Abbildungen der Seite

thousand Irish are reported as having come in 1729; and before the middle of the century near twelve thousand arrived annually for several years." The Presbyterian emigrants who came to this country by the middle of the last century, were between one and two hundred thousand. Those from Ireland alone could not have been less than fifty thousand.” (Hodge, Part I, pp. 65, 70.) The natural tendencies of the people, settling the southern part of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and spreading southward into Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and even to Georgia, to this form of government, were increased by the decided preferences of the first ministers. Makemie, Hampton, McNish, Davis, Henry, Thomson, Steward, Clement, Anderson, Wilson, Gillespie and Taylor, were from Ireland or Scotland. Mr. Andrews, long the pastor of the 1st Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, was from New England, and yet throughout his life was as strenuous in favor of this form of church government as any one of his brethren educated in the Kirk. (Ib., p. 88.) The same statement holds true of Maryland; but in Virginia, so far as we can learn, Presbyterianism took its rise in the very heart of the establishment, and among English settlers. (Life of Rodgers, p. 31.) of this noted event we wish to speak more at large in another place. We think it fair to conclude that the reason why Presbyterianism has become in the Middle and Southern States, what Congregationalism became in New England, is to be found principally in the predominance of the Presbyterian emigration in those parts, and in the preferences of their original ministers. Those men gave their impress to the generations following them, and that impress is not likely ever to be effaced.

The beginnings of Presbyterianism may be traced back to the felling of the first tree in New Jersey. The churches in Newark and Elizabethtown date back to the year 1666 or 7. From the first, Newark had a settled minister of this persuasion, and the succession of Elizabethtown, in which are found the golden links of Dickinson and Caldwell, is clear as far back as 1687. The church at Freehold was organized in 1692, that in Snowhill, Maryland, in 1684, that in Philadelphia in 1698. These dates will serve to mark the infancy of this church, but it did not assume an organic form until about the close of the seventeenth century, when the Presbytery of Philadelphia was organized. That Presbytery was made up of seven ministers, to whom the eighth was soon added by ordination. (Hodge, p. 88.) The actual strength of this organization in 1710, may be inferred from the following letter from the Presbytery of Philadelphia to that of Dublin. In all Virginia we have one small congregation on Elizabeth river, and some few families favoring our way in Rappahau noc and York; in Maryland four, in Pennsylvania five, in Jersey two, which bounds, with some places in New York, make up all the bounds which we have any members from, and at present some of these are vacant.” (Ib., p. 76.) It is not to be inferred that this gives the entire strength of the denomination; since as early as 1690 there was a " Presbytery of Charleston," and there is the clearest proof that New Jersey contained a number of churches which had not yet united with the Presbytery. But this was the strength of the Presbyterian organization. In 1707, it had only eight ministers, and in 1716 only “seventeen living and in connection with the Presbytery." The most of these men were liberally educated, either in Great Britain or New England, and some of them were preachers of great power. In this respect the founders of this church gave it their impress, by setting up and conforming to a high standard of ministerial attainments in learning.


And here we may refer to some facts of the greatest interest connected with the early history of Presbyterianism. The church at Newark, forty years after its organization, that is, in 1708, was still so small, and the surrounding population so limited, that Dr. Mac Whorter says, “When the walls of the second church building were a knee high, all the inhabitants, men, women, and children, could have sat upon the same." (Century Sermon, p. 13.) Their difficulties were not a little increased by the opposition they met with in obtaining a charter, which was not obtained until 1735; and the venerable parchment may yet be seen. And yet these large plans, seemingly extravagant, have been amply justified by the pulling down of that building for the larger one now occupied by the church, and by the numerous congregations in the city itself and its vicinity, which are swarms from the old hive. The character of these men is shown in a beautiful incident in their early history, which we can not deny ourselves the pleasure of quoting. There was a controversy between the proprietaries of East Jersey, and the original purchasers of Elizabethtown (they bought directly of the Indians) about the boundary between Newark and Elizabethtown, and in a chancery suit, an old man, many years after, deposed, "that he heard Governor Treat of Connecticut tell after what manner the line was settled between the two towns; and that it was done in so loving and solemn a manner that he thought it ought never to be removed; for he (the governor) himself being among them at the time, prayed with them on Dividend Hill, that there might be a good agreement between them.” (Whitehead, p. 46.) The chosen spot is yet pointed out, and intolerant as they are said to have been, we prefer their "loving and solemn manner” of settling boundaries, to that which our age has witnessed in the same kind of difficulties between Ohio and Virginia; and Ohio and Michigan. In fact, since reading some letters quoted by “George Scot of Pitlochie," and some of the charming collections of the New Jersey Historical Society, we do not wonder that such a pious and godly parentage should be honored by such a numerous, vigorous, and choice offspring as is now to be seen in the churches of New Jersey. Surely, Pierson, Dickinson, Caldwell, and the Tennents were worthy of such a posterity!

The state of things in New York in 1707, may be inferred from the fact that the pious and gifted Makemie, "the father of the Presbyterian church in this country," was imprisoned two months and put to costs of two hundred dollars, for preaching one sermon in a private house. In 1716, the first church was formed in that city, and yet they were not able to obtain a charter until the Revolution, so stout and determined was the resistance they met from the vestry of the famous Trinity Church. This semi-papal corporation at that early date gave some hopeful pledges of its future course. It even made the attempt to secure a legacy of seven hundred and fifty dollars left for this unincorporated church. The mernbers of the vestry appointed to conduct this wicked business, said to the conscientious executor, a warm Episcopalian, " Are you not a churchman, sir?" "Yes, I am a churchman; but I am also an honest man, and am determined to fulfill the intention of Capt. Owen (the testator) to the best of my knowledge and ability.” (Life of Rodgers, p. 169.) As late as 1722, this church was not in a condition to lose even a small minority which attempted to form a Congregational church, and it was not until 1739 that the church began to assume a commanding position, being then increased by a great revival.

The church in Philadelphia was organized in 1698; and yet one building accommodated the people until the second church was formed in 1743 of those who were friendly to Whitefield. (Log College, p. 74.) The present Jerusalem of the Presbyterian church, when Gilbert Tennent was called, was a little one in Israel.

But in no part of the country was the early history of this church more marked than in Virginia. The laws of that province were very severe against dissenters. There were but few Presbyterian families, and they exerted no denominational influence. The laws of the province made it a penal offense for any one to absent himself from the services of the established church on Sundays, and holy days. For the first offense, the culprit was to "lye neck and heels that night, and be a slave to the colony that week.” For the second, he was to be a slave for a month, and for the third, a slave for a year and a day. (Stith's Hist., p. 148, quoted by Miller.) The statute suspended, and for persistence banished, a minister officiating without testimonials to his Episcopal ordination, and publicly "subscribing to be conformable to the orders and constitutions of the Church of England." (Laws of Virginia, ed. 1769, p. 3.) The field was certainly not promising for Presbyterian toissionaries.


About 1730, a Scotch schoolmaster gathered a congregation between the Rappahannoc and Potomac rivers, and read to them the Scriptures and such sermons as he had ; and in 1738 we find their delegates seeking supplies from the Synod of Philadelphia, which were granted, and Mr. Anderson, formerly pastor of the church in New York, was sent. (Hodge, Part II, 259.) Boston's Fourfold State, and a copy of Luther on Galatians, fell into the hands of two wealthy planters and resulted in their conversion. One of them, a Mr. Samuel Morris, has written a somewhat minute account of this work in a letter to Mr. Davies, which he copied in a letter to Dr. Bellamy, and is to be seen in the second volume of Gillies' Historical Collections. Mr. Morris invited his neighbors to his house, and read Luther's words to them. His audience increased at such a rate that it became necessary to erect a house for their meetings. He was sent for to read these words in other neighborhoods. So utterly ignorant were they of any church names save those assumed by the establishment and the Quakers, that when prosecuted, they were obliged to consult concerning their name, and as Luther's book was the visible means of their present views, they called themselves Lutherans. They were repeatedly fined, and yet “Morris's Meeting House” was crowded. At last, after three years, they heard of a preacher, whose doctrine was like that they had read in Luther, and two messengers were sent in great haste to ask him to preach these words to them. The long journey was like to end in disappointment, for Mr. Robinson, sent out by the Presbytery of New Brunswick, had left. They followed him a hundred miles, and secured his services. The delight and animation of these men ou first hearing a living preacher like him of Wittemberg, are too well told by Mr. Morris to be omitted. It was from Luke 13:3, that Mr. Robinson addressed them.

“It is hard," says Mr. M., " for the liveliest imagination to form an image of the condition of the assembly on these glorious days of the Son of man. Such of us as had been hungering for the word before, were lost in agreeable surprise and astouishment, and some could not refrain from publicly declaring their transport. We were overwhelmed with the thoughts of the unexpected goodness of God in allowing us to hear the gospel preached in a manner that surpassed our hopes. Many that came through curiosity were pricked to the heart, and but few in the numerous assemblies on those four days appeared unaffected. They returned, alarmed with apprehensions of their dangerous condition, convinced of their former entire ignorance of religion, and anxiously inquiring what they should do to be saved. And there is reason to believe there was as much good done by these four sermons, as by all the sermons preached in these parts before or since." Persecution sought to check the work, but in vain. The place was visited by the Rev. John Blair, and so affected were the people by his preaching that, on one occasicn, "a whole house full was quite overcome by the power of the word, particularly one pungent sentence, and they could hardly sit or stand, or keep their passions under any proper restraint." The Synod of New York prosecuted this mission, mostly by sending settled pastors, such as William Tennent of Freehold, Samuel Finley, Samuel Blair and others; and the revival under their labors, and subsequently under those of President Davies, extended to many parts of the state and even as far as North Carolina and Kentucky. (Log College, p. 298.) The history of that work, as given by Mr. Morris and Mr. Davies is highly edifying, and the venerable Dr. Alexander of Princeton, tells us that he met with numerous Christians, half a century after Davies had left the field, who were awakened in that revival under his labors. And yet that great man, with true Christian modesty, speaks of the results of his preaching in a letter to Dr. Bellamy, as of “a considerable number of perishing sinners being gained to the blessed Redeemer.” (Hodge, Part II, p. 47.)

It was under these circumstances that Presbyterianism took its rise in Virginia, for Morris's Lutherans changed their name to that of Presbyterians after Mr. Robinson's visit. An imperfect copy of that severely Calvinistic "Four-fold State,” and “Luther on the Galatians” were the visible instrumentalities. And it is a fact worth recording that in 1748, after a number of churches were formed of this order, and when there were a hundred dissenters to where a few years ago there were not ten,” Mr. Rodgers, afterward the pastor of the church in New York, "was forbidden in the most peremptory manner, to preach within the colony, under the penalty of a fine of five hundred pounds, and a year's imprisonment, without bail or main-prize.” (Life of Rodgers, p. 53.) Nor were these unjust restrictions removed until the return of Mr. Davies from England some years later, with a written opinion from the attorney general, favorable to dissenters.

Such were the beginnings of this church. In 1741, we find the Synod of Philadelphia, before the schism of that year, increased from eight ministers to about forty-five ; and from the fact frem quently intimated in the Presbyterial and Synodical records, that many of them ministered to more than one church, and that many churches, as in Virginia, were formed on missionary fields, we infer that the number of churches under its care, might be between seventy-five and one hundred. In the absence of statistics on this point, we merely make a guess, probably not far from the truth.

We now approach, in this sketch, the period of a great schism in the Presbyterian church, and must briefly indicate two of its promi


« ZurückWeiter »