The Proceedings of The Unitarian Historical Society, 1925

The proceedings
Unitarian Historical Society (Boston, Mass.)

[Boston]
Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives / http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#cc-by-nc-nd-3.0
http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives

http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#cc-by-nc-nd-3.0
This work is protected by copyright law (which includes
certain exceptions to the rights of the copyright holder
that users may make, such as fair use where applicable
under U.S. law), but made available under a Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
license. You must attribute this work in the manner
specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way
that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the
work). Only verbatim copies of this work may be made,
distributed, displayed, and performed, not derivative
works based upon it. Copies that are made may only
be used for non-commercial purposes. Please check
the terms of the specific Creative Commons license
as indicated at the item level. For details, see the full
license deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.








The Proceedings
of the
/ r-
Unitarian Historical Society

volume i
PARTI
ii mi
GIFT
oc?
îÂKy
OF THE
How the Schism Came.
...
UNIVERSITY!
William
Notes on Increase and Cotton Mather
0!r
W.<jfeLX^fl|gig^
....
Kenneth B. Murdock
1925
The Beacon Press, Inc.

25
Beacon Street
Boston,
Massachusetts


THE PROCEEDINGS
Of The
UNITARIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY




The Proceedings
OF THE

ii
VOLUME I
PART I
THE UNITARIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY

List of Officers,
1925-26
Secretary-Librarian
Julius H. Tuttle, Esq.,
President
Reverend Henry Wilder Foote,
112 Clifton Street
Belmont, Mass.
Boylston Street,
Boston, Mass.
1154
Treasurer
Frederick W. Stuart, Jr.,

90 Fulton Street,
Dedham, Mass.

Honorary Vice-President
Honorable Winslow Warren,
Dedham, Mass.
Vice-President
Rev. Charles E. Park, D. D.
Boston, Mass.
Directors
H. W. Cunningham, Esq.,
Boston, Mass.
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr. Esq.,
Boston, Mass.
Miss Harriet E. Johnson,
Boston, Mass.
Reverend George H. Reed,
Winchester, Mass.
The Unitarian Historical Society was founded in 1900.

was the late Henry H. Edes of Boston,
who served from 1900 to 1919.
The purpose of the So
Its first president
ciety is to collect and preserve books, periodicals, pam

phlets, manuscripts, pictures and memorabilia which de
scribe and illustrate the history of the Unitarian movement;
to stimulate an interest in the preservation of the records
of Unitarian churches; and to publish monographs and
other material dealing with the history of individual
churches, or of the Unitarian movement as a whole.
The
Society welcomes to its membership all who are in sym
pathy with its aims and work. Persons desiring to join
should send the membership fee, ($1.00), with their names
and addresses to the Treasurer.
ANNOUNCEMENT

The Unitarian Historical Society, although it has been

in existence for a quarter of a century, has not hitherto
undertaken to print its Proceedings. A list of the annual
addresses delivered before it will be found on page 47.
Most of the earlier ones were informal in character and
cannot now be reproduced.
Some of the later ones have
been printed elsewhere.
Dr. Charles H. Lyttle's "Pen
tecost of American Unitari-anism" was published in pamphlet
form by the Society. A few others.which have never appear
ed in print, are of such value that they should be made avail
able for persons interested in our denominational history.
The Directors of the Society believe that the time has
come when the annual address should be regularly pub
lished, accompanied by brief historical notes and documents
of interest illustrating the life of the Unitarian churches
in this country or abroad.
We may well follow the ad
mirable example of our sister society in Great Britain,
which, although several years our junior, has, from the
date of its foundation, published a valuable series of Trans
actions.
Our publications must, at least for the present,
be on a more modest scale than those of the British Uni
tarian Historical Society, but their purpose will be the
same, to create a fresh interest in the historical back
ground of our churches; to preserve and to make readily
accessible information which is liable otherwise to be lost;
and to stimulate the interest of the local churches in the
preservation of their records.
The present undertaking cannot be successfully carried
out without the support of those who recognize the value
and importance of the preservation of historical records.
The Society therefore appeals to all such persons to be
come members and to send to the editors information as
to historical material which might be considered for pub
lication. Such co-operation is essential for the success of
the enterprise now launched, and will be greatly appre
ciated by the editors.

Copyright,
THE BEACON PRESS, INC.

All rights reserved
1926
of Volume
Contents
1925
Frontispiece, William Ellery Channing, from a por

trait by Gilbert Stuart
List of
Officers,
Page
IV
1925-26
Announcement
How the Schism Came, William Wallace Fenn
Notes on Cotton and Increase Mather, Kenneth
B.
Murdock
22

Records of the Annual Meeting, 1925
Historical Exhibit, Centenary

Unitarian Association
List of Addresses delivered
Editorial
of
45
the
American
47
before the Society
52
Committee
Henry Wilder Foote
Julius H. Tuttle
Charles E. Park
Communications to the Editors should
addressed
Henry Wilder Foote
Reverend
25
be
Beacon Street, Boston, Mass.
Subscriptions should
be
addressed to
The Beacon Press

25
Beacon St., Boston, Mass.
Single copies one dollar.
to

How the Schism
Came,
William Wallace Fenn,

Bussey
Professor
of
Theology in Harvard
University
The Unitarian Review for January, 1890, contained an

article by Dean Shaler of Harvard love and fame, en
titled "Critical Points in the Continuity of Natural Phe
In substance, the essay was delivered after
nomena".
wards as one of a series of lectures upon the Winkley Foun
dation in Andover Theological Seminary which were pub
lished in book form under the title "The Interpretation
Briefly put Dean Shaler's theory was that
of Nature".
while, in the light of evolution, continuity must be ac
knowledged, it frequently happens that within a continuous
process there arise critical points at which remarkable
changes unexpectedly occur, which are often of such a
character that they could not have been predicted a priori.
For example: when water is exposed to heat, its tempera
ture gradually rises until at a certain fixed point it abruptly
turns into steam, sustaining the relation of a gas instead
of a fluid to its environment. Subject it, on the contrary,
to a falling temperature, and the water becomes gradually
colder until, again at a fixed point, it freezes and as ice
has the properties of a solid instead of a liquid or a gas.
Thus the boiling and the freezing points are critical points
for water, in the continuity of a rising or falling temper
ature.
There is a succession of small changes, but there
are also sharp, unheralded transitions from one condition
to another. Take another illustration, for the principle
is important enough to repay clear exposition: an embryo
develops in the womb until the period of gestation comes
to term; then it is expelled from the womb and enters

- '
'
'
the
at once upon a wholly different mode of existence;
birth hour was a critical point in the continuity of growth.
As the child's life goes on, a watchful parent often feels
that its progress passes through fairly well marked stages.
It is as if the child were climbing up a flight of stairs with
high treads, instead of smoothly gliding up an unbroken
Characteristics appear without warning,
inclined plane.
if
in
as
its
growth the child suddenly emerged upon
almost
new levels where hitherto unknown interests, capacities,
It is
and powers make their appearance without bell.
We
so with an adolescent, and also with a mature man.
meet a friend with more or less regularity for many years,
and detect little or no change in him, but how frequently
it happens that we suddenly realize, with a shock of sur
prise, that he has grown perceptibly older since we saw
him last. There are signs that he has turned a corner,
or gone over a water-shed, that he has passed one of the
critical points in the continuity of his life.
Manifestly the principle applies also to social develop
Undoubtedly, continuity is preserved, yet there
ments.
are critical points at which the whole situation quickly
The comparatively even years
and unmistakably changes.
between these critical points we designate as ages or pe
riods, and attribute the transformation either to the in
fluence of some outstanding man, who alters the direction
of human thought or behavior, or to some social cataclysm
like the Great War which carries tremendous consequences
in its train. There is continuity of course, but there are
also critical points.
Nature pursues the even tenor of its
way, yet there are, even now, earthquakes in New Eng
land and tornadoes in Illinois. Gunpowder has a way of
going off with a bang and there are, still, explosions in
social and individual history.
One such instance of a critical point in the continuity
of the religious life of New England we are celebrating

One who would understand the schism in the

this year.
ancient Congregational order of Massachusetts by which
Unitarians came into separate denominational existence
must study a long process of gradual change, but he must
also observe that there came critical points at which con
tingency seems to have entered into the situation and
been responsible for a conspicuous and significant change
Thus, very soon after 1630, the
in the course of events.
Calvinism of the first settlers began to soften and this
process continued without marked interference for about
Time would fail us to trace this process or
a century.
do more than merely suggest certain reasons for it. Among
many causes the Anne Hutchinson troubles, the Half
way Covenant, the influence of Harvard College and of
English Latitudinarians like Tillotson probably the most
important was the change produced in the minds of the
When they
people by the success of their settlement here.
were but a handful of men and women with a boisterous
sea behind them, and a howling wilderness before them
where savage beasts and still more savage men malignly
tracked their timid wanderings, Calvinism was a perfectly
natural amd wholly congenial faith. They were, indeed,
but a handful of settlers, yet they were confident that
the hand that held them was the hand of Almighty God,
out of which no powers of earth or hell could pluck them.
Were they not in evident fact wholly dependent upon
God? Upon whom could they rely save upon Him? But
after they had discovered that there were no lions at Cape
Ann, and that the savages could be intimidated, after
they had cleared the wilderness and brought plenty into
their well established homes, a feeling of self-reliance sup
planted that of utter dependence upon God, and so their
Calvinism weakened.
They laid increasing weight upon
human efficiency, leading towards Arminianism, and upon
the usual church ordinances as means of grace, thus im

plicitly denying the theory of regeneration
by immediate
their Calvinism
divine operation. Almost imperceptibly

was crumbling.
This might have continued without break or hindrance
A thor
had it not been for one man, Jonathan Edwards.
oughly convinced Calvinist, whose theological doctrine was
fundamentally confirmed by his precocious philosophizing,
he was also a fearless and relentless preacher of terrific
With the whole energy of his masterful being he
power.
set himself against the current tendency and sought to
bring back into the religious life of New England, Calvin
ism with all, and even more than, its original vigor
and rigor. And he succeeded, as a man is wont to succeed
who with pitiless logic and winged words appeals to
religious conservatism. His doctrine was recommended
not only by its reliance upon certain selected portions of
Scripture taken at their face value without gloss or twist,
and the unflinching remorseless logic of his inferences, but
also by the plea that it was the faith of the founders of
New England by which the country had prospered and
from which their degenerate descendants had departed to
their loss and peril. Moreover, it fell in with the popular
interest excited by the Great Awakening.
Whitefield and
his inferior imitators in New England were Calvinists,
but they were appealing preachers and not convincing
It was Edwards who supplied a theological
theologians.
structure for their emotional preaching. Not that his
success was complete. At first, few of the ministers of
the Standing Order were affected by his doctrine, but
through his pupils and friends, men like Bellamy and Hop
kins, the latter of whom gave his name to the new move
ment, his influence spread and by the end of the 18th
century the Hopkinsian ministers and churches in New
England perhaps equaled in number the "alleviated" or
moderate Calvinists, and in addition there were many

scattered groups of come outers called "Separates" whose

members were sympathetic with the preaching of the Re
vivalists and consequently with its implied theology which
Edwards had made explicit. Yet there remained a large
number of ministers and churches which held aloof from
the New Lights and still continued in their tempered
Calvinism.
There were, on the other hand, not a few ministers,
especially in the Eastern part of Massachusetts, who having
already got much farther away from the original Calvin
ism than most of their contemporaries, were carried still
farther in the same direction by reaction against the ex
In a letter written by John
cesses of the Hopkinsians.
15,
1815 to the Rev. Jedidiah
Adams under date of May
Morse of Charlestown, the ex-President says: "Sixty-five
years ago my own minister the Rev. Samuel Bryant,
Dr. Jonathan Mayhew of the West Church in Boston,
the Rev. Mr. Shute of Hingham, the Rev. John Brown
of Cohasset, and perhaps equal to all if not above all,
Among
the Rev. Mr. Gay of Hingham, were Unitarians.
name, lawyers, physicians,
the laity how many could
read
tradesmen,
farmers. More than fifty years ago
Dr. Samuel Clark, Emlyn and Dr. Waterland. Do you
think, my dear, Doctor, to teach me anything new in
As the quotation shows this
favor of Athanasianism?"
Unitarianism was due chiefly to the English influence,
not, however, of avowed Unitarians, but of Latitudinarians in the Anglican church. Although this influence
was checked by the Revolution, the New England Liberals
persevered in their way of thinking, and the tendency
was aided, after the restoration of peace, by the writings
of English Unitarians and the teaching of the French phil
osophers.
It
would carry us far beyond the proper limits of this

paper to discuss the influence of France upon the theo

logical development of New England.

Suffice it here to
say that while immediately after the Revolution, there
was a very friendly feeling towards France on account
of her decisive assistance during the war, that feeling
speedily waned on account of the Genet affair, French
interference with our shipping, and particularly the horrors
of the Days of Terror.
The career of Dr. William Bentley
of Salem illustrates the complicated situation. Writing
to James Freeman of King's Chapel in 1788 he says: "You
are acquainted with my avowed disbelief in the Trinity",
and in his Diary under the date of May 18, 1792, he refers
to "the abominable doctrine of the Trinity". Even so
early as 1785 he had introduced Priestley's catechism into
his church. He was therefore a thorough-going Liberal.
Nevertheless the Monthly Anthology printed a scathing
review of one of his printed sermons, and, so far as I have
observed, never referred to him except in terms of dis
A partial explanation of this anomaly doubt
paragement.
less is that Bentley, like Mayhew of the generation before
him and Theodore Parker of the generation after him,
was an enfant terrible in the Liberal family, blurting out
things which its other members studiously refrained from
A deeper reason, however, is the contrast be
speaking.
tween his political attitude and theirs. They were Fed
eralists and friendly towards England, while he was an
ardent Republican who, after a brief period of hostility
to France, turned into a violent enemy of England when
she began to imperil the maritime interest of Salem by
Accor
a series of acts which led up to the war of 1812.
dingly Bentley was in decided disfavor with the Liberals,
notwithstanding his theological principles.
mention this merely in order to suggest the way in
which politics and theology combined to create a rather
more complicated situation than most historians of our
But the fact
religious development seem fully to realize.

is unmistakable that at the beginning of the 19th century
there was a party in New England, particularly on the

sea-board, which was very far removed from Calvinism.
It has been suggested, and the local distribution of the
party is in favor of the suggestion, that the broadening
influence of commerce had much to do with this tendency.
Evidently, then, these Liberals were too remote theolog
ically to be touched by the influence of Edwards and the
Hopkinsians.
To them the issues which the Old Calvinists and the Hopkinsians were discussing were neither living
nor momentous.
It was a contrast between "farmer meta
physicians," (as the Hopkinsians were sometimes called)
on the one hand, and more deeply read or widely traveled
men with larger experience in human affairs, on the other.
Moreover, the extravagancies of the Hopkinsians only
confirmed their distrust and disgust. They abhorred
revival measures, and the theology shocked their moral
sense.
They would have said to the Hopkinsians as Wesley
is reported to have said to Whitefield:
"Your God is
my devil".
For example:
two arguments were used by
the Hopkinsians which were irrefragable in logic but odious
in morals. The first ran thus: The object of creation is
to set forth the glory of God. His glory is his holy character.
In his character is hatred of sin, which therefore must
be manifest in creation.
Consequently the purpose of crea
tion would be defeated unless in the universe there were
sin for God to hate and hell to show how much he hates
it. But an objector would rejoin: Does not this, coupled
with the doctrine of decrees, make God the author of sin?
To which the Hopkinsian replied with cheerful and in
trepid logic: Of course it does, and God must be the cause
of sin: for if there were any evil in the cause of evil that
would be part of the evil for which a cause is sought.
Ac
cordingly only absolute goodness can be the cause of evil.
Now, I submit that it is ex
Quod erai demonstrandum.
10

ceedingly difficult to answer these vest-pocket arguments,

and the Liberals refused to try their teeth upon such logi
cal files;
they simply turned away in abhorrence from
so immoral an idea of God, and resolved that if that was
consistent Calvinism they were content to be Christians,
and Liberal Christians too.
So it came about that when the 19th century opened
there were in the ancient Congregational order of Massa
chusetts three pretty distinct parties.
To borrow politi
cal designations: there was the party of the Center, com
prising the Old Calvinists, only slightly affected either by
Edwards or by the Liberals, ministers and churches pur
suing their hum-drum drowsy way of mitigated Calvinism,
On the Right were the Hoplethargic and unaggressive.
kinsians, vigorous and self-assertive, passionately argumen
tative and addicted to revival methods.
On the Left were
the Liberals, by far the smallest of the three groups, strong
only within a short radius from Boston, peace-loving, pros
perous, anxious to be let alone and willing to let every
These three parties were
body else alone theologically.
distinct although as yet undivided.
If division should come
it was by no means certain where the line, or lines, of sep
aration would be drawn. There were plainly three possi
bilities. The three parties might fall apart into three de
nominations, or a line might run in such a way as to leave
Old Calvinists and Liberals united against Hopkinsians,
or it might run between Hopkinsians and Old Calvinists
combined against the Liberals.
In fact it looked as if
the Old Calvinists were more likely to go with the Liberals
than with the Hopkinsians, for the shading off through
the Arminians was more gradual in the former direction
than in the latter where the pitch was more abrupt theo
logically. Besides, Old Calvinists and Liberals were more
in favor of the establishment than were the Hopkinsians,
and, by and large, the political sympathies of the former
11
while those of the latter were

As a matter of fact, however, when
with the Republicans.
the schism came it left Old Calvinists and Hopkinsians
together on one side of the line and the Liberals alone
What determined the actual cleavage?
upon the other.
As one reviews today the tragedy of the separation it
think, that one man
gradually becomes clear to him,
was more responsible than anybody else for its occurring
where and as it did, and that man was Jedidiah Morse,
minister of the First Church in Charlestown.
This Jedidiah
Morse, father of the Morse of electric telegraph fame,
was born in Woodstock, Connecticut, in 1761 and grad
uated from Yale in the class of 1783.
In April, 1789, he
became minister of the First Church in Charlestown, where
he remained until February of 1820.
His situation at
Charlestown cannot have been altogether agreeable.
Until
his fellow-townsman and classmate Abiel Holmes came
to Cambridge in 1792, he, a Yale man, was surrounded by
Harvard graduates, and his clerical position made him
ipso facto a member of the Board of Harvard Overseers.
Besides, while a man of alert and inquisitive mind, the
Father of American Geography, he was very much of a
busy-body, vain, quick to take offence, suspicious and re
sentful. In short, with all his intellectual ability, he was
what we in New England call "pudgicky." If you ask
answer, it means the sort of man
what that word means,
that Jedidiah Morse was.
Now as native of a small
country town in Connecticut, a graduate of Yale, and
pastor for a time of a church in Medway, Georgia, Morse
had been unaffected by the liberal influence which was
strong in Eastern Massachusetts, and soon after coming
to Charlestown it was borne in upon him that his clerical
colleagues were unsound in the faith and that he was called
to become the champion of orthodoxy.
Taking his turn
in preaching the Great and Thursday Lecture in Boston
were with the Federalists

L
1
12
in January, July and December, 1790, three

discourses upon the divinity of Christ.
But he seems to

he delivered
have already conceived more practical measures to check

and counteract the growing heresy.
His biographer, Dr.
William B. Sprague, says: "It cannot be doubted that
Dr. Morse early formed the purpose of doing his utmost
to effect an important change in the ecclesiastical condi
tion of Massachusetts first by separating the Unitarians
from the Orthodox, and then by drawing the Orthodox
of different shades into more intimate relations. Both these
objects were ultimately effected, and more, probably, through
" *
the influence of Dr. Morse than that of any other man.
Dr. Sprague seems to me unquestionably correct in his
statement of Morse's policy, and we must now see how
The Lib
that clever tactician accomplished his purpose.
erals unwittingly played into his hands by electing, in 1805,
Henry Ware of Hingham as Hollis Professor of Divinity
This, the first endowed professor
in Harvard College.
ship in Harvard, established by Thomas Hollis of Eng
land in 1721, became vacant by the death of Professor
The two candidates were Jesse AppleTappan in 1803.
ton, afterwards President of Bowdoin College, and Henry
Ware of Hingham, the former an Old Calvinist, the latter
No objection was made
one of the acknowledged Liberals.
to Henry Ware on the ground of character or scholarship,
but his opponents on the Corporation, led by Eliphalet
Pearson, and on the Board of Overseers led by Jedidiah
Morse, contended that the Orders, drawn up by Mr. Hollis
and governing the appointment, required every incumbent
to be a Calvinist; and a Calvinist, Henry Ware certainly
was not. Of course, we cannot go into the controversy
and discuss its merits; it is only necessary to say that
the arguments of Pearson and Morse did not carry con*
Life of Jedidiah Morse, W.
B. Sprague, p. 57.

IS
viction and Henry Ware was elected by the Corporation

(it is said by but a single vote), and confirmed by the Board
of Overseers.
The significance of this event was that by
it a line was scored between the Liberals and the Old Calvinists, which was quite as much to Jedidiah Morse's pur
pose as if he had succeeded in defeating Henry Ware.
Disgruntled by the election of Henry Ware, and by
his own failure to be elected President of the College, to
which he had aspired after the death of Willard in 1804,
Eliphalet Pearson resigned his professorship and retired
to Andover where he had been Principal of the Academy
before going to Cambridge.
Convinced that Harvard could
no longer be trusted to educate ministers except of the
liberal type, and hence unacceptable to most of the churches
in Massachusetts, he conceived the idea of having a theo
logical seminary in Andover which should be Old Calvinist
in character. The constitution of Phillips Academy had
provided for the residence at the Academy of young men
pursuing their studies for the ministry, and a few had
availed themselves of this privilege. It was Dr. Pearson's
plan to carry into effect, and extend, this original provi
sion by securing proper accommodations and an endowed
professorship for theological students, and through the in
terest and benevolence of the Phillipses and Deacon Abbot
of Andover, this was accomplished. Here then was the
beginning of a theological school in Andover which should
be Old Calvinist in character and in which Dr. Pearson
was to be professor.
To guard against such perversion
as they believed the Hollis gift had suffered at Harvard,
the donors proposed that every professor in the School
should subscribe to the Westminster Shorter Catechism.
Meanwhile, however, a similar project was on foot at
Certain wealthy men of Newburyport and Sa
Newbury.
lem, influenced by Samuel Spring, minister of Newbury
port, were ready to provide funds for a theological school

14
in Newbury of which Leonard Woods, then pastor of the

Two theological schools,
local church, was to be professor.
then, were contemplated at the same time, in the same
county of Essex, and within easy distance of each other.
Why not combine the two undertakings and establish at
Andover one strong commanding school of theology? That
seemed an eminently sensible thing to do, yet there was
Those interested in the
a serious obstacle in the way.
Newbury School were Hopkinsians, while, as has been said,
those who were working at the Andover plan were Old
Calvinists, and the two groups were at loggerheads theo
Could this obstacle be overcome?
Here again
logically.
the ever busy Jedidiah Morse appears upon the scene,
He had been associated
serving as a useful go-between.
with Eliphalet Pearson in opposition to Henry Ware, and
he was even then negotiating with Spring and Woods for
a union of the Massachusetts Missionary Magazine, an Hopkinsian periodical in which they were interested, with the
Panoplist which he had started in the summer of 1805,
and which was designed to serve as an organ of the two
Woods, indeed, had been
parties as against the Liberals.
Even with Dr.
one of the contributors to the Panoplist.
Morse's energetic and ingenious activity, however, the nego
tiations between Andover and Newbury went on heavily
and once and again seemed on the verge of a break-down.
The Newbury group were suspicious of Andover, and were
resolved to guard their gifts against any possible perver
sion by Old Calvinists as well by the Liberals.
Finally,
as a safeguard, an elaborate creed was drawn up, every
word of which is said to have passed under the critical
eye of Dr. Emmons, the foremost living theologian of the
Hopkinsians, and a man of exceptional clearness of thought
and precision of statement. The Monthly Anthology pub
lished an elaborate study of the Creed which aimed to
prove that it was a thoroughly Hopkinsian document on

15
every point where Hopkinsians differed from Old Calvinists, and its contention seems to be well-founded;
the
Old Calvinists had no man in New England at all com
parable in acumen to Nathanael Emmons. It was required
that every Professor on the Newbury foundations, and
this was promptly extended to those of Andover also,
should subscribe to this Creed at his inauguration, and
lest he should learn something afterwards in the course
of his professional studies, regularly every five years there
after. To make assurance doubly sure, a Board of Visi
tors was established, the members of which also were re
quired to assent to the Creed, whose duty was to see that
the foregoing provisions were enforced.
With these elab
orate precautions, the union was finally made and An
dover Theological Seminary opened its doors in the Au
tumn of 1808.
The chief significance of this event was
that, in connection with the incorporation of the Mas
sachusetts Missionary Magazine into the Panoplist which
occurred in the same year, it signalized a union of Cal
vinists and Hopkinsians against the Liberals, the project
dearest to Dr. Morse's heart. Now it was clear where the
cleavage would be, for the line scored by the choice of
Henry Ware had broadened and deepened into an unmis
takable crack.
So far, however, there had been no formal split such as
Dr. Morse had early determined to effect. To this end,
therefore, he now directed his resourceful mind and rest
It was hoped to accomplish this part of his
less energy.
plan by the formation of Associations among ministers,
membership in which was conditional upon acceptance
of the Westminster Shorter Catechism, and of Consocia
tions among the churches, like those with which Dr. Morse
Behind these projects was
was familiar in Connecticut.
a purpose to bring the Congregational churches of the
Orthodox brand in New England into some sort of affilia

16
tion with the national Presbyterian churches.

At this
point, however, the opponents of the Liberals had over
shot their mark. Associations were formed from which
the Liberal men were excluded, but when it came to Con
sociations, Morse and his friends had reckoned ill with
the deeply-seated Congregationalism of Massachusetts.
No
man in all New England was more stoutly opposed to
Liberalism than the aforesaid Dr. Emmons of Franklin,
but none was more unreservedly devoted to Congrega
tionalism than he. One of his pithy sayings is often quoted
"Associationism leads to Consociationism, Consociationism
leads to Presbyterianism, Presbyterianism leads to Epis
copacy, Episcopacy leads to Roman Catholicism, and Ro
man Catholicism is an ultimate fact." This attempt on
the part of Dr. Morse was baulked, for it became evident
that he could not effect separation by this means without
alienating many of those whom he had just succeeded
in uniting, and in 1816 the plan was quietly shelved.
But Dr. Morse was not a man to be easily discouraged.
Besides, to his doubtless sincere opposition to heresy there
had by this time been added an element of personal rancor
and resentment.
This introduces us to a phase of the
controversy which seems to have had more importance
than is usually ascribed to it. There is a mean saying
Cherchez la femme the implication of which is that when
mischief is brewing some woman is tending the fire and
stirring the pot. So it was with this theological contro
versy of a century ago. Pray disabuse your minds at
once of any fear, or hope, that I am about to hand out
a bit of back-stairs scandal.
By no means; the woman
in this case was Hannah Adams, an aged and irreproachable
vestal, unprepossessing and half blind, who was laboriously
trying to earn a living by her pen, and the quarrel with
Dr. Morse of which she became the occasion was about
purely literary matters.
17

have spoken of Dr. Morse as the Father of American

Geography a phrase borrowed from the epitaph on his
monument in New Haven.
In the autumn of 1793 Rev.
James Freeman of King's Chapel issued a pamphlet dras
tically reviewing the latest edition of Morse's American
Dr. Jenks of Boston is quoted by Morse's
Geography.
biographer to the effect that the severity of the criticism
was due "in part at least to the odium theologicum of that
contentious period".
This may be doubted, but Dr. Morse
did not doubt it, and the offence rankled. His pamphlet
on "The True Reasons on which the Election of a Hollis
Professor of Divinity in Harvard College was opposed",
which appeared in 1805, provoked severe animadversions
from the Liberals.
Bentley quoted Dr. Waterhouse of
Cambridge as thinking that "Dr. Morse's conduct in the
election of a Professor of Divinity in Cambridge, and his
zeal to patronize the institution at Andover, has cost him
the favor of the clergy who, to use the Doctor's own words,
to bespatter him." This is valuable
testimony to Dr. Morse's state of mind at the time when
the Hannah Adams controversy broke out.
In 1799 this estimable bluestocking spinster had pub
lished a Summary History of New England. While this
book still held the market, Dr. Morse, collaborating with
the Rev. Elijah Parish, issued a "Compendious
History
Soon rumors began to circulate that
of New England."
Dr. Morse had made improper use of Miss Adams' book,
plagiarized it in fact, and also that he had wronged a needy
author, a woman, too, and of poor eye-sight besides, by
forestalling the market for her proposed Abridgement.
We need not follow the details of the controversy or even
the verdict of the informal jury to whom the matter was
The point is that Dr. Morse believed
ultimately referred.
that the whole business was an attempt to get back at
him for his opposition to Henry Ware and to the Liberals
spare no opportunity
18

in general.
It
made his view more plausible that Hannah
Adams was one of the Liberals herself and not only had
been befriended by them but is also said to have done
most of her literary work in Dr. Buckminster's study.
Whether justly or not, Dr. Morse believed himself the
victim of persecution by the Liberals who were engaged
in an "Indian warfare" against him, and, being the sort
of man he was, it added to the acrimony of the contro
versy. He was waiting for an opportunity to pay the
Liberals back in their own coin, and his chance soon came.
In 1812, an English Unitarian, Belsham, published a
life of Theophilus Lindsey, the leading Unitarian clergy
man in England, in which were letters from American
correspondents, several of whom were connected with
King's Chapel, in which the progress of liberal sentiments
On account
here was called a progress of Unitarianism.
of the war which was then on between this country and
England it was some time before this book reached Boston,
In
but when it came Dr. Morse seized his opportunity.
Uni
1815 he published a pamphlet entitled "American
tarianism" in which the letters referred to were reprinted,
and it was exultingly proclaimed that now at last the
mask was off and these New England Liberals were seen
for what they really were Unitarians and nothing else.
They had hitherto sought to disguise their true sentiments,
they had denied that they were Unitarians, arrogating
to themselves the name of Liberal Christians, but now
they were condemned out of their own mouths. Morse
was quite correct in saying that the Liberals in general
had not called themselves Unitarians, and this for the
very good reason that they were not Unitarians as that
term was then understood in England and wherever
Priestley was known. They were anti-Trinitarians, to be
sure, but they did not preach against the doctrine of the
Trinity, because they deemed it of minor importance and

also because they earnestly and sincerely wished
19
to avoid
schism in the old Congregational order.
Others might be
lieve the doctrine and preach it as much as they pleased
that was no concern of theirs only they did not believe
it and so of course would not preach it. Furthermore,
at that time the name Unitarian generally connoted Ma
terialism as a philosophy, Necessitarianism in morals,
Socinianism in theology, as well as sympathy with France
and the French Revolution some or all of these things.
Materialists, the New England Liberals certainly were not;
they could not sympathize with Necessitarianism for it
was precisely from Calvinism that they had revolted; and
as respects the person of Christ, Channing's statement
is demonstrably correct that among them there was great
diversity of opinion a few were Socinians, but for the
most part, the Liberals were Arians, and high Arians at
that, holding that Jesus was a divine pre-existent being
especially commissioned by God to convey to the world
a final and authoritative revelation of himself amply at
tested by miracle and prophecy and recorded in the New
Testament. Finally, so far as sympathy with the French
Revolution was concerned, who could be more opposed
to it, root and branch, than the conservative Federalists
who made up the bulk of the Liberal party in theology?
There was then a perfectly proper reason why they had
In fact, as
not called themselves by this party name.
Channing testified, they were distinguished by nothing
more than by unwillingness to be a party, they wished
no human leaders, they would avow no human creeds,
insisting that declarations of belief should be couched
only in the very words of the Scriptures of revelation.
Of course Dr. Morse expected that his pamphlet would
make trouble and his expectations were fully justified.
Channing was aroused by the charges of dishonorable
equivocation; he and others deeply resented also the at

20
tempts to check the freedom of theological inquiry and

To tie an institution of learn
squeeze out the Liberals.
ing up to a creed from which it could never cut loose seemed
to them monstrous;
to introduce associations and con
sociations was not to be endured.
So a vigorous contro
which,
started,
however,
soon
versy
passed over into a
serious discussion
the
upon
theological points at issue.
But now the lines were sharply drawn.
Conservative
ministers refused to exchange with liberal, conservative
church members seceded from parishes which called a
liberal minister, and the amenities went flying.
Unfortunately it was in connection with the point last
mentioned that a legal dispute arose, the settlement of
which embittered the controversy to a quite extraordinary
In brief the question was this: suppose that a
degree.
majority of the church members that is, the communi
cants secedes from the parish or society that is, the sec
ular organization responsible for finances does the with
drawing, or the remaining, group constitute the church
of that particular parish? This might seem purely an
academic question, but unhappily property rights were
involved.
For in many instances tangible property, the
communion plate, endowments, as well as the meeting
house itself, were held in trust by the Deacons of that
particular church. If the deacons seceded with the church
did they carry with them these trusts, or did they belong
to the deacons who remained, or who were afterwards
appointed by the church members who did not secede?
As involving property rights, the case came before the
courts, and in the famous Dedham case of 1820, the Su
preme Court of Massachusetts decided that the church
of a given parish or society must be identified by its con
nection with that parish or society.
Even if a majority
of the church members withdrew, those who remained
constituted the church in that parish and their deacons

were the lawful
21
custodians of property belonging to the

church. This decision bore very heavily upon the Con
servatives, who felt deeply injured some even going to
the point of charging that the decision was due to the
denominational preferences of the judges, an insinuation
against the Supreme Bench of Massachusetts which its
record and reputation make supremely ridiculous.
But
the Conservatives were right in declaring that the result
was inequitable, for so it was.
That it was good law does
not prove that it was just. We to-day ask why there
should not have been a proportional distribution of the
property between those who went and those who stayed.
That would have been just and right, but, after the case
had come into the courts and the courts had decided who
were the legal custodians of trust funds, the party so desig
nated could not lawfully have turned over those trust
funds or any part of them to any other persons or organi
zation whatsoever.
It was a tragedy that an appeal was
all, but, the appeal once made and
at
made to Caesar
It is not sur
the case heard, Caesar's verdict stood.
prising, however, that this decision greatly embittered the
controversy. When a root of bitterness springs up in
religious soil, wormwood is honey compared with the fruit
thereof. Henceforth the two parties must go their several
ways without hope of reconciliation at least for a century.
With the founding of the American Unitarian Associa
tion in 1825, which by the way, was strenuously opposed
by many of the older Liberal ministers and less than half
heartedly favored by Channing himself, who was by no
means of a denominational spirit and temper, the sep
aration was finally accomplished, and since that time the
two divisions of the ancient Congregational order have
been separate and distinct features in the ecclesiastical
And so the schism came.
landscape of New England.
Notes on Increase and Cotton Mather*

By Kenneth B. Murdock
Assistant Professor of English in Harvard University
Advocates of liberality in religion should find much to

cheer them at this meeting.
Here am I, an Episcopalian,
an officer of a non-sectarian university, talking to a Uni
tarian Historical Society about two Congregationalists!
have an idea that those two Congregationalists, were
they alive today, would be the first to approve of this
Both Increase Mather and Cotton Mather,
meeting.
earnest divines and staunch Congregationalists as they
were, kept abreast of the most advanced thought of their
times, and I can not imagine that they could live today
without becoming in our age as they were in their own,
advocates of enlightened and liberal doctrine.
Neither Increase nor Cotton Mather needs any intro
duction to this audience.
Their service of the Second
Church has been proudly recorded by Dr. Robbins and
others, and he has defended them against more than one
In his
of the charges popularly brought against them.
pages you find them as they were, sincere, earnest men;
men of great power in the pulpit; men of untiring energy
in their devotion to the Church, and men whose ideals
were those which we look for in spiritual and intellectual

leaders.
It
would be temerity in me to attempt to cover once

It would be
more the ground Dr. Robbins has covered.
futile to attempt to sketch with any degree of complete
ness in the time allowed me, the career of either of the
This paper was read to the Unitarian Historical Society on May 22, 1924.
Much of the
material has since appeared in Selections from Cotton Mather, edited by Dr. Murdock, published
by Harcourt, Brace Ac Co., and in Dr. Murdock's Increase Mather, published by The Harvard
University Press.
Ed.
But there are, fortunately, some bits of

great Mathers.
evidence bearing on their lives and characters, which have
become known since Dr. Robbins wrote, and there are
some elements in both men which have not been sufficiently
emphasized by their biographers. The random jottings
which make the material for what I have to say today
have been collected in the hope that they may shed light
on important and forgotten aspects of the great ministers
of the old Second Church, or may add something to the
picture of them presented by the historians.
Cotton Mather was the son of Increase, but in viola
tion of chronology speak of him first. He is better known
today than any other American Puritan, partly because
of the somewhat unlovely characteristics bestowed upon
him by certain writers, partly because his books were
brilliant enough and individual enough to win attention
from posterity, and partly because he has been fortunate
in serving as a subject for an expert and sympathetic biog
rapher. Barrett Wendell's biography of Cotton Mather
gives not only the chronicle of his life but also a picture
of the man, and one need not go beyond its pages to an
swer the question as to why the younger Mather made
himself so much of a human force in his day.
Unfortunately Mr. Wendell's biography is less read than
the statements of certain other historians, and too many
readers have been taught to see in Cotton Mather only an
epitome of Puritan shortcomings. Impartial investigation
has,
think, demonstrated long ago that most of the fail
ings for which he is held up to blame or ridicule are falsely
attributed to him. Before this audience it is not neces
sary to remark that he was not a malicious fomenter of
superstitious beliefs as to witchcraft nor a cruel persecutor
of supposed witches.
It is not necessary to defend him
here against the charge of being a sixteenth century mind
left behind by the march of progress.
We must admit

28
24
certain faults in him, vanity, a tendency toward pedantry,

overhastiness of speech toward his foes, and a too great
inclination to think of himself as an intellectual dictator
prefer to speak of his virtues, and
for his time. But
since to enumerate them would, I feel sure, be a longer
have to
task than to list his deficiencies, I limit what
say to a few comments on but one of his four hundred
books, which reveals more perfectly than any other with
am familiar some elements in his position as a
which
man of letters and a side of his philosophy too little re
This book is his The Christian Phil
membered to-day.
osopher, published in London in 1721.

Some critics have long maintained that Cotton Mather

had distinct ability as a writer. Barrett Wendell's fine
taste saw the excellence of the style of the Magnolia,

and he declared that the merit of the book disposed him
"to rate it among the great works of English literature
He adds, "Whatever else
in the seventeenth century".
Cotton Mather may have been, the Magnalia alone,
think, proves him to have been a notable man of letters".
Such praise, from a critic so well versed in the best of the
world's literature, outweighs many hastily uttered verdicts
from men less qualified to judge. Of course, neither Mr.
Wendell nor anyone else could overlook Mather's literary
vices, his too great use of fantastic conceits, what Daniel
Neal called in 1718 the "puns and jingles that attend
all his writings,"1
his excesses in the use of quotations
and allusions, and the marks of haste reasonably to be
expected and often to be found in the work of this amaz
ingly prolific penman.
But admitting all this, Cotton
Mather, to whom "the Blades' that set up" for Criticks"
appeared "for the most part as Contemptible, as they
are a Supercilious Generation"2
could and did write more
' Quoted in Sibley's Harvard Graduates, iii, 32.

C. Mather, Manuduclio ad Ministerium, (1728),
45.
than one page appealing to anyone with an ear for prose

style. They may not be pages of the sort that we should
wish to write, but they have always the stamp of indi
viduality and often reveal in some degree the high imagi
nation of the artist. Several such pages are to be found
in the Christian Philosopher, and it is to them that
wish now to turn.
The point of view from which Mather wrote this volume,
is interesting, and,
venture to believe, significant. Again
and again in this little book, half scientific treatise, half
religious plea, he dilates on the beauty of nature. This
is a theme familiar in our literature. Crevecoeur, Bryant,
Thoreau, and many followers, have sought
Emerson,
fitting words in which to express the glory and meaning
of the natural world. But such expressions are not com
mon until the late eighteenth century, and, except in a
page or two in Anne Bradstreet, it is not easy to find an
American author earlier than Mather giving much atten
tion to the beauty of his environment. But the Christian
Philosopher shows again and again not only that Mather
saw the wonders of nature with the observant eye of the
scientist, but also that his feeling for them was akin to
the poet's. Of the moon he writes, "My God, I bless thee
for that Luminary, by which we have the uncomfortable
That Luminary,
Darkness of our Night so much abated!
the Influences whereof have such a part in the Flux and
Reflux of our Seas; without which we should be very
miserable!
That Luminary, whose Influences are so sen
sibly felt in the Growth of our Vegetables, and our Ani
mals."1 Prosaic enough, perhaps, and certainly far re
moved from Henry Thoreau's passionate outburst of vague
But the next line,
adoration of the same "Luminary".
referring to what has gone before, reads, "These are some
of the Songs, which GOD, the Maker of us both, has

25
1 P. 51.
26
in
Night."
Mather's praise of God, as

revealed in the moon is, then, "a song" given him "in
the night," a product of inspiration, of the mystic feeling
that makes poets. Remember Thoreau once more and
his laconic "Dreamed of purity last night."
Or, again, we find Mather writing of fire, an element
which always fascinated him and about which he wrote
a work of theological instruction "This one Object,
the Fire on the Hearth, will afford a whole Book-full
of profitable Contemplations" 1. He walks in his garden
and sets down in his diary, "The Time of the year arrives
for the glories of Nature to appear in my Garden. I will
take my Walks there, on purpose to read the Glories of
In the Christian Philosopher
my SAVIOUR in them."2
he adds, "How agreeable the Shade of Plants, let every
Man say that sits under his own Vine, and under his
own Fig-treel" or, "How charming the Proportion
and
Pulchritude of the Leaves, the Flowers, the Fruits, he
who confesses not, must be, as Dr. More says, one sunk
into a forlorn pitch of Degeneracy, and stupid as a Beast."3
like best to think of Cotton Mather seated under his
own vine, and under his own fig-tree, his cares and quarrels
for the moment forgotten, delighting in what he called,
in what seems to me a splendid phrase, "the Gaiety and
Fragrancy" of flowers.4 He said that many a man feared
to learn Hebrew, lest he should be suspected of being "an
Odd starv'd, Lank sort of a thing, who had lived only
on Hebrew Roots all his Days."5 Such suspicions as
to scholars persist today.
To some of my generation
himself,
of
Mather
man
learning that he was, seems de
serving of the charge of being just such a person as Hebrew
scholars were said to be in his own day. But it seems
given me


the
1 P. 47.
' 7 Mats. Historical Society Collections, vii, 619-620.
P. 126.
* Christian Philosopher, 127.
Manudtictio, 30.

to me that the Christian Philosopher with its delight

in the stars, the moon, the elements^ the wonder and glory
of nature, is sufficient antidote, and that the man who
took his walks in his garden delighting in the beauty he
found there can by no means have been merely "an odd,
starved, lank sort of a thing." No, given a different age
in which to live, transferred to some clime where one might
more safely exult over things of this world, the Cotton
Mather revealed in the Christian Philosopher might
have turned his emotion into prose and verse gladly to
be read as expressing for all men the joy a philosopher,
a mystic, and a poet has in communion with the growth
and life and beauty of this sphere.
Perhaps the few sentences I have quoted do not justify
But there is one passage which
such a belief.
hope will
make my feeling clear.
"The Anatomy of Plants, as it has been exhibited by
the incomparable Curiosity of Dr. Grew, what a vast
Field of Wonders, does it lead us into!
The most inimitable Structure of the Parts!
The particular Canals, and most adapted ones, for the
conveyance of the lymphatick and essential Juices!
The Air-Vessels in all their curious Coylings!
The Coverings which befriend them, a Work unspeak
ably more curious in reality than in appearance!
The strange Texture of the Leaves, the angular or cir
cular, but always most orderly Position of their Fibres;
the various Foldings with a Duplicature, a Multiplicature,
the Fore-rowl, the Back-rowl, the Tre-rowl; the noble
Guard of the Films interposed!
The Flowers, their Gaiety and Fragrancy;
the Perianthium or Empalement of them; their curious Foldings

in the Calyx before their Expansion, with a close Couch
or a concave Couch, a single Plait or a double Plait,
or a Plait and Couch together, or a Rowl, or a Spire,
Notes on Increase arid Cotton Mather
28
or Plait and Spire together; and their luxuriant Colours

after their Foliation, and the expanding of their Petalal"1
feel that it is something more than a
As
read this,
list of scientific data. Am I wrong in believing that it
must have been written with an interest in form, an ear
for cadence and the sound of the individual word, and
that the printing of most of the sentences and phrases
as separate paragraphs bespeaks a writer concerned with
the artistic effect of his lines?
Think of Walt Whitman and remember how many of
his poems made use of the method which Mather chose.
To observe, to enumerate one's observations in long lines,
without meter but with a certain cadence and a very pre
cise care for the building up of a structural effect in a long
Do I
passage, these things were essential in Whitman.
err in seeing them displayed also in what I have quoted
from the Christian Philosopher? Whitman once wrote:
"0 the cotton plant! The growing fields of rice, sugar,
The cactus, guarded with thorns the laurel-tree
hemp!
with large white flowers,
The range afar the richness and barrenness, the old
woods charged with mistletoe and trailing moss,
The piney odor and the gloom, the awful natural still
ness, (here in these dense swamps the freebooter carries
his gun, and the fugitive has his conceal'd hut:)

the strange fascination of these half-known, half im

passable swamps, infested by reptiles, resounding with the
bellow of the alligator, the sad noises of the night-owl
2
and the wild-cat,
and the whirr of the rattlesnake."
In this
think, use of the same means as in

my quotation from Mather.
we have,
Now Whitman was, in intention at least, a poet, and one

cannot deny,
I think,
1 P. 127.
a From 0 Magnet-South.
that he was an artist in that he clothed

29
his ideas in a definite form, phrased with constant sensi

tiveness to rhythm and cadence, and constructed his work
on definite principles chosen because they were those by
which his emotion could be most perfectly expressed. He
called the result poetry; Mather was content that his
"songs given in the night" should pass as prose, but both
men desired to find artistic means of revealing their emo
tions, and they hit upon similar methods.
Cotton Mather
conceived of the "Anatomy of Plants" as a living testi
mony to the greatness of God, and his adoration for God
was too great for ordinary prose.
To utter it he sought,
consciously or unconsciously, a special form, and he strove
to make words carefully chosen for their sound, sentences
predominately rhythmical, and a carefully patterned struc
ture, aid in conveying his emotion. He had not the skill
displayed in the best of Whitman, but he exhibited a no
less heartfelt artistic purpose, and, under the stress of deep
spiritual excitement, achieved a style by no means unlike
that adopted by a nineteenth century American hailed
as an original literary genius.
have no wish to draw a
detailed parallel between Whitman and Mather, or to sug
hope that
gest that one was influenced by the other, but
I have made apparent why it seems* to me that Cotton
Mather may be justly called not merely a voluminous
compiler and hasty writer of tracts for the times, but also,
in intention and aspiration, at least, a literary artist. His
form may have been wisely or unwisely chosen, the result
may be good or bad, but the Christian Philosopher
shows him to have been a man quite as much interested
in skilful technique, in the power of language and style,
as in scholarship or theology. His day was not one in
which most Bostonians discussed seriously or generally
the technical side of prose or poetry, and that he showed
himself to be deeply concerned with such matters proves,
just as many pages of the Magnolia prove, that he was
in truth "a notable man of letters."

so
Such points, perhaps, are interesting only to students

of literature, but none of us today can be blind to the
importance of a second element in Mather, revealed also
This is his attitude toward
in his Christian Philosopher.
the relation between science and religion.
In 1894 Andrew Dickson White wrote: "My belief is
that in the field left to them their proper field the clergy
will more and more, as they cease to struggle against scien
tific methods and conclusions, do work even nobler and
more beautiful than anything they have heretofore done.
My conviction is that Science, though it has evi
dently conquered Dogmatic Theology based on biblical
texts and ancient modes of thought, will go hand in hand
with Religion; and that Religion, as seen in the recog
nition of 'a Power in the universe, not ourselves, which
makes for righteousness,' and in the love of God and of our
"
neighbor, will steadily grow stronger and stronger
These words were written as a preface to a great history
of the age-old "warfare between science and religion."
In writing them, Mr. White, it will be noticed, felt it neces
sary to date the ending of the warfare in the future, and
some elements in the religious controversies of today sug
In the light of all
gest that the peace is still to make.
this, the fact that Cotton Mather, more than two centuries
hundred and seventy three years before Mr.
White wrote his preface, tried to show that religion and
science should be friends, not foes, is a striking testimony
to his liberality and intellectual enlightenment. As he
put it, in beginning his Christian Philosopher, "The
ESSAYS now before us will demonstrate, that Philosophy
is no Enemy, but a mighty and wondrous Incentive to
Religion." i This savors of the twentieth century quite
as much as of the seventeenth.
It is akin in spirit to a
saying of a later minister of the Second Church, Ralph
ago,
one
p. 1.

SI
Waldo Emerson, "The Religion that is afraid of science

dishonours God and commits suicide." And it is the best
of evidence that Cotton Mather was a man of breadth,
vision, and independence.
That he was something more than a mere dabbler in
science, everyone knows.
We remember that he was elected
to the Royal Society. We respect his heroism in the fight
to introduce inoculation for smallpox, a fight in which
he braved the opposition of an excited populace, combatted
the arguments of physicians, and did not flinch even when
his opponents called him a foe to religion and to God. But
even though we have these things in mind, the Christian
Philosopher, I think, still has the power to interest us,
revealing as it does the breadth of Mather's learning, the
scientific quality of his method, and his acquaintance with
some of the best and newest books on natural philosophy.
The Christian Philosopher, then is a book with many
It exhibits Cotton Mather's
claims to our attention.
scientific zeal and learning, it displays his too often for
gotten enthusiasm for writing as a fine art, it shows him
to have been a man who rejoiced in the beauty of the world
with the emotions of a poet, and it makes abundantly
clear that he was no mere antiquarian but one whose fore
sight and liberality were equal to what was then the rad
ical step of attempting to bridge the chasm between the
theologian and the scientist. Yet, curiously enough, the
book has been largely forgotten too largely forgotten,
surely, in a day when experimentation in the border land
between poetry and prose is much in vogue, when we wel
come each new effort to find an artistic form capable of
expressing man's feeling toward nature, when we exalt the
study of science, and when the very question Mather set
himself to answer still remains a much debated problem.
An American university has recently offered a prize of
six thousand dollars "for the best book on the connec
32
tion, relation and mutual bearing of any practical science

If Cotton
with and upon the Christian religion."
Mather were alive today, who more likely than he to im
press the judges by his words on such a subject? How
much would his Christian Philosopher have to fear in
competition with more modern discussions of the same

theme?
Cotton Mather himself said: "After all, Every Man

will have his own Style, which will distinguish him as
Certainly this was true of
much as his Gate [gait]."1
him, and it is because the Christian Philosopher reveals
so well certain individual elements in Mather's style and
in his temperament, that I have ventured to speak thus at
length about it. I know of no better introduction to Mather
the scientist, Mather the artist, Mather the lover of beauty
and the liberal-minded philosopher. Properly read, I think,
it brings one into contact not with a hidebound theologian
but an intellectual pioneer; a man who was no mere Hebrew
scholar but a scientist, and one who should live not simply
as the dour Puritan of tradition but as an open-eyed man
of the world, a lover of trees, flowers, books, gardens, and
of life itself. Surely Mather is one who, to quote Profes
sor Riley, "would have agreed with Emerson when he
" 2
said, 'Come into the azure and love the day.'
The fact that Cotton Mather was an extraordinary
man has led some unwary students into the belief that
Increase Mather was chiefly distinguished by having been
his father. Others have fallen into the even more dangerous
error of believing that the two Mathers were alike in every
thing, and so to be praised or condemned in one breath.
Nothing is farther from the truth. They did share many
interests; they labored together at the Second Church;
each was marked in his generation by an advanced attitude
toward science, but in temperament and character even
1 Manuductio, 46.
I. W. Riley, American Philosophy (1908),
199.
33
style they were quite unlike. Nor can we

escape the conclusion, however much we admire Cotton
Mather, that his father was the greater man, measured
by his service to his church and country. If he lacked
his son's brilliance and eccentricity, he possessed more
universally useful qualities and used them so well as to
influence profoundly the spiritual, political, and intel
It was he, not his
lectual development of New England.
son, who became, in Barrett Wendell's words, "the greatest
of the native Puritans."
His career is familiar to you, and only its briefest out
line need be given here. He was born in Dorchester in
1639, graduated from Harvard in 1656, took his master's
degree at Trinity College, Dublin, in 1659, preached in
Devonshire, in Guernsey, and at Gloucester, England, re
turned to Boston after the Restoration, and became Teacher
There he served
of the Second Church on May 27, 1664.
until his death, a period of fifty-nine years. He was for
a time one of the Licensers of the Press, and for nearly
twenty years President of Harvard College, the first nativeborn American to hold that office. From 1688 to 1692
he was in England, representing the colony's interests
at the courts of James
and William III, winning from
them a new charter by which Massachusetts was governed
for nearly a century. By 1692 he was the unquestioned
leader of the American Congregational Church; his diplo
matic achievements were unrivalled among his country
men; he had already shown that Harvard was to develop
under his care, and he had written and published some

in literary
II
fifty books.
Inevitably, of course,
had political enemies, men

who differed from him as to the wisdom of the adminis
trative system provided for by the new charter he had
Their efforts, and the animosity
brought from London.
of certain Bostonians who opposed his views on minor
he

34
points of church discipline, compassed his forced resigna

It is the
tion from the presidency of Harvard in 1701.
fashion to call those Congregationalists who worked against
him liberals, but analysis of their tenets shows that they
were no more liberal than he, and that their ideal was
He yielded the President's chair
change, not progress.
Willard,
a
man
to
no less orthodox, sharing Mather's
views on witchcraft, and quite as determined to keep
Harvard sectarian in accordance with the wishes of most
of its alumni, its founders, and its benefactors.
Nor
should we forget that, had Mather been willing to sacrifice
his pride, he need not have given up his office in Cambridge.
He believed his work in his church and as a writer far
transcended in importance anything he could accomplish
at Harvard, and no attack upon him ever undermined
seriously his influence in the pulpit or among readers of
Till his death he kept his place as the
current books.
most widely known and respected of New England divines.
He died in Boston in 1723, and it is pleasant to recall that
in his last years, however worried he was by the relaxing
of old Puritan standards, he never gave up his work, and,
even in his last months, never blinded himself to the prog
ress of the world.
There are few more impressive epi
sodes in his life than his eager coming to the aid of his
son in advocating the unpopular cause of inoculation.
More than eighty years old, and very feeble, he could not
desert what he believed to be the right, and his interest
in scientific advance was no less marked in 1721 than it
had been in 1684 when he discussed the most recent as
tronomical discoveries.
Obviously a career so rich cannot be adequately dis
cussed in such a talk as this.
But I shall venture to offer
you a few notes upon it, giving as my defense the fact
that any man whose life has become a chapter in history
is in grave danger of appearing to modern readers as a
abstract personification of this or that virtue, of

am sure
ability, of achievement, or of failure. Now
that, whatever Increase Mather may have been, he was
flesh and blood, and that it was his humanity, the strength
of his personality, his direct day to day influence upon
men of all classes, which made the foundation of his great
ness. And, I think, there is no better way to discover
at a distance of two centuries such essential elements in
a man's character than to look at the books he read and
the friends he made.1
It is the less necessary to say much about Mather's
books, because, by the good offices of Mr. Julius H. Tuttle,
it has been made possible for students to gain an adequate
knowledge of his library. 2 There are, however, one or
Theology, of course,
two points worth noting particularly.
filled most of Mather's shelves, as was inevitable for a man
so wedded to his profession, but there was a volume of
Andrew Marvell, one of Donne, George Herbert's poems,
and the immortal Worthies of Thomas Fuller. Sir Walter
Raleigh's Prerogative of Parliaments, a book regarded
as advanced in its theories when it was published, the
works of certain Jesuits, and Jeremy Taylor's Liberty of
Prophesying, which has been called the statement of the
principles of toleration most fruitful in its effect upon the
English mind, all testify that Mather's reading was not
limited by any restrictions as to orthodoxy or conserva
tism. As for the classics, he owned Tacitus, Juvenal,
Persius, Cicero, Demosthenes,
Horace, Seneca, Lucian,
Moreover,
Sophocles, Lucan, and even Ovid's Art of Love.
on his first trip to England he bought Plautus, and when
he made his second voyage he listed among the books
to be taken with him a copy of Terence. Such choices
can be explained only by believing Mather to have been
mere

35
1 On all that follows about Increase Mather, fuller details and the authorities for my state
ments are given in my Increase Mather, Cambridge, 1925.
*
H. Tuttle, "The Libraries of the Mathers," in American Antiquarian Society Proceedings,
xx, 269-356.
J.
36
a man whose
literary tastes were broad and one whose

How
zeal for learning never stifled his sense of humor.
else can we explain his perusal of a volume called The

Cabinet of
Mirth?
Theology and general literature were not all that he

Cotton Mather came by his scientific in
chose to read.
terests by direct inheritance, it would seem, for his father
was unusual among American Puritans in his active de
votion to scientific pursuits. He was a tireless observer
of the facts of nature, and his books attest to his wide
In London in
reading in the works of current scientists.
1688 the two books he noted in his diary as ones to be
sought for were scientific. In an order sent to a book
seller several years later all the items save one were scien
tific. We have a record that he ordered similar books
for the college. Again and again one finds this or that
treatise of seventeenth century science wedged in among
the folios of sound divinity in his library, and the writings
of Robert Boyle alone filled a long shelf in his study.
Certainly, judged merely by the books he owned, even
without reference to the many others which he read, Mather
seems to have been as well read as most of us are ever
likely to be. He was, moreover, not only well read but
widely read. He was able to savor the jesting of The Cab
inet of Mirth as well as the close reasoning of Grotius;
the sober divinity of Richard Baxter no less than the melody
of Herbert; the undying literary appeal of Sophocles or
Lucian together with Jeremy Taylor's brilliant prose, and
the comedies of Plautus as well as the grim tales in Foxe's
Martyrs.
If reading maketh a full man, reading as catholic in
scope and as wisely chosen as Mather's should make a
man broad in point of view and sympathetic toward the
minds and motives of others.
Certainly, whether because
not,
he seems to have had a veritable
of his reading or

87
talent for friendship and a delight in human society, which

goes far toward explaining why he was able to accomplish
so much among men of various standards and creeds.
Look at his unpublished diaries and you will find that
hardly a day passed without its round of visits, its tale
of visitors, or a dinner with this or that Bostonian.
You
will find Mather complaining that such pursuits take him
from his work, but the secret of his feeling is revealed not
in what he writes but in the persistence with which he con
tinues to visit and be visited, to seek out his friends, to
dine with them, and, no doubt, to discuss with them sub
There is real revelation in the
jects both grave and gay.
diary entry which relates how Mather, dining with the
magistrates, was attacked by Governor Leverett for say
ing that there was more drunkenness in New England
than in Old England.
Mr. Stoughton suggested pleasantly
enough that Mather should recant, evoking from the great
divine only a refusal and a reflection that, if his labors
were not acceptable to men they were to God. And then,
recording the incident in his diary, he adds, "As for ye
Governor, He hath bin ye principal Author of ye multi
tude of ordinaries which be in Boston, giving licenses wn
ye townsmen wld not doe it. No wonder yt N. E. is vis
ited wn ye Head is so spirited."
There is something very
like a pun here, and
feel sure that among his intimates
Mather did not reserve all his puns to be written down
later in his diary. Indeed, if I had to find a text summing
should
up my impression of his love for human society,
choose his son's solemn record of how "a Gentleman that
made himself too much an Object of Ridicule" called
Mather to visit Sir Thomas Temple, whereupon the former
writes: "by being in Company, though good Company,
lost the Good Serious Frame of my Spirit." We are in
no danger of forgetting the Good Serious Frame of the
Puritans' Spirit, but we are less apt to remember that,
38
even in the Boston of two hundred and fifty years ago,

there was "Company," "good Company" and, in the great
est of our ancestors,
men to appreciate
what Dr. John

son called "good talk."

There are few of the early seventeenth
century families
in
Mather's record of his visitors
of Boston unrepresented
friends,
but
neither
Boston
nor New England limited
and
Abroad there were many good Puritans who
his circle.
corresponded with him, took pains that he should have
copies of their books, and welcomed him when he ventured
To name but a few, there were Samuel Clark,
overseas.
Thomas Beverly;
round-faced
biblical commentator;
Thomas Jollie; James Forbes, the much-persecuted; and
John Flavel. The three greatest nonconformists of his day
in England are said to have been John Owen, John Howe,
John Owen wrote a preface for
and Richard Baxter.
one of Mather's books, taking the occasion to praise its
author. John Howe met Mather in London in 1659, and
was so much impressed by him that he made him his own
deputy at his parish in Devonshire, thus beginning a friend
As for Baxter, his relations
ship broken only by death.
In London Increase vis
to Mather were of the closest.
and
in an unpublished letter
ited Baxter again and again,
now in a London collection we have evidence of Baxter's
admiration for his friend. 1 He dedicated his Glorious
Kingdom of Christ to Mather, asking him to correct
Similarly
such errors as there might be in the book.
John Leusden, a noted Hebrew scholar in Holland, dedi
cated a Psalter to Mather, and there is much other evidence
to show that the minister of the Second Church was in
truth, as he was said to have been, "known in both Englands," and, indeed, in continental Europe.
Such friends, it may be said, might have been won by
Mather's scholarship, by his professional eminence, what1 Part of this letter is printed in
K. B. Murdock,
Increase
Mather, p. 266.
39

ever his personality, but this explanation does not account
for his putting himself on good terms with many other

Englishmen as quickly as he did. His long friendship with
Sir Henry Ashurst, to be sure, may have been due in large
measure to the fact that both men were interested in non
conformity, in Indian missions, and in the dissemination
of the Gospel, but Lord Wharton was less likely to be im
pressed by mere zeal, and he was, we know, a friend and
ally of Mather. Thomas Hollis, too, great benefactor
to Harvard, remembered bis meeting with Increase Mather,
even though the latter seems temporarily to have forgotten
it. Anthony Wood, the cantankerous Oxford historian,
who, it has been said, never spoke well of any man and
certainly despised nonconformity, corresponded on the
most friendly terms with Mather, and afterwards took
pains to record in his diary that Mather alone among
dissenters was always courteous to him. Robert Boyle,
one of the greatest English scientists of all time, made
Mather a frequent and welcome guest. Such men and
others were his companions during his London sojourns,
and his record of his visits, his guests, and his dinings-out,
was no less voluminous when he lived in Copt-Hall Court,
Throckmorton Street, in the heart of London, than when
he pursued his daily round within sight of the Second
Church of Boston.
At court and in political circles, too, his capacity for
making his way among men, stood him in good stead.
The story of his diplomatic quest for a charter for New
England, as told in the State Papers, his diaries, and his
autobiography, displays a man who succeeded largely by
dint of the personal influence he secured among contem
He dined with Sir Nicholas Butler, a
porary leaders.
Catholic, to be sure, but a man of some influence at Court,
and, therefore, a useful friend. Then there was Mr. Grif
fith, a wellknown London divine; the witty Vincent Alsop,
40
Puritan influential at Whitehall; Lord Culpepper, once

Governor of Virginia; and even the Earl of Sunderland,
President of the Privy Council, all of whom gave Mather
a hearing and aided him in greater or less degree.
The
famous William Penn was a constant ally, even though
Even
his Quaker principles disturbed Mather somewhat.
Neville Payne, crafty schemer, profane playwright, and
Catholic, was sought out by our shrewd New Englander.
The Earl of Melfort, famed for his beauty and his skill
Bentinck, adviser to
as a dancer; Sir John Thomson;
William III; Carstares, the King's Chaplain; John Hamp
den; Sir John Maynard, the Earl of Bedford, Sir Edward
Harley, Alderman Love, William Sacheverell, Sir John
a
Bishop Tillotson, Bishop Burnet all these found

time to hear Mather, and most of them joined in his cause.
Such a record can be explained only by the recognition
that the foremost divine in all New England won respect
as easily in London as in his native Boston, where a con
gregation of a thousand or more looked up to him as both
His power must have been essentially
guide and friend.
the power of a mature and broadly developed personality.
It is well known, of course, that Mather impressed not
only his fellow divines, Anglican bishops, members of Par
liament, followers of the court, and lords and members
of the Royal Household, but the King and Queen them
selves.
Cotton Mather has proudly recorded how his
father "stood before kings", and won fair words and more
from James II, William III, and Queen Mary. There
is less complete record of certain other interviews which,
it seems to me, are even more significant to contemplate.
These interviews are those which Mather had with certain
ladies of the court.
One Blathwayt was Clerk of the Privy Council, and by
no means eager to see Mather succeed in his labors for
the colonies, but at the very time when he was urging

Somers,

41
the defenders of Andros to more activity, his wife, Mrs.

Mary Blathwayt, was helping William Penn and Increase
Mather to secure influence with English politicians. One
wishes that she had left a record as to how Mather gained
her active interest.
Then there were the Countess of
Anglesey and Lady Clinton, both members of Puritan con
gregations and so the more likely to find Mather persuasive,
and Madam Lockhart, one of Queen Mary's ladies, all of
whom used their influence in behalf of the emissary from
Boston.
Most entertaining of all, I think, is the record
of how Lady Jean Wemyss, Countess of Sutherland, called
by Mather "a very pious and admirably prudent lady,"
energetic person,
joined forces with him. She was an
used to pleading her own cause in official circles.
Her
husband sat in the Privy Council, her son fought bravely
for the King, and she herself was a trusted confidante
of the Queen.
To Mather she lent her influence, so that
when he came into Queen Mary's presence Her Majesty
remarked, "I have had a great character of you, from
my Lady Sutherland."
One's fancy delights in the pic
ture which reveals Mather and Lady Jean Wemyss work
ing in the same cause and exchanging good opinions of
one another. There were no ladies quite like the Countess
in Boston, and her garb and manner, and the Queen's
ring sparkling on her hand, would have provoked interest,
to say the least, had she appeared beside Maria Mather
and her daughters in the Second Church at Boston. But,
in England, Mather adapted himself to meet her and
other women versed in the ways of the world, and, more
He, soberly clad, and
especially, of the English Court.
somewhat impressed by the glow of many candles and
the brilliant costumes dear to Pepys's heart, tuned his
manner and speech to catch the ears even of the patched,
powdered, and worldly-minded.
Surely he did not talk
only of politics or theology. Surely some latent strain

42
of courtliness, some aptitude for deft compliment, came

to his aid. Without them he could hardly have won so
easily the good offices of these "ladies of honor."
Mather's books and his friends, then, prove conclu
sively that he was no mere scholar, no pedantic theologian,
but a man whose success was largely due to a winning
and dominant personality.
He must have been tolerant
toward ideas and manners quite foreign to his own. And,
if we admit this, we see one more reason for believing
that those historians who paint both Increase and Cotton
Mather as types of intolerance, narrowness, and bigotry,
are sadly astray.
Certainly, quite aside from the points we have already
discussed, there is abundant evidence that Increase Mather
was, by the standard of his day, tolerant in matters of
religion. We know that he joined in the service held at
the ordination of a Baptist minister in Boston.
We know
that in his writings he praised certain bishops of the Eng
And, although it has not hitherto been
lish Church.
pointed out, so far as I know, it is a fact that during his
agency in England, he never actively advocated the main
tenance of the old religious test for the franchise in Mas
sachusetts.
Under the first charter, one remembers, New
Englanders decreed that only church members might vote.
The provincial charter, . which Mather brought home, pro
vided that the test for full citizenship should be a property
He not only accepted this change in the
qualification.
old order, but, on one occasion at least, petitioned that
By so doing
the new charter should make such a change.
he outraged some ardent Congregationalists, but he kept
faith with his own liberal principles.
It . would take too long to go in detail into the other
evidence as to the strength of these principles of his. It
may be mentioned in passing, however, that Mather, while
in London, admitted freely that New England had been
too intolerant, an admission quite out of character for a

bigot or mere fanatic. We know that even in his youth
he "Disliked the Bitter Spirit he saw in some that car
ried all before them; and little Approved some Unadvised
and Sanguinary Things that were done by them who
did all; particularly, the Rash Things done unto the
Quakers." When the Baptists were troublesome to the
orthodox of Boston, Mather declared, "it were better to
err by too much indulgence towards those that have
the
root of the matter
in them, than by too much
Nay, as to those that are indeed Heretical
Severity.
can for my own part say with Luther ....
have no af
fection to sanguinary punishments in such Cases." In
1677 he said to the General Assembly "it is sufficiently
known that
have a greater latitude & Indulgence in
the Point of Toleration, than many better than myself
have." Is not this proof absolute that Mather was, and
that Bostonians knew him to be, more liberal minded than
many of his fellow divines in seventeenth century Boston?
There is, finally, one statement of Mather's precious
to all who believe in the modern ideal of academic freedom.
Speaking to the students of Harvard College, he denounced
Aristotle, declaring, "certainly an imp would be a fine
interpreter of Aristotle", but hastened to add, "You, who
are accustomed to philosophize in a liberal spirit, are
pledged to the formulas of no master; and you should
moreover remember that one truly golden sentiment of
Aristotle: 'Find a friend in Plato, a friend in Socrates'
say, a friend in Aristotle) 'but be sure, above all,
(and
" If Mather's Harvard was
to find a friend in truth.'
sectarian, it was none the less a place where intellectual

48
freedom
was a recognized
ideal.
hope that these scattered notes point to certain definite
conclusions as to the Mathers.

It seems to me that such
evidence as
have summarized proves that both of the
44
Puritan ministers of the Second Church were essen

tially liberals in mind. Both were eager students of science.
Both were scholars well trained in the humanities. Cotton
Mather was, in aspiration at least, a literary artist, and
great
he loved, and longed to express, the beauty of this world.

His father, too, wrote good prose, and what he lacked in
appreciation of external nature, he made up for by his

love for mankind and the skill with which he made all
sorts of men his friends.
It is a high satisfaction, I think,
to know and to remember that the two Mathers were
men whose power was rooted in true attainment, deep
They
and sincere zeal, real breadth, and sound humanity.
am
men, who, alive today, would,
were eager-minded
sure, be what we should call "modern," abreast of the
day, progressive, though holding still to the good in the
past, fearless in adventuring toward the right, and proud
in their loyalty to the best in their forefathers' tradition.
It is because they were such men that the Second Church
was crowded when they preached.
It is because they
were not historical abstractions, but true leaders of men,
whose qualities would have made them great in any era,
that their ministry in Boston forms one of the brightest
chapters in the church history of New England.

ANNUAL MEETING,
1925
The twenty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Unitarian His

torical Society was held in King's Chapel, Boston, on
Thursday morning, May 14th, at 11 o'clock. The Presi
dent, Rev. Henry Wilder Foote was in the chair.
The record of the last meeting was read and approved.
The report of the Librarian was read and accepted.
The report of the Treasurer, showing a balance of $86.17

on hand, was read, accepted and placed on file.
The President reported upon his visit to Englandfat

the time of the preceding Annual Meeting, in connection
with the centenary of the American Unitarian Associa
tion; and presented to the Society a set of publications
of the British Unitarian Historical Society. He called at
tention to the importance of having the proceedings of our
Historical Society published in a similar serial form. He
also spoke of the exhibit at 25 Beacon Street, in the Fifield
Room, arranged by a committee of the Society in connection
with the 100th anniversary of the American Unitarian
Association, and told of the great interest already shown
in the collections which had been generously lent for the
purpose.
A warm
of thanks, in behalf of the Society,

was made by the President to William Filene's Sons Com
pany, to Sampson and Coleman, and to Mr. Frederick
W. Stuart, Jr., for their aid in making the exhibition a
success, by furnishing and moving cases, and in furnishing
proper light for the display, which was seen by a large
number of people.
expression
The Secretary added a word concerning the objects of

the Historical Society, making an appeal for a wide sup
port and in increase in membership.
45
The Nominating
Committee having reported, the fol

lowing persons were elected officers of the Society for the
ensuing year:
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, President.
Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice President.
Hon. Winslow Warren, Honorary Vice President.
Julius H. Tuttle, Secretary and Librarian.

Frederick W. Stuart, Jr., Treasurer.
Directors
Henry Winchester Cunningham.Esq.,
Edwin J. Lewis, Esq.,
Rev. George Hale Reed.

The President then introduced Rev. Professor W. W.

Fenn, who read an admirable paper on "How the Schism
Came," telling the story of the religious development

during the half century preceding the founding of the
American Unitarian Association in 1825, and the steps
in the gradual unfolding of the liberal movement.
Julius H. Tuttle,
Secretary.
46
HISTORICAL EXHIBIT, CENTENARY OF THE

AMERICAN UNITARIAN ASSOCIATION
List of the principal exhibits shown on May
10th-17th,
in the Fifield Room, American Unitarian Associa

tion, 25 Beacon Street, Boston, on the occasion of the
one hundredth anniversary of the founding of the Asso
ciation on May 25th-26th, 1825.
1925,
American Unitarian Association

Record of its Organization, May 26, 1825.
Manuscript notes of Dr. Channing's Baltimore
Ser
mon, 1819.
Portrait of Rev. Aaron Bancroft,
first President
of
the Association.
Arnold, Rev. Harold G.

Theodore Parker, and other
memorabilia associated with him and with Rev.
Thomas Starr King.

Manuscript by
Rev.
Arlington Street Church, Boston

Model of the Federal Street Meeting House, 1809.
Rev. Jeremy Belknap's sermon book, showing the
entries covering the meeting of the Federal Con
vention in the Long Lane Meeting House in Jan
uary and February, 1788, and the ratification of
the Constitution of the United States on February
6, 1788.
Portrait of Dr. William Ellery Channing,

Portrait of Rev. Ezra Stiles Gannett, D.D.
Letters by Dr. Channing.
King's Chapel, Boston
Entry-book, 1686-1718.
Vestry Records, 1686-1729.
Letter from the Chapel to the Archbishop of Canter
bury, 1748, begging assistance in "rebuilding this
ancient ark".
Letter from the Bishop of London to the Chapel,
1749.
47
Letter from Bishop Provost to Rev. James Freeman,

1787.
Invoice of organ shipment from England, 1756.

Protest against adherents of the "Stone Chapel," De
cember 1787.
Record of marriages, taken from the Chapel by Rev.

Henry Caner, 1777.
(Freeman Edition), 1828, 1865.
Record of visits by Rev. James Freeman, 1810.
"Gemmalae Antiquae" of F. W. P. Greenwood,
Note written by Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes about
his intended marriage.
Photographs of ministers; James Freeman, 1787-1815;
F. W. P. Greenwood, 1724-1848; Ephraim Peabody,
1845-1856; Henry Wilder Foote, 1861-1889; Howard
N. Brown, 1895Generated on 2015-11-10 14:17 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403
Liturgy,
1768,
1785
Channing, Miss Eva.

Sermon case used by Rev. William Ellery
ning, D. D.
Ribbons used in tying his sermons.
The Channing Medal.
Several letters and portraits.
Ivory fan belonging to Mrs. Channing.
South
Chan-
Parish Church, Charlestown, N. H.
Record book.
Pictures of the first and second structures.
First Congregational Society, Cohasset, Mass.

Two old Record Books.
First Church, Dedham, Mass.
First book of records, kept by Rev. John Allen, 16381671.
Foote, Rev. Henry Wilder

Letter written by Dr. Channing.
48
Two letters written by Rev. Theodore Parker.

Autograph hymn by Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes,
"Twenty Sermons" by Rev. Andrew Eliot, D. D.,
minister of the Second
Church, Boston, published
1774.
All
Souls Unitarian Church, Greenfield, Mass.

Two pictures, exterior and interior of the first meet
ing house.
Copy of the first covenant.
Minature of Dr. Channing.
Hawes, Dr. Edward S. and the Misses Hawes.

Daguerreotype of Rev. Thomas Starr King, made by
Southworth
and Hawes, Boston.

First Church, Lancaster, Mass.

Portrait of Rev. Nathaniel Thayer, D. D., moderater
of the second meeting for the organization of the
American Unitarian Association, May 26, 1825.
First Religious Society, Newburyport, Mass.

Picture of the church edifice.
Channing Memorial Church, Newport, Rhode Island
Pulpit gown worn by Dr. Channing, given to the
Church by the courtesy of Sir Edwin Arnold about
1880.
Norcross, Grenville H., Esq.

Photograph of Rev. Cyrus A. Bartol.
Photograph of interior of the old West Church, Boston.
First Unitarian Church, Philadelphia, Pa.

Portrait of Rev. Joseph Priestley.
Portrait of Rev. William H. Furness.
Photostat copy of the sermon by Dr. Furness, Jan.
Procla
1868, immediately after the Emancipation
mation.
49
Photostat of the original articles of agreements of the

founding of "The Unitarian Society of Christians",
June
12,
1796.
Pew deed, Dec. 1828.

Photograph of the Priestley Monument.
Photograph of the Furness Monument.
Photograph of the May Monument.
Photostat copy of an original manuscript sermon by
Rev. Joseph Priestley, July 29, 1753; and letter
of Prof. Smith of the University of Pennsylvania,
as to the authenticity of Dr. Priestley's writing.
Two letters from Dr. Channing.
Dr. Horace Howard Furness, Jr., of Philadelphia.

Photograph of Rev. W. H. Furness,
Medal of Rev. W. H. Furness, and letter written by him.
Salem, Mass.
Portrait of Rev. William Bentley, 1783-1819.
Pictures of exterior and interior of Church, 1717-1845.

Second Church,
First Parish, Scituate, Mass.

Record books.
First Congregational
Parish, Sharon, Mass.
Covenent in handwriting of the first minister, Rev.

Philip Curtis.
Book of Records; 1743-1800.
First Congregational
Society,
Shirley, Mass.
Copy of Covenant.
Flagon.
Picture of meeting house.
Daguerreotype of Rev. Phinehas Whitney, first min
ister, (for fifty-five years).
Daguerreotype of Rev. Seth Chandler, minister for
fifty-one years.
50
Second
Parish, Worcester, Mass.
Record book, showing first meetings as a liberal church,

March, 1785, kept by Rev. Aaron Bancroft, first
President of the American Unitarian Association.
Printed volume of Aaron Bancroft's sermons, May,
1822.

Three pictures of the meeting
51
house.
LIST OF
ANNUAL ADDRESSES DELIVERED BEFORE THE
UNITARIAN HISTORICAL SOCHSTY
19011925
The earliest meetings of the Society were held in Channing

Hall in the building of the American Unitarian Associa
tion, 25 Beacon Street, Boston, and were informal in char

acter.
Since 1904 the Annual Meeting has been regularly
held in King's Chapel, Boston, except in 1923, when it
was held in King's Chapel Parish House.
The list of
speakers and their subjects is as follows:

May
23, 1901
Brief
addresses
Rev.
on
Samuel
Willard, D. D., Rev. Cyrus Bartol, D. D., and Rev. Alexander
Young, D. D., by Rev. C. E. Park, Rev.

George W. Solley, Rev. E. E. Hale,
Rev. S. B. Stewart, and Rev. Edward J. Young.
G. Masaryk, Prague, Bohemia.
"The Los von Rom Movement in Austria."
May
29, 1902
Prof. T.
May
21, 1903
Rev.
May
26, 1904
Edwin D. Mead, Esq., Boston.
Alfred Altherr, Basle, Switzerland.

"The Origin and Growth of the Liberal
Church in Switzerland."
"The Relation of the
Unitarian Fathers
in America."
to the Peace Movement
Rev. C. W. Wendte, Boston.

"Laelius and Faustus Socinus."
May
25, 1905
Rev. Edward Everett Hale, Boston.
May
24, 1906
Rev. John Carroll Perkins,

Me.
"The Part of the Pioneers."
May
23, 1907
"The Fort Palmer Episode and other Uni

tarian Memoirs."
Portland,
Rev. C. E. Park, Boston.

"Tablets and Memorials in our Churches."
52
May 28, 1908
Rev. James De Normandie, Roxbury.

"Some Eminent Unitarians."
Rev. Bradley Gilman, Canton.
May
27, 1909
May
26, 1910
Rev. H. G. Spaulding, Boston.

"Harvard College Forty Years Ago, and
the Old Harvard Divinity School."
May
25, 1911

"History of Ordination and Installation
"Holmes
as a Religious Teacher."
Practices."
May
23, 1912
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, Cambridge.

"The
Harvard School of Hymnqdy."
Transactions of the Unitarian

Historical Society of Great Britain,
See
May
22, 1913
Ill,
Part 2, Oct. 1924.

Rev. James De Normandie, Roxbury,
"History of the Harvard Church in CharVol.

lestown."
May 28,
1914
Rev. James DeNormandie, Roxbury,

"The Brattle Street Church, Boston"
See Proceedings of the Massachusetts
Historical Society, Vol. 47, pp 223 to 231,
entitled "The Manifesto Church."
May 27,
1915
Rev. Charles Graves, Albany, N. Y.

"An Early Unitarian Outpost."
See The Christian Register June 24,
1915, pp. 584-586 and July 1, pp. 608-611,
also Reprint by Geo. H. Ellis Co. 1915.
May 28, 1916
Hon. Winslow Warren, Dedham,

"The Value of Contemporary
See
Opinion."
Proceedings of the Massachusetts

Historical Society.
Vol. 49, pp 349-356.
May 25,
1917

"Possibilities of Beauty
gational Order."
See
in
the
Congre
American Journal of Theology,

Vol. XXIII, No. 1, Jan. 1919.
58
May 23,
1918
Rev. G. L. Chaney, Salem.

"The Hollis Street Church, Boston."
See The Christian Register, Nov. 28,
1918, p. 1134;
12, pp. 1191-2;
May
22, 1919
Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7; Dec.

Dec. 12, pp. 1215-6.
Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, Brooklyn, N. Y.

"The Pentecost of Unitarianism" (A study
of Channing's
Baltimore
Sermon of
1819.)
(Published for the Unitarian Historical Society by The Beacon

Boston, 1920.)
May 27,
1920
May 26,
1921
Professor W. W. Fenn, Cambridge.
"The Farewell Address of John Robinson."
Professor Efhraim Emerton, Cambridge.

"The

May
25, 1922
May 24,
1923
Unitarian Debt
Rev. W. G. Eliot, 2nd, Portland, Ore.

"The Early Days of Unitarianism, on the
Pacific Coast."
Professor Waldo
22, 1924
S.
Pratt,
Hartford, Conn.
"The Earliest
May
to Orthodoxy."
New England Music."
Dr. Kenneth B. Murdock,
Cambridge.
"Notes on Increase and Cotton Mather."
Proceedings of the Unitarian

Historical Society, Vol. I, 1925.
See
March
May
19, 1925
12,
1925
(Special Meeting) Rev. R. Nicol Cross,

Hampstead, London.
"Historical Sketch of British Unitarianism."

"How the Schism Came."
of the Unitarian
See Proceedings
Historical Society, Vol. I,
54
1925.


The Proceedings
OF THE

VOLUME
PART
The Unitarian
II
Churches of Boston in 1860

by
The Earliest
Edwin
J.
OF'
LEWiîfqr.;?
New England Music

by
Waldo
1928
The Beacon Press, Inc.

25 Beacon Street
Boston, Massachusetts
S.
Pratt


THE PROCEEDINGS
Of The


The Proceedings
OF THE
VOLUME
PART
25
Beacon Street
II
1928
THE BEACON PRESS, Inc.
Boston, Mass.

THE BEACON PRESS. INC.

Copyright,
All
1928
rights reserved

Secretary
Julius H. Tuttle, Esq.,
President
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote,
112 Clifton Street,
Belmont, Mass.
Boylston Street,
Boston, Mass.
1154
Treasurer
Harrie H. Dadmun, Esq.,
3 Wyman Terrace,
Arlington, Mass.
Honorary Vice-Presidents
Hon. Winslow Warren,
Pres. Earl M. Wilbur, D.D.
Dedham, Mass.
Berkeley, Calif.
Librarian
Vice-President
Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D.,
Miss Cynthia Griffin,
Boston, Mass.
One Year
Boston, Mass.
Directors
Rev. Louis C. Cornish, D.D.,

Boston, Mass.
Prof. Francis A. Christie, D.D.,
Lowell, Mass.
Two Years
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.,
Dorchester, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Three Years
Rev. Charles Graves,

Hartford, Conn.
Mrs. Mary Fifield King,
Milton, Mass.

CONTENTS
List of Officers,
1927-28
The Unitarian Churches of Boston in 1860

Edwin
J.
Lewis,
Jr.
The Earliest New England Music
28
Waldo S. Pratt
49
51

THE UNITARIAN CHURCHES OF BOSTON
IN
Edwin

In considering the
J.
1860*
Lewis,
Jr.
churches of this, our city, at the out
break of the Civil War, we have to remember that the Boston

of 1860 was, in many respects, very different from what it is
today. Within its area were included East Boston and South
Boston, but Charlestown, Roxbury, Dorchester, Jamaica
Plain, West Roxbury and Hyde Park, now embraced within
the city limits, were then independent communities. Further
more, that great district which we know as the Back Bay, an
area of more than four million square feet, was, for the most
part, mud flats and water. It is interesting in this connection
to note that one of the first buildings to be erected on the new
land was Arlington Street Church, begun in 1861. The popu
lation of the city in 1860 was a little less than 200,000. There
were 103 churches in the town of which thirty-five were Bap
tist, fourteen were Orthodox Congregational, twelve were
Episcopalian, ten were Methodist, two were Presbyterian,
eleven were Roman Catholic, six were Universalist and
twenty-one were Unitarian. It is of these twenty-one Uni
tarian Churches that I am to speak. Their congregations
formed by far the largest group in. point of numbers and
their pulpits were filled by a remarkable body of preachers,
distinguished alike for intellectual achievement and un
selfish service to the community. We will consider the
churches in the order of their foundation.
First Church
On the 27th day of August, 1630, John Winthrop, first
Governor of Massachusetts, Thomas Dudley, who was for a
Address delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Unitarian Historical Society, in Hale Chapel,
First Church, Boston, May 27, 1926.

The Unitarian Churches of Boston in
1860
long time Deputy-Governor, and afterward Governor of the

Colony, Isaac Johnson, "a gentleman of family and fortune",
and John Wilson, a minister of religion, with about ninetytwo others, men and women, entered into a covenant as a
Church of Christ, and first met for religious services under a
large tree which stood in what is now Charlestown, having
installed John Wilson as teacher. After a comparatively few
months, the larger portion of the worshipers removed to
Tramount or Boston, and there in 1632 erected their first
meeting house on the south side of what is now State Street,
with Rev. John Cotton of Boston, England, as their minister.
Practically nothing is known of this first building except that
it had a thatched roof. It must, of necessity, have been
exceedingly simple.
The Society continued to worship in this rude structure for
some eight years, when the growth of the population com
pelled the erection of a larger edifice on what is now Washing
ton Street, almost directly opposite the Old State House at
the head of State Street. Of this building also we have no
description. It was destroyed by fire October 2, 1711, and on
the same site in the following year was built the "Old Brick"
as it was later called, dedicated May 3, 1713. This third build
ing was occupied by the Society for nearly 100 years and was
finally taken down in 1808.
"Old Brick" was a plain rectangular box-like building
with thick masonry walls and a hip roof surmounted by a
small belfry with a slender spindle and vane. It looked more
like a schoolhouse than like the churches to which we are
accustomed. In form and plan it was the type of structure of
all the early New England meeting houses, of which the "Old
Ship" at Hingham is a well-known example. It held several
rows of enclosed box pews around three sides, a broad aisle
leading from the main entrance to the pulpit, and on either
side of this aisle benches or pews called respectively "men's

First Church, Chauncey
Erected 1808, showing remodeled

roof of 1843
Place
Second Church, Hanover
Erected in 1779
Street
Hollis Street Church
Brattle Square Church
Erected in 1810
Erected in 1772

- 1.

body seats" and "women's body seats", the sexes being

separated in early days except in the case of families.
A gallery extending around three sides was reached by a
staircase in the front porch, an arrangement still to be seen
in the Old South meeting house, built sixteen years later, and
which is simply a meeting house of the usual type with a
tower and steeple replacing one of the porches.
The fourth building of the First Church was built in
Chauncey Place and dedicated July 21, 1808. The building
was designed by Asher Benjamin, a prominent Boston archi
tect of the day. During the year 1843, the structure was com
pletely remodeled to admit of lighting from the roof. The
scheme was not particularly successful but was attempted on
account of the diminution of light occasioned by adjoining
buildings. The minister of the church in 1860 was Rev. Rufus
Ellis, during whose ministry the society moved once again to
its present beautiful home at the corner of Berkeley and
Marlboro Streets.
Second Church
The history of the Second, or Old North, Church is inter

esting and eventful.
It
has always maintained a position of

influence among the churches of Boston and has numbered
among its ministers and lay members some of the most dis
tinguished men of New England. It was gathered on the fifth

day of June, 1650, twenty years after the settlement of the
town. Its first meeting-house, located at the head of North
Square, was burned in the great fire of November 27, 1676.
No description of this early structure has come down to us,
but the church records give reason to suppose that some of
the pews were provided with private doors through the side
of the house into the street, a convenient, if unusual, device.
The second meeting-house, erected on the same site in
1677, was also of wood and of such solid construction that
100 years later it was still in excellent repair and might have
stood many years longer.
It
1860
was provided with a bell and
clock. The bell was rung at five o'clock in the morning, at

one o'clock (the hour for closing the market), and at nine
o'clock in the evening. The town's powder was stored here
for a long time. During the Revolutionary War, however,
while Boston was occupied by the British, this Old North

Church was torn down and burnt for firewood by the soldiers.
It was never replaced, but the site was sold and the parsonage
of Dr. Lathrop was built thereon.
The Second Church has gathered into itself, at different
periods, two other churches. In 1779, after the destruction of
the meeting-house just referred to, it formed a union with
what was called the New Brick Church, founded in 1721 by
a number of seceders from Brattle Square Church, of which I
will presently speak; persons dissatisfied with the call of Rev.
Peter Thacher from his society at Weymouth. The brick
meeting-house of the New Brick Church, which stood on
Hanover Street, became the home of the united societies
until, in March, 1844, the building was taken down and a
splendid new Gothic edifice erected in its stead, an imposing
structure with a steeple rising 220 feet from the ground.
On account of a division of feeling, wholly sectional,
between the North End and South End portions of the
parish, the new building was, in 1849, sold to the Methodists.
The Second Church, and nearly all the congregation, removed
with the minister, first to the Masonic Temple, and after
wards to the Chapel in Freeman Place, which was purchased
from the society which Rev. James Freeman Clarke was
serving. In 1854, the Society purchased the beautiful house
of worship in Bedford Street, belonging to the "Church of
Our Saviour", and united with this small but excellent
society by whom that noble red sandstone edifice had been
erected. This Bedford Street building, designed by Hammatt
Billings, was in the Early English style of architecture and
was a distinct addition to the city from an artistic stand
It
by stone in
and reerected in a modified form in Copley Square. Later still, on

the removal of the Second Church to its present location in
Audubon Circle, the Copley Square structure again took to
itself wings and now forms a part of "The Church of All
point.
was taken down stone
1860
1872

Nations".
The Second Church may well take pride in the list of
remarkable divines who have occupied its pulpit, numbering
among others, John Mayo, Increase Mather, Cotton Mather,
John Lathrop, Henry Ware and Ralph Waldo Emerson. The
minister in the year 1860 was Rev. Chandler Robbins, D.D.,
who was born in Lynn, February 14, 1810, graduated from
Harvard College in the class of 1829 and from the Divinity
School in 1833. Soon after graduation he accepted a unani
mous call to become the minister of the Second Church, as
the successor of Ralph Waldo Emerson. He was ordained on
December 4, 1833, and maintained an unbroken pastorate
over this one church for forty-one years until, in 1874, having
preached the sermon at the dedication of the new place of
worship in Copley Square, he retired from the active minis
try. Dr. Robbins died, after a short illness, on the 11th of
September, 1882, loved and respected by all who knew him.
King's Chapel
The society worshiping in King's Chapel was formed in
June, 1686, being the first Episcopal society in New England.
Its first church building, which
was of wood, was completed
in 1689, and stood on the spot covered by the present chapel.

In 1710, it was enlarged, but, falling into decay, was replaced
by the present granite structure, opened for worship August

21, 1754. This ancient church, designed by Peter Harrison of
Newport, has perhaps the most worshipful interior in Boston
today. In 1785, the proprietors voted that certain changes
were desirable in the ritual of the church and on June 19 of

1860
that year an amended liturgy was adopted, and this has since
been retained without material modifications.
The connection of the society with the American Episcopal
Church was terminated on the ordination of Rev. James
Freeman, who, on November 18, 1787, after the usual Sunday
evening service, was ordained by Dr. Thomas Bulfinch, the
senior warden of the Chapel, acting for the congregation, to
be "Rector, minister, priest, pastor, teaching elder and public
teacher" of their society. Rev. James Freeman served the
Chapel as reader, rector and minister for fifty-three years.
The Chapel was, in 1860, without a settled minister, Dr.
Ephraim Peabody having died on Thanksgiving Day, 1856,
after a pastorate of nearly eleven years, but Rev. Henry W.
Foote was installed as its minister in 1861.
Dr. Peabody was one of the most beloved and impressive
preachers of his generation. He was remarkable for the clear
ness of his mind, the delicacy of his perceptions, and the
warmth of his heart. A remarkable beauty of face and figure
added to his impressiveness as a preacher, and his peculiar
charm lay in the gentleness, simplicity, and sincerity of his
speech and life. In refutation of the popular stricture regard
ing "ministers' sons and deacons' daughters" it may not be
amiss to note that of the four children that survived Dr.
Peabody, one daughter, Ellen Derby Peabody, became the
wife of Dr. Charles W. Eliot, President of Harvard College;
another daughter, Anna Huidekoper Peabody, married Dr.
Henry W. Bellows, of New York; a son, Robert Swain Pea
body was President of the American Institute of Architects
and Dr. Francis Greenwood Peabody became Plummer
Professor in Harvard University and Dean of the Harvard
Divinity School.
Brattle
In the year
Square Church
Thomas Brattle conveyed a piece of land

in Brattle Close to an association of persons for religious pur
1697,

poses.
1860
simple wooden structure was erected thereon and
Dr. Benjamin Coleman, of London, began his ministry

in what is known as the "Manifesto Church". It was so called

here
on account of a document or manifest, in which, contrary to

the principles professed by the Puritan churches of that time,
the founders of this society advocated a freer institution,
which tolerated the reading of the Scriptures in public wor
ship, baptism of children whose parents were not full mem
bers of the church, admission to the church without public
relation of experience, and the right of every individual
member of the congregation who contributed to its support to
vote in its affairs. These principles were afterwards adopted
by all Congregational churches, but this Brattle Square
Church has often been referred to as the first Protestant
church in America.
The original wooden meeting-house was made to serve its
purpose for nearly seventy-five years, but in 1772 it was fi
nally taken down and on its foundations rose a commodious
brick church costing $40,000, to which sum Gov. John
Hancock contributed one-eighth.
The church was served by many eminent ministers : Peter
Thacher, J. S. Buckminster, Edward Everett, John Palfrey,
and, last but not least, Dr. Samuel K. Lothrop who, in 1860,
had been settled twenty-six years.
On September 14, 1871, almost exactly one hundred years
after the building of the brick meeting-house, the society laid
the corner stone of the new Brattle Square Church at the
corner of Commonwealth Avenue and Clarendon Street, the
"Church of the Angels" now occupied by the First Baptist
Church. The building of this new church involved a very
heavy debt, and the structure proved acoustically defective.
Dr. Lothrop urged that the cause be maintained; but, after a
year or more of effort, the society, in 1876, voted to disband.
No church in Boston could in its day boast a more distin
guished body of worshipers and liberal contributors, num
1860
bering among others, Presidents John Adams and John

Quincy Adams, Gov. John Hancock, Gov. Bowdoin, Harrison
Gray Otis, Daniel Webster, Chief Justice Parker, Theodore
Lyman, William, Amos and Abbott Lawrence, and many
more.
New North Church

The New North, at the corner of Hanover and Clark

Streets, near the East Boston ferry, was the fifth congrega
tional society organized in the town. Its first meeting-house
was dedicated May 5, 1714, enlarged in 1730 to nearly double
its original size, and replaced in 1804 by an imposing edifice,
built at a cost of $26,570.96. This structure was designed by
Charles Bulfinch, and is the only one of his many churches
still standing in Boston today.
The refined and dignified exterior with its stone pilasters,
graceful tower and cupola, is now disfigured by a covering of
somber paint, but an effort is being made to have this
removed so that this truly beautiful work of Boston's most
eminent architect may show its real worth. The interior, with
its double colonnade supporting the galleries and arched
ceiling, is still handsome although much of its original ele
gance has vanished since the meeting-house became a Roman
Catholic church.
cannot let this opportunity pass without a word of appre
ciation of Charles Bulfinch, the most eminent citizen Boston
has yet produced, to whom all our citizens and particularly
we Unitarians owe a deep debt of gratitude. What Wren
was to London, Bulfinch was to Boston and far more.
The minister of the New North in 1860 was Rev. Robert C.
Waterston, the latest in a list which included Rev. John
Webb, Dr. Andrew Eliot, Dr. John Eliot and Dr. Francis
Parkman. In 1863 the New North united with the Bulfinch
Street Church, of which Rev. William R. Alger was the
minister. Later still the joint society migrated with the
1860
pastor, Mr. Alger, to Music Hall, where it had a brief period

of prosperity, then sank into decline and dissolution.
New South, or Church Green

The first meeting of the proprietors of the New South
Church was held at the "Bull" tavern on the 14th of July,
1715. In September of the same year they petitioned for a
parcel of land called "Church Green", at the junction of
what is now Summer and Bedford Streets, for the purpose of
building a church thereon. A more suitable site could not have
been obtained. By situation and name it was doubtless
intended for the use made of it. The building was dedicated

on
January 8, 1717.
Nearly 100 years later this original structure was replaced
by the beautiful edifice which we associate with the name

"Church Green", and dedicated December 29, 1814. This
church was designed by Charles Bulfinch and was perhaps
the finest example of his ecclesiastical work. It was octagonal
in plan with a Greek portico at the front. Built of white
hammered granite with a graceful steeple 190 feet high, shaded
on either side by elms and horse-chestnut trees, this structure
was probably the handsomest in the town. The New South
Church was taken down in 1868 to give place to mercantile
structures. The beautifully carved communion table is still
in use today in the First Parish Church in Dorchester.
Following a long line of distinguished divines, the minister
in 1860 was Rev. Orville Dewey. Dr. Dewey's pastorate at
Church Green was but temporary, four years in all. The
physical infirmity which had occasioned his resignation from
the Church of the Messiah in New York, again attacked him
and he was compelled, in 1862, to permanently relinquish
the active ministry. He lived in peaceful retirement for
twenty years and passed quietly away on March 21, 1882,
within one week of his eighty-eighth birthday. Dr. Bellows
has this to say of him: "Dr. Dewey's nature was char
10
1860
acterized from early youth by a massive intellectual power

with an almost feminine sensibility; a poetic imagination
with a rare dramatic faculty of representation. . . . He had
every quality for a great preacher in a time when the old
foundations were broken up and men's minds were demand
ing guidance and support in the critical transition from the
days of pure authority to the days of personal conviction by
rational evidence; and no exaltation that the Church of the
Messiah will ever attain can in any probability equal that
which will always be given to it as the seat of Dr. Dewey's
thirteen years' ministry in the city of New York."
Federal Street Church

In
following, many Scotch

Presbyterians came to New England. A considerable group
of these with Rev. John Moorhead as their leader settled in
Boston. Although they were a desirable acquisition to the
town, being orderly and industrious, they at first met with a
cold reception, being looked upon as inferiors and intruders.
Nevertheless, these newcomers purchased in 1729, a plot of
ground at the corner of Berry Street and Long Lane, and con
verted a barn which stood on the premises into a meeting
house. This humble edifice, with slight additions, served them
as a place of worship for the first fifteen years. In 1744 a sub
stantial wooden building was erected on the same site after
the fashion of the meeting-houses of that day, with a tower
on the Berry Street end and the main entrance on the side.
With this old structure there are many interesting associa
tions. Within its walls the delegates met in convention to
decide whether Massachusetts should adopt the Federal
Constitution proposed for the United States; and here it was
finally accepted on February 7, 1788. It was owing to this cir
cumstance that the name of Long Lane was changed to
Federal Street,
1720, and for several
years
1860
11

This second wooden meeting-house was replaced in 1809

by a fine brick church designed by Charles Bulfinch in what
was then regarded as the Gothic style. This was the first
building of the type to be erected in Boston. It was taken

down in 1859, giving way to the demands of business. The
Society proceeded immediately to the erection of its present
building, Arlington Street Church, begun in 1861 and dedi
cated four years later. It was one of the earliest structures
built upon the Back Bay and is rightly regarded today as
one of the finest church buildings in the city.
In 1786 the Society relinquished its Presbyterian affiliation
and adopted the Congregational form with a tendency
towards Unitarianism. Dr. Jeremy Belknap, the eminent
scholar and historian, was installed as minister the following
year. On June 1, 1803, Dr. William Ellery Channing began
his pastorate, an association which was only terminated by
his death October 2, 1842. The name of Berry Street was
changed to Channing in his honor. The minister of the church
in 1860 was Dr. Ezra Stiles Gannett. He was born in Cam
bridge on the fourth day of May, 1801, and graduated with
first honors at Harvard. In the Divinity school he must have
added to his bright seriousness; for one October day, soon
after finishing the course, Dr. Channing, Boston's leading
preacher, knocked at his door. He came to ask him to preach
half the time for him. In fifteen services he ministered, and
then the parish gave the call, and the young man became Dr.
Channing's colleague in the Federal Street meeting-house
and later his successor. This ministry continued, with occa
sional interruptions caused by ill health, for forty-seven
years, until his sad death in the Revere railroad accident,
August 26, 1871.

With the growth of the town southward, the necessity was
felt for a place of worship nearer than Summer Street, and

12
1860
Gov. Belcher, who resided in the vicinity, gave the site, and
a small wooden meeting-house was erected in 1732 on what
was originally Harvard Street, afterward renamed Hollis
Street in honor of Mr. Thomas Hollis, an eminent London
merchant, and benefactor of Harvard College. The first
minister of the young society was Dr. Mather Byles, ordained
December 17, 1732, and ministering to this congregation for
forty-four years. Dr. Byles enjoyed a great local reputation
as a wit and punster. When the War of the Revolution finally
broke out, he found himself out of sympathy with the senti
ments of his flock and he was dismissed from his pastorate
in 1776.
The original meeting-house was destroyed by the great fire
of 1787, but, nothing daunted, the society reared its second
wooden edifice on the same site the following year, one of the
earliest buildings designed by Charles Bulfinch. In 1810 this
new structure was found too small for the rapidly increasing
congregation and it was placed on a raft and floated down the
harbor to East Brain tree, where Rev. Jonas Perkins preached
in it for forty-seven years. This Bulfinch building was
replaced in 1810 by the "Hollis Street Church" as many of us
remember it, an extremely dignified structure, the work of an
unknown architect.
Among the eminent ministers of this society have been
John Pierpont, whose pastorate lasted twenty-six years, and
Thomas Starr King, installed in 1848, and who was still the
minister in 1860, although he had been given a leave of
absence of fifteen months to preach in the Unitarian church
in San Francisco, which became his permanent parish. His
work in this western outpost was so successful that, at the
close of the first year of his pastorate, the church debt had
been paid off, the society was on a solid basis, the strongest
Protestant church in the city. Starr King was ordained and
settled originally as a Universalist minister, but the dividing
barriers between the Universalist and Unitarian bodies were

Rev. Chandler Robbins
Rev. Samuel K. Lothrop

Rev. Edward Everett Hale,
Rev. Cyrus A.
Rartol
1855

- ^* r
1860
13

Dr. Ballou and Dr. Chapin participated in the
services with Dr. Dewey, Dr. Frothingham, Dr. Bartol and
William R. Alger. In the year 1887, the Hollis Street Society
so slight that when he was installed over
in 1848,
united its fortunes with the South Congregational Church

and the Hollis Street meeting-house was sold and now forms
a part of the Hollis Street Theatre.

West Church
West Church was gathered January 3, 1737, consisting of
seventeen members. The first edifice, small and of wood, was
finished in the following April. This structure served its pur
pose for many years but was superseded in 1806 by the build
ing still standing in Lynde Street, facing Cambridge Street.
It is now used as a branch of the Boston Public Library. The
interior was particularly fine, exceedingly dignified yet
charming in its simplicity. It may be of interest to note in
passing that the ornate mahogany pulpit designed for, and
used in this church, is serving the same purpose today in the
First Parish Church in Dorchester. As an example of the
speed with which buildings were erected a century and more
ago, it is interesting to know that the corner stone of this
large and elaborate structure, seating more than a thousand
people, was laid April 4, 1806, and the church was fully com
pleted and dedicated in the following November, seven
months later.
The first pastor was Rev. William Hooper, from Scotland,
and the second, Dr. Jonathan Mayhew of Martha's Vineyard.
The two ministers of the church in 1860 were Dr. Charles
Lowell and Rev. Cyrus A. Bartol. Dr. Bartol was for more
than half a century a bright luminary of the Boston pulpit.
Born in the little town of Freeport, Maine, April 30, 1813,
graduating from Harvard Divinity School in 1835, he spent
a single year of apprenticeship at Cincinnati and was then
called to the historic West Church as the associate and sure
14
1860
and beloved Dr. Charles Lowell.

His ordination took place in 1837, and was the beginning of a
pastorate lasting sixty-two years till, in 1889, on account of a
redistribution of the city population, the old parish was dis
solved and the meeting-house devoted to other uses.
successor of the venerable
Ha wes Place Church, South Boston

Liberal religious services were held in South Boston as

early as 1810. Hawes Place Church was formed October 27,
1819, the society having been incorporated the preceding
year. The meeting-house was built in 1832 and dedicated on
New Year's Day of the year following.
The first minister, Rev. Mr. Wood, was ordained Novem
ber 13, 1821, but died within a few months, being succeeded
by Rev. Lemuel Capen who was the pastor of the church for
seventeen years. The minister at the time we are considering
was Rev. Thomas Dawes, installed May 22, 1854. He was a
graduate of Harvard College, a classmate of Dr. Edward
Everett Hale, and was a descendent of the famous William
Dawes who shared the honors with Paul Revere in that mem
orable ride in the early morning of the 19th of April, 1775.
Mr. Dawes died in Brewster, Mass., November 25, 1904,
after a pastorate of thirty-two years in the ancient First
Parish Church in that town.
Bulfinch Street Society

Up to the year 1822 there were but two churches in that
quarter of the city we now know as the West End, the West
Church in Lynde Street and the Baptist Church in Charles
Street. The Universalist Church in Hanover Street was at
that time overflowing. A portion of the worshipers there,
together with independent persons outside, joined to build a
new house of worship on Bulfinch Street on the northerly
slope of Beacon Hill.

1860
15
On October 7, 1822, the corner stone of a substantial

brick building, 74 x 70 feet was laid and the church was dedi
cated on the 7th of May following. The church possessed a
particularly attractive interior with commodious vestry
rooms in the basement. The building was later torn down
and the site is now occupied by the Bulfinch Place Chapel.
It was incorporated under the name of the Central Universalist Society. Rev. Paul Dean was installed on the day of
dedication as its first minister. By a unanimous vote of the
proprietors, in March 1838, application was made to the
Legislature for a change of name, for the reason, as set forth
in their memorial, "that the term Universalist, as now
theologically defined, expresses a meaning inconsistent with
their faith". The petition was granted and they were author
ized to take the name of "Bulfinch Street Society". The list
of the ninety-three original proprietors contains the names of
many of the most substantial citizens of the town and their
descendents are the active supporters of our churches today.
The minister of the church in 1860 was Rev. William Rounsville Alger.
William Rounsville Alger was born December 30, 1822.
Thrown at an early age upon his own resources, he obtained
work in the cotton mills at Hookset, N. H. His desire for
knowledge was such that he devoted the greater part of his
leisure time to study. Fastening pages of his grammar on a
post in the mill, he committed them to memory as he tended
his machines. In the odd moments of rest he worked out
problems in arithmetic and algebra, with a bit of chalk on a
strip of wood, or read a page in some history or romance. At
the end of five years, having fitted himself and saved suffi
cient money to pay for tuition, he entered the academy at
Pembroke, N. H., where he remained one year. He then went
to the academy at Lebanon, and from there, after a half
year's instruction, to the Cambridge Theological School, from
which he was graduated in 1847. In September of the same

16
1860
year, he was ordained over the Mount Pleasant Congrega

tional Society in Roxbury. In 1852, Harvard University con
ferred on him the honorary degree of Master of Arts. In 1855,
he resigned the pastorate of the Roxbury church, to accept
a call from the Bulfinch Street Society of Boston. In 1857, he
accepted an invitation to deliver the Fourth of July oration
before the city authorities of Boston, and improved the
occasion, although the pro-slavery feeling was then at its
height, by an uncompromising protest against the slave power
at the South and its upholders at the North. The Board of
Aldermen refused to pass the customary vote of thanks.
Seven years later, in 1864, the vote was passed. In 1868, he
was chosen chaplain of the Massachusetts House of Repre
sentatives, and in the autumn of the same year, the members
of his church and others of the liberal faith organized a
society for the holding of free services in Boston Music Hall.
There he preached to Sunday congregations of from two to
three thousand persons, until in 1873, after a period of ill
health, he resigned. In December of the following year he
accepted a call from the Church of the Messiah in New York.
Twelfth Congregational Chuech

In
having conferred together on

the subject of the increasing population of Boston, resolved
to attempt the formation of a new Society of Liberal Chris
tians. As a result of a subscription paper which was circu
lated, 102 persons expressed their willingness to share in the
expense of the undertaking, provided the location of the con
templated meeting-house should be in the western section of
the town, where many families resided who were unable to
find seats in any neighboring church of their own faith. The
proprietors of the new Society were incorporated June 14,
1824, as the "Twelfth Congregational Society in the City of
Boston". The meeting-house was completed at a cost of
$34,000, and solemnly dedicated to the worship of God,
1823, several gentlemen

1860
17
October 13 of the same year, 1824. It is pleasantly situated

on Chambers Street, between Allen and McLean Streets and
is shaded by trees on three sides. The building contains 150
pews, seating a thousand people and has a commodious
vestry.
Rev. Samuel Barrett, D.D. was ordained and settled as the
first minister and was still pastor of the church in 1860.
Samuel Barrett was born at Royalton, Vt., August 16, 1795.
By hard struggles and with the assistance of his minister,
Rev. Thomas Beede, he prepared himself to enter Harvard
College, from which he graduated in 1818, supporting himself
throughout the course and while in the Divinity School. He
received calls to the churches in Philadelphia, Baltimore and
Keene, but declined them all, finally accepting the invitation
of the Twelfth Congregational Society in Boston and was
ordained in the new church on February 9, 1825. His ministry
in this church lasted for thirty-five years, until his final retire
ment in 1860, although continuing active in all good causes
until his death on June 24, 1866.
Dr. Barrett had a large endowment of common sense. He
was firm and dignified in manner, conciliatory in disposition,
easily winning and holding the implicit confidence of his
people. He was active in the organization of the American
Unitarian Association, was elected one of the original govern
ing board, serving thereon for sixteen years. He was one of
the editors of the Unitarian Advocate and of The Christian
Register. He was for six years President of the Benevolent
Fraternity of Churches and wrote many of the earlier tracts
issued by the American Unitarian Association.
The Twelfth Congregational meeting-house is now St.
Joseph's Catholic Church. It is certainly not deserted today.
On a recent visit to the old building, now 102 years old,
counted on the roll of honor posted in the vestibule the names
of 366 young men of the parish who had served their country
in the World War. The architect of the building was Alex
ander Parris. Charlotte Cushman sang in the original choir.
18
1860
Thirteenth Congregational Church

On the 7th of September,
of a new
1825, was laid the corner stone
Unitarian meeting-house at the corner of Purchase
and Pearl Streets, near Griffin's Wharf, where the tea ships
lay on the night of the memorable "Boston Tea Party". This
was then a respectable part of the town and the society was

gathered expressly for the ministry of Rev. George Ripley, its

first minister. From its location it was called the "Purchase
Street Church". This original structure, seating about three

hundred people, was a remarkably unattractive edifice of
rough granite with a small belfry on the roof. The interior is
said to have been as homely as the outside. Nevertheless this
building remained the home of the society for more than
twenty years, but owing to a rather sudden change in the
neighborhood population, it was found inconvenient by a
majority of the worshipers and the meeting-house was sold
to the Roman Catholics and destroyed in the Great Fire of
1872. A new and sumptuous place of worship was erected at
the corner of Harrison Avenue and Beach Street, and dedi
cated May 3, 1848. At the same time the name of the society
was changed to the "Thirteenth Congregational Church of
the City of Boston".
The society had but two ministers during its compara
tively brief existence of thirty-two years, Rev. George Ripley,
1826-1841, and Rev. James I. T. Coolidge, 1842-1858. The
church was dissolved shortly after the close of Mr. Coolidge's
pastorate.
George Ripley was the most active originator and earnest
supporter of the Brook-Farm experiment. He was actively
identified with the Transcendentalist movement and one of
the first students in this country to master the teachings of
the great German leaders in philosophy. Although an accept
able preacher, he early found that ministry in a small parish
church did not greatly appeal to him and, withdrawing in
1841 from the Purchase Street Church pulpit, he gave himself
1860
19
unreservedly to literary pursuits. In 1849 he connected him

self with the New York Tribune and soon became one of its
leading editors and the recognized chief among American
literary critics. He continued to be the literary editor of the
Tribune until his death in 1880.
South Congregational Church

An association of citizens at the south end of the town

founded, in 1827, a society with the title, "South Congrega
tional Church". Hollis Street Church was at this time so
crowded that many families in this quarter could not obtain
seats in any convenient place of worship. The corner stone of
a commodious brick edifice seating a thousand persons was
laid August 7 of that year at the corner of Washington and
Castle Streets, and was dedicated January 30, 1828.
Rev. Mellish Irving Motte, the first pastor, was ordained
May 21 of the same year, Dr. Channing preaching the ser
mon. Mr. Motte, whose ministry lasted about fourteen years,
was followed by Rev. Frederic D. Huntington, and he in
turn, in 1856, by Edward Everett Hale. The tide of popula
tion had been setting steadily toward the South End. Dover
Street had become almost "down-town" and the major
portion of the congregation lived much farther out on the
"Neck", as it was called. For this reason, the old meeting
house was sold and a new one built on Union Park Street in
1861. Changes in the character of the population at the South
End continued and the increasing desirability of the "Back
Bay" as a residential locality brought about a union with
Hollis Street Church in 1887, and the society thus enlarged
moved to a third new building at the corner of Newbury and
Exeter Streets, and here Dr. Hale continued to preach up to
the time of his death, June 10, 1909, after an active ministry
of sixty-seven years. Within the past year the South Congre
gational Society has united with the First Church in Boston.
20
1860
Pitts Street Chapel

This modest structure is of special interest on account of
its association with the Benevolent Fraternity of Churches.
The first chapel was erected in Chapel Place, Friend Street,
and was called Friend Street Chapel. The first service was

held therein November 10, 1827. A second building was

erected on Pitts Street and dedicated November 13, 1836. It
remained the home of the congregation until Bulfinch Place
Chapel was built on the site of the Bulfinch Place Church
previously described. The founder and first minister of the
Chapel was Rev. Joseph Tuckerman, and his successor at the
time we are considering, and for many years afterwards, was
Rev. S. H. Winkley.
Warren Street Chapel,

With all its grand virtues, sympathetic care of the poor,
the unfortunate and the outcast non-elect was never a strong
point of Calvinism. The abyss between the respectable and
highly moral church-going community and the feeble

minded, will-less and vicious element, was, at the beginning
of the nineteenth century yawning wider, year by year. The
first man vividly to take in this situation was Joseph Tucker
man who founded a chapel of his own in Friend Street and
devoted his life to helping solve the problem of poverty,
ignorance and vice. Dr. Tuckerman's most ardent disciple
was Charles Francis Barnard. Graduating from the Harvard
Divinity School in 1831, he was ordained to the ministry-atlarge, and devoted all his energy to the idea of the "Children's
Church".
The corner stone of Warren Street Chapel, now known as
the Barnard Memorial, was laid July 23, 1835. Within its
cheerful atmosphere every kind of hidden talent and virtuous
disposition of the boys and girls was brought to the surface
and developed. Departments of many sorts and varied activi
ties were successfully instituted and carried on. No one, in
1860
21
any sphere of life, could resist the enthusiasm of young

Barnard's appeal. Edward Everett, Starr King, Robert C.
Winthrop came to talk to the children, Jenny Lind and Sontag to sing to them, and Agassiz to reveal the marvels of
nature. Within its walls were first organized night schools
for immigrant adults, vacation schools for street waifs, day
nurseries for infants and many other agencies now adopted
by the city or taken over by welfare organizations. This
happy work engaged Mr. Barnard until 1864 when, on ac
count of failing health, he was compelled to withdraw from
active service.
Suffolk Street Chapel

The Free Chapel on Shawmut Avenue, corner of Rutland

Street, originally called Suffolk Street Chapel, was one of the
chapels connected with the ministry-at-large, established
under the auspices of the Benevolent Fraternity of Churches.
This chapel was built in the year 1839 on land that was given
by the city, according to a grant in 1806, to the first religious
association that should erect a church thereon. The building
was of stone and cost $15,000. It is still standing today and
is now the place of worship of the First Swedish Baptist
Church.
The minister of the Chapel in 1860 was Rev. Samuel B.
Cruft. Mr. Cruft was born in Boston, December 19, 1816,
and graduated at the Harvard Divinity School in 1839. After
preaching for a time in Lexington, he entered the ministry-atlarge, and was minister of Suffolk Street Chapel from 1846 to
1862. He was for some years secretary of the Children's
Mission. A man of reverent spirit, scholarly habit, open of
heart and hand, and after his retirement he was a good
parishioner as he had been a faithful minister. He died in
Boston, February 7, 1899.
22
1860
Chuhch of the Disciples

The Church of the Disciples was founded in
by Rev.
Clarke,
who
continued
to
be
its
pastor until
James Freeman
his death on June 8, 1888. The society first worshiped in
Ritchie Hall, Amory Hall and the Masonic Temple. Later it
erected the chapel in Freeman Place (named after Rev. James
Freeman of King's Chapel) which it occupied until, in 1850,
on account of the illness of the pastor and other reasons, its
public worship was temporarily suspended, and the chapel
was sold to the Second Church. The little church continued
to live, in its Bible classes, conducted by each member in
turn, and in its communion service held in the same manner.
One of the lay volunteers was John A. Andrew, afterwards
the war governor of Massachusetts.
When Mr. Clarke returned to Boston in 1854, a living
nucleus was ready to receive him and to aid him in carrying
on the Church of the Disciples. The three principles on which
this society was founded are:
1. The voluntary principle, each member paying according
to his ability for the support of the church, and all seats being
1841
free.
2.
The social principle, each member feeling responsible for
the spiritual welfare of the church as a sort of assistant pastor.

3. Congregational worship, the congregation sharing in the
service, singing the hymns, and joining in the prayers and
responsive readings.
In 1860 the society was occupying a chapel on Indiana
Place. This was soon outgrown and a larger place of worship
was built on the corner of Warren Avenue and West Brookline Street. Later still the church erected its present hand
some edifice in the Back Bay section. Time does not permit
an extended review of the great work done by James Freeman
Clarke in the advocacy of the none too popular causes of
anti-slavery, .equal suffrage, civil service reform, temperance,
the care of neglected children and improvements in education.
1860
28
He was a Unitarian, but his broad sympathy, absolute

candor and the entire absence of the controversial spirit
caused him to be deeply respected by members of Trinitarian
churches. In his personality and his writings he has probably
done as much as any man in our communion to heal the
breach between Orthodoxy and Unitarianism.
Twenty-Eighth Congregational Society

In the early days of the Unitarian controversy
the exchange
of pulpits was looked upon as a sign of amity, and refusal to

exchange was a marked sign of disapproval and a denial of
Christian fellowship. In the winter of 1841 and 1842 Theodore
Parker, minister of the First Church in West Roxbury,
delivered in Masonic Temple, Boston, a series of Sunday
afternoon lectures, afterwards printed in 1842 under the title
"A Discourse on Matters Pertaining to Religion".
The next year, from September, 1843, to September, 1844,
he spent in Europe. On his return he found "the storm signal
still displayed over Boston Unitarianism". Few ministers
were willing to exchange with him. Mr. Sargent, minister of
Suffolk Free Chapel, conducted by the Benevolent Fraternity
of Churches, exchanged pulpits with Parker in November,
1844, and lost his position in consequence, and James Freeman
Clarke, who also exchanged with him in January, 1845, wit
nessed the withdrawal of fifteen families from his church in
disapproval. On January 22, 1845, a few earnest men met
together and declared by vote "that Theodore Parker have a
chance to be heard in Boston" ; and in pursuance of this reso
lution, Parker preached in the Melodeon on Sunday,
February 16, 1845. In November of the same year, the
Twenty-eighth Congregational Society was organized, which
on January 4, 1846, installed Theodore Parker as its minister.
From that time until his last sermon preached in Boston
Music Hall (whither his congregation had removed from the
Melodeon in 1852) on Sunday, January 2, 1859, Parker was
24
1860
far and away the most influential man in the Boston pulpit.
Scholarship has moved so rapidly and firmly since Parker's
day that his critical conclusions, revolutionary as they seemed
a half century ago, have been long overpassed, and are today
almost conservative commonplaces. It would be unprofitable,
as it is unnecessary, to dwell upon them. As one of his
biographers has truly said, "America will not forget Theodore
Parker, the valiant prophet of the moral self, the emanci
pator, setting man free from traditionalism and convention,
and bringing him face to face with God manifest in the world
without, abiding in the soul within".
Chuech of Oxjk Father, East Boston

Efforts were made to establish Unitarian worship in East

Boston as early as 1835, but no formal society was organized
until some years later, in 1852, when a church was gathered
under the leadership of Rev. Warren H. Cudworth who had
graduated from Harvard Divinity School the previous year.
The young pastor took up his work with earnest faith and so
infused his hopeful spirit and enthusiasm into his people that
within the year they had purchased a lot, built and furnished
a meeting-house which was dedicated December 29, 1852.
Mr. Cudworth organized all elements of his parish, young
and old, into agencies of helpfulness so that by 1855, three
years later, the society had increased from 60 to 117 regularly
enrolled families. He was a public-spirited citizen, outspoken
in his convictions as to the moral obligations of citizens in
relation to temperance, education and law enforcement, and
he early became the recognized "pastor of the unchurched"
of East Boston. The success, growth and efficiency of his
Sunday School are well known. On receipt of the news of the
fall of Fort Sumter, Mr. Cudworth offered his services to
Gov. Andrew and was appointed chaplain of the First Massa
chusetts regiment and served in this capacity throughout the
War. At its close he again took up the work of his ministry,
1860
25
now doubly endeared to his people by his great experiences.

His sudden death on Thanksgiving Day, 1883, while in the
midst of the opening prayer at the union service of the
churches in East Boston, was a sad blow to the church and
to the community.
Church of the Unity

A liberal
religious society was founded in Canton Street in

the year 1857 of which Rev. George Hughes Hepworth was
the minister. The society, which adopted the name Church
of the Unity, grew rapidly and in 1860 was able to erect a fine
building in Newton Street, where audiences of fifteen hundred
were frequently gathered to hear Mr. Hepworth preach.
George Hughes Hepworth was a Boston boy, a pupil of
the Boston Latin School and a graduate of the Harvard
Divinity School in 1853. During the Civil War he rendered
distinguished service to his country while serving on the staff
of General Banks. Upon his return to resume his pastoral
duties he became a leader in numerous public-spirited enter
prises in his native city. He was the founder of the Boston
School for the Ministry, which was later absorbed by the
Harvard Divinity School.
Mr. Hepworth was essentially a preacher. With the back
ing of William H. Baldwin of the Young Men's Christian
Union and a few others, he instituted a wonderfully successful
series of services in the Boston Theatre. Of all the clergymen
who participated in this theatre preaching, Mr. Hepworth
was by far the most popular. In the early seventies he ac
cepted a call to the Church of the Messiah in New York and
was succeeded at the Church of the Unity by Rev. Martin
K. Schermerhorn, who was in turn followed by Rev. Minot
J. Savage. After a brief joint pastorate with Rev. Robert
Collyer in the Church of the Messiah, Mr. Hepworth modified
his theological views and became Trinitarian. During the
26
1860
latter part of his life he was one of the editors of the New
York Herald.

The Church of the Unity was the last Unitarian Society

organized within the boundaries of the old city. Four years
later came the Civil War with its many distractions and the
great expansion of commercial interests. At about the same
time the development of the South End and the evolution of
the Back Bay ushered in a period of general redistribution of
the population. Closely following, occurred the Great Fire of
1872 which swept away a large section of the earlier town.
The year 1860 may be truly said to mark the termination
of an era in our history. With its close, the Boston of early
days became a memory. The simple comfortable homes, the
narrow tree-shaded streets and the secluded and picturesque
courts and gardens rapidly disappeared before the more
prosaic requirements of trade. One by one the Protestant
places of worship of every denomination vanished, until
today the number of such churches then standing which are
used for religious services can be counted on the fingers of a
single hand. Christ Church, Salem Street, still maintains the
open door at the North End, the Old South meeting-house
has become a showplace of historic interest, the West Church
now shelters a branch of the Public Library, the Baptist
Church on Charles Street* is rejoicing in a recent renovation,
while Park Street Church, Saint Paul's and our own King's
Chapel alone maintain the old traditions in the heart of Old
Boston. The fifty churches rebuilt by Sir Christopher Wren
in old London two hundred and fifty years ago are gone
today or are largely deserted by worshipers. Little wonder
then that in this fair city of ours the meeting-houses of its
own earlier days should have disappeared.
Their congregations have helped to build the Greater
Boston. New places of worship have arisen in new neighbor"JThe Charles
Street Meeting House has, for some years, been the home of an African Methodist
Episcopal congregation.

hoods.
27
As the number of Protestant churches in Boston, and
the size of their congregations, has diminished with the rapid

changes in the character of the population on account of the
large immigration from Europe, so the number and strength
of the suburban churches outside the old city limits has cor
respondingly increased. The descendants of members of the
older churches are now in large measure to be found in the
suburbs, as what in 1860 were mere villages have grown
into prosperous towns or cities. That is the story of every
Protestant body in Boston, and of the Unitarian churches
among the rest. With that change has come a decline of
theological antagonisms. The Unitarian churches have still a
mission to fulfill here in the home of its youth, but here, at
least, its progress is not so much advanced by the sword of
militancy as by the ploughshare of peaceful education, and
the various groups of Protestant Christians in New England
are coming more and more to discover that they are, and
should be, not opponents but a society of friends, following
as best they may in the footsteps of the "Great Friend of all
the sons of men".
THE EARLIEST NEW ENGLAND MUSIC*

Waldo
S.
Pratt
Professor of Music and Hymnology, Hartford Theological Seminary
A few
years ago, as the tercentenary of the settlement of
Plymouth was approaching, some impulse led me to examine

carefully the copy of the Pilgrim song-book which I had
casually used for general reference for many years, but which
discovered
did not properly know. From it culled the
forgotten facts that later were worked into various addresses
on the music of the Pilgrim Fathers. It has been pleasant to
find that others besides myself are interested in these facts,
not simply for their bearing upon our national origins, but
for some strains of profound human sentiment that run
through them.
It is curious how almost completely the subject has been
have found but one intelligent paper on the
neglected.
Plymouth Psalm-book and that is buried in the proceedings
of your Massachusetts Colonial Society.** All the other
references are either shallow or ignorant. To be sure, two or
three generations of us have read or sung those lines of
Mrs. Hemans

Not as the flying come
In
silence and in fear;
They shook the depths of the desert's gloom

With their hymns of lofty cheer.
Amidst the storm they sang
And the stars heard, and the sea!
And the sounding aisles of the dim woods rang
With the anthem of the free.
Address delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Unitarian Historical Society in King's Chapel
Parish House, Boston, May 24, 1923.
Vol.
I,
pp. 228-38.
We are apt to be so responsive to Mrs. Hemans' enthusiasm

about the Pilgrim's instinct for liberty that we never pause
to wonder as to what were those "hymns of lofty cheer" with
which her imagination decorates the scene of the settlement.
When some popular lecturer discourses on colonial music he
is apt to dwell on its merely quaint, or, perhaps, on what he
conceives to be its ridiculous side. Yet Mrs. Hemans, like one
or two other of the poets, has unconsciously seized upon
something of historical reality. The first New England
settlers were undoubtedly singers and the music which they
sang has been preserved. And some of it still has charm and
spirit and power.
am asked to couple with this Pilgrim subject a
Today
similar reference to the music that was brought a little later
to Boston and its vicinity. This latter topic is less certain
than the former. We know the Psalm-book which the
Pilgrims brought to Plymouth and kept in use there for
more than seventy years. But we have no corresponding
evidence about the usage among the far more numerous
settlements in the Bay Colony. But the story can be built up
in good part by the use of reasonable conjecture, all the steps
shall venture to
shall not attempt to indicate.
in which
ask you to accept the story as it has shaped itself in my mind,
and to let me turn back and forth between Plymouth and
Boston as if they were united earlier than was the actual fact.
For our purpose the primary point to remember is that the
first migrations to New England came just at the close of one
of the most eager and fertile of the periods in English popular
song. From the accession of Elizabeth in 1558, the singing
together of great crowds of people became a notable social
phenomenon, and ballads and ditties were circulated freely
in every class of society. Skilful musicians were perfecting
not only the madrigal and the motet, but the more flexible
part-song and glee. This English efflorescence of song was
really only a part of a large movement that affected France,

29

30
the Low Countries and Germany. Everywhere it was re

ligious as well as secular. The line between the two was
indistinct. We read, for instance, of thousands of persons
assembling in the long evenings behind St. Paul's in London
just to amuse themselves by singing Psalms! A whole series
of books was compiled to provide arrangements of the Psalmtunes in parts, so that they could be sung like glees. All such
singing, we should note, was usually quite without instru
ments that is, free and spontaneous. But we must suppose
that part-singing was rare among congregations generally.
As we all know, the song-impulse among English-speaking
people centered at first upon versifications of the Psalms
not on hymns, as in Germany. The Psalm-book came speedily
to be ranked next to the Bible in popular reverence. For our
present purpose we need not go into the interesting, but
intricate, subject of all the Psalters, especially on their
literary side. Three or four books only are important in their
bearing on the first music in New England.
There were two standard versions of the Psalms in Great
Britain, both derived from the movement initiated by Thomas
Sternhold in 1546 or 1547, and later carried forward under
the lead of John Hopkins. One of these versions was that
established in England in 1562 and generally known as the
"Sternhold and Hopkins" version, which was not displaced
till 1696, more than 130 years later. The other is the variant
of this that was prepared for Scotland in 1564 and sometimes
called the "Scottish Sternhold and Hopkins", which was set
aside by the Scottish Psalter proper in 1650. These two
versions differed considerably in their verbal contents, but
they differed still more in the music included. Both of them
may have been known and used among our first settlers,
though the chances are that the influence of the Scottish
book was slight and indirect. This latter book, however, was
much affected by styles that appeared strongly in the third
book to be specially mentioned.
31

The Psalm-book brought to Plymouth in 1620 and used

there until 1692, after the death of the last of the original
settlers (John Alden), was the version specially made by
Henry Ainsworth for the use of the English refugees in Hol
land. It was first issued in 1612, and ran through at least four
editions during the century. This book has many points of
peculiar interest, but musically it is closely related to the
Sternhold and Hopkins Psalter, except, as we shall see, in its
liberal use of French materials, with their more varied meters
and their often captivating melodies.
We need to keep clear in our minds that the famous Bay
Psalm Book of 1640, interesting as it is for other reasons, has
no bearing on our subject, since, until the edition of 1696,it did
not contain music. It sheds indirect light, however, because
of its almost exclusive clinging to Common Meter as a verseform, which implies that the tendency already strong in
Sternhold and Hopkins was growing stronger, as we know
was also the case in England.
will not complicate matters by naming the other books
that may possibly have had some influence in determining
what and how the earliest settlers sang. Chief among these
were a series of harmonized settings that appeared from time
to time. These had importance in directing later usage in
England, but they cannot be shown to be important in fixing
American usage at the start.
do not want to weary you with technical details, but
perhaps one or two further preliminary points may be made.
One relates to the probable method of singing. It was assumed
at the time we are regarding that the melodies would be sung
mostly in unison, with the men's voices as leaders. If addi
tional parts were attempted, they were above or below the
"tenor". The music was still printed without bars, except,
perhaps, at the end of the lines. No key-signatures were used
till somewhat later and various sharps required were not
written, but evidently understood. The pitch adopted doubt
32
less varied somewhat according to circumstances, but the
written music followed a fixed custom, the same tune being

do not suppose that the
always given at the same pitch.
out",
as was usual a half-century or more
words were "lined
later. Singers either had books or sang from memory.
Another remark lies mostly in the realm of conjecture.
How much were the people who first came to our shores
actually singers? As to the Plymouth company, we have
Winslow's explicit testimony that in the Leyden congrega
tion the singing was skilful and fine. I know of no parallel
testimony as to the settlers around Boston. It is incon
ceivable, however, that among the hundreds who presently
populated the Bay Colony there were not many who shared
in the English musical zest of the time. At both Plymouth
and Boston, we may be sure, the Psalm-singing on Sundays
was a cherished function, the one form of fixed liturgy that
came over intact from across the sea. We are told that for a
long period men took off their hats whenever they heard
some one singing one of the Psalm-tunes, even outside of the
church. assume, then, that the sudden decline in the extent
and quality of the music that undoubtedly set in during the
seventeenth century was due almost wholly to the absence of
general musical life among those who were struggling for
existence as pioneer homesteaders. But part of it, no doubt,
came from the ultra-Puritan repression that came presently
to be the dominating social note in the Bay Colony. This out
ran the measure of the Puritan iconoclasm in England, which
has been falsely charged with extreme antipathy to music.
If we assume that the standard sources of the first New
England usage were the English Sternhold and Hopkins and
the Psalter of the "heretic" Ainsworth, we find that the for
mer provided forty-two tunes for the Psalms proper (besides
almost twenty more for various formulae, like the Lord's
Prayer, the Magnificat, etc.) and the latter thirty-nine tunes
for Psalms only. The exact total is hard to estimate. About

33
twenty tunes were common to the two books, but just how
certain of the appended melodies in Sternhold and Hopkins
assume that a total number
are to be reckoned is uncertain.
of seventy-five to eighty is about all that is possible.
Actual usage may have reduced this considerably.
The question of where these melodies came from might be
discussed at much length. In general, their personal author
ship is impossible to trace. In this, as in their essential char
acter, they are true folk-songs. The two main sources are
English and French. Back of the whole development of con
gregational singing in western Europe from about 1550 lay
the successive Psalters of Geneva. But English Protestants
grafted on at once songs of their own, and ultimately, in both
England and America, the English tunes drove out the
French with but two or three exceptions. The Scottish church
held on longer to meters and tunes from Geneva, but these
too succumbed about the time when the Scottish Psalter of

1650 was issued.
After one has worked over the details awhile he comes to

have a certain instinct that some of the material is probably
English and some probably French, though he may not be
able always to give reasons for the faith that is in him. The
verse in all but a few cases is iambic never trochaic, as
began to be increasingly characteristic of English hymnody
only after Charles Wesley smote his Methodist lyre about
1740. But the English taste was for what came to be called
"Common Meter" the most used of the old "ballad-meters"
while the French had an analogous taste for some form of
"10s", probably because many of their popular songs tended
to that longer and rather more plastic type.* The English
_ Common Meter is still abundant in all hymn-books but in dwindling proportions.
is illustrated by Addison's familiar stanza
When all Thy mercies, O my God,
My rising soul surveys,
Transported with the view I'm lost
In wonder, love, and praise.
Its fluent form
The supremacy in English hymnody of Common Meter and its relatives was first challenged about
the middle of the eighteenth century, when several trochaic meters became popular. These were as
siduously cultivated during the nineteenth century, while some iambic typest also appeared that are
but distantly related to Common Meter. Among these latter one of the richest is that known as "10sM,
34
tunes early betrayed a tendency to slip into series of tones of
equal length, though almost always with a longer tone at the

beginning and end of each line. The French tunes, on the
other hand, abound in piquant note-patterns, with long and
short tones intermingled (somewhat as in our modern partsong tunes), and sometimes with "snap" effects and other
peculiarities that seem puzzling today. Two of the favorite
tunes (both English) are in triple rhythm, and occasionally
variants of other tunes appear in that rhythm, including
even what we call "Old Hundredth" (see Ps. 24 below). We
have got so used to measured uniformity and even monot
onous stupidity in what we are pleased to call "the old
tunes" that we almost want to quarrel with the historic facts.
Only the other day noted the lament of one of our intelli
gent organists over what he felt to be the secular irregularity
of some modern tune as compared with the churchly monot
ony of the old days. Yet in Ainsworth's Psalter there is not a
single tune written in the style that he had in mind. And
even the majority of what he termed "the stately German
chorales" were originally far more varied in movement than
after they emerged from under the editorial steam-roller in
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
The chances are that when one tries to cite a specimen tune
of the Puritan period he will pitch on "York" or "Dundee"
as these are now usually printed. That is, he thinks of a fourline Common Meter form with twenty-eight syllables and
notes to the stanza. This type undoubtedly did become com
mon during the seventeenth century, being what was then
called a "short tune" or "half -tune". In both Sternhold and
Hopkins and Ainsworth such tunes are very rare. The stan
dard patterns in these books had six or eight lines, as in all
the older German chorales, running from forty to eighty or

an early example being the touching prayer with which Lyte closed his ministry
Abide with me! fast falls the eventide;
The darkness deepens; Lord, with me abidel
When other helpers fail and comforts nee,
Help of the helpless. 0 abide with mel
35
even more syllables and tones to the stanza. (See Pss. 24, 39,
and 119 below.) The shift from the ample stanza to the
short one was plainly due to a demand for something plain
and easy. Musically, it was a great loss, as the newer and
curter melodies had little of the character and sweep of their
predecessors. It is interesting to observe with what a sure
instinct the hymn- and tune-writers of the last half-century
have returned to the long stanza.
At this point reference should be made to one feature in
these old books that seems strange to us.
mean their pref
erence for the minor mode over the major. In Ainsworth al
most exactly three-quarters of the tunes are minor, and in
Sternhold and Hopkins the proportion is nearly as large. So
far as technical facility goes, one is handled as well as the
other, but it is evident that the minor is the favorite, or at
least the more usual. This reminds us, of course, that these
songs arose just at the time when the modern feeling for the
major was disentangling itself from the medieval feeling, or
rather, when the instinct for the major which had long been
manifest in secular music began to make its way into the do
main of sacred music. To us today the major has become so
nearly universal in tunes that we almost resent anything else.
We are wont to think that a minor melody must be doleful,
if not grotesque. Yet every musician knows that minors are
not necessarily either of these. Everything depends upon
matters of rhythm, pattern and figure. Even a minor tune
may be full of spirit, and even of sparkle. Indeed, have been
interested to note how often the psalms of jubilance and faith
were set to minor melodies, as if these were felt to express
their intrinsic sentiment better. (See Pss. 3 and 97, 5 and 15
84

below.)
The form in which these melodies are put implies a sense

of harmonic structure essentially as we have it today. Not
only is it possible to fit modern harmony to them, but they
demand it. How they were treated by musicians of the time
36
we know from the several harmonized versions that were
These latter present few points that are in the least

unnatural to us. They do not go quite as far as we do in the
use of inverted chords, and so have usually a much more an
gular bass than is usual now, and, of course, they are much
more wary about all chromatic steps. But the harmonic
framework is quite like ours in its full sense of key or tonality,
in the general doctrine of chord-formation and connection,
and in the definition of lines or phrases by means of cadences.
The modulations, too, are just those to be found in a modern
hymnal. We are in the dark, however, about how much
harmonized singing was actually practiced in Protestant
churches. We may be sure that congregations did not have
tunes printed in parts. But they may have sung in parts
nevertheless. We today cannot quite understand that there
ever was a time when men sang freely in extemporized har
mony, or when a harmony heard once or twice might be
caught up and re-echoed faithfully by a crowd. And yet that
was just what was sometimes done in secular music in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. At all events, these
Psalm-tunes, like the melodies of the German chorales, are
implicit of harmony at every point.
I shall not attempt to make more than a few hasty remarks
about the words that go with these melodies. The theory
underlying them was that the entire Book of Psalms must be
made available for singing, it being assumed to be a divinelyappointed manual of praise; and that its text was to be versi
fied as literally as possible. The Sternhold and Hopkins
version was made on the basis of the so-called "Great Bible"
of 1539 or of the Genevan version of 1560, though with much
diversity in method and style, since the drafting of the verses
extended over more than fifteen years and was done by many
different versifiers, a few of whom may have been influenced
by their knowledge of the original Hebrew. The process in the
case of the Ainsworth Psalter was very different. Henry

made.
87

Ainsworth was known as one of the leading Hebrew scholars

of the time. When he set about making his Psalter, he first
prepared a wholly new prose translation from the original
text, accompanied by annotations that still have interest for
their acumen and pith. From this fresh version he then made
his versification. His Psalter, therefore, has an originality and
unity quite absent from the other. But Ainsworth's mind had
the peculiarities of genius. Several features of his work are
more curious than admirable, perhaps, and it is quite certain
that some of his typographical devices are perplexing to the
casual reader today as is shown in the mistaken comments
that they have provoked.
The whole story of the English metrical Psalters from
Sternhold's initial experiment in 1546-1547 down to the revo
lution of method under Isaac Watts in the early eighteenth
think, more important and significant than is
century is,
commonly thought. Years ago, when first plunged into its
intricacies as a part of the general history of English hymnody.I shared the common impression that it was a mixture of
oddity and barrenness. But came speedily to see that it was
not only a monument of a strenuous and earnest age, but also
do not
a literary monument as well, like the Prayer Book.
mean to imply that every versified Psalter has the richness
and dignity of the completed Prayer Book. But there is
hardly any one of them that does not yield passages that are
well worth quoting for their dignity and balance of ex
pression.
The point for us to bear in mind today is that when our
fathers sang from either of their Psalm-books they were using
what was to them not doggerel or mere verbal hack-work, but
the sincere effort of scholars and divines to render into verse
what they conceived to be the very spirit of the Psalms. And
there is no doubt that for the common people a far greater
influence resided in the versified text than in the prose text.
38
This influence was intensified by the association of the verses

with the melodies that went with them.
hope that I have not dwelt too long on these somewhat
technical points. My reason is obvious.
am asked to speak
on the music that can be connected with the earliest New
England settlements. Just what that was can be appreciated
only with some deliberate mental effort, particularly in view
of the prevalent popular misconceptions or misrepresenta
tions of it. Let us try to put ourselves back into the time and
the atmosphere to which these tunes belong a time when
God was near and real, when faith in his love and loyalty to
his will were as mainsprings in character and conduct, when
religion had the passionate and tenacious quality that sets it
above all other interests and when its expression in act and
word was intense and eager. We may be very sure that the
Sunday service of the fathers was not like many that we can
find today. It was both a compelling duty and a supreme
privilege. Through it the worshiper came sacramentally into
fellowship with things divine and eternal, not only by means
of the expounding of the Scriptures in the long sermon, but
in the extended prayers and the equally extended psalmody.
It is likely that these latter exercises of self-expression occu
pied more time than those of impression and exhortation.
For the time being men felt themselves limited in praise to
the paths of sentiment found in the Book of Psalms. But we
may be sure that those paths carried them far into the
mysteries of the worshiping experience. Intellectually their
praise was probably less elaborate in sweep than that of our
modern hymnody, and far less precise in its articulation and
less finished in its texture. But one wonders whether its
emotional, and therefore its spiritual, content may not have
been as rich as that which most of our modern congregations
seem to find. For the spirit of praise was surely there the
spirit which seeks to realize in the act of song something of
the essential passion of the soul after God, and, through the

39
vocal utterance of that passion, to find itself lifted into a new

and life-giving consciousness of communion with His very

presence.
When the foregoing paper was given it was followed by the

singing of a considerable number of the old melodies with
piano accompaniment. Some examples of these, taken from
the writer's brochure on "The Music of the Pilgrims"
(1921), are here appended, the plates being courteously lent
for the purpose by The Oliver Ditson Company. These
specimens illustrate several points made in the paper. It
should be noted, however, that only the melodies are original;
the harmonies supplied are modern.
Page 26 shows how, in Ainsworth's Psalter, the music was
combined with both a prose and a versified version, besides
some annotations on the text.
Psalms 3 and 97 (both 10s), page 70, offer a striking con
trast between minor and major as adjusted to somewhat
similar line-patterns that have no little positive vivacity.
Psalm 24 (C.M.D.), page 71, is one of the few cases where
triple rhythm is employed throughout. Every other line,
also, has a curious "snap" effect.
Psalms 5 and 15 (both 10s), page 72, supply another case of
a contrast in somewhat parallel forms between major and
minor. In both, the line-patterns vary for each line, besides
shifting to and fro somewhat between duple and triple
rhythm.
Psalm 39 (C.M.D.), page 75, is a remarkably spirited
treatment of Common Meter in its double or eight-line form.
Psalm 84 (L.P.M.D.), page 79, is the traditional battlesong of the Huguenots, though when thus sung was set to
Psalm 36 or (more often) to Psalm 68. This melody has a
singularly stirring effect when sung with vigor by men's
voices.
40

Psalm 119 (10s, D.), page 80, is one of the longest of the
serieseighty notes to the stanza. Properly sung, it is often
counted the noblest of all. But, in the old days, if the entire
119th Psalm was sung at once, the rendering would have
stretched to at least an hour and a quarter!
It may be added that in the writer's opinion effective
modern hymns to be used with these melodies are such as
the following:
Psalm
3.
Psalm 97.
Psalm 24.
Psalm
5.
Psalm 15.
Psalm 39.
Psalm 84.
Psalm 119.
God of our fathers, whose almighty hand.

Rise, crowned with light, imperial Salem, rise.
Let saints on earth in concert sing.
New every morning is the love.
O still in accents sweet and strong.
Thy kingdom come! on bended knee.
I'll praise my Maker with my breath.*
Spirit of God, descend upon my heart,
or
Break Thou the bread of life, dear Lord to me.
The meter of Psalm 84 is almost unknown in modern hymnals.

The page numbering of these plates which follow is that of The Music of the Pilgrims", rather
than of the present publication.
VHT.
PTaTm,
fxh our Lord,hm
excellent-great
is
thy name in all the earth: thou Which

bafig
thy glorhm-maUfite above the heauen.
3. Fro mouth tfbdes,&jitckjwt,theufimn&

r
fie
To monetise
4-*
'
fitadedfi; betaufi of them that,

,andfelf
thee
dtflrefss
avenger
ttaf:
4. When behold .thy hunts, thy

fingers deed:
the mom and Startijiobicb thai
j.
bafifiabijlxd.
is
What fiayUmatt thai him thou

remembriH*
and Admit fon% that him thou
viptest?
For thou htle lefferbtff nude him,
6.
thai be (fee Gods: and cromd bait
Vritbgtiril
).
with hottourablc-dtcencie.
Ofthy hand-toerki,
Sheet &
e.
thougave
him ruling:
didft every-thtng.
beeves til: and
fhld beajlstoith th
tinder hit fitty
tfm fit
fl
ancS-tkf
FohflMbeav'nsficf(heJeaalfi:
(fiwe.
that through the path- \\ayesof the
fias dotthgt,
to.
Job our Lord:bow extellent-great./amt
all the earth hath renoumed-nm*.
thy
mayfter f the trntfik. upon

Gittith; a Pfalm of David.
our Lord.how wondrouseycelletix thy name in al the earth:
IEhovah
which haft given thy glorious -maj'eftie, above the heavens.
3. Out-of the mouth of babe, &
fuckltngs.thou haft -founded ftrengthj
bccaufe of thy-diftreffersuo makeceafe
the entmie, & felf- avenger.
4. When I behold thy heavens.the
deed of thy fingers : the moon and
the ftarrs, which thou had ftably-confiiturod.
5. What fory-raan that thourermembrefthim : and the fonof Adam,
that thou-vifitefl him?
6. For thou haftmade-hirn-leffera
Side, than the Gods: and crowned him
with glory and comely-honour.
7. Thou gaveft-him-dominion,over
the works of thy hands:a!l,thou-didftfett under his feet.
8. Sheep and oxen al of them: and
alfo , the beafts of the feild.
<>. The fowl of the heavens, & the
fillies of the tea : that-which-paifcththrough.the pathesof the fcas.
xo- Iehovahour Lord : hoar won
drous-excellent u thy name,
in al the earth.
K^fnmtdtiens.
1
of by
lit a
of
. Gittithjflj the Gittith: topi) title tf alfo flflKn to tfteSi. & 84. P&lm. Cathfe
. 1. 3t ttf alfo t[\t name of city
vvineprefs Jfa.
tfje jSPifrhnjJ
Sam. 17 4
tb?ue
ioftO taku Gath-rimmonIof.ii.Ûlf)CWpoil
55 tirtc alfo of tjjc Hctitf
Obed-edom the
ILeWte mid finger mgfrafl.uMjS tatcba Gittite. i.Sam..io, &ovt
fenof leduthun,
infant, CpthCt fuch inltruments as were ufed
G lttith fjCtt map
the poftenty of Obed-edom the Gittite; 02,tftat tfjtfe lif.ilmro tor rc mabc upon cwafion
tranfpotrutg 4pob$ arfi
frowtftfhoujfeoftftatobed-edorti,
lo.ti.n . &c. ey,
tl(cl)t|tf.}p\Dl)fiofj(*in*Saro-'.*t'm tljefe 'âmie* Uirtr to be funn foi pjaiff of <0oo, at tfie infant, torjm
toctt
tljcOicrfitrar.fl.nfthitthewincpren'es.
iueffeff. StiioaccoiDmgtothiS*,
<Dittwupbeuie
jume of fame mufical inltrum.ntâuDfo the C[ja!itfcparap!)iafl
CO&tJ) ft.
a. our lord] 61, out fuftej uws
the uote ou Hal. a.
wonJnus-excelknt]
ifl
1
.
Pilgrim Psalter (reduced)

:
page from the
&
ps

t. To the
r
1
^rf
'

I layd
rrr
Jj
j JJ. M ju j J
rrr-f
TriJrr^J
me down and slept;
waking rose;
For me Jehovah firmly up did bear.

For thowsands ton of folk I wil not fear,
Which me besetting round about inclose.
Psalm 97
[P-3]
10s.
praise Him
Praise Him
O praise Him
Praise Him
with
with
with
with
of the trompet shril;

harp and the psalterion;
the flute and tymberel;
virginals and organonl
sound
70
[Pa.
150]
d.
.J, J J J J
J
.
r r r
|J/
r1
r.r
.i
JJ
f j r
r
r
r
i
P
.i
r
r
*
.
*>
Lift
up, ye gates, your heads, and ye,

Dores of eternal aye,
Be lifted up, that so the King
Of glory enter may!
He?
This King of glory, who
Jehovah, puissant
is
11
iiiji i
hJi
rr
'
rr
iir
J J

F f
11
m.
11 ,
c.
.i
Psalm 24.
And valiant, Jehovah, He

In battel valiant.
71
|P.4l
Psalm 5.
rtf
if.
ii
Jii
M
'
AA
JJ
.]
rrr

L.
J J
r f
J.I-n-1
rr
And all that hope in Thee for stay

Shal joy, shal showt eternallie;
And Thou shal cover them; and they
That love T y name, be glad in Thee.
Psalm
c.
15.
Ps.
5 ]
f r
Jr
'r r
Jehovah, who shal sojourner

In Thy pavilion bee?
Who shal a dweller be within
Thy mount of sanctitie?
72
r r
rr
[P.
Hi
Psalm 39.
c.
r
,.
jj

m.
d.
j j J J j
r r r r
mm
J J
j J
jn*J J J
r r
J Jj J J J
rrr f
,
'
,1
I1
ff rffjJ
-I
j JJjJ
r r f r
J j J j J
f r r r r
Kyre in my meditation burnd;

I with my tongue did speak.
Jehovah, make me know mine end,
What my dayes' mesure eke;
Know let me how short liv'd I am.
Loe, Thou hast giv'n my dayes
As handbredths, and my worldly time
Fore Thee as nothing weighes.
7f

Psalm 84.
l.
p. m. d.
Confess Jehovah thankfully,

For He is good, for His mercy
Continueth for ever.
To God of gods confess doo yee,
Because His bountiful-mercee
Unto the Lord of lords confess,
Because His merciful kindnes
To Him that dooth Himself onely
Things wondrous great, for His mercy
79
IPs.
136]

Psalm 119.
ios, d.
,i,n
r"n rrr
i
tj
'i
ii'rr,
irr
r
Behind and 'fore Thou doost me strayt inclose;

Upon me also doost Thy hand impose.
This knowledge is too marvellous for me;
It's high, to reach I shal not able be.
O whither shal I from Thy spirit goe?
And whither shal I flee Thy presence fro?
If I clime up the heav'ns, Thou art there;
Or make my bed in hel, loe, Thou art there.
to
rM
IPs.
159]

RECORDS OF THE ANNUAL MEETING,
1926

The twenty-sixth annual meeting of the Unitarian His

torical Society was held in the Edward Everett Hale Chapel,
First Church, on Thursday morning, May 27, 1926, at
eleven o'clock, the President, Rev. Henry Wilder Foote,
presiding.
The report of the Treasurer, showing a balance on hand of
$173.42, was read, accepted, and placed on file.
The President appealed for a larger membership of the
Society, and spoke of the new publication of the Society,
Volume I, Part 1, containing the address of Professor W. W.
Fenn, at the Annual Meeting of 1925, and that of Dr.
Kenneth B. Murdock, at the Annual Meeting of 1924. He
explained that members were entitled to copies; and that the
issue is on sale at one dollar.
The Nominating Committee having reported, the following
persons were elected officers of the Society for the ensuing
year:
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, President
Rev. Charles E. Park, Vice-President
Hon. Winslow Warren, Honorary Vice-President
Julius H. Tuttle, Secretary and Librarian

Frederick W. Stuart, Jr., Treasurer
Directors
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.
Miss Harriet E. Johnson
Rev. George Hale Reed

Rev. Charles Graves
49
Rev. William Safford Jones, of Portsmouth, New Hamp

shire, spoke of the importance of a suitable memorial to be
erected over the grave of Socinus in Poland, and
it
was
That this society endorse the plan sponsored by

Rev. Charles W. Wendte, D.D., and President Earl M.
Wilbur, D.D., to erect a simple monument over the now
Voted:
grave of Faustus Socinus at Luclawice, Poland,

and that the officers of the Society be hereby authorized to
use the name of this Society in commending the plan to the
Unitarian Churches in this country.
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot called attention to the coming
anniversary of Rev. Joseph Tuckerman.

neglected
On motion of Mr. William O. Comstock, of Brookline, it

was voted that the question of raising the membership dues
from one dollar to two dollars be referred to the Directors.
The President then introduced Mr. Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.,
who gave a delightful and instructive address on "The
Churches of Boston in' 1860" illustrated with lantern slides,
which was warmly appreciated.
Julius H. Tuttle,
Secretary.
50
1927
The twenty-seventh Annual Meeting of the Unitarian

Historical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday
morning, May 26, 1927, at eleven o'clock, the President,
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, presiding.
The record of the last Annual Meeting
approved.
was read
and

The report of the Treasurer was read and accepted.

The President spoke of the Society's plan to continue the
publication of Proceedings, and of the importance of having
a large membership to continue the work and enlarge the
interests of the Society. He also called attention to the plans
for the proposed Socinus Memorial.
Mr. Edwin
J. Lewis
read an appeal to raise the modest sum

of $3,000 for the erection of a room adjoining the ancient
chapel of Toxteth, Liverpool, England, and its equipment, as
a memorial to Richard Mather, minister there, and later
minister of the First Church in Dorchester, Massachusetts.
The President reported that the Directors in behalf of the

Society had accepted the generous offer of Dr. Charles W.
Wendte, of Berkeley, California, to give the sum of ten
thousand dollars to the American Unitarian Association, the
income of the same, after the death of Dr. Wendte and his
wife, to be divided between the Religious Arts Guild and the
Unitarian Historical Society, together with a collection of his
books to be divided between the same societies.
51
The proposed amendments to the Constitution were then

read by the Secretary and adopted as follows
Instead of Article
II,
the amended form shall be:
Article II. This Society shall be composed of all persons

interested in its purpose who have paid the annual dues of
two dollars.
Article V, in the amended form shall read:

Article V. The officers of the Society shall be a President,

a Vice-President, not more than two Honorary Vice-Presi
dents, a Secretary, a Treasurer, and a Librarian, these officers
to be chosen annually, and six additional Directors, two of
whom shall be elected each year for a term of three years,
and who together with the officers shall constitute the Board
of Directors. Vacancies which may occur in the Board of
Directors may be filled by the Board for the unexpired term.
Article VH, in the amended form shall read:

Article VII. The President shall annually appoint standing
committees of the Society on 1. Membership, 2. Library, 3.
Preservation of Records and 4. Publication; and committees
for such other purposes as may be deemed expedient for
administering the affairs of the Society or for advancing its
interests.
The Nominating Committee appointed by the President,

having reported, the following persons were elected officers
of the Society for the ensuing year:

Pres. Earl M. Wilbur, Honorary Vice-President
Julius H. Tuttle, Esq., Secretary
Frederick W. Stuart, Jr., Esq., Treasurer
Miss Cynthia Griffin, Librarian
58
DIRECTORS
For
one year
Rev. Louis C. Cornish, D.D.

Prof. Francis A. Christie, D.D.
For two years

Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., Esq.
For
three years
Rev. Charles Graves
Mrs. Mary Fifield King

The President then introduced Rev. Professor William W.

Fenn, D.D., who gave an able and appreciative address on

"Dr. Sylvester Judd, Unitarian Churchman in Maine".
Julius H. Tuttle,
Secretary.
[Since the Annual Meeting the vacancy caused by the
resignation of Mr. Stuart as Treasurer has been filled, on
October 14, in accordance with the amended By-Laws, by

the election of Mr. Harrie H. Dadmun, to serve until the
next Annual Meeting.]
58



The Proceedings
of the
/
Unitarian
Historical Society
II

VOLUME
PART
GfFT
The First Four Churches of Massachusetts Bay
Charles Edwabds Park

Thomas Goss
vs.
Inhabitants of Bolton
20
Joseph Nelson Pardee
An Early Unitarian Society in Portland, Maine

Vincent Brown Silliman
1931
31


THE PROCEEDINGS
OF THE


The Proceedings
of the
volume n
PART
25
Beacon Street
1931
THE BEACON PRESS, Inc.

THE BEACON PRESS. INC.

All rights reserved
Copyright,
1981
Printed in the United States of America

Secretary
Julius H. Tuttle,
President
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D.,
Boylston Street,
Boston, Mass.
Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.
21
1154
Treasurer
Harrie H. Dadmun,
50 Congress Street,

Boston, Mass.
Vice-President
Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D.,
First Church in Boston
Honorary Vice-Presidents
Rev. HenryWilder Foote, D.D., Rev. Earl M.Wilbur, D.D.,
112
Berkeley, Calif.
Clifton Street,
Belmont, Mass.
Librarian
Mrs. George F. Patterson,
Beacon Street,
Boston, Mass.
25

9 Park Street,
Directors
Boston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Rev. Charles Graves,
Wethersfield, Conn.
Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, D.D.,

Chicago, 111.
Prof. Francis A. Christie, D.D.,

Lowell, Mass.
Rev. John Carroll Perkins, D.D.,
Boston, Mass.

CONTENTS
List of
Officers, 1930-31

Charles Edwards Park
Thomas Goss vs. Inhabitants of Bolton
20


A Note on the Prayer Book of King's Chapel, Boston
31
. .
35
37
40
List of Annual
43
Addresses

THE FIRST FOUR CHURCHES

OF
MASSACHUSETTS
JL HE
BAY
Charles E. Park, D.D.
First Parish Church in Plymouth,
gathered
in
Elder Brewster's manor house in Scrooby, in 1606, escaping

thence to Amsterdam and Ley den, Holland, and in 1620
sending forth an advance post of one hundred and two souls
to plant a colony in New England, was a company of avowed

Separatists, followers of Robert Browne, who, in his pam
phlet "Reformation Without Tarrying for Any" had advo
cated a definite break with the established Church of England,
as being the only practical way of securing that purified form
of life and worship which they felt to be so essential. They
were a company of relatively obscure people of lowly condi
tion, humble-minded, conscientious, and altogether lovable
in their simple courage and honesty. They came to New
England with no more pretentious a purpose than to find a
home for themselves where, on the one hand, they would be
unmolested by the English Act of Uniformity, and on the
other hand, they might rear their children in the English
ways, the English tongue, the English moral standards that
were so dear to them, and that were like to be overshadowed
by the Dutch influences of their Ley den sojourn. They
looked forward to nothing more than a colony composed of
their own congregation, augmented by their own offspring
and by such like-minded persons as might from time to time
join them. It was an unassuming company of congenial souls,
embarked upon an unassuming enterprise. They neither
[1]

sought nor desired publicity. They only asked to be let alone.

They were a separated people separated, not only reli
giously, but socially and politically. As such, they could not
and did not expect ever to become a large or influential
colony. The Plymouth Church, therefore, is in a class by itself.
It stayed by itself, minding its own business, making its own
living, paying its own debts, at peace with its Redskin neigh
bors, increasingly honored and respected by its neighbors in
Massachusetts, New Haven, Providence and Rhode Island
until the Provincial Charter of 1685 merged it with Massa
chusetts to form the Royal Province of the Massachusetts
Bay.
And yet this Plymouth Colony has a very vital signifi
cance for the Massachusetts Bay. Had it not been for
Plymouth there might have been no Massachusetts Bay
as we think of it. Of course Massachusetts would have been
but by what sort of people, under what sort of
auspices, with what animating purposes, with what char
acter and traditions, we cannot say. The connecting link
between Plymouth of 1620 and Massachusetts Bay of 1630
appears to have been the Rev. John White of Dorchester.
This estimable man, full of imagination and enterprise, was
rector of Trinity Parish, Dorchester, full of gravity and
common sense, moderate and eminently practical the kind
of man that usually wins confidence and exerts a strong
influence by his sanity and lack of excessive fanaticism.
While sympathizing with the Puritan party, he conformed,
evidently taking at their word the bishops who maintained
that these little ritualistic details of worship to which the
more zealous Puritans so strenuously objected were, at best,
unessential matters. His solicitude for the well-being of his
flock embraced both their spiritual and their practical in
terests. His people were concerned in, if not actually engaged
in, the fishing industry. It had been well known for the past
ten years that the New England waters swarmed with fish.
settled,
Vessels in ever increasing numbers, one year as many as
fifty, had been making annual trips to New England, to

spend a season in fishing and then to return posthaste to
the European markets. Thus conducted at arm's length,

and involving the ever-perilous trans-Atlantic passage, it
was an expensive industry. A principal item of expense was
the need of double-manning the vessels, in order to have
hands enough on board to fish when they reached the
grounds, and make up their fare before the season ended.
How to reduce the expense of carrying these extra hands
was the problem. Rev. John White suggested to a group of
interested persons that this expense might be reduced by
planting a colony in New England. During the fishing season
this colony would supply the extra hands needed for fishing.
During the rest of the year, they could cultivate their little
farms, raise their own food supply, perhaps even gather furs
and lumber for shipment to England. The Plymouth men
furnished ample proof that such a colony could take root
and become self-supporting. Moreover, Plymouth inadver
tently supplied them with three experienced superintendents
for such an undertaking. Roger Conant, John Oldham, and
Rev. John Lyford had been invited in more or less per
emptory fashion to absent themselves from the Plymouth
Colony, because of certain incompatibilities of opinion
over the question of separation from the Church of England.
They had been established in charge of a little Plymouth
trading post at Nantucket. Here were the very men that
John White wanted to have charge of his colony of fishermen.
Conant and Lyford accepted the offer and repaired to Cape
Ann. Thence they moved to Naumkeag, as being a more
suitable spot. The Colony was started, but it would not suc
ceed. There was indolence and disorder. Fishermen make
poor farmers. There was grievous bungling in England. The
expenses became greater instead of less. After a brief trial
the project was abandoned and the men paid off. Nothing

daunted, John White urged Roger Conant to stay on at

Naumkeag, with the few dozen colonists who were willing
to stick to him, and take care of the live stock, and in a way
mark time, promising that he would aid him and support
him, and do all in his power to revive the project. This Roger
Conant consented to do, and John White kept his promise,
for, thanks to his industry, a company of gentlemen in and
around London were drawn into the enterprise. These gentle
men, among whom we find such honored and familiar persons
as Winthrop, Johnson, Dudley, Cradock, and Goffe, were
actuated by motives quite unlike those of Rev. John White.
We seem to feel that among them the emphasis was placed
upon the religious instead of the practical interest. They were
all out and out nonconforming Puritans. They had not the
moderation which marked White who, although Puritan in
his sympathies, did not refuse to conform, deeming these
matters of ritual too trifling in importance to fight over and
suffer for. In our eyes, he was right, but he lived at a time
when tolerance and moderation were both unfashionable and
ineffective. It was an age of intense feeling, angry and ex
cessive partisanship. The only way to put an enterprise
through was to place it in the hands of men who would not
bend even for trifles. And as the event proved, it was a
kindly fortune that brought John White's scheme for coloniz
ing Cape Ann to the favorable attention of these thick and
thin London Puritans who were prepared to go any length
for the furtherance of their Puritan ideal. With the addition,
then, of these London Puritans, who soon became the domi
nant element in the enterprise, John White's company of
Dorchester adventurers was revamped as the Governor and
Company of the Massachusetts Bay in New England. The
privilege of settling at Cape Ann, which White had purchased
of the Plymouth men, was taken over, and, in anticipation
of the official corroboration this privilege was to receive in
the grant of 1628 and in the Royal Charter of March 4, 1629,
under John Endicott, acting governor,

sailed for New England in March, 1628. They were followed
one year later by a second and still larger band which in
cluded the ministers Higginson and Skelton. This second
band numbered 300 souls, and they again were followed a
year later, 1630, by the Winthrop company, of about 1700
souls in all.
Before going further we may turn our attention with profit
to the nature and the motives of this Company of Massachu
setts Bay. In both respects we shall find them somewhat
mixed. As we have seen, in Old England, the nucleus of the
Company was the handful of Dorchester men, his own
parishioners, whom John White had roughly organized to
support his first undertaking. To these had been added the
above-mentioned London gentlemen, Puritans, men of sub
stance, learning, and character, with a sprinkling of baronets,
and at one or two points, with one or two noble connections.
Among these London gentlemen, mention is made of a group
of Boston men, from Lincolnshire, who were evidently an
element of considerable weight and influence if we may judge
from subsequent events, for one of their new settlements was
named Boston, and one of the leading figures in the life of
the Colony was John Cotton from St. Botolph's Church in
Lincolnshire.
As to the motives of the Company, we again have, as a
nucleus, the motives of John White. We are told that these
were threefold: he proposed a colony on Cape Ann (1) to
serve as a handy source of supply for the extra labor needed
by the fishing crews in their busy season; (2) to serve as a
handy source of supply for the provisions and necessaries
which the crews would need for their homeward voyage; and
(3) to serve as a sort of preaching station that should afford
religious instruction to both colonists and fishermen. In other
words, John White's motives were nothing if not practical.
He saw what his parishioners were doing hazarding life and
a band of settlers


well-being in these long fishing trips to the New England

waters and like the faithful, imaginative, enterprising
pastor that he was, he proposed to mitigate the hardship and
expense of their lot by giving them a base of operations
nearer the scene of their labors. And that is just what his
colony at Cape Ann was intended to be a base of opera
tions within their reach, on which they might draw for both
their practical and their spiritual necessities. This is all plain
and simple and above board.
But when we come to investigate the motives of the
London gentlemen, of the Boston men, of the other elements
in the Company, we find ourselves, in a measure, baffled.
There can be no doubt as to what their strongest, perhaps
their only motive was: to give their Puritan prejudices and
ideals as full and consistent an expression as possible to
start afresh in a new country and establish a form of human
life in strict obedience to the ordinances of God as set forth
in the Holy Bible; in brief, to establish a biblical common
wealth or theocracy, whereof God should be the foundation
and the will of God should be the government, and wherein
the precepts of the Bible should be the laws and statutes
to regulate actual daily living. There can be no question that
some such intention was supreme in their hearts, and that
it was their final and actuating motive. But nowhere do we
find it openly and frankly stated. Unmistakable allusions to
such a motive are to be seen in many casual phrases taken
from their church covenants: phrases like the following
"In obedience to His Holy Will and Divine ordinance"; "We
promise to walk in all our ways according to the rule of the
Gospel and in all sincere conformity to His holy ordinances."
Such phrases as these, which too often seem nothing more
to us than rather trite, rather conventional ways of giving
expression to a pious intention, must be understood in their
full and literal sense. They were vivid and forceful phrases.
They had a bite in them because they are the statement

of a very vivid and real intention. It was their purpose to

establish a life that should be in sharp contrast to the life of
England, with its moral laxity, its undue worship of custom,
its willingness to drift aimlessly along the line of least re
sistance with half an eye to the will of God, and an eye and
a half to the expediencies of king and state and church and
nobility and prevailing custom.
This theocratic motive and intention of theirs reveals
itself in such casual phrases in covenants and perhaps in
letters. But nowhere is it fully and frankly set forth. We
must rather think of it as something tacit in the Puritan
mind of the times. It was an elemental fact in their Puritan
equipment. There was no need to give it verbal form and
statement. To be a Puritan meant just that it meant the
intention to purify English life and worship of its falsehood,
pretense and corruption, and bring it back to the simple
Bible pattern.
Unless this tacit theocratic motive is seen in the Puritan,
it becomes difficult to understand just why they ventured
their bodily comfort, their estates, their families, their
health and their very lives upon so desperate an undertaking
as the settlement of New England. They were not interested
in fisheries like the Dorchester men. They were in no practi
cal need of a base of operations on the New England coast.
They were not poor men in need of better economic oppor
tunity. Their fortunes did not need to be repaired and re
plenished on the contrary, they were most of them people
of good substance and standing in Old England, whose
estates would be not increased but diminished by the step
they contemplated. They were not criminals, fleeing from
justice. To be sure, they were Puritans, known as such, and
as such under suspicion of the authorities, and yet it was
only the ministers among them who openly flouted the Act
of Uniformity and refused to conform, and insisted upon
preaching and worshipping in their Puritan fashion, who

really felt the heavy hand of the law. A few of these non
conforming ministers were marked for punishment, and
were forced into hiding and hunted and harried from place
to place so that some immediate way of escape from justice
became a pressing necessity. But this necessity for escape
was confined to the ministers, and only to a few of them.
The lay people could have continued an unmolested life in
England, as of course the great bulk of them did, suffering
nothing worse than the suspicion and the dislike of the
authorities.
We shall have to conclude then, in view of this dearth of
practical motives, that the real Puritan motive was an un
practical one not an impracticable one, although it did
in the end prove impracticable but an unpractical, a dis
interested motive. They proposed to undertake a very noble
experiment to start fresh, upon new ground, and build up
a purified English society, based upon the Bible Pattern
a theocracy. They would do this for God, and conscience.
They would also do it for their ministers who were the ones
most deeply and immediately interested, who had most to
gain from the success of the enterprise, and most to lose from
its failure. And we have to remember that the minister was
a tremendously important figure in Puritan circles and one
who exerted an influence over his followers of which we
today can have little conception. But apart from this desire
to support their ministers, which was a point where their
motive became practical and immediate, they were obeying
a lofty impulse a voice of conscience and of God which
had been gradually gaining power in their hearts for the
past one hundred years, and which bade them go forth and
establish an outpost of purified English life in the New
World, and set up in Massachusetts Bay a model and a
refuge, just as John Calvin had done in Geneva a hundred
years before, that should be a sort of haven of hope to their
fellow-Puritans,
and should attract them over in ever

increasing numbers, until the purified theocratic outpost

should get big enough and powerful enough to assume dicta
tion of affairs at home.
Perhaps this was a wild scheme. But it was an age of wild
schemes of desperate conditions and desperate remedies.
And at least it was a holy scheme, disinterested and imper
sonal, a bit of service to God, a chance for them to show that
they meant business, and were ready to put their professions
into deeds. We have in our possession a document bearing
the title "Considerations, or Conclusions, for Planting New
England." Its authorship has been ascribed both to John
Winthrop and to Rev. Francis Higginson. It contains nine
reasons or arguments for the removal to New England; ap
parently, it was a document passed around from family to
family among the Puritans who might be interested, in the
hope of settling doubts and enlisting recruits in the enter
prise. No one of the nine considerations explicitly states this
great tacit underlying motive. They are simply arguments
for espousing the motive, and the motive is assumed to be
familiar to the reader.
Here then are the people who in 1628, 1629, 1630 cross
the Atlantic to settle New England. First, there are the
Dorchester men. Their motives, as we have seen, are both
practical and religious, with the emphasis perhaps on the
practical. Second, there are the Puritans of London, and the
eastern counties. Their motives are, primarily, to establish a
Bible Commonwealth, and, secondarily, by so doing to
incidentally support their ministers. Third, there are the
laborers, the sailors and fishermen, the shipwrights and
artisans, the indentured servants, the mechanics, farmers,
maid servants, hired help, and various kinds of craftsmen.
These are not counted among the real undertakers, or assist
ants, or freemen of the Colony. They are never mentioned
as a class, but they constituted a large element. There is
nothing democratic about the old narratives. We have fre

10
quent references to this large element in the company. The

six men and a girl who started for Plymouth in a shallop
and were blown out to sea, one John Ruggles whose elevenyear-old daughter died, one Robert Wright, the linen draper
and brewer, and many other similar hints. But these refer
ences are always couched in language which suggests the
lowly social status of the person mentioned. From these ref
erences we may infer that this element was a very consider
able one that as a class they had no especial interest in the
loftier motives of the Colony that those of them who were
free agents came for the wages paid, while of course the
indentured servants came because they were brought by
their masters, and that finally this element was from the
very first inclined to be unruly and became more and more
so as they increased in number.
Here at best was a mixed set of motives: conscience, per
sonal interest, the hope of gain, the love of novelty and
adventure, and necessity. Of these, the highest is the one
we like best to remember: the motive of conscience which
proposed to establish in Massachusetts Bay a purified theo
cratic life. Undoubtedly this was the strongest of all, simply
because it was the motive of the leaders the ministers, the
governor and assistants, the freemen and covenanted church
members. They were the solid men of the enterprise and
their motive was hence the ruling motive. But we have to
remember that from the very start there were other motives
in the company. And from the very moment of their landing,
there begins a sort of race or contest which one of these
motives shall prevail, and take the lead, and become the
controlling and animating motive of New England.
It is that conflict that lends a tragic interest to the first
two or three generations of New England history. It is that
conflict of motives and purposes which supplies the necessary
foil or background against which we must examine the events
of those stormy days. It is only with that conflict of motives

11
and purposes in mind that we can properly understand, and

properly judge the characters and the actions that have
been so often and so grossly misjudged. After all, what was
Massachusetts Bay going to be? Some said, a theocracy.
Some said, a profitable economic enterprise. Some said,
a cave of Adullam, a refuge for all who are oppressed and
persecuted. Some said, a center of license and self-indulgence.
Some said, just a new start in life, with liberty and oppor
tunity and hope and justice available to all. While over and
above all, there were working the irresistible, imponderable
forces of Destiny to make Massachusetts Bay something
perhaps quite different, something that would have surprised
all the conscious active agents in the enterprise.
Doctors tell us that the moment of birth for a little baby
is a moment of sudden and marvellous physiological change.
A number of hitherto dormant functionalities, which had
been quiescent throughout the period of gestation, suddenly
awaken into activity the moment the little body emerges
into the air. The stomach, the lungs, the pores of the skin,
the digestive process, the vocal cords, the senses, all these
suddenly begin to function. In the same way, the moment
this Massachusetts Bay Colony came to the point of actual
birth and found itself in actual emergence in this new set
of conditions, in a new world, 3000 miles from home, sur
rounded by novelty, thrown upon its own resources, facing
new dangers and new opportunities, a number of totally
unsuspected functionalities awoke into activity, a number of
and selfwholly unforeseen self-adjustments, reactions,
adaptations began to operate. As these grew in power and
importance they took command of the situation and proved
the entire confusion and undoing of the original purpose.
At the outset the theocratic ideal had the advantage of
a great handicap over all other hopes and ideals. It was the
ideal of the leaders and the ministers. There doubtless were
other hopes and purposes present in the Colony, but they
12
The Firat Four Churches of Massachusetts Bay
dared not assert themselves against so powerful and watchful

a rival. The theocrats, if may so call them, were resolved to

keep matters very much in their own hands.
They realized
that the success of their ideal depended upon a number of

conditions.
1. It depended upon their virtual ownership of the land
upon which they were settled. If they could look upon this
territory as their land, they could assume the right to say
what sort of a life should be established upon that territory.
At this point, we find them guilty of something almost
clandestine. The great Charter of 1629 was their title to the
land, but this charter gave them no especial ownership in
the land. It granted them the authority to establish fisheries,
trading stations, and agricultural settlements, and gave
them civil jurisdiction within the limits of the grant. But it
expressly stipulated "that all and every of the subjects of us,
our heirs and successors, which shall go to and inhabit this
grant, and every of their children which shall be born there,
or on the way there, or on the way returning from there,
shall have and enjoy all liberties and immunities of free and
natural subjects within any of the Dominions of us, our
Heirs and successors, to all interests, constructions, and
purposes whatsoever, as if they and every of them were born
within the realm of England." Of course this was not explicit
enough for the Puritan theocrats. They must feel that they
owned the land. Somehow or other they must find in the
wording of the charter a ground for their claim that the
territory was theirs. Failing that justification, the next best
thing they could do was to keep the charter in their pos
session, out of sight of prying eyes, and agree among them
selves, quietly and under cover, to assume that the charter
gave them the virtual ownership and the virtual control
over that territory, which it emphatically did not, but which
they must have if the theocratic ideal was to succeed.
Accordingly on Aug. 26, 1629, a company of twelve gentle
18

men met and drew up what is known as the Cambridge Agree
ment a covenant whereby the signers bound themselves to

migrate to Massachusetts Bay by March 1, 1630, provided
that in the meantime, the whole government, together with
the patent (or charter) for the said plantation, be first, by
an order of court, legally transferred and established to re
main with us and others which shall inhabit upon the said
Plantation. Two days later this agreement was discussed at
great length, and finally voted through. We would give a
good deal to know what was said at that discussion. We sus
pect that the doors were locked and that secret counsels and
designs were quietly spoken. Lacking this knowledge, how
else may we construe this insistence that the entire govern
ment and the charter be transferred with them to New Eng
land to remain in their possession, than as their effort to
protect themselves from discovery in making more of a claim
than the charter granted? The theocratic ideal depended
upon their virtual ownership and control of the territory.
This the charter did not sufficiently give them. They must
therefore quietly assume that it did, and they would agree to
embark upon the enterprise provided they could take the
charter with them, and could interpret its terms and provi
sions in their way. After all, they were doing God's work,
and surely God would forgive them if they found it necessary
to quietly over-reach the literal terms of the king's grant.
2. The theocratic ideal depended upon a homogeneity of
purpose and interest. They must stand together and be of
one mind. They must keep the control of the Colony in their
own hands and the hands of their associates the fit persons
for the enterprise. That test of fitness must be passed before
a man could have a voice in the government of the Colony.
Such a test was supplied by membership in their churches.
If a man could satisfy the elders of a church as to his ortho
doxy, as to his character, as to the working of the Holy Spirit
within him, then he was admitted a covenanted member of
14
the church, and as such he had the right to vote. Church

membership was not only the condition but the protection
of citizenship : for if a man wandered from the path of
rectitude, either in conduct or belief, he could be disciplined,
admonished, excommunicated by the church, and at once
his free citizenship was forfeit. Churches, on the other hand,
were carefully regulated by the magistrates. Only with their
consent could a new church be gathered. And to gain this
consent, it was necessary to satisfy them as to the moral
and religious quality of the proposed constituent members,
and of the minister whom they proposed to settle. In these
ways they did their utmost to preserve that homogeneity
of purpose and motive upon which the theocratic ideal

depended.
3.
The theocratic ideal depended upon its practical work
ability. It must be able to govern the colony, to control its

unruly elements, to supply practical wants, to function in
peaceful, orderly, law abiding, efficient ways. It must not
only attract the favorable attention of Puritans in England,
so that migration to New England would continue, but it
must also avoid attracting the unfavorable attention of the
Crown, for the less notice the Crown took of it, the better.
To do this it must secure peace, prosperity, law and order,
contentment and pride in the Colony.
4. In more specific ways, the theocratic ideal depended
upon recognition of the supreme authority of the Holy Bible
as containing God's word, and confidence in the ministers,
as their guides and counsellors in the true understanding of
God's word. The godly and learned minister was a figure of
the first importance. He must not only be procured for the
beginnings of the enterprise, but a supply of such must be
assured for the future. Those old Puritans did not propose
to build their theocracy upon the broad and blessed founda
tion of human ignorance and superstition. They believed in
education. They founded Harvard College.

15
Bearing these things in mind, we can see at once what a

difficult, delicate, tortuous course those first Puritans had
to steer what tremendous odds they were facing and how
problematical an experiment they were trying to carry
through. We can understand and mercifully judge their ac
tions as one danger after another confronted them. We may
well wonder that they did not lose their heads, grow desperate
and panic-stricken, as lesser men would have done, but kept
their sanity and their poise almost intact clear through to
the very downfall of the theocracy. We should have no diffi
culty in understanding why the Sprague brothers had to go.
They were not Puritans, but conforming Anglican clergy
men. They simply did not belong in Massachusetts Bay.
We can understand why Roger Williams had to go. He
questioned their title to the land. He called upon them to
renounce all connection with the Church of England, and
this would have brought down upon them at once the repudia
tion of their own brethren in England and the unfavorable
attention of the authorities. He struck at the very heart of
the enterprise, and while he had a perfect right to his
opinion, he had no right to embarrass them by voicing those
opinions on what they assumed to be their territory and
within their jurisdiction.
We can understand why Anne Hutchinson had to go. By
claiming that all the ministers with two exceptions were
preaching a false covenant of works, she destroyed confidence
in the ministers. By saying that no amount of upright living
was proof that a man was saved, she belittled the value of
upright living and encouraged moral laxity. By saying that
the Holy Spirit dwelt in the person of the elect and sanc
tioned all his actions, she introduced a moral authority that
superseded the authority of the Bible. Here again she had a
right to her opinions, but no right to hold and disseminate
those opinions upon their territory and within their jurisdic
tion.

16
We can understand why the Quakers, and Familists, and

Anabaptists had to go. It was with them as with Anne
Hutchinson: they claimed the Inner Light, the personal in
spiration and possession by the Divine Spirit. They not only
introduced an authority greater than the Bible, but they
opened the door to all sorts of excessive, fanatical mysticism.
If they were allowed to set the fashion of divine personal
inspiration the Colony would soon be filled with wild-eyed
maniacs doing all sorts of crazy things and claiming for their
actions the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. How long would
their good name in England continue? How long would the
authorities suffer them to exist? How long could they of
themselves survive the social confusion that would result
from such teaching?
We can well understand the attitude of jealousy with
which they guarded their enterprise, the watchfulness with
which they pried into men's thoughts and actions, the
promptness with which they punished every slander, and
checked every wayward tendency, the anxiety with which
they debated each occasion or utterance for the harmful
effect it might have upon this undertaking. They were men
very much in earnest. They had devoted themselves to the
glory of God and the furtherance of His Holy Will, as they
understood it. They were magnificent in their unselfishness,
in their fidelity, in the completeness of their consecration.
They were waging a long, desperate, up-hill fight, but from
the very start the odds were against them and with every
passing year those odds increased in power and number
until at last the theocracy was proved an impossibility and
had to be given up.
First of all there was what Dudley called the "settling dispersedly." No one place was big enough for them all. As
farmers and homesteaders they needed plenty of land, tillage,
pasturage, meadow, and woods. They needed plenty of
water. Salem did not please them. Neither Charlestown nor

17
Boston were large enough. They at once split up into a

cluster of distinct settlements, Charlestown, Boston, Medford, Saugus, Dorchester, Roxbury, Watertown in addi
tion to the original settlement at Salem. Thus although the
Colony was a solid, homogeneous unit, under one governor,
one general court, one body of liberties, one church polity
and one acknowledged purpose, the mere fact of its sub
division into eight, and later into many more than eight
separate parts, each with its own church, its own minister,
its own local geography, its own local problems and oppor
tunities, its own set of local interests, and its own leading
spirits, inevitably introduced that process of variation from
type which is so familiar to the Evolutionist, and which was
the first insidious attack upon the homogeneity of the whole.
This process of variation from type was hastened by the fact
that these subdivisions in many cases simply followed the
old lines of demarcation that had obtained in England.
Friendship, the neighborhood feeling, the law that birds of
a feather flock together, had their influence in determining
these groups. The most conspicuous instance is, of course, the
Dorchester men, who had formed their church in England
and had come over in their own ship, the "Mary and John"
as a distinct body, landing two weeks before Winthrop and
going at once to Mattapan which they proceeded to rename
Dorchester. In a measure, the same was true of the group that
chose Roxbury for their settlement. They were mostly Nazing
men. Those remaining at Shawmut were many of them
Boston men. The group that went to Watertown was deter
mined not so much by these lingering geographical associa
tions as by a common response to the attraction of two
outstanding personalities, Sir Richard Saltonstall and Rev.
George Phillips. This carrying over into the New World of the
local ties and reliances and friendships and congenialities of
the Old World was the most natural thing imaginable. It is
rather touching. But no great stretch of the imagination is
18
needed to understand how
the characteristics peculiar to each group, and

hasten the process of variation from type. Then, too, we
have to remember the Dorchester Plan, so called, the town
meeting, which became for each settlement the method of
local government. Here was a most effective instrument for
teaching village pride, village consciousness, self-dependence
for each settlement, and self-direction. How could such dis
cipline fail to multiply distinguishing traits and interests as
between the various towns, and hence more and more under
mine that homogeneity of purpose and ideal in the Colony
as a whole upon which the theocratic ideal depended?
Many other causes conspired to attack and overthrow the
theocratic ideal. Shortly after 1641, trade relations were
established with the West Indies, with other colonies, and
this meant a broadening contact with the outer world. At
the end of fifty years, over four hundred home-built vessels,
big and little, were carrying New England furs, lumber, salt
codfish, and other commodities even into Mediterranean
ports. This trade brought prosperity, and awakened worldly
ambition. Little by little, settlements crept inland, further
away from tide-water. Watertown became a sort of starting
point, from which the more daring ones ventured off into
the wilderness to build new homes and enjoy greater earthly
opportunities. Whole companies of the more enterprising
started from Dorchester, from Roxbury, from Cambridge to
settle the Connecticut Valley. On the whole, Fate dealt
very kindly with the Colony. It took deep root. It flourished
and expanded. It became known in the Old World. More and
more people of all sorts and kinds and degrees came to Amer
ica. It became utterly impossible to restrict the suffrage
to fit persons. We can only marvel that the fit men managed
to monopolize the control of government when they were
outnumbered six to one by the heterogeneous elements in
the population. Beyond that they could not go. They were
develop

it would tend to confirm and

19
overborne by sheer weight of numbers. The restriction of

church membership had to be removed. The very method
they had adopted to assure a supply of learned ministers
proved to be one cause of the undoing of the theocracy.
Harvard College began to turn out educated men who em
ployed their education not in the ministry but in secular
pursuits, in discovering earthly opportunities to be improved ;
earthly values to be cultivated and enjoyed; earthly rewards
to be sought and garnered. And so as the Colony grew in
size, in numbers, in variety of interests, in breadth of vision
and outlook, in cosmopolitanism of temper, in multiplicity
of functions and obligations and responsibilities, most of all
in recognition of the gorgeous adventure of new life in all its
heroic proportions and possibilities that faced them and
challenged them from every side, the theocracy became less
and less attractive, more and more obsolete, and more and
more impossible. It died hard, but it had to die. Looking
back at it, we cannot avoid the feeling that the theocratic
ideal, as they formulated it, was essentially a way of escape
from an intolerable earthly condition. It was a counsel of
desperation. As such, it did its work. It brought over to
these shores a picked company of the best blood and brains
and character that England contained, a devoted band of
the "most remarkable class of people the world has ever
seen"; who would not have come for any other considera
tion. It sustained them through the initial hardships and
sufferings of their enterprise as no other purpose or hope or
ideal could have done. That is what the theocratic ideal did.
Having done that, it had to go. For they came over here in
their littleness and helplessness, thinking to plant this new
soil with the humble millet and barley of a narrow but holy
purpose. But the day came when they rubbed their eyes with
amazement to find that the millet and the barley were en
tirely overtopped and suffocated by the abundant golden
wheat of their nobility, their courage, their devotion, which
they had also planted without knowing it.
THOMAS GOSS
vs.
INHABITANTS OF BOLTON
1770-1782

casual visitor entering the
slit in the wall of the

South Cemetery of the town of Bolton, in Worcester County,

Massachusetts, comes face to face with a horizontal slab of
slate covering the plain brick walls of a grave and bearing
in classic Latin this inscription:
"Sacred to the memory of Rev. Thomas Goss, A.M.,
Pastor of the church among the Boltonians, who, for
upwards of thirty-nine years having exercised the sacred
office, departed this life Jan. 17th, 1780, in the 63d year
of his age. A man adorned with piety, hospitality, friend
liness and other virtues; somewhat broken in body but
endowed with wonderful fortitude; he was the first
among the clergy in these unhappy times to be griev
ously persecuted for boldly opposing those who were
striving to overturn the prosperity of the churches, and
for heroically struggling to maintain the ecclesiastical
polity which was handed down by our ancestry. Friends
erected this monument."
Between the lines the visitor sees evidence of some tragic
story.
A manuscript written by S. S. Houghton, Esq., as quoted
by Rev. Richard S. Edes in an historical address delivered in
1876, presents the tragedy from another point of view. It
ends: "Bolton church was the first to withstand the power
supposed to be vested in the clergy; thus did triumph the
true principles of liberty in ecclesiastical affairs." have been
unable to find a trace of this manuscript.
If the visitor seeks information from the natives of the
[20]

21
town he will hear the legend bluntly given that Mr. Goss
was dismissed from his pastorate for intemperance and im
morality, but a number of his parishioners followed him to
his own house where, for ten troubled years, until his death,
he continued to preach to them while the controversy raged
through the town and far beyond. It appears that the dis
turbance in Bolton was only a symptom, a local eruption, or
a ferment that was working in the ecclesiastical and political
blood of the colonies before it broke out in the Revolution.
The Puritans of Massachusetts were a high-spirited people
and the spirit of liberty grew with their freedom to plant
their institutions in virgin soil and nourish them in their own
way. Professing undying loyalty to the King of England, they
left the king out of their regard in setting up their civil state.
Acknowledging the English church, protesting only against
its corruptions, they quickly set up their own churches on
the authority of the individual congregations and ordained
ministers of individual congregations only. If a minister left
one church and settled over another he had to be ordained
over again. He had no right to preach in any pulpit but his
own. When ministers began to exchange, the rule was
evaded by the ruling elder reading the lessons and the hymns
and then welcoming the preacher with these words: "If the
visiting brother hath any message for us let him say on."
The early colonists were so fearful of clerical authority that
Mr. Skelton, of Salem, and Roger Williams, voiced a general
feeling when they entered a protest against the ministers
meeting together for consultation and good fellowship, "fear
ing that might grow in time to a presbytery or superintendency, to the prejudice of the churches' liberties." "But this
fact was without cause," says Winthrop, "for they were all
clear to that point, that no church or person can have power
over another church."
Passing along from Colonial to Provincial times, we find
a change coming over the face of things. Ministers have be
22
come restive in their position of inferiority to the magistrates.

Friction between the clergy and civil officers has appeared.
At the proclamation of
Queen Anne, 1712, the ministers had
because of the representatives of the General

walking ahead of them in the procession. Judge Sewell
a grievance

Court
had a hard time on account of it to persuade Mr. Willard to

dine with him. (Prov. Laws, 7 : 714.)
At the time of the Bolton Controversy the King had been
putting on the screws. The debate between George the Third
and the provinces was on. Committees of Correspondence
were making things lively in the towns.
In the churches "the Clergy," as the ministry had begun
to call itself, were assuming authority over the congrega
tions. In very many cases the pastors, presiding at church
meetings, put such motions as they favored and negatived
votes that went against them.
In civil affairs, parties had not yet divided into "Patriots"
and "Tories," but the ferment was working. In the churches
three parties were taking form: one holding that authority
rested in the hands of the clergy; one holding that it rested
in the congregation; and a third, compromising between the
two, with the opinion that authority was co-ordinate, as in
the two houses of the legislature.
This introduction furnishes the key to the meaning of the
controversy between Mr. Goss and the inhabitants of Bolton,
which began about five years before the Battle of Lexington
and Concord and ended about the time of the establishment
of the Federal Government.
The invisible root of the trouble, the root that patriots did
not care to expose to the King's spies, was that Mr. Goss
was a staunch Royalist in politics as well as an autocrat in
the church, and, with other able men in the Marlborough
Association, Mr. Rogers, of Leominster, Mr. Fuller, of Prince
ton, Mr. Morse, of Boylston, and Mr. Mellon, of Sterling,
he suffered dismission on trumped-up charges.
23

Only two men in the association, Mr. Harrington, of Lan

caster, and Mr. Adams, of Lunenburg, says Goodwin's His
tory of Sterling: "By uniting the wisdom of the serpent with
the innocence of the dove, had so permanently won the
affections of their people that they alone were able to main
tain their places."
To understand the history, it should be remembered that,
in New England, two separate bodies were concerned in the
settlement of ministers. The legal body was the parish,
usually coextensive with the town, to which all the inhabi
tants belonged. The business was usually done in town meet
ing, no distinctions between parish and town being drawn.
The church was a voluntary body, of covenanted souls, hav
ing no rights under the law but certain privileges, such as
worshipping in the parish meeting-house and co-operating
or quarreling with the parish in the selection of ministers.
All "power of contract" vested in the parish.
When the "Church of Christ in Bolton" was organized
does not appear and when preaching began is nowhere stated,
but at a town meeting held on the 13th of September, 1740:
"It was voted to have preaching somewhat longer," and
"The town chose Mr. Thomas Goss to be the minister to
preach six weeks in said town." "The town chose Mr. Jabes
Beaman to agree with Mr. Thomas Goss for six Sabbaths,"
"Jabes Fairbank, Moderator."

Provisions were made for carrying out the vote, but it was
discovered that the town had not followed the law, from
which difficulties arose, so a meeting the 3rd of February set
the vote aside and chose a committee to seek the advice of
neighboring ministers, and it chose Mr. Goss to preach until
a minister was chosen.
The ministers advised the town to hear Mr. Belcher
Handcock, and Mr. Ebenezer Gay for some convenient time,
and then choose from the whole number. It was done, and
on the 8th of June, Mr. Thomas Goss, undismayed by the
24

trial, was legally chosen by forty-four votes, to be the

minister of the town, "encouraged" by 400 pounds for settle
ment, and a salary of 180 pounds.
When Rev. Joseph Allen, of Westboro, wrote the History of
the Worcester Association, in 1867, nothing was known about
the life of Mr. Goss before his graduation from Harvard
College with the class of 1737, which also contained Andrew
Eliot, Peter Thacher and Timothy Harrington.
How things went on during the ensuing thirty years does
not appear in any available records.
It is safe to assume that old parishioners have died and
new ones been born until almost a whole generation has
passed out of the pews and another taken its place, and we
know from contemporary history that the very air is vibrant
with exqiting discussions of the relations of the colonies to
the mother country and of the qhurch to the state.
Where the majority stood is shown by the vote on August
13, 1771 : "To concur with the church in dismissing the Rev.
Thomas Goss from all parts of the ministerial office"; and,
"that no person shall be admitted to said house as a public
speaker but such as shall have the approbation of the select
men." Again, on the 12th of November: "Taking into con
sideration the demand of Mr. Goss, Daniel Bruce & others,
voted that it is their opinion that whereas Mr. Goss hath
made a division in the church and by maladministration and
breach of covenant hath brought the town of Bolton into
deplorable circumstances and thereby hath forfeited his right
of claim to the desk as a Teacher, wherefore they still adhere
to their former vote disposing of the matter."
In the face of petitions for conference, for arbitration, and
for compromises, the town steadily and logically maintains
that its only controversy with Mr. Goss is over the matter of
salary. And, with the devoted, or reckless, liberality of bel
ligerents, the town makes appropriations for defence in the
suits he brings against it for salary and damages.
25

Twice judgments for the plaintiff appear on the records

of the Court of Common Pleas and once for the defendant.
Finally, at the September term of the Superior Court, at
Worcester, the jury found that the town never promised
(salary) in manner and form set forth in the writ and the
Court found for the town, with costs.
In the case of Mr. Goss, there was no doubt of his loyalty
to the king and the matter came to a head in the month of
May, 1770, when the church brought charges against him
for intemperance. Then, in August, the church proceeds to
call a meeting without the initiative of the pastor, twentysix out of the fifty-two members responding and twenty-five
voting, and Mr. Goss is dismissed, both from his spiritual
office and from his fellowship with the church.
From that moment Bolton becomes the storm-center of a
widespread controversy and is dis-fellowshipped by the
ministers of the neighboring churches.
The original issue is now lost sight of through the develop
ment of a larger and more vital issue. The question under
debate concerns the Congregational polity of church govern
ment. Was the meeting that voted to dismiss Mr. Goss
regular, it having been called without the knowledge and
consent of the pastor? Was the act at that meeting valid
without the approval of the pastor? Did any church have
a right to call or dismiss a pastor without the advice and
consent of a council of neighboring churches?
The clerical position is clearly stated by Zabdiel Adams in
a sermon preached at a lecture in Bolton, Wednesday eve
ning, August 26, 1772. After expatiating at length on "The
Beauties of Christian Unity," he takes the ground that
councils are less likely to be warped by party feelings than
congregations; that, "to say that the decisions of councils
are not binding is to say that because our weapons of war
fare are not carnal, but spiritual, they have no significance."
He contends that churches were never known to dismiss

26
pastors, unless with their consent, without the advice and

direction of councils, much less in opposition thereto; and,
warming up to the pathos of the occasion, he declares : "This
new and upstart practice justly alarms. If things thus go on,'
what will become of our Congregational churches? Ministers
will have nothing to depend on but the fickle and inconstant
breath of mankind. Who that has common sense and com
mon prudence will ever go into the ministry on these terms,
to have a pityful subsistence whilst the relation continues
and have it dissolved at the pleasure of the people?"
Peter Thacher, as late as 1783, in a pamphlet on "The
Present State of the Clergy in New England," lamenting
over unpaid salaries and the worthlessness of paper money,
declares that: "If this power of dismissing pastors is lodged
in the church, without the intervention of indifferent per
sons, the Clergy of New England are of all men most
miserable."
Again, Mr. Adams, in reply to "A Treatise on Church
Government, by A Neighbor" who turns out to be Rev.
Ebenezer Chaplin, of Groton argues that "when a minister
negatives a vote of the church he only exercises his privilege
of dissenting from the opinions of the majority. He non
concurs. The prerogatives of a minister's office are not deter
mined by men. The people can call him to office and induct
him, but no more. He is possessed of more power than the
brotherhood. The brotherhood have some rights and minis
ters and people exercise checks upon each other. But if
ministers have no right to check, by negation, they may be
obliged to do that which is directly repugnant to their own
consciences. They are servants and abject slaves. Without
this power a minister is the most inconsistent creature in the
world; a passive tool of the people."
The controversy becomes more bitter when the town in
meeting assembled, April 23, 1773, votes to concur with the
church in calling Rev. John Walley to be their pastor.
27
Mr. Walley must have

desirous of office.
In
been a very brave man or one very

either case, his answer to the town was
not timid. He says: "I have received your votes passed the
20th day of April last. And
agree with you in them with
this addition:
As it belongs to the church to Depose the
Pastor from his Pastoral office among them in case of mani
fest unworthiness and Delinquency, so the pastor has the
right to, Resign after asking Dismission and assigning his
reasons, he judging them weighty and sufficient, although
the Church should judge otherwise. The Pastor has also a
right to speak his mind freely in all things that come under
the consideration of the Church, and to enter a protest
against their proceedings if he judge best to do so; but
grant that his dissent shall not make the determination
void. This concession
build not on the Platform wherein
think it is not clearly expressed, but upon the Holy Word
of God. Thus both the Pastor and the Brethren have a
right to Judge and act for themselves."
At the installation of Mr. Walley two councils are as
sembled at the same time. The Goss council proposes a joint
session with the Walley council, "For the sake of the King
dom of Christ," but the offer is declined. Five councils in all
have been called, all but the one Walley council standing by
the deposed pastor. The Gossites propose to leave the
matter to a general council; to ask dismission if the town
will pay the salary due; to divide the town into two parishes;
to make some other compromise; but the town stands firm.
The membership of some of these councils indicates the
breadth and importanceof the disturbance. OnAugust3,1772,
there were present from Boston, Dr. Chauncy, Dr. Pemberton, Dr. Eliot, and Dr. Cooper, with representatives from the
Second Church in Cambridge, First Church in Roxbury, and
First Church in Dedham. The council adjourned to the 6th of
August when there were present, Samuel Dexter, Wm.


28
Cooper, John Williams, John Tudor, Sam. Partridge, Eph.

Frost, Sam Barret, Chas. Chauncy, Ebenezer Pemberton,
Sam. Cooke, Andrew Eliot, Sam'l Cooper, Amos Adams,
Jason Haven; historic names these.
The controversy is not confined to one small parish. Disfellowshipped by the ministers of other churches, the Bolton
church determines to test its standing. On a communion
Sunday, in spite of a protest from Mr. Mellon, Deacon John
Fairbanks, Captain Samuel Baker, Captain Silas Bailey,
Lieut. James Goddard, with Robert Longley, go over to
Sterling to insist on Christian privileges. On their arrival a
dispute begins, which lasts through the day, far into the
night, and passes over to the next day. Meanwhile, the table
is cleared, the sacred vessels put away, and the communion
is not observed again in that church for many years.
Interesting sidelights may be seen in many of the records
of other churches. In 1775, Mrs. Samson moved from Bolton
to Templeton and desired to partake of the communion in
that church. She was a Walleyite and the pastor, Dr. Sparhawk, looked upon Mr. Walley as "irregular"; consequently
he opposed her admission to the table. Then began a con
tention between the church and its pastor which threatened
to disrupt their relations, until other issues sprang up which
overshadowed it and the pastor remained until his death.
In both these cases, as in many others, it is significant of
the democratic spirit that a majority of the church members
sympathized with the Bolton church against the arrogance
of the clergy.
No controversy can go on forever. The end came at Bolton
with a new order of affairs in the country at large. The occa
sion passed away with the death of the central figure, Dr.
January 17, 1780.

Two years later, the Revolution was accomplished and
Goss,
peace dawned on the Federation of States. Massachusetts

was tasting the sweets of her new constitution. Liberty in

29
religious affairs had made strides. Other than Congregational

churches were given the protection of the law. The clergy of
a new generation, now infused with republican ideas, could
not consistently maintain autocratic theories in ecclesiastical
affairs.
Weary of strife, Gossites and Walleyites began to get
together and agree on a line of action. The dismissal of Mr.
Walley was agreed upon and peacefully brought about, and
under a new minister, uncontaminated by personal partici
pation in "the late unpleasantness," the instruments of strife
built, and a new era
were buried, a new meeting-house
dawned. Mr. Walley departed without manifesting ill-feeling.
The great question what is the official relation of the
pastor to the church? has not yet been answered formally
by the Congregational Orders
Religious societies are governed and their power limited
by the laws of the states, but, so far as have learned, no
statute answers this question. Theoretically, and legally, all
authority rests in the membership of the societies. The minis
ter is only a mouthpiece of the congregation, set apart for a
specialized service. He has no rights save such as his con
tract written or implied covers. Some lawyers hold that
he bears the same relation to the society that the president
of a corporation bears to the board of directors, but a long
line of court decisions makes him little more than an em
ployee, for the old form of warrant reads: "To see if the
parish will vote to hire a minister."
The people who pay the bills expect to get their money's
worth of the kind of preaching they like. Though young
preachers may chafe under the limitations they feel, a softer
spirit prevails than in revolutionary days. Relations are
based on good-will and tactful common sense more than on
dogmatic platforms and ecclesiastical rules. Church councils
are more ornamental than authoritative and churches are at
full liberty to appeal from them to their own constituency.
30
In practice, the
general rule is one of extreme charity and

toleration for the minister who behaves himself with politic

dignity and tactful decency and, not infrequently, the run
ning of the whole machinery is left in his hands with a desire
only for practical results.
By a kind of paradox, noi freer, unhampered autocrats can
be found than we occasionally find in Congregational
ministers.
AN EARLY UNITARIAN SOCIETY
IN PORTLAND, MAINE

In
the year 1792 there was formed in what is now the

State of Maine, the Unitarian Society of the Town of
Portland. It came into being by the secession from the local
Episcopal Church, St. Paul's, of the lay reader who from
1787 had been officiating as minister and a number of other
laymen of the church. These had been joined by at least
one layman of the First Parish and two noteworthy citizens
of Biddeford. Two men then identified with the Second
Parish in Portland are also known to have allied themselves
with the new society. The society can hardly have continued
in existence beyond the year 1799 when its minister died.
However, it appears to be the earliest religious organization
i n the country to adopt the Unitarian name. It is of interest
for that reason but not for that reason alone. A study of the
circumstances
surrounding the formation of the society
brings together a great deal of material illustrative of the
religious life of the time, particularly in New England.
Only one original document concerning the Unitarian
Society in the Town of Portland is known to have survived.
It is an old, brown and rather tattered sheet of paper now in
possession of the First Parish in Portland. It reads as follows :
"We, the subscribers, being desirous of promoting the

cause of true Religion and firmly believing the doctrine
which teaches the existence of One God only; humbly
conceiving it to be not only rational but evangelical
do hereby agree to form ourselves into a Religious
31
32
Society, by the Name of the Unitarian Society in the

Town of Portland and do make choice of Mr. Thomas
Oxnard as our Minister & public Teacher of piety
Religion and morality, and engage to pay him annually
for his services in the Ministry, so long as he shall con
tinue to teach what we believe to be the principles of
Scripture & Reason and we remain members of the said
Society, the sum annexed to each of our respective
names; and it is hereby declared that no person shall be
considered a member of this Society after he has sig
nified his wish of leaving the same to the Teacher in
presence of two witnesses
"Portland 7th March 1792"
Fourteen names follow.

Mr. Thomas Oxnard, thus
designated
as religious leader
of the society, was an Episcopal layman who had come to

Falmouth from Boston by the year 1770, when he was ap
pointed deputy collector of the port. In 1774 there were but
eight persons on the "Neck" the portion of Falmouth which
later became Portland who owned more shipping than did
he. Upon the burning of Falmouth by Mo watt in 1775,
Oxnard, loyal to the mother country, left for British soil,
though he seems not to have left this continent. He returned
to Portland in 1784 to be imprisoned for violating the Massa
chusetts banishment act, which provided death as its penalty.
However, he was permitted by Governor Hancock to go to
Boston, there to remain until the legislature, by repealing
the act, should relieve him of his disabilities. He returned
to Portland and recommenced trade. In 1787, having formed
the intention of entering the ministry, he was appointed lay
reader of the Episcopal church. He died May 20, 1799.
William Willis, historian of Portland, says of him, "He was
a man of good mind, and unimpeached character and virtues;
and his children, brought up in honor and integrity, bear
witness to his elevated sentiments and his moral worth. He
was tall in his person, and thin, but of good presence. He
33
was more fond of study and meditation than action the
latter was even irksome to him."

Thomas Oxnard's acceptance of Unitarian views may have
been connected with the sojourn in Boston already referred
to. At any rate, about that time James Freeman, then lay
reader of King's Chapel, New England's oldest Episcopal
church, provided Oxnard with the works of two English
Unitarian ministers, Theophilus Lindsey and Dr. Joseph
Priestley. In November 1788, Oxnard wrote to Freeman,
"I cannot express to you the avidity with which these
Unitarian publications are sought after. Our friends here
are clearly convinced that the Unitarian doctrine will soon
become the prevailing opinion in this country. . . . Three
did not know a single Unitarian in this part of
years ago,
the country besides myself: and now, entirely from the
various publications you have furnished, a decent society
might be collected from this and the neighboring towns."
Thomas Oxnard's letter is preserved in an important chap
ter on American Unitarianism in Belsham's biography of
Theophilus Lindsey, published in London in 1812. The
author continues,
"Agreeably to this account, the doctrine of the proper
Unity of God made a progress so rapid in the town and
vicinage of Portland, that in the beginning of the year 1792
an effort was made to introduce a reformed Liturgy into the
episcopal church; which being resisted by one or two leading
members of the congregation, the Unitarians, who consti
tuted a considerable majority of the society, seceded from
the rest; and forming themselves into a separate church
they chose the Reverend Mr. Oxnard to be their minister;
and being denied the use of the episcopal chapel, they as
sembled for religious worship at one of the public school
houses, which was large and commodious, and where they
carried on the worship of the One God with increasing popu
larity and success."

34
In the
records of the Episcopal church itself, the secession

receives just this definite notice, namely, a minute passed
March
8, 1792,
at a meeting of the vestry:
"Voted that the clerk be desired to acquaint Mr.

Thomas Oxnard, that they are informed that he cannot
any longer conscientiously perform publick worship in
the mode he has heretofore done, and that they do not
expect him any longer to officiate."

Willis, having spoken of Oxnard's change of views, says

he "still continued to officiate to a few of his former hearers,
who had become Unitarians or were inclined that way, as
Dr. Coffin and family, Dr. Erving, Daniel George, Enoch
Esley, James Deering, etc." Coffin and Erving were phy
sicians; George was a printer; Ilsley was a large owner of
shipping; Deering was a large owner of real estate. Other
members were George Thacher of Biddeford, a lawyer and
congressman, which latter post he resigned to be an Associate
Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts;
Jeremiah Hill also of Biddeford, the first Federal Collector
of Customs on the Saco River; Major David Bradish;
J. Waldo; J. Winslow; James Corry; Dudley Hubbard.
A NOTE ON THE PRAYER BOOK

OF
KING'S CHAPEL, BOSTON

In Proctor and Frere's A New History of

Book of Com
mon Prayer, London, 1902, page 222, we read "there was
going on all through the 18th Century a series of agitations
in favor of a fresh revision, carried on mainly in the interest
of those who sympathized with anti-Trinitarian views."
And a footnote adds, "At the back of a great part of the
movement lay the proposals of Dr. Samuel Clarke as to
the
revision."
Dr. Clarke was born in Norwich, England, in 1675.
Some spoke of him as the leading philosopher in England
after the death of Locke. He surely had very wide learning
in Theology, Church History, the Classics. He was a private
chaplain to Queen Anne and, for the last twenty years of his
life, Rector of St. James, Piccadilly, in London.
Not long before his death in 1729, he took a Baskett Copy,
of the Prayer Book and interleaved it, writing changes that
appealed to him and crossing out lines of the text. This book
was never published. He called it merely a book of sugges
tions. His son gave it to the British Museum where it is
still preserved. Two copies were made of it by Rev. John
Disney, associate minister with Rev. Theophilus Lindsey of
Essex Chapel in London. One copy is still in the Williams
Library in London. The other copy was made for Bishop
Provoost of New York and brought by him to America.
The changes of the Revolutionary War required prayer
book revision. For the first few years there was no Episcopal
authority in America and certain churches acted independ1
This book is
7 x
9% inches in size.
135]

King's
ently. Liberal religious views were widespread.
Chapel acted first and in accordance with many suggestions
of Dr. Clarke, obtained through correspondence with Dr.
Lindsey, published in 1785 the first revised prayer book of
the Church of England ever to have been made in America.
It was printed by Peter Edes in State Street.
The next year the seven dioceses of New York, New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and
South Carolina, at a convention in Philadelphia, authorized
and published what they called a "Proposed Book." This
book omitted the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds; reduced
the articles from thirty-nine to twenty; altered the Apostles'
Creed and made many other changes. It was largely the
work of Dr. William White, first Bishop of Pennsylvania.
When the first General Convention of the Protestant
Episcopal Church was held in 1789, the King's Chapel book
was set aside, also the "Proposed Book"; nor was Dr. Clarke's
book, in possession of Bishop Provoost, regarded.
King's Chapel, however, retained its book of 1785 and
uses it still.
[36]
Dr.
Clarke's Prayer Book
BOOK
THE
O F
Common Prayer,
*
And Adttiiiriftration of th*
SACRAMENTS,
h-
AND OTHER
Rites and Ceremonies of the C h u* c h,

to theUfc ofthe
According
Church
of
England;
Together
withthe
PSALTER
or
PSALMS of DAVID,
Pointed asthey arc to heSung of Said in Churches:
AND THE
Form or Manner of Making, Ordaining, and ConfecratingofBisKOPs, Priests, and Deacons
Price>'jjfShi/luî
Ufliwi^d.
Morninc Prater.
fa tlxKitigtMiljc*/
* all Congregati5 A Prayer
Lotd oiir heavenly
F-itiier,onscommatedto theircharge,
highandmighty.Kingof thehealthful
,
Spiritof thygrace
f
tonyi,I.ordoflonh,tl>c
onlyRu- andthattheymaytruly pleafe
Icr of princes,
whodafifromthy thee,pouruponthemthecontithtone
hehold
dlrhedwellers
thy
up- nualdewof
hleffing.Grant
oncarth;MoftIwajtily
wehefcechthis,O Lord, fc* thehonour
of
thecwitiithyfacourTo
hehold
our ourAdvocate
andMediatour,
Jefus
Sovereign
Lord CJtrift. Amen.
gracious
, andfo reploiifh ^ '
King <
h.m'vrith
thegrace
ofdryHolySoi- X LmightyGod, whohaft
rit, thathe mayalwayinclineto
wrjîatthi(tini,with
thywill,andwalkinthyway:En- oneaccord
to nukeourcommoo
duehimplenteoudy
withheavenlyfiippbeations
untothee,and-*m
gifts,eranthiminheilthindwealtfi
awih, thatmmmi" w WW
long10live,ftrengthen
himthat ayttwrad
rlmrinbyName,
tmcr
hemayvanquim
andovercome
all thouwilt granttheir reonefb
f
hii enemieti
andfinallyafterthis Fulfilnow,O Lord, tliedeftrea
life,hemayattain
joy andpetitions
of thy fcTvarrts,
everlafting
as
andfelkity,through
forIhemt
JefusChrift mayhemoftexpedient
ourLord. Am*.
ui in thisworldknowgranting
% A iWr fs,ihe11W Family. ledgeof thytruth,andin the
X l-mightyGod,thefountainworld,to comelife ever
Lifting,
wehumhlyAmm.
\. of goridnefs,
befcech
theeto hbr&hii Royal
Car.ta. 14.
HighnelsGioiGtPrinceofirûVf.
r~W~tHe
grace
of ourLord Jefiis
thePriocefi,
andtheirIffoe,and
Oinft, andtheloveofGod,
alltheRoyalFamay:
Enduethem
andthefrltowfliipof the Holy
withthyHolySpirit enrich
themGhofl,hewithus all evermore.
Withthyheavenly
grace;profperAmen.
h^WPto^,,,^,
ut a.T.r
/,
*>
30
in thyfight,throughthemwithallluppiocfi;
is righteous
andhring
kingdom,
Jefusdrift ourLord, Amm. ttcmtothin:everlaftiug
Chnft
our
Lord.
tbrw$hJefus
?
Amen.
here
theAxthem.
fstictefth
1!*
Prayer
A
Clergy
fa
and
^
People.
fern
tehtrnihirt,except
w<xa
theLimighty
and<
rinyh rfj J , a*i1heir
cverbtthtgGod,
thetat
nufy
hfijrcioberail, aithtpvtthere
Reduced facsimile, actual size
if
HereetieihibQrier Mernii%
Prtjcrihrtufhimt
theTr.
x 9^2 inches.
ft
C
U
f\
ail

LONDON
Printedhy John Bask* TT, primerto theKing'smoltExccJJentMKfly,andhytheA%nsol'HÎ,7# deceÛ1724.
<&*
S"?'^ S,
^"

1928
The twenty-eighth annual meeting of the Unitarian His

torical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday
The record of the last annual meeting
was
read
and
approved.

The report of the Treasurer was read and accepted, show

ing a balance of $265.84.
An amendment to the By-Laws was proposed by the

Treasurer, to be acted upon by the Society at its annual
meeting in 1929, to be added to Article H:
"A
person may become a life member by the payment of

$50, which sum shall be funded and only the income there
from used for the expenses of the Society."
The Nominating Committee, Mr. William O. Comstock,

Chairman, and Rev. Eugene R. Shippen, appointed by the
President, reported the following persons to serve as officers
and directors of the Society for the ensuing year, and they
were elected

Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, Honorary Vice-President
Julius H. Tuttle, Secretary

Harrie H. Dadmun, Treasurer
[37]
Directors
For
one year
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.

For
two years
Rev. Charles Graves

For three years

Prof. Francis A. Christie
Rev. John C. Perkins
The President spoke of the great importance of having a
large and useful library at the headquarters of the American
Unitarian Association for study and research on the growth
and development of the Unitarian movement in America. He
instanced the remarkable collection gathered by Dr. Wilbur
at Berkeley, California, as the largest and best in this country ;
also the valuable library of Dr. Williams in London; and
also our Congregational Library in Boston; but he empha
sized the fact that the library of our denomination was sadly
deficient. He made an earnest appeal for gifts from wide
spread sources, for books, pamphlets, manuscripts, engrav
ings, photographs, and memorabilia, which would place our
collection in the front rank of denominational libraries. He
urged that every effort should be made to impress upon the
Directors of the American Unitarian Association the im
portance of their generous support of such a purpose, and of
the need of a proper endowment in its support.
The President referred again to the valuable gift of

Rev. Charles W. Wendte, of Berkeley, California, mentioned
in the Secretary's report of last year, and reported that the
collection of books as a part of his gift had already been
received, and divided between the Historical Society and the
Religious Arts Guild.
[38]
The President renewed his appeal for additions to the

Socinus Fund, which is to be used to erect a fitting memorial
over the grave of this early leader of Liberal Religion in
Poland.
The President
reported that the American Unitarian

Association and the Unitarian Historical Society had united
in a meeting at the headquarters, 25 Beacon Street, on
March 13, Tuesday, in the afternoon, to present a copy of
the oil portrait of Adrian van der Kemp to the Association,
which had been featured in The Christian Register.
The President
persons
again extended a cordial invitation to

interested in the aims of the Society to become

members.
Dr. Wilbur, at the invitation of the President, spoke of

his visit to the grave of Socinus in Poland, expressing his
own personal interest in the proposed memorial. He also
spoke of the great value of the proposed enlargement of the
Library at 25 Beacon Street, and outlined a number of
subjects under which such a collection could be made.
The President then introduced Dr. Francis A. Christie,

who gave an able and scholarly address on "Theodore Parker
and Modern Theology," to an appreciative audience.
Julius H. Tuttle,
Secretary.
[39]
1929
annual meeting of the Unitarian His

torical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday
The twenty-ninth


The report of the Treasurer was read and accepted, show
ing a balance of $121.75.
In
with a notice given at the last annual

meeting the By-Laws were amended by adding the following
:
paragraph to Article
accordance
II
"A
person may become a life member by the payment of

$50, which sum shall be funded and only the income there
from used for the expenses of the Society."
Prof. Francis A. Christie reported for the Nominating

Committee the following persons to serve as officers and
directors for the ensuing year, and they were duly elected:
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, Honorary Vice-President

[40]
Directors
For
one year
Rev. Charles Graves

For two years
Rev. John C. Perkins, D.D.
For
three years
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.


Dr. Samuel A. Eliot expressed a wish to have the four

busts at the American Unitarian Association identified, as
they bear no labels; and raised a question as to what has
become of the framed portraits of ministers which hung in
the old building. Miss Griffin replied that the portraits had
been taken out of their frames, and were in process of
arrangement and cataloguing.
It
that the President and Directors of the

American Unitarian Association be asked to express to the
National Council of Congregational Churches, meeting at
Detroit at the end of this month, their sentiments of com
was voted
mon interest at this anniversary of both bodies.
The President called attention to the Library of the Amer

ican Unitarian Association, which contains the material
belonging to this Society, and to the services of Miss Griffin
as Librarian which were to terminate by decision of the
Association on June 30. He expressed regret that the Asso
ciation had not taken steps to build up the Library, and the
wish that this Society might be able to furnish the means
to supply a librarian for this important work.
Dr. Eliot said that he would like to be assured that

material added to the Library would be preserved, and the
President spoke of its value as a library of reference.
[41]
The President also referred again to the Socinus Fund

which had now reached the sum of $1500, and made an
appeal for $500 more which he thought would be enough to
complete the proposed work.
The President then introduced Rev. Thomas H. Billings,

Minister of the First Church in Salem, who spoke about the
founding and early history of that church on this its three
hundredth year, and portrayed the labors and human in
terests of its first four ministers, Skelton, Higginson, Roger
Williams, and Hugh Peter.

by the
President, and spoke about the early history of the Arlington
was next introduced
Street Church, now in its two hundredth year, which began

in 1729 as the Church of Presbyterian Strangers. Miss
Johnson rehearsed their trials in gaining a foothold in Boston,
and told incidents of the ministry of their first minister,
Rev. John Moorhead, through that of Rev. Mr. Annan,
and Rev. Jeremy Belknap in this church in Long Lane, later
Federal Street.
William Safford Jones followed with interesting

comments on Rev. Mr. Belknap as the Historian of New
Rev.
Hampshire.
The President called attention to copies of Vol. I, Part
2,
the proceedings of the society which could be supplied at

the close of the meeting at $1.00 each; and spoke of the
purpose to publish Vol II, Part 1.
Julius H. Tuttle,
Secretary.
the annual meeting the vacancy caused by the

resignation of Miss Griffin as Librarian on July 1, 1929, has
been filled, on November 15, in accordance with the By-Laws,
by the election of Mrs. George F. Patterson, to serve until
the next annual meeting.]
[Since
[42]
List of Annual Addresses

delivered before
The Unitarian Historical Society

1901-1925

The earliest meetings of the Society were held in Channing

Hall in the building of the American Unitarian Association,
25 Beacon Street, Boston. Since 1904, the Annual Meet
ing has been generally held in King's Chapel, Boston. The
list of speakers and their subjects is as follows
May 23, 1901. Brief addresses on Rev. Samuel Willard,

D.D., Rev. Cyrus Bartol, D.D., and Rev. Alexander
Young, D.D., by Rev. C. E. Park, Rev. George W.
Solley, Rev. E. E. Hale, Rev. S. B. Stewart, and
Rev. Edward J. Young.
May 29, 1902. Prof. T. G. Masaryk, Prague, Bohemia.
by the Society.
Printed
21, 1903. Rev. Alfred Altherr, Basle, Switzerland.

"The Origin and Growth of the Liberal Church in
Printed by the Society.
Switzerland."
May 26, 1904. Edwin D. Mead, Esq., Boston.
"The Relation of the Unitarian Fathers to. the Peace
Movement in America."
May 25, 1905. Rev. Edward Everett Hale, Boston.
"The Fort Palmer Episode and other Unitarian
Memoirs."
May 24, 1906. Rev. John Carroll Perkins, Portland, Me.
May
[43]

May 28, 1908. Rev. James De Normandie, Roxbury.
May 27, 1909. Rev. Bradley Gilman, Canton.
May
23, 1907.
"Holmes as a Religious Teacher."

26, 1910. Rev. H. G. Spaulding, Boston.
"Harvard College Forty Years Ago, and the Old
Harvard Divinity School."
May 25, 1911. Rev. C. E. Park, Boston.
"History of Ordination and Installation Practices."
May 23, 1912. Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, Cambridge.
"The Harvard School of Hymnody."
See Transactions of the Unitarian Historical Society of
Great Britain, Vol. Ill, Part 2, October, 1924.
"History of the Harvard Church in Charlestown."
"The Brattle Street Church, Boston."
See Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society,
Vol. 47, pp. 223 to 231, entitled "The Manifesto

May
Church."
May 27, 1915. Rev. Charles Graves, Albany, N. Y.
See The Christian Register, June 24, 1915, pp. 584-586
and July 1, pp. 608-611, also reprint by Geo. H. Ellis
Co.,1915.
May 28, 1916.
Hon. Winslow Warren, Dedham.

"The Value of Contemporary Opinion."
See Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society,

Vol. 49, pp. 349-356.
May 25, 1917. Rev. C. E. Park, Boston.
"Possibilities of Beauty in the Congregational Order."
See American Journal of Theology, Vol. XXHT, No. 1,
January,
1919.
Rev. G. L. Chaney, Salem.

See The Christian Register, Nov. 28, 1918, p. 1134;
May
23, 1918.
Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7; Dec. 12, pp. 1191-2, 1215-6.
May 22, 1919. Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, Brooklyn, N. Y.

"The Pentecost of Unitarianism"(A study of Channing's
Baltimore Sermon of 1819.)

(Published for the Unitarian Historical Society by The
Beacon Press, Inc., Boston, 1920.)
'
27, 1920. Professor W. W. Fenn, Cambridge.

May 26, 1921. Professor Ephraim Emerton, Cambridge.
"The Unitarian Debt to Orthodoxy."
Printed in The Christian Register, July 14, 1921, pp. 657-
May
659; July 21, pp. 682-684.

May 25, 1922. Rev. W. G. Eliot, 2nd, Portland, Ore.
"The Early Days of Unitarianism on the Pacific Coast."

Printed in The Christian Register, June 22, 1922, pp.
586-587; June 29, pp. 613-614; July 6, pp. 637-038;
July
May
13, pp. 664-665; Aug. 3, pp. 735-736; Aug. 10,

pp. 756-758.
24,
1923.
Conn.
Professor Waldo
S.
Pratt, Hartford,
"The Earliest New England Music."

May 22, 1924. Dr. Kenneth B. Murdock, Cambridge.
See Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical Society, Vol.
I,
1925.
19, 1925
(Special Meeting). Rev. R. Nicol Cross,

Hampstead, London.
May 12, 1925. Professor W. W. Fenn, Cambridge.
March
I,
1925.
May 27, 1926. Mr. Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., Boston.

"The Churches of Boston in 1860."
May 26, 1927. Professor W. W. Fenn, Cambridge.
"Dr. Sylvester Judd, Unitarian Churchman in Maine."
May 24, 1928. Professor Francis A. Christie.
"Theodore Parker and Modern Theology."
May 23, 1929. Rev. Thomas H. Billings, Salem, Mass.
"Early History of the First Church in Salem, Mass."
Miss Harriet E. Johnson, Boston.
"Early History of Arlington Street Church, Boston."
May 22, 1930. Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D., Boston.
"The First Four Churches of Massachusetts Bay."
II, Part I, 1931.
[45



m 25
The Proceedings
of the

VOLUME
PART
II
II
The Development of Liberal Religion in Iceland

RoGNVALDUR
PETURSSON,
D. D.
The Rise of Icelandic Churches in America

George F. Patterson, D. D.
Kristofer Janson: as Man, Poet, and Religious Reformer

Amandus Norman, D. D.
1932
UNI VERS,
25 Beacon Street


The Proceedings
of the
VOLUME
PART II
1932
II


Copyright,
All rights
1932
25 Beacon St., Boston, Mass.
reserved.

LIST OF OFFICERS,
1931-32
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D.

21 Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.
Julius H. Tuttle, Esq.

1154 Boylston Street
Boston, Mass.
VICE-PRESIDENT
TREASURER
Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D.

Harrie H. Dadmun, Esq.

50 Congress St., Boston
HONORARY VICE-PRESIDENTS
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, D.D.

Belmont, Mass.
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, D.D.
Berkeley, Calif.
LIBRARIAN
Mrs. George F. Patterson

25 Beacon Street
Boston, Mass.

DIRECTORS
Lowell, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Rev.
John Carroll Perkins, D.D.

Boston, Mass.
J. Lewis, Jr., Esq.

Boston, Mass.
Edwin
Rev. Charles Graves

Wethersfield, Conn.
Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, Th.D.
Hyde Park, Chicago, 111.

Its first president was the late Henry H. Edes of Boston,
who served from 1901 to 1919, followed by Rev. Henry Wilder
Foote, D. D., who served until 1930. The purpose of the So
ciety is to collect and preserve books, periodicals, pamphlets,
manuscripts, pictures and memorabilia which describe and
illustrate the history of the Unitarian movement; to
stimulate an interest in the preservation of the records of
Unitarian churches; and to publish monographs and other
material dealing with the history of individual churches, or
of the Unitarian movement as a whole. The Society welcomes
to its membership all who are in sympathy with its aims
and work. Persons desiring to join should send the mem
bership fee ($2.00) with their names and addresses to the
Treasurer.

CONTENTS
1932
List of
IV
Officers

RoGNVALDUR PETURSSON, D. D.

The Rise and Progress of Icelandic Churches

14
in the United States and Canada
Kristofer Janson: as Man, Poet and Religious

Reformer
21
Records of Annual Meeting, 1930
41
44
47
Communications
should be addressed

to

THE DEVELOPMENT OF LIBERAL RELIGION

IN ICELAND
RoGNVALDUR
D. D.
was the first country of the western hemisphere

and settled by Europeans. Towards the close
of the eighth century it was visited by Irish hermits (Feb
ruary-August 795) , who on their return reported the marvel
of the perpetual day at mid-summer, where there was "no
darkness to hinder one from doing what one would." Per
manent settlement was effected in the next century by the
three Scandinavian countries and Norse refugees and sojourn
ers in the British Isles.
The colonists, many of whom belonged to the cultured,
independent upper class of Norway, were of a uniform race,
character and language, holding in common that rational
view of life commonly called the Odinic Religion, acquired
and evolved by the great Northern Race, through observa
tion, experience, travel, and cultural contact with other
people. The language had attained to a delicately balanced
state of expression. It had developed a rare quality of
rhythmic beauty and brevity, clearness of thought, vigor
It was highly figurative and peculiarly
and flexibility.
adapted for poetic and literary achievements, for which, for
centuries, the ancient Icelanders were destined to become
noted in the courts of northern Europe. But it was also in
separably connected with the past, reflecting in its metaphors
and similes, in its very structure, the mental, moral and
spiritual outlook and development of the race. The inherent
temperament of the Northern Race, its veneration for knowl
edge, truth, justice, fortitude, its passion for freedom, selfexpression, law and order, its assumption of right, its con
sciousness of a fundamental equality of the human and
ICELAND
discovered

PkTURSSON,
divine, its sense of duty and social obligation, its interpreta

tion and estimation of life and death, all was reflected in
the alliterations of every day speech. Every observation,
remark, conclusion, hearkened back to this fundamental
thought of life.

It
is well to bear this significant fact in mind whenever

an attempt is made to appraise or analyze the religious
development of the North and particularly that of Iceland,
where, down to the present day, the language has been
preserved almost in its classical purity. The apparent chang
es, abrupt as they may seem, from one faith to another,
have been largely illusory owing to this preserving quality
and nature of the language itself. The change from what
may be called the racial faith to a linguistically unassimilative foreign Roman Catholic faith (or later Orthodox
Protestantism) is not so much a transition as a revision
a translation of ideas and concepts of the former into terms
and expressions of the latter, altering but slightly the gen
eral outlook on life.
The early Norse religion did not distinguish sharply
the purely metaphysical and ethical. The sacred
Triad, Wisdom, Fortitude, Justice, not only reveals the divine
manifestations of the Universe but also implies the goal
set for human attainment and perfection. This the ancient
Havamal makes clear. It reiterates, over and over again,
that wisdom, discernment, the "understanding heart," is
not only to be coveted above all things, but is the underlying
principle of the Perfect Life. "No more precious burden,"
it declares, "can one carry on Life's highway than supreme
wisdom. In unknown parts it excels riches, which are a dire
distress." Freedom, self-reliance, courage, endurance, justice,
such are the requisites of happiness. It is reared on wisdom.
Wisdom dissipates fear, dispels error, clarifies the vision,
enlightens the judgment. "It is a lamp unto our feet and
a light unto our path." The individual, thus emancipated
by Wisdom, is free. He is raised to his highest estate, em
between
powered with freedom of choice, invested with the dignity

of a personal responsibility.
To this Triad, both in its amplified and popularized form,

life was squared in so far as circumstances would permit.

Human relationship to the divine was felt to be that of
friendship, sustained by communion and adoration, never
by supplication nor fear. Scores of passages in the classic
writers, referring to devotees of the ancient faith, speak of
them as the "friends" or the "loving friends" of the deities,
never as fearing them nor as their servants or slaves. The
"Fear of God," essentially a Semitic or Oriental obsession,
is an experience utterly unknown to the North. The same
is true of the theological idea of sin. It is only after the
introduction of Christianity that this fear is inculcated and
the feeling of sin aroused in the hearts of the faithful, but
sustained only as long as a belief in a place of everlasting
torment could be maintained. It is therefore not accidental
that the Catholic Church and later Protestantism, one after
the other, in every Northern country, has stressed unduly
this doctrine of sin and retribution. This notion of friend
ship, mutual attachment and comradeship, subconsciously
felt to exist between man and nature, the human and the
divine, runs counter to the whole Christian scheme of
Redemption.
Catholicism makes its first appearance in the Island in
the declining decades of the tenth century. Its first emissary
is a young Icelander by the name of Thorvaldur and known
as the Farfarer, on account of his extensive travels. Several
years he spends at the court of King Svein of Denmark,
then enters upon a series of wanderings, roving from one
country to another. On one of his travels in Southern Saxony
he makes the acquaintance of a missionary bishop by the
name of Friederick by whom he is baptized and converted
to Christianity. After remaining with the bishop for a while
he prevails on him to accompany him to Iceland on a mis
sionary journey "if perchance his father and mother and
those next of kin may be persuaded to follow his example
and be brought to God." The Bishop consents and with a

small band of thirteen men they set out for Iceland and
arrive early in the summer of 981.
Thorvaldur confined his activities chiefly to the northern

provinces, where his kinsmen exerted the greatest influence.
The Republican Constitution, though recognizing the na
tional form of worship, left
to each individual to choose
for himself in matters of belief. No forms or standards were
set up by which truth or error of any religious cult could
be adjudged. This tolerance placed the national religion at
a certain disadvantage in maintaining its position against
the advances of so highly an institutionalized organization
as the Roman Catholic Church. Its advocates took refuge
in this latitude of the law. They were immune from pro
secution as long as they committed no deed of violence. The
argument adduced in favor of the new religion was that of
superiority. It was essentially the true as opposed to the false.
it

(i.
The Island had then been settled for over a century. The
original, and at first detached, colonies of the distant fjords
and dales had become welded together into a unified Com
monwealth, setting up a republican form of government,
unheard of in the annals of Europe. These colonies had
surrendered their local sovereignty to a federal legislative
and judiciary assembly "Althingi"
e. the forum of all
House of Commons) founded in 930. A well regulated and
universal code of laws had been adopted, providing for all
contingencies of society, such as the relations and duties of
different classes, management of the poor, distribution of
landed property, regulations of weights and measures, fixing
of averages of values of commodities of import and export,
laws respecting marriage, divorce and inheritance, procedure
at law and punishment of crime.
Thorvaldur devoted himself with unabated zeal to his

missionary labors for five years or until he was outlawed
by Althingi for an act of violence he wreaked on two slan
derers of him and his missionary bishop. In this short period

he had accomplished much. He had paved the way for the

new faith into the Island. His immediate family, with the
exception of an elder brother, had received the rite of bap
tism, together with several influential personages of the
North, one of whom caused a church to be erected in 984
at his residence at Asi in Hjaltadal. Other noted persons
had accepted the "Prima Signatio" of the Church, while the
more frugally minded among the yeomanry refused to pay
the stipulated temple tax. Thorvaldur left and returned no

more. After many years of wandering in Southern Europe
he finally repaired to the Norse center of Polotozk in North
western Poland where he founded a monastery and died
shortly after.
Ten years elapse and no further attempt is made to
bring Iceland into the fold of the Church. In 995 King Olafur
Tryggvason ascends to the Norwegian throne, proclaims
Norway a Christian nation and with characteristic zeal and
impetuosity forbids all social and trade relations with heathen
lands. This proclamation was fraught with the gravest con
sequences for Iceland, whose trade had chiefly been with
Norway and to which it was closely linked by ties of kinship
and marriage. The issue took on a political and an economic
aspect. A five year struggle ensued between the supporters
of the old and the new order, happily terminating in a com
promise effected by the leaders of Althingi in the year 1000.
A law was passed, as a political expediency, ordering "that
all men should be Christians and take baptism, but the old
laws should stand, respecting eating of horse-flesh, exposing
of infants and of sacrifices, if done in secret:" a provision
repealed shortly after. "For," in the words of the Lawspeaker, "it hath come to an evil pass if men do not keep
one law in the land. Therefrom will come battles and war
to the point of laying waste of the land. This, therefore,
seems best to me, not to let them have their will who display
the greatest partiality, but so dispense matters between
them, that each side may gain some of its demands to the
end that we all may have one law and one faith. For this will
ever be true, if we have separate

have broken the peace."
laws we shall thereby

This "Act of Compromise" as it may properly be called,

enjoining "all men to be Christians," curiously enough made
no further provision for the establishment of the Church.
This gave rise to a situation somewhat unique. National
acceptance of the new faith naturally led to building of
churches. Many of the chieftains erected churches on their
estates and endowed them with landed property or miscel
laneous chattel. Others were encouraged to emulate their
example by promises held out, "that a man should have room
in the Kingdom of Heaven for as many men as could stand
in the church he built." But invariably the churches so
founded remained the property of the patron. He received
the tithes and negotiated with the priest. In the ancient
ecclesiastical law we read: "It is right for a man to have
a priestling taught for his church ; he shall make an agree
ment with the youth himself, if he be sixteen winters old,
but if he be younger then he shall make it with his lawful
guardian. He shall give him teaching, and fostering, and
A priest may free
treat him as if he were his own child.
himself from a church by teaching another in his stead.
If a church-priest die at the place where he was taught and
leaves property behind him, the church shall have it and
the man that was his patron 300 six-ounce ells. If he has
more property, then his kinsmen shall have it."
This law enacted towards the close of the eleventh cen
tury indicates the position of the church in the Common
wealth. One cannot help observing the similarity exhibited
between it and the ancient Temple which it superseded.
Churches were built and endowed by individuals, but their
ownership was vested in the founder, who passed it on to
his next of kin. For almost a century no general supervision
is exercised over the administration of these churches, no
attempts made to bring them into a corporate organization,
no bond of union exists between them approaching in any
sense that which is generally understood by an Establish
...
They were free and independent units, members at

large of the Christian fellowship in its broadest sense, essen
tially national in character. By reason of their generous
endowments affording leisure for meditation and study they
attracted the best talent of the land to the priesthood.
Younger sons of the ruling families, after years of traveling
and study abroad, returned to their native home, assumed
holy orders and settled down to the quiet life of the scholar
and counselor of the nation. To this fact may be attributed
the rise and development of that renowned literature of
the eleventh and twelfth centuries, for which Iceland is so
justly famous. The art of writing was introduced, schools
were established, and the study of the classical languages,
geography, astronomy and higher mathematics pursued
ment.
with all diligence.

But this happy state of affairs could not remain un
changed for ages. Bishops were appointed, a tithe law
foreign
enacted by Althingi 1096, parishes apportioned,
influences began to crop up in doctrinal and administrative
matters, Canon Law being submitted in opposition to Civil
Law. A long drawn out controversy arising over the "Glebe

Endowments" and contributing materially to the overthrow
of the Republic dragged on for centuries, finally terminated
by the "Glebe Covenant" of King Eirik of Norway, 1297,*
that handed all private and landed property of the church
over to the bishops. To all outward appearances, after the
beginning of the fourteenth century, the Church in Iceland
did not differ materially from the Church in other North
European Countries.
And yet it did differ. Owing to the fact that it was not
established by an autocratic mandate or imposed on the
nation by terms of conquest, but rather owed its existence to
an act of Althingi, it was subject to constitutional authority.
In this was vouchsafed a certain protection to the public
that fostered a spirit of freedom and independence.
But it
In 1262 the Republic came to an end and Iceland entered into, a personal union with
Norway, which was maintained up to 1397 (The Kalmar Union) when the Island,
together with Norway, passed under Danish rule.
also lent to the Church certain national characteristics which
it never lost. Two remarkable instances depicting this spirit

of independence may be cited from those with which the

ancient records abound. In the earlier stages of the "Glebe
controversy" towards the end of the twelfth century, Bishop
St. Thorlak insisted upon reading to the great chief of the
Southland, Jon Loptsson of Odda, grandson of Ssemundur
the Wise, a letter from the Archbishop of Trondhjem order
ing all church endowments to be placed under direct control
and supervision of the bishop. Jon replied: "I am willing
to hear the Archbishop's message, but I am no less deter
mined to pay no heed to it, for I do not think that he wills
or knows better than my forefathers, Ssemundur the Wise
and his sons." It may be noted that Ssemundur the Wise
was one of the men who, in conjunction with a former bishop,
prepared the Tithe Law of Althingi. The other and the more
striking one, because it emanates from a lowlier source, that
of an anonymous scribe of the fourteenth century, a compiler
of one of the Sagas (Fostbrsedrasaga) runs: "Christ has
made Christian men his sons but not his slaves."
Another distinctive feature is the non-observance of the

Canon Law of celibacy. This injunction of church discipline
was almost wholly relegated to the cloisters, "for those

elderly and more sedate ladies and gentlemen to observe,
who for the sake of their souls sought comfort in isolation
from the world." Priest and Bishop alike contracted a cer
tain form of marriage, amounting to a civil contract rec
ognized by the state. It was not an uncommon occurrence
that a bishop would be succeeded in office by his son.
Still another point of dissimilarity to be noted, one to
which I have already referred and which influenced the
relative position of Church and people, was the unbroken
succession of language, preserving as it did, in living forms
of speech, as well as on parchment and scrolls ; the Laws, the
embodiment of the very genius of Northern Civilization ; the
accounts of the old racial faith, its wise precepts and analysis
of truth, honor, justice and humanity. It was forsooth the

older faith, protesting against Roman authority, that cries

out in the words of the Scribe, "Christ has made Christian
men his sons and not his slaves." The older faith, though
superseded by a later one, still lived on in lay and legend,
saga and song. It afforded the valuable privilege of contrast
and comparison, so essential for right thinking and unbiased
judgment. For it must always remain true, that he who
knows only one religion knows none. Preserving within it
the true seed of liberalism, the church passed on, more
protestant than Protestantism, into the new era of the
Reformation, over which I can pass freely.
"The old order changeth," and in a surprisingly short
time again becomes old. After a dominant sway for five
centuries, Catholicism passes out, hallowed only in the mem
ory of later generations by the martyr blood of its last
bishop, Jon Arason of Holar, the northern diocese, who,
with two of his sons, was beheaded November 7, 1550, at
Skalholt, the seat of the southern diocese, where the re
formers had gained the ascendancy. Bishop Jon had not
only espoused the rights of Catholicism in the north, but
for ten years thwarted all efforts of the Reformers to subject
the civil and the ecclesiastical courts of the Island to the
arbitrary will of the new sovereign, the Aldenborgians of
Denmark. By his death the royal will ruled supreme, and
the Reformation was ushered in by the adoption by Althingi
of the so-called "Church Ordinance" of Christian III, 1551.
Then follows an era of reconstruction and so-called "faith
purification" extending into the succeeding century. The
most noteworthy achievement of this period is the transla
tion and printing of the Bible in 1584 by Bishop Gudbrandur
Thorlaksson of Holar, who has justly been called the father
of the Lutheran Reformation in Iceland, a great-grandson
of the martyred bishop. Another literary accomplishment
of no less value for the future development of the Church
was the translation into Latin of the ancient classical litera
ture of the Island. This prodigious task was performed by
a cousin of Bishop Gudbrandur, the Rev. Arngrimur Jonsson
10

Vidalin,
surnamed the "learned," master of the diocesan

college at Holar. These translations of the learned Vidalin
were hailed with enthusiasm at the Northern Universities
of Copenhagen, Upsala, Oxford and Paris. They opened up
a new field of study, that of "Northern Antiquities," that
gave rise to a second or a Northern Renaissance, fraught
with meaning for the subsequent development of political
and ethical science in Western Europe. Vidalin was kept
busy for the remainder of his long life, collecting material
and furnishing translations or transcriptions of ancient
manuscripts, for scholars and libraries abroad.
The voice of the old religion still spoke. At home Vidalin's
labors created a new impulse for the study of the native
classics, which has been carried on down to the present time,
and which, in the stifling atmosphere of the approaching
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries of foreign and ecclesi
astical aggression, made for purer air and a clearer vision.
It may be said that the labors of these two great men,
Thorlaksson and Vidalin, so closely associated in leading the
nation through the wilderness of a Reformation, smote the
rock of living waters, so that from it issued a stream that
caused, even in the desert of barren Orthodoxy, oases of
spiritual and intellectual growth to blossom forth in an age
of cruelty and social injustice. And though their labors
pointed to widely diverging avenues of thought, they reached
points of contact at intervals. Perhaps the finest example
of this is afforded in the beautiful hymns of the poet-priest
Hallgrimur Petursson, the author of the Passion Hymns of
Iceland and the universal funeral hymn of the church. In
the Passion Hymns there is an inimitable fusion of com
plexes, of religious realizations, derived from the older and
the newer faiths. The hymns, fifty in number, based upon
the Gospel story of the sufferings of Christ, rise into the
lofty edifice of the Lutheran doctrine of the Atonement,
which has for its foundation that impregnable moral con
sciousness acquired by the race through ages of mental
aspiration and groping. Verities depicting the true value
11

of life, character, and righteousness, as evolved by the

older faith, are employed in pointing the lesson of the
Divine Tragedy. After a lapse of nearly three centuries,
the superstructure having crumbled under the weight of
time, like so many abbeys or cathedrals of bygone ages, the
foundation remains, affording the grandest vantage ground
from which future generations will ascend into the mountain
to pray, and to worship the all pervading source of life in
spirit and in truth.
The contribution that these two men made to successive
generations may be summed up as follows : The bishop gave
to the cultured and the uncultured alike, in simple and un
affected language, that greatest collection of religious litera
ture ever produced, the Bible, while the learned schoolmaster
supplied the oil that kept the flickering lamp of reason burn
ing through the long intellectual night that enveloped west
ern civilization from the peace of Westphalia to the Era of
Enlightenment.
In Iceland as elsewhere the so-called Reformation had
to run its course. The century following the death of the
learned Vidalin is generally referred to as the "dark age"
in the history of the church, during which time Evangelical
ism reached and passed its final stage of development. After
the middle of the eighteenth century an era of enlightenment
was inaugurated by the founding of an organization known
as the "Society for the Advancement of Learning," sponsored
by leading educators of the time. The Society published an
Annual of encyclopedic character, crammed with information
regarding the latest theories in art, literature, science and
religion. This Journal, though shortlived, paved the way for
the next epoch, that of Rationalism, ushered in, in the de
clining years of that century, by the writings and literary
efforts of the Chief Justice of the Island, Magnus Stephensen.
Ably supported by many of his learned contemporaries, in
stead of directly attacking any of the pet doctrines of the
church, he simply eliminated them. The doctrine of eternal
punishment was the first one to be so dealt with. Holding
12

a royal charter
for the only printing press in the Island,
every publication had to pass directly under his hand. Thus

from the new edition of the hymn book, published at the
beginning of the century, he deleted every hymn referring
to the power of Satan or everlasting torment, inserting in
their place hymns, of his own translation, extolling the uni
versality of religion and divine providence. It was a bold
act, evoking a storm of protest, and although it did not
accomplish all that Stephensen had hoped for, it really
marks the beginning of a new era, the decline of orthodoxy
and rise of liberalism. The hymns deleted by Stephensen
never found their way back into the hymn book.
At the time of his death, 1833, classical Romanticism,
followed by so-called Realistic Naturalism in literature, had
reached its height in Northern Europe, hearkening back to
the enlightened individualistic freedom-loving age of the
sagas, exerting a humanizing and a broadening influence on
every line of thought. It was soon to make its triumphal
entry into Iceland, where, centuries before, it had had its
beginning in the literary accomplishments of the learned
Vidalin. Stephensen's work was carried forward by men
too numerous to mention, whose names will always be hon
ored in the history of the Island. Right down to the end of
the last century the doctrinal features of the church grew
less and less pronounced, while several actually disappeared.
Church and people were therefore prepared for the state
ment in the dedicatory discourse at the founding of the
University in 1911, made by its first President, Dr. Bjorn
M. Olsen, that "this institution (the Divinity School included)
is dedicated to the search after truth alone, in fearless
anticipation of whither it may lead," trusting in the guid
ance of enlightened reason and man's spiritual kinship with
God.
It
may be of interest to note that there never has been

a heresy trial within the church of Iceland. Absolute reli
gious freedom is now accorded everyone under the provision
of the Constitution, and religious views, ranging from
13

seventeenth century fundamentalism to twentieth century

Unitarianism, are found, among the clergy and laity, within
the Establishment itself. The underlying national conception
of the true message of Christianity, regardless of time or
change or the super-impositions of doctrines and decretals,
has always been that voiced by the cry of the ancient scribe
aforementioned: "Christ has made Christian men his sons
but not his slaves." At the present time this is publicly and
cheerfully acknowledged. The only conceivable modification
of it to be made, to express more exactly the religious senti
ment of the people to-day, would be the Unitarian alter
native: "Christ has made Christian men his brothers and
not his slaves."
THE RISE AND PROGRESS

of Icelandic Unitarian Churches in the
United States and Canada
did not discover the Icelandic opportunity. The Ice

landers discovered us. Strangely enough, many of the
sermons of Channing, Parker, and other early Unitarians,
were not unknown in Iceland in the latter half of the nine
teenth century. There is, I believe, a very high percentage
of real persons among the Icelanders. The Icelander is an
independent soul. Had this not been true, there would have
been no Icelandic people, no Icelandic culture, no Icelandic
music, no Icelandic art, for with a little giving here and
conforming there, his ancestors could have been physically
far more comfortable under the rather light tyranny of
Harald Haarfager of Norway, and Iceland would have been
at most a place where fishermen occasionally stopped to
repair the ravages of the storms of the North Atlantic.
The Icelander, therefore, has one of the fundamental ele
ments of genuine Unitarianism. You may tell him what he
must believe, but what he really believes will be the result
of his own mental processes not yours.
The National Church of Iceland is not the inelastic in
stitution so characteristic of Lutherdom on this side of the
Ocean, and indeed in Europe as well, though today there
are indications in Norway and Sweden of not a little re
vamping of the liturgy, and this may mean the beginning
of great changes there. However, the National Church of
Iceland has, generally speaking, permitted even welcomed
a wide intellectual freedom. Indeed, Icelanders being
what they are, it could not very well be otherwise. So the

WE

15
Icelanders who came to our shores were peculiarly prepared

for Unitarian thought.
Immigration to the United States began in 1870 and to
Canada in 1873. The first settlements in the United States
were made at Milwaukee and Shawano County, Wis. In 1875
and 1880 the settlers moved westward and founded settle
ments in Lincoln and Marshal Counties, Minn., Pembina and
Cavalier Counties, No. Dak., and Gimli, Manitoba. The first
settlements in Canada were in the Muskoka district in On
tario in 1873, and in the Musquodoboit Valley, Halifax Coun
ty, Nova Scotia, in 1875. Later, the settlers moved westward
to Winnipeg and Gimli, Manitoba, and to No. Dakota in the
States. Gimli, which was first called New Iceland, was settled
in 1875, Winnipeg and Minneota, Minn., in 1875, Pembina,
No. Dak., in 1878, Glenboro, Manitoba, in 1880 and Lundar
and Otto, Man., and Churchbridge, Sask., in 1887, and
Markerville, Alberta, in 1888. All these settlements have
continued down to the present day. Foam Lake and Wynyard, Sask., were settled in 1891 and 1904 respectively
and are among the largest of the Icelandic groups in the
West. It is variously estimated that from 25,000 to 30,000
people emigrated from Iceland from 1870 to 1900, or approxi
mately one-third of the entire population of the Island.
At the present day there are from 40,000 to 45,000 people
of Icelandic birth or origin in the Western States and Canada.
However, the great tide of immigration has practically
ceased since Iceland is today more prosperous than Canada,
and perhaps even than the United States. Last summer,
when I was in Iceland I met a number of Icelanders who
had returned to Iceland in order to recoup their fortunes.
Naturally, the organization of churches had to wait for
something like permanency in the settlements.
Churches
were formed in 1877 at Gimli, Arnes and Riverton, Man., at
Gardner and Mountain, No. Dak., in 1879 and 1880, and in
1882 in the Glenboro District of Manitoba and in Pembina
and Hallson, No. Dak. These churches were Lutheran after
the pattern of the State Church of Iceland. In their wander

16
ings in the Central West, these strangers in a strange land

came in contact with the Norwegian and German Lutheran
Synods of Missouri and Iowa, which influenced the sub
sequent history of the Icelandic churches. Three young men
entered theological seminaries at St. Louis, Mo. and Decorah,
Iowa, and were ordained to the ministry. These church or
ganizations were of a very conservative type, differing in
many respects from the Church of Iceland, although all
were designated as Lutheran.
The first minister to be ordained in this country was
Rev. Paul Thorlaksson, a college graduate of Reykjavik and
a graduate of the Lutheran Theological Seminary of St.
Louis, Mo. He was called in 1877 to the Gimli Settlement,
as was also Rev. Jon Bjarnason, an ordained minister of the
Church of Iceland. Both were Lutheran but of antithetical
views on matters liturgical and dogmatic, causing a division
of far reaching consequences among the settlers. Thorlaksson
held to the position of the American Lutheran Churches,
while Bjarnason insisted on the more liberal interpretation
of the creeds and confessions as held by the Church of
Iceland. In 1882 Thorlaksson died. In 1885 the Icelandic
Lutheran Synod was formed, which was made possible only
by effecting a compromise between the contending parties.
Rev. Mr. Bjarnason accepted the presidency and from that
time on inclined steadily more and more to the dogmatic
position of the American Synod.
As a protest against the conservative successes in de
fining the position of the Synod, attempts were made to
obtain ministers from Iceland but with varied degrees of
success. Bjorn Petursson, one of the pioneer settlers of
Gimli and later on of North Dakota, and a former Member
of Parliament of Iceland, now became one of the spokesmen
of the Liberals. He had become acquainted with Rev. Kristofer Janson, the Norwegian author and preacher (who, by
the way, is the Patron Saint of our Norwegian and Swedish
groups of Unitarians, and was then living in Minneapolis) ,
and through him he came to know the Unitarian Churches
17
in the West. In 1887 he published two tracts of Janson's in

an Icelandic translation which aroused some interest. That
year he visited several settlements and lectured on Liberal

Christianity.
In 1888 a liberal society was formed at Mountain, No.

Dak., known as the Culture Society. Leaders and organizers
were the late Icelandic poet, Stephan G. Stephansson and
Skapti B. Brynjolfsson, later a member of the North Dakota
Senate, his brother Magnus Brynjolfsson, a young lawyer
and later the State Attorney of Pembina County, Bjorn
Halldorsson, father of Dr. M. B. Halldorsson of Winnipeg,
and others. This was the first liberal religious society in
the settlements.
In 1890 Bjorn Petursson, with the assis
tance of Jon Olafsson, then Editor of the "Heimskringla"
and later a member of the Parliament in Iceland and a noted
poet, formed the first Icelandic Unitarian Church of Win
nipeg, with twenty-two charter members.
In 1887 Rev. Magnus J. Skaptason, then a minister in
Northern Iceland, was called to the societies in the Lake
Winnipeg District. No sooner had he reached his parish
than he found himself at variance with the Synod. In 1890
these differences were raised in the annual session of the
Synod. Rev. Mr. Skaptason had preached a sermon at Big
Island on Easter defending the view of universal election
and deprecating the doctrine of retribution and everlasting
punishment. What the Baltimore Sermon is to American
Unitarianism the Big Island Sermon is to Icelandic Liber
alism. After a stormy session, Rev. Mr. Skaptason was
expelled and the delegates from his district withdrew from
the Synod.
A Federation of Liberal Churches was then formed in
the Gimli Settlement and Skaptason was installed as their
minister. A Liberal Magazine was started at Gimli, known
as "Dagsbrun" (Dawn), advocating freedom in religion and
the abolition of creeds as tests of faith and morals. In 1891
this Federation sought affiliation with the American Unita
rian Association, altering its name to the Unitarian Societies

18
of Gimli, Ames and Hekla. Rev. T. B. Forbush, then mis

sionary Secretary for the Association in the Middle West,
visited these societies, as well as the Winnipeg Church, in
1892.
In 1893 Rev. Bjorn Petursson died. His wife, who
was an American, carried on his work for a year and then
left for her former home in Vermont. The Winnipeg Church
was thus left without a minister. At the suggestion of
Mr. Forbush, who rightly considered Winnipeg the more
important center, Skaptason was transferred to Winnipeg
where he remained till 1899 when he resigned and moved
to Roseau County, Minn. Again the church was without a
minister and the movement became dormant for over a year.
In 1901 the Icelandic Unitarian Conference was formed
at Gimli, Man., embracing the Lake Winnipeg Societies, the
Winnipeg Church, and individual members widely distributed
through the settlements. The chief organizers were T. Thorvaldson, who was a science graduate of Manitoba University ;
E. Olafsson, Manager of "The Heimskringla" ; Rev. M. J.
Skaptason ; Rognvaldur Petursson, then a theological student
at Meadville ; J. P. Solmundsson and others. The Conference
functioned down to 1922 when it was merged with the
Liberal Lutheran Societies in Saskatchewan under the gen
eral title of The United Conference of Icelandic Churches.
In 1903 Rev. Rognvaldur Petursson became minister of
the Winnipeg Church and continued in this capacity until
1909 when he was appointed Field Secretary of the Icelandic
Churches, which position he held for twenty years, until
1929. It should be noted that to the consecrated devotion
and untiring energy and tactful wisdom of Dr. Petursson
in his work among his countrymen we owe a debt which
can never be paid. One has only to visit the Icelandic com
munities in his company to realize the esteem in which he
is held. Indeed, it is not confined to the Icelandic settlements
in Canada and the United States but has extended far be
yond the boundaries of his adopted land, and has been
recognized both by the Government and the University of
Iceland.

19
Upon Dr. Petursson's retirement we were fortunate in

securing to succeed him the Rev. Ragnar Kvaran, for six
years the minister of the First Federated Icelandic Church
of Winnipeg. Mr. Kvaran has many peculiarly advantageous
qualifications for this task. He is cultured, versatile, at home
in both Icelandic and English, effective, popular, able, en
thusiastic and adaptable. We have confidence that he will
continue the constructive and farsighted policy that has
characterized the work of the office.
From 1903 to 1910 Rev. J. P. Solmundsson was minister
of the Gimli Circuit. Societies were organized at Lundar,
Mary Hill and Otto between the years of 1905 and 1910,
and at Riverton and Foam Lake, Sask., in 1911. The group
at Kandahar, Sask., was organized in 1924. Arborg began
its work in the same year and Piney, Man., in 1921.
The first church building in Winnipeg was erected in
1891.
The third building, or the now Federated Church,
was built in 1921. The church in Gimli was erected in 1884
and a second building replacing the first one in 1904. Wynyard, Sask., built in 1921 ; in 1925 Arnes built. The building
at Arborg was built in 1926 and Riverton in 1927. I saw
both the building of the Arborg and the Riverton churches
and know the devotion and self-sacrifice which went into
the materialization of the dreams of the people.
For more than fifteen years the Rev. Albert E. Kristjansson was the devoted minister of what is known as the Lundar
Circuit. He was indefatigable in his labors and was much
loved and honored by his constituency, having been a mem
ber of the Parliament of Manitoba. A few years ago he
made a journey to the Pacific Coast, and while in Seattle
he met a group of Icelanders and organized a church. He
has been settled there for some three or four years and
the work is going extremely well. A new building has been
erected and the outlook is very promising.
In 1921 Rev. Fridrik Fridriksson, a recent graduate of
the University of Reykjavik, came out to take charge of the
church in Wynyard. For eight years Mr. Fridriksson labored
20

in Wynyard, Kandahar and Kristnes.
At
the end of this

time he took a year off and went to the University of Chicago
to perfect his English. A little more than a year ago he
became minister of the new church in Blaine, Wash., which
had been organized by the Rev. Mr. Kristjansson.
It is notable that so many of the graduates of the Theo
logical School of the University of Reykjavik are entirely
acceptable among the Icelandic Unitarians. This is a com
mentary upon the general tone of Liberalism that obtains
in that university and among the people of Iceland generally.
It must be recognized that this work is largely and must
long be, to a great extent, a missionary enterprise. It is
unlikely that the Icelandic churches as such will ever grow
greatly in power and influence. This is what will happen
indeed, it is happening the second and third generations
are not Icelanders. They are Canadians and Americans.
While they have not forgotten the beloved home land it has
become a background, albeit a background that gives cour
age and confidence. We are planting the seeds of liberal
religion in what seems to us to be peculiarly fertile and well
prepared soil. The results of this sowing will be seen not in
an increasingly strong group of Icelandic churches but in a
general strengthening of religious liberalism wherever those
of Icelandic descent live.
Somewhat should be said also of the way in which the
work is generally carried on. We usually think of our min
isters as ministering to one parish or two at the most. In
Canada we have circuits in which may be one or two churches
but perhaps several congregations. Services are maintained
at intervals but the minister is in touch with his congrega
tion and the various spiritual needs are taken care of. Such
is the Lundar Circuit and the Gimli Circuit. The ministers
are constantly on the lookout for the manifestation of liberal
religious interest and are quick to take advantage of every
opportunity to bring the message of the Free Faith.
KRISTOFER JANSON:
As Man, Poet, and Religious Reformer
FOREWORD
paper was read on the occasion of the
of the Nora Free Chris
tian Church, of Hanska, Minnesota, a church
founded by Kristofer Janson in 1881, and served
by Amandus Norman as minister from 1893
until his death in November, 1931. It is a
tribute by one of the most courageous and
statesmanlike of Unitarian ministers to his
predecessor, teacher, and master. It is really
the portrait of two men of the one who wrote
it almost as truly as of the one of whom it is
written.
Unitarians of Anglo-Saxon descent may
learn from these two Unitarians of Norse
ancestry to appreciate with fresh and deeper
understanding the "ripest fruitage of civilized
Christian nurture ever produced in any con
siderable quantity in this or any land." And
that heritage has been permanently enriched
by the infusion of Viking blood which the Nora
Free Christian Church, on its lovely Minnesota
Frederick M. Eliot.
hilltop, represents.

THIS
fiftieth anniversary
REGARD the Unitarian
movement as one of the most

significant efforts to liberate the human mind and thus
to prepare our people for the New Freedom which is slowly
emerging in the world.
We are a group of rustic Unitarians. We derive our
living from the soil, and, naturally, being rational men and
women, we are as conservative as the soil we cultivate, but
also as progressive as the conditions under which we live and

22
Kristofer Janson
as Man, Poet, Religious Reformer
the sifted results of responsible thinking will allow us to be.

We claim kinship, mental as well as physical, with those
unafraid mariners of the North, who, in the early middle
ages ceased to hug the shallow shore-line, launched out upon
the main, sailed the uncharted sea by the sun, and when
that failed them by the never-setting stars, and found "Vinland the Good." We are deep-sea Unitarians. As such, we
are not overly concerned about the eddies and cross-currents
to the right or to the left of us on the surface of the mighty
stream of liberal thought. But let there be no misapprehen
sion as to our essential position. We cherish no undue
reverence for the mythologies of old, whether Norse, Greek,
Hebrew or Christian. We accept them, not as special revela
tions of ultimate truth, but rather as the disclosures of the
best that the men of old could embody in words after
pondering the problem of existence. And if their findings
no longer serve to feed our souls, let us not give way to
whining about the meagerness of our heritage, let us like
resolute and resourceful men and women dive deeper, soar
higher, and formulate the findings of our explorations in the
world of space, time, and mind into nobler and more soulsatisfying concepts to sustain the loftier race that is to be.
But my aim today is a much more modest one. I am not
here to plead for a man, a sect or any eddy of liberal thought
in particular. No! I shall simply endeavor to portray a
remarkable man, a gifted poet, a brilliant orator, a per
suasive religious reformer, to point out the paths in his life
and try to show the coherency in his development. Of course
you may expect me to accompany the portrayal of my prede
cessor and my best beloved teacher with all the sympathy
I possess.
I.
Kristofer Janson's appearance in Norwegian literature in

the early seventies marks a new support for the peasant
language as well as for the whole new national movement
in Norway. The highly gifted peasant poet Vinje, one of
Mr. Janson's contemporaries, called him "a priest in the

Kristofer Janson
23
church militant of Norway." A few years after Mr. Janson

had begun his ministry in Minneapolis, he declined the poet
pension which had been voted him by the Norwegian Stor
thing. It is significant that he did not leave the literature
of his native land in the same condition that he had found it
when he began his career ; this man was one of the greatest
acquisitions of the peasant language movement and he struck
out a definite new path in the literature of his native land.
Kristofer Janson was a child from a fashionable home, a
descendant of an aristocratic family. At his home the poet
laureate of Norway, the mighty Bishop Johan Nordahl
Bruun, used to roam, and the tribe of the Brahmins of
Bergen used to gather. Kristofer Janson, who, by birth and
antecedents was plainly destined to become the standard
bearer of the aristocratic idea in Norway, this highly gifted
young gentleman, who was a Master of Arts, and a student
of theology at the University of Oslo where he received the
highest honors, this man is suddenly seized by idealism and
democracy, and, without any consultation with his family
and its traditions, becomes a champion of the new peasant
language movement.
Kristofer Janson, whose beautiful poems had been a
favorite topic in select family gatherings and whose lampoon
in verse ridiculing the peasant movement had raised him in
the eyes of the ruling class as their coming standard-bearer,
is suddenly, as by a clap of thunder from above, changed
from the peasant party's Saul to its Paul.
As already stated, his family was one of the oldest as
well as one of the most influential in Bergen and Bergen had
for generations been considered the most cosmopolitan burgh
in all the North. This then was a breach with all the pro
prieties, a breach with all the ties of kinship to be a Janson,
a friend of the peasantry and a reformer of the peasant
language! But the young idealist's innermost genius was
gripped by the cause, and already in the students' union at
Oslo he gave his famous "freshman oration" in the peasant
language.
24
Kristof er Janson
Thus the first step was taken and the second soon fol
lowed; it was his first published work, "Fraa Bygdom"
"From the Country" which appeared in 1866.

On reading this book now, it becomes plain that it has

more than the form and the style in common with his latest
work of fiction, "The Solitary" ; it shares the errors of the

latter as well as its excellences tender and sympathetic,
devotional as a prayer, though it is less real. I have specially
in mind "Liv," one of the stories in "From the Country."
When "Liv" appeared, the romantic tendency in literature
reigned supreme in the North. No one was impudent enough
to ask for realities in fiction. No ! People of those days read
"Liv" and fell in love with the story and they forgot, just
as we so readily forget years later in "The Solitary," that
the author was more of a ministerial propagandist who is
out on a missionary journey, the minister who wants all
men to repent and become good, than the psychologist and
the truthful portrayer of the race he set out to portray.
Thus Janson's first work determined almost at once his
strength as well as his limitations as an author, determined
once for all the character of his poetic gift. And, if after
these many years, one re-examines his literary productions
as I have done during the past year, one is compelled to
confess that even his latest books changed but very little his
position in the literary history of his native land.
Naturally, however, such a man as Mr. Janson could not
remain stationary for nearly half a century, and it is obvious
that his first work is not his best. It only exhibits clearly
the nature of his talent as an author, not its matured
strength. And this in my opinion reveals a peculiar trait in
Mr. Janson's character. He passed through a long and in
tensive period of development, and yet he remained essen
tially the same. This, to my mind, reveals a firmness of
character, one might almost say a stubbornness, which is
not usual, because it presupposes a nature that may undergo
development but which does not really change, an individu
Kristofer Janson
25

ality that may be enormously enriched but is never uprooted

from its native soil.
Mr. Janson's development was continuous one long per
sistent effort. Wherever he stood in life, in literature, in
religion, there he ever stood with his whole soul. There was
no real conflict between his conduct and his teaching. Wheth
er we consider him as a poet, or teacher in the peasant highschool, or as a religious propagandist, this man moved for
ward in unassailable idealism, willing to be inspired and
willing to live a simple, free life in harmony with his own
teachings.
It was to be expected, therefore, that such a talented
man, gripped by the ideal of his age; by the legend of the
great awakening that passed through the north of Europe
during the sixties; the awakening of the peasantry; Scandinavianism, which aimed at a strong federated Union of
all the northern countries ; "grundtvigianism," a wide-spread
romantic reform movement in the church; it was to be
expected that the gifted poet-preacher could not remain a
mere spectator of this new movement, could not pause at
the mere reform of the language, writing entertaining books
and delivering brilliant orations in the peasant language.
He wished to come out and live it. And so we find Janson
leaving his beloved native Bergen and its happy and colorful
life to become the founder of a peasant high-school in one of
the most picturesque mountain valleys of central Norway.
At
of remarkable men assembled at

"Vanheim" peasant high-school, a trio of men, whose fame
reverberated throughout all the North lands and even fur
one time a group
ther. If one had been fortunate enough to be present there

while the school was at its best, one would never forget that
experience, never; it was a spell that gripped one for life.
(As a boy I once sat there on one of the benches in the
rear and wept.)
Let us take a look in, while the school is in session. The

hall is filled with people, pupils, young men and women,
farmers from the valley below, and strangers who paused
26
Kristofer Janson: as Man, Poet, Religious Reformer

for a day or two in order that they might hear and
see
what was going on at this wonder-school among the moun

tains. The door opens quietly, and Kristofer Bruun enters
a strange, slender, outlandish-looking figure of small
stature, a great man, a dreamer of apocalyptic dreams, an
Elijah among the mountains. With the prophet's dark hair
falling in heavy curly waves down over his shoulders, this
man who would tell the truth as he saw it, with utter im
partiality, to pope, emperor, king, or street gamin, was the
prototype of the hero in Ibsen's great drama "Brand." He
walks in quietly and sits down on a bench in a corner of
the hall. Then Bj0rnstjerne Bj0rnson enters, a man of
gigantic frame, deep penetrating eyes, heavy eye-brows,
finely-chiselled nose, massive head crowned with a forest of
coarse hair brushed back. He tears off his eye-glasses, wipe3
them in order that he may find his way among all these
chairs and benches, and strides majestically through the
hall, giving his right hand to one friend and the left to
another until he comes to his chair in front. Again the door
opens and Kristofer Janson rushes in, tall, rather slender,
erect, athletic, large head covered with a mass of chestnut
hair combed back, noble radiant face, smiling, confident as
a happy boy, saluting right and left; and I even thought he
nodded approvingly to the observant little country urchin
sitting with glistening eyes beside an elder brother, on one
of the benches in a rear corner of the hall. When after more
than half a century I try to visualize that assembly of mighty
farmers many of whom were able to trace their lineage to
worthy and valiant forebears of five hundred or even a
thousand years ago, those noble, intelligent, shining faces,
those steady, attentive eyes then I feel like emphasizing
that vague impression that I found myself in the presence of
something potentially great and mighty men and women
whose mental bells had been set a-swinging, teachable pupils
of their great masters; a group destined to lead on in a
great national awakening, to become one of the most con
sistently persistent advance guards of the New Freedom;
27

one of the most vital and fruitful factors working for the
advancement of orderly democracy, purposeful education,
and social justice in the Europe of the Nineteenth Century.
The school was really a mission station of that same pur
poseful education in the central part of rural Norway, and
there was present among these people a love of vital knowl
edge that perhaps made it unique in its time. There Kristofer
Bruun lectured on perhaps it was "Abraham's departure
from his Sumerian home" or "The Wise Men from the East"
or "Barkakha the Son of the Sun" while Janson relieved
the effect of his ponderous Spartan eloquence with a couple
of bright chapters from the book he was then writing. Then
Bj0mson arose and began, "Mr. Bruun, I cannot agree with
you in what you said about those Eastern stories ..." Dis
cussion followed, not only between these giants, but one
after another the farmers arose in the hall and asked leave
to speak. I repeat it : If one had been fortunate enough to be
present at such a meeting at Vanheim or at its sister school
Sagatun a short distance from my old home it was an
experience never to be forgotten.
In a short time the great trio parted. One achieved
world-fame as a poet, dynamic author and profound propa
gandist of the democratic idea, a challenging spokesman for
suppressed minorities a generation before Woodrow Wilson ;
another opened a Unitarian mission in America; while
the third remained to carry on the great work among the
farmers for many more years. Their genius led them into
different fields ; their religious faith came in time to separate
them; but they remained among the foremost educators of
their people each in his own way.
n.
While at his school Janson wrote some of his best books.
His activity as an educator of his people proceeded side by
side with his literary production, and this two-fold activity
may be traced everywhere in his books. In the selection of
his themes as well as in the treatment of them the peasant
28
Kristofer Janson

instructor is very much in evidence, the minister who is eager

to make good people of his readers. Thus pure literature
may have lost, but the cultural education of the people
gained. For this reason Janson' s books were often severely
handled by the literary critics, for they were deemed to do
violence to the whole decalogue of esthetics. This he was
aware of, and he continued deliberately to violate these rules.
His people were in the main a dull, slow-moving, stiff-necked
race. But Janson loved them, and, as a wise educator, he
set to work with all his persuasive power to arouse them.
For this reason we find that the poet nearly everywhere had
to carry wood and water for the preacher and the sermoniser.
By so doing, according to the literary wiseacres, he sinned
grievously against his own God-given creative gift.
When in "From the Country" he converts the worthless
young gypsy Aslak, the reader is left with the feeling that
an improbability if not an impossibility has been accom
plished, but he is carried along by the tender lyrical flow of
the narrative. We are almost about to fold our hands in
thanksgiving when the next moment's reflection convinces
the common-sense reader that it is not the poet and the
serious humanist he is dealing with, but the preacher and
the philanthropist. In the preface to one of his books Mr.
Janson said that he would rather be of some positive benefit
to his countrymen than regale the tastes of a few refined
readers. To do so must have involved a considerable sacrifice
on his part. As the highly gifted and intelligent man Mr.
Janson knew well the laws of esthetics, and the critics were
at times almost merciless in calling his attention to the fact
that these laws cannot be disregarded with impunity. For
half a century he received their berating, but it proved of
no avail. One at last realizes that this tireless perseverance
had a stronger hold on Janson than the poet: It was his
dream of childhood, his love as a man this lover of souls,
the minister. Above all else he must attend to his special
mission as the people's teacher, to be of positive benefit to
his countrymen.
29
The poets of the olden time, in the dreamy romantic

period, were a species of men a little superior to all other
people. They wore Spanish cloaks, broad-brimmed hats, orna
ments in their button-holes, big wigs, and usually neglected
to pay their board-bills. The poet of our time has come down

to the earth where he takes part in the throbbing life of

the present, and where he not infrequently carries aloft the
banner of the future. Kristofer Janson was no exception. It
was just his ambition to reach out a helping hand wherever
needed and so to do all the good he could on earth. He had
no wish to be a mere decoration in life, he wanted to donate
something. He would not be merely a man who sat and
wrote faultless books, he wanted chiefly to be the people's
inspiring teacher.
His old friends understand this now, though we are not

entirely reconciled as to the wisdom of it. I admired pro
foundly and I do still admire his willingness to give himself
to the utmost for the good of the people ; still I cannot help
but deplore the fact that his voice as a poet and as an author
is so comparatively weak, especially among the literary
coterie in the old homeland. Highly gifted and creative minds
are rare. In time he threw in his lot with us. He moved
among us a common man among us common folk who had
found a new home here in the West, willing to admire the
great literary lights of his homeland, so willing to step aside
and out of their way, though he himself often proved that
as a story teller and as a lyric poet he could maintain his
place beside the greatest. Bj0rnson himself declared that
there was not one among the highly gifted poets of the
golden age of Norse literary production who could write such
verse as Kristofer Janson. And so I repeat what we, the
scattered liberals of Norse antecedents in America, gained,
was forever lost to the literature of Norway.
While at the high-school he wrote "Sigmund Bresteson,"
a drama, "The Spellbound Fiddler," "Pictures from Iceland
and Italy," "From Danish Times," "Our Grandparents," etc,
30
Kristofer Janson

and all of these were written in the peasant language. Where

the poet was given free rein in these books, we received some
of the finest things from Janson's pen; there are passages
in "From Danish Times" and "Our Grandparents" that are
among the finest things in the Norwegian language. But of
course when Janson was to write a book about "The Danish
Times," the most humiliating period in Norwegian History,
it could not be merely a work of fiction, it had also to be his
torical to arouse in his beloved countrymen patriotic fervor.
But Janson was not a historical romancer, at least not

in the generally accepted sense in which we use that term.
There is something which the painter calls "atmosphere" in
a painted picture. I have to say about Janson's "From Dan
ish Times" that while it contained marvelously brilliant de
scriptions and while it still seems to retain much of its former
popularity, it lacks historical climate. And Janson proved
both in "From Danish Times" as well as in his greater work
"Our Grandparents" that he was unable to infuse a sense
of historical reality into his narrative.
Janson was a poet, not a historian or even a historical
romancer ; nevertheless he packed an enormous mass of his
torical material into these works. Why did he do it ? Because
it was not so important for him to provide a work of art as
a work of history. He wanted to produce a popular historical
narrative, brimful of patriotic Norse fervor, but also with
dates and real personalities, descriptions that would have
dynamic educational influence on his beloved slow-moving
Norwegian farmers a sort of historical ABC with illustra
tions to supplement his lectures at the peasants' highschool. Thus the instructor again over-ruled the poet.
The conditions which in our time are imposed on the
historical romancer are almost staggering. The author must
possess both the gift of the historian to see into the period
he intends to portray, and of course he ought also to be
gifted with creative imagination. He must carry us back
ward hundreds of years in time, provide the historical at
Kristofer Janson
31

mosphere in every sentence and so produce an illusion that

never deceives us. The noted French author, Gustave Flau
bert, ushered in a new method in historical romance that
made him master in this species of composition. He spent
months in the libraries merely in order to obtain information

about a single point in his historical romance; he searched
through files of old copper prints merely to come to a clear
understanding as to the bearing and the manner of dress of
a past age. He dug through ninety-eight volumes as a pre
liminary study for his "Salambo" a work in which he
wrote about Carthage as it was twenty-two centuries ago
besides all the numerous journeys he undertook in all direc
tions in southern Europe, Asia, and Africa. And all this
accumulation of learning is adjusted to the esthetic enjoy
ment, with the most palpable probability. There is a perfect
in
stench of twenty-two hundred year old atmosphere
"Salambo" and the manners and customs from the time of
Hamilcar.
Now there are very few who are thus both poet and
patiently persevering historian in one person, and our friend
Janson was not one of them.
Therefore "From Danish
Times" and "Our Grandparents" cannot strictly be judged
as historical works ; as poetical compositions, they are simply
failures ; and Janson, the critics declare, did it on purpose.
I have spent so much time on this, because I wish it to
help demonstrate something, a peculiarity in this man's
make-up, and I beg you to be patient. I wish to try to explain
the coherences in his development, and to examine a little
that which was the determining motive in this strange and
much misunderstood human being.
Kristofer Janson became a reformer of the Norse lan

guage; it cost him one of the wealthiest parishes, possibly
the primacy in the church of Norway. He became a teacher
in a peasant high-school ; it cost him the larger share of his
inherited fortune. During his whole life-time he was a
religious propagandist; it almost cost him the poet's im
mortality. But if pure literature lost much, the Scandinavian
32
Kristofer Janson
people on both sides of the Atlantic gained much. As a per

sonality he was one of Nature's few chosen noblemen.
we gather all that Mr. Janson produced during his
intensely varied and strangely colorful career, it makes a
respectable pile of books, some forty volumes all told. And
his production covers nearly the whole range of poetical
There are historical narratives, biographies,
composition.
poems, dramas, fairy tales, hymns, and novels. The verdict
of the critics is fairly unanimous as to Mr. Janson's special

If
gifts. He was a lyric poet and story-teller of rare charm. In

the other species of poetic production one is left with the
uneasy feeling of dealing with one who had strayed into an
alien field. He seems to have been perfectly at home in the
novel. There is wonderful movement in those stories of his,
a warm breeze of intriguing sentiment sweeps through them,
and his rich lyrical feeling pulsates through the whole from
the first page to the last.
There is a clearly marked line in Mr. Janson's develop
ment, from the delivery of the freshman oration at the
University to the later years spent in giving a series of
wonderful lectures before tens of thousands of skilled labor
ers and farmers from North Cape to the southernmost
extremity of Norway. And we are now able to trace every
step in this development. There is no deviation to this side
or that, no nervous haste ; quietly this man advances in his
persevering, uninterrupted aggressiveness. But he kept step
with the times ; he was ever to be found under one or another
of the most exposed banners of progress.
Mr. Janson soon came to feel that the "ore-bed" out of
which the peasant novel had come was just about exhausted
in the homeland; and that to continue would simply be to
repeat himself; and more especially his all-over-towering
contemporary, Bj0rnstjerne Bj0rnson. Were there no open
ings in other directions ? How did people actually live ? What
did they live for, what did they do? Surely this generally
speaking dull, slow moving and rather penurious Norwegian
peasantry was not the whole world!
Kristof er Janson
33

And Mr. Janson discovered slowly and by degrees that

out in Europe they had already set a whole world a-swinging; new intellects, large and capacious had come forward,
great thinkers had appeared, men with new thoughts and
ideas that no longer could be resisted. The Eighteenth
Century was dead or dying. The spirit of the Nineteenth
Century had burst out in waving flames in Art, in Religion,
in Science, in Literature; a whole world's sympathy with
hungering, moribund, enslaved humanity had broken loose.
They made republics, they blew up empires with bombs and
discharged the Devil with his horns, claws and curly tails.
There were uprisings along the whole front out in the great
world ; they ransacked the ship's hold for dead corpses ; and
this movement went forward not plaintively or apologeti
cally, but defiantly as with martial music; the beating of
drums and reverberating shouts of victory were heard in
the distance. The old world was cracking in its joints, the
revolutionary waves rose to mountain heights and the froth
ing foam reached even up to the self -conceited, well-organized
bureaucratic coterie ensconced behind the rockbound coast
of the Northland. Yea ! the people had awakened !
Our poor peasant-tutor and poet-preacher suddenly saw
new worlds revolving before his eyes. He had no choice. His
place was not in the junk-heap of departed greatness. He
would stand as a man in the life of his time. He would assist
in life-saving, assist in quenching, assist in clearing the
ship's hold of dead corpses ... It is at this time that Janson
began to doubt the Lutheran creed. And it was a very
dangerous thing to doubt the Lutheran creed, the verbal
inspiration and infallibility of the Bible, in Norway. The
church was a close corporation, part of the state government.
Of course the Lutheran hierarchy could not cause you to be
crucified or hanged, or send you to Siberia or to some Devil's
Island in the sea, for doubting its creed ; but it could very
effectively prevent you from earning a living.
To my mind, the churchmen looked merely at the surface
of the matter when they called doubt sinful. Perhaps only
34
Kristofer Janson
the sordid side of the matter influenced their attitude and

judgment. Sound doubt is an essential element in all intel
lectual activity. Sound doubt is not sinful but rather an
indication of potential power. It is honest doubt of the old
that has been the chief incentive in leading our race forward
from the earliest dawn of history to where we now are. But
it was a very risky matter to change one's attitude toward
religious and social truths in that old priest-ridden and
kirk-ridden homeland. It cost Mr. Janson his position as a
teacher, and thereby the prospect of being able to live in
his native land.
in.
At this

time, or about 1880, there appeared a strange

rainbow of hope and great promise, far in the west.
The chair of things Scandinavian at Madison, Wisconsin,

was about to be vacant, and the authorities were looking
round for a suitable man for the place. I understand that
a tentative offer was made to Mr. Janson and that he asked
for time in which to consider the matter and thus to prepare
himself for the task.
Some sort of church conference was going on at Madison
at about this time. A few of the leaders the stately, grandduke-like Joseph Henry Crooker, the unassuming scholarly
J. T. Sunderland, and the hairy, much-bearded and colorful
Jenkin Lloyd Jones were invited to lunch at Asgaard, the
home of Professor B. B. Anderson, who was at that time
professor of things Scandinavian at the University. The
conversation drifted to a consideration of the Scandinavians
who were then pouring into the country at the rate of fifty
thousand or so a year. There were, even at that early age,
thousands of prosperous Norwegian farmers in Wisconsin,
Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, and Dakota. They had made a
fair record for themselves during the Civil War. To be sure,
their chief priests were strong pro-slavery men and against
practically everything that may be called Americanism. They
were here primarily to form a Norse Colony if possible even
more high-church-like
than the most reactionary state

Kristof er Janson
35
church group in the homeland. Inferentially they made it

plain that while Hebrew was Jehovah's favorite language, he
might be disposed to listen to petitions and prayers made to
him in the sacred Norwegian and of course also in Dr. Martin
Luther's native language, as it was spoken at the Concordia
Seminary at St. Louis. The rest remained very doubtful.
But the great mass of the settlers, while very submissive to
the dictates of the priesthood, were not entirely destitute
of common sense. There were even some among them who had
a little sense of humor. They were humble folk, most of them,
farmer-tenants, farm-laborers, or small farmers from the old
homeland. But they had come here to stay, and to take their
share in the up-building of the country as well as to improve
their own conditions. Wisconsin sent three regiments large
ly made up of Norse settlers, and one of them almost entirely
so, into the service for the preservation of the Union. One
of these regiments, the 17th, became the "Pride of Wiscon
sin." It served under General Thomas at Chickamauga where,
during the most critical moment of that desperate battle, it
appears to have misunderstood the signal to fall back at
discretion and, instead, advanced to what its brave Colonel
Hans Hegg deemed an even more endangered position. The
brave Colonel fell, nearly all his staff fell, and more than
half of the men fell; but the rest held on doggedly until
relief arrived. This, and a few other things that they were
reputed to have done, created a rather favorable impression
about these people among the natives. And so we learn that
this little group of liberal minds, while eating their lunch at
Professor Anderson's home, were pondering the advisability
of opening some sort of a liberal mission among the farmerfolk from the old Northland.
Suddenly Professor Anderson rose, rapped on the table
and said that if they were really in earnest about doing this
thing, now was the time and he thought he could point out
to them the right man for the task. Some correspondence
ensued. The soul of Beacon Hill became much troubled, and
justly so. It was a loosely organized little corporation, this
36
Kristof er Janson
Hill of fifty years ago. It was the custodian of the

spiritual treasui'e in the world. It was the
precious
most
responsible representative of the ripest fruitage of civilized
Christian nurture ever produced in any considerable quantity
in this or any land. But was not this treasure intended
primarily, if not exclusively, for the children of the House
of Israel, at home or in dispersion ? And was it meet to take
the children's bread and cast it before these intruding nonHebrew speaking proselytes of the Gate ? Serious questions
these. For the field to be covered was very great, and the
resources with which to provide seed and sowers were very
Beacon
modest.

But some of these custodians at Beacon Hill were de

scendants of men who had dared to take great risks in new
ventures on the seven seas, and these men decided to take

great risks and to make a venture of a new kind. And in
view of these things they made generous provision for the
new venture.
Next we find our poet-preacher crossing the Atlantic on
a tour of inspection. A three months lecture trip from coast
to coast followed. Lectures on literary topics, fairy tales,
sagas, closing with the formation of a group of free religion
ists at Minneapolis. Here too an obliging friend, a member
of the real estate tribe, sold him a roomy corner lot way out
on Nicollet Avenue at not to exceed twice its actual value.
A contract was entered into for the erection of a substantial
dwelling for the family. Thus went the last eight or ten
thousand of the patrimony from the Janson estate at Bergen.
A return to Norway to wind up his affairs was followed by
the migration and launching of the new venture in the new
world.
Soon we find Kristofer Janson established in Minneapolis,
swinging his whip of cords lustily over the heads of the chiefpriests, pharisees and sadducees of the rapidly forming
Norse hierarchy in America. But here it was a case of Greek
meeting Greek in deadly combat. A perfect barrage was
levelled at this dangerous intruder. Solemn S. O. S. warnings
Kristofer Janson
37
were sent out from the pulpits of the more than two thou
sand Norwegian Lutheran churches throughout the Middle
West. Practically all the Norwegian papers were closed to
him. All the scribes in the religious reserve among his
countrymen organized a merciless campaign of misrepre
sentation and vituperation against him. He and his Unitarianism were denounced as worse than heathenism.
This man who was surrounded by bigots on every hand,

and bitterly hated not only by the few earnest believers

but also by the concentrated conventional hypocricy among
his countrymen, wrote these lines in my album during the
bitterest period of the raging conflict :
Fram til fridom til alt som er godt;
Kjempa mod alt som er stygt og raadt,
Turka burt taarar el ska burt trods;
Fram til dem Gud som elskar os.
Battle for freedom to do what is good;
Fight against all that is brutal and rude;
Conquer your foe by the power of love;
God be your guide wherever you rove.
Yes, this man, who was known to almost every child in

his native land, whose poetical compositions all people had
read, came to America, where they scarcely knew his name,
to break up new soil and prepare for a new kind of harvest
among his countrymen on this side of the globe. He had
been longing, as Bj0rnson's "Arne," for "twenty years over
the Lofty Mountains" ; he had been waiting for twenty years
to reach the goal, the dream of his childhood, his hope, his
love : to become a minister. This was a fidelity to the ideals
of youth almost unique.
His religious emancipation commenced at about the same

time as Bjprnson's, his great contemporary, or a little later;
but while Bj0rnson the giant went the whole length of re
ligious radicalism, so that he might properly be called a
radical theistic humanist, Janson remained to the end almost
38
Kristofer Janson
an orthodox Unitarian.
But that which held his piety in
check was his intense need of progress, his wish to keep
step with his time. At an age when most men cease to take
chances and sink down to a safe level, Mr. Janson remained
the same patient seeker. He was endowed with one of Mother
Nature's most precious gifts, that of always keeping young.

As a minister, he was an emancipated, modern man. He had
little sympathy with the sort of sanctimoniousness so com
mon among the Norse priesthood that even when they are
to blow their noses must preface it by saying: "If God be

willing."
While the minister in Janson for the most part harmed
the poet, the minister was scarcely able to write a sermon

without the aid of the poet. One heard it instantly; while
the minister brought out the text and the subject matter,
the poet formed it into shape and infused irresistible life and
light into the mass of the subject matter.
Few of those who did not have an opportunity to hear
him can have any clear idea of what he gave us every Sunday
morning at the Old Nazareth church in Minneapolis, or his
never to be forgotten public readings of the new Norse
classics at the same place Sunday evenings. Mr. Janson was
no theorizer. He had a perfect horror of the futile dialectics
of Hegelianism the dominant school of philosophy in Cen
tral and Northern Europe during the larger part of the
Nineteenth Century. He was no systematic theologian. His
great strength lay in his wonderful ability to absorb, to
understand, and to reproduce vital things. He was a bearer
of light and a giver of life. Here the poet helped the minister
to anticipate, to feel delicately what was right.
Yes, a strange new life radiated from that stone base
ment at Twelfth Avenue, South, and Ninth Street, Minne
apolis, on Sunday mornings during the Nineties. Usually
every seat was occupied. All sorts and conditions of men
came to listen. The preacher was filled with his subject,
glowing flames rose from every line in his carefully prepared
sermon, and a fellow-feeling for the rights of the suffering
Kristof er Janson
39

and the submerged such as no other minister in these parts

dared to express at that time. And we, who were young
then, were entranced by all this goodness. We forgot all
about the masterly eloquence, we forgot all about the egotism
and selfishness out in the cold world, we were lifted as on
invisible wings to behold vistas of moral grandeur, and we
had an unaccountable urge to weep and to vow to consecrate
ourselves to do things that count. For behind the inspired
preacher emerged the image of that other Son of Man, who,
two thousand years ago, on the shore of the Lake of Galilee,
implored his hearers to "love one another."

Mr. Janson's life had its full measure of storm and stress ;
the tragic was not absent. But he bore all serenely, and
retained the spirit of youth to the end. He was a child of
his generation, waging an uncompromising battle to retain
his personal integrity and giving his life without stint for
the service of his fellows.
What do I mean by that? He did not merely endeavor
to infuse the spirit of the time into his people. With all his
rare gifts, the touch of the born artist, the superiority of
the man of genius, he advanced the thought which had
gripped himself, the thought which in one form or another is
manifestly destined to lead in the further unfoldment of
man Democracy more of it and not less, not the showdemocracy of the crafty, unscrupulous, irresponsible, flagwaving office-seeker, but enlightened democracy, fit to grip
to itself the devotion of mature men and women, democracy
in politics, democracy in religion, democracy in our social
relations throughout the whole world, a deeper realization
of the fundamental fact of life that you and I are not safe
unless we give unreservedly all there is in us for the pro
motion of the welfare of all. So it should be, so it must be,
if civilization is not to perish from the earth.
I loved Kristofer Janson for his great optimistic power
and the heart cheerfulness that characterized all he said and
all he did. As the questions of his time appeared, he wove
them into his program; the labor question, the cause of
40
Kristof er Janson
temperance, the cause of peace, women's suffrage and, above

all, the cause of civilized religion everywhere at all times.
In contradistinction to the poet Vinje, who called him a priest
in the church militant of Norway, I would term him a min

ister in the struggling church of the Twentieth Century,
where it is less the true faith than the upright life which

saves men.
RECORDS OF THE ANNUAL MEETING, 1930

The Thirtieth Annual Meeting of the Unitarian Historical
Society was held in the Hale Chapel, First Church in Boston,
on Thursday morning, May 22, 1930, at 11 o'clock, the
President, Rev. Henry Wilder Foote presiding.
In the unavoidable absence of the Secretary, Edwin J.

Lewis, Jr., was chosen to serve as Secretary, pro tempore.
The record of the previous meeting was read and ap
proved.
The report of the Treasurer, showing a balance on hand

available for current expenses $297.75, with $250.00 in the
Life Membership Fund, was read and accepted.
The President reported that arrangements had been
made by the American Unitarian Association to employ
Mrs. George F. Patterson as Librarian, in place of Miss
Cynthia Griffin resigned on July 1, 1929, on a part time
basis. Mrs. Patterson's report, recounting a considerable
number of valuable additions to the Library, and an in
creasing interest in the Library, was read and accepted with
appreciative applause.
The President reported that the Socinus Fund is slowly
increasing. About $300.00 additional is needed for this object.
The President reported that it is the intention to publish
the third number of the Proceedings under the direction of
the Editorial Committee, Dr. John C. Perkins and Prof.
Francis A. Christie.
The President mentioned the suggestion of Prof. Charles
H. Lyttle of the Meadville Theological School that a MidWestern branch of the Society be organized with head
41
quarters at Chicago. On motion of Prof. Christie, it was

voted, that Prof. Charles H. Lyttle of Chicago be authorized
to act as the representative of the Unitarian Historical So
ciety in organizing a Mid-Western branch of the Society
with headquarters at Chicago.
On motion of Rev. Charles J. Staples, of Northboro,
Mass., it was voted, that the Executive Committee be re
quested to list the colonial church buildings now in charge
of Unitarian Societies, erected previous to 1830 or there
abouts, and to ascertain what can be done to aid such
societies, especially in country-towns, in preserving and
restoring such structures when necessary.
Prof. Christie reported, for the Nominating Committee,

the following persons to serve as Officers and Directors for
the ensuing year, and they were duly elected
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D., President

Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice-President
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, D.D., Honorary Vice-President
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, D.D., Honorary Vice-President

Mrs. George F. Patterson, Librarian
Directors
For one year
For two years
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.
For three years
Rev. Charles Graves
On motion of Mr. Lewis the following Resolution was
unanimously adopted and ordered spread upon the records:
"It was with sincere regret that the Unitarian Historical So
42
ciety learned that Reverend Henry Wilder Foote, for the

past eleven years its President, declines a further re-election.
The members present at this the Thirtieth Annual Meeting
of the Society desire to place upon record this expression
of their deep appreciation of the untiring zeal and whole
hearted devotion of Mr. Foote and a recognition of the suc
cess that has crowned his efforts to make of this Society
a potent power for the preservation of the records of past
achievements in the Unitarian fellowship and a stimulation
towards even greater successes in the future."
The President then introduced Dr. Charles E. Park, min
ister of the First Church in Boston, who was announced to
speak on "The First Four Churches of the Massachusetts
Bay Colony, 1630." (See Vol. II, Part I, of the Proceedings.)

Edwin
J.
Lewis,
Jr.
Secretary, pro tempore.
43
1931
The Thirty-first Annual Meeting of the Unitarian His

torical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday,
May 21, 1931, at 11 o'clock, A. M., the President, Dr. Christ
opher R. Eliot, presiding.
The record of the Thirtieth Annual Meeting was read

and approved.
The Treasurer, Harrie H. Dadmun, read his report, show

ing a balance of $532.64 in the Treasury, and the sum of
$450 in the Life Membership Fund. The report was accepted.
The Librarian, Mrs. George F. Patterson, read her report,
showing the arrangement of biographical material, and the
addition of more than 600 volumes, mostly from the libraries
of the late Dr. Paul Revere Frothingham, Rev. Francis
Wilder Holden, and Dr. Thomas Van Ness. The report was
accepted.
Dr. John Carroll Perkins made the report of the publica

tion Committee, describing in the main the new issue of the
Proceedings of the Society, Volume II, Part I, which he pre
sented ready for distribution to members.
Dr. Henry Wilder Foote stated that the amount of the
Socinus Fund, now held in the Treasury of the American
Unitarian Association, is $1673.44, and that it is hoped to
begin work on the Socinus Memorial during the visit of
Dr. Earl M. Wilbur in Europe in the coming summer. The
Secretary reported for the Nominating Committee the fol
lowing names of persons to serve as Officers and Directors
for the ensuing year, and they were duly elected :
44
Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D., President

Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice-President
Henry Wilder Foote, D.D., HonoraryVice-President
Earl M. Wilbur, D.D., Honorary Vice-President
Mrs. George F. Patterson, Librarian
Rev.
Rev.
Rev.
Rev.
Directors
For one year
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.
For two years
Rev. Charles Graves
For three
years

Rev. John Carroll Perkins, D.D.
Mr. Eliot expressed his appreciation of his election,
and spoke at length of the encouraging outlook of the Society
on this its Thirtieth Anniversary; of its desire to have a
larger membership; of the need to have a larger income to
insure the issue of two publications a year ; of the importance
of widening historical research ; of the need of greater care
in the preservation of church records ; of offering prizes for
essays on selected subjects; of the important reorganized
Library of the Meadville Theological School; of the value
of a catalogue of all books relating to Unitarianism in
Boston and Cambridge libraries; and of his own timely
presence at a recent meeting of the Western Conference in
Chicago, when Dr. Lyttle, a Director of the Society, led a
meeting to arrange for the formation of a Western Branch
of the Unitarian Historical Society, at which meeting a
committee was appointed to report upon the matter at the
next Conference.
Dr. Samuel A. Eliot raised a question as to whether

anything had been accomplished by the committee appointed
45
at the centenary of the American Unitarian Association in

1925 to prepare a history of the Association. Dr. Foote
replied that some materials for such a history had been
gathered but that the matter had been dropped. Another
committee was appointed by the directors of the American
Unitarian Association some two years ago but was inactive.
The President then introduced Rev. Dr. Rognvaldur Petursson, of Winnepeg, Manitoba, who addressed the Society
on "The Development of Liberal Religion in Iceland," tracing
its history from the arrival in Iceland of two Irish hermits
in the year 795.
The President then asked the Society to listen to the
playing of three Icelandic hymns on the organ by Mr. Robin
son, the organist of King's Chapel.

Following this, the President introduced Rev. Dr. George
F. Patterson, who read a paper on "The Rise and Progress

of Icelandic Unitarian Churches in the United States and
Canada."
The meeting was dissolved at 12.50.
Julius
H.
Tuttle
Secretary
46
LIST OF
ANNUAL ADDRESSES DELIVERED BEFORE

19011932
The earliest meetings of the Society were held in Channing Hall in the building of the American Unitarian Asso
ciation, 25 Beacon Street, Boston, and were informal in
character. Since 1904 the Annual Meeting has been regularly
held in King's Chapel, Boston, except in 1923, when it was
held in King's Chapel Parish House, and in 1930 when it was
held in Hale Chapel, at the First Church of Boston. The list
of speakers and their subjects is as follows:
May 23, 1901 Brief addresses on Rev. Samuel Willard, D.D.,
Rev. Cyrus Bartol, D.D., and Rev. Alexander
Young, D.D., by Rev. C. E. Park, Rev. George
W. Solley, Rev. E. E. Hale, Rev. S. B. Stewart,
and Rev. Edward J. Young.
May 29, 1902 Prof. T. G. Masaryk, Prague, Bohemia.
May 21, 1903 Rev. Alfred Altherr, Basle, Switzerland.
Switzerland."
May 26, 1904 Edwin D. Mead, Esq., Boston.

"The Relation of the Unitarian Fathers
to the Peace
May 25, 1905 Rev. Edward Everett Hale, Boston.

Memoirs."
May 24, 1906 Rev. John Carroll Perkins, Portland, Maine.

47
May 23, 1907 Rev. C. E. Park, Boston.

May 28, 1908 Rev. James De Normandie, Roxbury.

May 27, 1909 Rev. Bradley Gilman, Canton.

"Holmes
as a
Religious Teacher."
May 26, 1910 Rev. H. G. Spaulding, Boston.

the
Old
May 23, 1912 Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, Cambridge.

See "Transactions of the Unitarian Historical
Society of Great Britain," Vol. Ill, Part 2,
October,
1924.


"History of
the
Harvard Church in Charlestown."

See "Proceedings of the Massachusetts His
torical Society," Vol. 47, pp 223 to 231, entitled
"The Manifesto Church."
May 27, 1915 Rev. Charles Graves, Albany, N. Y.
See "The Christian Register" June 24, 1915,
pp.
584-586
and
July
1,
pp.
608-611,
"Reprint" by Geo. H. Ellis Co., 1915.
also
May 28, 1916 Hon. Winslow Warren, Dedham.

torical Society, Vol. 49, pp. 349-356.
"Possibilities
of Beauty in the Congregational
Order."
Journal of Theology,"
"American
Vol.
No. 1, January, 1919.
May 23, 1918 Rev. G. L. Chaney, Salem.
See "The Christian Register," Nov. 28, 1918,
See
XXIII,
p. 1134; Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7; Dec. 12, pp. 1191-2;

December 12, pp. 1215-6.
48
May 22, 1919 Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, Brooklyn, N. Y.

"The Pentecost of Unitarianism."
A study of Channing's Baltimore Sermon of
1819. Published for the Unitarian Historical
Society by The Beacon Press, Boston, 1920.
May 27, 1920 Professor W. W. Fenn, Cambridge.
May 26, 1921 Professor Ephraim Emerton, Cambridge.
'"The Unitarian Debt to Orthodoxy."
May 25, 1922 Rev. W. G. Eliot, Jr., Portland, Oregon.
"The Early Days of- Unitarianism on the Pacific
Coast."

May 24, 1923 Professor Waldo S. Pratt, Hartford, Conn.

See "Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical
Society," Vol. I, Part II, 1928.
May 22, 1924 Dr. Kenneth B. Murdock, Cambridge.
Society," Vol. I, Part I, 1925.
March 19, 1925 (Special Meeting)
Rev. R. Nicol Cross, Hampstead, London.

May 27, 1926 Mr. Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., Boston.
"The Churches of Boston in i860."
"Dr. Sylvester udd, Unitarian Churchman in Maine''
May 24, 1928 Professor Francis A. Christie.
May 23, 1929 Rev. Thomas

"Early History
Miss Harriet
"Early History
H. Billings, Salem, Mass.

of the First Church in Salem, Mass."
E. Johnson, Boston.
of Arlington Street Church, Boston."
May 22, 1930 Rev. Charles E. Park, Boston.

Society," Vol. II, Part I, 1931.
May 21, 1931 Rev. Rognvaldur Petursson, Winnepeg, Mani
toba.
"The Development of Liberal Religion in Iceland."

Rev. George F. Patterson, Boston.
"The Rise and Progress of Icelandic Unitarian
Churches in the United States and Canada."
Rev. Amandus Norman, Hanska, Minn.

"Kristofer Janson, as Man, Poet, and Religious Re
former."

Society," Vol.
II, Part
50
H.


The Proceedings
of the

VOLUME
III
PART I
Liberty and Liberals
Four Hundred Years Ago
George Lincoln Burr
Socinian Propaganda in Germany
Three Hundred Years Ago
Earl M. Wilbur
1933
25 Beacon
Street
><r^!~^**~^.
ptrKrR
'
"


The Proceedings
of the
VOLUME
PART I
1933
III


Copyright.
1933
All rights reserved.

LIST OF OFFICERS,
1932-33
PRESIDENT
Rev. Christopher R.
SECRETARY
Eliot, LL.D.

Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.
21
Boston, Mass.
VICE-PRESIDENT

HONORARY
Rev. Henry


Berkeley, Calif.
TT
H" Dadmun, Esq.
St., Boston
librarian
Wilder Foote, D.D.
Belmont, Mass.
?*e
50 Congress
VICE-PRESIDENTS
TREASURER
Mrs- George F. Patterson

25 Beacon Street
Boston, Mass.
DIRECTORS
Rev. Charles Graves, Wethersfield, Conn
Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, Th.D., Chicago
1930 to 1933
1930 to 1933
Prof. Francis A. Christie, D.D., Lowell

Rev. John Carroll Perkins, D.D., Boston
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., Boston
Miss Harriet E. Johnson, Boston
1931
to 1934
1931 to 1934
to 1935
1932 to 1935
1932

Treasurer.

CONTENTS
1933
List of
IV
Officers
Liberty and Liberals Four Hundred Years Ago

George
Lincoln Burr
Socinian Propaganda in Germany Three Hun

dred Years Ago
Crypto-Socinianism
at
22
Altdorf
Earl M. Wilbur
42
46
Communications
should be addressed to


LIBERALS AND LIBERTY FOUR HUNDRED

YEARS AGO
George
Lincoln Burr
months ago American Unitarians commemorated
the

SIXbirth four hundred years ago of two little books. By the

well-chosen pen of Dr. Wilbur we recalled to our memories
how then a young Spaniard, one Michael Servetus, put

forth for the first time views savoring of those we now call
Unitarian. But not in the history of speculative theology
alone does Michael Servetus deserve remembering. In that
of religious liberty as well his books and he are landmarks.
Twenty years ago, speaking in Boston to my fellows of the
American Historical Association, I tried to show that his
death in Geneva in 1553 is our best date for the ending of
the Middle Ages.1 For that heretic-burning at Protestant
hands proved the culminating point of the long effort in
Christendom to realize by earthly force a State of God. I
have hoped to point out some day more fully than has yet
been done how the Christian world protested against that
triumph of theocracy. But that protest had, too, its ante
cedents; and to-day I want to glance with you at what we
can detect of these in that eventful year 1531-32 when
Michael Servetus published his first books. What were the
perils that Liberals then faced ? And what in protest could
Liberals then say?
It
of the Diet of Augsburg.
The "na
tional council" promised the German princes by the halfGerman prince they had made Holy Roman Emperor and so
head of Christendom had now been held, and the leaders of
was the morrow
1 My paper, "Anent the Middle

Review, vol. 16, pp. 710-726.
Ages,"
may be found
in the American Historical

Liberals and Liberty Four Hundred Years Ago
German heresy, laying before him the creeds of their new

churches, had pledged themselves to bar all further change.
As for the official church of Rome and of the Empire, her
attitude toward religious freedom had for more than a thou
sand years been fixed. In their earlier years the Christians
had themselves taught tolerance ; and to them it is ascribed
by the historian of Roman religion that when at last the
Emperor Constantine granted to all faiths equality he could
base his act on their conviction and his that the God of
heaven himself wished all religion free.1 It does not follow
that to Constantine this freedom of religion meant freedom
too for heresy. Already the Christian jurist Tertullian, who
wrote "it is not for religion to compel religion," had written
also that "heretics should be coerced to their duty, not
enticed, for obstinacy needs rigor, not persuasion"; and
there is much in the acts of Constantine to suggest that to
his soldier mind a heresy was not a new religion, but only
insubordination to an old. If after him imperial policy for a
few years wavered, the edicts of Theodosius, another soldier
on the imperial throne, soon left no room for doubt ; and now
for more than a thousand years heresy had been, to state as
well as church, the highest of crimes treason to God him
self. To what thus touched the sovereignty of God the law
of the Roman world, as codified under Justinian, gave its
opening book; and its initial article, "Of the Supreme Trinity
and of the Catholic Faith," forbade that these should be so
much as publicly discussed. Now, too, since the thirteenth
century, the Church had had her special court to deal with
this high crime, the Holy Inquisition. She had in this court
only to condemn, and everywhere the secular power enforced
with death her decision. True, that court had found as yet
"Pendant toute la duree de la domination romaine, je ne vois pas un
seul sage, fut-il un sceptique, comme Pline l'ancien, un libre penseur
degage de tous les prejuges, comme Seneque, un philosophe honnete et
doux, comme Marc-Aurele, qui ait paru soupconner qu'on pourrait
accorder un jour des droits egaux a toutes les religions de Pempire.
Seuls les Chretiens l'ont pense et l'ont dit." Boissier, La fin du paga
nism e, i, p. 57.
1

but a cold welcome in Germanic lands.1 But there too now

inquisitors were busy ; and, if the heretic were of the clergy,
he could of course be summoned to Rome. With Martin
Luther the Church's action was slow; but, as even Protestant
scholars now see, there was no paltering. The posting of his
rebellious theses in 1517 had brought swift accusation; and
his trial had taken thenceforward its slow but steady course
at Rome. The heretic had refused, indeed, to appear there;
and when, in 1520, the Church's condemnation had been pro
nounced, the rest had to be left to her imperial lieutenant,
jtiut than that lieutenant, Charles of Spain and Austria, no
Emperor was ever less disposed to leave a heretic unpunished.
For Luther it was a triumph that his cause could be heard
before a German Diet and that he could make his own
answer. But from Charles that answer won no friendship,
no delay. The imperial edict of outlawry and death against
the heretic and his followers was duly issued, and in Charles's
own Netherlands it went forthwith into effect. If elsewhere
the execution of that edict had to wait, it was because Charles
of Hapsburg had more pressing errands. Such a trifle must
not put off the chastisement of his Castilian towns or chill
the loyalty of his German vassals while he could use their
aid in settling accounts with the French king or fending off
the Turk from Austria. Moreover, as churchmen loved al
ways to foretell, heresy was soon breeding revolution. By
1524 the peasants were making Gospel texts their excuse for
evading tithes and taxes, and slow German burghers were
rallying to prince and prelate for their repression. Charles
could well hold up for a time his edict, and, even when in
1526 that period of grace ran out, could accept the com
promise that, till the promised Council of the Church, each
petty German sovereign should as to religion "so rule and
hold as he hoped and trusted himself to answer to God and
to Imperial Majesty."
For the history of the Inquisition in Germany long hoped from Joseph Hansen we
still wait; but the footnotes to his translation of Lea's chapter (Qeachichte der
Inquisition im Mittelalter, vol. ii. chap. 6) give some hints of what he has learned.
Much too is added by Paul Fredericq's researches on the Inquisition in the Netherlands.
1

Luther himself, too, sobered by responsibility, seemed

fast forgetting this particular error, of those condemned as
his by the Pope's bull, that "heretic-burning is against the
will of the Holy Spirit." These words he could hardly take
back; but, now that on the Saxon throne as his lord there
sat a prince committed to his views and looking to him for
guidance, it grew clear to him that to a sovereign's religious
duty there are few limits. A Christian prince, he now taught,
must decide for his subjects what is the true religion and
must permit no other. If they refuse it or distort it, he
must punish them punish them, not for heresy, but for
sedition. Heresy is a spiritual thing and thoughts are "tollfree" ; they may think what they will. But, if they teach aught
that shocks the conscience of the prince, he must punish
them for blasphemy. He must require, too, in order that his
subjects may all know the truth, their faithful attention to
religious teaching in church and school. Thus did Luther
work out that compromise of "whose the region his the
religion," cuius regio ejus religio. Against the peasants who
made the Gospel teach revolution none wrote more hotly
than he, or more urged force in their repression. To him all
who taught disturbing doctrines were "fanatics" Schwarmer.
Even the order-loving Swiss were to him, because of their
rationalism, both fanatics and blasphemers.1
When, therefore, in 1529 the Emperor at last felt it safe
to proceed with vigor against the German heretics, his first
step was easy. Already they were divided, and he could count
on using the Lutherans against the others. Doubtless that
memorable German Diet that in the spring of 1529 assembled
at Spires is by most of us remembered for the "Protest"
a protest of the Lutheran princes and towns which was
thenceforward to furnish their Catholic opponents with a
of Luther's attitude I deal much more fully in "Anent the
Since, in 1901, the careful study of this was begun by Kohler in his
Reformation und Ketzerprozess much has been written on it and with growing
agreement.
The latest analysis is by an American
Roland H.
scholar. Professor
Bainton, in the Harvard Theological Review for 1929 (vol. 22, pp. 107-149), and
is now the best key to the whole literature.
I here tell only what is needed to make
intelligible the situation in 1529-30.
1
With the evolution
Middle
Ages."
name by which to call them: die Protestanten, the

But let us not forget that it was a protest
Protestants.

courteous
only against the high-handed annulment of the religious

compromise of 1526 a protest on behalf, not of the subject's
freedom to choose his faith, but of his sovereign's freedom
to dictate it. That Protest, though not accepted, was followed
by the tacit continuance for a time of what the Lutherans
claimed. But what to the Catholic majority of that Diet
must have seemed much more important was the law of
death enacted by Catholics and Lutherans jointly, on April
the 17th, three days before the submission of the Protest,
against the extremer heretics. The Swiss, it is true, were
not yet to suffer its harshest penalties. Among the Lutheran
princes were some, like the Hessian landgrave, too wise to
connive at the sacrifice of such allies. For the present it
seemed enough to provide that the Swiss views "certain
teachings and practices as to the sacrament of the body
and blood of our Lord" be excluded from Germany. But,
for all others (including, of course, all those whose views
resembled those now held by those we call "religious lib
erals"), in order to end "the frightful new doctrines and
sects of all sorts" and "to avert all further apostasy, unrest,
dissension, and annoyance," there is embodied in the "re
cess," or final decree, of the Diet an edict which has been
called, I think with justice, the harshest heresy law in
Christian history.
But, I hear some learned hearer exclaim, "That was only

the law against the Anabaptists." Yes ; and that is doubtless
why so few students of the period have given it the attention
it deserves. How slight a queerness in dress or doctrine
suffices to dull the edge of our interest! But do those who
draw aside their skirts know what in 1529 an "Anabaptist"
was? No name, perhaps, has orthodoxy, Catholic and Prot
Anabaptists were not the
estant, so unjustly blackened.
warring peasants : that error had already been refuted. Nor
could the name Anabaptist yet suggest those crazed folk at
Munster who a half-dozen years later scandalized the Chris
tian world and nobody more than their fellow Anabaptists.

Nor did Anabaptist mean, as scholars still are too prone to
assume, one who held strange views of baptism or laid par
ticular emphasis on that rite. As for immersion, the earliest
Anabaptists did not immerse, nor did many later ones ; and,
where practiced, that mode in itself caused no objection.
How, then, came such a name to be attached to them? And
what did it now mean? Let me tell the tale.

In 1529 the name Anabaptist was scarcely four years old.

January
In
of 1525, at Zurich, then as now the leading city
of the Swiss, a little handful of religious radicals, desperate
because they found themselves unable to win the reforming
leader, Ulrich Zwingli, to their ideal of a community for the
saints alone, resolved to form one for themselves and then
to initiate each other into it by a baptism. This was not to
them a re-baptism; for, like many another radical group in
that day of searching the Scriptures, they denied that what
was done to them as babes was really baptism. To the new
rite they attached no great importance. Nor was it striking
in form: they themselves described it as a "sprinkling," and

for their first wholesale baptism was brought in
a milk-pail. Nor did they take for their group a name. The
name Anabaptist was given by their foes, and against their
constant protest. The first to use it seems to have been
Ulrich Zwingli, and why he chose it is not hard to guess.
Denouncing from his pulpit these radicals, he declared, so
they themselves report, that they ought to be beheaded in
pursuance of the imperial laws. "Do you hesitate to punish
them? According to the imperial laws such heretics should
be beheaded."1 What imperial laws did he mean? The
laws against anabaptists rebaptizers.
the water
There were such laws laws more than a thousand years

old. Old puritanic parties in the early church the Montanists, the Donatists to punish those who fell away during
the persecutions or were led off into heresies had made
1 See their
Oeschichtabucher
(in the Fontcs
pp. 20, 21. and Hubmaier, Von dem Kindertauf
Rerum Auatriacarum
(1526).
xliii 1883),

rebaptism a condition of their restoration to the church.

Christian Emperors, siding with a milder policy and tiring
of the stubborness of these rigorists, had put forth edicts
punishing such rebaptism with death. Between those rebaptizers and the Swiss radicals there was, of course, no
historical connection; all that Zwingli himself urged was
that the movements were "not unlike" in their causes, and
that each brought about a quarrel, a division which is
what he understands by a "heresy."1 It was for this, then
their attempt to form a separate church, using rebaptism
as a means that Zwingli named them Anabaptists, and so
could threaten them with death by imperial law. That threat,
indeed, he speedily forgot. The recognition at Zurich of
imperial law would have hazarded his own neck and many
others; and the Zurich council forthwith enacted penalties
of its own for its radicals imprisonment, exile, then (1526)
death by drowning. These local laws did not, as Zwingli had
done, use the term heresy; and Zwingli himself soon shied
from the word Anabaptist. Finding that one of the Fathers
(Gregory of Nazianzum) had jestingly dubbed these rebaptizers Catabaptists (that is, as Zwingli understood him, misbaptizers), Catabaptists they were to him thenceforward
when he wrote in Latin. But, whether thus to the learned
they were Anabaptists or Catabaptists Baptists-Up or
Baptists-Down in the German of common folk they were,
and despite their protests, "Wiedertaufer," rebaptizers.
What Zwingli resented in them was not a theological
error. It was its practical consequence. He had himself once
shared as had Luther and others of the reformers their
doubts as to whether the baptism of infants is taught by
the New Testament. But, when these reformers had seen
i
"Thirteen hundred years ago, too," so he writes in his Von der Taufe, von der
Wiedertaufe und von der Kindertaufe (May. 1525) "rebaptizlng caused much dis
. . . The cause, too. of our Anabaptists

turbance.
is not unlike the causes of that
rebaptizing.
For in those days there were many disturbers and dividers, just as now
too every headstrong crank starts a group of his own ; and the bishops (that is to say.
the ministers or pastors) came together to hunt out in God's word what ground there
might be for these, strange views. And, when they found that these wranglers were
disputing for their notions (queer and silly enough they were, needing no description
not for their truth to God's word, they warned them
here) only out of willfulness,
soundly. Whoever thereafter clung to his crankiness was shunned as a sectary, a
partisan or divider what men call a heretic."
is
it
it
E. g, to Bullinger, already his lieutenant and soon to be his successor. The radicals
urged Zwingli, he later writes, that the godly "should separate themselves from the
others in this city and form a pure church and community of the true children of God,
who would have the spirit of God and be ruled or guided by him. But Zwingli replied
that he liked not at all such a separation and division. . . . And, when both sides had
disputed much and long, Zwingli's opponents saw that with him they would not gain
their end and considered how in other wise to bring about their separation and to set
up a separated church. So they began to attack infant baptism and to urge that, since
no true baptism, they had not been baptized, and that the believers must let
this
themselves be rebaptized into a holy community of God. And from this doctrine of
those whom hitherto
theirs
came that men began to call Baptists and Anabaptists
Zwingli, however, saw well from what the rebaptism came
some had called Spirituals.
"
and for what they wished to use it namely, for the separation (zur absunderung)
It was, of course, only of Anabaptism in the sense of Separatism that Bullinger could
make the oftxiuoted statement that the Swiss radicals "sucked their Anabaptism from
Miinzer." For Bullinger himself tells us that Miinzer held water -baptism of small
and, though he denied that infant baptism was from God, believed that a
account
rebaptism should be spiritual and did not himself rebaptize. Moreover, it is clear from
the letter of the Swiss radicals (5 Sept. 1524) which opened their relations with
Miinzer that they already taught adult baptism only and were not sure of his agree
ment. (For all this see Bullinger, Der Widertdufleren ursprung, etc., 1561, and the
letter to Miinzer, first printed by Cornelius in his Geschichte
de Munsterischen
Aufruhrs, ii, p. 240 ff., now well translated by Rauschenbusch in the American
Journal of Theology, ix, p. 91 ff.).
;
it
is

it
(i.
how the usage of the centuries had made infant baptism

the very basis of a Christian community, they saw no way
to let it go. Their critical consciences found quiet in the
assumption that the circumcision required for Hebrew chil
dren had among Christians been replaced by baptism. Since
the fourth Christian century it had been demanded by im
perial law of every parent. On it and on the pledge made
for the babe by its sponsors rested all the claims of Church
and State. By it one became a Christian do we not still call
e. a Christianing) and since Justinian
it a christening
had been the basis of citizenship as well. To this day, among
Catholics, one can not even be heretic unless one has been
baptized. To exempt their children from baptism, as these
Swiss radicals sought to do, was to free them from their
social and political obligations and to rebaptize themselves
was to form a new and rival community inside the old. So,
at least, Zwingli conceived their purpose. Anabaptist (fViedertaufer) to him meant Separatist. Over and over he took
what the name did
pains to make this clear; and that
from him.1 And since, meaning
mean to those who learned
thus any Separatist, the name soon ceased to suggest any
as well for the Saxon
thought of baptism, they used
Luther
and
whose views were
opposed
radicals who had
beginning to infect the South though these Northerners
were not rebaptizers and though their belief in violence

horrified the non-resistant Swiss Anabaptists.

Not to the Saxon north did Swiss Anabaptism first spread,

but into the Catholic lands of the Hapsburgs, adjoining
everywhere along the upper Rhine the lands of the Swiss;
and here too the name soon included all religious groups
outside the churches of the various governments.
In this
inclusive name were presently lost what anywhere had sur
vived of the "Spirituals" or "Evangelicals" or "Brothers"
Waldensian, Bohemian, or Mystical in origin whose history
is now so shadowy and so disputed, but who were certainly
one source of German separatism. And, from now on, every
new religious group, every isolated religious thinker, was
likely to be classed as Anabaptist and looked on as somehow
a traitor to all established religion till, especially among
the non-Catholic, the name of Anabaptist and that of heretic
came to be almost synonyms. Even Calvin, who had much
other use for the latter term, says of the Anabaptists that
"this vermin differs from all other groups of heretics in that
it does not err in certain points alone, but has given rise to a
whole sea of foolish notions so that one can hardly find an
Anabaptist without some wild idea of his own." And lest
any here may fondly dream that among this riff-raff were
not found the views now dear to Liberals, let me point out
to you how the judicial Bullinger, listing a little later the
varieties he knows of Anabaptists, after enumerating a dozen
common sorts, among whom he can now include those mad
folk at Minister, adds a thirteenth and culminating class
called by him the "Horrible" Anabaptists and among these
describes those who now bear the names of Unitarian and
Universalist.1
How a non-Catholic theologian, concerned for his par
ticular Ark of Salvation, should find convenient a compre
hensive name like Anabaptist for all religious rebels is clear
enough. But why should Catholics, to whom all others were
For Calvin's utterance see his Op. (in the Corpus Reformatorum), vii, p. 53; for
Bullingei's "Griiwenllche Toufer," his Der WidertSufferen ursprung, bk. ii, cap. 12.
1

10
heretics alike, find use for such a name? That is to forget

that all but Separatists had their protectors. Even the Em
peror was till 1529 bound by the compromise of "whose the
region, his the religion." Let us glance back at his lands
along the upper Rhine. A Catholic should, of course, send
heresy to the Church's courts ; but here the Church's courts
had scarce found entrance. Her inquisitors had in just this
region, indeed, had great success in bringing in witchhunting ; but it was by furnishing the secular courts with a
textbook and a code of procedure. Now the name Anabaptist
served as good a turn. For here more swiftly than in most
German lands imperial law was gaining vogue, and in it were
the edicts against anabaptism. They condemned it, not as a
heresy, but as a criminal act a crime whose penalty was
death, and with no need of trial by the Church. True, those
edicts, as we now see, were meant for no such rebaptizers
as these; but the historical study of law was yet in its in
fancy. Was it not of the very essence of heresy that the
Devil thus forever brings back in new and more seductive
forms the errors long ago refuted by the Fathers? So, at
least, was just then teaching Friar Conrad of Luxemburg
in the standard "Catalogue of Heretics." Johann Brenz, the
Swabian reformer, whose advice was in 1528 sought by Nu
remberg, protested indeed that to these simple folk, whose
blameless lives he personally knew, the old imperial laws did
not apply. But his protest had no weight with Catholic
princes ; least of all with Ferdinand of Austria, brother and
regent of the Emperor Charles, who already in June, 1524,
had leagued himself with the Bavarian princes and the South
German prelates for the enforcement of Charles's edict of
Worms. That the compromise of 1526 delayed. But not for
Separatists; and Ferdinand's fierce edict of 1527 (20 Aug.)
tells how, beside the Lutheran errors therein condemned,
there have now arisen "new, terrible, unheard-of doctrines
which because of their shameless blasphemy are not for us
to reveal among them that of anabaptism, though this act
has been forbidden, not only by the Church, but centuries
11

ago by the imperial laws." Sharper yet was the edict put
forth in 1528 (4 Jan.) by Charles himself through his Im
perial Council. Substantially this it was that now in 1529
was made law for all Germany by the Diet of Spires. Let us
look at it more closely.
"Inasmuch," it opens, "as there has lately arisen a new

Sect of the Anabaptism, which is forbidden by imperial law
and has for many centuries been condemned, and as this
Sect, regardless of imperial mandate, grows ever stronger
and more alarming, His Majesty, to fend off this serious evil
and its results, and to preserve peace and unity in the Em
pire, hereby ordains : That each and every Anabaptist, man
or woman, of responsible age, be put from natural life to
death by fire or sword" the men were burned, the women
drowned "without prior churchly trial." Nor may they (I
now abridge) in any wise be let off; but, in case any shall
forthwith confess, recant, and willingly bear penance and
penalty therefor, and begs for mercy, he shall be shown it.
All children must be brought for baptism. Nor may any
give refuge to an Anabaptist on pain of outlawry {Acht und
Bann). To this savage decree now add "unanimously" their
signatures "the Electors, Princes, Prelates, and Estates" of
all the Realm, and, say they, "we pledge ourselves to live up
to this edict." So, too, in the main they did some, like
Philip of Hesse, had wisely absented themselves from the
signing and so well that, when a year later, in 1530, there
came the great Diet of Augsburg, with the Emperor present
in person, it was felt enough, as regarded the Swiss and the
Anabaptists, to remind the Lutherans of this pledged co
operation. But at Augsburg there were submitted, and not
alone by the Lutherans, but by the Swiss and by a dissenting
group of South German towns, elaborate articles of faith,
from which they engaged there should be no more departure.
As for the Anabaptists, a contemporary estimates at two
thousand the number already legally slain among these
most of their ministers.
The Diet of Augsburg, as is well known, did not bring
12

peace. Charles accepted no Confession of Faith, and above
the heads of his heretic subjects his sword still dangled.

When, in 1546, the long-threatened war came it looked for
a time as if that sword would enforce submission. But, as
everybody knows, the fortunes of war changed, and when, in
1555, another Diet of Augsburg at last brought compromise,
the rival faiths were left substantially as that of 1530 had
found them. The Confessions there rejected continued to
define the creed of Lutherans and of Swiss; and, however
local laws replaced the imperial, their spirit was much the
same. When, in 1532, there was promulgated at last the
long-awaited criminal code for the Empire, the Carolina, it
contained, thanks to Lutheran influence, no clause as to
heresy. But, though Lutherans preferred to punish as sedi
tion or as blasphemy religious divergence, its penalty was
nearly everywhere death; and, thanks to the name Ana
baptist, even in Lutheran lands a court could safely use the
imperial law.1
And how about the Swiss? We have seen how Zwingli

in 1525, declaring heresy to mean faction, not error, turned
from thought of the old imperial laws to the legislation of
the Zurich council. To that alliance, that fusion, of local
church and local government, he remained thenceforward
true ; and his example was followed in the other Swiss can
tons that turned from the old faith. The civil government,
advised of course by its clergy, not only shaped the church
and cared for its maintenance, but tolerated no other wor
ship, "shut the mouths of God's foes," prevented sin. Its
citizens must listen to the preaching it provided, its preach
ers take oath to preach only what it approved. All surviving
Catholic usages must be abolished, and all who observe them
must be fined. Anabaptists (and all but Catholics and Zwinglians were deemed Anabaptists) must recant or choose
1 The Hessian
laws, thanks to Philip's tolerance, were the mildest.
But, even in
Hesse, writes in 1582 the Hessian jurist Sawr, "the Anabaptists
are by no means
tolerated. When detected they must abandon their error or must sell their property
and leave the land."
13
Of the states we call Protestant,

Zurich was earliest in use of the death penalty against dis
senters (Jan. 1527), and perhaps sternest in its use; and
that sternness grew. To the Diet of Augsburg, in 1530, her
theologians asserted their loyalty to the one true church
(which, of course, meant their repudiation of sects), and

between exile and death.1
there can be no doubt that they approved, except as to them

selves, the imperial law of 1529. Nay, in 1527, Zurich, Bern,
and St. Gall, joined presently by Basel and Schaffhausen,
had united in a common law against Anabaptists which
bound their subjects to betray to justice all suspected of
that crime. Their teachers and preachers and the leaders of
their groups must at once be drowned. The rest are to be
warned, and, if stubborn, imprisoned. When released they
must swear to have no more to do with the sect, and, if false
to this oath, shall be drowned. And when, in 1535, the
sectaries still multiplying, the Zurich council again asked
advice from its clergy, that body, now since Zwingli's death
(1531) led by Bullinger, replied that this Anabaptism,
though sometimes only the delusion of ignorant and simplehearted folk, is sometimes "a great open, scandalous, and
insincere blasphemy, dishonoring God, despising Holy Writ,
insulting God and the Holy Trinity, denying either the
divinity or the humanity of Christ, and belittling, spurning,
or distorting the doctrines on which our salvation rests." It
is better that its teachers be slain than that they lead many
into damnation. If, after being patiently instructed, they
give no hope of betterment, they must be prevented from
poisoning others and must be dealt with like other criminals
(each according to the circumstances of his case), in ac
cordance with the laws, divine, secular, and imperial the
laws, that is, of the Bible, of Zurich, and of the Empire.
1 Of the Zwinglian view and its development I must not here say more. One may now
use the monograph of Kreutzer, Zwingli's Lehre von der Oorigkeit (1909), and Alfred
Farner's Die Lehre von Kirche und Stoat bei ZuHngU (1931). with Kohler's review
of it (Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung , Kan. Abt. xx. p. 669 ff.). But one must not
omit tiie unfriendly pages of the Catholic Paulus, in his Proteetantitmus und Toleranz
(1911), and the Separatist Thudichum, in his Die deuttche Re
im 16. Jahrhundert
formation, lSn-fl (1907-9).
14
That is a significant phrase, that final one. Now that Unitarianism is to be feared, the laws of Zurich no longer
and the imperial law chiefly in thought must be
that of 1529.
Let it not surprise us that this type of heresy was
counted the most desperate.
It seemed blasphemy, and
blasphemy was now the highest crime known to the courts,
suffice;
crime reputed to bring down on a whole region the wrath

of God. The current definition of blasphemy, familiar to all
from an oft-enforced law meant to curb profane swearing
and wanton irreverence, was "If any ascribe to God what
does not beseem God or with his words robs God of what is
his due" and so it now ran in the Caroline code, where the
extreme penalty, as in the law of Moses, was death. The
catechisms, familiar to all from their childhood, enlarged
upon this in dealing with the Third Commandment; and
great was the general dread of any liberty taken with the
name or the attributes of God. Of this dread and of the law
against blasphemy Luther had availed himself when he felt
a need of the courts to aid him in repression; and by in
cluding in "blasphemy" much more than wanton insult to
religion he made that law almost a substitute for one against
heresy. "Manifest blasphemy is it," he wrote in 1530, "to
teach what is contrary to any recognized article of the faith
one clearly grounded in Scripture and believed by all
Christendom, such as children are taught in the Creed as,
for example, to teach that Christ is not God or that he did
not die for our sins, or to deny the resurrection or eternal
life or hell." Thus even Luther, to illustrate what blasphemy
is, thought first of what robs Christ of his attributes; and
it was easy to look on those who speculate as to the Godhead
as a sort of super-heretics. The Roman see itself, revising
a few years later its Lord's-Supper bull, which on Maundy
Thursday of every year reminded the faithful of the notori
ous heresies to be avoided, and which thus far had named
no modern heretic but Luther, now substituted for his name
"the Anabaptists" and "the Trinitarians" meaning by the


latter, of course,

Trinity.
I trust
who question the dogma
those
have made
it
15
of the
clear, then, that by this time not
only all Catholics, but all orthodox Protestants the Luther

ans, that is, and the Swiss were ready to punish arrant
heresy (though heresy they might not call it) with death ;
and that to all these the most arrant heresy (though they
might punish it as faction, as sedition, or as blasphemy)
was that to which we modern Liberals are still most prone.
But from the attitude of the Protestant leaders toward even
that heresy and its punishment to the attitude so soon to be
championed by Calvin and defended by Beza the step was
still a long one.
Such, four hundred years ago, were the limits of religious
liberty. Who protested? And how liberal were then the
Liberals ?
Not all were among the so-called Anabaptists. There was
Erasmus, with his dwindling group of fellow Humanists,
trimming between the rival orthodoxies. Great was liberty's
debt to them ; but they were survivals from a time more free.
Trimming had grown a ticklish business, now that the war
of dogma was so hot; and martyrdom was not their forte.
When in 1529, just as the edict of Spires had committed
Catholic and Lutheran alike to the repression of the sects
by force, Erasmus learned that his old friend Geldenhauer
had put at the forefront of a pamphlet against the perse
cution his own censure of the Spanish inquisitors, he was
in a fury. And with much reason; for not only was this
without his consent, but the title-page so displayed his name
that the pamphlet at first glance seemed his own. Forthwith
he printed a reply maintaining that, though he had censured
bigots, he had never justified heresy or opposed the death
penalty for blasphemy or sedition; and so fiercely in this
did he deal with Lutheran heresies and habits that the
Strasburg clergy were stirred to defend them. Whereupon
Erasmus in a fresh reply, tempering somewhat his wrath,
admitted his pleas to theologians and princes for Christian
16
clemency and scored his critics, especially the Strasburgers

and the Swiss, for their harshness to the Anabaptists. Yet
when soon (1531) another admirer, the free-minded Franck,
again quoted his words against persecution, so hotly did
Erasmus protest to the Strasburg authorities against their

permitting the publication of such a book that it cost Franck
imprisonment and exile.

What, then, of Geldenhauer and Franck themselves ? Let

me say first a word about what liberty owes to those not
Liberals. I suspect that tolerance, if not liberty, owes more
of actual advance to those who look with friendly eyes from
more conservative folds than to her thorough-going cham
pions. The leader who has a line beyond which he clearly
will not go may take with him to that line more than would
follow another so far ; and from his fellow leaders he is sure
of a better hearing. Often, too, a leader who like Luther
recedes from the breadth of earlier years has meanwhile
kindled others whose courage does not chill, or has committed
himself for life by phrases of his generous youth. Some
times, too, it is the earlier years that stay in the world's
memory and are still fruitful. For a century now the Luther
of history has been almost wholly the earlier Luther, he who
seemed to stand for liberty ; and by his story thousands have
been nerved for heresy who never learned how later he
repressed it. What, in the age we are studying, did not its
Liberals owe to the Erasmian words of the younger Zwingli,
to Brenz's vain protest against persecution, to the Strasburg
refuge of the younger Bucer ! And among those we call "the
lesser reformers" how many somehow with their orthodoxy
reconciled a breadth of view, a sympathy, a patience, and a
tolerance that passed that of the overworked leaders. Such
were a Capito, a Pellican, a Wolfgang Musculus ; such, among
the women of the Reformation, a Katharine Zell.
It is here,
for
1
perhaps, that one should speak of Geldenhauer ;

his tolerance did not make him a sectary.1 Gerald Gelden-
As "frei aller Secten" the Strasburg clergy in

Briefwechsel PhMpp's, i, p. 38.)
(Lenz,
1534 certified him to
Philip of Hesse.

17
hauer (Noviomagus, Nijmegen-born, as he Latinized his

name), a Netherland friend not only of Erasmus, but of
Thomas More, whose Utopia he had helped see through the
press, had begun his career as chaplain to Prince Charles,
the later Emperor. But, as More says of him, he must blurt
frankly out what Erasmus could insinuate, and he was al
ready a religious exile when in 1526 the persecution drove
his pen to fiery protest. First with the German princes
gathered at Spires, then with Duke Charles of Gelders, lord
of his Rhenish home, then with the Emperor himself, he
pleaded against the abuse of the old laws against their
subjects, whose crime was only their devotion to what they
thought the truth. It was these pleas, reprinted together
in 1529, to which he prefixed the passage from Erasmus.
Silenced for a little by that scholar's wrath or his own
poverty, he was in 1534 called by Philip of Hesse to a chair
in the new university at Marburg, where already in 1535
he was urging his prince to patience and gentleness with
the Anabaptists.1 To Geldenhauer, till his death in 1542,
Philip's exceptional tolerance was doubtless partly due.

But now, by most, belief in tolerance "the sin of in
difference," as Calvin called it was deemed an Anabaptist
heresy. Not, of course, that all Anabaptists were Liberals.
Even Michael Servetus, progressive and lover of mankind
though he was, I hesitate to call so. Not because his con
troversial manners were almost as bad as Calvin's; but
because to me he seems essentially a man of dogma. Once,
indeed, we hear him plead for tolerance; but he was then
on trial for his life, and his words to me do not suggest an
earlier advocacy. The Anabaptists included, of course, the
"lunatic fringe" of the great reforming movement, and most
of them, counted by the head, were doubtless what historians
have preferred to call them Radicals: simple-minded pie
tists or narrow-minded extremists. But among them, and
from the first, were Liberals in the highest sense of that
fine word. Witness Hans Denck scholar, proof-reader,
1 (Rommel.
PhiUpp, ii, p.
340.)
18
schoolmaster,
preacher, author, wandering "bishop"
of these
little knots of martyrs and freethinkers, but growing always

in wisdom, in modesty, in self-control, advocate always of
Christian love and Christian liberty; with his doubts as to
Hell, as to Satan, as to the Trinity, as to the Church, as to
the Bible, but with unshaken faith in the God and Father
of our Lord Jesus Christ. Witness his friend and partner,
Ludwig Hetzer, of whom Dr. Weis has just given us so
illuminating a life. Witness Balthasar Hubmaier or Michael
Sattler. All these had been swept off, however, before the
years we study; and those whom I shall name must be but
one or two.
word of Caspar von Schwenckfeld. A
Silesian nobleman whose deep piety turned him from a court
career to seek at Wittenberg itself light on the new outlook,
he was repelled by Luther's literalism and his growing in
tolerance and then found in South Germany a fertile seed
bed for his own more mystical faith. There, after 1527, one
meets him everywhere, that knight of the free spirit a
courteous, kindly man, a trifle deaf and with the persistence
of opinion so often characteristic of the hard of hearing.
Driven out from Strasburg, Augsburg, Ulm, a homeless
fugitive for a generation, he yet was everywhere welcomed
by old friends and making new ones, everywhere leaving
behind him not only a knot of disciples, but a disregard for
form and dogma and a readiness to find true religion under
any name. But, some will protest, Schwenckfeld was no
Anabaptist. Wasn't he, then? Only the other day was pub
lished a first volume of the sources for Anabaptist history
in Wurttemberg;
and the editor, Bossert, includes all
Schwenckfeldian records because, he says, to the courts the
Schwenckfeldians were a sort of Anabaptists. Of course, as
I have shown you, the name Anabaptist was a misnomer.
Schwenckfeld was not even a Separatist. But he was a foe
of infant baptism ; and that was quite enough to convict him.
Not the least of his services to liberty was this obscuring

First, then,
19
of the limits of Anabaptism this and his ready ear for all
other heretics, even for Servetus and for Franck.1

Of Sebastian Franck and of the book in which he quoted

Erasmus let me now speak. That book, his "Bible of History,"
was no work of learning ; but not less than that of Servetus
does it red-letter for Liberals the year 1531. It is only a
world-history, and in German for the common reader. Its
first part, "from Adam to Christ," is followed (as one might
expect from a German) by a chronicle of the Empire to his
own day, and that by a chronicle of the Popes; and it is
already clear that the author borrows his facts where he
happens to find them, and that what interests him is not
the facts, but his way of stating them and a mystical
philosophy of history he works into them. But the startling
thing is what follows: "a chronicle of the Roman heretics
and of all their teachings, now banned and damned by the
Roman church." His matter, indeed, is still largely borrowed,
and from Friar Conrad of all men. But Friar Conrad is
turned on his head; for the heretics are listed, not to
condemn them, but honestly to give them a hearing. And
among them now appear Augustine and Ambrose and Hilary
and Jerome and all who seem to the author to have struck
out new paths to truth aye, and also the heretics of his
own day, as he has known them: Erasmus and Luther and
Zwingli, yes and Miinzer and Hubmaier and Hans Denck and
the Anabaptists as a whole, and on the views of each a
fearless judgment of his own. A kindly judgment withal;
"for to my mind," he writes, "the bounds of the kingdom of
Christ are in our days drawn much too narrow." Nay, more :
at the end of his list of heretics he adds "Verdicts of the
Scriptures and of writers old and new as to what and who
a heretic is, and whether he may justly be tortured and put
to death." And again he quotes Erasmus, with the protests
of Brenz and Odenbach. It was this little body of protests
1 "Schwenckfeld,"
wrote Buoer to
against the book of Servetus, and
for whatever we oppose he favors,
who owed much to him, was often
Blaurer
(29 Dec. 1531), "was present at my lectures

1 hope he too disapproves it; but
do not know
or at least thinks it should be tolerated." Franck,
sheltered by the same roof.
20

that a quarter-century later formed a nucleus for that of

Castellio against the execution of Servetus.
And who, then, was this Franck? University-trained, a
preacher first Catholic, then Lutheran, then at Nuremberg
in close touch with the sects, he had gone through the gamut
of opinion to find himself an individualist. Schwenckfeld
taught that in any church one might be a Christian ; Franck's
message was that to be a Christian one needs no church at
all. An Anabaptist indeed (though he denied it) , but with a
difference: he would have no followers. Yet through those
books of his for none but Luther could write such German
as he his audience was great. That the rest of his life
was spent in poverty or in hiding who can wonder?
Of another book that saw the light in 1531 I speak with

more hesitation. It was that of Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa
on "The Vanity of all Arts and Sciences." A strange scholar,
this Agrippa, I confess, and something of a charlatan. Well
born, much-traveled, student in many lands, at last a physi
cian private physician to the powerful queen-mother of

France and then to the yet more powerful Margaret of
Parma, aunt of the Emperor Charles and regent of the
Netherlands he was rich in experience when at five and
forty he freed his mind in this exposure of the frauds and
follies of his time. A humanist, he had managed to hold a
middle place between the faiths, and he feels free to scoff
at everything. But of his earnestness there can hardly be
question when he rails at the church's inquisitors for their
eagerness to convict and burn a heretic, and at those espe
cially who torture poor women into confession of witchcraft.
Twice at Metz, while syndic there, he had saved from them
such victims, and he knew whereof he spoke. That the
source of such confessions was the torture, he first had thus
the hardihood to maintain ; and his protest brought suspicion
of his being himself in league with Satan. The great black
dog he made his companion was thought his familiar, if not
the Devil himself. In 1536, discouraged and broken in health,
Agrippa died ; and it was his pupil, the great Rhenish physi
21
cian Jan Weyer, who wrote, though not till thirty years
later, the book that first gave the witch-persecution effective
check. Yet Agrippa, too, had listeners among them Sebas
tian Franck; and, while Lutheran and Calvinist made it a
part of their orthodoxy to vie in witch-hunting with their
Papist foes, the Anabaptists were incredulous.

One other notable book and I am done. It was in this

same year or just before it that a churchly astronomer, one
Nicolaus Copernicus, put forth the booklet, his "little com
mentary" (Commentariolus) , which first outlined his novel
theory of the heavens. Though it found a hearing, even
before the Pope, and stirred much curiosity, a dozen years
had passed before he published more. His monograph was
known to be complete ; but, despite all urging, it was printed
only in time to reach him on his death-bed. How far this
was due to fear of the heresy-hunters can only be guessed
though there is food for guessing. But even the Commentariolus
had set men thinking ; and you will, I think, agree with me
that nothing has in the long run proved more fatal to perse
cution for heresy than that demonstration that the earth is

but a planet and the universe of theology far from sure.
So much, then, for my Liberals. To the conservatism of
their day they were, you will admit, pretty "red."
SOCINIAN PROPAGANDA IN GERMANY

THREE HUNDRED YEARS AGO
Crypto-Socinianism
at
Altdorf
Earl M. Wilbur
ANY
one enough interested in early Unitarian history to

track it to one of its remote haunts, and finding himself
at Nuremberg with an afternoon at his disposal, might
enjoy, as
did last summer, making an excursion to Altdorf .
This is a tidy but stagnant little market-town of some 3,000

fx
inhabitants, lying at the end of a branch railroad line eight

or ten miles east of Nuremberg. The town has an unusually
large and long market-place at its center, and at each end
of this a massive tower and gate, which are about all that
now remains of the old walls. At the farther edge of the
town is its most notable building, a stately stone structure
built around three sides of a court-yard, and now known as
the Wichernhaus, an institution conducted by the Innere
Mission, in which crippled youth are taught useful trades.
It is this building that might most interest a Unitarian
visitor historically inclined, for during several years early
in the seventeenth century it sheltered in greatest secrecy
a little nest of heretics whose adventurous story, since it has
never so far as I know been told in English, I shall here
relate.
Nuremberg in the first half -century of the Reformation,

being a rich and proud city of no little consequence, was
ambitious to possess a university of its own, rather than
send its sons abroad for their higher education. Melanchthon
was appealed to, and with his advice in 1526 the first step
was taken in the foundation of a gymnasium, which had a
distinguished Rector and excellent teachers. Yet, instead of



Socinian Propaganda in Germany 300 Years Ago
23
flourishing, the institution gradually declined and came to

a premature end, and the city fathers concluded that a busy
commercial city did not afford the suitable academic atmos
phere. Hence, acting on the counsel of the erstwhile Rector,
they determined to establish their school in some quieter
town near by. Thus in 1575 the Nurembergers opened a new
gymnasium in stately new buildings at Altdorf, which had
now for two generations been a part of Nuremberg's domain.
The Nuremberg Senate induced famous teachers to come to
Altdorf, and the school sprang at once into fame; and as it
offered a wide range of instruction in the four faculties, it
was soon advanced to the status of an Academy, with the
right to confer the Bachelor's and the Master's degrees. It
attracted students not only from all parts of Germany, but
also from foreign lands, conspicuous among these being
Poland, and it was especially favored by the nobility. Notori
ous among these was an undisciplined young Baron from
Bohemia, named Waldestein, or Wallenstein, whose later
adventures Schiller celebrated in two of his dramas, and
whose turbulent career of a few months at Altdorf was
stained by homicide, and ended with his being "relegated."
At a later period the philosopher Leibniz made his Doctor
here in 1666.
In
the Academy at Altdorf was again advanced, and

became a University with the usual four faculties, although
on account of the unsettled state of religion in that stormy
period the Theological Faculty was not given degree privi
leges till toward the end of the century. At the same time
the gymnasium was separated from the Academy and
removed to Nuremberg. Altdorf had its due measure of
teachers whose names are still remembered in the world of
scholarship: Fabricius and Doderlein the theologians, Wagenseil the jurist, and Sturm the philosopher, to mention
no more. It won distinction in philosophy, natural science,
and medicine, and its laboratories, clinics, and botanical
garden were celebrated.
The burghers of Nuremberg were proud of their nursling
1623

24
institution, poured out their wealth upon it, sent their sons
to it, and watched over it with solicitous care ; and although
it was properly called the University of Altdorf , yet it was
to all intents and purposes the University of Nuremberg.
Indeed, they liked to speak of it as die N iimbergische Universitat Altdorf. But its history was laid in troublous times.
It began in the midst of the Thirty Years' War, and it ended
in the midst of the Napoleonic Wars. Its internal life also
was stormy, and conflicts between town and gown were
frequent and serious. At length, after a hundred and twenty
years, it was called upon to face ruinous competition from a
new university opened at Erlangen, only a few miles from
Nuremberg, with distinguished teachers and a lavish endow
ment. The number of students at Altdorf gradually fell off,
the professors one by one withdrew, and in 1809 the
University was closed and its library and equipment were
transferred to Erlangen.1 The original buildings remain,
outwardly unchanged, but now long since devoted to other
uses.
About 1589 there came to the new Academy at Altdorf

a youth of fifteen whose story concerns us here. His name
was Ernst Soner (or Sohner),2 born 1572, the son of a
Nuremberg merchant whom Maximilian II. had admitted to
the nobility. He soon won distinction for his ability and his
attainments, which lay equally in the two fields of Aristo
telian philosophy and Medicine, received the Master's degree
in 1595, and was the first to be granted an aureum stipendium
offered to candidates in Medicine proposing to pursue their
studies abroad. Taking under his guidance two young gentle
men's sons from Nuremberg, he set out on his travels, and
after narrowly escaping both shipwreck and pestilence settled
down first at Leiden, where his unusual scholarship presently
won him the name of "the learned German." It was while
1 For an account of the University of Altdorf, see G. A. Will. Gerschichte und Beschreibung der Niirnbergischen
Universitat Altdorf. Altdorf, 1795.
For the best sketch of Soner's life, see J. J. Baier, Biographise professorom
Nttrnberg, 1728, pp. 26-36.
in Academia Altdorftana.
2
medicine
25
that there arrived from Poland two

Socinian missionaries, Christopher Ostorod and Andrew
Wojdowski, nominally for the purpose of superintending the
studies of some young Poles entrusted to their oversight,
but quite as much or more with a view to investigating the
prospects for their faith in the free republic, and winning
favor for it, for they brought with them a bale of Socinian
books for distribution. It is they that are credited with
having been the first to introduce Socinianism into Holland.
By private conversations and by circulating their books they
quietly sought to make converts; but the ever-watchful
authorities of the Reformed Church soon got wind of this,
had them called to account, and examined their books. The
result was that their books were seized and ordered to be
publicly burned as little better than Mohammedan, and they
themselves were ordered to leave the country within ten
days. But all this, however interesting in itself,1 is another
story. What is to the purpose here is the fact that, as
perhaps the most important result of their brief sojourn in
Holland, they made the acquaintance of Soner, formed an
intimate and lasting friendship with him, and held corre
spondence with him as long as he lived. Thus we come to
the source of Socinianism at Altdorf.

he was at Leiden
Leaving Leiden, and seeking to enrich his mind at other

seats of learning and by wide travel, Soner spent some time
at Oxford and at London, visited the main cities of France,
and traveled a thousand miles in Italy, going as far as Naples
and ending with the famous medical school at Padua. At
length he returned to take his Doctor's degree at Basel in
1601, and then, after these six years of elaborate prepara
tion, came home to Nuremberg at the age of twenty-eight
and entered upon a highly successful practice. It was there
fore not strange that when Professor Scherb of the Medical
Faculty at Altdorf saw his end approaching a few years
most accessible account of their adventures in Holland is in J. C. van Slee.
Haarlem,
Getchiedenis van het Socinianisme in de Nederlanden,
1914 ; and W. J.
Ktthler, Socinianisme in Nederland. Leiden, 1912.
1 The
26

later he should have designated Soner as his successor. Thus

in 1605 Soner became Professor of the Practice of Medicine,
and also of Natural Philosophy, holding, under a custom
which long prevailed at Altdorf, chairs in two faculties, and
dividing his instruction between them.1
Soner soon established a reputation as a popular teacher,
and in both faculties his lecture-rooms were crowded. He
is reported in his teaching to have been thorough, fresh,
original, and independent of current traditions, and to have
made much use of disputations in the training of his stu
dents. He was several times chosen Dean of the Philosophical
Faculty, and in 1607-1608 he served his turn in the rotating
office of Rector of the Academy. While it is true that he
published a few small medical writings, he left no mark in
that field, and his name is not mentioned in histories of
Medicine. For, as was the case with Servetus, though he
was by training and by profession a physician, and as such
might have become distinguished, his deeper interests lay
elsewhere, in Philosophy which he also professed, and in
Theology which he ardently cultivated as an avocation.
Whatever enduring influence he left, therefore, was in con
nection with his career as Professor of Philosophy. In con
nection with this he lectured, as his chair required, on not
only the Physics but also the Logic and the Metaphysics of
Aristotle, and in this field he was esteemed a matchless
teacher. Even a generation after his death his contribution
to the understanding of Aristotle continued to be so much
valued that the orthodox Altdorf philosopher Felwinger
edited from his manuscript two volumes of commentaries,2
carefully "castigated" of any Socinian impurities. His career,
however, was but brief, for after barely seven years of
teaching he was carried off by a malignant desease in 1612,
at the age of forty. He was extolled by the Rector of the
1 cf.
Will, op. sit., p.
39.
In Librum Aristotelis de Interpretatione, Altdorf, 1641. In XII, Hbros ArUtotelis

commentarlus. Jena, 1657, 1666. For his minor philosophical writings, see Philosophia
Altdorfina, hoc est . . . Ernesti Soneri . . . dlsputatlones philosophic* . . . accesserunt
aliquot Soneri orationes, ed. J. P. Felwinger, Nttrnberg, 1644.
2

27
Academy as incomparabilis Philosophus et Medicus excellentissimus.1

On theological subjects of course one in Soner's position
and holding his views could not safely publish anything.
One little tract of his, however, has survived, published long
after his time in free Holland, and entitling Universalism to
claim him (has the claim ever been asserted?) as one of its
earliest modern heralds.2 Zeltner has also preserved for us
the only letter of Soner's known to him, and the last six
chapters of a Catechism in German, "composed with the
greatest care, and of matchless clearness," as he observes,
of which he possessed the whole manuscript.3 Sand in his
Bibliotheca Anti-trinitariorum, followed by Bock, Historia Antitrinitariorum, attributes to Soner a dozen or more other
theological works, though all of them in manuscript. The
fragment of his Catechism which we possess makes it clear
that, as a true Socinian, Soner firmly held to the subordina
tion of Christ, as a being whose power was derived from the
Father;4 and that he repudiated any mathematical oneness
of God and Christ; but for any further statement of his
doctrinal position we have to rely mainly on the testimony
of his contemporaries at Altdorf to whom he had to some
extent expressed himself. His colleague, the thoroughly
orthodox Professor Schopper, who had had frequent and in
timate conversations with him, considered him an evangelical
Christian; since he held so strictly to the authority of
Scripture that he was wont to complain that on controverted
questions so many persons appeal not to Scripture but to
the Fathers and the Councils, whereas he considered that
the opinions of men ought to be squared with the Word of
1 Zeltner,
ut infra, p.
67.
First in Dutch translation, Bewys dat de strafen der verdoemden, etc., 1631. Later in
the original Latin, Demonstratio theologica et philosophica, quod asterna impiorum
supplida non arguunt Dei justitiam, sed injustitiam (In Fausti & Laelii Socini, item
Ernesti Sonneri Tractatus theologici, pp. 36-69), Eleutheropolis (Amsterdam), 1664.
2
pp. 319-358. Zeltner erroneously thinks (p. 48) that this was the basis of the
Catechism, which has in fact quite another pedigree. In choice of topics and
form of doctrine it is unmistakably Socinian. but the literary relation, if any, was
more likely in the other direction ; for the Racovian Catechism was published in Polish
in 1(06, the very year in which Soner habilitated at Altdorf, and a Minor Catechism in
German in the same year. The date of Soner's Catechism is not given.
3 Zeltner,
Racovian
4 Zeltner, p. 852f.
28
rather than contrariwise. Moreover he had frequently

said that he heartily believed that Christ was true God and
man, and as such he adored him in one person; while he
heartily detested those who in any way detracted from the
majesty of the Son of God, to worship and adore whom no
devotion of mortals could be sufficient. He died with a prayer
to Christ upon his lips.1

God
Now all this certainly sounds orthodox enough, especially

when judged by the standards of modern Unitarianism ; and
it was convincing to those who, trusting him, were his
sincere apologists, and who even when his secret heresies
had been clearly proved urged that he must then have
changed his views toward the end of his life. Yet those that
took account not only of the beliefs that Soner had thus
professed, but also of those that he had omitted to profess,
might have noted, as some did, that he had carefully ab
stained from acknowledging the Trinity, or the supreme and
eternal Godhead of Christ. In fact, he had expressed only
such beliefs as were accepted by the Socinianism of his time,
which ascribed to Christ a certain divinity, and made the
worship of Christ the very touch-stone of true Christian
faith; while the Socinians themselves without hesitation
claimed him as one of their number.2 He himself summed
up the practical essence of the Christian religion in the
statement that the main point in our religion is not knowl
edge of profound matters, not deep understanding of mys
teries, but a reverent and blameless life, and a diligent
observance of the commands of God; and this alone he
instilled and urged upon all, deeming that this was the only
way leading to the heavenly country.3
The theological atmosphere at Altdorf was rigidly ortho
Lutheran that even the reading of
Calvin's works, in which some of the students indulged
themselves, was regarded as a dangerous flirtation with
heresy. In such an environment Soner had every inducement
dox, and so strongly
1 Zeltner. pp. 67-59.
2 Zeltner, p. 60f .
3 Zeltner. p. 310.

29
to keep close the Socinian views which he had imbibed at

Leiden. But it may easily be believed that among the students
who fell under the spell of his influence there were some
who had stumbled at the intricate dogmas of the Athanasian
Creed and the Augsburg Confession, and would be attracted
by a doctrine that was much simpler in statement, appeared
to be better supported by Scripture, and laid its emphasis
much more on devoutness and a godly life than on specu
lative beliefs. With such he might venture to speak more
freely, though with his classes in general he exercised the
most prudent caution. His method in his public lectures on
Aristotle's Logic and Metaphysics was to illustrate philo
sophical problems by examples taken from the field of the
ology, and thus he could insinuate his views without arous
ing suspicion. In his collegia privatissima, however, where he
met only one or two pupils at a time, he could speak with
less reserve when it seemed safe to do so.
Into soil thus prepared, seeds were presently dropped
from other sources. Soner was in secret correspondence with
the Polish Brethren ; and as Altdorf had from the first been
more or less visited by Polish students (there being no
Protestant university in Poland), some of them now began
to arrive bearing letters of introduction from the brethren
at Rakow.1 These brought books from the Rakow press
which were quietly passed round with a view to winning
converts, and each convert made became a new missionary.
Finally, the regular academic disputations furnished an open
forum on which, under the form of debate, ticklish questions
might be raised or heresies defended, for the sake of practice
1 Zeltner gives (p. 36) a dozen or so of sample names, of which he drily remarks.
"Del describenti molesta, audituque horrida nomina" names hard for one even to
write down, and horrid to hear. The number of Polish students at Altdorf has,
however, been much overestimated. During the first seventeen years of the century an
average of about five students a year matriculated from Poland and Lithuania, and
during Soner's time the number was even smaller.
There is no clear reason for
thinking that more than a small proportion of these was of Socinian origin, and the
Transylvania
negligible.
was
number of Unitarians from
(See . von Steinmeyer.
Matrikel der Universitat Altdorf, Wiirtzburg, 1912). It is worth noting, however, that
one of the Poles, Adam Sieninski, son of the Palatine of Podolia, was chosen Honorary
Rector for the year 1609-1610, according to a custom by which this compliment was
sometimes paid to students of great distinction (cf. Will, op. cit., p. 38). Sieninski
was of the family whose head was proprietor of Rakow, and the most generous patron
of Socinian causes.

30
in dialectic skill. The mysteries of the Trinity and similar

dogmas resting more upon tradition and faith than upon rea
son and the clear teaching of Scripture provided favorite
topics for logical fencing and hair-splitting discussion.
One
student (Respondent) would undertake to defend a doctrinal
thesis; two others (Opponents) would attack it and try to
expose flaws in the Respondent's reasoning; while a pro
fessor in the given faculty (Praeses) would hold the debaters
to the point, and at the end might sum up the whole, as well
as pick up any dropped stitches and correct any erroneous
views. It is obvious that in the course of such disputations
many heretical views might be brought forward without too
great risk, and advantage was often taken of the opportunity.
Nor, as later became evident, did the Praeses always succeed
in defending the faith or confuting error in a way convincing
to all those whose doubts had been raised.
Thus Socinianism at Altdorf quietly spread unobserved
for seven years, and when at length Soner died untimely his
orthodoxy had never once come under suspicion. Underneath
the surface, however, much more had been going on than
had as yet been suspected. The next stage of this study
must therefore deal with some of the individual actors in
the drama, and with their organization into a secret brother
hood with a missionary purpose. The earliest Socinian known
to have come from Poland to Altdorf, and one of the leaders
in promoting the spread of his faith there, was Michael
Gittich, whose father had been a Protestant refugee from
Venice. His schooling had been among the Unitarians at
Kolozsvar, and later in the Socinian Academy at Rakow,
whence he came to Altdorf in 1607, the year in which Soner
was Rector, and probably enough in consequence of some
understanding with him. He stayed at Altdorf about two
years studying philosophy, and was greatly admired for his
studious habits and his irreproachable life ; but when it was
at length discovered that he had been persistently advocating
the Socinian doctrine in private conversation or discussions,
and that he wholly denied the deity of Christ, and argued

31
against his vicarious satisfaction, he was ordered to leave.

He was ordained by the Socinians at Rakow in 1611, and
was for many years pastor of their church at Nowogrodek
in Lithuania, where he died in 1654.1
At Altdorf Gittich soon formed an intimate friendship
with a German student, Johann Krell (Johannes Crellius as
he later always subscribed himself) from Helmetzheim in
Franconia, who was destined for his wide learning, his
reputation as a teacher, and his voluminous writings to win
much renown. He was already a favorite pupil of Soner.
During four or five years he devoted himself to imbibing
and spreading Socinian teachings, and he made several im
portant converts among the German students, yet so quietly
that when he suddenly and secretly left Altdorf soon after
Soner's death it occasioned general surprise. Perhaps he had
reason to fear that his heresy might now be discovered. At
all events, he fled alone and on foot to Poland, where he was
hospitably received, and at once joined the church at Rakow.
Although he never saw his native land again, he continued
as long as he lived to acknowledge it by signing himself
Johannes Crellius Francus. He was a man of massive learn
ing in both biblical scholarship and philosophy, and was soon
made Professor of Greek in the Academy at Rakow ; and he
was shortly afterwards elected Rector of the Academy and
pastor of the church, where he preached in Latin, German,
and Polish. Worn out by incessant labors he succumbed to
a fever and died in 1633 at the early age of forty-three. His
published writings fill four massive volumes of the Bibliotheca
Fratrum Polonorum, and include not only commentaries on
most of the books of the New Testament which mark an
epoch in the history of exegesis, and are still quoted with
respect in Meyer's commentaries, but also several works of
much influence in doctrinal theology and in ethics, many of
all these being translated into Dutch, German, French, or
English. He was the greatest scholar in the history of
Socinianism. His grandson Samuel (1660-1747), author of
1 See Zltner,
pp.
78-03,
226-229 ; Bock,
Histoiia Antitrinitariorum,
pp.
372-400.

32
numerous books that attracted marked attention in their

time, enjoyed intimate relations with distinguished persons
in Holland and England, and had two sons who were among
the first settlers of the American colony of Georgia, and are
the only Socinians known to have come to the new world.1
Of all the Socinians at Altdorf the most zealous and
active was undoubtedly Martin Ruar, another German, who
did not arrive from his Holstein home until the movement
was well under way, in 1611, only a year before Soner's
death. He was distinguished for his talents and eloquence,
a poet, a fine linguist, and a scholar of wide range. As a
student of Philosophy he soon became an intimate pupil of
Soner, and by him was tactfully led along until his theology
had become thoroughly transformed. He had singular suc
cess in making converts, and after making a secret journey
to Rakow, and having there been formally received into the
brotherhood of the church, he returned to Germany under
appointment as a Socinian missionary, and as such circulated
Socinian books, and by his letters sought to confirm his
scattered converts. He remained at Altdorf three years, was
leader of the Socinian group there, and at length removed
to Strassburg to pursue his mission in a new field. While
he was there, the Socinian movement at Altdorf fell under
investigation, and Ruar was found to have been so deeply
implicated in it that reports of his course there were for
warded to the university authorities at Strassburg. An in
vestigation ensued, and he thought it prudent to take his
leave without delay. Henceforth he led a restless and wan
dering life, traveled extensively, was offered a professorship
at Cambridge, and returning to Poland was appointed Rector
of the Academy at Rakow ; but soon tiring of scholastic life
he resigned and spent several years more in travel as com
panion to young Polish gentlemen, finally settling down to
the care of congregations in and near Danzig, where he died
in 1657.2
1 See Zeltner.
pp. 188-198; Bock, pp. 116-203.
2 See Zeltner.
pp. 94-150 ; 316-324 : Bock. pp. 713-735.

33
The three persons spoken of above were the foremost

leaders of the Socinian group at Altdorf, which seems first
and last to have included about twenty. Far from being a
company of depraved and abandoned heretics, bent chiefly
on corrupting the faith of those whom they might allure into
their net, they seem rather to have been, like the early
Socinians in general, a company of primitive Christians and
conscientious puritans, aiming on the one hand to hold the
New Testament faith in its purest and simplest form as
Contrasted with the changes which they felt had been introducd by the Creeds and Councils, and to commend it to
others as far as was possible in such an environment; and
on the other hand, in the conduct of daily life to live literally
as Christ and the Apostles had commanded. To this end
they were accustomed to hold private religious meetings in
one another's rooms for mutual encouragement ; and as they
observed that many of their fellow-students, though living
evil lives, yet partook of the Lord's Supper, they withdrew
from such association with them, abstained from communion
in church, and instead observed the sacrament privately in
their own lodgings, following the rite as practiced at Rakow.1
It is noteworthy that, bitterly as they were judged for
spreading their heretical doctrines, and for the stealth which
they of necessity had to use for self-protection in doing so,
their critics have left on record nothing but praise for their
devout piety and their exemplary conduct.
As a safeguard against their being discovered and be

trayed, the members of this secret religious fraternity (for
such it practically was) , in view of their having to separate
and to carry on correspondence with one another, adopted
a secret code. It was planned by Gittich, after a custom
not uncommon at the time, and it was not supposed to be
used always and everywhere but only under urgent necessity
and in serious circumstances. It contained some eighty names
of persons, places, and parties, and is still extant, together
1 Zeltner. pp. 128f,
ttlf.
34
with the identifications.1
Zeltner expands this list, by his

comments, into an extensive biographical and geographical
lexicon of Crypto-Socinianism, as the movement came after
wards to be known.2

It was not in
the nature of the case that such a movement

should continue indefinitely without becoming discovered or
suspected, and not long after Soner's death such rumors began
to be whispered about concerning the spread of Scinian
views among the students, and Soner's connection with them,
that when his intimate friend and late pupil Richter proposed
to honor him at Nuremberg in the customary panegyric ora
tion, permission for the use of the cathedral was for a time
withheld ; and when the oration was finally delivered it was
noted by some that while Soner's scholarship, his character,
and his piety were extolled, his particular religious views
were passed over very lightly with general statements.3 In
these circumstances, the position of the Crypto-Socinians at
Altdorf steadily grew more precarious. Gittich had indeed
already been detected and sent away in 1611, and Crellius
had deemed it prudent to steal away within a month after
Soner's death. By 1614, though no open charges of heresy
were yet made, suspicions had arisen against some of the
students at Altdorf. The bolder spirits therefore now formed
a plan to scatter to other universities in order to make con
verts in fresh fields, especially in universities where there
was most opposition to Socinianism and they might have an
opportunity in the disputations to maintain the Socinian
point of view. They then left Altdorf one or two at a time
during the year 1614, Ruar going to Strassburg, as we have
seen, and others to Jena, Wittenberg, Helmstadt, and Ro
stock, where their efforts met various success.
In the autumn of 1615 reports of what their former

students were doing reached the Curators of the Academy
at Altdorf and spurred them into action. They came out
from Nuremberg, and calling together the students who were
1 Zeltner, pp. 151-167.
2 Zeltner, pp. 151-382.
3 Zeltner, pp. 68, 66 ; Baler, p. 81.
35

at all suspected of heresy put them under examination. All

but one strenuously denied having anything to do with
Photinianism (as it was called, for the name Socinian had
not yet become current). Nicholas Diimler alone confessed

without shuffling that he could not believe in the Trinity as
taught in the Church, and gave numerous reasons for his
stand, disputing long and hotly with the Nuremberg theo
logians. When he could not be brought to yield, he was
required to put his doubts in writing, which he did at full
length. It was hoped that he would soon come to a better
mind, and he was invited to appear at Nuremberg a few
days later for further discussion. Instead he suddenly took
flight and made his way to Poland, where he was ordained
in 1618 at the same synod with Crellius, became pastor at
Meserite, and is thought to have died a few years later. At
Altdorf, as he failed to obey the formal summons to appeal*,
he was in due time expelled from the Academy and branded
with infamy as faithless and incorrigible.1
Of the students who left Altdorf to prosecute a mission
in other universities, two deserve special mention on account
of their dramatic history, and because their names became
so prominent in the history of Crypto-Socinianism. Joachim
Peuschel and Johann Vogel were students from Nuremberg
who came to Altdorf in the time of Soner and proved them
selves able scholars. Though they did not come under Soner's
immediate influence, they were both intimate with Crellius
and Ruar. They joined the Socinian group, attended its
religious meetings, partook of its sacrament, and were dili
gent in seeking out Scripture proofs of the Socinian teaching.
Peuschel was, after Ruar, the leader of the group, and they
were both ardent Socinians. Vogel left Altdorf together with
Ruar early in 1614, having received a certificate of honorable
dismissal. After visiting several other places he settled at
Jena, where he read theology assiduously, and also debated
so often and so hotly with Professor Grawer in the public
disputations that he had among the students the general
1 See Zcltner.
pp. 203-207.
423-428.
526-530,
1110-1167 ; Bock, p. 322f.

36
reputation of being a Photinian. After four months, there

fore, he thought it unsafe to stay longer, and took advantage
of an opportunity to accompany Ruar to Poland. There he
was cordially welcomed, and was formally received into the
brotherhood. Returning to missionary activity at Witten
berg, he embraced every opportunity publicly or in private
to spread his faith, and made not a few converts without
being discovered. Peuschel had meantime succeeded him
at Jena.
By the summer of 1615 disquieting rumors began to
reach the ears of the Senate at Nuremberg, and they centred
mostly about Peuschel. As he was studying abroad at public
expense, under pledge to hold the received faith, and was
still a citizen of Nuremberg, he was asked to give a candid
reply to twelve questions as to his religious beliefs. His
reply, which might have been brief and to the point, was
diffuse and evasive, for he had been coached and confirmed
by Ruar, who was now at Strassburg. Similar questions
were put to Vogel at Wittenberg, and with similar result.
Efforts to bring the two to a right mind through conversa
tions with theologians having proved futile, it was decided
early the next year to recall them home; and in order that
they might not escape as Diimler had done, the Senate re
quested that they be taken into custody.
Peuschel was
thrown into the University career at Jena, his lodgings were
searched, and many books of Socinians and Servetus were
found, as well as a quantity of cryptic letters. Vogel was
lodged in the public jail at Wittenberg, but little was found
in his lodgings. As soon as the necessary formalities could
be complied with, a Syndic came and took the two under
guard and in chains to Nuremberg, where they were placed
in the tower about the middle of April, together with two
others whose heresies had attracted less notice, Cornelius
Marcus and Christopher Uffinger.
The two were at once put under examination and frankly
told their story: how Crellius and others had led them
astray, what books had been given them to read (and that

37
the more eagerly after their professor had prohibited the

reading of such books) , what meetings they had held, how
they had celebrated the Lord's Supper, and how all rooted
back in Soner. Meantime steps were taken by the Curators
of the Academy to stamp out such heresy as still remained
at Altdorf . One or two students more were put under arrest ;
the rest were given a chance to clear themselves by surren
dering any Socinian books they might have. A large number
of these were brought together,1 and were burnt in the
market-place in the presence of the academical and civil
officers, the students, and a great crowd of citizens and
visitors, as a part of the public celebration of the Academy's
anniversary. One of the bystanders declared that the flames
rose high enough to be seen from even Poland and Holland
a statement which may be take for its symbolic value.
The herald denounced the wickedness, and ordered all that
favored or had taken part in it to quit the country, and that
at once. A few Polish Socinians were still at Altdorf, and
asked leave to remain on condition of good behavior; and
some indulgence was reluctantly granted them, since they
were nobles of high rank. But ere long they departed, and
the Academy was at last purged of its long infection. Indeed,
from this time on, scarcely a further trace is found of any
Polish students at Altdorf.2 All the other suspects were now
easily brought back to the way of evangelical truth.
The theologians of Nuremberg now applied themselves
to the task of converting their prisoners. To this end they
prepared, in both Latin and German, fifty "homologetic
Aphorisms," or Theses, in opposition to Photinian errors,
to be used as a basis of the examination, and these were
then discussed in the presence of the Curators of the Acad
emy and the theologians in fifteen formal meetings, pro
tracted from August 21 to October 18. Peuschel and Vogel,
examined separately, contested every step of the argument
with the greatest obstinacy; but with ripe theologians de1 See Zeltner,
pp. 513-517
for
partial list.
2 Zeltner,
pp. 522-526.

38
bating abstruse dogmas against immature students there

could never be uncertainty as to the outcome. Even if only
dialectical and scriptural methods were employed,1 their
imprisonment itself furnished an irrefutable argument which
could never be long out of mind; and the whole discussion
must have had something of the character of a theological
"third degree." Thus they gave way step by step until with
ten sessions the work seemed to be done. The prisoners
were then ordered after a few days to appear, make a public
recantation, subscribe the laws of the Nuremberg church,
and take a solemn oath. At this last requirement they balked,
for it was a marked characteristic of Socinianism to take
seriously the command of Jesus, "Swear not at all." Ap
parently the work must all be done over again. Pueschel
asked leave to return home for further reflection; but the
clergy, remembering Diimler, doubted his sincerity, grew
severe, and darkly hinted at invoking the penalty of the
Roman law (burning at the stake) . Discussion was resumed,
but Peuschel realized that it was of no use to prolong it. At
the next session he unexpectedly gave in, confessed his
errors, and promised to meet all the conditions imposed. He
took the oath and subscribed the laws, and the case was at
an end. Vogel's remaining scruples were soon disposed of,
and he too took the oath and subscribed the fifty Aphorisms.
Uffinger, as being relatively innocent, had evidently been
early discharged from custody; while Marcus, having been
easily persuaded to adjure his heresies with due solemnity,
was restored to communion, and eventually became Professor
of Theology at Altdorf .
Meantime the Polish Brethren at Rakow, who were ac
customed to follow their scattered members with solicitous
care, were apprised of what was taking place, and were much
distressed at the plight of Peuschel and Vogel as two who
had been duly received into their fellowship. Therefore they
first sent a courier to Nuremberg to see what could be done,
1 Zeltner categorically denies, in the face of .Socinian accusations, that the imprison
ment was unduly rigorous, or that threats and terrors were used ; on the contrary,
only serious admonitions when there seemed to be equivocation.
Op. cit., pp. 500-501.
39

and later sent two envoys to request the Nuremberg Senate

to release the two prisoners. But alas! before they arrived
the case was at an end, and nothing could be done.
After being duly confirmed and prepared for the event,
Peuschel and Vogel proceeded to make their public recanta
tion, which took place early in 1617 before a great crowd

from both Nuremberg and Altdorf. Vogel's oration was on
the divinity of Christ, which he defended on the customary
Peuschel, having apologized for his temporary
grounds.
aberration, likewise defended the dogma of the Satisfaction
of Christ. Having thus made his peace, Vogel now withdrew
from the field of theology and embraced the calling of a
teacher, becoming at length Rector of St. Sebald's School at
Nuremberg, where he lived to a ripe old age. Peuschel
entered the ministry and became pastor of St. Jacob's at
Nuremberg, where he was carried off by the plague at the
early age of forty. Both were supposed to be living in
peaceful conformity to the end of their days; though how
far a recantation obtained under such conditions was an ex
pression of sincere conviction is a question more easily raised
than answered. It is of record, however, that not long after
his recantation Marcus was exchanging letters with his old
friend Crellius, and that Peuschel not long before his death
had friendly correspondence with a Socinian convert whom
Ruar had won at Strassburg; and that when the Calvinists
had exiled the Remonstrants from Holland, he wrote a letter
of sympathy to them at Friedrichstadt.1 The missionary
efforts in the other universities must now have come to an
end, for we hear no more of them.
Thus ended a gallant attempt, and so far as is known the
only concerted and systematic attempt, to propagate Socinian
doctrine in Germany by making converts among theological
of the mission after the Socinians scattered from Altdorf. the arrest
and trial, and the recantation, is (riven at incredible length by Zeltner. pp. 383-814.
The orations of Vogel and Peuschel in recantation were published at Nuremberg in
1617 in two editions, and are reprinted in Zeltner. pp. 889-933.
A refutation by the
tireless Socinian controversialist,
Valentin Smalcius, was published at Rakow in the
same year, and is also reprinted by Zeltner, pp. 933-997. Finally, the Confessions of
faith submitted by Peuschel, Vogel and Dumler, in response to request from the
authorities when their orthodoxy was first called in question, are given by Zeltner,
pp. 998, 1071. 1119ff.
1 The whole story

40
students in the universities. It was a scheme apparently con

ceived and planned, and certainly carried on, by youth in
their twenties, of brilliant talents, burning zeal, and with that
reckless daring which goes with inexperience. Their effort
was of course from the start foredoomed to fail in an age
when nearly a century of theological controversy had sharp
ened issues to the last degree, and the guardians of the faith
were keenly alert to detect anything which might weaken the
defences which they had with such pains erected, and when
the secular arm was still prepared upon occasion to punish
heresy as a crime. Nor can they have planned and sustained
the attempt against such odds at all, save out of a firm
persuasion that the doctrine they held was the undoubted
truth of God, and a naive faith that, despite all obstacles
raised by man, it was therefore sure to prevail.
Thus the frontal attack upon the orthodox dogma was
soon repulsed. If in the course of a few generations more
not a few of the Protestant theological faculties in the
German universities came to shelter and even to honor teach
ers whose positions went far beyond those held by the early
Socinians, scriptural literalists as they were, and stout
champions of the scriptural Apostles' Creed as against the
non-scriptural "corruptions" of the Nicene and Athanasian
Creeds, it was because the authorities on which the orthodox
dogmas relied for support had in the meantime been weak
ened or undermined by biblical criticism and the study of
the evolution of Christian doctrine. Yet in the former of
these fields Socinianism too played no mean part through
the newer and more rational exegesis employed in the New
Testament commentaries of Crellius, himself, as we have
seen, one of the Altdorf Crypto-Socinians.
Well over a hundred years after the events narrated

above, Gustav Georg Zeltner, the learned Professor of The
ology and Oriental Languages at Altdorf,1 having become
interested in the matter, investigated it with characteristic
1 See the authobiographical
bere. 1722.
sketch in his Vitse Theologorum
Altorphinorum, Nurem*

41
German thoroughness, followed it out in all its ramifications

and connections to the remotest detail, and composed a history
of it, fully documented and enriched with a wealth of quota
tions and appendices. For some reason he was unwilling to
publish the work in his lifetime;1 but by some accident the
manuscript escaped from his hands and by devious ways fell
unexpectedly into those of a sometime Altdorf law student
who at once recognized its unusual interest, and overcoming
all scruples as to the propriety of his act put the work to
press, intending it as an antidote for any liable to become
infected with Socinianism.2 It is a forbidding, bulky Latin
quarto of more than one thousand, two hundred pages ; and
as if this were not enough, the editor added to it over seven
hundred pages more, containing a reprint of two "centuries"
of select letters written by Ruar and some forty others, rich
in contemporary accounts of what was going on among the
Socinians in the first half of the seventeenth century. The
whole volume makes a precious mine of materials for early
Unitarian history, full of interest and reward for any good
Latinist who has the time and patience to explore it. It is
largely from this volume that the present study has been
extracted and condensed.
why, for it is a work ostensibly unfriendly to the movement
it treats, and the author while reprinting a part of Soner'a Catechism
accompanies it by a brief refutation.
And yet it can not escape notice how frequently
he speaks in complimentary terms of the young heretics who move through his pages,
and that he gives as full a presentation of the Socinian side of the case as Socinians
themselves could fairly have asked, even to Smalcius's Refutation
of Vogel and
Peuschel, and Smalcius's rather irrelevant Diary. Is it possible that he had a partial
sympathy with the Socinian position, and was willing under the cover of a history to
bring it freshly to attention, yet shrank from incurring the criticism which some who
saw beneath the surface might bring upon him?
1 One cannot but wonder
of which
2 G. 6. Zeltner,
. . . accesserunt
Epistolarum
Historia Crypto-Socinismi altorfiiue quondam, academise infesti arcana

praeter alia Valentin! Smalcii Diarium Vitas . . . et Martini Ruari
centurue due, etc. Leipzig,
1729.
See the preface.
1932
The Thirty-second Annual Meeting of the Unitarian

Historical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday,
May 26, 1932, at 11 A. M., the President, Dr. Christopher
R. Eliot, presiding.
The record of the Thirty-first Annual Meeting was read

and approved.
The Treasurer, Mr. Harrie H. Dadmun, read his report,

showing a balance of $149.26 in the Treasury, and the sum
of $500 in the Life Membership Fund, which was accepted.
The Librarian, Mrs. George F. Patterson, read her report,
stressing the growing importance of the Library of the
Association for biographical and historical research, its
present needs and future possibilities, and noting among
the most important accessions the gift of a file of Unity
from a daughter of Rev. William C. Gannett, and by deposit
the record-books of the Massachusetts Convention of Con
gregational Ministers from 1880 to 1928.
Dr. John Carroll Perkins reported for the Publication

Committee, describing the new issue of the Proceedings of
the Society, Vol. II, Part 2, ready for distribution to
members.
Dr. Francis A. Christie reported for the Committee on

the Prize Essays. The Society through its Board of Directors
offered a prize of fifty dollars for an historical essay, on a
topic selected from a prescribed list of subjects, to the
students of the Harvard Theological School, the Meadville
Theological School, and the Pacific Unitarian School. The
prize was won by Arthur Newell Moore of the Meadville
Theological School on the subject "Theodore Parker's Protest
against the Capitalistic Industrialization of New England."
42
Dr. Henry Wilder Foote reported that the Faustus Socinus Fund had reached a sum, approximately, of $1800, and
spoke of the efforts of Dr. Earl M. Wilbur, who is now in
Poland, to complete the monument, with the permission of
the Polish government. This elicited some remarks by Dr.
Perkins on the design of the monument and the quality of
the stone to be used.
The President reported and read the authorization given
by the Society, to Dr. Wilbur, enabling him to proceed with
the work of erecting and completing this monument.

Dr. Foote spoke of the long search for the missing rec
ords of the Massachusetts Convention of Congregational
Ministers before 1880, and of the great importance of the
preservation of similar material.
The President spoke of his consulting, at the Massachu
setts Historical Society in connection with his researches
relating to the Boston Association of Ministers, a manuscript
volume containing a record of the meetings of an Associa
tion of Boston and Cambridge ministers, organized in 1690,
which was modelled upon a ministers' association in Cornwall,
England, the rules and early records of which, 1655-1659,
are also in this volume. He also instanced the fact that he
has been able to discover very little to verify the generally
accepted tradition that the beginning and development of
the Boston Public Garden were due to the efforts of Charles
Barnard more than to any one else. He would be grateful
for further information.
Miss Harriet E. Johnson called attention to the serious

loss of the early records of the Irish Presbyterian Church
in Long Lane, the predecessor of the Arlington Street
Church, and appealed to her hearers for clues which may
lead to the discovery of its papers and records before 1787,
which would be helpful to her in preparing her history of
that Church.
Rev. Charles A. Place then presented an interesting pre
liminary report listing and describing in detail the interiors
and exteriors of Unitarian Church buildings erected before
43
showing that few had carefully preserved their ancient

features.
It was voted that the Board of Directors be requested to
appoint a committee of five to continue the study of Church
buildings outlined by Mr. Place.
1830,
The Nominating Committee, Rev. Mr. Auer, Rev. Mr.

Jones, and Rev. Mr. Graves, reported the following persons
to serve as Officers and Directors of the Society for the
ensuing year, and they were duly elected:
Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D., President,
Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice-President,
Henry Wilder Foote, D.D., Honorary Vice-President,
Earl M. Wilbur, D.D., Honorary Vice-President,
Julius H. Tuttle, Secretary,
Harrie H. Dadman, Treasurer,
Mrs. George F. Patterson, Librarian,

Rev.
Rev.
Rev.
Rev.
and the following Directors
for three years :

Miss Harriet E. Johnson.
The President briefly expressed his appreciation of the
honor conferred by the election, and also the earnest hope
that the new year would be one of great success. He called
attention to the formation of a new Unitarian Historical
Society in the Western Conference, with headquarters at
Chicago, through the efforts of one of our Directors, Rev.
Charles H. Lyttle of the Meadville Theological School.
The President then introduced Dr. George Lincoln Burr,
of Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y., who gave an able and
exhaustive address on "Liberty and Liberals Four Hundred
Years Ago."
The President afterward referred to the great loss which
the Society had sustained in the death of two of its members,
Rev. Charles William Wendte, D.D., and Prof. William Wal
lace Fenn, D.D. Dr. Wendte was one of the earliest members
of the Society and a loyal supporter of its work from the
beginning. His interest in Unitarian history and traditions
44
in traditions and history as such merely, but as the

foundation upon which the Church of today stands, the soil
from which it has grown, and its abiding source of inspira
tion for the present and future. We are indebted to Dr.
Wendte not only for his loyal support, but for many gifts
of valuable books and pamphlets and for an example of
enthusiastic devotion to Truth, Religious Freedom, Inter
national Cooperation and Goodwill. Prof. Fenn was a special
student of New England religious history, its churches and
leaders. He knew this field as no other in our fellowship.
The Society is indebted to him for three of its ablest ad
dresses: "How the Schism Came," "The Farewell Address
of John Robinson," and "Dr. Sylvester Judd, Unitarian
Churchman in Maine." Prof. Fenn's friendship and ideals
of scholarship were invaluable.
The President appointed Mr. Gorham Dana to audit the
was not
Treasurer's accounts and his delayed report is entered here:

"Complying with your request I have looked over the ac
counts of the Unitarian Historical Society and find them in
excellent condition. The accounts appear to be properly cast
and there are endorsed checks to account for all expendi
tures."
JULIUS H. TUTTLE,
Secretary.
45
LIST OF

19011933
Switzerland."

"Laelius and Faust us Socinus."
to the Peace

Memoirs."

46



"Holmes
as a
Religious Teacher."

May 25,
1911

Society of Great Britain," Vol. HI, Part 2,
October, 1924.

"History of
the

pp.
584-586
and
July
1,
pp.
"Reprint" by Geo. H. Ellis Co.,
608-611,
also
1915.

"Possibilities of Beauty in the Congregational Order."

See "American Journal of Theology," Vol.
XXIII,
No. 1, January, 1919.

"The Hollis Street Church, Boston"
p. 1134 ; Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7 ; Dec. 12, pp. 1191-2
47

May 26,
1921
Professor Ephraim Emerton, Cambridge.


"The Early Days of Unitarianism on the Pacific
Coast."


"The Earliest New England Music"
Society," Vol. I, Part H, 1928.
Society," Vol. I, Part 1, 1925.

Society," Vol. I, Part n, 1928.
"Dr.Sylvester Judd, Unitarian Churchman in Maine''
"Theodore Parker and Modern Theology"
May 23, 1929 Rev. Thomas H. Billings, Salem, Mass.

"Early History of the First Church in Salem, Mass."
"Early History of Arlington Street Church, Boston."

May
21, 1931
Rev. Rognvaldur Petursson, Winnepeg, Mani

toba.


former."

Society," Vol.
II, Part
H.
May 25, 1933 Dr. George Lincoln Burr, Ithaca, N. Y.

"Liberals and Liberty Four Hundred Years Ago."
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur
"Socinian Propaganda in Germany 300 Years A go."
Society," Vol. Ill, Part I.
49



rFT
our ao
1031
The Proceedings
of the

[Unitarian
Historical Society^
VOLUME
PART
III
II
JOSEPH PRIESTLEY
Frederick R.
Griffin
THEODORE CIMUKFt^
Henry Wilder FffoOTK^
1934
25 Beacon Street


The Proceedings
of the
VOLUME
1934
III
PART II


Copyright,
25 Beacon St., Boston, Mrhs.
All
19S4
rights reserved.

LIST OF OFFICERS,
1933-34
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY

21 Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
VICE-PRESIDENT
iii/MnnoiuMi


Belmont, Mass.


Berkeley, Calif.
__
TREASURER
.
Carrie TT
H'
50
Esq"
Dalmui1'
Congress
St., Boston
librarian
25 Beacon Street
Boston, Mass.
DIRECTORS
Rev. Charles Graves, of Wethersfield, Conn

Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, of Chicago, 111
Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., of Boston
Miss Harriet E. Johnson, of Boston
Prof. Francis A. Christie, of Lowell
Rev. John Carroll Perkins, of Boston
1933-36
1933-36
1932-35
1932-35
1931-34
1931-34

illustrate the history of the Unitarian movement ; to
Treasurer.

CONTENTS
1934
IV
List of Officers
Joseph Priestley
Frederick R. Griffin
Theodore Clapp
13

Henry Wilder Foote

39
43
Communications



tU.juii.eoy cf the Technology
Keview)
Joseph Priestley
1733 1803
This picture
of the Gilbert Stuart portrait and

was made by Margaret Fitzhugh Browne of Boston, Mass. It
is now at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The chem
ical apparatus was added by Miss Browne and is a faithful
reproduction of that used by Priestley in his famous experiments.
is from
a copy

JOSEPH PRIESTLEY
1733-1804

Frederick R. Griffin
the last few months we have learned that the
hoarding of gold disturbs and disorganizes the currency
DURING
of the nation, resulting in serious financial and commercial
loss. The great men and women of the past are like gold.
When they are neglected and forgotten, when their adven
tures and achievements, notably in the realm of character,
are withdrawn from circulation in the memory and appre
ciation of an age, then the currency of courage and wisdom
is debased and life's supreme business suffers. When, how
ever, the men and women of gold are brought out of the
darkness of disuse and placed where they belong in the
public treasury of understanding and esteem, then the busi
ness of life is provided with a reliable and stable medium of
exchange.
Great men, as it was said of Lincoln, belong to the ages.

When the ages assert their claim to ownership, they are
enriched. When great men are neglected, those who are
guilty of the neglect are impoverished. For our sake rather
than for their sake, we need to increase our knowledge of
great men, to keep them in ever fresh and grateful memory
and when necessary, to clear their names of the tarnish of
misunderstanding and abuse which the ignorance and the
hostility of their own day placed upon them.

The riches of Joseph Priestley's life were many and
varied. Much which he achieved has permanent value, but
for our uses Priestley, the moral hero, stands above Priestley
the natural philosopher, teacher, reformer and minister of
religion. "If," said Frederic Harrison, "we choose one man
Joseph Priestley
as a type of the intellectual energy of the eighteenth century

we could hardly find a better than Joseph Priestley, though
his was not the greatest mind of the century. His versatility,
eagerness, activity and humanity ; the immense range of his
curiosity in all things, physical, moral or social ; his place in
in theology, in philosophy and in politics, his peculiar

relation to the Revolution, and the pathetic story of his

science,
unmerited sufferings, may make him the hero of the eight

eenth century."
In his lifetime Priestley was not a popular man although
he had numerous friends and received many and conspicuous
honors in recognition of his distinguished attainments. He
was the object of bitter criticism because he attacked the
externals of religion which is usually a hazardous thing to do.
His life-long endeavor to free Christianity from what he
called its "corruptions" was the cause of persecution from
which he suffered, and to this day it is the explanation of
the reservations which usually accompany the story of his
life. Samuel Horsley, Lord Bishop of St. Asaph, said that
"The most effectual preservative against the intended mis
chief of Priestley's views would be to destroy the writer's
credit and the authority of his name." Instead of a frank
and honorable attempt to refute Priestley's views of Chris
tianity, the Bishop of St. Asaph said that it would be better
to discredit Priestley's reputation as a man. In this endeavor
there was a measure of success and in consequence Priestley
suffered everything except actual martyrdom while unto this
day his memory is dimmed and his witness to Christianity
is only partially recognized. To see behind the records of his
detractors, to refresh the memory of his varied contributions
to human knowledge, and to gain a lively understanding of
his moral heroism are the objects of the celebration of the
bicentenary of his birth.
Joseph Priestley was born at Fieldhead in Yorkshire,
England, March 13, 1733 (O.S.), March 24, 1733 (N.S.),
the eldest of six children. His father was a finisher of cloth ;
his mother died in his seventh year but leaving upon his

Joseph Priestley
mind abiding impressions of the importance of religion and

the duty to respect the rights and the property of others.
At nine years of age he was adopted by his father's sister,
a strict Calvinist and Sabbatarian to whom he always felt
the greatest obligation. The elders who thus influenced his
childhood were strong in the faith and, being typical York
shire men, were independent and of robust convictions. Their
independency was Priestley's heritage and must account for
the courage to doubt which precluded his admission to the
church of his youth. When he was questioned on the sin of
Adam "He appeared to be not quite orthodox." He was then
eighteen years of age. It is worthy of mention as being
characteristic of the intellectual activity of his entire life
that during his school days, partly in the classroom and
partly without assistance, he learned Greek, Latin, Hebrew,
French, Italian, High Dutch, Chaldee, Syriac and Arabic.
His mind must have been a league of languages. He also
studied geometry, algebra, natural philosophy and logic.
For three years, from 1752 to 1755, he was a student at the
dissenters' academy at Daventry where he pursued a general
course of study followed by special study of theology. During
these years he determined to devote his life to the Christian
ministry. That this choice was made is evidence of strong
purpose and conviction because he was seriously handicapped
by an impediment in his speech. Concerning this impediment,
he said : "Like St. Paul's thorn in the flesh, I hope it has not
been without its use. Without some such check as this, I
might have been disputatious in company, or might have
been seduced by the love of popular applause as a preacher :
whereas my conversation and my delivery in the pulpit hav
ing nothing in them that was generally striking, I hope I
have been attentive to qualifications of a superior kind."
For three years he was minister of the Needham Market
Chapel and for an equal period minister of a Chapel at Nantwich. Both churches were small in numbers but large enough
to win the full devotion of their young and earnest leader.
The custom, established in these first years, remained

Joseph Priestley
throughout his life of avoiding in the pulpit all subjects of

a controversial nature. Out of the pulpit he never hid his
opinions on any subject; in the pulpit he was the interpreter
of Christianity as a way of life.
While in Nantwich he candidated at Upper Chapel in
Sheffield but not with success and for reasons which are of
interest. In the records of Upper Chapel in Sheffield, it is
said that there was no objection to Priestley's opinions but
that there were some who were displeased with the imper
fections of his delivery and who objected to "his gay and
airy disposition." This accusation was supported by the
report of his habit of jumping over the counter in the
grocer's shop where he lodged at Nantwich. Perhaps the
congregation was right: jumping over counters is bad busi
ness for ministers of religion. The Nantwich ministry was
important because it was during that period that Priestley
opened a school and inaugurated methods which are sufficient
to give him a permanent place in the history of education.
Also, at that time he bought his first scientific instrument
and began the pursuit of the hobby which made him famous.
For six years, from 1761-1767 he was tutor in divinity
and principal of Warrington Academy, an ancient institution
which has special interest because it was a direct ancestor
of Manchester College. In 1762 he married Mary Wilkinson.
Of this marriage Priestley characteristically wrote: "This
proved a very suitable and happy connection, my wife being
a woman of excellent understanding, much improved by
reading, of great fortitude and strength of mind, and of a
temper in the highest degree affectionate and generous,
feeling strongly for others, and little for herself. Also greatly
excelling in everything relating to household affairs, she
entirely relieved me of all concern of that kind, which allowed
me to give all my time to the prosecution of my studies and
the other duties of my station."
The teaching years gave Priestley ample opportunity for
the display of his uncommon intellectual eagerness and for
constructive expression of his social idealism. It was his

Joseph Priestley
conviction that "The good and happiness of the members,

that is, the majority of the members of any state, is the
great standard by which every thing relating to that state
must finally be determined."
It was by this standard that his educational theories and
practices were established. The design of education should
be to fit for the business of manhood and not alone for the
learned professions. He therefore introduced into the cur
riculum of his school, courses in history and economics, and
this he did many years before the same was done in Oxford.
He was a pioneer in the use of biography as an educational
agency. (His 'chart of biography' won for him in 1765 the
honorary degree of LL.D from the University of Edinburgh.)
Although this has a familiar sound to us, in Priestley's day
it was more than a novelty, it was revolutionary. Education
was for the privileged for the sake of careers of privilege.
To Priestley, education was for all who would avail them
selves of its opportunities and its design was the good and
happiness of the people. He said "That man is a friend of
his country who observes and endeavors to supply any de
fects in the methods of educating youth."
From Warrington Academy, Priestley went to Leeds and
for six years was minister of the Mill Hill Chapel, and then
for a like period was librarian of Lord Shelburne. His in
dustry was prodigal. A devoted minister caring for the
needs of his people, young and old, he yet found time to edit
a magazine, to write many tracts, to publish books on theo
logical, historical and scientific subjects. He came to know
Benjamin Franklin who continued throughout the remainder
of his life a warm friend and associate. Under the inspira
tion of Franklin, he wrote "The History of Electricity." This
work won for him the greatest of all honors which can come
to a scientist, a Fellowship in the Royal Society. He was
indifferent to no field of knowledge and sought truth with
the patience of a lover. "Ye shall know the truth, and the
truth shall make you free," he accepted as a guiding prin
ciple of his life. This love had a powerful and far-reaching
Joseph Priestley
influence over his activities and over his attitude toward

other people. What he claimed as the principle of his own
life, he advocated for others. He objected to authoritative
creeds because they limited the search for truth. He advo
cated complete toleration of Catholics as well as Protestants
since all should be free to pursue their quest according to

the requirements of their own loyalties. When freedom of

belief and expression are denied, there follows "insincere
subscription to articles of faith which is a vice of a malig
nant nature." Repression engenders violence so that the
safety of the state and its institutions is best safeguarded
by freedom. With these views it is not surprising that he
should have been a friend of the American colonists during
the days of their conflict with the crown; natural also that
he should have found a sympathetic comrade in Theophilus
Lindsey who welcomed his assistance in establishing in 1773
the first avowedly Unitarian chapel in England. Two utter
ances, coming from this period, are worthy of more than
passing notice: "Free discussion of the constitution cannot
harm the State. Great advantage would accrue to it should
its members learn to think with freedom, to speak and write
with boldness, to suffer in a good cause with patience, to
begin to act with caution, but to proceed with vigour." Dan
ger to the constitution lay rather in restriction than in free
dom. "It is chiefly when men are restrained from expressing
themselves in words, that they ever think of having recourse
to blows. When the current is not allowed a free outlet, it is
no wonder that it swells and bears down all before it." To
his eternal honour, Priestley pleaded for a complete tolera
tion of Catholics as well as of Protestants, when, as yet, the
idea was common with neither Dissenters nor Anglicans.
For all, whether "Christians, Papists, Protestants, Dissent
ers, Heretics, or even Deists," Priestley claimed the same
liberty of thinking, debating, and publishing. "There was no
need to confine our neighbour within the limits which satis
fied us. The wider we make the common circle of liberty, the
more of its friends will it receive, and the stronger will be

Joseph Priestley
the common interest."

While acting as Lord Shelburne's librarian, Priestley had
much time for his scientific labors. He wrote many books,
among which were six volumes on "Experiments and Ob
servations on Different Kinds of Air." At this time he made
his first scientific discovery in connection with "fixed air."
This discovery is now known as soda water, hence those who
resort to these waters should remember their debt to Priest
ley, while those who are relieved of their teeth by painless
extraction should likewise thank Joseph Priestley who iso
lated and described the gas known as nitrous oxide. His
greatest discovery that of oxygen was made on August
1st, 1774. Dr. James W. Holland, onetime professor in the
University of Pennsylvania, said of Priestley's discoveries:
"Including his crowning discovery of oxygen, or as he called
it, dephlogisticated air, he discovered and described for the
first time nine gases a larger number than all preceding
investigators put together could claim. He separated and
studied the properties of nitrous and nitric oxides, of sulphur
dioxide, silicon tetra fluoride, hydrochloric acid, ammonia,
methane, carbon monoxide. He made known many of the
properties of nitrogen, and materially added to our knowl
edge of the properties of hydrogen." Little wonder it is that
Priestley should be called the "Father of Modern Chemistry"
and be known, honored, and loved by the chemists of the
world.
But Priestley was by fixed and abiding choice a minister
of religion and while eager to continue his work in natural
philosophy, he was more anxious to return to the church.
The invitation to a chapel in Birmingham was gladly ac
cepted, and from 1780 to 1791 he there remained, "in the
temple of sedition and infidelity" as his enemies described it.
His preaching was dominated by a single conviction: that
Christianity, in its purest form, offers a way of life rather
than "a rule of observance and inflexible dogma." He fought
against infidelity and his zeal to combat orthodoxy was actu
ated by his belief that the "absurdities of orthodoxy," as he

Joseph Priestley
described them, were driving men into unbelief. To him

religion is a means to a certain end, good conduct in life, and
hence, Christianity, which is Christ's way of conduct, is to
be determined by the human character which it produces.
The sufficient bond of union in the church is "the profession
of our common Christianity." There must be diversity of
opinions but all men can learn diffidence in asserting their
own and charity in judging other people's. During his Bir
mingham ministry he published his most important theo
logical work, "The History of the Corruptions of Christiani
ty." Today we would not use his word "corruptions" but
would rather speak of the additions, the development in
thought and the growth of customs, institutions and observ
ances. To Priestley, the trinity, the atonement, the creeds,
opinions concerning the eucharist, baptism, the order of
clergy, the papacy, were corruptions. All these obscured
essential Christianity and not until the church went back of
the thought and practices which have generally character
ized it, to the way of life as manifested in the Christ, would
Christianity perform its beneficent service in transforming
the lives of the people. Always vitally interested in politics,
government, science, history, his preaching was devoted
without exception to his supreme loyalty, the one God and
the one revealer of the God way of life, Jesus of Nazareth.
He was not an orator; his impediment removed whatever
temptation might have enticed him to seek popular applause ;
his sermons were full of sound reasoning and good sense.
He spoke as one friend to another or as a pastor to his
beloved flock. By nature, peace-loving and not given to
wrangling, he yet became the outstanding pamphleteer of
his generation, since he was ever ready to defend the cause
of civil and religious liberty, to champion the principles of
the dissenters, to attack the prejudices and sterility of the
prevailing religion of his countrymen, and to vindicate Chris
tianity as a way of life.
If the Christ who set forth this way of life, had enemies,
was called seditious and suffered martyrdom, it is not sur

Joseph Priestley
prising that his followers have often shared his fate. Priest
ley was no exception and, upon the utterly false charge that
he was the enemy of the King and Constitution, he was
visited with the wrath of the mob. In 1791 his church in
Birmingham was burned to the ground and his house, library,
and scientific apparatus were destroyed. Three years later,
before setting forth for America, he offered his explanation
of the persecution which befell him, and to-day his judgment
is substantiated and confirmed. Speaking in farewell to his
fellow-countrymen, he said: "If, then, my real crime has not
been sedition or treason, what has it been ? For every effect
must have some adequate cause, and therefore the odium
that I have incurred must have been owing to something in
my declared sentiments or conduct, that has exposed me to
it. In my own opinion, it cannot have been anything but my
open hostility to the doctrines of the established Church, and
more especially to all civil establishments of religion what
ever."
While the fires were consuming church and home, Priest
ley spirited away for safety by solicitous friends, sat quietly
in his bedroom by night and wrote a sermon which he wanted
to preach in Birmingham on the following Sunday. The
sermon was not preached but it was written, and from the
text: "Father, forgive them for they know not what they
do." Certainly he exemplified the graces and virtues which
he recommended to others. "No human being," wrote a
friend, "could, in my opinion, appear in any trial more like
divine, or show a nearer resemblance to our Saviour, than
he did then. Undaunted he heard the blows which were
destroying the house and laboratory that contained all his
valuable and rare apparatus and their effects, which it had
been the business of his life to collect and use. . . . Not one
hasty or impatient expression, not one look expressive of
murmur or complaint, not one tear or sigh escaped him;
resignation and a conscious innocence and virtue seemed to
subdue all these feelings of humanity."
To return to Birmingham was impossible, hence he went

10
Joseph Priestley
to London and served for three years as minister of the

New Gravel Pit Chapel at Hackney. On April 8th, 1794, he
sailed from England, sad and disappointed when he reflected
upon the treatment he had received at the hands of some of
his fellow-countrymen whom he had sought to lead into a
better understanding and devoted practice of pure Chris
tianity, but uplifted and consoled when he dwelt upon the
many testimonials which sympathetic friends and admirers
had presented before he embarked. The voyage to the new
world was an occasion not for rest but for systematic reading
and experimentation. During the eight weeks at sea, he read
the whole of the Greek New Testament, the Hebrew Bible as
far as the first book of Samuel, Ovid's Metamorphoses,
Buchanan's poems, Erasmus' Dialogues, and Peter Pindar's
poems. This is the more worthy of note since he was quite
sea-sick. Landing in New York, he was received by repre
sentatives of the medical, scientific and patriotic societies
and assured of the high esteem in which he was held. In
Philadelphia he was likewise welcomed. The American Philo
sophical Society, the oldest scientific society in America,
presented through its president, David Rittenhouse, a formal
address of greeting and hospitality. From Philadelphia he
went to Northumberland, Pennsylvania, where he made his
home until his death. There he was industrious, as ever ; he
wrote a history of the Christian Church, worked in his
laboratory, and carried on an active correspondence with
friends in England and America. The University of Pennsyl
vania offered him the professorship in chemistry and later
the principalship but both invitations were declined. In the
spring of 1796 he visited Philadelphia and gave a course of
lectures on revealed religion. Those lectures, it is pleasant
to note, were given in the Church of the Universalists, and
were largely attended. Among his hearers were a number of
young Englishmen who were desirous of forming a church
and of securing the services of Dr. Priestley as its minister.
The church was organized and while Priestley occasionally
preached for the congregation, he did not take office in it.

Joseph Priestley
11
But he was the moving force in the church and was active
in arranging for its meetings and the establishing of its
customs. Writing to a friend in England, he said: "I do not
know that I have more satisfaction from anything I ever did
than from the lay Unitarian congregation I have been the
means of establishing in Philadelphia." This was the First
Unitarian Church in Philadelphia, organized June 12, 1796.
He also held meetings for worship in Northumberland but it
is not clear when a church was actually organized. From an
address to the Unitarian congregation in Philadelphia March
5, 1797, it would appear that in Priestley's opinion, the
Philadelphia church was the first which he organized and
the first to take the Unitarian name. He said in this address :
"I cannot leave this city, as I soon shall, without taking
an opportunity of expressing the great satisfaction I have
received from your conduct in standing forth, as you have
done, in the cause of important truth, by forming yourselves
into a society professedly Unitarian, in a part of the world
in which no suck thing existed before."
Infirmities limited his last years but his intellectual pow
ers remained unimpaired until the hour of his death. His
last visit to Philadephia was in 1803 when he preached to
the Unitarian Society and administered the Lord's Supper.
One night in the February following he gathered his grand
children about him and said: "I am going to sleep as well
as you, for death is only a good long, sound sleep in the
grave, and we shall meet again." The next day, February 6,
1804, he died at Northumberland. He had had a reasonably
long life and an extraordinarily full and active life. He made
original and permanent contributions to chemistry, to meth
od in historical research, to education, and he strengthened
the cause of civil and religious liberty. But his chief interest
was Christianity as a way of life. In manner, he was simple,
quiet, unaffected, in speech he was direct, candid and kind.
In all things he was patient and industrious, his curiosity
and his confidence in truth led him into many fields. He
made a host of friends. His family life was rich and happy.
12
Joseph Priestley
He was fond of music, enjoyed games and cultivated with

much pleasure his garden. As a preacher he recommended
the graces and virtues of the Christian life and in his con
duct he exemplified what he recommended to others.

Exhibit of Priestley Memorials

During Anniversary Week, May 21-27, there was on exhibition at
the Unitarian Headquarters, 25 Beacon Street, a loan collection of
Priestley memorabilia which proved to be of great interest, and for
which the Society was indebted to the First Unitarian Church of
Philadelphia (founded in 1796 by Joseph Priestley), the Unitarian
Library, Boston, Prof. Tenney L. Davis of the Chemistry Department
of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Prof. Lyman C. Newell,
Chemistry Department of Boston University, both of whom contributed
valuable memorials, and also to President Compton of the Institute of
Technology, who lent a valuable portrait of Priestley. Among the
memorabilia of special interest were the following: Painting by Mar
garet Fitzhugh Browne, with apparatus used by Priestley; Medallion
by Joseph Wedgwood; Silver Medal on departure from England, 1794;
Bronze and pewter medals, 1783; Engravings of Priestley, Caricatures,
Destruction of his House, Chapel and Laboratory by mob in Birming
ham; Home in Northumberland, Pa., 1794; More than forty volumes,
theological or scientific; manuscripts, pamphlets, and an autograph
letter after arrival in America, October 15, 1794.
THEODORE CLAPP*
Henry Wilder Foote

CLAPP
was born on March 29, 1792, in

Easthampton, Massachusetts, then a small village, now
THEODORE
a considerable town in the beautiful valley of the Connecticut
River. He was the son of Deacon Thaddeus and Achsah
(Parsons) Clapp, and was descended from Captain Roger
Clap, who, as a youth, emigrated from Devonshire to Massa
chusetts Bay in the ship Mary and John, and whose Memoirs
are a source of information about the settlement of Boston.
Thaddeus Clapp and his wife had seven children who grew
to maturity. First came a daughter, then twin boys, Thad
deus, Jr., and Theodore, then two more daughters and two
more sons. The family had long been settled in the Con
necticut Valley and for a hundred years maintained the only
public house in Easthampton, on the road leading north from
New Haven and Hartford. Thaddeus Clapp also ran a fulling
mill, was selectman, town treasurer for twenty years, justice
of the peace, representative in the General Court, and a
delegate to the State constitutional convention.
He must
have been a person of some means, and had the reputation
of a good citizen and useful public servant. Theodore Clapp's
most available sources of information
are Clapp's Autobiographical sketches
during a thirty-five years' residence in New Orleans, Phillips,
and recollections
Sampson & Co., Boston, 1857, of which four editions were printed (hereafter referred
to as Autobiography) and his Theological Views, comprising the substance of
Boston, 1869.
teachings during a ministry of thirty-five years in New Orleans.
Both books were published in his old age, when his strength was failing, and are
largely compilations of materials drawn from his sermons, which, for many years,
were printed weekly in the New Orleans Daily Picayune. The Autobiography must
source, since it is not an orderly and
be used with great caution as an historical
accurate record of his career but an old man's miscellany of reminiscences written to
entertain and edify. It contains many interesting pictures of life in New Orleans in
the first half of the nineteenth century, but is quite unreliable as to dates, and it
unintentionally distorts the story of his intellectual development. It needs to be supple
mented by the rare Report of the Trial of Rev. Theodore Clapp before the Missis
sippi Presbytery at their sessions in May and December, 1832. New Orleans 1SSS,
which Clapp himself prepared for the press, and which contains his speech in his own
defense, a document which shows him at the height of his powers.
The

14
Theodore Clapp
brothers and sisters married and settled in the vicinity on

farms or in business, except the youngest who went to
Williams College and became an Episcopal minister.
In his Autobiography Clapp says, "The humble home in
which my childhood was passed . . . today presents to my
mind a picture of surpassing loveliness." The house, was
"adjacent to the church and the parish school." He means
the village school, which he describes as small and poorly
equipped. It cannot have carried him far in education be
cause it was not until he was eighteen that he began Latin
under the tutelage of a minister. The church over-shadowed
the community. It was, of course, of the Congregational
order, and was rigidly Calvinistic in its teaching. "At sun
down each Saturday night, all secular labors were brought
to a solemn pause. Till the sundown of the next day we were
never allowed to leave the house, except to enter the church.
In prayers, sermon, conversation and books heaven was
represented under the symbol of an everlasting Sabbath day.
What an ingenious expedient to make religion appear beau
tiful to the young, loving and innocent mind!" And again,
writing of the fear of God which was drilled into him, he
says, "In New England, generally, at the period I am refer
ring to, the first impression which children, almost without
exception, received of God was that of a Being from whom
they had less to hope, and more to fear, than from all the
wicked men and demons in the universe." The statement is
too sweeping, since there had long been localities and reli
gious bodies in New England of which it was not true, but
it no doubt accurately represents the impression made upon
young Clapp.
Either the opportunity or the inclination to prepare him
self for college did not come to Clapp until he had nearly
reached the age at which many boys then graduated.
He
tells us that he began Latin on his 18th birthday, and Greek,
no doubt, at the same time. "By the end of September of
the same year," he writes, that is in six months time!
"I had perused, translated and parsed the entire works of

Theodore Clapp
15
Virgil, Cicero's orations against Cataline, Sallust, the Com

mentaries of Caesar, among the Latin classics, together with
the Greek Grammar, the Greek New Testament, and the
Graeca Minora, which at that time was much used in fitting
students for college. My preceptor, who had been a professor
of ancient languages in one of the best universities in New
England, was pleased to say that I was sufficiently acquaint
ed with the writings above mentioned to become a teacher
of them in any academy or school in the land." Clapp's
memory has betrayed him. The achievement of which he
naively boasts is an utterly impossible one for a beginner in
Greek and Latin, no matter how talented. What really did
happen was that in the fall of 1810 he entered Williams
College as a sophomore, and a year later transferred to Yale
as a junior, having done in one and a half years the work
usually spread over four years. Even so his achievement is
sufficiently remarkable.
The natural result of over-work, no exercise, and in
adequate nourishment was that he broke down in college.
He left New Haven, and spent seven months tramping in
the open, roughing it in western and central New York,
between Albany and Buffalo. He returned restored in health,
and graduated from Yale in September, 1814, when he was
twenty-two and a half years old. From the experience he
had learned the necessity of fresh air, physical exercise and
good food. He had a vigorous frame, and his health there
after was generally good until the breakdown which led to
his retirement at the age of sixty-five.
His most intimate friend at Yale, the only one whom he
mentions, was a classmate named Hopkins, whose home was
about ten miles from Easthampton. They had planned, after
graduation, to go together to study law at Litchfield, Con
necticut, but when the time came Hopkins was ill. Clapp,
who had been teaching school that year at South Hadley,
Mass., went to see him and found him dying. On his death
bed Hopkins urged Clapp to study for the ministry instead
of the law, either at Andover or at Princeton. Clapp's career

16
Theodore Clapp
was changed by this interview. In the fall of 1815 he went

to Schenectady, New York, where he spent a year in the
study of theology under Professor Andrew Yates and Presi
dent Eliphalet Nott of Union College. Then he had six weeks
under Rev. Evan Johns of Canandaigua, New York, for
instruction in Hebrew, and thence made his way to the
theological seminary which had been recently established at
Andover, Massachusetts, to uphold the most conservative
Calvinistic orthodoxy against the heresies of Harvard. He
remained at Andover but a single year, not long enough to
graduate. For the most part he accepted what he was taught,
though troubled by questions which his professors could not
answer. And one episode which occurred there made a pro
found impression on him. He was allowed the privilege of
studying in the library of Professor Woods in whose house
he roomed. One day a deacon from a neighboring church
came in to consult the professor on a problem of church
discipline. He stated that a prominent and wealthy member
of his church had been guilty of immoral conduct, but that
the fact was not generally known. Was it the duty of the
deacons to disclose it and to discipline the offender by exclud
ing him from communion, regardless of the inevitable scan
dal which would ensue ? The professor advised against such
a course and recommended a private admonition instead.
Then the deacon went on to relate that another member of
his church, an intelligent man of high character, had ceased
to believe in the Trinity and did not hesitate to make known
his opinions. What should be done with him ? This time the
professor advised prompt and unhesitating excommunication.
"So," thought young Clapp to himself, "a man, if wealthy
and prominent, may be immoral yet may remain in the
church, but a man of unblemished character, who doubts
one of the doctrines of the church, is to be expelled !" Few
things which Clapp learned at Andover made a greater im
pression on him.
In October, 1817, he was licensed to preach by the Asso
ciation of Congregational Ministers of Hampshire County

Theodore Clapp
17
(Massachusetts) . Instead of seeking a pulpit, however, he

followed the example of a good many young graduates of
the period who needed to earn money to pay off college debts,
and went as tutor in a wealthy family near Lexington, Ken
tucky, where he remained for a year and a half. He had
intended to return to Andover to finish his course, but, in
stead, probably for financial reasons, moved to Louisville
where he opened a small school and preached as opportunity
offered. Soon after his arrival in Kentucky he heard and
was charmed by the eloquence of the youthful Rev. Sylvester
Larned,* whom he had known at Williams College. Larned
had become the minister of the First Presbyterian Church
of New Orleans, where Clapp was destined to succeed him
four years later. That unforeseen development was the
result of Clapp's being called upon unexpectedly to preach
while he was spending his vacation at a resort in Kentucky,
during the summer of 1821. Unknown to him in his hotel
congregation were two trustees of Mr. Larned's church in
New Orleans. Larned had died of yellow fever the preceding
August, and when these trustees of his church returned
home they persuaded the church to invite Clapp to come to
New Orleans. Clapp was intending to return to Massa
chusetts and refused the first invitation, and a second, but
when the third letter came while he was waiting at the falls
of the Ohio River for a boat, he rather reluctantly consented
to go to New Orleans for a brief visit, and stayed thirtyfive years.
He came by boat down the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers,

and as "the waters were high, and the steamboat on which
(he) embarked moved with great speed," he arrived in New
Orleans in a week's time. He landed at Lafayette early one
morning and walked with the passengers across country to
Twenty years after Larned's death a volume containing a biographical sketch of him
and thirty-two of his sermons was published at the instance of his brother, Col. James
The volume corroborates the common testimony of his contem
Larned of Washington.
poraries as to the personal charm, intellectual power, and high eloquence of this
remarkable young man. The sermons are fresh, vigorous and persuasive, and give
evidence of breadth of mind, although naturally tinged with Calvinistic thought and
phraseology.
See Gurley, E.R. Life and Eloquence
of the Rev. Sylvester Larned.
New York, 1844.

18
Theodore Clapp
the city. His first sermon in the Presbyterian church was

preached on the last Sunday in February, 1822. The night
before some of the trustees called upon him and begged him
not to read his sermon but to preach extempore, as Larned
had been wont to do. Clapp had prepared a written discourse,
but he cast it aside and his extempore sermon was a success.
Thereafter, though he always prepared carefully, and his
sermons were in later years printed in full in The Picayune
nearly every week, he always preached extempore and after
wards wrote out what he had said, writing in two sittings,
one on Sunday evening, the other on Monday before break
fast. He must have written fast to accomplish this, as his
sermons are very long.
After his third Sunday in New Orleans he was formally
invited to accept the position of "stated supply" of the pulpit
of the First Presbyterian Church, which, being still on a
missionary basis, was not in a position to settle a regular
pastor. The church, located on St. Charles Street between
Gravier and Union Streets, was a brick structure covered
with cement marked out in blocks. It seated several hundred
people. It was built in what was then supposed to be "the
gothic style," which only meant that it had pointed windows
and a square tower with pinacles. Otherwise it had the
traditional meeting-house form. An iron gateway led in from
the street, to two doors on either side of the front. In the
vestibule signs read "Strangers' Gallery on the Right," and
"Gallery for Colored Persons on the Left." The pulpit stood
at the street end between the two doors, so that one entered
facing the organ loft and the congregation. There was a
small round pulpit, behind which were red hangings. It was
the oldest Protestant church building in the city though it
had been opened for worship as recently as July 4, 1819.
It had cost about $70,000. Clapp discovered, however, that
the property was encumbered with a debt of $45,000. It was
a time of great depression and there was no prospect of
clearing off the debt, but he refused to stay unless some
means were found of doing so. The trustees of the church
Theodore Clapp
19

applied to the legislature for permission to set up a lottery,

which, he remarks, "was then considered a justifiable mode
of raising money for charitable objects." Permission was
promptly granted, and the same week the right to run the
lottery was sold to agents of a New York firm for $25,000.
The balance was met by transferring the church property
to Judah Touro. Touro was a Jew, born in Newport, Rhode
Island, who had made a fortune in New Orleans and who
was a noted character of great generosity and benevolent
spirit. The sale of the property to him was apparently un
conditional, but he agreed to give free use of it to the con
gregation, and to turn over the pew-rents to Clapp as salary.
He did so for twenty-eight years, until the building was
burned, and then he helped Clapp' s congregation to acquire
new quarters. In spite of his constant assistance to Clapp,
which must have grown out of admiration for his character
and talents, Touro was staunchly loyal to the faith of his
fathers, and it is said that he never entered the church to
which he held title, and that he never heard Clapp preach.
These matters being arranged Clapp returned in May to
Louisville, where, on May 31, 1822, he married Miss Adeline
Hawes.* After his marriage he journeyed back to Massa
chusetts. He was ordained at Easthampton on September 12,
1822, by the Hampshire Congregational Association, and set
out again for New Orleans, where he was received on Oc
tober 23 as a member of the Presbytery of Mississippi.
It was under these circumstances that Clapp's ministry
in New Orleans began. At that time New Orleans was still
a small city of thirty thousand inhabitants, most of them
living in the Vieux Carre, although the city had begun to
grow above Canal Street after the Louisiana Purchase,
nineteen years earlier. But it was still predominantly French
and Catholic, and was several days' travel from the other
settled parts of the United States. The first Protestant
church in the city was one of the Episcopal communion,
She was originally from Boston.
their father.
They had six children, of whom two sons survived
20
Theodore Clapp

established in 1805. The Presbyterian Church was started

in 1807 on a missionary basis, and was organized on Novem
ber 23, 1823. A Methodist church was started in 1819. The
Catholic clergy included a bishop and about twenty resident
priests, with many of whom Clapp formed friendly associa
tions, and for whom he expresses genuine regard and admira
tion. This acquaintance with Catholics* was one of the first
influences which helped to break down his early prejudices.
When Clapp was settled as minister of the Presbyterian
Church he still thought of himself as soundly orthodox. He
had been reared and ordained as a Congregationalist, but in
the Calvinistic wing of that denomination,
which held a
theology nearly identical with that of Presbyterianism, so
that there were no theological obstacles to his taking charge
of a Presbyterian church. Furthermore the church, though
Presbyterian, included many persons, perhaps a majority,
who belonged to other communions, and it is said that not
a single trustee was a communicant.
Rumors soon reached
his ears that his brilliant young predecessor, Lamed, had
grown noticeably lax in doctrine before his death, and Clapp's
own relations with the Jew Touro, with Catholics, and with
men whose characters he admired but who were not mem
bers of any church, aroused again the unanswered doubts of
his student days at Andover. Clapp tells us that he kept his
doubts to himself, until, on the first Sabbath of July, 1834,
he announced from his pulpit his changed views, and his
intention to withdraw from the Presbyterian Church. This
is another instance of where his memory has betrayed him.
In reality the pulpit statement which he dates July, 1834,
was made in 1830, and by January, 1833, his connection with
the Presbyterian Church had come to a definite end. His
deposition from the Presbyterian ministry ended a con Clapp's acquaintance with the French Catholic population was
doubtless facilitated
by his residence in the Vieux Carre during at least his first two or three years in New
directory
gives
his
Orleans.
The
for 1823
address at the corner of Perdido and St.
Pierre Streets. In 1824 he lived at 31 Bayou Street, and is listed as "Prest. of College
of Orleans." Later he moved to the American quarter and lived on Carondelet Street
between Heria and Poydras Streets.
Theodore Clapp
21
troversy which had lasted some nine years, as the report of

his heresy trial, printed in 1833, makes abundantly clear.
That report is interesting reading today. It was prepared
for the press by Clapp himself, though it always refers to
him in the third person, and its pages show him at the height
of his powers. After the trial was over the Presbytery, in
spite of a promise to deliver promptly a copy of the records,
had withheld them until it had published a pamphlet entitled

Reasons for the Decision of the Mississippi Presbytery in the case of

Mr. Theodore Clapp.* Clapp bitterly denounced this proceed
ing, saying of the pamphlet, "This is a purely ex-parte

publication, made up of sheer falsehood, misstatements of
facts, sophistical reasonings, and garbled mutilated quota
No
tions from the testimony and documents
Presbytery in the United States ever before had the moral
turpitude, the hardihood, the utter recklessness of justice,
evinced by the Mississippi Presbytery in attempting to palm
off on the public a paltry pamphlet of some twenty pages
as a fair exhibition of Mr. Clapp's trial." The report which
he edited makes ample amends, for it prints the whole course
of his dealings with the Presbytery in some three hundred
pages, of which ninety-five are given to his speech in his
own defense.
It
appeal's that before his arrival in New Orleans a rumor

had been circulated that he was not orthodox, and he attrib
utes this rumor, and the subsequent whispering campaign
against him, to the machinations of certain graduates of

Princeton Theological Seminary, who wished to keep to
themselves this new field for Protestant missionary effort,
and who, he declares, "do not hesitate to employ the vilest
slanders to depress and ruin the young clergymen from New
England who come to these southern and western states. . . .
They pretend to a loftier piety than that possessed by the
purest ministers of the Northern States. They are distin
guished for a sanctimonious air, a holy gloom, an evangelical
* No copy of this pamphlet is known to exist.
Theodore Clapp
22
of countenance, which is acquired only by long

and painful discipline at the Seminary. The tones of their
voices are sepulchral and unearthly. In their discourses,
words flow with artificial slowness, and every period ends
with a pious cadence. In their ordinary gait and movement
there is an air which indicates a consciousness that they are
sedateness
'clothed with God's prerogative of judgment,' and are the

peculiar favorites of heaven. They decide ex cathedra upon
all points
of controversial theology and pronounce all those

who dare to dissent
...
to be gliding insensibly down the
declivity to dangerous heresy and hopeless ungodliness."

It may be noted here that Clapp was quite free from the
"sanctimoniousness" which he thus satirically describes. His
defence in his trial was marked with a lightness of touch and
a humor which his opponents must have regarded as evi
dence of a frivolous mind. One of his letters, after a semijocose quotation, adds in a footnote, "Forgive the above
ebullition of Parson Clapp's folly."
As early
before the Presbytery to

answer charges, and again in 1826. In the latter year the
charges involved minute points of doctrine, except one of
"immoral conduct." This charge of "immorality" is specified
as follows: "In permitting an assembly of free people of
colour and slaves to meet in the College for the purpose of
dancing to music of the fiddle, bass drum and tambarine, etc.
on Saturday night till Sunday morning 4 or 5 o'clock, when
he was president of said College !" His opponents had already
caused him to be haled into court and fined for the disturb
ance which the negroes had caused, but the Presbytery
exonerated him. In 1827 the Presbytery met in New Orleans
to reconcile the conflicting elements in the church. In 1828
Clapp appeared twice before the Presbytery. On all these
occasions his explanations were found satisfactory, but the
occasions would not have arisen had not the more vigilantly
orthodox members of his flock perceived from the altered
tone of his discourse that his thought was undergoing a
as 1824 he was called
Theodore Clapp
23
What had happened was that he had been challenged

to re-examine the grounds of his faith in a very different
atmosphere from that of orthodox Yale and Calvinistic Andover. This re-examination of his beliefs began after a con
versation with Judge Workman, who had come in 1824 to
hear him preach before offering him the presidency of the
College of Orleans. The judge heard him say in a sermon
that the doctrine of eternal punishment was confirmed by
hundreds of texts in the Bible, and asked him for a list of

change.
ten such texts. Clapp searched the scriptures, but could not
find in them the unanswerable proof for the doctrines of
Calvinism which he had been led to believe were in the
Bible. It was this study of the scriptures, pursued for some
six years with diligence and with a considerable measure of
scholarly equipment, which at last brought him to a decision.

He knew perfectly well the opposition and obloquy which his
change of views would bring upon him, but he faced the
issue
with courage.
On March 5, 1830, he wrote to the moderator of the

Presbytery that he no longer could accept the doctrines of
Unconditional Salvation and of Irresistible Grace. He wrote,
"I have not yet found, and at present despair of finding, any
texts of Holy Writ to prove, unanswerably, the distinguishing
tenets of Calvinism. . . . Suspecting that my brethren in the
ministry . . . will regard my present views as an essential
departure from . . . the distinguishing tenets of the Pres
byterian Church, I hereby solicit a dismission from the
Mississippi Presbytery, that I may join the Hampshire Asso
ciation of Congregational Ministers in the State of Massa
chusetts (the same body to which I belonged when I first
came to New Orleans)." He goes on to say that he has
generally been regarded as stated supply rather than as
pastor, and that the church will probably wish to remain
under the care of the Presbytery. About the same time he
announced from the pulpit his changed views.
The Presbytery, however, instead of granting his request,

24
Theodore Clapp
took it upon itself to send a letter to the congregation dis

missing Clapp and declaring his connection with the church
severed. The congregation voted to accept the Presbytery's
decision, but an indignant minority appealed to the General
Assembly of the Presbyterian church. The General Assembly
ruled that Clapp had been illegally dismissed ; that therefore
he was still a member of the Presbytery ; and that he should
be brought to formal trial for his views. Meanwhile Clapp
continued to occupy his pulpit. There were several post
ponements of action, but in May, 1832, the trial was begun
on charges of both doctrine and deportment.
The charges
on the ground of doctrine were to the effect that he did not
hold orthodox views about the Trinity and that he held other
beliefs inconsistent with the doctrine of Original Sin. Those
on the ground of deportment were vague assertions of lack
of zeal in pastoral attentions to his parishioners, coupled
with those of speaking slanderously of his opponents, and of
falsehood in statements about his relations with the Pres
bytery. Clapp had for some time carried on correspondence
with a Rev. George Potts, a minister without charge who
lived on his rich wife's plantation near Natchez. Potts seems
to have employed his leisure in nosing out heresy, and under
the guise of friendship had induced Clapp to express his
views frankly. He charged that Clapp had written, "I would
not unchurch a person, or keep him from the communion
table, merely because he did not believe in the doctrine of
the Trinity, if he embraced the other essential doctrines of
the Gospel and led a Christian life. I would as soon be settled
over a Unitarian church as any other. I would as soon
exchange pulpits with a Unitarian clergyman as any other,
if I believed him to be a good man." Others stated that
Clapp had said that "a good Unitarian could be a good
Christian," and that, "in a conversation respecting the death
of a certain individual who was understood to be a Unitarian,
Mr. Clapp had said to the wife of the individual, it would
not be asked at the bar of God whether he were a Unitarian
or not."
Theodore Clapp
25

After taking some of the testimony the Presbytery ad

journed, to meet again in July. When the time came Clapp
and his family, who had been ill, had departed for Kentucky.
From the river steamer Clapp wrote back explaining the
circumstances, and asking for a postponement till November.
But the Presbytery was in deadly earnest, censured him for
disregard of its convenience and suspended him from the
work of the ministry. Clapp, who declined to take its pro
ceedings very seriously, went right ahead, but was on hand
when it resumed the trial on December 12, in the Pine Ridge
Church in Adams County, Mississippi. The trial lasted ten
days more. Before it ended he was called upon to make his
defense. He knew perfectly well what the decision would be
and he let himslf go in an oration which must have made
his opponents cringe. He wrote it out afterwards, having,
as he says, the faculty of recalling almost verbatim what
he had said in a public address.
In his oration he analyzed unsparingly the motives which
had animated his opponents, with a frankness which it is
amazing that he dared to put into print. He does not say
much about his theological views, for he had already de
clared his rejection of Calvinism, and his attempts to define
his views of the Trinity had clearly shown him to be un
orthodox. But he stoutly maintained his right to liberty of
thought and his integrity of character. He says that as
early as 1830 a report had been circulated that he was at
heart a Unitarian. "One of the reasons . . . assigned for
circulating such a rumor was, that I had been heard to
declare from my pulpit my determination henceforth to
follow the truth only in my preaching, to whatever conclu
sion it might lead me. 'Such a profession (it was said) is in
the Northern States usually considered the forerunner of
apostacy from the orthodox faith.' . . . (What !) is devotion
to the cause of truth an evidence of apostacy?" He wound
up, with vigor but not with entire accuracy, "The charges
you have preferred against me are in many respects frivo
lous, in all utterly groundless.
When I first read them I
Theodore Clapp
26.
could not persuade myself that you were in earnest. Sub

sequent disclosures have convinced me that three years ago
for expelling me from the Presbyterian

Throughout this trial you have manifested a
you formed a plot
Church.
destitution of charity, and a degree of addling,

pompous pride, which can be felt by little minds only when
I am
invested with power and the love of domineering.
perfectly willing to leave the Presbyterian Church, I expect
to leave it; and I intend, with the blessing of Heaven, to
carry with me when I go, the most invaluable of all ter
restrial possessions an unsullied character."
deplorable
...

If
the Presbytery had roused Clapp to contempt and

indignation he in turn aroused its members to wrath. Hold
ing the theological views which they did they could do noth
ing else than suspend him from the ministry "for errors in
doctrine and deportment." This they did on December 23.
On his way home Clapp preached in a Methodist Church in
Natchez, and for this offense, on January 10, 1833, he was
"deposed from the office of the Gospel ministry for con
temptuous disregard of the decision of the Presbytery."
That ended his connection with Presbyterianism, but not his
ministry in New Orleans. As one looks back upon his trial
his figure towers above that of his persecutors, to all of
whom he was greatly superior in intelligence and character.
The most that one can say for them is that Clapp was un
orthodox on points of belief which they deemed essential,

and was sometimes inconsistent in his statements to a
degree which seemed to them to involve falsehood. But the
truth was that he had not the logical mind of a theologian
and often did not see where his off-hand statements would
lead him. The whole episode must have been an harassing
experience, and when Clapp wrote his Autobiography, twentyfive years later, the controversial embers still glow with heat
as he turns them over, but he was more generous than his
opponents seem to have been, and tends to minimize the
whole episode with a kind of careless magnanimity. As he
Theodore Clapp
27
life the heresy trial seemed very insignifi

cant in comparison with his other experiences.
It is evident that the views with which Clapp emerged

looked back upon
from the Presbyterian Church were substantially those held

at that period by the Universalists and Unitarians on the
eastern seaboard. But he had arrived at them by his own
intellectual processes. He tells us in his Autobiography that
at that time he had read none of Channing's writings save
one or two occasional sermons that had come his way, but,
since the preface to the report of his trial begins with a
quotation from Channing's sermon of May 26, 1830, on
"Religious Liberty," and one of the witnesses at his trial
testified that he had advised her to read "Channing's Works"
and had stated "that there were pious persons among Uni
tarians," his words "at this time" must be interpreted as
referring to a somewhat earlier period. After his trial he
was generally known as a Unitarian, though he disliked any
denominational label. His Autobiography gives no indication
that he established any close connections with the Uni
tarians of New England, and the only mention of his ever
having preached in any Unitarian pulpit other than his own
is in his account of his visit to England. Apparently after
his experiences with the Presbytery he was wary of any
denominational ties, even as light ones as those of Unitarianism, and preferred to go his way pretty much alone.
But his name appears in 1846 in the first Year-Book of the
American Unitarian Association in the list of "churches with
their pastors." In that list, from 1849 on, the date of his
settlement is given as 1815 (sic), an error which he never
took the trouble to correct.
His Unitarianism, though sufficiently radical to bring him

the unshakable opposition of the orthodox, was of a very
conservative variety and developed little beyond the point he
had reached in the eighteen-thirties. He viewed with great
concern Theodore Parker's radicalism and the tendencies of
the German rationalists. He summarized as follows his own
Theodore Clapp
28
faith in an article printed in the Picayune for April

under the heading "What Is Unitarianism ?"
1,
1855,
is
happiness.
:
We believe in one Catholic and Apostolic Church,

the Communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins the
Resurrection of the dead, and life everlasting."
That credo sounds conservative enough nowadays, but in the

eighteen-fifties he was still regarded as dangerously radical
it
it
by the Protestant clergy of New Orleans.

During his long-drawn out controversy with the Pres
bytery his congregation gave him a steadily increasing sup
port, and when he finally withdrew the vote was eighty-six
with him to twenty-six against him. The majority retained
the use of the church property and were incorporated on
February 26, 1833, as the First Congregational Church of
New Orleans. The Presbyterians reorganized and built an
other church, to the pulpit of which they called Rev. Joel
Parker. "Parson Clapp's Church," to give
the name by
which
was widely known, remained on St. Charles Street
until
was destroyed by fire on the night of January 18,
1851. No other church in the city would open its doors to
Clapp and his congregation for fear of seeming to counte
nance heresy, but again the noble-hearted Jew, Touro, came
to the rescue. He purchased
small chapel on St. Charles
a
it

it,
"We believe that the Bible, the whole Bible, and

nothing but the Bible is a divinely inspired and in
fallible standard of faith and practice.
We believe in God, the Father, and in the Son, and
in the Holy Ghost, as they are revealed in Scripture.
We believe that Jesus is the Mediator between
God and man: the sacrifice for sin, and the Saviour
from
and that the atonement which he made
indispensably necessary to the salvation of sinners.
We believe that God will certainly and universally
reward or punish men according to their deserts.
We believe that evangelical repentance, purity of
heart, integrity of purpose, and a blameless, holy life,
are the prerequisites to the enjoyment of eternal

Theodore Clapp
29
Street for the congregation to use without charge, until an

adequate new structure could be erected further up town on
St. Charles Street, between Julia and Girod Streets. This
later church, which was completed in 1855 at a cost of
$75,000, was a handsome edifice. It was octagonal, built of
brick covered with cement, with fine interior woodwork and
organ, high arches, and a great pulpit and a massive pulpit
chair which is now in the Louisiana State Museum. The
church stood until 1902, when it was sold and torn down. It
was called "The Church of the Messiah," and the Society
was known as "Congregational," or "Independent." The
word "Unitarian" was added to its name in 1853, and it is
now known as The First Unitarian Church of New Orleans.
After removal to the new church a parish organization

was effected, but in the earlier days there seem to have been
no church officers or deacons. When, in the course of the
service, the time came for the collection, Parson Clapp would
look over the congregation and call by name the individuals
whom he selected to take it. The curious situation existed
of a church society without officers, worshipping in a build
ing to which it had no title; with pew rents going directly
to the minister in lieu of salary ; with no Bible Class, Sunday
School or other parish activities ; nothing but Parson Clapp
and his Sunday morning sermon. There was no evening serv
ice, for there was no way to light the church. But the church
was always filled to capacity to hear the preacher. Seldom in
Protestantism has a minister been more of an autocrat in his
church.
Clapp's experiences with the Presbytery necessarily bulk
much larger in an ordered account of his life than they do
in his A utobiography, because they were an important element
in his intellectual and spiritual development, and form an
essential background to the history of his church. They
illustrate his intellectual capacity, his clear honesty, and his
independence of character. An early recognition of his
ability is indicated by the offer in 1824 of the presidency of

80
Theodore Clapp
the College of Orleans, then the only institution of the sort

in this part of the country.* His sermons give evidence of
wide and constant reading in both classical and current
literature. In his Autobiography he describes his methods in
detail. "No clergyman," he writes, "can succeed as a settled
pastor without fixed habits of the most persevering and
energetic study.' He should rise at four o'clock a. m. in sum
mer and five o'clock in winter, so as to secure an opportunity
of from five to six hours of uninterrupted study, before he is
liable to be broken in upon by company, or by applications
for parochial ministrations."
Fully to appreciate the man, however, it is necessary to
deal with other aspects of his career. He was evidently a
pulpit orator of great ability, pouring forth an impassioned
flood of words. His style was diffuse, but his sermons still
read well, for they are enlivened by illustration and anecdote,
and contain much sound advice and practical piety, f Stran
gers visiting New Orleans were advised to go to "the French
opera, the American theatre, and Parson Clapp's church," a
saying which he quotes as a doubtful compliment to him.
The result was that he had a very large transient congrega
tion, often including visitors of distinction. Zachary Taylor
came to the church after the Mexican War, and Jenny Lind
on her tour in 1851. An amusing example of the effect of
his preaching came to me as late as 1903. It so happened
that fifty-six years earlier, in 1847, Clapp had been in Lon
don. Clapp tells us in his Autobiography that he had a letter
of introduction to a "Rev. Mr. T. of London," who can have
been no other than Rev. Edward Tagart, predecessor of the
The
College of Orleans had a precarious existence for a decade, supported by the

of lotteries and by occasional small grants from the legislature.
Clapp was
president from 1824 to 1826. The College ceased to exist a year later.
proceeds
t An anonymous writer in Cohen's New Orleans Directory, 1854, pp. VII and VIII,
gives a page and a half to an account of Clapp. "Not the least of Mr. Clapp's attrac
tions as an orator is his eccentricity.

It is so perfectly natural that no one can ever
be offended by it. It is shown in his frequent culling from the ordinary incidents of
life adopting even the cant of the times figures and illustrations applicable to the
most serious and sacred themes: in his abrupt transitions from the highest nights to
the most commonplace topics ; and in displays of familiarity with the lighter literature
of the age, which other clergy would have burned at the church door." The same
writer calls him "proudly self-reliant and indepedent in his character and opinions"
and "ardently hostile to all cant, hypocrisy and Pharisaical display of piety."

Theodore Clapp
31
famous James Martineau in the pulpit of Little Portland

Street Chapel in London. Mr. Tag-art invited him to preach
and the two ministers met for the first time at the church
just before the service began. Seeing Clapp was emptyhanded Mr. Tagart asked, "Where's your sermon?" and was
much disturbed to learn that Clapp had no written discourse
such as a London congregation was accustomed to. Clapp
explained that he always preached extempore, and offered to
withdraw if Mr. Tagart preferred. But Tagart took a chance,
and led Clapp into the pulpit. Clapp says he preached for
forty-five minutes "exactly as if I had been addressing my
own people at home," and says that his hearers appeared to
be deeply stirred. That they were not only stirred but star
tled I learned from an old English lady, Miss Tagart, who,
in 1903, referred to this very occasion. I met her in Europe,
and, on learning that I was minister in New Orleans, she
asked me if I had ever heard of a Rev. Mr. Clapp of that city.
I told her that, after an interval of forty-five years, I had
succeeded to Clapp's pulpit. "Well," she said, "I have never
forgotten the day he preached for us in Little Portland Street
Chapel, when I was a girl. He shouted and gesticulated, and
once took the Bible and pounded it up and down on the desk,
and we thought he was going to throw it at us!* We had
never heard any preaching like it." I don't believe they had,
for the quiet, sedate, literary style of the English pulpit of
that period was far removed from the oratory which made
Parson Clapp famous.
It was not, however, Clapp's eloquence alone which en
deared him to his people, nor his intellectual capacities and
independence which chiefly brought him the respect of the
community. To these qualities were added his moral courage
and devotion which carried him undaunted through twenty
epidemics of yellow fever and cholera, and the generosity
with which he ministered to the distress which followed in
A very old lady in New Orleans, who remembers hearing Clapp in her youth, has
also told me of his peculiar habit of emphasizing his remarks by lifting the Bible and
putting it down again.
32
Th
e o d
ore Clapp

their wake. It is difficult for us today to realize the horror

of these fearful epidemics, now happily so completely a thing
of the past that we read of them as we do of the "black
death" in medieval Europe, or the "London plague" of 1660.
We know now the way in which they spread, and how they
can be controlled, and therefore our fear of them has gone.
But it is scarcely thirty years since men acquired that con
trol, and when Clapp lived these epidemics came and went in
ways which were mysterious, baffling and utterly unaffected
by any of the various expedients which medical men at
Neither Clapp nor his devoted wife ever took
tempted.
either disease, though two of their children died of cholera
in 1833. But Clapp's Autobiography contains chapter after
chapter in which he describes in painful detail the terrible
experiences of those days, which made an indelible impres
sion upon him.
Yellow fever broke out in almost every summer in the
eighteen-twenties, and both yellow fever and cholera came
in 1832 and 1833. He tells us that in ten days between
October 27 and November 6, 1832, five thousand deaths
occurred in a population of thirty-five thousand, and that in
the two years of 1832-33 the total deaths from the two
diseases raging simultaneously amounted to at least ten
thousand. I do not know whether these huge figures can be
verified from other authorities, but no doubt the mortality
was very heavy, and was much greater among the more
recent and unacclimated Protestant population than among
the native-born French Catholics. Clapp faced the danger
fearlessly and labored indefatigably to visit the sick, console
the dying, bury the dead and relieve the destitute. In the
epidemic of 1832 he was the only Protestant minister left in
the city, except the Episcopal clergyman who was confined
to his house with a lingering illness. Frequently he had gone
north on his vacation when the epidemic broke out, but he
always returned at once to his post. Thus in 1853 he had
gone in May for a trip to Boston, Nahant and Niagara, but
while at the latter place, in July, he heard that yellow fever

Theodore Clapp
38
had broken out in New Orleans, and turned back with all
possible speed, getting home in a week's time. Eight thou
sand deaths occurred that summer and fall. His story bears
ample testimony to his undaunted courage.
These epidemics brought other miseries in their train.
While they ran their course business came to an almost
complete cessation, for weeks on end. There were heavy
financial losses; hundreds of families lost their bread
winners; and outside the churches there were then hardly
any agencies for the relief of the distressed and the rehabili
tation of the destitute. For months much of Clapp's time
was spent in raising and administering money for the relief
of the needy, regardless of church affiliations. Any one in
distress could appeal to him, and many did so whom it was
difficult to help wisely. Clapp's salary from the pew-rents
which the arrangement with Touro turned over to him came
to five thousand dollars a year, a large sum, worth as much
as twelve or fifteen thousand today. But he was prodigal in
giving, and spent it all, and then went out to beg more from
men of wealth. He says that Touro first and last gave him
at least twenty thousand more, each time with a word of
caution that this was positively the last time; and Touro
was not the only rich man from whose benevolence he
exacted toll. It was this outstanding generosity and eager
spirit of practical service which brought him the love and
admiration of many who perhaps never heard him preach.
He was so generous that he laid up nothing for his old age.
After his retirement his church gave him a stipend, but that
inevitably came to an end with the outbreak of the Civil War,
and his last years were passed in poverty.
Clapp's reminiscences are too random to enable us to
trace in detail much that we should like to know of him. He
frequently went north in summer, to Kentucky or further
afield, and he took a long European tour in the spring and
summer of 1847 to recuperate from a serious illness. That
tour began with a sailing voyage of eight weeks from New
Orleans to Liverpool, which he hugely enjoyed, and took him
34

as
Theodore Clapp
far as Rome. He carried letters of introduction, and his
stay in London was made memorable by a long interview

with Thomas Carlyle. His interest in Rome was heightened
by his acquaintance with Catholicism in New Orleans. He
felt the moving appeal of the Roman Catholic Church and
more than once states that he would gladly have been a
Catholic if his intellect had permitted him to accept the
dogmas of that form of Christianity. In many places abroad,
as frequntly in this country, he was greeted by total stran
gers who would tell him that they had visited New Orleans
and had heard him preach in "The Strangers' Church," as
his church was often called.
His manifest courage, in facing both physical danger and
the misunderstanding to which his intellectual independence
exposed him ; his unstinted generosity to those in need, even
when they had but the slightest claim upon him ; his mag
nanimous sympathy with all sorts and conditions of men ; no
less than his eloquence in the pulpit, brought him the love
and affection of all classes, excepting, perhaps, those whose
theological narrowness made them regard him as a danger
ous influence. He obviously put into practice, far more than
most men do, the Christian principles which he preached.
He returned the affection of his fellow-citizens in good meas
ure. Seldom has a minister more whole-heartedly identified
himself with the community which he served, or more de
served its affection and loyalty. Everywhere he went he was
eager to proclaim the excellent qualities of the people among
whom he dwelt. He has no fault to find with them, for they
are generous, high-minded, hospitable folk, the equals of the
best in Europe and America. The writer of a review of his
Autobiography truly describes it as a book of the "confidences"
of a man who found good in everything, and adds, "Never
was the world so widely seen with so serene a sympathy."
Even negro slavery seemed to him a mild and beneficent
institution, in which the slaves are better off than the
industrial workers of England or the peasants of France.
Among the few sermons which he printed in pamphlet form

Theodore Clapp
35
is one in defence of slavery, delivered in 1838 in answer to

Channing's famous treatise on the subject. It is rehearsal
of the standard arguments that the removal of the slaves
from Africa has been a blessing for them; that the slaves
were incapable of an independent life; and that it is to the
master's self-interest to treat them well. It is interesting
also, in this connection, to compare his passionate eulogy of
Webster after the latter's death, with Theodore Parker's
terrible denunciation of Webster at the same time. In his
Thanksgiving Day sermon for 1852, printed in the Picayune,
he refers to his "well-known views about slavery," and says
of Uncle Tom's Cabin, "The romance which I have just men
tioned is a tissue of the basest untruth and the most erro
neous injustice." If it is difficult for us today to understand
how a man of his intellectual capacity and moral insight
could defend slavery we should remember that he saw the
institution at its very best in the households of the humane
and high-minded people who were his friends and parish
ioners, and that his ardent and quite uncritical temperament
often blinded him to the fundamental social problems about
him. He was, in truth, no social reformer, but did his work
through the power of his appeal for personal righteousness.
Although Clapp evidently had a strong constitution,
which served him in good stead during his long and arduous
ministry and carried him untouched through the epidemics
which time and again swept New Orleans, his serious illness
in 1847 was probably the beginning of the breakdown which
came a few years later. The change which came over him
is indicated in his portraits. He was a large, well-built man,
not precisely handsome, but with a fine, open countenance
manifesting benignity and intelligence, with a high, domed
forehead and luxuriant brown wavy hair. The First Uni
tarian Church possesses a marble bust of him, modelled by
J. C. King in New Orleans in 1838, which does him scant
justice, and a more adequate portrait painted by D. M. Carter
in 1845, which shows him still vigorous, and younger than
Theodore Clapp
36

one would expect for his years.* But the Louisiana State
Museum has another portrait of him. painted only a few
years later (perhaps by Adolph Rinck in 1851), showing him
standing in his pulpit dressed in his black Geneva gown, and

in this portrait he appears much heavier and older. Prob
ably he aged rather rapidly as he approached his sixtieth
year. He preached in the newly erected "Church of the
Messiah" on St. Charles Street for the first time on Novem
ber 4, 1855, and for a few months thereafter, but his last
sermon there was preached only six months later, on May 4,
1856. He resigned on account of ill-health, and retired to
Louisville. He had sufficient strength to write his Auto
biography, which appeared in the fall of that year, and his
Theological Views which was published in 1859, both books
being in a large measure compilations of materials he had
used in his sermons. Preaching, however, was no longer
possible. In a letter written in October, 1858, in answer to
an invitation to come to Massachusetts to address a Clapp
family reunion, he declined, saying that he was troubled with
"vertigo and fainting" and had "a dilapidated liver," and
that he "cannot expect, reasonably, ever again to speak in
public." He adds that "although I have been living South
forty-one years, I have lost none of my partiality for
Massachusetts."
He lived in retirement at Louisville until death came to
him on May 17, 1866, in his seventy-fifth year. He was
buried there, but the next year, in accordance with a wish
which he had frequently expressed and at the urging of his
friends in New Orleans, his body was removed to the city
which had been the scene of his labors. A funeral service
was held on March 24, 1867, in the church which he had
served, at which Rev. William G. Eliot, of the Church of the
Messiah in St. Louis, preached a memorial discourse before
a great throng. Tradition long afterwards told of the endless
The
State Museum also has an unfinished replica or copy of Carter's

A good steel engraving of
attributed to Samuel F. B. Morse.
Clapp serves as frontispiece to his Autobiography, and there is another and quite
different one of him in Cohen's New Orleans Directory for 1854.
Louisiana
portrait, mistakenly
Theodore Clapp
37
which followed him to his final resting place in

Cypress Grove Cemetery, as the city united to honor in his
death him whom the people had greatly honored and loved
in his life. In the same tomb with him lie several members
of his family, and Sylvester Larned, the gifted friend of his
youth.
procession
Representations
of Theodore Clapp
I. Marble bust with incised inscription on the back at base: "J. C. King
fecit modelled 1838." Now owned by the First Unitarian Church of

New Orleans.
(J. C. King was born in Scotland, worked for some years in New
Orleans and later in Boston, where he died in 1882.)
This bust is not a very good piece of work and gives an inadequate
idea of the appearance of Theodore Clapp. The Daily Picayune, May 6,
1838, gives an account of this bust, and of the sculptor, and says that
"many duplicates" were ordered. No copies have been located.
II. Oil
portraits.
Portrait owned by the First Unitarian Church of New Orleans,

(a)
signed and dated (above the cuff of the right wrist): "D. M. Carter.
N.
O. 1845."
This portrait is 342 inches high by 27i inches wide, with a rounded
top, and shows Clapp seated, half front, his left shoulder turned toward
the spectator, his head turned left, three-quarters front. The back
ground shows a column, and a vista at the extreme left. Clapp wears
a black coat, high linen collar, and heavy black stock. His right hand,
resting upon the arm of his chair, holds his spectacles. His countenance
is marked by a high, domed forehead, crowned with abundant brown
hair. His eyes are gray.
(Daniel Malone Carter, the painter, was born in Ireland in 1827,
and was brought to this country in 1839 by his parents, who settled in
New York. He began as an itinerant portrait painter at an early age
and the inscription proves that he was in New Orleans painting pic
tures at the age of eighteen.)
(b) The Louisiana State Museum at the Cabildo has an unfinished
replica or copy of Carter's portrait, erroneously attributed to Samuel
F. B. Morse. It is inferior to the portrait owned by the church.
(c) The Louisiana State Museum in the Cabildo has a later por
trait of Theodore Clapp, presented by Angus Lea. Height 41i inches;
width 321 inches. It shows Clapp standing in his pulpit against a
shaded brown background, half front, his right shoulder toward the
spectator, looking out ahead of him. He is dressed in a high white
collar, broad black stock, and a black coat over which he wears a black
silk Geneva gown. His left hand holds a Bible upright on the pulpit.
His right hand is extended, before him, the forefinger pointed in
gesture. He has a full face, well-colored, intelligent and benevolent in
expression, gray eyes, small side-whiskers and brown hair, abundant
except at the temples. The face is unmistakably the same as that
shown in Carter's earlier portrait, but he looks a good deal heavier
and older.
Theodore Clapp
38
The picture must have been painted after his serious illness of 1847,
and before his resignation from the pulpit in May, 1856, and is a good
representation of him as he looked in his last years in New Orleans.
A German artist named Adolph Rinck is known to have been painting
in New Orleans in 1851. He did a portrait of Judah Touro at that time.
Rinck's name is listed in Nagler, Neues Allgemeines Kunstler-Lexicon,
printed in 1843, where it is stated that he had painted in Berlin and
had gone to Paris in 1835. He exhibited for several years thereafter in
the Paris Salon.
work.
It is quite possible that this portrait of Clapp is his

III.
Steel Engravings.
Cohen, New Orleans Directory, 1854, opp. page VII, contains a
(a)
fairly good steel engraving showing Theodore Clapp, facing full front,
with a reproduction of his signature. This shows him as he must have
appeared about the time the engraving was made.
Steel engraving frontispiece to Clapp's Autobiographical Sketches
(b)
and Recollections. This appears to be a good likeness and is more attrac
tive than the steel engraving listed above, but it shows him at a
somewhat earlier age than the date of publication of the book. Perhaps
the engraving was made in the 1840's. It has been copied in pen and
ink by Mrs. W. B. Gregory, a member of the First Unitarian Church
in New Orleans and has been frequently reproduced from her drawing.
Portrait of Mrs. Theodore (Adeline Hawes) Clapp.

An oval picture, height 36 inches; width 28 inches.
Mrs. Clapp is shown seated, half-front, her right shoulder towards
the spectator, her head turned right, three-quarters front, in a red
stuffed chair with a carved back, against a background of wall, with a
vista to the right showing hills, trees and river. She is shown as a
youngish middle-aged woman, with rather plain features, well-colored,
with brown ringlets falling to her shoulders. She is dressed in black,

with white lace trim at the neck and wrists, and a cross-shaped pin
with five red stones on her bosom. Her right hand holds a handkerchief,
her left rests on the arm of her chair.
The picture is unsigned and undated. It is not a companion picture
to that of her husband by D. M. Carter, being of different size and
shape, but it might have been painted about the same time and by the
same artist. It is now owned by the First Unitarian Church of New
Orleans, to which it was given with Carter's portrait of Theodore Clapp.
Theodore Clapp
Bibliography
Clapp, Theodore Autobiographical
Sketches and Recollections. Phil
lips, Sampson. Boston, 1857. (Four editions were published.)
Clapp, Theodore Theological Views, comprising the substance of teach
ings during a ministry of thirty-five years in New Orleans. Boston,
1859, 12. pp. 335.
Clapp, Theodore Slavery: A Sermon delivered in the First Congrega

tional Church in New Orleans, April 15, 1838. New Orleans, 1838,
8. pp. 67.
Theodore Clapp
39
Clapp, Theodore A Discourse delivered in Philadelphia, July 18, 1854,

at the funeral of the late Henry D. Richardson of New Orleans, by
the Revd: Theodore Clapp. Boston, 1854.
Clapp, Theodore A Discourse delivered in the First Congregational
Church, New Orleans, La. (On Christian Sympathy Angelic.) Ap
pended to J. B. Furgerson,
Spirit Communion.
Nashville, 1855.
8. pp. 12.

A Report of the Trial of Rev. Theodore Clapp before
the Mississippi
Presbytery at their session in May and December, 1832. Hotchkiss,
N. O. New Orleans, 1833. 8. pp. XIV, 374.
On p. 103 there is a reference to a printed sermon by Clapp, preached
August 3, 1826, from Chron. XXIV, 15-16. It is not stated whether
this sermon was printed in the press or in pamphlet form. No copy
of it has been found.
Milner, Ula Theodore Clapp, a study in religious development (1928).
An unpublished thesis prepared by Miss Ula Milner while a student
at Tulane University in New Orleans. Copies in the library of
Tulane University and the library of the American Unitarian Asso
ciation, Boston. A careful comparison of the statements in Clapp's
Autobiography with the Report of his trial.
Dexter Biographical Sketches of the Graduates of Yale College. Vol.
VI, 632-635 (1912). A brief and accurate sketch of his life, giving
information not found elsewhere.
Robert Gibbes Barnwell, Ed. The New Orleans Book, New Orleans,
1851. A collection of literary pieces by New Orleans writers. Clapp
contributed an essay on "The Ocean," reprinted in large part in his
Autobiography.
Eliza Ripley Social Life in New Orleans. Appleton, New York, 1912.
Chap. XVII, "Dr. Clapp's Church." A vivacious account of Clapp
and his church.

Cohen New Orleans Directory 1854, pp. VTI-VIII. New Orleans Pica
yune, 1854. Has a good steel engraving of Clapp, and a two-page
reading notice of him.
The New Orleans Daily Picayune for many years printed Clapp's ser
mons with great frequency, generally in the Sunday morning issue
following the date of their delivery. The files of the Picayune are the
chief source for his sermons. The library of the American Unitarian
Association, Boston, Massachusetts, has a collection of about fifty,
clipped from the Picayune between 1849 and 1856.
OTHER REFERENCES
E. Clapp Clapp Memorial (genealogy), pp. 77, 86-87, 347-348.

Lyman History of Easthampton, p. 148. Reference to the Clapp fami
ly in Easthampton.
Sparks, W. H. Memories of Fifty Years, pp. 451-459. A eulogistic
account of Clstpp, but with no information not available from other
sources.
RECORDS OF THE ANNUAL MEETING, 1933

The Thirty-third Annual Meeting of the Unitarian His
torical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday, May
25, 1933, at 10 a. m., the President, Dr. Christopher R. Eliot,
presiding.
The record of the Thirty-second Annual Meeting was

read and approved.
The Treasurer, Harrie H. Dadmun, read his report, show

ing a balance of $135.37, and the sum of $500 in the Life
Membership Fund. The Auditor's report, by Gorham Dana,
attesting the Treasurer's statement as correct, was sub
mitted ; and both reports were accepted.
The Librarian, Mrs. George F. Patterson, reported that
more than two hundred volumes, and many pamphlets and
valuable photographs, had been received, and that much of
her time had been devoted to research work in response to
important inquiries. Attention was called to the gift by
Dr. John Carroll Perkins of a complete file of the Church
Exchange ; the completion of the Society's file of Unity ; the
deposit of the records of the Cape Cod and Norfolk-Suffolk
Conferences; the addition of the prize-essay sketches of
Unitarian Churches; and of Newspaper Cuttings of Uni
tarian items collected by Miss Dorothy Rutledge.
The President spoke of the importance of the Library
and of its further enrichment by gifts and deposits by mem
bers and friends, and he commended the Librarian for her
fidelity and devotion to her work.
Dr. Perkins, on behalf of the Publication Committee,
reported that the new issue of the Society's Proceedings,
Vol. Ill, Part I, was ready for delivery to members.
40

Prof. Francis A. Christie, for the committee on the prize

offered for the best Unitarian Church history, reported the
receipt of seventeen such histories, of which that of the
Newburyport Church by Miss Minnie Atkinson had been
awarded the prize of fifty dollars. The histories were of the
following churches : Arlington, Mass., by Rev. Frederic Gill ;
Arlington Street, Boston, by Miss Harriet E. Johnson ; Deerfield, by Jonathan Porter Ashley; Greenfield, by Lucy Cutter
Kellogg; Newburyport, by Minnie Atkinson; Scituate, by
Rev. Robert Lewis Weis; Somerville, by Sara Stone Car
penter ; Templeton, by Rev. Richard Allen Day ; Charlestown,
N. H., by Ellen L. Feletron; Wilton, N. H., by R. G. Ring;
Yonkers, N. Y., by Rev. Hilary G. Richardson ; Iowa City and
Keokuk, Iowa, by Rev. M. L. Townsend; New Orleans, La.,
by Mitchell Pilcher; Chicago, 111., by Herman A. Richardson;
Ann Arbor, Mich., by E. Scott Polk ; and Memphis, Tenn., by
Louise Rugg.
Dr. Foote reported on the progress of the Socinus Monu

ment, and stated that the fund raised for the purpose was
approximately $1800. He spoke of the great service of Dr.
Wilbur on this memorial, and of the importance of having
him remain in Europe several months longer to complete his
researches on early Unitarian history there, and he urged
the Society to endorse an appeal for the further extension
of Dr. Wilbur's work. He estimated the monthly cost to be
about $150, and suggested contributions to this end.
Prof. Lyttle enthusiastically supported Dr. Foote's sug
gestions and spoke of the great importance of Dr. Wilbur's
researches, and of his obtaining copies and translations of
material in European archives, thus accomplishing what
could never again be so well done. He offered the following
Resolution, which was adopted :
Resolved, That the President of the Unitarian Historical

society appoint a Committee of two to confer with the
President of the American Unitarian Association to provide
in the near future funds to enable Dr. Wilbur to complete
his important researches into European Unitarianism ; and
41

that this Committee, if it seems feasible, take the initiative

in appealing for such funds in the name of this Society.
This Resolution was referred to the Directors.
Miss Harriet E. Johnson spoke of her recent attendance
at the ninety-ninth anniversary meeting of the Universalist
Historical Society and of its interesting programme.
Mr. Hosea S. Ballou, President of that Society, being
present at our meeting, expressed his pleasure at listening
to our exercises, and spoke of his own anniversary meeting
and of the purposes of his Society.
The President stated that the Historical Society of the
Western Conference will have a meeting soon, at which there
will be two addresses upon the History of the Church in
Cincinnati and the History of the Meadville Theological
School, copies of which will be sent to our Society.
The President called attention to the Priestley exhibit
at the American Unitarian Association, and expressed the
Society's appreciation of the help of the Association, and
also the grateful thanks of this Society, to President Compton and Prof. Davis of the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and Prof. Newell of Boston University, for
their interest in lending books, medals, photographs, and the
portrait of Priestley, to be a part of the exhibit.
Dr. Foote referred to the notice sent out for the Priestley
anniversary. He also called attention to a special meeting
which will be held during the ensuing year in memory of
Rammohum Roy, and he urged the Society's interest in the
matter. He suggested the advisability of sending out to our
Churches a list of reading references relating to Rammohum
Roy and the Brahmo Somaj.
Dr. Southworth followed in the same vein, and said that
Rammohum Roy, the father of modern India, was in cor
respondence with Channing and his contemporaries.
It was
voted, that this matter be referred to the Directors of the
Society.
The President appointed Rev. Harold G. Arnold and Rev.

Anita Pickett a committee to nominate officers for the en
42
suing year. They reported the names of the following per

sons, who were duly elected :
Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D., President,
Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice-President,
Henry Wilder Foote, D.D., Honorary Vice-President,
Earl M. Wilbur, D.D., Honorary Vice-President,
Julius H. Tuttle, Secretary,
Harrie H. Dadmun, Treasurer,
Mrs. George F. Patterson, Librarian,
Rev.
Rev.
Rev.
Rev.
and the following Directors
for three years :

Rev. Charles Graves, of Wethersfield, Conn., 1933-36

Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, of Chicago, 111.,
1933-36
The President then introduced Dr. Griffin, of Philadel
phia, who addressed the Society on Joseph Priestley, whom
he considered one of the great Unitarian heroes of the
eighteenth century. He was the founder of the First Church
in Philadelphia, and its patron saint. He was a friend of the
American Colonies and of the French Revolution. Dr. Griffin
recounted evidences of the great ability of Priestley in vari
ous fields of human activity and learning, and of his remark
able versatility. He was born in 1733, and came to this
country in 1794. His last visit in Philadelphia was in 1803,
a short time before his death in 1804.
JULIUS
H. TUTTLE,
Secretary.
Annual Membership
life
Membership
$2.00
50.00
. .
List of Life Members

Mr. Albert H. Wiggin
Mrs. Edgar Scott
Miss E. Josephine Brazier

Miss Evelyn Sears
Mr. Henry D. Sharpe
Mr. Edwin J. Lewis, Jr.
Mrs. George M. Reed (deceased).
43
LIST OF

19011934
Switzerland."

to the Peace

Memoirs."

44

May
27, 1909
Rev. Bradley Gilman, Canton.

"Holmes
Religious Teacher."
as a

May 25,
1911

May
23, 1912

Society of Great Britain," Vol. m, Part 2,
October,
1924.


"History of
May
the

28, 1914
pp.
584-586
and
July
1,
pp.
608-611,
"Reprint" by Geo. H. Ellis Co., 1915.
May
also
Hon. Winslow Warren, Dedham.

28, 1916
"Possibilities
Order."

XXIII, No. 1, January, 1919.
p. 1134; Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7; Dec. 12, pp. 1191-2;
45
May 22,
1919
Rev. Charles H. Lyttle, Brooklyn, N. Y.

"The Pentecost of JJnitarianism."

May 26,
May
1921
Professor Ephraim Emerton, Cambridge.

W. G. Eliot, Jr., Portland, Oregon.
25, 1922 Rev.
Coast."



See "Proceedings of the Unitarian
Historical

May
12, 1925


"Dr. Sylvester Judd, Unitarian Churchman in Maine"

"Theodore Parker and Modern Theology''
May 23, 1929 Rev. Thomas H. Billings, Salem, Mass.
"Early History of the First Church in Salem, Mass.''

"Early Flistory of Arlington Street Church, Boston."
46
May
22, 1930
E. Park, Boston.
Rev. Charles

toba.


former."
"Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical

Society," Vol. n, Part n.

See

Rev. Earl M. Wilbur
"Socinian
Propaganda
in Germany JOO Years Ago."
"Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical

See
May 25, 1933 Rev. Frederick R. Griffin of Philadelphia.

"Joseph Priestley."
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote
"Theodore Clapp."
See "Proceedings
Society," Vol.
of Belmont, Mass.
of the Unitarian Historical
in, Part II.
47




The Proceedings
of the
VOLUME
PART
IV
JOSEPH TUCKERMAN
Christopher R. Eliot
WILLIAM GREENLEAF ELIOT
George Reeves Throop
1935
25 Beacon Street


The Proceedings
of the
VOLUME IV
PART I
1935

UNITARIAN HISTORICAL SOCIBTT

25 Beacon St, Boston,
All rights reserved.
Copyright,
1935

LIST OF OFFICERS
1934-35
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY

21 Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.
Rev. Frederick L. Weis,

Th. D.
Lancaster, Mass.
VICE-PRESIDENT
TREASURER


50 Congress St., Boston

Belmont, Mass.


Portland, Oregon
LIBRARIAN

25 Beacon Street
Boston, Mass.
DIRECTORS
Prof. Francis A. Christie, D.D., of Lowell

Julius H. Tuttle, of Dedham, Mass

Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., of Boston
1934-37
1934-37
1933-36
1933-36
1932-35
1932-35

Treasurer, or $50.00 for life membership.

CONTENTS
1935
List of
IV
Officers
Joseph Tuckerman

William Greenleaf Eliot

George Reeves
33
Throop
44
48
should be addressed
Communications
to

JOSEPH TUCKERMAN
Pioneer in Scientific Philanthropy
occasion

niversary
THE
for this address is the One Hundredth An

of the Benevolent Fraternity of Unitarian
Churches, organized in Boston in May 1834 to continue the

work which Joseph Tuckerman had been carrying on as a
"Ministry-at-Large " for eight years in Boston, under the
auspices of the American Unitarian Association.
It was a ministry designed especially to help the unfor

tunate and neglected people of the city, many of whom were
living in conditions of wretched poverty and vice, and many
more without church affiliations. A group of Unitarian
laymen, organized in 1822 as an "Association for Religious
Improvement," had been holding Sunday Evening meetings,
called Lectures, for several years in the North End. Suc
cessful as these were, it became evident, after four years,
that such work required a leader who should give it his
full time and devotion, and Dr. Tuckerman was chosen.
Because of his success in establishing this Ministry at
Large, as he called it, he is properly recognized as its found
er, but full credit should be given also to these devoted
laymen who had prepared the way and who gave to this
new leader, throughout his ministry, their enthusiastic and
generous support. The story of their Association, which I
like to call the first Unitarian Laymen's League, would be
well worth telling, but there is no time for it now.
Nor will there be time to dwell with adequate emphasis
and appreciation upon Dr. Tuckerman' s service as a Minister
of the Gospel, which indeed he regarded as vastly the most
important part of his life-work, as the source not only of
his own personal inspiration but as that to which he looked
for the moral and social progress of mankind.
Dr. Tuckerman's family and social background was of
the best New England character, and may be traced to the
Joseph Tuckerman
Tuckermans of Devonshire, England, as far back as 1445.*

In 1649, two brothers, Otho and John, emigrated to the
Massachusetts Bay Colony. Otho settled in Portsmouth, N. H.
John, born in Devonshire in 1624, was the ancestor of the
Boston branch. He is described as "a man of strong char
acter, of a studious habit of mind, and a loyal member of
the Church of England." He died in 1678.
Following the direct line of descent from John, we have
1655, who fought in King Philip's War and
served with distinction in the Narragansett Campaign;
Edward (1), b. in 1699, a successful man of business and
one of the original proprietors of Trinity Church, Boston
(1734) ; Edward (2) , b. in 1740, who became one of Boston's
distinguished and most public-spirited citizens. He married
Elizabeth Harris, in 1765, and their second child was Joseph,
the subject of our remembrance today.

John (2) b.
Joseph's father, Edward, was not only prominent and

successful in business but held many positions of leadership
and trust in the Community. He was "surveyor of wheat"
in Boston for thirty-seven years. An expert in grain, he
became "the chief authority on production and prices in
Massachusetts."
In
active in organizing the Massachusetts

Mechanic
Association for the protection of Em
Charitable
and
"the
of industrial arts," and also
encouragement
ployes
in organizing the Massachusetts Mutual Company, which
was "the first successful effort to protect citizens against
loss by fire." As "Trustee of Town Lands" for eleven years,
Chairman of the Massachusetts General Hospital Fund, a
member of the Society for the Aid of Immigrants, he ren
1795 he was
dered valuable
service.
Throughout his life he was an ardent and loyal American,

being one of the "Sons of Liberty," of whom Samuel and
John Adams were the most distinguished leaders. In the
early years of the Revolution he served as Lieutenant, from
1774-1776. His intense loyalty led to his withdrawal from
Trinity Church, which was too strongly "Tory" to suit his
type of patriotism, and became a member of Hollis Street
Congregational Church.
Such then was the family and social background of
Joseph Tuckerman, a background of culture and wealth, of
See ''Tuckerman Family" by Bayard Tuckerman, privately printed 1914, River
Mass.
side Press, Cambridge,


Joseph Tuckerman

intense patriotism, military service, religious devotion and

personal character, public-spirited citizenship and loyalty.
He was born in Boston on January 18, 1778, which, by
the way was the year when the Massachusetts Convention
ratified the Constitution of the United States, only however

after a strenuous debate over the Sixth article which pro
vided that "no religious tests shall ever be required as a
qualification to any office," a debate in which, of the seven
teen ministers present, fourteen voted in the affirmative,
their spokesman being Rev. Phillips Payson of Chelsea who
said that a religious test would be "a great blemish on the
Constitution" and that "God is the God of conscience, and
that for tribunals to encroach upon the conscience of men
is impious."
Joseph was prepared for college, partly at Phillips Acad
emy, Andover, and partly by the Rev. Thomas Thacher
of Dedham, and he entered Harvard in 1794. He was gradu
ated in 1798, in the same class with William Ellery Charming,
Judge Joseph Story and Washington Alston. He had not
distinguished himself as a student, nor had he given prom
ise of the serious and intensely enthusiastic work of his
later life.
Of this early period, Dr. Channing wrote as follows:
"When I first knew him in college, he had the inno
cence of childhood ; he was sympathizing, generous, without
a stain of the vices to which youth is prone; but he did
not seem to have any serious views of life. Three years
he passed almost as a holiday, unconscious of his privi
leges, uninterested in his severer studies, surrendering
himself in sportive impulses, which, however harmless in
themselves, consumed the hours which should have been
given to toil. How often has he spoken to me with grief
and compunction of his early wasted life ! In his last college
year a change began, and the remote cause of it he often
spoke of with lively sensibility. His mother, he was ac
customed to say, was one of the best of women. She had
instilled into him the truths of religion with a mother's
love, tempered with no common wisdom. The seed was
sown in a kindly nature. The religious principle, which
at first had only been a restraint from evil, began to incite
to good; and to this the progress and greatness of his life
were mainly due."
This rather severe judgment of Tuckerman's college
days should be supplemented and qualified by that of his
Joseph Tuckerman
Judge Story, who in a letter to Dr. Channing,

after Dr. Tuckerman' s death, wrote as follows:
"During his college life he (Tuckerman) did not seem
to have any high relish for most of the course of studies

classmate,
then pursued. He had an utter indifference, if not dislike,

to mathematics, and logic, and metaphysics ; and but a slight
inclination for natural philosophy.
"And yet I should not say that he was idle or indolent,
or without a strong desire of improvement. His principal
pleasures lay in a devotion to the more open and facile
branches of literature, and especially English literature.
History, moral philosophy, poetry, the drama, and the class
of studies generally known by the name of belles-lettres,
principally attracted his attention; and in those his reading
was at once select and various."
Judge Story dwells with delight upon his "warm-hearted
his buoyant and cheerful temper, his active,
sympathetic charity, his gentle and frank manners, and
above all, that sunniness of soul which cast a bright light
over all hours. So uniform, indeed, was his kindness and
desire to oblige that I do not remember a single instance
in which he ever betrayed either a hastiness of temper or
a flash of resentment. He was accustomed to distribute a
portion of his weekly allowance among the poor, and the
friendless, and the suffering. His love of morals and virtue
was as ardent as it was exalted. His conduct was blameless
and pure. I do not believe that he ever wrote a word which,
dying, he could have wished to blot on account of impurity
of thought or allusion ; and his conversation was at all times
that which might have been heard by the most delicate and
modest ears." Judge Story closes by saying that while he
was not led to expect of him such eminence in profession
and character as he afterwards attained, he was in this view
mistaken, not having taken into account the "probable ef
fects of a deep, religious sensibility and an enthusiasm for
goodness, when combined with a spirit of glowing benev
benevolence,
olence."
Here we have then the picture of a free-spirited youth,

Sir Galahad, indeed, of purity and love, who was about
to dedicate himself to the serious search for truth and the
self-sacrificing service of God and Man. What I have quoted
a
Joseph Tuckerman
justifies the following appreciative description by Francis

Tiffany:*
"He seemed a creature born for pure enjoyment of air
and sunshine, exempt, by happy birthright, from every
call to the serious duties of life. Enough for him to live
and give thanks in so beautiful a world. Pure and innocent

as a maiden, no trace of vice soiled him, only so unspeakably
happy was he a happiness he carried with him to the last
day of his life that he seemed the dower from heaven
of eternal childhood, free to float, at the will of every passing
breeze, like the clouds in the blue sky."
His special preparation for the ministry was again under
the guidance of Rev. Mr. Thacher of Dedham, such being
the custom those days. Of this period Dr. Channing gives
the impression that the preparation had been far from
adequate, and that it was "a kind Providence" that placed
him "in a small, obscure parish, (Chelsea, Massachusetts)
which offered nothing to gratify ambition or dissipate the
mind. . . . Here he became a student, a faithful, laborious
student, and accumulated much knowledge and devoted no
little time to the thorny topics of theology. Thus the de
fects of his early intellectual training were repaired, and
his faculties sharpened and invigorated." So great was the
change that Dr. Channing said: "He was, perhaps, the most
signal example within my remembrance of improvement:
of a man overcoming obstacles and making progress under
disadvantages."
The Chelsea congregation was indeed "small and ob
scure," but his larger parish was the town itself, and this
brought him many opportunities for the kind of service
he loved . He was not only a preacher, fervent if not elo
quent, but preeminently a pastor and a friend, untiring
and devoted.
One of his
successors
in Chelsea, Rev. George M. Rice,
after talking with many of the people who knew him well,
wrote as follows: "So far as the spirit of mingled piety
and philanthropy could consecrate any minister to his work,
he was consecrated. . . . That which characterized his min
istry the most, that which made him peculiarly an object
of the veneration and love of his parishioners, was his glow
ing interest in the poor and suffering. They were never
neglected. His purse too was as open as his heart. His visits
Life of Charles F. Barnard, by ReT. Francis Tiffany, 1895, p.
11.
Joseph Tuckerman
at the poorhouse were very frequent. 'Mr. Tuckerman was

extraordinary good to old Mrs. Hasey,' said one of her fel
low-lodgers; and the family which perhaps of all others
he visited most and to which he showed the most attention,
was a colored family."
There was no physician in the town, so he kept a supply
of medicines on hand, and gave them out, with valuable

advice, free of charge. "Nor was his kindness confined to
his parish. Wherever he heard of distress or need, there
he was quick to go. In a word, to quote one who had known
him longest, 'his aim seemed to be to realize the idea of the

good Samaritan.' "
Said his own daughter, recalling the times when she

used to go with him as a little child making parish calls:
"To me he seemed some superior being; and the feeling
was not lessened by observing the reverence and love which
everywhere greeted him, and how gently and firmly he
seemed to guide all in the pathway of Heaven. And as he
spoke of the Saviour, with so much love and reverence, as
he always did, I looked at him and thought, 'He must have
looked as you do now.'
"*
Such was this minister among his people and fellowcitizens a shepherd indeed to his flock, a guardian angel
over the children, a friend in every home, whom the rough
est fellows on the street, and Chelsea had such, respected,
and whom the humblest and poorest loved.
Rev. Francis Parkman, whose sister Dr. Tuckerman had
married, wrote after his death : "I have always regarded my
brother's ministry in Chelsea as the shining glory of his
life. He loved his people, regarded them as his family, and
was the father, brother, friend to them all. It was then he
laid the foundation of all his future usefulness."
It is noteworthy that while in Chelsea he became inter
ested in the sailors. The United States Marine Hospital was
there and Mr. Tuckerman's sympathies were early enlisted
by a knowledge of the trials and temptations of the sailors.
They were more deeply stirred by what he saw a few years
later, during a voyage to Charleston, S. C. (1819) . In 1812,
with the aid of friends in Boston, he organized a Seamen's
Friend Society, which was "the first great effort in the
Note '
Faith,"
For a description of his personal appearance,

Vol. II, p. 108, by Henry T. Tuckerman.
see
"Heralds of a Liberal
Joseph Tuckerman
United States to befriend sailors."* Although this society

did not long survive, the honor of having been the first to
make such an effort belongs to Dr. Tuckerman, and we
may properly consider it the beginning of the splendid
work of Father Taylor at the Seamen's Bethel, which was
carried later into every great port of our land. It is espe
cially notable as Dr. Tuckerman's first attempt to embody
in an institution the spirit of moral and social reform which
had been waxing strong within him and was destined at
last to place him among the leading philanthropists of his
time.
Dr. Tuckerman was ordained as the minister of the

Church of Christ in Chelsea (formerly Rumney
Marsh) on November 5, 1801 and remained there until
November 1826, a ministry of twenty-five years. He asked
for "a dissolution" because of his failing health, but, re
turning to Boston, soon found himself engaged in the kind
of work which for years he had had at heart and for which
he was by nature and by experience best fitted. This work
he called a "Ministry at Large." It was to continue under
his active leadership until 1834, holding evening services
for two years in an old paint shop in Smith's Circular
Building, corner of Merrimack and Portland Streets, and
later in a small chapel on Friend Street, built for him by
his Unitarian supporters. It was primarily and continued
to be a ministry of religion a Christian ministry.
I now come to the special subject of this paper, "Dr.
Tuckerman as a Pioneer in Scientific Philanthropy," but a
few words should be interpolated here about such a Ministry
at Large, lest we should seem to be claiming too much.
Dr. Tuckerman was indeed the first** to undertake a
Ministry at Large under Unitarian auspices and to give it
systematic development as something distinct from the usu
al denominational church program, but this kind of Christian
work was not strictly speaking entirely new to Boston.
In his book on "The Ministry at Large" Dr. Tuckerman
himself points out that "the moral claims of the poor had
before this time (1826) engaged the attention of a 'Society

First
See "The Ministry at Large" by Joseph Tuckerman, p. 173.

An article In the Christian Klegister of October 31, 1835, signed by Frederick
T. Gray, Elijah Cobb, K. W. Bayley, H. B. Rogers and Joseph Tuckerman, refers
to Dr. Tuckerman as "the first, and for years the only minister-at-large In our
city." p. 255. This article was a reprint of an appeal issued that year for
money to erect a new Chapel in Pitts Street.
Joseph Tuckerman

for the Moral and Religious Instruction of the Poor' and

missionaries had been employed by this Society for the ac
complishment of its objects," but, he adds, that its only

missionary at that time was "a young candidate for settle
ment who was called soon to a congregation in the country."
As a matter of fact, the Society referred to was organ
ized in 1816,* by members of the Old South Church, who
had discovered by a personal survey of the Town that "the
heathen were at our door," and that in certain parts of the
Town (notably between Beacon Hill and the Charles River)
there were "dance halls, grog shops, gaming houses, and
all the multiplied engines of Satan, in full and vigorous
operation."
Now this was ten years before Dr. Tuckerman began
his work in Boston and six years before that valiant group
of young Unitarian laymen, already referred to, organized
their "Association for Religious Improvement" and began
their Sunday Evening Lectures in the North End; and to
its credit, this Old South Association for the "Moral and
Religious Instruction of the Poor" had been fairly busy
during these ten years, establishing Sunday Schools, visit
ing the destitute and afflicted, distributing tracts, opening
"a school for Africans," providing preaching services and
a Bethel Boarding House for sailors, and doing other kinds
of moral and welfare work.
Their leading missionary had been Rev. William Jenks,
but by the time Dr. Tuckerman appeared, he had withdrawn,
to become the minister of a new congregation of which
a few had been his mission families. This loss, evidently,
had weakened the Society, as Dr. Tuckerman intimates,
but nevertheless it continued to function and eventually
became the "City Missionary Society," supported by the
orthodox Congregational Churches, and it has been distin
guished ever since for its philanthropic and religious serv
ices, efficient and loyal and strong.
When we ask what the other denominations had been
doing, the Baptists, Methodists, or the Episcopalians, it
appears that none of them had as yet undertaken to or
ganize this kind of missionary work.
The Episcopalians** indeed had a small group of church
men calling themselves the "Massachusetts Episcopal MisOne Hundredth Annual Report of the City Mission, 1919, pp. 11-12.
See ''Memorial History of Boston," Vol. Ill, pp. 456-7. Also ''Seventy-fifth Anni
versary of the Episcopal City Mission" by Rev. Frederick B. Allen, 1919.
Joseph Tuckerman
sionary Society" and they appointed Dr. Asa Eaton, minister

of Christ Church, Salem St., as a city missionary. But this
was not until 1829, and it was not until 1844 that the
Episcopal City Mission was definitely established, with Rev.
E. M. P. Wells as missionary (better known as Father Wells)
at St Stephen's Chapel, which had been built for him by
Mr. William Appleton.
Long before this the Baptists and the Methodists were
in establishing their churches in Boston and vi
cinity. They were ardent missionaries, and while they con
fined their efforts largely within their own denominational
circles, it is vastly to their credit that this meant minister
ing among the humbler and poorer people, from whom,
especially at first, their congregations were drawn. The
first Methodist Church,* built in 1796, was, to be sure, in
the North End where many of Boston's well-to-do citizens
resided, but it was a modest structure, in Ingraham's Yard,
known later as Methodist Alley, and we may be sure that
few if any of Boston's citizens of "higher social rank" were
among them. The Baptists** date their beginning from
their church in Charlestown, organized in 1665, but their
growth as a denomination dates from the early decades of
the nineteenth century, and even then it was slow. Outside
of their interest in "Home and Foreign Missions" their
community service was not organized as such, but flowed
through channels of individual Christian sympathy and be
nevolence, reaching many of the unfortunate and neglected
poor, near and far.

engaged
Tremont Temple was organized in 1839 as a free church

all persons "rich or poor, without distinction of
color or condition" should be welcome and feel "free to enjoy
the public ministry of the gospel." The Baptist Social Union
was not organized until 1864.
It thus appears that in 1826 when Dr. Tuckerman came
to Boston, there was no well-organized Society for moral
and religious work among the poor or for what is now
called Social Service, except that of the orthodox congregationalists, and that already started by the Association
of Unitarian laymen. Dr. Tuckerman came with the definite
purpose of devoting his life to such work and it soon de
veloped into the idea of a Ministry at Large set apart and
where
See "Memorial History of Boston," Vol. Ill,

Se "The Memorial History 0f Boston" Vol.
Chap.
Ill,
IX,
Chap.
pp. 438-39.
pp. 431-2.
VIII,
Joseph Tucker man
10
consecrated to this one great end. He had caught this vision

of a special ministry for those "unconnected with places of
worship and who were, or thought themselves, too poor to
form and to maintain this connexion." "I came to the city,"
he said, "that I might seek for families of this class; to
do what I could to bring them into connexion with our
churches; and where this object could not be effected, to
serve them otherwise, as far as I might, in the office of
the Christian ministry." That he was greatly surprised and
even shocked by the conditions he found is made clear by
his own words: "I might have continued my ministry (in
and not have obtained the views
Chelsea) for centuries
of human life, and of the moral conditions and claims of
our fellow-beings, obtained in a year of the ministry in
which
have lived in this city."* That he soon found it
necessary to add to his moral and religious ministrations the
study of social problems is not surprising. That he became
not only the founder of the Unitarian "Ministry at Large"
but "a far-seeing prophet of beneficent reforms and a pioneer
of scientific philanthropy" is the grateful testimony of his
contemporaries and of posterity.
....

In 1841, following Dr. Tuckerman's death, Channing

said: "He saw more and more clearly that the Ministry
at Large, with other agencies, was to change the aspect of
a large portion of society. It became his deliberate convic
tion, and one which he often repeated, that great cities
need not be haunts of vice and poverty; that in this city,
there were now intelligence, virtue and piety enough, could
they be brought into united action, to give a new intellec
tual and moral life to the more neglected classes of society.
For this faith he acted, toiled, suffered and died."
Reviewing his work in the Christian Examiner for Janu
ary 1853, Ephraim Peabody said: "So far as we know, the
Ministry at Large was the first systematic effort to embody
in a permanent institution the best ideas of the time re
specting the true methods of Christian benevolence. It was
the commencement of a new era in the annals of pauperism."
In
1926,
Jeffrey R. Brackett, on the occasion of its
One Hundredth Anniversary, said: "He, Tuckerman, had

not merely courage and perseverance but also imagination
In 1829 Dr. Tuekermaii names three ministers at large besides himself in
Boston : Mr. Conant, Baptist ; Mr. Eaton, (Episcopalian, and Mr. Shelden, Con
gregational Calvtaist Semi-Annual Report of his third year, p. 23.
Joseph Tucker man
11
and vision. He insisted that the minister should combine

Christian zeal with the social mind. He combined in himself
the missionary minister and the embryo social worker."*
On the same occasion, Dr. Francis G. Peabody said:

"The principles governing Dr. Tuckerman's philanthropic
work were those which are now in the twentieth century
universally accepted as self-evident, but were unrecognized,
or even unimagined, a hundred years ago."
It
has been said, and often,
that Dr. Tuckerman was
far in advance of his age in his ideas, principles, and methods

of dealing with social problems and that he made recom
and actually inaugurated institutions, during

ministry
in Boston which were the fruitful seed
his short
of later harvests and forecast methods adopted many years
afterward. It is therefore important to set forth in some
detail the evidence establishing this claim.

mendations,
As I have pointed out, Dr. Tuckerman's work in Boston

began as a Christian minister, and as a visitor among the
poor, and he never ceased to value these avenues of service
above all others. But he soon found himself facing social
problems vastly larger than those of individuals, and he
therefore set to work promptly along these lines, gathering
statistics, studying social conditions and philanthropic work
not only in his own city, but also as existing in England
and France. He regarded this careful study of such problems
as a necessary part of the ministry at large. He deprecated
the too general habit of treating such questions "merely
as topics of political economy and with reference to exist
ing institutions and the state of society." They must be
studied not only from "the records of Police Courts, of pris
ons, and almshouses, but by a long personal intercourse with
all classes of the poor and by acquainting oneself with all
the various circumstances of their character and condition."
Dr. Tuckerman would be thoroughly scientific, but also
human. He became a sociologist, a forerunner of what has
become one of the most intensely vital sciences of modern
times. He read Chalmers, Ainslee ("Present State and
Claims of London") Degerando's "The Visitor of the Poor,"
(he wrote a long introduction for the American Edition),
Prison and Hospital Reports, the history of the Poor Laws
in England and Scotland, the Reports of the "1831" Com"One Hundredth Anniversary
of the Ministry
at Large," 1926.
Joseph Tuckerm a n
12

missioners in England, and made himself familiar at first

hand with Massachusetts prisons, almhouses, houses of cor
rection, and the State's ineffective pauper laws. In his
reports to the American Unitarian Association, he discussed
at length and always with vigor the outstanding social needs
of Boston, and two notable documents from his hand, one
addressed to Harrison Gray Otis, Mayor of Boston, the
other to the Massachusetts Legislature, dealt with the
House of Correction and the Common Jail in Boston, and
the Massachusetts Pauper System. Thus he became a leader
and inspirer of public opinion, himself convinced that moral
and religious progress could not be expected except as eco
nomic and social conditions were changed to make this
possible.
One of the first social questions to demand his atten
tion was that of intemperance. It was indeed a serious
problem, from every point of view. Drunkenness blocked
his efforts among the poor, whichever way he turned. He
said that more than ninety percent of poverty and crime
could be traced to this cause. A society for the "Suppression
of Intemperance" had been organized as early as 1813,* but
in 1823 Rev. Henry Ware, in an address upon the "Criminal
ity of Intemperance" said "that the money expended for
drink in Boston would more than cover her total taxes."
The picture Dr. Tuckerman draws of the evils of in

temperance as he knew them is a pitiful one. He dwelt
especially upon their effect in the home. Sometimes, he tells
us, mothers and fathers both are intemperate, and the
children drunkards at the age of fourteen or fifteen years.
He said that rum was the chief ingredient of breakfast,
dinner and supper. Children will not go to school. At nine
or ten years of age they are often beyond parental control.
Their home is in the streets. They are in training for the
House of Correction or the State Prison.
It is important to remember that in Dr. Tuckerman's time
the evils of intemperance were attributed solely to ardent
spirits. Nothing was said about lighter beverages. It was
not until years later that the danger lurking in these was
Dr. Tuckerman's efforts, therefore, were direct
recognized.
ed against drunkenness, and he sought to restrain men or
to persuade them to restrain themselves from excess. He
"to discountenance and suppress the too free use of ardent spirits, and
its kindred vices, profaneness and gaming." See "The Liquor Problem" by Daniel
Object :
Dorchester,
p.
190.
Joseph Tuckerman
13

was not an advocate of no-license or prohibition. That would

have been expecting too much in his day. Even hard cider
was not included in the discussion until 1836.* The problem
was not one of law, but of moral and religious persuasion
and of example on the part of the reformer, and of moral
principles and self-control on the part of the victims.
Nevertheless, on certain points, Dr. Tuckerman stood
in the van. He set forth the evils of intemperance with no
uncertain sound. "He looked on a shop for vending ardent
spirits" so Dr. Channing tells us "as he would have looked
on a pitfall opening into Hell." When a Massachusetts law
forbidding the sale of ardent spirits in any less quantity
than fifteen gallons was repealed, Dr. Tuckerman, with
John C. Warren, M. D., Jonathan Phillips, and William Ellery Channing, were among the protestants ;** and he strong
ly urged long sentences for habitual drunkards, not only as
punishment but to help them break the drink habit. He had
little confidence in mere talk, however deeply stirred the
speakers might be. He recognized, indeed, the influence of
a moral and religious appeal, of public prayer and religious
instruction, but he declared that "the confirmed drunkard
is not so to be recovered."
In this problem he took an advanced position, regarding
as a disease and not merely a moral question.

He said that the drunkard's desire, or will, to reform must
be aided by medicine, and he advocated the use of medi
cated spirits to create such disgust for drink that men would
abstain at least long enough for nature to recover her
normal health, and the moral sense its control. He enters
into the subject at great length in one of his early reports,
giving many instances of successful treatment out of his
own three months' experience. It is a good illustration of
his thoroughness and care. "I should not willingly have done
what I have in this business," so he said, "had I not been
assisted with the advice, and the occasional visits, of a
medical friend to whom I am much indebted for his serv
intemperence
ices on these occasions."
Equally interesting and important was the problem of

neglected and wayward children, and here again Dr. Tuck
erman took advanced ground. He did what he could, perLiquor Problem in all Ages" by 'Daniel
''The Liquor Problem," p. 290.
See "The
Dorchester,
p. 213.
Joseph Tuckerman
14
to rouse parents to a deeper interest in their chil

dren's education and to induce the children themselves to be
regular in their attendance at school, but he went much
further than this, publicly advocating a "city superintend
ent, whose duty it should be to place every boy and girl
whom he should find out of school, and unemployed, in one
of our public schools ; and, when anyone, through filial
disobedience, cannot be kept in one of these schools, let
it be the duty of this superintendent to take proper measures
for his or her moral security."*
sonally,

This was a clear forecasting of the system of truant

officers adopted later by the city.
Dr. Tuckerman said also that the superintendent of
children might do much good "by providing places for chil
dren in families, especially in the country," and in that
suggestion he forecast the "placing-out" system now so
generally adopted by state and private child-helping socie
ties. Such a superintendent as proposed, he said, might as
properly be "municipal" as the city marshall. He said that
the government has a right to employ any means for the
protection of its children.
He urged the establishment of several private schools
to meet the needs of children too old for the primary, and
not qualified for the grammar, schools a sort of special
ungraded school for those who were, for these reasons,
excluded from the city schools altogether. Boston has such
schools today. He offered himself as a voluntary superin
for such schools.
tendent
Again, in this connection, we find in Dr. Tuckerman's

a clear prophecy of the most progressive theories
regarding the treatment of delinquents, such as have result
ed in our modern juvenile courts. There existed a School for
Juvenile Delinquents (the House of Reformation in South
Boston) in Dr. Tuckerman's day, but no child could be sent
there unless first tried in open court and convicted of a
crime. Dr. Tuckerman felt that this was wrong. Not only
would parents naturally shrink from this process, even to
"Is it not apparent that
save their children, but, he asks,
very
on
evil
the minds of children
the influence must be
institution,
they
that
are sent there as consent to that
writings
iSefond
'Semiannual
Report November
5,
1830, p. 33.
Joseph Tuckerman
15
demned criminals ?" Thus early in our history did one great
soul feel the enormity of such a procedure. Thus early did
one who loved children advocate a gentler and wiser way.
Dr. Tuckerman felt deeply the responsibility of society it
self for the moral exposure and transgressions of its chil
dren. This was a new view of the situation. Listen to his

own words:
"In receiving the sentence of law they (the children)

are treated as responsible moral agents, and as alone re
sponsible for their transgressions. But are they so? How
much greater, I ask, is their guilt than that of society
around them which might have saved them from it, and yet
left them uncared for to fall into it?" Do not such words
remind us of what Judge Lindsay, and Judge Cabot, and
many others, have been saying in our time concerning paren
tal and social responsibility? "Here is the fountain which,
if cleansed, would send purified and purifying waters into
a thousand streams now corrupted to their lowest depths
Is this a Christian state of society ? Is this the social
state God intended for man?"
....
Nor was Dr. Tuckerman far behind our modern penol

ogists in his discussion of prison and jails. In December,
1829, he addressed a letter to Hon. Harrison Gray Otis, the
mayor of Boston, respecting the House of Correction and
the Common Jail. It is a master-piece of clear description
and argument, calmly written, but full of intense feeling.
He lays bare, with ruthless hand, the terrible evils then
existing in those institutions, the crowding of four, five
and six prisoners (men, or women) into cells no larger than
10 feet by 5; the absolute lack of classification, whether
by age or degree of criminality; the freedom of communi
cation from cell to cell. He depicts the actual horrors of
such conditions and the inevitable demoralization, especially
of the young and less hardened. He had been visiting there
for three years and knew what he was saying: "Is it just,
then, or is it wise, to imprison the intemperate with the
lascivious, and with thieves ? . . . . Simple debt ought not to
be treated as a crime and the debtor made to feel as guilty
in the eye of the law as an adulterer or murderer ; . . . . and
here, too, are those who have been committed for trial,
whom yet the law recognizes as innocent ; .... I should as
soon think of sending a diseased man, for the recovery of
his health, into a lazaretto infected with the plague, as of
16
Joseph Tuckerman

sending a convict to this prison for reformation ; . . . . Let a

young convict be sent here and in a single month he will
have learned more of the arts of iniquity, than he would
probably have ever learned in his ordinary intercourse with
the world
Without the classification of prisoners, a
jail is the foulest sink on earth of human corruption."
His argument, therefore, was always for classification

and humane treatment ; for reformation, not merely punish
ment. "It is forgotten," he said, "that the convict is a fel
low being. . . . We have yet to learn that the reformation
of the violator of law is an object which claims at least
equal attention as the security of society. . . . Treat men
as if they were totally depraved, and you will do much to
make them so. And have you then no share in their accountableness for their guilt? The subject has obtained
but little attention, compared with its claim upon public
I do
interest. It demands the best thought among us
earnestly beseech those among us who are qualified for the
work, not merely to look at the subject of prisons, but to
examine it, and to discuss it, till it shall be well compre
hended, and till principles shall be established for their
structure and government, which shall make them, as far
as they may be made, Schools of Reformation. ...
would
make no appeal to the passions on so grave a subject. But
I do appeal to the great eternal principles of justice in
every mind. I do beseech those who are interested in the
wellbeing of our city, to inquire, and to examine, that they
may understand the evils of these institutions; and then
with due deliberation to consider what is our duty re
Here then, I leave the subject, at least
specting them
for the present. The facts which I have stated will not,
believe, be disputed. But even should they be, I am satis
fied that they cannot be disproved."
....
These were brave words and it is to such intelligent

criticism and leadership that society owes its advance in
prison methods and discipline and the development of the
subject into the modern science of penology.
Dr. Tuckerman took an active interest not only in the

House of Correction and the Common Jail, but also in the
School for Juveniles, and the House of Industry, at South
Boston, often visiting them and advising with their super
intendent. He interested himself in the difficulties and
problems of discharged prisoners, and presented these to the
Joseph Tuckerman
17
public in words of fire, pleading for sympathy and practical

aid. "Will you then do nothing for him? Will you cast him
off as a worthless thing? Will you make him feel that you
will not trust him, because the mark of the prison is in
delibly fixed upon him? May God deal more mercifully with
you in the day of your own final account !"

Be it remembered that the Massachusetts Society for

Aiding Discharged Prisoners was not organized until 1846 ;
the Massachusetts Reformatory in 1884; the Reformatory

for Women in 1877; the Massachusetts Prison Association
in 1889 ; and it will appear that Dr. Tuckerman was well in
the forefront of such reforms. It is interesting, moreover,
that the Farm School at Thompson's Island, one of the
most humane and beneficent institutions, was the direct out
come of the Ministry at-Large and Dr. Tuckerman's appeals
in behalf of the children. It was believed to be the first in
stitution of its kind in the country. Dr. Tuckerman's appeal
arrested the attention of Patrick Tracy Jackson, Esq., who
enlisted Judge Jackson, his brother, and Judge Prescott, and
others, and a plan was soon formed. Thompson's Island was
bought ($6,000) and suitable buildings were erected. This
was in 1832, and the institution has prospered and done
excellent work from that day to this. Says Dr. Tuckerman,
"The establishment of this School I regard as one of the
most important of our means of moral security and progress.
... .Its object is to unite in early years the discipline of a
school with a practical education in agricultural pursuits;
and to offer a home to those who are friendless and morally
exposed."*
But among
the many problems of the day, none was

greater than that of Pauperism, and no one did more than
Dr. Tuckerman to help solve it. Intensely sympathetic as
he was with genuine poverty, he had no foolish sentimental
ity when he faced the unjustifiable demands of the idle
tramp, the professional beggar, or the pauper. As Baron
Degerando said of him, "He knew the difference between
poverty and pauperism;" and he felt keenly the necessity
of educating the community in that distinction!**
It
was he who in 1820*** warned charitable individuals

and societies not "to adopt any measures which will enlarge
by Dr. Tuckerman, 1838.
Ministry at Large, p. 201.
Dr. Tuckerman's Serai-Annual Report 1829.
"'The Ministry at Large,"
18
Joseph Tuckerman

....
and perpetuate the evil of an excessive poor population

and to avoid whatever may give an artificial extension to
the laboring class of the city." Men had been flocking to the
city, encouraged by the towns (to get rid of them) and at
tracted by the apparent prosperity of the city and by the
fame of Boston's charities, until the trades were oversupplied and the streets were full of people out of work,
and the city overrun with beggars. Thus wages had been
lowered and rents raised. He said that this surplus popu
lation should be induced to return to the country. He uttered
a timely warning against boastful and ostentatious charity
and misleading advertisements; against special dwellings
for the poor at lower rents; against artificial devices for
making work, because "unnecessary and useless work must
occasion ultimate loss somewhere, and, indirectly at least,
even to the laborers themselves employed upon it;" against
the establishment of soup-houses and vegetable depositories
for the free distribution of these supplies, saying that such
charity would weaken the spirit of self-dependence, en
courage idleness and vice, and increase pauperism. True
charity means "far more than almsgiving." We should aim
"not at the immediate, but at the greatest ultimate good."
We should "make almsgiving minister to piety and virtue,"
which will prove to be the "truest economy as well as a
just exposition of Christian duty."
It was Dr. Tuckerman then whose voice was heard urging

careful discrimination in the distribution of charity, this
to be secured by visiting, and investigation, and concerted
action among the benevolent societies. "Can no plan be de
vised" he asked, "for their closer union with each other?"
He proposed a "registry" to be made every week in "a book
kept for the purpose in the office of the overseers of the
poor" for which weekly reports should be sent by the agents
of other benevolent societies, this office to be used as a
central bureau of information. He had no doubt that this
would give one-third additional value to all charitable funds.*
While urging vigorous measures to prevent the accu
mulation of foreign poor in the city that restless, discon
tented, vagrant population which other countries, and even
other states and towns were only too ready to cast off
he urged "a deeper sense of the relation which Christianity
recognized between the more and the less favored classes
Second
Seml-Annual Report,
1829, p. 15-19.
Joseph Tuckerman
19
of society." This reminds us of Arnold Toynbee and Robert

Woods. He could sympathize even with the pauper class,
feeling as he did so profoundly the responsibility of society,
and especially of the educated and prosperous, for its exist
ence. He felt deeply the need of increasing individual re
sponsibility. "There is no public provision, or associated ex
ercise of charity," he said, "that can be substituted for
individual obligation and individual responsibility." There
should be more visitors and more visiting and more personal
friendship and helpfulness. Were private citizens to do their
duty, there would be little need of benevolent societies or
city aid, so he believed; and in a city of the size of Boston
in 1830 such a programme seemed feasible. Impossible in
the great cities of today, its fundamental principles are yet
sound.
In
the spring of 1832, Dr. Tuckerman organized a band

of visitors to the poor to assist him in his work, and the
following winter the ministers-at-large opened an office in
the basement of a Tremont Street Savings Bank, to which,
by the use of tickets, applicants for aid might be referred.
This was in October, 1833, and for several years the min
isters at large were in attendance to receive applicants, and
much good was accomplished in detecting imposters, check
ing beggary and meeting legitimate needs.
In February,
another interesting step was taken

in the same direction. A suggestion was made "that much
good would result from the adoption of a similar plan by
the various Benevolent Societies" of which there were
twenty-six in Boston at that time. A meeting was called,
at which Moses Grant, Esq. presided and H. B. Rogers acted
as the Secretary. Frederick T. Gray explained the purpose
of the meeting, to consider the subject of Pauperism in
Boston and "to adopt measures which woulde more effec
tually relieve the wants of the Poor and secure the rights
of Society." A committee with Mr. Gray as chairman was
appointed "to ascertain how far the various Benevolent
Societies in the City can cooperate together in the work of
Charity, and to report a plan for a more systematic method
of distributing charitable funds."
This was on February 7, 1834 and the Report of the
Committee was read and ordered printed, and then sent to
all the Benevolent Societies for examination and approval.
At a later meeting (October 1834) the Association was
1834,
20
Joseph Tuckerman

finally organized by the adoption of a Preamble and Consti

tution, and the election of officers. Joseph Tuckerman was
made President, and Henry B. Rogers, Secretary.
The plan of organization was a very simple one, provid
ing for two delegates from each Society, stated meetings
each month, an annual meeting in January, written reports
every month from each Society, with full and accurate ac
counts of persons assisted "according to a form to be adopted
by the Association" ; and it was declared that "the Associa
tion shall have no control, direct or indirect, over the funds
belonging to either of the Societies represented in it." Its
objects were to be as follows: "To adopt measures for the
effectual prevention of fraud and deception in the applicants
for charity; to obtain accurate and thorough information
with regard to the situation, character and wants of the
poor; and generally to interchange knowledge, experience
and advice upon the important subjects connected with the
duties and responsibilities of Benevolent Societies." Though
Boston was small (population about 70,000) these problems
had become of threatening importance. Immigration was
increasing rapidly; beggary and crime, intemperance, neg
lected children, slum conditions, badly managed institutions,
were growing evils. This was just forty-five years before
the "Associated Charities" of Boston was organized.*
On October 13, 1835, the first Annual Report of this
Association, written by Dr. Tuckerman, was presented. It
had been a successful year. Twenty-six Societies were re
presented in its membership, twenty of which had rendered
reports. An alphabetical list of all persons helped had been
kept, with necessary information. Monthly meetings had
been held in the central office of the Ministry at Large. The
Ticket System had been continued, to encourage citizens
to refer applicants for aid to the office for investigation
and aid, if deserving, or for reference to the churches to
which they belonged, or to one of the Societies. Dr. Tucker
man commends the system and says: "We believe that a
great check to beggary was given by this system the last
winter."
In the course of his long report, (48 pages) Dr. Tucker
man sets forth in a clear and masterly fashion the two
in America" by George W. Cooke, p. 225.
Report of Committee of Delegates from Benevolent Societies, May, 1834. First
Annual Report of the Association, October, 1835, Joseph Tuckerman. Ministry at
Large In Boston. J. Tuckerman, p. 125.
See ''Unitarianism

Joseph Tuckerman
21
objects of the Association, first, "The remedy and prevention

of abuses of alms" and second, "The most effectual relief
of the suffering poor." Never for a moment forgetting the
need and the duty, and one may add, the beauty, of friendly
aid, rightly given, in the spirit of the Master, he vividly
sets forth the dangers of indiscriminate giving, however
sympathetic, whether by individuals or societies or the
State, supporting his argument by the disastrous working
of the Poor Laws in England and by recent experiences in
Boston. Almost every word of this able report, at least as far
as its purposes and principles go, might have been spoken
as a warning to us today. Social conditions, economic prob
lems, moral and religious questions, face us today in size
enormously greater and threatening even greater evils than
a hundred years ago, and many of the century-old remedies
for prevention or cure are no longer adequate, but poverty
and ignorance and suffering are the same, vice and crime
essentially the same, pauperism the same deadly evil, while
on the other hand individual righteousness and truth, in
tegrity, self-reliance, courage, loving-kindness and gene
rosity, industry, justice and fidelity and faith, national and
international, never change and must be the living inspira
tion of Science, Government, Social Order, Business, the wel
fare of Nations, the Progress and Peace of the world yes, at
the very center of life itself.
The work was carried on systematically and in coopera
tion with the office of the Ministers at Large. Dr. Tucker
man says: "We regard this union as a very valuable fruit
of our ministry." It was continued for a number of years
with excellent results, but the detail work having been
too heavy for the ministers, a new Society was formed,
with a paid superintendent, under the name "The Society
for the Prevention of Pauperism." This Society exists today
as "The Industrial Aid Society." Its purpose was to deal
with the whole subject of Pauperism and its prevention.
It followed the principles and methods laid down by its
founders. It undertook, among other things, to find work
for the unemployed, but followed many other lines which
have since been specialized in the Children's Aid Societies,
the Provident Association, and the Associated Charities,
now the Family Welfare Society.
So important had Dr. Tuckerman's work become, and
interesting
were its results, that it attracted attention
so
Joseph Tucker man

22
throughout the state, and when, in 1832, a year of great

distress, the Legislature appointed a commission to inquire
into the condition of the poor (in all parts of the state),
Dr. Tuckerman was the one man of all others to be placed
upon it. He was named, and did the larger part of the work.
He traveled all over the state visiting sixty-eight towns,
to investigate institutions and to study social conditions.
He approached the subject in a thoroughly scientific and
also sympathetic spirit. He studied the problem of state
and municipal relief in all its stages, from the days of
ancient Greece and Rome to the latest experiments and
experiences of Great Britain. He was already familiar with
the history of the Poor Laws in England and the reports
of Parliamentary Commissions, showing the utter failure of
these laws. He wrote the report for the Commission, (in
cluding tables of statistics appended), and as it has been
often referred to as evidence of Dr. Tuckerman's advanced
views and influence, it may be well to consider it in some
detail, and in the light of subsequent developments.*
The Commission was appointed by the House on Feb
ruary 29, 1832, as follows: Hon. William B. Calhoun, Hon.
Henry Shaw, Josiah Caldwell, Esq., George A. Tufts, Esq.,
and Rev. Joseph Tuckerman, instructed "to prepare, digest
and report to the next Legislature such modifications or
changes in the present Pauper System of the Common
wealth, as they may deem expedient." The Report is dated
January 11, 1833, and the recommendations made were as
follows :
1.
That "after the year 1835, there shall be no longer
a recognition of State's poor by the Government of this
Commonwealth."
2.
That from and after the year 1835, "all the requisi
tions of this law (respecting habitancy) respecting
the charge and support of the poor shall be repealed,
and abolished; and that every town and county in the
State shall be left free upon all questions respecting
the charge and support of the poor."
3.
That "power be given to the Overseers of the Poor,
and Directors of Workhouses, to compel the labour of
such idle-bodied (sic) receivers of their bounty, to an
House
Document
No.
41,
1833,
No.
6.
Joseph Tucker man
23
extent to defray all expenses that may have been in

curred for them, and to make a reasonable compensation
for the care that may have been taken of them."
4.
That appropriations be made by the Government
to build county or district workhouses for the employ
ment of the idle and able-bodied, provided these coun
ties or districts agree to build such.
5.
That "as pauperism in its worst form, as well as
crime, is increased and extended in the Commonwealth,
by the unsuitableness of our County Jails, and Houses
of Correction
which tend utterly to destroy any re
mains of self-respect, or moral feeling. .. .your Com
missioners recommend a committee to visit County Jails
and Houses of Correction, collecting statistics, and re
porting measures to make these institutions effectual
to the purpose for which they were intended."

....
That a penalty be attached to the practice of send

ing the poor from town to town, "in order to be relieved
from the charge of them," thus increasing "the class
of the wandering poor," and that this be made suffi
ciently heavy to secure its discontinuance.
6.
That the Legislature shall obtain plans for Alms

houses and Work-houses, for towns and counties, "in
which the poor may live together as a family, rather
than at large, and in which all who have any capacity
for labor may be required to employ that capacity for
their own support and the support of their fellow-in
mates," and for such "Classification as should be made
and maintained, at once from sympathy with the virtous and impotent poor; for the restraint of the vicious
poor; and the prevention of pauperism."
7.
That annual reports be made to the Commonwealth

by every County Jail and House of Correction.
8.
9.
That a Bill, or Bills, for the accomplishment of these
proposals be prepared and reported "as soon as may be."
What
then,
in
brief,
were
these
recommendations?
First, the prompt repeal of all existing laws recognizing

State responsibility for the support of the poor, and return
ing this responsibility to the free action of the towns and

counties.
Joseph Tuckerman
24
Thoroughgoing reforms in the local Almshouses,

of Correction, and Workhouses, by classification and
separation of those admitted; by applying a compulsory
work test for those able to work; by sympathetic care of
the aged, the helpless, and of children; and by requiring
annual reports.
2.
Houses
3.
counties
selves.
4.

ibilities.
Government appropriations to encourage and enable

or districts to build model workhouses for them
Heavy penalties upon towns shifting their respons
This was in January 1833, and we now ask what became

of these recommendations, and for the answer we turn to
pages 124 sq. in Robert W. Kelso's "History of Poor Relief
in Massachusetts."
There we find reference to the Report but without any

mention of Dr. Tuckerman.
There had been other Commissions preceding this, in
cluding one in 1820 of which Josiah Quincy had been the
leading member. A later report (1831) had recommended
changes in the pauper law system and an order actually
passed the Senate in that year "to consider the expediency
of repealing all laws providing for the support of State
paupers." Therefore, it would have seemed probable that
would be adopted.
the Tuckerman recommendations
But the vote was negative. "The line of least resistance,"
to
says Mr. Kelso, "was followed. The recommendations
abolish State aid and to help provide county workhouses,
and thus to check the evil of the "wandering poor," were
ignored. A system of Houses of Correction for misdemean
ants was established, instead of workhouses for the ablebodied poor; but the Towns refused to release the State
from the old-time policy of reimbursement for pauper aid.
That was all. The State Aid System continued practically
as it was. In fact, it has never been repealed. Again and
again repeal was recommended and urged, but no favorable
action was taken. State paupers, largely immigrants, con
tinued to wander from town to town. Houses of Correction
were filled with "a promiscuous, unclassified population of
rogues, vagabonds, stubborn children, drunkards, wanton
and lascivious persons, and such as fail to provide for them

Joseph Tuckerman
25
selves or to support their families." Reform measures were

defeated again and again because of local selfishness or
political jealousies. Even Boston, first to call for State aid
in 1695, when crowded with refugees after King Philip's
war, opposed any change in 1849, lest she should receive
an unfair financial burden, should State aid be repealed. The
long story of committees and discussions and reports con
tinued from year to year. State almshouses at Tewksbury,
Bridgewater and Monson were opened in 1854 ; State asylums
and hospitals were built; Dorothea Dix, Samuel G. Howe,
rendered noble service; Reform Schools for wayward youth
and the School for the Feebleminded
followed; until in
1858 a State Board of Charities to supervise the entire
system was recommended by a Commission and finally estab
lished in 1863. But even then the Commission agreed that
they could not approve the principle of State pauper aid.
"We have come to the conclusion," they said, "that the
State system ought not permanently to be maintained,"
only "for a brief period, with modifications
and always
with a view to its abolition at the earliest day consistent
....
....
with the public welfare."

That day never arrived. The process of modification,
however, continued until at last a plan of "centralizing policy
and decentralizing administrative detail," to quote Mr.
Kelso's phrases, was evolved and adopted.

This, I suppose, might be called a compromise between
State and Local responsibility and care.
"It is essentially the supervisory system of public char
ities," continues Mr. Kelso, "which Massachusetts was first
among the States to inaugurate and for which she has
become famous."
At Tewksbury and Bridgewater the State carried out
the principle of giving work to the able-bodied and requiring
it. Monson was set apart for children, following the prin
ciple of classification. Private agencies were made respons
ible to the State, recognizing "a primary obligation on the
part of the State arising out of the nature of a trust."
Subsidies to private charities were permitted but in return
the State was to have a number of trustees on each Board
of Managers. The entire system of grants to private agen
cies was forbidden by law in 1916. (Kelso, p. 153) . In 1919,
the "State Board of Charities" was organized into a "State
Department of Public Welfare."
Joseph Tuckerman
26
now to Dr. Tuckerman, what shall we say?

let me quote from a report he made to the Benevolent
Fraternity, on May 5, 1833, four months later than the
Report rendered to the Legislature, because in this he is
even more outspoken in regard to government provision
for the poor.
Returning

First
On page 5 he says: "The leading principles to which I

would call attention are, that provisions for the poor are
the proper objects, not of legal enactment, but of Christian
humanity and charity; that this humanity and charity, if
left unfettered by legal enactments, are sufficient for the
security of the best provisions which can be made for all
classes of the indigent and necessitous ; and that the result
of interpositions of human laws to secure obedience to the
moral law of charity, ever has been, and is, an increased and
even frightfully increasing extent of the beggary and crime,
which these laws have been intended to remedy."
On page 13, we find the following: "Before I undertook
the agency for an examination of the actual influences of
our own poor-laws, I was decidedly in favor of a modified
plan for a State provision for the poor. But in the progress
of that examination, I was brought to an entirely different
conviction." He frankly says that he may be in error, ad
ding the following statement of purpose: "My aim is not
change for the sake of change, or even for the purpose of
experiment. It is truth, and truth only
If I have taken
narrow views, and been led to erroneous conclusions upon
it, no one will rejoice more than I shall in an exposure of
my errors." But, nevertheless, he holds to his conviction
stoutly as shown in the following declaration: "Law has
never interfered even for the regulation of wages, or of
industry or enterprise in any of their departments, with
out extending injury to a far greater number than it has
been able to benefit. Above all will this be the result, when
it assumes to enforce moral obligations. And provisions
for the poor are, I repeat, the appropriate work of charity.
So God intended that they should be. And never will they
be sufficient, or what they should be, or conduce to God's
purpose concerning them, till they are made exclusively the
work of enlightened Christian charity."
He does indeed allow that the law may "remove impedi
ments in the way of free moral action," or extend protection,
or inflict punishment, and even do much to prevent pauper
Joseph Tuckerman
27
ism, by requiring work of the able-bodied asking assistance.

It may establish Houses of Reformation, and prisons, with
wise and humane discipline. But again he asserts the prin
ciple that the law "cannot authoritatively require charity,
or prescribe the manner or amount of almsgiving, without
encroaching on a moral principle, to the action, or even to
the very life of which, freedom is as essential a requisite
as is air to the continuance of human existence."

Does this seem only a wearisome repetition of what a

Unitarian minister was thinking and saying a hundred years
ago, and is it irrelevant, valueless, today? Perhaps so, but
has it not interest in the light of what Federal and State
governments have been doing to meet business depression

and the prodigious problems of unemployment and suffer
ing today, by the control and regulation of business, by
providing work, by doles and nation-wide care for individuals
and families in distress? And is it not interesting also in
view of the system of public welfare evolved in Massa
chusetts during the last seventy-five years?
Dr. Tuckerman's specific recommendation, to abolish at

once the entire pauper system, to repeal existing laws, to
leave all provision for the poor to private individuals or local
agencies, was never adopted, though made again and again
by later commissions, but two things were established, (1)
a sympathetic and yet scientific approach to the problem,
and (2) recognition of the dangerous tendency and the
certain failure of the then existing system, if not so modi
fied as to make it effective and safe. And that these two
results were attained is clearly shown by the recommenda
tions made and the methods gradually adopted by the State,
and finally by the modifications, compromises, if you please,
by which our present system of a "centralized policy and
decentralized administration," under the Department of

Public Welfare, was achieved.
Dr. Tuckerman, in his report to the American Unitarian
Association (1833), after laying down the principles above
stated, proceeded to divide the poor into five classes, present
ing different problems, and to suggest the solution for each.
The first division was that of "the idle, intemperate, and
improvident, who but for their idleness, intemperance, and
improvidence, might support themselves by their own la
bors." With this group Dr. Tuckerman deals firmly, but with
open-hearted understanding and sympathy, because he be
a

28
Joseph Tuckerman
lieved that social conditions, neglect, temptations, indiffer

ence, were largely responsible.
He believed that moral
agencies, a deepening sense of responsibility and obligation,
on the part of Society itself, and a drawing together of
rich and poor, as members of one household, would go far
to prevent or solve this problem. Public sentiment, humanity,
religion, would eventually be powerful to save. But, taking
the world as it was, his practical suggestion for this group
or class, was "work," the opportunity to work work, to
be supplied by sympathetic individuals or communities, in
the cities or the country, or in well-organized workhouses,
as suggested in his Report to the Legislature. This is due
not merely for the protection of Society, but in recognition
of a just claim which these people can make, brought to
their need by misfortune, or by social conditions largely
beyond their control. Notice that Dr. Tuckerman says "wellorganized workhouses." Elsewhere, however, he points out
that not one such existed at this time in England or
America. He found them "as bad as could well be devised."
The second class is that of the permanently poor, in

capable of service because of disease, and therefore a burden
and menace to society. For these he recommends the work
house to be "organized upon the principles of an enlarged
Christian philanthropy." Incidentally, he urges that habit
ual drunkards should be admitted to the workhouse for at
least twelve months, and compelled to earn their living.
He laments the utter failure of Boston's House of Industry
to render effectual service.
The third class includes all others who because of de
bility or old age must be permanently supported; and for
these he recommends Almshouses, which should be made
as comfortable, respectable and homelike as possible such
as he himself had seen in some of the country towns.
The fourth class, those temporarily or only occasionally

in need, he would leave to private charity. Curiously enough,
and revealing an old-fashioned point of view, he suggests
that in many towns there would not be more of these (to
be supported by "charitable alms") than "would be required
to keep our sympathies in a happy and healthful exercise."
Finally he comes to the children, "the fairest claimants"

he says, "for public sympathy and charity; the orphans,
the deserted, the neglected, and otherwise morally exposed
Joseph Tuckerman
29
children of the poor." None of these, he insists, should be

brought "into connexion with adults brought to poverty by
gross vices" : a commonplace principle of justice today, but
a practice all too common then. For all who need control and
moral discipline, and there were many such, he would have
an institution like the existing House of Reformation, (by
no means perfect, he knew), or the newly-opened Farm
School on Thompson's Island.

As we read this last report of Dr. Tuckerman to the

Fraternity of Churches, we feel the depth and sincerity
of his human sympathy, and recognize his profound under

standing of individual and social needs; we applaud his
farsighted vision, his sense of social justice, and we realize
how strong his purpose was, to minister not only to the
physical needs of men, but to their moral and spiritual wel
fare as well, nay, most of all, and to unite all classes of
society in a fraternal and responsible union, as children of
God and members one of another.
He feared "State Aid" and "Poor-laws" lest they increase
pauperism (which he sharply distinguished from poverty).
By bringing this ever-threatening danger forcibly to notice
he did much to prepare the way for our system which aims
at least, to safeguard both private and public charity by
localizing responsibility and instituting a state-wide super
vision. Many of his practical suggestions and plans have
become common practice, and yet we wonder what he would
think of our State laws today, providing for a minimum
wage, mothers aid, old age assistance, out-door aid, and the
various kinds of insurance proposed, old age, unemployment,
health, or injury. His abiding hope was based upon moral en
lightenment and character. He said over and over again, I
look for no great general good, in any department of society,
except from moral causes; and I look for the operation of
moral causes only to an enlightened and a free public
sentiment."
In conclusion, I should like to quote two or three highly
significant sentences from the closing chapter of Robert
Kelso's book on Public Relief in Massachusetts (already re
ferred to). After giving high praise to our Massachusetts
system as showing, perhaps, greater progress than any
other "in the humane and rehabilitating treatment of broken
citizenship," he adds the following sobering reflection: "Yet
that must be said of the Massachusetts system which may

30
Joseph Tuckerman
be said of all other systems in the nation, namely, that it is

essentially remedial rather than preventive. It is humane,
but is it scientific? It is vast in extent, but it tends to in
crease the numbers of the dependent whom it was designed
to relieve. Its process is remedial: it follows after the fact
of dependency. It does not aim in the main to forestall
dependency by preventive measures."
"In this tercentenary year," he continues, "of the New
England settlement, therefore, after three hundred years
of experience, a new and serious meaning may be read into
that eulogistic phrase in which the Commission of 1834
essayed to land our legislative beneficiaries : Public Charities
may be compared to a noble river, rolling on in majesty to
the sea, and bearing on its bosom the wealth of the State."
For, he continues, "Public Relief which seeks only to relieve
distress ends by creating the pauperism which it was de
signed to remove."
And again, after showing how present systems of

philanthropy place a premium upon the birth of the handi
capped and foster hereditary mental defects so that the
ratio of increase among the incompetents exceeds the ratio
among normals he ends with these words of wisdom : "The
history of public relief in Massachusetts is warning enough
that the system of the future must be scientific; not less
sympathetic, but more purposeful."
These words were written in 1922. Would the warning
any different, or less emphatic, in 1934? And was not
this the daily teaching of Tuckerman, a century ago, to
beware of the danger of extending and perpetuating pover
ty, of increasing pauperism, of breaking down individual
responsibility, of weakening independence and character, in
the effort to relieve suffering by State or Federal aid ?
be
There was a danger in the old, out of date "laissez
faire" policy, which relieved individuals and society itself
from responsibility and direct action, on the plea that if we

let things and situations alone, (family problems, social
evils) they will right themselves and the world be the
stronger and the better for it. We have learned that such
a policy is cruel, destructive, fatal.
But is there not another kind of "laissez faire" which
may be as dangerous? It does not throw the responsibility
back upon suffering individuals, nor leave social evils to
Joseph Tuckerman
31
cure themselves, but it does say "Let the State do it: let
the Federal government do it ; let the people trust more and
more to public servants and to the public treasury."
Here then are two kinds of "laissez faire" policies. In

some way, by experience, and a wisdom from above, both
these dangers, threatening our Twentieth Century character
and civilization, must be met and overcome.

Boston was not the only city that caught Dr. Tuckerman's spirit and followed his lead. Charlestown, Roxbury,
Cambridge, Salem, Portsmouth, Portland, Lowell, New
Bedford, Providence, Worcester, New York, Baltimore, Cin

cinnati, Louisville and St. Louis all took up similar work,
under such ministerial leaders as William Henry Channing,
Lemuel Capen, W. H. Farmer, Mordecai de Lange, Chris
topher P. Cranch, Horatio Wood, James H. Perkins, Corlis
B. Ward, Charles H. A. Dall, Carlton A. Staples, Thomas L.
Eliot and others. In all these cities good work was done,
though not continued, in most instances, for a long term
of years, as other societies or institutions gradually took
their place.
Even more notable was the extension of this work to
England, where to this day it is carried on by Unitarians
under the name of Domestic Missions. As early as 1830
attention was given to the subject by the British and
Foreign Unitarian Association, and in 1832 the first Mission
was opened in London. In 1833-34, Dr. Tuckerman visited
England and gave a great impetus to the movement. So
cieties to carry
on the work (Domestic Missions) were
formed at once in Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, and
before many years, in seven other cities. Today there are
many branches of this ministry at large still active, and
Dr. Tuckerman's picture may be seen in many a chapel or
Sunday School over there. Indeed, it has been sometimes
said that his name is more widely known and honored there
than in the United States. It was Dr. Tuckerman who first
interested Mary Carpenter in her great work for neglected
and wayward children, a work which led to England's
system of "Reformatory and Industrial Schools." His wel
come to England had been most cordial and his long visit
there was made delightful by the hospitality of many leading
citizens with whom he had been corresponding for several
years. He also spent some weeks in France where he was
welcomed by Degerando, the eminent philanthropist, who
32
Joseph Tuckerman

translated certain of his writings into French and introduced

his methods of charitable work into Paris, and elsewhere.
In conclusion, let us remember that Dr. Tuckerman's

health permitted him only eight years of active service in
the Ministry at Large in Boston. One is filled with wonder
that in so short a time he was able to accomplish so much.
He died on April 20, 1840. He was born in the family man
sion on Orange Street (now Washington), and during his
Boston ministry lived at No. 5 Mt. Vernon Place*. He came
of a distinguished family. Fortunately, he inherited a
moderate fortune, enough to make him independent of the
meagre salary he received. He was generous in its use. When
I came to the church in Bulfinch Place, (1894), there was
one teacher in the Howard Sunday School, Miss Elizabeth
S. Emmons, who remembered seeing Dr. Tuckerman and
described him going about in the winter with a blanket
shawl over his shoulders. When someone remonstrated
with him for taking such risks, he said "What would my
poor people do, if I did not visit them?"
It has been said of Dr. Tuckerman that "he remembered

the forgotten." He himself will never be forgotten, and
"his works do follow him." Said Dr. Follen, after having
heard him describe his work, "He is a great man." Said
Dr. Channing, "His heart was his great power." Prof. Fran
cis G. Peabody, referring to his reports said, "They are
fully modern, like the familiar talk of our associated char
ities experts today. The prophecy of 1826 has become the
wisdom of 1926. The times have caught up with this unique
statement of a Unitarian minister of 100 years ago."
Upon his memorial tablet in Bulfinch Place Chapel,
Boston, are inscribed these words:
A Wise Student of Social Problems
A Farseeing Prophet of Beneficent Reforms
A Pioneer in Scientific Philanthropy
An Efficient, Public-spirited Citizen

"His Best Monument is the Ministry-at-Large
His most Appropriate Title, the Friend of the Poor"
This Tablet is Erected to honor his Memory and
To inspire later Generations with his Ideals.
"'The Tuckerman Family,"
p. 111.
WILLIAM GREENLEAF ELIOT t

George Reeves Throop
Chancellor
of Washington
University,
St. Louis,
Mo.
An Address delivered on November 25, 1934, at the

Church of the Messiah, St. Louis, as a part of the cele
bration of the one-hundredth anniversary of the founding

of the Church.
The ordered scheme of William Greenleaf Eliot's life

presents a highly typical realization of the goal of personal
service. The viewpoint of his own friends and compeers has
been more than substantiated by the objective discrimina
tion of time, the leveler of all prejudices and the ultimate
judge of all effective values. A centenary celebration of the
Church of the Messiah must in great part be a recognition
t
William Greenleaf Eliot was born in New Bedford, Massachusetts,
on August 5, 1811, but the family moved to Washington, D. C. when

he was still a young child. His father, William Greenleaf Eliot, was
a grandson of Rev. Andrew Eliot, D.D., (1718-1778)
minister of the
New North Church, Boston, and a direct descendant of Andrew Eliot
who came to Beverly, Mass., about 1663, from East Coker, Somerset
shire, England. His mother, Margaret Dawes, was a daughter of
Judge Thomas Dawes of Boston, (1757-1825) and his grandmother,
Greenleaf, was the daughter of Hon. William Greenleaf,

Sheriff of Boston during the Revolution. He married
Abigail Adams Cranch, a daughter of Judge William Cranch of
Washington, D. C. on June 29, 1837.
Elizabeth
(1725-1803)
Dr. Eliot was graduated from Columbian College, Washington,

in 1830, and from the Harvard Divinity School, Cambridge, in 1834.
Ordained as an evangelist in the Federal Street Church, Boston, on
August 11, 1834, he arrived in St. Louis on November 27, 1834,
established the Church of the Messiah and continued as its minister
until 1873. He became Chancellor of Washington University in 1872.
He received the honorary degree of Doctor of Sacred Theology from
Harvard University in 1854. He died at Pass Christian, Miss., January
23, 1887. He was a devoted minister and pastor, as well as a publicspirited citizen.
Based primarily on and in some part quoted from the life of William Greenleaf
Eliot, by Charlotte C. Eliot, published by the Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass.
in 1904.
34
of his achievements, just as any commemorative services

in Washington University always draw inspiration from his

work.
One may hesitate to choose between the terms pioneer

movement and missionary spirit characterizing the inner
urge of this young man of twenty-three when he first
ventured to the Middle West in 1834. We may not ineptly
refer to the analogous but earlier spirits who pushed back
the frontier from New England and Virginia. But Dr.
Eliot's career is still somewhat exceptional: a graduate of
Columbian College in Washington, D. C, in 1830, and of the
Harvard Divinity School in 1834, his whole thought turned
not towards a life which included a sympathetic inter
course with fellow workers in the Unitarian denomination
but in the direction of a vague but inspiring path of duty
that led to St. Louis, then an outpost of civilization, away
from the world of books and of the associations to which
he was closely bound.
desire to begin his ministry
at some distant point, probably in the West, considerably
antedated his graduation from the Cambridge Divinity
School. This was augmented by the settling of his friend
Rev. James Freeman Clarke in Louisville, Kentucky, and by
with him. When Christopher
subsequent correspondence
Rhodes* came to Boston in June, 1834, for the purpose of
finding a young man to spend the winter in St. Louis as a
"missionary preacher", he learned that this recent Divinity
graduate had already formed the idea of going to St. Louis
on just such an errand. This disciple of Channing, the apostle
and interpreter of the Scriptures in the
of Unitarianism
light of reason, had chosen a ministry where many at first
welcomed his coming only under the impression that it was
an anti-Christian movement.
It is known that Dr. Eliot's
The history of his pastorate is long and vital. It lasted

actively from his earliest arrival here until 1870, when he
presented his letter of resignation, which did not become ef
fective, however, until 1873, though he afterwards preached
often and ably. It was marked by as commanding an in
fluence over his congregation and the community as few
ministers have ever attained. A body never robust and
n voune merchant and a leader of the liberal movement
in St. ILonis. Ills New England home was Newport, R. I. He became one of
University.
Washington
the incorporators of
Christopher Rhodes was


85

health always frail, requiring at times, particularly in later

life, periods of rest and travel, made it finally impossible
for him to carry on his ministry and to develop the educa
tional work in which he desired to see the consummation
of a great ideal, and for which no fitting alternate was at
hand. His regret at this severance was great, and his re
tirement from active religious work left him with the feeling
that something had gone out from his life. He wrote at
that time, though apparently never publicly said, that he
had departed from this work only for a season and under
providential necessity and hoped in some humbler way to
renew it; that in his opinion higher than all worldly honor
was the privilege of speaking in Christ's stead and of per
suading men to be reconciled to God.
Your present pastor (Rev. Walter S. Swisher), has

already spoken of some of the phases and experiences of
this ministry. I am primarily concerned with the results
of Dr. Eliot's standing and influence as a leader in social
and educational fields. It is of more than usual significance
that Wayman Crow,* when obtaining in 1853 the charter
of the institution which subsequently became Washington
University, should desire to have it incorporated as "Eliot
Seminary." This was indeed a distinctive honor to a com
paratively young man of forty-two years of age, and is
indicative of the preeminent place held by Dr. Eliot in the
intellectual life of the city at that time. His declination of
the honor is also indicative of the innate modesty of the
man and his sincere feeling that he was only a worker and
a servant for the good of all.
Dr. Eliot's interest in education was early expressed and
became effective soon after his arrival in St. Louis. In great
part through his agency and influence the Boys' Industrial
School was established in 1841, though primarily as a
feature of charity work. He was one of the four or five
founders in 1843 of the Academy of Science, which has
played so important a role over so long a period. He believed
that popular education should be part of the foundation of
the social structure upon which higher education was to rear
its pinnacles. His repeated phrase "a good education for the
many and the best education for the few" was allied to his
often expressed belief that those who value religion, moral
ity, literature, and education, must establish institutions
A member of the Church of the Messiah
and of the State Legislature.
86

by which public opinion may be educated and public taste

purified and the community saved from forgetting that
there is something real in the world besides money, and that
there are intellectual pleasures which money cannot buy.
In 1841, and again in 1848, Dr. Eliot became a member

of the School Board of the public schools, public in name
rather than free in fact, as now. In August of the latter
year he was appointed a committee to draft a memorial
requesting the legislature to authorize the citizens to vote
a tax in St. Louis not exceeding one tenth of one per cent
for the public schools. In October he was unanimously
elected president of the school board, and served in that
capacity until 1850, a troublesome office, he declared, the
treasury being empty and many things in confusion. With
his customary forthrightness he stated that the citizens
and especially the religious part of them were so inactive,
so blind to the best interest of the community, so busy on
the one hand with party politics and on the other with
sectarian theology, that they did nothing when most ought
to be done. In spite of this apparent apathy, and largely
through the efforts of Dr. Eliot, the enabling act for a
school tax was passed by the State Legislature and later
voted at a special election in St. Louis, in June, 1849. There
is no question that this represents the actual founding of
the present public school system of St. Louis, and that the
consequential part, first and last, was played by William
Greenleaf Eliot. He was particularly proud of the fact that
it was on this first Monday of June 1849, when such a large
part of the city had just been destroyed by "the great fire,"
that the citizens determined, by vote of two to one, to tax
themselves for the support of public schools. The establish
ment of evening schools was also a feature of his program
and in 1850 two evening schools were opened as a part of
the public school system. It is also interesting that the
first practical work done under the charter of Washington
University during the winter of 1854-5 was a temporary
evening school for boys. His work in this public field has
been well described as the ideal of a reflective and prophetic
mind, which recognized that such a system was essential
to the intellectual life and religious freedom of the city, and
that its influence would be an efficient barrier against mate
rial, Philistine worldliness on the one hand and un-American
ecclesiasticism on the other.
87
It
is undoubtedly true that this accomplishment in the

of public education placed Dr. Eliot in a unique posi
tion in this city. It must have influenced Wayman Crow,
a member of Dr. Eliot's church, in his choice of the name
"Eliot Seminary." In 1853 Dr. Eliot became President of
the Board of the State Institute for the Blind, a position
which he held for some time. In the same year he received,
at Mr. Crow's instance, a commission as curator of the State
University at Columbia, an office which he accepted with
some hesitation on account, as he said, of "a troublesome

field
state of affairs resulting from political and religious contro

versies." It is not a matter of record that the chartering
of a "Seminary" was ever discussed by Mr. Crow and Dr.
Eliot beforehand, though it must have represented their
joint aspirations. On the very day, February 22, 1853, on
which the Governor signed the bill, Dr. Eliot wrote that
an Eliot Seminary had been incorporated by the present
legislature, but that he knew nothing of it. He afterwards
stated that the first announcement took the incorporators,
all of them members of the Church of the Messiah, by
surprise, and in fact caused some amusement, as an edu
cational enterprise of that scope seemed quite beyond their
strength. But he adds that the charter seemed to them
later to be capable of the grandest use and its possession to
constitute a divine call.
If Dr. Eliot did not permit his name to be used in con
nection with the newly chartered institution, he did spend
the first year in revolving plans and methods of starting
the work. He also agreed to accept the Presidency of the
Board of Directors, with Mr. Crow as Vice President, and
these positions they retained during their respective life
times. It was probably due to Dr. Eliot's well known liberal
principles, in which Mr. Crow and the other members of the
Board must have heartily concurred, that in 1857 the
amendment to the charter was framed to exclude instruction
either sectarian in religion or partisan in politics and to
exclude any sectarian or partisan test in selection of per
sonnel for any purpose whatsoever. This emphatic declara
tion is the more remarkable when one considers that high
er education at that time was in the main sectarian in
origin, when not state founded. It is seldom that we find
so liberal a stand elsewhere at this early date. From the
fact that the first board was composed entirely of mem
bers of Dr. Eliot's church has arisen the belief, often still
88
heard and credited, that Washington University was Uni

tarian in its inception and still is, or was once allied in some
way to the Unitarian Church. These beliefs are, of course,
entirely fallacious, though the indebtedness of the Univer
sity for material support to the Church of the Messiah may
well be seen from an address by Dr. Eliot in Boston in 1864,
in which he stated that of the total amount, $478,000, thus
far contributed to Washington University, four-fifths had
come from his own congregation.

An account even moderately complete of Dr. Eliot's work

for and in Washington University would far exceed my time.
But we must note that his conception of the institution

was always dominant both at the beginning and at the
time when he resigned his pastorate and undertook more
actively its educational direction. It is also interesting to note
that at the very beginning there appears the idea of mak
ing provision for a thorough and complete education, with
This indicates
particular view to practical usefulness.
that the utilitarian idea was foremost in the minds of the
incorporators, and that it was only after much doubt and
deliberation and by a prodigious stride (on the part of the
incorporators) that Eliot Seminary finally became in 1857
"Washington University."
Dr. Eliot strongly deprecated what seemed to him the

absurd distinction by which only law, medicine, and theol
ogy could be dignified as professions. The organization of
the O' Fallon Polytechnic Institute, previously referred to
as an evening school, was certainly due to these views. It
was practical, scientific, and industrial in its scope. It did
not, however, represent a systematic course of instruction
and was later (1868) conveyed to the St. Louis Public
School Board, which assumed certain obligations for its
continuance. But the real and broad purpose of the incorpo
rators of the University Dr. Eliot declared to be the found
ing of an institution for the public benefit and the laying
of a broad and substantial foundation for educational, re
ligious, and philanthropic work upon which depended the
intellectual, moral, and religious growth of society.
Dr. Eliot always dwelt with peculiar pride on the pro
vision for the non-sectarian character of the institution.
He declared that it was the right basis for an American
university, if the superstructure is to be consecrated as it
should be to the sovereign love of truth. That, he said, was
39
the single aim of all scientific investigation, of all learned

research, of all philosophical inquiry, and of all ethical
analysis and instruction. He suggested as a possible motto

for the University, "Veritas pro veritate" truth for truth's

sake. His tendency to emphasize the scientific curriculum,
and to bring it into equal importance with the humanistic,
also evidenced his openness of mind and breadth of educa

tional concept. He himself thoroughly believed in the dis
ciplinary use of classical studies, and that the mind was
not ready in early youth to comprehend all scientific truths.
He was on the whole a rather thoroughgoing traditionalist
in education, while seeing that error was still mixed with
the many great truths and lessons of former times. He
might well be called in education, as he called himself in
religion, a conservative radical, for with his constructive
mind he believed passionately in a progress guided by the
best of the tradition of the past.
His interest in the creation of a department of American

history, considered of far less importance then than now,
is evidence of his desires and views towards promoting the
careful study of American history, not only among the
students of the University itself, but in the community at
large. It was his opinion that Americans were growing
up without an opportunity of studying and comprehending
the principles on which their political and social freedom
and national independence rest, and that if the history of
our growth and the elements of our several and special pros
perities as States in the Union were better understood,
the possibility of separation or conflict would be entirely
removed. John Fiske, eminent as historian and philosopher,
lectured on a non-resident basis in this department for many
years, and Dr. Eliot always hoped to see this work enlarged,
believing that in this way the University might well do
good service for the whole country in the advancement of
American patriotism and statemanship, and thereby help
to create a true nationality of sentiment and character.
Dr. Eliot was constituted ex-officio Chancellor of the
University in 1870, the year of Chancellor Chauvenet's death.
Because of the tetter's illness, he had already assumed many
of his duties, and had presented his resignation as pastor
to the Church of the Messiah; though at its request this
was deferred until a successor could be found. He was
formally inaugurated as Chancellor on February 29, 1872,

40
when Mr. Crow, in a most appreciative address delivered

to him the Charter of the University as a symbol of the
power conveyed and perhaps, we may add, of the grave
burdens involved. At this time Mr. Crow referred to Dr.
Eliot as the "founder," in grateful acknowledgment of his
energy, executive ability, and unselfish devotion to what
he called the sacred cause of education.* Dr. Eliot in his
reply emphasized his wish to build a university so widely
acknowledged in its influence that St. Louis and Missouri
should be honored throughout the world by its being estab
lished there. He strongly advocated again the best education
for the few, while pointing out the higher per capita cost
of such an ideal.
Dr. Eliot devoted himself during his administration to
the duties of his office with the same zeal and enthusiasm
that he had displayed in his other labors. His understanding
of the function of a University was unusually high and
clear, and on the whole many years in advance of his
time. He added himself to that eminent list of the clergy
who in the field of American education have so distinguished
themselves in university and college administration. The
ministerial mind has often seemed to grasp far better than
that of any other profession the purpose of higher educa
tion, perhaps because the liberal attitude evinced through
an enlightened creed most nearly approaches the academic
ideal of the search for philosophic and scientific truth.
Charles Dickens, in his "American Notes," refers appro
priately to the Church of the Messiah and Dr. Eliot. His
words voice the conception I have mentioned: "The Uni
tarian Church is represented, in this remote place, by a
gentleman of great worth and excellence. The poor have
good reason to remember and bless it; for it befriends
them, and aids the cause of rational education, without any
sectarian or selfish views. It is liberal in all its actions; of
kind construction; and of wide benevolence."
I am dwelling at greater length on Dr. Eliot's educa
tional work than upon his labors in his pastorate or in
more directly social and charitable and even political fields.
It seems to me clear from the perspective which I can obtain
of his life, that Dr. Eliot did not strongly differentiate
these various activities. To him they all fitted into the goal
of service to humanity, and it delighted him that the oppor
tunity for this service manifested itself in various aspects.
Dr. Eliot always spoke of "the founders" ; recognizing the truth that it is quite
to attribute entire credit to any one person.
Impossible
41
The phases of his life's work are too multifarious and even
too kaleidoscopic in character to be discussed in detail or
at length. To whatever point he turned, his active mind
and resolute spirit sensed the need, and into the fray he
cast himself body and soul.
There can be no more typical illustration of this feature

of his psychology than his part in the organization and

support of the Western Sanitary Commission, the Red Cross
of the West at the time of the Civil War, and the most im
portant factor in the saving of tens of thousands of lives
of both Union and Confederate soldiers.
The Western Sanitary Commission was organized at the
suggestion of Dr. Eliot and on the lines laid down in a
document which he drew up on September 3, 1861. Its
general object as stated by his far-seeing and practical
mind was to carry out, under the properly constituted mili
tary authorities and in compliance with their orders, such
sanitary regulations and reforms as the well-being of the
soldiers demanded. This inclusive power gave the Commis
sion authority to select and furnish buildings for hospitals,
provide nurses, inspect camps and attend to matters of
health and comfort of troops in and near St. Louis, until
Secretary Stanton later extended the range of its activities
to all the States West of the Allegheny Mountains. It is
characteristic of the efficiency of Dr. Eliot and his fellow
civilians that in six weeks after its organization four large
general hospitals were established, with over two thousand
beds, all occupied, and with all the essential comforts that
sick men might require.
Four gentlemen, designated by Dr. Eliot to act with him

self on the Board of the Commission, were appointed by
General Fremont, and they served together throughout the
war in perfect concord. Dr. Eliot, as usual, took upon himself
the immediate necessity of raising the necessary funds. He
issued a successful "Appeal to the Public" on September 16,
1861, and the response was early and full. Not only did the
Commission provide hospitals and care for the sick and
wounded, but in accordance with Dr. Eliot's suggestion it
made arrangements for proper burial and marking of the
graves of the soldiers who died in the hospitals. During
this work Dr. Eliot took upon himself various important
responsibilities; visiting Washington to confer with the
President and the Secretary of War in regard to the official

42
status of the Commission, carrying on publicity and propa

ganda on behalf of the work, personally procuring clothing
and furnishing stores to Confederate prisoners in this re
gion, taking the initiative in negotiations with Major General
Halleck, the Commander of the Department of the West,
issuing an appeal to fit up the first floating hospital on the
Mississippi, and undertaking through the Commission the
labor of carrying the task into execution.
Towards the close of the year 1862 he left for Boston,
the center of his many friendships and the source of much
of the money he raised from time to time, where he issued
an appeal in which he said that the armies of Missouri and
Arkansas, numbering 75,000 men, depended entirely upon
the Commission for sanitary supplies, in addition to the 35
boats of the gunboat fleet on the Mississippi River. As a
direct result of this visit over $50,000 came, then and later,
to supplement the resources of the Commission. In 1863 he
wrote that they had the whole army west of the Mississippi
to see to, and a large part of General Grant's, and the gun
boats, and the usual summer sickness. I can not follow this
phase farther. It provides full materials for a volume and
truly amazes us by its vastness and its complexity. If we
remember that Dr. Eliot was at that same time engaged
in the not light duties of his pastorate, endeavoring to keep
alive a struggling University, finding time for many other
charitable and philanthropic projects, we can only ejaculate,
"What prodigies of labor, what miracles of accomplish
ment!" We wonder if the occasion produces the man, or if
our forefathers were of sterner stuff.
The personal courage and complete devotion to duty
which Dr. Eliot always displayed was signally exemplified
in the year 1849, when St. Louis was visited, and sorely
tried, by the triple plagues of pestilence, fire, and flood.
Asiatic cholera appeared early in the year and made
desperate inroads on all classes of the population to the
extent that one tenth of the citizens perished of the disease.
During the entire continuance of the epidemic, Dr. Eliot
was under intense physical and nervous strain. In no way
did he spare himself and in his correspondence he relates
how he was continually exposed to the contagion through
increasing ministrations to the sick and services for the
dead, but by the mercy of God was preserved without harm,
though many of his friends and members of his church
48

were taken. The resulting obligations for the care of

orphans and dependents which he assumed, and which in
some cases extended over a period of years, were multi
tudinous and almost incredible.
This man seems to me to have been at heart a scholar,

though his record of achievement stands more by what
he planned and executed than in the writings he has left,
which are necessarily few in number and, in the main, com
pilations of sermons or lectures. He was as a young man
much interested in German philosophy and wrote that
instead of creating skepticism in his mind, it had made the
foundations of his religion tenfold stronger. He read Goethe
extensively and was enraptured with Wilhelm Meister, for
he thought to find in it the perfect development of spiritual
philosophy. In his student days he was devoted to meta
physical studies and never underestimated the value of
speculative thought, for which he regretted he had later
so little time. He was appealed to by the "conservative
radicalism" of James Martineau and like him deemed im
possible any serious conflict between science and religion.
Of him he said, and it is perhaps most typical of his own
creed: "He has the essence and strength of the most
steadfast faith, the freedom of the largest philosophy."
But the paths of his life were many and led him else
In the field of the conflict over slavery and emanci

pation he took a vital part. He was an active participant
in the controversies over the liquor traffic and other social
problems. He was an early advocate of woman suffrage.
He was the leader or aided in the organization of many
enduring charities. We cannot pause to follow them further.
A few exhibit the type of service he displayed in all. A divine
spark drove him to the service of humanity and of his God.
A mind more rational and practical than we might expect
carried through his plans and maintained by sheer courage
a physical strength seldom sufficient for the greatness of
his tasks. A vision, far in advance of his day,has been
proved by time, and has left to us the fruits of his work.
where.
RECORDS
OF THE ANNUAL
MEETNG,
1934
The Thirty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Unitarian

Historical Society was held in King's Chapel on Thursday,
May 24, 1934, at 10 o'clock, A. M., the Honorary VicePresident, Rev. Dr. Henry Wilder Foote, presiding.
The record of the Thirty-third

read and approved.
Annual
Meeting was
The Treasurer, Mr. Harrie H. Dadmun, reported a

balance of $70.56 in the Treasury, and the sum of $500.00
in the Life-Membership Fund. Mr. Henry R. Scott reported
as auditor, attesting the Treasurer's statements as correct;
and both reports were accepted.
patrons had visited the Library, and that research
work had kept pace with previous years, and that there
had. been received about 300 volumes, a large collection of
pictures, and more than 1000 pamphlets. Notable additions
were received from the library of the late Rev. Dr. Howard
N. Brown, through the generosity of his daughter; from
Dr. Augustus M. Lord of Providence, R. I. ; from the Church
in Meadville, Pa., and Mr. Edward S. Adams, of Fall River,
Mass.; from Miss Anna E. Lanning of Dorchester, Mass.;
from Miss Mildred L. Winship, of Cambridge, from the
Lend-a-Hand Society, and from Rev. George B. Spurr,
Hyannisport, Mass.
250
Due to requests, two duplicate loan collections of

pictures for exhibition purposes have been arranged, each
with eighty pictures of uniform size, suggestive of Liberal
Religion. These sets have been constantly in the field since
early last fall, and are much appreciated. This project has
provided a set of copyfilms of eminent Unitarian laymen,
which may be used at small cost for permanent local exhib
its. At the suggestion of the Society's President, Dr. Eliot,
44
group of photographs has been made in connection with a

study of Unitarian hymn writers. In addition, an exhibit
of photographs of eminent Unitarian laymen, noted Uni
tarian ministers and pictures of Unitarian churches in this
country is being arranged for the International Congress to
be held in Copenhagen.
a
The Vice-President, Dr. Foote, stressed the importance
of the Library service, and of the preservation of manu

script-records and papers, as well as the desirability at an

early date of a full time service. He instanced the recovery
of the early records of the Massachusetts Convention of
Congregational Ministers before 1780. This gift completes
the series in possession of the Library, and emphasizes the
importance of gathering records in a safe place.
The Vice-President spoke of the successful completion
of the Socinus Monument in Poland, describing various de
tails, and expressing deep appreciation of Dr. Earl M. Wil
bur's personal supervision and of the aid given in the work
by the Polish government, architects, and governing author
ities. He read one of several letters received by the Presi
dent, Dr. Eliot, from persons of note in Poland expressing
warm approval of the completed project. He hoped that
many persons might make it in their way to visit this im
portant shrine.
Mr. Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., realizing the great need of an

increased membership in the Society to give the financial
aid necessary to publish its proceedings and valuable histor
ical material, suggested a plan to increase the life-member
ships to at least one hundred, which would give the treasury
a fund of five thousand dollars, the income of which would
be most acceptable. The matter was referred to the Directors
for action.
Rev. Robert D. Richardson spoke of the historical
activities in the Middle West, the beginning of the Western
Unitarian Historical Society, and of two important historical
addresses at a recent meeting of the Western Conference.
The Vice-President called attention to an article in a
recent number of the Christian Register on the Beginnings
of Unitarian History by Rev. Charles Graves, and of the
interesting research by Rev. F. L. Weis, in compiling a list
of ministers from the beginning of settlements in this
country. He called attention to the new issue of our Pro
ceedings, Vol. HI. part II., copies of which were ready for
45
distribution by the Secretary, who also had for sale a few

of the Prize Essay, "A History of the Church at
Newburyport," by Miss Minnie Atkinson.
volumes
A motion was made from the floor that the Annual Meet
ing be held at a different hour, and it was voted to refer
the matter to the Directors with power.
Mr. John G. Greene spoke of the Centenary of the Uni-

versalist Historical Society, and moved the following reso

lution, which was unanimously passed: That the Secretary
of the Unitarian Historical Society be requested to send,
on behalf of the Society, greetings to the President of the
Universalist Historical Society, and congratulations on the
completion of its first hundred years, during which it has
done much to encourage historical research and to promote
the cause of liberal religion.
The Committee to Nominate officers for the ensuing year,
Messrs. Edwin J. Lewis, Jr., Charles T. Billings, and Henry
R. Scott, reported the following names of persons, who
were duly elected to their respective offices. Previous to the
ballot, Mr. Lewis announced the desire of Mr. Julius H.
Tuttle to retire from the duties as Secretary of the Society,
and offered a motion of appreciation for his valuable services
of twelve years in the office. This was unanimously voted,
and Mr. Tuttle responded with his hearty thanks.
OFFICERS FOR
1934-35
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot, LL.D., President.

Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice-President.
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, D.D., Honorary Vice-President.
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, D.D., Honorary Vice-President.
Rev. Frederick L. Weis, Th.D., Secretary.
Harrie H. Dadmun, Treasurer.
Mrs. George F. Patterson, Librarian.
and the following Directors for three years :
Julius H. Tuttle.
then presented the President, Dr.
Eliot, whose able and instructive address on the Rev. Dr.
Joseph Tuckerman was listened to with close attention. Be
The Vice-President
46
fore passing to his subject, Dr. Eliot read a letter from

Miss Amy F. Haskins on Dr. John Codman, of Dorchester,
which pictured the religious feeling during Dr. Codman's
ministry there.
JULIUS
H. TUTTLE,
Secretary.
Annual Membership
life
$2.00
50.00
Membership
List of Life Members

Mr. Albert H. Wiggin
Mrs. Edgar Scott

Miss E. Josephine Brazier

Miss Evelyn Sears
Mr. Henry D. Sharpe
Mrs. George M. Reed (deceased).
47
LIST OF

19011934


Switzerland."

to the Peace

Memoirs."

48
May
28, 1908


"Holmes
as a
Religious
Teacher."

May
25, 1911
Old
the


Society of Great Britain," Vol.
Ill,
Part
2,

October, 1924.

"History of
the
Harvard Church in Charlestoivn."

pp.
584-586
and
July
1, pp.
608-611,
also
1915.

"Possibilities
Order."

p. 1134 ; Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7 ; Dec. 12, pp. 1191-2
49

May 25,
1922
Rev. W. G. Eliot, Jr., Portland, Oregon.

Coast."

May 24,
1923
Professor Waldo S. Pratt, Hartford, Conn.





"Early History
Miss Harriet
"Early History

of the First Church in Salem, Mass.''
E. Johnson, Boston.

60

May 21,
1931
Rev. Rognvaldur Petursson, Winnepeg, Mani

toba.


former."
See "Proceedings


Society," Vol. H., Part n.

Rev. Earl M. Wilbur
joo Years Ago."

1933 Rev. Frederick R. Griffin of Philadelphia.
"Socinian
May 25,
Propaganda
in Germany
"Joseph Priestley."
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote of Belmont, Mass.

"Theodore Clapp."
See "Proceedings
Society," Vol.
May
24, 1934
Ill,

Part II.
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot of Cambridge.

"Joseph Tuckerman."
George Reeves Throop, of St. Louis, Mo.

"William Greenleaf Eliot."
Society," Vol. IV, Part I.
51



JUN 17
<j
193c
U U
L
LIBRARY-
The Proceedings
of the

Ûnitarian
Historical Society
VOLUME IV
PART
II
EBENEZER GAY
Frederick
Lewis Weis
THE GRAVE AND MONUMENT OF

FAUSTUS SOCINUS
Earl Morse Wilbur
1936
25 Beacon Street


The Proceedings
of the
VOLUME
1936
IV
PART II

UNITARIAN
Copyright,
25
Beacon
HISTORICAL
St.,
All rights
1936
Boston, Mass.
reserved.
SOCIETY

LIST OF OFFICERS
1935-36
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY

21 Francis Avenue
Cambridge, Mass.
Rev. Frederick L. Weis,

Th. D.
Lancaster, Mass.
VICE-PRESIDENT
TREASURER


53

Belmont, Mass.


Berkeley, Calif.
State St., Boston

LIBRARIAN

25 Beacon Street
Boston, Mass.
DIRECTORS
Edwin J. Lewis, of Boston

Prof. Francis A. Christie, D.D., of Lowell
Julius H. Tuttle, of Dedham
1935-38
1935-38
1934-37
1934-37
1933-36
1933-36

Treasurer, or $50.00 for life membership.

CONTENTS
1936
List of
IV
Officers
Ebenezer Gay, D. D., and his Influence as

a
pioneer in Liberal Religion
Frederick Lewis Weis

The Grave and Monument of Faustus Socinus 25
Earl Morse Wilbur

43
48
Communications


THE REVEREND EBENEZER GAY, D.D.

of Hingham, Massachusetts, and his Influence
as a
Pioneer in
Liberal Religion
By Frederick
Lewis Weis
Town of Hingham began its corporate existence

THE
just three centuries ago, but the town had been settled

as early as 1633, having at that time borne the name of

Bare Cove. In 1635, homes for thirty newly arrived colonists
and a meeting house were erected, and on September 18th
1635, the Reverend Peter Hobart, Master of Arts of Mag
dalene College, Cambridge, was ordained as the first minister
of the church at Hingham. This was the twelfth church to
be organized in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and the
sixteenth in what is now the Commonwealth

setts.1 Here for forty-three years, among
and neighbors of Old Hingham, he labored
England parish until his death, January 20th
of Massachu
his relations
in this New
1678/9.2
He was a scholarly man, passing on to his children this

same love of learning. Five of his sons were graduated at
Harvard College. Of these Joshua was minister at Southold,
Long Island, Gershom at Groton, Nehemiah at Newton and
Jeremiah at Topsfield, while Japhet became a surgeon and
was probably lost at sea.3
Under Mr. Hobart the church and town prospered,
though nothing of vital importance seems to have occurred
until the declining strength of the venerable Mr. Hobart
necessitated the settling of a colleague, in 1678, in the per
son of Mr. John Norton (Harvard College, 1671). The long
ministry of Mr. Norton appears also to have been quiet and
peaceable until his death, October 3rd 1716, at the age of
1
Francis H. Linlcoln : Ecclesiastical History, in "History of Hingham, Massachu

setts," Vol. I, Part II, p. 1, and Weds: "The Colonial Churches of Massachusetts,"
No. 16, p. 7.
Venn : "Alumni Cantabrigiensis."
Sprague, "Annals of the American Pulpit,"
I, pp. 68-70. Weis: "The Society of the Descendants of the Colonial Clergy; Vol.
The
First Record Book," p. 61.
Sibley's "Harvard Graduates," Vol. I, pp. 214-219, 211-213, 167 : Vol. II, pp. 229234, 235-238, etc.
Ebenezer Gay
sixty-five years. Little is known of him, but he has been

described as "a man of amiable character, fervent piety, and
religious zeal ; a faithful and beloved minister.1
In
during the ministry of Mr. Norton, the first

meeting house having become too small for the growing
congregation, it was decided to build a new church. This
venerable house, opened for public worship on January 2nd
1681/2, is the present meeting house of the First Parish in
Hingham, popularly known as the "Old Ship", because of
the shape of the rafters in its roof. It is the oldest church
edifice in America which has been in continuous use since
its dedication, having, in January 1935, entered upon its
254th year of usefulness.2
It
1681,
in the present meeting house of Hing

ham that Ebenezer Gay entered upon his duties as the third
minister of the First Parish in 1717, a pastorate destined
was, therefore
to cover the remarkable span of sixty-eight years and nine

months. He outlived two generations of his parishioners;
and not a single individual who was an active member at
the time of his ordination survived him. When Mr. Solomon
Lincoln wrote his Memoir of Dr. Gay, three-quarters of a
century had elapsed since the old gentleman's death, yet his
memory was then fresh in the traditions of the generations

who had known him so long and so well. Mr. Lincoln knew
many persons who recollected him in his old age. Thus we
are not without first hand contacts with the venerable
minister, thanks to his biographer.3
Mr. Gay was the youngest son of Nathaniel and Lydia
(Lusher) Gay, and was born in Dedham, August 15th, 1696.
He was prepared at the town school at Dedham and gradu
ated at Harvard College in 1714, where, according to the
Reverend Joseph Thaxter, "he made distinguished profi
ciency in the knowledge of the Classicks, and various other
1
2
3
History," 21-24. Weis: "Colo

Sibley, opus cit. II, 394-396. Lincoln: "Ecclesiastical
nial Clergy," p. 67. Mr. Norton was the ancestor of President John Quincy Adams,
Eliot,
D.D., and many other distinguished New Engthe Rev. William Greenleaf
landers.
History," 22-23.
"Ecclesiastical
Solomon Lincoln, "Memoir of Rev. Dr. Gay."
Lincoln:
Ebenezer Gay
He received his second degree in 1717. His

inclination early led him to the study of theology, which he
did in connection with teaching. Four of his classmates at
Harvard were from Hingham, namely, Samuel Thaxter,
Nehemiah Hobart, Adam Cushing and Job Cushing. He re
ceived a unanimous call to fill the pulpit left vacant by the
death of the Reverend Mr. Norton; and on June 11th, 1718,
he was ordained and installed. The ordination sermon was
preached by his boyhood minister, the Reverend Joseph
Belcher of Dedham.2

sciences.1
Mr. Gay brought with him to the ministry a high repu

tation for scholarship. Dr. John Eliot remarked that when
Mr. Gay was a young man he had obtained the notice of
Governor Burnet, who was a good judge of character, and
particularly fond of men of letters.3 The Governor is
said to have remarked that among the clergy of Massa
chusetts, Mr. Simon Bradstreet of Charlestown and Mr. Gay
of Hingham, were the most erudite. In the course of his long
life, Dr. Gay received many testimonials of the high regard
in which he was held, being frequently called upon to preach
at ordinations and funerals. Among his more notable works
were the Artillery Election Sermon preached in 1728, the
General Election Sermon preached in 1745, and the Sermon
before the Convention of Congregational Ministers of Massa
chusetts in 1746. He was chosen to give the Dudleian Lecture
at Harvard College hx 1750, and, in 1785, he received the
degree of Doctor of Divinity from his Alma Mater.4
On November 3rd, 1719, Mr. Gay was married to Jerusha
Bradford, daughter of Samuel Bradford of Duxbury, and
great-granddaughter of Governor William Bradford. She
was the mother of eleven children, five sons and six daugh
ters. Dr. Gay lived to be ninety-one, and retained his
1
2
3
4
Weis: "Cotonial Clergy of New England," p. 103. F. H. Lincoln: "Ecclesiastical

History," VoJ. I, Part II, pp. 24-31. Sprague: "Annals of the American Pulpit,"
VIII, pp. 1-7 Eliot. "Heralds of a Liberal Faith." I. pp. 1-19, Thaxter. Obituary
Notice in the "Massachusetts Gazette,"' 1787. Shute: Funeral Sermon of Dr. Gay,
etc.
Gay:
"An Old Man's Calendar." Memoirs in the Appendix, p.

John Eliot: "Biographical Dictionary of New England.
S(v
S. A. Eliot: "Heralds of a Liberal Faith," I, pp. 1-2.
29.
17
5 3
Ebenezer Gay
faculties in remarkable vigor till the close of his life. On

Sunday morning', March 8th, 1787, when preparing for his
regular service, he was attacked with sudden illness, and
died almost instantly. Dr. Shute of the South Parish
preached his funeral sermon. In it he speaks in strong terms
of the learning, liberality, candor and strength of mind of
his deceased friend.1

Hazlitt, the son of the Unitarian minister of that name,

painted Dr. Gay's portrait. "He was about middle size,"
wrote Mr. Lincoln, "of dignified and patriarchal appearance,
and, if we can judge of his features as delineated by the
pencil of Hazlitt, they were not particularly handsome. He
had, however, in the recollection of those who knew him, a
grave, yet benignant expression of countenance. Those who
loved him held him in such affection and reverence that
they would not admit that Hazlitt's portrait was not a beau
tiful picture."2
Dr. Cornish, in his excellent paper on the life of Madame
Derby, states that before the Revolutionary War, Hingham
was a quiet little fishing port. There were then no big houses
in Hingham, in the sense the term is now used. Until modern
times there were no mansions. There were fine, small homes,
as one might expect in the largest mackerel fishing town
along the coast. The people, for the most part, divided their
time between farming and fishing, and they practiced the
democracy of the sea.3
In another
respect Hingham, indeed every town in the

Colonies, was different then. Everyone went to church. They
were fined if they did not go. Thus from first to last, during his long pastorate, Dr. Gay had the pleasure and the
inspiration of a full meeting house every Sunday.
The interior of the meeting house was much as it now

stands, and for thirty-two years Dr. Gay preached from the
1
2
3
S. A. Eliot. "Heralds of a Liberal Faith," I, p. 2.

Solomon Lincoln: "Memoir of the Rev. Dr. Gay."
Louis C. Cornish : An address on "Madame Derby," delivered in the Old Meeting
House at Hingham, Massachusetts, on Sunday afternoon, October 2, 1934, upon
the celebration of the 150th anntiversary of her signing the indenture.

Ebenezer Gay
present pulpit. For it was in 1755, that this pulpit was in

stalled. On that occasion Dr. Gay preached on a text selected
from the book of Ezra: "And Ezra, the Scribe, stood in a
pulpit made of wood." The same year, 1755, two rows of
square pews were built around the walls, the centre space
being kept for the benches. The ancient pewter baptismal ba
sin, probably first used in Hingham in Old England, then
three centuries ago in the first log church in our Hingham,
was without question used by Parson Gay throughout his
ministry. For communion, also, he must have used the four
tankards brought out by our forefathers from Old Hingham.
It was during his ministry, too, that the oldest of the silver
communion plate was purchased, soon after 1740, from a
bequest of thirty pounds for that purpose. These things
form perhaps the most immediate tangible link between Dr.
Gay and the present day.
Dr. Gay has often been called the father of American

Unitarianism. President John Adams, in a letter to Dr.
Jedediah Morse of Charlestown, dated May 15th, 1815,
wrote, "Sixty years ago my own minister, Rev. Lemuel
Briant, Dr. Jonathan Mayhew, of the West Church in
Boston, Rev. Mr. Shute, of Hingham, Rev. John Brown of
Gohasset, and, perhaps equal to all, if not above all, Rev.
Dr. Gay, of Hingham, were Unitarians." One could ask for
no more reliable source of information, and no more definite
statement than this. Like most of his contemporaries, Dr.
Gay was not given to accurately defining his doctrinal po
sition. But Mr. Lincoln, his biographer, recorded that "his
discourses will be searched in vain for any discussions of
controversial theology, in advocacay of the peculiar doctrines
known as orthodox, or the expression of any opinions at
variance with those of his distinguished successor in the
same pulpit, Rev. Dr. Ware." The liberalizing influence of
Dr. Gay was exercised chiefly through personal intercourse ;
Ebenezer Gay
in his own parish, over the pupils who resorted to him, and
with his ministerial associates.1

Early in his ministry, Mr. Gay proved himself liberal in

his treatment of a brother minister who had had the mis
fortune of being questioned as to his orthodoxy, and had
been condemned by some of the outstanding clergymen of
the province. This was Rev. Samuel Osborn of Eastham, an
Irishman, and a graduate of the University of Dublin, who
found himself suspended from the ministry by a council of
ten ministers and churches on the ground of views which
show that his study of the Bible had impaired his Calvinism.
After various vicissitudes he was represented by Benjamin
Colman, Thomas Prince, William Cooper and Joshua Gee as
refusing to subscribe to the Confession of Faith, denying
original sin, the doctrines of the Trinity, and justification
by faith alone. Osborn denied these accusations save the first.
Eleven clergymen, however, rendered an opinion, which they
signed at Salem, June 9th, 1740, that Osborn had been
harshly treated, and that, as to his four articles, "we can't
find that said Articles necessarily couch or include in them
any dangerous Errors. But taking them as a Christian,
candid, and charitable Construction, to us it appears that
they well accord with the Truths laid down in the Gospel,
and the Doctrines generally received by these churches."
This was signed by Ebenezer Gay, and ten other clergy
men.2
Thus, as early as 1740, Gay was upholding a persecuted

minister, accused of being unorthodox on the four matters
of doctrine which he himself later advocated, namely, the
refusal to subscribe to the Confession of Faith, the denial
of original sin, the denial of the doctrine of the Trinity, and
the denial that justification by faith without works was
sufficient.
1
2
Eliot: "Heralds of a Liberal Faith," I, pp. 2-3; .Sprague, etc. Cooke: "Unitarianism in America," p. 58 ; S. Lincoln, "Memoir."
Francis A. Christie : "The Beginnings of Arminfianism in New England, in Papers
of the American Society of Church History," Second Series, Vol. Ill, pp. 162-163.
Authorities for these statements are quoted there.

Ebenezer Gay
Dr. Gay's name is also signed to a paper entitled, "The

Sentiment and Resolutions of an Association of Ministers
convened at Weymouth, January 15, 1743," in which they
bear testimony against Whitefield's "enthusiastic spirit,"
against his preaching "as having a tendency to promote a
spirit of bitterness," and against "his practice of singing
hymns in the public roads when riding from town to town."
They further declare that they will not encourage him to
preach, either publicly or privately, in their respective pa
rishes. This association of ministers, in which Dr. Gay was
apparently the leading spirit, included a number of neigh
boring clergymen, all of whom were recognized as "liberal,"
and who were the forerunners of the Unitarian movement,
Besides the ministers named by John Adams, this group
contained Dr. Barnes of Scituate, Dr. Hitchcock of Pem
broke, and later Dr. Gay's parishioner and pupil, Joseph
Thaxter. These neighbors and friends enjoyed entire har
mony in their religious opinions, and formed what seems to
have been the first ministerial association in New England
to hold the convictions which later became known as Uni
tarian. They were, however, much adverse to controversy.
They did not conceal their opinions when challenged, but
they declined arguement.1
Besides his intimacy with his neighbors, Dr. Gay was a
firm friend of Jonathan Mayhew. The bond of friendship
between them was especially warm and intimate. Dr. Gay
appreciated the fine qualities of his pupil's mind and spirit,
and we may rightly infer that the liberal views of the elder
clergyman were warmly espoused at this time by the bril
liant young student, who was soon as an orator, contro
versial writer and Unitarian preacher, to outdistance even
his distinguished teacher. The Hon. Alden Bradford, bio
grapher of the younger Mayhew, stated that the latter was

indebted to Dr. Gay for the adoption or confirmation of the
"liberal and rational views" which he embraced.2
1
2
Solomon Lincoln:
Alden Bradford:
"Memoir." Eliot: Heralds of a Liberal Faith." I,

of Dr. Mayhew," pp. 14, 18, etc.
"Life
p. 8. Sprague.
Ebenezer Gay
It was the custom in that day for the student of divinity,

soon after graduation from college, to live in the family of
some prominent divine. Thus, Jonathan Mayhew, who was

graduated from Harvard in 1744, took his theological studies

under the direction of Mr. Gay. At this period, as appears
from an imperfect journal, Mayhew studied Milton, Locke,
Taylor, Wollaston, Whiston and especially Dr. Samuel
Clarke. The latter was opposed to creeds, especially the
Athenasian; and, in other respects, was an advocate of free
inquiry, and a strenuous defender of the doctrine of moral
liberty. "His first position or principle was the unity of God ;
which he considered the only guard against idolatry, as well
as the basis of all morality and all religious obedience."1
Dr. Gay heads
list of fifty prominent clergymen, as
given by Bradford, who openly opposed or did not teach or

advocate the doctrines of Calvinism and whose orthodoxy
was denied or suspected.2
On the occasion of Mr. Mayhew's ordination over the
West Church in Boston, in June 1747, the Boston clergy,
because of his known un-orthodox views, refused to take
part. But Dr. Gay did not hesitate because of any such con
siderations. He preached the ordination sermon, and declared
in the course of his remarks: "I have been pleased, in fre
quent conversations with you, to observe your thirst after
knowledge, and a desire to find truth; to prove all things,
and to hold fast that which is good." Twenty years later,
Dr. Gay was called upon again to preach in the West Church,
this time to deliver two funeral sermons after the death of
Dr. Mayhew.
Thus, whatever may have been the theological views
entertained by Dr. Gay in the early part of his ministry, it
is well understood that he sympathized with the spirit of
free inquiry, which gradually wrought such a change in the
opinions of many eminent divines, sometime previous to the
1
2
"Bradford: "Life of Dr. Mayhew," pp. 22-23.

Ibid., p. 24, Cooke: "Unitarianism in America," pp.
47-48.

Ebenezer Gay
year 1750. Yet he was always careful not to stir up discord

among his fellow men. In his Convention Sermon of 1746,
for example, he attributes dissensions among the clergy to
"ministers so often choosing to insist upon the offensive
peculiarities of the party they had espoused, rather than up
on the more weighty things in which we are all agreed." But
he was opposed to creeds or written Articles of Faith. He
thus expressed himself, in 1751, in his sermon at the ordina
tion of the Rev. Jonathan Dorby of Scituate : "And 't is pity
any man, at his entrance into the ministry, should, in his or
dination vows, get a snare to his soul by subscribing, or
any ways engaging to preach according to another rule of
faith, creed, or confession, which is merely of human pre
scription or imposition."1
in his historical sketch of

Harvard College, written in 1787, states that "When an
undergraduate in the university, 1783, he recollected seeing
three venerable and learned men," Dr. Gay, Dr. Charles
Chauncy, of the First Church in Boston, and Dr. Nathaniel
Appleton, of the First Church in Cambridge, "pass through
the college yard to the Library." "Dr. Gay and Dr. Chauncy
were on a visit to Dr. Appleton, and they walked up to the
The Hon. Alden Bradford,
chapel together, two being nearly ninety years old, and the
other, Dr. Chauncy, about eighty-three. It excited great

attention at the time." Great intimacy existed between
these three patriarchs of the Massachusetts churches during
their long and useful lives. Chauncy and Gay died in the
same year, Appleton three years earlier. At the ordination
of Simeon Howard as minister of the West Church in Boston,
as successor to Dr. Mayhew, Dr. Chauncy preached the
sermon, Dr. Gay gave the charge, and Dr. Appleton wel
comed the candidate into the fellowship of the churches.
They were often associated in similar services.2
1
2
Broadford: Hist. Sketch of Harvard College, in Am. Quat. Reg., May,

Lincoln, in Hist. Hingham, I, Pt. II, pp. 25 ; Eliot.
As above, note 1. Also Eliot: "Heralds of a Liberal Faith,' I, p. 4.
1837 ; S.
10
Ebenezer Gay
Dr. Chauncy regarded Gay as one of the most valuable

men of his time; and, indeed, he has been represented to
us by those who knew him well, as among the most popular
preachers of the eighteenth century.
In the Revolutionary period Dr. Gay adhered to Tory

sentiments, and continued for years to pray for the King
and the royal family, yet such was his discretion that he
maintained his position at the head of a large and intelligent
parish composed of supporters of the Declaration of Inde
pendence, without alienating the affection of his people or

impairing his usefulness. And notwithstanding his political

opinions, he continued to find among the ministers who held
opposite views his most ardent friends.
Many amusing and characteristic anecdotes are told of
Dr. Gay. The following will illustrate his ready wit and
humor.
Mr. Eben Howard Gay tells this story of his ancestor.

One day Dr. Gay and a friend were riding horseback along
the road to Boston. Near the edge of the town they passed
a gallows with the noose of the halter swaying back and
forth in the wind, as a reminder of the summary treatment
to be expected by horse-thieves. The friend, always ready
for a joke at the expense of some one else, said, "Dr Gay,
where would you be now if that gallows had its due?"Dr.
Gay replied with the utmost good humor, "I'd be riding

alone to Boston."
Although Dr. Gay habitually put spiritual things first,
there were times when he was not unmindful of his temporal
welfare. One such occasion is revealed by a note owned by
the First Parish in Hingham. It was written to the Parish
Committee by Dr. Gay, and gives evidence that much of
his pay was received in kind. In this instance he wrote. "I
call your attention to the salt marsh hay delivered to me.
It is poor in quality and short in quantity, and I don't
expect to have to speak of this a second time."
Ebenezer Gay
11
When the good doctor was over ninety years of age, a

parish meeting was called to discuss the need of procuring
a colleague for him. On this occasion he arose and said,
"Gentlemen, I see no reason for this discussion. I dismiss
the meeting."
At the ripe
age of ninety-one years he died. His funeral

sermon was preached by Dr. Shute, minister of the South
Church. The text was taken from Numbers xxiii. 10: "Let
me die the death of the Righteous and let my last end be
like his." Most of the sermon is taken up with the descrip
tion of the life of a righteous man. Towards the end, how
ever, there are personal allusions to Dr. Gay.
DESK, in which he has stood

labouring in word and doctrine, for almost seventy years,
shall know him no more . . . For learning, for ability, can
dour, and strength of mind, he was distinguished and cele
brated, by the judicious and candid
True greatness
needs no laboured panegyrick! . . . But yet, as he was

".
This SACRED
....
mighty in the scriptures, and lived the gospel which he

preached to others, you have a higher motive to recollect,
and with the more safety may depend upon his instructions ;
which, if they are admitted to have their practical influence,
will, no doubt, make you wise unto salvation."
On March 30th, 1787, an obituary notice of
Dr. Gay was
printed in the Massachusetts Gazette. It is attributed to

the Reverend Joseph Thaxter, the minister for many years
at Edgartown, a native of Hingham, pupil and disciple of
Dr. Gay, and one, who having in his youth sat under the
ministry of Dr. Gay, was highly qualified to speak authori
tatively of the character and worth of his ministry. From
this source the following material is taken:
"The duties of his office engrossed his whole attention;
and, making the Bible the rule of his faith, he became
mighty in the Scriptures: In consequence of which, he was
led to a juster view of the plan of Divine Grace in the
Gospel, and to sentiments more liberal and candid, than were
Ebenezer Gay
12
common in that day.
His compositions were judicious, evi
dently the result of

calculated to impress
of moral obligation.
others were enforced
intense thought and application and

upon the minds of his hearers a sense
The doctrines which he preached to
by his own example.
"In Ecclesiastical Councils, (to which

he was formerly
often invited) his wisdom and benevolence were conspicuous,
and gave him great advantage in composing difficulties, and
healing divisions, subsisting in churches.
"Though his conversation abroad might often seem too

reserved, yet in private, among his friends, it was free,
instructive and edifying ; the salutary effects of which have
been sensibly felt by his brethren in the ministry; and his
kind, parental treatment will ever be acknowledged by them.
His prayers were rational and devout, and well adapted to
the various occasions of life. Enthusiasm and superstition
formed no part of his religious character.
"It
was his greatest dread, he often said to his friends,

to live beyond his usefulness : and it is remarkable, that, by
the continuance of his bodily and mental abilities, he was
able to persevere in the ways of well-doing, to maintain
the post assigned him, and go through all the duties of
his office, to the very close of life. . . .
"Thus lived and died that great and good man, the Rev
erend Doctor Gay, who now rests from his labours, and his
works, we trust, follow him, in the ample rewards of grace
and glory."
DR. GAY'S PUBLICATIONS

We must, of necessity, base our evaluation of the intel
lectual gifts of Dr. Gay upon those sermons of his which
have been printed. His twenty publications were all sermons,
as was apt to be the case in regard to the works of a clergy
man in that day. Fortunately, too, they appeared at frequent
intervals, each decade of his preaching being marked by at
Ebenezer Gay
13

least one. But while occasional sermons may indicate the

intellectual progress of a preacher, they are apt to be un
satisfactory as regards the details of his doctrinal position.
As it is impossible to derive a satisfactory systematic the
ology from the letters we chance to possess written by Saint

Paul, so, too, we can gather little that is specific of a doc
trinal nature from Dr. Gay's writings. But of this we can
be certain: they all indicate the liberal spirit of the writer.
Again they are mostly of a practical kind, and evince a
sound understanding of human nature. They are far removed
in their tenor from the dogmatism and severity of the time.
Seven of them are ordination sermons ; three were delivered
as lectures; four were political or military in substance; one
was given before the Convention of Congregational Minis
ters of this state; one was a Thanksgiving sermon, and the
last, written at the age of eighty-five years, was appropri
ately on old age.
We may, with advantage, glance at some of them. All
are now rare. Few copies, if any, remain in private hands.
Together, however, the American Antiquarian Society in
Worcester, the Widener Library and the Harvard Divinity
School Library possess them all.
The earliest of these sermons was delivered at the ordi
nation of the Rev. Joseph Green, at Barnstable in 1725. This
has been "admired for its wise counsel, reasonable admo
nitions and moving exhortations."
At the ordination of his namesake, the Reverend Ebe

nezer Gay, at Suffield, Connecticut, January 13th, 1741/2,
his subject was. "Ministers Insufficiency for their Important
and Difficult Work." The sermon is eminently practical,
displaying concretely to the congregation how a minister's
life and preaching appeal strongly to some, while at the
same time it has little effect upon others, thus, as he re
marks, justly rendering "those who are employ'd in it,
awfully sensible of their insufficiency for it."

14
Ebenezer Gay
For Jonathan Mayhew he was called upon to preach, not

only an ordination sermon, but two funeral sermons as well,
each of which was printed. Dr. Mayhew, as we have indi
cated elsewhere, was of the same liberal temper as Dr. Gay
himself. Realizing how dangerous, as well as how wholesome,
it is for a preacher to speak the whole truth, Dr. Gay spoke
on "The Alienation of Affections from Ministers." Beginning
by declaring how favorable at first is the reception of a
minister, he intimates how easy it is, in time, for a congre
gation that is narrow-minded, to drift away from him. Then
he clinches his argument for the necessity of loyalty on
the part of the congregation, by using as the closing words,
his text: "Am I therefore become your enemy because I
tell the truth?"
No matter how fantastic the text, Dr. Gay had a happy
faculty of drawing out from it very sound conclusions. A
case in point is his sermon called "The Mystery of the
Seven Stars in Christ's Right Hand" which he preached
at the ordination of Jonathan Dorby over the Second Church
in Scituate (now Norwell). Yet his texts were not always
fantastic, as is evidenced by the sermon he preached at the
installation of the Reverend Ezra Carpenter, at Keene, New
Hampshire, 1753. On this occasion he chose for his subject:
"Jesus Christ, the Wise Master Builder of his Church" and
the text employed was from Zechariah, "I lifted up mine
eyes again, and looked, and, beheld a man with a measuring
line in his hand." In similar vein, is the one Dr. Gay preached
at Yarmouth when the Rev. Grindall Rawson was installed
there in 1755. He took as his text, "Take heed to thyself,
that thou forsake not the Levite, as long as thou livest
upon the Earth." Another striking sermon was preached
when Caleb Gannett was ordained at Hingham in 1768. His
discourse, to which he gave the title, "A Call from Mace
donia," is singularly appropriate. It describes Paul's work
as a missionary, and then proceeds to outline the future
work of Mr. Gannett, as the minister "of a Society of Pro
testant Christians in the Town of Cumberland, and Province
of Nova-Scotia."

Ebenezer Gay
15
Three discourses which Dr. Gay preached at funerals

were printed. The custom of preaching at funerals has now,
fortunately, gone out of style. At that time the services were
usually simple and intimate, and often limited to the imme
diate family and neighbors. But when a person of unusual
prominence died it was the custom of the times to preach a
funeral sermon. This was sometimes done on a Sunday
following the death, but often at the funeral itself. Thus,
in 1744, Mr. Gay preached at the funeral of the Rev. John
Hancock of Quincy. Because of Hancock's comparative
youth, Mr. Gay entitled his discourse, "The untimely Death
of a Man of God lamented." For his text he selected I Kings
xiii. 30: "And they mourned over him, saying, Alas my
Brother." Three-quarters of such a sermon was concerned
with death and immortality in general, while towards the
end a few paragraphs or sentences were added which were
devoted to the subject of the sermon, but one is usually dis
appointed in these remarks because of their scantiness and
too general application. It will be sufficient to describe this
process of development in only one of Dr. Gay's funeral
discourses, which he preached in Boston, in 1766, soon after
the death of Dr. Jonathan Mayhew. This discourse is called,
"A beloved Disciple of Jesus Christ characterized."
In this case, Dr. Gay first sketched a picture of the
be
Intellectual capacity, a good natural dis

position and spiritual graces are the characteristics of such
a disciple. In the second half, the preacher urges us to
emulate these qualities. Then he declares : "This bringeth me
to say, in how precious esteem the late beloved pastor of
this flock is to be retained . . . The death of a disciple whom
Jesus loved, ought, in a special manner, to be mournfully
resented . . . They die young whom God loveth . . . There
is strong consolation for mourners, even this, that death
hath not separated him from the love of Christ ; but brought
him rather into his bosom, and lodged him in the embrace
of his everlasting love." At the afternoon service on the same
loved
disciple.
16
Ebenezer Gay
John's Vision of the Woman

This,
clothed with the Sun."
he says, is a great wonder; so
also is the Reverend Jonathan Mayhew. In 1770, he preached
a Thanksgiving Day sermon, which was printed. It bears
the title, "The Devotions of God's People adjusted to the
Dispensations of his Providence."

day, Dr. Gay preached on "St.
During the eighteenth century the people of Boston en

joyed not only the two sermons on Sunday in each meeting
house but also a mid-week lecture as well, which was
preached at the First Church in rotation by all of the Con
gregational ministers of the town. Hingham was too far
removed to benefit much from these ministrations, but Mr.
Gay was not to be outdone by his neighbors. So he insti
tuted a week-day lecture in Hingham. Two of his lectures
were printed in 1728. The first was called, "The Tran
scendent Glory of the Gospel." The central thought of this
sermon is that the gospel is incomparably more glorious
than the law. The second lecture, exegetical in substance,
he called, "A Pillar of Salt To Season a Corrupt Age." This
sermon may be summarized as follows: "Sin is a trans
gression of the Law." The looking back of Lot's wife was
sinful because it was "contrary to a divine Prohibition." It
was a "Contempt of God's Omniscience." "In our flight from
mystical Sodom, we should not look back."
During this same year,
militant ser
Artillery Company
in Boston. It bears the title : "Zechariah's Vision of Christ's
Martial Glory." Ten years later, 1738, he preached to four
military companies on a training day at Hingham. This was
1728, he preached a
mon before the Ancient and Honorable
patriotic sermon, called, "Well-accomplish'd Soldiers, a

Glory to their King, and Defence to their Country." The
text was from Chronicles, "And next him was Jehozabah,
and with him an hundred and fourscore thousand, ready
prepared for war." A summary of the sermon is contained
in the first sentence: "It was a part of the Priest's Duty,
under the Mosaick Dispensation, to hearten and incite the
a
Ebenezer Gay
17
Armies of Israel to fight the Lord's Battles, with Intrepidity

and undaunted Courage."

At
a third lecture delivered at Hingham in 1730, Mr.

Gay preached a sermon well calculated to please Governor
Belcher on the occasion of his arrival in the Colony with his
commission. The divine sanction of Kings and magistrates
was pretty generally accepted in that day, so that when
Mr. Gay preached on, "The Duty of People to pray for and
praise their Rulers," his sentiments must have met with
well-merited approval. At least we may be sure they did
with the governor. After describing the equity, peaceableness, mercifulness, piety and refreshing influence of Solo
mon's government, together with the "Large Extent and
Vast Riches of his Kingdom" and the "pious and dutiful
Behaviour of the King's Subjects", he proceeds to demon
strate that "prayers should continually be made for the
Ruler of a People." This he developed as follows : "The Will
of God has made it the indispensible Duty of a People to
pray continually for their Ruler." Moreover, the "publick

Good" and the "Law of Gratitude" require us to do this.
The ruler himself stands in need of such continual prayer
and God is glorified thereby. Such "continual Prayer made
for the Ruler of a People tends to engage and influence them
to discharge their whole Duty to him."
It was to be expected that sooner or later so excellent

and politic a preacher would be asked to preach an Election
Sermon. This he did before his Excellency William Shirley,
Esq. on May 29th, 1745. The title was, "The Character and
Work of a good Ruler, and the Duty of an obliged People."
In this instance, however, Mr. Gay speaks out straight to
the Governor and council, and, in no uncertain terms, tells
them about the character and duties of good rulers, which
by implication, are their duties.
for which Dr. Gay is most justly
noted have been saved for the last. The first of these was
preached in 1759, as the Dudleian Lecture at Harvard Col
The three sermons
Ebenezer Gay
18
it is interesting to note that some of the points

by
Dr. Gay one hundred and seventy-five years ago,
stressed
were again reiterated by the Dudleian lecturer in 1935. His
subject was "Natural Religion as distinguished from Re
vealed." This sermon may be read with much profit today.
It is liberal in its outlook and sagacious in its conclusions.
From it the following passages have been selected to give
the content and development of the author's reflections :

lege, and
"The Characters of the Deity are plainly legible in the

whole Creation around us: And if we open the Volume of
our own Nature, and look within, we find there a Law
written ; a rule of virtuous Practice prescribed. Religion is
divided into natural and revealed. Revealed Religion, is
that which God hath made known to Men by the immediate
Inspiration of his Spirit, the Declarations of his Mouth, and
Instructions of his Prophets : Natural, that which bare Rea
son discovers
and dictates.
We should not depreciate and cry down Natural Re

ligion on Pretence of advancing the Honour of Revealed
as if they were two opposite Religions, and could no more
stand together in the same Temple than Dagon and the Ark
of God. Whatever Distinction we observe between them,
there is no Contrariety in the one to the other: They subsist
harmoniously together, and mutually strengthen and con
firm each other. Revealed Religion is an Additional to Na
tural; built, not in the Ruins, but on the strong and ever
lasting Foundations of it.
1.
"We should not magnify and extol natural Religion,

to the Disparagement of Revealed.
2.
"The Gospel of Christ hath been a Light to lighten the

modern deistical Gentiles: For the juster notions they have
of the divine Attributes, and moral Duties than the ancients,
they are greatly indebted to that Revelation which they
decry, not to say any Thing of those heavenly Truths and
important Duties, which are taught only in the Bible. 'Tis
here we learn the Religion of Nature in its greatest Purity."
Ebenezer Gay
19
But the sermon that best displays Dr. Gay's own forth
right and noble character, as well as the liberal ideas which
he taught, is the one he preached before the annual Masschu-

setts Convention of Congregational Ministers in Boston,

May 29, 1746. He was then fifty years old, at the height of
his intellectual powers, and already recognized as a pioneer
and leader in liberal doctrine and practice. He called his dis
course, "The True Spirit of a Gospel-Minister." It has a
message for every age. He begins in general terms, as
follows :
"The Gospel is Christ's Gospel, and should be preached
with Christ's Spirit. It was so by the first Ministers of it.
The same Spirit which descended on him came also upon
the Apostles, when they were all with one Accord in one
Place, on the Day of Pentecost. The like gracious Vouchsafement is to be desired of us, the Lord's Ministers, who are
met together in this Place, in the day of our annual, bro
therly Convention."
Then he considers in two splendid paragraphs, which
we shall quote, the moral qualifications of a good minister:
"Purity, considered in Opposition, not only to moral
Pollution, but also to Hypocricy, is requisite to qualify a
Minister; and will dispose him to all Fidelity in his Office.
When he hath a sincere Regard to God, To his Will and
Command, to his Presence, Acceptance and Honour; When
his Intentions are upright, and his Sentiments agree with
his Words and Actions, and there is no Guile in his Spirit,
nor Dissimulation in his Behaviour toward God or Men. But
he is fair and open, not wrapping himself in Clouds; not
concealing his real Principles under the Ambiguity of Ex
pressions; not disguising any bad Purposes, with Fallacious
Pretences of Concern for the Glory of God, the Interest of
Religion, and the Good of Souls; not laying of Snares to
catch Men ; Baits to allure them into any Mischief, or Incon
venience, not using any Art of Deceit, treacherous Collu
Ebenezer Gay
20
. . . But having
a good Conscience, in all Things
willing to live honestly.
"A pure Spirit keeps a Minister steady in his Course,
pursuing, by even Steps, the worthy Ends of his Office,
thro' all the Temptations and Oppositions he meets with, to

divert and discourage him. It pointeth him to Marks which
are fix'd, and always in the same Place; directs him in a
straight Path, by an invariable Rule; and he proceedeth
uniformly in his Work, not changing with the Wind of a
vertiginous World, the varying Circumstances of Place and
Time, the fickle Humours of Men, and uncertain Contingen
cies of Affairs. A Man of this Spirit, is consistent with
himself, is the same, as to his Faith and Practice of what
is necessary and substantial Truth and Duty, in all Countries,
in all Cases, in all Conditions The moral Reason of Things
being everywhere, and always, the same. Let the Weather
be fair or foul; let the World smile or frown; let him be
followed or forsaken by the Multitude ; let him be prospered
or disappointed, he holds on his Way, passing by Honour
and Dishonour, evil Report and good Report. He does not
prevaricate in the Lord's Message, and play fast and loose
for sinister Ends. His Preaching, like the great Subject of
the same not Yea at one Time, and Nay
Christ Jesus,
in the Eyes
at another. . . For as low as the Attainment
of some, 'tis of no small Consequence that a Christian Min
ister be an honest Man."
best known
But perhaps the sermon for which he
called "The Old Man's Calendar." It was delivered in his
pulpit in Hingham, on Sunday morning, August 26th, 1781,
his eighty-fifth birthday. He selected, as his text, the words
of Joshua, (xiv. 10), "And now, lo, am this day four score
and five years old." In prefatory note to later edition,
said that the Discourse "met with so much favor from the
public, that
was reprinted not only in this country, but
also in England and Holland, being translated into the
Dutch language." A few quotations will suffice to give its
flavor and insight:
it
is
is
it
is
is
is
it,

sions,
Ebenezer Gay
21
"Lo, now, my brethren, I am this day fourscore and five

years old, a wonder of God's sparing mercy. Sixty-three of
these years have I spent in the work of the ministry among
you. One hundred and forty-six years ago your fathers came
with their Pastor, and settled in this place. I am the third
in the pastorate of this church, which hath not been two
years vacant. Scarce any parish but hath had more in that
office in so long a space of time. The people of this have been
steady to their own ministers, living to old age; have not
been given to change, nor with itching ears have heaped to

themselves teachers.
bless God, who disposed my lot
among a people with whom
have lived here in great peace
eleven years longer than either of my worthy predecessors.
I have only to wish that my labours had been as profitable
as they have been acceptable to them. . .
"Is it
such a favour to live to old age, the days of which

are evil, and the years such as we are apt to say, we have
no pleasure in them?
answer, that life is the principal
good, the foundation and capacity of our enjoying any; and
the lengthening it to old age is an instance and display of
the goodness by a faithful Creator, who hath promised it

to them that follow him in the way of his commandments ;
as also, that goodness and mercy shall follow them to the
end of their days.
"Such is the common dotage on life, as to occasion the
remark, that there is no man so old, but thinks he may live
a year longer.
"It
was good advice, Be sure to repent one day before

thy death. If we that are very old mean to do so, we must
repent today ; for we have least reason to boast of tomorrow.
But, can a man be born again, when he is old? Can he be
converted, and become a regenerate child of God, when he
is grown old in sin? It seemeth a miracle of grace that he
should be so, but it is not to be despaired of as impossible:
nothing is so with God. To a repentence which is unto Sal
Ebenezer Gay
22
vation, the succor of divine grace is necessary; and we do

not know it is too late for us to seek it."
And finally, with a touch of humor, he adds: "The sin

ner being an hundred years old shall be accursed", the more
accursed for dying so old an impenitent.
DR. GAY'S INFLUENCE IN THE FIELD OF
LIBERAL RELIGION
It
is difficult to estimate correctly the liberalizing in

fluence of Dr. Gay. He died a generation before the begin
ning of the Unitarian controversy, yet we are assured that
he was a Unitarian by no less a person than his neighbor and

fellow-believer, John Adams, President of the United States.
By
Mr. Gay had manifested liberal ideas both in

his preaching and in his stand in relation to the trial for
heresy of the Reverend Samuel Osborn of Eastham. In 1743,
he opposed the preaching of Whitefield. All of the members
of the ministerial association, over which he presided, were
distinctly liberal, and eventually became Unitarian. Dr.
Mayhew undoubtedly studied divinity with Dr. Gay. The
1740,
fact that Gay commended so heartily Mayhew's liberal point

of view; the fact that Gay preached Mayhew's ordination
sermon, on which occasion no Boston minister was present
i because of Mayhew's pronounced
Unitarianism ; the fact that
\Gay specifically stated in that ordination sermon that he
approved and sympathized with the younger minister's un
trammelled search for knowledge; the fact that Gay main
tained a most cordial relationship with Dr. Mayhew through
out the tatter's ministry, and with the West Church in
Boston which he knew to be Unitarian in its theology; the
fact that Gay preached two funeral or memorial sermons
at the West Church, after the death of Dr. Mayhew: all
of these evidences prove that Dr. Gay was not only a liberal,
but that he publicly favored the Unitarian position.
It was not by chance that Lemuel Bryant of Quincy,

Jonathan Mayhew of Boston, Daniel Shute of Hingham, John
Ebenezer Gay
23
Brown of Cohasset, David Barnes of Scituate, Gad Hitch

cock of Pembroke, Joseph Thaxter of Edgartown and at
least a score of Dr. Gay's most intimate friends and con
temporaries should all have been liberal and Unitarian. Two
of these men were his students, while all were in harmony
with him in matters of belief, and he was the leading spirit
of the group.
English Unitarian minister, crossed the

Atlantic and settled in Gay's own parish with a view to be
coming his successor. Henry Ware, who succeeded Dr. Gay,
was recognized from the first as a Unitarian, and as such
was elected professor of Theology at Harvard College. There
was no transition of opinion from Gay to Ware, but rather
a continuation of the same liberal theological view-point.
Hazlitt,
an
When all of these considerations are taken together,

there can be no doubt but that Dr. Gay was not only a
liberal, but a Unitarian as well. On more than one occasion,
he protested against binding creeds and confessions of faith,
and he never seems to have any sympathy whatever for
the doctrines of original sin and justification by faith with
out works. These views are openly proclaimed in his pub
lished discourses.
It was through personal intercourse with members of

his parish, with his pupils, and with his fellow ministers
that Dr. Gay's greatest contribution to liberal theology was
undoubtedly made. And such an influence, as a pioneer in
religious liberalism, honestly and openly and continuously
exerted and expressed for a period of nearly seven decades,
bore fruit in eastern Massachusetts in the establishment of
the Unitarian denomination a generation after his death.
Due to Dr. Gay's influence, the First Parish in Hingham
has been consistently liberal and Unitarian for two thirds
of the three hundred years of its existence.



THE GRAVE AND MONUMENT

OF FAUSTUS SOCINUS
AT LUSLAWICE1
By
Earl Morse Wilbur

Jâustus Socinus, founder of
of theology
which eventually developed into Unitarianism, was born
a Roman Catholic at Siena in 1539. In middle life he em
braced the reformed religion, became a voluntary exile
from his native Italy, and after spending some three
fruitful years in the study of the Scriptures in Switzer
land became early in 1579 a permanent resident of
Poland. From then until 1598 he lived at the capital,
Krakow, save the four years from 1583 to 1587 when,
being in some danger of persecution on the ground
of radical political views, he sought refuge on the estate
of a Polish nobleman at Pawlikowice near Wieliczka,
a system
ten or twelve miles to the south-east, whence he returned

to Krak6wr from time to time for brief visits. In the sum
mer of 1586 he married Elizabeth, daughter of his host,
Christopher Morsztyn; but she died the following year
at Krakow, leaving him an infant daughter, named Agnes
after his honored mother. Although he led the retired
life of a scholar, and did not engage in religious con
troversy unless forced into it by foes or urged by friends,
at
he came to be known as the outstanding Dissident
Krakow, and hence was a ready target for attacks. The
Catholic reaction against Protestantism was gathering
force, he had been denounced from the most important
pulpit at Krakow as a most dangerous heretic, and having
1
Pronounced
loose-wah-veet'-se.
Formerly spelled Ludawice (pron.
loots-)
The Grave and Monument of Faustus Socinus
26
already in 1594 been the victim of a brutal street attack,

he was on the; evening of Ascension Day 1598, when ill
and confined to his couch, set upon by a fanatical mob
of university students who had forced their way into his

lodgings, and was dragged bareheaded and barefoot and

scantily clad to the great market-place, where they made
a bonfire of his priceless books and manuscripts, and
were also on the point of burning him alive when a sud
den change of whim suggested that he be drowned in
stead.1 Before this plan could be executed, he was rescued
from the mob by one of the university professors, was
spirited away to a place of safety, and at daybreak was
removed to the estate of an Italian friend at Igolomia,
fifteen miles east of town.
Socinus would gladly have remained indefinitely at
Igolomia, where he had long before been invited to make
his home ; but the place lacked the theological books that
he needed for his studies, and it was also deemed
too near Krak6w to be secure from further attacks. He
therefore wrote to his dear friend, Peter Statorius, the
scholarly young minister of Luclawice, proposing a visit
of some weeks there if it were found convenient. Thus it
was that, after a brief visit at Rakow to see his little
daughter, he came to take up his residence at Luclawice,
where he was to spend the rest of his days.
Luclawice, lying in the beautiful valley of the Dunajec

near Zakliczyn, some forty-five miles, south-east of Krakow, and now but a quiet village,1 was at the end of the
sixteenth century a place of some consequence, with a
population of 300 "Arian" families in the vicinity; and
1
a contemporary account, see Matthaeus Radecius, Epistola de fato Fausti

philologicae et historicae (Leiden,
Socini, in Thomas Crenius, Animadversiones
(Konigs1699), iv. 233-242 ; reprinted in F. S. Bock, Historia Antitrinitariorum
berg, 1774-84), ii. 692-697. See also Socinus's letter to his rescuer in his Opera, i.
475, in Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum.
Pew

* I
^ *-
<* 1 .

27

among the Arians1 it was a center second in importance

only to Rakow, with a flourishing church, an important
academy, and( a press at which many Arian books were
printed. The village was the joint possession of the
noble families Taszycki and Blonski, who lived in adjoin
ing houses, were related by marriage, and both Arians.
Lacking the means to send his twelve sons to Krakow for
their education, Achacy Taszycki founded here an Arian
school for them, which attracted students from both Pol
and and Transylvania. Abram Blonski for his part built
a stone chapel hard by his house, and supported the
minister.2 The chapel is still standing and parts of the
old manor-house are said to be incorporated in the pre
sent beautiful one.
Socinus at first made his home with Statorius, where
the simpler food and more convenient meal-hours suited
his weak digestion better than the heavy and rich diet
and late hours usual in Poland. Later on he had his own
establishment, living with his daughter in one story of a
stone building in which the Arians had in great isecrecy
carried on a printing-press on one of the little islands
in a bend of the river known as Venice.3 Finally, toward
the end of his life, he was the guest of the lord of the
manor in the manor-house of Abram Blonski. Here,
though inconsolable over the loss of his precious books
and papers at the hands of the mob in Krakow, he
gradually acquired new tools for the studies which occu
pied him as he composed theological writings for the use
of the young church, and planned a Cathechism for in
struction in its doctrines. His correspondence was large,
he was constantly consulted about church problems in
1
2
3
The body of anti-trinitarian churches with which Socinus associated were (though
popularly known as Arians, and the name still persists in Poland.
incorrectly)
For convenience I use the term here. They called themselves the Polish Brethren,
and were officially named the Minor Reformed Church.
Szczesny Morawski, Anjanie Polscy (Lw6w, 1904), pp. 73-75.
Venice is still pointed out, a hillock not far from the manor-house, and near the
former bank of the Dunajec, though the river has long since changed its course,
cf. Morawski,
op. eit. p. 77.

28
both Poland 'and Transylvania, and he continued, as far

as his miserable eye-sight and broken health permitted,
to keep busy with his studies and to assist with his coun
sel at the synods of the churches. Although the estate
which he had inherited in Italy, and which bad earlier
supported him in modest comfort, had now long since
been confiscated as the property of an escaped heretic,
his intimate friend and fellow-countryman, Dr. Niccola
Buccella, physician-in-chief to King Stephen Batory, had
left him a life annuity of 100 florins. But the physical and
mental strain involved in the hardships and sorrows
that had befallen him and undermined his long precar
ious health ; he was tortured with the stone ; he suffered
intermittently from tertain fever; his sight and hearing
were both impaired; and while he prayed for patience
he longed for release. At length, worn out and eager to
go, he closed his eyes on March 3, 1604. Statorius, his
pastor and nearest friend, preached the memorial sermon
for his master, and in the next year followed him to the
grave.
The grave of Socinus lay to the west of where the Arian
chapel is said to have stood, at the edge of the Arian
cemetery, on the brow of a little hill facing the Dunajec.
Blonski had it marked by a monument of native sand
stone suitably inscribed.1 It was a cube about thirty
inches through, which may very well have beien sur
mounted by a tall tapering pyramid, a style which was
conventional at that period. Onlyj the cube now remains
however; and it is perhaps the upper stone that legend
says was later pulled down and thrown into the Dunajec
oy fanatical Catholics. Of the original inscriptions on
the cube, there are remnants on only two of the four
sides : one side is completely filled1^ with a Polish inscrip
tion in seven lines, so badly weathered away that only a
1
Morawski,
p. 121.
29

word or two has been made out1 though patient studycould probably recover a good deal more ; the other side
retains half a dozen words of an Italian couplet of which
the whole has fortunately been* recovered, as will 'he re
lated below. A third side will certainly have borne the
name and dates of Socinus, while the fourth side may
have borne the Latin couplet which early? tradition asso
ciated with the monument.2 When Alexander Gordon
visited the grave in 1879 he fancied he could still make
out the initials F. S. ; but these two sides are now entirely
bare, and they would naturally have been the first to be
obliterated by any that wished to efface all memory of
the great heretic and his work.
Socinus left but the one child, Agnes. A year or two
after his death she was married to Stanislaus Wiszowaty
Vice-Prefect of Filipow in Lithuania on the border of
East Prussia3, where a son Andrew was born to them in
1608. When persecutions of the Arians began to thicken
after the fall of Rakow in 1638, the Wiszowatys removed
to Galicia and purchased an estate at R^bkowa (Robkow) not far from Luclawice. Their home was in a sec
luded spot, and they felt safe from harm; but robbers
from the neighboring mountains, hearing that Wiszowaty
had a large sum of money by him, attacked the house
by night, and finding nothing tortured him so that
he not long afterwards died of his injuries^ in 1643. The
son Andrew became minister of Rahkowa in 1652, and
here the widow Agnes died and was buried in 1654.4
Andrew showed himself one of the most stedfast figures
among the Arians at the time of their banishment from
Poland in 1660, and finally settled among the exiles in
1
2
S
4
tAK
MD
OCZYMA
Tata ruot Babylon,
N__^SZ
GLUC
DLA SWOICH
POGLADALI. ......
destruxit tecta Lutherus,

Muros Calvinus, sed fundamenta Socinus.
Morsztyn, had been starost here, and this will have
Christopher
grandfather,
Her
brought together the otherwise far-separated families . . .
cf, Morawski, pp. 155-158.
30

Holland, where he published several works of importance,

and edited the Opera of Socinus in the Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonarum, and died in 1678. Of his two sons,
Benedict became minister of the church of Arian exiles
at Andreaswalde in East Prussia, and Andrew of the
Polish congregation at Kolozsvar. With these we lose
track of any descendants of Socinus.
As persecution of the Arians grew more severe toward
the middle of the century, the congregation at Luclawice
tended to bow before the storm. While not a few re
moved thither after they were driven out of Rak6w in
1638, on the other hand some of the noble families sought
safety in other confessions. Some of the Blonskis became
Calvinists, Achacy Taszicki went over to the Catholic
Church ; and although he did not molest the Arians in his
village, he gave the Catholics the school and the church,
and was buried in the near-by cloister of the Reformati
in 16451. Others went into exile, and the Arian meeting
house was demolished by a mob from a neighboring
and although some, notably the women, remained
stedfast for long afterwards, their church became vir
tually extinct when the edict of banishment was enforced
against all Arians in 1660.
town2
From then on for over 160 years our knowledge of the

grave of Socinus is a blank. By 1675 all that had known
him must have died or emigrated, and all memory of him
in the neighborhood will have ceased. The Arian cem
etery, with no one left to respect, it* gradually went the
way of all neglected cemeteries until it was obliterated
and only the grave of Socinus remained, marked by its
massive block of stone. Indeed, Friedrich Samuel Bock,
that diligent compiler of everything that could be learned
of Socinianism in his time, wrote in 1784, "Whether there
1
2
(Krak6w, 1888), p. 27; Morawski, p. 187;

cf. X. Maciej Smolenski, Melsztyn
Chronicle of the Luslawice cloister, p. 342.
p. 187, 289 ; Henryk Merczyng,
Morawski,
Protestanccy
Zbory i Senatorowie
(Warsaw, 1904), p. 112.


THE GRAVE
(From
St^czyiiski's
OF SOCINUS
Okolice Galicyi)
IN
1847
31
was a monument to him I have; been unable to learn. If

any was erected it has certainly been destroyed, since
after they were proscribed by public law all traces of
this sect in Poland have been scattered or destroyed. 1

It now
remains to relate the steps by which the grave

of Socinus was rediscovered, gradually regained its place
in the knowledge of men, and has at length been marked
by a worthy monument. It was not until after 1822 that we
find any direct reference to it, when a geographer, writ
ing of Luslawice and Socinus, reports, "Recently, in the
year 1822, his tomb was discovered among some old
trees which, if they were planted by contemporaries, are
already more than two centuries old. The grave is marked
by a large stone, and on it is an inscription in Italian."2
In 1832 a pedestrian making a tour of the Carpathian

foothills reaches Luslawice, and notes in hia diary, sub
sequently published, "Here the famous Socinus died and
was buried. Here the country people show his grave on
an elevation, surrounded by great trees."3 Ten years later
we find it recorded in a work on the Antiquities of Po
land, speaking of Luslawice, that "in the centre of the
village, at the place where the Arian church formerly
stood, on a pretty level spot lying a little above the road,
overshadowed by a circle of lindens and acacias, was the
grave of Socinus, and on it a square stone carved with the
Italian inscription (here given garbled and incomplete),
Che semire racodie fama fuera, f ama supera la morte.
The other inscriptions are worn by time and illegible."4
In 1847 an artist visits the place and makes] an excel
lent drawing, showing the grave and its cube of stone
shaded by a semi-circle of lindens. This, later engraved
1
2
3
4
Bock, op. cit., ii. 707.

Krlestwa
Siarczynski,
Franclaek
Slownik historyczno-statistyczno-geograflczny
Galicyi, ii. 273 (Ms. no. 1826 in Ossobiski Library, Lw6w. Adryan Krzyzanowski.
says
Siarczy6ski,
394,
there was
quoting from
Dawna Polska (Warsaw, 1857), ii.
an inscription in Latin, Italian and Polish.
Seweryn Goszczynski, Dziennik podrozy do Tatrow (Petersburg, 1853), p. 28.
Polskie,
Starozyznsci
(Poznafi, 1842-52). ii. 98.

82
and published, is the earliest illustration that we have.

Speaking of Socinus he says, "He was buried on a beauti
ful level spot lying a little above the road, and his
gravestone remains to this day. It is a lovely spot, shaded
by ancient lindens and hornbeams set in a semi-circle. In
the distance through the trees one can see the walls of the
famous old castle of Melsztyn. A cube of hewn stone,
thrown down perhaps purposely, with an Italian inscrip
tion for the most part obliterated, serves Socinus for a
monument. . . . Even in our time, so the people of the
place say, the bones of this famous man have been dug
up and thrown into the Dunajec; and the stone, which
could not easily be destroyed, has been broken with
hatchets."1 He inserts in his descriptive text a poem of
twenty-eight lines inspired by the scene and its associa
tions. In 1856 the legend above reported has grown, and
the stone itself is said to have been recently thrown into
the Dunajec.2
It
was not, however, until 1879 that any knowledge of

the grave of the man to whom their faith owes most was
brought to the attention of Unitarians. In August of that
year the Rev. Alexander Gordon of Belfast, on his way to
visit the Unitarian churches of Transylvania, undertook
to explore some of the ancient haunts of the Socinians in
Poland, and thus visited Luslawice. He reported that the
grave was kept carefully enclosed by a plain oaken rail
ing recently restored by the proprietor of the ground;
but he added nothing new to previous knowledge.3
In
Professor Wladislaw Luszczkiewicz of the

Academy of Fine Arts at Krakow visited Luslawice with
his pupils. He recorded that except the grave of Socinus
all the old Arian cemetery had fallen under the plow,
which sometimes turned up coffins. A single shattered
1
2
3
1892
Maciej Bogrusz Steczynski,

Okolice Galicyi, (Lw6w, 1847), p. 61.
Lucyan Siemieffiski, Ustep z wycieczki po okolicy Podg6rskiej
(in "Czas'\ Dodatek Miesieczny, iii. 368-400, Krak6w, 18S6.)
cf. extract from his letter of August 15 in Christian Life, (London, iv. 407f 1879,)

I .
- -

33
linden still shaded the grave, which was inclosed by a

low picket fence about eight feet square. Within this neg
lected lot, covered with grass and weeds, was the cube
of stone about a meter through, sunk into the ground, and
in front of this a thick slab diagonally broken1 (now first
mentioned by any one), about three feet by five. The
cube bore well-nigh obliterated inscriptions on two sides,
of which one could now decipher only the Italian words,
Chi sent . . . te vera fama supera la morie. The slab had
a decorative
border inscribed but illegible, and in the
center was a heraldic device with some initial letters.2

It was not until near the beginning of the twentieth cen

tury that any measures were taken to preserve the grave
of Socinus from further neglect and complete oblitera
tion. Credit for such action is due to Dr. Wlodzimierz Demetrykiewicz, Professor of Archaeology in the Univer
sity at Krakow, who about the turn of the century was
for twenty-five years a member of the board of Conserva
tors of National Monuments for West Galicia. As he
journeyed about his territory looking for monuments
suitable for conservation, his attention was called to the

grave of Socinus at Luslawice. As early as 1896 he ar
ranged with the peasant proprietor, Mr. Jozef Konwent,
for the permanient care of the neglected grave; but in
1902 the latter sought permission of the local court to
bring the parcel under the plow, since it hindered culti
vation of surrounding ground, though he consented to
delay action for a time. Meanwhile Professor Demetrykiewicz secured the interest of both the Italian and the
Austrian governments; and (despite no little opposition
from ecclesiastical quarters, but With the influential aid
of Mr. Adolf E. Vayhinger, notary at Tam6w, who when
previously owner of the estate had built a fence about
1
2
It was still unbroken at Alexander Gordon's visit in 1879.

Wladislaw Lmsczkiewicz, Z wycieczki z ucznaimi w roku 1892 (In Wiadomofici Numizmatyczno-Archeologiczne,
Tom ii., 1895, nos. 2, S (Krak6w, 1896), p. 290).
34

the grave and had since been watchful to protect it from

desecration) after delays which lasted for five years, the
little parcel of ground was at length bought for 100 kro
nen in 1907, deeded to the government, and placed un
der the care of the board of Conservators.1 The owner
of the property had meanwhile* died, and the estate was
being parceled out to peasants, who at once felled the
remaining linden; but the site was put in order by the
Conservators and the grave was covered by a rude oak
canopy with tiled roof.
The next step was taken in 1910, when the grave was
for the second time visited by a (Unitarian.. At the meet
ing of the International Congress of Free Christianity at
Berlin in the summer of that year, Professor H. Merczyng
of St. Petersburg, a liberal Polish Calvinist who had long
been interested in the history of Arianism in1 Poland, and
had himself visited the grave in 1897, read a paper on
the history of the Unitarian movement in Poland, in the
course of which he paid tribute to the work of Socinus,
and made a plea for the restoration of his tomb as an
act of historic justice. Under his guidance Dr. Charles W.
Wendte of Boston after the close of the Congress visited
Luslawice. It was in his fertile brain that the seed plant
ed by Professor Merczyng at Berlin now began to germin
ate. After his return to America he published in the
Christian Register an article relating his visit to the
neglected grave, and setting forth a plan for having
a suitable monument erected2; and he at once organized
an international committee to raise a fund for the pur
pose ; while Professor Merczyng had secured the interest
and hearty endorsement of Dr. Kopera, Conservator of
National Monuments at Krakow. Some $300 was thus
1
Galicyi Zachodniey (Krakow, 1900), I, 441. For a

cf. Teka Grona Konserwator6w
view of the grave in 1902, see Morawaki, p. 128. For news items relating to the
matter, see "Czas," Krak6w, October 5, 9, 13, 17, 1902, and August 2. 1907. The
deed is recorded in the local court at Zakliczyn.
See Christian Register (Boston, January 19, 1911), xc. 64-66.



35
raised in England and America and deposited with the

American Unitarian Association. Various architectural
projects were discussed with Dr. Wendte in 1912 when
Professor Merczyng visited America, including one of a
memorial chapel, and one of a large, rough-hewn pyra
midal symbolic structure designed by his friend, the
painter Maryan Wawrzieniecki of Warsaw, who had
long been a Socinus enthusiast, and had visited the grave
with Professor Demetrykiewicz a decade before, and
had written of it in a Warsaw; illustrated journal;* but
before the full desired amount could be secured, the
World War intervened. Luslawice was in the theatre
of active hostilities where the ground was fought over
three successive times. Soldiers used the fence around
the grave for their camp-fires, and winter winds stripped
the roof of most of its tiles. In view of the uncertain
state of European affairs there was even serious thought
of abandoning the project altogether, and devoting the
funds to another purpose.
In the autumn of
1924, however, Dr. Earl M. Wilbur

who had gone to Poland to investigate the
of Berkeley,
history of Socinianism there, was requested by Dr.
Wendte to look into the matter of the monument and
report. He visited the grave, sounded local opinion, and
reported that there was no serious obstacle to proceed
ing, but on the contrary much encouragement to do so.

It was decided to revive the project, and to solicit the
rest of the required funds. Dr. Wendte resigned his
trust in the matter to the Unitarian Historical Society
whose President, the Rev. Henry Wilder Foote, together
with Dr. Wilbur, appealed for further contributions.
The result was that, what with accumulations in interest,
about $1,800 was available when Dr. Wilbur again went
to Poland for a long period in 1932, with authority to
carry the project through to a conclusion. He was most
1
"Ziemla", May
25,
1912.
36

fortunate in having the active interest and assistance of

several influential Polish friends1 and thus, twentythree years after its first inception, Dr. Wendte's dream
at length came true.
Professor Adolf Szyszko-Bohusz, Rector of the school

of Architecture at the University of Krakow, the most
distinguished among living Polish architects, and well
known for his restoration of the ancient royal castles
at Warsaw and Krakow, consented to undertake this
small commission; and, after annoying delays, satisfac
tory plans were agreed on, and a suitable material was
at length found within the necessary limit of cost. A
small additional surface of ground was now required
to give the monument a proper setting; but when the
peasant owner of the adjoining land was approached,
she was found unwilling to sell at any reasonable. price,
if at all, and proceedings seemed hopelessly blocked.
At this critical juncture the owner of the manor-house
at Luslawice, following an inspiration of his wife, gen
erously proposed that the grave be removed to a site
in the park adjoining his residence, and the monument
erected there on ground which he offered to deed to
the State for the purpose. It was indeed a happy solu
tion of the difficulty, for it was in the manor-house on
this very .estate that Socinus spent his last days as Bloriski's guest, and a chapel is still standing hard-by in
which he doubtless worshipped. The offer was grate
fully accepted, and the site of the original grave aban
doned in favor of one much more fitting, and far more
1
record here my deep obligation to the following gentlemen at Krak6w, without

whom it is doubtful whether the project could have been successfully carried out:
Professor Wadaw Sobieski (d. 1935), who guided me on my first visit to the grave.
Professor Stanisaw Kot. whose counsel in the early stages showed me how to
Society, whose
proceed. Judge J6zef Muczkawski, President of the Archaeological
advice and assistance at several critical points were invaluable. Ing. Bogdan Treter,
Conservator of National Monuments, whose expert counsel and ever-ready sym
Dr. Wlodzipathy helped to overcome several obstacles otherwise insurmountable.
mierz ALlamowicz, who generously contributed to the solution of legal questions
who in
of Tarn6w and Luslawice,
involved. Also to Ing. Stanisaw Vayhinger
herited his father's interest in preserving the grave of Socinus, and who at a
moment which threatened defeat for the project, graciously offered an ideal site
for the monument. E.M.W.

1
**

THE NEW MONUMENT

OF SOCINUS,
1933
37
beautiful. Thus, after nearly six months of repeated

obstacles and discouraging delays, the contract was at
length signed at the end of the year, and the monument
completed in August, 1933.

The monument, placed against a fine background of

trees and shrubbery, is built in classical Doric style of
a warm cream-colored dolomite, nearly as hard and
durable as granite, and more pleasing to the eye. Four
fluted monolithic columns rising from a base of two
steps support an entablature
with flat roof, which
shelters the original tomb-stone, and bears the name
and dates, Faustus Socinus, 1539-1604.
Between the
two rear columns is a wall of polished gray granite
inscribed as follows:
In memoriam1
Fausti Socini Itali
nati Senis Dec. 5, 1539
denati Luclaviciis, Mar. 3, 1604
et in recognitione laborum ejus
pro libertate, ratione, et tolerantia
in religione
posuerunt 1933
cultores in Europa, Anglia, America
Chi semina virtu, raccoglie fama
E vera fama supera la morte.2
At the foot of the monument in front lies the broken
slab which for the past forty years or more had lain
near the tomb-stone of Socinus. It is of sandstone
1
: In memory of Faustus Socinus of Italy, born Siena, December 5,

died Lusawice, March 3, 1604, and Precognition of his efforts for freedom,
reason and tolerance in religion. Erected 1933 by those who honor his name in
Europe, England, America.
The man who virtue sows doth reap renown,
And true renown doth triumph over death.
This is the Italian couplet referred to above, which had for a hundred years past
beeni quoted in fragmentary
form by visitors. In the autumn of 1932 I was so
fortunate as to discover the complete text in the Czartoryski Library at Krakw,
in the autograph album of a Rak6w student: Pamietnik Przyjaci6l Andrzeja Lubienieckiego (MS. no. 1403, p. 151). It is a part of the autograph page of Johannes
Blonski of Lucawice, the son of the Abram above mentioned. He will have derived
it from the monument which he often saw in his youth. The autograph is dated
1618, fourteen! years after Socinus's death. B3I.W.
Translation
1539,
38
measuring about 38 x 67 inches. It bears on the border

a Polish inscription, and in the center a heraldic I device
with an obliterated inscription. From a study of it made
in the summer of 1933 under the direction of 'Professor
Demetrykiewicz, it appears that it marked the grave
of the honorable and god-fearing Mr. Stanislaw W . . .

(Z(A)CNEGO I BG(G)OBOINE(GO)
NISL(A)W(A) W. . . One would fain
PANA S(TA)-
believe that this

was the gravestone of Stanislaw Wiszowaty, who was
husband of Socinus's only daughter and died in 1648 at
Rabkowa not far away; but the heraldic device bears
no resemblance to the arms of the Ruch clan which the
Wiszowatys bore, and identification is probably impos
sible.1 The stone is doubtless a remnant from, the old
Arian cemetery at Luclawice.
After the old
stones had been removed from the spot

they
had
where
so long lain, the ground beneath was
excavated in the hope of finding remains to be deposited
in the vault beneath the new monument. Nothing was
found. Moreover, the layers of earth made it clear that
the ground had never been disturbed at that spot. As
wider exploration was not feasible, there is neither con
firmation nor disproof of the legend that the grave had
long ago been opened and the bones thrown into the
Dunajec. In 1926 or 1927 Polish admirers of Socinus in
America, adherents of the Polish National Church, un
connected with the Unitarians and without their know
ledge, and apparently without being aware of the pro
ject already on foot, raised a modest sum of money for
restoring the grave of Socinus. It was expended under
the direction of the Conservator of Monuments, the two
stones above mentioned were placed on a cement found
ation, and a rude but substantial canopy was erected
over them, and still remains in situ.
1
It
might possibly be the stone of Stanislaw WiSniowski, Arian preacher here from
1675.

89
Legend has long been busy with the grave of Socinus,

and the peasant mind is a field in which legends grow
freely. There is in the neighborhood the tradition, al
ready mentioned, that the grave was; opened and its con
tents thrown into the river in order, as one version has
it, that a plague raging in the village might be stayed
by removing the relics of the great heretic; and it has
already been noted that the original legend was expand
ed to include the great stone. The origin of the legend
may perhaps be found in the fact that late in the
eighteenth century, as the records of the neighboring
church of Domoslawice state, permission to open the
grave was actually sought and given, though no advan
tage was taken of it. Again, about 1869, Wincenty
Wdowiszewski, an engineer of the district, excavated
graves at LusJawice and found various coffins hollowed
out of trees; but he did not come upon that of Socinus.1
This will have tended to give the legend new life.
Legends are also rife about a peasant's removing the
stone (the slab?) to use as a door-step, and being
by night in such a fearful dream that he re
warned
placed it the next day. Indeed, at the writer's first visit,
one of the peasants standing by ( averred that he himself
had done it. All such stories may be dismissed as hav
ing little if any basis in fact, as may also the local belief
that there is a mysterious secret underground passage
leading from the grave to the manor-house a third of a
mile away.2 A more recent legend' was first reported by
Dr. Wendte in 1910, and has been retailed to every
visitor since. It is that early in the present century there
came each year from the direction of Tarnow an elderly
man of unknown name and foreign garb ; that he; cared
for the grave, contemplated it and paid the neighbors to
1
2
Maryan Wawrzieniecki,
Socyna w Luslawicach
Gr<5b Fausta
(in "Ziemia," iii.
336-338, Warsaw, May 25, 1912).
For an interesting report on this legendary matter, see the article by Zbyslaw
Cioikoez, Notaki w starym Kniedzdie Aryanskim (In Reform acja w Polsce, ii.
281-285, Warsaw. 1925).
40
keep it free1 from weeds; or (variant), that he knelt by

the grave, read prayers there, and wept. It was conjec
tured that the mysterious visitor must be an Italian, and
that he must have died soon after his last noted. visit in
1910. The stranger was in fact Professor Demetrykiewicz, the Conservator of Monuments, who did make
annual visits ending in 1910, knelt down to pull the
weeds, and taking out his note-book made entries in it.
This he himself told the writer with great amusement
in 1932.

For
one who would visit the monument and the site
of
the grave there are two convenient ways. One may go

by rail from Krakow forty miles east to Tarnow, and
thence drive some fifteen miles south to Luslawice. But
a much more interesting way is to drive from Krakow,
including on the way a short detour to Pawlikowice on
the hill behind Wieliczka, in order to visit the Morsztyn
estate where Socinus lived for several years and found
his bride; and thence on through a beautiful district
where three hundred years ago Arian churches were
more numerous than anywhere else in Poland to Zakliczyn, and to Luslawice just beyond. The whole round
is about ninety miles and may easily be accomplished
in an afternoon. The ruined castle of Melsztyn, on the
west bank of the Dunajec facing Luslawice, was once
the possession of Arian proprietors; and the whole sur
rounding country is full of places where the Arians
once made history, worshipped, suffered persecution,
and died.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Krlestwa
Siarczyski.
Sownik historyczno-statistiyczno-geograficzny
Franciszek
Galicyi, p. 274, s. v. Lualawice. (Ossoliski library, Lww, MS. no. 1825).
1853,
Seweryn Goszczynski. Dzienrik podry to Tatw (in 1832), Petersburg,
p. 28. Also in his Dziea Zbiorowe. Lww, 1911.
Staroytnocie Polskie, Pozna, 1842-52, ii. 98, s. v. "Lusawioe."
Maciej
Bogusz Stczyski.
Lww, 1847, p. 61f, "Grobowiec
Okolice Galicyi,
Fausta Socyna w Lusawicach." With engraving.
Lucyan Siemieski. Ustp z wyczieczki po okolicy Podgrskiej,
(n "Czas," Doda
tek Miesiczny, iii. 363-400, Krakw, 1856).
Adryan Krzyanowski, Dawna Polska, Warszawa, 1857, ii. 394.
Sownik Geograficzny Krlestwa Polskiego, Warszawa, 1881-1904, v. 484, s. v.

"Luslawice."
X. Maciej Smoleski. Melsztyn, Krakw, 1888, p. 27.
Wadysaw Lusczczkiewicz. Z wycieczki z uczniami w roku 1892. With engravings.
(In Wiadomoci Numizmatyczne*- Archeologiczne, i. 1895, nos. 2 and 3, p. 290, Krakw,
1896).
Galicyi Zachodniey, Krakw 1900, i. 441.
Teka Grona Konserwatorw
"Czas," Krakw. No. 229, October 5, 1908, "Grb Faustyna Sociusa." No. 232,
October 9, "Grb Faustyna Oocyusza." No. 235, October 13, "Grb Faustyna Socyfusza." No. 239, October 17, "W sprawie grobowca Socyusza." No. 175, August 2,
1907, "Z opieki nad zabytkami."
Aryanie Polscy, Lww, 1906, p. 121. With engravings.
.Szczsny
Morawski.
Maryan Wawrzieniecki. Grb Fausta Socyna w Lusawicach. With engraving. (In
"Ziemia," iii. 336-338, Warszawa, May 25, 1912).
Zbysaw Ciokosz. Notatki w starym gniedzie aryaskim. With drawings.
(In
"Reformacja w Polsce," ii. 281-285, Warszawa, 1925).
Trzy
poeci
graba
Socyna.
u
Kazimierz Dobrowolski.
(ibid. 285-287).
(ibid., vi.
Earl M. Wilbur. Pomnik Socyna w Lusawicach. With illustrations,
300-302, 1934).
Mgr. Stanisaw Szczotka, Z dziejw grobu Fausta Socyna w Lusawicach.
(In
"Gos Narodu," dodatek, Krakw, April 20, 1935).
Alexander Gordon. At the grave of Socinus. (In "Christian Life," iv. 407f. Lon
don, August 23, 1879).
Charles Wendte, Faustus Socinus, 1539-1604.
(In "Christian Register," lxxxiii.,
738-741. Boston, July 7, 1904).
A visit to the tomb of Faustus Socinus. (ibid., xc. 64-66, Jan. 19, 1911).
The Wider Felktwship, Boston, 1927, ii. 370-379.
Henryk Merczyng. The Unitarian movement in Poland from 1560-1660. (In Fifth
International Congress of Free Chrisianity and Religious Progress: Proceedings and
Papers, Berlin, 1910, pp. 300-805).
Earl M. Wilbur. At the cradle of Unitarianism. With illustrations. (In Christian
Register," civ. 448-466, May 7, 1925).
Henry Wilder Foote. The tomb of Faustus Socinus. (ibid. cvii. 236, March 22,
1928).
Earl M. Wilbur. Unitarian heresy cradled in Poland, (ibid. cxi. 551, September
29, 1932).
A monument to Socinus. With illustration, (ibid. cxii. 757-769, Novem
1
ber 23, 1933. Same article in "Inquirer," xcii. 489-490, London, October 21, 1933).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The contract price of the monument was 14,000 Polish zlotys; the architect's fee
was 1,000 zotys ; incidental expenses amounted to 619.18 zlotys. The contract was let
at a price that would have brought all expenses within the amount available ; but the
fall in American exchange between the date of the contract and that of the final
payment resulted in a shortage of $124.11, which was made up by the American
Unitarian Association.
Erection of the monument was made possible by contributions from the following
sources. Of the total, $303.08 was raised by Dr. Wendte's committee, and the rest
under the auspices of the Unitarian Historical Society by Dr. Foote and Dr. Wilbur.
Accumulations of interest on the dormant funds brought up the total to about $1,800.
CONTRIBUTORS
Unitarian Association
Arnold, Rev. Haroid G., West Roxbury
Baldwin, Mrs. Isabel A., San Francisco
Berkeley, Calif., Women's Alliance
American

Blake, Miss Louise, Brookline

Blanchard, Henry, Portland, Me.
Boston, Arlington Street Church Alliance
Brazier, Miss E. Josephine, Philadelphia
British and Foreign Unitarian Association
Brown, Rev. William Channing, Littleton
Bulkley, Rev. Benjamin R-, Concord
Burkhart, Rev. J. Franklin, Charleston,
S. C.
Burt, Miss Mary H., Meadville, Pa.
Carpenter, Mrs. Caroline H., St. Louis,
Mo.
Channing Conference
Chlrurg, Dr. Michael, Boston
Christie, Prof. Francis A., Lowell
Clark, Mrs. Estelle P., Ojai, Calif.
Clough, Mrs. Nellie Brown, San Francisco
Coleman, Miss Emma L., Boston
Curtis
Eliot, Rev. Christopher R., Cambridge
Eliot, Rev. Frederick M., St. Paul, Minn.
Eliot, Rev. Thomas L., Portland, Ore.
Eliot, Rev. William G., Jr., Portland, Ore.
Emerton, Prof. Ephraim, Cambridge
Emery, George A., Saco, Me.
Ewing, Mrs. E. C, Wheeling, W. Va.
Fay, Mrs. Harriet Kelsey, Pasadena, Calif.
Field, Mrs. William De Y., Auburndale
Fitz, Mrs. Henrietta G., Boston
Forbes, Rev. Roger S., Germantown, Pa.

Furness, Misses Rebecca and Laura, Boston
Friend, Fochester, N. Y.
Friends (4)
Gammans, Miss Edith, Boston
Gannett, Rev. William C, Rochester, N. Y.
Garvin, Milton T., Lancaster, Pa.
Gill, Rev. Frederick, Arlington
Gooding, Rev. Alfred, Portsmouth, N. H.
Green, Rev. Walter C, Cleveland, Ohio
Harrison, John, London, England
Ha wee Miss Clara J., Free port, 111.
Hawksley, Charles, London
Hedge, Miss Charlotte A., Brookline
Hempstead, Ernest A., Meadville, Pa.
Hill, Miss Theada J., Wellesley Hills
Hindes. Mrs. Stetson G., San Francisco
Hodgdon, Waldo C, Dover
Holt, Alfred, Liverpool, England
Holt, Philip, Liverpool, England
Holmes, Rev. John Haynes, New York
House, Miss E. W., Bath, England
Hunt, Rev. Walter R., Boston
Johnson, Miss Harriet E., Boston
Jones. Rev. William Safford, Portsmouth,
N. H.
Kidder, Mrs. Henry P., Boston

Kincaid, W. W., Niagara Falls, N. Y.
Lambert, Dr. L. D., Oakland, Calif.
Lanning, Mrs. Edward, Boston
Comprising
sundry contributions
Latimer, Rev. George D., Boston

Leavens, Rev. Robert F., Berkeley
Lee, Rev. E. Rosalind, Penmaen, S. Wales
Loring, Rev. Robert S., Milwaukee, Wis.
Lewis, Edwin J., Jr., Boston
Los Angeles, Women's Alliance
Loud, Charles E., Boston
Lowell, Miss Lucy, Boston
Lyman, Miss Theodora, Portsmouth, N. H.
Macondray, Mrs. Martha L., San Fran
cisco
Merrill, C. W., Berkeley. Calif.
Moline, 111., Burroughs Club
Moot, Adelbert, Buffalo, N. Y.
Neehousmyer, G. E., Boston
New Orleans, First Unitarian Church
New Orleans, Women's Alliance
Norcross, Grenville, Boston
Osburn, Mrs. Rose G., Eugene, Ore.
Osgood. Rev. Edm. G. S., Brattleboro, Vt.
P., J. D.
Peabody, Prof. Francis G., Cambridge
Peery, Dr. Bessie E., San Diego, Calif.
Perkins, Rev. John Carroll, Boston
Phillips, Stephen W., Salem
Portland, Oregon, Women's Alliance
Reed, Rev. Clarence, Oakland, Calif.
Reed, Mrs. George M., Dorchester
H., Portland,
Robertson,
Mrs. Hannah
Ore.
Rowen, Daniel, Berkeley, Calif.
Russell, Mrs. Mary Otis, Boston
Sacramento, Calif., Women's Alliance
St. Cloud, Minn., Post-office Mission Com
mittee
San Francisco, Society for Christian Work
San Jose, Calif., Women's Alliance
Santa Barbara, Calif., Women's Alliance
Savage, Rev. Maxwell, Worcester
Schulek, Geza, Budapest, Hungary
Sears, Miss Annie, Boston
Sears, Miss Evelyn, Boston
Sharpe, Henry D., Providence, R. I.
Simons, Rev. Minot, New York
Snow, Rev. Sydney B., Chicago
Speight, Prof. Harold E. B., Hanover,
N. H.
Spokane, Wash., Women's Alliance
Spurr, Rev. George B., Boston
Staples, Rev. Charles J., Northboro
Stebbins, Mrs. Horatio, Berkeley, Calif.
Stebb i ns . M rs . Roderick , M i 1ton
Stuart, Miss Helen A., Boston
Sunderland, Rev. Jabez T., Poughkeepsie,
N. Y.
Tower, Mrs. Sarah L., St. Louis, Mo.

Tuttle, Julius H., Boston
Walker, Mrs. John G., Boston
Wendte. Rev. Charles W., Berkeley, Calif.
Wigglesworth,
George, Milton
Wilbur, Rev. Earl M., Berkeley, Calif.
Wildes, Maurice H., Boston
Williams, Mrs. W. C, Dedham
from individuals.
ANNUAL MEETING,
1935
The Thirty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Unitarian His

torical Society was held in King's Chapel, on Thursday,
May 23, 1935, at 10 o'clock, A. M., the President, Rev. Dr.
Christopher R. Eliot, presiding.
The record of the Thirty-fourth Annual Meeting was
read and approved.
Treasurer, Mr. Harrie H. Dadmun, reported a

balance of $6.89 in the Treasury, and the sum of $500. in
the Life Membership Fund. Mr. Henry R. Scott reported
as auditor, attesting the Treasurer's statement as correct;
and both reports were accepted.

The
The small balance on hand called forth a discussion as

to the size of the membership of the society. Mr. Dadmun
said that while several years ago the membership numbered
115, at present there were only 62. Mr. Billings moved that
the directors formulate some plan to increase the member
ship, and the vote was carried.
over 280 patrons had used the Library, as well as four re
search workers from four different universities. The re
search workers were engaged in writing monographs on
Rammohun Roy, Dr. Frederick Henry Hedge, Dr. Joseph
Tuckerman, and Church Architecture. The gifts of the year
include about 300 volumes, approximately 2,000 pamphlets,
and over 200 pictures. Through a gift to the Association
for work pertaining to matters of an historical nature, the
Fifield Collection, which was presented to this Society by
Mrs. Mary Fifield King of Milton, has been checked and
43
Miss Harriet Brewster has ably assisted in this work,

as well as in that of indexing the collection of sermons. The
report of the Librarian was accepted and placed on file.
filed.

Dr. Francis A. Christie then reported for the Publication

Committee calling attention to the present issue of the
Proceedings. He spoke of the study of Joseph Tuckerman
by the President, Dr. Eliot, and the valuable account of
William G. Eliot by Chancellor Throop of Washington Uni
versity, St. Louis. Dr. Christie declared that too often the
Unitarian movement has been called an intellectual move
ment not concerned with the common man and his needs.
The career of Dr. Tuckerman refutes this narrow view
point. The really dominent characteristic of our movement
has been its trend towards the social expression of Christian
ethics. Dr. Christie also said that the life of William G.
Eliot was a splendid example of the great civilizing influ
ence which was carried by our ministers into the western
areas a century ago.
Dr. Christie further emphasized the importance of Dr.

Wilbur's well-documented story of the Socinus Monument.
He concluded his report by urging that more life members
be secured to build up the funds of the Society
The President then read a letter from Dr. Lyttle giving
an account of the work of the Western Division of the Uni
tarian Historical Society. The meeting was held at Evanston,
Illinois, on Tuesday, May 14th 1935. Dr. Lyttle spoke of
"The Canonization of Sir Thomas More, Christian Human
ist", and Lewis B. Fisher, of Chicago, spoke on "Universalist Beginnings in Chicago and Vicinity." Furthermore Dr.
Lyttle reported that at the Meadville Theological School a
number of excellent theses had been submitted on the follow
ing subjects: Jenkin Lloyd Jones, William Channing Gannett,
The Free Religious Association, Jasper Douthit, and the
History of the First Unitarian Church in Chicago.
The Committee to nominate officers for the ensuing year,
Messrs. Henry R. Scott, Rev. Charles T. Billings, and Harrie
44
H. Dadmun, reported the following names of persons, who

were duly elected to their respective offices :
I.,
Mr. John G. Greene then inquired as to how far Dr.

Wilbur had progressed on his History of Unitarianism. He
spoke of Dr. Wilbur as one of the most competent historians
of our times and indicated that the History would deal with
Unitarianism in all lands. The President replied that Dr.
Wilbur has already collected a vast amount of material and
having
is making good progress in the work, Section
been finished.
Mr. Thompson of Dighton spoke of the preparations

now being made for the celebration of the bicentenary of
the birth of Thomas Jefferson (1943). Already the Thomas
Jefferson Bicentennial Association has been incorporated,

the governors of all of the states being members. Mr.
Thompson, Historian of this Association, declared that this
Society will be interested in this project because, while
Mr. Jefferson was nominally an Episcopalian, he was in
reality
Unitarian.
a
The President then read

communication from the
"1630 Club" of the First Church Boston in regard to the
tercentenary of Boston Common, submitted by Miss Lucretia
Towne Gartrell. "The history of Boston Common begins in
1634, when William Blackstone sold his land for $150."
member of the First Church, was a
Governor Winthrop,
principal in this transaction. "On December 18, 1934, exactly
a

Rev. Christopher R. Eliot, L.L.D., President.

Rev. Charles E. Park, D.D., Vice President.
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, D.D., Honorary Vice President.
Rev. Henry W. Foote, D.D., Honorary Vice President.
Rev Frederick L. Weis, Th.D., Secretary.
Harrie H. Dadmun, Esq., Treasurer.
Mrs. George F. Patterson, Librarian.
and the following Directors for three years :
Miss Harriet E. Johnson.
45
three hundred years from the day when Governor Winthrop's committee was appointed, the first Boston Common
Tercentenary celebration took place. On this occasion, Dr.
Charles E. Park, present minister of the First Church, gave
the benediction in the Puritan manner. Thus once more
liberal thought was associated with the Common, this time
Modern Unitarianism."

The Rev. William Ware Locke called attention to the

important fact that Charles Barnard, founder of the Bar
nard Memorial, was the person most influential in having the
Public Garden set aside for its present purpose. The Pre
sident also spoke of the prominent part Charles Barnard
had taken in saving the Public Garden for the public, but
he declared that credit was due others as well, as for ex
ample to Horace Gray and his associates who began as early
as 1837, to carry out such a project.
The Annual Address was delivered by the Rev. Frederick
L. Weis. His subject was "Ebenezer Gay, D.D., of Hingham,
and his Influence as a Pioneer in Liberal Religion." The
address was given in recognition of the Three Hundredth
Anniversary of the founding of the First Parish Church in
Hingham. The paper was divided into three parts ; the life,
works, and influence of Dr. Gay, who commenced his min
istry in Hingham in 1717, and continued there until his
death in 1787, having been for nearly seventy years the
sole minister of the parish. His published works consisted
of twenty sermons and lectures. Three of these were of
especial importance, that delivered before the Massachusetts
Convention of Congregational Ministers in 1746, the Dudleian Lecture in 1759, and the sermon on Old Age, preached
on his 85th birthday. Finally, in the closing section, the
speaker indicated the important influence exerted by this
pioneer religious liberal and Unitarian.
After the
paper, the President, closed the meeting
with
the following words:

no matter how precious, may have only a
deadly, deadening power unless we welcome them with an
Traditions,
46
open mind and heart as an inspiration, and give them new

life for the new tasks of our new day.
History, glorious as it often is, may be nothing but a

heavy load, crushing us to earth, unless it comes to us with
wings of faith and hope and goodwill, to lift us out of our
selves to heights of vision to see divine possibilities and
to consecrate our lives to their fulfilment.
Therefore, the Unitarian Historical Society would en
deavor to keep the past alive and to make it a saving, in
spiring influence today.
The meeting adjourned at noon.
Respectfully submitted,
FREDERICK L. WEIS,
Secretary
47
LIST OF

19011935
May
23, 1901
Brief addresses on Rev. Samuel Willard, D.D.,



"The Origin and Growth of
Switzerland."
the
Liberal Church in
May 26, 1904 Edwin D. Mead. Esq., Boston.

to the Peace

Memoirs."

48

May
28, 1908


"Holmes
May
26, 1910
as a
Religious Teacher."
Rev. H. G. Spaulding, Boston.

May
25, 1911
the
Old
May
23, 1912

Society of Great Britain," Vol. in, Part 2,

October, 1924.
May
22, 1913

"History of
the

pp.
584-586
and
July
1,
pp. 608-611,
also
1915.

"Possibilities
of Beauty in
the Congregational
Order.''
"American Journal of Theology," Vol.

See
p. 1134; Dec. 5, pp. 1166-7; Dec. 12, pp. 1191-2;

49


"The Early Days of Unitarianism
on
the
Coast."
Pacific






"Early History
Miss Harriet
"Early History

of the First Church in Salem, Mass."
E. Johnson, Boston.

50


toba.

Churches in the United States and Canada"

former."
See "Proceedings


Society," Vol. n, Part n.
"Liberals and Liberty Four Hundred Years Ago!'
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur
"Socinian
Propaganda
in Germany 300 Years Ago."

Society," Vol. Ill, Part L
May 25, 1933 Rev. Frederick R. Griffin of Philadelphia.

"Joseph Priestley."
Rev. Henry Wilder Foote of Belmont, Mass.

"Theodore Clapp."
See "Proceedings
Society," Vol.
May
24, 1934
Ill,

Part II.
Rev. Christopher R. Eliot of Cambridge.

"Joseph Tuckerman."
George Reeves Throop,
of St. Louis, Mo.

"William Greenleaf Eliot."
Society," Vol. IV, Part I.
May 23, 1935 Rev. Frederick Lewis Weis of Lancaster, Mass.
"Ebenezer Gay of Hingham and
Pioneer in Liberal Religion."
his Influence
as a
Rev. Earl M. Wilbur, of Berkeley, Calif.

"The Grave and Monument of Faustus Socinus at
Luslawice."
See "Proceedings of the
Society, Vol. IV, Part H.
51
Unitarian Historical






UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY

BERKELEY
Return to desk from which borrowed.
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
FEB1

29Ms/52Wg
REC D LD
MAY 'i
i&g
IN STACKS
FEB
1 7 1965
RE-CD
REG
MAY
LD
IT
*W
MAY 1
1165
JAN 17
LD 21-95m-ll,'50(2877sl6)476
p"
Lri# 13 '67
-5
195C
PfO-
86
RecKJ
83
-4
OAN DEPT-

ILH
a
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
1-4


The Proceedings of The Unitarian Historical Society, 1925

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Proceedings of The Unitarian Historical Society, 1925

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The proceedings

Unitarian Historical Society (Boston, Mass.)

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Unitarian Historical Society

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

How the Schism Came.

Notes on Increase and Cotton Mather

The Beacon Press, Inc.

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

UNITARIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Unitarian Historical Society

THE UNITARIAN HISTORICAL SOCIETY

Frederick W. Stuart, Jr.,

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Miss Harriet E. Johnson,

The Unitarian Historical Society was founded in 1900.

Its first president

ciety is to collect and preserve books, periodicals, pam

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

The Unitarian Historical Society, although it has been

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

THE BEACON PRESS, INC.

Frontispiece, William Ellery Channing, from a por

How the Schism Came, William Wallace Fenn

Notes on Cotton and Increase Mather, Kenneth

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

Records of the Annual Meeting, 1925

Historical Exhibit, Centenary

List of Addresses delivered

before the Society

Henry Wilder Foote

Henry Wilder Foote

Beacon Street, Boston, Mass.

The Beacon Press

Beacon St., Boston, Mass.

Single copies one dollar.

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

How the Schism

William Wallace Fenn,

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

The Unitarian Review for January, 1890, contained an

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

How the Schism Came.

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

How the Schism Came.

One who would understand the schism in the

How the Schism Came.

Generated on 2015-11-10 14:16 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc1.$b463403

plicitly denying the theory of regeneration