Chapter 19

[152]Quoted by Walker, in hisHistory of the Congregational Churches in the United States, p. 216.[153]Green,Life, pp. 224, 225.[154]Cf. supra,pp. 36and37et seq.[155]See Walker,Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, p. 287.[156]The lowest point of religious decline in the history of New England was reached in the first quarter of the eighteenth century. The absence of vital piety was generally remarked. The prevailing type of religious experience was unemotional and formal. The adoption of the Half-Way Covenant in the third quarter of the previous century helped to precipitate a state of things wherein the ordinary distinctions between the converted and the unconverted were largely obscured. Emphasis came to be laid heavily upon the cultivation of morality as a means of promoting spiritual life. Prayer, the reading of the Bible, and church attendance were other “means”. In other words, man’s part in the acquisition of religious experience came prominently into view. The promoters of the revival attacked these notions, asserting that repentance and faith were still fundamentally necessary and that the experience of conversion,i. e., the conscious sense of a change in one’s relation to God, was the prime test of one’s hope of salvation. Charles Chauncy, minister of the First Church, Boston, in hisSeasonable Thoughts on the State of Religion in New England(1743), championed the former position; the great Edwards came to the defence of the latter.[157]Channing,Memoirs, vol. i. pp. 287–290, 387.Cf.also Goddard,Studies in New England Transcendentalism, pp. 13et seq.[158]Riley,American Philosophy, p. 192. Note: It is not here maintained that radical religious ideas in New England had their earliest roots, or found their sole stimulus, in the controversy which the theological formulations incident to the Great Awakening provoked. Incipient religious liberalism is distinguishable as far back as the publication of Cotton Mather’sReasonable Religion, in 1713. In his erudite essay on “The Beginnings of Arminianism in New England,” F. A. Christie adopts the position that prior to the Great Awakening there were rumor and alarm over the mere arrival of Arminian doctrines in this country; but that after 1742 the heresy spread rapidly, chiefly due to the growth of the Episcopal church, with its marked leanings to the Arminian theology.Cf.Papers of the American Society of Church History, Second Series, vol. iii, pp. 168et seq.But however that may be, the cause of Arminianism during the eighteenth century was promoted by men in New England who drew at least a part of their inspiration from the writings of leaders of thought in the mother country whose theological positions inclined strongly toward rationalism.Cf.Cooke,Unitarianism in America, pp. 39, 44et seq., 79. Harvard College, from the close of the seventeenth century on, was increasingly recognized as a center of liberalizing tendencies, although none will dispute that the kernel of intellectual independence was found, all too frequently, well hidden within the tough shell of traditional conceits.Cf.Quincy,The History of Harvard University, vol. i, pp. 44–57, 199et seq.Independent impulses were largely responsible for the following events which mark the definite emergence of Unitarianism in America: the organization of the first New England Unitarian congregation at Gloucester, Mass., in 1779; the publication in this country, five years later, of the London edition of Dr. Charles Chauncy’sSalvation for All Men; and the defection from Trinitarian standards of King’s Chapel, Boston, in 1785–87. Still it must be maintained that the controversies which raged around the doctrines of the New Calvinism beyond all other factors stiffened the inclinations and tendencies of the century toward liberal thinking. Such terms as “Arminianism”, “Pelagianism”, “Socinianism”, “Arianism”,etc., which occur with ever-increasing frequency from the fourth decade of the century on, are in themselves suggestive of the divergencies in religious opinion which the doctrinal discussion incident to the Great Awakening provoked.Cf.Fiske,A Century of Science and Other Essays: “The Origins of Liberal Thought in America”, pp. 148et seq.[159]As a typical illustration the comment of Lyman Beecher may be cited: “The Deistic controversy was an existing thing, and the battle was hot, the crisis exciting.” (Autobiography, Correspondence, etc.vol. i, p. 52.) The date is about 1798. In the same connection President Dwight of Yale is referred to as “the great stirrer-up of that [i. e., the deistic] controversy on this side the Atlantic.” (Ibid.) It is certain that Dwight had some acquaintance with the works of the leading English deists, and that he opposed their views.Cf.Travels in New England and New York, vol. iv, p. 362; but his main target was infidelity of the French school. Beecher fails to distinguish between the two.[160]One discovers no convincing evidence that the deistical views of Benjamin Franklin produced any direct effect upon the thought of New England. As respects Thomas Jefferson the case was different. But New England Federalists were so successful in keeping public attention fixed on Jefferson’s fondness for French political and religious philosophy, that his alleged “French infidelity” rather than his opinions concerning natural religion became and continued to be the bone of contention. That he was regarded as a deist is, however, not to be questioned. Bentley,Diary, vol. iii, p. 20.[161]Allen’s book of some 477 pages bore the following pretentious and rambling title:Reason the only Oracle of Man, or a Compendius System of Natural Religion. Alternately Adorned with Confutations of a Variety of Doctrines incompatible to it; Deduced from the Most Exalted Ideas which we are able to form of the Divine and Human Characters, and from the Universe in General.By Ethan Allen, Esq. Bennington, State of Vermont.The Preface is dated July 2, 1782. Evans records the fact that the entire edition, except about thirty copies, was destroyed by fire, said to have been caused by lightning, an event which the orthodox construed as a judgment from heaven on account of the nature of the book.Cf.American Bibliography, vol. vi, p. 266. The author’s aim has been interpreted as an effort “to build up a system of natural religion on the basis of a deity expressed in the external universe, as interpreted by the reason of man, in which the author includes the moral consciousness.” (Moncure D. Conway inOpen Court[magazine], January 28, 1892, article: “Ethan Allen’s Oracles of Reason,” p. 3119.)[162]The Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, vol. iii, p. 345. The comment of Yale’s president is fairly representative: “And the 13th Inst died in Vermont the profane & impious Deist Gen Ethan Allen, Author of the Oracles of Reason, a Book replete with scurrilous Reflexions on Revelation. ‘And in Hell he lift up his Eyes being in Torments.’” (Ibid.) In 1787, at Litchfield, Connecticut, where Allen’s home had once been, there was published an anonymous sermon, from the text: “And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks which the swine did eat.” (Luke 15: 16.) The sermon was planned to counteract the effect produced by the “prophane, prayerless, graceless infidel,” Allen, through the publication of the book in question. The author, “Common Sense” (apparently Josiah Sherman), adopts for his sermon the caption, “A Sermon to Swine,” and explains in the Advertisement the temper of his mood: “By way of apology, I hope Gen. Allen will pardon any reproach that may be supposable, in comparing him to the Prodigal Son, sent by the Citizen into his fields to feed Swine with husks, when he considers, what an infinitely greater reproach he casts upon the holy oracles of God, and upon his Prophets, Apostles and Ministers, and upon the Lord of life and glory himself; at whose tribunal we must all shortly appear; when he represents Him as an impostor and cheat, and all the blessed doctrines of the gospel as falsehood and lies.” (A Sermon to Swine: From Luke xv: 16 … Containing a concise, but sufficient answer to General Allen’s Oracles of Reason.By Common Sense, A. M., Litchfield, 1787.)An amusing albeit suggestive episode is recorded by William Bentley in hisDiary, in connection with certain reflections on the dangers involved in the loaning of books: “Allen’soracles of reason… was lent to Col. C. under solemn promise of secrecy, but by him sent to a Mr. Grafton, who was reported to have died a Confirmed Infidel…. The book was found at his death in his chamber, examined with horror by his female relations. By them conveyed to a Mr. Williams … & there examined—reported to be mine from the initials W. B., viewed as an awful curiosity by hundreds, connected with a report that I encouraged infidelity in Grafton by my prayers with him in his dying hour, & upon the whole a terrible opposition to me fixed in the minds of the devout & ignorant multitude.” (Ibid., vol. i, p. 82.)The following extract from Timothy Dwight’s poem onThe Triumph of Infidelitysupplies another interesting contemporaneous estimate of Allen’s assault upon revelation:“In vain thro realms of nonsense ranThe great Clodhopping oracle of man.Yet faithful were his toils: What could he more?In Satan’s cause he bustled, bruised and swore;And what the due reward, from me shall know,For gentlemen of equal worth below.”A foot-note explains the point in the last two lines: “In A——n’s Journal, the writer observes, he presumes he shall be treated in the future world as well as other gentlemen of equal merit are treated: A sentiment in which all his countrymen will join.” (The Triumph of Infidelity: A Poem.[Anonymous], 1788, pp. 23et seq.The copy referred to is dedicated by the author “To Mons. de Voltaire.”)[163]The Age of Reason: Part I, appeared in America in 1794.Cf.The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, edited by Moncure Daniel Conway, New York, 1901, p. vii; also advertisements of its offer for sale,Massachusetts Spy(Worcester), Nov. 19, 1794. TheConnecticut Courant(Hartford), Jan. 19, and Feb. 9, 1795, contains examples of pained newspaper comment.Walcott Papers, vol. viii, 7.[164]At least fifteen thousand copies of the second part of the book arrived in America in the spring of 1796, despatched from Paris by Paine, consigned to his Philadelphia friend, Mr. Franklin Bache, Republican printer, editor, and ardent servant of radicalism generally. It was clearly Paine’s purpose to influence as many minds in America as possible.Cf.Conway,The Writings of Thomas Paine, vol. iv, p. 15; Paine’s letter to Col. Fellows, in New York, explaining the forwarding of the books. This effort to obtain a general circulation of theAge of Reasondid not escape the attention of men who were disturbed over the prevailing evidences of irreligion. In a fast day sermon, delivered in April, 1799, the Reverend Daniel Dana, of Newburyport, Massachusetts, called attention to the matter in the following fashion: “ … let me mention a fact which ought to excite universal alarm and horror. The well-known and detestable pamphlet of Thomas Paine, written with a professed design to revile the Christian religion, and to diffuse the poison of infidelity, was composed in France, was there printed in English, and an edition containing many thousand of copies, conveyed at a single time into our country, in order to be sold at a cheap rate, or given away, as might best ensure its circulation. What baneful success has attended this vile and insidious effort, you need not be told. That infidelity has had, for several years past, a rapid increase among us, seems a truth generally acknowledged.” (Two Sermons, delivered April 25, 1799: the day recommended by the President of the United States for National Humiliation, Fasting and Prayer.By Daniel Dana, A. M., pastor of a church in Newburyport, 1799, p. 45).Cf.alsoibid., p. 20.[165]The Age of Reasonwas written from the standpoint of a man who believed that the disassociation of religion from political institutions, and the elimination from it of fiction and fable, would bring in the true religion of humanity. The following excerpt sets out the author’s approach and aim: “Soon after I had published the pamphlet, ‘Common Sense’, in America I saw the exceeding probability that a revolution in the system of government would be followed by a revolution in the system of religion. The adulterous connection of church and state, wherever it had taken place, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, had so effectually prohibited by pains and penalties every discussion upon established creeds, and upon first principles of religion, that until the system of government should be changed those subjects could not be brought fairly and openly before the world; but that whenever this should be done a revolution in the system of religion would follow. Human inventions and priestcraft would be detected; and man would return to the pure, unmixed, and unadulterated belief of one God and no more.” (The Writings of Thomas Paine, vol. ii, pp. 22et seq.) Paine’s exposition of the tenets of natural religion was far from scholarly, and as soon as the public became aware of the eccentric and uneven character of the book, the storm of criticism speedily blew itself out. The recoil of Paine’s ugly attack upon Washington, in the same year in which theAge of Reasonwas extensively circulated in this country, materially helped to discredit the book.[166]A partial list of the books and pamphlets, separate discourses not included, which were published in this country immediately following the appearance of theAge of Reasonwill serve to emphasize the depth of the impression which Paine’s book made: (1) Priestley, Joseph,An Answer to Mr. Paine’s Age of Reason; being a Continuation of Letters to the Philosophers and Politicians of France, on the Subject of Religion; and of the Letters of a Philosophical Unbeliever. Second Edition. Northumberlandtown, America, 1794; (2) Williams, Thomas,The Age of Infidelity: an Answer to Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason. By a Layman (pseud.). Third Edition, Worcester, Mass., 1794; (3) Stilwell, Samuel,A Guide to Reason, or an Examination of Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason, and Investigation of the True and Fabulous Theology, New York, 1794; (4) Winchester, Elhanan,Ten Letters Addressed to Mr. Paine, in Answer to His Pamphlet, entitled The Age of Reason, Second Edition, New York, 1795; (5) Ogden, Uzal,Antidote to Deism. The Deist Unmasked; or an Ample Refutation of all the Objections of Thomas Paine, Against the Christian Religion; as Contained in a Pamphlet, intitled (sic), The Age of Reason, etc., Two volumes, Newark, 1795; (6) Broaddus, Andrew,The Age of Reason and Revelation; or Animadversions on Mr. Thomas Paine’s late piece, intitled “The Age of Reason”, etc.… Richmond, 1795; (7) Muir, James,An Examination of the Principles Contained in the Age of Reason. In Ten Discourses, Baltimore, 1795; (8) Belknap, Jeremy,Dissertations on the Character, Death & Resurrection of Jesus Christ … with remarks on some sentiments advanced in a book intitled “The Age of Reason,”Boston, 1795; (9) Humphreys, Daniel,The Bible Needs no Apology; or Watson’s System of Religion Refuted; and the Advocate Proved an Unreliable One, by the Bible Itself: of which a short view is given, and which itself gives a short answer to Paine: in Four Letters, on Watson’s Apology for the Bible, and Paine’s Age of Reason, Part the Second, Portsmouth, 1796; (10) Tytler, James,Paine’s Second Part of the Age of Reason Answered, Salem, 1796; (11) Fowler, James,The Truth of the Bible Fairly Put to the Test, by Confronting the Evidences of Its Own Facts, Alexandria, 1797; (12) Levy, David,A Defence of the Old Testament, in a Series of Letters, addressed to Thomas Paine, Author of a Book entitled, The Age of Reason, Part Second, etc.… New York, 1797; (13) Williams, Thomas,Christianity Vindicated in the admirable speech of the Hon. Theo. Erskine, in the Trial of J. Williams, for Publishing Paine’s Age of Reason, Philadelphia, 1797; (14) Snyder, G.,The Age of Reason Unreasonable; or the Folly of Rejecting Revealed Religion, Philadelphia, 1798; (15) Nelson, D.,An Investigation of that False, Fabulous and Blasphemous Misrepresentation of Truth, set forth by Thomas Paine, in his two volumes, entitled The Age of Reason, etc.(This volume appears to have been published pseudonymously. Advertised in Lancaster, Pa., Intelligencer and Advertiser, October, 1800); (16) Boudinot, Elias,The Age of Revelation, Or, The Age of Reason shewn to be an Age of Infidelity, Philadelphia, 1801.[167]Cf.Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, Appendix I, pp. 217et seq., for a detailed and fairly satisfactory statement of the character and extent of the discussion which Paine’s book precipitated in New England.[168]Channing,Memoirs, vol. i, pp. 60, 61. On the latter page it is asserted that in order to counteract such fatal principles as those expressed in theAge of Reason, the patrons and governors of Harvard College had Watson’sApology for the Biblepublished and furnished to the students at the expense of the corporation. This was in 1796. Beecher’sAutobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, pp. 30, 35, 52, touches upon the situation at Yale.Cf.Dwight,Theology: Explained and Defended, vol. i, pp. xxv, xxvi. The extensive prevalence of infidelity among Yale students is commented upon and the statement made that a considerable proportion of the class which President Dwight first taught (1795–96) “had assumed the names of principal English and French Infidels; and were more familiarly known by them than by their own.” (Ibid.)Cf.Dorchester,Christianity in the United States, p. 319.[169]The impression lingered on after the stir caused by the appearance of theAge of Reason. In 1803 Paine was in southern New England. His presence was disturbing, as the following comment of William Bentley will show: “Reports are circulated that Thomas Paine intends to visit New England. The name is enough. Every person has ideas of him. Some respect his genius and dread the man. Some reverence his political, while they hate his religious, opinions. Some love the man, but not his private manners. Indeed he has done nothing which has not extremes in it. He never appears but we love and hate him. He is as great a paradox as ever appeared in human nature.” (Diary, vol. iii. p. 37.Cf. ibid., vol. ii. pp. 102, 107, 145.)[170]Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 141et seq.[171]Ibid., p. 143.[172]Dwight,Travels, vol. iv, p. 361.[173]Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. v, pp. 154, 274;Massachusetts Historical Collections, Sixth Series, vol. iv,Belknap Papers, p. 503.[174]The entire episode is treated with great fullness and equal vividness by Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 164–188.[175]Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vi, pp. 153et seq.[176]From the first, devotion to the French cause had not been quite unanimous. Here and there, scattered through the country, a man might be found who from the beginning of the Revolution had cherished misgivings as to the essential soundness of the principles of the French in the conflict they were waging with despotism. Occasionally a man had ventured to speak out, voicing apprehension and doubt, although usually preferring to adopt the device of pseudonymity. Conspicuous in this by no means large group were the elder and the younger Adams, the former declaring himself in his “Discourses on Davila” (Cf.The Life and Works of John Adams, vol. vi, pp. 223–403), and the latter in the “Publicola” letters, written in 1791, in response to Paine’s treatise on “The Rights of Man”. Morse,John Quincy Adams, p. 18. Butevents, much more than political treatises, were to break the spell which the Revolution in its earlier stages cast over the people of America.[177]No better testimony concerning the unfavorable impression created by the execution of the French king could be had than that supplied by the comment of Salem’s republican minister, the Reverend William Bentley. Under date of March 25, 1793, he wrote: “The melancholy news of the beheading of the Roi de France is confirmed in the public opinion, & the event is regretted most sincerely by all thinking people. The french lose much of their influence upon the hearts of the Americans by this event.” (Diary, vol. ii, p. 13.Cf.Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 254et seq.) This thrill of public horror also found expression in the following lines taken from a broadside of the day:“WhenMobstriumphant seize the rheins,And guide theCarofState,Monarchs will feel the galling chains,And meet the worst of fate:For instance, view theGallicshore,A nation,oncepoliteSee what confusion hovers o’er,AStar, that shone so bright.Then from the scene recoil with dread,For LOUIS is no more,The barb’rousMobcut off his head,And drank the spouting gore.Shall we, theSonsof FREEDOM dareAgainst sovileaRace?Unless we mean ourselves tobare(sic)Thepalmof their disgrace.No! God forbid, the man who feelsThe force ofpity’scall,To join thoseBrutes, whosesentenceseals,Whose hearts are made of gall.”(The Tragedy of Louis Capet, and Printed next the venerable Stump of Liberty Tree, for J. Plumer, Jun., Trader, of Newbury-port.) (In vol. 21 of Broadsides, Library of Congress.)[178]Webster,The Revolution in France considered in Respect to its Progress and Effects, New York, 1794. Webster’s discriminating pamphlet is one of the most suggestive of all American contemporaneous documents.Cf.Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, p. 259.[179]For characteristic outbursts of this nature,cf.Adams,Life and Works, vol. ii, p. 160; Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 90. Typical newspaper comment similar in vein may be found in theWestern Star(Stockbridge, Mass.), March 11, 1794, and theGazette of the United States(Philadelphia), April 13, 1793.[180]As early as 1790 John Adams had spoken of the French nation as a “republic of atheists.” (Works, vol. ix, p. 563.) Other leaders responded to similar sentiments. (Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, p. 266.) Familiarity with French philosophical and religious opinions before the French Revolution had supplied a basis for this concern.[181]Aulard,Le culte de la Raison et de l’Être suprême, pp. 17et seq.Cf.Sloane,The French Revolution and Religious Reform, pp. 53, 79, 97. The effort to dechristianize the institutions of religion in France is admitted by both writers, but the superficial occasion of this hostile effort is made clear.[182]Cf. infra,pp. 103et seq.[183]The practice of looking to the religious situation in France for ammunition to serve the artillery of political parties in America, is well illustrated in the following instances:The Western Starof March 25, 1794, dwelt at length upon the depravity of French irreligion, and asserted that the lack of public alarm in this country must be accepted as convincing evidence that the American public has already yielded itself to the seductive influence and power of atheistical opinions. On the other hand, theIndependent Chronicle, issues of March 6 and July 24, 1794, pounces upon Robespierre’s scheme for the rehabilitation of religion under the guise of the cult of the Supreme Being, and with great gusto asserts that here is the positive and sufficient proof that the charge of atheism which has been lodged against the Revolutionists is as baseless as it is wicked. An examination of the newspaper comment of the day supplies abundant warrant that this crying up and crying down of the charge of French infidelity went far in the direction of investing the political situation in New England with those characteristics of bitter and extravagant crimination and recrimination with which all political discussion in that section, as in fact throughout the entire country, near the close of the eighteenth century, was so deeply marked.[184]By the adoption of this measure the Catholic clergy in France were turned into state officials. The relation of the Pope to the French clergy became that of a spiritual guide and counsellor only. The principle of territorial limitation on the part of ecclesiastics was also abolished.Cf.Sloane,The French Revolution and Religious Reform, pp. 121et seq.[185]Aulard,The French Revolution, vol. iii, pp. 152–191, gives an excellent résumé of the dechristianizing movement.[186]The conservative press of America saw to it that this information did not escape the attention of its readers.Cf.Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 267et seq.Cf.Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 80–87, 98et seq.[187]Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 269et seq.[188]Dwight,Travels, vol. iv, p. 362.[189]Beecher,Autobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, p. 30.[190]Baldwin,Annals of Yale College … From its Foundation to the Year 1831, New Haven, 1831, p. 146.[191]Field,Brief Memoirs of the Members of the Class Graduated at Yale College in September, 1802. (Printed for private distribution), p. 9.[192]Beecher,Autobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, p. 30.[193]Sprague,Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. ii, pp. 164, 165.Cf.Sketches of Yale College, with Numerous Anecdotes… New York, 1843, p. 136.[194]Memoir of William Ellery Channing, vol. i, p. 60.[195]Ibid.Sidney Willard, in hisMemories of Youth and Manhood, vol. ii, p. 101, tones down the picture appreciably.[196]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 88et seq.[197]A Sermon Delivered to the First Congregation in Cambridge, and the Religious Society in Charlestown, April 11, 1793.By David Tappan, A. M., Professor of Divinity in Harvard College, Boston, 1793.[198]Ibid., p. 16.[199]David Osgood (1747–1822) was one of the best known New England clergymen of his day. Possessing a fondness for unusual public occasions, such as state and church festivals, he acquired the habit of turning them to account by way of airing his political and religious ideas, a custom which drew to him the cordial support of the Federal school to which he belonged, and the no less cordial contempt of the Republicans.Cf.Sprague,Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. ii, pp. 75, 76.[200]The predilection of the New England clergy for political preaching requires a word. The clergy emerged from the period of the American Revolution with their reputation considerably enhanced. The cause of the struggling colonists they had supported with resolution and ability and their moral force had shown itself remarkably effective. It is also to be noted that from the settlement of the country, the clergy had been extraordinarily influential in the direction of public affairs. They were the intimates and advisers of public officials as well as the trusted counsellors of the people. After the setting up of the government most of the questions which agitated the public mind had definite moral and religious aspects. The New England clergy would have regarded themselves as seriously remiss and therefore culpable had they not spoken out upon the burning questions of the day. With the intrusion of foreign affairs into the sphere of American politics the impulse in the direction of political preaching was decidedly strengthened. Definite issues regarding morality and religion were thus raised, and the passions of patriotism and religious devotion became inextricably woven together. Love,The Fast and Thanksgiving Days of New England, p. 363; Swift,The Massachusetts Election Sermons: Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, vol. i:Transactions, 1892–1894, pp. 422et seq.[201]The Democratic Societies (or Clubs), to which fuller attention is given onpp. 104et seq., instantly assumed a position of first importance in the minds of many clergyman of New England. Coupled as their emergence was with the amazing performances of Genet, they had the effect of suggesting to the clerical mind the fatal thrust at religion which might, and probably would result, on account of their subterranean operations. This idea of a secret combination against the institutions of religion in America, which proved to have a powerful attraction for many clerical minds, was definitely related to the spasm of anxiety and fear which swept the country when the presence of these secret clubs became generally known.[202]Cf.[Osgood, David],The Wonderful Works of God are to be Remembered. A Sermon delivered on the day of the Annual Thanksgiving, November 20, 1794, Boston, 1794, pp. 21et seq.[203]On account of the virulence of party feeling, it was not to be expected that Osgood would succeed in stating the case in a manner acceptable to all. Popular opinion respecting the wisdom and fairness of Osgood’s performance was far from unanimous. An opposition, inspired by political interests, quickly developed, to which Republican newspapers willingly enough gave voice.The Independent Chronicleof Dec. 11, 1794, contains typical expressions of adverse comment. An exceptionally forceful counter-attack was made in the guise of an anonymous “sermon”, entitled: “The Altar of Baal Thrown Down: or, The French Nation Defended, Against the Pulpit Slander of David Osgood, A. M., Pastor of the Church in Medford. Par Citoyen de Novion.” The author of this pamphlet, who, as time demonstrated, was none other than James Sullivan, later governor of Massachusetts, right valiantly took up the cudgel in defence of the French. The French, he argues, are to be regarded as a mighty nation by whom our own nation has been preserved from destruction. Their excesses are most charitably and fairly explained in the light of the frightful oppressions which they had long suffered. Their attitude toward religion should not be regarded as hostile. The French strike only at a clergy who have linked their power with that of the nobility, and who together have made the people’s lot intolerable.Cf. ibid., pp. 12et seq.The entire sermon abounds in caustic criticism of Osgood for having stepped “out of … line to gratify a party.”[204]Christian Thankfulness Explained and Enforced. A Sermon, delivered at Charlestown, in the afternoon of February 19, 1795. The day of general thanksgiving through the United States.By David Tappan, D. D., Hollisian Professor of Divinity in Harvard College, Boston, 1795.[205]The Nature and Manner of Giving Thanks to God, Illustrated. A sermon, delivered on the day of the national thanksgiving, February 19, 1795.By Ebenezer Bradford, A. M., pastor of the First Church in Rowley, Boston, 1795.[206]The so-called “Whiskey Rebellion” came in for a considerable amount of hostile comment on the part of the Federalist clergy at this time. Generally speaking, the New England clergy felt sure of their ground respecting the alleged causal relation between the Democratic Clubs and the Pennsylvania uprising. Hence it happened that the tone of clerical condemnation with respect to everything which had the semblance of a secret propaganda was appreciably heightened. The moralizing tendencies of the clergy with respect to the secret combinations which were believed to be back of the “Whiskey Rebellion” is well illustrated in the following:A Sermon, delivered February 19, 1795, being a day of general thanksgiving throughout the United States of America. By Joseph Dana, A. M., pastor of the South Church in Ipswich. Newburyport, 1795.Cf.also,Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 7.[207]Tappan’sSermon, p. 36.[208]A Discourse, delivered February 19, 1795. The day set apart by the President for a general thanksgiving throughout the United States.By David Osgood, A. M., pastor of the church in Medford, Boston, 1795, p. 18.[209]Ibid., pp. 18, 19.[210]A Sermon, delivered before the Convention of the Clergy of Massachusetts, in Boston, May 26, 1796.By Jeremy Belknap, minister of the church in Federal-Street, Boston. Boston, 1796, pp. 15et seq.A similar note was struck by Tappan in the convention of the following year.Cf.Sermon, delivered before the Annual Convention of the Congregational Ministers of Massachusetts, in Boston, June 1, 1797, Boston, 1797, p. 26.[211]A Sermon, delivered on the 9th of May, 1798. Being the day of a National Fast, Recommended by the President of the United States.By John Thornton Kirkland, minister of the New South Church, Boston. Boston, 1798, pp. 18et seq.[212]Complaints of the nature indicated, and justifications of ministerial conduct in continuing the practice of “political preaching” increase in number from about 1796 on. The following examples are picked almost at random:The sermon preached by John Eliot at the ordination of Joseph M’Kean, Milton, Mass., November 1, 1797, Boston, 1797, p. 33; James Abercrombie’sFast Day Sermon, May 9, 1798, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, (n. d.); Eliphalet Porter’sFast Day Sermonof the same date, at Roxbury, Boston, 1798, p. 22; Samuel Miller’sFast Day Sermon, also of the same date, at New York, New York, 1798.[213]God’s Challenge to Infidels to Defend Their Cause, Illustrated and Applied in a Sermon, delivered in West Springfield, May 4, 1797, being the day of the General Fast.By Joseph Lathrop, minister … Second Ed., Cambridge, 1803.[214]Ibid., p. 4.[215]A Sermon, preached on the State Fast, April 6th, 1798.… By Nathan Strong, pastor of the North Presbyterian Church in Hartford. Hartford, 1798, pp. 14et seq.[216]Some Facts evincive of the Atheistical, Anarchical, and in other respects, Immoral Principles of the French Republicans, Stated in a sermon delivered on the 9th of May, 1798.… By David Osgood … Boston, 1798.[217]One of the curious results of the reflection of the American clergy on the significance of the French Revolution was a marked disposition to treat the Roman Catholic Church with unwonted sympathy and respect. Osgood’s implied apology not infrequently received an unblushingly frank statement.Cf.for example, Nathan Strong’sConnecticut Fast Day Sermon, cited above.[218]This estimate of the case appealed to Osgood’s mind and satisfied his fancy. A year later he was heard on the following subject:The Devil Let Loose; or The Wo occasioned to the Inhabitants of the Earth by His Wrathful Appearance among Them. For lurid rhetoric Osgood outdid himself on this occasion. “Not in France only, but in various other countries, is the devil let loose; iniquity abounds; unclean spirits, like frogs in the houses and kneading-troughs of the Egyptians, have gone forth to the kings and rulers of the earth, … the armies of Gog and Magog are gathered together in open hostility against all unrighteousness, truth and goodness.” (The Devil Let Loose, etc. Illustrated in a Discourse, delivered on the Day of the National Fast, April 25, 1799, Boston, 1799, pp. 13et seq.)[219]Some Facts Evincive, etc., pp. 13, 16et seq.[220]Acts and Proceedings of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, May 17, 1798, pp. 11et seq.[221]Ibid.[222]TheMassachusetts Mercury(Boston), June 19, 1798, contains the address in full.[223]This address may be found in theIndependent Chronicleof July 4, 1799, and theNewburyport Heraldof June 28, 1799. A further comment, of more than average significance, on the unparalleled degeneracy of the times may be found in the sermon preached by the Reverend William Harris, of Marblehead, Massachusetts, before the annual convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church, held in Boston, May 28, 1799.Cf.A Sermon delivered at Trinity Church, in Boston.… By William Harris, rector of St. Michael’s Church, Marblehead, Boston, 1799. A decade and a half later Lyman Beecher preached his famous sermon on “Building Waste Places.” The impression which lingered in his mind concerning the period under survey is worthy of consideration. After having discussed the unhappy condition of religious life in the churches of New England during the first half of the eighteenth century, he said: “A later cause of decline and desolation has been the insidious influence of infidel philosophy. The mystery of iniquity had in Europe been operating for a long time. The unclean spirits had commenced their mission to the kings of the earth to gather them together to the battle of the great day of God Almighty. But when that mighty convulsion [Foot-note: The French Revolution] took place, that a second-time burst open the bottomless pit, and spread darkness and dismay over Europe, every gale brought to our shores contagion and death. Thousands at once breathed the tainted air and felt the fever kindle in the brain. A paroxysm of moral madness and terrific innovation ensued. In the frenzy of perverted vision every foe appeared a friend, and every friend a foe. No maxims were deemed too wise to be abandoned, none too horrid to be adopted; no foundations too deep laid to be torn up, and no superstructure too venerable to be torn down, that another, such as in Europe they were building with bones and blood, might be built…. The polluted page of infidelity everywhere met the eye while its sneers and blasphemies assailed the ear…. The result was a brood of infidels, heretics, and profligates—a generation prepared to be carried about, as they have been, by every wind of doctrine, and to assail, as they have done, our most sacred institutions.”Cf.Beecher,Autobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, pp. 239, 240.[224]Robinson,Jeffersonian Democracy in New England, p. i; Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, p. 150.[225]The term “Anti-Federalist” was born out of the struggle which developed over the adoption of the national constitution. The term “Republican” was one of the by-products of the discussion which arose in this country, from 1792 on, over French revolutionary ideals.Cf.Johnston,American Political History, pt. i, p. 207.[226]American State Papers: Foreign Relations, vol. i, p. 140.[227]The issues of theColumbian Centinelfor 1793 abound in addresses of this character.[228]Cf.for example, the issues of theConnecticut Courantfor July 29, Aug. 5 and 26, 1793, and of theIndependent Chroniclefor May 7, 16 and 23, 1793.Cf.Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, p. 128.[229]TheConnecticut Courantof May 13, 1793, contains the first announcements of Genet’s arrival which that paper made. Subsequent issues are fairly well occupied with accounts of Genet’s arrival in Philadelphia, the unconfirmed expressions of cordiality and heated enthusiasm which he encountered there, the congratulatory address which the citizens of that place presented him, Genet’s response,etc.In the issue of August 12 mention is made of the Frenchman’s arrival in New York. Thus far not the slightest trace of a suspecting attitude of mind is discoverable.[230]The issues of theConnecticut Courantfor August 19 and 26, and November 11, 1793, contain articles that admirably illustrate the rising temper of the New England Federalists as they contemplated Genet’s absurdities and improprieties.[231]Luetscher, in hisEarly Political Machinery in the United States, p. 33, asserts that not more than twenty-four separate organizations of this character were formed within the two years which followed their first appearance. These were fairly well distributed throughout the Union. One was in Maine, one in Massachusetts (Boston), three in Vermont, two in New York, one in New Jersey, five in Pennsylvania, one in Delaware, one in Maryland, two in Virginia, one in North Carolina, four in South Carolina, and two in Kentucky.[232]McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 175et seq.[233]Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 189et seq.[234]Robinson,Jeffersonian Democracy in New England, p. 10, for significant comments upon the effect of the establishment of the Democratic Societies on general political interest. The vote was appreciably increased and elections were more hotly contested on account of the emergence of the Clubs.Cf.alsoNew England Magazine, January, 1890, p. 488.[235]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 75;Wolcott Papers, vol. vii, 5, letter of Jedediah Morse to Oliver Wolcott. TheIndependent Chronicleof Jan. 16, 1794, contains the Rules and Regulations and the Declaration of this Society.[236]Massachusetts Mercury, Nov. 29, 1793.Cf.Works of Fisher Ames, vol. ii, pp. 146et seq.[237]Jedediah Morse did not fail to observe the appearance of the Boston organization nor to divine its character and general scope of action. In a letter to Oliver Wolcott, Secretary of the Treasury, and Morse’s intimate friend, a letter written close to the date of the organization of the Constitutional Club, Morse wrote optimistically but seriously of the situation:

[152]Quoted by Walker, in hisHistory of the Congregational Churches in the United States, p. 216.

[153]Green,Life, pp. 224, 225.

[154]Cf. supra,pp. 36and37et seq.

[155]See Walker,Creeds and Platforms of Congregationalism, p. 287.

[156]The lowest point of religious decline in the history of New England was reached in the first quarter of the eighteenth century. The absence of vital piety was generally remarked. The prevailing type of religious experience was unemotional and formal. The adoption of the Half-Way Covenant in the third quarter of the previous century helped to precipitate a state of things wherein the ordinary distinctions between the converted and the unconverted were largely obscured. Emphasis came to be laid heavily upon the cultivation of morality as a means of promoting spiritual life. Prayer, the reading of the Bible, and church attendance were other “means”. In other words, man’s part in the acquisition of religious experience came prominently into view. The promoters of the revival attacked these notions, asserting that repentance and faith were still fundamentally necessary and that the experience of conversion,i. e., the conscious sense of a change in one’s relation to God, was the prime test of one’s hope of salvation. Charles Chauncy, minister of the First Church, Boston, in hisSeasonable Thoughts on the State of Religion in New England(1743), championed the former position; the great Edwards came to the defence of the latter.

[157]Channing,Memoirs, vol. i. pp. 287–290, 387.Cf.also Goddard,Studies in New England Transcendentalism, pp. 13et seq.

[158]Riley,American Philosophy, p. 192. Note: It is not here maintained that radical religious ideas in New England had their earliest roots, or found their sole stimulus, in the controversy which the theological formulations incident to the Great Awakening provoked. Incipient religious liberalism is distinguishable as far back as the publication of Cotton Mather’sReasonable Religion, in 1713. In his erudite essay on “The Beginnings of Arminianism in New England,” F. A. Christie adopts the position that prior to the Great Awakening there were rumor and alarm over the mere arrival of Arminian doctrines in this country; but that after 1742 the heresy spread rapidly, chiefly due to the growth of the Episcopal church, with its marked leanings to the Arminian theology.Cf.Papers of the American Society of Church History, Second Series, vol. iii, pp. 168et seq.But however that may be, the cause of Arminianism during the eighteenth century was promoted by men in New England who drew at least a part of their inspiration from the writings of leaders of thought in the mother country whose theological positions inclined strongly toward rationalism.Cf.Cooke,Unitarianism in America, pp. 39, 44et seq., 79. Harvard College, from the close of the seventeenth century on, was increasingly recognized as a center of liberalizing tendencies, although none will dispute that the kernel of intellectual independence was found, all too frequently, well hidden within the tough shell of traditional conceits.Cf.Quincy,The History of Harvard University, vol. i, pp. 44–57, 199et seq.Independent impulses were largely responsible for the following events which mark the definite emergence of Unitarianism in America: the organization of the first New England Unitarian congregation at Gloucester, Mass., in 1779; the publication in this country, five years later, of the London edition of Dr. Charles Chauncy’sSalvation for All Men; and the defection from Trinitarian standards of King’s Chapel, Boston, in 1785–87. Still it must be maintained that the controversies which raged around the doctrines of the New Calvinism beyond all other factors stiffened the inclinations and tendencies of the century toward liberal thinking. Such terms as “Arminianism”, “Pelagianism”, “Socinianism”, “Arianism”,etc., which occur with ever-increasing frequency from the fourth decade of the century on, are in themselves suggestive of the divergencies in religious opinion which the doctrinal discussion incident to the Great Awakening provoked.Cf.Fiske,A Century of Science and Other Essays: “The Origins of Liberal Thought in America”, pp. 148et seq.

[159]As a typical illustration the comment of Lyman Beecher may be cited: “The Deistic controversy was an existing thing, and the battle was hot, the crisis exciting.” (Autobiography, Correspondence, etc.vol. i, p. 52.) The date is about 1798. In the same connection President Dwight of Yale is referred to as “the great stirrer-up of that [i. e., the deistic] controversy on this side the Atlantic.” (Ibid.) It is certain that Dwight had some acquaintance with the works of the leading English deists, and that he opposed their views.Cf.Travels in New England and New York, vol. iv, p. 362; but his main target was infidelity of the French school. Beecher fails to distinguish between the two.

[160]One discovers no convincing evidence that the deistical views of Benjamin Franklin produced any direct effect upon the thought of New England. As respects Thomas Jefferson the case was different. But New England Federalists were so successful in keeping public attention fixed on Jefferson’s fondness for French political and religious philosophy, that his alleged “French infidelity” rather than his opinions concerning natural religion became and continued to be the bone of contention. That he was regarded as a deist is, however, not to be questioned. Bentley,Diary, vol. iii, p. 20.

[161]Allen’s book of some 477 pages bore the following pretentious and rambling title:Reason the only Oracle of Man, or a Compendius System of Natural Religion. Alternately Adorned with Confutations of a Variety of Doctrines incompatible to it; Deduced from the Most Exalted Ideas which we are able to form of the Divine and Human Characters, and from the Universe in General.By Ethan Allen, Esq. Bennington, State of Vermont.The Preface is dated July 2, 1782. Evans records the fact that the entire edition, except about thirty copies, was destroyed by fire, said to have been caused by lightning, an event which the orthodox construed as a judgment from heaven on account of the nature of the book.Cf.American Bibliography, vol. vi, p. 266. The author’s aim has been interpreted as an effort “to build up a system of natural religion on the basis of a deity expressed in the external universe, as interpreted by the reason of man, in which the author includes the moral consciousness.” (Moncure D. Conway inOpen Court[magazine], January 28, 1892, article: “Ethan Allen’s Oracles of Reason,” p. 3119.)

[162]The Literary Diary of Ezra Stiles, vol. iii, p. 345. The comment of Yale’s president is fairly representative: “And the 13th Inst died in Vermont the profane & impious Deist Gen Ethan Allen, Author of the Oracles of Reason, a Book replete with scurrilous Reflexions on Revelation. ‘And in Hell he lift up his Eyes being in Torments.’” (Ibid.) In 1787, at Litchfield, Connecticut, where Allen’s home had once been, there was published an anonymous sermon, from the text: “And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks which the swine did eat.” (Luke 15: 16.) The sermon was planned to counteract the effect produced by the “prophane, prayerless, graceless infidel,” Allen, through the publication of the book in question. The author, “Common Sense” (apparently Josiah Sherman), adopts for his sermon the caption, “A Sermon to Swine,” and explains in the Advertisement the temper of his mood: “By way of apology, I hope Gen. Allen will pardon any reproach that may be supposable, in comparing him to the Prodigal Son, sent by the Citizen into his fields to feed Swine with husks, when he considers, what an infinitely greater reproach he casts upon the holy oracles of God, and upon his Prophets, Apostles and Ministers, and upon the Lord of life and glory himself; at whose tribunal we must all shortly appear; when he represents Him as an impostor and cheat, and all the blessed doctrines of the gospel as falsehood and lies.” (A Sermon to Swine: From Luke xv: 16 … Containing a concise, but sufficient answer to General Allen’s Oracles of Reason.By Common Sense, A. M., Litchfield, 1787.)

An amusing albeit suggestive episode is recorded by William Bentley in hisDiary, in connection with certain reflections on the dangers involved in the loaning of books: “Allen’soracles of reason… was lent to Col. C. under solemn promise of secrecy, but by him sent to a Mr. Grafton, who was reported to have died a Confirmed Infidel…. The book was found at his death in his chamber, examined with horror by his female relations. By them conveyed to a Mr. Williams … & there examined—reported to be mine from the initials W. B., viewed as an awful curiosity by hundreds, connected with a report that I encouraged infidelity in Grafton by my prayers with him in his dying hour, & upon the whole a terrible opposition to me fixed in the minds of the devout & ignorant multitude.” (Ibid., vol. i, p. 82.)

The following extract from Timothy Dwight’s poem onThe Triumph of Infidelitysupplies another interesting contemporaneous estimate of Allen’s assault upon revelation:

“In vain thro realms of nonsense ranThe great Clodhopping oracle of man.Yet faithful were his toils: What could he more?In Satan’s cause he bustled, bruised and swore;And what the due reward, from me shall know,For gentlemen of equal worth below.”

“In vain thro realms of nonsense ranThe great Clodhopping oracle of man.Yet faithful were his toils: What could he more?In Satan’s cause he bustled, bruised and swore;And what the due reward, from me shall know,For gentlemen of equal worth below.”

“In vain thro realms of nonsense ranThe great Clodhopping oracle of man.Yet faithful were his toils: What could he more?In Satan’s cause he bustled, bruised and swore;And what the due reward, from me shall know,For gentlemen of equal worth below.”

“In vain thro realms of nonsense ran

The great Clodhopping oracle of man.

Yet faithful were his toils: What could he more?

In Satan’s cause he bustled, bruised and swore;

And what the due reward, from me shall know,

For gentlemen of equal worth below.”

A foot-note explains the point in the last two lines: “In A——n’s Journal, the writer observes, he presumes he shall be treated in the future world as well as other gentlemen of equal merit are treated: A sentiment in which all his countrymen will join.” (The Triumph of Infidelity: A Poem.[Anonymous], 1788, pp. 23et seq.The copy referred to is dedicated by the author “To Mons. de Voltaire.”)

[163]The Age of Reason: Part I, appeared in America in 1794.Cf.The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, edited by Moncure Daniel Conway, New York, 1901, p. vii; also advertisements of its offer for sale,Massachusetts Spy(Worcester), Nov. 19, 1794. TheConnecticut Courant(Hartford), Jan. 19, and Feb. 9, 1795, contains examples of pained newspaper comment.Walcott Papers, vol. viii, 7.

[164]At least fifteen thousand copies of the second part of the book arrived in America in the spring of 1796, despatched from Paris by Paine, consigned to his Philadelphia friend, Mr. Franklin Bache, Republican printer, editor, and ardent servant of radicalism generally. It was clearly Paine’s purpose to influence as many minds in America as possible.Cf.Conway,The Writings of Thomas Paine, vol. iv, p. 15; Paine’s letter to Col. Fellows, in New York, explaining the forwarding of the books. This effort to obtain a general circulation of theAge of Reasondid not escape the attention of men who were disturbed over the prevailing evidences of irreligion. In a fast day sermon, delivered in April, 1799, the Reverend Daniel Dana, of Newburyport, Massachusetts, called attention to the matter in the following fashion: “ … let me mention a fact which ought to excite universal alarm and horror. The well-known and detestable pamphlet of Thomas Paine, written with a professed design to revile the Christian religion, and to diffuse the poison of infidelity, was composed in France, was there printed in English, and an edition containing many thousand of copies, conveyed at a single time into our country, in order to be sold at a cheap rate, or given away, as might best ensure its circulation. What baneful success has attended this vile and insidious effort, you need not be told. That infidelity has had, for several years past, a rapid increase among us, seems a truth generally acknowledged.” (Two Sermons, delivered April 25, 1799: the day recommended by the President of the United States for National Humiliation, Fasting and Prayer.By Daniel Dana, A. M., pastor of a church in Newburyport, 1799, p. 45).Cf.alsoibid., p. 20.

[165]The Age of Reasonwas written from the standpoint of a man who believed that the disassociation of religion from political institutions, and the elimination from it of fiction and fable, would bring in the true religion of humanity. The following excerpt sets out the author’s approach and aim: “Soon after I had published the pamphlet, ‘Common Sense’, in America I saw the exceeding probability that a revolution in the system of government would be followed by a revolution in the system of religion. The adulterous connection of church and state, wherever it had taken place, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, had so effectually prohibited by pains and penalties every discussion upon established creeds, and upon first principles of religion, that until the system of government should be changed those subjects could not be brought fairly and openly before the world; but that whenever this should be done a revolution in the system of religion would follow. Human inventions and priestcraft would be detected; and man would return to the pure, unmixed, and unadulterated belief of one God and no more.” (The Writings of Thomas Paine, vol. ii, pp. 22et seq.) Paine’s exposition of the tenets of natural religion was far from scholarly, and as soon as the public became aware of the eccentric and uneven character of the book, the storm of criticism speedily blew itself out. The recoil of Paine’s ugly attack upon Washington, in the same year in which theAge of Reasonwas extensively circulated in this country, materially helped to discredit the book.

[166]A partial list of the books and pamphlets, separate discourses not included, which were published in this country immediately following the appearance of theAge of Reasonwill serve to emphasize the depth of the impression which Paine’s book made: (1) Priestley, Joseph,An Answer to Mr. Paine’s Age of Reason; being a Continuation of Letters to the Philosophers and Politicians of France, on the Subject of Religion; and of the Letters of a Philosophical Unbeliever. Second Edition. Northumberlandtown, America, 1794; (2) Williams, Thomas,The Age of Infidelity: an Answer to Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason. By a Layman (pseud.). Third Edition, Worcester, Mass., 1794; (3) Stilwell, Samuel,A Guide to Reason, or an Examination of Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason, and Investigation of the True and Fabulous Theology, New York, 1794; (4) Winchester, Elhanan,Ten Letters Addressed to Mr. Paine, in Answer to His Pamphlet, entitled The Age of Reason, Second Edition, New York, 1795; (5) Ogden, Uzal,Antidote to Deism. The Deist Unmasked; or an Ample Refutation of all the Objections of Thomas Paine, Against the Christian Religion; as Contained in a Pamphlet, intitled (sic), The Age of Reason, etc., Two volumes, Newark, 1795; (6) Broaddus, Andrew,The Age of Reason and Revelation; or Animadversions on Mr. Thomas Paine’s late piece, intitled “The Age of Reason”, etc.… Richmond, 1795; (7) Muir, James,An Examination of the Principles Contained in the Age of Reason. In Ten Discourses, Baltimore, 1795; (8) Belknap, Jeremy,Dissertations on the Character, Death & Resurrection of Jesus Christ … with remarks on some sentiments advanced in a book intitled “The Age of Reason,”Boston, 1795; (9) Humphreys, Daniel,The Bible Needs no Apology; or Watson’s System of Religion Refuted; and the Advocate Proved an Unreliable One, by the Bible Itself: of which a short view is given, and which itself gives a short answer to Paine: in Four Letters, on Watson’s Apology for the Bible, and Paine’s Age of Reason, Part the Second, Portsmouth, 1796; (10) Tytler, James,Paine’s Second Part of the Age of Reason Answered, Salem, 1796; (11) Fowler, James,The Truth of the Bible Fairly Put to the Test, by Confronting the Evidences of Its Own Facts, Alexandria, 1797; (12) Levy, David,A Defence of the Old Testament, in a Series of Letters, addressed to Thomas Paine, Author of a Book entitled, The Age of Reason, Part Second, etc.… New York, 1797; (13) Williams, Thomas,Christianity Vindicated in the admirable speech of the Hon. Theo. Erskine, in the Trial of J. Williams, for Publishing Paine’s Age of Reason, Philadelphia, 1797; (14) Snyder, G.,The Age of Reason Unreasonable; or the Folly of Rejecting Revealed Religion, Philadelphia, 1798; (15) Nelson, D.,An Investigation of that False, Fabulous and Blasphemous Misrepresentation of Truth, set forth by Thomas Paine, in his two volumes, entitled The Age of Reason, etc.(This volume appears to have been published pseudonymously. Advertised in Lancaster, Pa., Intelligencer and Advertiser, October, 1800); (16) Boudinot, Elias,The Age of Revelation, Or, The Age of Reason shewn to be an Age of Infidelity, Philadelphia, 1801.

[167]Cf.Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, Appendix I, pp. 217et seq., for a detailed and fairly satisfactory statement of the character and extent of the discussion which Paine’s book precipitated in New England.

[168]Channing,Memoirs, vol. i, pp. 60, 61. On the latter page it is asserted that in order to counteract such fatal principles as those expressed in theAge of Reason, the patrons and governors of Harvard College had Watson’sApology for the Biblepublished and furnished to the students at the expense of the corporation. This was in 1796. Beecher’sAutobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, pp. 30, 35, 52, touches upon the situation at Yale.Cf.Dwight,Theology: Explained and Defended, vol. i, pp. xxv, xxvi. The extensive prevalence of infidelity among Yale students is commented upon and the statement made that a considerable proportion of the class which President Dwight first taught (1795–96) “had assumed the names of principal English and French Infidels; and were more familiarly known by them than by their own.” (Ibid.)Cf.Dorchester,Christianity in the United States, p. 319.

[169]The impression lingered on after the stir caused by the appearance of theAge of Reason. In 1803 Paine was in southern New England. His presence was disturbing, as the following comment of William Bentley will show: “Reports are circulated that Thomas Paine intends to visit New England. The name is enough. Every person has ideas of him. Some respect his genius and dread the man. Some reverence his political, while they hate his religious, opinions. Some love the man, but not his private manners. Indeed he has done nothing which has not extremes in it. He never appears but we love and hate him. He is as great a paradox as ever appeared in human nature.” (Diary, vol. iii. p. 37.Cf. ibid., vol. ii. pp. 102, 107, 145.)

[170]Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 141et seq.

[171]Ibid., p. 143.

[172]Dwight,Travels, vol. iv, p. 361.

[173]Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. v, pp. 154, 274;Massachusetts Historical Collections, Sixth Series, vol. iv,Belknap Papers, p. 503.

[174]The entire episode is treated with great fullness and equal vividness by Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 164–188.

[175]Writings of Thomas Jefferson, vol. vi, pp. 153et seq.

[176]From the first, devotion to the French cause had not been quite unanimous. Here and there, scattered through the country, a man might be found who from the beginning of the Revolution had cherished misgivings as to the essential soundness of the principles of the French in the conflict they were waging with despotism. Occasionally a man had ventured to speak out, voicing apprehension and doubt, although usually preferring to adopt the device of pseudonymity. Conspicuous in this by no means large group were the elder and the younger Adams, the former declaring himself in his “Discourses on Davila” (Cf.The Life and Works of John Adams, vol. vi, pp. 223–403), and the latter in the “Publicola” letters, written in 1791, in response to Paine’s treatise on “The Rights of Man”. Morse,John Quincy Adams, p. 18. Butevents, much more than political treatises, were to break the spell which the Revolution in its earlier stages cast over the people of America.

[177]No better testimony concerning the unfavorable impression created by the execution of the French king could be had than that supplied by the comment of Salem’s republican minister, the Reverend William Bentley. Under date of March 25, 1793, he wrote: “The melancholy news of the beheading of the Roi de France is confirmed in the public opinion, & the event is regretted most sincerely by all thinking people. The french lose much of their influence upon the hearts of the Americans by this event.” (Diary, vol. ii, p. 13.Cf.Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 254et seq.) This thrill of public horror also found expression in the following lines taken from a broadside of the day:

“WhenMobstriumphant seize the rheins,And guide theCarofState,Monarchs will feel the galling chains,And meet the worst of fate:For instance, view theGallicshore,A nation,oncepoliteSee what confusion hovers o’er,AStar, that shone so bright.Then from the scene recoil with dread,For LOUIS is no more,The barb’rousMobcut off his head,And drank the spouting gore.Shall we, theSonsof FREEDOM dareAgainst sovileaRace?Unless we mean ourselves tobare(sic)Thepalmof their disgrace.No! God forbid, the man who feelsThe force ofpity’scall,To join thoseBrutes, whosesentenceseals,Whose hearts are made of gall.”

“WhenMobstriumphant seize the rheins,And guide theCarofState,Monarchs will feel the galling chains,And meet the worst of fate:For instance, view theGallicshore,A nation,oncepoliteSee what confusion hovers o’er,AStar, that shone so bright.Then from the scene recoil with dread,For LOUIS is no more,The barb’rousMobcut off his head,And drank the spouting gore.Shall we, theSonsof FREEDOM dareAgainst sovileaRace?Unless we mean ourselves tobare(sic)Thepalmof their disgrace.No! God forbid, the man who feelsThe force ofpity’scall,To join thoseBrutes, whosesentenceseals,Whose hearts are made of gall.”

“WhenMobstriumphant seize the rheins,

And guide theCarofState,

Monarchs will feel the galling chains,

And meet the worst of fate:

For instance, view theGallicshore,

A nation,oncepolite

See what confusion hovers o’er,

AStar, that shone so bright.

Then from the scene recoil with dread,

For LOUIS is no more,

The barb’rousMobcut off his head,

And drank the spouting gore.

Shall we, theSonsof FREEDOM dare

Against sovileaRace?

Unless we mean ourselves tobare(sic)

Thepalmof their disgrace.

No! God forbid, the man who feels

The force ofpity’scall,

To join thoseBrutes, whosesentenceseals,

Whose hearts are made of gall.”

(The Tragedy of Louis Capet, and Printed next the venerable Stump of Liberty Tree, for J. Plumer, Jun., Trader, of Newbury-port.) (In vol. 21 of Broadsides, Library of Congress.)

[178]Webster,The Revolution in France considered in Respect to its Progress and Effects, New York, 1794. Webster’s discriminating pamphlet is one of the most suggestive of all American contemporaneous documents.Cf.Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, p. 259.

[179]For characteristic outbursts of this nature,cf.Adams,Life and Works, vol. ii, p. 160; Gibbs,Memoirs of the Administrations of Washington and John Adams, vol. i, p. 90. Typical newspaper comment similar in vein may be found in theWestern Star(Stockbridge, Mass.), March 11, 1794, and theGazette of the United States(Philadelphia), April 13, 1793.

[180]As early as 1790 John Adams had spoken of the French nation as a “republic of atheists.” (Works, vol. ix, p. 563.) Other leaders responded to similar sentiments. (Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, p. 266.) Familiarity with French philosophical and religious opinions before the French Revolution had supplied a basis for this concern.

[181]Aulard,Le culte de la Raison et de l’Être suprême, pp. 17et seq.Cf.Sloane,The French Revolution and Religious Reform, pp. 53, 79, 97. The effort to dechristianize the institutions of religion in France is admitted by both writers, but the superficial occasion of this hostile effort is made clear.

[182]Cf. infra,pp. 103et seq.

[183]The practice of looking to the religious situation in France for ammunition to serve the artillery of political parties in America, is well illustrated in the following instances:The Western Starof March 25, 1794, dwelt at length upon the depravity of French irreligion, and asserted that the lack of public alarm in this country must be accepted as convincing evidence that the American public has already yielded itself to the seductive influence and power of atheistical opinions. On the other hand, theIndependent Chronicle, issues of March 6 and July 24, 1794, pounces upon Robespierre’s scheme for the rehabilitation of religion under the guise of the cult of the Supreme Being, and with great gusto asserts that here is the positive and sufficient proof that the charge of atheism which has been lodged against the Revolutionists is as baseless as it is wicked. An examination of the newspaper comment of the day supplies abundant warrant that this crying up and crying down of the charge of French infidelity went far in the direction of investing the political situation in New England with those characteristics of bitter and extravagant crimination and recrimination with which all political discussion in that section, as in fact throughout the entire country, near the close of the eighteenth century, was so deeply marked.

[184]By the adoption of this measure the Catholic clergy in France were turned into state officials. The relation of the Pope to the French clergy became that of a spiritual guide and counsellor only. The principle of territorial limitation on the part of ecclesiastics was also abolished.Cf.Sloane,The French Revolution and Religious Reform, pp. 121et seq.

[185]Aulard,The French Revolution, vol. iii, pp. 152–191, gives an excellent résumé of the dechristianizing movement.

[186]The conservative press of America saw to it that this information did not escape the attention of its readers.Cf.Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 267et seq.Cf.Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 80–87, 98et seq.

[187]Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 269et seq.

[188]Dwight,Travels, vol. iv, p. 362.

[189]Beecher,Autobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, p. 30.

[190]Baldwin,Annals of Yale College … From its Foundation to the Year 1831, New Haven, 1831, p. 146.

[191]Field,Brief Memoirs of the Members of the Class Graduated at Yale College in September, 1802. (Printed for private distribution), p. 9.

[192]Beecher,Autobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, p. 30.

[193]Sprague,Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. ii, pp. 164, 165.Cf.Sketches of Yale College, with Numerous Anecdotes… New York, 1843, p. 136.

[194]Memoir of William Ellery Channing, vol. i, p. 60.

[195]Ibid.Sidney Willard, in hisMemories of Youth and Manhood, vol. ii, p. 101, tones down the picture appreciably.

[196]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, pp. 88et seq.

[197]A Sermon Delivered to the First Congregation in Cambridge, and the Religious Society in Charlestown, April 11, 1793.By David Tappan, A. M., Professor of Divinity in Harvard College, Boston, 1793.

[198]Ibid., p. 16.

[199]David Osgood (1747–1822) was one of the best known New England clergymen of his day. Possessing a fondness for unusual public occasions, such as state and church festivals, he acquired the habit of turning them to account by way of airing his political and religious ideas, a custom which drew to him the cordial support of the Federal school to which he belonged, and the no less cordial contempt of the Republicans.Cf.Sprague,Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. ii, pp. 75, 76.

[200]The predilection of the New England clergy for political preaching requires a word. The clergy emerged from the period of the American Revolution with their reputation considerably enhanced. The cause of the struggling colonists they had supported with resolution and ability and their moral force had shown itself remarkably effective. It is also to be noted that from the settlement of the country, the clergy had been extraordinarily influential in the direction of public affairs. They were the intimates and advisers of public officials as well as the trusted counsellors of the people. After the setting up of the government most of the questions which agitated the public mind had definite moral and religious aspects. The New England clergy would have regarded themselves as seriously remiss and therefore culpable had they not spoken out upon the burning questions of the day. With the intrusion of foreign affairs into the sphere of American politics the impulse in the direction of political preaching was decidedly strengthened. Definite issues regarding morality and religion were thus raised, and the passions of patriotism and religious devotion became inextricably woven together. Love,The Fast and Thanksgiving Days of New England, p. 363; Swift,The Massachusetts Election Sermons: Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, vol. i:Transactions, 1892–1894, pp. 422et seq.

[201]The Democratic Societies (or Clubs), to which fuller attention is given onpp. 104et seq., instantly assumed a position of first importance in the minds of many clergyman of New England. Coupled as their emergence was with the amazing performances of Genet, they had the effect of suggesting to the clerical mind the fatal thrust at religion which might, and probably would result, on account of their subterranean operations. This idea of a secret combination against the institutions of religion in America, which proved to have a powerful attraction for many clerical minds, was definitely related to the spasm of anxiety and fear which swept the country when the presence of these secret clubs became generally known.

[202]Cf.[Osgood, David],The Wonderful Works of God are to be Remembered. A Sermon delivered on the day of the Annual Thanksgiving, November 20, 1794, Boston, 1794, pp. 21et seq.

[203]On account of the virulence of party feeling, it was not to be expected that Osgood would succeed in stating the case in a manner acceptable to all. Popular opinion respecting the wisdom and fairness of Osgood’s performance was far from unanimous. An opposition, inspired by political interests, quickly developed, to which Republican newspapers willingly enough gave voice.The Independent Chronicleof Dec. 11, 1794, contains typical expressions of adverse comment. An exceptionally forceful counter-attack was made in the guise of an anonymous “sermon”, entitled: “The Altar of Baal Thrown Down: or, The French Nation Defended, Against the Pulpit Slander of David Osgood, A. M., Pastor of the Church in Medford. Par Citoyen de Novion.” The author of this pamphlet, who, as time demonstrated, was none other than James Sullivan, later governor of Massachusetts, right valiantly took up the cudgel in defence of the French. The French, he argues, are to be regarded as a mighty nation by whom our own nation has been preserved from destruction. Their excesses are most charitably and fairly explained in the light of the frightful oppressions which they had long suffered. Their attitude toward religion should not be regarded as hostile. The French strike only at a clergy who have linked their power with that of the nobility, and who together have made the people’s lot intolerable.Cf. ibid., pp. 12et seq.The entire sermon abounds in caustic criticism of Osgood for having stepped “out of … line to gratify a party.”

[204]Christian Thankfulness Explained and Enforced. A Sermon, delivered at Charlestown, in the afternoon of February 19, 1795. The day of general thanksgiving through the United States.By David Tappan, D. D., Hollisian Professor of Divinity in Harvard College, Boston, 1795.

[205]The Nature and Manner of Giving Thanks to God, Illustrated. A sermon, delivered on the day of the national thanksgiving, February 19, 1795.By Ebenezer Bradford, A. M., pastor of the First Church in Rowley, Boston, 1795.

[206]The so-called “Whiskey Rebellion” came in for a considerable amount of hostile comment on the part of the Federalist clergy at this time. Generally speaking, the New England clergy felt sure of their ground respecting the alleged causal relation between the Democratic Clubs and the Pennsylvania uprising. Hence it happened that the tone of clerical condemnation with respect to everything which had the semblance of a secret propaganda was appreciably heightened. The moralizing tendencies of the clergy with respect to the secret combinations which were believed to be back of the “Whiskey Rebellion” is well illustrated in the following:A Sermon, delivered February 19, 1795, being a day of general thanksgiving throughout the United States of America. By Joseph Dana, A. M., pastor of the South Church in Ipswich. Newburyport, 1795.Cf.also,Wolcott Papers, vol. viii, 7.

[207]Tappan’sSermon, p. 36.

[208]A Discourse, delivered February 19, 1795. The day set apart by the President for a general thanksgiving throughout the United States.By David Osgood, A. M., pastor of the church in Medford, Boston, 1795, p. 18.

[209]Ibid., pp. 18, 19.

[210]A Sermon, delivered before the Convention of the Clergy of Massachusetts, in Boston, May 26, 1796.By Jeremy Belknap, minister of the church in Federal-Street, Boston. Boston, 1796, pp. 15et seq.A similar note was struck by Tappan in the convention of the following year.Cf.Sermon, delivered before the Annual Convention of the Congregational Ministers of Massachusetts, in Boston, June 1, 1797, Boston, 1797, p. 26.

[211]A Sermon, delivered on the 9th of May, 1798. Being the day of a National Fast, Recommended by the President of the United States.By John Thornton Kirkland, minister of the New South Church, Boston. Boston, 1798, pp. 18et seq.

[212]Complaints of the nature indicated, and justifications of ministerial conduct in continuing the practice of “political preaching” increase in number from about 1796 on. The following examples are picked almost at random:The sermon preached by John Eliot at the ordination of Joseph M’Kean, Milton, Mass., November 1, 1797, Boston, 1797, p. 33; James Abercrombie’sFast Day Sermon, May 9, 1798, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, (n. d.); Eliphalet Porter’sFast Day Sermonof the same date, at Roxbury, Boston, 1798, p. 22; Samuel Miller’sFast Day Sermon, also of the same date, at New York, New York, 1798.

[213]God’s Challenge to Infidels to Defend Their Cause, Illustrated and Applied in a Sermon, delivered in West Springfield, May 4, 1797, being the day of the General Fast.By Joseph Lathrop, minister … Second Ed., Cambridge, 1803.

[214]Ibid., p. 4.

[215]A Sermon, preached on the State Fast, April 6th, 1798.… By Nathan Strong, pastor of the North Presbyterian Church in Hartford. Hartford, 1798, pp. 14et seq.

[216]Some Facts evincive of the Atheistical, Anarchical, and in other respects, Immoral Principles of the French Republicans, Stated in a sermon delivered on the 9th of May, 1798.… By David Osgood … Boston, 1798.

[217]One of the curious results of the reflection of the American clergy on the significance of the French Revolution was a marked disposition to treat the Roman Catholic Church with unwonted sympathy and respect. Osgood’s implied apology not infrequently received an unblushingly frank statement.Cf.for example, Nathan Strong’sConnecticut Fast Day Sermon, cited above.

[218]This estimate of the case appealed to Osgood’s mind and satisfied his fancy. A year later he was heard on the following subject:The Devil Let Loose; or The Wo occasioned to the Inhabitants of the Earth by His Wrathful Appearance among Them. For lurid rhetoric Osgood outdid himself on this occasion. “Not in France only, but in various other countries, is the devil let loose; iniquity abounds; unclean spirits, like frogs in the houses and kneading-troughs of the Egyptians, have gone forth to the kings and rulers of the earth, … the armies of Gog and Magog are gathered together in open hostility against all unrighteousness, truth and goodness.” (The Devil Let Loose, etc. Illustrated in a Discourse, delivered on the Day of the National Fast, April 25, 1799, Boston, 1799, pp. 13et seq.)

[219]Some Facts Evincive, etc., pp. 13, 16et seq.

[220]Acts and Proceedings of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, May 17, 1798, pp. 11et seq.

[221]Ibid.

[222]TheMassachusetts Mercury(Boston), June 19, 1798, contains the address in full.

[223]This address may be found in theIndependent Chronicleof July 4, 1799, and theNewburyport Heraldof June 28, 1799. A further comment, of more than average significance, on the unparalleled degeneracy of the times may be found in the sermon preached by the Reverend William Harris, of Marblehead, Massachusetts, before the annual convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church, held in Boston, May 28, 1799.Cf.A Sermon delivered at Trinity Church, in Boston.… By William Harris, rector of St. Michael’s Church, Marblehead, Boston, 1799. A decade and a half later Lyman Beecher preached his famous sermon on “Building Waste Places.” The impression which lingered in his mind concerning the period under survey is worthy of consideration. After having discussed the unhappy condition of religious life in the churches of New England during the first half of the eighteenth century, he said: “A later cause of decline and desolation has been the insidious influence of infidel philosophy. The mystery of iniquity had in Europe been operating for a long time. The unclean spirits had commenced their mission to the kings of the earth to gather them together to the battle of the great day of God Almighty. But when that mighty convulsion [Foot-note: The French Revolution] took place, that a second-time burst open the bottomless pit, and spread darkness and dismay over Europe, every gale brought to our shores contagion and death. Thousands at once breathed the tainted air and felt the fever kindle in the brain. A paroxysm of moral madness and terrific innovation ensued. In the frenzy of perverted vision every foe appeared a friend, and every friend a foe. No maxims were deemed too wise to be abandoned, none too horrid to be adopted; no foundations too deep laid to be torn up, and no superstructure too venerable to be torn down, that another, such as in Europe they were building with bones and blood, might be built…. The polluted page of infidelity everywhere met the eye while its sneers and blasphemies assailed the ear…. The result was a brood of infidels, heretics, and profligates—a generation prepared to be carried about, as they have been, by every wind of doctrine, and to assail, as they have done, our most sacred institutions.”Cf.Beecher,Autobiography, Correspondence, etc., vol. i, pp. 239, 240.

[224]Robinson,Jeffersonian Democracy in New England, p. i; Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, p. 150.

[225]The term “Anti-Federalist” was born out of the struggle which developed over the adoption of the national constitution. The term “Republican” was one of the by-products of the discussion which arose in this country, from 1792 on, over French revolutionary ideals.Cf.Johnston,American Political History, pt. i, p. 207.

[226]American State Papers: Foreign Relations, vol. i, p. 140.

[227]The issues of theColumbian Centinelfor 1793 abound in addresses of this character.

[228]Cf.for example, the issues of theConnecticut Courantfor July 29, Aug. 5 and 26, 1793, and of theIndependent Chroniclefor May 7, 16 and 23, 1793.Cf.Channing,History of the United States, vol. iv, p. 128.

[229]TheConnecticut Courantof May 13, 1793, contains the first announcements of Genet’s arrival which that paper made. Subsequent issues are fairly well occupied with accounts of Genet’s arrival in Philadelphia, the unconfirmed expressions of cordiality and heated enthusiasm which he encountered there, the congratulatory address which the citizens of that place presented him, Genet’s response,etc.In the issue of August 12 mention is made of the Frenchman’s arrival in New York. Thus far not the slightest trace of a suspecting attitude of mind is discoverable.

[230]The issues of theConnecticut Courantfor August 19 and 26, and November 11, 1793, contain articles that admirably illustrate the rising temper of the New England Federalists as they contemplated Genet’s absurdities and improprieties.

[231]Luetscher, in hisEarly Political Machinery in the United States, p. 33, asserts that not more than twenty-four separate organizations of this character were formed within the two years which followed their first appearance. These were fairly well distributed throughout the Union. One was in Maine, one in Massachusetts (Boston), three in Vermont, two in New York, one in New Jersey, five in Pennsylvania, one in Delaware, one in Maryland, two in Virginia, one in North Carolina, four in South Carolina, and two in Kentucky.

[232]McMaster,A History of the People of the United States, vol. ii, pp. 175et seq.

[233]Hazen,Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution, pp. 189et seq.

[234]Robinson,Jeffersonian Democracy in New England, p. 10, for significant comments upon the effect of the establishment of the Democratic Societies on general political interest. The vote was appreciably increased and elections were more hotly contested on account of the emergence of the Clubs.Cf.alsoNew England Magazine, January, 1890, p. 488.

[235]Morse,The Federalist Party in Massachusetts, p. 75;Wolcott Papers, vol. vii, 5, letter of Jedediah Morse to Oliver Wolcott. TheIndependent Chronicleof Jan. 16, 1794, contains the Rules and Regulations and the Declaration of this Society.

[236]Massachusetts Mercury, Nov. 29, 1793.Cf.Works of Fisher Ames, vol. ii, pp. 146et seq.

[237]Jedediah Morse did not fail to observe the appearance of the Boston organization nor to divine its character and general scope of action. In a letter to Oliver Wolcott, Secretary of the Treasury, and Morse’s intimate friend, a letter written close to the date of the organization of the Constitutional Club, Morse wrote optimistically but seriously of the situation:

Back to IndexNext