The separates; or, Strict Congregationalists of New England

Introduction

By Prof. Williston Walker, d. d.

Among the more important of the consequences of that vast religions upheaval in eighteenth century- New England, of which Whitefield's preaching was the most striking episode, was the revolt against the conservatism, formalism and rigid ecclesiastical discipline of the established churches of these colonies, to which the title, "Separatist Movement," has usually been given. The "Great Awakening," as the revival in general has been called, well deserves its fame as the most wide-spread and intense spiritual quickening in New England history. No other epoch of New England story has witnessed so generally diffused an interest in spiritual concerns or has beheld so expensive a manifestation of the visible working of the divine Spirit upon the hearts of men as the years 1740, 1741 and 1742, when the revival was ait its height. It stands in retrospect like a mountain peak in colonial religious history above the monotonous level characteristic of the eighteenth century.

But the "Great Awakening" is not remarkable only for its accessions to the churches and its quickening of the life of the spirit. In some respects its methods and its characteristic manifestations were unparalleled in New England history. It was distinguished far beyond any revival in this region beside, by fervent appeals to the feelings resulting in emotional excitement sufficient oftentimes to produce striking physical effects, and by such a sense of the divine presence and of the reality of unseen things as led many who came under its power to claim visions and spiritual gifts not granted to Christians in more ordinary times. These more unusual and ex-

travagant manifestations were opposed, indeed, by the vast majority of the ministry of New England; but they were wide-spread and impressive among the humbler and more ignorant subjects of the "Great Awakening."

Born of the intenser manifestations of the revival and emphasizing thus its more emotional and transitory aspects, the Separatist movement had in itself from the first the seeds of ultimate dissolution. Its adherents laid weight on bodily effects as evidences of the working of the Spirit of God. They denied the necessity of an educated ministry. They believed themselves so gifted with the "key of knowledge," as to be able to discern by spiritual initiation who were truly Christians and who were not. They regarded discipline as a prime duty. Holding such opinions, prevailingly recruited from the more ignorant and less well-to-do portion of the population, and persecuted by the heavy hand of the colonial government for many years, it is no wonder that the Separatists as a whole ended in disaster.

Introduction 5

Yet these traits were far from exhausting the characteristics of the Separatist movement, and had they been all, that movement would have lost much of the significance which properly belongs to it. The Separatists were in large degree a protest against the departure of eighteenth century Congregationalism from its earlier ideals. The lapse of a century since the planting of the New England churches had resulted in great modifications. The dying out of the fire of the original spiritual zeal in which the colonies were planted was followed by a decreasing intensity of religious experience and a diminishing emphasis in preaching on the possibility and necessity of a conscious "conversion," such as had prevailed in early New England. Since men had little of striking religious experience to tell, the custom of "relations" of God's dealings with the soul passed into comparative disuse as a condition of entrance into church-membership. New England preaching, till awakened by the revival, had been growing formal and increasingly essay-like for two generations. And, in Connecticut at least, a state-supported ecclesiastical organization, approaching Presbyterian government in several of its features, had taken the place of the freedom of earlier Congregationalism.

Most disastrous of all was the Half-Way Covenant system. Begun by earnest pastors in the seventeenth century in an honest desire to hold young people under the watch and discipline of the churches, it really lowered the spiritual tone of the churches as a whole. It established a half-way house between a neglect of Christian privileges and a full acknowledgment of the claims of the gospel. Those who had been bapltized in infancy by reason of their parents' Christian profession were now allowed and encouraged to bring their own children for baptism and a similar church-membership even if conscious themselves of no regenerative change. Such imperfect members satisfied the conditions of their "half-way" status if they gave intellectual assent to the main doctrines of the Christian faith and agreed to submit themselves to church discipline. The chief evil of the system was (that it encouraged men and women to do something to which they and the church alike ascribed value; but something, nevertheless, far short of a full consecration to Christ and his service. Having "owned the covenant" and entered into "half-way" membership, they too easily satisfied themselves thalt they had done all possible for themselves and their children.

Against all these serious modifications of earlier Congregationalism the Separatists protested. They were not the only ones in our churches who antagonized these evils.. The more strenuous supporters of the "Great Awakening" who never left the fellowship of the established churches did so very generally. But the Separatists were determined and consistent opponents of these things, and in their attitude they are amply justified by later Congre-

Introduction 7

gational history. Whatever their errors and shortcomings in other respects, — and the following narrative stows that these were fatally numerous, — the Separatists were right in their opposition to many serious spiritual declensions in the churches of their day.

This movement, never told heretofore with the fulness thaJt it deserves, has found a painstaking and sympathetic historian in Dr. S. L. Blake, and students of eighteenth century New England religious story will welcome his narrative of the rise, growth and decline of the Separatists. The episode is one well deserving the labor and care which he has bestowed upon its presentation.

A Foreword

In "Some Aspects of the Religious Life of New England," Dr. George Leon Walker, speaking of the Separates of Connecticut, says, "The subject deserves a fuller investigation than it has ever yet received." He also speaks of it as "a chapter which still awaits its proper treatment at the hands of some painstaking and sympathetic historian." In preparing the second volume of the history of the first Church of Christ, New London, Connecticut, the writer found a considerable wealth of material concerning this unwritten chapter of ecclesiastical history in New England. He also became aware that more was within reach, much of which had never seen the light. He was led to further investigation and found so much that he resolved to gather the material into a volume. Besides, on studying the subject, as it presented itself, the writer, while recognizing the many foolish extravagances of the "New Lights," as they were often called, yet found himself so in sympathy with many of their contentions that he seemed to himself so far forth to fulfil Dr. Walker's condition of a "sympathetic historian."

The story is a somewhat thrilling one. It throws a strange light upon religious liberty in Connecticut between 1742 and 1784. The materials were gathio The Separates

ered from many sources. The following are the principal authorities consulted:

Diary of Joshua Hempstead, covering the period when the movement was in its strength.

Records of the First Church of Christ, New London,

Original Records of the Separate Church in Preston.

Original Memorial of the same church petitioning the legislature for relief from taxation in support of the Established Church.

History of the Preston Separate Church by A. A. Browning, Esq., of Norwich.

History of the Newent (Lisbon) Separate Church, in manuscript.

Colonial Records of Connecticut.

Annals of Saint James, New London, by R. A. Hallam, d. d.

History of New London, by Miss Caulkins.

History of Norwich, by Miss Caulkins.

History of Windham County, by Miss Ellen D. Larned.

Gleanings from the History of Windham County, by the same author.

History of the Enfield, Conn., Separate Church, by Rev. O. W. Means, ph. d., a most excellent monograph.

History of Montville.

History of the Suffolk Congregational Associa-

A Foreword n

Hon, Long Island, by Rev. William I. Chalmers of Riverhead, L. I.

Contributions to Ecclesiastical History of Connecticut.

History of Connecticut, by Benjamin Trumbull,

D. D.

Early History of Christ Church Parish, Guilford, by Rev. William G. Andrews, d. d.

Great Awakening, by Rev. Joseph Tracy.

Congregationalists in America, by Rev. A. E. Dunning, d. d.

History of Congregationalism, by Rev. George Punchard.

History of Congregationalists in Massachusetts, by Rev. J. S. Clark, d. d.

Baptists in Norwich, by Denison.

History of Beneficent Church, Providence, R. L, by Rev. J. G. Vose, d. d.

Some Aspects of the Religious Life of New England, by Rev. George Leon Walker, d. d.

History of the Congregational Churches, by Prof. Williston Walker, d. d.

One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the South Congregational Church, Middletown, Conn., by Rev. Frederick W. Green.

Journal of Rev. Jacob Eliot, Goshen, Conn., in manuscript.

The Diary of Rev. Ezra Stiles, d. d., Vol. I.

Backus' Church History.

Joel S. Ives' Address at the 250th Anniversary of the church in Stratford.

S. L. B.

Contents

Introduction 3

A Foreword 9

I Their Rise and Cause 17

II

We should naturally expect so wide and deep a religious movement as the Great Awakening, to affect favorably the spiritual condition of the churches, and that they would all be deeply engaged in it. But the contrary was too largely true. Among the Episcopalians, Dr. Cutler, formerly rector of Yale College, said, "It would be an endless attempt to describe the scene of confusion and disturbance occasioned by him [Whitefield] ; the divisions of families, neighborhoods and towns, the contrariety of husbands and wives, the undutifulness of children and servants, the quarrels among teachers, the disorders of the night, the intermission of labor and business and husbandry, and gathering the harvest," and much more of the same sort. Dr. Cutler in the same paper describes the scenes attendant upon the awakening as "laughing, yelping, sprawling, fainting." Of Gilbert Tennent he had similar

things to say, calling him "a monster, impudent, noisy." He called the preaching of this evangelist, "beastly brayings." Dr. Charles Chauncey, pastor of the First Church in Boston, led those in the Congregational churches of Massachusetts who opposed the revival. He published a volume entitled, "Seasonable Thoughts on the State of Religion in

New England," in which he undertook faithfully to point out "the things of a bad and dangerous tendency in the late and present religious appearance in the land." As early as 1741 a fierce controversy broke out between the "New Lights" and the "Old." Ecclesiastical and legal methods were taken in Connecticut to repress the revival methods which were then in use. But all this opposition tended rather to fan the flames. August 11, 1741, the Hartford Association voted that no weight was to be "laid upon those screechings, cryings-out, faintings and convulsions which sometimes attend ye terrifying Language of some preachers and others, as evidences of, or necessary, to a genuine Conviction of Sin, humiliation, and preparation for Christ." Similar action was taken by other associations, and thus the challenge was thrown down, and the battle was soon on in all its fury. Of course there were strong men who entered into the work heaiitily. Doubtless there was some occasion for criticism. The promoters of the Great Awakening were often indiscreet, sometimes censorious in their judgment of others who did not reach their standard. Whitefield was a man of intense emotions. He awakened similar feelings in others. Because of his alleged excesses the faculties of Harvard and Yale issued testimonies against him. The opposition spread in Connecticut. Backus says, "A great majority of the ministers and rulers through the land disliked this work, and exerted all their powers against it."

November 24, 1741, a general consociation of the churches of the colony of Connecticut was convened at the suggestion of the legislature, and at its expense, at Guilford. This body consisted of "three ministers and three delegates from each association." Professor Williston Walker says, "This body, of which the colony bore the expenses, met at Guilford, November 24, 1741 ; and enjoys the distinction of being the last Congregational Synod representative of the churches of a commonwealth called under the auspices of the State." It was convened to consider the practice, which was spreading, much to the alarm of the government and the regular churches, of itinerating, or "going abroad and preaching and administering the seals in another parish without consent of the minister of the parish." It was itinerating of this sort, which, as we shall soon see, got Rev. Philemon Robbins of Branfofd into trouble. To this convention, assembled at Guilford in 1741, Rev. Mr. Whittlesey of Wallingford proposed the question whether such itinerating were disorderly. It promptly voted in the affirmative. At the next session of the legislature, in May, 1742, this vote of (the Guilford convention was framed into the following "Act for regulating abuses and correcting disorders in ecclesiastical affairs," which made it a penal offence for one minister of the Congregational order, or any layman, or any foreigner, to go into the parish of any clergyman and preach without his invitation. The act provided : —

That if any ordained minister, or any other person licensed as aforesaid, to preach, shall enter into any parish not immediately under his charge, and shall there preach or exhort the people, he shall be denied and secluded the benefit of any law of this colony, made for the support and encouragement of the gospel ministry, except such ordained minister, or licensed person shall be expressly invited and desired to enter into such parish, and there to preach and exhort the people, by the settled minister, and the major part of the church and society within such parish;

That if any association of ministers shall undertake to examine or license any candidate for the gospel ministry, or assume to themselves the decision of any controversy, or as an association to counsel and advise in any affair that by the platform, or agreement above mentioned, made at Saybrook, aforesaid, is properly within the province and jurisdiction of any dfcher association, then and in such case every member that shall be present in such association so licensing, deciding or counseling, shall be each and every one of them, denied and secluded the benefit of any law in this colony, for the support and encouragement of the gospel ministry;

That if any minister, or ministers, contrary to the true intent and meaning of this act, shall presume to preach in any parish, not under his immediate care and charge, the minister of the parish where he shall so offend, or the civil authority, or any of the committee of said parish, shall give information thereof, in writing, under their hands, to the clerk of the parish or society where such offending minister doth belong, which clerk shall receive such information, and lodge and keep the same on file, in his office, and no assistant or justice of the peace, in this colony, shall sign any warrant for the collecting any minister's rate, without first receiving a certificate from the clerk of the society, or parish, where such rate is to be collected, that no such information as is above mentioned, hath been received by him, or lodged in his office;

That if any person whatsoever, that is not a settled and ordained minister, shall go into any parish, without the express desire and invitation of the settled minister of such parish, if any there be, and the major part of the church, or if there be no such settled minister, without the express desire of the church or congregation within such parish, and publicly preach and exhort the people, shall, for every such offence, upon complaint made thereof to any assistant or justice of the peace, be bound to his peaceable and good behavior, until the next county court in that county where the offence shall be committed, by said assistant or justice of the peace, in the penal sum of one hundred pounds lawful money, that he or they will not again offend in the like kind; and said county court may, if they see meet, further bind the said person or persons, offending as aforesaid, to Ifcheir peaceable behaviour, during the pleasure of the said court;

That if any foreigner or stranger, that is not an inhabitant of this colony, including as well such persons as have no ecclesiastical character, or license to preach, as such as have received ordination or license to preach, by any association or presbytery, shall presume to preach, teach, or publicly exhort, in any town or society within this colony, without the desire and license of the settled minister, and the major part of the church of such town or society, or at the call and desire of the church and inhabitants of such town or society, provided that it so happen that there is no settled minister there, that every such preacher, teacher, or exhorter, shall be sent, as a vagrant person, by warrant from any one assistant or justice of the peace from constable to constable, out of the bounds of the colony.

This extraordinary legislation had its origin, in part, at least, in the New Haven Consociation, as appears from instructions given to their delegates, whom they sent to the Guilford council. The suggestions to the consociation came from Rev. Samuel Whittlesey of Wallingford, who had a grievance, and a point to gain. Further, the association of New r Haven, which met at Wallingford, September 28, 1742, voted its unanimous thanks to be communicated to the legislature to be convened at New Haven, October 14, 1742, for having passed the act just quoted, in May of the same year. The vote reads as follows : —

To the Hon. General Assembly, etc., convened at New Haven, October 14, 1742. — May it please this honorable assembly to permit us, the Association of the county of New Haven, regularly convened in the first society of Wallingford, September 28, 1742, to lay before you our grateful sense of the goodness of the General Assembly in May last, in so caring for our religious interests, and ecclesiastical constitution; and our just apprehensions of their wisdom, in making the statute, entitled, An act for regulating abuses, and correcting disorders, in ecclesiastical affairs; and pray that it may be continued in force.

All this points to the New Haven Association, and to the Rev. Samuel Whittlesey as fthe origin of the remarkable act just quoted.

This act held against exhorters, lay preachers, evangelists, and all who separated themselves from the established order, and practically abolished religious liberty in Connecticut. It all sounds very strange to modern ears. It did not leave a loophole. It put a strong fortress around the established order. But one act more needed to be taken to destroy all religious liberty in the colony. And that was taken in May, 1743. Trumbull well says, "The law was an outrage to every principle of justice, and to the most inherent and valuable rights of the subject. It was a palpable contradiction, and gross violation of the Connecticut bill of rights. " Baptists and Episcopalians were accorded privileges which were denied to Congregationalists, who dissented from the established order of the Saybrook Platform, and were constituted under the Cambridge Platform into separate churches. Trumbull says, "Even in Connecticut, the Episcopalians were allowed to preach and colledt hearers, and erect churches, in any of the ecclesiastical societies, in opposition to the established ministers and churches. The Baptists were allowed to do the same. The law was therefore partial, inconsistent, and highly persecuting." As we have seen, the law of 1742 was an enactmenlt of the votes passed at Guilford the previous November. It was therefore, says Trumbull, an expression of the strong "opposition of heart which there was in the Arminians and old lights, to the work of God, and to the zealous and faithful promoters of it." Those who, for doctrinal or other reasons, separated themselves to form Separate churches were made to feel the grip of the law. In May, 1708, a statute of religious toleration had been passed by the legislature, which was reaffirmed by that body in October of the same year, when the Saybrook Platform of September was given legal authority. By this statute, those whose sober consciences led them to dissent from that Platform, could do so without being held to answer therefor. In May, 1743, this act of May, 1708, was repealed. The legislature coupled this repeal with a distinct promise to those who were not Congregationalisms ; but those who, while preferring the Congregational faith and polity, wished to withdraw from the established system, of which the Saybrook Platform was the basis, and organize under the more Congregational Cambridge Platform, were now forbidden all right to do so. Thenceforward the Saybrook Platform was made legally binding upon all Congregationalists at least. Connecticut was now under as rigorous an ecclesiastical establishment as that from which the Fathers had fled in England. This continued until the act of 1743 was repealed in 1784, and liberty of conscience was granted to Christians of every name.

A few cases of the rigor with which the law was enforced will suffice to show, on the one hand, how bitter was the opposition which the Great Revival awakened in the established churches, and on the other hand how sorely those were made to suffer who, for conscience' sake, withdrew from these churches. The church in Salisbury was organized in 1744, upon the Cambridge Platform, in defiance of the vote of the legislature. Rev. Mr. Leavenworth of Waterbury, Rev. Mr. Humphrey of Derby, and Rev. Mr. Todd of Northbury, were among those who assisted at Mr. Jonathan Lee's ordination, as the first pastor of that church. For this offence these three men were suspended by the association to which they belonged. Mr. Benjamin Pomeroy of Hebron was brought before the Assembly because he said that the late laws of the colony were calculated to encourage persecution, and to lead men to break their covenants, while the law to prevent ministers from going into other towns to preach was without reason, and contrary to the Word of God. He was tried, and the Assembly sentenced him to forfeit his lawful salary until the next session of the legislature, and to pay the costs of his prosecution, £32, 19s., 8d., and give bonds in fifty pounds for his good and peaceable behavior meanwhile. The case of Rev. Philemon Robbins of Branford is another of like character. The Baptists of Wallingford invited him to preach for them, as there was a deep religious interest among them. He agreed to go. A remonstrance was sent him by forty-two members of Mr. Whittlesey's church. Two ministers of neighboring churches wrote advising him not to go. He had promised to go. The case seemed urgent. He went. He was tried by the consociation, and found guilty. He was deposed from the ministry. Various charges were brought against him, showing how deep was the feeling among the established churches of the colony against the state of things brought about by the revival. The vote expelling Mr. Robbins from the ministry was as follows : —

This consociation do now upon the whole judge and determine the said Mr. Robbins unworthy the ministerial character and Christian communion; and accordingly do, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, according to the word of God, and the powers invested in this consociation by the ecclesiastical constitution of this government, depose the said Mr. Philemon Robbins from his ministerial office and ministerial and pastoral relation to the first church in said Branford, and debar and suspend him from communion in any of the churches of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The church, however, stood by their pastor, and he continued to minister to them.

The attempt to enforce the Saybrook Platform was vigorous and determined, but was not always successful. Every possible measure was taken

both by the legislature, and by the leaders among the clergy, the former usually following the lead of the latter, to suppress zealous, experimental preachers and people. Ministers were put out of associations and consociations; and men and women were excluded from communion for the offence of going to hear these preachers. Such facts show how violent was the spirit of opposition aroused by the Great Awakening. Further action of the legislature in October, 1743, was taken in obedience to a purpose to exclude all obnoxious preachers from abroad from the colony. lit was intended to prevent men like Whitefield and Tennent from coming into Connecticut. It provided that, if any foreigner or stranger, not an inhabitant of the colony, should return into it, after he had been transported out of it by order of the courts, and should preach or teach or exhort in any town or society within its borders, it should be the duty of the proper officer of the law to cause the offender to be arrested and brought before him, and, in case of his guilt, to bind him "in the penal sum of one hundred pounds lawful money, to his peaceable and good behavior, and that 1 he will not offend again in like manner/' Then the offender should be summarily ejected from the colony, and be required to "pay down the cost of his transportation." The repeal of the act "for the ease of such as soberly dissent" from the Saybrook Platform, in May, 1743, left no relief for dissenters from the established mode of worship, except upon application to the General Assembly, which was growing more rigorous in its enforcement of conformity. This act of repeal gave liberty to sober dissenters to apply for relief, and it was promised that they should be heard. If they had any characteristics which distinguished them from Presbyterians or Congregationalists, they might expect indulgence upon taking oath, and subscribing to the declaration provided for such cases; but otherwise none need expect indulgence. Thus liberty of conscience was put within the reach of Baptists, Episcopalians and others, who were thus relieved from taxation to support the established churches and their ministers. But for dissenting Congregationalists there was no redress. The adoption of the Cambridge Platform served only to distinguish those who adopted it as Congregationalists, and liable to the full penalties of the law.

Mr. John Owen of Groton was arrested for uttering hard speeches against the law^s and the officers of the government, and for advocating principles calculated to bring the government into contempt. Mr. Owen and Mr. Pomeroy were brought before the assembly in May, 1744, to answer to the charges made against them. Mr. Owen made some slight concessions and was dismissed on paying the cost of his prosecution. Mr. Pomeroy, as we have seen, did not come off so easily. These are examples, which might be considerably multiplied, of the strenuous measures which were "itaken to suppress the zealous, experimental preachers and people, both by the legislature and the leaders among the clergy," many of whom, Trumbull tells us, were

"preachers of a dead, cold morality, without any distinction of it from heathen morality, by the principles of evangelical love and faith." Zeal, experimental knowledge of religion, earnestness in preaching, were termed enthusiasm, and enthusiasm was disorderly. While the civil authorities were rigorously enforcing the laws, the clergy were adoplting measures no less severe in suspending members from their communion for the sin of going to hear zealous preachers like Whitefield, Wheelock, Pomeroy and others. Nor did these pastors always stop to ask the churches, but in some cases suspended offending members by their own act. In some cases, Trumbull tells us, this suspension laslfed ten or twelve years, till the pastors were dead and succeeded by others. In many instances consociations ordained men against the opposition of a large majority, not only of (the church, but of the legal voters, as will be seen later. Not only were members expelled from churches, but also earnest, godly ministers were put out of associations because of their zeal.

It must be borne in mind that the action of the New Haven Association in 1741 secured the calling of the council at Guilford in November of that year. The action of that council resulted in the rigorous restrictive legislation of 1742, and finally, in 1743, in removing all relief for dissenJters from the established order who were Congregationalists. The action of the legislature in 1743 was taken with a view to suppress enthusiasm, and was directly the result of action taken by the General Association at New London, June 15, 1742. After recognizing the fact that God had visited his people and stirred up great numbers to ask what they must do to be saved, and expressing thankfulness for this visitation, and after expressing the belief that the enemy of souls was very busy in efforts to destroy the work of God, the Association said : —

We think it our duty to advise and entreat the ministers and churches, of the colony, and recommend it to the several particular associations, to stand well upon their guard, in such a day as this, that no detriment arise to the interest of our grealt Lord and Master, Jesus Christ.

Particularly, that no errors in doctrine, whether among ourselves or foreigners, nor disorders in practice, do get in among us, or tares be sown in the Lord's field.

That seasonable and due testimony be borne against such errors and irregularities, as do already prevail among some persons ; as particularly the depending upon and following impulses and impressions made on the mind, as though they were immediate revelations of some truth or duty that is not revealed in the word of God : Laying too much weight on bodily agitations, raptures, extasies, visions, &c. : Ministers disorderly intruding into other ministers' parishes : Laymen taking it upon them, in an unwarrantable manner, publicly to teach and exhort : Rash censuring and judging of others : That the elders be careful to take heed to themselves and doctrine, that they may save themselves, and those that bear them : ThaJt they approve themselves in all things as the ministers of God, by honor and dishonor, by good report and evil report; That none be lifted up by applause to a vain conceit, nor any be cast down by any contempt thrown upon them, to the neglect of their work: and that they study unity, love and peace among themselves.