Quakertown authors. Peace Meetings inaugurated. Zerah C. Whipple. Peace Meetings of present day. Brief summary of Rogerene doctrines and customs
| APPENDIX. | |
| Extracts from “Epistles” by John Rogers, Sr. | 345 |
| Extracts from “Two Ministrations” by John Rogers, Sr. | 349 |
| Extracts from “Concerning the Sabbath” by John Rogers, Sr. | 352 |
| “Heretics” by John Rogers, Sr. | 361 |
| Extracts from “Conversations with John Rogers” by Samuel Bownas | 362 |
| Extracts from “Reply to J. Backus” by John Rogers, 2d | 363 |
| Extracts from “Answer to Cotton Mather” by John Rogers, 2d | 365 |
| Extracts from “Reply to Peter Pratt” by John Rogers, 2d | 368 |
| Extracts from “Answer to Mr. Byles” by John and Joseph Bolles | 369 |
| Extracts from “Looking Glass for Presbyterians of New London” by John Rogers, 3d | 373 |
| Extracts from “Debate between Mr. Byles and Congregational Church,” published by the Church | 381 |
| Extracts from “The Battle Axe” by Timothy Watrous, Sr., and Timothy, Jr. | 383 |
| Petition by Alexander Rogers (John, 2d) | 386 |
| Titles of Books by Rogerene Authors | 388 |
Note.—The only change from the original Rogerene writings in this Appendix or in the body of this work has been in omitting the old style capital letters at beginning of substantives.
INTRODUCTION.
While spending the summer at New London, in 1894, we were requested to aid Mr. John R. Bolles, in the capacity of reader and amanuensis, he being compelled, by reason of impaired sight, to depend upon such assistance. The work upon which he was engaged was a vindication of the Rogerenes. Having, from what we had read and heard concerning this colonial sect, regarded them as fanatics whose idiosyncrasies bordered upon lunacy, we could neither understand Mr. Bolle’s interest in the subject, nor why he was so willing to call public attention to the fact that certain Rogerene leaders were among his ancestors. Nevertheless we could not refuse to render the small service required of us.
The chief sources upon which Mr. Bolles depended for information were Miss Caulkin’s “History of New London” and a number of Rogerene works, nearly two hundred years old, dating from their first publication, which were in possession of family friends. It was necessary for us to read these works to Mr. Bolles. Much to our surprise, we found them to be of an exceedingly intelligent, logical character, far removed from the fantastic and visionary. Although written during periods of severest persecution, they were perfectly calm and dispassionate in tone, even in the few pages where reference was made to Rogerene sufferings “for conscience’s sake”; these being passed over, for the most part, with the remark that “it would take a large volume to contain them all.” In these volumes was almost nothing of Rogerene history; but here stood out, in bold relief, such features of Rogerene faith and principles as dearly separated this sect from other people of their day and were calculated to excite bitter enmity and opposition on the part of the ruling and popular party. It was now easy to understand why these dissenters were portrayed to their own and succeeding times as brainless enthusiasts. Those in advance of their age are as cranks and fanatics in the esteem of their contemporaries, and rumor is ever busy blackening the character of unpopular people.
The Rogerene leaders appeared, in their writings, as consistent Christians, contending, by word and example, for the religion set forth in the New Testament, a religion depending not upon the observance of forms or of days, but upon love to God and the neighbor. They maintained that the civil government had no right to dictate in matters of religion; that the Christian church had but one lawgiver and judge, the Lord Himself. The divine commands regarding religion as set forth in the New Testament they would strictly obey, but they would, “for conscience’s sake,” obey no command of men in this regard. The purely civil laws they held themselves bound to observe, according to Christ’s command. Had Sunday laws been instituted for avowedly sanitary and moral purposes, and for the convenience and protection of church-going people, none would have conformed to such laws more conscientiously than the Rogerenes, such obedience being in the line of their preaching and practice regarding the civil laws. But because they were commanded to keep this day “sacred,” as a religious duty and necessity, and such observance was accounted a vital part of a religious life, they would not join in what seemed to them to be more of the nature of heathen idolatry than of the religion instituted by Jesus Christ.
At a period when extreme regard for the first day “Sabbath” was one of the most readily accepted signs of a religious life, and no laws were more rigidly enforced than those which guarded that “sacred” day from desecration, the Rogerenes conscientiously ignored its sacredness. At a period when the materia medica was founded largely upon erroneous ideas and practices, when surgery was bungling and blundering and he who called a physician was, frequently, more liable to die of the so-called remedy than of the disease, the Rogerenes elected to trust their health and their lives to Nature and to Nature’s God, in the manner prescribed in the New Testament, and they appear to have profited by their choice.[1] At a period when no men were more in favor of war than those who preached—in parts—the gospel of Him who bade His followers to forgive their enemies, to love them and pray for them and to return good for evil, the Rogerenes stood for uniform peace and good will on the part of Christians, according to the spirit and the letter of the Master’s teachings. At a period when the law called upon all to support a state church, the Rogerenes refused to pay towards the support of a church of whose teachings they largely disapproved, or to either give or take anything