[92] Actual disestablishment did not come in Massachusetts until 1833.
[93] Since the particular purpose of this chapter is to explain the bitter spirit existing between the orthodox party and dissenters in New England near the close of the eighteenth century, rather than to re-write the history of the struggle for full religious toleration, much that occurred in the long process of severing the bond between church and state may be passed over. Attention will be focused upon the character rather than the chronology of the struggle.
[94] Cobb, The Rise of Religious Liberty in America, p. 238; Fiske, The Beginnings of New England, pp. 123 et seq.
[95] Greene, The Development of Religious Liberty in Connecticut, p. 121; Cobb, The Rise of Religious Liberty in America, p. 243.
[96] Cobb, op. cit., pp. 244, 246.
[97] Ibid., pp. 240 et seq.; Greene, The Development of Religious Liberty in Connecticut, pp. 62 et seq., 68.
[98] It was the judgment of Isaac Backus that “oppression was greater in Connecticut, than in other governments in New England”. (History of New England, vol. ii, p. 404.)
[99] Cobb, The Rise of Religious Liberty in America, p. 244. Cobb’s statement concerning the lack of harshness and ungentleness which characterized the attitude of the supporters of the state church toward dissent is extreme. The controlling spirit of the Standing Order was doubtless a positive concern for the welfare of the Establishment rather than a desire to weed out dissent; but the clash of interests became so sharp and bitter that motives did not remain unmixed, and in many an instance dissent in Connecticut was compelled to reckon with a spirit of actual persecution.
[100] The Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, vol. i, p. 21.
[101] Cobb, The Rise of Religious Liberty in America, pp. 246 et seq.