The Plagues of Religious Forgetfulness, Apathy, and Ignorance

This morning, I went to attend services at First Churches in Northampton, Mass. The church is a merging of American Baptist and a United Church of Christ congregations, and is a landmark in the town, as it was the home parish of Jonathan Edwards, perhaps the most famous American theologian ever.

Jonathan Edwards is credited with starting and being a major driving force behind the first of the Great Awakenings, or periodic revolutions in American religious thought.

When Edwards came to Northampton to preach in 1727, the American economy was booming and Americans were continually striving for wealth and material goods. Young people especially were often left out of the picture, as wealthy New Englanders had bought up all the land and they had nowhere to build farms to start their lives. The rich also had all the nice pew seats in front of the churches, and the young and destitute were not encouraged to come.

Edwards reached out to these people, and started changes that made American evangelism what it is today. He railed against materialism, reconciled scientific discovery with religious faith, and encouraged simple language in preaching in order to allow the most people to understand it.

Most importantly, however, he brought experiential interpretation of theology that can still be witnessed today. He was also one of the first to preach passionately, rather than lecturing academically from the pulpit. By utilizing a manner full of fire and brimstone, stressing the necessity of “New Birth” conversion to counteract man’s inherent depravity, Edwards brought his adherents to wailing, fainting, and convulsion.

His teachings spread across the country and even across the Atlantic, creating schisms in many Protestant branches and renewing faith in many. It is estimated that during the First Great Awakening, which lasted from around 1730 to 1760, the amount of churches in America almost doubled.

But the First Churches in Northampton is under construction, and was closed:

Its congregation is still meeting, however, and this week was worshipping down the street at Edwards Church, a UCC church started by followers of Edwards as well:

The service was simple with a smattering of hymns and a welcoming sermon from a guest preacher about being ready for God’s grace and learning to admire the beauty of God’s creation.

Afterwards, I walked around the church, and found this timeline, which stretched for many yards, detailing the history of Northampton and the church:

I also found this portrait of Jonathan Edwards:

Edwards Church has many remnants of Edwards’ presence, from pamphlets by the door and a glass case full of memorabilia. But when I asked around to see if someone could talk to me about his continued influence in the church and the town, no one had any idea. As I was trying to get audio, one woman offered to read from a pamphlet for me, but did not have any information herself. In fact, no one could really tell me anything about Edwards or his teachings, but just knew a few dates and figures.

Granted, neither the ministers for Edwards Church or First Churches were present, as they were out of town. But should the clergy be the only ones responsible for keeping the history of the faith?

I’m not saying that the churches should necessarily keep all of the teachings of Edwards, and it certainly doesn’t. Both of the churches are very liberal, with strong emphases on diversity and inclusion regardless of sexual orientation. Edwards would not have liked this, as he made judging others one of his main pastimes. In fact, his parishioners eventually turned him out for judging them too harshly.

But even if the parishioners these days are opposed to the hard-line tactics of their founder, they should at least know what they were — especially in a political and social climate that so clearly has strong influences from the thoughts he introduced.

I would assume that liberal churches such as these would want its message to spread, eventually reaching the more conservative churches that they used to emulate. But does their message hold sway when the people they are trying to reach see them as out of touch and distant from their roots? Can one effectively participate in American public debates without knowing something about Christianity, which is a major talking point for many politicians? How can you argue against a religious point of view without really knowing what it is or where it came from. To be trite, you have to fight fire with fire, and you can’t change religious minds with secular humanism.

But above all, how can we be solid in our faith when we don’t know what it comes from. If we don’t know where we’ve come from as children of God, how can we know where we’re going? If there is no trace of where you’ve been, there’s no proof you’re walking a righteous path, and not just standing in place.

Forgetting religious history or not caring about religious roots is reprehensible, as it turns followers into blind sheep. It’s easy to trust terrible demagogues when there’s not comparison to other truths or interpretations. With only one morsel of grain, it’s impossible to know whether it’s wheat or chaff.

I’ll be returning to Edwards Church tomorrow, and hopefully one of the ministers will be back to shed some light on this. But until then, here’s a quote from Edwards:

“There are two sorts of hypocrites: one that are deceived with their outward morality and external religion; … and the other, are those that are deceived with false discoveries and elevations; who often cry down works, and men’s own righteousness, and talk much of free grace; but at the same time make a righteousness of their discoveries and of their humiliation, and exalt themselves to heaven with them.”