USA > Connecticut > Contributions to the ecclesiastical history of Connecticut > Part 11
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
Observe the contrast yet further, with respect to some cir- cumstances of each scene. The area of the State of Connec- 16
114
ticut is less than five thousand square miles. Wisconsin em- braces more than fifty thousand. At the date we have in mind, the population here has grown slowly, through three quarters of a century, to fifteen thousand souls. There, ten years have spread over the Indian hunting grounds more than three hundred thousand. Here, the population is select and homogeneous in respect of origin, domestic and social customs and religious faith and practice. There, it is mixed and di- verse, drawn by immigration from all civilized nations, with different languages and habits and representing all shades of Christian faith and unchristian skepticism. Here, the pressure of tyranny, felt by the earlier fathers and remembered by their sons, binds all together for the maintenance of highest public freedom. There, freedom enjoyed, without being appreciated, tends to disintegrate society under the prevalent maxim, " Every man for himself in greatest individual liberty." Here, a sterile soil and the struggles and hardships incident to those times which tried men's souls, have developed habits of care- ful thrift and a spirit of self-sacrifice, There, the idolatry of mammon prevails, and genders wild speculation rather than patient industry ; and the abundant fruits of a fertile soil, gath- ered in peace, without care or fear, encourage profusion for present self indulgence. Here, all the institutions of civilized society make progress under a process of slow development, in which the depths are sounded and the bearings all taken, and with narrow sails, the whole movement is safe and strong and grand. There, every thing goes with a rush, and careless confi- dence at the helm hardly deigns to glance at the charts and tables prepared by past labor, and reckless presumption in the engine-room crowds on steam to the utmost, and the excite- ment of the race makes the eager voyagers almost heedless of the awful collapse or tremendous explosion by which, ever and anon, nature protests against the violation of her laws and warns them to "make haste slowly."
Now, for a moment, suppose those venerable Saybrook fathers suddenly called forth from their graves and sent out West to settle foundations there, in just the present condition of things ; or conversely, suppose those young western pioneers, such as they are, carried back a hundred and fifty years and
115
entrusted with that ancient work of the giants. Surely, it is no disparagement to them of the former age and no affectation of modesty in us of the present, to say that, in either case, nothing could have been fitly or succesfully done. See, then, the wisdom with which divine providence ordered the times and circumstances and relations of things. Wisely did God choose the time, and the place, and the men, and guide the process for the slow and sure unfolding of these precious Puri- tan principles, and the form of organization, through which their value was to be tested by first experiments. And, not in false assumption, but in simple faith, we may add, wisely has God chosen the time and the place and the men for carrying out the process on a grand scale by giving wide, rapid and varied application of these principles to all kinds of people for the ultimate transformation of the world. We have made out many points of strong contrast ; yet the work is really one, only viewed at different stages, widely separated. The labor of discovery and invention must precede that of application. The care and wisdom with which the fathers defined and illustra- ted their principles is the conservative element in the enthusiastic swift action of their descendants, the inheritors of those princi- ples ; and the very difficulties which attend and embarass the present stage of the work in those newer portions of the coun- try present that as the proper field for the ultimate triumph of those principles, and promise to unfold in due time, even in these striplings, the true strength and mettle of the noble stock from which they sprang. So we see realized another feature of the picture before referred to. She, whose face glows with the inspiration of hope as her eye dwells on bright visions of the future, sits leaning back upon her sister, whose soul wrapped in meditation on the past reads its lessons of wisdom, and the lessons of wisdom read by the one are the true source of in- spiration to the other.
Yes, the work is one. The contrast respects only external circumstances. The Puritan pioneers of the West, in organiz- ing Christian institutions there, have to study the same problem which exercised the minds of the Connecticut fathers. That problem may be propounded in a threefold form thus :
1. How shall beliefs be harmonized and defined in fixed
116
symbols of evangelical faith, without restricting private judg- ment, or abating the sense of personal accountability for opinions ?
2. How shall mutual co-operation and efficient combination be secured, without infringing individual liberty or relieving personal responsibility ?
3. How shall the great agencies for the work of education and the thorough evangelization of the country be established and maintained, without centralizing power, stimulating selfish ambition and chilling the glow of piety ?
This is no place to enter upon the discussion of this prob- lem. Yet it must and will surely be discussed. Earnest minds are now actively engaged in its discussion. Nowhere does the dispute run higher than in the region of country from which I come. Just now, the work which most needs to be done there seems to be hindered by the heat of this discussion Yet we may believe that God will overrule even this, in the final issue, for the more rapid extension of the Redeemer's king- dom. A final solution of the problem has not yet been found, and will not be, very likely, till the millenium.
By the very statement of the question, in either form, we make a balanced sentence. Two opposite tendencies of the human mind are to be reconciled. A great and good end is to be attained and a danger to be guarded against. Diverse an- swers will be given, according as he who attempts the solution leans, through the bias of natural temperament, education or existing relations, to the one side or the other. So we have two solutions proposed. Ecclesiastical control is the watchword, on the one hand, and untrammeled independency on the other. Each answer bears upon the problem, but the trouble is that either taken by itself provides for only one side of the case. Therefore, either pushed to its extreme is false and mischiev- ous. The one, seeking efficiency by centralization tends to- wards the despotism of the Papacy. The other, guarding liberty by standing aloof from necessary bonds and alliances, tends towards latitudinarianism in matters of faith and sepa- rate, discordant and therefore inefficient action. We approxi- mate a true solution only as we expand our views to embrace the whole end to be attained. In other words we must free our-
117
selves from intolerance and exclusiveness and with genuine catholicity of spirit, contemplate with single eye the wide- sweeping interests of the Redeemer's kingdom. We need not believe that all wisdom died with the fathers of Connecticut. Yet who can fail, considering what they did in their day and their circumstances, to wonder and rejoice that they were ena- bled with such large comprehension and clear foresight, to provide so well for the interests involved in both parts of the great question. I will not say that they reached a perfect result, or that the form of organization adopted by them is to be exactly imitated in all circumstances. But I do believe that the happiest result will be reached in all cases, in proportion as the question is met in the large, free spirit which animated them. In this respect they present a worthy example.
As a last remark, I offer a thought suggested by some of the historical facts presented this morning. It appeared that the times of greatest agitation and hottest dispute were times of great spiritual declension in the churches. The two things are reciprocally cause and effect. Our grand safeguard there- fore in all this work of building up the temple of God, which is the church of Christ, is in the pervading presence of the Holy Ghost, keeping each soul true in supreme devotion to the Head, and therefore humble, and because humble and obe- dient, wise to carry out his blessed plan. "Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord." Let us all take the lesson. May the Spirit of God ever dwell in these old churches of Connecticut to make them live and flourish, for centuries to come, on the foundations so wisely laid, centuries ago! May the same Spirit animate and guide the sons of Con- necticut and those associated with them in the present work of laying foundations for the building of God in the newer states ! May the one Spirit thus make the work one and advance all parts in harmony towards a blessed consummation for the good of men and the glory of God !
THE SAFETY AND WISDOM OF COMPLETE RELI- GIOUS LIBERTY, AS ILLUSTRATED IN CON- NECTICUT DURING THE LAST ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS.
-
BY REV S. W. S. DUTTON, D. D., NEW HAVEN, (THE MODERATOR. )
MR. SCRIBE :
I propose to speak briefly of the illustration, which we have in the history of the past one hundred and fifty years in Con- necticut, of the safety and wisdom of complete religious lib- erty, and of the peril and folly of restricting it : or the safety and wisdom of leaving the reception and support of religion wholly to the voluntary principle, without any legal or civil compulsion.
This seems very plain to us. But it was not so to our fa- thers. From the beginning of the colonies down to 1818, in Connecticut, and to a later period in Massachusetts, religious liberty was more or less restricted. It was not till then com- plete. It advanced to completeness by slow steps, and resisted steps as it regards Congregationalists-steps directly against the protests, the prayers and the efforts of our fathers. In this we see that God in his providence is wiser than the wisest of men.
Let us look at some of these steps or stages in the progress of religious liberty here.
At the beginning, in these Puritan colonies, all were com- pelled to support the Congregational order, which was the order of religion established by the civil government. And not only that, none had any liberty to worship publicly in any other way. Moreover, in those colonies, Connecticut excepted, men could not vote or hold any civil office, un- less they were members of some Congregational church. So close at first was the union of Church and State. The rigor of this rule began to be abated in 170S, when the General Assembly of the State passed the Act of Toleration, as it was called, by which all persons, who soberly dissented from the worship and ministry by law established, (i. e. the Congrega-
- - -------- - --
119
tional,) were permitted to enjoy the same liberty of conscience with the Dissenters in England, under the act of William and Mary ; i. e. they were exempt from punishment for not con- forming to the established religion, but not exempt from taxa- tion for its support. By appearing before the County Court, . and there in legal forms declaring their " sober dissent," they could obtain permission to have public worship in their own way, but were still obliged to pay for the support of the Con- gregational churches in the places of their residence. There was a further relaxation, as it regards Episcopalians, in 1727, and as it regards Quakers and Baptists in 1729. They were then exempted from taxation by the established churches, pro- vided they attended on the worship of God in a tolerated soci- ety of their own denomination. But Congregationalists and Presbyterians had no such exemption. If, for any reason, any of them wished to secede from churches or societies, and wor- ship by themselves, they were still obliged to pay their taxes for the support of the churches from which they had seceded. And even this small degree of liberty for seceding Congrega- tionalists and Presbyterians, was restricted by special acts of the Legislature, in the time of the "Great Awakening " of 1740, through the influence of the "Old Lights," or opposers of that Awakening. The Legislature, to suppress enthusiasm, as was alleged, repealed, in 1743, the Act of Toleration, so that thereafter none could secede from the established ecclesi- astical societies, (Congregational, ) and worship by themselves, without punishment, unless they should ask and obtain special permission from the Legislature ; which special permission, it was plainly intimated, Congregationalists and Presbyterians should not have. And in the previous year, 1742, for the same purpose of suppressing enthusiasm, i. e. suppressing the " New Lights," a law was passed to this effect, that if any ordained or licensed preacher should preach, or exhort, within the limits of any parish, without the consent of the pastor and majority of that parish, if he was from without the colony, he should be arrested and carried out of the colony as a vagrant. If he was from within the colony, he should be deprived of his sal- ary, and that without any trial, simply upon information, whether true or false, lodged by any person, with the clerk of
120
his parish. Also, if any person not licensed to preach, should exhort, within the limits of any parish, without the consent of the pastor and majority of that parish, he should for every such offense be bound to keep the peace, by any assistant or Justice . of the Peace, in the penal sum of one hundred pounds.
The operation of these severe restrictions on religious liberty is so well illustrated in the history of the church of which I am pastor, the North Church in New Haven, that I will make a few references to that history.
That church was organized in 1742, by a Council consisting of five ministers, one of whom was Dr. Bellamy, and was com- posed of members who favored the revival of religion which was then in progress, and seceded from the First Church in New Haven on account of the opposition of the pastor of that church, Rev. Mr. Noyes, and of the majority of the church to that revival, and to its chief promoter, the celebrated Whitfield. Yet they could gain no permission to form an ecclesiastical society, nor to hold public worship. They did have public worship however, but under much oppression. For eighteen years they were taxed for the support of the church which they had left, besides bearing a heavy voluntary burden for the support of their own church. Then, for a large part of that eighteen years they could have no regular minister, at least not without having him molested, fined and punished by the officers of the law. For attempting to preach to that church, Rev. Samuel Finley-afterward President of Princeton College, whose name is familiar to all who have read Dr. John Mason's eloquent Contrast between the Death of David Hume and that of Samuel Finley-was arrested and carried out of the colony as a vagrant. He had previously been treated in the same way for preaching to a church which seceded, or " separated," as the term was, for the same purpose, in Mil- ford. The tradition is, that Finley having been arrested on Saturday, in anticipation of his preaching, was kept in custody by the officer of justice on the Sabbath, and by him was taken to Rev. Mr. Noyes's church, and made to sit in the aisle-prob- ably to expose him as an offender against the laws, and to give him the privilege of hearing preaching and praying specially designed for his benefit.
121
Great was the hostility against the " Separates" of that day, who, according to our present views of religious liberty, should have been freely allowed to secede and form distinct churches ; and whose motive was, to say the least, honorable to their Christian zeal and devotion. And their oppression was often severe, as is seen by the laws enacted and enforced against them. One or two illustrations of this hostile feeling occur to me. The father of one of the deacons of the new (the Sepa- rate ) church in New Haven was deacon of the First Church. The child of the son died. The father, in a written note, de- clined to attend the funeral, because the son belonged to the "New Light" church ! After the frame of the "New Light" meeting house was prepared to be raised, all the long pieces of timber were cut in two in the night. The "New Lights " re- placed them by others, over which they kept guard. The late Chief Justice Daggett used to illustrate this state of feeling by an anecdote, which I will relate. He said that his father, who resided in the town of Attleboro, Mass., attended the Congre- gational church ; but being a Baptist in sentiment, he had some sympathy with the "Separates," many of whom were, or be- came, Baptists. Rev. Mr. Thacher, a minister of the vicinity, preaching on a certain Sabbath in Attleboro, in giving a sum- mary catalogue of those who would be excluded from the kingdom of heaven, ended off with the expression, "and all Separates." Mr. Daggett, meeting him during the week, said to him : "Mr. Thacher, I did not like that passage in your sermon, last Sabbath, in which you classed the Separates with thieves and liars, and others who would be excluded from the kingdom of heaven." "Oh," said he, " Brother Daggett, I meant those who are separate from all righteousness !" " Ah ! Was that your meaning ? Then, I think that when you preach here again, you had better explain it : for you was un- derstood to have a very different meaning." Mr. Thacher's reply may as well be added : for, though it does not further illustrate the point in hand, it does illustrate something else. " Brother Daggett, I am well aware that I am very liable to err. But, Brother Daggett, I have no knack at confessing !" There are many who have " no knack at confessing," especially men of strong will.
17
122
The Saybrook Platform, or the consociational system, was at that time made an instrument of restricting religious liberty. The Presbyterian or strict construction of its articles prevailed at that period, which made the consociation a judicial and au- thoritative tribunal. And this power was used to prevent the formation of "New Light" churches; the ruling party in- sisting that no new churches should be formed, unless they would agree to be bound by the Saybrook Platform, i. e. be consociated, and so far forth give up their Congregational liberty.
In the year 1784, another of the steps toward complete reli- gious liberty, which I am noticing, was taken. The legal es- tablishment of the Saybrook Platform was abrogated, leaving all free to worship with whatever denomination they preferred. All, however, were still taxed for the support of some church, the church of their choice. In the year 1818, when the new constitution was formed, this last restriction was removed ; and religion was left entirely to voluntary support. A plan which the experience of forty years has proved to be by far the best. And yet our fathers feared it, and protested, prayed and strove against it. They dared not trust complete religious liberty. They feared to leave religion to the free reception and support of the people. They thought that it would not do not to com- pel men to support that which they disbelieve. I have lately read over again a sermon, preached by Dr. Lyman Beecher, during the period when the question of the new constitution was pending, in which with all his eloquence he sets forth the plan of leaving religion to voluntary support, as one which would open the floodgates of ruin on the state.
I need spend only a few moments, in conclusion, in advert- ing to the evils of these restrictions on religious liberty, as they have appeared in our history.
1. The strict union of church and state which existed at the first was very disastrous. As only members of the established churches were allowed to vote or hold office, unrenewed men were tempted to become members of the church; membership was construed, also, to include all baptized persons ; and then, in order that children of parents not members in full standing, not participants of the Lord's supper, might be baptized, and so be
123
called members so far forth as to vote and hold civil office, the pernicious "Half-way-covenant " was invented and practised. Under such influences, the vital church was merged to a la- mentable extent in a mass of unconverted members. Uncon- verted men, to some extent, were in the ministry. The dis- tinction between those renewed by the grace of God and the unrenewed, between the real church and the world, was in a great measure obliterated; and the standard, both of religion and morals, became very low,-so low that it seemed that nothing but the extraordinary grace of God in the great Awakening of 1740 could have saved the churches from apostasy.
2. These restrictions, or some of them, tended to decrease Congregationalism and to increase other sects. At one period, as I have shown, if Congregationalists, dissatisfied with the administration of the church to which they belonged, seceded and formed another Congregational church, they were doubly taxed-i. e. for the new church and the old one also-by law for the old one, and voluntarily for the new one ; whereas, if they formed a church of another denomination, they were re- leased from taxation to the church which they had left. This, especially in the time of the great Awakening, resulted in the formation of many Baptist churches. The larger part of the Separate churches became Baptist, not because they preferred distinctive Baptist principles, but because the Baptists were Congregational in government, and for the most part in doc- trine, and they, by calling themselves Baptist, could escape the oppression of double taxation. Indeed, the formation of those Separate churches, and the earlier growth of the Baptist denom- ination in this state, was little more than a practical protest against the prevalent violation of religious liberty.
3. That state of the laws which obliged all to pay for the support of some church, but allowed them tochoose which, was found to favor the laxer kinds of religion. Infidels and Nothingarians, compelled to support some kind of religion and allowed to choose which, of course chose the least strict, both as to orthodoxy and practice. They practised on the principle of an infidel, who attended Matthew Hale Smith's church, when he was a Universalist minister in Hartford. Said he to Mr. Smith : "I go to hear you preach. But I don't believe your
124
doctrine. I go to hear you, because your doctrine is nearest to nothing of any that I know of!" This result, which I have described, was what might have been expected from such a state of the laws. And accordingly it has been found in Mass- achusetts especially, that the repeal of the law for the compul- sory support of religion has been a very severe blow to Unita- rianism, so prevalent there, and to all the laxer forms of Chris- tianity.
On the other hand, it has been found since religion has been put upon the voluntary principle and the free choice of men for support, that men generally have more interest in it, and are more active to extend it. And voluntary enterprise and gene- rosity in the work of Home Missions have done far more to build up waste places, and to prevent places from becoming waste, than was ever done, or could be done, by force of law.
But my time is up, and I must conclude. Let us lay to ยท heart the great lesson of this subject, and have entire faith, under God, in full religious freedom.
CONSOCIATED CONGREGATIONALISM.
- -
BY REV. JOSEPH ELDRIDGE, D. D., NORFOLK.
MR. MODERATOR :
Congregationalism, Consociated Congregationalism is my theme.
I love Congregationalism of every description, but acknowl- edge a preference for Consociated Congregationalism ; that of Connecticut, as distinguished from that of Massachusetts. My preference is not a hereditary feeling ; for I was born and re- ceived my early training in the Old Bay State. It is the result of my observation of its working in Litchfield County during a period of more than a quarter of a century. The Congre- gational churches of that county have been consociated from the beginning. During nearly the entire period of their history, they have settled and dismissed their pastors, and transacted all that ecclesiastical business, that is elsewhere performed by Councils, through the agency of the Consociation. In proof of the salutary operation of the system, I appeal with confi- dence to the general character of their pastors, past and pre- sent,-and to the condition of the churches.
Consociation has supplied those churches with a succession of ministers, competent and orthodox, faithful and devoted. Among the fathers, were Halleck, Griffin, Hooker, Bellamy, Backus, and others. There were giants in those days. Speak- ing of my immediate predecessors and cotemporaries, I can testify to their soundness in character and doctrine, to their fidelity and usefulness.
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.