USA > Massachusetts > Suffolk County > Boston > History of the Old South church (Third church) Boston, 1669-1884, Vol. II > Part 13
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 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73
When I first opened it, and had read only the introductory Para- graph, wherein you inform me that you had attentively considered the contents of mine, I expected surely in what followed to find some regard paid to, and some remarks made upon them. I expected that some notice would be taken of the reasons I gave you for asking a Dismission, that they would be severally discanted upon, approved or disapproved of ; and if Disapproved of, that their insufficiency as a proper ground of such request would have been candidly pointed out. But instead of this, to find almost the whole of your Letter consisting of censorious "Observations " upon my conduct without any consider- ation of, or respect to anything I had written you as the true ground and motives thereof, was to me indeed to the last degree surprizing.
These Observations I beg leave to speak particularly upon, and that with plainness and freedom ; for I cannot but think that a little proper reflection must convince you of the great impropriety of them.
Your first Observation is : That it is very surprizing I should apply for a Dismission and determine not to return at a time when you had the highest reason to expect me, and when God in his Providence had lately by death deprived you of your other Pastor, the Revd. Doctor Sewall. To this let me reply : Whence was given so high reason for expecting me daily, was not my leaving you intended as a mean for my recovery from an ill state of health, which rendered me incapable of serving you in the Ministry ; Had I at any time since that, or in any way given you reason to Conclude that this end was answered ? Had I written any Letter to you, or any single person, wherein I In- formed you that I should return at such a time ? Did I ever in any of my private letters say more than that I had received advantage from this or that measure ? and did I not in my very letter to you inform you that such was the state of my Health at that time, that I had the greatest reason to suppose, that were I to return and serve you in the Ministry this Winter following only, I should be rendered as unfit, if not more so, for the labors of my office as when I left you.
115
MR. BLAIR'S SECOND LETTER.
And as to its being " at a time when you were deprived of your other Pastor," Let me ask you, Whether he was not as really incapable of serving you when I came away, as when I asked for a Dismission? How could it then be a Greater crime in me to ask this Dismission and determine not to return when he was dead, if I apprehended I had sufficient reason for it, than to leave you, apprehending I had sufficient reason, when he was living ? Besides after his Death were you not just in the same condition as any other Society would be, which had but one Pastor, who might be necessarily absent on account of indisposition ? How then could the Doctor's Death have rendered my Conduct more reprehensible than it would have been had you not had another Pastor? I would by no means here underrate your loss in his Death - your loss was Great - I mean only that your remain- ing advantages after his Death were equal to those of another Socie- ty, who, having but one Pastor, were deprived of his present services in the way I have spoken of. But suppose you had Justly the highest reason to expect me daily, and give the Doctor's Death all the weight of an Objection which you can reasonably think is due to it; yet is [it] not strange on these considerations [to] be so censured, when had you attentively considered the contents of my Letter, you would have there seen Arguments offered as the ground of my conduct, that were abundantly sufficient to outweigh these Objections, yet you have seen meet to pay no regard to them at all and to reprehend me for acting as I did at a time when you had the highest reason to expect me, and were deprived of your other Pastor, just as you might if I had no reason, nor ever had given you any reason for so doing at that time. To what my dear Brethren can I impute this ?
In the next place, you observe, that it is unaccountable I should make such an application, and form such a Resolution before it had been signified to me by the Church that they had not altered their sentiments relative to the matter in dispute between us ; and even before I had vouchsafed to write you [a] single line and properly inform myself on this Head.
With respect to this observation it is to me more unaccountable than the Conduct it reprehends, you need only recollect, as I hinted to you in my letter that when I took my leave of you, I desired you would as a Church in my absence, seriously and attentively reconsider the point of dispute, for that it was not in my power to comply with your Vote, and that in consequence hereof you by your Committee in- formed me, only that you would attend to it each man in his individual capacity, but not as a Church. How then could it be unaccountable to you that I should make such an application and form such a reso- lution before I had a change of your sentiments signified by you, when you could not but have known that you yourselves had deprived me of all reason to expect such a signification? the same question
II6
HISTORY OF THE OLD SOUTH CHURCH.
I may also with equal reason ask with respect to my not writing to you for the regular information you speak of. Indeed had the case been otherwise, and I neglected to write for this purpose, I should not have tho't myself very blameable for omitting such an Article of mere formality, while I could have procured sufficient information to act upon in the way of more private intelligence ; and should have tho't it very unaccountable to be blamed for it by the Church as an unaccount- able piece of Conduct.
Your next Observation seems to be a reason given why my Conduct in this instance is so very unaccountable, For say you had been regu- larly notified that we still continued of the same Opinion as when you went from us, and had even despaired by any further endeavours to have bro't about an alteration in our sentiments and practice, yet this . would have been far from being a sufficient justification of such deter- mination.
Here, if I understand you, you meant to argue from the lesser crime to the Greater - thus : If it was unjustifiable in me to act as I did even after regular notification, and when I despaired of an alteration in your sentiments, much more unjustifiable it must have been in me to act so without such notification, and without writing a line to the Church for that purpose. But how the consequence follows I cannot see ; because I might be really unjustifiable for writing as in the former case, and yet circumstances might be such as that I might be as really vindicable as in the latter. Nor can I see how you should infer from my Omission of the aforesaid formality that I did not de- spair of bringing about an Alteration in your sentiments, especially considering the above mentioned cause of this omission. Let me ask you, was this Reflection kind? and does it not insinuate that I would willingly believe that there were irremoveable Objections to my con- tinuing in my connections with you, when I knew not that there were such, and therefore that I had other reasons for my Conduct than those I gave you ?
But I would enquire a little into the reasons you give in support of the aforementioned sentiment ; vizt. that had I even despaired of an alteration, I should be far from having in this a sufficient justification of my Conduct. The reasons you mention are these, vizt : "my con- nection with the Church over which I was ordained ;" "The Engage- ments I then entred into, and the Charge I then undertook ; " and " the peculiar distressing and Destitute Circumstances under which I left you." Far be it from me to lessen the weight of these consider- ations ; I felt their full force before I determined how to act ; and nothing but the strongest Conviction of Duty could induce me to de- termine as I did, so far as that determination seems to have been in Opposition to them. But I think you speak of them as Objections, which no circumstances, no arguments, no considerations whatever ought in justice to outweigh.
II7
MR. BLAIR'S SECOND LETTER.
As to the first, vizt : "my Connection with the Church over which I was so solemnly ordained." Here I conclude that by ordained you must have meant Installed; and by my Connection with the Church, such as was publicly declared and ratified at my Installation. But if you tho't on that occasion, or when you wrote your letter, that this Con- nection was of such a Nature as no circumstances but Death itself could reasonably dissolve, you were most certainly in a great error ; I never tho't so; I considered my Installation as a public Testimony of what had been before privately transacted between us: That is, of your calling me to serve you in the Ministry, and promising to support me, and my consenting on my part to serve you, and promising to do it with faithfullness according to the Grace given me. In all this I neither expressly nor implicitly bound myself in a connection which no consideration or even such considerations as I have mentioned in my letter, ought to discontinue. To have formed such a Connection would have been highly imprudent and sinful, as I wish you may never be taught by any future unhappy experience.
As to the second, viz: "the engagements I then entred into and the. Charge I undertook." These engagements were such as I have just mentioned, and implied nothing more which bound me to you, whatever might occur, for life. And as to the Charge I undertook, It was very Great ; the Duties I was warned to perform were weighty solemn, and important ; But, if you will allow it, it was the Consider- ation of this very thing which induced me to that which you have con- demned. For so weighty was the Charge that I deemed it my bounden Duty to run all risks rather than not endeavour by every proper likely mean to subvert any principle or practice which I apprehended to be contrary to the mind and will of the great Head of the Church ; and when I could not prevail, and the Church had notwithstanding all my endeavours confirmed and established such principle and practice, to sacrifice my highest worldly emoluments, and my interest in their affec- tions by applying for a Dismission rather [than] continue my Con- nections with them under the Difficulties with which I should labour with respect to the freedom of continued endeavours to the same pur- pose ; and rather than be the Occasion of such future contentions and divisions among them as might destroy my usefulness and their tran- quility without succeeding in my aim. Not to add also, rather than by reason of bodily frailty and indisposition to stand in the way of another who might serve them with more vigour and usefulness ; and rather than eat their Bread without rendering equitable service.
And as to the third reason, vizt: "the peculiar and destitute cir- cumstances under which I left you." No man could have attended to this case more fully and feelingly than I think I did both at and from the time I left you ; But as it is a tender point, I shall only observe in general, that the most just and rational view I could entertain of it,
II8
HISTORY OF THE OLD SOUTH CHURCH.
was not sufficient to overbalance the prospect of those unhappy cir- cumstances in which they together with myself might [be] involved were I to continue my pastoral offices among you. This I have repre- sented to you in as concise and summary a manner as I could in my letter to which I refer you.
But besides these I find another reason mentioned of which together with the foregoing, you have tho't proper to charge me with a want of consideration, vizt : "That perfectly consistent with a good Conscience I might have discharged the duties of my pastoral office, that of ad- ministring the Ordinance of Baptism, in some special cases excepted."
Why you should think it proper to suppose I had not considered this, when you must have known that the General sense of what I ever said or wrote on the subject, necessarily implied a consideration of it, I leave to your own Reflection : as also, why you should think it proper to mention it as an argument in Condemnation of my Conduct, when you must have known that the sum of the Contents of my letter was, that tho I could administer that Ordinance in some cases, yet such difficulties would attend my future Connection with you, by rea- son of the difference of sentiment and practice in other cases between me and the Church and my Colleague, should one be introduced to act where I could not, as rendered it expedient for me to apply for a Dismission. Suffer me, my dear Brethren, to say, that had you on your part so attentively considered these contents as you think you had, methinks that censuring me as not having considered the matter I now speak of, you would rather have been disposed to say, or at least suppose, that tho I did consider this as in itself an argument for continuing with you ; yet there were others in my apprehension suf- ficient to remove it. This would have been kind, because it would have been agreeable to the true state of the case as communicated to you. Tis Grievous, my Brethren, that in your letter, which you have chose should be almost wholly in the strain of censure and reproof you should have attended only to one side of the Question, and pro- nounced upon my Conduct by comparing it with the considerations that are on that side only, without paying any regard to those on the other which justify it, and should represent me as acting against all the reasons on the one side, without having reasons to support me on the other, or ever having given you any. But I need not enlarge on remarks the justness of which must on a little sober and candid reflec- tion, be obvious to yourselves.
We have given in full the first half of Mr. Blair's letter ; in the second half, he justifies himself for not returning to Boston to arrange in person for his dismission; insists that when he went away in May, he had not fully made up his mind to leave the church ; protests against the comment upon his decision to
119
MR. BLAIR'S SECOND LETTER.
refund the amount of his salary since May ; objects to the terms of the vote by which his dismission was granted ; and concludes with kind wishes for the church's continued prosperity. There is no record of the official reply sent to this letter, but we may assume that it was brief. To have attempted to meet the various points presented would have been to prolong, and to widen the range of a correspondence, already voluminous, which could re- sult in no good. Mr. Blair's mistake, or at least misfortune, was that he did not return to Boston at the time of Dr. Sewall's death, advise with his friends in the church as to the best course for him to take, and then tender his resignation. His letter of resignation sent from Philadelphia led to the impression that when he left in May, it was with the conscious intention and expectation of not coming back at all. This tried the brethren, and they showed their feeling in the answer sent by them. Then came the rejoinder from which we have quoted. A year and a half later, Mr. Blair paid a visit to Boston; mutual expla- nations were satisfactorily made ; and cordial relations were re- stored between the ex-pastor and his people.
Novr. 12. 1769.
The Brethren of the Church and congregation were stay'd, and Voted that there be a Meeting of the Brethren of the Church and Con- gregation on Tuesday the 21st Instant at 10 o'Clock A M.
Novr 21. 1769.
The Brethren of the Church and Congregation met according to adjournment. Voted that Deacon Jeffries be Moderator.
Deacon Phillips informed the Brethren that he had Received direc- tions from the Revd. Mr. Samuel Blair to make a Surrender of his Sallery from the Time he left them last Spring to the Church in his Name ; Mr. Blair's reasons for which are that " he might not receive a reward for services he had not done, and that he might silence those who might be disposed to find fault." There upon Voted that the same be accepted and retained in the Deacons hands for the Use of the society.
Novr. 26. 1769.
The Brethren of the Church and congregation were stay'd and Voted that there be a meeting of the Brethren of the Church and con- gregation on Tuesday the 28th Instant at 10 o'Clock A M to consider of further Supply of the pulpit.
Novr 28th. 1769.
The Brethren met according to adjournment, and Voted Deacon Jeffries Moderator, and that the Deacons be a Committee for Supply-
120
HISTORY OF THE OLD SOUTH CHURCH.
ing the pulpit the Two Sabbaths next ensuing - Mr. Thomas Prentice who was to have been Invited being Engaged for those Sabbaths.
Voted That Mr. Thomas Prentice of Holiston be Invited to preach to this Society Six Sabbaths after the Deacons have Supplied for the two Sabbaths mentioned in the foregoing Vote.
Voted That Mr. Samuel Webster who has heretofore preached to this Society at the request of their then committee the Deacons, be also invited to preach to this Society Six Sabbaths.
Mr. Prentiss was a son of the Rev. Joshua Prentiss, for forty- five years pastor of the church in Holliston. He graduated at Harvard College in 1766,1 and was ordained October 30, 1770, as pastor of the church in Medfield. He was then only twenty- three years of age, and he may have been thought too young for the Old South pastorate. His second wife, Mary, daughter of John Scollay, was a member of the Old South.2
Mr. Webster was a son of the Rev. Samuel Webster, of Salis- bury. He graduated at Harvard College in 1762, and was or- dained as pastor of the church in Temple, New Hampshire, October 2, 1771. He died in the sixth year of his pastorate.
Two regiments of British troops were at this time quartered in the town of Boston, and eight war vessels commanded the harbor. " A military guard with cannon pointed at the very door of the State House;" and there was constant friction be- tween the troops and the people, which culminated on the 5th of March, 1770, in what is known in American history as the Boston Massacre. This brought matters to a crisis ; the citizens were resolved that the regiments should at once be removed from the town; and, on the morning of March 6, a meeting was convened in Faneuil Hall, and a committee, with Samuel Adams as its chairman, was appointed to wait upon Governor Hutchin- son, and to give expression to the popular will. In the after- noon, the citizens again assembled in Faneuil Hall to receive the report of their committee. The people from the surrounding country had been pouring into Boston all day long, and the crowd was now so great that it was found necessary to adjourn to the Old South. Thomas Cushing was moderator. The com- mittee appointed in the morning reported the result of its visit
1 He joined the First Church, Charles- town, of which his relative, the Rev. Thomas Prentiss, was pastor, September 25, 1768. His son, of the same name, was the first minister of the Second or Harvard Church, Charlestown. See
History of the Harvard Church, by Henry H. Edes, pp. 119, 120.
2 She was received into the Medfield Church, by letter from the Old South, June I, 1794. See The Prentice-Prentiss Family, by C. J. F. Binney, P. 51.
.
I2I
THE BOSTON MASSACRE.
to the governor, to the effect that he had no power over the military ; Colonel Dalrymple, however, had promised to withdraw one of the two regiments from the town. This was declared to be unsatisfactory ; and a new committee was chosen to make a final demand, consisting of Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Wil- liam Molineux, William Phillips, Joseph Warren, Joshua Hen- shaw, and Samuel Pemberton. The struggle in the council chamber between the royal prerogative and the popular will was a severe one. Samuel Adams, says Mr. Tudor, "seeming not to represent, but to personify the universal feeling and opinion, with unhesitating promptness and dignified firmness," declared that " nothing short of the total evacuation of the town by all the regular troops " would satisfy the public mind and preserve the peace of the province. The authorities, civil and military, were abashed before him, and at length gave way, promising that the two regiments should be removed to the Castle, now Fort Independence, without unnecessary delay. The vast as- sembly in the meeting-house received the answer of the royal governor with the dignity and self -restraint of conscious strength. The comment of the Boston Gazette is simply this : " The inhabitants could not avoid expressing the high satisfac- tion it afforded them."
Thanksgiving Collection 16th Nov 1769, and Communicated to the Society March 25. 1770.
Was appropriated .
£I. 7. 0 2. 5. 0
to Mr. Adams. Rev. Mr. Campbell
at large
3. 12. 0 289. 4. 2 £292. 16. 2
Appropriated L. Money
9. 74
att Large .
38. II. 2星
£39. 0. 10
It was Voted, That the unappropriated part of the fore mentioned Collection be disposed of to charitable and pious uses by the Deacons according to their best Discretion.
Lords Day P. M. March 25th 1770.
The Brethren of the South Church and congregation were Stay'd and Voted that the following nine persons viz. the Hon Andrew Oliver Esq. Deacon Phillips, Deacon Jeffries, the Hon Thomas Cushing Esq. Mr. Jonathan Mason, Mr. William Whitwell, Col. Joseph Jackson, the Hon Thomas Hubbard Esq. and Capt. Samuel Greenwood, be and they
I22
HISTORY OF THE OLD SOUTH CHURCH.
are hereby appointed a committee to consider what steps may be proper to be taken towards the settlement of a pastor, that Mr. Willard be in- vited to Supply the pulpitt for five weeks, and in case he should be engaged, that the committee provide a Supply.
The Report of the committee appointed to consider in what manner the dwelling house lately [occupied] by the Rev. Doctor Sewall may be best improved was Read, and agreeable to said Report, Voted as follows, that inasmuch as we are at present destitute of a pastor and so the Society have no occation to put the house to the Use for which itt was Originally Designed, It would be but a proper mark of Regard to the memory of our late pastor and to the circumstances of his family to allow his son to have the benefitt of the improvment of said house untill further Orders, and that a Committee be appointed to take the charge of this affair and do therein as they shall judge most for the Interest of the family and needfull for the preservation of the house.
Voted that Deacon Jeffries and Deacon Phillips be a Committee for the purpose aforementioned.
Mr. Joseph Willard, son of the Rev. Samuel Willard, of Bidde- ford, and great grandson of the Rev. Samuel Willard of the South Church, entered Harvard College late in life and gradu- ated in 1765.1 He was ordained, November 25, 1772, colleague pastor with the Rev. Joseph Champney, of the First Church, Beverly ; and in 1781 was chosen President of Harvard College, on the resignation of the Rev. Samuel Langdon, D. D.
Deacon Sewall had recently lost his property, and the family of Edmund Quincy also into which he had married was in em- barrassed circumstances. The omission of his name in the above vote, and of any direct reference to his affairs, shows the delicate considerateness of those who prepared it. He soon after resigned his office as deacon, and died at Holliston, Jan- uary 19, 1771.
Lords Day April 17th 1770.
The Brethren of the Church and Congregation were stay'd and Voted that Mr. John Marsh be desired to supply the pulpitt for six weeks to commence from the expiration of Mr. Hitchcock's Term which will be the 29th Inst.
Voted that Mr. Peter Thatcher be desired to preach to this society.
Until recent times it was the custom for young men about to enter the ministry to preach on trial for a series of Sabbaths in
1 There was another Joseph Willard Mendon, and afterward, in 1784, at Box- in the class of 1765, who was settled at borough.
-
123
DEACON SEWALL'S RESIGNATION.
vacant pulpits. They were really candidates for ordination and settlement ; they had no pastoral record behind them ; and the only way in which the churches could ascertain what were their doctrinal beliefs and general qualifications for the pastoral office was by hearing them thus preach Sabbath by Sabbath. Mr. John Marsh referred to above was. a son of Deacon David Marsh, of Haverhill, and a graduate of Harvard College in the class of 1761. He was ordained pastor of the First Church, Wethersfield, Connecticut, and his ministry there was long and successful. Dr. Sprague says that he was a man of highly pol- ished manners and fine literary tastes, a moderate Calvinist, and a great admirer of the writings of John Howe.1 Mr. Enos Hitchcock graduated at Cambridge in 1767, and became col- league pastor of the Second Church, Beverly ; he was afterward settled at Providence, where he died in 1803.
Mr. Thacher's ancestors for four generations had been mem- bers of the South Church, - the Rev. Thomas Thacher, pastor, the Rev. Peter Thacher, of Milton, Oxenbridge Thacher, and Oxenbridge Thacher, Junior. He graduated at Harvard Col- lege in 1769, and, a year later, was settled at Malden. He came to the Church in Brattle Street in 1785.
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.