Emerson: A Pale Shade of Gray from a Personal Perspective
Placed next to each other, the absolute darkness draws attention to the utter brightness, and the other way around. This disparity becomes even more apparent when comparing the works of Jonathan Edwards and Thomas Paine, both of whom advocated strong Calvinism. There are many shades of gray in between these extremes, and Ralph Waldo Emerson offers one that conveys his personal religious convictions while also accepting the idea of subjectivity. Thematically and rhetorically, Emerson shares certain similarities with Paine and Edwards, although he obviously deviates from their extremes. His tone and thoughts on human agency show how he answers to the Paine-Edwards contradiction with a subjective, liberating spirituality.
Edwards and Paine have sharply divergent views on the topic of human agency. Because "carnal man" (Edwards' term) is so terrible and pitiful (p. 98), he will be lost without organized religion, according to Edwards. Humans are responsible for obeying and repenting (90), but even if they do so, God has the final say on whether or not they are saved. "All national institutions of churches," as Paine puts it, "enslave men" (666). As a substitute, he turns to his own inner relationship with God: "My own thought is my own church" (666). As long as men are "mentally faithful to themselves," they have the freedom to worship the God of their choice. Paine, on the other hand, empowers the individual to take action and worship on his or her own terms, whereas Edwards does not. A similar sentiment is expressed by Emerson: "Go alone...refuse the good models... and dare to embrace God without mediator or veil" (114). With that, he also grants man a great lot more agency for action, which is reminiscent of the writings of Paine but distinct from Edwards'.
Emerson, on the other hand, takes Paine's man's freedom a step farther, venturing into new area uncharted by Edwards-Paine. Anyone can become the "New Teacher" and help others realize the truth according to Emerson, while Paine talks about man's liberty in terms of personal worship (117). That is why Emerson believes that the power and potential that a person has is directly related to his or her choice of worship. That which displays God in me, fortifies me." Emerson sees divinity in man far more clearly than Paine and Edwards. I become a "wart and a wen" if I show God out of me (108). Human potential for genuine humanity and greatness is immense, thanks to the power of God within us and our ability to behave authentically to ourselves (31). When it comes to human potential, Paine and Edwards offer two very different viewpoints. Emerson, on the other hand, offers a much more empowering and exalted view of mankind than Paine does.
The Paine-Edwards binary is further complicated by differences in vocal style, particularly in terms of tone and technique.
Edwards' voice aims to induce terror in those who hear it. His use of repetition will not allow the audience to avoid the idea that evil man should be very terrified of his enraged God.' To evoke strong feelings, Edwards use metaphorical language and precise diction. As an example, he describes the fires of hell (92), compares man to a worm (90, 98, 99), and utilizes very absolute diction, such as "everlasting" and "utmost scorn" (90). As an added touch, Edwards addresses the assembly personally as "you," mentioning members of every age group in his lamentation on the sorry state of mankind (104). His route to salvation has been welcomed by all of Edwards' listeners, who have been subject to all of these mentioned horrors. As a result, he gets the results he wants by speaking in an empathic manner.
Paine, on the other hand, uses reasoning and evidence to prove his points. If you're going to use the Bible as an example of proof against itself, you're going to have to do it in an objective way. To establish his case, he begins by describing what he intends to accomplish, and then provides the "proof" that backs it up (736). "For what can be greater blasphemy than to attribute the depravity of man to the orders of the Almighty?" asks Paine in his claim that the Bible is a book of lies, wickedness, and blasphemy (747). With Edwards' heated rhetoric, Paine uses reason and logic in a very different way.
Emotion or reasoning are not Emerson's only sources of inspiration. In other words, his tone is academic, but it still has a degree of emotion. Emerson's worldview is not based on logic or objective reason, as Paine's is: in Emerson's opinion, contradicting oneself is fine (24). Emerson, on the other hand, is able to articulate his ideas in great depth and establish an intellectual system, which lends his voice some credibility. By doing this, he breaks away from the expository attitude and includes the reader without pressuring him or her to choose a side. As a result of Emerson's emphasis on man's power and potential, the reader is more likely to accept his views. The reader is included in Emerson's work, although he does so in a different way than Edwards. As Emerson seeks to break free from the constraints of conformity, Edwards utilizes this tactic to scare the listener into submission. Similarly to Edwards, Emerson also makes use of imagery, but he does it in order to convey a sense of awe and wonder: "The cool night bathes the globe like a river, and prepares his sight for the red sunrise" (103). Emerson's enthusiasm for his subject comes through in passages like these, in which he expresses his admiration for human nature and the essence of the human person. There is a sense of intellectualism to his delivery while yet conveying a strong sense of personal agency.
Because he admits subjectivity, Emerson's ideas and tone defy the rigorous religious orthodoxy and rationalism dichotomy. When it comes to explaining why they are correct and others are incorrect, Edwards and Paine excel. Readers who disagree with Edwards are condemned to eternal damnation, while those who disagree with Paine are condemned to irrational indifference. Paine's position on "the Right of every Man to his own opinion" (665) and his refusal to "condemn" individuals who hold opposing views make him appear subjective and relative (666). It's clear from his description of Christianity as a "fable" (671), his criticism of the absence of historical evidence (670), his claim that it has desecrated God (673), and his hatred of it for "corrupting and brutalizing people" (677) that he believes this religion is erroneous and even harmful.. Christian readers of Paine can be sure that their faith will find no place in his writings. That is why Paine does not accept beliefs that crumble under the "weapon" of "Reason" that he wields (665). There is no room for anyone with religious ideas that differ from their own in Paine or Edwards' works.
Emerson, on the other hand, is more tolerant of differing viewpoints. However, Emerson does not declare that Christianity is "bad" or "evil" in his recommendation to "refuse the good models," as Paine did. Christian virtue is valued because it leads to "religious sensibility," and the purity of its representations is sacred and permanent in proportion to its purity, he argues (106). One of the many magnificent spiritual possibilities for man, according to Emerson (106), is the pure Christian expression shown by Jesus. As long as a person behaves in accordance with his or her own definition of what is right, good, and pure, he or she will experience the full potential of man. Emerson must accept subjectivity since every man makes his own decisions about how to spend his life, what he will do, and what he will believe.
Edwards, Paine, and Emerson's works would all be identifiable if three unidentified items were examined. There would be a clear divide between Edwards and Paine, both in terms of ideology and tone. An angry God and a wicked man would be described by Edwards in a highly emotional and frightened tone. Paine, on the other hand, would allow man to follow a religion of the mind, but he would dismiss Christianity by logic and 'proof.' For Emerson, however, there is no need to go either way. As a result, he would allow for the existence of a subjectivity that allows for man's greatness and agency to flourish. As a result, he would argue his position in a way that was intelligent and hopeful. Emerson lends a shade of gray to the black-and-white binaries of Edwards and Thomas through his ideas and presentation of them. This gives him a choice that isn't limited to the extremes.
