Thomas Paine and Ralph Waldo Emerson can rightfully be called the heads of the transcendentalist movement. Their ideas are nearly identical albeit slightly clouded with a transition in jargon. They wrote about the wonders in nature, defamed the church, and called for the people of the world to open their minds. The main difference is that they lived in two different eras. Paine was the leader of the deist motion in the 18th century, and Emerson was fighting for the transcendentalist motion a century later. However the gap in the era does not strain the similarities and connections between the ideas of the two writers. Joe Webb in his paper Echoes of Paine: Tracing the Age of Reason through the Writings of Emerson, ties these two men together using the ideas of Paine as portrayed in The Age of Reason. The ideology that he expresses can be used as an outline for the life of Emerson, and also express his ideas. From the notion that these two men bore more similarities than what met the eye, it can be reasoned that their ideologies and movements are analogous.

Webb opens his piece with a brief summary of the life of Emerson. He writes that the philosopher has long been considered an influential writer, particularly on the topics of deism, individualism, and obviously transcendentalism. In his writings he captures the ultimate idea behind the transcendentalist motion, that god can be reached and a relationship built with him through nature. Emerson was after an original relation to the universe and existence, using natural science as the one tool to build this with. Paine, who also explained the universe as naturally as possible, was not a personal favorite of Emerson. On numerous occasions Emerson accused Paine of being a blasphemer or infidel.

A bridge between the ideologies of Paine and Emerson can be built upon two words, Reason and Nature. Emerson worshipped nature, feeling that it was the medium in which to experience god. Likewise, Paine worshipped reason and rational though, but in its application it became synonymous with the Nature of Emerson. The tools that Emerson used to experience god, science and observation, manifested in the form of astronomy. This can easily be related to Paine’s view of the world being the evidence of god. These two men attempted to strip the world of the complications imparted by the church.

The ideology of deism that Paine fought for was only a short lived motion, but with The Age of Reason being the last text of the movement, it went out with a bang. The overarching ideas behind the movement were captured in this text, such as the necessity for “intuition” or “dependence upon an imminent life.” These ideas can be nicely translated into the transcendentalist movement. The intuition being the encouragement for seeking god in nature, and the joy in the finding the “mystic ecstasy,” are only two of the connections.

As to suggest a strong possibility that the writings of Paine could have influenced Emerson, or even to have been a source, there are thematic similarities between The Age of Reason and the works of Emerson. Although Paine was out of publication by the time of Emerson, he still was widely read. Emerson who was a Harvard student, most likely would have been exposed to the writings of Paine during his education and given the opportunity to use his thoughts as a springboard. Albeit that Emerson vehemently and openly denied the worth and validity of Paine, this suggests that he had a strong grasp and understanding of his writings. Even though Emerson had a strong public disliking of Paine, he still possessed a wealth of his “infidel” works.

These two thinkers made the demand that the people have open minds to begin their works. They then diverge with Paine attacking the god of the Unitarian church, calling it blight upon morality. As scientific advancements were made, the truthfulness of miracles was brought into question. However, the belief in miracles only strengthened one’s faith in god, even without proof of miracles.

Both Paine and Emerson shared a disliking of the sky hook explanation or miracle explanation of natural phenomena. Paine felt that these beliefs demeaned the purpose and mystique of god all the while portraying the entire religion weak. While Paine’s belief of nature and existence being the one and only miracle was brought into question, he ultimately found that belief in miracles was an admission of lunacy.

Emerson also shared the belief that if God partook in the daily lives of his creations he becomes nothing more than a showman. The ever present belief, that Nature is god and through experiencing nature one experiences god, comes into play here also in an attempt to substitute this belief for the one of miracles. Both men used the destruction of the belief in miracles as a starting point for their own beliefs to build of off.

One of the most notorious conclusions from The Age Of Reason is that the Bible is heresay of heresay and therefore mostly useless. Paine acknowledges that it sometimes offers a good piece of advice or two, as any book might. Paine would prefer to experience god in private reflection. Emerson echoes this in his dislike of books in general. He says that books are for idle times, and urged that existence be experienced rather than read about. This can be seen as derived from Paine’s writing as Creation being the universal language, and the path to experiencing and enriching oneself in god.

The deists of Paine’s motion did not want to simply demean the Christian religion, but instead wanted to encourage the people to develop their relationship with god through natural experiences. They felt that a stronger relationship with god could be developed through enriching oneself in nature. This idea is the exact same one of the transcendentalists. Only the most pure and uninterrupted relationship was fit for that with a deity, so when the bible attempts to play mediator between the two, the deists raise alarm. Private mediation and reflection were the steps to knowing god, as is seen in the works of the two men.

One topic that these men’s writing garnered them unwanted and negative attention was their portrayal of Jesus. Paine and Emerson both knocked down the divine status of what they saw was a man. The miraculous resurrection and the tales of otherworldly miracles they found to be embellishment on part of the church. The man and ideas of Jesus, however, were admirable, and the portrayal of Jesus by the two men bear resemblance. Emerson found that although it was incorrect to call him a deity, he was the ideal man. The “simple, philanthropic life” and his recognition of individual worth were the qualities of a great man rather than a god. Paine wrote before this that Jesus’ morality was the best intentioned. He accused the church of embellishment in the case of miracles, and should focus on the life, which Paine did not deny, of Jesus and his lifestyle.

In understanding that the deists were essentially worshippers of nature, one can
understand that transcendentalism is a reiteration of deism. Emerson can be seen as a translator of the ideas of Paine, century before him, into his time. Bearing this in mind the writings of Emerson can be greater understood because The Age of Reason can be used as a decoder of sorts for his writing.

Webb wrote in a style that introduced an idea or section, told one of the philosopher’s sides, then the other, followed by bridging them together with The Age of Reason as footholds. This multistep process made it very easy to translate the two men ideas over the century gap in their writings. This is evident in the section about the philosopher’s views of miracles. He opens saying that “as science has progressed over the last few centuries, the existence of miracles has become increasingly problematic for more liberal-minded theologians.” (Webb, 518). This established that miracles would be the topic of the next few paragraphs. He then segues into Paine’s view first by using a summary from John Mecklin. Mecklin wrote about the necessity of miracles in the Christian religion feeling that “there is a higher law of nature… which at times intergeres with natural laws… although we have no information whatever as to the operation of this higher law.” (Webb, 518) Webb then uses this idea of miracles to make sense of Paine, by having him refute the necessity of miracles rather than refuting them outright. He then applies the same thought process to Emerson. This breaking down makes it easier to understand when normally philosophical writers like to shroud their ideas between half truths and tired clichés.

The question that the essay addresses is whether or not Emerson is a reincarnation of sorts of Paine. Webb accomplishes this by first acknowledging the opinion that Emerson held of Paine and then finds connections between the two texts. The relationship between the two men that Webb built up is strong enough to show that Paine was a prototype for the transcendentalist motion, and that if you understand his writings, which are less convoluted at times than that of Emerson, you have a good start of Emerson.

While trying to show that Paine was a likely source for Emerson, Webb brings up the interesting point that Emerson despised him. On numerous occasions Emerson called him an “infidel” or other slanderous names for those void of religion. Well, sticks and stones, Emerson, for it is you who has a wealth of Paine related texts in your library. Emerson was probably only donning a persona as to not garner the entire hatred of society with his writing. Through establishing Paine as a common “enemy” between his motion and society, the public would be more likely to consider his thoughts. If his public person was the only that disliked Paine, then it can be seen that his writings are influenced strongly by Paine. This is exactly the point that Webb goes to prove.

As summarized, both men did a bit of thinking on Jesus, his divinity, and his ultimate worth. Paine felt that he was just a man, but an ideal man. Paine gave so much credence to his lifestyle that, as Webb says, he “closely mirrored Jesus” in his teachings and actions more than those who sought to defame him. Emerson was also included in living this life. Paine wrote that “The morality that he preached and practiced was of the most benevolent kind.” (58) Webb later wrote that he accepted Jesus the man existed, and was likely crucified. Crucifixion was a common mode of execution in that time, and there is no other reason not to believe he existed.

Likewise, Emerson wrote over half a century later wrote of the simple and enviable life that Jesus had. Although being the poster boy for Christianity the teachings of Jesus were closer to that of Emerson. He sympathized with philanthropy, charity, and understanding the world through experiencing it. His description was abundant with similarities from Paine’s description, like the role he played as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist.” These relations suggest that Emerson was more strongly influenced by Paine that what he let off.

Potentially the most important relation that can be made between the two philosophers is that Paine worships Reason, and that Emerson worships the same beliefs under the moniker of Nature. In nature they found order, structure, and implication of design as Webb writes. The god that they found was not the cosmic voyeur and participant in the affairs of humans, but merely a creator. This conclusion is helpful because by knowing one it is implied that the other is understood.

Using Webb’s paper and The Age of Reason it should be possible to make a greater sense of the transcendentalist having been much longer acquainted with the deist world view. Particularly the two thinker’s views on religion are of interest. The deist view was evident knowing only a brief summary of the ideology, but even after having read Emerson the transcendentalist view is fuzzy.

As Webb writes Emerson and the transcendentalists sought god in their surroundings and in nature. The finding of religion in its existence was supposedly “satisfying” and “rational.” (Webb, 514) Translating that into the thoughts of Paine, the order and suggested design is from where god is derived. The question remains as to why Emerson labels Paine a heretic. If they followed nearly identical beliefs it would make no sense to greatly dislike it and its followers,

There is more but you can comment now, please.