All this is, however, of little importance, for this is not the work of Edwards referred to by the present writer in his previous essay.  The tract recently printed as a volume may be the one referred to by Dr. Bushnell, in 1851, but of this reference by him the writer never heard until after his own essay was already printed.  The manuscript of the “Observations” was received by Professor Smyth, as he tells us in his introduction, about fifteen years ago, from the late Reverend William T. Dwight, D. D., to whom it was bequeathed by his brother, the Reverend Dr. Sereno E. Dwight.

But the reference of the present writer was to another production of the great logician, thus spoken of in a quotation from “the accomplished editor of the Hartford ‘Courant,’” to be found in Professor Smyth’s introduction: 

“It has long been a matter of private information that Professor Edwards A. Park, of Andover, had in his possession an published manuscript of Edwards of considerable extent, perhaps two thirds as long as his treatise on the will.  As few have ever seen the manuscript, its contents are only known by vague reports....  It is said that it contains a departure from his published views on the Trinity and a modification of the view of original sin.  One account of it says that the manuscript leans toward Sabellianism, and that it even approaches Pelagianism.”

It was to this “suppressed” manuscript the present writer referred, and not to the slender brochure recently given to the public.  He is bound, therefore, to say plainly that to satisfy inquirers who may be still in doubt with reference to Edwards’s theological views, it would be necessary to submit this manuscript, and all manuscripts of his which have been kept private, to their inspection, in print, if possible, so that all could form their own opinion about it or them.

The whole matter may be briefly stated thus:  Edwards believed in an eternity of unimaginable horrors for “the bulk of mankind.”  His authority counts with many in favor of that belief, which affects great numbers as the idea of ghosts affected Madame de Stall:  “Je n’y crois pas, mais je les crains.”  This belief is one which it is infinitely desirable to the human race should be shown to be possibly, probably, or certainly erroneous.  It is, therefore, desirable in the interest of humanity that any force the argument in its favor may derive from Edwards’s authority should be weakened by showing that he was capable of writing most unwisely, and if it should be proved that he changed his opinions, or ran into any “heretical” vagaries, by using these facts against the validity of his judgment.  That he was capable of writing most unwisely has been sufficiently shown by the recent publication of his “Observations.”  Whether he, anywhere contradicted what were generally accepted as his theological opinions, or how far he may have lapsed into heresies, the public will never rest satisfied until it sees