LETTER XV.

Ideas of the Pilgrim Fathers-Progress of Toleration-Episcopacy-Bishop Seabury-Dr. Duché-Methodism in America-In Connecticut-Anecdotes-Lorenzo Dow-The Wolf in my Father's Fold.

MY DEAR C******

I have intimated that, at the period of which I am writing, there was a storm gathering which was speedily to sweep away the last vestige of that system of legal and statutory privilege which the Congregational clergy had enjoyed in Connecticut, from the foundation of the colony. The government at the beginning was a kind of theocracy, in which God was considered as the active and positive ruler, of whom the men appointed to office were the agents. This impression pervaded the minds of the first settlers of New England. These were all Independents in religion, who had been persecuted at home, and had come here to enjoy their peculiar worship without molestation This was in fact the fundamental

idea of the Puritan Fathers.

It was therefore not only with amazement, but indignation, that they found, as the population increased, that Quakers, Baptists, and other sectarians, came among them, and demanded toleration of their peculiar notions. In vain did they seek to crush out these disturbers of the public peace. Persecution

only made them thrive: the trampling heel of oppression benefited them, as hoeing among weeds renders them more rank and pestiferous-inasmuch as the roots strike deeper, and the multiplied and invigorated seed are scattered over a constantly widening surface.

To the oppressed Puritans in England, toleration of their peculiar faith was an obvious idea. Their circumstances suggested it as a right, and denial of it as a sin. They emigrated to the New World, carrying this conviction with them. But universal liberty of worship was not yet conceived: that was reserved for those Baptists, Quakers, and others, who, from their position, had begun to see the light, though it was even to them but dimly revealed. They sought rather, each sect for itself, the tolerance of their worship, than general toleration as the right of man. Roger Williams, indeed, seems to have made this discovery, yet at first he advocated it rather in the spirit of intolerance.

As time advanced, the malcontents increased, and although orthodoxy contended at every point, it was compelled to yield inch by inch, until, at the period around which my narrative revolves, only a single remnant of its ancient privileges remained in the statute book of Connecticut. That consisted in a law which compelled every man, on reaching his majority, to pay a tax to the Congregational society in whose bounds he lived, unless he lodged a certificate

with its clerk that he belonged to some other reli gious persuasion.

This became the point of attack, in which all the dissenting sects in religion, and all the opposers in politics, united. But the time for this union, as stated in a preceding letter, had not yet arrived. The heterogeneous particles were silently moving to their coalescence and their crystallization, forming in the end the party which took the watchword of TOLERATION, and which gained the ascendency in 1817; but as yet, the keenest sagacity had not seen the coming event-which was nevertheless near at hand.

Up to this time-the early part of this centuryorthodoxy seemed, on the surface, to stand almost unquestioned in Connecticut.* Unitarianism had begun in Boston, but had not made any noticeable con

* After this work was begun and considerably advanced, I happened to discover in the Historical Library of the Atheneum at Hartford, a manuscript account of Ridgefield-historical, descriptive, ecclesiastical, economical, &c.-prepared by my father in 1800, upon a request by the State authorities. Among other remarks of a general nature, I find the following:

"About the time that Paine's Age of Reason presented itself to view, like Milton's Description of Death- Black it stood as night, fierce as ten furies, terrible as hell'-the horror of its features disgusted the people to such a degree that it has not yet had an advocate in this town."

"There have been, in years past, a number of people who called themselves Baptists, who showed much zeal in religion, and met in private houses for worship: at the present day they are much on the decline."

"A few have joined the Methodists, whose preachers, though very zealous, have made little impression on the minds of the people of this town." A little after this the Methodists increased in the manner I have related.

"Almost all the people attend public worship with the Congregation

quests in the land of "steady habits." Methodism— destined soon to sweep over the State-only glimmered faintly, as a kind of heat-lightning, in the dis tant horizon, indicating the electricity that was in the atmosphere. Universalism, in the form of Restorationism, was doubtless planted in many minds, for the eloquent and enthusiastic Murray* had been preaching in the country. As yet, however, there were few organized societies of that persuasion-now so numerous-in the Union.

Episcopacy had been introduced at an early date. Indeed, Connecticut had the honor of receiving the

alists or Episcopalians, and there is and has been, for a long time past, the utmost harmony and friendship prevailing between the several denominations of Christians here. They frequently worship together, and thus prove the efficacy of that Spirit whose leading characteristic is charity."

* John Murray, the first Universalist minister in Boston, was an Englishman, born about 1741. He became a preacher, and was at first a Calvinist, then a Wesleyan, then a follower of Whitfield. Afterward he went to London, and there plunged into the vortex of dissipation. In 1770, being in a state of poverty, he came to America, where he preached, and by his eloquence soon acquired a high degree of popularity. At one time (1775) he was chaplain to a regiment in Rhode Island. After preaching with success in various places, he was settled, in 1785, in Boston, where he continued till his death in 1815. He, as well as Winchester-a Universalist of great ability, and who, with Hosea Ballou, may be considered as the founder of modern Universalism in this country-was a Trinitarian; but his main doctrine was, that, "although sinners would rise to the resurrection of damnation, and at the judgmentday would call on the rocks to hide them from the wrath of the Lamb, yet that after the judgment, the punishment was fulfilled, and the damnation ended." He believed that the devil and his angels only would be placed at the left hand of Christ, like the goats, and that all mankind would be placed at his right. Ballou, Balfour, and other Universalists of the modern sect, maintain that there will be no judgment-day and no future punishment.

first ordained bishop of the Episcopal Church in America, thus anticipating even Virginia, to whom the Church of England was a mother church from the beginning. This was Bishop Seabury,* who was consecrated in the year 1784, and established at New London.

I have heard of him a well-authenticated anecdote, which is very suggestive. On his arrival from England, whither he had been to acquire his high ecclesiastical honors, there was a general curiosity to see him and hear him preach, especially in Connecticutalthough the mass of the people, being Congregation

*Samuel Seabury, D. D., was a native of Groton, Conn., and was born in 1728. He graduated at Yale College, and then went to Scotland, to study medicine. He was there, however, ordained, and coming back to America, was settled at New Brunswick, New Jersey, as the missionary of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Having been stationed for a time at Jamaica, in the West Indies, he returned, and was settled at West Chester. Here he wrote and published several pamphlets in favor of the Crown, and was consequently seized by a party of soldiers, and for a time imprisoned at New Haven. When New York fell into the hands of the British, he joined them there, and became chaplain to Fanning's tory regiment. After the peace, having been elected bishop by the Episcopal clergy of Connecticut, he went to England, and applied to the Archbishop of York for consecration. This could not be granted, as an indispensable condition to consecration was, by law, an oath of allegiance to the crown. After nearly a year of fruitless efforts to obtain his object in England, he made application to the bishops of Scotland, by whom he was consecrated in 1784. He then returned, and entered upon the duties of his office, making New London his residence. He was an able man, and exercised a beneficial influence in establishing and extending the Episcopal Church, not only in Connecticut, but in the country generally. He was a worthy predecessor of other bishops of Connecticut-Jarvis and Brownell-who have not only done honor to the Church over which they presided, but have contributed to swell the list of scholars and divines which adorn our literature and our ecclesiastical history.