apt to believe that
what is true of one kind of preaching at one time, must be true of
it at another. Now, I believe that both the doctrines of
dependence and moral accountability must be _admitted by the
public mind_, to secure upon that mind the full power of the
gospel. I also believe that greater or less _prominence_ should be
given to the one or the other of these doctrines, according to the
prevailing state of public opinion. When, at the earlier periods
alluded to, the doctrine of dependence was dwelt on chiefly, (I do
not suppose exclusively,) the public mind believed enough--I might
say too much--concerning the free moral agency of man, and had not
so well learned as since to pervert the doctrine of dependence to
justify the waiting attitude of a passive recipient. And, then,
both doctrines told with power on the mind and the conscience,
and, through God, were attended with great and happy results. But
the prominence given to the doctrine of dependence, in preaching,
was continued, until, if I mistake not, it so engrossed the public
attention, and so obscured or weakened the doctrine of
responsibility, that many fell into the opposite error of quietly
waiting for God's interposition. Hence, when this prevailing error
is again corrected by a more prominent exhibition of man's
responsibility, in the form of immediate obligation, &c., the
power of both doctrines is again combined on the public mind, and
we see the same or even greater results in revivals of religion.
Nor would it be strange if the latter kind of preaching should, in
its turn, prevail so exclusively and so long, that the practical
influence of the doctrine of dependence should be greatly
impaired, to be followed with another dearth of revivals and a
quiet reliance of sinful men on their own self-sufficiency. On
this subject, I have often, in view of the tendency of the human
mind to vacillate from one extreme to the other, expressed my
apprehensions. In some of my brethren, whom I love and respect, I
see what I esteem a _disproportioned_ estimate of the importance
of preaching dependence; in others, whom I equally respect, I see
what I regard as a _disproportioned_ estimate of the importance of
preaching moral responsibility. In regard to myself, I can say
that I have aimed, in this respect, rightly to divid