This article will describe some revivals of the Second Great Awakening that we have largely forgotten. By naming the entire movement a result of man-made revivalism, we fail to recognize many examples of true revival between 17 that we can rejoice in and learn from. But these generalizations neglect large and important spheres of the Second Great Awakening.

These sharp contrasts fit when focusing on certain aspects of each era. The First is seen as revival, while the second as revivalism.

Many see the First Great Awakening as controlled, orderly, robustly theological, and Calvinistic, epitomized by the theology and leadership of Jonathan Edwards conversely, the Second Great Awakening is viewed as emotional, wild, atheological, and Arminian, epitomized by frenzied camp meetings on the frontier or Charles Finney’s manipulative “new measures.” The First is seen as a genuine work of God, while the Second is described as a work of man-centered manipulation. Ĭharacterized by “stillness,” “silence,” and the “distinguishing doctrines of grace,” this revival may seem out of place in the period known as the Second Great Awakening. Many of them possess deep and discriminating views and all, or almost all, are born into the distinguishing doctrines of grace. The converts are strongly marked with humility and self-distrust: instead of being elated with confident hopes, they are inclined to tremble. While it bears down everything with irresistible force, and seems almost to dispense with human instrumentality, it moves with so much silence. This work, in point of power and stillness, exceeds all that I have ever seen. After revival swept through his congregation in the winter of 18, adding over 200 members to his church, Edward Dorr Griffin wrote to his friend, Ashbel Green.

Charles jacobs revival