USA > Connecticut > Connecticut in transition: 1775-1818 > 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 | 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
59 For a discussion of this point, see Albert E. McKinley, The Suffrage Fran- chise in the Thirteen English Colonies in America, pp. 424-425.
60 Diary, I, 147.
51
THE BAPTIST CHURCH
cution in the very usage of the words "toleration" and "dissenter." He would not be appeased.
During the Revolution Connecticut Baptists read such pamphlets as Isaac Backus's An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty, The Exact Limits between Civil and Ecclesiastical Government, and Israel Holly's An Appeal to the Impartial. Backus, as a leading American Baptist, ex- erted a wide influence. The logic of the Baptist contention appealed to thinking men, for it was indeed strange that Puritans who once fled in terror from a royal church should themselves set up what was to all practical purposes a persecuting establishment. Then attention could not be diverted from the inconsistency of New England refusing re- ligious freedom to dissenters who were assisting in the struggle for political independence.
The general Act of Toleration in 1784 in no respect met Baptist de- mands for a free church within a free state. They were quite wrought up over the various projects to sell the Western Reserve and use the proceeds as a fund for the support of the Congregational ministry and the schools.61 This opposition was one of the reasons why it was found advisable to use the lands only as a school endowment.
In 1794 Rev. John Leland addressed a crowd of angered Baptists from the capitol steps, urging them to join in bringing about reform, freedom of conscience, and a complete disestablishment. Leland, though his pastorate was in Cheshire, Massachusetts, became a spokesman for the Connecticut Baptists. He had recently removed from Virginia where he had energetically supported the reform movement which re- sulted in 1786 in the separation of church and state.62 This gave him a crusader's zeal for the combat with New England reaction. In 1801 he delivered a telling criticism of the Congregational system in his sermon, A Blow at the Root. The following year he published The Connecticut Dissenters' Strong Box, containing one of his earlier productions, The high-flying Churchman stript of his legal Robe appears a Yoho, besides the dissenters' petition, Connecticut's ecclesiastical laws, and extracts from the various state constitutions, showing that sixteen states recog- nized the rights of conscience and three of these the doctrine of church and state. In 1806 he appeared in print with a tract, Van Tromp lower- ing with his peak with a Broadside, containing a plea for the Baptists of Connecticut. He severely indicted the Standing Order with its tithed,
61 Greene, Religious Liberty, pp. 380 ff.
62 Greene, Religious Liberty, p. 374.
52
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
worldly ministry; and pleaded for a pure ministry and voluntary Gospel support. No single man did more to educate his people and the general public to demand religious freedom.63
Leland was one of the first to realize the need of a written constitu- tion as a safeguard against legislative infringements, and as the only means of perpetuating the blessing of religious liberty. He furthermore maintained that, as the interests of New England Federalism and the state religions were mutual, those opposed to state churches must cast their lot with the Republican opposition. Nor did he fear a coalition with ungodly Republicans. He agreed with the anonymous writer who said:
You now, perhaps, may feel yourselves authorized to repeat the charge that we are acting in concert with infidels; and why should we not be, so far as infidels make use of right reasons? I have attempted to make appear that so far they are nearer to revelation than any kind of a State church, as such whatever.64
His arguments led the Baptists, and incidently other dissenters, to join the party of their interests and principles. To the charge that in making onslaughts on legislation supporting the Gospel he furthered deism, he advised his opponents:
If you wish to prevent the spread of deism and infidelity, renounce State aid and convince the world that religion can stand alone; let it never be said that a cow, or a dollar, or a cent is taken from any widow or man, by the constable, to complete your salaries or pay for your temples.65
The work of Leland encouraged the Baptists persistently to petition the Legislature for redress. In these petitions it was argued that a legally supported ministry was contrary to God's law, and that the certificate law wounded the conscience even when it occasioned no real persecu- tion. If, as the Congregationalists held, it was a mere trifle, let the state give it up. The three pence on tea, it was recalled, was only a trifle. Then the certificate law left unchurched Baptists at the mercy of the tithe-reeve, as well as dissenting non-resident land owners. Why not tax your actual enrolled membership, it was asked. Here they struck to the quick, for it was generally feared that such a plan would leave an unsupported ministry and put a premium on non-affiliation. The peti- tioners expatiated on the evil of established churches, which, they
63 About this time the Windham Herald press published a "Review of the Ecclesiastical Establishments of Europe," by R. Huntington.
64 The Age of Inquiry (1804), by a True Baptist, p. 16.
65 Leland, Sermon, Apr. 9, 1801.
53
THE BAPTIST CHURCH
argued, had always stimulated infidelity. Attacks on the Anglican church probably alienated the Episcopalians. If so, their methods were more honest than politic. Some of the petitions urged that there was no constitutional basis for the establishment, for King Charles would not have granted such a privilege to dissenters. Hence they humbly prayed that their sufferings be alleviated. Their arguments against the ungodli- ness of a compulsory church tax were not unlike those of Abraham Bishop. Nor is it improbable that there may have been some collabora- tion. John Leland at any rate subscribed to the views advanced by his brethren petitioning against "fettered religion." 66
These memorials offer a close parallel to the later abolitionist peti- tions which tormented and puzzled Congress. The 1802 petition died in the Lower House committee. That of 1803 gained a hearing, only to be lost by the strictly party vote of 131 to 45. At this time the Baptists vainly appealed for Methodist support, for Bishop Asbury saw no rea- son why Methodists should further the interests and liberties of a sect which railed against Episcopacy in whatever form.67 In 1804 another petition was lost by 106 votes to 77.68 Every session was favored with a petition until 1818, though the Council did not so much as take them under consideration until 1815. These petitions, subscribed to by thou- sands, it was said, were widely circulated. Advertised by Republican papers, they were fathered in the Assembly by Republican leaders and supported by a solid phalanx of the Republican votes. In this way the alliance between Republican and Baptist was tightly cemented.
The Baptists became an important element in the Republican party as early as 1802 when Bishop appealed to them and all other humbler dissenters against "the sultanlike professors" of the established order. A Baptist pamphleteer thus urged Republican claims:
Republicanism, as the source of civil liberty and happiness, dictated by reason in the state-would never be affected with licentiousness and disorder, were it not for the opposition of its enemies, and the principles which lead to monarchy and aristocracy-its parallel in the church, as the source of re- ligious liberty and spiritual happiness, dictated by revelation.69
66 Bishop, Address (1802), pp. 84 ff .; "Old Hundred," in Mercury, Apr. 22, 1802; David Daggett, Broadside (1803), Bentley, Diary, III, 192. There is good ma- terial in the following issues of The American Mercury: June 4, 1801, July 7, 1803, Oct. 4, 11, 1804.
67 Journal, III, 404.
68 For votes, Mercury, July 14, 1803, May 31, 1804. See Emily Ford, Notes on the Life of Noah Webster, I, 527-528. Webster along with Oliver Ellsworth acted on the committee which rejected the 1802 petition.
69 The Age of Inquiry (1804), p. II.
54
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
Such appeals were timely; for they removed any conscientious scruples against acting with a party whose members were so generally held up for execration. Baptist elders did not hesitate to offer prayer at Repub- lican celebrations or occupy positions of honor at Republican banquets.
While actual figures showing Baptist strength are not available, enough statistical material is at hand to make clear the importance of the sect as an element in the opposition party. Dr. David Field, a Con- gregational minister, estimated the number of Baptist families in Middle- sex County at 489 out of a total of 3,688, or about thirteen per cent.70 There is no reason to believe that this county was more of a Baptist stronghold than any of the other counties save Litchfield. In 1818 an im- partial statistician reckoned that the Baptists had ninety-seven societies plus four insignificant unorganized groups. The annual Almanack and Register listed about eighty-six societies, whereas Morse and Morse in their usually very accurate Guide estimated that there were ninety Baptist societies or sixteen more than the number granted to the Episco- palians. In 1820 a Baptist historian thought that there were about seventy-three societies with 7,503 communicants.71 While these figures do not square, it is easy to explain away the inconsistencies, as the num- ber of societies fluctuated and as some authorities counted unorganized groups. At any rate, their number stiffened the Baptist demands and vastly aided in the Toleration-Republican triumph.
4. The Methodist-Episcopal Church
Connecticut Methodism had a short history at the time under con- sideration. Jesse Lee, that successful itinerant exhorter, may accurately be said first to have thrust its belief on the attention of the state in his "iter" of 1789.72 While its early growth was discouragingly slow, time attested that Connecticut was a fallow field for Methodist endeavors.
The introduction of Methodism was made comparatively easy by
70 Statistical Account.
71 These figures are computed from the town statistics given in the Pease and Niles Gazetteer, and the Almanack and Register for that year. See Guide, p. 91; Burrage, Baptists in New England, p. 235.
72 Nathan Bangs, History of the Methodist Episcopal Church, I, 288-290. III, 365 ff. As to the possibility of earlier Methodists, see Gold, Cornwall, p. 175; Al- vord, Historical Address, pp. 24-26; Anderson, Waterbury, pp. 693 ff.
55
THE METHODIST-EPISCOPAL CHURCH
the statute of 1784 which guaranteed to Methodists the right of dissent, if properly certified to some organized society. A supplementary act of 1791 gave this privilege to all Christians, but compelled the filing of a certificate with the clerk of the Congregational society as proof that they were supporting a near-by society of their own persuasion.73 While the enactment did not prove as liberal in the working as in theory, it was more tolerant than the system in vogue in frontier Ver- mont until 1801 or Massachusetts until 1814.74
Hence it was possible for a small group of Methodists to deposit certificates of dissent with the clerk of the Congregational society and maintain a station on the circuit of some exhorter. This much the Meth- odists owed to the strivings of fifty years on the part of the earlier dis- senters.
Furthermore, early Methodism was advanced on account of the low tone of religious life and the weakening hold of Congregationalism on the people, as evidenced by their "certificating themselves" on grounds other than those of conscience. The materialistic reaction after the Great Awakening, along with the increasing discontent among the poor and lowly with the political, social, and religious organization of the state, also aided the new sect. But finally its astounding growth must be accredited to the frantic enthusiasm of the early adherents and to the tireless work of the zealous circuit rider.
The following short sketch of the growth of Methodism will bring out fully enough the methods employed by the circuit preachers, the reasons for their success and the petty persecution to which its adherents were subjected. On the other hand, it will be seen that the conservative Standing Order was not without grounds for their opposition to and fear of what they honestly regarded as overturning, revolutionary prac- tices in the garb of religion. By chronicling their advance in this and that locality the reader will gain some idea of their numerical strength.
Stratford has the honor of being the seat of the first legally estab- lished Methodist society in the state. Consisting in 1789 of only three charter members, even its founder, Jesse Lee, could hardly have waxed exultant over the future. However, its membership was increased by those of little faith, who preferred to support voluntarily the Methodist
73 Conn. Statutes, p. 575; Swift, System of the Laws, I, 146; Loomis and Cal- houn, Judicial History, P. 55.
74 Laurer, Church and State, pp. 98-99.
56
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
church rather than the establishment.75 This was a period, it might be suggested, when all taxes were a grievance to the more contentious of the Connecticut Yankees. Later in that same year Jesse Lee enrolled two or three persons in a society at Redding. As great as was the opposition of the town officials, their money-making propensities inveigled them into renting the town house to the Methodist elders. By 1811 this hum- ble society was in a position to build a plain, unpainted, steepleless church. In the next few years small groups were organized at Norwalk, Fairfield, Milford, Danbury, Canaan, Windsor, Haddam, Middle Had- dam, East Hartford, Cornwall, Waterbury, and Gales Ferry.76 A society was established in New London by a converted Congregationalist min- ister, despite the vexatious persecution to which he, an apostate, was subjected. Yet it only offers another instance of a religious society thriving under persecution, for in a couple of years a church was built, and by 1819 there were about three hundred and twenty members. Even New Haven was invaded in 1795.77
During the decade of 1790 Bishop Asbury made several tours through Connecticut to stimulate members and missionaries and to con- solidate the scattered societies. Incidentally his own enthusiasm, ser- mons, and exhortations resulted in more conversions. His Journal affords the best source of information regarding Methodist efforts and the dis- couraging obstacles everywhere to be surmounted.78 Sometimes con- sciously, then unintentionally he tells of the petty persecutions and the unchristian tone of his reception. In some towns he was confronted with an openly hostile, mob-like gathering; town halls and meeting places presented locked doors; and at times his ardor met only a chilling coldness. New Haven's frigid treatment he could only describe as a "curious reception." President Stiles heard him at this time, but, con- trary to his usual custom, made no observation of moment in his diary.79
Asbury carefully noted the few kindnesses which he received, such as the use of a town hall or when thriving Baptist organizations honored
75 Bangs, Methodist Church, I, 291. Cf. Larned, Windham County, II, 233-234.
76 Todd, Redding, pp. 113 ff .; Field, Haddam and East Haddam, p. 39; Stiles, Windsor, p. 440; Field, Statistical Account, p. 62; Avery, Ledyard, p. 54; Stiles, Diary, III, 417; Asbury, Journal, III, 255, 291; Bangs, Methodist Church, II, 353.
77 Caulkins, New London, p. 595; Barber and Punderson, History and Antiqui- ties of New Haven, pp. 29-30.
78 Journal, II, 102-106, 137, 198, 227, 231, III, 242. Supplement with Moses L. Scudder, American Methodism, pp. 465 ff.
79 Diary, III, 420.
57
THE METHODIST-EPISCOPAL CHURCH
him with the use of their pulpits. Apparently Baptists and Methodists, in the face of opposition of the Congregational order, worked in more than usual harmony, even though appealing to the same social class.80
At times to the man in the saddle Connecticut seemed an unpropi- tious field for evangelical labors. Still, by 1800, the foundations had been laid. The revivals of that year, with their renewal of interest in spiritual affairs, helped to increase the Methodist following.81 Then too, like the Baptists, they found an advantage in the association between dissent and Republicanism. Dissent came to be political as well as religious. Log- ically the Methodist could be but democratic in feeling and Republican in party, for he was invariably one of the submerged group, if the term can be used in connection with the social life of the commonwealth. At all events, the period of political troubles and bitter partisan rivalry tinged with religious persecution proved conducive to the growth of Methodism.
East Hartford organized a society in 1800. Sharon, a few years later, witnessed in the entrance of dissent the first breach in the town church. Vainly, but bitterly, did they attempt to stifle the schismatic revolt. The New Haven society was large enough by 1807 to warrant a build- ing and later to be taken off the circuit. Cornwall, Norwich, Hamden, Waterbury, Burlington, Saybrook, Seymour-all organized churches in the next decade. In Granby it was said that the Methodists outnumbered the more respectably rated Episcopalians. Middletown, destined to be- come the seat of a Methodist college, was taken off the circuit by 1816, so strong had its society become. All Connecticut, not excepting Litch- field County, which longest remained immune from infectious dissent and Republicanism, felt the effects of Methodism as a rival religious movement and as a quickener of the Congregational pulse.82
Congregational opposition to the Methodist movement has been 80 For evidence forcing a modification of this statement, Asbury, Journal, III, 104.
81 By 1801 there were about 1,600 Methodists in the state. Greene, Religious Liberty, p. 407; Abel Stevens, History of the Methodist-Episcopal Church, IV, 63; Bangs, Methodist Church, II, 101; Scudder, American Methodism, pp. 264-265.
82 The paragraph is written chiefly from the following: Goodwin, East Hart- ford, p. 145; Church, Address, p. 36; Dwight, Statistical Account, p. 43; Barbour, New Haven, pp. 29-30; New Haven Historical Society, Papers, III, 163; Gold, Cornwall, p. 175; Caulkins, Norwich, p. 322; Field, Statistical Account, pp. 47-49; Anderson, Waterbury, pp. 693 ff .; Rev. Hollis Campbell, Seymour, p. 37; Noah A. Phelps, History of Simsbury, Granby, and Canton, p. 112; Goodenough, Clergy of Litchfield, p. 160.
58
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
noticed, though it is a phase of the religious struggle which merits ob- livion, for its bickerings and sectarian jealousies were quite unworthy. However, one can readily appreciate the fear of staid, conservative lead- ers. Methodism even more than other sectarianism seemed a menace as a revolutionary movement closely associated with a political party, sus- pected and accused of plotting the destruction of both religion and the state.83 To the minister of the Standing Order, the untutored exhorter fresh from the shop or field was a demagogue ranting the Word of God. The Methodist ministry, if possible, was even more primitive than that in which the Baptist gloried.84 Their large, often unauthorized camp meetings were the source of much annoyance; for Connecticut was not in favor of anything but the most orderly, godly revival; and many a minister questioned the propriety of any revival. That there were ir- regularities in connection with these camp meetings is not to be doubted, nor on the other hand is all the gossip to be credited.85 Some of the criti- cism can be accounted for in that such meetings were an innovation and hence unwelcome. Robbins wrote: "The Methodists go great lengths in fanaticism. They hurt their own cause." Again he noted a "Methodist camp meeting-which was most outrageous." 86 The novelty finally wore off, for one finds the good old orthodox Hartford Courant adver- tising a camp meeting for Ellington in 1810.87 Fearon in his travels noticed that the Methodists were generally despised as fanatics.88 Wil- liam Tudor in his letter on religion considered their lack of respectabil- ity as due to their wandering, whining preachers with their calls for enthusiasm so unsuited to the climate or likings of New England.89
In estimating the number of Methodists there is valuable material in the published minutes of the annual conferences of 1813 to 1818, with reports from the various circuits.90 The individual figures for the towns appear fairly trustworthy, though sectarian loyalty may have condoned
83 Cf. Larned, Windham County, II, 282-284; and Barstow, New Hampshire, PP. 425, 443.
84 Scudder, American Methodism, ch. iv; cf. North American Review, IX, 240-260.
85 Dwight, Sermon (1801), p. 17; Gold, Cornwall, p. 72; Larned, Windham County, II, 333-334; Church, Salisbury, p. 36; Scudder, American Methodism, pp. 465 ff.
86 Diary, I, 90, 450.
87 Aug. 15, 1810.
88 Henry B. Fearon, Sketches of America, pp. 161 ff.
89 Letters, p. 69.
90 Yale Pamphlets, Vol. 1233.
59
THE SMALLER RELIGIOUS BODIES
the lack of scrupulous accuracy in the desire to demonstrate progress. The reports were neglectfully incomplete, for, all told, they accounted for only fifteen towns when there were certainly fifty-three societies, large or small, within the state, or one to every four Congregational societies.91 Even so, these figures enumerate something like 5,532 white and 114 Negro communicants. The inclusion of the Negro is interesting as indicating the class in society to which an appeal was made. That these figures do not represent more than one-half of the Methodist total seems probable, for one must consider that dissenters could legally at- tend and support a church of their creed even if across the state line. This being the case, many Methodists no doubt worshipped in the chapels of the bordering states.
As Methodists increased in numbers their opposition to the Congre- gational order became more determined. Realizing that their hopes were bound up in the success of the reform party, they early followed their Baptist brethren into its ranks.
5. The Smaller Religious Bodies
Universalism appeared about 1792 when Southington was said to be infected. The Universalists then organized a society. Canterbury was disturbed by a Universalist revolt when a small group organized them- selves into the Independent Catholic Christian Society with a short tenure of life. Norwich was said to have a society in 1820. President Dwight knew of only one Universalist body in 1810; and in 1818 the Connecticut Gazetteer enumerated but two bodies, one in Newtown and another in Somers.92
There were probably more Universalists, for towns like Middletown and Killingworth together had at least seventy families. In Windham County there were known to be twenty families, but no societies.93 The settled clergy asked: Why should a Universalist be dependent upon a ministry? Naturally as a tithe payer every Universalist was opposed to
91 Pease and Niles, Gazetteer, p. 32; Morse and Morse, Guide, p. 91.
92 Timlow, Southington, p. 311; Rev. Andrew Hetrick, Historical Address, p. 19; Caulkins, Norwich, p. 323; Dwight, Travels, IV, 444; Pease and Niles, Gazet- teer, p. 32.
93 Field, Statistical Account; Larned, Windham County, II, 391.
60
CONNECTICUT IN TRANSITION: 1775-1818
the religious constitution. As they were known to be democrats to a man,94 no sectarians were more disliked by the Congregationalist who felt that, like that of the atheist, deist and Unitarian, a Universalist's oath should not be accepted, for it lacked the restraining fear of a future life.
Unitarianism as a religious system first attracted notice about the be- ginning of the nineteenth century, when two clergymen were removed from their parishes for this heresy.95 Rev. John Sherman, one of the men expelled, wrote in 1805 an apology in defense of his creed. In 1806 the Rev. Henry Channing, a believer in Unitarian doctrines, was dismissed at his own request from the pulpit of the New London society. As Uni- tarians were classed as deists and held guilty of a felony, their history was shrouded in darkness.96 The orthodox estimate of the Unitarian was well summed up in the following: "The professed Deist gives Christian- ity fair play. If she cannot defend herself, let her fall. But the Unitarian Christian assassinates her in the dark." 97 Writers tabulating religious statistics excluded Unitarians as of no importance. While the local Epis- copalian historian may be justified in his belief that the Episcopalian fold proved the haven for those in Connecticut who sought escape from rigid Puritanism, just as the Massachusetts "intellectuals" found solace in Unitarianism,98 yet the fact that Unitarianism never thrived in the state explains the united Congregationalism which stood so long against the reform party.99 Unitarians like Universalists were ardent Tolera- tionists, Channing, one of their leaders, being active among the reform- ers.
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.