General History of Connecticut, from Its First Settlement Under George Fenwick to its Latest Period of Amity with Great BritainPeters, Samuel
History
General History of Connecticut, from Its First Settlement Under George Fenwick to its Latest Period of Amity with Great Britain
Peters, Samuel
Connecticut -- History -- Colonial period, ca. 1600-1775; Connecticut -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783
The historians of New-England boast much of the happiness all parties
there enjoy in not being subject, as in England, to sacramental test
by way of qualification for preferment in the State; on which account,
with peculiar propriety, it might be called a free country. The truth
is, there never has been occasion for such a test-act. The Assemblies
never appointed any, because the magistrates are annually chosen by
the people, of whom the far greater part are church members; and this
church-membership, in its consequences, destroys all liberty in a
communicant, who is necessitated to swear to promote the interests of
that church he is a member of, and is duly informed by the minister
what that interest is. The minister is the eye of conscience to all
freemen in his parish, and tells them that they will perjure
themselves if they give their votes to an episcopalian, or any person
who is not a member of the Church of the _Sober Dissenters_. Those
freemen dare not go counter to the minister’s dictate, any more than a
true Mussulman dare violate the sacred law of Mahomet. What need,
then, is there of a civil test, when a religious test operates much
more powerfully, and will ever keep Churchmen, Separatists, Quakers,
Baptists, and other denominations from governmental employments in
Connecticut, and confine them to the Old and New Lights; whilst the
test act in England prevents no dissenter from holding any civil or
military commission whatsoever? Upon this subject Mr. Neal has exerted
himself in so signal a manner, that he ought to be styled the Champion
of New-England. He represents that there were two State factions in
New-England: the one out of place he calls spies and malcontents,
chiefly because they had no share in the government. He adds, p. 615:
“I can assure the world that religion is no part of the quarrel; for
there is no sacramental test for preferment in the State.”--Many
people in New-England have not been able to assign a reason for Mr.
Neal’s choosing to hide one truth by telling another, viz. that there
was no statute in New-England to oblige a man to receive the sacrament
among the _Sober Dissenters_ as a qualification for civil office. This
assertion is really true; and when Mr. Neal speaks a truth, he, above
all men, ought to have credit for it. But Mr. Neal well knew it to be
the truth, also, that no man could be chosen a corporal in the
train-band unless he was a member of the Church of the _Sober
Dissenters_, because then every voter was subject to a religious test
of the Synod or Consociation. Mr. Neal, indeed, seems to think that a
civil test is heresy itself, but that a religious test is liberty, is
gospel, and renders “all parties of christians in New-England easy--a
happy people.” The reason, however, of his muffling truth with truth,
was, he wrote for the Old Lights and against the New Lights for hire;
the New Lights being the minority, and out of place in the State.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account