Understanding Jonathan Edwards

Transcription

1

2

3 Understanding Jonathan Edwards An Introduction to America's Theologian EDITED BY GERALD R. MCDERMOTT OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 2009

4 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS Oxford University Press, Inc., publishes works that further Oxford University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education. Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland. Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Copyright 2009 by Gerald R. McDermott Published by Oxford University Press, Inc. 198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication.Data Understanding Jonathan Edwards: an introduction to America's theologian / edited by Gerald R. McDermott. p.cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN ; (pbk.) 1. Edwards, Jonathan, I. McDermott, Gerald R. (Gerald Robert) BX726o.E3U ' dc Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper

5 Contents Contributors, xi Important Dates in the Life of Edwards, xv Introduction: How to Understand the American Theologian, 3 Gerald R. McDermott 1. Jonathan Edwards's Life and Career: Society and Self, 15 Kenneth P. Minkema 2. Alternative Viewpoint: Jonathan Edwards's Life and Career, 29 Chris Chun 3. Edwards and Revival, 37 Harry S. Stout 4. Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and Revival, 53 Willem van Vlastuin 5. Edwards and the Bible, 63 Douglas A. Sweeney 6. Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and the Bible, 83 Wolter H. Rose 7. Edwards and Biblical Typology, 91 Tibor Fabiny

6 X CPNTENTS 8. Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and Biblical Typology, 109 Gerald R. McDermott 9. Edwards and Beauty, 113 Sang Hyun Lee 10. Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and Beauty, 127 Katalin G. Kallay 11. The Literary Life ofjonathan Edwards, 133 Wilson H. Kimnach 12. Alternative Viewpoint: The Literary Life of Jonathan Edwards, 45 Anna Svetlikova 13. Edwards and Philosophy, 151 Miklos Veta 14. Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and Philosophy, 171 Magdalena SevCikova 15. Edwards and the World Religions, 177 Gerald R. McDermott 16. Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and the World Religions, 195 Michal Valeo Conclusion: Edwards's Relevance Today, 201 Gerald R. McDermott Further Reading, 219 Index, 225

7 xiv CONTRIBUTORS Michal Valeo teaches theology at the University of Zilina and directs the Lutheran Bible School in Martin, Slovakia. An ordained Lutheran minister, Professor Valeo did his master of divinity studies at Comenius University in Bratislava and Luther Theological Seminary in Gettys burg and was awarded his doctorate at Commenius University in His dissertation was on the sources and meaning ofchemnitz's Christologyforhis treatment of the Lord's Supper. Professor Valco's main theological interests are historical theology and Christian dogmatics. His first university textbook is currently being published under the title From Creation to Redemption: Chapters from Lutheran Theology. Willem van Vlastuin is lector of systematic theology at Amsterdam Free University. He has published a monograph on Edwards: De Geest van opwekking: Ben onderzoek naar de leer van de Heilige Geest in de opwekkingstheologie van] onathan Edwards ( ) (The Spirit of Revival: A Study in the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit in the Revival Theology of Jonathan Edwards [ ]). Professor van Vlastuin has written several other books, including Revival, which was translated into English and Russian. He is also part-time pastor at Katwijk aan Zee and chairman ofthe.bonisa mission to China. Miklos Veto, born in Budapest in i936, participated in the Hungarian Revolution of i956 and fled to France as a political refugee. With doctorates in philosophy (Oxford, Sorbonne, University of Nanterre) and Catholic theology (University of Strasbourg), he taught at Marquette, Yale, Poitiers, and universities in Africa and Canada. In 2007 he was named a member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Professor Veto has published more than twenty books, including La Pensee de Jonathan Edwards, an English translation of which will appear in the United States in He is currently preparing a treatise on metaphysics.

8 Alternative Viewpoint: Edwards and the World Religions Michal Valeo In my response to McDermott's chapter on the relationship of Jonathan Edwards-an outspoken, well-respected, and influential theologian of the eighteenth century-to the world religions, I will attempt to highlight some of the most interesting points of the lecture, offer an initial critical evaluation, and suggest a few questions for further discussion. Summary of the Arguments McDermott opens his presentation with a bold statement about a critical shift in recent research in the area of Edwards's apologetics, including his theodicy. After all, theodicy-either for the sake of his own conscience or for the sake of the critics of Christianity-seems to be the source and focus of Edwards's dealing with non-christian religions. As McDermott writes, "Edwards, no doubt disturbed by deist use of the religions to attack the Reformed God's goodness and justice, worked hard to learn about the religions." 1be attacks of deism, therefore, are identified as "one major stimulus to Edwards's fascination with the religions." 1bis is the first thesis of McDermott's essay. 1be second one outlines the prisca theologia, typology, and dispositional soteriology as three approaches or ways Edwards dealt with the question of the relationship between Christianity and other religions, between the Triune God and the history of non-christian religious experience.

9 196 UNDERSTANDING JONATHAN EDWARDS McDermott presents a competent analysis of the subject, grounded in solid historical research and a careful theological reflection. In his approach, however, he stays a "historical theologian" -more historical than systematic, reluctant to make open theological deductions or suggestions. His essay, nevertheless, is thought-provoking and sj:imulating. Prisca theologia was a commonly used theological approach in ancient times (especially by early apologists), but it has rarely been connected with Reformed theologians. The same can be said about the interreligious typology described and identified in Edwards's texts. The idea of dispositional soteriology is certainly the most intriguing concept that McDermott chose to emphasize and analyze. This concept is also the one that is most questionable when it comes to its theological value. The Question of Motivation Was Edwards "disturbed by deists," or was he truly "fascinated" with other religions? It is an important question to which we do not find a clear answer in McDermott's essay. In other words, was the critique of deism or Edwards's private fascination the "stimulus" for his research on the subject of world religions? McDermott suggests a development in Edwards's thinking on this matter: Edwards was initially "disturbed" by deists, and later on he became "fascinated" with other religions. This question, perhaps,-does not seem to possess the critical importance that I am suggesting here, but I would like to suggest that the way we answer this question will significantly influence the way we read Edwards on this topic, as well as the way we integrate Edwards's approaches into our apologetics and interreligious dialogue today. How could so many respected scholars for such a long time overlook this intriguing feature of Edwards's theology? According to McDermott, "a vast majority" of readers and scholars had had a wrong assumption regarding this issue, seeing Edwards just as an uncompromising defender of Reformed orthodoxy. The reason for this "neglect" by the majority of scholars was the omitting or overlooking of Edwards's marginal notes and some of his sermons, according to McDermott. Still, it seems to me that more research and theological reflection needs to be done to determine, beyond any doubt, if the reason for this "neglect" was merely a "historical" one (in terms of the previous scholarship methods) or a theological one. Could it be that we overemphasize an insignificant theological experiment of Jonathan Edwards, about which he himself was not convinced?

10 ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT: WORLD RELIGIONS 197 The Influence of the Enlightenment Edwards, too, was a child of his time. His time was the age of Enlightenment. The underlying characteristic of Enlightenment is an uncriti~al faith in the objectivity of human reason-in the capacity of reason (a metaphysical, transpersonal category) to explain the world and to teach the human race how to live in it. It would be interesting to investigate how the ideas and methods of the Enlightenment influenced Edwards in his methodology and approaches to theology. Did he feel the need to "rationalize" God's justice and defend God's right to condemn people to hell by explaining that "God had provided revelation for the majority of the heathen," and then maintaining that, because "few had listened," God's justice is exonerated? Did the rationalistic methodology of the Enlightenment make him think that the "prisca theologia, typology, and dispositional soteriology" were the necessary and reasonable tools that will help Christianity become more intelligible to modem man and thus more defensible to the critique of the modem age? Perhaps the question could be restated as the following: Are we, postmodern interpreters of Edwards, so influenced by the age of reason that we cannot resist the urge to rationalize Christianity, which prompts us to look for respectable archetypes with similar approaches? Although my last words probably are an overstatement of the issue, they reflect a general tendency of much of modem theology to rationalize, psychologize, or historicize some basic teaching of Christianity in order to defend it. The danger is that by so defending Christianity we compromise its very essence. The Concept of Prisca Theologia Cannot Be Maintained The line of argument in Dr. McDermott's essay goes as follows: If it can be proved that the heathen had sufficient access to revelation regarding God's redemptive activity-by means of prisca theologia and with the help of interreligious and "natural" typology-god would use that revelation to create an inner disposition in some (although very few) of the heathen, which would enable them to be saved. Many scholars today, however, have far less confidence in the so-called history of the prisca theologia than did early Christians, or Edwards and his contemporaries. The idea of Greek philosophers studying under Hebrew patriarchs or prophets, as well as the idea of a common linguistic root or hieroglyphs shared with the Egyptians, has not been supported by modem

11 198 UNDERSTANDING JONATHAN EDWARDS archaeological research. If, then, the heathen did not have access to the type of revelation that Edwards suggests, it becomes highly questionable that there was an opportunity for God to create the proper disposition in them in order to save them. A More "Hopeful" Soteriology The most thought-provoking part of McDermott's essay is the one on dispositional soteriology. Though one could easily get lost in the scholastic terminology in the beginning of this section (essence, habit, tendency, etc.), it is important to expl~iri the terminology for the sake of the argument that followed. The essence of true religious experience for Christians and non-christians alike, according to Edwards, is a certain kind of a disposition of the human soul: "a sense of the dangerousness of sin, and of the dreadfulness of God's anger... [such a con-. viction of] their wickedness, that they trusted to nothing but the mere mercy of God, and then bitterly lamented and mourned for their sins." This inner disposition, then, is the only prerequisite to salvation: "The disposition is all that can be said to be absolutely necessary. The act [of receiving Christ] cannot be proved to be absolutely necessary... 'Tis the disposition or principle is the thing God looks at." McDermott's conclusion is that "if one can therefore be a saint before conversion, then theological groundwork has been laid for the position that (some of) the heathen can be saints before they come to Christ if they have the proper dispositions." Jonathan Edwards, as McDermott rightly pointed out, never drew such a conclusion (as far as we know), but rather remained very critical of heathen idolatry-"lost people" who live in darkness.. If it is true that Edwards opened the door for a more "hopeful" or broader soteriology, why did he never choose to follow through? Was he truly fascinated? Did he truly believe in his new approaches? What if he failed building a more hopeful or broader soteriology precisely because he understood the limits of his experiments? What if Edwards was more a theologian of the cross, ready to live with the tension, which our human reason presents when it comes to judgment, condemnation, and salvation? So the question before us is how we should understand this idea of "disposition" and the proposed dynamic relationship between regeneration, conversion, and justification, especially after we seriously take into account the Reformed concept of election as the decisive and ruling factor in human salvation. Dispositional soteriology does not solve the f;candal of a God who freely chooses or elects those sinners whom He will graciously regenerate and save! Edwards must have known this!

12 ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT: WORLD RELIGIONS 199 Historically speaking, because of certain themes in Puritan covenantal theology, regeneration ceased to be understood as a miraculous event bestowed by the Spirit as he wills and came to be understood as a human act of self. determination (as can be seen in many revival movement preachers of the 1740s). Jonathan Edwards opposed this change in meaning, trying to reestablish the miracle of regeneration in the historical event of preaching Christ in the historical community of believers. According to Edwards, the true question in regeneration is whether we see the true God truly, namely, in Christ who befriends sinners. The cross and resurrection with Christ is the specific way God has redeemed his creatures in order to bring them to communion with himsel In Christ's merciful and victorious love for sinners, revealed in his cross and resurrection, the "loveliness of God" is revealed, which inspires our love. The beauty of God transforms everyone who beholds it. A truly regenerated person, according to Edwards, is one whose love for God has been evoked purely by God's own loveliness rather than by any selfish motive. Behind the human experience of regeneration is the far more important reality of the divine self.bestowal, which produces this new reality in darkened minds. History is the battleground of the Kingdom of God. But where else can we find this beauty, this marvelous self.bestowal of God through Jesus in the power of the Spirit, but in the midst of the community of the people of God where the Word is preached and God gives himself to us through bread and wine and water according to his promise? What if we cannot have the right disposition toward God until Christ appears in our field of vision and gives us the God to whom we may have the right disposition-whom we can love? Edwards means very specifically the beauty of the Triune God, the "sweet harmony" of the eternal divine life of the Father and the Son in the Holy Spirit. This and only this type of religious experience, according to Edwards, is life changing, or, to put it in other words: giving the right disposition to sinners on their way to salvation. The Eastern European Context The position of the established churches in Ea~tern Europe has changed dramatically in the post-communist era. The communication of the Gospel in this new environment has proven to be difficult for churches that were used to a restricted, yet predictable position under Communism. After Communism fell, new religious ideas and sectarian delusions flooded our area of the world. Now Eastern Europe is more multicultural and multireligious than ever, but

13 200 UNDERSTANDING JONATHAN EDWARDS the churches have fewer tools than their Western brethren have for coping with this new situation. Therefore the study of Christianity's relationship to world religions is of utmost relevance. The challenge is twofold: Christianity in post-communist Europe has to "rediscover its face" following a difficult period of oppression, failures, and martyrdom, and it has to deal with a radically new social, political, economic, and religious situation. A faithful Christian witness in this setting needs to start by rediscovering Christianity's own traditions, exploring carefully its own theological roots. Then he or she must try to understand the nature of the changes that have come to the Slovak nation over the past centuries-reformation and Counter-Reformation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, ethnic tensions in the nineteenth century, the Holocaust during World War II, and four decades of Communism-so that he or she can engage society in a culturally sensitive manner. Only in that process will the churches be able to engage meaningfully in interreligious dialogue. But at that point it will be all the more pressing to figure out how our Christian faith should understand other religions. Perhaps then we can learn something from Jonathan Edwards-even while recognizing from his own work certain pitfalls that must be avoided. Conclusion This is why I believe Professor McDermott's study raises relevant questions in our religiously pluralistic world. As a systematic theologian I regret that we were left with a historical analysis (though a solid one) without clear implications based on a more open theological evaluation of Edwards's ideas. What McDermott did show us through his interpretation of Edwards, though, is the richness of religious experience beyond Christianity and Judaism. He reminded us that Christian "chauvinism" is disrespectful not only to other religions but also to God's greatness, to the richness of his mercy, to the glory of his wisdom. God is greater than our theologies-this is a lesson that we need to remind ourselves constantly. Jonathan Edwards's apologetic experiments did not provide him with ready, infallible solutions. But they did keep him humble in the view of the richness of the life of the Triune God and his amazing and most unexpected involvement in the history of the world for the sake of our salvation. Having said that, the question remains, of course, how far is too far when it comes to our human speculation. Just like Edwards, we have to learn to live with the tension.