No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Jonathan Edwards and the Theocratic Ideal
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Extract
Looking back upon the Puritan Holy Commonwealth from the vantage point of our Great Society, we recognize continuity, but it would be surprising if we were not more conscious of differences. Not the least of these, we might assume, would be the abandonment of a colonial ideal of theocracy in favor of a wall of separation between church and state in a thoroughly secularized world. Surely in a day when God is hidden or dead we do not look for any avenues of divine direction in mundane affairs or for some visible body of saints through whom God's continuing will for culture may be made known. Yet it has been urged that even after the Puritan theocracy collapsed “the Puritan vision of the political order subdued to God and operating under his will by his people was not lost. It persisted in American life through various transformations until thoroughly secularized.” The thesis deserves scrutiny, period by period, person by person. For our purposes we can find substantial evidence of a continuing theocratic ideal in such a suggestive period as the Great Awakening,2 when revivalist preachers and excited followers seemed to rattle and even threaten the structure of their own society, and certainly left a legacy of movements and causes to affect the body politic later. Towering over all other figures in the upheavals of the 1740's is that fascinating and enigmatic Puritan, Jonathan Edwards. The specific purpose of this paper is to inquire whether this contemporary of Davenport and Tennent—as well as Franklin and Mayhew—did what we might expect him to do: support and transmit a theocratic ideal.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Church History 1966
References
1. Brauer, Jerald, “The Rule of the Saints in American Politics,” Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture, XXVII (09, 1958), 242.Google Scholar
2. This in the face of the fact that the Great Awakening spawned groups which became “staunch partisans of the separation of church and state,” the judgment of Pfeffer, Leo, Church, State, and Freedom (Boston, 1953), p. 92.Google ScholarStokes, Anson Phelps, in his Church and State in the United States (New York, 1950), I, 242Google Scholar, emphasizing that the revivals were “a severe blow to the cause of church establishment,” goes on to suggest some of the directions in which these religious energies would affect civil life. The point is that a theoc ratie ideal need not be identified with a seventeenth-century or any other specific theocracy.
3. Boorstin, Daniel J., The Americans: The Colonial Experience (New York, 1958), pp. 5, 29.Google Scholar
4. Schneider, Herbert, The Puritan Mind (New York, 1930), p. 106.Google Scholar
5. Stokes, op. cit., p. 241.
6. Niebuhr, H. Richard, The Kingdom of God in America (Torehbook ed., New York, 1959), p. 123.Google Scholar
7. Miller, Perry, “Jonathan Edwards' Sociology of the Great Awakening,” New England Quarterly, XXI (03, 1948), 50, 51, 51–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarMy italics.
8. “Jonathan Edwards and the Great Awakening,” in Errand into the Wilderness (Cambridge, Mass., 1956), pp. 153–166.Google Scholar
9. “A Strong Rod Broken and Withered,” in Works, VI, 219–221.Google Scholar Passages from Edwards, unless otherwise noted, are taken from the Sereno Dwight edition (New York, 1829–1830, 10 vols.). Subsequent references will specify the title of the selection and then add the volume and page number from the Dwight edition.
10. “The Character of a Good Ruler,” in Miller and Johnson, The Puritans (New York, 1938), pp. 250–256.Google Scholar
11. Stokes (p. 241) mentions Edwards' “insisting that the Church and the State were very different, and that the Church should be exalted as a spiritual and not a political institution.”
12. Melanchthons Werke in Auswahl (Gütersloh, 1951), p. 390Google Scholar, cited in Lecler, Joseph, Toleration and the Reformation (New York, 1960), I, 246.Google Scholar
13. The Complete Writings of Roger Williams (New York, 1963), IIIGoogle Scholar (The Bloody Tenent of Persecution), 151, 175.
14. Ibid., VII, 178.
15. Thoughts on the Revival, IV, 144, 146, 146–147.
16. The Complete Writings of Roger Williams, III, 150.Google Scholar There are many other points of comparison between Edwards and Williams, such as their differing attitudes toward the continuing meaningfulness of the Old Testament theocracy, but these go beyond the present study. Also curious is Perry Miller's thesis, advanced in the interpretive essay prefixed to Vol. VII of The Complete Writings, that the real but hidden point at issue between Williams and the authorities was not the nature and security of the state but the merits of the historical and typological approaches to the Old Testament.
17. His phrases in “Jonathan Edwards' Sociology,” pp. 53, 52.
18. Miller, Perry, Jonathan Edwards (Meridian, ed., New York, 1959), p. 217.Google Scholar
19. Miller, , “Edwards' Sociology,” pp. 62–77.Google Scholar
20. Winslow, Ola, Jonathan Edwards (New York, 1940), p. 148.Google Scholar
21. The Kingdom of God in America, pp. 119 ff.
22. “The Christian Pilgrim,” VII, 139, 140, 141, 145.
23. “Christians a Chosen Generation,” VIII, 390.Google Scholar
24. “The Church's Marriage to Her Sons and to Her God,” VI, 195.Google Scholar
25. An Attempt to Promote Union in Prayer, III, 493.Google Scholar
26. Parrington, Vernon Louis, Main Currents in American Thought (New York, 1930), I, 162.Google Scholar
27. Schafer, Thomas A., “Jonathan Edwards' Conception of the Church,” Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture, XXIV (03, 1955), 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Ibid., p. 55, citing Works, VIII, 543Google Scholar, and I, 700. The same thought appears much later in The Nature of True Virtue, III, 97: “If there be any being statedly and irreclaimably opposite, and an enemy to being in general, then consent and adherence to being in general will induce the truly virtuous heart to forsake that enemy, and to oppose it.”
29. Miscellaneous Observations, VII, 201.Google Scholar
30. “The Church's Marriage,” VI, 200. Edwards says that “a particular visible church of Christ is a particular society of worshippers, or of visible saints, united for the social worship of God according to his institutions or ordinances.” (“Nature and End of Excommunication,” VI, 575.) The covenant idea is not totally absent, as has been argued. The saints are “God's covenant people, are in the way of covenant blessings…[have] the divine covenant to plead” (Ibid., 575–576).
31. Thoughts on the Revival, IV, 85.Google Scholar
32. History of Redemption, III, 180.Google Scholar
33. Religious Affections, V, 182–183.Google Scholar
34. 1 Chron. 15:2, quoted in Thoughts on the Revival, IV, 245.Google Scholar
35. Miller, John C., “Religion, Finance, and Democracy in Massachusetts,” New England Quarterly, VI (03, 1933), 36–37.Google Scholar
36. “The Watchman's Duty and Account,” VII, 179.Google Scholar
37. Thoughts on the Revival, IV, 148.Google Scholar
38. “The True Excellency of a Gospel Minister,” VIII, 442–443.Google Scholar
39. Farewell Sermon, I, 634.
40. Letter to Rev. Erskine, I, 412.
41. Qualifications for Communion, IV, 406.Google Scholar
42. “The Ohurch's Marriage,” VI, 194.Google Scholar
43. Thoughts on the Revival, IV, 219.Google Scholar
44. Ibid., pp. 241–246.
45. Quoted in Walker, Williston, A History of the Congregational Churches in the United States (New York, 1907), p. 257.Google Scholar
46. Thoughts on the Revival, IV, 238.Google Scholar
47. Miscellaneous Observations, VII, 280.Google Scholar
48. A Dissertation Concerning God's Chief End in Creation, III, 26, 44.Google Scholar My italies.
49. Miscellaneous Observations, VII, 282, 285.Google Scholar
50. Charity and Its Fruits, ed. Tryon Edwards (New York, 1851), p. 124.Google Scholar
51. History of Redemption, III, 393, 406.Google Scholar
52. An Attempt to Promote Union in Prayer, III, 468–469, 519.Google Scholar
53. History of Redemption, III, 392.Google Scholar The novelty and sources of Edwards's millennial ideas are discussed by Goen, C. C., “Jonathan Edwards: A New Departure in Eschatology,” Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture, XXVIII (03, 1959), 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54. Creeds of the Churches (Anchor ed., New York, 1963), p. 289.Google Scholar George Williams mentions the Anabaptists' desire “to dispense with earthly magistrates and prelates” and refers to the tendency, common in the Radical Reformation, to be “quite indifferent to the general political and social order.” The Radical Reformation (Philadelphia, 1962), xxiv, xxv.Google Scholar He also points out that this attitude was encouraged by an intense millennial conviction.
55. Miscellaneous Remarks, VII, 363.Google Scholar About the early Anabaptists Edwards is quite explicit. “They held a great many exceeding corrupt opinions. One tenet of theirs was, That there ought to be no civil authority, and that it was lawful to rebel against it.” History of Redemption, III, 373.Google Scholar
56. Schneider, pp. 106–107.
57. Perry, Ralph Barton, Puritanism and Democracy (New York, 1944), pp. 343, 344.Google Scholar
58. History of Redemption, III, 429, 490.Google Scholar
59. James Fulton Maclear does not deal with Jonathan Edwards in his article, “‘The True American Union’ of Church and State: The Reconstruction of the Theocratic Tradition,” Church History, XXVIII (03, 1959), 41–62.Google Scholar But it is interesting that he finds his crisis in the late eighteenth century, when, he says, even the theocratic ideal of New England wac in danger of collapse.