AMERICAN LITERATURE LECTURES, PART II



THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

Shaping of the National Ideals

I. Pictures of Eighteenth-Century America


The Importance of Eighteenth-Century Literature. Until near its close, the American eighteenth century, like the seventeenth, produced no great amount of artistic writing. Looked on purely as literature, most books of the period are drab-colored indeed. Looked on from another viewpoint, however, these same books become luminous with meaning. For the eighteenth century was, above all others, the crucial period in which our national ideals were taking form; and eighteenth-century writings show us, as through so many windows, the national culture in the making. To a reader unfamiliar with this background, much that is valuable in nineteenth-century literature would remain unintelligible or pointless.



The more one reflects on the cultural changes illustrated in eighteenth-century literature, the more amazing those changes appear. In these hundred years a ragged line of colonies along the seaboard, supporting a total population of only 250,000, developed with startling speed into a united and independent nation of five million people. In 1700 few communities had emerged from a frugal, half-primitive condition; by 1800 a complex agrarian and mercantile society had grown up, supporting a wealthy class whose members moved with cosmopolitan ease in the drawing rooms of Europe. In 1700 American thought was still living in the Calvinistic and Lutheran world of the Reformation; by 1800 the majority of Americans had moved toward the pietism of the English Methodists, while a smaller but no less influential group had, like Franklin, adopted scientific deism. In 1700 there were no facilities for a professional literature; not a single newspaper, magazine, or theater existed in the entire length and breadth of the colonies. By 1800 journalism had become a growing, though inchoate, profession; the theater was an accepted institution; the first American novels had been published, and the foundation had been laid for the professional literary careers of Irving, Cooper, and Poe. Altogether, the story of the unfolding America of the eighteenth century, as mirrored in American literature, is one of more than epic adventure.



Colonel William Byrd and Colonial Virginia. Into the making of the new nation, materials were to go that were quite different from Sewall's bourgeois New England. While the Puritan mind was being secularized, a stratified, semifeudal society was taking form in Virginia. Here lived, in the older-settled regions near the coast, a landed aristocracy similar to that of England, secured in their lands by the English provisions of primogeniture and entail, supported by slave and white servant labor, and already devoted to a graciously patrician mode of life. But away from the Virginia Tidewater, in the more newly settled "back country" or down in North Carolina, lived people of a quite different sort--shiftless, uncouth folk who followed an improvident, careless mode of life midway between savagery and civilization. Both types of society are portrayed by Colonel William Byrd (1674-1744), a paragon of Virginia gentlemen, and the most entertaining raconteur of the colonies. Byrd's own character is in epitome the best of the virginia aristocracy; his writings contain a picture, done with no very flattering touches, of the Virginia back country.

Byrd's personality--his command of men, his fondness for action, his good humor, his wit, and his genial worldliness--is disclosed in his History of the Dividing Line. The History is based on a journal the author kept in 1728 while helping direct a survey of the North Carolina-Virginia border. Portions of the History are interesting as adventure narratives. The story of the search for a channel among the shoals of the Sound, and the story of the loss and final escape of a surveying party in the Dismal Swamp, arouse no little suspense. The hardships of the route Byrd treats with a bluff good nature which is strikingly unlike the austerity of the Puritan religionists. How foreign to the temper of Cotton Mather's society is this incident which occurred in the Dismal!

It was now a great misfortune to the men to find their provisions grow less as their labor grew greater; they were all forced to come to short allowance, and consequently to work hard without filling their bellies.


Though this was very severe upon English stomachs, yet, the people were so far from being discomfited at it, that they still kept up their good-humor, and merrily told a young fellow in the company, who looked very plump and wholesome, that he must expect to go first to pot, if matters should come to extremity.
This was only said by way of jest, yet it made him thoughtful in earnest. However, for the present he returns them a very civil answer, letting them know that, dead or alive, he should be glad to be useful to such worthy good friends.


Other passages of Byrd's History portray the back-country people along the Carolina, and reveal, incidentally, the origin of important social forces that were making for democracy. To Byrd's patrician eyes the North Carolinians appeared lazy, irreligious, lawless, and above all, dirty.

The men, for their parts, just like the Indians, impose all the work upon the poor women. They make their wives rise out of bed early in the morning, at the same time that they lie and snore, till the sun has run one-third of his course, and dispersed all the unwholesome damps. Then, after stretching and yawning for half an hour, they light their pipes, and, under the protection of a cloud of smoke, venture out into the open air; though, if it happens to be never so little cold, they quickly return shivering into the chimney corner. When the weather is mild, they stand leaning with both their arms upon the corn-field fence, and gravely consider whether they had best go and take a small heat at the house: but generally find reasons to put it off till another time.
Thus, they loiter away their lives, like Solomon's sluggard, with their arms across, and at the winding up of the year scarcely have bread to eat. Everywhere, however, these shiftless people agreed in preferring their improvident freedom to the restraints of oligarchial Virginia. "Some borderers, too, had a great mind to know where the line would come out, being for the most part apprehensive lest their lands should be taken into Virginia. In that case they must have submitted to some sort of order and government; whereas, in North Carolina, everyone does what seems best in his own eyes." As is quite natural, the significance of this frontier aversion to government escaped Byrd altogether. In Byrd's time the wisest philosopher could hardly have forseen that such improvident, agu-shaken communities would become the nurseries of the democratic revolution, would aid in overthrowing the imperial regime of Great Britain, and would coalesce, under Jefferson and Jackson, into a major political party. And Byrd was in no sense a social philosopher or original thinker. But as an attractive type of the early Virginia gentleman--well informed, witty, observant, practical, and gifted with a facile, neoclassic grace of style--he holds a significant place in colonial literature.



St. Jean De Crevecoeur (1735-1813). The observations of Colonel William Byrd, though witty, are superficial. For a profounder study of the social forces moving in colonial America, it is necessary to turn to a later author, Crevecoeur, the French immigrant. His most important work, the Letters from an American Farmer, was not published until 1782 and portrays the colonies just prior to the Revolution. Yet his descriptions can be applied, with slight modifications, to the whole eighteenth century in America. Of this seedime of American civilization they offer the fullest literary portrait.

The ordinary history text has little to say of colonial events between 1700 and 1750. No important political developments, no exciting struggles with the mother country mark this forgotten half-century. But in population, wealth, and racial stock the period brought important changes. The middle colonies in particular, though founded later than Virginia and the New England commonwealths grew rapidly. Into these colonies poured a heterogeneous mixture of European races and religions, the immigrants being attracted by the policy of religious toleration. English Quakers and Anglicans were there; Scotch-Irish Presbyterians; German Lutherans, Moravians, the Mennonites; and at least a liberal sprinkling of other folk. The majority of these middle-colony people became thrifty farmers and merchants who, in their devotion to business no less than in their mixed racial stock, forecast the typical American of the following century. By virtue of a broad familiarity both with European culture and with colonial life, St. Jean de Crevecoeur was well equipped for the task of describing this heterogeneous society.

From the first of Crevecoeur's twelve Letters the reader learns that the work is addressed by an "American Farmer" to an imaginary correspondent in England, who is curious about the colonists'new manner of life. The second
letter describes the situation and pleasures of a typical American farmer. The third portrays the mixture of races in the middle colonies, enumerates the advantages America offers to the immigrant, and forecasts the emergence of a new national type, the American. Succeeding letters discuss the Quaker settlements on Nantucket and Martha's Vinyard, and the slaveholding society of the Charleston district. Letters ten and eleven disclose Crevecouer as an amateur naturalist, able to discourse amusingly on such incongruous topics as snakes, the hummingbird, and a visit to the gardens of the famous Pennsylvania botanist, John Bartram. The twelfth letter expresses the distress of the peaceful farmer at the outbreak of the struggle between the colonies and Great Britain. Constitutional quarrels do not concern him, and the security of his beloved family is menaced by Guerrilla warfare.

Crevecoeur's Letters constitute, for American literature, the first important romantic idealization of nature and the simple life. Primitive nature is to Crevecoeur a never-failing source of wonder and beauty. The songs of the thrush and robin delight him; the economy of a hive of bees is a thing of admiration. Like Shaftesbury, he marvels at the perfect order and symmetry of the world-machine, Nature. In this unspoiled environment lives the typical American farmer, fortunate in his economic independence, in his snug, comfortable house, in his wholesome country sports of husking bees and sleighing, and in the affections of his family hearth. This rural life Crevecouer regards ad the most fortunate lot possible to the common man.

Such a portrait of country life is obviously produced, not by simplicity, but by sophistication. To the interpretation of the American scene Crevecouer brought a mind trained in European literature and philosophy. His addiction to feeling, his facile emotionality, allies him with the eighteenth-century trait of "sensibility" which, in reaction against the arid rationalism of the age of Queen Anne, infused the work of Richardson, Rousseau, and Burns with throbbing emotion. His economic and political philosophy parallels, if it is not derived from, the precepts of the physiocratic economists of France. Like the physiocrats, he emphasizes the dignity and importance of agricultural pursuits, and prefers a minimum of legal restraint on industry. These


views he finds abundantly justified in the workings of the new American social order.

Plainly, Crevecoeur's work was deeply influenced by an ideal that was to become peculiarly American, and to affect the entire course of American literature--the ideal of a larger and fuller life for the common man. to the oppressed of Europe, he maintains, American can give economic independence and completer manhood. The motives to immigration, he perceives, are largely economic. the European leaves his native country because that country, overcrowded with population, has no bread for him. Granted only that the immigrant be industrious, American society can regenerate him by offering him a decent living, land, citizenship, and self-respect. Nor the least factor in this change is the indulgent American law which, instead of exploiting the many in behalf of the few, restrains the people by "the silken bands of mild government, all respecting these laws, without dreading their power, because they are equitable." The foundations of an American patriotism Crevecoeur traces to the loyalty inspired in the immigrant by America's indulgence and bounty. The evolution of a distinct American race he forecasts as a result of the fusion of numerous European strains, particularly the english, Irish, Scotch-Irish, and German. In fine, Crevecoeur's work not only celebrates the idyllic charms of the American countyryside, the attractions of an agrarian society, and the advantages offered by America to the despairing Old World peasant; it clarifies the forces which were creating an American unity and a new nationalism:

He is an American, who leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds. He becomes an American by being received in the broad lap of our great Alma Mater. Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose labours and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world....The American is a new man, who acts upon new principles; he must therefore entertain new ideas, and form new opinions. From involuntary idleness, servile dependence, penury, and useless labour, he has passed to toils of a very different nature, rewarded by ample subsistence.--This is an American.



II. Religious America: Edwards and Woolman


Middle-colony society, as portrayed by Crevecoeur, was not deeply concerned with religion. the absence of a state church and the intermingling of various sects had combined to lessen the driving power of early Protestantism. In New England, the original Puritan impulse was slowly losing energy; in Virginia the staid Anglicanism of the establishment was proving incompetent to leaven the crude masses of the frontier. Throughout the colonies, therefore, an abundant but neglected harvest was awaiting the sickle of a new religious movement. Such a movement came in a series of religious revivals known as the Great Awakening, which permanently changed the course of American religious history. The initial figure of this movement, its profoundest thinker, and its only worthy representative in literature, was the Puritan mystic, Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758).

The Orthodox Environment of Edwards. Edwards was born at East Windsor, Connecticut, of an orthodox and ministerial ancestry. His father was a clergyman; his grandfather, Solomon Stoddard, was the young man's predecessor as pastor at Northampton, Massachusetts, where the great awakening was begun. East Windsor was a stronghold of old-fashioned Puritanism; and Yale, where Edwards graduated in 1720, was still untouched by those liberalizing influences which ad overthrown the Mather regime at Harvard. Edwards graduate study of theology, his brief pastorate in New York, and his tutorship at Yale confirmed the previous orthodox influences to which he had been subjected. In his environment, therefore, there was little to guarantee that his mind would exceed in range the narrow and puerile Calvinism of Wigglesworth. That Edwards did go inconceivably farther than Wigglesworth in religious experience; that he became, Franklin excepted, the most eminent and influential author of colonial America, is owing to the imperious drive of his native genius. For in native gifts he was supremely endowed. He was the most acute logician of his times; he was potentially a great philosopher; he was at heart a poet; and he was one of the great mystics of the race.



Mysticism and the Personal Narrative. Though Edwards was theologically orthodox, his religion differed widely from traditional Puritanism. romanticist and poet by nature, he brought to the support of the Puritan creed a beautiful mysticism quite foreign to Calvin's scholastic logic. Mysticism means immediacy of religious insight, a feeling, a sense, an intuition of divine truth not founded on evidence nor achieved by reason. At some time during the rigorous self-discipline which he practiced in youth, Edwards began to achieve this mystical intuition. "As scientist and philosopher he moved among the foothills of the Mount of Vision, conscious always that the Mount was there; but when, at about eighteen or nineteen, he underwent his great conviction of its presence, he saw such glories at its summit that he never quite recovered from that light" (Van Doren, Carl). Thereafter, he was frequently visited with intense and rapturous moods, during which he enjoyed, untroubled by doctrine, an "inward, sweet delight in God and divine things."

The most poetic expression of Edwards's mysticism is A Personal Narrative, which he composed about 1743 as a record of his earlier religious affections. The Narrative abounds in recollections of moods of exalted rapture. Even the thunderstorms, Edwards testifies, which formerly had terrified him, came to delight him because he felt in them the immanent presence and majestic of God. the virtue of holiness appeared to him bright, charming, and serene; the soul of a true Christian seemed like a white flower bent to receive the sunlight of God's glory. The contemplation of religion he found to be not gloomy, but full of joy. The things of the spirit were "immensely the most exquisitely beautiful. The spiritual light is the dawning of the light of glory in the heart."

Unlike many Puritan writings, the Personal Narrative is excellent even when it is judged by the requirements of artistic literature. Edwards's mysticism appeals to human traits that are immemorial and enduring--to man's brooding, reverent sense of the mystery that lies beyond phenomena, to man's intuitions of austerly spiritual glories


which the senses cannot perceive. Alone among American Puritans, Edwards transmutes religious experience into forms of lofty and enduring beauty. If at times his diction is too flowery, if his words are inadequate to carry the burden of his visions, he nevertheless possesses the romantic gift of suggesting far reaches and overtones of experience that words, by their very nature, cannot fully convey. No religious autobiography in English is so rich in poetry as the Personal Narrative. Free in the main from theological shackles, it endures as the lyric embodiment of Puritan aspiration.

Edwards's Defense of Calvinism: The Freedom of the Will. Yet Edwards's reliance upon a mystical inner light, instead of making him the founder of a new creed, only re-enforced and strengthened his orthodoxy. that his vision led him, not to the discovery of new doctrines, but merely to the exaltation of the old, is shown by his sermon on the reality of spiritual light. This sermon maintains "that there is such a thing as a Spiritual and Divine Light, immediately imparted to the soul by God, of a different nature from any that is imparted by natural means." This miraculous light is used of God, not to disclose new religious truths, but to display the superlative excellence of the old. "There is a beauty in them that is so divine and Godlike...a glory that is so high and great, that, when clearly seen commands assent to their divinity and reality." Now this intuitive vision of the splendor of an ancient creed is the connecting link between Edwards's mysticism and his defense of Calvinistic theology. Only in the Calvinistic doctrine of absolute sovereignty could he find an adequate statement of his concept of God's glory; and to this central doctrine of Calvinism he submitted himself with passionate devotion. "I rejoiced in it, that God reigned, and his will was done." "My heart panted after this, to lie low before God, as in the dust; that I might be nothing, and that God might be all." This is Calvinism at its purest and austerest heights--the utter selflessness, the supreme trust of submitting the soul utterly to the arbitrary fiat of the Omnipotent.



"That God might be all" became the master passion of Edwards's life. this is the underlying rock upon which the Calvinism of all his sermons is founded. His Calvinism, contrary to popular opinion, is not displayed chiefly in the terrible damnatory sermons like the "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." The tenor of his preaching in regard to future punishment is evangelistic; and in its strenuous efforts to secure voluntary conversions, it cuts sharply across, if it does not contradict, the determinism of Calvin's creed. Typical Calvinistic sermons of Edwards are "God's Sovereignty" and "God Glorified in Man's Dependence," which proceed to the utmost conceivable extreme in withdrawing all glory from humanity and laying it on the altar of an immanent, overwhelming Deity.

But Edwards was not content with establishing the doctrine of God's sovereignty merely on the bases furnished by Scripture; he wished to establish it on the bases of logic and metaphysics also. He must, in short, give an answer to the perennial philosophic questions of free will and determinism. If he could show that the human will is not free, but is controlled by nonvoluntary forces, then the last shred of human independence would be taken away, and the very mind itself of man would cast helpless at the feet of its Maker. This ultimate problem of Calvinism Edwards attacked in The Freedom of the Will (1754). Edwards's approach to the question is psychological, after the manner of introspection, reflection, and analysis which he had learned in his youth from John Locke. The arguments of his theological opponents, the Arminians, he demolishes by bringing them to their reductio ad absurdum that the will is absolutely independent of man's other functions, its actions absolutely unswayed by preceding causes. He then proceeds to show that the will is swayed by, and subject to, whatever desire is uppermost in the mind; and the origin of man's desires, the evil as well as the good, he traces back through infinite labyrinths of causation to an all-embracing, always-enduring First Cause. These views Edwards sustains with a logic at once rigorous and subtle, which can at no point be penetrated, but which can be successfully attacked only by undermining the first premises on which it rests.


Though the psychological methods of Edwards are not antiquated, The Freedom of the Will became famous in its own age. The work has been designated at the only original contribution of colonial America to philosophic thought. It was translated into several European languages. When it was discussed in England by Boswell and Dr. Johnson, the latter characteristically summed up his criticism of the common-sense dictum, "All theory is against the freedom the will, all experience for it."

THE GREAT AWAKENING. The historical importance of Edwards, however, does not inhere directly in his mysticism nor in his belated defense of Calvinism. It inheres in his influence on the great awakening, that long series of religious revivals which, during three quarters of a century swept America from Massachusetts to Georgia and established Protestant evangelism as the prevailing religion of the American people. The movement was especially strong in Edwards's Northampton church in 1734, and its early history is traced in his Faithful Narrative of the Surprising work of God (written in 1736). The origin of the revival was spontaneous; unplanned, it arose as a natural result of the powerful preaching and influence of Edwards. Notwithstanding certain lesser awakenings in the time of Solomon Stoddard, Northampton--indeed, all New England--knew little of the processes of religious revivalism. Manifest first in a growing seriousness on the part of the young people, the revival soon swept the whole community. Even upon the street corners the seeking of salvation was eagerly discussed. Hundreds of people underwent the experience of a terrible conviction of unworthiness and sin, a resignation to God's justice in concerning the sinner to an eternal punishment, and finally a healing assurance of salvation through surrender to Christ. This vivid religious experience, this abrupt transition from a state of sin to a state of grace, was called conversion.

Though not unknown among former American Puritans, these abrupt conversions were unfamiliar. The revival system, with its unrestrained emotionality, its visions, trances, weeping, and even swooning, broke completely with the staid formalism of the old-fashioned Puritans.


Opposition to the movement, accordingly, was widespread. Even the congregation of Edwards proved unable to endure the emotional tension, and the revival expired in a wave of mental abnormalities. Meanwhile, however, similar awakenings were under way in other Massachusetts towns, and the movement was on the verge of sweeping New England like wildfire.

The Edwardean revival system, with its emphasis on vivid and profoundly emotional religious experience, has several European parallels. In Germany, a strong reaction against Protestant formality had appeared in the pietism of Spener and the Moravian communities of Count Zinzendorf. In England, dissatisfaction with the laxity of the establishment was prompting the Methodist associations of the Wesleys and Whitefield. Faced with a wholly unevangelized population among the north-English workingmen, the Methodists developed, alongside their piestic morals, an evangelical system strikingly like that of Edwards. Like the older Calvinism, their evangelical theology stressed the doctrines of the Fall of Man and the lost state of humanity. Unlike Calvinism, it stressed also the voluntary search of the sinner for salvation, a sharply defined conversion or "experience of grace," and the free play of the emotions.

Created thus independently in America and in England, the evangelical system proved admirably adapted to the colonial environment. From Massachusetts, revivals swept through Connecticut and into New Jersey. thence, in the powerful preaching of the Presbyterian Samuel Davies, the awakening was carried into Virginia back country, where it created a numerous Presbyterian denomination alongside the established church. No sooner was the Presbyterian impetus spent than the Virginia Baptists began evangelization. Meanwhile the piestic German sects had waxed strong in Pennsylvania and the Shenandoah Valley, and the whole antiformalistic reaction in America had been strengthened by the evangelical tours of Charles Wesley and George Whitefield. By 1800 the wave of religious enthusiasm had leaped the Appalachian barrier and was overrunning the frontier in Kentucky and Tennessee. The older colonial church establishments had been overthrown, and the thought of America had been stamped indelibly with the forms of Protestant evangelicism.

the great awakening produced no writings that can properly classed as literature; yet its indirect influence on the development of American letters has been enormous. It determined as the original Puritan impetus alone might not have determined, that American writing should be conditioned by the influence of an aggressive religion. The development of the drama would be retarded; the novel would have to struggle to maturity through a heavy fog of moral didacticism. The romantic movement, when imported from Europe, would be sobered and chastened; its moral idealism would be admitted, its moral anarchy rejected. To nineteenth-century readers, earnestness would become an important criterion of literary excellence. In recompense for certain restrictions American literature would gain in idealism, restraint, and moral decency. Moreover, with the passing of the nineteenth-century, evangelicism was to harden into the stiff-necked village piety that drew down the bitter satire of Mark Twain. In the twentieth it was to evolve into the fundamentalism which provoked the vigorous satirical attacks of Sinclair Lewis. by a grotesque irony, Elmer Gantry only mirrors the obverse side of a religious movement whose first literary result was Edwards's Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God.

While the great awakening was gathering headway about him, Edwards's position in his own church was being undermined. Undoubtedly his pastoral yoke was galling, and the burdens he laid were heavy. When he insisted that only believers with definitely marked conversions be admitted to the Lord's Supper, his congregation deserted him and in 1750 dismissed him from the pastorate. For some years thereafter--during part of which time he composed The Freedom of the Will--he served as missionary to the Indians at Stockbridge, Massachusetts. In 1757 he was called from his obscurity to the presidency of Princeton, then Nassau. He took up his new duties in January, 1758, only to be stricken down by his fatal illness in March.



The career of Edwards was on the whole strangely mixed and self-contradictory. Variously gifted as a scientist, philosopher, and poet, he sternly wrought his opulent nature into submission to the God of John Calvin. Possessed of a new mystical vision of divine excellence, he thought to express its splendors in the verbiage of an obsolescent theology, whose decay no human being could have arrested. Yet, confronted with the revivalist phenomona in his own church, he broke with Puritan formalism to follow the path of the impassioned evangelical. He thus became a strong influence in fostering that type of Protestantism which shaped the American mind for more than a century, and which even the present age is still powerful. His enduring literary work is the Personal Narrative, in which he crystallized into language of permanent beauty one of the great mystical experiences of the race.



ENLIGHTENMENT IN THE COLONIES

I. THE AGE OF REASON


In striking contrast to the gloomy determinism of orthodox Puritan thought was the brief but strongly influential flowering of scientific rationalism known as the Enlightenment. This attitude of mind, which dominated British intellectual life in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries and which colored the thinking of most influential Americans up to 1789, did much to destroy the Calvinistic conception of the earth as a vale of tears and suffering and to convince man that, far from being the infinitesimal plaything of an inscrutable God, he was rather the master of his fate and the hope of the universe. With its emphasis upon reason rather than authority, its encouragement of scientific inquiry, and its almost childlike belief in the perfectibility of man and his world, the Enlightenment marked a happy departure from Puritan authoritarianism and


engendered a spirit of optimism especially fitting to the emergent Colonial culture.

The Enlightenment was in essence simply a further development of the spirit of inquiry which had dominated European intellectual life since the inception of the Renaissance. From the fourteenth century on, European thinkers had been striving to dispel the fog of mystery and superstition which had hung over medieval Europe, fostering unsound conceptions of nature
of the universe and sicouraging, on theological grounds, a further inquiry into its workings. To the medieval scholastic, the entire universe testified to the order and perfection of the Divine Mind, and the guardian of that order and perfection was the Church, with the Bible as the final court of appeal in all matters. From the Bible the medieval scholar learned that the earth was the center of the cosmos because it was the home of man, whom God had created in his own image and whom , of all creature in existence, he most favored. The planets, being less important, revolved around the earth, and in their unchanging course served as a constant demonstration of the eternality and perfection of the Creator. Having in this way settled the question of why the universe exists, medieval scholasticism proceeded to draw inference after inference from its hypothesis itself. To the scholastic, it was enough to know the why of existence; to search into the how would be presumptuous and sacrilegious.

It was this theological approach to learning that came most sharply under attack after the fourteenth century. With the coming of the Renaissance, European thinkers were increasingly unwilling to have their conception of man and his universe governed by grand scholastic hypotheses. The global expansion of trade and the consequent passion for exploration and discovery broadened intellectual as well as geographical horizons and tended to lessen the hold of scholastic metaphysics in favor of a more tangible and material value system. As man perceived a greater future for himself on earth, he became less concerned with preparation for eternity and less moved by religious arguments based upon acceptance and faith. Furthermore, it became clear that many basic assumptions, held on the authority of the Church, were open to question. The discovery of Chinese civilization by the


West in the late thirteenth century and growing trade relations between East and West cast considerable doubt on the validity of certain scholastic premises. The religious tolerance and high moral and cultural standards of the Chinese contrasted embarrassingly with Christian bigotry and persecution and gave evidence that Western religion had no monopoly upon virtuous and ethical living. Furthermore, Chinese culture had obviously preceded the accepted date of the Flood (the Chinese had records of antediluvian eclipses), thus bringing the infallibility of the Bible into question. By 1543, when Copernicus demolished medieval cosmology by proving that the sun, rather than the earth, was the center of the universe, the Western intellectual world had already developed a sufficient protective coating of skepticisims to avoid the chaos this discovery would have caused a century or so earlier.

Following Copernicus' discovery, the interest of the sixteenth century turned increasingly from the why of things to the how. In this search scholars worked out many devices, both intellectual and mechanical, which aided their quest for understanding and supported their findings. Galilleo's telescope (1609), the mathematical developments of Kepler (1571-1630) in astronomical calculation, Descartes (1596-1650) in analytical geometry and, most influential of all in the subsequent development of science, Newton's (1642-1727) discovery of law and gravitation supported the Copernican system and opened enormous new fields in astronomy and physics. Vesalius' (1514-1564) studies om anatomy and William Harvey's discovery of the circulation of blood (1628) put medicine on a modern plane, while van Helmont's (1577-1644) theory of the existence of gases and Robert Boyle's discovery of the law of gaseous expansion (1660) metamorphosed chemistry from a medicine-show alchemy to a potent force in the technological development of the Western world. As a result of van Helmont's and Boyle's pioneering, Joseph Black was to discover carbon dioxide (1755), Henry Cavendish hydrogen (1765), Joseph Priestly oxygen (1744), and Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1797) the whole system of quantative chemical analysis.



In other fields, the period was marked by James Hutton's (1726-1797) studies in the geological evolution of the earth's crust (which put a further strain on the Biblical story of the Creation), Linnaeus' (1707-1778)
classification of plants, and Buffon's (1707-1788) studies in animal species, all of which profoundly influenced later speculation in evolution. In the light of these major discoveries and their innumerable subsidiary developments, it is small wonder that many minds were no longer attracted by mystical explanations of God and the universe, or that they turned to science and reason for an understanding of the world.

The impact of the new scientific "Enlightenment" upon the established religious beliefs was, of course, devastating. Isaac Newton's conception of the universe as a rational mechanical phenomenon governed by mathematical laws of cause and effect left little room for such traditional theological impedimenta as revelation, miracles, and Biblical authority, nor did it give much sanction to the function of the clergy as a interceding body between man and God. Particularly did the Enlightened philosophers reject the older pessimistic belief in man's total depravity. Instead of the gloomy doctrine of Original Sin, the new thought embraced the concept of man as capable of infinite perfectibility and as a creature whose good or evil traits resulted from environmental conditioning rather than from Divine Grace or the sins of Adam and Eve. The philosopher Henry Bolingbroke (1678-1751) typified this line of thought when he attached both clerics and atheists for weakening a belief in God through admitting the presence
of evil, and Pope in his Essay on Man gave poetic immortality to this attitude when he proclaimed:

As full, as perfect, in vile man that mourns
As the rapt seraph that adores and burns:
To Him no high, no low, no great, no small,
He fills, he bounds, connects, and equals all!

.........................................

All nature is but art, unknown to thee;
All chance, direction, which thou canst not see;
All discord, harmony not understood;
All partial evil, universal good;
And spite of pride, in erring reason's spite,
One truth is clear, Whatever is, is right.




Pope's famous utterance that the "proper study of mankind is man:" was an aphorism given considerable development in the decades to come; and David Hume, one of the most forceful of anti-mystics, put an ironic capstone to the enlightened attitude against theology in the concluding paragraph of his Essay on Miracles:

Our most holy religion is founded on faith, not on reason, and it is a sure method of exposing it to put it to such a trial as it is by no means fitted to endure. So that upon the whole, we may conclude that the Christian Religion not only was at first attended by miracles, but even at this day cannot be believed by any reasonable person without one.


All of this anti-clerical, anti-mystical talk must not be taken to mean that the Enlightenment rejected God. On the contrary, the dominant motive in its attempt to understand the universe was deeply religious. Actually, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century science must be considered an attempt to establish the existence of God on a rational rather than a metaphysical basis. By rejecting miracles, the Incarnation, the Trinity, and Biblical authority, philosophers of the enlightenment felt they were merely clearing away the fog that prevented man from understanding the true nature of the Divinity. Following the trail blazed by Newton, they held that essential truth is revealed by natural laws, which are in turn revealed by reason. The fact that these laws exist and that they operate rationally is proof in itself of a Divine Being, since some Force must exist to have created and motivated the vast machinery of the universe. to Isaac Newton the Great Machine must have a Mechanic or a Supreme Architect. Joseph Priestly put the thought another way in his analogy of the watch--the existence of the watch testifies to the existence of the watchmaker; thus may we deduce the existence of God from the fact of the universe. As a matter of fact, most Enlightened thinkers accepted the spirit of Christianity, once they had stripped it of its mysticism and superstition; and some like John Locke, did not even deny the possibility of revelation, though eh subjected such experiences to the light of reason.

Whatever God hath revealed is certainly true; no doubt can be made of it...but whether it is a divine revelation or no, reason must judge. (Essay Concerning Human Understanding)




The most important movement growing out of attempts to reconcile science with religion was DEISM, which reached its high point in England in the early eighteenth century in the American colonies a half-century later. The deists accepted the authority of human reason, rejected the miraculous, and denied the Trinity and the authority of the Bible. They further denied the divinity of Christ, though they revered his teachings and took them as part of their creed. They advocated divine worship, although in time this came to mean a private relationship between the individual and God rather than attendance at public services. It is significant that, though many deists were members of the clergy, there never developed any deistic church or formal organization. Essentially, Deism was a way of thinking rather than a formal institution, and its implications were as much ethical and social as they were religious. The religious principles of deism were set for th by Lord Herbert of Cherbury (1583-1648), who is generally regarded as the founder of the movement, when he stated his famous Five Points:


1. That there is a Supreme Power (which he further
explains to be a benevolent God).

2. That this Sovereign Power must be worshipped.

3. That the good ordering or disposition of the faculties
of man constitutes the principal or best part of divine
worship, and that this has always been believed.

4. That all vices and crimes should be expiated and effaced
by repentance.

5. That there are rewards and punishments after this life.



Before proceeding further, we must repeat the word of caution. The Enlightenment as such was confined to a limited number of highly educated, articulate persons whose careful reasoning was followed only by others of like turn of mind. The great mass of people went along as usual, seeking their daily bread and following beliefs that were more habits than convictions. In time, it is true, many of the attitudes of the Enlightenment filtered down to the common level and became habitual also; but it would be a gross error to believe that the Enlightenment was consciously a mass movement, or that because of it the common man was going to alter the slightest degree his timeless procedure of following the line of least resistance.



II. THE ENLIGHTENMENT IN AMERICA



The spirit of the Enlightenment came rather late to the American colonies partly because of the natural cultural lag between dependencies and a mother country, partly because of the predominantly religious nature of the colonies, and partly because the almost completely agrarian economy in America was less concerned with scientific and mechanical development than was the industrialized England. Nevertheless, by the latter half of the eighteenth century, the eastern seaboard cities had become centers
of rationalistic thought. Nearly all the leaders of the Revolution were children of the Enlightenment, rarely attended public worship,m and were deeply interested in the newly developing scientific and sociological ideas. It is at first puzzling to contemplate a society whose spiritual foundations were largely Calvinistic turning against mysticism toward rational practicality as the basis for its morality. But as we have seen, New England Calvinism almost from the first had been weakened by strong currents of dissent, most of which had attacked the authority of the clergy and had stressed the need for individual practicality and self-reliance. Many of the New England dissenters, particularly Roger Williams, went along with the French Protestant Petrus Ramus (1515-1772), who believed the universe to be comprehensible through reason rather than through revelation. The authority of the Bible in New England, while strong, was not absolute.

One of the earliest to minimize revelation was John Wise of Ipswich (1652-1725). Wise, like Ramus, stated that a knowledge of absolute laws without practical, individual application was no knowledge at all, and that reason was at least equally important with Biblical authority. In his Churches' Quarrel Espoused (1710) and his Vindication of the Government of New England (1717) he struck powerful blows at the Presbyterian theocracy of the Mathers. He pointed out that New England had been founded on a Congregational, not on a Presbyterian, system and called for a return to the earlier, more democratic type of government. Under such attacks as those of Wise, Puritanism gradually became more rational in self-defense, and the authoritarianism of the "Saints" more flexible and cognizant of public wishes. But many of the young students of the early eighteenth century were not to be appeased by the minor concessions of the dogmatists, and as time went on, they became more and more drawn to religious liberalism. By 1740 even the Harvard library was full of books on the new rationalism and the orthodox were reporting with alarm that the younger generation was avidly reading and subscribing to anti-mystical tracts.


The most important figure among the anti-mystics was Benjamin Franklin who, more than any other man, represents the spirit of the Enlightenment in America. Though born in Boston of Puritan parents Franklin, while retaining all of his Puritan faith in the standard virtues, nevertheless had no patience with the Calvinistic attitude that the earth was a vale of tears and suffering so constituted to try men's spirits for the wrath to come. Rather he believed that this life should be dedicated to the pursuit of human happiness, which is attained only through a constant cultivation of the art of getting along with one's fellow man. For Franklin, the act of worship was carried out most sincerely when it was directed toward the betterment of man in his practical, every-day human relationships. Accordingly, Franklin borrowed from the Puritan teachings his famous Thirteen Virtues (temperance, silence, order, resolution, frugality, industry, sincerity, justice, moderation, cleanliness, tranquility, chastity, and humility) and exhorted others to practice them, not for their Calvinistic value of "justifying the ways of God to man" but rather for
their practical usefulness in what Franklin recognized and approved as the fundamental motive of existence--the desire to Get On. In a sense, Franklin's attitude was simply a modernization of the Puritan concept of fruitful industry. But whereas the Calvinist regarded prosperity as a mark of God's favor and a possible sign of heavenly reward, Franklin looked upon it as a means of establishing the earthly happiness of mankind.

It was this go-getting "tradesman's attitude" of measuring man's worth through a material success resulting from honesty and hard work that makes Franklin so typical of his day and so popular with future generations. Growing up at a time when economic and political power was being taken from outmoded aristocracy by a dynamic and commercial-minded middle class,


Franklin became a ready spokesman for the new order. Lacking great wealth, historical fame, education, traditional distinction, the man of the middle class found his self-justification in the one quality in which he excelled: material advancement. Franklin found nothing wrong in the worship of success so long as that success was honestly obtained. He believed that the desire for social and financial security could be a powerful force in the dynamics of society and an incitement to intellectual and spiritual improvement. Moral virtue, far from being a mystical quantity, was a practical commodity through the exercise of which man could succeed; it should be pursued not through fear of God's wrath nor because it is its "own reward," but rather because it is the key to personal happiness and social well-being. In his Autobiography, Franklin asserts that

Truth, Sincerity, and Integrity in Dealings between Man and Man were of the utmost importance to the Felicity of Life...Revelation had indeed no weight with me as such; but I entertained an Opinion, that tho' certain Actions might not be bad because they were forbidden...yet probably those Actions might be forbidden because they were bad for us.

And later he sums up his whole ethical attitude under the frank statement that "Nothing is so likely to make a man's fortune as virtue."

It is this common-sense side of Franklin that was most heeded in his own time and is popularly regarded as being most characteristic of him today. Persons who never even suspected the political, philosophical, and scientific stature of the man quoted and believed his Poor Richard, whose homely saws ("Waste not, want not," "A penny saved is a penny earned," "Diligence is the mother of good luck," "One today is worth two tomorrows") seemed to them to plumb the depths of useful wisdom. Today some find this dollar morality the essence of Babbittry and bourgeois pettiness, but it would be unjust to Franklin to assume that he at any time condoned greed or that he regarded the desire for getting on as any more than a reciprocal force to virtue and social well-being. It must be remembered that he lived in a world of small, independent workers where large fortunes of the Astor-Vanderbilt-Rockefeller variety were as yet undreamed of. the Machiavellian schemings and the undisguised rapacity of the post-Civil War era would have horrified both Poor Richard and his benign creator beyond all measure, and the amassing of wealth for luxurious living, for special


privilege, or for its own sake would have seemed to Franklin a criminal action. For him, the way to wealth led not through the marshes of selfishness but rather along the highroads of social and spiritual betterment for all mankind.

Less material minded, but even sharper in attacking metaphysical religion was Thomas Paine. One of the Enlightenment's most fiery champions, Paine on his once shocking Age of Reason (1794) heavily, and often crudely, scored what he considered to be the claptrap of clerical mythology. To him the turgid apparatus of miracles, supernatural portents, and other marvelous occurrences succeeded only in destroying the real values of Christianity, and therefore should be eliminated completely. Paine believed that in a skeptical and rational age religion could hold its own only when it was made consistent with reason, and particularly with the deistic concept of God as a First Cause acting for the benefit of mankind through the laws of nature. Accordingly, he attacked the notion that the Bible was the incontestable word of God and proceeded carefully, and somewhat pedantically, to dissect the Gospels and point out all the inconsistencies, contradictions, and statements based upon miracles, superstition, or unreasoned proof. To many persons, this attack upon the letter of the Scriptures was equivalent to a destruction of their spirit, but such was not Paine's intention. Like Franklin, he was a fundamentally pious man who wished to rid Christian theology of what he considered its outmoded qualities in order that its finest precepts could continue to survive. Without this purgation, Paine felt, the world would soon reject all religious beliefs and would sink into a morass of cynical atheism.

Far less renowned than either Franklin or Paine, but perhaps even more effective among the non-intellectuals was Elihu Palmer, an ex-Baptist minister who left his calling to devote his life to attacking religious supernaturalism. His widely read Principles of Nature (1801) was one of the most uncompromising works of the Enlightenment and also one of the most forceful in calling for an ethical religion based on natural laws. Like Paine, he attacked Biblical myths as dangerous fabrications which destroy man's comprehension of the true beauty and harmony of the universe,


and advocated a rule of reason in religious as well as temporal thought. Though by no means original in his strictures, Palmer is nevertheless a significant figure in the American Enlightenment because of the popularity of his writings and lectures and, more important, because of his carefully formulated "principles of nature" which formed the creed of the Deistical Society of New York, of which he was a founder. Since these principles form a clear and complete summary of the rationalistic religious thinking, they will be set forth here in their entirety. He held that all true rationalists would believe:


1. That the universe proclaims the existence of one supreme
Deity, worthy of the adoration of intelligent beings.

2. That man is possessed of moral and intellectual faculties
sufficient for the improvement of his nature, and the
acquisition of happiness.

3. That the religion of nature is the only universal religion; that
it grows out of the moral relations of intelligent beings, and
that it stands connected with the progressive improvement and
common welfare of the human race.

4. That it is essential to the true interest of man, that he love
truth and practice virtue.

5. That vice is every where ruinous and destructive to the
happiness of the individual and of society.

6. That a benevolent disposition, and beneficent actions, are
fundamental duties of rational beings.

7. That a religion mingled with persecution and malice cannot be of
divine origin.

8. That education and science are essential to the happiness of
man.

9. That civil and religious liberty is equally essential to his
interests.

10. That there can be no human authority to which man ought to be
amenable for his religious opinions.

11. That science and truth, virtue and happiness, are the great
objects to which the activity and energy of the human
faculties out to be directed.

(Elihu Palmer, "Posthumous Pieces; Principles of the
Deistical Society of the State of New York," 10-11.)


It is astonishing how many of these deistic principles persist today and how many of our present values, even within the functioning of relatively orthodox religious groups, suggest the spirit of rationalistic naturalism as set forth by elihu Palmer. Yet it must be remembered that at the time conscious religious unorthodoxy was decidedly a minority reaction. Deism was confined largely to the educated classes of the eastern seaboard, and even with them it was hardly a sufficiently focused activity to be called a "movement." The uneducated masses, of course, ignored it entirely in favor of a more emotional religious outlook; and in the eighteenth century no attempt was made to convert them to a changed point of view, partly because the opinions of the mob were traditionally considered unimportant, and partly because most of the thinkers agreed with Franklin that too strong attacks upon popular religion without sufficient reeducation would probably result in nothing more than a weakened lower-class morality.