It is worthy of especial notice, that, among all the episcopal clergy settled in Connecticut, only one of them has been accused, even by their enemies, of a scandalous life, or of any violation of moral law. They have exercised more patience, resignation, and self-denial, under their various trials, fatigues, and oppressions, than can be paralleled elsewhere in the present century. The countenance of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, and an allowance of 650l. per annum between eighteen of them, have proved the means of averting from the professors of the Church of England that rigour which has constantly marked the conduct of the General Assembly and Consociation towards Anabaptists, Quakers, &c. &c. Had the bishops shown as much concern for the welfare of the Church of England in America as the Society have done, they would have prevented many reproaches being cast upon them by the dissenters as hireling shepherds, and have secured the affections of the American clergy in every province to themselves, to the King, and the British Government. If the religion of the Church of England ought to have been tolerated and supported in America, (which, considering the lukewarmness of the bishops in general, even since the
Restoration of Charles II., seems to have been a dubious point,) policy and justice long ago should have induced the King and Parliament of Great Britain to have sent bishops to America, that Churchmen at least might have been upon an equal footing with dissenters. Against American bishops I have never heard of any objections, either from the dissenters or the episcopal clergy south of the Delaware River, so powerful as the following:
“That the Church of England increases in America, without bishops, faster than it does in England, where are bishops to spare.” If the dissenters in America err not in advancing, as a fact, that in 1715 the Church of England, under the bishops, had been upon the decline, and the protestant dissenters upon the increase, in England, it may be but natural to suppose that the dissenters in America wish to have the English bishops resident there, and the dissenters in England to retain them, as they appear to be so beneficial towards the growth of the dissenting interests here; and so the dissenters in both countries disputing about the residence of the bishops merely because the absence of them is disadvantageous to the one, and their presence advantageous to the other, would it not be the best way of strengthening the interest of both those parties, and weakening that of the Church of England, to retain half the bishops in England and send the other half to America? Against this plan, surely, no dissenter could object; it will neither add to the national expense nor to the disadvantage of England or America, since it promises to be equally serviceable to the protestant dissenting interest on both sides the Atlantic,
and will reconcile a difference between the protestant dissenters, that has been supposen in New-England to be the reason of bishops not being sent to about one million episcopalians in America, who are left like sheep in a wilderness without a shepherd, to the great danger of the protestant dissenting religion in those parts. Nor can it be apprehended that this plan of dividing the bishops will meet with the disapprobation of the episcopalians, except a few licentious clergymen in the American southern colonies, who dread their lordships’ sober advice and coercive power.
Of all the wonders of the English Church, the greatest is that the rulers of it should hold episcopacy to be an institution of Christ, and that the Gospel should be spread among all nations, and, at the same time, should refuse the American Churchmen a bishop, and the fanatics and heathen all opportunities of enjoying the Gospel dispensation in the purity and lustre with which it shines in the Mother Country. If bishops are necessary, let America have them; if they are not necessary, let them be extirpated from the face of the earth; for no one can be an advocate for their existence merely for the support of pomp, pride, and insolence, either in England or America.
The English and Dutch have always kept their colonies under a state of religious persecution, while the French and Spanish have acted with generosity in that respect towards theirs. The Dutch presbyterians in New-York were held in subordination to the Classis of Amsterdam, till, a few years since, they discovered that subjection to be anti-constitutional and oppressive; upon which a majority of the ministers in their cœtus
erected a classis for the ordination of ministers and the government of their churches, in defiance of the ecclesiastical judicatory of Amsterdam. Mr. Smith, in his history of that province, p. 252, justifies the schism upon the following ground: “The expense,” says he, “attending the ordination of their candidates in Holland, and the reference of their disputes to the Classis of Amsterdam, is very considerable; and with what consequences the interruption of their correspondence with the European Dutch would be attended, in case of war, well deserves their consideration.” Nevertheless, Mr. Smith agrees with his protestant dissenting neighbours, that the American episcopalians suffered no hardship in being obliged to incur the same expense in crossing the Atlantic for ordination. If the Dutch are justifiable in their schism, I cannot perceive why the American episcopalians might not be justified in a like schism from the bishops of London. Had the episcopalians as little aversion to schism as the protestant dissenters, the clergy north of the Delaware would, in 1765, have got rid of their regard of an English, and accepted of a Greek bishop, whom they could have supported for half the expense their candidates were at in going to England for ordination. But they were said by some to be conscientious men, while others said they were Issachar’s sons couching down beneath their burthens.
To proceed in my description of the country:
Connecticut is situated between 41 and 42 degrees of north latitude, and between 72 and 73 degrees 50 minutes west longitude from London. Notwithstanding, from this latitude, New-London lies 600 miles nearer
the line than the capital of England, the winter sets in there a month before it does here, and not only continues longer, but is more severe. This extraordinary coldness is said by naturalists to arise from the vast frozen lakes and rivers, and mountains eternally covered with snow, throughout the northernmost parts of America. The mountains may have their share in producing this effect; but I am apt to think the lakes and rivers have a contrary influence. If I ask why lands bordering on them are three weeks earlier in their productions than lands ten miles distant, it will readily be imputed to the warmth of the air, occasioned by the reflection of the sun’s rays from the water. On the same principle, I argue that the rays of the sun, multiplied and reflected by ice also, will render the air warmer. But it may be further said, that the cause is perhaps to be ascribed to the soil being more sandy and loose near a lake or river, and, therefore, naturally warmer than that which is remote and not sandy. I reply, that there are loose, sandy plains, twenty miles off from any lake or river, three weeks later in their products, and very perceptibly colder, than lands upon them. It would be to no purpose to urge that the damps and fogs from unfrozen lakes, rivers, &c. &c. affect the distant but not the adjacent country; because I apprehend there are no unfrozen lakes and rivers in the north of America in winter. Besides, if there were, the mists arising from them would naturally be intercepted by the first mountains or forests they approached. But I pretend to little philosophical knowledge in these matters; I write from experience, and can thence, moreover, assert that mountains with snow upon them are not so