Conclusion and Prospect

The conclusion makes several observations about Edwards and his intellectual context. The portrait of Edwards is of a private scholar pastoring churches in New England. As such, he stands in discontinuity with the seventeenth-century theologians and philosophers he admired. Furthermore, Edwards is positioned as a transitional figure between the pre-enlightenment and enlightenment era, though firmly rooted in early modern Reformed theology. Methodologically, the conclusion states that the inclusion of early New England history and theology, the period from circa 1625 to circa 1750, into the field of post-Reformation studies assists one in a more careful examination of the rise and development of Reformed Orthodoxy in New England than has been researched thus far. Secondly, this study offers an initial attempt to fulfill the first consideration by placing Edwards in a broader theological context. Thirdly, reading Edwards against the background of early modern intellectual history offers several areas of unexplored research.

Sources of Christian Homiletics

That Edwards assumed a Puritan style of homiletics is questioned in view of the Christian tradition of preaching. The chapter argues that if the homiletic labors of the preacher of Northampton are “statements on the full range of his thought,” one must situate Edwards’s sermons, both in form and structure, in terms of continuity and discontinuity with Christian preaching. The caricatures and commendations of Puritan preaching must be set aside, so that a broader context of long-standing trajectories of Christian homiletics throughout the ages can be discerned and brought into view. Although Edwards resided on the outskirts of the colonial world, his intellectual endeavors in framing his homiletic discourses resonated strongly with the trajectories of Christian homiletics of earlier centuries—though mediated through the early modern period. Edwards’s sermons, then, as literary devices or discourses with their rhetorical particularities, must be situated in the history of preaching.

Sources of History as Theology

Much ink has been spilled about Edwards’s A History of the Work of Redemption, and one is reminded that “any discussion of what Edwards would have done in developing the Redemption sermon series into a mature treatise must be inconclusive.” This chapter attempts to look at Edwards’s proposed “body of divinity in an entire new method,” by offering a fresh evaluation of its continuity and discontinuity with early modern systems of divinity. Therefore, the chapter first gives a succinct overview of various thoughts on Edwards’s intended “body of divinity,” followed by an overview and examination of relevant works of seventeenth-century systematic theology. Thirdly, Mastricht’s treatment of the De dispensatione fœderis gratiæ (On the dispensations of the covenant of grace) will be considered in relation to Edwards’s Redemption Discourse, the three later notebooks about the “History of Redemption,” and the section of the letter to the Princeton Board.

Sources of Biblical Exegesis

Edwards biblical exegesis is informed by early modern biblical interpreters of Scripture. This chapter will explore, first, the place of Poole’s Synopsis in the history of biblical exegesis, as well as Edwards’s use of this synoptic Bible commentary in a New England context. Secondly, the nature of Poole’s work, providing various exegetical options, demands that one ask three questions related to Edwards’s use of the Synopsis: First, does Edwards follow specific exegetical interpretations offered by Poole? Second, what is the underlying source of those interpretations as one attempts to discern exegetical trajectories and choices? Thirdly, does an exegetical choice from Poole in one writing contribute interpretatively to other parts of his writings such as his sermon corpus, treatises, and notebooks, including the notebook on Hebrew Idioms?

Introduction

Edwards’s debt to Protestant scholasticism, Reformed orthodoxy, and early modern Reformed theology has been largely overlooked in interpretations of his thought. The chapter argues that the model of continuity and discontinuity between the Reformation and post-Reformation era, expressed by the phrase “Calvin vs. the Calvinists,” should be considered and challenged in examining the relationship between Edwards and post-Reformation thought. Therefore, first, a broad sketch of interpretative models will be provided concerning the various appraisals of Reformed orthodoxy. Secondly, a proposal will be offered that the era of Protestant scholasticism and Reformed orthodoxy, as commonly and currently understood, should include early eighteenth-century New England history—thus treating the post-Reformation era as a transatlantic enterprise.

Sources for the Formulation of Doctrine

The nature and extent of theology is formulated by Edwards in a classical Protestant scholastic way with trajectories reaching back to the Medieval theology. The Medieval and early modern Reformed definitions and distinctions of theology are foundational to Edwards’s formation of doctrine. This chapter attempts to evaluate Edwards’s theological inquiry by a more in-depth view of Protestant scholasticism and its trajectories in terms of continuity and discontinuity. It situates Edwards’s work against the historical context seventeenth-century English Puritanism and continental post-Reformation Reformed thought, when New England’s theological orthodoxy and practice were put to the test. The rise of Arminianism, the dissemination of Deism, and the news about the “New Methodists” contributed to division and realigned allegiances in the British colonies. Edwards was not an insignificant participant in these transformative years for New England, though based in the rural town of Northampton.

Jonathan Edwards and the Protestant Scholastics

Edwards’s theological and philosophical reflections can be found in his treatises, miscellanies, sermons, forms of Scripture commentary, notebooks, and other writings. Given that he lived in the late orthodox period of the post-Reformation era, it is natural to raise the question to what degree there was continuity and discontinuity between his theological and philosophical thought and that of his predecessors. This is all the more important because some of Edwards’s doctrinal formulations found their way into New England’s “New Divinity.” The answer to this question, then, will be formulated, in part, against the background of Petrus van Mastricht (1630–1706), a representative of Protestant scholasticism, who wrote during high orthodoxy. It is hoped that this will also satisfy some in Edwards scholarship who ask who Mastricht is. He is an appropriate subject for comparison considering the praise the preacher of Northampton bestowed upon the German-Dutch theologian, philosopher, and Hebraist.