Hello Mr. Kerns:
I recognize you as an authority on the colonial history of the Shenandoah
Valley and I would be loathe to find myself in disagreement with you on any
issue. The point I was trying so feebly to make was that the sheer numbers
of Presbyterians (and other dissenters -- but mostly those folks from
Ulster) that were flooding into Virginia's back country was so great that
the colonial authorities could never have hoped to effectively control them.
My contention is one of the realpolitic. Therefore, the issue of who could
or could not hold office in the back country and rule effectively over such
a restless, energetic population that was filling up the valley would not
turn on the kind of fine distinctions you are making in your argument about
the issue of transubstantiation. So the issue was not who could or couldn't
take communion in an Anglican church but who was going to manage this unruly
mob invading the state.
But thank you for your work in the history of the Valley. And for replying
to my message. My personal historical orientation is to look at things from
the view point of the Scots Irish.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wilmer L. Kerns" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: Catholics in post-reformation England and Virginia
> Paul,
>
> Besides the matter of allegiance to the pope, I believe an important issue
> between protestants and Roman Catholics in Colonial Virginia was
> transubstiantion. A Frederick County parish record, 1761-1763 (in
Frederick
> County record section in Library of Virginia), required this test:
>
> "I do declare that I do believe there is not any transubstantiation in the
> Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and in the Elements of Bread and Wine, at
or
> after the Consecration thereof by any Person Whatsoever."
>
> An inspection of signatures in the Parish Register reveals people of
German,
> Irish, English, and probable Scots and Dutch origins. For example, Joseph
> Glass, John McKenzie, John Kennedy and others were no doubt Presbyterians.
I
> see signatures on the list who were known to be German Reformed.
>
> You are right about the signatures representing persons who were in or
> seeking to be within the poswer structure of the Parish. The 1761-1763
list
> contains signatures such as Dr. James Craik (Washington's physician), John
> Neaville, Morgan Morgan, Gabriel Jones, Adam Stephen, Burr Harrison, Angus
> McDonald, Charles Smith, Thomas Rutherford, Peter Hog, Richard Paris
> (Pearis), James Keith, David Shepherd, Thomas Bryan Martin, Edward Rogers
> Jr., John Hite, Archibald Wager, et al. The Register contained only one
name
> that was signed with an X (his mark) and that was John Shealy.
>
> In conclusion, the test for taking communion wasn't any particular
> Protestant denomination versus the Anglican Church, but a repudiation of
the
> doctrine of transubstiantian (which says the bread and wine are literally
> the body and blood of Christ). It didn't matter if you believed in
> consubstiantiation as a Lutheran or in the doctrine of commemoration as a
> German Reformed or Signs and Seals as a Calvinist.
>
> Wilmer l. Kerns
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Horatio Paul McAfee
> Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2001 10:55 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Catholics in post-reformation England and Virginia
>
>
> [log in to unmask] stated in his post that...
>
> "Hence the Test Act and taking of communion as pre-requisites for holding
> office in England AND Virginia - the idea being that if you could swear
> allegiance to the king and take communion in an Anglican church, you could
> not simultaneously be loyal to the pope - so you were, in essence, vouched
> safe for participation in public office, parliament, whatever."
>
> I would be surprised to find that one of my ancestors, William McMachen of
> Frederick County, a Presbyterian, ever submitted to taking communion in an
> Anglican Church in order to qualify for holding public office. Old
William
> was one of the Scots Irish who brought his family from Pennsylvania in the
> 1740's into the Shenandoah Valley. In 1743 he was appointed as one of the
> justices of the Frederick County Court and held the office until his death
> in 1749. I believe Old William's fellow justices were also Prebyterians
and
> Scots Irish as well.
>
> The Scots Irish were flooding into the Shenandoah in great numbers and the
> colonial authorities of Virginia (some surmise) were all too happy to have
> the usually unruly Presbyterians forming a barrier between the Indians and
> the already settled parts of Virginia.
>
> Interestingly enough, old William McMachen's great-grandson, Samuel Doak
> McMahon (McMachen was changed to that new spelling earlier) did have to
> face a religious test when he came, in 1831, to live in a territory of
> Mexico (now known as Texas). The Mexicans ran hot and cold on the issue of
> Anglo immigration but did require immigrants be Catholic. Only
occasionally
> was there any enforcement, but in 1835 (one year before Texas
Independence)
> a census was taken and residents of Sabine County were asked to state
their
> religion. Samuel D. McMahon, the descendant of Old William, allowed as how
> he was a Methodist but his son, James, said his religion was Catholic, as
> did most of the persons the census talked to, although it is doubtful that
> a single resident of the County was Catholic. James later became a
> Methodist preacher, as did his father and several brothers-in-law.
>
> Paul McAfee
>
> 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
|
