USA > New Jersey > Mercer County > Trenton > History of the Presbyterian Church in Trenton, N.J. : from the first settlement of the town > Part 4
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
I find no record of Mr. Cowell's reception to the care of the Presbytery of Philadelphia, nor of his licensure. They were probably in the lost minutes of 1732-3. On the 20th of July, 1736, the people of Trenton supplicated the Presby-
* Quincy's "History of Harvard University," i. 388-392.
42
HISTORY OF THE
tery of Philadelphia, to which they then belonged, for the ordination of Mr. Cowell. This was granted, and accord- ing to appointment, a committee of Presbytery met at Tren- ton on the second of November of that year. The com- mittee, as present, were the Rev. Messrs. Jedediah Andrews, David Evans, Eleazer Wales and Richard Treat. The Rev. William Tennent and Hugh Carlile were absent. The Rev. Jonathan Dickinson and John Pierson sat as correspond- ents, having been delegated on other business. In the fore- noon of the first day Mr. Cowell was carried through his examination in theology. In the afternoon he preached his trial sermon from Romans 3: 25, read his exegesis ("An lex naturæ sit sufficiens ad salutem"), and was con- versed with on personal religion and his motives for the ministry. The next day was observed by the congregation, according to the directory, with fasting and prayer. At two o'clock the services of ordination and installment took place "in the public meeting house, at Trenton, in the pres- ence of a numerous assembly," Mr. Jedediah Andrews, of Philadelphia, preaching from 2 Timothy 2: 2.
At this Presbyterial meeting an inquiry being instituted as to what provision could be made for the vacant congre- gations of Hopewell and Maidenhead (Pennington and Lawrenceville), Mr. Cowell was appointed to supply the former as often as he could, and Mr. Wales the latter.
Mr. Cowell established his residence in the town. He was then, and continued through life, unmarried. In May, 1737, he was received in Synod, and at that session a sup- plication coming in from Trenton for an appropriation from the fund for the assistance of the feebler congrega- tions, the sum of five pounds was allowed for the year.
I would be glad to give some notice of each of the signers of Mr. Cowell's call, but find it impossible to collect ma- terials to any extent.
CORNELIUS RINGO was of the German family which gave name to the village of Ringoes, in Amwell. Philip Ringo,
43
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
of Amwell, in 1757 left four sons, Albertus, Henry, John and Cornelius. Cornelius died at Maidenhead, in 1768.8
PETER LOTT was a name of several generations. In 1721 one of them died, leaving five children, to one of whom, Peter, he bequeathed "six shillings" more than to the rest, and made him executor. He was of Hopewell. Peter Lott was a witness before Presbytery in Rev. Mr. Morgan's case in 1737. In 1755, Peter Lott, of Trenton, had (as appears by his will) a nephew, Peter, son of his brother, Hendrick, and a nephew, Peter Rappleje, and a third nephew, Peter Schanck. He had a brother, Mewrice, or Maurice. He desired "to be buried in Long Island, where my father and mother were buried." In 1762 a Peter Lott, Junior, died at South Amboy, leaving sons, Peter, Daniel and Gershom, and a daughter, Ruth; and in 1764, the legatees of Peter Lott, of Middlesex, were his grandson, Gershom, and his sons, Henry, Abram, George and Charles.
JOHN PORTERFIELD9 died in 1738. His will, dated three years before, describes him "of Trenton, merchant," and devises a thousand acres on the south branch of the Raritan, and other property in East New Jersey, "late recovered from John, Earl of Melfort," one of the noble proprietaries. It mentions his brother, Alexander, of Duchall, in Scotland, and a nephew, William Rollston, of the shire of Air, and "Boyd Porterfield, grandson to my brother." He be- queathed to another nephew, William Farquhar, "chirur- geon of Brunswick, all my interest in one third part of the forge at Trenton." John Kinsey, of Philadelphia, Joseph Peace, of Trenton, and William Farquhar were his exec- utors.
FRANCIS GIFFING. A blacksmith of this name died at Trenton in 1749. His children were John, Martha, and Rebecca. His wife, Margaret, and Joseph Yard were the executors.
The BELLERJEAUS are of French descent, and have their representatives still in Trenton. The name of Samuel Bel-
44
HISTORY OF THE
lerjeau occurs hereafter, in 1770. One of the family was a physician.
RICHARD SCUDDER came from Long Island in 1704, and established himself on a farm on the Delaware, about five miles above Trenton, which is still possessed by his lineal descendants. His children were Hannah, Mary, Richard, John, Abigail, Joseph, Samuel, Rebecca, and Joanna, all of whom were baptized by the Rev. Jedediah Andrews, eight of them, together with their father, at one solemnity.10 He died March 14, 1754, at the age of eighty-three.
His son, JOHN, who also signed the call, died May IO, 1748, at the age of forty-seven. His children were Daniel, Amos, Prudence, Jemima, Jedediah, and Ephraim.
DANIEL, the eldest son of John, died June 5, 1811, aged seventy-five. He was a trustee in 1786 and subsequently. His children were Rachel, Keziah, Abner and Elias.
ELIAS, the youngest child, died February 20, 1811, at the age of forty-four. His children were Daniel, John, Jasper Smith and Abner. The third of these is the present treasurer of the city congregation, being of the fifth gen- eration of the family.
ANDREW REED was a merchant in Trenton, and is prob- ably the person mentioned in Governor Morris's papers, as having caused an excitment in 1744, in consequence of his having been elected loan officer, with some informality by the justices of Hunterdon .* He was the first treasurer of the borough of Trenton upon its incorporation in 1746.11 He was made a trustee of the church by the charter of 1756, and served until 1759, when he removed to Amwell, where he died, December 16, 1769. He was the father of General Joseph Reed, of the Revolution, who followed him in the trusteeship in 1766. Mr. Andrew Reed resided for some time also in Philadelphia, and was a trustee of the Second Presbyterian Church in that city. He had a
* Papers of Lewis Morris, pp. 275, 303, 317.
45
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
brother, Joseph, who died at Amwell, in 1774, whose will mentions the children of his late brother, Andrew, namely, Joseph, Boaz,12 John, Sarah (wife of Charles Pettit), and Mary. He (Joseph) left a legacy to Margaret, "the wife of CLOTWORTHY REED, of Trenton,"13 a name which is found among the signers of the call. He also left thirty pounds to Princeton College, in addition to twenty already subscribed, and fifty to the united Presbyterian congrega- tions of Amwell, directing that his body should be interred in "the old English Presbyterian meeting-house graveyard in Amwell," or in any other Presbyterian graveyard nearer which he might be at the time of his death.
In the Register of Baptisms, by the Rev. Jedediah An- drews, pastor of the First Church of Philadelphia, some of the names of the signers are found.14 August 2, 17II, Mr. Andrews baptized in Hopewell, RICHARD SCUDDER, and his eight children, Hannah, Mary, Richard. John, Abigail, Joseph, Samuel and Rebekah. At Maidenhead, March 6, 1713, Rebekah, daughter of EBENEZER PROUT, and Daniel, son of ROBERT LANNING. At Hopewell, April 21, 1713, Susanna, daughter of RICHARD SCUDDER, and Alexander, son of CHARLES CLARK. At Maidenhead, December 21, 1713, Abigail, daughter of RALPH HART. At Hopewell, July 28, 1714, Eunice, daughter of EBENEZER PROUT. At Maidenhead, April 17, 1715, Edward, son of RALPH HUNT. July 13, 1715, Joseph and Anna, children of ELIAKIM ANDERSON ; Frances, daughter of ROBERT LANNING.
The year 1738 is notable in the history of New Jersey, as the first in which the Province had a Governor exclus- ively its own. Heretofore the crown had united it with New York in the commissions of the successive Governors; but now Colonel Lewis Morris, a native of Morrisania, in New York, was appointed for New Jersey alone. The Legislative Assembly of the Province was accustomed to
46
HISTORY OF FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
meet alternately at Perth Amboy and Burlington. Gover- nor Morris was anxious to fix upon a permanent and more central place for the seat of government. In 1740 he writes : "I have hired Dagworthy's house at Trenton." In 1742 he negotiates with Governor Thomas,15 of Pennsylvania, for a lease of his estate called Kingsbury-the property in the lower part of Warren (then King) street, subsequently occupied by other provincial governors-and which, after a long interval, became the executive mansion during the incumbency of Governor Price. Lewis describes it in 1744 as "about half a mile from Trenton; a very healthy and pleasant place, parted by a small brook (Assanpink) from Trentown, the great thoroughfare between York and Phila- delphia." He was not able to obtain a change in the seat of government; but in accommodation to his bad health the Legislature was summoned to meet at Trenton, and once at least at Kingsbury, in order to be dissolved in per- son by the Governor. He died there, May 21, 1746.
Governor Morris belonged to the English Church, and while a resident at his estate of Tintern, or Tinton, in Mon- mouth county, when President (1700) of Council, had recommended to the Bishop of London, as necessary "to the bringing over to the Church the people in these countries," that none but "churchmen" should be placed in the high offices; that members of that Church should have "some peculiar privileges above others," and that no man should be admitted to a great benefice in England who had not preached "three years gratis in America." But his secta- rian zeal had disappeared when he made his will: "I forbid any man to be paid for preaching a funeral sermon over me ; those who survive me will commend or blame my life as they think fit, and I am not for paying of any man for doing of either; but if any man, whether Churchman or Dissenter, in or not in priest's orders, is inclined to say any- thing on that occasion, he may, if my executors think fit to admit him to do it."16
CHAPTER IV.
REV. MR. COWELL AND REV. MR. TENNENT. SCHISM OF SYNOD.
1736-1760.
MR. COWELL's name appears in the minutes of Presby- tery, first of Philadelphia, afterwards of New Brunswick, as a punctual attendant down to 1746. From that year to 1762 there is a hiatus in the records, and there is no means of ascertaining what part he took in that judicature during the remainder of his life, beyond what transpires through the minutes of the Synod.
It is only from the proceedings of this court that we obtain information of a theological controversy between Mr. Cowell and the Rev. Gilbert Tennent, of the Presby- tery of New Brunswick, that is first mentioned in May, 1738, at which time a large correspondence had already passed between them. From the tenor of the proceedings in three successive sessions of the Synod, it appears that Mr. Tennent suspected Mr. Cowell of holding that doctrine, or some form of it, which makes the happiness of the indi- vidual the chief motive of religion. Not satisfied with the result of the correspondence, Mr. Tennent brought the sub- ject to the notice of Synod May 27, 1738, with a request for an expression of their opinion. The Synod appointed a committee, composed of Rev. Messrs. J. Dickinson, Pierson, Pemberton, Thomson, Anderson, Boyd and Treat, to con- verse with the two controvertists together, "that they may see whether they so widely differ in their sentiments as is supposed ; and if they find there be necessity, distinctly to consider the papers; that Mr. Tennent and Mr. Cowell be
(47)
48
HISTORY OF THE
both directed to refrain all public discourses upon this con- troversy, and all methods of spreading it among the popu- lace, until the committee have made their report to the Synod, and that no other member take notice of and divulge the affair." The committee, finding that the debate was not to be settled by conversation, obtained leave to defer their report until the next Synod, and the Rev. Mr. Cross was added to their number.
On the second day of the next year's session (May 24; 1739), the committee were not prepared to report. On the 25th the subject was again deferred-the committee being probably engaged in private conference with the parties. On the 29th the report was presented; upon hearing which the Synod expressed their great satisfaction in finding the contending parties fully agreed in their sentiments upon the point in controversy, according to the terms in which the overture of the committee had embodied the doctrine. The committee preface the theological statement to which they had secured the assent of the disputants, with this somewhat caustic intimation :
"Though they apprehend that there were some incautious and un- guarded expressions used by both the contending parties, yet they have. ground to hope that the principal controversy between them flows from their not having clear ideas of the subject they so earnestly debate about, and not from any dangerous errors they entertain."
The committee then proceeded to harmonize the views which each of the polemics took of his favorite side of the problem. The substance of their statement is, that God has been pleased to connect the highest happiness of man with the promotion of the divine glory, and therefore the two designs must never be placed in opposition.
The decision was made at the last sederunt of the meet- ing, when Mr. Tennent had not much time to weigh the terms of the report; but upon the reading of the minutes
·
49
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
at the opening of the session of 1740, he expressed his dissatisfaction and asked for a reconsideration of the subject. After much debate upon this request, it was refused by a great majority .* Mr. Tennent's disposition was not towards concession. Neither his pen nor voice as yet gave promise of the future "Irenicum." As Dr. Finley said at his funeral, if an end seemed to be attainable, "he would not give up the point while one glimpse of hope remained." He subsequently alluded in the harshest terms to what he conceived to be the heretical standing of many of the Synod on the point of his controversy with Mr. Cowell. "His natural disposition," says Dr. Alexander, "appears to have been severe and uncompromising; and he gave strong evidence of being very tenacious of all his opinions, and not very tolerant of those who dissented from his views, as appeared by the controversy which he had with the Rev. Mr. Cowell, of Trenton, and which he brought before the Synod."i
Our whole Church was now approaching one of the most exciting and tumultuous epochs in its history-an epoch signalized by the discordant epithets of "The Great Re- vival," and "The Great Schism," to which might be added, as their sequel,"The Great Relapse"-the times of Edwards, Whitefield, Wesley, Tennents, Dickinson, Blair, Davenport, and the parties, sects, and controversies with which their names are associated; times of fanaticism and censorious- ness, yet also of awakening and reformation; the good of which has overbalanced the mischief-the Divine wisdom neutralizing the foolishness of men. A full and candid survey of the period from 1740 to 1758, and a discriminat- ing view of what is pure and what spurious in the character of a "Revival," may be found in Dr. Hodge's volumes on
* Records, pp. 138, 142, 143, 146, 149, 150. The proceedings are given in Dr. Hodge's Constitutional History. Part I., pp. 235-239.
t "Log College," chap. iv.
4 PRES
50
HISTORY OF THE
the "Constitutional History of the Presbyterian Church." All that pertains to my limited purpose may be compressed in a few paragraphs .*
Both in this country and Great Britain, the piety of the Church, its ministry and laity, was in a languid condition. In some parts this was accompanied with, or caused by, a looseness in doctrinal opinion. The first marked symptoms of improvement appeared at Freehold, New Jersey, in the congregation under the care of the Rev. John Tennent, and throughout his brief ministry from 1730 to his death in 1732. Under the itinerating ministry of the Rev. John Rowland, in Maidenhead, Hopewell, and Amwell, similar effects appeared a few years later, and most conspicuously in 1740. In Elizabethtown, Newark, New Brunswick, and other parts of New Jersey, as well as in the neighboring Provinces, and in Virginia and New England, the "awaken- ing" was remarkably extended and decided. In the year 1738, Whitefield first appeared in America, and repeated his visits at intervals until his death at Newburyport in 1770. His extraordinary preaching and inexhaustible enthusiasm served to increase and diffuse the religious fervor that had already made its appearance, while the irregularities of his measures, and the marks of fanaticism that characterized his language and conduct, excited the mistrust of some of the most pious and judicious, as to the ultimate effect of his course.
It was the excitement, both good and bad, attending the movements just referred to, that led some of the most zeal- ous ministers to disregard formalities and regulations which they supposed were impediments in the way of attempting what the times required. In 1737, the Synod of Philadel- phia, the only Synod and the highest court of the Church, . prohibited the intrusion of the ministers of one Presbytery within the bounds of another. The main object of this law
* For the documents and records see Baird's Digest, 2d edition, pp. 592-617.
5I
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
was to prevent itinerant ministers from producing confusion by preaching in parishes uninvited by the proper minister. Again, in 1738, the Synod directed that every candidate for the ministry should present to the Presbytery to which he applied a diploma of graduation, or an equivalent certifi- cate of scholarship from a committee of the Synod. In that year the Synod had formed out of the Presbyteries of New York and Philadelphia the Presbytery of New Brunswick. All the churches and ministers to the north and east of Maidenhead and Hopewell, with some others, were united in the new Presbytery. On the first day of its constitution it deliberately disregarded the latter rule, and licensed a candidate without diploma or certificate. The Synod pro- nounced this act disorderly, and refused to recognize the licentiate. In reply, the Presbytery, led by the Rev. Gilbert Tennent, stated their objections to both of the above-named rules, as infringing on Presbyterial rights and transgressing Synodal authority.1 The Synod slightly modified the rule of examination, but adhered to its principles. The Presby- tery persisted in their contumacy, ordained the very proba- tioner (Rowland) that they had irregularly licensed, and continued to license in the old way.
The Hopewell family of churches became involved in the schismatic proceedings. Hopewell and Maidenhead, still in the Presbytery of Philadelphia, supplicated the new Presby- tery for Mr. Rowland as their supply, which was granted. The Presbytery of Philadelphia, which had, through Mr. Cowell, informed Rowland that they adhered to the Synod's view of his defective standing, and advised him not to preach at Hopewell, now refused to allow him to minister in their jurisdiction. Thereupon the people who favored Rowland asked the Philadelphia Presbytery to form them into a separate congregation. This was consented to, pro- vided they would not erect a new church without the consent of the other part of the congregation to its location.2 Upon
.
52
HISTORY OF THE
this agreement they were set off. The new congregation at once asked to be dismissed to the more congenial Presbytery of New Brunswick. The Presbytery insisted upon their first complying with the condition on which they were set off. The people complained of this decision to Synod, which (1739) wholly sustained the Presbytery, and pro- vided for their (the Presbytery's) fixing the place of the new house, but none of the parties submitted to its judg- ment.
Matters became still more complicated as the Synod en- deavored to compromise the points in debate. Gilbert Ten- nent, with his characteristic harshness and uncharitableness, formally attributed the objectionable rules of the Synod, and its adherence to them, to doctrinal unsoundness and want of piety. Mr. Blair followed in the same strain. Tennent encouraged the schismatic tendencies of the Synod's opponents by a bold sermon at Nottingham, excit- ing the disaffected to withdraw from the ministry of those whom he condemned. It was fruitful in alienations and divisions.
The Synod met in 1741. A violent protest against recog- nizing the Tennent party as members of Synod was read, and then signed by a majority. Scenes of disorder ensued. The Presbytery of New Brunswick, regarding themselves excluded by this unconstitutional measure, withdrew in a body from the house. The next day it divided itself into the Presbyteries of New Brunswick and Londonderry, and took measures for organizing a new Synod. In 1742 the old Synod was occupied with ineffectual plans of reconcilia- tion. In 1743 Mr. Cowell being Moderator, and in 1744, the discussion went on, and no union taking place, the dis- owned members, and others who sympathized with them as unjustly dealt with, met as the Synod of New York in Elizabethtown, September, 1745. In the references to this schism the Synod of Philadelphia is called historically the
53
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
Old Side, and the other Synod the New Side. The separa- tion continued until 1758.3
Through these agitations Mr. Cowell stood by the old Synod; and though after his experience of Mr. Tennent's qualities as an antagonist he may not have felt any personal prepossession for the side on which he was leader, his char- acteristic moderation and self-command were doubtless pre- served. According to President Davies, perhaps alluding to these times, "in matters of debate, and especially of relig- ious controversy, he was rather a moderator and compro- miser than a party." There is no reason to believe that he was carried away, as many were, by their admiration of the zeal of Whitefield, to overlook the serious perils of the excitement of his visits. Whitefield was, of course, a favorite with the "New Side." He was one of those men towards whom a broad charity is extended by the humble minds who honor in another the zeal in which they regard themselves to be defective, and overlook extravagancies for the sake of the good which they hope they will be the means of producing. Whitefield's history stands in need of this charity, and we should be slow in suspecting those men of coldness to a true work of Divine grace who were consci- entiously restrained from giving their countenance to his methods of procedure.
In the first year of his American travels Whitefield preached at the towns between Philadelphia and New York. His own journal of November 12, 1739, says: "By eight o'clock we reached Trent-town in the Jerseys. It being dark, we went out of our way a little in the woods; but God s'ent a guide to direct us aright. We had a comfortable refreshment when we reached our inn, and went to bed in peace and joy in the Holy Ghost." He left town early the next morning. After preaching in the neighborhood he was brought back to Trenton in the same month, by the pros- pect of a great gathering of people to view an execution.
·
54
HISTORY OF THE
"November 21, 1739. Being strongly desired by many, and hearing that a condemned malefactor was to suffer that week, I went in company with about thirty more to Trent- town, and reached thither by five in the evening. Here God was pleased to humble my soul, and bring my sins to remembrance, so that I could hardly hold up my head. However, knowing that God called, I went out, trusting in Divine strength, and preached in the court-house; and though I was quite barren and dry in the beginning of the discourse, yet God enabled me to speak with great sweet- ness, freedom, and power before I had done. The unhappy criminal seemed hardened, but I hope some good was done in the place." .
Whitefield, it appears from this, preached according to English custom, in the presence of the condemned man.4 Mr. Cowell improved the same occasion by a sermon in his own church, on the repentance of the dying thief, which looks as if he did not offer his pulpit to the eloquent itin- erant. A' letter of Jonathan Arnold, who appears to have been an Episcopal minister, perhaps a missionary, in Con- necticut, dated, "East Chester, November 27, 1739," and addressed to Wm. Smith, Esq., of New York, refers to an incident of that visit. "When Mr. Whitefield came with me from Trenton, we agreed to search and examine each other. He had the preferance. I past his examination till we came to Brunswick, after which I was to have the same liberty with him. He escaped by turning aside to preach for the famous Mr. Tennent."
In November, 1740, Whitefield was here again, as his journal speaks of having had at Trenton "a long confer- ence with some ministers about Mr. Gilbert Tennent's com- plying with an invitation to go and preach in New Eng- land." It is probable that he visited Trenton during his other tours in America, from 1744 to 1770. On the 30th of July, 1754, one of his letters says: "To-morrow I preach
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.