USA > Connecticut > New Haven County > Branford > A history of the First church and society of Branford, Connecticut, 1644-1919 > Part 7
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
They also felt, as did the church, that the time had come to assert their opposition to the infringe- ment upon their rights, by the Consociation, more explicitly and sharply. Accordingly, at a meeting of the church on January 22, 1747, the articles of complaint against Mr. Robbins which had been car- ried into the council, being read, together with his answers thereto, it was voted that:
"I. We are of opinion that what is contained in the articles of charge against the Pastor of this church respecting Doctrine and principle is very wrongfully and injuriously charged, and disagreeable to the known course and tenor of his preaching-We are generally steady attendants on his ministry & don't remember that he has ever expressed himself as charged in those articles-and as to what respects his conduct, we apprehend it wrong- fully represented in the articles of charge-indeed his admitting Mr. Davenport to preach at that time & so Messrs. Buel and Brainard to hold a meeting at his house, as they did carry it on, was what we could not some of us, so well approve of under the circumstances and we don't think he would act in the same way again.
"2. We think Mr. Robbins' answers to said articles are according to truth, and agreeable to his known Principles and Doctrine. Some of us remember the particular pas- sages in his sermons which are quoted in his answers to said articles and they truly represent what was delivered.
"3. We think Mr. Robbins preaches the Doctrines of Grace more clearly and pungently than in some of the first years of his ministry among us and yet we have much reason to fear our uneasy Bretheren and Neighbors, especially some of the principle men among them are dis-
1
102
satisfied on account of those Doctrines which doctrines for our part, we think are clearly revealed in the word of God, adheared to by the reformed churches as appears by their confessions of faith and catechisms, and we trust God has and will imprint them on our hearts, and enable us to maintain them as long as we live.
"4. That the above votes be signed by the Deacons of this church in behalf of the church. Accordingly we who heartily join with our Bretheren in the above votes subscribe our names.
John Russell ~ Deacons of the Church in Branford. Samuel Rose S
The Society held a like meeting, on the second day of November 1747. It was a wrathy one. The records of the doings of the council were not even allowed to be read in the meeting. After a warm discussion, sentiment crystallized in the fol- lowing declaration :
"Yt whereas ye first church of Christ in Branford was settled on, or agreeable to ye Platform Drawn up or agreed upon at Cambridge in ye year 1648 agreeable to which ye said church ruled and governed in Peace & whereas after ye settlement of a Platform of Church Government at Saybrook ye sd church with their minister did once or twice choose their messengers to attend ye Consociation of ye County but did not renounce ye form of Government on which ye sd church was settled nor vote themselves under ye Saybrook Platform & whereas ye sd first church which is now in this Society being under such circumstances, settled the Revd Mr. Philemon Rob- bins in ye ministry here who was chosen by this Society and sd church for their minister & Pastor, who has con- tinued in sd office to General Satisfaction & whereas by reason of some late Difference arising by means of some
103
uneasy Persons in this Society, it was found necessary yt both ye church & Society should more explicitly declare which rule of Government they would agree to & be Governed by, therefor ye Church in this Society at their meeting Novr 4th 1745 Declared their renunciation of ye SayBrook Platform aforsd & Declared ye same to be a Congregational Church, & this Society at their meeting Octr 21st 1745, Declared their Denial to be Governed by or Submission to ye Acts or conclusions of Counsells formed on ye Saybrook Platform, Without their being called with ye consent of this Society & whereas Notwith- standing ye church in this Society is Congregational, & yt this Society agree with ye Church in those principles, yet ye Consociation of New Haven County since ye said 4th of November on ye Complaint of one member of sd Church, assumed to Themselves a Pretended Government & jurisdiction over this Church & Society & have with- out hearing ye Parties or persons concerned, Pretended to come into Conclusions respecting our Revd Elder & without knowing ye Truth from him, ye Church or this Society, have, as we are credibly Informed passed a sen- tence by which they Endeavor to Depose him, ye sd Mr. Robbins Wherefor lest such an Extraordinary step should tend to our Disturbance & Create Scruples in weak minds, ye Society do now by this their vote, Declare yt we owned the sd Mr. Robbins to be our Lawfull & Worthy minister & do now renewedly Declare ye Con- tinuance of our choice of him to be our minister accord- ing to ye Law of this Government & further Declare yt we are of opinion yt ye sd conclusions of ye sd Consocia- tion are not by this Society to be acknowledged or regarded."
These two declarations made the breach between the church and the Consociation absolute. From this time, and for many years, the church in Bran-
104
ford held no fellowship with the churches of the vicinage and became, to all intents and purposes, an independent body, tho still affirming themselves true to their denomination. Certain of the dis- senters in the congregation appealed to the General Assembly for intervention. The Assembly recom- mended another council, and the Society called one, to convene on Wednesday June 29th, inviting, as members, certain ministers from various parts of the state, whose names had been recommended by the Assembly. The Council did not meet. In July, the Society invited them again, this time for the first Wednesday in August. But, judging, perhaps, discretion to be the better part of valor, the min- isters again failed to appear. Here the matter ended, and the Branford Church and the Consocia- tion went their separate ways. It was not until June 8, 1760, that the church received any further communication from the Consociation. At that time it received an invitation to join with its sister churches in ordaining Mr. Noah Willis of West Haven, "it being the first letter this church has received from the moderator of the Consociation of this County since our vote of refusing the Say- brook and taking the Cambridge Platform." The invitation was accepted, with the provision "that our sending messengers to the Consociation and their acting in the Consociation as occasion may serve shall not be looked upon as an argument of our Being under the regimen of the SayBrook agreement or Platform." Deacon Samuel Rose
105
accompanied Mr. Robbins to the ordination of Mr. Willis, and thus friendly relations were resumed. The church continued to fellowship with its sisters, more and more frequently, and the old struggle was, if not forgotten, at least passed over in silence.
Before leaving this story of the tribulations of Philemon Robbins we may, wisely, make two or three comments concerning it. Let us concede, in the first place, that which Robbins himself was quite ready to admit, that his acceptance of the invitation to preach to the Baptist congregation in Wallingford was not wise, under the circum- stances. But let us also assert, and here too with Mr. Robbins, that there was no shadow of moral wrong about it. The issue was not one of crim- inality; it was an issue between the contrasting convictions of two incompatible conceptions of church polity. Thereby is the whole story raised from the realm of petty enmities and personal bick- ering to the level of participation in a conflict of much moment in the preservation of our church polity and faith. Let us see just what, in this larger aspect, the significance of this conflict was.
Coming to these shores in order that they might escape a church order intolerant of the dictates of their minds and hearts, the New England fathers, contrary to what is often ignorantly believed, did not set up a state in which there was liberty of faith and conduct. Early Congregationalism was a state religion and the churches were as much "established" churches as any they had left behind,
106
in England. Only, for the most part, they were established churches instead of an established church. That is to say, that while everybody was legally bound to support the church set up in his community, and heresy and even non-attendance were severely dealt with, there was, at the begin- ning, no authority higher than the local church. Each church was independent and such gathering of the churches in Associations or Councils as there was, was for purpose of mutual counsel only, and the acts or resolutions of those gatherings had only advisory force. But, as we have seen, when the Saybrook Synod, of which Samuel Russell had been an influential member, devised the system of "Consociations" they introduced into Congrega- tionalism a legislative and judicial body which was to have superior and mandatory power over the local church. The idea of such a body was bor- rowed from the Presbyterian theory and is totally at variance with the fundamental ideas of our denomination.
It was against the right of such a body to dictate to a local church or minister, what should or should not be said or done, that Philemon Robbins, sup- ported solidly by the Branford church, rebelled. He claimed that he had absolute right to preach when and where he chose, and to invite whom he would to occupy his own pulpit, so long as his people were satisfied. The Consociation asserted that he could not preach where, when or what they should choose to legislate against.
107
The issue is a sharp one and, tho he and his people stood nearly alone in their time, we of to-day are almost universally agreed with them. We honor him for his protestant courage, and his fellow ministers grew into days when they learned to honor and respect him too. We also admire the breadth of mind which allowed him, in the days when men of other creeds were heretics and damned, to meet those not of his fold in fellowship and to see, in their invitation, a call from God. Inexpedient his conduct may have been, but his consequent tribulations were those of a man of larger heart and vision than his peers, of one "per- secuted for righteousness sake." "Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven."
Little information has come down to us of what happened in Branford church in the latter years of Robbins' pastorate. The years which preceded and followed 1776 were too filled with political sig- nificance for men to give more than necessary attention to church affairs. They did more than they wrote. It will be always a matter of regret to us that we have not the story of those thrilling days. What has been saved is mostly passing remarks and allusions. The depreciation of cur- rency, the hardness of times, come first to notice. The salary is constantly readjusted, to keep pace with the decreased purchasing power of money. Salt works are established, at Indian Neck, in 1777, in an effort to add to the Society's financial resources, and lumber is sold, and more of the
108
lands are leased. We read of "foot guards" and "horse guards" drilling on the Green, and of a regiment of five hundred "Leather-Caps" being recruited by Col. Douglass, of Northford, which joined Washington's army at New York. A ship of war was built on the Branford River, and her guns were borrowed and used against the British, at East Haven. Coast guards patrolled the shore, from Branford Point to Stony Creek, and Bran- ford men fought well in the new navy, and some of them were captured and died on prison ships.
These things we know, and it is not difficult to infer the rest. It was a time of deeds, not words, and men worshipped with swords and muskets and made glad sacrifice for liberty. "Father" Gillett assures us that Branford did her part well, and that the church furnished its full quota of money and of men-and we believe his words. There can be no honor roll, bearing visible names and deeds, placed on the walls of Branford church, in memory of these times, but we gladly do homage in our hearts.
The sons of Philemon Robbins bore their part in the Revolution and served in the army as chap- lains, as surgeon, and with arms in hand. Mr. Robbins himself did not enter active service. His health was failing, and he was subject to long periods of illness. His sons assisted him often in the pulpit, and he relinquished a part of his salary to the Society. His first wife, Mrs. Hannah Rob- bins, died on Sunday, June 16, 1776, while her son,
109
Ammi, was preaching for his father. Two years later (October 21, 1778) Robbins married Jane Mills, the widow of Reverend John Mills of Kent. One of her grandchildren was Samuel J. Mills, the leader of the little Williams College Band which began the history of the American Board of Com- missioners for Foreign Missions.
Two of the sons of Mr. Robbins followed their father into the ministry, both studying theology with the noted Dr. Bellamy, of Bethel, an intimate and much respected friend of their father. Ammi became minister of the church at Norfolk, Connect- icut, and some of his descendants still hail from that town. Chandler was called to the pastorate of the old Plymouth church, home of the Pilgrims, and spent his life in service in that place. Phile- mon Robbins preached the ordination sermons for both his sons, and both sermons were printed. The one preached at the time of Chandler's ordina- tion may be seen among the exhibits of Pilgrim Hall, in Plymouth.
Upon Sunday, the eleventh of August 1781, Mr. Robbins preached with unusual power and elo- quence. His spirit threw off the infirmity of advancing years, and his hearers were astonished at the vigor of his language and the splendor of his vision. He closed his sermon with the words, "Glory! Glory!", and the congregation dispersed, with the spell of his fervent discourse still over their hearts. The next day, as he sat smoking before the fireplace, after dinner, he fell asleep.
1
IIO
His wife, unable to arouse him, called the doctor, who exclaimed at once "It is Death; and without a pang!" The grief into which the whole com- munity was plunged is reflected in the entry made upon the church records : "August 13, 1781 This day died the Reverend pastor of this church Phile- mon Robbins in the 72d year of his age and 49th of his ministry. He died in an instant sitting in his chair. May the Lord sanctify this bereavement to this poor destitute flock."
So passed Mr. Robbins to his larger ministry. That he had not failed to give a faithful account of his stewardship on earth is testified to by the fact that he had added two hundred four members to the one hundred twenty-five whom he had found at the time of his ordination, and had baptized about eleven hundred people. These additions to the membership of the church were divided evenly, for the most part, thruout his ministry; the great- est number, for any one year, being twenty-eight, in 1733, and there being five years with no addi- tions. Although his pastorate included the season of the Great Awakening, it also included many years of war and hardship, during which church life was at low ebb throughout the country.
Lacking, perhaps, in gifts of careful scholarship, and being wanting in diplomacy, at least at times ; his was no studied excellence nor churchly states- manship. But he was tolerant where others hated, broad where most were narrow, prophetic in an age of pedantry, a stalwart, great-hearted man of
III
God. His people loved him and delighted in the spiritual food which he ministered to them. He was faithful in preaching, scriptural tho not dog- matic. He said, at one time, that he had read, before his congregation, the entire New Testament, and the Old Testament from Job to Jeremiah XXVI-a rather large example of thoroness.
It was his lot to pass thru much tribulation, to be outlawed by his peers; yet being reviled, he reviled not again, but ran with patience the race that was set before him, looking unto Jesus, the Author and Finisher of his faith. Of a mighty earnestness, his enthusiasm was never forgiven by his enemies, but it endeared him to his friends. Nor shall we be far amiss if we name him the "Great Heart" of the Branford church, who "fought a good fight," who "finished his course," who, by patient steadfastness, "kept the faith."
TWO MINOR PROPHETS
Only a great man can wear the robe of a prophet and it is no wonder that the two immediate succes- sors to the office of Philemon Robbins should not have measured up to the fullness of his stature. It was months before any effort was made to fill his place. In the spring of 1782, a Mr. Zebalun Ely, tutor of Yale College, was supplying the pulpit and, on the first Monday in March, he was requested to continue to preach for another month, with a view to settlement. He served on until August first, when he was given a call by the Society. Mr. Ely declined the call, and accepted one to Lebanon. After almost another year had elapsed, they called a Mr. Channing, but he also declined.
The Branford people then consulted with various members of the Consociation, and the latter recom- mended Mr. Jason Atwater for the pastorate. He was requested to preach for four Sundays as a candidate and, in November, was extended a call. The vote was far from unanimous and, when the Consociation met, on Wednesday, February 18, 1784, for the purpose of examining Mr. Atwater, it was felt that it was inexpedient to proceed at once with his ordination, and the gathering adjourned until March Ioth.
On March Ist the Society renewed their vote, the record reading, "in pursuance of the advice of
I13
ye Consociation convened in said Society on the 17th Day of Feby last the doings of ye Consocia- tion being read-after many objections and debates it was voted by division of the house 'whether they were Desirous that Mr. Jason Atwater should be settled.'" This time the vote was somewhat more favorable, there being seventy-eight in favor of his settlement, and twenty-one against. The dislike of the minority, for Mr. Atwater, was great and continued to increase rather than abate, as weeks went by. But the Consociation followed the majority vote, and the candidate was ordained, March 10, 1784, at their adjourned meeting.
Anticipating this action, the opposing minority had, three days previously, endeavored to be excused from the payment of further church rates, but had been answered to the effect that their peti- tion would not be granted unless they joined some other society. Now there was no other society in town, so the disaffected group proceeded to form one and, December II, 1784, fifty-four of them notified the First Society that they had formed a new society for an Episcopal church. So began Trinity Parish.
It is probable that the separation of the old Society would have come eventually, in any case, tho it was unquestionably precipitated by the divi- sions over Mr. Atwater. From the beginnings of the century some of the supporters of the church had been sympathizers with the Church of Eng- land. At the time of Mr. Robbins' troubles, an
1
II4
abortive attempt to separate the parish had been made, a committee being appointed (December 1749) "on the request of Nathaniel Johnson and John Wilford, in behalf of the members or profes- sors of the Church of England in this town, for a committee to ascertain and lay out a suitable piece of land in some of the highways in said town for them to set up and build a Church on." The move- ment died without fruit, but increasing numbers of the Episcopalian sympathizers became lax in their support of the Society and in church attendance. Occasionally they even held meetings of their own. On December 24th, 1750, the Society voted "Liberty to ye Professors of ye Church of England (as they call Themselves) to meet in ye meeting House on ye 25th of Instant December," and, in 1753, a like permission was accorded for "Dec" 25th which yt call Christmas." It must be remembered that our forebears avoided keeping that holy day themselves, branding it as a relic of popery. Sev- eral votes were also passed, from time to time, assigning seats in the Meeting House to these same people, even to such of them as had refused to pay their taxes. So we see that the separation had been impending for a long time.
The movement had begun with the moving into town of Church of England people, and had been nourished in this wise. As early as September 1748, Rev. Matthew Graves, of New London, and Dr. Samuel Johnson, of Stratford, had held Epis- copal services in Branford. Soon an embryo
II5
society was started and worship was conducted by regular missionaries. During the War of Inde- pendence this society had been unpopular and was suspected of Toryism. But it never entirely died out.
After the reorganization (June 2d, 1784), efforts began to be made towards a church building. The town granted a site on School House Hill, but the building was finally begun on Baldwin's Hill. The Congregationalists aided them in their endeavors and the town granted such assistance as was neces- sary. The new house of worship was sufficiently completed for services to be held therein by May of 1786 but was not entirely finished, and conse- crated, until nearly fifty years later, or September 17, 1832. It stood to the northwest of the present building and was a very plain, barnlike structure. Rev. Ashbel Baldwin was first in charge, serving Guilford also. The relations with the Congrega- tional people were harmonious at first, but were later disturbed, for a time, by the claim of the new Society to a portion of the lands at Indian Neck. The claim was never granted, and the matter grad- ually ceased to be pressed.
There is a strange irony in the fact that, soon after Atwater had been first called, and before his ordination, the Church, despite its years of conten- tions against that system and its outlawry, for rebellion against it, adopted the Saybrook Platform. Verily Mr. Robbins must have turned over in his grave. That the bitter experiences of the past and
1
II6
the former utter condemnation of that document should be forgotten so soon seems almost beyond belief. It can be explained, however, by the fact that the "Consociation" system had lost its teeth and had gradually returned to the usages of the "Association" plan, in its actual practices. Never again would there be possible the dangers against which Robbins had so long stood in protest. So the vote really meant little save an eternal blot upon ยท the names of those who so dishonored the memory of their late leader. A faithful few held out for years against this vote of the majority and refused to sign their names after the Saybrook Platform until, just after the accession of "Father" Gillett, . they were compelled to do so or forfeit their church membership.
Jason Atwater was granted a salary of one hun- dred pounds, and the use of the wood "standing on the Society's Land, he to Cut and Cart the same." He had been born in Hamden, Conn., May 5, 1759, the son of Jacob and Miriam (Ives) Atwater, and had graduated from Yale College in August, 1781. Soon after coming to Branford, he married the daughter of Northford's minister-Mistress Anna Williams.
In the summer of 1792, the Society helped him to build the house on the west corner of Main and Rogers streets, tho Rogers Street was not cut thru at that time. His farm extended from Main Street backwards down to Page's Point and, so, included all of what is now the western side of Rogers
II7
Street. The house was later sold to Mr. Tyler, then to Elizur Rogers, and is now occupied by Mr. Zacher.
During Mr. Atwater's ministry several important changes are to be noted in the arrangement of the interior of, the Meeting House and in the conduct of public worship. On December 8, 1783, the hours of worship, on the Sabbath, were set at "half after Ten in the morning & a quarter after one in the afternoon." On March 26, 1785, it was voted that "the members of ye Church come forward into ye Fore Seats to partake of the Lord's Supper" and also that "confession for publick Scandal be only before ye whole Church."
The Meeting House was "new Seated," in April of 1784, and "3 of ye back seats in ye body of ye House on each side of ye brod Alley" were taken up, and pews were put in their place. A year later "all of ye Long seats (except ye first) in ye Body of ye House" were removed and replaced with four Pews on each side of ye broad Alley." "Alley," of course, means aisle.
Perhaps the most interesting development was that of the choir and the singing school. As early as January 26, 1784, it had been directed "That no Person that is not seated in the first seats in the frunt & side Galleries should set in sd seats on any Day of Publick Worship, except those that sing, in order that they may have suffitient room to set together ye better to perform that part of Wor- ship." From this we know that the choir, at that
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.