USA > Connecticut > Fairfield County > Stratford > A history of the old town of Stratford and the city of Bridgeport, Connecticut > Part 15
USA > Connecticut > Fairfield County > Bridgeport > A history of the old town of Stratford and the city of Bridgeport, Connecticut > Part 15
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 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60
It is probable that at this time there were no families residing two miles from the village of Stratford, in the town, unless it was at Farmill river, and it is quite uncertain if any were there. The hop garden had been cultivated in that vicinity but probably by persons residing in the village.
Neither were there any residents at Pequannock, or Stratford land on the west side of the Pequannock river. A family or two were residing probably at the mill at what is now the east end of Old Mill Green, and also at the tide mill at the Eagle's Nest, or as it was frequently called in those days, Old Squaws. There may have been, also, a few families residing out of the village a short distance north or upon Clapboard Oak Hill, but it is quite doubtful; yet within eight or nine years after 1661, the residences beyond two miles from the village had become quite numerous.
In January, 1664, the town voted that the " land between Pequannock river and, the bounds between Fairfield and Stratford shall be laid out by division to the inhabitants of the town, fronting on the country highway." This highway was on the line, now Park avenue and the road up Toilsome Hill; and it is said "the lots to run three or four miles ;" that is, extend along the road northward that distance. Previous to this there had been many pieces of land laid out to different men in the Pequannock field which lay south of Golden Hill, there having been a fence made along the boundary line, and hence the above division was largely if not wholly northward of what is now Fairfield avenue. Parcels of land had been laid to a number of individuals before 1661, at Oronoke and at Farmill river, but very few if any residences had been erected upon them.
The town having had considerable prosperity, and hav- ing made good progress as to the laying out and clearing up land, and establishing additional settlers, turned its attention to the needs of the Church, in the winter of 1665-6.
169
First Church in Stratford.
" March 5, 1665-5. The town being together at a lawful meeting. propounded whether or no the town will lay out a house lot out of the sequestered land. and fence it and build a comfortable house upon it and lay a considerable quantity of meadow and upland to it, as need shall require, for the use of the ministry to continue for ever for that end and use ; and this was the vote of the town that it should be so performed."
An entry, afterwards erased, adds "there was a clear vote, for there was not one blank, yet a considerable part of the town would not vote, not that they were against the min- istry but the ambiguousness of the vote."
Since Mr. Blakeman had his house and land, which he had possessed more than twenty years, this vote could have no purpose but that of obtaining another minister, although as yet they had not voted to secure one.
This parsonage lot was taken out of the highway or public green at the southeast corner of Watchhouse Hill, near the site afterwards of the second meeting house.
The Rev. Adam Blakeman had served this church from its settlement here in 1639, until the end of the year 1665-a pastorate of 26 years-without intermission or failure of health, apparently, unless just at the last, and without diffi- culty or trouble in his office. At this time the town saw fit to move in the direction of relief to their aged minister and a more ample supply of their needs as a parish or society. It was the movement of the town and not the Church, and hence the following vote :
" April 20, 1665. At a lawful meeting the town did consider the giving Mr. Chauncey a call to help Mr. Blackman in the ministry for a year ; and they agreed by vote. The word given was to draw to the west side of the meeting house, and it was clearly manifest to be the major part to give him a call for a year."
There is no evidence that he had been in the place before this vote, or that anything had been done previously to secure any other man as a supply. Mr. Chauncey was obtained and after about two months we find another record :
"June 1, 1666. At a lawful town meeting, the inhabitants being generally present, a paper was offered containing divers propositions to Mr. Israel Chauncy in order to a mutual agreement for his settling amongst us in Stratford ; the paper being dated with this present meeting. June 1, 1666. It was voted and agreed that the said paper should by the townsmen of Stratford be subscribed in the name of the town and presented to Mr. Chauncy."
170
History of Stratford.
This proceeding was in perfect harmony with the prac- tice of other towns at that time, for the town employed and paid the ministers. If the records of this Church were pre- served, we should find a vote by it, on the question of settling a pastor but not as to hiring him as a supply.
The paper addressed to Mr. Chauncey by the town, signed by the selectmen, is as follows :2
" Mr. Chancy : We, a Christian people, by the providence of God settled together in this plantation of Stratford, judging it our duty, as from the command of God, so from our own necessary spiritual and eternal good, to endeavor after, maintain and uphold a minister orthodox in doctrine and practice that the word of life and salvation may be held forth unto us, and all the ordinance of God dis- pensed among us : and whereas you have been some time amongst us, we accounting it reasonable, very necessary, and equal that some mutual agreement be made in a Christian way between you and us, we hereupon think to propound to you for your settling and continuing with us as followeth. We desire that you would perform the work of a minister of the gospel unto us in the preaching of the word and administering of the sacraments. More particularly we desire if all they that profess faith and obedience to the rules of Christ, not scandalous in life, and do present themselves in owning the Covenant, when they have given them- selves unto the Lord in baptism, may be admitted and accounted members of the church, and under the care and discipline thereof as other members, and have their children baptized. Notwithstanding we desire not that any thus admitted may approach unto the Lord's Table till on and by examination and due trial they make testimony unto the judgment of Charity of their fitness thereunto. Moreover as God owneth the infant children of believers of the Covenant of Grace, neither doth exclude the same children when grown up from having their standing in the Covenant while they do so walk as they do not reject it. God owneth them and would not have the grace of His Covenant shortened or straight- ened nor put them from under the dispensation of His grace, giving His ministers a solemn charge to take care of and train up such as a part of their flock : We desiring also that the children of Church members may be accounted Church members as well as their parents, and that they do not cease to be members by being grown up, but that they do still continue in the Church successively until, according to the rules of Christ, they be cast out ; and that they are the subjects
1 In the Woodbury History, i. 119, the date of this paper is given as 1669, whereas on the town record it is plainly written as here rendered, 1666. But what is still more surprising is that this paper is used in that work to prove that the Stratford Church did not practice the Halfway Covenant, yet that was the very one particular thing it bound Mr. Chauncey to do. The labored effort made in that book to show that Stratford Church had a very wicked feud between 1666 and 1670, would have been commendable, if the author had possessed genius enough to have known or comprehended what the real questions of division were, but as. it was, nothing is left to us but simple astonishment.
I71
First Church in Stratford.
of Church discipline even as other members, and they should have their children baptized, notwithstanding their present unfitness for partaking of the Lord's Supper.
And further we assure you that without the least suspicion you may credit us that upon your accepting said propositions and granting them unto us we shall, according to our abilities, contribute to your comfortable subsistence amongst us. Expecting an answer from you in time convenient (we) "Subscribe " in the name of the town.
THOMAS FAYRECHILDE, JOSEPH JUDSON, HENRY WAKELYN, THOMAS UFFOOT."
"This is a true copy taken out of the original and compared this 25th June, 1666, by me. JOHN MINOR, Recorder."
It may be observed that this proposition to Mr. Chauncey was made after he had been hired two months and five days ; that, by town vote-apparently without dissent-it was ordered to be signed by the selectmen and presented to him ; and that it stated plainly the methods of church work and discipline which would be expected of him; and upon this Mr. Chauncey was settled in the town and church as pastor.
The letter shows definitely that the church practiced the Half-way Covenant and intended so to practice. This method of discipline arose thus: The Puritans in England had adopted the principle not to baptize children unless one or both of the parents were members of the church. Soon after settlement at Windsor, Conn., parents were found there who were not members of that church, but were members of the Episcopal Church in England, who desired to have their children baptized here since they could not go to England for it. This question came before the court at Hartford, and finally the practice was adopted to allow persons who were not members of these churches or any others, to have their children baptized upon certain conditions. These were, as stated in this paper to Mr. Chauncey, " not scandalous in life," and who believed the doctrines of these churches-" professed faith and obedience to the rules of Christ." Such parents and their children were taken under the " watch and care of the church," and the children were baptized; but the parents were not to partake of the Communion. Two sacraments
172
History of Stratford.
were acknowledged-Baptism and the Lord's Supper, and as in this covenant one only was included, the church relation was expressed by the words " Half-way Covenant." In this relation all that was prohibited from such persons was the Lord's Supper, as is evident from the following, in this paper from the parish to Mr. Chauncey, viz: " Notwithstanding we desire not that any thus admitted may approach unto the Lord's Table till on and by examination and due trial they make testimony unto the judgment of Charity of their fitness thereto." That is, until by examination and a knowledge of their lives it should be evident that they were proper persons to come to the Lord's Table.
This Half-way Covenant method of membership, then, was in practice and had been for years in the Stratford church when Mr. Chauncey came here, and the whole expres- sion of the church and the town so far as appears in any record or intimation, was to have it continued.
Soon after Mr. Chauncey was settled as pastor a question of difference arose in his parish which eventuated in the for- mation of a second church in the town and that church, largely, removed afterwards and settled at Woodbury. The inquiry is, what were the questions which caused the division and trouble? Evidently these, and only these, that the Half- way Covenant members should be allowed to come to the Lord's Table, and that the minister alone should examine the candidates, and receive them into the church. The church hitherto refused these. A small minority now demanded them. The minority were all members in Half-way Cove- nant, and hence were denied but one privilege, and therefore could complain of nothing else, for in their letter to Mr. Chauncey and the Church they say, speaking of what God had done for them,3 " and hath given us an interest in himseit to be our God, and taken us to be his own, giving us his own discipline and ordinances for our spiritual and eternal good, and owning us hath given us equal right with yourselves in all his ordinances."
3 See Woodbury History, vol. i, 115-118.
I73
First Church in Stratford.
This letter not being answered as the parties desired, they wrote another in which they say :4
" Whereas we have formerly made known our minds unto you in writing, as concerning our desire of communion in all God's ordinances with you, holding forth unto you by way of preface, our right unto them, from the free grace of God owning us externally sealing the privileges of the Cove-
4 The Minority's First Letter.
"To Mr. Chancy and the rest of the Church at Stratford.
"Loving brethren and friends, God by his good providence having brought us hither, who are of his church and people, and separated us from the world, and of his free and abundant grace hath taken us and our seed into covenant with him- self and with his church and people, and hath given us an interest in himself to be our God, and taken us to be his own, giving us his own discipline and ordinances for our spiritual and eternal good, and owning us hath given us equal right with yourselves in all his ordinances, his providence also having setled us together in this plantation that we might jointly together worshipp him in all his ordinances, and that we should be mutuall helpers of one another in our Christian race. These few lines are to informe you that wee whose names are underwritten doo declare to you our earnest desire to enjoy communion in all God's ordinances with you, that we may together worshipp him according to his holy will ; desiring also that wee and our posterity may be owned as immediate members of the Church of Christ by you ; as Christ owneth us and ours by his own institution, taking us into covenant, and solemnly setting his own seal upon us. We further declare, that owning it to be our duty, and hoping it to be our desire to account you our best friends, who shall use means to convince us wherein we have sinned, and bring us to the sight of our evils ; we desire that if any man being converted according to God's rules, and do not hold forth repentance, then no such person so remaining may be admitted to communion, till he hold forth repentance. And whereas there hath beene difference about the calling of Mr. Chancy, and severall of us have declared our objections against his setling amongst us till those objec- tions were answered, and we judge they never were unto satisfaction ; yet if you shall see cause to answer our earnest and reall desires in the premises, as we hope you will, wee shall pass by what hath been, and endeavor lovingly to close together and walke together according to the rules of God's holy word, hoping and desiring you will so farr respect us as to give us an answer hereunto in writ- ing as soon as you conveniently can.
Yours in all due respects and desireous of unity according to the rules of Christ.
January 16, 1665-6.
JOSEPII JUDSON, JOHN MINOR,
RICHARD) BUTLER, JAMES BLACKMAN,
DAVID MITCHELL,
SAMUEL SHERMAN,
HENRY WAKELYN, DANIEL TITTERTON."
Woodbury History, i. 115.
174
History of Stratford.
nant unto us." Thus, clearly, they state the question to be " communion in all God's ordinances with you." In the second letter they state another point, not introduced in the first, thus :
" And if anything did on our part lie in the way, have seriously appointed us a time for examining of us in respect of our faith and knowledge: accounting it requisite that the Minister may take particular knowledge of all those that are to have Communion in the whole worship of God: And herein (to deal plainly) that nothing may hereafter be laid as a block in our way, we desire that in this examination by the Minister or Ministers and Elder we may issue in their ques- tioning and examining only."3
3 The Minority's Second Letter.
"Whereas we have formerly made known our mindes unto you in writing, as concerning our desire of communion in all God's ordinances with you ; holding forth unto you by way of preface, our right unto them, from the free grace of God owning us and externally sealing the privileges of ye Covenant unto us ; have also declared our mindes concerning such letts as may hinder us from proceeding unto such attaynments mentioned in some clauses thereof ; and comeing together to know how you stood affected to our desires, hoped you might have seen good soe farr to have betrusted those yt were to declare your minde unto us as in con- feering with us to take farther knowledge of our desire propounded ; and to putt us in a way of farther proceeding ; should have bin glad soe farr to have bin ten- der by you that they might have took it into consideration. And if anything did on our part lye in ye way, have seriously appointed us a time for examining of us in respect of our fayth and knowledge: Accounting it requisite yt ye Minister may take particular knowledge of all those yt are to have communion in the whole worshipp of God ; And herein (to deal plainly) yt nothing may hereafter bee laid as a block in our way ; we desire that in this examination by ye Minister or Ministers and Elder wee may issue in their questioning and examining only. And whereas we have openly, solemnly, wholly and only ingaged ourselves to be the Lord's, who hath graciously taken us into Covenant with himself and his faithful people ; we desire, yt in the owning hereof, wee may not be further trouble with any imposition of that nature. The exercise of your tenderness unto us wee cannot but hope for, according as you are allowed. Ro. 14:1.
February 9th, 1665-6.
JOSEPH JUDSON, JOHN MINOR,
RICHARD BUTLER, JAMES BLACKMAN,
DAVID MITCHELL, HENRY WAKELYN,
SAMUEL SHERMAN,
DANIEL TITTERTON."
Woodbury History, i. 116.
175
First Church in Stratford.
Here they make a condition or demand, that in owning the Covenant the minister or ministers and elder shall be the only parties admitted to the examination. They go further and with scorn stigmatize the examination before the Church, which was the custom then, an "imposition," thus :
" And whereas we have openly, solemnly, wholly and only engaged ourselves to be the Lord's, who hath graciously taken us into Covenant with himself and his faithful people ; we desire that in the owning hereof, we may not be further troubled with any imposition of that nature."4
These letters were written in January, 1665-6, a short time after Mr. Chauncey's settlement, and to them a reply was sent the next April which shows that the particular questions at issue were the communion and examination of candidates by the minister alone :
" Whereas we received from you two writings, the sum of both which was to hold forth your earnest desire as to communion in all the ordinances of Christ with us, These are to give you to understand that our apprehension concerning the order of discipline is the same that we have formerly manifested it to be, both by our practice and answer to your proposals. And whereas you apprehend you have equal right with ourselves in all the ordinances of Christ in this place, these may certify you at present that we are of a different apprehension from you in that matter.""
4 The italics are in the original.
5 " Church Answer to the Men."
"Neighbors, whereas wee received from you two writings the sum of both which was to hold forth your earnest desire as lo communion in all the ordinances of Christ with us, These are to give you to understand that our apprehension concerning the order of discipline is the same that we have formerly manifested it to bee, both by our practice, and answer to your proposalls. And whereas you apprehend you have equall right with ourselves in all the ordinances of Christ in this place, these may certifie you at present that we are of a different apprehension from you in that matter. And whereas you desire that your posterity may : etc wee would put you in mind that as yet the matter is in controversie among the learned and godly. Likewise whereas you seem to intimate in the close of your first page that you have taken offence at our late proceedings, but as you say upon the granting of the premises are willing to pass it by ; we return no more at pres-
.
176
History of Stratford.
The minority mention only one condition as ground of reception, viz: that of repentance, in their first letter, but claim membership by virtue of birth-right: "desiring also that wee and our posterity may be owned as immediate members of the Church of Christ by you."
Hence their views of membership were those, very nearly, of the Episcopal Church, except as to confirmation, and this they doubtless would have accepted very readily at the hands of a Bishop.
The Rev. Adam Blakeman died somewhere between April, 1665, and the next January, and hence Mr. Israel Chauncey was installed that year as pastor, and on Dec. IS, 1666, by town vote, his salary was fixed at sixty pounds per annum.
At the same time the town voted to divide the parsonage lot which had been appropriated according to a previous vote
ent but this, viz : wee hope if you had sufficient ground so to doo, the godly and learned would have spied it out, and have endeavored to convince us of our evills herein. . Lastly, whereas in your latter page you prescribe the way wherein you desired to be attended : viz : you account it requisite : etc : To which we answer in the words of Paul in another case, wee have no such custom nor the churches of Christ with whom we hold communion, and moreover it is practised you know by those whose principles in discipline are farr different from ours. And truly neighbours, as it relates to your case, (notwithstanding wee gladly and heartily desire ye increase and enlargement of ye Church when it may be attained in a rulable and satisfactory way yet) we must plainly tell you that we cannot at pres- ent see how it will stand with the glory of God, the peace of ye Church and our and your mutuall edification (which ought to bee deare unto us, and earnestly sought by us) for you t, embody with us in this society: The Apostle Paule exhorts the Corinthians, and so all that walk together in church fellowship : I Romans 10, to avoid divisions and to be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment, otherwise it is not likely we should keepe the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, to which we are exhorted, Eph. 4:3. And notwithstanding wee give this answer in generall to you all that were concerned in the pages presented to us ; yet you may easily imagine that we have particular exertions as it relates to particular persons whereof we find that we are thereunto called, wee shall manage and desire satisfaction in before they are admitted to communion in all the ordinances.
April 16, 1666.
This is a true Coppe of ye answer given unto us as it was tryed by both papers. Church Answer to the men."
Woodbury History, i. 117.
177
First Church in Stratford.
and to give "one quarter part of it to Mr. Chauncey and a quarter part of it to Mr. Peter Bulkley or any other man by that party obtained that now endeavors for Mr. Bulkley."
This is the first' record that indicates a division of effort, in the form of another or second church; but the further statement of the vote at this time shows that the matter had matured to a large degree, for it says :
" And that which shall be laid out to Mr. Chauncy, shall by him be improved as his during his life or continuance in Stratford, and in case of removal the said land is to return to the town again. . . . . . It is also agreed in case Mr. Bulkley or any other minister be obtained, he shall have, hold and enjoy his part in every respect as Mr. Chauncy doth.
" It is further agreed respecting a house lot, the reserved land for that purpose shall be equally divided into two lots and Mr. Chauncy is to have his choice which of the two he will please to have."
Upon this agreement of the two parties application was made to the General Court to sanction the division, if there was nothing in the law against it ; and the Court granted the request, and directed that "from henceforth they shall all jointly make payment of their proportions towards the main- tenance of Mr. Chauncy till there be another minister at Stratford there cohabiting."
During the year 1667 the division made further progress, but as far as any records show took no new form, no violent conflict, other than that given above ; and the representations other than here given seem wholly gratuitous. There was a division of sentiment as to church relations and privileges, brought out upon the settlement of Mr. Chauncey and at the decease of their former minister, and it took the form of a separate church within one year, but no legal organization was secured. Had there been any way for the dissenting party to have connected themselves with the Episcopal Church there can be no doubt but they would have done so, for their views were in accord with that Church, and it is probable that something of these views, after this discussion,
I78
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.