hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
New England (United States) 416 0 Browse Search
United States (United States) 294 0 Browse Search
James Cooper 208 0 Browse Search
Washington Irving 194 0 Browse Search
I. Bryant 172 0 Browse Search
Benjamin Franklin 143 1 Browse Search
Jonathan Edwards 138 0 Browse Search
Europe 130 0 Browse Search
Pennsylvania (Pennsylvania, United States) 108 0 Browse Search
Massachusetts (Massachusetts, United States) 78 0 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of Cambridge History of American Literature: volume 1, Colonial and Revolutionary Literature: Early National Literature: Part I (ed. Trent, William Peterfield, 1862-1939., Erskine, John, 1879-1951., Sherman, Stuart Pratt, 1881-1926., Van Doren, Carl, 1885-1950.). Search the whole document.

Found 145 total hits in 46 results.

1 2 3 4 5
Ralph Waldo Emerson (search for this): chapter 1.5
ion. One cannot avoid the feeling, when his writings are surveyed as a whole, that in his service to a particular dogma of religion Edwards deliberately threw away the opportunity of making for himself, despite the laxness of his style, one of the very great names in literature. It should seem also that he not only suppressed his personal ecstasy in his works for the press, but waived it largely in his more direct intercourse with men. He who himself, like an earlier and perhaps greater Emerson, was enjoying the sweetness of walking with God in the garden of earth, was much addicted to holding up before his people the pleasant, bright, and sweet doctrine of damnation. Nor can it be denied that he had startling ways of impressing this sweetness on others. It is a misfortune, but one for which he is himself responsible, that his memory in the popular mind today is almost exclusively associated with certain brimstone sermons and their terrific effect. Best known of these is the di
Wills (search for this): chapter 1.5
s he had divided the soul into two faculties: one called the understanding, by which it discerns, views, and judges things; the other called the heart or will, being nothing else but the inclination of the soul towards or the disinclination from what is discerned and judged by the understanding. In the Freedom of the will he starts with Locke's statement that the Will is perfectly distinguished from Desire, which in the very same action may have a quite contrary tendency from that which our Wills set us upon. This theory Edwards analyses and rejects, and then proceeds to show that a man's desire and will are virtually the same faculty of the soul. It follows from this that the will at any moment is determined by the strongest motive acting upon the soul; we are free in so far as no obstacle is presented to our willing in accordance with our inclination, but our inclination is determined by what at any moment seems to us good. In his attack on the common arguments for the freedom
James Franklin (search for this): chapter 1.5
God. his preaching. the great Awakening. narrative of surprising Conversions. thoughts on the revival of religion. marks of a work of the true spirit. treatise concerning religious affections. the quarrel with the Northampton congregation. Stockbridge. President of the College of New Jersey. death. the relations of Edwards to the deistic controversy. the freedom of the will Jonathan Edwards was born at Windsor, Connecticut, in 1703. He belonged, unlike his great contemporary Franklin in this, to the Brahmin families of America, his father being a distinguished graduate of Harvard and a minister of high standing, his mother being the daughter of Solomon Stoddard, a revered pastor of Northampton, Massachusetts, and a religious author of repute. Jonathan, one of eleven children, showed extraordinary precocity. There is preserved a letter of his, written apparently in his twelfth year, in which he retorts upon certain materialistic opinions of his correspondent with an ea
Sarah Pierrepont (search for this): chapter 1.5
the Berkeleian idealism left off. After graduation Edwards remained for two years at Yale, preparing for the ministry. In 1722 he was called to a Presbyterian church in New York. Here he preached acceptably for eight months, returning then to his father's house, and later to New Haven, where he held the position of tutor in the college. In 1727 he went to Northampton as colleague, and became in due time successor, to his grandfather. Almost immediately after ordination he married Sarah Pierrepont, like himself of the Brahmin caste, whom he had known as a young girl, and whose beauty of body and soul he had described in a passage of ecstatic wonder. They say, he began, being himself then twenty and the object of his adoration thirteen, there is a young lady in New Haven who is beloved of that great Being who made and rules the world, and that there are certain seasons in which this great Being, in some way or other invisible, comes to her and fills her mind with exceeding swee
John Norris (search for this): chapter 1.5
life; yet there is perhaps another way of escape, which, if it does not entirely silence the metaphysical difficulties, at least gives them a new ethical turn. Twice in the course of his argument Edwards refers to an unnamed Arminian Edwards, it should seem, had immediately in mind the Essay on the freedom of Will in God and the Creature of Isaac Watts; but the notion had been discussed at length by Locke (Essay II, xxi), and at an earlier date had been touched on with great acumen by John Norris in his correspondence with Henry More. who placed the liberty of the soul not in the will itself, but in some power of suspending volition until due time has elapsed for judging properly the various motives to action. His reply is that this suspension of activity, being itself an act of volition, merely throws back without annulling the difficulty; and as the argument came to him, this refutation is fairly complete. But a fuller consideration of the point at issue might possibly indicat
William Berkeley (search for this): chapter 1.5
in some newly discovered treasure. Some time after reading Locke and before graduation he wrote down a series of reflections, preparatory to a great metaphysical treatise of his own, which can be compared only with the Commonplace Book kept by Berkeley a few years earlier for the same purpose. In the section of Notes on the mind this entry is found: Our perceptions or ideas, that we passively receive by our bodies, are communicated to us immediately by God. Now Berkeley's Principles and hisBerkeley's Principles and his Hylas and Philonous appeared in 171O and 1713 respectively, and the question has been raised, and not answered, whether this Berkeleian sentiment was borrowed from one of these books or was original with Edwards. Possibly the youthful philosopher was following a line of thought suggested by the English disciples of Malebranche, possibly he reached his point of view directly from Locke; in any case his life-work was to carry on the Lockian philosophy from the point where the Berkeleian idealism
Laurentius Valla (search for this): chapter 1.5
m; he is, like ourselves, a channel, not the source. The only difference is that God has complete knowledge of the possibilities of being, and therefore is not moved by threats and blind commands but, immediately, by what Edwards elsewhere calls the moral necessity of governing in accordance with the best of the different objects of choice that are proposed to the Divine Understanding. By such a scheme God is really placed in about such a position as in the Leibnitzian continuation of Laurentius Valla's Dialogue on free will and Providence, where he is naively portrayed as looking upon an infinite variety of worlds piled up, like cannon balls, in pyramidal form before him, and selecting for creation that one which combines the greatest possible amount of good with the least possible admixture of evil. From this pretty sport of the imagination Edwards would no doubt have drawn back in contempt, and indeed in his ordinary language God is merely the supreme Cause, without further spe
Commonplace Book (search for this): chapter 1.5
0, before his seventeenth birthday. While at college he continued his interest in scientific observations, but his main concern was naturally with theology and moral philosophy. As a sophomore he read Locke On the human understanding, with the delight of a greedy miser in some newly discovered treasure. Some time after reading Locke and before graduation he wrote down a series of reflections, preparatory to a great metaphysical treatise of his own, which can be compared only with the Commonplace Book kept by Berkeley a few years earlier for the same purpose. In the section of Notes on the mind this entry is found: Our perceptions or ideas, that we passively receive by our bodies, are communicated to us immediately by God. Now Berkeley's Principles and his Hylas and Philonous appeared in 171O and 1713 respectively, and the question has been raised, and not answered, whether this Berkeleian sentiment was borrowed from one of these books or was original with Edwards. Possibly the y
Jonathan Edwards (search for this): chapter 1.5
Chapter 4: Edwards Paul Elmer More, A. M., Ll.D., Formerly Editor of The Nation. Edward controversy. the freedom of the will Jonathan Edwards was born at Windsor, Connecticut, in 1703eleian idealism left off. After graduation Edwards remained for two years at Yale, preparing foroon began to tell on the people. In 1733, as Edwards notes in his Narrative of surprising Conversiediately after the story of the young convert Edwards notes that the Spirit of God was gradually wihat, notwithstanding his verbal reservations, Edwards had no critical canon to distinguish between e of New Jersey to succeed him as president. Edwards hesitated, stating frankly to the Trustees hifered an easy mark for so sharp a logician as Edwards. But whence arise the conditions by which t of hatred as that which we feel for Judas? Edwards had terrified the people of Enfield with a pi above his predecessor. Few men have studied Edwards without recognizing the force and honesty of [31 more...]
George Berkeley (search for this): chapter 1.5
consequences and being impelled by no momentary preponderance of the one or the other from his innate disposition, deliberately and freely chooses what is evil and painful. Such an account of human action is monstrous, inconceivable; it offered an easy mark for so sharp a logician as Edwards. But whence arise the conditions by which a man's inclination is swayed in one direction or the other? Edwards carries these unflinchingly up to the first cause,--that is, as a Christian, to God. Berkeley had made the world to consist of ideas evoked in the mind of man by the mind of God; Edwards accepts the logical conclusion, and holds God responsible for the inclination of the human will which depends on these ideas. Calvin did not hesitate to attribute, in the bluntest language, the source of evil to God's will, but at the same time he warned men against intruding with their finite reason into this sanctuary of the divine wisdom. The mind of Edwards could not rest while any problem see
1 2 3 4 5