A Special Exertion of Almighty Power: The Conversion Philosophy of Asahel Nettleton

January 31, 2021 · by Daniel Pentimone · in Evangelism & Missions, History

Introduction

The world is filled with more lost souls than it has ever before held. Christ called His people to preach the Gospel, but what does this look like? While the specific cultural situations of the present are unlike the past, there is much that modern believers can learn from the past. One of the great instructors of evangelism must surely be Asahel Nettleton, the itinerant evangelist of the Second Great Awakening. It is estimated that he was instrumental in the salvation of no less than 25,000 souls.[1] Even for those wary of revivals, his works were “so rational, scriptural and beneficial in their effects that few pious people could really object to them.”[2] Nor was Nettleton a theological experimenter; he believed that evangelism consists simply in “preaching the Word of God,”[3] which is one reason why he opposed the New Measures of Charles Finney. In short, Nettleton is an ideal instructor in evangelism.

At its core, Nettleton believed that the moral inability of sinners necessitates immediate repentance, which the wise evangelist will encourage through orderly and pious means. In order to better understand Nettleton’s thinking, this paper will begin with a brief survey of the itinerant’s life. It will then look at three important aspects of salvation: the sinner’s moral inability, the necessity of immediate repentance, and the influence of the evangelist.

The Life of Asahel Nettleton

Nettleton has been called “the most amazing itinerant minister America has ever produced.”[4] He was born in North Killingworth, Connecticut on April 21, 1783. Nettleton grew up in a rather nominal household, but as a young man he wrestled for “ten tortuous months” with his own depravity until he finally attained peace with God.[5] He entered Yale in 1805, earning his BA degree four years later.[6] He followed this with an apprenticeship under the Reverend Bezaleel Pinneo, where he remained until May, 1811.[7]

Nettleton hoped to become a foreign missionary, but without clear direction overseas, he began to preach as an itinerant in southeast Connecticut. He had the opportunity to see firsthand the spiritual ravages that the radical James Davenport had unfortunately accomplished during the First Great Awakening,[8] and he learned the lesson well: Nettleton never preached revival at a church that he was not welcomed to, stating that “If they do not choose to invite me into their field, my business is meekly and silently to retire.”[9] Nettleton preached in the northeast, primarily Connecticut, until 1822, when he became seriously ill with typhus fever.[10] Nettleton improved after an extended illness, but his strength was ruined, and he was never able to carry on the same degree of work as he had originally. His later life was marked by opposition, both to the New Measures of Charles Finney[11] and to the increasing liberalism of the New Haven theology of Nathaniel Taylor and Lyman Beecher.[12] Nettleton left the field of his earthly labors on May 16, 1844.

The Sinner’s Moral Inability

Nettleton based his preaching in the moral inability of the sinner. He believed that sinners have no ability to choose Jesus Christ; hence he said, “The apostle does not say that they were half dead, or almost dead, but he asserts that they were ‘dead.’ …Men naturally dead, will never raise themselves to life… So it is with sinners…left to himself, the sinner will as certainly remain in his sins, as the dead will continue to sleep in their graves.”[13] Yet Nettleton did not hold to the exact formulation of depravity that the reformers held; he believed that original sin consists in the actual sins which every individual commits, because they are Adam’s descendants. This is in contradistinction to original sin being a moral taint or inclination: “By original sin is meant that actual sin which all Adam’s posterity commit in consequence of his being constituted their public head.”[14]

Nettleton followed in the tradition of Jonathan Edwards, who distinguished between natural and moral inability.[15] Natural inability is the physical incapability to perform an action – and in this sense, no one is unable to repent. Moral inability is “the opposition of want of inclination”[16] which prevents certain types of moral activities. Moral inability, then, is like the kleptomaniac who instinctively steals a pen because of his moral nature, but not because of any physical necessity. Tyler recounted that “It was a prominent object with him [Nettleton] to show that sinners labor under no inability to obey the divine commands which furnishes them with the least excuse.”[17]

Nettleton himself used this distinction often, arguing that the awakened sinner’s physical ability and moral inability only increased his condemnation. In one sermon from 2 Corinthians 6:20, Nettleton urged,

“Or will you plead your inability? What! Cannot be reconciled to God! Cannot feel sorrow for sin! Cannot cease to rebel against the King of heaven! What an acknowledgement is this! Out of thine own mouth, wilt thou be condemned. If indeed, you are so opposed to God, that you cannot feel sorrow for sin, this is the very reason why you ought to be condemned. The harder it is for you to repent and love God, the more wicked you are, and the greater will be your condemnation.”[18]
Asahel Nettleon

For Nettleton, this was not an insignificant doctrine; to some extent, it was an affirmation of his own depravity before conversion. Nettleton wrestled with his own condition before God for ten months, as already mentioned, but at the conclusion of this time he realized that his lack of faith was still his own fault. “He came to believe that in all of his experience there had been no true contrition for what he had done to God, only dread for the consequences of his actions.”[19] This only increased his guilt, proving that he was truly a rebel before the Almighty. Hence, Nettleton thought of sinners more as “willing slaves and friends of Satan” than as “victims of intellectual kidnap.”[20]

The Necessity of Immediate Repentance

Because Nettleton did not believe that sinners were physically unable to repent, he followed the approach of Samuel Hopkins, who argued that the awakened sinner must repent, rather than await some Divine action.[21] In other words, because the sinner is called to repent, the best course of action is to do so, rather than to pursue the means of grace such as Bible reading and church attendance. Nettleton himself called men to immediate conversion, and he skillfully demolished every argument that they raised against this. He said, “If we direct the sinner to wait, we direct him to run the awful hazard of losing his soul.”[22] Nettleton even addressed this in his “Village Hymns,” a hymn-book that he edited in his later life that contained many hymns suitable for revival. One of them states,

“My conscious gilt [sic] is now so great,
If I attempt to pray,
The tempter tells me yet to wait,
Or frights my soul away.”[23]

Hence, in Nettleton’s mind, it is not simply bad advice to advise the awakened sinner to wait for God’s mercy; it is actually a thought from the devil himself.

It may seem that Nettleton held to a contradictory standard, denying that humans have any ability to become spiritually alive, yet commanding them to repent immediately. This tension – indeed, the central tension of the Reformed system of soteriology – was no difficulty for Nettleton. Once, speaking to a woman who denied that she could repent, he said, “Why, madam, you hold to the doctrine of election in a stricter sense than I do. I should prefer to say, not that ‘you cannot,’ but that you ‘never will’ repent unless God has determined to change your heart.”[24]

What did Nettleton mean when he argued that sinners must repent? This word seemed to carry, for Nettleton, the specific idea of submission and surrender to divine sovereignty. In his sermon “Sinners Entreated to be Reconciled to God,” he said, “…I beseech you, lay down the arms of your rebellion; bow and submit to your rightful Sovereign.”[25] This submission occurred among many of his converts, who often, after being terrified at the thought of being in the hands of God, found themselves “unexpectedly rejoicing in that very thought.”[26]

It is important to understand that while Nettleton believed in the duty of immediate repentance, he did not skim over the bad news or ‘law-work.’ As important as repentance was, it would never occur without a deep-seated knowledge of sin: a conviction that led to repentance. Not only does repentance imply that one is a sinner, it also implies conviction of sin. “Without conviction no sinner ever did, or ever will repent.”[27] Nettleton did not require this conviction to last for a long time, but it did need to be sincere, based on an actual consciousness of sin rather than a mere fear of danger.[28]

Generally, Nettleton called men to go straight to God in prayer, individually. At the end of an ‘inquiry meeting,’ where sinners gathered to receive counsel about their spiritual state, Nettleton would dismiss them, urging them to go straight to their prayer closets in silence.[29] He said that “Repentance implies confession of sin. ‘I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid.’ The sinner who has long refused to retire to confess his sins to God, will now be constrained by the power of conscience to cry for mercy.”[30] As to what this prayer looked like, Nettleton seems to have never given specific words, but perhaps a hint can be gleaned from Hymn 343 in his hymnal, where the awakened sinner cries,

“Great God to thee I make
My sins and sorrows known;
And with a trembling heart
Approach thine awful throne;
Tho’ by my sins deserving hell,
I must repent – for who can tell? –

God hath an ear to hear,
While I’ve a heart to pray –
To him I will submit,
And give myself away:
If he be mine, all will be well,
For ever so – and who can tell?”[31]

The Influence of the Evangelist

Nettleton believed that the sinner was totally depraved because of moral inability, though he remained physically capable of repentance. Yet while the sinner was required to repent immediately, the evangelist also played an important role in aiding this process along. The evangelist performed the role of spiritual midwife through prayer, a reverent approach to God, removal of spiritual roadblocks, and a healthy degree of skepticism toward conversions.

Nettleton was undoubtedly a man of prayer, one who entered the pulpit “directly from ‘the mount of communion.’”[32] He encouraged people to pray for spiritual awakening, and he was convinced that prayer could bring about such awakening. At one place, after urging his hearers to pray for such awakening, he noted that even if they did not, “it is possible there may be one [awakening], for Christians in other places have agreed to pray for you.”[33] He also regarded the spirit of prayer as “the unfailing precursor of a revival of religion.”[34] Of course, the reason for such prayer was because God is sovereign. Even the spiritual birth of a believer was solely the result of God’s work, for “every real Christian becomes such by a special exertion of Almighty power to change his heart.”[35] If this is true, the evangelist must be a man of prayer.

The evangelist also had the important duty of safeguarding the attitude of reverence toward God. Unlike many other episodes in the awakenings, Nettleton’s meetings were marked by “a hushed, mysterious stillness.”[36] There was a solemnity about Nettleton’s message that filled sinners, who were often “bowed down with distress.”[37] Nettleton went so far as to remove from his meetings those who disrupted the order and stillness of the event,[38] and he did not even prefer to converse much with awakened sinners, since he believed that it would “dissipate, rather than deepen, religious impressions.”[39] One reason for such stillness was his conviction that counterfeit zeal often resembles true zeal, but it is often excessive. “False affections,” he said, “often rise far higher that those that are genuine.”[40]

The crucial work of the evangelist was to act as a sort of soul-surgeon. While this took place in part through proclaiming the truths of the Bible, it focused on the process of overcoming various roadblocks that the sinner might raise against the truth. Nettleton believed that the typical conversion involved several stages: a growing interest in spiritual things, a conviction about sin, a period of resistance and opposition, and finally submission.[41] While not every sinner followed this path, it was part of Nettleton’s philosophy of conversion, and he aimed to determine where each sinner was and how best to move them along the path to conversion.[42] He “presumed that certain moral or spiritual obstacles obstructed that goal” such as secret sin or trifles about doctrine, and “He sought to detect, as quickly as possible, what that barrier was and to remove it.”[43]

Once an awakened sinner finally came to the point of conversion, it was an experience that often led to profound joy.[44] However, Nettleton did little to encourage new converts in their sense of peace. He felt that false conversions were a real danger, and he warned that “numbers who have long imagined themselves at peace with God, have only been at ease in Zion.”[45] In his particular branch of New England theology, assurance of salvation did not come easily.[46] For those who wanted such certainty, Nettleton recommended self-examination, Bible reading, and prayer.[47] He would warn his hearers against the danger of self-deception and the deceitfulness of the human heart, pointing out specific ways that one could be deceived.[48] In fact, he was even hesitant to speak of his own salvation. “The most that I ventured to say respecting myself,” he affirmed, “is that I think it possible that I may get to heaven.”[49]

The evangelist, to be sure, had an important role in the process of conversion. He was not the most important figure, since only God could bring about true conversion. Yet a careful approach and great discretion in dealing with the individual could be used by God to aid in conversion. Perhaps Nettleton himself summed it up best when he said, “The wakeful preacher will be extremely solicitous to give to the work a pure and lovely character, to enstamp the image of Christ – …He will not dash on, regardless of remote consequences; but his vigilance and extreme caution will resemble that of the painter when he said, ‘I am painting for eternity.’”[50]

Conclusion

Asahel Nettleton was convinced that the moral inability of sinners necessitates immediate repentance, which the wise evangelist will encourage through orderly and pious means. His own Calvinistic doctrines and the influences of New England theology affected his views of regeneration, and he was celebrated for his care and wisdom in dealing with awakened souls. While modern evangelism may seem to require new methods and approaches, perhaps Christians should take time to learn from one who was eminently successful in the past in bringing souls to Christ. Perhaps it is time to reconsider the conversion philosophy of Asahel Nettleton.

[1] John Thornbury, God Sent Revival: The Story of Asahel Nettleton and the Second Great Awakening, (Darlington: Evangelical Press, 1977), 233.

[2] Ibid., 141.

[3] Robert Grossmann, “The Calvinistic Ground of True Evangelism,” Mid-America Journal of Theology 3, No. 2 (1987): 227.

[4] John Armstrong, Five Great Evangelists, (Fearn: Christian Focus, 1997), 162.

[5] Oliver Crisp and Douglas Sweeney, After Jonathan Edwards: The Courses of New England Theology, (Oxford: Oxford University, 2012), 138.

[6] Armstrong, Five Great Evangelists, 168-69.

[7] Ibid., 170.

[8] Ibid., 171.

[9] Bennet Tyler, Memoir of the Life and Character of Rev. Asahel Nettleton, D.D. (Hartford: Robins & Smith, 1844), 253.

[10] Armstrong, Five Great Evangelists, 184.

[11] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 191.

[12] Ibid., 196.

[13] Tyler, Memoir, 276.

[14] Asahel Nettleton, Sermons from the Second Great Awakening, (Ames: International Outreach, 1995), 234.

[15] Crisp and Sweeney, After Jonathan Edwards, 57.

[16] Crisp and Sweeney, After Jonathan Edwards, 57.

[17] Tyler, Memoir, 284.

[18] Tyler, Memoir, 285.

[19] Armstrong, Five Evangelists, 165.

[20] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 82.

[21] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 46.

[22] Bennet Tyler and Andrew Bonar, Asahel Nettleton: Life and Labours, (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth, 1996), 306.

[23] Asahel Nettleton, ed., Village Hymns for Social Worship, (New York: E. Sands, 1827), 223.

[24] Tyler and Bonar, Nettleton, 406.

[25] Asahel Nettleton, Remains of the Late Rev. Asahel Nettleton, D.D., ed. Bennet Tyler (Hartford: Robins and Smith, 1845), 262-63.

[26] Tyler, Memoir, 239.

[27] Nettleton, Sermons, 433.

[28] Tyler, Memoir, 235.

[29] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 115.

[30] Nettleton, Sermons, 434.

[31] Nettleton, Village Hymns, 227-28.

[32] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 125.

[33] Ibid., 60.

[34] Lyman Beecher and Asahel Nettleton, Letters of the Rev. Dr. Beecher and Rev. Mr. Nettleton on the “New Measures” in Conducting Revivals of Religion, (New York: G. & C. Carvill, 1828), 18.

[35] Nettleton, Sermons, 143.

[36] Iain Murray, Revival and Revivalism: The Making and Marring of American Evangelicalism 1750-1858, (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth, 1994), 211.

[37] Tyler, Memoir, 234.

[38] Crisp and Sweeney, After Jonathan Edwards, 139.

[39] Tyler and Bonar, Nettleton, 301.

[40] Beecher and Nettleton, Letters, 30.

[41] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 63.

[42] Ibid., 112.

[43] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 112.

[44] Ibid., 87.

[45] Nettleton, Sermons, 361.

[46] Thornbury, God Sent Revival, 83.