Part 13 (pages 176–189)
| fourteen
reeting the Finneys as they arrived in Oberlin, CG Ohio, in 1835, was-a huge three-thousand-seat
tent with a lofty banner. fluttering over it announcing, “Holiness to the Lord.” The tent, a token of love and appreciation to Charles, came by way of his band of friends and admirers. Now he would be able to hold revival services on the Oberlin campus in addition to ful- - filling his new responsibilities as professor of theology. A short time later, the Oberlin Congregational Church was formed, and Charles was selected to be pastor. He held that position for years to come.
At the time the Finney family arrived, not many Oberlin campus buildings had been built. Once Charles’s friends learned of his new commitment at Oberlin, how- ever, many of them rallied to help the fledgling institute. Several close friends and associates of the evangelist also became part of Oberlin’s select faculty. These included ~~ dents, and 1 many of them did manual labor in exchan, : their tuition. They: could work on ie school farm
a so Tappan had to declare bankruptcy. Probably Charles wondered in those early days. whether he had done the right thing leaving a secure, successful pastorate for col- lege life in the American wilderness.
Soon after the family’s arrival in Oberlin, Charles learned that his Lectures on Revivals of Religion had reached: England and received much acclaim. He’ also knew that.the British.Christian public would apprec- iate Oberlin Institute’s stance on abolition, collegiate co- education, and social reform, so he suggested that John Keep and William Dawes.be sent to-England to do some fund-raising. The English did respond, and: the. men returned with six.thousand pounds.
Other American Christians pitched in, too, to help the struggling school. Some of the people from Ohio, how- ever, were opposed to the-college’s abolitionist stand and refused to help. There was even talk by.the state legisla- ture of. Ohio about rescinding the college charter.: The school overcame all these difficulties in time as Christians on both sides of the Atlantic gave generously to the institute.
Charles and his family suffered financially during these times, but he knew God would provide for them. He later recalled an example of just how. the Lord provided for his family’s needs:
At one time, I saw no means of providing for‘my family through the winter. Thanksgiving day came, and found us so poor that I had been obliged to. _sell my traveling trunk, which I had used in my always tried to be generous to others. Hearing about a missionary to the Ojibway Indians who had no overcoat, Charles gladly sent him the best one he had. It had. cost him about fifty dollars, a considerable.amount of money in the nineteenth century. The Oberlin Institute might not have continued had it not been for Charles and his fol- lowers, who always gave largely to the school. ;
Charles also seemed to have a penchant for getting into trouble with other church leaders. During the years when he divided his time between New York and Oberlin, the evangelist (along with Asa Mahan) had worked out his concepts - of. perfectionism and sanctification. Charles called the series “Lectures to Professing Christians.” The lectures first appeared in Leavitt’s New York Evangelist, then went into book form. and. were read by people throughout America and. much of Europe. A fury of protest erupted because nineteenth-century Christians did not accept the idea of perfectionism.
The evangelist, however, had come by his teaching honestly. He always searched for truth, and regarding his idea of perfectionism, he declared, “I say again that true Christian consistency implies progress in knowledge and holiness, and-such changes in theory and in practice as are demanded by increasing light.” Further, Charles could be tenacious in clinging to his beliefs: “If upon fur- ther discussion and investigation I.see no. cause to change, I hold them [new ideas] fast.”
Certain conditions that Charles had witnessed led to a search for a higher Christian life. Initially, he realized after finishing a series of meetings, a number of believers ve ani were’ greatly pe ana ‘eas, Hi ‘told of his ‘own experience of. divine’ blessing: PLE Esa The-last winter that I spent in New York, the Lord was pleased to visit my soul with a great refreshing. After.a-season of great searching -of heart, He brought me, as He has often done, into a large place, and gave me much of that divine sweetness in my soul, of which President [Jonathan] Edwards speaks as he-has.attained in his. own experience. That winter I had a thor- ough breaking up: so much so that sometimes, for a considerable period, I could not refrain from loud weeping.in. view of my own sins, and of the love of God in Christ. Such seasons were frequent that winter, and resulted in the great renewal of my spiritual strength, and enlarge- ment of my views in regard to the privileges
of Christians, and the abundance of the grace of God.
Some of the hue and cry that came forth from more tra- ditional Christians was that Charles’s view bordered on heresy; further, the view was considered antinomian. If the evangelist’s view was the right one, and a person was perfect, he could live any way he wished.
After much opposition by various churches and lead- ing ecclesiastical authorities, “Oberlin Perfectionism” was called as an item to be discussed before a convention in Cleveland. Lyman Beecher, the evangelist’s main oppo- nent in the “new measures” fracas, turned out to be the chief adversary this time as well. Charles never refuted his position, but neither did he criticize his opponents’ stance. He did experience much ostracism from certain quarters; ‘Charles Finney
moreover, the. Oberlin Institute: published. two periodi- cals reflecting Charles’s (and'Mahan’s) views: the Oberlin Evangelist, and later, the-Oberlin Quarterly. These publi- cations reached many people with the evangelist’s:ideas and also preserved much of his writing. :
Overall; Charles’s -years at Oberlin were fruitful ones— for himself and for his students. As a theology professor, he had to study long and hard to stay ahead of his stu- dents; but in the process of applying theological concepts to real life, he grew and matured in his faith along with the students. His practicality served him well, too, as he advised the students on many everyday matters. He told them, for example, “Beware how you write ladies; what is written is written.” He cautioned future ministers not to blow their noses with their fingers, not to spit on the car- pet, and not to use dirty handkerchiefs.
Other disgusting habits they should not practice were: not to put their feet and muddy boots on the sofa or on the door posts, nor to pull off their socks in front of families. He related two revolting stories to classes. The first con- cerned a young minister “who called on some ladies after walking some distance, took off his boots and hung his socks on the andirons the first thing.”
Another minister, according to the theology professor, “Put his feet up in a window in a lady’s parlor to enjoy the cool air.” Some other habits Charles advocated for his stu- dents were to practice good grooming by keeping their nails and hair clean and being sure they had clean teeth and sweet breath. Most of these students had grown up on the frontier and needed to be taught about good hygiene.
’. The evangelist provided an excellent model for his:stu- - dents to emulate..They did so; whether Charles taught in the classroom, where they could.see his earnestness and determination to live for Christ, or whether they observed him preaching with utmost conviction as pastor of the Oberlin Congregational Church. The Oberlin Institute, however, could not expect their famous professor-preacher to give them all his time.. The world at large still needed him, too. So Charles.set his sights once more toward his calling as a preacher of revivals.
Bostonians. As the evangelist preached, he noted that “the Spirit of the Lord was immediately poured out.” Under conviction for sin, people continuously knocked on his door seeking peace, and many soon came to a per- sonal knowledge of Christ.
From Boston, the evangelist was called to Providence, Rhode Island, by Josiah Chapin,.a large contributor to Oberlin Institute. Charles was thrilled at the conversions of many prominent citizens. A judge of the Supreme Court, who was a well-known skeptic, began attending the ser- vices. The man paid close attention to the services even though he had not come to them before. One night as the evangelist closed his message, the old judge stood up ask- ing if he might say something to the people. Charles told him he could, and choking with emotion, the judge said:
My friends and neighbors, you are probably sur- prised to see me attend these meetings. You have known my skeptical views, and that I have not been in the habit of attending religious meetings, for along time. But hearing of the state of things in this congregation, I came in here; and I wish to have my friends and neighbors know that I believe that the preaching we are hearing, from night to night, is the gospel. I have altered my ‘mind. I believe this is the truth, and the true way of salvation. I say this that you may understand my real motive for coming here; that it is not to criticize and find fault, but to attend to the great question of salvation, and to encourage others to attend to it.
Charles Finney:
The feeling with which the judge spoke greatly affected the congregation, and many others came under conviction. Charles continued to‘hold nightly inquiry meetings in the large basement room below the church. Night after night, the room filled to. overflowing. Again, the-evangelist re- joiced in the pouring out of God’s Spirit on: Providence.
By spring, it was time for Charles to. return: to “Obertin, On his way, he rested for a day in Rochester, New: York, with a friend. But when word got out that:-he was in their area, a leading judge-in the state court of appeals urged him ‘to stay and preach. Several others prevailed:on him as well. The evangelist always found it difficult to say no, so he remained in Rochester. ..
Charles did most of his preaching in George S. Boardman’s Bethel Church. As. the meetings got. under way, several-attorneys asked him to preach a series of ser- mons to the city’s. lawyers. The: evangelist. rose. to .the occasion. Given his background as a lawyer, he relished the opportunity-to persuade his peers about the truth of the gospel. He knew their skeptical bent, but he knew, too, their love of argumentation. In his first message to the attorneys, Charles asked, “Do we know anything?” He began to build his arguments on what is. known. Of course, many of those who were not.lawyers. failed:.to appreciate some of these messages, yet the church was filled to capacity every night.
For two months, Charles preached in Rochester.: The meetings increased in fervency and impact. The whole city was soon moved by his meetings. Each denomina- tion in‘ the city profited from the revival. More than one thousand conversions took place throughout the city. Many of this number were attorneys—and some of them chose to enter the Christian ministry later. A number of physicians found Christ, too. ;
Charles believed. that lawyers proved easier to reach than physicians because of the latter group’s skeptical turn of mind. Of lawyers, he said: “I have always found, wherever I have labored, that when the gospel was prop- erly presented, they were the most accessible class of men; and I believe it is true that, in proportion to their rel- ative number, in any community, more have been con- _ verted, than of any other class.” As for physicians, he-did concede, “They are intelligent; if the gospel is thoroughly set before them, they are easily convinced.”
Following the Rochester revival, Charles traveled back | to Oberlin for the summer.session. Then, in the fall of - . 1843, he returned to Boston and Marlborough Chapel. His earlier ministry. of the year before had not really settled the prevailing religious controversies. Charles remarked: “Their system is one of denials. Their theol- ogy is negative. They deny almost everything, and affirm almost nothing.” The evangelist believed the Unitarians were largely to blame for the situation since they caused the orthodox to question every doctrine of the Christian faith.
As Charles struggled with the religious turmoil and faced small attendance and few visible results, he also faced a personal crisis. He struggled over his own dedi- cation and holiness. Moreover, the lethargy and lack’ of spirituality of many church members troubled him. He y lay very ill back in Ohio and had only. a: ‘sho : ~ Charles struggled over: giving her up. He. reveale his” oe anguish with these words: i
I wrote to my. wife, telling her what a struggle 1 : had had, and the concern that I had felt atnot. being willing to commit her, without reserve to the perfect will of God. But I was able, after oe : struggling for afew moments with this discour- --. agement ‘and bitterness, which Ihave since’ : attributed toa fiery dart of Satan, to fall ‘back, - in.a deeper sense. than I had-eéver done before. - _ upon the infinitely blessed and perfect will. : of God. I then told the: Lord that I had. such