USA > Virginia > Old churches, ministers and families of Virginia, Vol. I > Part 45
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
425
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
of us remaining who remember old Mr. Francis Nelson as the fre- quent delegate from this parish. He married one of the descendants of the old Mr. Page of whom we have spoken. They had fourteen children, to whom by good management they contrived to give respectable educations, though living on a poor Hanover farm. Unable to afford other conveyance than a farm-wagon with four mules, his family was punctually at church in that, when the weather would allow, himself being on horseback. The great se- cret of his bringing up such a family on such a farm was, a con- scientious determination to live on its proceeds and never run in debt. He was himself an example of that self-denial which he re- quired of his children. If the allowance of tobacco raised on his own farm and set apart for his own use failed before another crop, and he had not the money to pay for more, he did without it. If tea or coffee could not be had for the elder members of the family, as was often the case, milk served in their stead; if there was not milk enough for the children, water supplied its place. Thus did he live and die without debt. And, what is more worthy of notice than any thing else, all of his fourteen children entered into full communion with the Church of their parents. I conclude this part of the article on Hanover by stating that this parish, though small, has furnished four ministers to the Church,-the Revs. W. N. Pen- dleton, Washington Nelson, Robert Nelson, and Farley Berkeley. It ought to have furnished many more, but I could wish they had all done as well. In my next, I shall consider what occurred in this county in relation to the Rev. Samuel Davies, and the esta- blishment of the Presbyterian Church in the same, with a review of what is ascribed to the Episcopal Church in the way of intole- rance.
-
426
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
ARTICLE XXXIX.
Parishes in Hanover .- No. 2.
THE history of the treatment of other denominations of Chris- tians by the Government and Church of Virginia deserves a special consideration ; and I know not where, in the progress of my sketches, it can be more properly examined than in connection with the history of this parish. That the Episcopalians of Vir- ginia should, from the first, have shared in the spirit of the age, and been sometimes guilty of such an exclusive course as marked the Church of England, of Scotland, and of New England, and which all in this age of toleration unite in condemning, was to be expected; but it is not fair that she should be loaded with a heavier reproach than was merited. From a pretty extensive- and, we think, impartial-examination of the subject, we are firmly persuaded that her misconduct in this respect has been greatly exaggerated, and is much misunderstood to this day, even by some of her most attached friends. The press, the pulpit, and the fireside have been, for more than a century, accustomed to retail instances of imprisonment, and fines, and restraints, colour- ing and magnifying them according to the temperament of the speaker, until many have been impressed with the belief that the bloody persecutions of Nero, in the first ages, were not more wicked. I remember from early boyhood to have heard, from the pulpit and elsewhere, of the dreadful persecution of a worthy old Dissenting minister, and for a long time his name was always associated in my mind with stripes, imprisonment, and the shutting up his lips from preaching the Gospel of Christ. During the last summer I happened at the court-house, where whatever proceedings took place must have been recorded; and I asked to see the records of the same, when one of the clerks, being a descendant of the old martyr, with a smile told me that the persecution was not so cruel as some had supposed. On examination of the record, it appeared that, having violated the Act of Toleration and preached in various places of the parish without taking out a license for the same, he had been presented for it, summoned before the court, and made to give a small security for the observance of the law in the
427
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
future. All that the law required was, to ask for a license to preach in such and such places, and it was freely given. I have, during my life, been accustomed to hear of the persecutions of the harmless Quakers in Virginia and elsewhere, and have ever thought that it must have been proof of a most uncharitable spirit, not to make the largest allowance for their scruples, and not only permit them without molestation to worship God according to their own consciences, but even to have some immunities as citizens on the same account. But recent investigations have convinced me that great injustice has been done to our forefathers in the imputation cast upon them for their treatment of the first of this sect who came into America. I have been, by the kindness of a friend, furnished with extracts from the records of the Court of Accomac,-going back to the year 1632, the oldest documents of the kind in Vir- ginia,-from which I find that, between 1650 and 1660, some persons (called Quakers) appeared in that part of Virginia, and, after a time, having made a few converts, built a log-church,-only ten feet square, so small was their number. They were charged not only with vilifying the ministers and disobeying the laws, but with blaspheming God. Witnesses, in open court, proved their denial that Christ was ever seen in the flesh, that he had any humanity about him, that several of them called God "a foolish old man," and other names. On account of these things they were ordered to be sent over the bay to the Governor and Council. What was done to them does not appear. How entirely does this change the aspect of the case! It seems they were sent over for trial, not for dissenting from the Church of England, but because they were disobedient to law, wicked men, and blasphemers. Were this the only testimony against them, we might hope some mistake had occurred; but, both before and after this, we find the Acts of Assembly and other documents speaking of some belong- ing to this sect as lawless persons, disturbers of the peace, atheists, and blasphemers. Even at a time when other denominations-as the Huguenots and German Lutherans-were not only tolerated but patronized, these men were put upon the same footing with Papists. In the year 1711, Governor Spottswood, in a letter to the Lord- Commissioner, speaks of them as much embarrassing the Govern- ment, and " broaching doctrines so monstrous as their brethren in England never owned, and which cannot be suffered in any govern- ment. They have not only," he says, "refused to work themselves, or suffer any of their servants to be employed in the fortifications, but affirm that their consciences will not permit them to contribute
-
428
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
in any manner or way to the defence of the country, even so much as trusting the Government for provision to support them that do work, though at the same time they say that, being obliged by their religion to feed their enemies, if the French should come here and want provisions, they must, in conscience, supply them." Governor Spottswood was not the man to be thus dealt with. Accordingly he says, "I have, therefore, thought it necessary to put the laws in force against them, since any one that is lazy or cowardly would make use of the pretence of conscience to excuse himself from working or fighting when there is greatest need of his service." As the Quakers became a more respectable body in Virginia, the treatment of them was changed.
I must make the same remark as to another denomination of Christians in Virginia, who were generally called-as on their first appearance in Europe-Anabaptists, and were a very different people from what they are at this time. In the year 1761, the Rev. James Maury addressed a printed letter of some length to the Christians of all denominations in Virginia, calling upon them to unite in opposing that new sect. There was at that time a considerable number of Presbyterians in the Valley, and some in different counties in Eastern Virginia. The Methodists, also, had their preachers and congregations. The ground on which he calls upon them to unite against the Anabaptists was, that they denied all ordination, and claimed that every one had a right to preach, by virtue of the inspiration of the Spirit, and that they were going about, without any licence, disturbing the order of neigh- bourhoods and churches with wild doctrines. Although Mr. Maury held in high esteem and preference the Episcopal ordina- tion, yet he considered that regularly-appointed preachers of the other Churches, according to some rule, were lawful ministers, of which the Baptists at that time had none. This fact I mention to show that the first opposition made to the Baptists was in a measure caused and strengthened by doctrines and practices which they themselves would now hold in condemnation, and upon which they would exercise discipline. That their preachers were dealt severely with in some instances then, and perhaps at a later date, is certainly true; but let the truth also be admitted, that it was the State, not the Church, which did it; that the civil magistrates, not the clergy, were guilty ; that the offences which were the cause of their being arraigned were offences against laws made by the civil legislature, though those laws had reference to religious matters. Let it also be remembered how
429
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
often the clergy themselves condemned and opposed all such inter . ference, and how, when an appeal was made to the Governor and Council, the mildest and most tolerant construction was put upon the law, and the magistrates rebuked. Mr. Sample, in his " His- tory of the Baptists of Virginia," gives some instances of this. We shall also see, hereafter, how the Bishop of London, in his own behalf and that of the whole Church of England, disavows having any thing to do with the making or executing laws against Dissenters. The following extract from the address of Mr. Maury will show of what spirit he was :-
""Tis true, the author acknowledges himself peculiarly bound by ties of duty, as he is prompted by inclination, to wish-and, if he can, to promote-the prosperity of that peculiar Church in which he deems it his honour and happiness to minister. Yet be just enough to believe him, when he declares that he would deem it no small addition to that honour and happiness, could he be an instrument of furthering in any degree the spiritual comfort and edification of any one honest and well-disposed person, of whatever persuasion, within the extensive pale of the Catholic Church at large; that he hath much at heart the eternal welfare of Dissenters and Conformists; and that, as he thinks he sees errors in both, and sincerely laments them, so he is disposed cheerfully to exert his endeavours, weak as they be. at best, to rectify whatever may be blameworthy in either."
Having made these preliminary remarks, I proceed to consider the case of the Rev. Samuel Davies and the Presbyterians of Hanover county, Virginia, which has been the subject of much discussion. I introduce it by the following address of five Epis- copal clergymen, in Hanover and the counties around, to the House of Burgesses, in the year - :
"ADDRESS TO THE BURGESSES.
" To the Worshipful the Speaker and. Gentlemen of the House of Burgesses.
"The humble petition of some of the Clergy of this Dominion showeth :-
"That there have been frequently held in the counties of Hanover, Henrico, Goochland, and some others, for several years past, numerous Assemblies, especially of the common people, upon a pretended religious account,-convened sometimes by merely lay enthusiasts, who, in these meetings, read sundry fanatical books and used long extempore prayers and discourses,-sometimes by strolling, pretended ministers,-and at present by one Mr. Samuel Davies, who has fixed himself in Hanover; and, in the counties of Amelia and Albemarle, by a person who calls himself Mr. Cen- nick, well known in England by his intimacy with Mr. Whitefield.
" That though these teachers and their adherents (except the above- mentioned Cennick) assume the denomination of Presbyterians, yet we
-
430
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
think they have no just claim to that character, as the ringleaders of the party were, for their erroneous doctrines and practices, excluded the Presbyterian Synod of Philadelphia in May, 1741, (as appears by an ad- dress of said Synod to our Governor;) nor have they, since that time, made any recantation of their errors, nor been readmitted as members of that Synod,-which Synod, though of many years' standing, never was reprehended for errors in doctrine, discipline, or government, either by the established Kirk of Scotland, the Presbyterian Dissenters in England, or any other body of Presbyterians whatsoever. Whence we beg leave to conclude, that the distinguishing tenets of these teachers before men- tioned are of dangerous consequence to religion in general, and that the authors and propagators thereof are deservedly stigmatized with a name (New-Lights) unknown till of late in this part of the world.
" That your petitioners further humbly conceive that, though these excluded members of the Synod of Philadelphia were really Presbyterians, or of any of the other sects tolerated in England, yet there is no law in this Colony by virtue whereof they can be entitled to a license to preach, far less to send forth their emissaries, or to travel themselves over several counties, (to many places without invitation,) to gain proselytes to their way; 'to inveigle ignorant and unwary people with their sophistry ;' and, under pretence of greater degrees of piety among them than can be found among the members of the Established Church, to seduce them from their lawful teachers and the religion hitherto professed in this Dominion.
" Your petitioners therefore, confiding in the wisdom and piety of this worshipful House, the guardians of their religious as well as civil privileges, and being deeply sensible of the inestimable value of the souls committed to their charge, of the infectious and pernicious tendency, nature, and conse- quences of heresy and schism, and of the sacred and solemn obligations they are under ' To be ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's word, and to use their utmost care that the flock of Christ may be fed with the sincere milk of the word ouly,' humbly pray that the good laws, formerly in that case made and provided, may be strictly put in execution ; particularly that entitled 'ministers to be inducted.' And, as we humbly think this law still retains its primitive force and vigour, so we pray that it may on this occasion effectually exert the same, to the end that all novel notions and perplexing, uncertain doctrines and speculations, which tend to the subversion of true religion, designed by its admirable Author to direct the faith and practice of reasonable creatures, may be suitably checked and discouraged. And that this Church, of which we are members, and which our forefathers justly esteemed a most invaluable blessing, worthy by all prudent and honourable means to be defended and supported, being by us in the same manner regarded, may remain 'the pillar and ground of truth,' and glory of this Colony, which hitherto hath been remarkably happy for uniformity of religion.
"And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, &c. "D. MOSSOM, PAT. HENRY,
" JOHN BRUNSKILL, *
JOHN ROBERTSON, ROBERT BARRETT."
* There were three ministers named John Brunskill at this time in Virginia, two of whom lived in Caroline county, and one in Fauquier. The one in Fauquier was an unworthy person.
431
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
That these memorialists were perfectly sincere and conscientious in their protest, I doubt not ; nor have I any reason to suspect the respectability of their character. The following statement, which I take substantially from the history of the Presbyterian Church in Virginia, by the Rev. Mr. Foote, will show the grounds on which the charges in the foregoing letter were made. It must have been somewhere about the year 1740, when the reports of some great awakenings and revivals at the North, and some books differing from those in common use, found their way first into Virginia, and especially excited the minds of some persons in Hanover, Louisa, and other counties around. Finding nothing in the sermons of the Episcopal ministers corresponding with these, some of the laity separated themselves from the usual services, which by law they were bound to attend, and read sermons in private houses. After a time certain ministers came among them from the North, but who were not recognised by the Philadelphia Presbytery. It seems that they, and some of the laymen who set up reading-houses, held some extravagant doctrines, probably Antinomian, which made a great noise. These, and the irregular meetings of the itinerant preachers, and lay readers and exhorters, came to Governor Gooch's ears. They were charged with assailing the Church and its minis- ters, in private and public, with the most abusive language, and of disturbing the peace and order of society. Governor Gooch, who had always treated the Dissenters with great kindness, and had, in reply to a letter from the Philadelphia Synod a few years before, assured them that their members and people should be allowed the free exercise of conscience in the worship of God, if complying with the Act of Toleration, became much offended, and, summoning a general court, delivered a charge complaining of the conduct of those laymen and preachers who, professing to be Presbyterians, yet utterly disregarded the conditions of the Act of Toleration, and pro- duced much discord in the Colony. This charge was laid before the Synod of Philadelphia by a gentleman from Virginia. The Synod, having considered it, sent the following address to the Governor :-
" May it please your Honour, the favourable acceptance which your Honour was pleased to give our former address, and the countenance and protection which those of our persuasion have met with in Virginia, fills us with gratitude, and we beg leave on this occasion with all sincerity to express the same. It very deeply affects us to find that any who go from these parts, and perhaps assume the name of Presbyterians, should be guilty of such practices, such uncharitable and unchristian expressions, as are taken notice of in your Honour's charge to the Grand Jury. And, in the mean time, it gives us the greatest pleasure that we can assure your Honour
432
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
these persons never belonged to our body, but are missionaries, sent out by some, who, by reason of their divisions and uncharitable doctrines and practices, were, in May, 1741, excluded from our Synod, upon which they erected themselves into a separate society, and have industriously sent abroad persons whom we judge ill qualified for the character they assume, to divide and trouble the churches. And, therefore, we humbly pray, that while those who belong to us, and produce proper testimonials, behave themselves suitably, they may still enjoy the favour of your Honour's countenance and protection. And praying for the divine blessing on your Honour's person and government, we beg leave to subscribe ourselves your Honour's, &c. &c.
"ROBERT CATHCART, Moderator."
The following is an extract from the Governor's reply :-
" GENTLEMEN :- The address you were pleased to send me, as a grateful acknowledgment for the favour which teachers of your persuasion met with in Virginia, was very acceptable to me, but altogether needless to a person in my station, because it is what by law they are entitled to."
The Synod soon after this, in reply to a petition from the people in Hanover, sent them, as a temporary supply, two most venerable men, Messrs. Tennent and Finley, who were kindly received by the Governor and permitted to preach in Hanover. Then followed the Rev. Mr. Blair, and soon after Mr. Whitefield, who, in passing through Virginia, preached for them five days. During the inter- vals of their visits, it is said that the Non-conformists and itinerant preachers and lay readers were harassed by the pains and penalties of the law, by which I presume is meant the fines for not attending the Established Church. The meetings for reading were, however, kept up, although forbidden. Those ministers and readers who had been summoned to Williamsburg for violation of law, and for the use of most abusive language, seemed all to have been dismissed, and there was no terror in the law for any who chose to worship God in their own way and place, except a trivial fine for being absent from church, which, I will venture to say, was seldom en- forced, as few could be found who would undertake to present them. Those who are persecuted are very apt to magnify their sufferings, and those who come after them to magnify them much more.
We now come to the time when the Rev. Samuel Davies, after- ward President of Princeton College, settled in Hanover, as the regular pastor of the Presbyterians there and in some other places around. Calling at Williamsburg, and showing his credentials as a minister of that denomination, the Governor and Council licensed four places at which he was allowed to officiate. His zeal and eloquence soon attracted crowds, and drew many from the Episcopal
433
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
churches. His fame spread through the counties around, and in a short time three other places were licensed, and then three more were called for. Meanwhile, complaints were made to the Governor that he also was nothing more than an itinerant proselyter, as those who had gone before him, and who had been condemned by the Philadelphia Synod itself. About this time the letter from the five clergymen, which goes before, was addressed to the Burgesses. The Governor was much excited, and, with the Council, questioned whether it was according to the true intent of the Act of Toleration to allow one man to have any number of houses licensed, in any number of counties, at which to preach and draw away the people from their regular places of worship, to which they were attached, and which they were bound to attend by law. Mr. Davies appeared before them and plead his own cause,-no doubt with great ability. The result, however, was a refusal to license any more without consul- tation with the authorities of England, and Mr. Davies was required to content himself with his seven congregations in five or more counties. The Governor himself, in his letter to the Synod of Philadelphia, had said, after condemning itinerant preachers, who disturbed the order and peace of the community, "Your mission- aries producing proper testimonials, complying with the laws, and performing divine service in some certain place appropriated for that purpose, without disturbing the quiet and unity of our sacred and civil establishments, may be sure of my protection.". On such terms Mr. Davies was supposed to have come to Virginia, and for the alleged violation of such was opposition made to the licensing
f so many places of service. We have the whole subject discussed in a kind of triangular correspondence between the Bishop of Lon- don, Mr. Davies, and the excellent Dr. Doddridge of England. I shall briefly state the main points of these letters,-enough to exhibit the subject in its proper light. The Bishop of London says, that, as to any methods of oppression with the Dissenters, neither he nor his Commissaries have any power, nor desire it; that if any is ex- erted, the civil Government alone is concerned ; that if the Church of Virginia is in such a state of corruption as the Church of Rome was at the Reformation, then, without any law authorizing it, such methods as Mr. Davies pursues are justifiable ; but, that though Mr. Davies gives a much worse account of the clergy than he receives, yet he does not justify himself on that ground; that he places it on the right given by the Toleration Act, in which he (the Bishop) differs from him, thinking that it never was designed to give such unlimited license. The Bishop evidently considers that
28
434
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
Mr. Davies had come from a great distance (three hundred miles) to disturb the minds of a people, where he admits that only a few years before there were not more than five or six Dissenters. The Bishop alludes to the opposition made at the North to the plan he had submitted to Government of sending some Bishops, though only to the Southern part of the country, where the Episcopal Church prevailed, and asks what would be thought if the people of New England were not allowed to settle ministers for themselves, but must send them over for Orders to Geneva. He also alludes to the fact of their persecuting and imprisoning members of the Episcopal Church for not contributing to the support of their preachers. In view of all these things, he asks, is it consistent to be sending a minister to Virginia to disturb the minds of a people acknowledged to be Episcopal, and to be a true Church ?* Dr. Doddridge, in his letter, differs from the Bishop as to the construction to be put on the Act of Toleration, and shows clearly that the practice in England is altogether different, and in favour of what Mr. Davies pleads for ; that it is only required that three men apply to have a place licensed, and that every licensed minister may officiate. He agrees with the Bishop, that it is a great hardship that the Episcopalians of Ame- rica should be obliged to send their candidates to England for ordi- nation, and says that he has always condemned his brethren for their opposition. As to requiring Episcopalians in certain parts of New England to pay for some other ministry, which may be the established one, he is not sufficiently acquainted with the nature of the Establishment to speak, but says that he has always maintained that, in England, it was reasonable that Dissenters should pay something to the Church which the majority had established. Of the Church of England he speaks in kind terms, "as a most re- spectable body, and heartily prays that it may in every regard be more and more the glory of the Reformation." "As for myself," he concludes, "having now lived for almost a century, I consider myself (if all my best hopes do not deceive me) as quickly to join that general assembly and Church of the first-born, where our views and hearts will be forever one; and, as that prospect approaches, I really find every thing that would feed the spirit of a party daily losing its influence on me. These sentiments I daily cultivate in
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.