VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 9 Nov 2010 12:44:58 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (132 lines)
Thanks, Jon.  I agree. What you present confirms where my speculation  was 
heading 
in my note to Roger Mallen.
 
--Warren
 
 
 
In a message dated 11/9/2010 10:26:54 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,  
[log in to unmask] writes:

Just  reservation about timing - aren't the notable instances of persecution
of  baptists, for example, ca 1773 ?
Within a two years though we see petitions  from baptists and other
dissenters treated with sympathy by many in Va  assembly, and after the war
starts, evangelical recruits were needed for  the army etc......
Madison in 1780s of course recruited dissenters to  support passage of the
statute for religious freedom -- Jefferson was in  France, had written the
statute during 1776-9 revision of the laws program  -- but my sense is that
active persecution was earlier......    so  just quibbling about timing.
Jon  Kukla
________________
www.JonKukla.com  <http://www.jonkukla.com/>


On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:18 AM,  <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Jon, in your response to Paul  Finkelman, you say "not sure I  would
> characterize *1780s* as a  period of  'vicious persecution' of any
>  denomination  in
> VA."   Does your uncertainty have to do with your   sense of the degree of
> the persecution that does seem to have   existed?   More than one 
religious
> historian has maintained  that it  was the treatment of Baptists and 
others
> by
> both  government authorities and  general population that helped produce  
our
> national position on religious  tolerance and freedom.   Similarly, Thomas
> Jefferson's concept of separation  of church  and state seems to have been
> influenced by his perception of ill   treatment of such folk as the
> Baptists.
>
>  Thoughts?
>
>
>
> In a message dated 11/9/2010 9:05:49  A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
> [log in to unmask]  writes:
>
> When  described in detail, the oaths taken by  18th-c VA officeholders  
were
> typically described as "the Oaths  appointed to be taken by Act  of
> Parliament* followed by a  statement about "repeat[ing] and subscrib[ing  
--
> i.e., signing]  the Test"**
>
> {Language quoted from William Nelson's   assumption of governorship in
> October
> 1770 in Van Horne ed  Nelson  Correspondence 37-38n}
>
> *Act I George I stat 2 cap  XIII - oath of  allegiance to George I and
> succession of his  Protestant heirs
> ** The  Test was a repudiation of  transubstantion required by the Test 
Act
> of
>  1673
>
> At the beginning of a general assembly session and when  new  burgesses
> entered the Assembly from by-elections, the  journals refer more  
succinctly
> to the oaths....
>
>  George Washington signed a Test Act Oath  about May 22, 1754 - the  
document
> is extant, or at least preserved by  published  photographs......
>
> And in 1777 VA adopted its own  (secular)  Test Act requiring "free male
> inhabitants of this  state above a certain age  to give assurance of
> allegiance to the  same [i.e. to the  commonwealth]."  - Hening Statutes 
9:
>  281-83.
>
> PS to original  query : not sure I would  characterize *1780s* as a period
> of
> " vicious   persecution" of any denomination in VA
>
> Jon  Kukla
>  ________________
> www.JonKukla.com  <http://www.jonkukla.com/>   <http://www.jonkukla.com/>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010  at 10:28 AM,  Henry Wiencek
>  <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
> > According to   the "Industrial and historical sketch of Fairfax County,
> >  Virginia,"  (1907), in colonial times all county officials were
>  > required to take  the "Test Oath" denying belief in the
> >  Transubstantiation of the  Eucharist, a clause no Roman Catholic  could
> > swear to.
> >
> >  Henry  Wiencek
> >
> >  ______________________________________
> >  To subscribe, change  options, or unsubscribe please see the 
instructions
>  at
>  >  http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>  >
>
> ______________________________________
> To   subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions
>  at
>  http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
>
>  ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options,  or unsubscribe please see the instructions 
at
>  http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>

______________________________________
To  subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions  
at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html


______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US