century. In a far higher degree than Spinoza, he was a ?God-intoxicated man.?? His fundamental notion that there is no causality except the divine was made the basis of a theory of necessity which played into the hands of the deists when he opposed and was alien not only to Christianity but even to theism. Edwards could not have gotten his idealism from Berkeley; it may have been suggested to him by the writings of Locke or Newton, Cudworth or Descartes, John Norris or Arthur Collier. See Prof. H. N. Gardiner, in Philos. Rev., Nov. 1900:573-596; Prof. E. C. Smyth, in Am. Jour. Theol., Oct. 1897:916; Allen, Jonathan Edwards, 16, 308-310, and in Atlantic Monthly, I)ec. 1891:767; Sanborn, in Jour. Spec. Philos., Oct. 1881:401-420; G. P.. Fisher, Edwards on the Trinity, 18, 19.

(b) The older Calvinism, represented by Charles Hodge the father (17971878) and A. A. Hodge the son (1823-1886), together with Henry B. Smith (1815-1877), Robert J. Breckinridge (1800-1871), Samuel J. Baird, and William G. T. Shedd (1820-1894). All these, although with minor differences, hold to views of human depravity and divine grace more nearly conformed to the doctrine of Augustine and Calvin, and are for this reason distinguished from the New England theologians and their followers by the popular title of Old School.

Old School theology, in its view of predestination, exalts God; New School theology, by emphasizing the freedom of the will, exalts man. It is yet more important to note that Old School theology has for its characteristic tenet the guilt of inborn depravity. Limit among those who hold this view, some are federalists and creatianists, and justify God?s condemnation of all men upon the ground that Adam represented his posterity. Such are the Princeton theologians generally, including Charles Hodge, A. A. Hodge, and the brothers Alexander. Among those who hold to the Old School doctrine of the guilt of inborn depravity, however, there are others who are traducians, and who explain the imputation of Adam?s sin to his posterity upon the ground of the natural union between him and them. Baird?s ?Elohim Revealed? and Shedd?s essay on ?Original Sin? (Sin a Nature and that Nature Guilt) represent this realistic conception of the relation of the race to its first father. R.. J. Beckinridge, R. L. Dabney, and J. H. Thornwell assert the fact of inherent corruption and guilt, but refuse to assign any rationale for it, though they tend to realism. H. B. Smith holds guardedly to the theory of mediate imputation.

On the history of Systematic Theology in general, see Hagenbach, History of Doctrine (from which many of the facts above given are taken), and Shedd, History of Doctrine; also, Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:44-100; Kahnis,

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment