Portrait of Asahel Nettleton
reproduced courtesy of
The Connecticut Historical Society,
Hartford, Connecticut
Portrait of Asahel Nettleton
reproduced courtesy of
The Connecticut Historical Society,
Hartford, Connecticut
On April 21, 1783, Asahel Nettleton was born into the home of a Connecticut
farmer, the second child and eldest son of six children. In his youth, he
was catechized in the Westminster Shorter Catechism, giving him a mental
apprehension of truths which, when God brought the truths home to his heart,
greatly increased his effectiveness as an evangelist. In the year 1800,
Nettleton became convicted that his life was dangerously frivolous; as a
result, he sought to change both himself and his friends. An increasing
sense of the wickedness of his heart brought about a corresponding attempt
to prove the Bible wrong. He disliked the God he found there, for he knew
that such a Holy Being must of necessity condemn him. He wished for God's
non-existence.
After Nettleton struggled in spiritual distress for ten months, God's Spirit
changed his heart and brought him to embrace the Savior. He did not at first
recognize his change as conversion but now found delight in objects which
before had "given him so much distress." His views and feelings
were the same as those "whom he regarded as the friends of Christ."
Now, instead of hoping for God's non-existence, the attributes of the Tri-une
Deity appeared lovely and "the Saviour was exceedingly precious."
Now, instead of feelings of bitter opposition, he contemplated the doctrines
of grace, with delight, and "had now no doubt of their truth."
This astounding change, he knew, was "not the result of any effort
of his own, but of the sovereign and distinguishing will of God."1
In 1805, in spite of pressing hardships, Nettleton entered Yale College,
then under the presidency of Timothy Dwight. During his years there he justly
gained the respect of his classmates as having unmixed sincerity in his
devotion to Christ and earnestness in his desire for the salvation of his
friends. Beyond the necessary study of the liberal arts curriculum, he gave
his time to theological study and the development of a capacity for spiritual
discernment. During a revival in 1807 at Yale, Nettleton was effective as
a spiritual counselor. His career at Yale prompted the judgment from Timothy
Dwight, "He will make one of the most useful men this country has ever
seen."2
Nettleton, along with Samuel Mills, envisioned a life of service among those
who had never heard the gospel on the mission field. Three factors converged
to preclude that possibility for Nettleton. One, a debt incurred while in
school needed to be paid and he felt he must stay until that was done. Meanwhile,
his preaching in destitute areas of Connecticut was so effective that leaders
of the Congregational church urged upon him the duty to stay. Third, his
contraction of typhus in 1822 eliminated all remaining hopes he had of work
on the mission field.
In 1812, at the invitation of the pastors of churches, Nettleton began itinerating.
Nettleton had seen the effects, and in fact had interviewed some eyewitnesses,
of the inordinate affectations of James Davenport in the Great Awakening.
He entered into this ministry with several convictions. One, he must do
nothing to win affection from or destroy the influence of the settled pastorate.
No lasting good could be done without the support and long-term influence
of faithful pastors. Two, he would not seek to stir up interest where it
was clear the Spirit of God had not preceded him. If he in fact detected
a spirit of "enthusiasm" he would work to root it out. He had
no fear at all that in his opposition to this type of misguided zeal he
was "quenching the spirit." Three, he would not stay where there
appeared to be any reliance on him. He felt he could be of no use if a church's
anticipation fostered hope and excitement because of confidence in the human
instrument, rather than remorse for sin and desire for the favor of God.
Four, he believed that those converted during seasons of revival had a fervour
for God purer and more sustained than those who made professions in times
without general revival. Nettleton made the following observation in 1829.
During the leisure occasioned by my late illness, I have been looking over
the regions where God has revived his work for the two years past. The thousands
who have professed Christ in this time, in general appear to run well. Hitherto,
I think they have exhibited more of the Christian temper, and a better example,
than the same number who have professed religion when there was no revival....
When I look back on revivals which took place ten or fifteen years ago,
I have been agreeably surprised to find so many of the subjects of them
continuing to adorn their profession. Take the whole number who professed
religion as the fruit of these revivals, and take the same number who professed
religion when there was no general revival, and I do think that the former
have outshined the latter. I have not made a particular estimate, but from
what I have seen, I do believe that the number of excommunications from
the latter is more than double in proportion to the former.3
For eleven years Nettleton immersed himself virtually without respite into
the cause of revivals. This involved preaching three times on Sabbaths,
usually twice, maybe thrice, during the week, and numbers of personal interviews
and visits to homes where small but spiritually interested groups would
be gathered. This schedule came to a halt in October, 1822, when after visiting
a sick person he contracted typhus fever. For more than two years he was
unable to engage in any revival activity, but took advantage of the time
to compile his Village Hymns for Social Worship. After that time he could
engage in far less strenuous activity, was more selective in engagements,
and took longer periods of rest between revival efforts. Though the impression
of his person was less powerful than before, accounts of his visits to churches
still abound with testimonies of the effectual working of the Spirit of
God. He traveled not only in New England during these years but also into
the South as far as Virginia and South Carolina.
He went to the United Kingdom in 1831, ostensibly to rest, but preached
frequently. In addition, he regularly had opportunity, as well as necessity,
to distinguish between revivals in America and the more recent impact of
the New Measures excitements. One report of the revivals in America concentrated
on methods, events, and results characteristic of the New Measures fervor.
Nettleton responded, "I am exhausted in my attempts to vindicate our
revivals. I can only tell the good ministers here, that I do not, and never
did, approve of the practice mentioned in the above letter."4
That practice Nettleton had opposed with increasing conviction since 1826.
At that time he was drawn into a controversy with Charles Finney. The controversy
was never really about methods although that issue first prompted the initial
meetings between Nettleton and Finney. Though Finney declared "He could
have led me almost or quite at his discretion," there is no evidence
in any of Finney's relationships with older, more experienced and wiser
people that he had any penchant for being led.5
The conflict climaxed at New Lebanon, New York, in July 1827. Nettleton
had written publicly opposing the methods employed in Finney's meetings.6
Finney responded with a sermon, "How can two walk together except they
be agreed?" The conference was arranged by Nathan Beman, a Finney supporter,
and Lyman Beecher.7 There amidst wrangling, charges and counter charges,
and some histrionic posturing on the part of Lyman Beecher, Nettleton felt
strongly the futility of such discussion. Near the close of the meeting,
Nettleton read a letter outlining the disturbing practices and the conference
approved resolutions rejecting the use of such practices. Finney and his
followers, while clearly advocating some of the measures which give rise
to these complaints, denied that these measures consisted of such abuses
as outlined in the letter.8 Perhaps, Finney proposed, a resolution against
lukewarmness should also be adopted.
Several factors conspired against any satisfactory resolution to this conflict,
especially in the dynamics of the New Lebanon Conference. One, the issue
continued to be reduced to one of methods and the underlying theological
distinctions garnered only brief attention. The orthodox participants, in
fact, seemed unaware at this time that distinction in methods arose from
radically different theological assumptions. Only in the next few years
was the reason for this impasse in the discussion understood more fully.
Two, one of Nettleton's chief protagonists, Lyman Beecher, agreed with Finney's
anthropology and would soon be visibly aligned with the theological shift
voiced in 1828 by Nathan W. Taylor.9 Three, others who complained against
Finney's methods were actually susceptible to many of Finney's theological
caveats concerning human responsibility. They were followers of the "consistent
Calvinists" Samuel Hopkins and Nathanael Emmons.10 Four, Finney and
his co-adjutants went to the conference fully convinced that the charges
against them were false, or, where correct, merely reflected a theological
or methodological insight superior to those of their accusers. Finney claimed
that after the conference opposition to his revival efforts decreased.11
He said that the opposition of Beecher and Nettleton was "impertinent
& assuming, uncalled for & injurious to themselves, & the cause
of God." And besides that, in spite of their efforts Finney could say,
"their opposition never made me ashamed, never convinced me that I
was wrong in doctrine or practice, & I never made the slightest change
in conducting revivals as a consequence of their opposition. I thought I
was right."12
In 1832, after his return from England, Nettleton joined efforts to conserve
the orthodox theology of the past from the destructive force of Taylorism
and the dispiriting effects of Finneyism. A vital part of this effort consisted
of the founding of the Theological Institute of Connecticut. Nettleton,
refusing an invitation to become a regular faculty member, was retained
as an occasional instructor. He spent his last years lecturing on evangelism,
counselling students, writing letters to friends making observations on
the condition of religion in New England and America, and preaching as strength
allowed. In May 1844, he died after a lengthy season of suffering and in
a great deal of pain. His comforts in Christ, however, outstripped the rigors
his calamitous sickness and to the end he continued to affirm that it was
"sweet to trust in the Lord."13
Asahel Nettleton: Sermons From the Second Great Awakening
contains over 50 sermons preached by Rev. Asahel Nettleton. For more information
click on the link above or the Books by Asahel Nettleton link.
1 Bennet Tyler, Nettleton and His Labours (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth
Trust, 1975) p. 29. This volume was first published in 1844 and was published
in Scotland in 1854 with an introduction and occasional notes by Andrew
Bonar and also, by him, "Remodelled in some parts." The Banner
of Truth edition is a reprint of the 1854 printing in Scotland. This will
normally be referred to as "Tyler," but special mention will be
made of Bonar when it is clear that the text is a part "Remodelled"
by him or inserted on the basis of his own knowledge.
2 lbid., p. 41
3 From a Letter of Nettleton quoted in "A brief sketch of an Argument
respecting the nature of Scriptural, and the importance and necessity of
numerous, rapid, frequent, and extensive Revivals of Religion, " in
Biblical Repertory & Theological Review, January, 1834, p. 124
4 Tyler, p. 289.
5 Charles Finney, The Memoirs of Charles G. Finney: The Complete Restored
Text ed. Garth M. Rosell and Richard A. G. Dupuis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1989) p. 204. Hereinafter this will be referred to as
Memoirs. One also should consult John F. Thornbury, God Sent Revival (Welwyn,
Herts, England, and Grand Rapids. Evangelical Press, 1977) pp. 164 - 179.
6 This was eventually published in 1828 along with other letters in a volume
entitled Letters of the Rev. Dr. Beecher and Rev. Mr Nettleton on The New
Measures in Conducting Revivals of Religion. New York, 1828.
7 Beecher's Autobiography records that Beecher said, "Finney, I know
your plan, and you know that I do; you mean to come into Connecticut and
carry a streak of fire to Boston. But if you attempt it, as the Lord liveth,
I'll meet you at the State line, and call out all the artillery men, and
fight every inch of the way to Boston, and then I'll fight you there."
Beecher eventually signed a truce with the party of Finney and invited him
to preach at his Boston church in August, 1831.
8 Finney, Memoirs, p. 222. Finney's version of the conference and all its
connections is recorded on pp. 216 - 231 as well as valuable footnotes by
the volume's editors. These footnotes contain references to related source
material. Finney continued to defend the profitableness of his measures
with an unusual sense of their virtual divinity. "I have always &
everywhere used all the measures I used in these revivals, & have often
added other measures such as the anxious seat whenever I have deemed it
expedient. I have never seen the necessity of reformation in this respect.
Were I to live my life over again, I think that with the experience of more
than forty years in revival labors I should under the same circumstance
use substantially the same measures that I did then. And let me not be understood
to take credit to myself No indeed. It was no wisdom of my own that directed
me. I was made to feel my ignorance & dependence & led to look to
God continually for His guidance. I had no doubt then nor have I ever had
that God led me by his Spirit to take the course I did. So clearly did he
lead me from day to day that I never did nor could doubt that I was Divinely
directed" (p. 227).
9 In his famous address Concio ad Clerum, Taylor rejected the Westminster
Confession's doctrine of original sin. Sinfulness is not innate; neither
guilt nor necessary predisposition toward sin are innately connected with
the human heart, according to Taylor. Sin always is a deliberate moral choice
as has no pre-existence to the choice. One always has the power of contrary
choice. This theology blended perfectly with the revival techniques of Finney.
Nettleton and Taylor were close friends all of their lives, but Nettleton
ardently opposed Taylor's "New Haven Theology."
10 Again, Finney's representation of their ideas was extravagant, but their
alterations in Edwards's theology diminished the direct connection between
original sin and the sinner's sinning, and made it appear that each individual's
sin arose from the decree and over-ruling providence of God.
11 lnterpretations of the New Lebanon conference from distinctly different
perspectives may be seen in Keith J. Hardman, Charles Grandison Finney 1792
- 1875 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990) pp. 133-149; and, lain Murray,
Revival and Revivalism (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1994) pp.
225 - 252. That the theological tendencies of Finney were not clear at this
time probably contributed to the focus of the discussion on method more
than doctrine and also explains some of the support he received from settled
pastors who believed the Westminster Confession. Hardman's discussion of
Beecher's zeal for the "social order" explains both his initial
opposition and eventual friendship (148, 149).
12 Finney, Memoirs, pp. 239, 240.
13 For an account of his sickness see Thornbury's God Sent Revival, pp.
220 - 225. Thornbury's book gives a sensitive and engaging portrayal of
Nettleton's entire life.
Number of visitors since July 10, 1996
Web Counter courtesy of our friends at
http://www.digits.com/