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