About this folder

Input: emerson.folder04.xml#29999
timestamp: 2016-11-08 18:57:39Z
Stylesheet: mme2xhtml_bland_2.xslt#31111
timestamp: 2017-03-10 20:30:52Z

Acknowledgments

The editors, Sandra H. Petrulionis and Noelle Baker, would like to acknowledge the support of the Ralph Waldo Emerson Fund, the Ralph Waldo Emerson Memorial Association, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, Harvard University’s Houghton Library, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Any views, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this edition do not necessarily reflect those of the NEH.

HM41b GTF13,SI BP1 degree of liberty and freedom of will (which does not ap- nopear philosophical or scriptural to the calvinistic Inquirier) that I should look for the belief, the sublime and godlike belief that human misery will find an universal re- nomedy. To him, who views every man as unconnected with a federal head—born innocent in the most po- nofitper-nofect sense—free in the most perfect manner, the scheme of eternal anguish may be more consistent with the manifest attributes of God and the nature of things. But to the consistent Calvinist, who believes in a God without succession of ideas—to whom the future of every possible existence was always present—always and nessecarily connected with His will and agency—who from a formed the whole of plan of the creation and redemption from a perfect view of all it’s consequences; to such a believer, whose views are thus extended—a final res- notoration becomes a kind of intuition. In the native depravity of human, fallen nature, in its connection with a first reperesentative, and it’s misterious and aggrandising relation to a Second by whom came all are made alive—in the nessisity of a foreign and divine agency to conversion, are found supports of the restora- notion from scripture of an unanswerable nature, with- noout adverting to those numerous select passages which support this belief— And in truth, I know not where HM41 GTF13,SIcontinued BP2 they are, nor what they are. This is the first time I ever combined the motives of a belief, which at all times has existed in a timid and vague manner. On the calvinistic plan, the belief of the contrary cannot convert the sin noner, nor injure the regenerated. The perpetuity of the moral law and the immortality of the soul are strong arguments in favor of an eternal exilement from a holy Govonor of the moral world. But Jesus Christ hath placed us under grace—and the grandeur of redemption by a divine person, at the same time that it argues—that it proves—the immortality of the soul, argues as strongly that the curse due to the breach of an immutable law is removed from the human race as a condemnatory sentence. As a rule of conduct it was honored by the chistian law Giver—and will to all moral agents continue an eternal rule of conduct. And the impenitent Sinner will suffer the vengance due to it’s personal violation in a de- nogree beyond our present conceptions, and worthy the justice of God. The absolute decrees of God which the Calvinist adheres to, places eternal punishment as one of the first magnitude. Now the sin which was to be the cause of this punishmentwhere must it have been—among the decrees? If the Deity were plainly exhibited in the GTF13,SII coulers colors which these conclusions draw, what human soul could dwell on the portrait, and va- HM42bno GTF13,SIInocontinued BP3no lue their existence? One really interested in the honor and character of God, however safe they might feel them noselves, could not be happy, while the only Source of thier happiness was surrounded, not with clouds and darkness but with the most terrific light. At least it appears to me so, but the case is otherwise, for among that class of christians, are some of the most happy and sublime spirits. These seem to be so dazzeld with the divine splendors as to loose lose the remembrance that what is jus notice in man, benevolence &c, must be of the same kind in God. If they plead that the over plus of happiness in the universe verifys the divine benevolence; to some, who follow the idea of the everlasting misery of the damned, it will not be wholly sattisfactory—unless, as was before observed, their existence is preferable to nonexistence. The calvinistic belief includes a secret and revealed will In all the reigions of truth (and this sentiment is in some form there) and speculation, thier could not be a stronger sup- noport of the belief of a final restoration of the human nature to it’s pristine grandeur, and to the still higher destination of belonging—of being incoperated incorporated into the interest and honors of the Son of God.

Apart from speculation, I humbly confess myself dark & ignorant—and altogather removed from condemning the Calvinist who reaches the pinnicle of hopkinsianism. It is possible they may have discovered the incognita the of man’s condition—and that truth has never been awarded to any HM42 GTF13,SIIcontinued BP4 Sect but thiers—were this the case—it does seem to those not initiated that they the uninitiated are the objects of charity—and that there is no neceſsecary conmection between truth & bigotry. But a mind less partial to this sect than mine, would be ready to compare them to comets, whose light was splendid— but terrific—whose excentrice eccentric revolutions while they portended destruction to the order of their system—might be among the happiest means of agitating and supplying with new light the whole planetary world!

Wateford 1809

MME numbers the first three pages of this brief Almanack. Since this page begins with “5” (encircled and positioned on a line by itself in the top right corner) and begins in the middle of a sentence, the editors presume that four preceding pages are no longer extant.

This numeral is encircled and positioned on a line by itself in the top left corner of the page.

This numeral is encircled and positioned on a line by itself in the top right corner of the page.

This Almanack reflects MME’s reading and commonplacing of several works concerned with the theological controversy and doctrinal debates that emanated from the founding of Andover Theological Seminary in Andover, Massachusetts in August 1808. This institution was organized by two groups of religious orthodoxy in New England, the “old Calvinists” and the “Hopkinsians,” adherents of Jonathan Edwards’s student, Samuel Hopkins, whose views differed from traditional Calvinist doctrine on several issues. According to religious historian Henry K. Rowe, Hopkinsians regarded themselves as the “Consistent Calvinists” pp8 ; they “maintained the doctrine of divine sovereignty, but they modified the plight of man. They rejected the Old Calvinist doctrine of the imputation of Adam’s sin . . . and maintained that every man’s sin is his own personal responsibility. They made less of human depravity and more of actual sinning. They did not believe that God had closed absolutely the door of hope, because there is in man a certain natural ability to obey God’s law. And Christ had died for all men, not as a penal satisfaction to an outraged deity, but as an expression of his universal benevolence. And man should rely on the atoning Christ and not on any outward means of grace” Rowe_History123 History of Andover Theological Seminary Rowe, mHistory Rowe Henry K. Newton, MA 1933 cit pp17 . As Rowe and others have explained, in founding the Andover seminary these two antagonistic groups ultimately overcame their differences in order to provide an orthodox institution to educate and train conservative clergy, which they were motivated to do in light of the, to them, radically divergent position taken by Harvard College with the appointment of liberal theologian Henry Ware as Hollis Professor of Theology Rowe_History123 History of Andover Theological Seminary Rowe, mHistory Rowe Henry K. Newton, MA 1933 cit pp9 . The founding of Andover and the publication of The Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover (1808) precipitated a debate published in several issues of the Monthly Anthology (associated with liberal Boston theologians, including William Emerson, MME’s brother and former editor of the Monthly Anthology, with whom she was living in Boston during this controversy) and The Panoplist (identified with more conservative Calvinists and Hopkinsians) over 1808-1809. This and subsequent pages of this Almanack reflect MME’s reading of these articles, as, for example, with the Monthly Anthology’s assertion that according to its creed, all Andover Seminary professors must swear to be “ Calvinists” or lose their positions, a requirement that the Anthologist reviewer regards as mendacious and bigoted NA_Monthly_Art3895 ART. 38: The Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover; with a Sketch of its Rise and Progress . . . Monthly Anthology, and Boston Review aArticle 38 page602-14 1808 November vol5 issue11 pp602614602–14 cit pp604, 606-13 . On this Almanack page, she likely has in mind several passages from the Constitution and Associate Statutes, including the statements that “God’s decrees perfectly consist with human liberty; God’s universal agency with the agency of man; and man’s dependence with his accountability”; and that “every professor must be . . . an orthodox and consistent Calvinist.” She may also refer to the “Creed” (32) to which Andover professors were required to affirm: They must believe in the trinity, that God creates man in his own image, and that “the enjoyment of GOD [is] his supreme happiness; that this enjoyment is derived solely from conformity of heart the moral character and will of God; that Adam, the federal head and representative of the human race, was placed in a state of probation, and that in consequence of his disobedience, all his descendants were constituted sinners . . . . [so that] every man is justly exposed to eternal damnation; so that, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of GOD; that GOD, of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity elected some to everlasting life, and that he entered into a covenant of grace to deliver them out of this state of sin and misery by a REDEEMER; that the only REDEEMER of the elect is the eternal SON of GOD.” Additionally, the creed required professors to subscribe to the view “that our salvation is wholly of grace; that no means whatever can change the heart of a sinner, and make it hold; that regeneration and sanctification are effects of the creating and renewing agency of the HOLY SPIRIT . . .; that by convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds, working faith in us, and renewing our wills, the HOLY SPIRIT makes us partakers of redemption” NA_Andover_Constitution81 Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover. . . mAndover Constitution Farrand, Mallory Boston 1808 cit pp35, 51, 32-34 . MME may refer to herself as the “calvinistic Inquirier” as she examines the above and other tenets of this creed, but in a broader sense, writers on both sides of the debate regard the free inquiry into divine “truth” as central tenets of their doctrine and view their opponents as “bigots.” Even as she follows the debate between liberal Boston Unitarians and conservative Calvinists and Hopkinsians, MME appears to depart from both in asserting “the sublime and godlike belief that human misery will find an universal remedy,” or universal salvation. By “all are made alive,” MME alludes to 1 Corinthians 15:22: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”

MME continues to examine the distinctions between the Hopkinsians and traditional Calvinists, both of which groups accept the cardinal doctrine as stated in The Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover “that our salvation is wholly of grace” NA_Andover_Constitution81 Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover. . . mAndover Constitution Farrand, Mallory Boston 1808 cit pp33 , i.e., that God’s grace in providing his sacrificial son Jesus has atoned for human sinfulness. In rejecting the doctrine of imputation, Hopkinsians believed that each sinner is responsible for his/her own depraved nature, a position with which MME seems in this passage to align herself in asserting that the “curse” of Adam’s original sin is “removed from the human race as a condemnatory sentence” to hell. Hopkinsians regard all individuals as “moral agents” responsible for their own “rules of conduct.” They accept the Calvinistic tenet that sinners “will suffer the vengance,” but believe such damnation results from their own sinful nature and behavior rather than as inheritors of Adam’s. In asserting that “the curse . . . is removed from the human race as a condemnatory sentence,” MME advocates more strongly for a belief in universal salvation than do either the traditional Calvinists or the Hopkinsians. By the Calvinist’s “absolute decrees,” MME may refer to the creed, drawn up by the Hopkinsian Associate Founders, to which professors of the newly organized Andover Theological Seminary must subscribe. Although this creed recognizes “that in consequence of his [Adam’s] disobedience all his descendants were constituted sinners,” they are also “by [their own] nature . . . personally depraved” NA_Andover_Constitution81 Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover. . . mAndover Constitution Farrand, Mallory Boston 1808 cit pp33 .

MME quotes from Psalms 97:1-3: “The LORD reigneth; let the earth rejoice; let the multitude of isles be glad thereof. Clouds and darkness are round about him: righteousness and judgment are the habitation of his throne. A fire goeth before him, and burneth up his enemies round about.” By “terrific light,” she may refer to the conversion of St. Paul, who as related in Acts 9:3-8, was temporarily blinded by a heavenly light en route to Damascus.

MME alludes to Deuteronomy 29:29: “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.” By “the belief of a final restoration,” she may refer to the Calvinistic doctrine set forth in the creed in The Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary of Andover, “that the souls of believers are at their death made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; that their bodies, being still united to CHRIST, will at the resurrection be raised up to glory” NA_Andover_Constitution81 Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Seminary in Andover. . . mAndover Constitution Farrand, Mallory Boston 1808 cit pp34 .

Both the Monthly Anthology and the Panoplist writers accused the other of bigotry and mendaciousness. The Anthologist’s liberal theological position regarded the restrictive creed required of Andover Seminary professors to be Hopkinsian (rather than strictly Calvinist, as the Panoplist claimed) and also “bigoted,” because it excluded other theological approaches or thinking, and mendacious because the Panoplist characterized the creed as Calvinist: “We think it requires no common intrepidity for any man to stand forward and assert the complete and absolute identity of Calvinism and Hopkinsianism. If it were only said that Calvinists, if they were consistent, would be Hopkinsians, and if they were true to their principles, they ought to go to all their consequences with the Hopkinsians, there would be some plausibility in the proposition. But to risk their whole cause on their ability to show, that the Hopkinsians maintain only the principles acknowledged and defended in the writings and standards of Calvinism, we think can proceed only from absolute desperation.” The Anthologist similarly criticized the strict adherence to the creeds required of its professors by the recently founded Andover Theological Seminary: “We think that any man, who is not a bigot to his own opinions, may rejoice in the foundation of an institution, even though by those who differ from himself, where these and all other opinions are to be fairly and freely examined; and yet with perfect consistency condemn a seminary, from which all freedom of inquiry, at least in the instructors, must be for ever excluded” NA_Monthly_Defence96 Defence: Of the Review of the Constitution and Associate Statutes of the Theological Institution at Andover Monthly Anthology, and Boston Review aDefence: Of the Review page194-205 1809 March vol6 issue3 pp194205194–205 cit pp198, 195 . Continuing to insist that its “Creed is strictly Calvinistic NA_Panoplist_ReviewFeb99 Review of Reviews. Farther Remarks on the Theological Institution in Andover, Occasioned by the Review of its Constitution and Statutes, in the Monthly Anthology Panoplist and Missionary Magazine aReview February page413-24 1809 February vol1 issue9 pp413424413–24 cit pp416 and that the liberal Anthologists were the hypocrites, the Panoplist responded: “The very men, who affect this indifference [to doctrines of revelation], and maintain its necessity in religion, are among the greatest bigots to their own modes of thinking, and commonly the most illiberal in their opposition to those, who differ from them” NA_Panoplist_ReviewMar100 Review of Reviews. Farther Remarks on the Theological Institution, in Andover, Occasioned by the Review of its Constitution and Statutes, in the Monthly Anthology Panoplist and Missionary Magazine aReview March page471-81 1809 March vol1 issue10 pp471481471–81 cit pp477 . MME may refer to herself or the author of this review as “uninitiated” into the “truth” of the Hopkinsian position; in either case she seems to advocate for truth over bigotry.

MME may be commonplacing from Jane West’s Letters to a Young Lady: “‘Heresies,’ as the venerable Bishop Horne observes, ‘however defeated, however triumphantly answered, are only conquered for a time. They seem to make their periodical revolutions in the church, like comets in the heavens, now disappearing, and now appearing again in their erratic course.’ Can this be wondered at? It is the spirit of the mystery of iniquity, which always speaks; and when the old embroidered suit of popery is worn thread-bare, it will dispute in the quaint garb of puritanism. Theological controversy, considered in its best light, I mean as keeping alive a zeal for religion, is even then a most humiliating proof of human imperfection, and shews that we are still at an immense distance from possessing that peace which Christ bequeathed to us” West_Letters151 Letters to a Young Lady, in which the Duties and Character of Women are Considered, Chiefly with a Reference to Prevailing Opinions West, mLetters West Jane O. Penniman Troy 1806 cit pp2:92 .

MME had expressed her restlessness in Boston to Mary Wilder Van Schalkwyck White in the spring of 1809, writing that “I intend going to Waterford & indeed expected to have been there almost by this time, but my brother persuades me from one time to another to put it off and thinks Boston the best place on most accounts. And (I dont exactly know how to account for it) I am so indecided, so indifferent as to the place of my abode, that I form no plans and seem to be the most at loose ends of all the world” Simmons_SL130 Selected Letters of Mary Moody Emerson Simmons, mSelected Letters Emerson Mary Moody Simmons Nancy Craig University of Georgia Press Athens 1993 cit pp42-43 . Her sisters, Phebe Bliss Emerson Ripley, with her husband Lincoln Ripley, and Rebecca Emerson Haskins, with her husband Robert Haskins, lived in Waterford, and MME resided there primarily with the Haskins. According to Phyllis Cole, MME preferred the more rural independence of Waterford, where “Baptists and Methodists abounded,” and which therefore provided a greater degree of intellectual freedom than she had heretofore known when lodging with her brother William, a Unitarian minister in liberal Boston. She remained here through the entirety of 1810 Cole_MME21 Mary Moody Emerson and the Origins of Transcendentalism Cole, mMary Moody Emerson Cole Phyllis Oxford University Press New York 1998 cit pp130-131 .