Antidisestablishmentarianism in Cambridge -- Wednesday

To explain the history of Antidisestablishmentarianism in Cambridge I decided not to untangle the interwoven stories of religious pluralism, the Disestablishment movement and the history of Unitarianism in Cambridge. I think it is in the spirit of the lengthy title of this post. If you're just interested in finally learning what the word means, head to the bottom of the full post (appearing on Friday), but the full story is more complex and richer, which is why it's here.

This is by far the longest post you ever will find at Cambridge Considered. Because of this, I am serializing it, so this week, there will be a new piece every day, but after this week, they will appear on the blog as one post. See Monday's post here, and Tuesday's here.

A Second Divide: the Unitarian Controversy

In the second half of the 18^th century, liberal religious thought was replacing Puritan thought within Massachusetts churches.^† Leading minsters were challenging Calvinist doctrines such as original sin. By the American Revolution, many clergymen in Massachusetts had made a quiet transition towards religious views that rejected the doctrine of a trinity with God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit being separate, equal parts.¹ At the time, this rejection was alternately called Anti-Trinitarianism, Arminianism or Unitarianism. Many in this school of thought were uninterested in getting involved in doctrinal debates, some because they felt it would distract from religious observance, and others because they did not want to be the subject of controversy. The first congregation to call an explicitly Unitarian minister to its pulpit was King's Chapel in downtown Boston, an Episcopal church that hired James Freeman in 1787.² The decision was controversial both within that church and in the larger community, but in the next few decades, several Congregational churches also called Unitarians to be their ministers.

At the beginning of the 19^th century, a change happened in Cambridge that would shape the structure of religions in New England. Harvard historian Samuel Eliot Morison described it this way: “In the years 1804-1806 occurred a college revolution that has influenced the University to this day: both the senior professorship and the presidency were captured by Unitarians.”³ “Captured” is a good word, because the changes at Harvard were the first major event in what became known as as the “Unitarian Controversy” within the Standing Order of Congregational churches.

In 1804, the Hollis Professorship of Divinity at Harvard College was open to a new professor. Established in 1721 by a Baptist, The Hollis Professorship of Divinity is the oldest endowed chair in America.⁴ Generally, the school's Board of Overseers laymen were interested in appointing a liberal Congregationalist, like Henry Ware.⁵ However, the University president, Joseph Willard, swore he “would sooner cut off his hand than lift it up for an Arminian professor.” One of the requirements of the Professorship was that the appointee be “of sound and orthodox principles.” Ware's opponents argued that orthodox meant Calvinist, while his supporters argued that for the professor to be considered orthodox, his views only had to be shared by many of his contemporaries.

Willard died in 1804, and now the college had two very important seats to fill.⁶ In 1805, Harvard's Board of Overseers confirmed Ware for the Hollis Professorship, causing vocal backlash from the orthodox.⁷ The same year, an Episcopalian was chosen to be the college President, but he declined, and the second choice was a Unitarian.⁸

Feeling betrayed, orthodox Calvinists and other orthodox congregationalists split off and founded several new seminaries as alternatives to Harvard, beginning with Andover Seminary^‡ in 1807.⁹ Some historians point to the founding of Andover Seminary as the defining moment in the schism among the churches of the Standing Order.¹⁰ Harvard continued on the Unitarian path. In 1810, Reverend John Thorton Kirkland, a professed Unitarian, was elected to without opposition. Kirkland was a beloved, influential president. When Harvard created a Divinity School for graduate studies in religion, Kirkland's fame helped spread the school's reputation for liberalism.¹¹

During the next 15 years, the Unitarian Controversy continued. Congregationalists continued to debate points of theology relating to belief in the trinity, how to interpret scripture, and human nature. In 1821, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided that the majority of a parish had the right to choose the minister and retain the property, even if the majority of the church members disagreed. As it was spurred by a case in Dedham, Massachusetts, Baker vs. Fales, this became known as the Dedham Decision.¹² The case was one of the most important events in the schism between Unitarians and Trinitarians. Additionally, it made it clear that although deacons of a church could hold property for the church's use, a church itself did not have the right to hold property. It was the parish that owned property and existed as a legal entity. The church had no power except over its own organization.¹³

 

†The term “liberal” as applied to religion has meant a number of things over the years. In 18^th and early 19^th century Christianity, it usually referred to an emphasis on the use of reason and evidence in forming a religious understanding. Unitarians sought evidence in the Bible for their beliefs, and argued that the Bible did not provide a basis for the belief in the Holy Trinity.

1Wright, Conrad, ed. A Stream of Light: a short history of American Unitarianism. Boston: Skinner House Books, 1989. Page 3.

2Wright 6.

3Morison, Samuel Eliot. Three Centuries of Harvard. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936. Page 187.

4Wright 8.

5Morison 187.

6Morison 190.

7Morison 190.

8Morison 190.

‡The school still operates as Andover Newton Theological in Newton, MA, having merged with Newton Theological Institution in 1965.

9Wright 10.

10For example, Bumbaugh, David. Unitarian Universalism: a narrative history. Chicago: Meadville Lombard Press, 2000. Page 108.

11Morison 196-197.

12Harris, Mark. Historical Dictionary of Unitarian Universalism. Lanham, Maryland, and Oxford: The Scarecrow Press, 2004. Page 480.

13Harris 150.

Antidisestablishmentarianism in Cambridge -- Tuesday

To explain the history of Antidisestablishmentarianism in Cambridge I decided not to untangle the interwoven stories of religious pluralism, the Disestablishment movement and the history of Unitarianism in Cambridge. I think it is in the spirit of the lengthy title of this post. If you're just interested in finally learning what the word means, head to the bottom of the full post (appearing on Friday), but the full story is more complex and richer, which is why it's here.

This is by far the longest post you ever will find at Cambridge Considered. Because of this, I am serializing it, so this week, there will be a new piece every day, but after this week, they will appear on the blog as one post. See Monday's post here.

The Establishment of Religion in the Massachusetts Constitution

By the time of the American Revolution, there was significantly more religious diversity in Cambridge. A contingent of Anglicans settled in Cambridge on what's now called Tory Row and founded Christ Church in 1759. Baptists, Methodists, and Quakers had grown in number since the Great Awakening.¹

The new state constitution reaffirmed principles of religious establishment that had been in place to one degree or another since the area was settled. Towns in Massachusetts were legally required to support public religious worship. Most did this through a property tax that all inhabitants paid towards building and maintaining church buildings and paying the ministers' salaries.² Technically, individuals were allowed to choose which church would receive their support, if they attended a local church. If a person did not attend a local church, the share of their taxes that was alloted for church support would go to the majority church in the town.³ The Congregationalist churches that were a part of the group receiving support and fulfilling the towns' legal requirement to have a church were known as the churches of the Standing Order.

Minority groups were pleased with the system in which they were able to elect which church to support, and considered it a large step forward for individual rights of conscience and towards disestablishment.⁴ Still, both the Congregational clergy and Harvard, which was lead by Congregationalists, were receiving public support.

The main problem for religious minorities was that many religious groups did not have enough members in each town to support their own church, so they attended a church in a neighboring town. For example, the Catholics in Cambridge attended church in Boston; a group began raising funds to build a Catholic church in 1831, but it did not open until 1842.⁵ People who attended a minority church outside of their own parish had no control over where their church-supporting taxes went. The money went to the local church that was part of the Establishment, meaning that their own church would lose money and they would be forced to contribute to a church they did not attend or believe in. Slowly, non-established groups began founding their own churches. In Cambridge, the first Baptist church opened in 1817, the first Methodist church opened in 1818, and the first Universalist church opened in 1822; other groups continued to be forced to pay taxes to the First Parish Church.⁶

To modern ears, state establishment of churches may sound downright unconstitutional. In fact, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, prohibiting the establishment of religion, only applied to the federal government at the time. The original legal precedent for applying the First Amendment to the states was in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, adopted in 1868.

1Brown 95.

2Harris, Mark. Historical Dictionary of Unitarian Universalism. Lanham, Maryland, and Oxford: The Scarecrow Press, 2004. Page 444.

3Brown 95.

4Brown 95.

5Sutton, S.B. Cambridge Reconsidered: 3 1/2 Centuries on the Charles. (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1976), 57.

6Seaburg, Alan. Cambridge on the Charles. (Cambridge: Anne Miniver Press, 2001), 196.

Antidisestablishmentarianism in Cambridge -- Monday

To explain the history of Antidisestablishmentarianism in Cambridge I decided not to untangle the interwoven stories of religious pluralism, the Disestablishment movement and the history of Unitarianism in Cambridge. I think it is in the spirit of the lengthy title of this post. If you're just interested in finally learning what the word means, head to the bottom of the full post (appearing on Friday), but the full story is more complex and richer, which is why it's here.

This is by far the longest post you ever will find at Cambridge Considered. Because of this, I am serializing it, so this week, there will be a new piece every day, but after this week, they will appear on the blog as one post.

Church and State Before the Revolution

Longtime readers will already know that it's nearly impossible to look at the early history of Cambridge or anywhere in New England without looking at the role of religion in social and political affairs. (See my posts on the seventeenth century, the eighteenth century, and three posts on Anne Hutchinson). Religion and government were tightly intertwined for the Puritan settlers – they had different leaders, but the church was supported by taxes, and the qualification for voting in the government was being a member in good standing of the church. In 1648, the New England churches broke away from the Christian reform movement the settlers had been a part of in Europe. The New England Puritans created the Cambridge Platform, which outlined the congregational model in which individual congregations are autonomous and have no higher church hierarchy to answer to. The churches following this model were called Congregationalist.

In 1690, the General Court of Massachusetts extended voter eligibility to all adult men who met financial criteria and “possessed good character.” Previously, only men who owned a very large amount of land or who were full church members could vote. This change gave new rights to those were not a part of the established church.¹ The religious establishment in New England was taking a different form from that in Europe, but Massachusetts was still incorporated by the English crown. In 1692, a royal charter made Massachusetts into a British colony rather than a corporation, making the residents subject to British rule. One effect of this change was that while the system in which Congregationalist churches were supported by taxes was maintained, the Charter also required a policy of tolerance for minority religions, mostly Baptists, Anglicans, and Catholics.²

The difference between the parish and the church is key to understanding the politics of religion in early New England. The parish consisted of every resident of a specific geographic area. In Cambridge, the distinction between the town government and the parish as an incorporated legal entity in the town was made formal in 1733.³ For legal purposes, it was assumed that you attended your parish's church. There was one church per parish, a Congregational church, that satisfied the legal requirement for towns to support religion. This church was the established church.

Church membership was more complicated, and up to the clergy or governing body of the church itself. The process of achieving membership in full communion, and the implications of church membership, changed over time. What was unchanging was that this was a small, elect group of people who were practicing members of the established faith and who had received confirmation of this by the church itself. If you were a dissenter, a practicer of a different religion, or someone who had not met the requirements your church set, you were a part of the parish but not a member of the church.

The Great Awakening -- and a Great Divide

In the first several decades of the 18^th century, public involvement in religion in Massachusetts was waning. A minority of people were full members of their churches. Puritanism's strict codes for a moral life were no longer socially enforced. For example, more than a third of first children in the 1730s were conceived out of wedlock.⁴

In the 1730s, a movement came along to counteract this waning interest in religion. A few ministers began preaching that having a conversion experience, in which the individual feels powerfully connected to God, was essential for salvation. The idea would have been familiar to their Puritan ancestors. Then, beginning in Northampton in 1734, the idea of conversions suddenly caught on and began spreading like wildfire.⁵ By 1740, religious revival was all over Massachusetts, and in that decade the movement, called the Great Awakening, spread over the English colonies. The people whose religious views were transformed as part of the revival, sometimes called New Lights, supported an emotional connection with religion. Like in many religious revivals, they advocated worship that was was fervent, passionate, and emphasized emotion over reason.⁶ This group revitalized belief in Calvinist doctrines.

However, the movement did not spark change everywhere. The Old Lights, those who were more conservative during the Great Awakening, emphasized order and reason. Later on, some of the Congregationalists who emphasized reason became the most radical and liberal in the church.⁷ In many places in New England, churches began to split along pro-revival and anti-revival lines. It fractured the unity of the church that had once been so closely connected with the state. While the divided churches all called themselves Congregationalists, never again would religion in Massachusetts be as monolithic as it had originally been.⁸

1Breen, T.H. Puritans and Adventurers: Change and Persistence in Early America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. Page 95.

2Brown, Richard, and Jack Tager. Massachusetts: A Concise History. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 2000. Page 49.

3http://www.firstparishcambridge.org/FirstParishHistory

4Brown 53.

5Brown 53.

6Brown 54.

7Harris, Mark. Historical Dictionary of Unitarian Universalism. Lanham, Maryland, and Oxford: The Scarecrow Press, 2004. Page 222.

8Brown 55.