Lemuel Haynes: The Most Important American Figure That You’ve Never Heard Of
Written by Jared C. Wilson |
Wednesday, March 1, 2023
In many ways, Haynes could be considered a kind of American Spurgeon—a faithful preacher and pastor, beloved for decades by his church and his family, and concerned to see the implications of the gospel fleshed out in homes and in society.
An Unquestionable Legacy
Lemuel Haynes is perhaps the single most important American figure most Christians have never heard of. Born July 18th in 1753 to a Black man and a White woman, Haynes was abandoned by his parents in the home of a family friend who sold the infant Haynes into indentured servitude. By the providential hand of God, however, young Lemuel was placed into a Christian home, where by all accounts, including his own, he was treated as a member of the family and raised to love the things of God.1
Growing up in colonial Vermont, Haynes worked hard and studied hard, proving himself quite adept at intellectual pursuits despite being largely self-taught. He has affectionately been called a “disciple of the chimney-corner” as that is where he would spend most evenings after work reading and memorizing while other children were out playing or engaging in other diversions.
Haynes’s commitment to theology began in that chimney-corner, and eventually he was born again. Not long after his conversion, he turned his followership of Christ and his intellectual bent into a serious endeavor by writing and preaching. An oft-told anecdote about Haynes concerns a scene of family devotions at the Rose household where he was indentured. Given his adeptness at reading and his deep concern for spiritual matters, the Rose family would often ask Haynes to read a portion of Scripture or a published sermon. One night, Haynes read a homily of his own without credit (apparently the sermon on John 3:3 included in this volume). At the end, members of the family remarked at its quality and wondered, “Was that a Whitefield?” “No,” Haynes is said to have replied, “it was a Haynes.”
The few sermons we have of Lemuel Haynes prove him to be an exceptional expositor in the Puritan tradition, similar to Edwards or Whitefield though simpler than the former and more substantive than the latter. And yet, what Haynes may have lacked in eloquence compared to his contemporaries, he more than made up for in biblicism and applicational insight.
Officially licensed to preach in 1780 by the Congregational Association, Haynes soon after preached his first public sermon (on Psalm 96). He was then ordained in 1785 and would go on to receive an honorary Master of Arts degree from Middlebury College.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
AI, Transhumanism and Religion
Without the Holy Spirit there is no church, no church service, no pastor, no sermon, no ministry, and no life. All you then have is just humanistic mush. But we now want to replace even God in our lives, and some churches are happy to go along with this. Sorry, no true Christian ever will. God words without God are nothing. ‘Church services’ without God are nothing. Religious rituals and ceremonies without God are nothing.
Many of the folks pushing things like transhumanism, AI, posthumanism and so on have often made clear the religious nature of their endeavours. They see all this as a new religion offering full and final salvation – but of a radically different sort than traditional religion does.
While many atheists and secularists are enthralled by the bright promises of a new technological future, others with a religious bent are also a part of all this, and are quite happy to tell us how old religions are being transcended and replaced in this world of AI and techno-futurism.
A critic of all this, James Herrick, has written extensively about these matters. In one 2017 collection of essays he offered this summary statement: “Transhumanists speak confidently of achieving goals such as technological immortality, creating computer deities, and radically altering the human race through technological enhancements including genetic and nanotechnological interventions.”
And in another 2017 book he puts it this way:
Religious categories such as miracle, resurrection, eternal life, and God are now contested territory, with old-style spiritual religionists pitted against new-style technological ones. It is no longer a question of science vs. religion, but of new scientific religions vs. old traditional ones.
A number of observers have suggested that we are currently witnessing the emergence of a powerful new technological religion. Some embrace the possibility while others detect in it serious dangers. As narratives that mingle an aggressive technological agenda with spiritual aspiration, technofuturist myths address the longing expressed by artificial intelligence specialist Hugo de Garis to “invent something” that would satisfy spiritual longing “and satisfy the criteria from your intellect, from your knowledge, from your science.” For de Garis this dream of wedding spiritual longing to technological realities constitutes “a kind of scientifically-based belief system that energizes, that creates a vision, that excites.” De Garis labels this hope, “the idea of god building.” Neuroscientist Sebastian Seung, a critic of Transhumanism, secures the point in writing, “The Bible said that God made man in his own image. The German philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach said that man made God in his own image. The transhumanists say that humanity will make itself into God.” Yet, the ethical details of this new technological religion are conspicuously absent from the discussion. De Garis, Seung, and many others raise the question: How should we think about the religious aspirations present in the Transhumanist vision?
Two recent items making headlines around the world illustrate the sort of brave new techno-religious worlds we are heading to. And these matters should concern not just Christians but all of us who care about the road we are now travelling on.
The first comes from something Yuval Noah Harari recently has said. You remember him: the atheist, homosexual historian who is often associated with Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum and the Great Reset mob. He routinely says stuff that is all rather shocking, and his latest offering was no different. As one report states:
Harari — who has written Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, and 21 Lessons for the 21st Century — spoke last month about the future of AI and said it may soon greatly influence spirituality:
“It’s the first technology ever that can create new ideas. You know, the printing press, radio, television, they broadcast, they spread the ideas created by the human brain, by the human mind. They cannot create a new idea.
Read More
Related Posts: -
A Response to: “Music at the GA and the PCA”
What all those times of worship at our General Assemblies have had in common every year was enthusiastic congregational singing, from metrical psalms to classical hymns to contemporary songs. All of that made the recent article, that was so critical of the singing at the Assembly, to be so very disappointing.
One of the great privileges we enjoy in the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) is gathering each year with like-minded commissioners and guests at our annual General Assembly. The past two (Birmingham ‘22 and Memphis ‘23) were especially important in the issues we considered, and especially wonderful in the corporate worship in which we engaged. In addition to the major worship services, we were led in congregational singing at the beginning of each business session during the day. This is the reason we exist … to worship our glorious God, to sing His praise in the midst of the Assembly.
As has become customary, the three evening worship services at our General Assemblies were each led by a different set of local teaching and ruling elders and musicians from churches in the host presbytery. Each included great preaching, solid liturgical structure, and a variety of musical styles. One evening was with choir, orchestra, and organ. A second was with piano and a small acoustical instrumental ensemble. A third was by a praise band that included guitars, percussion, and vocalists. Each of these involved many hours of planning and rehearsal by talented, well-trained Christian musicians who were honored to offer their skills as a sacrifice of praise to enhance the worship of God’s people.
Speaking of skill, is a trained musician somehow excluded from using his/her talents in worship? Some would suggest so. Is musical creativity ruled out because it involves a level of richness beyond that of the amateur? Must hymns always be sung in the four-part harmony printed in the hymnal? Remember how God utilized the most skilled artisans in the decorations in the tabernacle. Look at how much literary excellence came from the skillful musicians/poets who wrote the Psalms. And remember how Calvin sought the finest poets and composers in France to put together the Geneva Psalter. What are we to make of the inspired command in Psalm 33:3, “Sing to Him a new song; play skillfully on the strings, with loud shouts.” We who are musicians aren’t “showing off” our talents, as we are sometimes accused of doing; we are doing what God has equipped and commanded us to do, and to do what we pray is glorifying to God and beneficial to His people.
What all those times of worship at our General Assemblies have had in common every year was enthusiastic congregational singing, from metrical psalms to classical hymns to contemporary songs. All of that made the recent article, that was so critical of the singing at the Assembly, to be so very disappointing. It did not really come as a surprise, since the author has been posting negative comments of this sort for a number of years. Here is a link to that article, which also appeared in The Aquila Report. One of its key complaints was the lack of, or supplanting of, congregational hymnody. That is quite a surprising charge, since by my count, between the evening services and the daytime singing we sang a total of 25 songs in our two and a quarter days of convened gatherings in Memphis! Most of these were classical hymns from the “Trinity Hymnal” (like Our God, Our Help in Ages Past, and Holy, Holy, Holy). Some were more contemporary songs that are very well known across the denomination (like In Christ Alone and We Will Feast in the House of Zion). Some (just a few) were newer compositions that we learned quickly and easily.
I have known the author of the article for many years, and appreciate the great ministry God has granted him, both in his local congregation and for the denomination. He was the compiler of the 1994 paperback “Trinity Psalter.” While I have not agreed with all his perspectives about worship, his books and articles on the subject have been significant. His two recent publications on the attributes of God are splendid. And I’m so glad to join him in urging the singing of Psalms regularly in our worship services. It’s tragic that they have been so neglected, especially in Reformed churches. Our people are missing so much by their lack of familiarity with this biblical collection of songs for worship. At our most recent General Assembly, at the beginning of one morning business session, I spoke briefly about this before leading the commissioners in the a cappella singing of Psalm 100.
While it was not explicitly stated, it seemed that the author has a very negative view of the presence of choirs (or soloists?) in worship. Sadly, there have been occasions in some of our churches where the choir usurps the congregation’s singing, but these are rare. The choir’s role is to lead, support, and encourage congregational singing. In most churches, the choir rehearses the hymns at their practice, not just the anthem. And so on Sunday morning, the congregation typically sings much better when the choir is carrying out those roles. In many instances (as at our most recent Assembly), the choir director selects anthems based on familiar hymns. A creative accompaniment (varied harmonization, contrasting instrumental registration, modulations to a different key, etc.) enhances the beauty of the hymn and makes a more powerful impression on the mind and heart. Is it legitimate for a choir or soloist to sing in addition to (not in place of) the congregation? No more or less so than for a pastor or elder to pray in addition to (not in place of) the congregation.
One of the criticisms made by the author of the recent article was that the sound of the choir and instrumentalists drowned out the human voices in the congregation. That’s a very subjective call, and it may depend on where one was seated in the room. In such a large space as the Assembly Hall, with extremely challenging acoustics and with congregants so spread out, there has to be enough volume to keep everyone on pitch and in time with the rhythmic movement of the music. Otherwise, it becomes chaos! I know that in the church served by the author of this recent critical article, there is a very large pipe organ that produces a substantial volume in morning worship, volume that I’m sure the organist uses in appropriate measure. And at the Assembly, the room was so large that it was absolutely necessary to amplify the sound of musicians and speakers. If one was sitting close to the speakers through which the sound was coming, it could well have seemed excessively loud, but we trust the expert sound technicians monitoring the volume and quality of the music at the sound booth to adjust it appropriately for everyone present.
Speaking of the sound volume of our music in worship, what do we make of the inspired words of Psalm 150 concerning both the instruments we use and the volume at which our music is presented? That Psalm lists a large array of instruments that are used in worship: trumpets, lutes, harps, tambourines, strings, pipes, sounding cymbals, even loud clashing cymbals! And when we come to passages like Revelation 1:10, 14:2 and 19:6, we read of John’s description of a massive sound in heaven, sometimes like the sound of an enormous (deafening?) waterfall. There are times in the Bible when we hear of “a still, small voice” and “peace, be still.” But there are also numerous times in the Bible where we are commanded to “make a joyful noise unto the Lord, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise.” Surely these passages give guidance for us in our temporal worship here, preparing us for the eternal worship we will find in heaven.
Without a doubt, congregational singing of hymns must always be one of the major elements of corporate worship, along with scripture and prayer and the preaching of God’s Word, etc. Our hymn singing is significantly improved by several things. These include the selection of hymns (are they singable, are they familiar – or learnable), are they placed in the service at the appropriate place in the liturgy), what instrumental accompaniment is utilized, and how do the acoustics of the room impact the singing (not too much carpet, draperies, cushions, sound-absorbing ceiling tiles, etc.). We who lead can also help the congregation by our rubrics in announcing hymns, informing them of the theme, and perhaps something about who wrote the words (John Newton?), who wrote the music (Martin Luther?), and a story behind its composition (as with “It Is Well with My Soul”).
By the way, to help with that, I am in the process of writing 3-5 page hymn studies each week that include that kind of background information, along with brief commentary on the text of each stanza. I have now completed 160 of those studies, and email them free each week to hundreds of you who have requested to be on my distribution list. If you would like to be added, email me here. You can find the entire set of hymn studies thus far here.
In conclusion, our worship should always be guided by what God has revealed in His Word. And there is a huge body of revealed truth in Scripture regarding worship, “from Genesis to the maps!” It has been a joy to consider that material over the years, not only in the worship I have planned and led in churches where I have served as a pastor, but also in the years that I taught the required “Reformed Worship” course as a seminary professor. We have in Scripture the timeless principles that should shape our theology and practice of worship, in whatever age we live and in whatever nation where we serve. But we need to distinguish between those abiding principles and the cultural practices and preferences of our particular time and place. I fear this article has not adequately distinguished between the two.
And let me add a few words about beauty. Our God is beautiful beyond description. Beautiful in the truths of His character. Beautiful in the acts of grace for His redeemed. Beautiful in His design of function, variety, and complexity in creation. Beautiful in His painting in vivid, kaleidoscopic colors all around us. We could go on and on and on with examples of His beauty. But He is also beautiful in the matter of sound and music. After all, who was it who invented and created musical sound, and who prompted the creation of man-made musical instruments (including the divinely made human voice), and who created the human ears that hear music and the minds that respond with appreciation to music-making? Revelation is filled with imagery of the beauty of heaven that includes not only the colors around His throne, but also the glorious sound of music sung by saints and angels. And so should we not strive for beauty in the music we create and offer to Him in our worship as a sacrifice of praise?So I join my voice to the many (thousands?) who came away from our General Assembly, thrilled to the bottom of our hearts with the worship in which we were privileged to participate, and grateful beyond words for the great work invested by those who planned, prepared, and led us into the throne room of God through the music. I’m already looking forward to next year!
Larry Roff, is a Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America, served as Editor of the Trinity Hymnal, and Organist for the General Assembly.
Related Posts: -
More than Thoughts and Candles
Is there more hostility to authentic biblical Christianity than a few decades ago? Probably. But people are still people. They don’t want to be scared, and they don’t want to die. They need forgiveness, they need comfort, they need hope. They need Jesus.
It certainly wasn’t the first deadly shooting on one of our college campuses, but this one just happened to be the college campus I know best. On Monday night, while I was taking my nine-year-old to a Hornets game for his birthday, my phone erupted with texts from my friends in East Lansing. There was an active shooter on the campus of Michigan State University.
We’ve all seen these stories before. Maybe your school or child’s school has faced this grief already. It was a little over four years ago when a similar tragedy took place at UNC Charlotte, just 20 minutes from where I now live. On Monday it happened at MSU—three dead, five seriously wounded, and a whole community in mourning.
Before moving to Charlotte, I pastored in East Lansing for 13 years. If you’ve never lived in a small city with a major university, you may not be able to fathom how virtually everyone and everything can be connected to a single school. I didn’t go to Michigan State, but it was hard to pastor University Reformed Church without bleeding green and white. I could hear Spartan Stadium from my home and see the blimp overhead for big games. So as I followed the news on Monday night, into Tuesday morning, I knew all the buildings and all the streets. I heard from friends with children locked in the basement of the library, from friends who opened their home for college students to sleep on the floor so they could get off campus, from friends with relatives who were running across campus in the dark because the police told them the shooter could be nearing their location.
Read More
Related Posts: