USA > Connecticut > New London County > New London > The early history of the First church of Christ, New London, Conn. > Part 2
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
-
20
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
with in Massachusetts. But it is not on record that the first settlers of Connecticut, and of New London, ever lifted the hand of persecution against a single person because of his religious beliefs. People were punished severely for breaking the laws; but they were not put to torture for holding their convic- tions.
Here we may introduce some of the men who were contemporary with Winthrop, and who were foremost in planting the colonies which were after- wards united to form Connecticut. As we have seen, Thomas Hooker led his Church from Cambridge, through the wilderness, to a home at Hartford, on the banks of the Connecticut, in 1636. He died in 1647, the year after the planting of the Pequot Colony. Dr. Dunning says [Congregationalists in America p 150] " the first constitution of Connecticut, adopted in 1639, was largely the work of Thomas Hooker, and was the first written constitution in his- , tory which resulted in a civil government. Our pres- ent National Government is in direct descent from that formed on this constitution, which marked the beginning of democracy. Connecticut made to Mas- sachusetts the first propositions which resulted in the confederacy of the New England colonies, and in this movement also the hand of Hooker is conspicuous." This early constitution was the model followed in
:
21
PURITANISM IN NEW LONDON.
drafting the charter of 1662, which was so broad and liberal in its provisions, and so amply secured to the inhabitants of the Colony the fullest rights of citizen- ship, and of religious conviction, that it remained the constitutional law, without revision, more than forty years after the Colony became a State. But Thomas Hooker was a Puritan, driven out of England into Holland because of his religious convictions. If Hooker's constitution was the beginning of a demo- cratic form of government in the world, if, as some allege, it was the first draft of our national declara- tion of independence. and of our national constitu- tion, then the world, and we of today owe no small debt to the Puritanism of Connecticut, as it was expressed by the liberal spirit of Thomas Hooker.
Among the early Puritans who settled Connecticut is to be named another man of great moral and intel- lectual force and stature. He was a great preacher, and there were associated with him laymen of like qualities. I refer to Rev. John Davenport, who founded the Quinnipiack Colony in 1639. He re- mained in New Haven till 1670, and was therefore contemporary with nearly the whole of Mr. Win- throp's official life, and was his personal friend. These men gave tone to the life of the Colony. They determined its civil and its religious character. What some are pleased to denominate the Blue Laws of
22
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
Connecticut, were simply expressions of those high moral convictions of right and wrong, which are essential to the largest and most perfect freedom. The Puritans believed that he is the freest man who is most obedient to duty and to what is right.
I can not stop to speak in detail of Theophilus Eaton, the first Governor of the New Haven Colony, nor of William Janes, the first teacher of that Col- ony, nor of a good many others of like qualities. Trumbull says of these early Puritan settlers of Con- necticut, that " they were of the first class of settlers, and all, except the ministers, were chosen magis- trates or Governors of the Colony." They were picked men which the Puritan exodus brought to Massachusetts and passed on to Connecticut. "They formed its free and happy constitution, were its legis- lators, and some of the chief pillars of the church and commonwealth." They were Puritans. They were Calvinists. They were Congregationalists. They believed in the supreme headship of Christ. They were therefore dissenters from the Church of Eng- land. The clergy " were distinguished for litera- ture, piety, and ministerial gifts." "They were mighty and abundant in prayer." They were emi- nently men of God, and undershepherds of the flocks committed to their charge.
.
23
PURITANISM IN NEW LONDON.
The men immediately associated with Mr. Win- throp in the settlement of the Pequot Colony are, some of them, worthy of special notice. The first town clerk was Jonathan Brewster, who came to New London before 1650. He was a son of Elder Wil- liam Brewster, of the Mayflower. He appears as "Clarke of the Town of Pequett " in September, 1649. February 25 of that year he was one of four who were chosen "townsmen," or selectmen. In 1650 he was made a freeman of Connecticut with Mr. Win- throp, and in September of that year he appeared at the General Court as one of the first deputies from Pequot. He was one of four who were always enti- tled Mr. when spoken of in connection with the plan- tation. He was evidently a prominent man, and took a leading part in the affairs of the new settlement. Of his staunch Puritanism there can be no question. He died in 1661.
Another prominent man, who appeared still earlier upon the scene and who lived to a later date, was Thomas Miner. He came to New England with John Winthrop, the elder, in the Arabella, in 1630, He first settled in Boston, and then in Hingham. From there he came to New London in 1645, and was one of the advance party who broke ground here in that year. In 1647 he was appointed "to act in all Town affaires " in the capacity of selectman. This election
24
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
was repeated the following year. In his diary are a good many entries showing that he was engaged in the transaction of the town's business. In 1649 he "was appointed ' Military Sergeant in the Towne of Pequitt,' with power to call forth and train the inhab- itants." In 1650 he appeared with Jonathan Brew- ster as one of the first deputies to the General Court from the new Colony. He was a member of the First Church of Christ. In 1674 he united with others to form the first Church in Stonington, and was one of its first deacons. He was prominent in founding both New London and Stonington. His son John moved to Woodbury and became the founder of a family. His son Clement lived in New London and was deacon of the Church. He was a man of strong character and of pronounced religious convictions. His diary records repeated instances of attendance upon the ordinances of the gospel. He died October 23, 1690, aged 83. Robert Hempstead, Carie Latham, Thomas Stanton and others were associated with Winthrop in the found- ing of the town. They were religious men, they were, most, if not all of them Church members, and they were of the Puritan faith. Thomas Stanton was, with Thomas Miner, an original member of the first Church in Stonington, and was prominent in its affairs till he died in 1678. Puritanism left its mark upon the foundations of the town.
25
PURITANISM IN NEW LONDON.
Another contemporary of John Winthrop, Jr., who was associated with him in giving character to the town, and who was a Puritan, was Richard Blinman, the first pastor of the Church, and of the town. When he was driven from his living in England, he came to Marshtield, and fifty or more persons fol- lowed him for the sake of their religious convictions. The same people followed him to Gloucester in 1642, and to New London in 1650. They were Puritans. They constituted the Church, which was thus an organized embodiment of their Puritan principles. They at once became prominent in the affairs of the town, both at Gloucester and in New London, and stamped their character on the institutions which they planted.
Some of the men who came to New London be- cause Mr. Blinman came may be named as examples of the whole. Robert Park, and his son Thomas, came to New England about 1635 or 1636. They seem to have settled in Watertown, Mass., whence they emigrated to Wethersfield. They came to New London in 1640 or 1650, probably because Mr. Blin- man, Thomas Park's brother-in-law, was coming.
The leading man who followed Mr. Blinman from Chepstowe was Obadiah Bruen. He was town clerk in Gloucester, and in Pequot till he removed to New Jersey in 1667. He was a member of this Church,
26
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
and of the Puritan faith. Miss Caulkins says of him, " during the sixteen years in which Mr. Bruen dwelt in the young plantation, he was perhaps more intimately identified with its public concerns than any other man. He was chosen a townsman for fifteen years in succession, and except the first year, uni- formly first townsman and moderator." He was on all committees, was recorder of the town, and clerk
of the court. His was the only name in New Lon- don on the Charter of Charles II. "He appears to have been a persevering, plodding, able and discreet man," who did a great deal, helped everybody, and left everything better for his management.
James Avery seems to have come to New London with Mr. Blinman. He was a member of this Church. He was a man of prominence and influence. He founded a large family which bears his name. He was chosen townsman for twenty-three years, and represented the town in the General Court twelve times. He lived on Poquonnock Plain in the old Avery homestead recently destroyed by fire, till he died about 1694.
Capt. George Denison was prominent in all the affairs of the Colony after his arrival in 1651. He also was a member of this Church. He came to America with his father, William Denison, in The Lyon, with John Elliot of Roxbury. In 1654
27
PURITANISM IN NEW LONDON.
he moved to the east side of the Mystic River, and was interested in the founding of Stonington and its first Church. He was a Puritan. Although he had fre- quent disputes with his neighbors, and had difficulty with his minister, as will appear, yet he was a strong man of very decided opinions.
John Coit was of Mr. Blinman's company who came from Gloucester. He followed his pastor from Wales. He was of the Puritan faith. He was prominent in the affairs of the town. He also founded a family which still bears his name. He was a member of this Church. His son, Joseph, became a deacon of it, and the ancestor of all the Coits in Connecticut, and perhaps in the United States.
Andrew Lester is another member of the Blinman company, who was a member of the Church, and whose family name survives him. Such were the men who were the founders of the town and the Church. They were Puritans. Many of them had been driven out of England by religious persecutions. They were men of strong convictions; else they would not have chosen expatriation rather than sur- render their beliefs. Whether we agree with them or not, we must applaud their heroism ; for the men who are willing to suffer for the sake of what they believe to be a fundamental principle of civil and of religious liberty, are worthy of all praise. If their notions of
28
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
religious liberty are less latitudinarian than some of today, we must remember the times in which they lived, and the school of religious toleration in which they were trained. Even then we may well ask if a little less latitude is not to be desired. At any rate it is pretty difficult for a candid mind to sneer at these men.
They were pretty severe sometimes ; quite as severe on themselves as on any one else. For example, Na- thaniel Mather wrote in his diary : " Of all the mani- fold sins which then (in childhood) I was guilty of, none so sticks upon me as that, being very young, I was whittling on the Sabbath day." Another records that "he lived in prayer thrice a day and 'did not slabber over his prayers with hasty amputations, but wrestled in them for a good part of an hour ;' " that he " chewed much on excellent sermons," and spent much time over his Bible. It must be confessed that this sounds strange in these times. But it is to be remembered that the spirit of those days was conge- nial to such exercises and experiences. It would sound strange now to read records of the police court like these which are to be found in the early records of New London : "Goodwife Willey presented " to the court, "for not attending public worship, and bringing her children thither ; fined five shillings;" "John Lewis and Sarah Chapman presented for sit-
29
PURITANISM IN NEW LONDON.
ting together on the Lord's day, under an apple tree in Goodman Chapman's orchard," and many more like these. They show the sterling character of the men who laid here the civil, social and religious foun- dations of the State and of the town. Nor are in- stances like the above to be judged in the light of present public sentiment, but in the light of the pub- lic sentiment of those times. Those men may seem narrow to us, but they were fully abreast of the best thought of their own day.
Thus the founders of this town and Church were Puritans of a most pronounced type. They protested against the Church of England, because it stood for intolerance. Hooker came to Connecticut because he could not endure the aristocratic notions of John Cot- ton, which prevailed in Massachusetts. The men who came to Connecticut and New London represented the largest liberty, as it was then understood. They took their stand upon the word of God. So that when a Colony was planted, civil and religious freedom were framed into its constitution.
The founder of this town was a Puritan. The first minister of the Church, and most of the original members, who followed him from Chepstowe, by way of Marshfield and Gloucester, to New London, were Puritans. The second minister was the son of a Puri- tan-Rev. Peter Bulkeley, of Concord, Mass. The
30
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
third minister was the son of a Puritan Governor of Massachusetts-Simon Bradstreet. The fourth min- ister, Gurdon Saltonstall, was of Puritan descent. This town and Church had their origin in Puritanism of no uncertain kind.
The founders of this town and Church were not illiterate adventurers. They were the men of culture and learning of their times. We may not like their creed, but it was an emphatic protest against corrup- tion in social life, in the Church and in the State. They were uncompromisingly loyal to their convic- tions. When we put their sturdy adherence to what they felt ought to be, by the side of the easy way in which truth and duty are sometimes dealt with, we find it pretty difficult to laugh at Puritanism. We may not like their methods. We may not like the men. But their sincerity is above impeachment. The Church which they erected on the principles for which they sacrificed themselves, is their fitting mon- ument.
III.
ORIGIN OF THE FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST.
It was the habit of godly men in the ancient times to set up an altar to God on the spot where they pitched their tents ; to erect a sanctuary in the place where they established their home. Thus Abraham and Jacob built an altar to the Lord at Bethel; Moses built an altar to Jehovah Nissi on the field where Amalek was defeated by Israel; a Tabernacle for the worship of God was erected in the Wilderness. The Pilgrims of Plymouth brought their Church with them to these shores. One of their very first acts was to build a house for it. The Puritans who landed at Salem in 1628 formed a Church August 6 of the next year. The company of Governor Win- throp, which landed at Charlestown in June, 1630, organized a Church on the 30th day of the following month. On the same day another group of the same company organized a Church at Watertown, where they had gone to fix their dwelling place. The cus- tom of those early days was either to transport the already organized Church, as was done by the Pil- grims of Plymouth in 1620, and by the company
-32
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
which settled in Dorchester June 6, 1630, or, at the earliest possible moment after establishing their homes in a given place, to organize a Church. Our purpose is to state reasons for believing that at the earliest possible moment after founding New London the prevailing course was pursued, and the First Church of Christ was planted in New London as early as 1651. When John Winthrop, Jr., "removed his family from Boston in October, 1646, * and dwelt during the first winter at Fishers Island," and finally settled them in New London in 1647, we may believe that he did not remove them from the religious privileges which were so highly prized, for any period longer than the necessities of the case required.
As we have already seen, Rev. Thomas Peters was associated with Mr. Winthrop " for the better carry- ing on the work of said plantation." It is probable that preaching the gospel was in the minds of the Massachusetts Legislature when this vote was passed. The Colony was small at this time. It did not receive any considerable accessions till the company came from Cape Ann, in 1650 and 1651. This may account for the fact that there appears to have been no Church organization previous to the latter year. We expect to show that from 1651 to the present this Church has existed in this town. Inasmuch as there is no record
33
ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH.
of the organization of a Church either before or after 1651, we expect to show that, as the First Church in Hartford emigrated with its pastor, Rev. Thomas Hooker, from Newtown (now Cambridge), Mass., in 1636, so the First Church of New London emigrated with its pastor, Rev. Richard Blinman, from Glouces- ter, Mass., in 1651.
It is worth noticing here, as helping to establish this view, that Mr. Blinman, as will be seen, was well and favorably known to the Winthrops during his ministry in Gloucester. It seems likely that John Winthrop, Jr., became apprised of the fact that Mr. Blinman would be willing to remove from Gloucester, and that many of the Cape Ann planters could be persuaded to emigrate to parts having a more fertile soil, and that he held out such inducements as brought about such an exodus from Gloucester. For it is known that Cape Ann lane was opened for their accommodation, and was given this name in honor of the place from which they had removed as one of the inducements held out to them to come to Pequot. In this way Winthrop secured a large and valuable accession to the population of the new Colony, and at the same time secured a Church and its pastor. As a matter of fact, the people from Cape Ann were the majority of the Colony, and at once took a leading part in all its affairs.
34
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
The date of the earliest records of the Church is October 5, 1670. This was the date of Mr. Brad- street's ordination, as we learn from his own diary and that of Thomas Miner, His actual ministry began four years before, in 1666. The reason why bis ordination was delayed does not appear. But his four years of previous service point to an organized Church which he served. His ordination, October 5, 1670, points to an organized Church, over which he was ordained as pastor. Because the records do not begin till the date of Mr. Bradstreet's ordination Dr. Trumbull erroneously concludes, "there seems to have been no Church in New London till the ordi- nation of Mr. Bradstreet." But we expect to show from the records of the Church, from the current expressions of the times, and from various other con- siderations that there was a Church before that date, and that it had been here at least nineteen years and a half when Mr. Bradstreet was settled over it as its pastor.
The FIRST thing to be said is that it seems not to have been the custom of those early times, at least in New London, to keep careful records. For example, it was not till February 6, 1660, that the town awoke fully to the importance of taking measures to pre- serve public documents and records of its doings. In the next place, it is a fact that there are but
·
35
ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH.
five entries of Church action made upon the rec- ords of the Church between October 5, 1670, and 1757. Further, it evidently was not Mr. Blinman's habit to keep records; partly, it may be, because the chief business of the Church was done in town meet- ing, and partly, perhaps, because he lacked the me- thodical turn of mind essential in a good recorder of events. We learn from contemporary sources that a Church was gathered in Gloucester, by Rev. Richard Blinman, in 1642. Thus Rev. Dr. Joseph S. Clark, in his Congregational Churches of Massachusetts, says [p. 33], "in the same year, 1642, Rev. Richard Blinman and several Welsh families" (Punchard gives the number of persons as about fifty) "who had recently located at Marshfield, removed to Gloucester, and uniting with a small colony of fisher- men already on the ground, were formed into a Church under his pastoral care." But Babson's His- tory of Gloucester says " neither record or tradition " of the first Church in Gloucester "has handed down any account of its members or its early proceedings, nor of its history for sixty years." Then the ab- sence of records prior to October 5, 1670, proves nothing against the existence of a Church here pre- vious to that date. 1687274
The SECOND thing to be borne in mind is, that the habits of the times, and the character of the men
36
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
engaged in planting this town, afford the strongest presumption that they would not let a quarter of a century pass without an organized Church. These men, as we have seen, were Puritans. They were Calvinists in their belief. They became Congrega- tionalists in Church discipline and order on arriving in America. They believed in the supreme headship of Christ. They believed that the New Testament was the perfect rule, not only of faith and practice, but also of worship and discipline. They believed that Churches ought to be formed and governed after the pattern which they believed could be found in the New Testament. For this reason they were dissent- ers from the national establishment. They believed that the same principles should govern the State. The clergy were eminently men of God. " As they had taken up the cross, forsaken their pleasant seats and enjoyments in their native country, and followed their Savior into a land not sown, for the sake of his holy religion, and the advancement of his Kingdom, they sacrificed all worldly interests to these glorious purposes. The people who followed them (the clergy) into the wilderness, were their spiritual chil- dren, who imbibed the same spirit and sentiments, and esteemed them as their fathers in Christ." [Trumbull, vol. i, pp. 261-2.] These were the lead- ing men of the Colony. They were most exemplary
£
37
ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH.
in their manner of life. The almost stern regard for the Sabbath, the penalties inflicted upon men and women for neglecting the house of God, or for dis- turbing public worship on the Lord's day, forbid us to suppose that men of such temper would allow themselves to settle a town without providing for preaching the gospel, and, as soon as circumstances would permit, organizing a Church upon the simple plan of the New Testament. As we have seen, Mr. Winthrop, and those associated with him, were men of this stamp.
It is further to be said that Mr. Winthrop seems from the first to have had it in mind to erect a house of worship. For the high ridge, on which the old cemetery lies, was called Meeting House hill from the foundation of the town. Further, this ancient cemetery, which was in use the year before, was solemnly dedicated by vote of the town, June 6, 1653, to purposes of burial. The vote declares, "it shall ever bee for a Common Buriall place, and never be impropriated by any." Burial grounds were, in those early days, Church yards. Then we have good reason to believe that it was in the mind of the founders of the town to have an organized Church at the earliest possible moment.
It is further to be said, as confirming this view, that Mr. Peters undoubtedly came here to be the
.
38
EARLY HISTORY OF THE FIRST CHURCH.
shepherd of the new Colony, and we have reason to believe that during his brief stay there were worship- ping assemblies to whom he ministered. These wor- shipping assemblies, though they were not organized into an ecclesiastical body, were a distinct expression of the purpose of the men who first settled here, to organize a Church as soon as it could be done. As we shall see, no evidence can be found that an organ- ized Church was on the ground till Mr. Blinman and his followers moved hither from Gloucester. With their coming the Church idea, which evidently had from the first been in the minds of the original set- tlers, found formal expression and embodiment. The organized Church which, as we expect to show, was brought to New London from Gloucester, took up into itself those disciples which it found on the ground. Thus the First Church was planted here as a definite execution of the purpose which seems all along to have been in the minds of Winthrop and his associates, and as a formal, organic expression of fellowship in Christ.
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.