Unmasking Religious Hypocrisy
1
How Jonathan Edwards Unmasks Religious Hypocrisy
Bruce W. Davidson
Abstract
Uncovering the evil of religious hypocrisy was a persistent concern in the writings
and career of Jonathan Edwards, the American theologian and philosopher (17031758). In his view, the essence of all evil and the root of all hypocrisy was narcissism.
Edwards considered that the faith of false converts arose from purely self-centered
concerns. Naturally the hypocrite often had a high degree of self-confidence –what
people nowadays would call high self-esteem. Edwards discovered in scripture and in
his own observations a set of signs that often reveals the presence of religious
hypocrisy. One was an overriding concern for emotional and mystical experiences
rather than moral life and character. Self-centeredness also led the hypocrite away
from the realm of objective truth and rationality. Usually the religious hypocrite
embraces a customized theology, fashioning a deity and a religious life that suits him.
In contrast, authentic piety springs from genuine love for God that goes beyond
simple self-interest and manifests its reality in the form of a consistent, transformed
life and character that stands the test of time. If he were alive today, Edwards would
probably see the mystical and psychotherapeutic trends of the contemporary world as
an encouragement to self-delusion and religious hypocrisy.
Key words: religion, hypocrisy, self-esteem, narcissism, psychology, psychotherapy
*****
1. Introduction
History often shows dramatic shifts in the usage and meaning of certain
words. Two that come to my mind are the words wicked and hypocrisy. Both have
changed dramatically in the last two hundred and fifty years, since the time of the
American theologian and church leader Jonathan Edwards. The word wicked seems
largely to have gone out of use, except as a term of praise among British youth or as
the name of a popular contemporary musical. In place of this word, psychotherapeutic
terminology and concepts such as psychotic have come into vogue. Psychiatrist Garth
Wood complains about this subtle change in usage: ‘It serves no purpose to regard an
aggressive psychopath or sociopath as being psychologically diseased. We already
have a perfectly good concept to explain and describe their moral bankruptcy. It is the
notion of evil. . .extreme wickedness. . . and we would not confuse evil with
disease’.1 In contrast, the word hypocrisy but continues today in common usage but
has perhaps seen a subtle shift in meaning.
Rather than confessing wickedness, people nowadays often testify to
addiction, “co-dependence,” low self-esteem, or other psychological maladies. In
many respects, people tend to look upon themselves as the victims of psychological
and social forces upon their personalities instead of as responsible agents of their own
evil. Unlike many modern people, Jonathan Edwards was not afraid to face the dark
side of human existence and apply the word wicked to people and actions. The word
appears frequently in his writings, as does the word hypocrisy. The element of
subtlety and deception was what most interested him about human wickedness. His
special insights concern the devious nature of wickedness, especially in the realm of
religious belief. Perhaps his magnum opus is A Treatise on the Religious Affections,
Unmasking Religious Hypocrisy
2
which stands as perhaps the most penetrating attempt to sort out true and false piety in
religious history. From this and other works we can glean insights for unmasking the
presence of hypocritical piety. Edwards took a theocentric concept of wickedness and
hypocrisy rather than simply an anthropocentric one. He also took a psychological
view of it, as opposed to simply a moral perspective. That is to say, he saw the heart
as the primary locus of evil.
Essentially, Edwards saw religious hypocrisy as the outgrowth of narcissism.
He identified various signs by which one might be able to recognize it in individuals
professing religious belief. All of them are telltale signs of self-centeredness. The true
convert, in Edwards’s view, manifest the marks of love for God not solely arising from
self-interest. In this paper I will look at Edwards’s ideas about hypocrisy and the
nature of human evil. After that, I will look at some prominent attributes of false piety
in Edwards’s analysis and draw out some implications of Edwards’s thought for
contemporary people.
2. Historical Background
A number of personal, pastoral, and historical events fed into Edwards’s
determination to take up the topic of authentic piety versus religious hypocrisy. His
own personal religious pilgrimage was a complicated one. By his own account,
Edwards “got religion” in his early teens and began zealously preaching to his
childhood friends. However, during this time he retained an antipathy to various ideas
in Christianity, such as the ideas of hell and predestination. Eventually his zeal waned
and his lost interest in religion. However, he testifies that during young adulthood he
experienced a religious conversion of an entirely different sort, which led him to
regard his previous religious experience as spurious. This new experience led him to
feel profoundly drawn toward God himself apart from considerations of personal
salvation. Contemplating the verse ‘Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible,
the only wise God. . .’ (1 Timothy 1:17) seemed to trigger his new experience of
reverence toward God. In many ways both these experiences –the superficial earlier
religiosity and the later conversion- became models for Edwards’s descriptions of
hypocrisy and authentic faith.
During his tenure as pastor in Northhampton, Edwards witnessed a number of
relgious revivals and their aftermaths. Though he started out very optimistic about the
authenticity of the conversions during theses revivals, he gradually moved from a
positive to a negative orientation about many of the conversions. His earlier works
about the revivals are mostly apologetic, answering critics of the revivals. These
earlier works do not appreciate the danger of hypocrisy in the way that his later ones
do. However, as uncontrolled fanaticism began to increase among revivalists and the
lives of a number of converts seemed to remain unchanged, eventually Edwards
became skeptical of the reality of the experiences of many of the supposed converts.
Chamberlain sees Edwards’s pastoral concern about hypocrisy as a more
significant motivation for his works such as A Treatise on the Religious Affections
than his desire to defend the revivals from critics within the churches.2 Furthermore,
She notes that in modern discourse, the term hypocrisy often means people who
openly and blatantly live in a way that contradicts their profession of religious belief,
whereas in Edwards’s time the term often was applied to subtle instances of religious
self-delusion, not openly scandalous inconsistency. Edwards appears to have been
influenced by the views of the earlier Puritan Thomas Shephard, who also dealt with
the religious fanaticism and preached pastoral sermons about distinguishing true and
false piety.3 The Puritans in general often took up the topic of discerning spurious
piety.
Unmasking Religious Hypocrisy
3
Another influence on Edwards was his response to philosophical currents of
his time, such as deism and ethical humanists such as Francis Hutcheson. Hutcheson
advocated a kind of ethical narcissism:
Where Virtue costs us much its own pleasures are the more sublime. . . These
moral pleasures do some way more nearly affect us than any other. They make us
delight in ourselves and relish our very nature. By these we perceive an internal
dignity and worth and seem to have a pleasure like to that ascribed often to the
Deity, by which we enjoy our own Perfection. . .4
However, from Edwards’s point of view Hutcheson’s description just shows how ‘the
unregenerate characteristically make themselves their last end, and make their own
happiness their chief good, to which they subordinate God’, as Stoever explains.5
3. The Roots of Real Godliness and Hypocrisy
In Edwards’s worldview, the world breaks down into people ‘that love God or
those that are his enemies’.6 The godly have real love for God, while hypocrites have
only love for themselves, which hides under a cover of bogus piety. The devil accused
Job of having just that sort of piety.7 Chamberlain labels Edwards’s approach to
discerning the difference between the two as the ‘devil-comparison method’. That is,
the devil can counterfeit almost every characteristic of piety except the sort of love for
God that the authentically pious experience.8 The love that real believer has is unique
in respect to its object: God’s holiness. In an unpublished sermon named ‘True Saints
Differ From All the World’, Edwards explains, ‘the Spirit of God is his personal love.
And this infinite love is the infinite holiness of God, as Christ is the wisdom of God:
for all holiness consists in love.’9 In the same sermon Edwards asks his listeners if they
are familiar in an experiential way with. ‘that supreme excellency and sweetness there
is in holiness’.10 This should be a continuing experience and not a transitory one,
resulting in an frame of mind akin to that of the Beatitudes –not complacent but
thirsting for greater personal sanctity and closeness to God, humble with a sense of
one’s sinfulness, etc.11 This attitude of mind is primarily directed toward God himself
and not toward oneself or the eyes of others. Only an act of God’s sovereign, free
grace produces this attitude in the heart.
The hearts of hypocrites are another matter. Interestingly, Edwards’s account
of original sin traces it solely to unfettered self-love turned malignant. No evil principle
of action was introduced; narcissism by itself was able to do all the work of bringing
mankind down. As Gerstner explains, ‘The most fundamental Edwardsian conception
of sin is as self-love without God. . . . this was the root of all evil. . . No infusion or
transfusion of corruption was necessary. . . ‘12A more modern way of putting it is that
all human evil is essentially narcissism. I use the term not in the clinical sense of
Narcissistic Personality Disorder but in its classical meaning of self-absorption,
which in Edwards’s conception all people experience to at least some degree.
According to Edwards, what psychologists now label as the disease of narcissism is
just an extreme case of a problem we all have. In his words, ‘the whole of the
corruption. . . may be resolved into an inordinate self-love.’13 In its most extreme,
visible form, narcissism ‘will dispose one to delight in another’s misery, because selflove seeks its own comparative happiness . . . Self-love will delight in cruelty and
putting others to pain, because it appears to it as an exercise of power . . .’14
One manifestation of this universal condition is a kind of love for God arising
from a self-centered religiosity. The religious hypocrite loves God only because he
Unmasking Religious Hypocrisy
4
perceives that God can enhance his own status or further his own desires, in Edwards’s
view:
. . . as the love and joy of hypocrites, are all from the source of self-love; so it is with
their other affections. . . everything is as it were paid for beforehand, in God's highly
gratifying their self-love, and their lusts, by making so much of them, and exalting
them so highly, as things are in their imagination. 'Tis easy for nature, as corrupt as it
is, under a notion of being already some of the highest favorites of heaven, and
having a God who does so protect 'em and favor 'em in their sins, to love this
imaginary God that suits 'em so well, and to extol him, and submit to him, and to be
fierce and zealous for him. The high affections of many are all built on the
supposition of their being eminent saints.15
They assume a stance of utilitarianism about religious belief. God serves chiefly as a
platform for displaying and enjoying their own virtue and spirituality.
4. Symptoms of Religious Hypocrisy
It follows that various concrete and observable signs can reveal this
narcissistic orientation to religious practice and expression. First of all, Edwards
considered that those who are obviously impressed with their own conversion stories
and religious experiences are likely to be hypocrites, so a preening, self-centered
tendency to refer constantly to oneself was a bad sign. Hypocrites often imagine that
God is as impressed by their religious emotions and performances as they are. So
their religion tends in the direction of self-righteousness: ‘All false religion, all the
religion of hypocrites, is of that nature and tendency. ’Tis one of the greatest
distinctions . . . between true religion and all its counterfeits –that way of trusting in
our own righteousness.’16 Ironically, at the same time hypocrites have no interest in
experiencing the real holiness of Christ, either as something to contemplate with
enjoyment or as something to imitate themselves.17
From their narcissism often comes a mysticism that eschews any objective,
rational referent for faith. On the basis of his inclinations, the hypocrite embraces a
customized deity that suits him. While the true convert values the truth in a rational
way, ‘sanctifying and assisting their reason to search out the meaning of Scripture’,
false faith ‘sets up other things, and finally to bring the Scripture into contempt’.18
Irrational mysticism affords religious narcissists more scope to take center stage in
defining the nature of God and faith. They often have experiences they cannot explain
in words –‘an unaccountable persuasion that their minds are suddenly possessed with
that they can give no reason for’.19
A similar irrationality appears in their lives, which tend to be marked by a
great deal of variation and inconsistency over time. Ultimately, they do not really
change much as a result of their newfound faith:
Men may have alterations of their ideas, and a great many changes in what passes
in their minds, and in their feeling, and in their affections, and yet they not be
changed. Everything that is new and extraordinary in a man’s mind, don’t change
the man, any more than putting on a new garment, or going into another room.
There are many new ideas that men have excited in ‘em, and new affections, and
very strange and extraordinary feelings, that don’t change the man to make him
new. . . 20
Unmasking Religious Hypocrisy
5
One example of such glaring inconsistency would be refusing to restore what one has
wrongly taken from someone else, an important proof of genuine repentance.21
Another would be the neglect of a private prayer life.22 In one sermon titled ‘Wicked
Men Inconsistent with Themselves’, Edwards enlarges on this tendency:
They choose and refuse the same things. . They pray for conversion but they do
not leave their sins. They want humility but persist in pride. They want to come
to Chirst they say but not to the whole Christ. They prefer heaven but they
choose hell. They dislike things as they are but they refuse to have them
otherwise. They dislike God as He is but they wouldn’t have Him otherwise.23
‘They dislike God as He is’ -not only their behavior but their religious
ideology has a certain arbitrariness to it. Hypocrites tend to fashion for themselves an
image of deity that they can feel comfortable with. Ideas unattractive to them such as
divine wrath and absolute sovereignty might fall victim to a theological reworking.24
5. Conclusion and Implications
Jonathan Edwards’s recognition of the subtle, devious, and self-deluding
nature of self-love in relation to religious hypocrisy was far ahead of his time. He had
many insights that modern psychologists are only now catching up with. In recent
years research psychologists have undermined the widespread belief in the benefits of
self-love and high self-esteem. Instead, research has revealed that high self-esteem
encourages violence among criminals and narcissistic self-delusion among college
students. For purposes of self-justification and ego-protection, even memory has been
shown to play amazing tricks of self-deception. As a result of hypnosis or counseling,
people have created memories of victimization that never occurred, and they often
cling to them even after their falsehood is revealed –a condition called False Memory
Syndrome. Unfortunately, humanistic psychotherapy and popular psychology in
general have encouraged these problems. For many years, a naïve faith was placed in
the therapeutic power of self-love. Now many are finding that self-love can lead to
delusions and destructive behavior.25 Edwards was right to see unbridled self-love as
a root of great evil, including religious hypocrisy.
Yet ironically, at the very time when self-centered popular psychology is
being undermined by scientific inquiry, self-esteem ideology and self-centered
mysticism are making great headway in the realm of religious belief. Many reject any
objective standard for evaluating their experiences and instead launch into uncharted
seas of self-centered piety and religious innovation. Churches often embrace
psychotherapy focusing on individual feelings and market techniques for attaining a
state of higher consciousness rather than teaching religious ideas or morality. Even in
popular culture, one finds examples of narcissistic religious thinking, such as the
book and movie Eat, Pray, Love, in which the main character encounters God as an
entity that simply ratifies her own personal inclinations and pursuit of selfactualization.26
Edwards clearly explicates the dangers of a neo-Romantic exaltation of
feeling over reason, having observed that strong emotions do not necessarily
demonstrate religious sincerity or a truly transformed character. He urges an emphasis
of God over self and transcendent truth over personal feeling After all, the great
religions once aimed at raising our eyes to something far beyond our limited selves.
Garth Wood, The Myth of Neurosis: Overcoming the Illness Excuse (New York: Harper and Row,
1986). 2
2 Ava Chamberlain, ‘Brides of Christ and Signs of Grace’ in Jonathan Edwards’s Writings: Text,
Context, Interpretation (ed. Stephen J. Stein; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996) 3-18.
3 William Stoever, ‘The Godly Will’s Discerning: Shephard, Edwards, and the Identification of True
Godliness’, in Jonathan Edwards’s Writings: Text, Context, Interpretation (ed. Stephen J. Stein;
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996) 85-99.
4 From the ‘Essay on the Passions’, quoted in William Robert Scott, Francis Hutcheson by (New York:
Augustus M Kelley, 1966) 159.
5 Stoever, ‘The Godly Will’s Discerning’ 87.
6 Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, vol. 25: Sermons and Discourses 1743-1758 (ed.
Wilson H. Kimnach; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992) 523-524.
7 Ibid. 531.
8 Ava Chamberlain, ‘Jonathan Edwards on the Relation between Hypocrisy and the Religious Life’ in
Perspectives on American Religion and Culture (ed. Peter W. Williams; Edinburgh: Blackwell, 1999)
342.
9 Unpublished sermon ‘True Saints Differ From All the World’ on John 14:7. Number 831 (preached
July 1746) from the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University.
10 Ibid.
11 Unpublished sermon ‘The Parable of the Net’ on Matthew 13:47-50. Number 821 (preached 1746,
III) from the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University.
12 John H. Gerstner, The Rational Biblical Theology of Jonathan Edwards vol. 2 (Powhaten: Berea
Publications, 1993) 336.
13 Jonathan Edwards, The Blessing of God: Previously Unpublished Sermons of Jonathan Edwards (ed.
Michael McMullen; Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2003) 333.
14Edwards, Works 18:78.
15 Edwards, Works 2:253.
16 Unpublished sermon on Matt. 21:31 “Self-righteousness”. Number 859 (preached January 1747)
from the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University.
17 Jonathan Edwards, The Blessing of God 366.
18 Edwards, Works 25: 309-310.
19 Ibid. 304.
20Unpublished sermon on 1 Corinthians 6:11 “The Work of God in the Heart Not a Whim But a
Reality”. Number 859 (preached March 1747) from the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University.
21 “Duty of Restitution” unpublished sermon on Luke 19:8-9. Number 823 (preached May, 1746) from
the Jonathan Edwards Center at Yale University.
22 Jonathan Edwards The True Believer (ed. Don Kistler; Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 2001) 50.
23 Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards vol. 2 (ed. E. Hickman; Edinburgh: The Banner
of Truth Trust, 1834) 920.
24 Bruce W. Davidson, “The Four Faces of Self-love in the Theology of Jonathan Edwards,” Journal of
the Evangelical Theological Society 51:1 (2008) 47-56.
25 Roy F. Baumeister, Jennifer D. Campbell, Joachim I. Krueger, and Kathleen D. Vohs, ‘Exploding the
Self-Esteem Myth’ in Scientific American (January, 2005); Jean M. Twenge and W. Keith Campbell,
The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement (New York: Free Press, 2009).
26 Elizabeth Gilbert, Eat, Pray, Love: One Woman's Search for Everything Across Italy, India and
Indonesia (New York: Penguin, 2007).
1