The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1888-03-03
REVEALS AND REVEALS.


We print this week a sermon by the
Rev. w. A. Pratt reviewing the Whittle
revival in Cedar Rapids. The sermon
is from a pastor who has taken no &C
tive part in that revival, and who utter
ly repudiates the theology Of which
Major Whittle is an exponent. judy
ing from Mr.. Pratt's sermon, Major
Whittle preached straight-out ortho-
doxy, differing in no important respect
from the old-time revivalism. What
ever notifications this revival present
ed, and whatever improvement it ex-
hibited beyond those held under ortho-
dox influences during the past genera
tion,-the reyivals of Knapp, Finney,
Burchard, Littlejohn and others, was
in the better spirit manifested by
the evangelist, and not in the theology
which he preached.
Indeed it rarely happens that we find
a professional revivalist who fails to
make the old theology of the evangeli-
cal churches the veritable backbone of
his appeals. Mr.. Moody lifts into a
greater prominence the love of God
and breaches the saving work of Christ
more in the spirit of the New Tesla
ment than any modern evangelist. But
even Mr.. Moody is thorough devotee
of the "blood theology" and bases
many of his appeals on such concep-
lions of the Saviour's work and mission
as would be repudiated by every Uni
versalist and Unitarian in Christendom.
Sam Jones has cw ore of the
modern spirit of evival work, and
breaches more practical sermons than
any evangelist now before the public;
but his methods are so vulgar and SEN
sational as to repel thoughtful minds.
So far as modern revivalism in the
orthodox church is concerned, it shows
little response 20 the educated and in
telligent religious thought of the pres
ent generation. AS Mr.. Pratt suggests
in what is perhaps the most thoughtful
passage in his sermon, it reflects moth
ing whatever of the advance that the
ology has confessedly made in the last
generation. Revivals are still conduct
ed on the implication that the old in
terpretations of the Bible are correct,
and that the doctrines of the past, es-
pecially those of the vicarious atone
ment, an endless hell and an omnipo-
tent devil, are still in the ascendant.
While the fact is everywhere recog-
nized that the style of preaching is
greatly changed, and the Objectionable
doctrines of the past are largely rele-
gated to the limbo of the creeds, it is
also true that the revival teachings of
the day are still loyal to the old faith.
But, as remarked, it comes in less OBJ
jectionable form than formerly, and
the methods adopted are less offensive
to rational Christians. The personal
element which once did not scruple to
vilify and abuse Universalists has
largely dropped out. But the chief ap
peals at all such meetings still remains
substantially the same, and are based
on the old doctrines.
1t has been suggested more than
once, and many facts would seem to
lend color to the suggestion, that the
popular orthodox preachers of the day,
who deal very lightly in terrors and
seldom sound the alarm of orthodoxy,
avail themselves of the services Of pro-
fessional revivalists in order that their
congregations may be indoctrinated
with the evangelical dogmas without
the preachers bearing the responsibility
of their proclamation. Whether this
be so or not, it is suggestive fact that
many of those evangelists who sound
the keynote of endless hell in such un-
equivoeal strains, are often found ply