USA > Connecticut > A complete history of Connecticut, civil and ecclesiastical, from the emigration of its first planters, from England, in the year 1630, to the year 1764; and to the close of the Indian wars > Part 13
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56
1. " Whether (if the narration above written be true) it is lawful for the said minor part at Guilford, to embody into church estate, and get their minister ordained as soon as they can ?
2. " Whether it is lawful and expedient for such minis- ters and churches, as are willing, to assist that people in their embodying into church estate, and ordaining their minister ?
" Your gratifying us and this poor people in this matter, will exceedingly oblige your friends and fellow laborers in the gospel of our LORD REDEEMER," &C.
This letter was signed by Mr. Moss, of Derby, and Mr. Mather, of Saybrook, and directed to the Rev. Peter Thatcher, and other ministers of Boston. With the let- ter, documents were sent, proving the facts stated. The answer to this letter i's not to be found, but the probabili- ty is, that it was favorable to the minor party, and encour- aged the ministers who favored them, to afford them their assistance, as it appears that early in the spring, they
124
HISTORY OF
CHAP. VII.
Book II. were preparing to embody into church estate, and expected that Mr. Ward would soon be ordained over them.
1731.
March 10, 1731.
The legislature, however, with a view to unite the par- ties, in their session in October, appointed a large coun- cil to meet, at Guilford, and hear the parties. They were to attempt all proper measures to conciliate and bring them together, and, if possible, to settle the church and town in peace. They were chosen from the three counties of Hartford, New-Haven and New-London. The council consisted of the Rev. Messrs. Eliphalet Adams, Samuel Whitman, John Bulkley, Nathaniel Chauncey, Phinehas Fisk, Samuel Whittelsey, Jared Elliot, Joseph Noyes, Sam- uel Hall and Isaac Stiles, with their delegates. They met at Guilford early in the spring ; chose the following gentle- men, moderators and scribes, viz, Mr. Adams and Mr. Whit- man, moderators ; Mr. Bulkley and Mr. Fisk, scribes. The minor party had most positively and repeatedly renounc- ed the Saybrook Platform, not only before the church, but repeatedly, by their agents, before the General Assem- bly. The council nevertheless cited them to appear before them ; but they would not appear as a body, nor by their committee. Two or three of their leading men, as indi- viduals, stated to them their grievances, and the grounds of their separation. Upon this, having heard the repre- sentations of the church, the council representing that they had fully heard the parties, came to the following re- sult.
1. " That with relation to the settlement and ordination of the Rev. Mr. Ruggles in this place, and the conduct of the church in that affair, on representation made by the committee, above said, to this council, of the several steps of their procedure in that affair, we cannot but ap- prove of them, and judge them very agreeable to such rules as in an affair of that nature they ought to regard and have their eyes upon.
2. " With respect to the reasons alledged in the narrative of the dissenting party, as grounds of their separation from the communion of the church, and what was offered by said Leete and Cruttenden, for vindication of themselves in that matter, we judge them insufficient, and that sepa- ration as sinful and justly offensive.
3. " That the dissenting brethren, their setting up a separate assembly for public worship without the counte- nance and liberty of the General Assembly, or approba- tion of neighboring churches, or the allowance of the set- tled minister of the place, and contrary to the advice of the association of the county, we judge to be disorderly
125
CONNECTICUT.
CHAP. VII.
and sinful, and disallowed by the fifth article in the thir- Book II. teenth chapter of the Cambridge platform of the year 1649: Also, that some of them, their pretended qualifying them- 1731. selves according to a law in our book of the statutes, made March 10. for the case of such as soberly dissent from the way of public worship and ministry established by the laws of this government, was an abuse of that law, and unjustifiable.
4. " With respect to the duty lying on the church of this place, toward their dissenting brethren, we judge, that in case, after an invitation made by this council and the said church to those dissenting brethren, those that have taken the oaths, as others, at the desire of this council, to return to the communion of said church ; or an invitation made to them by the said church, with such reflections on themselves, for their separation, as this council shall think proper, they do not in some reasonable time, so do, that. they shall be suspended from the communion of the church of CHRIST : which sentence shall be pronounced against them, either by the Rev. Mr. Ruggles and church, or by the Rev. Mr. Jacob Hemingway and Mr. Jared Elliot in conjunction with them, as the said Mr. Ruggles and church shall choose.
5. " And, whereas the said dissenting brethren enter- tain hopes of embodying themselves into church estate, and having a pastor ordained over them, in a short time, this council have judged their proceedings hitherto irre- gular and offensive, so do now further declare and judge them, the dissenting brethren, incapable of entering into a church state, till such time as they have returned back to their pastor and brethren of the church from which they have separated themselves, with such reflections on them- selves, as this council have thought proper : and that if any ministers and churches shall assist in so embodying them and ordaining a pastor over them, it will be disorder- ly and sinful ; and accordingly as such, bear testimony against it.
6. "Further, as we have found a separate meeting for public worship, set up by the dissenting party in this place, a disorderly meeting, do also judge that Mr. Edmund Ward's preaching to the said assembly, is disorderly and sinful, and will be so if he persists therein ; and by the authority of this council do charge him to desist preaching to them ; and that he do not presume to submit to ordination, or to take upon him the pastoral charge over them.
" And finally, whereas, some reflections have been cast upon the Rev. Mr. Ruggles, as though he were weak, in- sufficient, unworthy and unqualified for the work of tho
126
HISTORY OF
CHAP. VII.
Book II. gospel, unsound in his doctrines, of a party spirit, and lit- tle religion ; this council declare, that nothing of this na- 1731. ture hath appeared unto us ; and he having given us a March 10. specimen of his ministerial abilities, partly from his per- sonal acquaintance, and partly from credible testimony, we esteem him a worthy minister of JESUS CHRIST, endow- ed with a good measure of ministerial gifts, sound in the faith, of a serious, religious and peaceable spirit, a sweet temper and becoming conversation, and worthy of honor and respect, and as such do recommend him and his la- bors, to the blessing of Almighty GOD."
This result of the council, was accepted by vote of the church in open council.
This, considering the state of the town, that the separa- tion had greatly increased, since the ordination of Mr. Ruggles, so that more than one half the original members of the church, at that time, had separated, from him ; that they had utterly renounced the Saybrook Platform ; quali- fied themselves by law for a distinct worship ; and had built them an house for it, was a very extraordinary result. 'That in these circumstances, they should proceed to a ju- dicial hearing and decision, without attempting any con- ciliatory measures, seems to have been very uncommon, in similar cases. Their result was every way calculated to justify Mr. Ruggles, and the remainder of the church and society, and to lay the dissenters under every disad- vantage ; to deprive them, even of the preaching of the word and all the means of salvation, unless they would re- turn and sit under the preaching of Mr. Ruggles. This they had declared they could not in conscience do. Mr. Ruggles, in their view was not an orthodox experimental preacher, and they could not be profited by him. The dissenters had no choice in the council, and they con- sidered themselves as a distinct and legal society, and as having a right, by act of parliament and the laws of the colony, to worship God by themselves, and to choose and settle a minister for themselves. The ministers of New- Haven county had prejudged the case, and ordained Mr. Ruggles, in their opinion, in a rash and imprudent manner, against such a minority and division in the town as ought to have prevented it, at least, until some further trial had been made for a greater union. They considered the council as having no more authority over them than they had over any church in Massachusetts or New-York, or of any other place, or denomination. Mr. Ward did not consider himself as amenable to them, or that he was obliged to desist preaching the gospel at their mandate:
127
CONNECTICUT.
CHAP. VII.
The dissenters and he, imagined that they were upright Book II. and conscientious in their proceedings. Not one of them therefore was disposed to make the reflections which the council had directed, or to return to Mr. Ruggles, and their brethren, from whom they had separated.
The consequence was, that after they had been invited Forty six to return, and had, for a short time, neglected it, they persons suspended were cited before the church, and forty six of them, six from com- more than one half of the church, at the time of Mr. Rug- munion, gles' ordination, were suspended from communion.
The town was now in a very perplexed and melancho- ly condition. About one half of the professors in it were suspended from communion ; the council who had advised to this measure, had declared it disorderly for ministers to preach to them, and charged their own teacher, by all their authority, to preach to them no more. The major part of the town at the same time, were taking the property of those who had separated from them, and had not qualified themselves by act of parliament, by distraint, for the support of Mr. Ruggles, and to pay the other tax- es of the first society ; and the town was in a state of great irritation.
The assembly were petitioned to make them a distinct society. Several of the first society were so convinced of the necessity of it, for the general peace and edification of the church and town, that they preferred a petition to the legislature, praying that it might be done. Several of the ministers of the colony were so affected with the unhappy state of the town, that they petitioned the assembly to ap- point the General Association a council, with their dele- gates, to repair to Guilford, and hear and advise the par- ties and make a report of their doings to the General As- sembly. The assembly rejected the petitions for making them a distinct society, and came to the following resolve, viz.
" Upon the motion of the party who have separated Act of the themselves from the old society in Guilford, on the recom- assembly, mendations of the Rev. Mr. Timothy Woodbridge, and di- Oct. 1731. vers other Rev. elders of the churches in this colony, that it may be of service to the interest of religion, for this as- sembly, in conforinity to a former act of this assembly, in reference to Stratford, to appoint some from each associa- tion in this colony, to enquire into their case, in order to the bringing matters to a comfortable issue :
" This assembly observing, that the society in Guilford, having not come into the established platform of church discipline, as allowed and. confirmed by the laws of this
June 30th, 1731.
128
HISTORY OF
CHAP. VII.
Book II. colony, and more especially, upon consideration, that the dissenting party of that society have, by their agents from 1731. time to time, before this assembly, declared their dissent from the said platform of church discipline; and thence suppose they cannot be holden, nor obliged to abide the determination, of any associations so appointed, according to the rules of the platform of church discipline, establish- ed as aforesaid :
" Whereupon this assembly consider that it is not rea- sonable for this assembly to oblige, nor direct the several associations throughout this colony, to send their delegates to hear the said society and dissenting party at Guilford; as the reverend elders, in their memorial, have proposed. " Yet, nevertheless, if the dissenting party of the church of Guilford, (so called,) shall, themselves, move to the el- ders of the several associations in this government, to send their delegates, to consider of the difficulties that have arisen in said society, and to give advice to said society on the premises, at the proper charge of the dissenting party ; that then the assembly do advise, that the several associations appoint and send their delegates to Guilford, giving suitable notice to all parties concerned, of the time of meeting; and, being met, that they use all proper meas- ures and endeavours to bring each party to a sense of any errors they find them to have been in; and endeavour to moderate their tempers, and bring said society into chris- tian love, peace and unity ; and if that desirable end can- not by them be attained, said associations are directed to signify to the General Assembly, to be holden at Hartford, in May next, what they shall think proper and best to be done, for the good and peace of the several parts of the said society, and the support and honour of religion amongst them."
The minor part of the society made application to the several associations to send their delegates, agrecably to the act of the General Assembly. They convened at Guil- ford, November 23d, 1731.
There were present the Rev. Messrs. Stephen Mix, Samuel Woodbridge, Jacob Hemingway, Jared Elliot, ation meet Ebenezer Williams, William Russell, Benjamin Colton, William Worthington, and Solomon Williams.
The venerable Mr. Stephen Mix, of Weathersfield, was chosen moderator ; Mr. Ebenezer Williams and Mr. Wil- liam Russell, were chosen scribes. The committees of both the parties appeared before the council, and were fully heard. The people who had separated from Mr. Ruggles and their brethren, pleaded that Mr. Ruggles was
The gene- ral associ- at Guil- ford, Nov. 231.
-
129
CONNECTICUT.
CHAP. VII.
not, in their view, an orthodox, experimental, profitable Book II. preacher, and that they could not be benefitted by his preaching ; and had opposed his settlement from the be- 1731. ginning : that their brethren, sensible that their opposi- tion to Mr. Ruggles would make matter of difficulty at his ordination, voted that they might go off, and be a society by themselves : that they considered it as an agreement between them, and so separated themselves, and made no opposition to the ordination of Mr. Ruggles; and they could not consider him as their pastor, rightfully ordained over them, more than over any other society who had ne- ver chosen him. They insisted that they had been guilty of no immoral conduct; for which they ought to be suspend- ed froin the communion of their brethren, or from the or- thodox and regular churches in New-England : that pro- vision was made by the laws of the nation, and statutes of the colony, for persons soberly dissenting from their breth- ren, as to the mode of worship. Such they pleaded that they were, and that they had taken the benefit of the laws, and could not conceive that they had done any thing wrong or sinful therein: They stated, that they held to the same confession of faith with their brethren, and with the churches of New-England, from the very beginning : that they adopted the same mode of discipline, which was first agreed upon by the fathers of the New-England churches, and under which a great majority of them had continued unto the present time. They urged, therefore, that there was no just ground for their suspension, and the cruel treatment they had received. They maintained, that the proceedings of Mr. Ruggles and their brethren, with re- spect to them, was a groundless usurpation, and a lording it over God's heritage. They urged, that if their separa- tion was schismatical and sinful, and deserved excommuni- cation, that then our fathers deserved excommunication ; the first church in Boston, and the second in Hartford, were guilty of schism, and worthy of excommunication : That if it was sinful in them to take benefit of the act of parliament, the law of the nation and of the colony, then obedience to the law ivas sinful, and that all who took the benefit of it were guilty of sin. They pleaded, that they were a legal society, and that the council who had con- demned them, not only had no right to judge in their case, but numbers of them were prejudiced men, and had pre- judged the case. They complained of their brethren, as insincere, and as treating th'in with deceit and cruelty. They said, they imagined they were honest and sincere in voting them off, if the General Assembly would grant them
130
HISTORY OF
CHAP. VII,
Book II. the privilege ; which they alledge it would have freely and. immediately done, had they not by all means in their power 1731. opposed it. They not only pleaded that they were a legal society ; but that they had employed a regular preacher, who had been examined and approved by the association of the county of New-Haven, as a person qualified to preach the gospel, and whom they esteemed to be an or- thodox, experimental preacher of the gospel, and a man who was exemplary in his life and conversation. They therefore pleaded, that there was no just occasion for sus- pending them from the communion of the saints, or any gospel privileges, more than for any other churches, or chris- tians in New-England, who held to the same doctrines and mode of discipline with themselves. They further plead- cd, that the major part of the church and society were the faulty cause of the separation, as they did not follow the advice of the association, and allow them to hear another man, when they were not united in Mr. Ruggles, and had forced upon them a man whom they could not hear. These. in general, were the things pleaded before the several councils, and gentlemen who were sent to hear and recon- cile the parties, in vindication of those who had separated from the first church and society.
The first church and society represented, that they had regularly called and settled Mr. Ruggles, according to the law and ecclesiastical constitution of the colony ; that he was, in their opinion, and in the opinion of his ordaining council, an orthodox, worthy minister, of unblamable conduct, and that their brethren had no just ground of separation.
The association, upon hearing the parties, were divided in their opinion, and came to the following result :
Result of
" This association, finding it difficult to come to an uni- the general " ted resolve, and that their time is too strait for answer- associa- tion, Nov. 23d. " ing the end of their delegation, have adjourned, and, by " these presents, do adjourn themselves, or it, to Hartford. " on the Tuesday in the week of the election next ensu- " ing," &c.
Whether this council met again, according to their ad- journment, or what their final result was, does not appear from any thing left on file. The separate party continued their petitions to be made a distinct society, representing their distressed condition, as they were so opposed every way by their brethren, that they could not have the minis- ter whom they had unanimc- sly chosen, and who was in their opinion ordained over them, nor have a church gath- ered among them for that purpose ; and were deprived of
131
CONNECTICUT.
CHAP. VII.
the liberty of conscience, and of the ordinances of the gos- Book II. pel, and means of salvation. They prayed the assembly, That they might be declared to be a lawful ecclesiastical 1732. society, according to the act of parliament, and their own statutes, for the relief of sober consciences ; and their min- ister, Mr. Edmund Ward, to be a lawful ecclesiastical teacher ; and that it might be lawful for such ministers as were willing to assist in uniting them in church estate, and in ordaining their pastor elect, so to do, and not be judged dis- orderly, or subject to any punishment on that account ; or if the honourable assembly should not grant these privileges, that they would, in their great wisdom, devise some way, in which they might enjoy the ordinances of the gospel with christians in general.
As the general association were not agreed in their opin- May, 1732. ion with respect to the difficulties at Guilford, and had done nothing effectual towards composing the parties, the assem- bly appointed a committee of their own, to repair to Guil- ford, hear them, and make their report. This committee reported in favour of uniting the parties, and recommend- ed the appointment of a large and respectable council for that purpose. The General Assembly, instead of granting the petitions of the aggrieved brethren, appointed the Rev. Messrs. Seth Shove, Anthony Stoddard, Jonathan Marsh, William Russell, Benjamin Lord, George Griswold, Elea- zer Williams, and Thomas Clapp, with their delegates, to meet at Guilford, and finally determine the case of forty-six persons in said Guilford, which had before been laid before a council there, March 10th, 1731, which gave sentence against them. It was at the same time resolved, that the minor party should bear the expense of the council; and that the minor party should not be taxed the current year, for the settlement or support of the Rev. Mr. Ruggles. It was enacted also, that all taxes which had been laid, and all arrearages, should be paid up.
But a small number of the gentlemen appointed to meet in council at Guilford, convened on the business for which they had been appointed. It seems that the clergy were not united in their opinions. It was an extraordinary case, for one half of a church to be excommunicated by the pas- tor and the other part of the church, when they had been guilty of no immorality or scandal, but separating from their brethren, according to the rights of men of sober con- sciences, warranted by act of parliament, and by the stat- utes of the colony, in that case provided. The council ยท was not chosen by the consent of the parties, nor agreeable to the religious constitution of the state ; but was imposed
132
HISTORY OF
CHAP. VII,
Book II. by act of assembly. To suspend such a number of profes- sing christians from the communion of the saints, in these 1732. circumstances, when they held communion with the church- es of Massachusetts, and the majority of the churches in New-England, who had adopted the same mode of worship with themselves, was a difficult, and, apparently, an incon- sistent matter, and, in the opinion of many, a gross viola- tion of the rights of conscience. On the other hand, to give judgment against their brethren of the council, who had condemned them, and ordered their suspension from communion, must have been disagreeable. A great part of the gentlemen, therefore, it seems declined doing any thing in the affair. At the time appointed for the meeting of this Nov. 21st, council, Nov. 21st, 1732, four elders, with their delegates, only convened. These were the Rev. Mr. Shove, Mr. Stoddard, Mr. Russell, and Mr. Griswold.
Mr. Anthony Stoddard was chosen moderator, and Mr. William Russell scribe. After devout supplications to the GOD of all wisdom and grace, both the persons who were suspended from communion, so many of them as were yet living, and the Rev. Mr. Ruggles and his church, appeared before the council. The members suspended from the communion of the church, were asked whether they could now comply with the determination of the council met at Guilford, March 10th, 1732, and make the reflections the said council thought proper for them ? They unanimously declared they could not ; and they put in various papers, and pleaded many things in their own defence, to show. their innocency, and that they were unjustly and cruelly treated. Their pleas were the same, in substance, as those made before the general association. Mr. Ruggles and his church, were then desired to show the reasons of their suspending those brethren from their communion. But they denied the jurisdiction of the council, and refused to show the reasons of their proceedings, or to submit to their determination relating to their affairs. The council, nevertheless, came to the following result :- "The council was laid under a disadvantage, as to discovering the rea- sons and grounds upon which the church and council judg- ed the withdrawing of the said members sinful, and the means they used to continue and strengthen themselves in said separation justly offensive and sinful ; upon what re- presentation has been made to us, by the minor part, (in presence of Mr. Ruggles and the church,) of their with- drawing from the worship and communion of the church in this place, and the methods they had used to continue them- selves therein, and what they offered to clear themselves
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.