The early history of the first Church of Christ, New London, Conn

Contents

I. Introductory

II. Puritanism in Connecticut

III. The Origin of the First Church of Christ

I. Introductory

This Church has no record of its organization. Its origin, therefore, has been involved in uncertainty. Dr. Trumbull, the historian of Connecticut, supposed that it was constituted when its records began, October 5, 1670 — the day of Mr. Bradstreet's ordination. But this date seemed altogether impossible. It was not like the men of those times to let twenty-five years pass in the history of a town with no Church. Besides, if the organization had taken place on that date, a record of the fact would have been made in the proceedings of the Colonial Legislature, which had voted that no Church should be embodied ' ' without consent of the General Court, and approbation of the neighboring elders." This fact, together with the fact that no record of any application to the General Court for permission to be embodied into a Church here can be found, led the writer to believe not only that the Church is older than the date of Mr. Bradstreet's ordination, but also that it is older than 1650 — the date of Mr. Blinman's arrival in Pequot. Soon after assuming the pastorate he set about justifying these convictions. The third chapter records the result.

If the Church had an earlier existence, then Mr. Bradstreet's list of members ought not to be the first. Proofs were soon found that a much earlier catalogue could be made out ; proofs so positive as to leave no room whatever to doubt that there was a Church in New London long before October 5, 1670. The result appears in Chapter VII. It shows reasons to believe that there were Church members, whose names are known to us, twenty years before Mr. Bradstreet's list was made.

A Church without deacons would be a thing almost, if not quite, unknown among Congregational Churches. The writer found evidence that there were such officers early in the history of the Church in New London. Chapter X embodies the result of the search. It seemed best, while upon the topic, to complete the list and bring it down to date, although this is beyond the limit of the period covered by this volume. The same may be said of the list of men raised up for the ministry given in Chapter XL

The name which this Church ibears, The First Church of Christ, was in the early days given to the first Church planted in a town. Thus the first Church in New Haven, in Hartford, in Middletown, in Fairfield, and in other ancient towns were origi-

INTRODUCTORY. 3

nally called and are still known by this name. A vote passed June 19, 1700, is recorded on our ancient minutes, in which. " The First Church of Christ" is, by its own official action, the name applied to this Church j is, in fact, the name it bore in Gloucester. Besides, for seventy-five years this was the only Church, of any name, on the ground; and therefore its right to be called the First Church of New London, and indeed of Xew London county, cannot be questioned.

A Church so ancient must have much in common with the history of the town which has grown up around it, and much in common with the world's progress during its life. From 1651 no Church, save those at Hartford and Xew Haven, was as closely connected with the civil and ecclesiastical history of Connecticut. Three of the Governors of the Colony were furnished from among its adherents — John Winthrop, Jr., Fitz-John Winthrop and Gurdon Saltonstall. Obadiah Bruen, a member of it, is named in the charter given by Charles II. Its pastor, Governor Saltonstall, had a conspicuous hand in framing the Saybrook Platform and was influential in the establishment of Yale College in its home in Xew Haven. Two of its pastors, Adams and McEwen, were members of the Board of Trustees of the College. Adams was offered the Presidencv in 1714, which office he declined at the urgent request of the town. Other similar facts show how close has been the touch of this Church with the events which have marked the world's progress during the last two hundred and fifty years.

So far as is known no other Church in Connecticut ever gave its pastor to be Governor of the State. It is also worth mention, as giving a hint of the stable character of the Church, that it has had but twelve ministers in two hundred and fifty-five years. It is believed that no other Church of equal age in the State, and few in the country, can show a like record. Two of its pastorates together covered almost a century. That of Eliphalet Adams extended from February 9, 1709, to October 4, 1753, when he died — a period of over forty-four and a half years. The pastorate of Dr. McEwen was the longest in the history of the Church, and extended from October 23, 1806, to September 7, 1860, when he died — a period of almost fifty- four years. The shortest ministry was three years, and was that of Mr. Bulkeley, who refused to be settled. The average length of pastorates, not counting Mr. Bulkeley, who was not ordained, has been over twenty- three years. It may be added that in not a single case has a pastor been dismissed, except in response to his own earnest desire.

INTRODUCTORY. 5

The record of the Church, with reference to the branches of work and forms of activity which belong to the present, will appear in another volume. The great work of missions, the various branches of evangelism, the work in the slums of the great centers of population, movements like the Y. M. C. A., &c, were unknown to the seventeenth century. The aim of the present volume is to discover the origin of the Church, and trace the history of its beginnings to the time of Eliphalet Adams.

As the history of a Church is largely a story of its pastorates, we have written the narrative in this form. The biography of each minister is given only so far as his life was part of the life of the Church and gave significance to it. If the story seems somewhat identical with that of the town, it is because the town was the parish, and in some remote sense the Church, till 1726. However, this volume groups together the facts which belong distinctively to the life of the Church.

Special mention should be made here of Miss Caulkins' invaluable History of New London, as one of the principal and most reliable authorities consulted. The Colonial records of Connecticut and of Massachusetts have also been searched. The Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of Connecticut, as well as standard works on Congregationalism, have furnished material. The records of the Church, although far from being full, have also aided in the preparation of this volume. These and other authorities are noted in the text, and indebtedness to them is hereby acknowledged.

The two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the Church should have been held in May, 1892. But at that time the date of the organization was too problematical. This volume is sent forth in lieu of such a celebration. Certainly whoever are members of the Church in 1942, and whoever is pastor, they will not hesitate to celebrate its three hundredth anniversary in May of that year, and before the thirteenth day. Nor will there be any doubt about observing the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of its planting in New London in the early half of 1901.

This volume is also sent forth with the hope that its perusal may stimulate a new interest in this venerable Church on the part of those who now are members of it. They stand in the line of succession from eminent men and women, and compose a Church which has a history of which they may well be proud. Ancient as it is, it has the vigor of youth, and stands in line with the most advanced work of the Kingdom, yet without surrendering anything of that wholesome conservatism which refuses to remove the ancient landmarks.

INTRODUCTORY. /

With a prayer for continued divine blessing, this volume, dedicated to the worthy memory of the men and women vrho laid the foundations and reared the superstructure of our civil, social and religious freedom, is sent forth as a contribution to the ecclesiastical history of Connecticut.

II. Puritanism In New London

Organizations and communities get, in their beginnings, that character which usually survives all changes, and remains to the end. The men who found a State, and lay the first courses in the rising wall ; the men who begin a Church, lay its corner-stone, and erect it out of principles and beliefs which have been inwrought into the fibre of their being, give to each a permanent trend, which is not likely to change, without an irruption of opposing civil and religious forces, which sweep away the old landmarks. It is well therefore to look to find the roots of the State, of the social order, of the Church. Whatever else we may say, or think, we shall be obliged to admit that much of what we prize and enjoy today, is directly due to the men who laid the foundations.

It is quite the fashion now to speak slightingly of the so-called "blue laws of Connecticut," and of the Puritanism of the fathers. But it must not be forgotten that the Constitution drafted by Puritan Thomas Hooker in 1639, the Charter secured by Puritan John Winthrop, Jr., from Charles II. in 1662. and the present Constitution of this State, adopted in 1818, were the statement and guarantee of the principles of civil and religious liberty which was assured to the citizens of this Colony, and which we today enjoy. We shall find, if we make careful search, that our freedom and the free institutions of which we boast were of a Puritan source.

December 21, 1620, was an epoch-making date. The landing of the Pilgrims was an epoch-making event. It was the beginning of the planting of New England j it was the first stone laid in the foundation of this free government. The landing of John Winthrop and his company at Massachusetts Bay June 27 [17 o. s.], 1630, was another epoch-making event, and was the second step in the planting of New England. Winthrop wrote in his journal, a few days after his arrival: "Thursday, 17 [June]. We went to Mattachusetts to find out a place for our sitting down."

It is with this latter event that the civil and religious history of New London, and of Connecticut, is closely allied. The Arabella and her companion ships, not the Mayflower, brought to these shores the Colony from which came the men who planted Con - necticut, and brought hither three or four of its earliest Churches. m The planting of Connecticut was the third step in the planting of New England. The Churches brought hither from the Colony of Massachusetts Bay were the Church in Windsor, which emigrated from Dorchester in 1635 with Rev. John Warham j the first Church in Hartford, which emigrated from Cambridge in 1636 with Rev. Thomas Hooker, of whom it is said that he was quite as famous a preacher as John Cotton, who was the leading man of his times in Massachusetts; and the First Church of Christ, New London, which, as we expect to show, emigrated from Gloucester in 1651 with Rev. Richard Blinman, its first pastor. Besides these facts is this also, namely, that the authority under which John Winthrop, Jr., founded the Pequot Colony was given by the Legislature of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay.

It should be said, however, that the Puritans who came to Connecticut under the lead of Hooker, and those who settled New Haven under the lead of John Davenport and Theophilus Eaton, and the men who settled the Pequot Colony under the lead of John Winthrop, Jr., had quite as much of the free and liberal spirit of the Pilgrims of Plymouth as the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay, of whom John Cotton was the ecclesiastical head, who had not quite forgotten the aristocratic spirit o£ the Church from which he fled. It was John Cotton who said that he did "not conceive that God ever did ordain" Democracy "as a fit government either for Church or Commonwealth." Hooker said, " In matters which concern the common good a general Council chosen by all to transact businesses which concern all I conceive most suitable to rule and most safe for relief for the whole." Thus it will be seen that these two men were wide apart in their notions of government. This was the sufficient reason why Hooker and his company did not remain in Massachusetts. Hooker's sentiment struck the keynote of popular liberty in civil affairs, afterwards promulgated in our Federal Constitution. It was the kind of Puritanism which was to dominate the Colony of Connecticut. It was in complete harmony with the language of the compact signed on board the Mayflower — we ' ' doe by these presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a Civill Body Politicke, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid ; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just and equall Lawes, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions, offices from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the generall good of the Colony : vnto which we promise all due submission and obedience." We shall find that the Puritanism which prevailed in Connecticut, determined as it was by the liberal spirit of Thomas Hooker, and John Davenport, and John Winthrop, Jr., was quite a different affair and of a far milder type than the Puritanism of Massachusetts Bay, which was dominated by the more austere and aristocratic spirit of John Cotton. And his notions of civil government were far less productive of free citizenship than were those of Thomas Hooker. Thus from the first Connecticut was to all intents and purposes a free and independent State, and when the War of the Revolution broke out, this Colony had little to gain from it in the way of civil liberty. For under its Charter, which was but a restatement of Hooker's Constitution, every citizen had all the rights of Englishmen under the Crown, and elected their own Governors — a privilege accorded to none of the other Colonies, save Rhode Island. So that the Puritanism of Connecticut always made for the freedom of the citizen under the laws. Thus the stamp of Puritanism was upon the civil and religious foundations of this Commonwealth.

The first minister in New London of whom we have any account was Rev. Thomas Peters, an uncle of Mrs. Winthrop, who had been acting as chaplain to Mr. Fen wick and the garrison stationed at Saybrook. When the plan of a settlement at Pequot was proposed, he entered heartily into it, doubtless with the expectation of becoming a permanent resident, and, it may be, of exercising his functions as a clergyman. It is not at all unlikely that during his stay divine services were held. This was in 1646. The Legislature of Massachusetts, in its act by which it incorporated the Pequot plantation, associated him with Mr. Winthrop "for the better carrying on of the plantation."

Mr. Peters was a Puritan clergyman who had been ejected from his parish in Cornwall, England. He was a brother of the famous Hugh Peters, of Salem, who was with Hooker in Holland, and who came to New England in 1635. [Punchard's Hist. Cong'lsm, vol. iv, pp. 57, 58.] In the autumn of 1646 he was called back to his former flock in Cornwall, and left Pequot never to return. Mr. Edward Winslow writes in 1647: "Mr. Thomas Peters, a minister that was driven out of Cornwall by Sir Ralph Hopton in these late wars, and fled to New England for shelter, being called back by his people, and now in London." It is not known that there was any other clergyman in this Colony until Richard Blinman came in 1650. It does not follow, however, that there were no religious services, for in those days it was customary for laymen, especially deacons, to hold services in the absence of clergymen. Here, then, we find finger-marks of Puritanism on the foundations of Connecticut and of New London. If we look carefully, we shall find them more clearly defined.

John Winthrop, Jr., the founder of New London, was the eldest son of John Winthrop, Sr., the first governor of Massachusetts. He was born in Groton, England, February 12, 1606. His family was one of substance and of honorable repute. His father, unless we except himself, was the most distinguished Puritan in civil life of the seventeenth century. His home at Groton was in the cradle of Puritanism. Huntingdonshire on the west gave Oliver Cromwell to the world. At the University of Cambridge, near by, had studied some of the leading Separatists and Puritans of the times. Among them were these, whose names are famous in New England history — John Robinson, John Cotton, John Winthrop, Sr., Thomas Hooker. The Winthrop family were of the Puritan faith. Every breath which the younger Winthrop drew was tinctured with it. It ran in the blood in his veins. It was a foregone conclusion that he would be a Puritan. He could not well have been anything else, without violating all the laws of heredity. He was descended from Adam Winthrop, a rich clothier of Suffolk, a man of piety, of culture, and of great strength and decision of character. Of his father, John Winthrop, Sr., it is said, "he was exemplary for his grave Christian deportment," and it is thought that at one time he contemplated entering the ministry. But he finally turned his attention to the law.

When John Winthrop, Jr. came to New England, like his father he became a Congregationalist. His religious character was such as to give ground for the belief that he was one of the earliest promoters of this Church, and that when it came here in 1651, he became a member of it. Certainly he was one of its adherents.

He came to New England in 1631. Four years later, under a commission to build a fort at Saybrook, he became the first Governor on Connecticut soil — a post which he held for a year. In 1645 he broke ground for the Pequot Colony, which became a legal fact, by act of the Massachusetts legislature, May 6, 1646. In 1657 he was chosen Governor, and went to reside at Hartford. With the exception of a single year he was annually re-elected till he died. April 20, 1662, he secured the charter from Charles II., which united the Connecticut and the New Haven colonies under one jurisdiction, with himself for Governor. He was no common man, says Dr. Trumbull.

The reasons for the great Puritan exodus from England under Endicott in 1628, under Winthrop in 1630, with Hooker, Cotton and Stone in 1633, and with John Davenport in 1637, are not far to find. The religious and political condition of affairs in England was repulsive in the extreme to the Puritans, who represented the Evangelical element in the Church of England. Charles I. was King. Laud was practically, as in 1633 he became actually, primate, and at the head of ecclesiastical affairs. He formed the purpose to raise the English Church to be a reformed branch of the great Catholic Church. In keeping therewith he sternly repressed the Puritan spirit. All hope of purifying the Church was at an end. Non-conformity within it was driven to be separation from it. Under the pressure, some of the best blood of England was driven out of it to find a home where there would be freedom to worship God according to the dictates of one's conscience, and to hold views agreeable to the Evangelical spirit. The pioneer band of Pilgrims, who had come to Plymouth in 1620, were sending back tidings of the religious liberty which they were enjoying. These reports awakened in the breasts of the harried Puritans ' ' the dream of a land in the West where religion and liberty could find a safe and lasting home." [Green's short Hist, of the Eng. People, p 498]. In 1628 the Massachusetts company had established a colony at Salem with John Endicott as Governor. A charter was secured from the King which established the colony at Massachusetts Bay, in which Salem was included. John Winthrop was chosen Governor, October 20, 1629. He set sail, and led the largest Puritan exodus to these shores, in the next year.

I can not forbear to quote what Green says of this company of immigrants to these shores who fled from the persecutions and intolerance of the Old World, and its established religious customs and beliefs : ' ' They were in great part men of the professional and middle classes ; some of them men of large landed estate, some zealous clergymen like Cotton, Hooker, and Roger Williams, some shrewd London lawyers or young scholars from Oxford. The bulk were Godfearing farmers from Linconshire and the eastern counties. They desired, in fact, ' only the best' as sharers in their enterprise, men driven forth from their fatherland not by earthly want, or by the lust of adventure, but by the fear of God, and the zeal for a godly worship." [Ibid].

After signing a compact to go to Massachusetts as its Governor, Mr. Winthrop wrote to his son, John Winthrop, Jr., a careful statement of reasons for the new plantation in New England. The following memorable reply shows how deeply the son entered into sympathy with the religious sentiments o£ his father. il For the business of New England, I can say no other thing, but that I believe confidently, that the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord, who disposeth all alterations, by his blessed will, to his own glory and the good of his ; and, therefore, do assure myself, that all things shall work together for the best therein. And for myself, 1 have seen so much of the vanity of the world, that I esteem no more of the diversities of countries, than as so many inns, whereof the traveller that hath lodged in the best, or in the worst, findeth no difference, when he cometh to his journey's end ; and I shall call that my country, where I may most glorify God, and enjoy the presence of my dearest friends. Therefore herein I submit myself to God's will and yours, and with your leave, do dedicate myself (laying by all desire of other employments whatsoever) to the service of God and the company herein, with the whole endeavors both of body and mind." Hon. Robert C. Winthrop well says of this reply that " it is a memorable letter in New England history." It, without doubt, confirmed the father in his purpose, and may be considered the casting vote which decided the planting of New England. Certainly the movement to Massachusetts, out of which came the movement which planted colonies at Hartford, at New

Haven, and at Pequot, was undertaken in that spirit o£ reliance upon God, which was characteristic of the Separatist and Puritan revolts from the corruptions in life, belief and worship of the Established Church.

While some left England without thought of separating from its Church, yet on arriving here, almost their first step was out of its communion. Winthrop ; s first act, within a month after landing at Charlestown, was to join in the formation of a Congregational Church, as an embodied expression of the Puritanism which he had embraced while yet in England. The settlers of Connecticut followed this most worthy practice. The gathering of a Church was a formal expression of their purpose in coming to these shores, and of the deep religious character of the men who were engaged in those majestic movements across the sea in search of civil and religious liberty. As John Winthrop, Sr., planted a Church when he planted a Colony, so we have reason to believe that it was in the purpose of John "Winthrop, Jr., to do. But whereas John Winthrop had a large number associated with him to gather into a Church at the first, with John Winthrop, Jr., the case was far different.

John Winthrop, Jr., was a Puritan; but his puritanism was not of the severe type. Witches and Quakers, and Ann Hutchinson were summarily dealt with in Massachusetts. But it is not on record that the first settlers of Connecticut, and of New London, ever lifted the hand of persecution against a single person because of his religious beliefs. People were punished severely for breaking the laws ; but they were not put to torture for holding their convictions.

Here we may introduce some of the men who were contemporary with Winthrop, and who were foremost in planting the colonies which were afterwards united to form Connecticut. As we have seen, Thomas Hooker led his Church from Cambridge, through the wilderness, to a home at Hartford, on the banks of the Connecticut, in 1636. He died in 1647, the year after the planting of the Pequot Colony. Dr. Dunning says [Congregationalists in America p 150] ' ' the first constitution of Connecticut, adopted in 1639, was largely the work of Thomas Hooker, and was the first written constitution in history which resulted in a civil government. Our present National Government is in direct descent from that formed on this constitution, which marked the beginning of democracy. Connecticut made to Massachusetts the first propositions which resulted in the confederacy of the New England colonies, and in this movement also the hand of Hooker is conspicuous." This early constitution was the model followed in drafting the charter of 1662, which was so broad and liberal in its provisions, and so amply secured to the inhabitants of the Colony the fullest rights of citizenship, and of religious conviction, that it remained the constitutional law, without revision, more than forty years after the Colony became a State. But Thomas Hooker was a Puritan, driven out of England into Holland because of his religious convictions. If Hooker's constitution was the beginning of a democratic form of government in the world, if, as some allege, it was the first draft of our national declaration of independence, and of our national constitution, then the world, and we of today owe no small debt to the Puritanism of Connecticut, as it was expressed by the liberal spirit of Thomas Hooker. Among the early Puritans who settled Connecticut is to be named another man of great moral and intellectual force and stature. He was a great preacher, and there were associated with him laymen of like qualities. I refer to Rev. John Davenport, who founded the Quinnipiack Colony in 1639. He remained in New Haven till 1670, and was therefore contemporary with nearly the whole of Mr. Winthrop's official life, and was his personal friend. These men gave tone to the life of the Colony. They determined its civil and its religious character. What some are pleased to denominate the Blue Laws of

Connecticut, were simply expressions of those high moral convictions of right and wrong, which are essential to the largest and most perfect freedom. The Puritans believed that he is the freest man who is most obedient to duty and to what is right.

I can not stop to speak in detail of Theophilus Eaton, the first Governor of the New Haven Colony, nor of "William Janes, the first teacher of that Colony, nor of a good many others of like qualities. Trumbull says of these early Puritan settlers of Connecticut, that " they were of the first class of settlers, and all, except the ministers, were chosen magistrates or Governors of the Colony." They were picked men which the Puritan exodus brought to Massachusetts and passed on to Connecticut. ' ' They formed its free and happy constitution, were its legislators, and some of the chief pillars of the church and commonwealth." They were Puritans. They were Calvinists. They were Congregationalists. They believed in the supreme headship of Christ. They were therefore dissenters from the Church of England. The clergy " were distinguished for literature, piety, and ministerial gifts." " They were mighty and abundant in prayer." They were eminently men of God, and undershepherds of the flocks committed to their charge.

The men immediately associated with Mr. Winthrop in the settlement of the Pequot Colony are, some of them, worthy of special notice. The first town clerk was Jonathan Brewster, who came to New London before 1650. He was a son of Elder William Brewster, of the Mayflower. He appears as tl Clarke of the Town of Peqnett ,J in September, 1649. February 25 of that year he was one of four who were chosen "townsmen," or selectmen. In 1650 he was made a freeman of Connecticut with Mr. Winthrop, and in September of that year he appeared at the General Court as one of the first deputies from Pequot. He was one of four who were always entitled Mr. when spoken of in connection with the plantation. He was evidently a prominent man, and took a leading part in the affairs of the new settlement. Of his staunch Puritanism there can be no question. He died in 1661.

Another prominent man, who appeared still earlier upon the scene and who lived to a later date, was Thomas Miner. He came to New England with John "Winthrop, the elder, in the Arabella, in 1630. He first settled in Boston, and then in Hingham. From there he came to New London in 1645, and was one of the advance party who broke ground here in that year. In 1647 he was appointed "to act in all Town affaires " in the capacity of selectman. This election was repeated the following year. In his diary are a good many entries showing that he was engaged in the transaction of the town's business. In 1649 he ' ' was appointed ' Military Sergeant in the Towne of Pequitt,' with power to call forth and train the inhabitants." In 1650 he appeared with Jonathan Brewster as one of the first deputies to the General Court from the new Colony. He was a member of the First Church of Christ. In 1674 he united with others to form the first Church in Stonington, and was one of its first deacons. He was prominent in founding both New London and Stonington. His son John moved to Woodbury and became the founder of a family. His son Clement lived in New London and was deacon of the Church. He was a man of strong character and of pronounced religious convictions. His diary records repeated instances of attendance upon the ordinances of the gospel. He died October 23, 1690, aged 83. Robert Hempstead, Carie Latham, Thomas Stanton and others were associated with Winthrop in the founding of the town. They were religious men, they were, most, if not all of them Church members, and they were of the Puritan faith. Thomas Stanton was, with Thomas Miner, an original member of the first Church in Stonington, and was prominent in its affairs till he died in 1678. Puritanism left its mark upon the foundations of the town.