Solparvus
Puritan Board Senior
What follows is a little writing exercised based on one of my classes, with a public repentance at the end.
In 1750 Jonathan Edwards was voted out of the pastorate by his church in Northampton, but the journey out probably began in 1744. A discipline case known as the "bad book case" had come before the church, and in a meeting Edwards had read off a list of young persons with whom he needed to speak. Edwards made a boorish mistake: He did not distinguish between perpetrators and witnesses, resulting in needlessly spoiled reputations.
It wasn't the only integral event. Factors more immediate to the dismissal included trying to change the church's long-standing practice of open communion, and a change in stance on qualifications for church membership. However, historians agree that Edwards' general demeanor as a person was no help.
This was the weakness of Edwards' life most likely to blast the gourds of his labors, and they did in some respects. Piper, quoting Marsden, notes that Edwards was "never given to excessive tact" and often came off "brittle" and "unsociable." Matthew Everhard, an Edwards scholar remarks* that Edwards was aware of the problem himself, and it explains some of his resolutions from his younger years. Some resolutions which I think could be related:
I've found traces of this commitment in "Charity and its Fruits", based on sermons preached in 1738 (source). When describing the loveliness of the saints in heaven:
Touching the resolutions again though, Edwards stopped resolving in 1723, per a previous post I made. The "bad book case" was in 1744. Two decades and a classic sermon series later personal mannerism was still a problem.
When Edwards was offered the presidency of Princeton in 1757, months before his death, it was still a problem. Edwards was aware of the weakness caused by his manner and temperament, and cited it as the primary reason that he was a poor fit for the presidency. From volume 16 of the Yale collection of the works of Jonathan Edwards:
As I understand it, Edwards did accept the presidency because of the urging of other faithful men.
The Scriptures say that for any man to be an elder he must be "of good behavior", or κοσμικον, per 1 Timothy 3:2; such a behavior that is decent and orderly, respectful of other persons, and not always needlessly turning people off. I doubt Edwards would have continued in the ministry after the expulsion if he felt that in regards to this qualification he had habitually botched it; and Edwards was evidently aware of his weakness, and strove to correct it. Others who knew better encouraged him to the presidency of Princeton. Add to this, per Piper article earlier there were social dimensions to the expulsion not tied to Edwards' person. However, let's be real: it did stain an otherwise faithful ministry.
What causes this? Sometimes it's temperament. Some who are put together a certain way and strong in some areas, try as they may, sometimes break legitimate social décor and have no clue they did it.
Other times, it's sin. We offend others because we didn't love them enough to avoid offense, nor for the same reason did we study to avoid it. Whether Edwards sinned is between him and his master. This is no judgment on him.
Were Edwards to walk among us today, who might he be like to us? Maybe that pastor who is deeply spiritual and highly competent in doctrine and practice, but in social situations is reserved, doesn't say much, monotone when he does speak, perhaps fervent at inappropriate times, and occasionally does the thing that more socially sensible people would not have done. Sometimes the phenomenon is in the pulpit itself! You deeply appreciate the treasures this man brings forth; but still, you could appreciate those insights more if properly communicated.
There are lessons for life in Christ's body. Leaving out the occasional, truly necessary propriety of a sharp rebuke or pointed admonition... On the one hand, some of us need to work harder to understand the importance of social décor and personal demeanor to personal effectiveness; or more simply, strive to better love our neighbors so that we will love them after this manner. There may be some who go to their Bibles, books, meditations, and are harvesting bunches of golden apples; but would do more good to place them on platters of silver (Proverbs 21:11). Some naturally shine in this qualification. For some of us, we must die to ourselves in a way others are not called to in order to display good order. It is an act of love to fellow church members. If anything, do it because some church members (like at Northampton) have a long-term memory.
Still, who can't help but feel that the Northampton congregation was the real loser here? Edwards was a redeemed sinner, and maybe despite his efforts even sinfully neglected the platter of silver, but still... didn't he serve them apples of gold? "Love covers a multitude of sins" and we are called to bear with one another's infirmities. Sometimes even godly men require our forbearance and meekness. It's our loss if we don't. None should ever, as Bunyan says in his apologetic for Pilgrim's Progress, toss the apple for the core.
I write mainly for my own edification, as one who is more likely to botch it from this cause than any other. This is in some part a personal and public repentance for all the cage-stagey-ness that maybe shows up in my writing that I am totally unaware of. I leave the judgment to others whether my postings are gold or pyrite, but in the multitude of words sin is not lacking. None of us ever mean harm in the way we present, or write, or speak; but nonetheless, our sin and selfishness run deep, and so does our ignorance, and the fault often lies at our own feet. For my own part, I ask forgiveness publicly.
The Lord bless these things to those whom they apply.
*From lectures at RPTS for PT510 Spiritual Development, taped in 2020. This may not be the exact lecture, but is in substance contained in all three of his lectures for the class.
In 1750 Jonathan Edwards was voted out of the pastorate by his church in Northampton, but the journey out probably began in 1744. A discipline case known as the "bad book case" had come before the church, and in a meeting Edwards had read off a list of young persons with whom he needed to speak. Edwards made a boorish mistake: He did not distinguish between perpetrators and witnesses, resulting in needlessly spoiled reputations.
It wasn't the only integral event. Factors more immediate to the dismissal included trying to change the church's long-standing practice of open communion, and a change in stance on qualifications for church membership. However, historians agree that Edwards' general demeanor as a person was no help.
This was the weakness of Edwards' life most likely to blast the gourds of his labors, and they did in some respects. Piper, quoting Marsden, notes that Edwards was "never given to excessive tact" and often came off "brittle" and "unsociable." Matthew Everhard, an Edwards scholar remarks* that Edwards was aware of the problem himself, and it explains some of his resolutions from his younger years. Some resolutions which I think could be related:
I've found traces of this commitment in "Charity and its Fruits", based on sermons preached in 1738 (source). When describing the loveliness of the saints in heaven:
Touching the resolutions again though, Edwards stopped resolving in 1723, per a previous post I made. The "bad book case" was in 1744. Two decades and a classic sermon series later personal mannerism was still a problem.
When Edwards was offered the presidency of Princeton in 1757, months before his death, it was still a problem. Edwards was aware of the weakness caused by his manner and temperament, and cited it as the primary reason that he was a poor fit for the presidency. From volume 16 of the Yale collection of the works of Jonathan Edwards:
As I understand it, Edwards did accept the presidency because of the urging of other faithful men.
The Scriptures say that for any man to be an elder he must be "of good behavior", or κοσμικον, per 1 Timothy 3:2; such a behavior that is decent and orderly, respectful of other persons, and not always needlessly turning people off. I doubt Edwards would have continued in the ministry after the expulsion if he felt that in regards to this qualification he had habitually botched it; and Edwards was evidently aware of his weakness, and strove to correct it. Others who knew better encouraged him to the presidency of Princeton. Add to this, per Piper article earlier there were social dimensions to the expulsion not tied to Edwards' person. However, let's be real: it did stain an otherwise faithful ministry.
What causes this? Sometimes it's temperament. Some who are put together a certain way and strong in some areas, try as they may, sometimes break legitimate social décor and have no clue they did it.
Other times, it's sin. We offend others because we didn't love them enough to avoid offense, nor for the same reason did we study to avoid it. Whether Edwards sinned is between him and his master. This is no judgment on him.
Were Edwards to walk among us today, who might he be like to us? Maybe that pastor who is deeply spiritual and highly competent in doctrine and practice, but in social situations is reserved, doesn't say much, monotone when he does speak, perhaps fervent at inappropriate times, and occasionally does the thing that more socially sensible people would not have done. Sometimes the phenomenon is in the pulpit itself! You deeply appreciate the treasures this man brings forth; but still, you could appreciate those insights more if properly communicated.
There are lessons for life in Christ's body. Leaving out the occasional, truly necessary propriety of a sharp rebuke or pointed admonition... On the one hand, some of us need to work harder to understand the importance of social décor and personal demeanor to personal effectiveness; or more simply, strive to better love our neighbors so that we will love them after this manner. There may be some who go to their Bibles, books, meditations, and are harvesting bunches of golden apples; but would do more good to place them on platters of silver (Proverbs 21:11). Some naturally shine in this qualification. For some of us, we must die to ourselves in a way others are not called to in order to display good order. It is an act of love to fellow church members. If anything, do it because some church members (like at Northampton) have a long-term memory.
Still, who can't help but feel that the Northampton congregation was the real loser here? Edwards was a redeemed sinner, and maybe despite his efforts even sinfully neglected the platter of silver, but still... didn't he serve them apples of gold? "Love covers a multitude of sins" and we are called to bear with one another's infirmities. Sometimes even godly men require our forbearance and meekness. It's our loss if we don't. None should ever, as Bunyan says in his apologetic for Pilgrim's Progress, toss the apple for the core.
I write mainly for my own edification, as one who is more likely to botch it from this cause than any other. This is in some part a personal and public repentance for all the cage-stagey-ness that maybe shows up in my writing that I am totally unaware of. I leave the judgment to others whether my postings are gold or pyrite, but in the multitude of words sin is not lacking. None of us ever mean harm in the way we present, or write, or speak; but nonetheless, our sin and selfishness run deep, and so does our ignorance, and the fault often lies at our own feet. For my own part, I ask forgiveness publicly.
The Lord bless these things to those whom they apply.
*From lectures at RPTS for PT510 Spiritual Development, taped in 2020. This may not be the exact lecture, but is in substance contained in all three of his lectures for the class.
Last edited:
I do hope to read much more of Edwards when opportunity presents itself.