006 The Virginia Chronicle

THE VIRGINIA CHRONICLE.

PREFACE.

I have neither his Lordship, his Grace, nor his Highness, to dedicate this little Chronicle unto, for patronage; but, like its author, it must stand upon its own merits, and like him, it has many imperfections. The piece will in no wise answer its title, save only in giving an account of the different religious sects in the state: and, even in this particular, the account is general, without descending to minute circumstances. To make the pamphlet small, where I have quoted the words of others, or taken passages out of histories, I have given the authors no credit. If I have bourne too hard upon the Episcopalians, it is because they only have been established by law, and I am no great admirer of legal religion. And even in this point, I hope the note, under the twelfth head, will sufficiently palliate. In the description of the Baptist principles, I have sometimes used the plural pronoun, we, us, etc., but if I have inadvertently misrepresented the general opinion, and only written my own, I I should be glad to be corrected. A particular narration how the Baptist religion broke out and spread, and by what means, and marvellous ways God wrought, is likely to be offered to the world, in a History now preparing by the General Committee. Although I have presumed to appear in public, yet I will by no means recall a former observation:

Some books are written in ambition, Others to change a low condition;

Some are th’ effect of pride and spite, And some, perhaps, are written right; But should the gospel clearly shine, How many books, now call’d divine, Would be committed to the flames, And authors lose their mighty names. THE VIRGINIA CHRONICLE 25.

Truth is as essential to history as the soul is to the body. - FREDERICK. In omnibus rebus magis offendit nimium quam parum. A DESCRIPTION OF VIRGINIA. THIS state, from the Virgin Queen, (Elizabeth,) is called VIRGINIA. Bounded on the north, by Maryland, Pennsylvania, etc.; on the west, by the Ohio and the Mississippi; on the south, by Carolina, and on the east, by the Atlantic. From east to west, the state is about seven hundred and fifty-eight miles; but from north to south, it is very unequal, being much wider at the west than at the east. According to the best calculation of the boundary lines, it includes one hundred and twenty-one thousand, five hundred and twenty five square miles, or, seventy-seven million, seven hundred and seventy-six thousand acres. The state is divided by several ridges of mountains: the Blue Ridge, the North Mountain, and the Alleghany, are the most notable. Though some mountains are of a greater altitude from their bases in the two first ridges mentioned, yet the Alleghany is the ridge-pole of the state. All the waters, east of that mountain, fall into the Atlantic; and all west of it, fall into the Mississippi, and empty themselves into the Gulf of Mexico. The state, at present, is divided into ninety counties, each of which, is entitled to send two delegates to the General Assembly. There are also, in the state, about one hundred parishes. In England, there are nine thousand three hundred and forty-eight parishes; in Scotland, nine hundred and thirty-eight; in Ireland, fifteen hundred and eighty-six; in all, eleven thousand eight hundred and seventy-two. In some counties, there are not more than one parish; in others, there are as many as four; in rare instances, parishes include parts of two counties. Those counties that have been established since the revolution, have no parishes in them. Under the regal government, parish-officers provided for the poor, as well as the preachers; but now, the poor are otherwise provided for, and preachers are not supported by legal force; and was it not for the preservation of parish property, viz., glebes, churches, etc., there would be no need of parish bounds in the state.

NUMBER OF INHABITANTS. IN the year, 1584, Queen Elizabeth, by her letters patent, licensed Sir Walter Raleigh, to search for remote heathen lands, not inhabited by Christian people, and sent out two ships, which visited Wococon Island, in North-Carolina; and the next year he sent one hundred and seven men, who settled Roanoke Island.

And, in the year, 1586, he sent fifty men more, and in 1587, one hundred and fifty more, with a governor and twelve assistants, who landed at Hatteras. Sir Walter being attainted at home, could take no more care of his new colonists; and what became of them, whether they were devoured by hunger, or wild beasts - destroyed by savages, or incorporated among them, no mortal man can tell.

But, in 1607, King James executed a new grant of Virginia, to Sir Thomas Gates, and others, which was superseded, 1609, to the Earl of Salisbury, and others. The first settlement they made, was at Jamestown, few in number, and surrounded almost by savage nations; but, by the blessing of God, the little one is become a strong nation. Mr. Jefferson says, that in 1782, there were in this state, five hundred and sixty-seven thousand six hundred and fourteen inhabitants, of every age, sex, and condition. Of which, two hundred and ninety-six thousand eight hundred and fifty-two, were free, and two hundred and seventy thousand seven hundred and sixty-two, were slaves; which makes the proportion of slaves to the free, nearly as ten to eleven. Mr. Randolph, in 1788, stated the round numbers, thus: three hundred and fifty-two thousand whites, and two hundred and thirty-six thousand blacks; in all, five hundred and eighty-eight thousand. According to Mr. Randolph’s statement, from 1782, to 1788, the whites had increased above fifty-five thousand, but the blacks had decreased about thirty-four thousand. These gentlemen had both official accounts, being both governors of Virginia, but the returns from the counties are imperfect, and from some counties, no returns at all are made to the Executive. According to Mr. Randolph’s account, the proportion of blacks to the whites, is nearly as two is to three. To do honor to both these great characters, and to make allowance for population, and emigration in the west part of the state, since 1788, I conclude that the number of six hundred thousand inhabitants, is not far from truth. And to form a compromise between their proportions, ten to eleven, and two to three, we may suppose that the number of blacks, compared to that of whites, is like six to seven. By this rule, there are in Virginia, three hundred and twenty-three thousand and seventy-seven whites, and two hundred and seventy-six thousand nine hundred and twenty-three blacks. It has been observed, that the number of acres in Virginia, is seventy-seven million seven hundred and seventy-six thousand, which, equally divided among the inhabitants, would be more than one hundred and eleven acres for each soul; which is above thirty times as much as the nation of Israel had, when they took possession of the promised land, according to Richard Tyron, Esq. OF THE QUAKERS. THE first settlers in this state, were emigrants from England, of the English church, just at a point of time when the Episcopalians were flushed with complete victory over all other religious persuasions; and having power in their hands, they soon discovered a degree of intolerance towards others. The oppressed Quakers, flying from persecution in England, cast their eyes on these colonies, as asylums of civil and religious liberty, but found them free for none but the reigning sects. Several acts of the Virginia Assembly, of 1659, 1662, 1693, made it penal in parents, to refuse to baptize their children; prohibited the unlawful assembling of Quakers, and made it penal for any master of a vessel to bring a Quaker into the colony; ordered those already here, and those who should come thereafter, to be imprisoned till they should abjure the country; provided a milder punishment for their first and second return, but death for the third; forbid all persons from suffering Quaker meetings in, or near their houses, entertaining them individually, or disposing of books that supported their tenets. It is a satirical saying, that every sect will oppress, when they have the power in possession, and the saying is too serious as well as satirical. When we read of the sufferings of the Quakers, or any other society, we can hardly believe that those oppressed innocents, would ever retaliate, if it was in their power; much less, that they would ever oppress those who had not oppressed them; but stubborn fact declares the contrary. I have pretty good authority, that the Penn Quakers, in Pennsylvania, imprisoned and fined the Keithian Quakers, in 1692, on account of some religious disputes. What contributes greatly towards this kind of oppression, is the erroneous scheme of receiving all the natural offspring into the pales of the church: by this method, in general, a great majority of the church will be ignorant of the new birth, and consequently of the nature of the gospel; and therefore, of course, appeal to the civil law, for protection, which naturally brings on oppression upon all nonconformists.

Notwithstanding the laws of Virginia were so severe against the Quakers, yet there is no account that any of them were put to death; and a remnant of them have continued in Virginia, down to this day, holding the same principles, and pursuing the same manners, of their brethren in the northern states, and those in Europe. OF THE SLAVES. THE horrid work of bartering spirituous liquor for human souls, plundering the African coast, and kidnapping the people, brought the poor slaves into this state; and, notwithstanding their usage is much better here than in the West Indies, yet human nature, unbiased by education, shudders at the sight. They populate as fast as the whites do, and are rather more healthy, The first republican assembly ever holden in Virginia, passed an act, utterly prohibiting the importation of any of them into the state. In some things, they are viewed as human creatures, and in others, only as property; their true state then, is that of human property. The laws of Virginia, protect their lives and limbs, but do not protect their skin and flesh. The marriage of slaves, is a subject, not known in our code of laws. What promises soever they make, their masters may and do part them at pleasure. If their marriages are as sacred as the marriages of freemen, the slaves are guilty of adultery, when they part voluntarily, and the masters are guilty of a sin as great, when they part them involuntarily; and yet, while they are property, it is not in the power of the masters to prevent their being forced apart, in numberless instances. The marriage of a Hebrew servant, with a Canaanitish slave, could be dispensed with, at the servant’s option, without sin. From this, we should imagine, that there was little or no validity in the marriage of two slaves; but, if it is maintained that their marriages are equally binding with the marriages of the free-born, the inevitable parting of married slaves, holds forth the idea of slavery in a still more aggravated point of view.

Liberty of conscience, in matters of religion, is the right of slaves, beyond contradiction; and yet, many masters and overseers will whip and torture the poor creatures for going to meeting, even at night, when the labor of the day is over. No longer ago than November, 1788, Mr. - made a motion in the assembly, for leave to bring in a bill, not only to prevent the assembling of slaves together, but to fine the masters for allowing it; but, to his great mortification, it was rejected with contempt. No change is yet discernible among the negroes in Virginia, in point of color; but the children of the third and fourth generations retain as much of the jet, as their ancestors did, who were imported from Africa. The difference of climate, therefore, cannot be the cause of the difference of colors; and, as they live upon the same kind of food that the whites do, their diet cannot be the cause of a diversity of color, hair or shape.

Letters were not much used, if any at all, before the days of Moses; consequently, 2,500 years elapsed without registers, which answers for our ignorance of the cause of the many colors, different shapes, and diversity of hues among the sons of grandfather Adam, and father Noah; and also apologizes for our uncertainty, how the many islands and continents were peopled, at first, with those animals that the ark unladed upon the mountains of Ararat. From the blacks, in Virginia, there have been few Albinos born. These Albinos proceed from black parents, but are in color like the tawny plastering of a wall, without any seams in their flesh, or much Cornelian. Their hair, in length and curl, is like that of blacks, but of a white color; their shape like blacks. Their eyes are sharp and tremulous, and cannot endure the light of the sun as well as others, but see better in the night. Some of their children are black, and others are Albino. I have seen a few of them, and heard of others.

Romulus, the first king of Rome, placed the patricians in the senate, and divided the plebians into tribes, but as for the slaves, they were not considered at all, which is true of the slaves in Virginia, as far as it respects incorporation, but not in every respect. Among us, they are tried before magistrates and courts, and their evidences are as valid, one against another, as the testimonies of the free-born are; but the concurring testimony of a thousand blacks against a white man, is but a cypher in law. If a slave is ever so much abused by his master, or overseer, with unmerciful tasks, barbarous chastisement, etc., if his life and limbs are secure, nothing is done to the abuser. The slave has none to apply to for redress. In our federal government, the slaves are treated with some more respect than they are in the state government. Although they have no vote in the choice of representatives to Congress, yet, according to the census established in the federal constitution, five of them number equal to three whites, which amounts to this, that a slave is possessed of three-fifths of a man, and two-fifths of a brute. The state of slaves is truly pitiable, and that of the master, in some things, more so. Slaves, drudge and toil for others, and but seldom please them. Men seldom please themselves, and others are almost sure to displease. When the mind is out of humor, it always seeks an object to accuse with the cause of its trouble: so Adam blamed Eve, and Eve the devil. Overseers commonly scold at slaves, let them do ill or well, from the generally received opinion, that negroes will not bear good usage; the slave grows heartless, and sinks in despair, and, knowing that he labors for another, has nothing to stimulate him. The master finds that, without force, nothing will be done; and, therefore, without rage and lightning in his eyes, and a lash in his hand, can make him happy, he is sure to be miserable. If a hard hand and a meek heart, are preferable to a soft hand and a turbulent, fretted, disappointed heart, the master would be better without them than with them. The whole scene of slavery is pregnant with enormous evils. On the master’s side, pride, haughtiness, domination, cruelty, deceit and indolence; and on the side of the slave, ignorance, servility, fraud, perfidy and despair. If these, and many other evils, attend it, why not liberate them at once? Would to Heaven this were done! The sweets of rural and social life will never be well enjoyed, until it is the case. But the voice of reason, (or perhaps the voice of covetousness,) says, it is not the work of a day; time is necessary to accomplish the important work: a political evil requires political measures to reform. Insurmountable difficulties arise to prevent their freedom. Can government free them? The laws have declared them property; as such, men have bought and enjoyed them. Is it not unconstitutional for government to take away the property of individuals? Can government ransom them? Their number Isaiah 276,923; if they should be valued at £30 in average, the sum would be £8,307,690, infinitely beyond what the commonwealth could pay to the holders of slaves, for their ransom, unless they should be made to ransom themselves in discount; which would cast an intolerable burthen upon those who, through conscience or poverty, have none of them in possession.

Some men have almost all their estates in slaves, while the estates of others are in lands; should the legislature, therefore, force one part of the community to give up their property, and leave the other part in full possession of all, would they not be justly accused of injustice?

Others, there are, who owe great sums of money; they were credited upon the value of their slaves; should their slaves be now emancipated by law, the creditors would lose their just dues. The custom of the country is such, that, without slaves, a man’s children stand but a poor chance to marry in reputation. As futile as this may appear to a foreigner, I am well convinced, that now it is one of the great difficulties that prevent liberation of slaves among the common sort. To this I would add, that bad custom has so far prevailed, that it is looked upon rather mean for a free man to be employed in drudgery. Were they freed from their masters, without being eligible to any post of honor and profit, it would only be another name for slavery; and, if they were eligible, it is not easy to say what governors, legislatures, and judges we should have. If they were walking at liberty, in every respect, I know not what past injuries might prompt them to do. And how much mixing of colors in marriage, and how many forcible debauches there might be, no mortal man can foretell. 26. But one thing is pretty certain, that fancy can hardly point out, how they could serve the whites worse than the whites now serve them. Something must be done! May Heaven point out that something, and may the people be obedient. If they are not brought out of bondage, in mercy, with the consent of their masters, I think that they will be, by judgment, against their consent.

It is the peculiarity of God, to bring light out of darkness, good out of evil, order out of confusion, and make the wrath of man praise him. The poor slaves, under all their hardships, discover as great inclination for religion as the freeborn do. When they engage in the service of God, they spare no pains. It is nothing strange for them to walk twenty miles on Sunday morning to meeting, and back again at night. They are remarkable for learning a tune soon, and have very melodious voices.

They cannot read, and therefore, are more exposed to delusion than the whites are; but many of them give clear, rational accounts of a work of grace in their hearts, and evidence the same by their lives. When religion is lively, they are remarkably fond of meeting together, to sing, pray, and exhort, and sometimes preach, and seem to be unwearied in the exercises. They seem, in general, to put more confidence in their own color, than they do in the whites. When they attempt to preach, they seldom fail of being very zealous; their language is broken, but they understand each other, and the whites may gain their ideas. A few of them have undertaken to administer baptism, but it generally ends in confusion. They commonly are more noisy, in time of preaching, than the whites, and are more subject to bodily exercise, and if they meet with any encouragement in these things, they often grow extravagant. THE UNIFORMITY OF RELIGION FOR ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY YEARS.

UNDER the regal government, the Episcopal form of worship was established by law in Virginia. The ministers of that order, solemnly affirmed, that they gave their unfeigned assent and consent to the thirty-nine articles, and book of common prayer, and declared that they were inwardly moved, by the Holy-Ghost, to enter upon the work of the ministry; this they avowed at their ordination, and being consecrated by a spiritual lord in England, they were proper subjects to fill the vacant, or new created parishes in Virginia. If it could be supposed, that they were avaricious salary-hunters, they surely had a tempting bait before them; like the people of old, who said, "put me, I pray thee, into the priest’s office, that I may have bread to eat. " But, as it is not my wish to inculcate slander, or raise a mean jealousy in the minds of any, I shall attend to matter of fact. When an incumbent was inducted into a parish, he was entitled to a wealthy glebe, having all necessary houses built upon it, at the expense of the parish, which he held during good behaviour. His fixed salary was sixteen thousand pounds of tobacco, which was stated at 16s and 8d per hundred, which made the sum of £133 6s 8d, Virginia currency. He was also entitled to 20s, for every marriage that he solemnized in the mode of a license, and 5s for every one by publication. He had a further perquisite of 40s for every funeral sermon that he preached. His parishioners, were under no legal bonds to have a funeral sermon preached for their deceased friends, but custom led all persons of reputation, to request it. Whether it was owing to their superabundant virtue, or the indolence of the people, or any other cause, it seldom so happened that they were dismissed from their parishes, after they were once inducted into them. The king of Britain was the head of that church; every child that was baptized was a member of it, and no discipline was executed among them but the civil law. The Quakers were few and peaceable, and, as there were none to oppose Episcopacy, it may be said, that they enjoyed the full possession of the state, until about 1740, without having any to call in question their doctrine and forms of worship. OF THE PRESBYTERIANS. THAT part of Virginia, between the Blue Ridge and the Alleghany, is peopled in part by emigrants from Pennsylvania, of Irish extraction, and Presbyterian profession, who, before the middle of this century, set up their form of worship; but, being in the then frontiers of the state, were not troubled by government; but the rise and treatment of the Presbyterians, below the Blue-Ridge, was as follows: A number of persons in the county of Hanover, grew very uneasy in the state they were in; could not find that satisfaction, under the preaching of Episcopal ministers, which they desired, and had no opportunity of hearing any others; but, in the year 1743, a young gentleman from Scotland, got a book of Mr. Whitfield’s sermons, and one Mr. Samuel Morris read it, and received great benefit therefrom. He next invited his neighbours to come and hear the book read, and as the truth had great effect upon them, Mr. Morris was invited to meet the people at various places, and read to them, which was much owned and blessed of God; but, for absenting from the church, they were cited to appear before the court, to assign their reasons, and declare what denomination they were of. As they were not acquainted with any dissenters but the Quakers; and as they had heard and read of Luther, the Reformer, they declared themselves, Lutherans. About this time, Mr. William Robinson, from a northern Presbytery, travelled through the back parts of Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. On his return, he founded a Presbyterian congregation in the county of Lunenburg, Virginia, and preached, with great success, in Amelia. The people in Hanover, hearing of him, sent a messenger, desiring him to come into their Macedonia, and help them. Accordingly, on July 6th, 1743, he came and preached among them four days, with remarkable success, and directed them to pray and sing, at their meetings, as well as read. After him, came Mr. Roan, from the Presbytery of Newcastle, who was instrumental in spreading the work further around; but, for speaking a little freely of the degeneracy of the Episcopal clergy in Virginia, he was accused of speaking blasphemy. A vile wretch, (like Jezebel’s witnesses,) deposed that he blasphemed God and the clergy, whereupon an indictment was drawn up; but he was returning to the northward, when the trial came on, no witnesses appeared against him, so that the indictment fell through. The people in Hanover, then sent to the Synod of New York, in 1745; the Synod drew an address to Sir William Gooch, governor of Virginia, and sent it by the Rev. Messrs. Tennant and Finley. The governor received them very politely, and gave them license to preach. After they left Virginia, Mr. Morris was several times presented to the court, and fined, for neglecting the church. Soon after, came Messrs. William Tennant, and Samuel Blair, and after them, Mr. Whitfield, and preached among them four or five days. In the spring of the year, 1747, came Mr. Samuel Davies, in a time of great need. A proclamation was set up at their meeting-house, obliging all the magistrates to suppress all itinerant preachers; but, Mr. Davies went to the governor and obtained a license to preach at four meeting-houses. He moved into Virginia, in 1748, and preached there eleven years; he had seven meeting-houses, three of them were in Hanover, and four in the counties of Henrico, Caroline, Goochland, and Louisa. In 1759, he removed from Virginia to New Jersey, to be President over Nassau Hall College, at Princeton; but the great and good man, did not live long there, for he departed this life, February, 176 1.

About the time of the revival, in Hanover, there was a great awakening in Augusta, under the ministry of Messrs. Dean and Byram, and something of a like work in Frederick. The Presbyterians are pretty numerous in Virginia; they have several academies in the state, and one college in Prince Edward, presided over by Mr. Smith, under whose ministry there has been a sweet revival of religion of late. Their doctrine and discipline, are too well known to be repeated. They were all obliged to pay the Episcopal clergymen, as much as if they had been Episcopalians, until the late Revolution; and, if their preachers solemnized the rites of matrimony, in the mode of license, the parish preachers claimed and recovered the fees, as though they had solemnized the rites themselves. The Presbyterians indulge, perhaps, in too much mirth at their houses, yet, it may be said in truth, that they have the best art of training up children, in good manners, of any society in the state. OF THE METHODISTS. THE Methodists took their rise in England, fifty or sixty years ago; but what concerns us at present, is to consider their rise and spread in America, and particularly in Virginia, which was as follows:

About 1764, Philip Embury, a local preacher, from Ireland, came to New York, and formed a society, of his own countrymen, and others. About the same time, Robert Strawbridge, another local preacher, from Ireland, settled in Frederick county, in Maryland, and formed a few societies. In 1769, Richard Boardman, and Joseph Pilmoor, came to New York, who were the first regular Methodist preachers on the continent. In 1771, Francis Asbury, and Richard Wright, came over, and many classes were formed, and many ministers were raised up among them. From their first rise in America, until 1784, they called themselves the members of the church of England, and went to the Episcopal ministers for baptism and the eucharist.

They never spread much in Virginia, till about 1775. Since that time, they have spread so much, that they have a sprinkling all over the state, and, in some counties, are numerous. In 1784, Rev. Thomas Coke came over from England, having authority from Mr. John Wesley, (the first founder of the society,) to organize the Methodists into a distinct church. Pursuant thereto, Mr. Francis Asbury was ordained superintendant, and a number of elders and deacons were consecrated for inferior services. Their number, on the continent, is above forty-three thousand, and they have been the most fortunate, in increasing their number of preachers, of any society in Virginia. They deny the doctrine of predestination, according to the Calvanistic explanation; hold that Christ died for all Adam’s progeny; believe that, after men are converted and sanctified, they may fall away, and be finally damned; their doctrine, in fine, is Arminian, their magazine bears the name. Their ministers are very constant preachers, and they exceed all societies in the state, in spreading their books and written tenets among the people. They generally baptize by sprinkling, but their rules allow of pouring or immersion. 27. OF THE TUNKERS

THERE are a few Tunkers and Mennonists in Virginia, and, as it is the design of this chronicle to treat of all the religious sects in the state, I shall give an account of their first rise and peculiarities. First of the Tunkers. The Germans sound the letter t like d, for which reason they are called Dunkers, which name signifies Sops or Dippers. They first arose in Schwardznau, in the year 1708. Seven religious neighbors, chiefly Presbyterians, consorted together, to read the Bible, and edify each other in the way that they had been brought up, having never heard that there was a Baptist in the world. However, being convinced of believers’ baptism, and congregational government, they desired Alexander Mack to baptize them, which he objected to, considering himself unbaptized; upon which they cast lots for an administrator.28. Upon whom the lot fell, has been cautiously concealed; but baptized they were, in the river Eder, by Schwardzenau, and then formed themselves into a church, choosing Alexander Mack for their minister. As God prospered their labors, and made them increase, both in members and preachers, so Satan raised persecution against them. Some fled to Holland, and some to Creyfelt; and the mother church voluntarily removed to Frizland, and thence to America. In 1719, and in 1729, those of Holland and Creyfelt followed them. In Pennsylvania, Maryland, etc., there is a considerable number of them; and a few from those states have found their way into Virginia. They hold that Christ not only died for all Adam’s race, but that he will finally restore all to glory. They practise trine-immersion in baptism; leading the candidate into the water, he kneels down, and the minister dips him, face downward, first in the name of the Father, then in the name of the Son, and then in the name of the Holy Ghost; which being done, while he continues on his knees, the minister imposes hands upon his head, prays, and then leads them out. They also practise washing of feet, anointing the sick with oil, and the holy kiss. They will neither swear, fight, nor keep slaves. They make little or no use of the civil law, and take no use for money. As Christians, they live mortified, self-denying lives; and, as citizens, they are patterns of peace; well deserving their common title - harmless Tunkers. OF THE MENNONISTS. THE Mennonists derive their name from Menno Simon. He was born in the year 1505 - got into orders in 1528 - continued a famous preacher and disputer till 1531. He then began to question the validity of many things in the church of Rome, and among the rest, infant baptism; but neither the doctors of his order, nor those of the Protestant faith, gave him the satisfaction he wished for. He finally embraced believers’ baptism, and continued preaching and planting churches in the low countries for thirty years, and died in peace, January 31, 1561. Menno was dipped himself, and dipped others, and so did his successors, except when they were in prison, or were hindered from going to the water, and then pouring was practised. What they used in Europe, only of necessity, is become the only mode practised by them in America. They hold a profession of faith a prerequisite to baptism, which, in Virginia, is made by learning to answer a number of questions. The candidate being received, kneels down before the minister, and water is poured on his head; after which, follow imposition of hands and prayer. They believe the doctrine of universal provision, but not the doctrine of universal restitution; they are equally conscientious of swearing and bearing arms, with the Quakers and Tunkers. The only Virginia Baptist church that I know of in the state, that refuse to bear arms, or take an oath before a magistrate, is one in Shenandoah; the chiefest of whom, are the natural descendants of the Mennonists. In worship and discipline, they are like other Baptists in the state; but some peculiarities of the Mennonists, keep them from uniting. The Tunkers and Mennonists seem to be more consistent with themselves than the Quakers, in disusing the law as well as arms. Perhaps the reason is, because the two first have been small, persecuted societies, and have learned to bear affliction patiently, and have but little to do with mankind; but should they undertake to settle a colony themselves, as the Quakers did Pennsylvania, it is probable that they would see the necessity of civil law. Civil government is certainly a curse to mankind; but it is a necessary curse, in this fallen state, to prevent greater evils. It is yet a question, whether the good Quakers have a sufficient reason for using the law, and not appealing to arms. If an internal foe arises, and kills a man, they execute the law, and hang the murderer; but if external foes invade, and kill and burn all before them, no means must be used to bring them to punishment. Is it bad reasoning to say, that when innocency is injured, it appeals first to law for redress; but if it finds no redress at law, it finally appeals to arms? The law of a state, is the compact of citizens in the state, and the law of nations in confederation, is the compact of bodies of men; and why the violators of one should be punished, and the breakers of the other pass with impunity, is not so easily answered. If all nations were true to their engagements, there would be no war in the world; so, if all the citizens in a state, lived agreeable to the laws of it, there would be no punishment. If there was no sin in the world, there would be no laws needed. The more virtuous people are, the more liberal their laws should be; but the more vicious the people are, the more severe the laws must be, to restrain their unruly passions. Where rulers are more virtuous than the people, the more independent and important the rulers are, the better for the people; but where the people are more virtuous than the magistrates, magistrates should be dependant on, and responsible to the people. As it is generally seen that the people are more virtuous than those in power; consequently, a republican, responsible government is best. Great salaries given to officers, are as dangerous to the good of the community, as no salaries are. Great salaries stimulate avaricious men, to make use of undue means to acquire those offices, while men of real merit feel a disgust to prey so much upon the industrious. Incompetent salaries, disable men of small forturnes from filling those offices their real merit entitles them to, and consequently fix government in the hands of the rich, who generally feel more for themselves, than they do for the poor. To fix salaries high enough, and not too high, is the work of the wise; and to give power enough to men to do good, and yet have it so counterpoised, that they can do no harm, is a line so difficult to be drawn, that it has never yet been done. OF THE BAPTISTS. THE Baptists took their rise in Virginia, before the Methodists; but, as I purpose to treat more largely on the doctrine and forms of the Baptists, than I have done on other societies, I have reserved them for the last.

There were a few Baptists in Virginia, before the year, 1760, but they did not spread, so as to be taken notice of by the people, much less by the rulers, till after that date. About the year, 1764, they prevailed so much, that, in the year following, they formed an Association, called, "the Ketocton Regular Baptist Association." 29. From 1764, to 1774, the Baptists spread over the greatest part of the state that was peopled. Several ministers, of that order came from Pennsylvania and the Jerseys, and settled in the northern parts of the state, and others were raised up in the southern parts, who travelled about, and preached like the old Baptist, John, "repent, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand," and great numbers of the people went out unto them, and were baptized, confessing their sins. Many of the young converts caught the spirit of their teachers, and zealously engaged in the work. In a course of time, the fires from the northern preachers, and those in the south, met, like the two seas, in St. Paul’s shipwreck, in Orange county, 1767. Two or three ministers, from each side, assembled in conference, but did not so happily unite, as candor desired. A division took place. The northern members called themselves, "Regular Baptists," and the southern members called themselves, "Separate Baptists;" and, if some alienation of affection did not attend this division, in some instances, it was because they were free from those temptations that have always mingled with religious divisions, and if there was not a little zeal discovered to proselyte, as well as convert the people, I have been wrongly informed. The Regulars, adhered to a confession of faith, first published in London, 1689, and afterwards adopted by the Baptist Association of Philadelphia, in 1742; but the Separates had none but the Bible. Just upon the spot of ground where the division took place, the members knew something of the cause; but those who lived at a distance, were ignorant of the reason, and whenever they met, they loved each other as brethren, and much deplored that there should be any distinction, or shyness among them. The Separates, who also formed an association, increased much the fastest, both in ministers and members, and occupied, by far, the greatest territory. The Regulars were orthodox Calvanists, and the work under them was solemn and rational; but the Separates were the most zealous, and the work among them was very noisy. The people would cry out, "fall down," and, for a time, lose the use of their limbs; which exercise made the bystanders marvel; some thought they were deceitful, others, that they were bewitched, and many being convinced of all, would report that God was with them of a truth. THE PERSECUTION OF THE BAPTISTS.

SOON after the Baptist ministers began to preach in Virginia, the novelty of their doctrine, the rarity of mechanics and planters preaching such strange things,30. and the wonderful effect that their preaching had on the people, called out multitudes to hear them - some out of curiosity, some in sincerity, and some in ill will. Their doctrine, influence and popularity, made them many enemies; especially among those who value themselves most for religion in the Episcopal mode. The usual alarm of the Church and State being in danger, was echoed through the colony; nor were the Episcopal clergymen so modest, but what they joined the alarm; like the silversmiths of old, crying "our craft is in danger of being set at naught." Magistrates began to issue their warrants, and sheriffs had their orders to take up the disturbers of the peace. The county of Spottsylvania took the lead, and others soon followed their example. Preaching, teaching, or exhorting, was what disturbed the peace. A like work disturbed the peace of Satan, when he cried out, "let us alone." Sometimes, when the preachers were brought before the courts, they escaped the prison by giving bonds and security, that they would not preach in the county in the term of one year; but most of them preferred the dungeon to such bonds. Not only ministers were imprisoned, but others, for only praying in their families, with a neighbor or two. The act of toleration, passed in the first of William and Mary’s reign, afforded the suffering brethren some relief. By applying to the general court, and subscribing to all the thirty-nine articles, saving the thirty-fourth, thirty-fifth, and thirty-sixth, together with one clause in the twentieth, and part of the twenty-seventh, they obtained license to preach at certain stipulated places; 31. but, if they preached at any other places, they were exposed to be prosecuted.

Some of the prisoners would give bonds not to preach, and as soon as they were freed, would immediately preach as before. This was done, when they had reason to believe that the court would never bring suit upon the bonds. I have never heard of but one such suit in the state, and that one was dismissed. The ministers would go singing from the court-house to the prison, where they had, sometimes, the liberty of the bounds, and at other times they had not. They used to preach to the people through the grates: to prevent which, some ill-disposed men would be at the expense of erecting a high wall around the prison; others, would employ half drunken strolls to beat a drum around the prison to prevent the people from hearing. Sometimes, matches and pepper-pods were burnt at the prison-door, and many such afflictions the dear disciples went through. About thirty of the preachers were honored with a dungeon, and a few others beside. Some of them were imprisoned as often as four times, besides all the mobs and perils they went through. The dragon roared with hideous peals, but was not red - the Beast appeared formidable, but was not scarlet colored. Virginia soil has never been stained with vital blood for conscience sake. Heaven has restrained the wrath of man, and brought auspicious days at last. We now sit under our vines and fig-trees, and there is none to make us afraid. THE REASONS OF THEIR DISSENT. BUT why this schism? says an inquisitor. If the people were disposed to be more devotional than they had been before, why not be devout in the church in which they had been raised, without rending themselves off, and procuring so much evil unto themselves? This question may be answered in part, by asking a similar one. Why did the Episcopal church rend off from the church of Rome, in the Reformation? Why not continue in that church, and worship in her mode? What necessity for that schism, which occasioned so much war and persecution? If we are to credit Frederick, in his "Memoirs of the House of Brandenburg," the cause of the Reformation was, in England, the love of a woman - in Germany, the love of gain - in France, the love of novelty, or a song. But can the church of England offer no other reason for her heretical schism, but the love of a woman? Undoubtedly she can: she has done it, and we approve of her reason; but after all, she is not so pure in her worship, but what we have many reasons for dissenting from her. Some of which are as follows:

1. No national church, can, in its organization, be the Gospel Church. A national church takes in the whole nation, and no more; whereas, the Gospel Church, takes in no nation, but those who fear God, and work righteousness in every nation. The notion of a Christian commonwealth, should be exploded forever, without there was a commonwealth of real Christians. Not only so, but if all the souls in a government, were saints of God, should they be formed into a society by law, that society could not be a Gospel Church, but a creature of state.

2. The church of England, in Virginia, has no discipline but the civil law. The crimes of their delinquent members are tried in a court-house, before the judges of the police, their censures are laid on at the whipping-post, and their excommunications are administered at the gallows. In England, if a man cast contempt upon the spiritual court, the bishop delegates a grave priest, who, with his chancellor, excommunicate him. The man thus excommunicated, is by law, disabled from being a plaintiff or witness in any suit. But for heresy, incest or adultery, the bishop himself pronounces the exclusion. The outcast, is not only denied the company of Christians, in spiritual duties, but also, in temporal concerns. He not only is disabled from being plaintiff or witness in any suit, (and so deprived of the protection of the law,) but if he continues forty-days an excommunicant, a writ comes against him, and he is cast into prison, without bail, and there continues until he has paid the last mite. Mrs.

Trask was judged a heretick, because she believed in the Jewish Sabbath, and for that, she was imprisoned sixteen years, until she died; but a Gospel Church has nothing to do with corporeal punishments. If a member commits sin, the church is to exclude him, which is as far as church power extends. If the crime is cognizable by law, the culprit must bear what the law inflicts. In the church of England, ecclesiastical and civil matters are so blended together, that I know not who can be blamed for dissenting from her.

3. The manner of initiating members into the church of England, is arbitrary and tyrannical. The subject, (for a candidate I cannot call him,) is taken by force, brought to the priest, baptized, and declared a member of the church. The little Christian shows all the aversion he is capable of, by cries and struggles, but all to no purpose; ingrafted he is; and, when the child grows up, if he differs in judgment from his father and king, he is called a dissenter, because he is honest, and will not say that he believes what he does not believe; and, as such, in England, can fill no post of honor or profit. Here, let it be observed, that religion is a matter entirely between God and individuals. No man has a right to force another to join a church; nor do the legitimate powers of civil government extend so far as to disable, incapacitate, proscribe, or in any way distress, in person, property, liberty or life, any man who cannot believe and practice in the common road. A church of Christ, according to the Gospel, is a congregation of faithful persons, called out of the world by divine grace, who mutually agree to live together, and execute gospel discipline among them; which government, is not national, parochial, or presbyterial, but congregational.

4. The church of England has a human head. Henry VIII. cast off the Pope’s yoke, and was declared head of the church, 1533; which title, all the kings of England have borne since; but the Gospel Church, acknowledges no head but King Jesus: He is lawgiver, king, and judge - is a jealous God, and will not give his glory unto another.

5. The preachers of that order, in Virginia, for the most part, not only plead for theatrical amusements, and what they call civil mirth, but their preaching is dry and barren, containing little else but morality. The great doctrines of universal depravity, redemption by the blood of Christ, rengeneration, faith, repentance and self-denial, are but seldom preached by them, and, when they meddle with them, it is in such a superficial manner, as if they were nothing but things of course.

6. Their manner of visiting the sick, absolving sins, administering the Lord’s supper to newly married couples, burying the dead, sprinkling children with their gossips, promises, cross, etc., are no ways satisfactory, and, as they were handed to us through the force of law, we reject them in toto. These are some of the reasons we have for dissenting from the Episcopalians in Virginia, and though they may not be sufficient to justify our conduct, in the opinion of others, yet they have weight with us. 32.

THREE GREAT PRINCIPLES.

THERE are three grand, leading principles, which divide the Christian world: I say leading principles - for each of them is subdivided into a number of peculiarities; these three, I shall call fate, free-will, and restitution.

1st. Fate. Those who believe this doctrine, say, that God eternally ordained whatsoever comes to pass: that if the minutest action should be done that God did not appoint, it would not only prove a world of chance, but create an uneasiness in the Divine mind; that providence and grace are stewards, to see that all God’s decrees are fulfilled. Sometimes a distinction is made between God’s absolute and permissive decrees; that God absolutely decreed the good, and permissively decreed the evil. Other times it is stated thus: that upon the principle of God’s knowing all things, every thing comes to pass of necessity. With this sentiment, most commonly, is connected the doctrine of particular redemption: that Jesus Christ undertook for a certain number of Adam’s progeny, and for them alone he died; that those for whom he died, shall be called, by irresistible grace, to the knowledge of the Truth and be saved; that if one of these, whom he chose and redeemed, should miss of Heaven, his will would be frustrated, and his blood lost. And as this, at first view, seems to excuse the non-elect for not believing in the Mediator, it is sometimes said that Jesus died virtually for all, but intentionally for a few. Others, who disdain such pitiful shifts, say, that the want of the faith of God’s elect, is no sin; that justice cannot require a man to have a more divine life than Adam possesed in Eden; that if we, as rational creatures, do not believe as much as Adam could have believed in innocency, when revealed to us, that we are guilty of the sin of unbelief; but that the law cannot require us to believe in a Mediator, and therefore, the want of that faith is not a sin. Those who adhere to this principle, are called, Fatalists, Predestinarians, Calvanists, Supralapsarians, etc.

2d. Free-Will. Those who adopt this principle, affirm that God eternally decreed to establish the freedom of the human will. That if men are necessary agents, the very idea of virtue and vice is destroyed; that the more angels and men are exalted in their creation, in the state of free agency, the greater was the probability of their falling; that sin could never have entered into the world, upon any other footing; that if man does what he cannot avoid, it is no rebellion in the creature; that God never offers violence to the human will, in the process of grace; that Christ has fulfilled the law, which all were under- bore the curse for all - spilt his blood for all - makes known his grace to all - gives to each a talent - bids all improve - and finally, that if men are damned, it will not be for the want of a Saviour; but for refusing to obey him, damned for unbelief, and that those who are damned will have their torment augmented for refusing an offered Saviour. Some, who adhere to this doctrine, believe that when men are once born again, that they can never perish, and others believe, that there is no state so secure, in this world, but what men may fall from it into eternal damnation. The advocates for the above sentiment, are called Arminians, Free-willers, Universal Provisionists, etc.

3d. Restitution. Those who espouse this sentiment, declare that God eternally designed to save all men; that he made them to enjoy him for ever, and that he will not be frustrated - that Christ died for all, and will not lose his blood - that if more souls are lost than saved, Satan will have the greatest triumph, and sin have a more boundless reign than grace - that if even one soul should be miserable, world without end, the sting of death and the victory of the grave would never be destroyed - that Jesus will reign till all his foes, even the last enemy, shall be rooted up - that he will reconcile all things unto himself, and make all things new - that every creature in heaven, in earth, and under the earth, shall join in the celestial doxology. But those who hold this doctrine are equally perplexed and divided, with those who believe the two before-mentioned principles.

Some of them extend the doctrine to fallen angels, others confine it to the human race - some believe there will be no punishment after death, others conclude that torment will be infflicted in Hades, upon rebellious souls, even until the resurrection of the body; and others think that they will not all be restored, till the expiration of several periodical eternities. Those who avow this doctrine, are called Universalists, Hell-Redemptioners, &c.

Whether it is a blessing or a curse to mankind, it is a certain truth, that the theoretic principles of men, have but little effect upon their lives. I know men of all the before-written doctrines that equally seem to strive to glorify God, in the way which they conceive will do it the most effectually. It is no novelty in the world, for men of different sentiments, to stigmatize the doctrines of each other, with being pregnant with dangerous consequences; but it is not the doctrine or system that a man believes, that makes him either a good or bad man, but the SPIRIT he is governed by. It is a saying among lovers, that "love will triumph over reason," and it is as true, that the disposition of the heart will prevail over the system of the head. The third principle, mentioned above, has few, if any, vouchers among the Baptists in Virginia; but the two first spoken of, divide counties, churches and families, which, about the year 1775, raised a great dispute in Virginia, and finally split the Separate Baptists, which division continued several years; but, after both parties had contested till their courage grew cool, they ceased their hostilities, grounded their arms, and formed a compromise upon the middle ground, of "think and let think;" and ceded to each other its territory and liberty.

I am acquainted with men of all these principles, who are equally assured they are right. No doubt they are right in their own conceits, and they may be all right in their aims; but I am assured they are not all right in their systems; and far enough from being right, when they bitterly condemn each other. OF MARRIAGE.

IT is a question, not easily answered, whether marriage was appointed by the Divine Parent, merely for the propagation of the human species, or for the education of children. Whether one or the other, or both were reasons of the institution, it certainly was appointed by God, honored by Jesus, and declared to be honorable unto all by St. Paul. What lies before me at present, is to consider the mode of marriage, in Virginia, before the late revolution, and the alterations that have since taken place.

Under the regal government, the rites of matrimony were solemnized two ways. The first, and most reputable way, was this: From the clerk’s office, in the county where the bride lived, a license was issued to the bridegroom, which cost twenty shillings, which was a perquisite of the governor; and fifty pounds of tobacco for the fee of the clerk, which raised the price to a guinea. This license was delivered to the clergyman on the wedding day, for his security; and for solemnizing the rites, he was entitled to twenty shillings. This way of getting wives, was too expensive for the poor, and, therefore, another mode was prescribed by law, as an alternative. The clergyman published the banns of marriage on three holy days, for which he was entitled to eighteen pence, and for joining such couples together he was entitled to five shillings. The Presbyterian ministers sometimes solemnized the rites; but if it was by a license, the parish preacher claimed and recovered his fee, as though he had solemnized the rites himself. After the declaration of independence, in 1780, an act passed the general assembly to authorise as many as four ministers in each county, of each denomination, to solemnize the rites; but the act was so partial that some would not qualify, others took what indulgence the act gave, and still petitioned for equal liberty. The Episcopal clergymen were allowed to join people together in any part of the state, while others were circumscribed by county bounds. In 1784, this partiality was removed, and all ministers were set on a level. By presenting credentials of their ordination, and a recommendation of their good character in the society where they are members, and also giving bond and security to the court of the county where they reside, they receive testimonials, signed by the senior magistrate, to join together any persons who legally apply in any part of the state. Publication is now abolished. From the county in which the bride resides, a license is issued out of the clerk’s office, which costs the groom fifteen pence; this license is given to the preacher, for his security; and for joining them to-?ether, he is entitled to five shillings. The preacher is under bonds to ertify the clerk, from whom the license came, of the solemnization; and the clerk, for registering the certificate, is entitled to fifteen pence more: so that it costs but seven shillings and six pence to get a wife in these days. THE DECLENSION AMONG THE BAPTISTS. A REVIEW of head eleven, informs us what persecution the Baptist preachers were subject to, which continued in some counties until the revolution. Upon the declaration of independence, and the establishment of a republican form of government, it is not to be wondered at that the Baptists so heartily and uniformly engaged in the cause of the country against the king. The change suited their political principles, promised religious liberty, and a freedom from ministerial tax; nor have they been disappointed in their expectations. In 1776, the salaries of the Episcopal clergymen were suspended, which was so confirmed in 1779, that no legal force has ever been used since to support any preachers in the state. But as they gained this piece of freedom, so the cares of war, the spirit of trade, and moving to the western waters, seemed to bring on a general declension. The ways of Zion mourned. They obtained their hearts’ desire, (freedom,) but had leanness in their souls. Some of the old watch-men stumbled and fell, iniquity did abound, and the love of many waxed cold. But the declension was not so total, but what God showed himself gracious in some places; his blessings, like small showers in the drought of summer, were scattered abroad. Delegates from the churches assembled in association once or twice in each year; but so much of the time was taken up in considering what means had best be used to obtain and preserve equal liberty with other societies, that many of the churches were discouraged in sending delegates. Many of the ministers removed from their churches, to Kentucky, and left their scattered flocks, like a cottage in the vineyard, like a lodge in a garden of cucumbers. In this point of view was the Baptist Society in Virginia, at the close of the war, and the return of auspicious peace.

October, 1783, was the last General Association the Separate Baptists ever had. They divided into four or five districts; but to maintain a friendly correspondence, and be helpers to each other, in a political way, they established a General Committee, to be composed of delegates sent from each distinct Association, to meet annually. Not more than four delegates from one Association are entitled to seats. This committee give their opinion on all queries sent to them from any of the Associations, originate all petitions to be laid before the legislature of the state, and consider the good of the whole society. It may be here noted, that the General Committee, as well as the Associations, exercise no lordship over the churches - all they attempt is advice, which is generally received by the churches in a cordial manner. Should they attempt any thing more, without legal authority, they would appear ridiculous; and with legal authority, they would grow tyrannical. Of this Committee, the regular Baptist Association became a member. In 1784, the Episcopal society was legally incorporated, and such exertions were made for a general assessment, to oblige all the citizens in the state to pay some preacher, that a bill for that purpose passed two readings; but the final determination of the bill was postponed until November, 1785; when the time came, the Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers, Methodists,33. Deists, and covetous, made such an effort against the bill, that it fell through. In 1786, the act, incorporating the Episcopal society was repealed; but in 1788, their trustees were legalized to manage the property, which is the state of things at this time.

Several attempts were made, at different times, to unite the Regular and Separate Associations together, but all proved in vain, until August, 1787, when they united upon the principle of receiving the confession of faith, before mentioned, as containing the great essential doctrines of the gospel, yet, not in so strict a sense, that all are obliged to believe everything therein contained. 34. At the same time, it was agreed, that the appellations, Regular and Separate, should be buried in oblivion, and that in future they should be called "the United Baptist Churches of Christ in Virginia." THE GREAT WORK. THE first part of the last head gives an account of the declension of religion among the Baptists, which continued until 1785. In the summer of that year, the glorious work of God broke out, on the banks of James River, and from thence has spread almost over the state. In treating of this great revival, I shall not write as a divine, a philosopher, or an opposer, but solely as an historian. In the greatest part of the meetings, when religion is low among the people, there is no unusual appearance among them; a grave countenance, a solemn sigh, or a silent tear, is as much as is seen or heard, and sometimes a great degree of inattention and carelessness: but in times of reviving it is quite otherwise, in most places. It is nothing strange, to see a great part of the congregation fall prostrate upon the floor or ground; many of whom, entirely loose the use of their limbs for a season. Sometimes numbers of them are crying out at once, some of them, in great distress, using such language as this:

"God, be merciful to me a sinner - Lord, save me or I must perish - what shall I do to be saved?" etc. Others breaking out in such rapturous expressions as these: "Bless the Lord, O my soul! O, sweet Jesus, how I love thee! - Let everything that hath breath praise the Lord! - O, sinners! come, taste and see how good the Lord is! " etc.

I have seen such exercise, and heard such melody for several hours together. At Associations, and great meetings, I have seen numbers of ministers and exhorters, improving their gifts at the same time. Such a heavenly confusion among the preachers, and such a celestial discord among the people, destroy all articulation, so that the understanding is not edified; but the awful echo, sounding in the ears, and the objects in great distress, and great raptures, before the eyes, raise great emotion in the heart. Some of the ministers rather oppose this work, others call it a little in question, and some fan it with all their might. Whether it be celestial or terrestial, or a complication of both, it is observed by the candid that more souls get first awakened at such meetings, than at any meetings whatever, who afterwards give clear, rational accounts of a divine change of heart. This exercise is not confined to the newly convicted, and newly converted, but persons who have been professors a number of years, at such lively meetings, not only jump up, strike their hands together, and shout aloud, but will embrace one another, and fall to the floor. I have never known the rules of decency broken so far as for persons of different sexes, thus to embrace and fall at meetings. It is not to be understood that this exercise is seen in all parts of the state, at times when God is working on the minds of the people. No, under the preaching of the same man, in different neighborhoods and counties, the same work, in substance, has different exterior effects. At such times of revival, it is wonderful to hear the sweet singing among the people, when they make melody in their hearts and voices to the Lord. In the last great ingathering, in some places, singing was more blessed among the people than the preaching was. What Mr. Jonathan Edwards thought might be expedient in some future day, has been true in Virginia. Bands go singing to meeting, and singing home. At meeting, as soon as preaching is over, it is common to sing a number of spiritual songs; sometimes several songs are sounding at the same time, in different parts of the congregation. I have travelled through neighborhoods and counties at times of refreshing, and the spiritual songs in the fields, in the shops and houses, have made the heavens ring with melody over my head; but, as soon as the work is over, there is no more of it heard. Dr. Watts is the general standard for the Baptists in Virginia; but they are not confined to him; any spiritual composition answers their purpose. A number of hymns originate in Virginia, although there is no established poet in the state. Some Virginia songs have more divinity in them, than poetry or grammar; and some that I have heard have but little of either.

Candidates generally make confession of their faith before the whole assembly present; but, sometimes there are so many to offer, that the church divides into several bodies, each of which acts for the whole, and receives by the right hand of fellowship. At times appointed for baptism, the people generally go singing to the water-side, in grand procession: I have heard many souls declare they first were convicted, or first found pardon going to, at, or coming from the water. If those who practice infant baptism can say as much, it is no wonder they are so fond of it. Forty, fifty, and sixty have often been baptized in a day, at one place, in Virginia, and sometimes as many as seventy-five. There are some ministers now living in Virginia, who have baptized more than two thousand persons. It is said that St. Austin baptized ten thousand in the dead of winter, in the river Swale, in England, in the year 595. I have seen ice cut more than a foot thick, and people baptized in the water, and yet I have never heard of any person taking cold, or any kind of sickness, in so doing. And strange it is that Mr. Wesley should recommend cold bathing for such a vast number of disorders, and yet be so backward to administer it for the best purpose, viz., to fulfil righteousness. THE NUMBER OF BAPTISTS.

THERE are in Virginia, at this time, about one hundred and fifty ordained preachers of the Baptist denomination, and a number besides who exercise a public gift; but in the late great additions that have been made to the churches, there are but few who have engaged in the work of the ministry. Whether it is because the old preachers stand in the way, or whether it is because the people do not pray the Lord of the harvest to thrust out laborers, or whether it is not rather a judgment of God upon the people, for neglecting those who are already in the work, not communicating to them in all good things, 35. I cannot say; but so it is, that but few appear to be advancing, to supply the places of the old ones, upon their decease.

There are also about two hundred and two churches. The exact number of members I cannot ascertain. Between Potomac and James rivers, are nine thousand; and as there is about the same number of preachers and churches, between James river and North Carolina, together with some good account, I judge there are as many as nine thousand south of James river. Upon the western waters, in Kentucky, there are thirty-one churches, divided into three Assaciations. In one of them, there were one thousand members, May, 1789. In another, there is about the same number; but, lest I should swell my numbers too high, I will add the little Association, at the falls of Ohio, containing five churches, to make the round number of two thousand in Kentucky; and, as there are a few Baptists between the Alleghany and Kentucky, I conclude the sum of twenty thousand is a moderate estimate. These churches are classed into eleven Associations, nine of which correspond in the General Committee. For the ease of the eye, they are stated in the following table:- 1 General Committee

11 Associations

202 Churches 150 Ministers, 36.

20,000 Members The number of communicants compose but a small part of those who commonly attend Baptist worship. It will not appear extravagant, to those who are generally acquainted in the state, to say that, taking one part of the state with another, there are more people who attend the Baptist worship, than any kind of worship in the state. OF DRESS.

UPON the first rise of the Baptists in Virginia, they were very strict in their dress. Men cut off their hair, like Cromwell’s round-headed chaplains, and women cast away all their superfluities; so that they were distinguished from others, merely by their decoration. Where all were of one mind, no evil ensued; but where some did not choose to dock and strip, and churches made it a matter of discipline, it made great confusion for no standard could be found in the Bible, to measure their garments by. No doubt, dressing, as well as eating and drinking, can be carried to excess; but it appears to be a matter between God and individuals; for, whenever churches take it up, the last evil is worse than the first. This principle prevailed until the war broke out, at which time the Baptist mode took the lead. Those who went into the army, cut off their hair, and those who stayed at home, were obliged to dress in home-spun. Since the return of peace, and the opening of the ports, the uniformity between the Baptists and others, in point of clothing, still exists; notwithstanding the great work of conversion there has been in the state, but very little is said about rending garments; those who behave well, wear what they please, and meet with no reproof. THE EXCESS OF CIVIL POWER EXPLODED. THE principle, that civil rulers have nothing to do with religion in their official capacities, is as much interwoven in the Baptist plan, as Phydias’s name was in the shield. The legitimate powers of government extend only to punish men for working ill to their neighbors, and no way affect the rights of conscience. The nation of Israel received their civil and religious laws from Jehovah, which were binding on them, and no other; and with the extirpation of that nation, were abolished. For a Christian commonwealth to be established upon the same claim, is very presumptuous, without they have the same charter from Heaven. Because the nation of Israel had a divine grant of the land of Canaan, and orders to enslave the heathen, some suppose Christians have an equal right to take away the land of the Indians, and make slaves of the negroes. Wretched religion, that pleads for cruelty and injustice. In this point of view, the Pope offered England to the king of Spain, provided he would conquer it; after England became Protestant, and in the same view of things, on May 4, 1493, the year after America was discovered, he proposed to give away the heathen lands to his Christian subjects. If Christian nations, were nations of Christians, these things would not be so. The very tendency of religious establishments by human law, is to make some hypocrites, and the rest fools; they are calculated to destroy those very virtues that religion is designed to build up; to encourage fraud and violence over the earth. It is error alone, that stands in need of government to support it; truth can and will do better without: so ignorance calls in anger in a debate, good sense scorns it. Religion, in its purest ages, made its way in the world, not only without the aid of the law, but against all the laws of haughty monarchs, and all the maxims of the schools. The pretended friendship of legal protection, and learned assistance, proves often in the end like the friendship of Joab to Amasa.

Government should protect every man in thinking and speaking freely, and see that one does not abuse another. The liberty I contend for, is more than toleration. The very idea of toleration, is despicable; it supposes that some have a pre-eminence above the rest, to grant indulgence; whereas, all should be equally free, Jews, Turks, Pagans and Christians. Test oaths, and established creeds, should be avoided as the worst of evils. A general assessment., (forcing all to pay some preacher,) amounts to an establishment; if government says I must pay somebody, it must next describe that somebody, his doctrine and place of abode. That moment a minister is so fixed as to receive a stipend by legal force, that moment he ceases to be a gospel ambassador, and becomes a minister of state. This emolument is a temptation too great for avaricious men to withstand. This doctrine turns the gospel into merchandise, and sinks religion upon a level with other things. As it is not the province of civil government to establish forms of religion, and force a maintenance for the preachers, so it does not belong to that power to establish fixed holy days for divine worship. That the Jewish seventh-day Sabbath was of divine appointment, is unquestionable; but that the Christian first-day Sabbath is of equal injunction, is more doubtful. If Jesus appointed the day to be observed, he did it as the head of the church, and not as the king of nations; or if the apostles enjoined it, they did it in the capacity of Christian teachers, and not as human legislators. As the appointment of such days is no part of human legislation, so the breach of the Sabbath (so called) is no part of civil jurisdiction. I am not an enemy to holy days, (the duties of religion cannot well be performed without fixed times,) but these times should be fixed by the mutual agreement of religious societies, according to the word of God, and not by civil authority. I see no clause in the federal constitution, or the constitution of Virginia, to empower either the federal or Virginia legislature to make any Sabbathical laws.

Under this head, I shall also take notice of one thing, which appears to me unconstitutional, inconsistent with religious liberty, and unnecessary in itself; I mean the paying of the chaplains of the civil and military departments out of the public treasury. The king of Great Britain has annually forty-eight chaplains in ordinary, besides a number extraordinary; his army also abounds with chaplains. This, I confess, is consistent with the British form of government, where religion is a principle, and the church a creature of the state; but why should these plans of proud, covetous priests, ever be adopted in America? If legislatures choose to have a chaplain, for Heaven’s sake, let them pay him by contributions, and not out of the public chest. In some of the states, a part of each day, during the session of assembly, is taken up in attending prayers; and they may well afford it, for they are paid for the time; but whether they would pray as long, if they were not under pay, is a question; and whether the chaplain would pray as long for them, if the puplic chest was like Osiron’s purse, is another. For chaplains to go into the army, is about as good economy as it was for Israel to carry the ark of God to battle: instead of reclaiming the people, they generally are corrupted themselves, as the ark fell into the hands of the Philistines. 37. The words of David are applicable here: "Carry back the ark into the city." But what I aim chiefly at, is paying of them by law. The very language of the proceeding is this: "If you will pay me well for preaching and praying, I will do them, otherwise I will not. " Such golden sermons and silver prayers are of no great value.

WASHING OF FEET AND DRY CHRISTENING

WASHING of feet is practised by some of the Baptists, disused by others, and rejected by the third class, which breaks no friendship among them, each one acting according to his persuasion. Baptism and the Lord’s supper, are neither of them used for the good of the body; but the first is significant, and the last commemorative. The question is, whether washing of feet is to be performed for the good of the body, or as a sacred rite? If for the good of the body, it should be done when, and only when, the feet are sore and filthy; but if as a sacred rite, people should do as they now do, viz., wash their feet clean before they meet together for the purpose of washing feet. A person being taken upon surprise at a washing feet meeting, made this confession: "If I had known that you would have washed feet tonight, I would have washed mine clean before I came from home."

Some of the preachers practice what is satirically called dry christening, and others do not. The thing referred to is this: when a woman is safely delivered in child-bearing, and raised to health enough to go to meeting, she brings her child to the minister, who either takes it in his arms, or puts his hands upon it, and thanks God for his mercy, and invokes a blessing on the child; at which time the child is named. The Baptists believe that those who preach the gospel should live of it: that a preacher is as much entitled to a reward for his labor, as the reaper in the field is to his hire. It is a gross innovation from truth, to view the wages of a minister in the light of alms. That religion that opens the heart, unties the purse-strings. When souls are caught in the net of the gospel (like the fish that Peter caught) they have a piece of money in their mouths. If people will not give the preacher his due, they and their money must perish together.

Finally, the Baptists hold it their duty to obey magistrates, to be subject to the law of the land, to pay their taxes, and pray for all in authority. They are not scrupulous of taking an oath of God upon them to testify the truth before a magistrate or court; but reject profane swearing. Their religion also allows them to bear arms in defence of their life, liberty and property, and also to be friendly to those who differ with them in judgment, believing a cynick to be as bad as a sycophant. THE VIRGINIA BAPTISTS COMPARED WITH THE GERMAN. FROM this account of the Virginia Baptists, they appear to be a very different sect from the German Anabaptists. The grand error of those rioters, was founding both dominion and property in grace; which is the error of the church of Rome, and the church of England unto this day; and, indeed, the error of all established churches that incapacitate a man from holding his office and property, without he will submit to a religious test. The confusion in Germany was not of the religious kind, but the struggles of the people to get clear of the oppression of the princes. Their leader taught them, that if they would acknowledge their mission, they should be free from taxes, rents, and subjection; the prospect of which, drew multitudes of them, until, like the followers of Theudas and Judas, they were all dispersed. If the German fanatics were really Baptists, yet it is as cruel to impute their errors, by wholesale, to the Virginia Baptists, as it would be to impute all the cruelty of the church of Rome to those societies in Virginia that practise infant baptism. I have two histories of the German insurgents before me, one of which appears to be a scorpidium, written with the head of an asp, dipped in gall, the other is more mild. If these histories may be depended upon, neither Nicholas Stork nor Thomas Muncer, were Anabaptists; Melchoir Hoffman and John Bechold, were. They were called Anabaptists, because they repeated baptism; but they did not dip but sprinkle, so that the whole uproar belongs to other societies, and not to the Baptists. A late author, Rev. Mr. Pattilloe, in giving an account of the rise of other societies, says, "the Baptists made their appearance in Germany, soon after the Reformation began." Has the good Mr. Pattilloe got this by wrote, hearing of it so often? or has the judicious pen of Mr. Smith helped him out in a dead lift? or can the gentleman demonstrate his assertion and implication by real facts? Should I affirm that the Presbyterians made their appearance in London, in the reign of James 1:1-27., on the fifth of November, 1605, in the gun-powder plot, it might perhaps raise the bristles of his meek heart; and this I might affirm with as much propriety, as he could affirm what he has. The names Papist and Presbyterian, are as much alike as Baptist and Anabaptist, and their modes of baptism far more uniform. I admire Mr. Pattilloe’s writing in general; I was a subscriber for his book, and think my dollar well exchanged; but, let the Rev. gentleman remember, that the Baptists can produce sacred proof for their appearance in Judea, about fifteen hundred years before those tumults in Germany, and if he can produce more antiquated proof of the Presbyterians, then let him triumph; otherwise, be peaceable, as becomes him.

SOME REMARKS. A retrospective view of this Chronicle, informs us that the number of religious sects in Virginia, is seven, viz., Episcopalians, Quakers, Presbyterians, Methodists, Tunkers, Mennonists, and Baptists. There are a few Jews, but they have no synagogue, nor is there any chapel for Papists. If men had virtue enough, it would be pleasing to see all of one mind; but in these lethargic days, if there is not a little difference among men, they sink into stupidity. It is happy for Virginia, in a political point of view, that there are several societies, nearly of a size; should one attempt to oppress another, all the rest would unite to prevent it. And the same may be said of the United States; more than twenty religious societies are in them, which render it almost impossible for one order to oppress all the others. This is a greater security for religious liberty than all that can be written on paper. If two or three of the most popular societies in the Union should unite together, the other societies would have cause to fear, from the consideration, that the many generally oppress the few; but if things in future, emerge as they have heretofore, we have more reason to believe, that the present societies will split and subdivide, than we have to believe, that parties, now at variance, will ever unite. O, Virginia! O, America! - a people favored of the Lord! - may the goodness of God excite our obedience. There are yet remaining some vestiges of religious oppression, but they are chiefly theoretical. It may be said, that in substance, the different societies enjoy equal liberty of thinking, speaking, and worshipping, and equal protection by law. Perhaps there is not a constitutional evil in the states, that has a more plausible pretext, than the proscription of gospel ministers; I say in the states, for most of them have proscribed them from seats of legislation, &c. The federal government is free in this point: to have one branch of the legislature composed of clergymen, as is the case in some European powers, is not seemly - to have them entitled to seats of legislation, on account of their ecclesiastical dignity, like the bishops in England, is absurd. But to declare them ineligible, when their neighbors prefer them to any others, is depriving them of the liberty of free citizens, and those who prefer them, the freedom of choice.

If the office of a preacher were lucrative, there would be some propriety in his ineligibility; but as the office is not lucrative, the proscription is cruel. To make the best of it, it is but doing evil, that good may come: denying them the liberty of citizens, lest they should degrade their sacred office. Things should be so fixed in government, that there should be neither degrading checks, nor alluring baits to the ministry; but as the proscription, mentioned above, is a check, so there are some baits, in the states, to the sacred work. In some of the states, the property of preachers is free from tax. In Virginia, their persons are exempt from bearing arms. Though this is an indulgence that I feel, yet it is not consistent with my theory of politics. It may be further observed, that an exemption from bearing arms, is., but a legal indulgence, but the ineligibility is constitutional proscription, and no legal reward is sufficient for a constitutional prohibition. The first may be altered by the caprice of the legislature, the last cannot be exchanged, without an appeal to the whole mass of constituent power. THE RIGHTS AND BONDS OF CONSCIENCE. The Subject of religious liberty, has been so canvassed for fourteen years, and has so far prevailed, that in Virginia, a politician can no more be popular, without the possession of it, than a preacher who denies the doctrine of the new birth; yet many, who make this profession, behave in their families, as if they did not believe what they profess. For a man to contend for religious liberty on the court-house green, and deny his wife, children and servants, the liberty of conscience at home, is a paradox not easily reconciled. If a head of a family could answer for all his house in the day of judgment, there would be a degree of justice in his controlling them in the mode of worship, and joining society; but answer for them he cannot; each one must give an account of himself to God, and none but cruel tyrants will prevent their wives, children or servants, either directly or indirectly, from worshipping God according to the dictates of their consciences, and joining the society they choose; for as religion does not destroy either civil or domestic government, so neither of them extend their rightful influence into the empire of conscience. The rights of conscience are so sacred, that no mortal can justly circumscribe them, and yet the conscience is so defiled by sin, as well as the other powers of the soul, that it may lead men into error. The word conscience, signifies common science; a court of judicature, erected by God in every human breast: and, as courts of justice often give wrong judgment, for want of good information, so it happens with conscience. The author of our religion said, "the time will come, when he that killeth you, will think that he doeth God service." And Paul verily thought that he ought to do many things against the Lord Jesus. So that conscience is not the rule of life, but the word of God. Though conscience should be free from human control, yet it should be in strict subordination to the law of God.

THOUGHTS ON SYSTEMS. THAT devil, who transforms himself into an angel of light, is often preaching from these words; "contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." Whenever men are self conceited enough to believe themselves infallible in judgment, and take their own opinions for tests of orthodoxy, they conclude they are doing God service, in vindicating his truth; while they are only contending for their particular tenets. By this gross mistake, the Christian world is filled with polemical divinity. I very much question, whether there was ever more sophistry used among the old philosophers, than there has been among divines. I never saw a defence of a religious system, but what a great part of it was designed to explain away the apparent meaning of plain texts of scripture. System writers generally adopt a few principles, which, they say, are certain truths, and all reasoning against those principles they strive to make sophistry, and all texts that seem to withstand their scheme, they endeavor to explain away; sometimes by mending the translation of the Bible. I have never yet known an instance of a man’s altering the translation of a text that expressed his own sentiment, as it is translated. When men are run hard to support their plan, they will appeal from scripture to the reason of things; and when reason fails them, they will fly back again to scripture; and when both disappear, they will have recourse to the unsearchable ways of God. There is no doubt in my mind, that the God of order acts consistently with himself; but it is a grand doubt, whether divine materials ever did, or ever will, submit to human standards. And, I think it much safer for a man to own his ignorance, and stand open to conviction, than to be too positive in asserting things that he himself may doubt of in his cool retired hours.

25. Published in Virginia, 1790.

26. If we were slaves in Africa, how should we reprobate such reasoning as would rob us of our liberty. It is a question, whether men had not better lose all their property, than deprive an individual of his birth-right blessing freedom. If a political system is such, that common justice cannot be administered without innovation, the sooner such a system is destroyed, the better for the people.

27. Baptism, by some, is made everything; by some, anything; and, by others, nothing. The Episcopalians make it everything; they say that the water is blest to the mystical washing away of sin; that, by it, children are regenerated, and engrafted into the body of Christ, which is everything we need. The Methodists make it anything; either sprinkling, pouring or immersion. No matter how it is done, if it is done. Can it be supposed, that Jesus, who was faithful in all his house, in the character of a son, should be less definite in his orders than Moses was, who was only a servant? See (says the Hebrew prophet) that thou makest the tabernacle, in all things, according to the pattern shown to thee in the Mount; and is the pattern of Jesus of no more use than to be made anything of? That which is to be done but once in a man’s life, should be well done. Are the words of St. Paul inapplicable here? "One baptism." The Quakers make it nothing; but when they regard the word of God more, and the word of Barclay less, they will then find baptism, not only to be a command, but the first command, after repentance and faith.

If baptism is everything, Simon, the witch, is gone to heaven, and the thief dropt from the cross to hell. If it is anything, we may say of it, as Mr. Wesley does of praying time, "any time is no time." And if it is nothing, why is the noun, with its verb and participle, recorded almost one hundred times in the New Testament? If men can be perfect, or obedient in all things, without it, what means this bleating of the Scriptures which I hear?

28.This mode was used in the ordination of Matthias to the apostleship; and, like every other account in the New Testament, is a precedent without a second. As no two instances of ordination are uniform, can it be a piece of licentiousness to treat the subject, as to its mode, with a degree of indifference? In Virginia, Episcopal, Presbyterial, and Congregational ordinations are all contended for. Imposition and non-imposition of hands are equally pleaded for; but, after all, a commission from Heaven, to preach and baptize, is the great quintessence.

29. Ketocton, is the name of a water-course, in Loudoun county, that empties into the Potomac. Most of the Baptist churches, now in Virginia, take their names of distinction from the waters where they are.

30. To this day, there are not more than three or four Baptist ministers in Virginia, who have received the diploma of M. A., which is additional proof that the work has been of God, and not of man.

31. There are other parts of the thirty-nine articles, equally exceptionable with those parts excepted. If a creed of faith, established by law, was ever so short, and ever so true; if I believed the whole of it with all my heart- should I subscribe to it before a magistrate, in order to get indulgence, preferment, or even protection - I should be guilty of a species of idolatry, by acknowledging a power, that the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ, has never appointed. In this point of view, who can look over the Constitutions of government adopted in most of the United States, without real sorrow? They require a religious test, to qualify an officer of state. All the good such tests do, is to keep from office the best of men; villains make no scruple of any test. The Virginia Constitution is free from this stain. If a man merits the confidence of his neighbours, in Virginia - let him worship one God, twenty God’s, or no God - be he Jew, Turk, Pagan, or Infidel, he is eligible to any office in the state.

32. What is here said of the church of England, respects them before the late Revolution. Since the independence of the state, a great number of those who still prefer Episcopacy, have the most noble ideas of religious liberty, and are as far from wishing to oppress those who differ with them in judgment, as any men in the state. Experience proves, that while each man believes what he chooses, and practises as he pleases, although they differ widely in sentiment, yet they love each other better, than they do when they are all obliged to believe and worship in one way. The only way to live in peace and enjoy ourselves as freemen, is to think and speak freely, worship as we please, and be protected by law in our persons, property and liberty.

33. Before this, the Methodists petitioned for a continuation of the established religion of the state; but being organized a distinct church, they vigorously opposed the assessment; and at the same time petitioned the legislature for a general liberation of the slaves Although the petition was rejected, as being impracticable, yet it shows their resolution to bring to pass a noble work.

34. A union seemed so necessary and desirable, that those who were somewhat scrupulous of a confession of faith, other than the Bible, were willing to sacrifice their peculiarities, and those who were strenuous for the confession of faith, agreed to a partial reception of it. "United we stand, divided we fall," overcome, at that time, all objections; but had they united without any confession of faith, as they did in Georgia, perhaps it would have been better. In kingdoms and states, where a system of religion is established by law, with the indulgence of toleration to non-conformists of restricted sentiments, it becomes necessary for such non-conformists to publish a confession of their faith, to convince the rulers that they do not exceed the bounds of toleration; but in a government like that of Virginia, where all men believe and worship as they please - where the only punishment inflicted on the enthusiastical, is pity - what need of a confession of faith? Why this Virgin Mary between the souls of men and the scriptures? Had a system of religion been essential to salvation, or even to the happiness of the saints, would not Jesus, who was faithful in all his house, have left us one? if he has, it is accessible to all. If he has not, why should a man be called a heretick because he cannot believe what he cannot believe, though he believes the Bible with all his heart? Confessions of faith often check any further pursuit after truth, confine the mind into a particular way of reasoning, and give rise to frequent separations. To plead for their utility, because they have been common, is as good sense, as to plead for a state establishment of religion, for the same reason; and both are as bad reasoning, as to plead for sin, because it is everywhere. It is sometimes said that hereticks are always averse to confessions of faith. I wish I could say as much of tyrants. But after all, if a confession of faith, upon the whole, may be advantageous, the greatest care should be taken not to sacradize, or make a petty Bible of it.

35. Gospel preachers are generally like the ass seen by Agelastus, loaded with figs, and feeding upon thistles.

36. In England, are two arch-bishops, and twenty-six bishops. In Ireland, are four arch-bishops, and nineteen bishops. In Scotland, one general assembly, thirteen provincial synods, and sixty-eight presbyteries.

37. A sheriff being sent to bring a Tartar to court, was a long time detained; when solicited to make his return, he replied, "the Tartar will not come." Come without him then, said the judge. "Yes sir, " said the sheriff; "but the Tartar will not let me."