History of the Second church of Christ in Hartford, Part 23

Author: Parker, Edwin Pond, 1836-1920
Publication date: 1892
Publisher: Hartford, Conn., Belknap & Warfield
Number of Pages: 496


USA > Connecticut > Hartford County > Hartford > History of the Second church of Christ in Hartford > Part 23


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


Your sorrowfull and disconsolate friends,


HARTFORD, Nov. 11th : 57.


JOHN WEBSTER, JOHN CULLICK, WILLIn GOODWIN.


[This letter - most of which we have given - mentions an "inclosed " paper containing "the ground of our withdrawing." That paper, unfor- tunately, has not been found.


This letter also, in a postscript, mentions " a former paper bearing date 26th October," which was probably the "remonstrance sent to the church at Hartford" (mentioned in the next paper), and which was afterwards " pub- lished and read in several churches," which has not been found. ]


270


History of the Church


XI


COMPLAINT OF NATHANIEL BARDING AND OTHERS OF THE CHURCH, AGAINST MR. WEBSTER AND OTHERS OF THE DIS- SENTING BRETHREN, PRESENTED TO THE GENERAL COURT.


The 4th of December, 1657 :


A Declaration of sevrall grievances and offenses given by Mr Webster, Capt. Cullick, Mr. Goodwin, and Andrew Bacon, and the other subscribers to a remonstrance sent to the Ch: of Christ at Hart- ford, now published and read in several churches, tending to the defamation of Mr. Stone and the Ch: at Hartford, and to the breach of the peace of the Chs. and commonwealth, which wee whose names are subscribed humbly present to this honored court for relief, helpe, and direction, desiring it may be duly considered. (See note to the pre- vious paper.)


Their offenses are these which follow :


I. Wee conceive that they have violated their covenant with us which they have not only made, but lately renewed in a solemn manner, and yet they repeat former [matters] which were all issued according to the Counsell of the late reverend Elders and Messengers sent from seven churches in Mattachusetts, whereby they make it appear that they refuse to stand to that determination, to which wee and the Ch: doe stand firmly according to our agreement and ingagement.


[But the withdrawers stood steadfastly by the result of the first Council - June, 1656 - which Mr. Stone condemned and publicly discredited. They affirmed (see next paper) that the Elders and Messengers from Massachusetts had never "been called or owned by us a Counsell"; and they charged Mr. Stone with breaking the Pacification made by those Elders and Messen- gers, and renewing the former offences.]


2. They have withdrawn themselves from all Ch: communion with us, not giving us any convincing reason out of the word of God for their withdrawing from us, &c., &c.


[The remainder of this specification is an amplification of the foregoing, charging the withdrawers with acting unreasonably both in their withdraw- ing and in their letters and papers, to the defamation of Mr. Stone, to the hurt of the Church, and the violation of the laws. And a third specification is added, which is given in our First Chapter, page 19, to the effect that the action of the withdrawers, if tolerated, will cause divisions of churches in other towns, &c.]


The reason why wee are necessitated to present these grievances and offences to the consideration of this honored court, is because these our brethren doe deny any Ch: relation to us; secondly, the Civill authority are by the appointment of God and by the lawes of this com-


271


Appendix I


monwealth to see that the peace, ordinances, and rules of Christ in every Ch: within this jurisdiction bee observed, &c.


NATHANIELL BARDING,


GEORGE STOCKING,


GEORGE GRAVE,


THOMAS SPENCER,


WILLIAM KELSY, JOSEPH EASON,


PAUL PECK,


JONIN BAYSY,


NATH. WILLETT.


[One, at least, of these signers afterward went over to the withdrawers. What fruit this complaint yielded may be seen by referring to Col. Records of Conn., vol. 1 : 311, 312, 318. See also our First Chapter, page 38.]


XII


LETTER FROM THE WITHDRAWERS TO GOVERNOR EATON AND REV. JOHN DAVENPORT OF NEW HAVEN.


[We give only certain sentences and a general account of this not very important letter. The writers affirm that they had never been a party to calling or owning the Elders and Messengers from Mass. as a Councell. They affirm the subscribers of the "remonstrance to the church at Hartford" were not allowed by Mr. Stone to speak to their paper before the church, and that these subscribers went to the Governor and Deputy, and offered in open court to make proof upon oath to the particulars in their remonstrance, but were not allowed to do so, because when'Governor Winthrop expressed willingness to hear them, Mr. Talcott and others vehemently objected on technical grounds, so that they were denied a hearing both in the church and in the court wherein they had been publicly accused. The entire paper may be read in second volume of Conn. Hist. Soc. Coll.]


XIII


FROM THE WITHDRAWERS TO OTHER CHURCHES OF CONNECTICUT AND NEW HAVEN COLONIES.


REVEREND AND DEAR SIR : -


Wee being necessitated toe make a reply to Mr. Stone's papers (in way of answer to ours) which himself and the Ch: hath sent to severall churches, you may please to understand that wee have sent you a true coppie of what wee sent in to Mr. Stone upon the 29th of the last moneth. Our humble request is that this our reply may be read to your ch: and though wee are (as we conceive) inforced to withdraw from the perticular church wee did belong toe, which is a great grief to our hearts, yett


272


History of the Church


we desire to holde our comunion with the churches of Christ as formerly. And yett not being able to content ourselves with that, but earnestly longing and desiring that wee might again be under the wing and government of Christ in his church, to enjoy and meete with him in all the waies of his instituted worship, have propounded our selves to the Ch: of Christ at Wethersfield for comunion with them thearein. Now thearefore, having found all former means by a councill and otherwise fruitless as toe a thorough healing, and that thear is noe other meanes within our viewe left but only to apeale to the churches and crave their judgment and help in this our afflicted state and condition : - Wee earn- estly intreate that as speedily as you may you would afoarde us what help you shall judg wee neede, as our case requires : either in that way we have taken of prpounding ourselves, or in any other that you shall discerne to be more according to a rule of Christ. [The remainder of the letter is unimportant. ]


Yor deeply afflicted friends and brethren in the Lord, in the name of the rest withdrawne.


JOHN WEBSTER, JOHN CULLICK, WILL: GOODWIN, ANDREW BACON.


HARTFORD, February 12th, 1657.


XIV


REV. JOHN DAVENPORT OF NEW HAVEN TO THE CHURCH AT WETHERSFIELD.


[A digest of this long letter is here given, with quotations of the most important paragraphs.]


The church at New Haven had already answered the letter of the Wethersfield church, in which advice had been asked concerning the propriety of receiving the Hartford withdrawers. Moreover, says Davenport, several of the Elders of the late Council had met in New Haven to discuss the same question, and Davenport had, by courtesy, met with them. He proceeds to give a brief account of what he has done to inform himself of the facts in the case, and then to deliver his opinion. He finds


Ist, "That the whole church at Hartford unanimously consented to call a council of Elders of that colony, with whom were joined Mr. Prudden of this colony, to give advice for the ending of the differences between them ; by which act the church did put the whole power of judging one another about the matter so referred out of their own hands into the hands of the council, with submission to their judgment, &c."


24, "That council thus ealled left their final determination with them in writing, subscribed by them all . first, that mutual satisfaction should be given on both sides to each other, by acknowledg- ing their faults in the particulars mentioned in that writing ; second,


Appendix I 273


that if differences should again break forth or not be healed, the dissenting brethren should crave their dismission, and the church should give it them."


3ª, Mr. Davenport mentions Mr. Stone's opposition to the Council's Result, "published to their reproach," and the Council's defense against his strictures.


4th, The Elders of the said Council all testify that the dissenting brethren " have fully attended " both parts of the Council's advice, and, when no peaceful settlement was obtained, asked for letters of dis- mission.


He then mentions the failure of the Pacification attempted by the Elders from Mass., and the final withdrawal of the minority, who would either form a distinct church or join some other, but the Hartford church would not permit them to do either.


5th, " The Elders of said council do further testify that Mr. Stone and the church at Hartford have violated the determination of the Council in both parts of its advice, by their never giving the satisfaction prescribed for the healing of offenses, and now by their not giving the offended brethren their dismission."


As to what should be done, Mr. Davenport remarks that the with- drawers are well known to be godly people. "They are for their num- ber and qualities a party not be despised." They have fulfilled their duties as defined by a mutual council, and the church has violated that council's determination. Their proximity to Wethersfield is noted as reason why they should be admitted there. The injustice of requiring all churches to refuse them admission is pointed out, and it is further remarked that such injustice would also bring all councils into disrepute and the Congregational way of church government into reproach. Mr. Davenport earnestly wishes that Mr. Stone & the Hartford church would be pleased to give the dissenting brethren their dismissions with - out any conditions or delay, but if they are resolved not to do this, he thinks the Wethersfield church may receive said dissenting brethren. He advises cautious procedure and the advice of a council on this point, but distinctly says that if the Wethersfield church should receive them it would be virtually sustained not only by himself but by the church in New Haven.


TESTIMONY AND COUNSEL OF THE REV. JOHN HIGGINSON OF GUILFORD.


[Of this very long letter or document such portions are here given as are of chief importance.]


In the first outbreak of difference between Mr. Stone and Mr. Good- win, Mr. Higginson endeavored to effect a reconciliation without a council. This was before the church was divided into parties. After the council had delivered its opinions, both parties sent to Mr. Higgin-


IS


274


History of the Church


son and appealed to him for advice. The question whether Wethersfield church should receive the withdrawers was submitted to him and to the Guilford church.


He gives his opinion on the whole question :


(1) The Council called to adjust the differences was a mutual one.


(2) It was the duty of that Council to set down their definitive sentence & decisive judgment, which they did : - " Satisfaction mutual for offenses given, separation by dismission of the dissenting brethren, in case of non-satisfaction."


(3) It was the duty of both the parties of the church at Hartford to submit to the definitive sentence of the Council; - to give satisfac- tion, or in case of non-satisfaction, the dissenting brethren were to ask and receive dismission.


(4) " The dissenting brethren have submitted to the judgment of the Council, in both parts of it. They have given satisfaction as they were advised to do." That failing, " they have desired their, dismis- sion."


(5) " Mr. Stone and the church there hath not submitted to the judg- ment of the Council, in neither part of it." They have not given sat- isfaction as they were advised to do, nor have they given dismission when it was desired.


" But instead of submission, Mr. Stone hath risen up in opposition to the Council, setting up his own judgment in his own case against the judgment of the Council ; frequently calling for disputation after their definitive sentence, openly in the face of the country publishing a confuta- tion of the judgment of the Council, and by restless endeavor procuring other Elders to come up from the Bay." This opposition to the Council by Mr. Stone hath been the blameable cause of the continuance and increase and multiplying of those contentions and disorders that have been since the Council : as also it hath given . . such a wound to the Congregational way, that except Mr. Stone's repentence be as publicly known as his sin in so doing, his example in this and the consequences of it is like to have a destructive influence upon all the churches in New England."


Mr. Higginson says the Magistracy of the colony should have seen that respect & submission were given to the determination of the Coun- cil, but the Magistrates were interested in the case and divided among themselves, and allowed the Elders of the Council to be " discouraged and discountenanced by a prevailing party growing up under the shad- dow of Mr. Stone."


Mr. Higginson gives his opinion that "notwithstanding Mr. Stone's opposition to the Council, and notwithstanding the different apprehen- sions of the Elders of the Bay (who were not called by both parties, nor so advantaged to understand the state of things in Hartford as the neighboring Elders were) yet the definitive sentence of the Council stands in full power, as it did at first."


275


Appendix I


He further says that the Pacification procured through the Elders of the Bay was "through importunity yielded unto by the dissenting brethren."


It did not nullify the power of the sentence of the previous Council, or the duty of submission to it. "I see not wherein the dissenting brethren can be blamed for desiring their dismission but Mr. Stone and the church are to be blamed for not granting their dis- mission."


Mr. Higginson had some legal scruples about the act of withdrawal without regular letters of dismission, and he discusses at some length " the defects of order " in the Congregational system. Finally he bears witness concerning the dissenters that they are "persons sound in the faith and of unblameable life ; " and adds that in case the Elders of the Council judge that their withdrawal has been according to the scope of their sentence, the withdrawers " are fitt either to joyn in church fel- lowship amongst themselves, or to joyne to another church as God shall direct and give them opportunity to do."


[It will be seen by the reader of these documents how perfectly the testi- mony and opinion of Mr. Higginson agree with those of Mr. Davenport. The full text of these two documents may be found in the Hist. Society's Coll., vol. II. The other documents in the controversy may be found there, but they are not of sufficient importance to be printed here. We have given such papers, or digests of them, as pertain to the facts in the case, and show the status and the animus of both parties in the controversy. The whole matter is of interest and instruction, as showing the first marked case of dissent from the established church in Connecticut. Here in New England Dis- senters found their way almost as hard as their fathers had found it in old England.]


APPENDIX II


PASTORS AND DEACONS OF THE CHURCH SUPERINTENDENTS OF THE SUNDAY-SCHOOL COMMITTEE, CLERKS, AND TREASURERS OF THE SOCIETY


.


279


Appendix II


PASTORS OF THE CHURCH


JOHN WHITING,


1670-1689


THOMAS BUCKINGHAM,


1694-1731


ELNATHAN WHITMAN, D.D., .


1732-1777


WILLIAM PATTEN, Colleague of Mr. Whitman, 1767-1773


BENJAMIN BOARDMAN, 1784-ISO2


ABEL FLINT, D.D., . ·


1791-1824


JOEL HARVEY LINSLEY, D.D., 1824-1832


CORNELIUS VANARSDALEN, D.D., . 1832-IS36


OLIVER ELLSWORTH DAGGETT, D.D., 1837-IS43


WALTER CLARK, D.D.,


1845-1859


EDWIN POND PARKER, D.D.,


IS60-


280


History of the Church


DEACONS IN THE CHURCH, SO FAR AS KNOWN


George Grave,


in office 1670 ;


died


1673


Stephen Hosmer,


1687.


John Wilson,


I688.


Samuel Smith,


1707


John Eston, .


171I


John Merrolds,


1712


Thomas Bunce,


1714.


Thomas Richards,


I730.


Thomas Seymour, Esq.,


Daniel Bull,


1776


Thomas Hosmer, Esq.,


1777


Medad Webster,


1793


Ebenezer Crosby,


1791 ;


1795


Jonathan Wells,


1791 ;


1794


Matthew Webster,


born in 1720 ;


ISO7


Thomas Seymour, Esq.,


chosen


1794;


died


1829


John Babcock,


1794;


died


1796


Joshua Hempstead, .


I795;


resigned 1818


Thomas Tileston,


1809;


aged 95 yrs.


Russell Bunce,


1818;


resigned 1821


Michael Seymour,


1820;


1830


Elijah Knox, .


1820;


1847


Elijah Porter Barrows,


1830;


I831


J. Hubbard Wells,


1830;


died


1862


George Corning,


1831 ;


1840


Zephaniah Swift,


1831;


1836


Albert W. Butler,


1839;


resigned 1852


Seth Terry,


1847;


died


1865


Henry L. Bidwell,


1852;


resigned 1858


Lucius Barbour,


1858;


Ashbel W. Barrows, .


I858;


1873


Thomas H. Welles, .


1862 ;


died


1887


Charles T. Webster, .


IS64;


1878


Nelson Kingsbury, .


1866;


resigned 1874


William H. Sumner, .


1870;


1877


William L. Squire, .


66


1873;


ISSI


Peter D. Stillman,


1852;


1880


66


( died


1837


( resigned 1809


1712


Daniel Merrels,


1767


1865


Appendix II


281


Franklin Glazier,


chosen 1878;


died 1889


Elnathan B. Frisbie,


1878;


resigned 1881


George H. Woods,


1880.


Charles S. Goodwin, .


18SI.


Charles S. Gillette, .


66


ISSI ;


died


1887


Henry E. Harrington,


188I.


George F. Hills,


1887.


Joseph A. Graves,


1887.


Hosmer Griswold,


1888.


282


History of the Church


SUPERINTENDENTS OF THE SUNDAY- SCHOOL


J. Hubbard Wells,


1828-9, 1830-5-6


D. F. Robinson,


1831


Zephaniah Swift, .


1832


John H. Goodwin,


I833-4


Peter D. Stillman,


1837-8, 1845-6


Simeon L. Loomis,


1839-40


Charles P. Welles,


1841-2-7-9


John B. Corning, .


1843


A. W. Butler,


1844


Henry S. Bidwell, .


1850


James Goodman, .


1851 to 1860-62-64


Henry C. Robinson,


1861, 1866-7 to 1871


Rowland Swift,


1863


Nelson Kingsbury,


1865


James H. Tallman,


1876-7-8-9


Rev. E. P. Parker, D.D.,


1880 to 1883


Olin H. Clark,


1884


Frank E. Hyde,


1885-7


Joseph A. Graves,


1886


Lucius F. Robinson,


.


IS88-93


Appendix II


283


COMMITTEE OF THE SOCIETY


[The first mention of a Committee in the Records of the Society is under date of Dec. 19, 1787, when Captain Aaron Bull and Mr. Joseph Church ask "to be excused from that office in which they have long served the Society."


The following list comprises the names of those who have served in that office.]


Thomas Seymour,


1787


Thomas Y. Seymour,


1787, 1798-1801


Jonathan Bull,


1787


Andrew Kingsbury,


1798-1801


Levi Robbins,


1798, 1801-4


Roderick Sheldon,


1799-1800


Zebulon Seymour,


1802-1806


Tim Barnard,


1802-1805


Richard Seymour,


1805-1806 1806


Reuben Wadsworth,


1807-1821


Elisha Shepard,


1807-1822


Elisha Williams, .


1807-1815


Sylvester Wells, .


IS22


Chauncey Barnard,


1823-1834


Charles Butler,


1823-1829


Henry Kilbourn, .


1823-1831


Horace Goodwin, .


1830-1831


Horace Goodwin 2nd,


1831-1835


George Putman,


1830-1831


D. F. Robinson,


1831-1837


Horace Seymour,


1832-1836


Freeman Seymour,


I835


William Johnson, .


IS36-1837


Horace Goodwin,


1837


James T. Hinsdale,


1837


Charles P. Wells, .


1837-1839


Samuel Dodd,


1838


Lewis Skinner,


1838


John H. Goodwin,


1839


Charles T. Webster,


1839


Simeon L. Loomis,


1840-1843


Samuel Dodd,


1840-1841


Between Dec. 19, 1787, and Jan. 11, 1798, no election of a committee is recorded.


Mack C. Webster,


1832-1835


Henry Seymour, .


1816-1822


James Wells,


284


History of the Church


Enoch C. Stanton,


1840-1841


Allen Porter,


1842-1843


Leander C. Burnham,


1842-1848


David F. Robinson,


1844-1849


Ellery Hills,


1844-1849


Charles T. Webster,


1849-1851


Peter D. Stillman,


1850-1860 1852


James H. Ashmead,


1853-1859


Lucius Barbour, .


1853-1864


Howell R. Hills,


1856-1859


Marshall Jewell, .


1856-1862


Edwin D. Tiffany,


1860-1862


George S. Gilman, Esq., .


1860-1862


William S. White,


1861-1864


Peter D. Stillman,


1863-1867


Henry A. Cooley, .


1864-1874


James H. Ashmead,


1864-1865


Nelson Kingsbury,


1865-1868


James Goodman, .


1865


George W. Moore,


1866-1872


Edward Kellogg, .


1866-1868


Frederick R. Foster,


1868-1874


Loren P. Waldo, Esq.,


1869


E. Palmer Tiffany,


1869-1874


Samuel C. Colt,


1870-1874


Charles H. Smith,


1873-1874


Nathaniel T. Pitkin,


1875-1879


Henry C. Dwight,


1875-1881


Albert L. Butler,


1875


Burdett Loomis, .


1875-1878


Alvan P. Hyde, Esq.,


1875-188I


Franklin Glazier, .


1876-188I


John R. Hills,


1879-1881


Charles S. Gillette,


1880-1883


William E. Baker,


1882-1893


Henry C. Robinson, Esq.,


1882-1889


George F. Hills, .


1884-1889


Henry E. Harrington,


1890-1893


Joseph A. Graves,


1890


Charles H. Northam,


1891-1893


H. F. Sumner,


1850-1852


Samuel Woodruff,


285


Appendix II


CLERKS OF THE SOCIETY.


[Such records of the Society as now exist are opened under date of Nov. 21, 1767, transcribed from "the original records" by John Ledyard. The first business meeting is recorded under date of Jan. 29, 1767 (copied from a former record), in the handwriting of the Society's Clerk, Daniel Shel- don. His handwriting continues until May 9, 1768. The record from Oct. 21, 1768, until Feb. 22, 1773, is made by some one person unknown, with the exception of meetings held April 12, 1769, and April 29, 1770, which are recorded by Thomas Seymour, clerk pro tempore ]


Daniel Sheldon,


1767-1768


Thomas Seymour, pro tempore,


1769-1770


Jonathan Buli,


1772-179S


William Whitman,


1798-1802


Henry Seymour,


ISO2-ISI4


James Babcock,


ISI4-1820


Charles Babcock,


IS20-IS24


Charles Shepard,


IS24-1829


Lewis Skinner,


1829-1843


John H. Goodwin,


1843-1847


Samuel Dodd.


IS47-IS52


Caleb L. Packard,


1852-1853


William Blatchley,


IS53-IS73


William L. Squire,


IS73-ISSI


John E. Morris,*


ISSI


* Still in office.


286


History of the Church


TREASURERS OF THE SOCIETY.


[Each of the following persons held the office until the election of his successor as recorded below.]


Jonathan Bull,


elected 1775


Barzillai Hudson,


I798


Consider Burt,


I802


Henry Seymour, .


. € 1805


George Burr,


IS2I


Daniel Hinsdale, .


IS24


Charles Shepard,


I828


Horace Goodwin 2d,


1829


D. F. Robinson, .


66


I83I


Charles P. Wells,


1834


James T. Hinsdale,


66


1836


F. A. Brown,


1837


John B. Corning, .


1841


John H. Goodwin,


1847


H. L. Bidwell,


I853


John H. Goodwin,


1854


Rowland Swift,


1856


Edwin D. Tiffany,


1864


George F. Hills, .


I868


Charles F. Gillette,


1875


James H. Knight,* * Still in office.


1880


Charles Shepard,


I832


IS35


Henry Francis,


APPENDIX III


[This appendix is a partial copy of the records of the Second Church of Christ in Hartford. The records up to 1860 are contained in three vol- umnes. The earliest now in existence was prepared by the Reverend Thomas Buckingham, and comprises the records of the church from the beginning, inclusive of those presumably kept by the Reverend John Whiting, the first pastor, the original of which has probably ceased to exist. This little book is six and one-half by six inches in size, and contains sixty-four pages. It is seemingly complete. Two leaves which are missing from the body of the book evidently contained no portion of the record, as its continuity is perfect.


The volume or volumes succeeding Mr. Buckingham's record, and prior to the pastorate of Reverend Dr. Flint (1730-1791), are missing and have probably been destroyed.


The second existing volume contains the record kept by the Reverend Dr. Flint, and covers not only the acts of the church, but a very full list of baptisms, marriages, and deaths.


The third volume covers the period from 1824 to 1860, and in it are found the baptisms administered by the Reverend Doctors Linsley, Vanarsdalen, Daggett, and Clark.


Mr. Buckingham's record is given in this appendix almost in its entirety, as is also the record of baptisms, marriages, and deaths kept by Dr. Flint, it having been thought best to present them in this way in order to preserve the quaintness of the phraseology and spelling. This is followed by an index, by means of which any name may be readily found. The baptisms recorded in the third volume are here arranged alphabetically, and require no index.]


288


History of the Church


REV. MR. BUCKINGHAM'S RECORD.


" Some Acts Done by the Second Church in Hartford after their Settlement in a Distinct State, ffebry 12 : 1669-


" March 28, 1677. The church having before chosen Mr. John White to the office of a Ruling Elder and He accepted it, He was accordingly this day ordained to and in that office in the presence and with the aprobation of the Elders and messengers of some neighbour churches.


" This Holy man having faithfully served the Lord in his place and that also with good success through grace (He was a good man and god was with him) fell asleap in Christ and went to receive his reward Janry 1683.


March 24, 1685, the church and children of it renewed the covenant as may be seen in the forme as it is written in a loose Sheete among the papers belonging to ye church."


[Here follows a record (commenced in the margin of the page) and very badly torn and defaced, continuing through the first and occupying also the whole of the second page, relating to matters of discipline, of which it is im- possible to make a complete copy, on account of the mutilated condition of the margin. The church rules and covenant begin at the top of the third page, which is also somewhat mutilated.]


" Having had the consent and countenance of the General Court and the advice of an ecclesiasticall councill to incourage us in imbodying as a church by ourselves, Accordingly, upon the day of compleating our distinct state (viz. ffebry 12, 1669), This paper was read before the messengers of the churches, and consented to by ourselves, viz .:




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.