The Andrew Fuller Center Review – EDIT - Word of Truth

shire congregation styled his ministry
as “very a ecting and evangelical,” and
his sermons as “truly evangelical, melting
and a ectionate discourses.” 5 e
qualities which were most characteristic
of Fuller’s preaching—a plain style of
address, evangelical doctrine, and the
personal language of the heart—were
indicative of the evangelical renewal of
English Dissenting pastoral theology at
the end of the eighteenth century.
“ e Simplicity of the Gospel”: Fuller’s
plain style of preaching
Andrew Fuller embraced a “plain style”
of address that was particularly well suited
for his evangelical aims: vernacular in
language, simple in composition, intentionally
perspicuous, and more a ecting
than a ected in its rhetoric.
is plain style was not uniquely the
product of evangelicalism, representative
as it was of a more general move
toward plain, unadorned prose in literature
and correspondence, as well as
homiletics. e style sought a common
language, accessible by a wide range of
readers, an approach shared by Isaac
Watts (1674–1748) in his hymnody:
“ e Metaphors are generally sunk to
the Level of vulgar Capacities, I have
aim’d at Ease of Numbers and Smoothness
of Sound, and endeavoured to make
the Sense plain and obvious.” 6
e trajectory of English sermon
composition was away from the “metaphysical”
style of Lancelot Andrewes
(1555–1626) and John Donne (1572–
1631), and although Puritans were
crucial in that shi , in time there was
also a departure from the proliferation
of subheadings that had characterized
some Puritan preaching. ere emerged
a fairly broad consensus as to simplicity
in Protestant preaching across the theological
spectrum, allowing, of course, for
individual personality and theological
content.
e emphasis on plainness and simplicity
in preaching was an important
element of Fuller’s instructions about
preaching, and his own sermons were
characterized by clarity, applicability,
and biblical language. One of the editors
of his collected Works, Joseph Belcher,
wrote of Fuller’s preaching, “You are
struck with the clearness of his statements;
every text is held up before your
view so as to become transparent.” 7 Joseph
Ivimey’s appraisal was that Fuller
“greatly excelled in the simplicity of his
compositions.” 8
One of the shaping in uences upon
Fuller’s appropriation of the plain style
was the widely read Essay on the Composition
of a Sermon by French Protestant
Jean Claude (1616–1687). 9 In outlining
general rules for sermons, Claude emphasized
clarity and comprehension,
warning that obscurity is “the most
disagreeable thing in the world in a
gospel-pulpit.” Rather, “a preacher must
be simple and grave. Simple, speaking
things full of good natural sense without
metaphysical speculations; for none are
more impertinent than they, who deliver
in the pulpit abstract speculations,
de nitions in form, and scholastic questions,
which they pretend to derive from
their texts.” 10 Claude’s translator, Robert
Robinson, pithily contended: “Plainness
in religion is elegance, and popular perspicuity
true magni cence.” 11
e impetus toward simplicity and
plainness in art and rhetoric, Peter Auksi
has argued, is a signi cant stream within
not wholly surmount, tho I may perhaps
be more favorably disposed toward your
view than most persons in the [Kingdom?].
I have feared also a temptation to dwell
upon a few truths, and some of them the
most di cult truths of Religion, to the
neglect of other parts of Revelation. I
hope all your friends will guard against
this evil.
Another Danger to w[hi]ch some of
the New England Divines seem exposed,
is the Neglect of Scripture Authority,
and a method of proving theological
points more by reason than by the Bible.
But nothing puzzles me so much as
the views some of you seem to entertain,
respecting the divine Agency in
respect of Sin. Must we almost lay aside
the Business of proving that God is the
Author of all the moral good in the Universe,
to spend our Lifetime in proving
that he is also in some sense the Author
of all the moral Evil in the world; and yet
that this is no Excuse for Sin? I am afraid
that if we get the former part of this
last Notion into Men’s hands, we shall
never be able to prevent their drawing a
contrary Conclusion. Some w[ould] be
ready to stone us, before we could make
them understand us on this subject, and
others w[ould] surely shi o all blame
from themselves upon the most High. I
wish much to know how your brethren
w[ould] answer the pleas of the Hindoos,
if they were in the Case of our Missionaries
in Bengal 8 and shall therefore inclose
a few Extracts from the last journal
of my friend Marshman. It w[ould] be
a high grati cation to receive your own
Remarks but if your weak state of health
sh[ould] prevent, or if you should be
gone to Heaven before this reaches you,
I sh[ould] be glad for this Letter to be
given to [Mr.?] Strong, 9 or some friend
of nearly the same stamp, and w[ould]
thank him for his Observations. I don’t
want it to go to any one who pushes the
Matter still further, e.g. Dr Emmons*
seems to be such a one. 10 I cannot relish
his representation of sev[era]l subjects,
particularly his idea of a Christian popping
into a State of perfection and out
again interchangeably, all the days of his
Life etc.
I am strongly persuaded that I need
not make an Apology to you for so freely
mentioning the points on which I feel
most di culty; I believe that I and my
most intimate friends are more disposed
to canvass the subjects on which you
have written impartially, than any others
you w[ould] nd in England. And it
must be some advantage to you, to see
wherein subjects strike those who were
unused to the discussion, and cause
them to fear for bad consequences.
Surely it w[ould] be well if all Christians
w[ould] labor earnestly a er the investigation
of truth, without being unduly
in uenced either by their attachment to
old ideas and phrases on the one hand,
or by the a ectation of novelty on the
other.
Do you know whether any thing has
been sent to America in reply to Dr Ezra
Stiles[’] 11 letter to Sir W[illia]m Jones 12
about the Jews at Cochin etc. 13 I have
begged our brethren to enquire, and nd
that [Mr.?] Brown 14 is now likely to prosecute
the business with earnestness.
I wrote long since to Dr. Dwight, 15
and sent him several pamphlets, begging
for some Acc[oun]t of his Uncle’s
Death 16 and wishing much to know
into what hands his d[ea]r grandfather’s