USA > Connecticut > New London County > New London > The early history of the First church of Christ, New London, Conn. > Part 10
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
170
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
have a right to come to the Lord's Table, without being able to claim the experience of the new birth, provided they lived orderly and outwardly correct lives. If they might have the privilege of the one Sacrament, why not of the other also ? The step was . not far to the question why they should not be en- titled to a vote in the affairs of the Church. It was finally decided, however, by the convention of June 4, 1657, that persons who were come to maturity, ought " to own the covenant they made with their parents, by entering thereinto in their own persons." " Yet it was decided that while the children of those thus owning the covenant ought to be admitted to baptism, they themselves ought not to come to the Lord's Table, nor vote in Church affairs, till they had made a profession of personal regeneration." [Dunning. ] Instead of allaying strife the result of this council tended to foment, and prolong it. It is not our purpose to call the logic of this conclusion in question. But it is difficult to see, if the one point of baptism were yielded, why the other points would not follow, and why those, who might have their children baptized, might not also, for the same reason, come to the Lord's Table, and have a voice in the affairs of the Church. In fact, such came to be the result in many cases, to the great damage of the Churches, which became filled with members utterly lacking in
-
171
THE HALF-WAY COVENANT.
spiritual life and Christian character. The finding, or rather compromise decision, of 1657, was let- ting down the first bar. The others came down in succession, till often, regenerated character, was not required as essential to church membership; only an outwardly correct life. The battle of Unitarianism in the nineteenth century began to be fought during the last half of the seventeenth century.
The controversy waxed hotter and hotter, nor did it cease till it claimed, and in many cases secured, full Church privileges for those who were the bap- tized children of the Church, without exacting of them the usual Christian experience. They formed a kind of third estate. They were exemplary in their lives; they helped support the gospel; why should they not come to the Lord's Table, have a voice in the affairs of the Church, express their minds in the calling of a pastor, etc? The feeling grew so strong that in 1662 "the fourth Synod, which met at Boston, passed a vote which reaffirmed and commended the crude expedient of the Half-way Covenant" [Dr. Bacon]; that is, on presenting their children for baptism, they were to make a certain public confes- sion of Christian faith and obedience, which was not to be understood as implying a Christian experience or change of heart. The discussion never came to a definite decision. Churches were left to decide their
172 EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
own internal practice. But lines of cleavage were drawn. In 1707 Rev. Solomon Stoddard, of North- ampton, Mass., the grandfather of Jonathan Ed- wards, preached a sermon in which he took ground that "the Lord's Supper is a converting ordinance." The sermon provoked sharp and unfavorable discus- sion and comment. Inreply he published his "Appeal to the Learned; being a Vindication of the Right of Visible Saints to the Lord's Supper, though they be destitute of a Saving Work of God's Spirit on their Hearts." These "visible saints" were the offspring of Christian parents, who had received the rite of baptism, and inherited the relation of sonship toward God. There are abundant evidences that this Stod- dardean plan was partially at work in this Church before it was promulgated by Mr. Stoddard, in the case of those who would "conform their outward conduct to the accepted rules of Christian morality." Says Dr. Bacon, "silently, widely, and for at least a quarter of a century the practice had preceeded the public vindication of it."'
The Churches, which were thus increased in mem- bership by the admission of persons who laid no claim to regenerate character, grew lax in discipline. The morals of a community often sank to so low an ebb that offences against social purity were not infre- quent. Into the pulpits came men who could lay
.
173
THE HALF-WAY COVENANT.
small claim to a spiritual experience, even if they had been converted. Fruit was borne in a scheme of jus- tification by works. The cleavage which split the Churches of New England asunder in the early part of this century began in the practices of the last half of the seventeenth century.
· The baptismal question was a burning one. It was, in fact, paramount to every other. So much stress was laid on it that men, who were not ready to take the vows of God upon them, esteemed this sign and seal of the covenant as of the utmost importance to their children, and they were willing to go half- way to secure it for them; forgetting that the ordi- nance means nothing, and secures nothing for the subject, unless the believing faith of the parent accompanies the act of consecration. The practice of infant baptism seems to have been more general than in some later periods, in which the people of God seem to have forgotten that the children were included in the covenant.
The spiritual conditions were not favorable to the promotion of deep personal piety, nor of revivals of religion. There were no awakenings in this Church, nor, indeed, in New England, worth mention, before 1740. " Into these conditions the preaching of Jon- athan Edwards came as a purifying stream from a divine fountain." [Dunning. ] Their effect on this
-
174
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
Church may be seen in the fact that during the first half century of its existence in New London not over two hundred were received into its membership, and that a full century of its life passed without a reli- gious awakening.
This appropriately introduces to the next pastorate, in which we shall find the Half-way Covenant in full practice.
IX.
THE ROGERENES.
As we have seen, the Rogerene movement began in New London during the ministry of Mr. Brad- street. But it became a prominent religious factor in the ministry of Mr. Saltonstall. Its doctrines and practices were more sharply defined, and began to take deeper root and to assert themselves more posi- tively .. As it was the first break in the unity of reli- gious thought and worship in New London, and as its originators and adherents so vitally affected the life of the Church during the ministry of Mr. Saltonstall, a brief account of this sect may be given as a further introduction to his pastorate.
The originator of the family in New London, whose name the movement came to bear, was James Rogers. He came to America, it is supposed, in 1635, when twenty years of age. IIe settled in Strat- ford, and afterward at Milford, where he joined the Church in 1652. He came to New London between 1656 and 1660. He joined this Church by letter from the Church in Milford in 1670, soon after Mr.
176
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
Bradstreet's ordination. He soon acquired large property, and exerted considerable influence in both civil and ecclesiastical affairs. He built a house of stone on that part of Mr. Winthrop's house-lot which was next the Old Town Mill. Mr. Winthrop's deed fixes the location. It is found in Book III. p. 124, of the ancient Town Records, is dated May 13, 1660-61, and reads as follows :
"Know all men by these presents that I John Winthrop for lawfull considerations to me thereunto moving do give, grant, alienate, confirm and make over unto James Rogers of New London, bisket Baker, that part or parcel of ground on which his house in New London now stands containing also the [il- legible] and garden plat joining to said house as now lay ex- cepting only a sufficient landing-place and way, or passage which is left common that to go to and from the grist mill by land and water, this said way [now known as Mill street] being the boundary to said ground thus given towards the west, my own land without the garden and lot to be the bounds eastward. The street [now known as Winthrop street] between my or- chard and the said grounds the bounds next northward, the mill cove or creek the bounds to the southward."
That is, the town dwelling of James Rogers stood on the piece of ground between Winthrop street and the cove and east of Mill street. The Winthrops afterwards bought the ground back. The deed makes impossible the view stated, by Miss Caulk- ins, that Mr. Rogers lived on the spot where the Winthrop school now stands.
Mr. Rogers, as the deed specified, was a baker. He did business on a large scale. He furnished biscuit
177
THE ROGERENES.
for seamen, and for the colonial troops. Between 1660 and 1670 he had a greater interest in the trade of this port than any other person in the town. He had large landed estates on Great Neck, at Mohegan, several house lots in town, and a large tract of land on the east side of the river.
He had a numerous progeny, descending from his five sons, who were progenitors of as many distinct lines. But we are more immediately concerned with his third son, John, who was the direct founder of the sect which still bears his ancestral name. In 1670 this John married Elizabeth, the daughter of Matthew Griswold. In 1674 he and his brother James embraced Sabbatarian views, and were im- mersed. Jonathan followed in 1675, and the father, James, with his wife and daughter Bathsheba, in 1676. They became dissenters from the Congrega- tional order and joined the Seventh Day Church in Newport. The elder James was an upright and cir- cumspect man. He died February 1687-8.
Asthe government of Andros was paramountin New England at the time, his will was probated in Boston. It was a simple document, expressing the wish that his children should not contend over his property. " What I have of this world I leave among you, de- siring you not to fall out or contend about it; but let your love one to another appear more than to the
.
178
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
estate I leave with you, which is but of this world." A later part of the document says, "if any difference should arise, &c., my will is that there shall be no lawing among my children before earthly judges, but that the controversy be ended by lot, and so I refer to the judgement of God, and as the lot comes forth, so shall it be." This irenic desire of the father was not met, for the children were soon engaged in a bit- ter controversy respecting boundaries, in which "earthly judges" were obliged to interfere.
His will further says, "and for your comfort I sig- nify to you that I have a perfect assurance of an interest in Jesus Christ and an eternal happy state in the world to come, and do know and see that my name is written in the book of life."
In 1677, on account of some differences with cer- tain elders of the Seventh Day Church, from Rhode Island, John Rogers withdrew from the Sabbatarians, and advanced notions of his own. He assumed, and performed, the ministerial offices of baptizing and preaching. He gained a few disciples, and formed a new sect, who were called Rogerenes, Rogerene Quakers, or Rogerene Baptists-Rogerenes, because they were followers of John Rogers ; Quakers, be- cause some of their beliefs were in harmony with those of the Friends ; Baptists, because they were immersionists.
..:.
179
THE ROGERENES.
In respect to most of the Christian doctrines they were orthodox. They held to salvation by faith in Jesus Christ, to the Trinity, to the necessity of the new birth, to the resurrection of the just and the un- just, and to an eternal judgment. One of their peculiarities was an evident determination to be per- secuted. By their defiance of the laws of the Colony, they constantly made themselves liable to fines and imprisonment, and when punished for their misde- meanors they called it persecution. They maintained obedience to civil magistrates in all but matters of conscience and religion. A town rate they would pay without remonstrance, but they rebelled against being taxed for a minister's salary. They regarded all days alike, and so were brought into conflict with the statutes of the Colony which required the observ- ance of Sunday. For while they often met for relig- ious services, on the first day of the week, when their service was ended they felt free to labor as on other days. They had no houses set apart for public wor- ship. They regarded a church-tower, a pulpit, a cushioned pew, a church, a salaried minister in a black suit of clothes, with peculiar aversion. They did not believe in taxation for the support of the institutions of religion ; nor in administering civil oaths ; nor in prayer on public occasions or in the family; nor in the use of the voice in prayer, unless, on special occa-
180
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
sions, the Spirit of God within should move one to audible prayer ; nor in the use of medicines as means for the recovery of health; nor in any civil or relig- ious rite in marriage.
An account of the marriage of John Rogers and Mary Ransford will best state their views as to the proper method of entering into this holy alliance. His first wife, Elizabeth Griswold, had left him, a divorce having been granted her by the legislature. After living alone twenty-five years, he married himself to his maid servant, and on this wise. He would not be married by any minister or magistrate. So he hit upon the following course of procedure, as described by his son : "They agreed to go into the County Court and there declare their marriage; and accord- ingly they did so; he leading his bride by the hand into court, where the judges were sitting, and a mul- titude of spectators present; and then desired the whole assembly to take notice, that he took that woman to be his wife; his bride assenting to what he said, whereupon the judge ( Wetherell) offered to marry them in their form, which he refused, telling them that he had once been married by their author- ity, and by their authority they had taken away his wife again, and rendered him no reason why they did it. Upon which account he looked upon their form of marriage to be of no value, and therefore he
.
:
THE ROGERENES. 181
would be married by their form no more. And from the court he went to the governor's house (Fitz- John Winthrop's) with his bride, and declared their marriage to the governor, who seemed to like it well enough, and wished them much joy, which is the usual compliment." This strange scene they called marriage. It serves to show their views and prac- tices, and how they were accustomed to set. common law at defiance, and make themselves liable to its penalties. Certainly such proceedings would not be tolerated now, and it does not seem that they were persecuted simply because they were required to con- form their conduct to the laws of the Colony.
Not only did they hold peculiar views, and indulge in unlawful practices, but they meant that others should know it. They resorted to various ways of showing their contempt for the regular ministry. It is said that John Rogers once met Dr. Lord at the door of his meeting house in Norwich Town, and accosted him, as he took off his hat and displayed the ministerial wig, with these words, "Benjamin, Ben- jamin, dost thou think that they wear white wigs in heaven?" On another occasion he sent a wig to a contribution made in aid of the ministry. For this offence he made this candid apology, which is found in the town book :
.
182
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
" Whereas I John Rogers of New London did rashly and unadvisedly send a perewigg to the contribution of New Lon- don, which did reflect dishonor upon that which my neighbors ye inhabitants of New London account the ways and ordi- nances of God and ministry of the word to the greate offence of them, I doe hereby declare that I am sorry for sayde action and doe desire all those whom I have offended to accept this my publique acknowledgement as full satisfaction. 27th, 1:91. JOHN ROGERS."
It was contempt cast upon Mr. Saltonstall for which this ample apology was made.
But the regret expressed was only a temporary emotion. For he resumed almost immediately his career of offence. He and his followers felt bound to dissent from the established order, from the com- monly received opinions and practices, and from the express statutes of the Colony, and that too in a way to bring upon themselves the force of the law. In 1676 the fines and imprisonments of James Rogers and his sons for profanation of the Sabbath began. For this and similar offences they, and some of their followers were fined repeatedly, the fine being at first five shilling, then ten, then fifteen. At the June session of the court in 1677 seven persons were fined £5. In September the court ordered that John Rogers be called to account every month, and fined £5 each time. Others of the family were dealt with in a similar way for blaspheming the Sabbath, and for calling it an idol, and for stigmatizing the clergy-
183
THE ROGERENES.
men as hirelings. Later to these fines was added the punishment of sitting in the stocks and whipping.
Not only did they disregard the Sabbath and God's express command to keep one seventh of time holy, they also were determined that others should not observe holy time in peace. Dr. McEwen says that they regarded worship, performed on the Lord's Day, as a species of idolatry which they felt called upon to oppose. They felt it to be their special mission to destroy priestcraft. So they used a variety of means to disturb those who were assembled for worship on the Christian Sabbath. They were ac- customed to enter places of worship in a rude and boisterous way; to engage in various sorts of manual labor, such as sewing or knitting, during the service, in order to interrupt. it. They sometimes came to church and behaved in a most unbecoming manner. They would often rise up in worshipping assemblies and interrupt the preacher and call him a hireling, accuse him of making merchandise of the flock, tell- ing the people that they were sunk in the mire of idolatry, and entangled in the net of Antichrist, and calling the preacher a liar, if he said anything which they did not believe. They even went so far as to rush into church and interrupt the preacher to declare their violations of the laws respecting the keeping of holy time. Bathsheba Fox, a sister of John Rogers,
184
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
went openly to church to proclaim that she had been doing servile work on the Christian Sabbath. John Rogers went with her, and interrupted the preacher to proclaim a similar offence. On one occasion he trundled a wheel-barrow into the porch of the church during divine service. . For this he was arrested, set in the stocks and imprisoned. Probably this was the very thing which he sought to bring upon himself as his testimony against what he called the errors of the times. While held in durance he hung out of his window a board which had the following proclama- tion :
"I, John Rogers, a servant of Jesus Christ, doth here make an open declaration of war against the great red dragon, and against the beast to which he gives power ; and against the false church that rides upon the beast : and against the false prophets who are established by the dragon and the beast ; and also a proclamation of derision against the sword of the devil's spirit, which is prisons, stocks, whips, fines and revil- ings, all which is to defend the doctrines of devils."
This would all have been harmless, if these people had not so persistently crowded their sentiments upon the attention of others in a way not to be disregarded. Thus on the next Sunday after writing the above, being allowed the privilege of the prison limits, he rushed into the meeting house during the service, and with great noise and violence denounced the minister and the worship. For this offence Mr. Rogers was taken to Hartford jail. The document
185
THE ROGERENES.
providing for his removal was dated March 28, 1694, and is as follows :
"Whereas John Rodgers of New London hath of late set himself in a furious way in direct opposition to the true wor- ship and pure ordinances, and holy institutions of God, as also on the Lord's day passing out of prison in the time of public worship, running into the meeting house in a railing . and raging manner, as being guilty of blasphemy ; "
and more to the same effect, setting forth the rea- sons for more rigorous dealing with the offender. At Hartford he was tried, fined £5 for disturbing public worship, required to give bond of £50 not to repeat the offense, and was seated upon the gallows fifteen minutes with a halter round his neck. He refused to pay the fine or give the bond, and was remanded to jail, where he was kept till the whole length of his imprisonment was three years and eight months. During his term of confinement an attack was made upon the government of the Colony by several of his followers, reciting that "to compel people to pay for a Presbyterian minister is against the laws of Eng- land; is rapine, robbery and oppression." The re- monstrants paid for this attack at the rate of £5 each.
These people were dealt with with rigorous sever- ity. But what was the magistrate to do who was sworn to keep the peace ? And what shall be said of their violent and disorderly conduct, in defiance of
186
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
the rights of the community? They felt the heavy hand of the law, but they had themselves principally to thank. Their right to hold their peculiar views was not questioned, nor were they punished for hold- ing them.
It is said by his followers that John Rogers, after embracing the views which he preached, made him- self so obnoxious to the colonial statutes by his man- ner of advocating them, that he spent nearly one- third of his life in prison. Writing in 1706 he said : "I have been sentenced to pay hundreds of pounds, laid in iron chains, cruelly scourged, endured long imprisonments, set in the stocks many hours together, &c." His son states that his father's sufferings con- tinued for more than forty-five years, and adds, " I suppose that the like has not been known in the king- dom of England for some ages past." There can be no doubt that unreasonable severity was shown to this man and his followers. Thus he was fined £5 " for unlawfully rebaptizing," and was publicly " whipped fifteen lashes" for creating disturances on the Lord's day in worshipping assemblies of such a violent nature that several women fainted away. The offence was great ; the punishment was severe. Neither could happen now.
John Rogers was a strong man. He believed what he believed with a strong conviction. The steadfast-
187
THE ROGERENES.
ness with which he and his followers clung to their beliefs, even though we regard them as fanatical, can not but elicit our admiration. But the difficulty was that they refused to render obedience to the laws, and refused to respect the rights of others to hold their beliefs in peace, and be protected in the exer- cise of their privileges. Their views . made them a disturbing element in the community, and nothing was left for the magistrate to do but to punish their misdemeanors. It was, doubtless, a mistake for the early settlers of New England to compel conformity to an established ecclesiastical order; the very evil which they had left England to escape. It is likely, too, that in these days much of the offending of the Rogerenes would have been passed over without no- tice. It may be, too, that prejudice and rumor exag- gerated their offences. But be that as it may, they were a part of the civil order which they were bound to regard.
These people were not punished for their beliefs, but because, as Trumbull says, they took pains to disturb Christian assemblies, and deprived others of their right to worship God in their own way. Mr. Saltonstall may have been more uniformly rigorous than other magistrates. But he tried to persuade them to desist from molesting the worship of their neighbors, and offered them generous terms which
-
:
188
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
would have secured liberty of conscience and convic- tion to them, and lasting peace to the community. Says John Bolles, "he gave his word that to persuade us to forbear, if we would be quiet, and worship God in our own way according to our consciences, he would punish any of their people that should disturb us in our worship." When it is said that Mr. Salton- stall was rigorous in his dealings with offenders, it should also be remembered that these people refused his proposition to secure to them the same rights of worship and belief which others enjoyed, on the simple condition that they would desist from molesting the worship of those who differed from them. They refused all compromise, and insisted on pursuing their riotous methods. It was not their fault if Mr. Saltonstall's pastorate was not a stormy one. The reputation which he had for austerity of manner and severity of spirit, was partly due to the rigorous measures to which the riotous behavior of the Roger- enes drove him.
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.