According to Rhys Isaac in "The Transformation of Virginia," the worst
conflict with the Separate Baptists took place during an increasing controversy
over authority structures in general, be it in the form of religious or
political government. There were attempts at "judicial suppression" of the
Baptists on the basis of "subverting the established Religion" and
threatening authority. These were generally unsuccessful, particularly since the
laws were "an ad hoc mixture of particular provincial enactments and
uncertain applications of English law. Two acts of the Virginia Assembly were
invoked in this connection--first a statute (14 Charles II c. 14) of 1662 that
restricted the right to preach in the colony to those who had received
'ordination from some Bishopp in England'; and second, a revised statue (4 Anne
c. xxx) of 1705 that exempted Protestant dissenters from penalties for
nonattendance at their parish churches (to which they were liable under
Virginia law). Those qualified for exemption were defined by reference to an
English statute of 1689 (1 William and Mary 18)--the famous Act of Toleration.
The 1705 law's references to the English statute were the sole, and
somewhat tenuous, legislative grounds for arguing that the entire At of
Toleration was in force in Virginia. Nevertheless, the authorities in the colony
had been licensing preachers and meetinghouses uinder the act since 1747,
although they had at the same time introduced arbitrary variations from
English law (mainly in the direction of tighter restriction) in order to meet
local exigencies). [Isaac, espec. pp. 198-199]
In a footnote, Isaac speaks of "the greater stringency of the Virginia
applicatio of the law [which] appears clearly in a letter from Philip
Doddridge to Samuel Davies, 1751. . . It must be supposed that the belief that
he Act of Toleration applied to Vrginia, although it could only be
validated by reference to the Virginia statute 4 Ane c. xxx, was not based on that
act but rested rather on the assumption that the Toleration Act was an
essential part of the British constitution. For the power of assumed analogy
between the constitution of Britain and those of the colonies, see Bailyn,
Origins of American Politics, 59-65." [Isaac, 391]
Warren Napier, PhD
Affiliate Faculty, College of Professional Studies
Liberal Arts, Regis University, Denver
In a message dated 11/9/2010 6:59:01 A.M. Mountain Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Does anyone know if Virginia had any religious tests for office holding
either before or after the Revolution. The 1776 Constitution says little
about Religious, but in fact the state maintained an established church until
after the Revolution. Similarly, while the 1776 constitution proclaims the
right "to the free exercise of religion" (Va. Dec. of Rights, Sec. 16) but
we know Baptists were viciously persecuted in the 1770s and 1780s.
So, were there statutes (rather a constitutional provision) limiting
office holding?
----
Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
518-445-3386 (p)
518-445-3363 (f)
[log in to unmask]
www.paulfinkelman.com
______________________________________
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
|
