitude of the townspeople

changed from hostility to sympathy. This development may be in part attributed to

exposure to the "Oberlin Doctrine," Finney's brand of Taylorism. When Lyman

Beecher headed a Western Reserve campaign to squelch the doctrine, the commu-

nity reacted defensively and formed a solid front in support of Finney.¹⁷

In 1835 Charles G. Finney was elected a vice president of the Ohio Antislavery

Society at its first annual meeting. Chosen chairman at the fourth anniversary

meeting in 1839, he offered to the group nine resolutions which highlighted the ses-

sion and gave voice to his "higher law" convictions. The resolutions were "explana-

tory of the ground assumed by Abolitionists, in regard to the political bearings of

the slave question...."18

A consideration of other resolutions adopted by the convention is useful to an un-

derstanding of the mood of the society and of the thinking of many other similar

groups. Delegate Robert Hanna resolved that "the church of Christ in the United

States is responsible in great measure for the present existence of slavery in this

country, and that we cannot but regard any branch of the church that will refuse to

bear testimony against it, as false to her sacred vows, and in league with the dark

spirit of slavery." James G. Birney, who would be presidential nominee of the Lib-

erty party a year hence, proposed that the society support politically "those only

who, being of good moral character, are known to be favorable to human rights,

and to the abrogation of all distinctions in right founded on color." Another resolu-

tion by Birney held that "all plans of gradual emancipation are inadequate, as

means for the abolition of slavery in the United States.^"19

Legislators, state and federal, were praised or condemned depending upon their

stated positions in recent controversies related to slavery. The purposefulness of

the delegates is evident in a proposed resolution that failed adoption: "Resolved,

that slavery, having . . . placed itself under the protection of the General Govern-

ment, and thereby involved the whole Union in one common guilt and disgrace, we

not only claim a right to interfere with it by moral means, but also claim, that the

Constitution of the United States, if necessary should be so amended as to enable

the national legislature to legislate for its abolition."²⁰

The resolutions, as they evolved, do not demonstrate a disposition to take the ex-

treme ground that eastern abolitionists assumed soon thereafter-to condemn the

federal Constitution in outright fashion or to enter into a covenant to violate federal

law by positive action-but the implication was present in the Ohio society's rheto-

ric, and the Oberlinites in their Underground Railroad activities experienced few

qualms at positive violation. By and large, the adopted resolutions called for self-

examination on the part of Christians confronted by a proslavery system.21

16. Gilbert H. Barnes, The Anti-Slavery Impulse, 1830-1844 (New York, 1964), 65-72.

17. Finney, Memoirs, 337, 343-345, 353.

18. Report of the Fourth Anniversary of the Ohio Anti-slavery Society (Cincinnati, 1839), 5.

19. Ibid., 6, 7.

20. Ibid., 14.

21. John L. Thomas, The Liberator; William Lloyd Garrison, A Biography (Boston, 1963), 220-221;

226-227, 387; Ralph Korngold, Two Friends of Man; The Story of William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell

Phillips and Their Relationshp with Abraham Lincoln (Boston, 1950), 145-146, 239.

Charles Finney                                                                   147

Since Finney's resolutions (which were all adopted) are basic to the "higher law"

argument, they should be considered in their entirety except where repetitious.²²

The first asserted the right of the society to discuss freely the political character and

influence of slavery: "Religion cannot be separated from politics and government,

insomuch as our conformity or non-conformity to the law of our country, must have

a moral and religious character."

His second resolution was based on the premise that society was justified in exam-

ining the moral character of the laws:

Resolved, That for the following obvious reasons, we regard it, as a well settled principle of

both common and Constitutional law, that no human legislation can annul, or set aside, the

law or authority of God.

a. The most able writers on elementary law, have laid it down as a first principle, that

whatever is contrary to the law of God, is not law.

b. Where a bond, or other written instrument, or anything else, is of immoral tendency,

Courts of law have refused to recognize it as legal and obligatory.

c. The administration of oaths, or affirmations, in Courts of justice, is a recognition of the

existence and supreme authority of God.

d. The Constitution of this State expressly recognizes the axiom, that no human enact-

ment can bend the conscience, or set aside our obligations to God.

e. The grand instrument on which the federal Government is founded recognizes the

same truth-that rights conferred by our Creator as inalienable, can never be cancelled, or set

aside by human enactments.

f. The administration of oaths, or affirmations, in all the departments of the general and

state governments, is a recognition of the truth, that God's authority is supreme.

Theodore Weld's efforts had made the Ohio society one of the fastest growing

antislavery agencies in the nation.²³ The mood of the society and Finney's resolu-

tions must be considered in context with the direction of Ohio politics. The third

resolution referred to Ohio's long standing "Black Laws," particularly a statute of

1804 that regulated free Negroes coming into the state and an 1807 law that in-

creased the restrictions, including the requirement of a $500 surety bond, and pro-

hibited them from giving testimony in court cases involving white persons.²⁴ While

the laws were not rigidly enforced, they were obnoxious to abolitionists. The issue

had come to debate in the recent 1838-39 session of the state legislature resulting

from the problem of fugitive slaves from Kentucky. Tensions heightened and in

February 1839, a state fugitive slave law more harsh than the 1793 federal law was

passed.²⁵

The resolutions relating to this deteriorating situation stated: "Resolved, That we

do not consider ... the Black Laws of Ohio ... as obligatory upon the citizens of this

22. Report, Ohio Antislavery Society, 17-19.

23. Barnes, Anti-Slavery Impulse, 238.

24. Salmon P. Chase, ed., The Statutes of Ohio and of the Northwestern Territory.... from 1788 to 1833

. . (Cincinnati, 1833), 393-394, 555-556.

25. Francis P. Weisenburger, The Passing of the Frontier, 1825-1850 (Carl Wittke, ed., The History of

the State of Ohio, III, Columbus, 1941), 381-382. The state of Kentucky initiated action by sending com-

missioners to Governor Wilson Shannon with a request for legislation. Despite opposition in the senate

led by Benjamin Wade, a state law was passed which in its broad outlines resembled the federal law of

1850. Earlier (January 1838), the lower house had adopted resolutions rebuking the abolitionists. Their

petition campaign and efforts to interfere with slavery by congressional action, the resolutions, stated.

were disruptive of union. These defeats, coupled with losses in the fall elections of 1839 (Wade was un-

seated), and the lack of Whig assurances in 1840 doubtless led Ohio abolitionists to support the Birney

candidacy. See ibid. 378-383.

148                                                            OHIO HISTORY

State, inasmuch as its requisitions are a palpable violation of the Constitution of this

State, and of the United States, of the common law and of the law of God." The

fourth resolution asserted obedience to Ohio's Black Laws "highly immoral"; the

fifth resolved that "no man, by any promise or oath, or resolution, can make it right,

or lawful, for him to do that which is contrary to the law of God."

Numbers six and seven applied to the taking of oaths: "Resolved, That an oath or

affirmation, to support any human constitution or government is obligatory no fur-

ther than the principles of that constitution or government are in accordance with

the law of God. Resolved, That an oath or affirmation to support the Constitution

and law of this State and the United States is obligatory because, and as far as, those

constitutions and laws are consistent with each other, and with the law of God, and

no farther."

The eighth deemed it imperative that all citizens inquire into the moral character

of federal state laws and the subject of slavery. Finally, the Christian duty was un-

derscored; "Resolved, That we deem it highly improper, for Christians to decline

acting on the subject of slavery and emancipation, on account of the political char-

acter and bearings of these questions, because we cannot innocently suffer a legal

enactment to crush our brother, when the means of prevention are peaceable, and

within our power."

Finney's inclination toward peaceable means goes far to explain his later refusal

to push the "higher law" application to the limits that some of his colleagues advo-

cated. In his Lectures on Systematic Theology, a collection (1846) of his addresses

to theological students, Finney further developed his "higher law" doctrine. It was

a theology of his own making, concerned with moral government and with the vol-

untary nature of sin and holiness. He held that there could be no rule of duty ex-

cept the moral law, or the law of nature; God would accept nothing short of full

obedience. Christian love, which rendered such obedience possible, involved will-

ingness, liberty, intelligence, virtue, disinterestedness, impartiality and universality.²⁶

Human government he recognized as part of the moral government of God, in-

dispensable to securing the highest good of the universe. But the rights of such gov-

ernment were limited: "The end of government is the highest good of human

beings, as part of universal good. ... No legislation can have any authority that has

not the highest good of the whole for its end. ... All legislation and all con-

stitutions not founded upon this basis, and not recognizing the moral law as the only

law of the universe, are null and void, and attempts to establish and enforce them

are odious tyranny and usurpation." Christians were bound to disobey human gov-

ernments when moral obligations were violated-"when human legislation con-

travenes moral law, or invades the rights of conscience." The author spoke specifi-

cally of slavery, although his lectures were generally abstract, as unlawful due to its

"selfish" nature; "no legislation, or anything else, can make it right."²⁷

The chorus of "higher law" advocates hit a climactic pitch in the 1850's, princi-

pally in response to the federal fugitive slave law enacted as a component of the

Compromise of 1850. That compromise sought a disposition of the Mexican ces-

sion and settlement of other continuing sectional problems. In the course of debate

on the several compromise measures, Massachusetts Senator Daniel Webster sug-

26. Charles G. Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, ed., J. H. Fairchild (Whittier, California,

1946), X, 115-117, 135-145.

27. Ibid., 221, 223, 227.

Charles Finney                                                                  149

gested that it would be abrasive to set restrictions on slavery in the western terri-

tories, since nature would rule out its extension to that region. William H. Seward,

Senator from New York, responded that "there is a higher law than the Con-

stitution, which regulates our authority over the domain.... There is no human

enactment which is just, that is not a re-enactment of the law of God."²⁸ Thus the

"higher law" theme gained national currency a decade after Finney's pro-

nouncements.

Ralph Waldo Emerson, "high priest" of Transcendentalism, a theory of moral in-

tuition which summoned the initiate before his soul for judgment, said of the Fugi-

tive Slave Law of 1850, "This filthy enactment was made in the nineteenth century

by people who could read and write. I will not obey it, by God!"²⁹ Since Transcen-

dental doctrine held that "the method is nothing; the spirit is all," Emerson could

refer in 1859 to John Brown, apprehended in a violent attack upon the South to fo-

ment insurrection, as "the saint . .. whose martyrdom . . . will make the gallows as

glorious as the cross."³⁰ Henry David Thoreau, Emerson's disciple and an out-

spoken nonconformist in his own right, considered Brown a "Transcendentalist

above all."³1 Theodore Parker, fiery Unitarian minister with Transcendental associ-

ations,³² sounded a radical note in speaking of the federal law: "I tear the hateful

statute of kidnappers to shivers; I trample it under my feet. I do it in the name of

all law; in the name of justice and of man; in the name of the dear God."³³ It is sig-

nificant that Parker applauded, and directly supported, Brown's venture.

"Higher law" reactions to the Fugitive Slave Law were not limited to the Boston

area. Henry Ward Beecher, highly influential Brooklyn minister and son of Lyman

Beecher, took an uncompromising stand: "I disown the act. I repudiate the obliga-

tion." Regarding the fugitives, he would "shelter them, conceal them, or speed

their flight, even though the consequences be grave."³⁴ Beecher pledged his wealthy

Plymouth Church to contribute twenty-five Sharp's rifles-they came to be called

"Beecher's Bibles"-to a group of antislavery colonists heading to Kansas from the

East.³⁵ The Oberlin College community called for repeal of the law and admon-

ished the individual to utilize his intellectual and moral faculties to determine where

his duty lay. If, after such consideration, he was led to disobey the law, "he must

act accordingly and submit peacefully to the penalty, if he cannot honorably evade

it."³⁶

Although the pages of the Oberlin Evangelist abound with such direction, the

voice of Charles G. Finney was muted beyond his presentation of resolutions to the

Ohio Antislavery Society in 1839. The explanation lies in Finney's willingness to

look to revivalism, as opposed to agitation, for the answer to the slavery problem.³⁷

28. Congressional Globe, 31 Cong., 1 sess., Appendix, 265, 266.

29. Quoted in Leonard W. Levy, "Sims' Case; The Fugitive Slave Law in Boston in 1851," Journal of

Negro History, XXXV (January 1950), 60.

30. Quoted in C. Vann Woodward, The Burden of Southern History (New York, 1960), 54.

31. Ibid.

32. The theory is offered by H. Shelton Smith, "Was Theodore Parker a Transcendentalist?" New

England Quarterly, XXIII (September 1950), 351-364, that-his claims to the contrary notwithstanding-

there is some doubt as to Parker's Transcendental pedigree. Smith finds Parker's philosophy founded on

three bases: instinctive intuition of God, right, and immortality.

33. Theodore Parker, The Slave Power, ed. with notes by James K. Hosmer (Boston, 1911), 340.

34. Quoted in Oberlin Evangelist, October 23, 1850.

35. Paxton Hibben, Henry Ward Beecher; An American Portrait (New York, 1927), 159.

36. Oberlin Evangelist, October 23, 1850; April 14, 1852.

37. McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, 111-112.

150                                                                OHIO HISTORY

His conviction was consistently maintained and had been expressed in unmistakable

terms even before his "higher law" statement. By the late 1830's the Great Revival

had run its course, and, with its passing, the antislavery impulse was altered. It no

longer expressed itself in a benevolent effort to bring slaveholders to repentance for

their sins. There developed a "hatred of the sinner as well as of his sin, a sectional

hostility toward slavery and the South." Churchmen of that section, no longer con-

tent to merely deny that slavery was a sin, reacted by contending that it was a posi-

tive good. This, in turn, provoked "in the North a denunciation of slavery more in

the spirit of anger than of love."³⁸

This denunciatory spirit, Finney felt, would fast carry the nation into civil war.

He had confided to Weld in 1836, "Nothing is more manifest to me than that the

present movements will result in this [civil war] unless your mode of abolitionizing

the country be greatly modified. How can we save our country and affect the

speedy abolition of slavery? This is my answer .... Now if abolition can be made

an append[a]ge of a general revival of religion all is well... just as we made temper-

ance an appendage of the revival in Rochester."³⁹

Finney characterized the leading abolitionists of that day as "good men but there

are but few of them wise men. Some of them are reckless. Others are so denuncia-

tory as to kill all prayer about it. There is very little confidence and concert among

many of our abolitionists .... I tell you again that unless we can have such an ex-

tensive Revival of religion as to soften the church and alarm the world we are all

among the breakers."⁴⁰ It was obviously his belief that with an awareness of sin,

abolition would come peaceably and naturally.

That Finney's opinion was not shared by all his associates is quite apparent from

a consideration of correspondence bearing on methodology to be employed by

Oberlin in combatting slavery. One of those being sent out as lecturer by the col-

lege complained to Weld that "Mr. Finney is making a strong effort to have us

Evangelize instead of abolitionizing [sic]."⁴¹ Weld, an early leader in Finney's

"Holy Band," did not share his mentor's sentiments, although he was quick to de-

fend him against the petty criticism of Lewis Tappan. Tappan was convinced that

Finney was a coward, afraid to strike hard at slavery. Weld understood and re-

spected Finney's position, which he explained in November 1835 to Tappan:

The truth is Finney has always been in revivals of religion. It is his great business, aim and

absorbing passion to promote them. He has never had hardly [sic] anything to do with Bible,

Tract, missionary, Education, Temperance, moral Reform and anti slavery societies. The

three last he has joined and has decidedly committed himself before the public in favor of

their principles, and taken a bold and high stand with reference to them at the Communion

table. Finney feels about revivals of religion and the promotion of the church and ministry

in doctrines and measures, just as you and I do about anti slavery.

Tappan nevertheless was vindictive and withdrew financial support from the Ober-

lin Theological Department.⁴²

Finney was determined not to be drawn into the cause of abolition "to make it a

38. Barnes, Anti-Slavery Impulse, 161-163.

39. Finney to Weld, July 21, 1836, in Gilbert H. Barnes and Dwight L. Dumond. eds., Letters of Theo-

dore Dwight Weld, Angelina Grimke Weld, and Sarah Grimke, 1822-1844 (New York, 1934), I, 318-319.

40. Ibid., 319-320.

41. Sereno W. Streeter to Weld, July 20, 1836, ibid., 317. See William T. Allen, Sereno W. Streeter, J.

W. Alvord and James A. Thome to Weld, August 9, 1836, ibid, 327.

42. Weld to L. Tappan, November 17, 1835, April 5, 1836. ibid., 242-243, 289.

Charles Finney                                                                  151

hobby or divert the attention of the people from the work of converting souls."⁴³

He advised Oberlin students to permit nothing to divert them from revivalism;44 a

careful institutional historian reports that Finney's interest "in social reform, in

worldly matters generally, was always secondary and subordinate to his main pur-

pose-to save souls for Christ."⁴⁵

Finney eventually assumed the presidency of Oberlin (1851-65), a tenure marked

by prolonged absences in the cause of revival. And in the fall of 1857, on the heels

of economic depression, an urban revival swept the land. It posed a contemporary

challenge to the total philosophy of Finney, who was instrumental in laying a

groundwork for the Awakening.⁴⁶ He was one of the leading lights of the national

Pentecost, which took him to Boston, a center of marked coldness as compared to

Philadelphia or New York. A correspondent to the New York Observer reported

that Bostonians held no aversion for revivals or evangelists, but that there was a "dis-

trust of the soundness of Mr. Finney's Theological sentiments .... Especially on the

subject of Christian Perfection do our pastors differ widely from Mr. Finney..."47

Finney preached in Park Street Church of Boston (Congregational) in the winter

of 1856-57 and had on that occasion sought a conference with Theodore Parker,

Unitarian "higher law" advocate. He was denied an audience. In the winter of

1857-58, at the peak of the Awakening, Finney was back in the Park Street Church,

acutely aware of the "mischievous influence" of Parker's "harangues" at the Music

Hall. Parker represented the revival as geared to draw attention from social re-

form, especially antislavery. The Park Street Church mounted a prayer meeting in

March 1858, whereby "all the evangelical denominations" agreed that wherever

they might be when the clock struck one, they would pray "that God would either

convert Theodore Parker to the truth, or in some way destroy his influence so that

sinners would no more stumble by reason of his teachings."⁴⁸ Parker was singularly

unmoved by the publicized efforts to quiet his critical tongue and announced that

he would support violence to abolish slavery.⁴⁹

John Brown was in Boston in the spring of 1858 meeting with the "secret six"--

Parker was among them-who nurtured him and were privy in some degree to his

projected raid into the South. This group voiced a concern that the revival was

turning men from the contemplation of the "nation's great sin" to a consideration of

individual shortcoming. One historian of the revival opines that the raid was set-

tled upon at this point to stimulate antislavery fervor which seemed to be on the

wane.⁵⁰ Later, at Oberlin in September 1858, the celebrated Wellington rescue

43. Finney, Memoirs, 324.

44. Richard E. Day, Man of Like Passions; A Dramatic Biography of Charles Grandison Finney (Grand

Rapids, Michigan; 1942), 170-173.

45. Robert S. Fletcher, A History of Oberlin College from Its Foundation through the Civil War (Ober-

lin, 1943), II, 887.

46. Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform, 45, 204.

47. New York Observer, May 14, 1857, quoted in Cheesebro, "The Preaching of Charles G. Finney,"

271.

48. Reminiscences of Rev. Charles G. Finney. Speeches and Sketches at the Gathering of His Friends and

Pupils in Oberlin, July 28th, 1876 (Oberlin, 1876), 39-40; Theodore Parker, The Collected Works of Theo-

dore Parker (London, 1876), 1II, 275-277.

49. Parker, Collected Works, XII, 176.

50. Russell E. Francis, "Pentecost: 1858. A Study in Revivalism" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The

University of Pennsylvania, 1948), 92, 124-125, 172. Such an analysis might be disputed, since the raid

was postponed at the instruction of the committee. However, that delay must be considered tactical and

temporary.

152                                                                  OHIO HISTORY

erupted.⁵¹ Perhaps significantly, Finney was in England conducting a revival.

Although the definitive biography of Charles G. Finney is yet to be written, Wil-

liam McLoughlin has held his ministry to critical scrutiny in Modern Revivalism;

Charles Grandison Finney to Billy Graham (1959). He designates Finney the father

of modern revivalism, then includes him in a sweeping charge that "it is fruitless to

search for connections between modern revivalism and social reform movements."

The essential function of revivalism since 1825, argues McLoughlin, has been "its

effort to adjust the theological, ethical, and institutional structure of Protestantism

to the changes in American culture."^{52  Or,} more simply put, revivalists have re-

flected rather than shaped their times.

For all that, McLoughlin is ambivalent in his treatment of Finney, acknowledging

in a footnote that he became increasingly militant after 1839 due to his dis-

illusionment at the Presbyterian schism of 1837-38.53 It is remarkable that Gilbert

H. Barnes, whose Anti-Slavery Impulse, 1830-1844 (1933) brought attention to the

western focus of antislavery activity and the role of Weld, Finney and others, settled

on that precise year as critical for a different reason-Finney's Great Revival was

fading and with it the prospect of a peaceable solution to sectional strife structured

on spiritual responsibility. McLoughlin has written the introduction to a recent edi-

tion of The Anti-Slavery Impulse in which he contends that Barnes exalted Weld and

Finney too much. Significant to this paper, and quite contrary to Barnes' con-

clusion, he reckons that there was in Finney's perfectionism "a strong element of es-

capism, an over-optimistic reliance upon the Holy Spirit to perform the difficult task

of freeing the slaves."⁵⁴

Timothy Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform (1957), takes an entirely different

view of Finney. While he would agree that revivalism since 1890 has been theolog-

ically obscurantist and socially negative, it was not so in Finney's time nor in his

case. Smith makes much of the mass mind, which has been neglected in research.

He also gives attention to the post-millennial orientation of Finney, a popular con-

viction which motivated many to work for Christ's kingdom on earth and the broth-

erhood of man.⁵⁵ According to Smith, the quest for personal holiness inherent in

revival measures became the common man's Transcendentalism and the "drive

shaft" of reform. The evangelists, Finney prominent among them, prepared the

way in theory and practice for the social gospel.⁵⁶

It is quite clear from the evidence that Finney favored the role of revivalist over

that of political agitator. But he did not retreat from politics, as is evidenced by the

Ohio Antislavery Society action. Nor did he abstain from denouncing slavery from

the pulpit; the "abomination," he said, must be called by its proper name.⁵⁷ If some

of his contemporaries felt he was soft on slavery, others considered him an activist

51. Two federal commissioners and two Kentucky claimants held an alleged fugitive in nearby Wel-

lington, Ohio. A crowd of local citizens converged on the building and effected a rescue. The United

States District Court at Cleveland brought indictments against thirty-seven Oberlin and Wellington citi-

zens. In retaliation, the Lorain County Court of Common Appeals charged the claimants and deputy

marshals with kidnapping. The upshot was a mutual cancellation of charges. See Oberlin Evangelist,

September 29, 1858; July 13, 1859.

52. McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, 11, 523, 526.

53. Ibid., 112-113, fn. 94.

54. Barnes, Anti-Slavery Impulse, xxii, xxvii, xxviii.

55. Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform, 9, 46, 225-237. See also Fletcher, History of Oberlin College,

1, 252-253.

56. Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform, 8, 204.

57. Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion, 266.

Charles Finney                                                               153

of the first rank.⁵⁸ Holding firmly to perfectionist convictions brought considerable

denominational censure and loss of patronage. It is difficult to sustain, in full con-

text, that such a posture constitutes what one recent author has termed a "failure of

nerve.^"59

Perhaps the great distinction of Finney as revivalist was that in his most heated

denunciation of slavery there was compassion. He could stigmatize the vice, but he

must do it in a spirit of love. Holding such views, he could hardly abandon the

church as advocated by Garrison-the church was the last hope of the world. Nor

would it have been consistent with his philosophy to supply rifles for antislavery col-

onists to Kansas or to actively support the guerilla forays of a John Brown.

If the Transcendentalist philosophy was murky and the philosopohy of politicians

untrustworthy, the "higher law" to Charles Finney was unmistakably the law of

God. "Entire sanctification," made available to the many through the medium of

revival, could bring all men to the high state of morality which would demand that

God's "higher law" be operative above the frail and imperfect statutes of the unre-

deemed.

58. David W. Bartlett, Modern Agitators; Pen Portraits of Living American Reformers (New York,

1855), 157. Theodore Parker was also included in this collection.

59. Opie. "Finney's Failure of Nerve," 155-173.