USA > Massachusetts > Middlesex County > Weston > Sermon, delivered at Weston, January 12, 1813, on the termination of a century since the incorporation of the town > 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
The exact period when what is now called Wes- ton began to be settled is not known ; but it must have been pretty early ; for there are still standing houses, or parts of houses, which were erected about one hun- dred and forty years ago. In ecclesiastical affairs, however, this town was connected with Watertown
* Amcr. Ann. in a note, i. 255.
+ Prince's Chron. p. 248, 219. # State Records.
19
about sixty eight, and in civil concerns about eighty three years. The tradition is, that the inhabitants of the remote westerly part of this town went to worship at the remote easterly part of Watertown, at a house not far from the old burying place. In this they man- ifested a zeal for the house and worship of God, not often found among their descendants.
As the fathers of this town were so long interested in them, it will not be irrelevant to my purpose to give a sketch of the ecclesiastical history of Watertown 1 from its first settlement, at least to the time of our sep- aration from it.
The first church in Massachusetts was planted at Salem ; the second at Charlestown, including Boston ; the third at Dorchester; the fourth at Roxbury ; the fifth at Lynn, and the sixth at Watertown .* Of the
* In placing the churches in this order I have followed Dr. Holmes' Amer. Ann. i. 262; though he has placed the date of their formation one year too late, as the author of Wonderworking Providenee had done before him. This last author, Mather's Magnal. and Coll. His. Soc. eall the church at Watertown the seventh, numbering that at Boston the fourth. This must be an errour ;t for Winthrop's Journal, p. 45, Prince's Chron. p. 250, and Emerson's Hist. of First Church, probably taken from the records of that church, the best evi- dence to be had, place the division of the original church, composed of members in Charlestown and Boston, Oct. 14, 1632; which was certainly after the other six churches had been formed.
By more attentively examining and comparing authorities, since the delivery of the discourse, I find reason to doubt the correctness of the order in which Watertown church is plac- ed. Without deeiding positively on the question, I shall ad-
+ [It is corrected in Hist. Coll. x. 314. A. H.]
-
affairs
20
last the Rev. George Phillips, the ancestor of the late and present Lieut. Gov. Phillips, and other respecta-
duce a number of authorities, and leave the subject for the in- vestigation of those who have more leisure, and think it of sufficient importance to engage their attention. According to Prince's Chron. 212, 243, Gov. Winthrop proposed that July 30, 1690, should be observed as a day of fasting and prayer, on account of the prevailing sickness, and with a view to seek the divine direction in their ecclesiastical affairs. The people at Salem and Plymouth were invited to keep the same day. The day was observed at Charlestown, " when Gov. Win- throp, Dep. Gov. Dudley, Mr. Johnson, and the Rev. Mr. Wilson, first enter into church covenant, and lay the founda- tion of the churches, both of Charlestown and afterwards of Boston "
Of Watertown Mather, Magnal. B. III, chap. 4. pp. 82, 83, says, " Upon a day set apart for solemn fasting and pray- er, the very next month after they came ashore, they entered into this Holy Covenant, July 30, 1630." 'The covenant fol- lows. Mather considered this transaction as the formation of a church. He says, " About forty men, whereof the first was that excellent Knight Sir Richard Saltonstal, then subscribed this instrument, in order to their coalescence into a church state ; which I have the more particularly recited, because it was one of the first ecclesiastical transactions of this nature managed in the colony." Allen's Amer. Biog. and His. Dic. 476, assigns the same period to the church at Watertown. According to these authorities, when compared, it appears to have been co-eval with that at Charlestown. But from other testimonies it seems to have had a prior existence, and to have been second only to the church at Salem. Under date August 27, 1630, Gov. Winthrop says, Journal 20, " We of the con- gregation kept a fast, and chose Mr. Wilson our teacher," &c ; and he informs us, that other officers were that day chosen, and that all were ordained by the imposition of hands. Prince,
21
ble characters of the name, was the first minister, and continued in the office until July 1, 1644, the day of his death.
In 1634 the Rev. John Sherman, who " received his first impressions of religion under the ministry of the famous John Rogers," came to this country, and preached his first sermon at Watertown, where he con- tinued some time an assistant to Mr. Phillips ; but af- ter a while removed to Newhaven, preached occasion-
247, places Mr. Wilson's ordination on this day ; and says, it is " the first ordination of an elder in Massachusetts Bay." He here makes a distinction between elder and pastor and teacher ; for the two latter officers had been ordained at Sa- lem the preceding year. Amer. Ann. i. 256, place the founda- tion of Charlestown church, including Boston, at this period. Emerson's History of First Church, p. 11, informs us, that " a covenant was formed and subscribed, August 27, 1630." To reconcile these authorities, may we not suppose that, July 30, 1630, Gov. Winthrop, Dep. Gov. Dudley, Mr. Johnson, and Rev. Mr. Wilson agreed upon a form of covenant, and took preparatory steps to the gathering of a church, which was ef- fected the 27 of the following month ? Wonderworking Prov- idence, speaking of Salem, does not allow that a church can be constituted by a less number than seven men. Four only are mentioned in Prince's Chron. as having covenanted at Charlestown, July 30, 1630. These might not consider them- selves to be a church, but design to prepare the way to erect one in due form. On the same day, July 30, 1630, at Water- town forty men subscribed a church covenant, and from that time seem to have been considered a distinct church. If there be no mistake in the historical facts now adduced, it would seem that Watertown church had a prior existence to the one at Charlestown, and was second only to that at Salem in the Massachusetts Bay.
22
ally in the vicinity, and at length was appointed a mag- istrate in that colony.
In 1639 the Rev. John Knolles came to New Eng- land, and was teacher with Mr. Phillips at Water- town until 1642, when, in consequence of letters from Virginia, soliciting ministerial assistance, he and Mr. Thompson of Braintree went to that colony. But on his arrival there he found both the form and spirit of the English church, and was not permitted to preach publickly on account of his non-conformity. He return- ed, and, I find by Watertown records, was associated with Mr. Sherman* in the ministry in 1648. He went back to England about 1650, and, after suffering much persecution, died in old age.
After the death of Mr. Phillips, the people of Wa- tertown applied to Mr. Sherman to settle with them in the ministry. He accepted their invitation, though requested, at the same time, to settle in a church at Boston, and invited by letter to return to London, and there enter into the ministry. Mr. Sherman was one of the most distinguished scholars of the age, and a great blessing to the College. " He was chosen fel- low of the corporation, and for thirty years delivered lectures which most of the students attended once a fortnight," walking from Cambridge to Watertown to enjoy the privilege.
*. For an account of Mr. Phillips, Mr. Sherman, and Mr. Kuolles, or Knowles, see Mather's Magual. book 3, chap. 3, p. 216, book 3, 2d part, chap. 4, p. 82, chap. 29, p. 162. El- iot's Biog. Die. 877, 378, 427, 428. Allen's Amer. Biog. and His. Dic. 476, 512. Holmes' Amer. Ann. i. 321. Palmer's non-conformist ii. 349. &e.
23
The exact period of Mr. Sherman's settlement at Watertown I have not been able to ascertain. He was in office there in 1648,* and continued in it until his death, August 8, 1685. He was taken sick at Sudbury, where he preached his last sermon.t
The Rev. John Bailey was the immediate succes- sor of Mr. Sherman. His brother Thomas Bailey was for a short time his assistant. These brethren were ejected ministers in England, and came to New England in 1683, or 1684. It appears from the rec- ords of Watertown that they both resided in Boston. I find no intimation that either of them resided at Watertown previous to Mr. Sherman's death. June 15, 1685, a committee was chosen to apply to Mr. Bai- ley (christian name not mentioned in the record) to come and dwell among the people at Watertown, and be an assistant to Mr. Sherman. August 24, 1685, about a fortnight after the decease of Mr. Sherman, the town applied to Mr. Bailey the eldest, which was Mr. John Bailey, to come and dwell among them, and labour in the ministry. At a subsequent meeting the town vot- ed to be at the expense of transporting Mr. Bailey from and back to Boston, until they could provide a
* The records of Watertown for several years previous to this date I have not found. The faet here stated is confirm- ed by the following extract : " At a general town meeting the 16 (7) 1648, the town granted to pastor Knowles and pas- tor Sherman, 120 pounds for the year following, to be equally divided between them."
t Mr. Sherman married twice, and had twenty six children: six by his first, and twenty by his second wife, who lived his widow some years.
24
house for him and his family. He continued to labour among them, and early in 1686 manifested his accep- tance of their invitation to settle with them in the min- istry. He was ordained, Oct. 6, 1686. His brother Thomas Bailey was invited to be his assistant ; and for this purpose he was moved up to Watertown, Nov. 2, 1687. He died, Jan. 21, 1688. Perhaps it should stand, if we begin the year with January, 1689. In the first case he was not minister three months at Water- town; on the other supposition, not fifteen months. It does not appear from the records that he was any more than assistant to his elder brother at Watertown .*
Dr. Eliot, in his Biog. Dic. p. 40, must have fallen in- to a mistake in respect to these two men. John, and not Thomas, was the minister who statedly, not occasionally, sup- plied at Watertown. The records of the town prove this fact. The first church records now to be found were kept by Mr. John Bailey, beginning in 1686, which was 56 years after the formation of the church, and ending, by him, in 1692. In this book of records, the only one known in Watertown, he insert- ed an Epitaph engraven on the tombstone of his brother Thom- as, and the one engraven on the tombstone of his wife, made by Mr. Moody ; I suppose Mr. Joshua Moody, who, after be- ing perseented at Portsmouth by Cranfield, preached at Bos- ton for a considerable time.
Extraets from Judge Sewall's manuscript journal. " July 25, 1686, Mr. John Bayley preaches his farewell sermon, and goes the 28th to Watertown. Oct. 6, Mr. Bayley ordained at Watertown. Mr. Bayley not ordained as congregational men are."
On examining Watertown records, and comparing them with other authorities, it appears that Mr. John Bailey was the minister at Watertown about six years, and that his bro- ther Thomas was his assistant a few months. Both had resid - ed, and occasionally, if not statedly, preached, at Boston.
25
Mr. John Bailey removed to Boston in 1692, and in 1693 became assistant to Mr. Allen, minister of the first church, and continued in the office until Dec. 16, 1697, the day of his death. He died in the 54th year of his age.
In 1690 application was made by the town of Wa- tertown to Mr. Henry Gibbs to be assistant minister with Mr. Bailey. He accepted the invitation, and was induced by renewed calls, often repeated, to con- tinue his labours with them several years after Mr. Bailey's removal to Boston.
An attempt was made by the town in 1692, to fix upon a place for a new meeting house, " most con- venient for the bulk of the inhabitants." The town did not agree upon a spot. The selectmen then ap- plied to the Governour and Council to appoint a com- mittee to examine and report on the subject. Dec. 27, 1692, the town voted to submit their difference " relating to settling a minister, and the placing of a meeting house," to a committee to be appointed by the Governour and Council. William Stoughton, John Phillips, Ja. Russell, Samuel Sewall, and Joseph Lynde, men distinguished in the annals of New Eng- land, were appointed to this service. They attended upon it, and dated their report at Boston, May 18, 1693. It does not, however, appear to have been com- municated to the town until April 17, 1694. The committee say in their report :
" We do advise and determine, that forasmuch as you have once and again called the Rev. Mr. Henry Gibbs to labour in the Lord's vineyard at Watertown ; 4
26
which he has so far accepted, as to spend some years with you ; in which time yourselves and others have had plentiful experience of his ability and real worth, that therefore you do your endeavour that he may be speedily fixed among you, in the work and office of the ministry."
" And whereas there has been of a long time, even ever since the days of your blessed pastor Phillips, an earnest contending about the place of meeting for the publick worship of God, having heard and duly weigh- ed the allegations of both parties, in your public meet- ing, and considering the remoteness of the most of your inhabitants from the place where the meeting house now stands, our advice and determination in the matter is, that within the space of four years next com- ing there be a meeting house erected in your town on a knowl of ground lying between the house of the wi- dow Sterns and Whitney's hill, to be the place of meeting to worship God, for the whole town."
This report did not meet the wishes of both par- ties. A protest against the place for the meeting house, containing a plea in behalf of the farmers, was signed by 118 persons. Mr. Gibbs was still employ- ed. The proposed meeting house was erected and accepted by the town, Feb. 4, 1696, as the place of publick worship, according to the advice of the com- mittee. On this day, Mr. Gibbs, who had been near- ly six years with them, and was still the object of their affection and choice, refused to accede to the propos- als of the town to officiate in the new meeting house, on account, as he stated, of the dissatisfaction respect-
27
ing it. The town urged him to comply with their request ; but he persisted in his refusal. Whether induced to reject their overtures by the state of irrita- tion in the parties, or, in some measure, by his own predilection for the old house, and the favour he had for those who adhered to it, we cannot, at this dis- tance of time, positively determine. Subsequent events render it probable, that the last motive had some influence.
Previously to this time the following vote passed, Oct. 2, 1694, " Our neighbours the farmers being upon endeavours to have a meeting house among themselves, the town consents that they may come as far as Bea- ver Brook* upon the country road leading to Sudbu-
* This brook still retains the name. It passes the great road at the lower part of Waltham plains. The origin of the name will be seen in the following extract from Gov. Win- throp's Journal, page 32. " Jan. 27, 1632. The Governour and some company with him went up by Charles River, about eight miles above Watertown, and named the first brook, on the north side of the river (being a fair stream and coming from a pond a mile from the river) Beaver Brook, because the beavers had shorn down divers great trees there and made di- vers dams across the brook. Thence they went to a great rock upon which stood a high stone cleft asunder, that four men might go through, which they called Adam's chair, be- cause the youngest of their company was Adam Winthrop. Thence they came to another brook, greater than the former, which they called Masters' Brook, because the eldest of their company was one John Masters. Thence they came to an- other high pointed rock, having a fair ascent on the west side, which they called Mount Feake, from one Robert Feake, who had married the Governour's daughter in law. On the west
28
ry, and so run north and south upon a line, to the end there may be peace and settlement amongst us." I find side of Mount Feake they went by a very high rock, from whence they might see all over Whipcutt, and a very high hill due west about 40 miles off, and to the N. W. the high hills by Merrimack above 60 miles off."
Our veneration for Gov. Winthrop and his companions . leads the imagination into the pleasing idea, that every brook they named flows with purer water than other streams ; that every mountain they ascended exhibits the bush burning, but not consumed; that every hill upon which they trod is a kind of holy ground, hallowed by the presence of those pious pil- grims; that every rock at which they halted is a kind of al- tar, reared by the hand of nature to nature's God. With these feelings we are eager to trace their steps, and to plant our feet where theirs were once placed. But to ascertain the pre- cise spots mentioned in the Journal would require attention, and perhaps be attended with some difficulty. The descrip- tion of Beaver Brook does not fully agree with present ap- pearances. Though one branch of it proceeds from a pond ; yet this pond is double the distance from the river stated in the Journal. The probability is, that the meadow west of Waltham meeting house was so flowed by the beavers, as to have the appearance, in the winter season, of a natural pond. Adam's Chair, according to the Journal, was found between the two brooks. I find no person able to point it out to me. Perhaps in the lapse of nearly two centuries the position of the cloven parts of the high stone may be so changed, as not to excite notice as a curiosity. Masters' Brook is now known by the name of Stony Brook. Mount Feake has lost its name ; nor is it certainly known where it stands ; some conjecture in the southeast part of Weston. The very high rock on the west side of Mount Feake may be ascertained, with a consid- erable degree of certainty, by the compass, and by the pros- pect it gives ; especially if it were known where to look for
29
no evidence that this offer met the wishes of the farm- ers, or that any measures had then been taken to erect the farms into a distinct precinct. June 26, 1696, the town agreed to keep a day of humiliation, to be fixed upon by the Rev. Samuel Willard and Rev. Cotton Mather, who were requested to aid in the religious so- lemnity. August 28, 1696, the church called the Rev. Samuel Angier, who had been settled at Reho- both, to be their minister, to officiate in the new meet- ing house.
Sept. 21, 1696, the town met to have a friendly de- bate on their affairs. After some discussion they chose a committee of conference, and adjourned to the 28 of the same month. The dispute was now between the east end and middle part of Watertown. Being met according to adjournment, and finding that their committee had not agreed upon the matters in dispute, the town concurred with the church in the call of Mr. Angier.
Feb. 1, 1697, the farmers, that is, the inhabitants of what is now Weston, were by vote exempted from ministerial rates in the town.
Mr. Angier accepted the call, and manifested a rea- diness to be inducted to office. Upon this the church chose the Rev. Mr. Estabrook of Concord to " give the pastoral charge to the Rev. Mr. Angier, and to be the mouth and moderator of the church in the publick management of the whole affair of perfecting Mr. An- gier's settlement."
Whipcutt. The very high hill due west from this rock, about 40 miles distance, is unquestionably Wachusett, a well known hill in the north part of Princeton.
30
May 17, 1697, the church voted to proceed to a full settlement of Mr. Samuel Angier as their pastor, he taking the charge over them according to the rules of the gospel, without reordination by imposition of hands.
Here is an ancient example of considering a first ordination valid, after dismission from a particular charge. The right and authority to administer spe- cial ordinances remain after such dismission, if by it the ordination be not nullified.
The church agreed to invite ministers to their as- sistance in the settlement of Mr. Angier ; but, if they could not be obtained, that they would proceed to the settlement of Mr. Angier, with his concurrence .* What gave rise to this precautionary measure does not appear from the records. But the right of a church to induct into office ministers of their own choice, other ministers and churches refusing to assist in the solemnity, is here assumed in conformity to the Cam- bridge Platform. If ministers and churches would admit this principle of our fore-fathers, we should not often see ecclesiastical councils attempting to over- rule the choice of christian societies.
Mr. Angier was inducted into his office at Water- town, May 25, 1697, and so far as appears, without any other ministerial aid than that of Mr. Estabrook. He was minister for the whole church and town at this time.
" At a meeting of the two precincts July 2, 1697,"
Waltham church records, committed to Rev. Warham * Williams by Rev. John Angier of Bridgewater.
31
(this is the first instance that two precincts occur in Watertown records,) the town renewed their efforts to settle Mr. Gibbs in connexion with Mr. Angier .* Mr. Angier approved of the measure ; but I find no answer to the call.
Judge Sewall in his MSS. says, " Oct. 6, 1697, a church was gathered at Watertown east end, and Mr. Henry Gibbs was ordained. The ceremony was abroad, because the western party got possession of the meeting house." We infer that the Farmers, being previously exempted from ministerial rates in the town, took no part in this opposition and disor- der.
We have now come down to the period when the Farmers were virtually, though not in legal form, a distinct precinct. But, before we enter upon the lo- cal history of this section, we will pursue a little far- ther that of the other parts of the town.
Mr. Angier and Mr. Gibbs were now ministers at Watertown, the former at the new, the latter at the old meeting house. Orders passed in the General Court to regulate the support of the ministry in Watertown, and to determine where their meeting houses should be placed. According to the records of the town these orders passed in 1700, 1712, and 1720. It ap- pears that both ministers were supported from the common treasury, and that the eastern and middle
* Watertown records, " Voted, that we do renew our call once more to the Rev. Mr. Henry Gibbs, that he be assistant to the Rev. Mr. Samuel Angier in the work of the ministry in the new meeting house for the town."
32
parts of the town were not, in any legal form, divided into distinct precincts. Attempts were still made to unite both parties in one house of worship. The town continued in much the same state for several years, expressing a desire to maintain the worship of God according to the rules prescribed by the General Court. The east congregation manifested a ready submission to these rules.
. May 13, 1715, the town voted to " build a meet- ing house for the accommodation of the inhabitants of the most westerly part of the town." This was after the incorporation of Weston; and therefore had res- pect to what is now Waltham. Nothing, however, was effected for seven years. Sep. 6, 1715, the east- ern congregation petition to be a separate town. It does not appear that the prayer of the petition was granted. Motions were made to fix a dividing line between the two congregations, as to the expense of repairing their respective meeting houses, and parson- age houses ; but not in respect to the annual support of their ministers. The line was proposed by a com- mittee from the General Court ; but does not appear to have been accepted at that time by the town.
Jan. 21, (some say June 21) 1719, Mr. Angier died, aged 65, and was buried in Waltham grave yard.
Nov. 19, 1720, the General Court appointed a committee tó determine the dividing line between the two precincts, to consider the expediency of removing one or both meeting houses, and to fix upon the places most proper for them. The committee reported, Dec.
33
3, 1720, that they had agreed on a divisional line, and determined that within two years the new or west meeting house should be removed to a rising ground within twenty rods of Nathaniel Livermore's dwelling house, or a new one erected on that spot within the term; and that the old or east meeting house should, within ten years, be removed to school house hill, or a new one built on that spot. This report was read and accepted by the General Court, Dec. 7, 1720; at the same time the Court ordered the west precinct to pay their proportion to the removing or rebuilding the cast house, when it should be done, as shall be paid for removing or rebuilding their house. The town voted compliance with this report of committee and order of the General Court, granted money to effect the removal of the meeting houses, or to build new ones, and appropriated the town's proportion of the {50,000 of bills of credit, issued by the government, to the same object. The next precinct applied for the C'est < new meeting house, in order to remove it to the select- ed place, which was near the ground now occupied by Waltham meeting house ; but they did not obtain it. They then purchased of Newton their old meeting house, removed and newly erected it on the ground designated in the order of the General Court.
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.