Full text of "The history of the American Episcopal Church 1587-1883"

THE HISTORY

OF THE

CHURCH

1587-1881.

FROM-THE- LIBRARY-OF
TR1NITYCOLLEGETORONTO

THE HISTORY

AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH

THE HISTORY

AMERICAN

EPISCOPAL CHURCH

1587-1883

WILLIAM STEVENS PERRY, D.D., LL.D.

BISHOP OF IOWA

IN T WO VOL UMES

VOL. II

THE ORGANIZATION AND PROGRESS OF THE
AMERICAN CHURCH

1783 1883

PROJECTED BY CLARENCE F. JEWETT

BOSTON
JAMES R. OSGOOD AND COMPANY

1885

JAMES R. OSGOOD AND COMPANY
All rights reserved

Press of Rockwell and Churchill, Boston

CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

Organisation anti progress of tfje American

BY THE EDITOR.

CHAFrER I.

MEN AND MEASURES OF THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION

AUTOGRAPHS: Samuel Seabury, Samuel Keene, 2; William Smith, 3;
Abraham Beach, 5 ; Samuel Magaw, 6 ; William White, 7 ; Abra
ham Jarvis, 10; Samuel Parker, Samuel Provoost, 19.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES . 20

CHAPTER IIV
THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH 26

ILLUSTRATION : Old Trinity Church, Boston, 26.

AUTOGRAPHS : Samuel Parker, 26 ; James Duane, Uzal Ogden, Joseph
Hutchins, Samuel Powel, 28; Richard Peters, Charles Henry
Wharton, Robert Clay, 29; David Griffith, 30; J. Graves, 31;
Jacob Duche, Alexander Murray, 34; Granville Sharp, 35;
William White, Jacob Read, 36; Henry Purcell, John Page, 37;
William West, 40 ; Signatures of English Prelates, 43 ; Robert
Smith, 44 ; Francis Hopkinson, 45 ; Thomas Bradbury Chandler, 46.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES 47

CHAPTER III.

THE CONSECRATION OF THE FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS : SEABURY, AT

ABERDEEN, 1784; WHITE AND PROVOOST, AT LAMBETH, 1787 . 49

VI CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

ILLUSTRATIONS : House at Woodbury, Conn., in wliich the Convocation
met, 49; Consecration House, 53; Fac-simile Document signed
by Bishops Kilgour, Petrie, and Skinner, 54 ; Fac-simile Letter
and Seal of Bishop Seabury of Connecticut, 65; Bishop Sea-
bury s House, New London, Conn., 58; Bishop Seabury, 60; Fac
simile of " Plan for obtaining Consecration," 62 ; Fac-simile Letter
of Archbishop of Canterbury, 69 ; Fac-simile Title-page of Act of
Parliament, 70 ; Fac-simile Act of Parliament empowering the
Consecration of American Bishops, 71 ; Lambeth Chapel, 73 ;
Seal of Archbishop of Canterbury, 73.

AUTOGRAPHS : Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop of York, 68.
ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES 74

CHAPTER IV.

THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES OF THE NORTHERN, MIDDLE,

AND SOUTHERN STATES 76

ILLUSTRATIONS : Rt. Rev. Samuel Provoost, first Bishop of New York,
78 ; Rt. Rev. Samuel Parker, second Bishop of Massachusetts,
84 ; Bishop Provoost s Book-plate, 88.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES 87

CHAPTER V.

THE PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE GENERAL ECCLESIASTICAL CONSTI
TUTION OF 1789 89

ILLUSTRATION : Fac-simile of Signatures of Bishop Seabury and the
New England Deputies to the Amended Constitution of 1789, 97.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 99

CHAPTER VI.

THE PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND FINALLY PRESCRIBED . . 101
ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES 115

CHAPTER VII.

THE ADJUSTMENT OF CONFLICTING INTERESTS AND PRINCIPLES IN THE

CHURCH 119

ILLUSTRATIONS : Signatures to Bishop Claggett s Letter of Consecra
tion, 125 ; Seal of Bishop Provoost, 126.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES 128

CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS. VII

CHAPTER VIII.

THE REVIVAL OF CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA AND

THROUGHOUT THE SOUTH 132

ILLUSTRATIONS : Rt. Rev. James Madison, first Bishop of Virginia,
141 ; Rt. Rev. Richard Channing Moore, second Bishop of
Virginia, 145 ; Rt. Rev. Robert Smith, first Bishop of South
Carolina, 147.

AUTOGRAPHS : William Meadc, 143 ; Theodore Dehon, 147 ; Nathaniel
Bowen, 148.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE . . 148

CHAPTER IX.

THE EPISCOPATE OF JOHN HENRY HOBART, AND ITS INFLUENCE AT

THE NORTH 149

ILLUSTRATION: Trinity Church, Oxford, 155.

AUTOGRAPHS : Samuel Provoost, 149 ; Abraham Jarvis, Bishop of Con
necticut, 159 ; Benjamin Moore, Thomas Bradbury Chandler, John
Henry Hobart, 165.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES 166

CHAPTER X.
BISHOP GRISWOLD AND THE NEW ENGLAND CHURCHES 173

ILLUSTRATIONS : Rt. Rev. Edward Bass, first Bishop of Massachusetts,
177 ; Rt. Rev. A. V. Griswold, Bishop of the Eastern Diocese, 182.

AUTOGRAPHS: Roger Viets, 174; Samuel Seabury, Bishop of Con
necticut, 175; Robert Fowle, 178; James Nichols, Daniel
Barber, 180.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE - 187

CHAPTER XI.
PARTIES IN THE CHURCH 188

ILLUSTRATION : Bishop Seabury s Receipt for Services, 190.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 196

VIII CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

CHAPTER XII.
THE HOME EXPANSION OF THE CHURCH 197

ILLUSTRATIONS : Rt. Rev. John S. Ravenscroft, Bishop of North
Carolina, 201; Rev. Joseph Pilmore, 213; Rt. Rev. Philander
Chase and Wife, 215 ; Rev. Francis Lister Hawks, 216.

AUTOGRAPH: Francis L. Hawks, 211.

CHAPTER XIII.

THE FOUNDERS AND FOUNDING OP THE CHURCH AT THE WEST . . 219

ILLUSTRATIONS : View of Gambler College, 227 ; On the Kokosing,
near Kenyon College, 230; Bishop Chase s Log Hut, the First
Episcopal Palace of Ohio, 231 ; Kokosing, the Home of Bishop
Bedell, 232; Old Kenyon, 233.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 235

CHAPTER XIV.
THE MISSIONARY SPIRIT IN THE CHURCH 236

ILLUSTRATIONS: The Rectory of St. Paul s Church, Baltimore, 237;
Rev. Alonzo Potter, 243 ; Rt. Rev. William Jones Boone, First
Missionary Bishop to China, 249.

AUTOGRAPHS: G. T. Bedell, 241; J. H. Hill, 242; James Milnor,
246.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 250

CHAPTER XV.
PIONEER WORK BEYOND THE MISSISSIPPI 251

ILLUSTRATIONS : Rt. Rev. Jackson Kemper, 251 ; Church of the Holy
Communion, St. Peter s, Minnesota, 261 ; the First Seabury Hall,
Faribault, Minnesota, 263 ; Mission Sod-house, Nebraska, 267.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 268

CHAPTER XVI.

THE OXFORD MOVEMENT AND ITS INFLUENCE UPON THE AMERICAN

CHURCH 269

ILLUSTRATION : St. Mark s Church, Philadelphia, 273.
ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 274

CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

CHAPTER XVII.

TROUBLES IN PENNSYLVANIA, NEW YORK, AND NEW JERSEY . . .

ILLUSTRATIONS : lit. Rev. Henry Ustick Onderdonk, Bishop of Penn
sylvania, 278 ; Rt. Rev. G. W. Doane, Bishop of New Jersey, 280.

277

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 282

CHAPTER XVIII.

DEFECTIONS AND ACCESSIONS : Loss AND GAIN

284

ILLUSTRATION : Rt. Rev. L. Sillitnan Ives, Bishop of North Carolina,
286.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE "MEMORIAL" DISCUSSION AND ITS PRACTICAL RESULTS . . . 292

ILLUSTRATIONS : William A. Muhlenberg, 292 ; Divinity School of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in Philadelphia, founded by Bishop
Potter, 293.

AUTOGRAPH : William A. Muhlenburg, 292.
ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE 300

CHAPTER XX.
THE CHURCH ON THE PACIFIC COAST . . .

311

ILLUSTRATIONS: Good Samaritan Hospital, Portland, Oregon, 321;
St. Helen s Hall, Portland, Oregon, 323; Bishop Scott Grammar
School, Portland, Oregon, 325.

AUTOGRAPHS : William Ingraham Kip, 313 ; Benjamin Wistar Morris,
317 ; Daniel S. Tuttle, 327.

CHAPTER XXI.
THE ATTITUDE OF THE CHURCH DURING THE CIVIL WAR .

ILLUSTRATION : Trinity Church, New York City, 335.
ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE

328

336

XII CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

467; List of Bishops Consecrated by Bishop White, 470; Bishop
White, as seen walking in the streets in Philadelphia, 471.

AUTOGRAPHS : William White, 469 ; William Bacon Stevens, 472.

MONOGRAPH V.

OLD TRINITY, NEW YORK, AND ITS CHAPELS. Morgan Dix . . . 473
AUTOGRAPH : Morgan Dix, 484.

MONOGRAPH VI.

A CENTURY OF CHURCH GROWTH IN BOSTON. Phillips Brooks . . 485

ILLUSTRATIONS : Soumling-Board, King s Chapel, 485 ; King s Chapel,
erected in the year 1749, 487; Pulpit, King s Chapel, 489; Tre-
mont Street, looking north, about 1800, 491; Rev. J. S. J.
Gardiner, 493 ; Franklin Place, 495 ; lluins of Trinity Church,
1872, 497; Tower of Trinity Church, 501; Chancel of Trinity
Church, 503; New Trinity Church, 505.

AUTOGRAPHS: Mather Byles, 486; John C. Ogden, 488; James Free-
. man, 490; 491; Phillips Brooks, 506.

MONOGRAPH VII.
REPRESENTATIVE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS 507

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

Engene A. Hoffman 507

ILLUSTRATIONS : Rt. Rev. T. Defion, Bishop of South Carolina, 509 ;
General Theological Seminary, New York City, 533.

AUTOGRAPHS: Daniel Burhans, 509; E. A. Hoffman, 534.

THE EPISCOPAL THEOLOGICAL SCHOOL IN CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

George Z. Gray 535

ILLUSTRATIONS : Plan of the Episcopal Theological School, Cam
bridge, 535 ; Episcopal Theological School, Cambridge, 537.

AUTOGRAPH : George Z. Gray, 538.

TRINITY COLLEGE. Samuel Hart 538

ILLUSTRATIONS : Trinity College in 1829, 539 ; Dining-hall Mantle-
piece, 540; Trinity College in 1869, 541; Bishop Berkeley s
Chair, 542 ; View of Proposed Buildings, Trinity College, Hart
ford, 543 ; Seal of the College, 644 ; Statue of Bishop Brownell,
545.

AUTOGRAPH : Samuel Hart, 546.

CONTENTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS. XIII

ST. PAUL S SCHOOL, CONCORD. Hall Harrison 547

AUTOGRAPHS : George C. Shattuck, 647 ; Henry A. Coit, 548 ; Hall
Harrison, 552.

HISTORICAL SKETCH OF RACINE COLLEGE. Arthur Piper . . 552
AUTOGRAPH : Arthur Piper, 557.

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE SOUTH. W. P. DuBose 557

ILLUSTRATIONS : Seal of the University of the South, 557 ; St. Luke s
Theological Memorial Hall, Sewanee, Tennessee, 559.

AUTOGRAPH : W. P. DuBose, 560.

MONOGRAPH VIII.

THE CHURCH IN THE CONFEDERATE STATES. John Fulton . . . 561
AUTOGRAPH : John Fulton, 592.

MONOGRAPH IX.

THE LITERARY CHURCHMEN OF THE ANTE-REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD.

Henry Coppee 593

AUTOGRAPH : Henry Coppee, 610.

MONOGRAPH X.

CHURCH LITERATURE SINCE THE REVOLUTION. Julius H. Ward . . 611
ILLUSTRATION : lit. Rev. John Henry Hobart, 613.
AUTOGRAPH : Julius H. Ward, 630.

MONOGRAPH XI.

THE CHURCH S HYMNOLOGY. Frederic M. Bird 631

AUTOGRAPH : Frederic M. Bird, 650.

THE HISTORY

AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

ana WWQVWS of ttie

1783-1883.

BY WILLIAM STEVENS PERRY, D.D., LL.D.,

Bishop of Iowa.

CHAPTER I.

MEN AND MEASURES OF THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION.

RE the close of hostilities between the mother-land and
the revolted colonies the minds of both clergy and laity who
had continued faithful to the church of their baptism had be
come familiarized with the fact that the civil independence of the
American States involved the separation of the Church in America
from the parent Church of England. It was in Connecticut and in
Maryland that the recognition of this fact first took form in efforts for
organization, and the perpetuation of the church s continuity. These
measures proceeded from ideas wholly at variance, and in their devel
opment threatened for a time the disruption of the infant Church. In
their subsequent modification and comprehension in a single system
they have each left their influence on the principles and procedure of
the American Episcopal Church.

In Connecticut, where the Episcopal Church had struggled for
existence for three-quarters of a century, and under wise leadership
and with a native ministry had attained no inconsiderable strength and
prominence, ten of the fourteen clergymen who were still in their
cures met in convocation at Woodbury, and on " Lady-day," the feast
of the Annunciation, 1783, as the first step towards organization and
the perpetuation of the Church, made choice of the Rev. Samuel
Seabury, D.D., as their bishop-elect. The clergy of the city of New

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

York united with their brethren of Connecticut in their approval of
this act, and tlio few clergy of the Church in New England outside of
the limits of Connecticut followed with kindly sympathies and hearty
prayers the indefatigable Seabury across the ocean on his difficult and

/? x &gt;c ^- Q^

vCC&&ZCSl&lt;/ &lt;*S* ^^T

^&lt;^^
? *&lt;s ^*

doubtful errand. Once entered upon this effort to secure the episco
pate as the foundation of the Church, the Connecticut clergy never
relaxed their labors till the end was gained. Their action had been
taken without the presence of the laity, who had Leon trained to
w trust matters purely ecclesiastical to their clergy." l They consist
ently declined to unite in schemes for organization or the formation
of ecclesiastical constitutions, or the consideration of alterations in
the liturgy, until they had secured the completion of the church s polity
in the possession of a valid episcopacy. Their longings and labors\
were not in vain, and on the 14th of November, 1784, in an " upper (
room " at Aberdeen the first Bishop of Connecticut received at the &gt;
hands of the primus and two other bishops of the Scottish Church the \
consecration denied him in England.

In Maryland, under the proprietary and colonial governments,
the Church had been established by law, and upon the breaking out of
the war, under the name and title of "the Protestant Episcopal
Church " the identity of the Church in the independent State with the
mother-church of England, and its rights of property in the churches,
chapels, glebes and endowments of that mother-church, were duly rec
ognized in the "vestry act" of 1779. There was danger that the
legislature might go further than merely secure the church s rights
and property. So closely was the Erastianism of the age ingrained
in churchmen and legislators alike that it was proposed in the Assem
bly to proceed to organize the Church by legislative enactment, and to
appoint ordainers to the ministry. Happily, this extraordinary propo-

sition attracted the attention of the wise and scholarly Samuel Keene,
who hastened to Annapolis, and was heard before the House in oppo-

1 Vide an intcrostincr letter from Hie Rev. Notes and Documents, illnstratinjj the Onraniza-

Ahrahani Beach to the Ucv. Dr. \Vliite, report- tion of the Church," appended to the reprint of

in the result of a visit to the meeting of the the "Journals of General Conventions," m.,

Connecticut clergy in 1784, in Perry a "Historical p. 12.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 3

sition to the measure contemplated. His arguments were convincing,
and the scheme was abandoned.

The temporal necessities of the various parishes induced action on
the part of " a very considerable number of vestries, wholly in their
lay character," l in the form of a petition to the. General Assembly of
the State for the passage of a law for " the support of the Christian
Religion," enabling any church-wardens and vestry " by rates on the
pews from time to time or otherwise, ... to repair the Church or
Chapel, and the Church yard and Burying Ground of the same." The
consideration of this petition was not pressed during the continuance
of the war, but on the coming of peace, the question of a religious
establishment was brought before the Assembly in an address from the
executive, warmly commending the provision of a " public support for
the Ministers of the Gospel." A copy of this address came into the
hands of a number of the clergy, assembled at the commencement of
Washington College in May, 1783, who at once took the initiative in
securing " a Council or Consultation " for the purpose of considering
" what alterations might be necessary in our Liturgy and Service ; and
how our Church might be organized and a succession of the Ministry
kept up." 2 At a meeting of the clergy, held with the permission of
the Assembly, besides the preparation of a draft of an act or char
ter of incorporation for adoption by the legislature, the following
"Declaration of fundamental rights and liberties" was unanimously
agreed upon and subscribed. In the style and arrangement of this
paper we see the hand of the leading man of the Maryland clergy, the
celebrated Rev. Dr. -William Smith, at that time President of Wash-

ington College. The original manuscript is preserved among the
Smith papers in the archives of the General Convention. We give it in
full as one of the most important, as it is the earliest, of our ecclesi
astical " state papers" :

A Declaration of certain fundamental Eights & Liberties of the Protestant
Episcopal Church of Maryland ; had &made at a Convention or Meeting of the Clergy
of said Church, duly assembled at Annapolis, August 13, 1783, agreeable to a Vote

1 "An Address to the Members of the Prot- Principles of the American Revolution." T5al-

estant Episcopal Church of Maryland, containing timore, 1784. 8vo. p. 17. This rare tract is

an account of the Proceeding of some late Con- reprinted in full in Perry s "Hist. Notes and

ventions both of cler&lt;ry and laity, for the purpose Documents," pp. 14, 33.

of organizing the said Church, and providing a ! The address, etc., p. 6. Perry s " Hist. Notes

Succession in her Ministry agreeably to the and Documents," p. 19.

4 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

of the General Assembly passed upon a petition presented in the Name and Behalf
of the said Clergy.

Whereas by the Constitution and Form of Government of this State " all
persons professing the Christian Religion are equally entitled to protection in
their Religious Liberty, and no person by any Law (or otherwise) ought to be
molested in his Person or Estate on account of his Religious persuasion or pro
fession, or for his religious practice ; unless, under Colour of Religion, any man
shall disturb the good order, peace, or safety of the State, or shall infringe the
Laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious Rights;" And
Whereas the ecclesiastical and Spiritual Independence of the different Religious
Denominations, Societies, Congregations, and Churches of Christians in this State,
necessarily follows from, or is included in, their Civil Independence.

Wherefore we the Clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Maryland,
(heretofore denominated the Church of England, as by Law established) with all duty
to the Civil authority of the State, and with all Love and Good will to our Fellow-
Christians of every other Religious Denomination, do hereby declare, make known,
and claim the following as certain of the fundamental Rights and Liberties inher
ent, and belonging to the said Episcopal Church, not only of common Right, but
agreeable to the express words, spirit and design of the Constitution & Form of
Government, aforesaid, viz.

1st. We consider it as the undoubted Right of the said Protestant Episcopal
Church, in common with other Christian Churches under the American Revolution,
to compleat and yreserye herself as an entire Church, agreeable to her antient
Usages and Profession ; and to have the full enjoyment and free exercise of those
purely spiritual powers which are essential to the Being of every Church or Con
gregation of the faithful ; and which, being derived only from Christ and his
Apostles, are to be maintained independent of every foreign or other Jurisdiction,
so far as may be consistent with the Civil Rights of Society.

2d. That ever since the Reformation, it hath been the received Doctrine of the
Church whereof we are members (& which by the Constitution of this State is entitled
to the perpetual enjoyment of certain Property and Rights under the Denomination
of the Church of England), that there be these three Orders of Ministers in Christ s
Church : Bislwps, Priests and Deacons, and that an Episcopal Ordination and Com
mission are necessary to the Valid Administration of the Sacraments, & the due
Exercise of the Ministerial Functions in the said Church.

3d. That, without calling in Question, or wishing the least Contest with any
other Christian Churches or Societies, concerning their Rights, Modes and Forms,
we consider and declare it to be an Essential Right of the Protestant Episcopal
Church to have, & enjoy the Continuance of the said three Orders of Ministers
for ever, so far as concerns matters purely Spiritual, & that no persons in the
character of Ministers, except such as are in the Communion of the said Church and
duly called to the ministry by regular Episcopal Ordination can or ought to be
admitted into or enjoy any of " the Churches, Chapels, Glebes, or other Property "
formerly belonging to the Church of England, in this State, & which by the Con
stitution and Form of Government is secured to the said Church for ever, by what
ever Name she, the said Church, or her Superior Order of Ministers, may in future
be denominated.

4th. That as it is the Right, so it will be the Duty, of the said Church, when
duly organized, constituted and represented in a Synod or Convention of the differ
ent Orders of her ministry and People, to revise her Liturgy, Forms of Prayer &
publick worship, in order to adapt the same to the late Revolution, & other local
circumstances of America, which it is humbly conceived may and will be done,
without any other or farther Departure from the Venerable Order and beautiful
Forms of worship of the Church from whom we sprung, than may be found expe
dient in the Change of our situation from a Daughter to a Sister Church.

William Smith, President, S Paul s & Chester Parishes, Kent County.

John Gordon, S Michael s, Talbot.

John MacPherson, W m and Mary Parish, Charles County.

Samuel Keene, Dorchester Parish, Dorchester County.

W n West, S Paul s Parish, Baltimore County.

W" Thomson, S Stephen s, Cecil County.

Walter Magowan, S James s Parish, Ann Arundel County.

John Stephen, All-Faith Parish, S 1 Mary s County.

Tho* Jn Claggett, S 1 Paul s Parish, Prince George s County.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. . 5

George Goldie, King & Queen, Saint Mary s County.

Joseph Messenger, 8 Andrew s Parish, S Mary s County.

John Bowie, S Peter s Parish, Talbot County.

Walter Harrison, Durham Pai-ish, Charles County.

W m Hanna, S Margaret s, Ann Arundel.

Thomas Gates, S Ann s, Annapolis.

John Andrews, S 1 Thomas s, Bait. County.

Hamilton Bell, Stephney, Somerset County.

Francis Walker, Kent Island.

John Stewart, Port-tobacco Parish, Charles County.

In this important document we find the first jpublic assumption
of the present legal title of the "Protestant Episcopal Church" by a
representative body of that Church. There is also the assertion of
" the ecclesiastical and spiritual independence of the Protestant Epis
copal Church in Maryland, " as necessarily following from the civil in
dependence of the state. The right of this Church of Maryland "to
preserve herself as an entire Church, agreeably to her ancient
usages and profession," as well as to exercise her "spiritual power"
derived "from Christ and Plis Apostles" independent of "Every
foreign or other jurisdiction," so far as " consistent with the civil rights
of Society is claimed." The necessity of Episcopal Ordination and
commission, "to the valid administration of the Sacraments and the
due exercise of the Ministerial Functions in the said Church," is clearly
laid down, and the exclusive right of "the Ministry by regular Epis
copal Ordination " to be "admitted into or enjoy any of the Churches,
Chapels, Glebes, or other_p_ro.perty formerly belonging to the Church of
England," is emphatically asserted. It is claimed that " the said
Church, when duly organized, constituted, and represented in a Synod
or Convention of her Ministry and people," is competent " to revise
her Liturgy, Forms of Prayer, and public worship, in order to adapt
the same to the late revolution, and other local circumstances of
America." Here, also, we have the first authoritative recognition of
tjie right of the laity to admission to the counsels of the Church, and
this document, it will be borne in mind, was the production of the
clergy alone. Deprecating any " further departure from the venerable
order and beautiful form of worship of the Church " of England, "that
may be found expedient in the change . . . from a daughter to
a sister Church," these clergymen of Maryland, less than a score in
number, laid broad and deep in this comprehensive and yet conserva-

tive document the foundations of the Ecclesiastical Constitution of the
American Church.

6 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

While these important measures were occupying the attention of
the churchmen of Maryland, a correspondence had been opened by the
Rev. Abraham Beach, of New Brunswick, New Jersey, with the Rev.
Dr. William White, of Philadelphia, in which the hope was expressed
" that the members of the Episcopal Church in this country would in
terest themselves in its behalf, would endeavour to introduce Order and
uniformity into it, and provide for a succession in the Ministry." The
meeting of the Corporation for the Relief of the Widows and Orphans
of the Clergy, which had been organized prior to the war, was made
the occasion of an informal gathering at New Brunswick of clergy
and laity from the States of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania,

on the llth of May, 1784, and a committee of correspondence was
appointed " for the purpose of forming a continental representation of
the Episcopal Church and for the better management of the concerns
of the said Church." There were present at the conference, the
Rev. Drs. White and Magaw, the Rev. Messrs. Beach, Bloomer,
Frazer, Ogden, Blackwell, Bowden, Benjamin Moore and Thomas
Moore, and Messrs. James Parker, John Stevens, Richard Stevens,
John Dennis, Esquire, and Colonels Hoyt and Furman. This con
ference appointed a committee, consisting of the Rev. Messrs. Abraham
Beach, Joshua Bloomer and Benjamin Moore, to attend the Trinity
convocation of the Connecticut clergy, "for the purpose of soliciting
their concurrence . . .in such measures as may be deemed cou=C
dticivc to the union and prosperity of the Episcopal Church in thej
States of America."

On the 24th of May, 1784, there met at Christ Church, Philadel
phia, under the chairmanship of the Rev. Dr. William White, a con
vention of the clergy and laity, assembled in pursuance of a recom
mendation of the clergy and vestries of the united churches of Christ
Church and St. Peter s, and St. Paul s, Philadelphia. This conven-^
tion, memorable as being the first occasion on which the laity were
admitted to sit in the councils of the Church, was convened for the
purpose of " forming a representative body of the Episcopal church e&gt;
in the Stale." The clergy appeared by virtue of their holding the
cure of souls. The laity had their appointment by delegation from " the
Church Wardens and Vestrymen of each Episcopal Congregation in

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION.

the State." There were four clergymen present and twenty-one of the
laity. The principle was laid down at the outset that each church should
have one vote. This convention appointed a stand
ing committee of clergy and laity, for concerted
action with the representatives of " the Episcopal
Church in the other States," in framing a constitu
tion for an ecclesiastical government, and agreed
upon the "fundamental principles " thereof, claiming
the independence! of" the Episcopal Church in these
Stales " of foreign authority ; asserting its " full
and exclusive power to regulate the concerns, of its
owncommumon ; " professing its doctrinal agree
ment with the Church of England, and its purpose
of preserving w uniformity of worship " " as near
as may be ; " recognizing the three orders of the
ministry, with prerogatives and powers. to "be exer
cised according to reasonable laws ; " declaring that

^^^^^^^^^ j ^^"^"^^^^"^^^^fc^^^^^^""* ^

the right of enacting " canons or laws" was in "a
representative body of the clergy and laity con
jointly ; " and stipulating " that no powers be dele
gated to a general ecclesiastical government, ex
cept such as cannot conveniently be exercised by
the clergy and laity in their respective congrega
tions."

to have _been_" the pro-.

poser ^oFtEe" measure adopted in the Philadelphia/
convention of uniting the laity with the clergy in(
the church s deliberative and legislative bodies4
It was near the close of the contest for indepen
dence, early in August, 1782, that William White
"despairing," as he himself says in a letter written
years afterwards to Bishop Hobart, " of a speedy
acknowledgment of our independence, although
there was not likely to be more of war, and per
ceiving our ministry gradually approaching to an
nihilation," published in pamphlet form an essay
entitled "The Case of the Episcopal Churches
Considered." l It is important to the full under
standing of this essay to remember that at the
time of its issue from the press the first week in
August, 1783, there had been no acknowledged
negotiations between the hostile governments look
ing to a return of peace on the basis of a recogni
tion of American independence. The " Case of the
Episcopal Churches Considered " was advertised in
the "Pennsylvania Packet" of August 6th, though
a few copies had been distributed by the writer to J
his friends immediately prior to this announce-

1 Vide MS. note on the Church in America, by by Thos. II. Montgomery, Esq., of Phiiadel-
William White, published in photo-lithography, phia.

8 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

ment. 1 It was on this very day that Congress received from Sir
Guy Carleton and Admiral Digby a communication, dated on the
2d, giving a prospect of peace. That a cessation of hostilities
would shortly take place had been generally believed, but that
Great Britain, hopeless though she might be of a successful issue
of the struggle to reduce the revolted colonies, would treat with
them on a footing of equality as a nation, was not anticipated by
any. The communication from the British authorities changed at
once the whole aspect of affairs. The pamphlet was at once with
drawn from sale, and as many copies as were within the author s reach
were destroyed. The bishop himself, in his episcopal charge of 1807,
when adverting to the measures proposed in this pamphlet, adds to
the expression of his conviction " that under the state of things con
templated some such expedient as that proposed must have been
resorted to ; " acknowledges that " had the proposal been delayed
a little longer, the happy change of prospects would have prevented
the appearance of the pamphlet, unless with considerable alterations."
This pamphlet, in its discussion of measures for the perpetuation of
the Church, while proceeding on the understanding " that the succes
sion cannot at present be obtained," recommended, "in the proposed
frame of government, a general approbation of Episcopacy, and a declara
tion of an intention to procure the succession as soon as conveniently
may be ; but in the mean time " advised an effort "to carry the plan into
effect without waiting for the succession." 8 In view of the assertion, "that
the very name of bishop* is offensive," the pamphlet proceeded : "If so,
change it for another ; let the superior clergyman be a president, super-*
intendent, or in plain English, and according to the literal translation of
the original ,4in overseer." 3 The proposal of " an immediate execution of
the plan" of organization, and the perpetuation of the ministry, " withv
out waiting for the Episcopal succession," was urged " on the presump-y
tion that the worship of God and the instruction and reformation of the
people are the principal objects of ecclesiastical discipline ; if so, to
relinquish them from a scrupulous adherence to Episcopacy is sacri
ficing the substance to the ceremony." 3 The plea of delay is met by
the inquiry, "Are the acknowledged ordinances of Christ s holy religion
to be suspended for years, perhaps as long as the present generation
shall continue, out of delicacy to a disputed point, and that relating only
to externals." 3 " All the obligations of conformity to the divine ordi
nances, all the arguments which prove the connexion between public

i Copies of this pamphlet were advertised for pole s edition as 1783. There seems every proba-

sale in the "Pennsylvania Packet" of the 6th bility that since the prospect of peace opened,

of August, 1782, the day on which Confess as it did almost contemporaneously with the first

received a communication which opened the appearance of this pamphlet, rendering its plea

way for the cessation of hostilities and the of necessity no longer available, its disserama-

coming of peace. Bishop White tells us, in tion was for a time suspended, and it was with-

the " MS. Note " already cited, that " some held from general circulation till the time named

copies had been previously handed by the author in the Bisnop s Memoirs, the summer of 1783.

to a few of his friends. Copies bearing the date One of the early copies must have fallen into the/

of 1782 are to be found in the public libraries in hands of the Connecticut Clergy Convention.

Philadelphia and elsewhere. Bishop White in The original edition of 1782 or 1783 is exceed^)

his Memoirs (Second edition, p. 89) speaks of ingly rare, and of the Stavely reprint but few

it as " published in the summer of 1783, and the exist.

reprint by Stavely in 1827 and that of 1859, and * The Case of the Episcopal Churches in Per-

that appended to Perry s " Reprint of the Early ry s " Hist. Notes and Documents," p. 427.
Journals," in., p. 416-436, give the date of Clay- Ibid., p. 428.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 9

worship and the morals of a people, combine to urge the adopting some
speedy measures, to provide for the public ministry in these churches,
if such as have been above recommended should be adopted, and the
Episcopal succession afterwards obtained, any supposed imperfections
of the supposed intermediate ordinations might, if it were judged
proper, be supplied without acknowledging their nullity, by a con
ditional ordination resembling that of conditional baptism in the
liturgy." 1 The pamphlet proceeds to an examination of the claims
made by the advocates of the exclusive validity of Episcopal orders,
naturally arguing against their view, even to the extent of conceding
that "the original of the order of bishop was from the presbyters
choosing one from among themselves to be a stated president in their
assemblies, in the 2d or 3d century." 2 But independently of this
proposition for the organization of the Church and the continuation of
its ministry, without the succession, "which," as Bishop White sub
sequently acknowledged, " in the opinion of the author, would have
been justified by necessity and by no other consideration;" and the
arguments by which this proposal was sustained, the " Case of the
Episcopal Churches Considered " presented a plan for the organization,
of the American Church which exhibited the comprehensive mind of
a statesman, and which, in its general features, was subsequently for-/
inulated in the ecclesiastical constitution under which we have so long-
and so happily been united. The ideas of the essential unity of the
whole American Church as a national and autonymous body ; its in
dependence of all foreign jurisdiction, civil or ecclesiastical; its entire
separation from State control ; the comprehension of the laity in the
deliberative, legislative, and judicial assemblies of the Church. ; the-dioicc
of its ministers by those to whom they were to minister ; the equality
of its parishes ; its threefold organization, diocesan, provincial, and
"continental" or general, are clearly stated and temperately enforced.
In fact, the legislation of a century has hardly filled out the outline
sketch of church organization and government, prepared by the young I
patriot, priest and preacher of Philadelphia, in 1782.

To the principles set forth in this important pamphlet Bishop
White clung with characteristic consistence to the latest years of his
long and honored life. In a note appended to a letter addressed to
Bishop Hobart, under date of December 21, 1830, he thus alludes
to this production of his youth : " In agreement with the sentiments
expressed in this pamphlet I am still of opinion that in an exigency
in which duly authorized Ministers cannot be obtained, the paramount
duty of preaching the Gospel, and the worshipping of God on the
terms of the Christian Covenant should go on in the best manner
which circumstances permit. In regard to Episcopacy I think that it\
should be sustained as the government of the Church from the time of
the Apostles, but without criminating the ministry of other churches ; \
as is the course taken by the Church of England."

The impression produced by the appearance of this pamphlet was
profound. The breadth and comprehensiveness of its suggestions, and

1 The Case of the Episcopal Churches, etc. Perry s " Hist. Notes and Documents," p. 428.

2 Ibid., p. 430.

10 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

the soberness of judgment and unfailing courtesy and consideration
with which the views of others were stated and discussed, compelled a
hearing, even for those proposals which were so happily rendered un
necessary by the immediate prospects of peace. It was but a few
months after the appearance of " The Case of the Episcopal Churches
Considered " that the clergy of Connecticut, with the advice and hearty
cooperation of their brethren of New York, made choice of Seabury
as their bishop-elect, and sent him abroad, first to England, and then

to Scotland for con-
secration. At the
meeting of the Con-
necticut Clergy,
at Woodbury, on
the eventful Lady
Day of 1783,
the " Philadelphian
Plan, "as it was sub-
sequently called,
was fully discussed,
and the Secretary of the Convocation, the Rev. Abraham Jar vis, was in
structed " jnji frank and brotherly way, to express their opinion^ the
mistakes anoTcTangerous tendency of this pamphlet." There seems
ample evidence from the following extracts of letters written by the
Rev. Charles Inglis, D.D., who was then about starting for England, to
Dr. White, that suspicions, arising from the perusal of the pamphlet
we have alluded to, had prevented the comprehension of White, and
the clergy still further at the southward, in these efforts for an Ameri
can Episcopate.

NEW YORK, May 21, 1783.

For some time past I have very much wished to see you, and have some Con
versation on the common Interests of our Church, with which Politicks have
nothing to do. In the late Troubles, I firmly believe that you, like myself, took
that part which Conscience and Judgment pointed out ; and although we differed
in Sentiments, yet this did not in the least diminish my Regard for you, nor the
good Opinion I had always of your Temper, Disposition, and Religious Principles.
I ever shall esteem a man who acts from Principle and in the Integrity of his Heart,
though his Judgment of Things may not exactly coincide with mine.

In one Point I am certain we agree, that is, in the Desire of preserving our
Church and promoting the Interests of Religion. This Point, I am persuaded,
might be served, could we confer together. The State of Things is such that I
cannot go to Philadelphia, or else I would go with pleasure ; but you can come
here, there is no impediment in the Way but a Pass to come within the Lines,
which I shall immediately procure when you arrive at Elizabeth-Town. Think on
this Matter, and let me hear from you.

Family affliction prevented Dr. White s acceptance of this invita
tion, and, instead, a kind letter bore to Dr. Inglis words of affection
ate interest and brotherly regard, eliciting the following lettei in
reply : -

I thank you for the Pamphlet which accompanied the Letter. I had seen it
before, and on being told that you were the Author, concluded that you wrote it
under the Impression that the Case of our Church was hopeless, and no other
method left 01 preserving it from utterly perishing. From some Hints in your Let-

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. H

ter, I perceive that my conclusion was right. It must be confessed that your
apprehensions at that Time were not wholly without Foundation ; nor is anything
more natural than, when we are anxious about any Object of Moment, to cast about
for some expedient to accomplish it, and to catch at whatever appears practicable,
when the most eligible method is thought to be out of our Power. In making this
Observation, I only give a Transcript of what has passed in my own Mind on this
very subject ; and therefore I cannot but applaud your Zeal in a Matter of such
general and great Moment : at the same Time I tell you candidly my Opinion, with
which I believe you will agree, that the supposed Necessity, on which your Scheme
is founded, does not now really exist; and that the Scheme itself could not answer
the End of a regular Episcopate. In short, my good Brother, you proposed not
what you thought absolutely best and most eligible, but what the supposed Neces
sity of the Times compelled you to adopt, and when, no better Expedient appeared
to be within your Reach. In this Light the Pamphlet struck me the moment I
heard it was yours ; and your Letter confirms me in the Judgment I had formed.

That the Necessity there supposed does not now exist is demonstratively clear ;
because the way to England is open, from whence an Episcopate can be obtained,
to say nothing of other Episcopal Churches, from which the Relief might probably
be procured for our Church. That the Scheme itself would not answer the end of
an Episcopate, is no less clear ; for if adopted and adhered to our Church would
cease to be an Episcopal Church ! It|s impossible that there can be an Episcopal
&lt; Jhurch without Episcopal Ordination ; and the Ordination here proposed is not
Episcopal, that is, by a Bishop, bu JTby Presbyters. But it is needless to enlarge
on the point, as you very ingenuously own that " you are not wedded to the particu
lar plan proposed ;" and your good sense has prudently directed you "to delay
rather than forward measures to accomplish the Object in Contemplation, with
Hopes of its being undertaken with better Information."

You desire to know my Sentiments as to " the Measures to be pursued for the
continuance of our Church." One principal Reason why I wished for an interview
was, that we might confer together on the Subject. We might receive mutual In
formation by an Interview, which cannot so well be obtained by Letter. Indeed,
there are many particulars of great Moment in such a Business that cannot con
veniently be committed to writing ; for although whatever you say to me would be
perfectly safe and kept secret, as I believe what I say to you would also be on your
Part, yet there are a thousand little incidental Circumstances that are necessary to be
known, in order to form a right Judgment, which do not occur, perhaps, when we
write, or would require much, time to set down.

My clear, decided Opinion in general is, that some Clergyman of Character and
Abilities should go from hence to England to be Consecrated and admitted to the
sacred office of a Bishop by the English Bishops, and then to return and reside in
America. The next consideration to a good moral Character, sound principles,
abilities and learning in this Clergyman is, that he should be held in esteem by the
leading Men in Power in this Country, as it would reconcile them the better to the
Measure. If such a Clergyman will undertake to go on this Design, he shall have
all the Assistance and Support that I can possibly give him. But whether Matters
are yet ripe for such a Step, or how far you and others may think them so, is what
I am unable to determine. Were it necessary, I could adduce unanswerable argu
ments to evince this to be the most eligible Scheme ; though I verily believe there
needs no Arguments to convince you of it. What I wish you to do is to keep
your Eye upon it, and prepare Matters, as your Judgment and Prudence shall
direct, for its Execution, when you think the Time for it is come.

To these letters, the weighty words of one to whose master-hand
was afterwards committed the moulding of the English colonial Church
at the Northward, we may add, as bearing upon the general history of
this period of organization, and also illustrative of the views enter
tained abroad of the famous pamphlet to which we have referred, ex
tracts from letters of the Rev. Dr. Alexander Murray and the Rev. Jacob
Duche, two loyalist clergymen from Pennsylvania, then resident in
London, to whose kind offices Dr. White was subsequently much
indebted in the prosecution of his plans :

12 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

LONDON, 26th July, 1783.

DEAR SIR : ... The grievance of having had no Resident Bishops in

America can now be easily and regularly remedied : it depends not now so much
on the will of this as of that country. You will, no doubt, have an Ambassador or
Resident at this Court, to negotiate your public concerns ; and if he applies, at the
request of any one State or Body of People, for the consecration of an American
Bishop, you may have any of your own Nomination set apart for that Office accord
ing to the rules of the Church of England, without requiring oaths of allegiance to
this kingdom; an Act of Parliament would be no sooner moved for than pas &lt;1,
enabling the Bishops to dispense with whatever was incompatible on the occasion.

Iff then, you plead necessity for Presbytcrial Ordinations, it is a necessity of
your own making, which can never justify such an extraordinary step, which will
necessarily give rise to new divisions and sects in your young States, and these for
midable ones. You may expect thousands of Emigrants who will choose the Sacra
ments from the hands "of Ministers Episcopally ordained, and will continue, as
formerly, to call such from England or Nova Scotia (in which a Bishop Inglis or
Dr. T. B. Chandler and College is to be settled), to supply their spiritual necessi
ties ; better then have an unexceptionable, complete Church Government at once
within yourselves, than be constantly depending upon another people for supplies
of this kind. If you are the author of the pamphlet on this subject, it must have
been written when you despaired of such an amicable accommodation as has lately
taken place. You might have expected peace or truce, without a Recognizance
of Independence, as in the case of the Spanish and Dutch ; but now that this i.s
ratified in the most solemn manner, you have ever} thing that is friendly and rea
sonable to expect from the British ; they are as generous as brave, and you may
one day combine your forces, as the Spanish and Dutch have done lately. There
is nothing new under the s\m. Your mode of Government would depress the
present Episcopalians far below the level of the Presbyterians, who preserve
some consistence, and admit Episcopal Ordination, while we constantly reject theirs,
and will also your*. . . .

ALEXANDER MURRAY.

Mr. Duche s letter, interesting as containing the germ of the
principles on which our ecclesiastical constitution was subsequently
constructed, is also an evidence of the interest felt in the mother-
church in the plans and purposes of our founders. Mr. Duche spoke
ex cathedra, being on terms of close intimacy with the Archbishop
of Canterbury, and, to a certain extent, representing that prelate s
opinions.

ASYLUM, Aug. llth, 1783.

MYDEAiiSiR: . . . I have read your Pamphlet with great attention.
Reasoning, as you do, on the ground of necessity, you are certainly right ; and
the Arguments, as well as the Cases you adduce, are exactly to the Purpose. But
I cannot conceive that any such necessity at present exists. The venerable old
Doctrine of Apostolic Succession need not yet be given up. The Episcopal Clergy
have only to wait with Patience, and they may have, if they are unanimous, a
Church in each State, with a Bishop at its head, chosen by themselves, and regu
larly consecrated, without taking any Oaths of Supremacy, etc., and unconnected
with any Civil or Ecclesiastical Government but their own. The Plan I would pro
pose would be simply this. Let the Clergy of each State (say Pennsylvania for
instance) , together with Lay Deputies from each Congregation in the State, assem
ble, and with due Solemnity elect one of their Presbyters to y Office of Bishop.
Let him preside in their Conventions, and agree with them upon such alterations in
the Discipline and Liturgy of the Church of England as Circumstances have ren
dered necessary. Let him wait for an opportunity of being regularly consecrated ;
and till such opportunity offers, let the Convention meet and fix upon his Powers,
the Mode of supporting him, and all other things that may contribute to y e Good
Order and Government of the Church. He may do all the Offices of a Bishop but
ORDAIN and confirm, and he will not be long without receiving Power to exercise
these. All this will be perfectly consistent with your new Constitution. Nay, you
cannot be interrupted in the completion of such a Plan, unless Mobs and Associa-

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 13

tions should still be suffered to exercise an illegal Power. Each Episcopal Church
of each State to be independent of the others. Or, if for y sake of Uniformity of
Discipline and Worship, throughout y States, an annual Synod or Convocation be
deemed necessaiy, let the Bishop of each State, with a certain Number of his Pres
bytery, be sent to the Place appointed ; but let there be no Archbishop or Patriarch.
The hrst consecrated Bishop always to preside. The rest to take Precedency ac
cording to seniority of Consecration. Though I may never see you, I shall always
be happy to hear of the welfare and increase of the Episcopal Church. LJiave
much to say on this subject, and think a Church might now be formed more upon
y Primitive and Apostolic Plan in America, than any at present in Christen-/

doar T~~. .

Ever yours sincerely,

J. DUCHE.

But among these letters none were more weighty or wiser than
another from the gifted Inglis, then on the eve of his departure for
England. The whole communication, with its preface of touching
references to his wife s decease, and its refutation of some of the slanders
heaped upon him for his " Toryism " by the unscrupulous Whigs of
New York, 1 is most creditable to the writer s head and heart. We
have room only for extracts ; and we may remark, in passing, that the
clear and full statement of what the churchmen of New York had all
along sought to secure in striving for an American episcopate, is a
most interesting commentary on the statements already made in
giving, as we have sought to do, the story of the struggle for the
episcopate :

NEW YORK, October 22d, 1783.

REVEREND SIR : ... Your last Letter contained many Points of
Moment, which require the most serious Consideration. Some of them could be
better discussed at a personal Interview, which was the Reason of my wishing for
one ; but since that is now impracticable, I shall give you my sentiments upon
them briefly ; for my present hurry in preparing to embark for England will not
permit me to enlarge on them so fully as I would otherwise chuse.

As to " the Obligation of the Episcopal Succession," which, you say, " you
never could find sufficient arguments to satisfy you of," I need only declare that I
am perfectly clear and decided in my judgment of it. Before I entered into Holy
Orders, I was fully persuaded of the truth, of what is asserted in the Preface to our
Ordinal viz., " It is evident unto all men diligently reading Holy Scriptures and
ancient authors, that, from the Apostles Times, there have been three Orders of
Ministers in Christ s Church Bishops, Priests, and Deacons." All my Reading
and Inquiries since (and they have been diligent and impartial) have served to
confirm me in this Persuasion. The Episcopal Order originated from our Saviour
himself in the Persons of his Apostles ; the Succession of that Order was continued
by the inspired Apostles, who, equally under the Influence of the Divine Spirit,
dictated those Scriptures which are to be the Rule of Faith and Practice to the
Christian Church to the End of Time ; and also appointed those Ministers, and that
Form of Government which were ever after to continue in the Christian Church ;
and I conceive that we are as much bound to observe their appointment and direc
tions in the one case as the other.

It is evident, from Scripture and Ecclesiastical Antiquity, that Bishops were
superior to the other two Orders ; and that Ordination and Government were chiefly
referred to them. The true State of the Question on this Point is, Did the Apostles
establish a perfect equality between Gospel Ministers ? or, Did they establish a Sub
ordination among those Ministers ? The latter appears as clear to me as the noon
day sun ; nor are we more at Liberty, as I hinted before, to depart from what they
have instituted and appointed in this Respect, than we are to lay aside or depart

1 Vide, among other publications, "Dr. Inglis s titled, A Reply to Remarks on a Vindication qf

Defence of his character against certain false and Gov. Parr and his Council, &c.,&c

malicious charges contained in a pamphlet, en- London : Printed in the year 1784."

14 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

from the Scriptures which they left for the Rule of our Faith and Practice. If they
were unerringly guided by the Divine Spirit in one case, they were so in the other
also ; and it is a certain Fact, that, for 1500 years after our Saviour s Time, thereV
was no regular Ordination or Ecclesiastical Government, but what was of tin:
Episcopal kind.

I .nt . :i"iiu r ii "i tliis Head in an ainicalilc, short Letter to :t Brother ; ;uul I
shall only observe further that few Things have more confirmed my Sentiments on
this Subject than the poor, flimsy Evasions that have been used by Men, otherwise
respectable, to elude the Force of those Arguments, which have been drawn from
Paul s Epistles, and the primitive Writers in behalf of Episcopacy. These men j
would laugh at such Evasions in any other case where their judgment was not biased^
or predetermined.

You say that some settled mode must be adopted for the selecting the " prin
cipal Pastor of the Church ; " and then ask, " By whom is this to be done ? " 1
answer, If by principal Pastors you mean the Incumbents of Parishes, I appre
hend the Right of Presentation should, in general, remain in the same Hands as
formerly. Tnus the Election of a Rector in Philadelphia and New York, or, in
other Words, the Right of Presentation, is vested in the Church Wardens and Ves
try, and should continue in the same Hands. When the Legislature, by a publick
Law, makes Provision for the Support of Clergymen, it has a Right to prescribe the
mode of electing or appointing those Clergymen to particular Parishes, as was the
Case, if I remember right, in Maryland formerly. But, in my Opinion, it would
be best, on many accounts, that, on the Demise or Removal of an Incumbent, the
Church Wardens and Vestry of each Parish should have the Right of chusing a
Succession ; and even where the State has made legal Provision for the Clergy, I
think this mode preferable to any other ; granting no more to the Governor than
the authority to induct the Person chosen. If by principal Pastors you mean
Bishops, I think the Clergy of each State should have the Right of Electing, with
the Governor s Approbation. But it is time enough to talk of this Point when it
shall please God to grant this essential Benefit to the Episcopal Churches in America.

You say, 4&lt; That some Alterations in our Liturgy are become necessary in
Consequence of a Change of Circumstances," which is undoubtedly true ; and ask,
" By whom are those changes to be made? " I answer, By the Clergy without
Doubt ; yet still with the Concert and Approbation of the Civil Authority. I sup
pose that all the State Holy-Days, such as November the 5th, January 30th, etc.,
will be laid aside in the Thirteen States. The Collects for the King and Royal
Family must Lo altered and adapted to the present State of Things ; for in Publick
Worship Prayers for the Civil Rulers of the State should never oe omitted. And
here I cannot but express my Wish that Harmony and Uniformity might take place
among all the Episcopal Churches ; which can only be effected by the Clergy of
the several States consulting^ each other, and agreeing to adopt the same Collects
for this Purpose. Were a Bishop settled in America, this point would be easily
accomplished ; without one, I apprehend Difficulties will arise.

You say, " The Trial and Deposition of irregular Clergymen is to be provided
for; and it is to be hoped that this will not be done at pleasure, but under reason
able Laws ; " and ask, " By whom are such Laws to be made ? " To this, I reply,
That Clergymen are amenable, equally with Laymen to the Laws of the State, and
are punishable by those Laws, if they transgress them. But as to any proper Ec
clesiastical Discipline, by which Irregularities in Clergymen, not cognizable by the
Civil Laws, shall be censured or punished, it is not to be expected until you have
Bishops, and some regular System of Church Government is settled. I mean not
that Bishops should be vested with Arbitrary Power ; or that they should censure
and depose at Pleasure. They are to be guided by Canons, which point out the
Duty of Clergymen, and according to which the latter should be judged. Our
Church has already provided several such Canons ; and if any more such should
be required in this Country, the Clergy, in Conjunction with a Bishop or Bishops,
are the Persons by whom they should be enacted.

Some years since, I drew up a Plan for an American Episcopate, which met
with the Approbation of several of the most respectable Characters in England, as
well as America. Give me leave to transcribe a few Extracts from it, which will
partly convey my Sentiments on the Subject. It was proposed in that Plan

"That two or more Protestant Bishops of the Church of England be appointed
to reside in America.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 15

" That they are not to have any temporal authority whatever, nor interfere
with the Rights or Emoluments of Governors.

" That their proper Business shall be to Ordain and Superintend the Clergy,
and Confirm such as chuse to be Confirmed.

"That they may hold Visitations, assemble the Clergy of their respective
Dioceses in Convocations, where the Clergy shall be their Assessors or Assistants ;
and that, in those Convocations, such matters only shall be transacted as relate to
the Conduct of the Clergy, or to the Order and Government of the Churches.

" That they be vested with Authority to censure delinquent Clergymen accord
ing to the Nature of their Offence ; and to proceed even to Deprivation, in cases
which may require it, after a regular Trial ; the Courts in which such Trials are
held to consist of the Clergy of the Provinces respectively where the Delinquent
Persons reside ; and the Bishop to pronounce the sentence of Deprivation, accord
ing to Canon 122."

Here it is supposed that there are Canons or Laws by which the Delinquent
Person is to be tried, according to which the Court is to proceed in the Trial ; that
each Clergyman, as an Assistant to the Bishop, has a Vote in acquitting or con
demning ; and that the Bishop, according to his Function, and Superiority of his
Order, pronounces or delivers whatever Sentence the Court may award. On such
a Plan, Arbitrary Sway and Oppression are wholly excluded. It may be proper to
observe, that the Canons, like the Liturgy, will require Revision. The Canons, as
they now stand, are applicable to the State of Things in England, where they were
made ; but many of them are not so in America ; and, therefore, some should be
altered, others wholly omitted, and others again, perhaps, added, when a Bishop
is settled in this Country ; for, until you have a Bishop, you can have no centre of
Union, nor can you act with Regularity and Order hi Matters of this Sort. I could
say more on this Subject, but really have not Time.

I must be candid in telling you that I can neither see the Propriety or the
Advantage of the scheme you propose, to join Laymen with Clergymen for enact
ing Ecclesiastical Laws, trying delinquent Clergymen, etc., as a "Collective Body,
to whom the extraordinary occasions of our Churches may be referred." This
certainly, if I understand you right, is not the plan of the Church of England.
Many Inconveniences will unquestionably attend it the Advantages are doubtful.
Instead of attracting Lay-Members to the Church, I apprehend it would be produc
tive of endless Broils between the Laity and Clergy, probably, of oppression to the
latter. The Clergy are already amenable to the Civil Power for Civil Offences ;
is not that sufficient ? Are not Clergymen the best Judges of Ecclesiastical Offences?
and of the properest Methods to reclaim their erring Brethren? which is pre
ferable to punishment, if it can be effected.

There is little doubt but that a Clergyman of good Character, who went to
England properly recommended, with the Consent of the State from whence he
went, and where he was afterwards to reside, would be consecrated a Bishop.
An Act of Parliament, indeed, would be necessaiy to empower the Bishops in
England to Consecrate without administering the State Oaths ; but I am confident
this Act might be obtained. I am almost a Convert to your Opinion that it would
be best to request the Bishops in England to chuse a proper Person there, a Man
of Abilities, Piety, liberal Sentiments, and unblemished Morals, for the first
American Bishop. All Circumstances considered, it would be better than to send
a Person from hence. There would be fewer Objections to a stranger, who had
never been in America, and was clear of having taken any Part in our unhappy
Divisions, both in England and America, than against an American Clergyman,
however respectable his Character might be. But a Bishop is absolutely necessary,
and either way he ought, by all means, to be obtained. The great Point is to
procure the Consent and Approbation of the Legislature of some State to the
Measure ; if this is done, the Rest will be easy. And here, I must tell you that my
only Hope is from Maryland or Virginia. Nothing of the kind is to be expected
from the Northern States. Consider this Matter, and try what you can do with
your Friends in Maryland. The Church of God calls for your Assistance, and that
of all its other worthy Members, and it is their indispensable Duty to afford that
Assistance as far as it is in their power.

The News Papers, some time since, announced that the Clergy of Maryland
had chosen Mr. Keene to be sent for Consecration to England ; but I find the
account was premature. Mr. Keene was a very worthy man when I knew him,
and I doubt not but he is so still. I shall embark next week for England, where I

1G HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

shall be happy to give every aid within the Compass of my Power to any measure
of this kind. I shall, therefore, be glad to hear from you, and know how matters
are circumstanced; and particularly what progress is made in Maryland toward
procuring an Episcopate. Direct to me, etc., etc.

Sincerely wishing you Health, Happiness, and every temporal Felicity, and
Success in your Ministry,

I am, with much Esteem, Reverend Sir,
Your affectionate Friend and humble Servant,

CHARLES INGLIS.
REVEREND DR. WHITE.

Though the announcement in the newspapers alluded to by Dr.
Inglis in his concluding paragraph was incorrect, still the movement
for the episcopate, first inaugurated by the clergy of Connecticut,
had been followed by the action of their brethren of Maryland. The
clergy of this important State, where the Church had retained much
of its former influence and respect, met in August, 1783, at Annapolis ;
framed, after the political fashion of the times, a " Bill of Rights ; " and
chose the celebrated William Smith, D.D., formerly Provost of the
College and Academy of Philadelphia, but at that time President of
Washington College, Maryland, as their bishop. But this effort for a
bishop at the southward failed, in consequence of grave charges
affecting the character of the bishop-elect ; and from being among the
foremost of all the American churches, in efforts for the perfection of
her ecclesiastical organization, Maryland, as we shall subsequently see,
was outstripped in gaining the prize by Connecticut, New York, and
Pennsylvania. In the meantime, when the mind of every thoughtful
member of our communion was turned upon these questions of church
perpetuation, there came from the Rev. Abraham Beach, of New
Jersey, the first definite plan for general organization and a united
effort to secure the end desired. This letter, so interesting in itself,
as furnishing information of the state of feeling in the Church at this
time with reference to union and organization, becomes important as
we remember the great results springing directly from the proposition
it was the first to enunciate in public :

NEW BRUNSWICK, 26th January, 1784.

REVEREND SIR : I always expected, as soon as the Return of Peace should
put it in their Power, that the Members of the Episcopal Church in this Country
would interest themselves in its Behalf would endeavour to introduce Order and
Uniformity into it, and Provide for a Succession in the Ministry. The Silence on
this Subject which hath universally prevailed, and still prevails, is a Matter of real
Concern to me, as it seems to portend an utter extinction of that Church which I so
highly venerate.

As I flatter myself your Sentiments correspond with my own, I cannot deny
myself the Satisfaction of writing you on the Subject.

Every Person I have conversed with is fully sensible that something should
be done, and the sooner the better. For my own Part, I think the first step that
should be taken, in the present unsettled State of the Country, is to get a Meeting
of as many of the Clergy as can be conveniently collected. Such a Meeting appeal s f,
to be peculiarly necessary in order to look into the condition of the Widows Fund, 1
which may at present be an object worth attending to, but will unavoidably dwindle
to nothing, if much longer neglected. Would it not, therefore, be proper to ad
vertise a Meeting of the Corporation in the Spring at Brunswick, or any other place

1 The Charitable Corporation for the Relief men of the Church of England in the American
of the Widows and Children of deceased Clergy- Colonies, established prior to the Revolution.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 17

that may be thought more convenient, and endeavour to get together as many as
possible of the Clergy who are not members, at the same time and place.

A sincere Regard to the Interests of the Church induces me to make these
Proposals, wishing to be favored with your sentiments on this subject. If anything
should occur to you as necessary to be done, in order to put us upon an equal foot
ing with other Denominations of Christians, and cement us together in the Bonds
of Love, I should be happy in an opportunity of assisting in it.

I am, Reverend Sir,

Your alFectionate Brother,

And very humble Servant,

ABRAHAM BEACH.
THE REVEREND DR. WHITE.

We have reason to regret here, as in many other connections, that
the voluminous manuscript correspondence of Bishop White has so few
copies or drafts of his own communications. In some instances we
have been fortunate enough to supply the deficiency from other collec
tions; but, in the present instance, we can only infer the doctor s
answer from Mr. Beach s response the following month :

NEW BRUNSWICK, 22d March, 1784.

REVEREND SIR : As soon as I was made acquainted by your Favour of the
7th Feb. of your concurrence in the Proposed Meeting of the Clergy, I wrote to
Mr. Provoost and Mr. Moore, of New York, on the subject. They both approve of
the Measure ; and not only approve of it, but think it absolutely necessary..

In a Letter I received from Mr. Blackwell, some time ago, he proposed
Tuesday, llth May, as a proper time for the Meeting, and acquiesced with my
proposal of Brunswick for the place. I remarked this in my Letter to Mr.
Provoost ; in answer to which he acquainted me that on consulting Mr. Duane, and
other Members of the Corporation in New York, they discovered a desire that the
Meeting should be held in New York, on Wednesday, the 12th May.

For my own Part, I have no manner of Objection to the Alteration, any
farther than its depriving me of the Company of some of my Brethren at my
House. Even this Pleasure, however, I am ready to forego, if our meeting in New
York may have any tendency to promote peace and harmony in the Church there.
This expectation and belief is the principal Reason for their wishing for the Altera
tion with regard to time and place.

Should this proposal of meeting in New York, on Wednesday, the 12th May,
meet with your approbation, will you be so good as to acquaint the members of
the Corporation in Pennsylvania, and desire their attendance ? Would not adver
tising in the public papers be proper ?

Some of the Lay Members may. perhaps, scarcely think it worth their while
to take so much Trouble without a prospect of immediate Profit to themselves. I
cannot but flatter myself, however, that there are some still, who would wish to
promote the Interests of Religion in general to save the Church of which we are
Members, from utter decay and consequently to promote the real happiness and
prosperity of the country. Persons of this character will not, surely, withhold
their assistance at this veiy critical juncture.

. . . I should be exceedingly happy to hear from you, as soon as your
Convenience will permit; and am, Rev. Sir,

Your affectionate Brother,

And very Humble Servant,

ABRAHAM BEACH.

REV. DR. WHITE.

Recurring to the subject a few weeks later, the amiable Mr.
Beach announces the completion of his arrangements for the proposed
meeting at New Brunswick, and requests his brother of Philadelphia
to open the services there with a sermon: His letter is as follows :

18 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

NEW BRUNSWICK, 13th April, 1784.

REVERETD SIR : I have just received a Letter from Mr. Provoost, signify
ing his concurrence with the first appointment. It is at length agreed, upon
all hands, that our meeting be held at Brunswick, on Tuesday, the llth May;
and as the day is near at hand, I think no Tune ought to be lost in giving the
proper Notice.

I wish you would be so good as to advertise it in one of your News Papers,
with an invitation to all Clergymen of the Episcopal Church; and perhaps you
may think it proper to invite respectable characters of the Laity, as matters of
general concern to the Church may probably be discussed. As soon as I find the
Advertisement in a Philadelphia paper, I will cause it to be inserted in one hi New
York ; and will write, likewise, to all concerned in Jersey.

You will doubtless agree with me in the propriety of having a Sermon on the
occasion. Will you be so good as to preach it?

I am much obliged to you for the Pamphlet you were so kind as to send me.
I had the Pleasure of reading it on its first Publication, and am happy to agree with
you in every particular, excepting the necessity of receding from ancient usages.
If this necessity existed in time of war, I cannot think that it does at present;
and as you convey the same idea in your letter, I flatter myself our sentiments on
Church Government entirely agree.

Your affectionate Brother,

And very Humble Servant,

ABRAHAM BEACH.

REVEREND DR. WHITE.

We have given these copious extracts from the correspondence
of those most active at this period of our church organization for
the purpose of presenting, as in the case of Dr. Inglis s lengthy
communication, the views of White, and the arguments with which
he supported them, to be learned, unfortunately, only from the
quotations made by his correspondent for the purpose of answering
them, and also to show the influence in the Church already attained
by this comparatively young man, when the old and experienced are
found waiting for his advice, or seeking to influence his action.

.Thus already was he a primus inter pares, without whose aid and
influence nothing could be successfully done or even attempted.

The meeting in New Brunswick met, as appointed, on the
eleventh of May. Bishop White, in his " Memoirs," dates this
preliminary gathering a little later in the month ; but the original rec
ords, still preserved, in the handwriting of one of its members, subse
quently the second Bishop of New York, are conclusive on this point.
These simple minutes of our preliminary convention are informal and
brief, filling less than a common letter-sheet ; and their preservation
is solely owing to the care with which Bishop White gathered and
preserved the data of our history. 1

1 " At New Brunswick, Tuesday, llth May, ensuing, for the Purpose of soliciting their Con-

1784, several Members of the Episcopal Church, currcuce with us in such Measures as may be

both of the Clergy & Laity, from the States of deemed conducive to the Union & Prosperity of

New York, New Jersey, & Pennsylvania were the Episcopal Churches in the States of America,
assembled together, present: The Rcv d - D r - "Also agreed by the Gentlemen present,

White, Rev 1 - D r - Magaw, Rev d - M r - Beach, Rev 4 - that the undermentioned Persons be requested to

M - Bloomer, Rev 4 - M r - Frascr, Rev d - M r - Ogdcn, correspond with each other, & with any other

Rev 4 - M r - Blackwcll, Rev*- M r - Bodcn, Rcv d - Persons, for the Purpose of forming a Conti-

M r - Bcnj n - Moore, Rcv d - M r - Tho - Moore, ncntal Representation of the Episcopal Chmvh,

James Parker, John Stevens, Richard Stevens, & for the better Management of other Concerns

John Dennis, Esquires, Col. Hoyt& Col. Furman. of the said Church.

" It was agreed, that the Rcv d - Mess- Beach, "Rev d - Mess"- Bloomer, Provoost & B

Bloomer & B. Moore be requested to wait upon Moore for New York.

the Clergy of Connecticut, who are to be con- " Rev 4 - Mess Beach, Ogden & Ayres for

vcncd on the Wednesday in Trinity Week next New Jersey.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION.

While this correspondence was going on, and before the arrange
ments for this informal meeting at New Brunswick had been perfected,
there had taken place, at the instance of Dr. White, the measures for
convening a State Convention in close connection with the wider ec
clesiastical organization already in process of formation. Thus was
the clear and comprehensive mind of White grasping at once the de-
tails of the local and^eueral government of the Church ; and the theories
promulged in " The Case of the Episcopal Churches Considered " were
being put to the test of actual trial, establishing in the test their
originator s claims to remarkable foresight and unusual constructive
and executive power.

Nor was this all that the earnest and laborious White contributed
to the general organization of our Church. There were letters, written
at length and in detail, letters still remaining, and, from their faded
yellow foolscap pages and well-formed characters, abounding in the
quaint contractions, betokening the hurry and drive of a wearisome
correspondence, speaking to us again and again of the love and interest
felt by this excellent man in the successful working out of his plans
for good for the Church of Christ. These letters, borne by post or
packet, to Parker, in Boston, and through him to Bass, at Newbury-

port, and even to the then destitute parish at Falmouth, just reviving
from the ashes of the bombardment, and, as yet, unable to secure or
support a clergyman ; finding their way to New York, where the
patriot Whigs were busied in measures for the election of Provoost
to the rec
tor ship of
Trinity and
the episco
pate of that
State ; easily

carried by water to the excellent Wharton, at Wilmington, in Dela- &gt;
ware, where the first convert from Romanism to the Protestant faith
in our American Church, was beginning a life-long work of faithful
labors in his new ecclesiastical home ; borne on the great mail roads
to the thoughtful William West, in Baltimore, one of the most earn
est-minded and best of men ; taken by coach to Chestertovvn, in Mary-

" Rev a - D r - White, D -Magaw, & M r - Black- out consulting his Colleagues of the same State,

well for Pennsylvania. whenever it may be deemed expedient." / 7 ~"*

" Any one of which Persons of each State the Bishop White Papers.
respectively, to correspond with the others, with-

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

land, where the indefatigable Smith, driven from one college, had
speedily inaugurated another of reputation and success ; pressing
further, by winding roads and water-courses, to Fairfax, in Virginia,
where the pious Griffith was laboring in his pleasant parish, uncon
scious of the trials that awaited him in his struggle for the episcopate ;
and reaching even South Carolina, where Purcell, an interested
correspondent of the painstaking White, received them with mingled
hopes and fears as to his chances for a mitre ; these letters, in a day
when note-paper and penny posts were never dreamed of by the most
sanguine of correspondents, were the great stimulants to flagging ex
ertions, and the cause, we may not doubt, of success in quarters where
any other pen would have found no such response. And, borne across
the water in the heavy mail-bags of slowly-sailing packets, they con
veyed to old friends and new ones tokens of church life in our western
hemisphere, where many anxious hearts had feared that life was all
crushed out. Surely, then, as there are piled around us, while we
write, volume after volume of these carefully considered letters, ever
fresh in their expressions, and fair in their swift chirography, we can
not withhold from White the patient, laborious, loving father of
our revived, reorganized Church our highest meed of praise with an
ever-deepening respect, an ever-increasing honor.

It was a wise Providence, as we shall see, that united in the work
of laying thus broad and deep the foundations of our American Church,
the apostolic Seabury and the saintly White. Recognizing, as we can
not fail to do, the minor points of theological difference that were never
deemed by the latter of importance enough to cause any diminution
of the " affection and respect " l with which he regarded the former,
we may well and wisely rejoice, that, with the acknowledged diversity
of gifts, of graces, of opinions, and of temper and character, the bishops
of Connecticut and Pennsylvania were chosen of God to build up,
independently at first, and then unitedly, the firm fabric of our eccle
siastical organization. Had it been formed wholly as the one wished
it, it might have been found impracticable. Had the other s ideas
been carried out, without the modification after years experience and
conference with his Episcopal brother brought about, there might have
been found tendencies to radicalism in the working of our system.
But, by these holy men s united efforts, there was built up, with no)
untempered mortar, under God, " a glorious Church"- built by thesejl
his servants, on the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus/
Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.

TTTE append the "testimonial" of Dr. Smith, addressed to tho Archbishop of
y V Canterbury, Dr. John Moore, and signed by the Maryland clergy, which is
still preserved in the hands of one of his descendants :

l Bishop White, in his " Memoirs of the Church," 2d cd., p. 8-1.

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 21

44 MARYLAND, ANNAPOLIS,

"AugfclG 1 ", 1783.

" MY LORD Whereas the good people of this State in communion with the
Church of England have long laboured & do still labour under great Difficulties,
through the want of a regular Clergy to supply the many Parishes, that have for a
considerable time been vacant

"To prevent therefore and guard against such an unhappy situation for the
future, We the Convocation or meeting of the Clergy of the Church of England
have made choice of, and do recommend our Brother the Reverend Doctor Wuliam
Smith, as a fit and proper Person, and every way well qualified to be invested with
the Sacred Office of a Bishop, in order to perpetuate a regular succession of Clergy
Among us. We do with the greater confidence present unto your Lordship this
Godly and well learned Man to be ordained and consecrated Bishop ; being perfectly
satisfied that he will duly execute the office whereunto he is called, to the edifying
of the Church, and to the Glory of God.

" Your Lordship s well known Zeal for the Church and Propagation of the
Christian Religion, induces us to trust that your Lordship will compassionate the
case of a remote and distressed People, and comply with our Earnest Request in
this matter. For without such Remedy the Church in this Country, is in imminent
danger of becoming Extinct

That your Lordship may long continue An Ornament to the Church, is the
hearty Prayer of My Lord

" Your very Dutiful and Most obedient Servants
JOHN GORDON, St. Michael s, Talbot County
JOHN MACPHERSON, W m & Mary Parish, Charles County
W" THOMSON, St. Stephen s Parish, Cecil County.

SAMUEL KEENE, Dorchester & Great Choptank Parishes, Dorchester County.
W" WEST, S . Paul s Parish, Baltimore County.
GEORGE GOLDIE, King & Queen, Saint Mai-y s.

JOHN BOWIE, S . Peter s, Talbot.

JOHN STEPHEN, All-Faith Parish, Saint Mary s County

WALTER MAGOWAN, St. James Parish, Ann-Aundel Cty.

W" HANNA, St. Margaret, Ann-Arundel

JOSEPH MESSENGER, St. Andrew s Parish, St. Mary s County

Trio . JNO. CLAGGET, S . Paul s Parish, Prince George s County

THOMAS GATES, St. Ann s, Annapolis.

JOHN ANDREWS, S Thomas, Bait. County.

HAMILTON BELL, Stepney, Somerset County

FRANCIS WALKER, Kent Island, Queen Ann s County

JOHN STEWART, Port Tobacco Parish, Chai-les County

LEO CUTTING, Allhallow s Parish, Worcester County

WILL SMITH, Stepney Parish, Worcester County.

RALPH HIGINBOTHAM, S Ann s Parish, Ann Arundel County

EDWARD GANTT, Junior, Christ Church Parish, Calvert County
HATCH DENT, Trinity Parish, Charles County."

The history of the adoption of the name " Protestant Episcopal," as applied
to the American Church, is given by the late Dr. Ethan Allen, historiographer of
the Diocese of Maryland, in his " Protestant Episcopal Conventions in Maryland
of A.D. 1780, 1781, 1782, 1783," appended to the Convention Journal of 1878. It
is as follows :

" The Convention convened at Chestertown, Kent county, Nov. 9th, 1780.
" There were present,

Rev. SAMUEL KEENE, Rector of St. Luke s, Queen Anne s county.
Rev. WILLIAM SMITH, D.D., Rector of Chester Parish, Kent county.

Rev. JAMES JONES WILMER, Rector of Shrewsbury Parish, Kent county.
Col. RICHARD LLOYD, Vestryman of St. Paul s Parish, Kent county.

4 Mr. JAMES DUNN, " " " "

Mr. JOHN PAGE, Vestryman of St. Paul s Parish, Kent county.

Mr. RICHARD MILLER, " "

4 Mr. SIMON WICKES, " "

Dr. JOHN SCOTT, Vestryman of Chester Parish, Kent county.

Mr. JOHN BOLTON, " " 4 " "
Mr. J. W. TILDEN, " " " " "

22 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

14 Mr. ST. LEGEB EVERETT, Vestryman of Chester Parish, Kent county.

"Mr. JAMES WROTH, " " " "

" Mr. JOHN KENNARD, Church Warden of Chester Parish, Kent county.

" Mr. STURGESS, " " "

" Mr. CiiitiSTOi iiER HALL, Vestryman of Shrewsbury, S. Sassafras, Kent.

Mr. GEORGE MOFFETT, " " " "

" Mr. WILLIAM KEATING, "

Mr. C , Church Warden

" Mr. JOHN BROWN, Vestryman of St. Luke s, Queen Anne s county.
Mr. DOWNS, " " "

" Dr. WILLIAM BORDLY.

Dr. VAN DYKE.

Col. ISAAC PERKINS.

Mr. CIIAS. GROOM.

Mr. WILLIAM KEENE.
Mr. JAMES HACKETT.

" Dr. Smith was appointed President, and Mr. Wilmer, Secretary.

" A petition to the General Assembly of Maryland for the support of public
religion was then read and approved, and ordered to be sent to each Vestry in the
State ; and if by them approved, after obtaining signatures in their respective
parishes, it was to be carried up to the legislature. . . .

" On motion of the Secretary, it was proposed that the Church known in the
province as Protestant be called the Protestant Episcopal Church, and it was so
adopted."

NOTE. In a letter dated May 6, 1810, from the Rev. James Jones Wilmer to
Bishop Claggett, he writes, " I am one of the three who first organized the Episco
pal Church during the Revolution, and am consequently one of the primary aids of
its consolidation throughout the United States. The Rev. Dr. Smith, Dr. Keene and
myself held the first convention at Chestertown, and I acted as secretary." He also
states in this letter that " he moved that the Church of England as heretofore so
known in the province be now called The Protestant Episcopal Church, and it was
so adopted." See Md. Archives.

The records of the first meeting in Pennsylvania, at the instance and under the
superintendence of Dr. White, are given in full from the original manuscript, in
Dr. White s handwriting, in the archives of the General Convention Another
copy, in the same handwriting, is in the possession of the author.

PHILADELPHIA, March 29, 1784,

At y* House of y* rev d D r White,

Rector of Christ s Church & S Peters.

In consequence of Appointments made by y* Vestry of Christ s Church & S 1
Peters and by y* Vestry of S 1 Paul s Church, viz., by y Vestry of Christ s Church &
S Peter s as folio weth,

" The Rector mentioned to y* Vestry that he lately had a Conversation with
y* rev* D r Magaw on y* Subject of appointing a Committee from y* Vestries of
" their respective Churches to confer with y Clergy of y said Churches, on y*
" Subject of forming a representative Body of y* episcopal Churches in this State,
" & wished to have y* Sense of this Vestry thereon. After some consideration y*
" Vestiy agreed to appoint Matthew Clarksou & W" Pollard for Christ s Church and
" D r Clarkson & M 1 John Chaloner for S Peters."

And by y* Vestry of S Paul s Church as followeth,

" A Copy of y Minute of y* Vestiy of y* United Churches of Christ s Church
" & S Peters of v* 13th of Nov last was, by y^ rev* D r Magaw, laid before this
" Vestiy & is as follows. (Here followeth y* Minutes.) The above Minute being
" taken into consideration and this Vestry concurring in Opinion thereon, ununi-
"mously appointed Lambert Wilmer & Plunket Fleeson Esq 1 on y* part of this

sembled at y* time & place above mentioned.

The Body thus assembled, after taking into consideration y* Necessity of

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 23

speedily adopting Measures for y" forming a Plan of ecclesiastical Government for
y" Episcopal Church, are of Opinion, that a Subject of such Importance ought to be
taken up, if possible, with y" concurrence of y* Episcopalians generallyln y" U.
States. They therefore, resolve to ask a Conl erence with such Members of y* epis
copal Congregations in y* Counties of this State as are now in Town ; & they
authorize y* Clergymen now present to converse with such Persons as they can find
of y* above Description & to request their meeting this Body at Christ s Church on
Wednesday Evening at seven O Clock.

Adjourned to y same Time & Place.

CHRIST S CHURCH, March 32.

The Clergy & y two Committees assembled according to adjournment, (all
y* Members being present except* M" Clarkson Esq, detained by sickness), &
y* Body thus assembled elected D r White their Chairman.

The Clergy reported, that agreeably to y appointment of y last Meeting,
they had spoken to several Gentlemen, who readily consented to y* proposed
Conference.

The Meeting continued some Time ; when it was signified to them, that several
Gentlemen who had designed to attend were detained by y unexpected Sitting of
v* hon 1 House of Assembly, they being Members of that House. The hon 1 James
Read Esq" attended according to Desire.

After some Conversation on y 9 Business of this Meeting, it was resolved, that
a circular Letter be addressed to y* Ch: wardens & Vestrymen of y respective epis
copal Congregations in y State ; and that y* same be as followeth ; viz.,

GENTLEMEN, The episcopal Clergy in this City, together with a Committee
appointed by y e Vestry of Christ s Church & S* Peters and another Committee ap
pointed by y" Vestry of S Paul s Church in y e same for y purpose of proposing a
Plan of ecclesiastical Government, being now assembled, are of Opinion, that a
Subject of such Importance ought to be taken up, if possible, with y concurrence
of y* Episcopalians generally in y U. States. They have therefore resolved as pre
paratory to a general Consultation, to request y* Church wardens and Vestrymen
of each episcopal Congregation in y State to delegate one or more of their Body to
assist at a Meeting to be held in this City on Monday y* 24 th day of May next, and
such Clergymen as have parochial Cure in y said Congregations to attend y* Meet
ing; which they hope will contain a full Representation of y* episcopal Church in
this State.

The above Resolve, Gentlemen, the first Step in their Proceedings, they now
respectfully and affectionately communicate to you.

Signed, in behalf of y Body now assembled,

W. WHITE, Chairman.

Resolved : that a circular Letter be sent to some one Gentleman in each of the
said Congregations ; and that Copies of y same be left with y Chairman, y re
spective Directions to be supplied by him after due Enquiry ; & that y Letter be
as followeth ; viz.,

SIR, The Body herein mentioned, bein^ informed that you are a Member
of y* episcopal Church in & always ready to attend to it s concerns, take y*

Liberty of requesting you to deliver y enclosed.

Signed in behalf of y* said Body,

W. WHITE, Chairman.

Resolved : that y Letters addressed to y* Churches formerly included in y*
Mission of Radnor be enclosed under Cover to y* reV 1 W. Currie their former
Pastor ; & the Clergy are desired to accompany them with a Letter of y e said rev*
Gentleman requesting his Assistance at y proposed Meeting.

Resolved : that as j^ rev d Joseph Hutchins is y Minister of y* Churches for
merly included in y Mission of Lancaster, y circular Letter be addressed to him &
not to y* Ch: wardens & Vestrymen of y said Congregations.

Resolved : that it be recommended to y Vestries under whose appointments
these Proceedings are made, to cause y* same to be read to their respective Con
gregations on Easter Monday at their annual Election of Ch: wardens & Vestrymen.

The Chairman is empowered to call Meetings, at any time previous to Easter.

Adjourned.

24 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

At y* house of D White,
April G lh .

The Clergy & y* Committee* met ; except Matthew Clarkson Esq" who was
detained by Sickness.

The Chairman reported that he had forwarded Letters to every Church of
which he could receive Information ; & that there are two small Congregations who
were never provided with an Incumbent, of whom he hath not yet been able to
ascertain, whether they be in Chester County or in y* State of Delaware ; he is desired
to make further Enquiry & in case they shall be Ibund to be in Chester County, to
invite them to y* intended Meeting. 1 he names of y* gent" to whom y* Letters have
been addressed, are as follow: those for y* Late Mission of Radnor to y* rev* W n
Currie ; those for y* late Mission of Lancaster to y* rev 4 Joseph Hutehins ; that for
Oxford to M Cotman; that for All-Saints, Pequestan, to M r Johnston; that for
Whitemarsh to M r Sam 1 Wheeler ; that for Bristol to W. Coxe Esq" ; that for Read
ing to Collinson Read Esq" ; that for Morlatton to M r George Douglass ; that for
Carlisle to Col. Smith ; that for York to Col. Hartley ; that for a Church near York
to y* same Gentleman; that for Chester to Edw d Vernon Esq"; that for Marcus
Hook to M Sam 1 Armer ; and that for Concord to M r Isaak Bullock.

The foregoing is a true Ace of y proceedings of y episcopal Clergy & Com
mittees from y respective Vestries of y* episcopal Churches at three different
Meetings.

Signed in behalf of y* said Body,

W. WHITE, Chairman.

P.S. It appearing that the Rev d M r Tiling is y* Minister of v* ep l : Ch : in
Caernarvon & Piquea & that y* rev d M r Mitchell had gathered a Congregation at
Fort Pitt, y* Clergy wrote to those Gent" inviting them to y* Meeting together with
Delegates from their Vestries, the Committees of y two Vestries being at this Time
dissolved by y* Elections at Easter.

W. WHITE.

[The original manuscript bears the following endorsement : ]

I deposit this with y* Committee of y* General Convention for collecting
Journals : it being y* original Record of y* first steps taken for y* organizing of y*
episcopal Church throughout y* Union.

WM: WHITE.

Oct. 30, 1821.

Endorsed " First Meeting of Conv" for Organizing y* Church."

Bishop White begins the concluding paragraph of his " Episcopal Charge
on the Subject of Revivals, delivered before the Forty-eighth Convention of the
Diocese of Pennsylvania, and addressed to the clerical members of the Convention,
Printed by order of the Convention, Philadelphia, 1832," with the following
words :

" Brethren, it is bordering on the half of a century since the date of the
incipient measures of your bishop, for the organizing of our church out of the
wreck of the Revolution."

On a copy of this charge in possession of Thomas H. Montgomery, esq., of
Philadelphia, the bishop has added in the last blank pages, the following note:

Those Measures began with y* Author s Pamphlet, entitled " The Case of y*
Episcopal Churches in y United States considered."

The Circumstances attached to that Publication are y* following :
. The Congregations of our Communion throughout y U. States, were approach
ing to Annihilation. Altho within this City, three episcopal Clergymen, includ
ing y* Author, were resident & officiating ; y e church over y* rest of y* State, had
become deprived of their Clergy during y* War, either by Death, or by Departure
for England. In y* eastern States, with two or three Exceptions, there was a ces
sation of y e Exercises of y" Pulpit ; owing to y* necessary Disuse of y* Prayers for
y* former Civil Rulers. In Maryland & in Virginia, where y Church had enjoied
civil Establishments, on y* ceasing of these, y* Incumbents of y* Parishes, almost with
out Exception ceased to officiate. Further South, y* Condition of y* Church was
not better, to say y* least. At y* Time in Question, there had occurred some Cir
cumstances, which prompted y* Hope of a Discontiuance of y* War : but, that it

THE PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION. 25

would be with y* Acknowlegement of American Independence, there was little
Reason to expect.

On y 6" 1 of August 1702, y* Congress, as noticed on their printed Journal of
that Day, received a Communication irom Sir Guy Carleton & Admiral Digby,
dated y" 2* of that Month, which gave y first Opening of y Prospect of Peace.
The Pamphlet had been advertised for Sale in y e " Pennsylvania Packet" of y* G h
& some Copies had been previously handed by y* Author, to a few of his Friends.
This suspended y intended Proceedings in y Business ; which, in y Opinion of
y" Author, would have been justified by Necessity, & by no other Consideration.

It was an Opinion commonly entertained, that if there should be a Discon
tinuance of military Operations, it would be without y* Acknowlegement of Inde
pendence as happened after y* Severance of y* Netherlands from y Crown of Spain.
Of y e like Issue there seemed probable Causes, in y Feelings attendant on disap
pointed Efforts for Conquest ; & in y* Belief cherished, that y" Succeses of y* former
Colonists would be followed by Dissentions, inducing Return to y* Domination of
y Mother Country. Had y* War ended in that way, our obtaining of y* Succession
from England would have been hopeless. The Remnant of y Episcopal Church
in Scotland, labouring under penal Laws not executed, would hardly have re
garded y bringing down on themselves of y* Arm of Government. Fear of y* like
Offence would have operated in any other Quarter to which we might have had
Recourse. In such a Case, y e obtaining of y* Succession in Time to save from Ruin,
would seem to have been impossible.

CHAPTER II.

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH.

"TpARLY in October, in the year of grace 1784, there gathered in
fij New York from New England, and all along the seaboard to
Virginia, the representatives of our communion, bent on the
pious work of reorganizing their torn and shattered Church. From
Boston, home of the Puritans, came the courtly Parker, and the well-
powdered wig and ample
shovel-hat he wore, crowned
a face benignant in its ever-
ready smile, and a T)road,
well-shapen forehead, indic
ative of intellectual power. He had come to represent the States of
Massachusetts and Rhode Island, met in convention the month before,
and, though, like White, young in years and in the ministry, his
prudent patriotism amidst the opening scenes of the Revolution had
long since placed him in the rectorship of Trinity, where he had been
but an assistant before ; and had won for him, besides, the confidence
and esteem of his townsmen of all sects and parties. To him, now
that the Avar was over, the Church in New England looked up as to a
leading man in her councils,
and afterwards, by his active
exertions and patient wait
ing, for both were required
in this delicate and" difficult
task, the efforts of White
for the healing of the breach
between the Church in Con
necticut and the Church in
the other States were ably
furthered, and were brought
at length to a successful and
most happy issue. Well,
then, may Samuel Parker s
name stand first among the
members of this preliminary
gathering for organization.
Connecticut at first had shrunk from what was then a novelty , an
ecclesiastical convention of which the representatives of the laity
formed a component part. They had, as clergy, met more than a
year ago, and their choice for the episcopate had fallen on the earnest
and persevering Seabury, who, though they knew it not as yet, was
now preparing for his journey northward into Scotland for the imposi-

OLD TRINITY CHURCH, BOSTON.

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH. 27

tion of holy hands. But still clinging to the hope and trust that had
shone out so bright in them when others doubted of the possibility of
the church s full and complete reviving, they waited the result of their
application to the mother-land. And now, as their last advices from
abroad had hinted at a change of plans, or, rather, at the possibility
of a resort to the alternative of Scotland, suggested when the choice
of Seabury was made, they were the more inclined to await the per
fecting of their Church by the presence of a bishop in their councils,
than to engage without one in what seemed to them a premature effort
for organization and ecclesiastical reform. Still, after conference with
the Rev. Messrs. Abraham Beach, of New Jersey, who first suggested
the idea of a general meeting of this nature, and Joshua Bloomer and
Benjamin Moore, of New York, who had been deputed to attend their
convocation to urge their cooperation and presence, they decided to
send a delegation with carefully defined powers, and added their influ
ence to that of the committee in securing a representation from the
States further eastward. Consequently, the Eev. John R. Marshall
appeared and took his seat as the deputy from the State of Connecticut.
Of this gentleman wo know but little. His name occurs nowhere else
on our journals or published records, and few traces, if any, remain
of his life and ministry, save this embalming of his name, for all
time, on the rudely printed broadside which contains the doings of
this primary convention of our Church.

The patriot Rector of Trinity heads the list of the deputies from
the State in which the convention met. We can almost see him, as,
dignified in mien even to stateliness and reserve, he moved among his
peers as one born to high command. There was something of the
soldier in the composition of Provoost, and the Huguenot blood, in its
ininglings with that of the more phlegmatic Hollanders, had not lost
all its fire. Witness his exploit at East Camp, when his farm was
ravaged by the British, a story all his biographers delight to detail.
But with all the fire and force of his brave ancestry, there was in him
that scholarly love of ease and enjoyment of quiet contemplation
restraining him, if canon law and church allegiance had not, from the
exercise of arms during the long strife of the Revolution. We may
indeed lament that, when souls were famishing and perishing for the
bread of life, Provoost could find it in his heart to spend his days and
years in study, withdrawn from all ministerial duty, at his country
seat upon the Hudson ; but we are thankful that anything kept him
from the field of conflict and the stain of blood.

Just now Provoost was doubtless the most prominent of the clergy
of New York, and already was " bishop-designate " by the warm friends
among the Episcopalians his consistent patriotism had secured. By
virtue of this eminence his name heads the long list of the New York
delegation, and with him were Beach, the excellent and pious mission
ary, who had left his old field of labor in New Jersey for an assistancy
at Trinity, New York ; and Moore, no great friend to Provoost, be
cause, like Beach, rather "a Tory than a Whig in politics^ and yet so
mild and saintly as to make all jnen friends to him; and Joshua
Bloomer, a man of mark in the Church ; and Cutting, one of the old

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

clergy, faithful to his king till peace was gained, yet still remaining in
his American home, unseduced by larger salaries in the bleak provinces,

or pensions in the
mother-land ; and
Thomas Moore,

tisan of Seabury
afterwards, much
to the annoyance
of the patriot

Bishop of New York. Of the laity there were the Hon. James Duane,
and Marinus Willet, and John Alsop, Esquires, all from Trinity, and
old New Yorkers, full
of years and honors
then, and not forgot
ten now. New Jersey
sent the factious Uzal
Ogden, whose strug
gle for the bishopric
of that State forms an
unpleasant chapter in our ecclesiastical annals, and with him the respected
names, yet well remembered there, of John DeHart and John Chetwood,
Esquires, and Mr. Samuel Spragg, soon to be ordained by Seabury s
hands . Doctorates in divinity were not so common then as now , and only
White, who had just been honored thus by the college at Philadelphia,
and Magaw, then vice-provost of that institution, of the Pennsylvania
list, and the famous Dr. Smith, whose degree came first from Oxford,
then from Dublin, and last of all from Aberdeen, in this first conven
tion had this appendage to their names. Of Magaw we need only
say that his was an honored name, and his a useful, happy life.

Joseph Hutchins, of Lancaster, was joined with the two most promi-^
nent of the Philadelphia clergy t and was worthy of this honored asso-)

ciation. With these
gentlemen came
Matthew Clarkson,
Richard Willing,
Samuel Powel, and
Richard Peters,
Esquires, men of
fame and fortune,
whose names willlive
in the Church they helped to revive.

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH. 29

Delaware, in its weakness, sent the Rev. Sydenham Thome and
Charles Henry Wharton, a man of singular elegance and accomplish
ments, a scion of an old Maryland family of the Romish faith, whose
life was checkered with varying for
tunes, and who found in the church
of his adoption an honored name, de
served by learning, purity , and simple
piety. We have read many of his letters, some of them playful, some
business-like and formal, and others still so full of sweetness and affec
tion that we cannot fail to venerate his memory, and feel that his was

a respect
ed place
among
those who
gathered,
in that
chill Oc
tober, to
revive the
church of

their love. With these two clergymen was added a merchant, Robert
Clay, whose interest in the church s work led him, a few years after, to
seek the laying on of hands in or
dination, and who was spared for
a long life of usefulness in the ,
diocese he thus represented at the L
very start.

Maryland sent to New York,
on this important errand, her most
gifted clergyman, William Smith, D.D., the able president of Washing
ton College, at Chestertown, and but a little before holding the posi
tion of provost of the college and academy of Philadelphia. Of fine
abilities, honored abroad and at home, the most prominent man in
learning and reputation of all our clergy, it was at this very conven
tion that he was destined, alas ! to make shipwreck of a lifetime s
honors, and by a public indulgence now become, we are forced to
believe, habitual in intemperate habits to close to himself the
coveted episcopate none labored more to secure. Soured and saddened
by the unlooked-for opposition of his oldest pupils and dearest friends,
it is a redeeming trait that Dr. Smith relaxed in no respect his efforts
for the church s good, even when there faded out from view life s
most longed-for prize ; and we trust that in declining years, for it was
at this period that his dereliction from duty culminated, the returning
Spirit of God brought peace to his stricken soul, with the pardon
offered by a merciful Saviour, who willeth not the sinner s death.
These were the delegates ; but there is added at the foot of the
list, in the unique copy of the proceedings of this convention which
Bishop White preserved for after years inspection, this Nota Bene:
"N.B. The Rev. Mr. Grin^th, from the State of Virginia, was
present by permission. The clergy of that State being restricted by

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

laws yet in force there, were not at liberty to send delegates, or con
sent to any alterations in the Order, Government, Doctrine, or Wor
ship of the Church."

A letter among the Bishop White correspondence gives us some
additional information with reference to the strange proceedings of the

Virginia clergy in their efforts for reorganization. And this letter,
and this mention of a name we cannot fail to read with a respect
amounting even to veneration, bring before us one of the best of men,
who, from far different reasons than those which withheld this honor
from Smith, failed, like him, of the episcopate.

We linger almost lovingly over the folio broadside on which were
printed, occupying but a single page, the proceedings of this initial
gathering. Turning from it to the huge volume that records the
doings of our last triennial, we have at a glance the evidence of the
church s growth and power. Let us then strive to follow these worthy
men into their gathering- place, and record the proceedings of this
meeting so fraught with consequences of good to generations then
unborn.

Dr. Smith was chosen president; and the Rev. Benjamin Moore,
the secretary, as we have seen, of the informal meeting at New linms-
Avick, again took up the. recording pen. The letters of appointment
were read, and then there followed communications from the clergy of
Massachusetts Bay and Connecticut. From Massachusetts there were
sent the Pennsylvania resolutions we have already referred to, with
some additions guarding against possible tendencies to radicalism, such
as was already rampant in Virginia ; expressly adding to the avowal
of our independence as a Church the expression of the desire for the
episcopal succession from abroad ; restricting the laity to an equal
representation and an equal vote with that allowed to the clergy, and
appointing the Rev. Samuel Parker, of Boston, the Rev. Edward Bass,
of Newburyport, and the Rev. Nathaniel Fisher, of Salem, a com
mittee of correspondence "with the clergy of the other Episcopal
Churches in America, in Convention, committees, or otherwise."
Added to these " fundamental resolutions," printed for the first time in
the notes to the reissue of the early convention journals, 1 was a decided
vote that a circular letter be written, in the name of this Convention, to
the Episcopal clergy in the States of Connecticut, New York, and
Pennsylvania, urging the necessity of their uniting with us in adopt
ing some speedy measures to procure an American episcopate, "as it is

Vol. i., pp 433-436. In the reprint of the pears. The originals were subsequently found
Massachusetts journals, issued by the convention amonr the Bishop Parker and Bishop White
of that diocese in 1849, nothing of this nature ap- correspondence.

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH. 31

the unanimous opinion of this Convention, that this is the primary
object they ought to have in view, because the very existence of the
Church requires some speedy mode of obtaining regular ordination."
Thus, at the outset, did Massachusetts and Rhode Island avow their
hearty maintenance of the old faith and the old polity. With their
resolutions and votes there came a letter from this convention, ad
dressed to the "Reverend and Honored Brethren" of "the Committee
of the Episcopal Church in the State of Pennsylvania," urging most
strenuously the delay of any efforts for organization or ecclesiasti
cal reform other than those absolutely necessary for the immediate
securing of an episcopate, declaring it their unanimous opinion that
"it is beginning at the wrong end, to attempt to organize our Church
before we have obtained a head," and expressing the belief that "a
regular application" made by a "representative body of the Episcopal
Churches in America would easily obtain a consecrated head." To
these clear and decided views, the Church in Massachusetts, and that
in Rhode Island, clung with great tenacity till their reasonable desires
were gratified. And it was in direct fulfilment of these principles that
there was subsequently shown in Massachusetts that marked con
servatism that at length secured the union of all the churches on an
equal basis, and in deference to episcopal precedent and authority, by
which peace was restored to our American communion. Such then
were the views of Massachusetts, and especially of Parker, her dele
gate to New
York ; for the
original letter
whose synopsis

given is written

in his handwrit

ing, and is evi

dently his com

position, though

signed by " J. Graves, Moderator." The communication from Con

necticut was to this effect, as we learn from Bishop White s Memoirs *

"that the clergy of Connecticut had taken measures for the obtaining

of an Episcopate ; that until their design in that particular should be

accomplished, they could do nothing; but that as soon as they should I

have succeeded, they- would come forward with their Bishop, for the f

doing of what the general interests of the Church might require. J

With these official documents brought by the representatives of
the New England States, who, with those from Pennsylvania, were the
only regularly accredited deputies present, 2 the convention proceeded
to " essay the fundamental principles of a general Constitution." 3 The
following gentlemen were appointed on this committee, viz., the Rev.
Dr.s. Smith and White, the Rev. Messrs. Parker and Provoost ; and (
of the laity, Messrs. Clarkson, DeHart, Clay, and Duane. To this
committee was also assigned the further duty of framing and proposing

1 Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 81. s Perry s " Reprint of the Early Journals,"

* Ibid., p. 80. in., pp- 4, 5.

32 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

" a proper substitute for the State Prayers in the Liturgy, to be used
for the sake of uniformity, till a further review shall be undertaken
by a general authority and consent of the Church."

On the following day the committee presented their report. It is
to be found in full in the preface to Bioren s reprint of the convention
journals, edited by Bishop White ; in the reissue of the early journals
which has appeared under the sanction of the General Convention, and
in White s "Memoirs of the Church." It establishes the General Con
vention, defines the character of its members, gives power for associated
action on the part of " Congregations in two or more States," declares
the maintenance of the "Doctrines of the Gospel now held by the
Church of England," and the adherence of the American Church to the
r I/itiiruT of the said Church as far as shall 1&gt;o consistent with the Ameri-
carTRe volution and the Constitutions of the respective States ; " gives
to "a Bishop duly consecrated and settled" in any State, ex-ojficio
memBerSfiip of this convention ; provides for the equality of the clerical
and lay vote, requiring concurrence to secure the passage of any
measure ; and appoints the first meeting of the General Convention
thus established and defined " at Philadelphia, the Tuesday before the
Feast of St. Michael next," expressing the hope that the " Episcopal
Churches in the respective States will send their clerical and lay
deputies, duly instructed and authorized to proceed in the necessary
business herein proposed for their deliberation." Other documents
than the printed records lead us to believe that this "essay," as origi-j
nally presented, was considerably pruned and amended when under the&gt;
Deliberation of the " Committee of the Whole." As appears from the
allusions to the whole business, in correspondence still unpublished,
between White and Parker, the fifth article, as originally reported,
provided for the presidency of a bishop, should one be obtained before
the meeting of the convention ; but this very proper measure, though
supported by the New England delegations, and by Dr. White himself,
was voted down ; a fact we can only explain by the subsequent course
of Provoost with reference to Seabury, whose approaching consecra
tion was now confidently expected. The proposition for changing the
State prayers, referred to this committee, was only acted upon generally
by a declaration of adherence to the English prayer-book. This
appears to have been the work of Parker, who complained bitterly
when the Philadelphia Convention proceeded ruthlessly, and, as he
justly remarked, without any authority, to the complete and thorough
revision of the liturgy. The admission of the laity to our councils,
White s favorite scheme, prevailed ; though in Connecticut the bishop-
elect had received none but clerical votes, and the same was the case
with Dr. Smith, then bishop-elect of Maryland. It was a wise meas
ure, however, as time has since shown us ; and for its adoption White
could well afford to sacrifice other and less important propositions.
Beyond these measures nothing was done, save a recommendation to
the clergy of the respective States to authorize a committee to ex
amine and appoint lay readers for " the present exigency." With this
resolution this " primary Convention," as we should call it nowadays,
adjourned. *"

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH. 33

Its members bore away with them mingled memories, good and
ill. Wharton had observed, with sadness and shame, the reprehensi
ble conduct of the president, Smith, to which he was afterwards to
testify, when, a little later, he, with the rest of the convention at Wil
mington, declined to sign the testimonials of that gifted and erring man
for consecration. White, noting, we may not doubt, the signs of the
coming struggle between Provoost and the Bishop of Connecticut, and
disappointed that a measure designed to prevent any ebullition of feel
ing from an apparent want of respect to the Episcopal office, should
have failed, was still grateful to God that so much had been done ;
while Parker, whose far-seeing mind was equally alive to danger in
this quarter, brooded over the prospect of schism, and was soon found
pouring out his heart in a long epistle to his Pennsylvania friend and
brother, full of warning counsel, coupled with expressions of affection
ate personal regard. Griffith, whose family affairs had called him to
New York, and thus enabled him to be present at the primary meet
ing of a body at one of whose sessions he was destined to die, away
from family and home, returned to his native State, fired with a desire
to share in the pious work of helping on the organization of the Church
of which he was so worthy a member ; while Smith, foreboding, doubt
less, difficulties at home, as well as those he knew were hindering
him abroad in his efforts for the mitre, hurried back to his country
college, and to his controversies with the Presbyterians, and the prose
cution of his schemes of land speculation, in which his ever-active
spirit found abundant occupation.

Again did the mail-bags bear their ponderous packets and letters,
and the printed sheet of the proceedings was hurried hither and thither,
from hand to hand, throughout the land. Again did the trading
vessels bear across the ocean the intelligence to waiting, anxious
hearts, the glad intelligence that there was still life in the almost
crushed and ruined Church. And, in the midst of all this question
ing, and planning, and laboring, when cold November had set in at
last, in a little, unnoticed private chapel, in an " upper room " of a house
in Aberdeen, there knelt, in deep solemnity, one whose bowed head
was not uplifted till, in the solemn act of consecration, he rose the
first bishop of the American Church. Thus were the longings, the
prayers, and the labors of nearly a century gratified. The Church in
America had now a head, vested with the full authority and commission
of a bishop in the Church of God.

Friends in Old England sympathized with the churchmen in New
England in their dissatisfaction with the proceedings in New York.
Duche", immediately on receipt of the news, wrote almost indignantly
as follows :

Your Conclusions at New York, I must tell yon plainly, are quite inconsistent
with the Discipline of the Church of England, which you profess to make ^your
Model, so far as she may be supposed unconnected with any Civil Power. They
are also inconsistent with the Form of Ecclesiastical Discipline which prevailed in
the purest period of the Christian Church. They scorn to be wholly formed upon y*
Presbyterian Model, and calculated to introduce the same Kind ct Government in
the Church, that is established in your State. Whereas the State, according to their
own acknowledgment, will have nothing to do in Church Matters. You have it

34 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

therefore in your [power] to form a Church perfectly primitive, and absolutely
uncontrouled by any Civil Power, so far as its Laws do not interfere with those
of the State.

Judge then with what Astonishment every true Episcopalian must view your
Treatment of the Episcopal Order, by declaring, as you have done, that they shall
have no distinction at your Conventions, but bo only considered as Members, ex-
officio. I consider this as fundamentally wrong. An Episcopal Clergyman can
not confound the Orders of Bishop and Priest, and withhold Assent from due Sub
ordination.

These and other Matters, I hope, will be properly cleared up and settled on
the Arrival of Bishop Seabury, who sails for New York some time during * "*

any

any Power on Earth, and therefore comes to you in " unquestionable Form ;" just
such a Bishop as you would have wished, and such as you could by no other means

have obtained. Receive him, therefore, I beseech you,

j with Cordial Affection, and with that Christian Respect

y *jt / which is due to his high and sacred Office. Suffer no

** .ffU L4. Cdf fl Schism in y" Church. Providence has sent him to ac-

^* *-* complish and preserve a compleat Union in your new

American Episcopal Church. His Consecration, you

know, cannot be approved of here, for Reasons obvious to those who know the
Connection of the Church with the State. I, therefore, could not ask him to offi
ciate for me, neither would he for prudential and proper Reasons. He considers
himself, and must be considered here, as a foreign Bishop. God grant that you
may all be kept in y Unity of the Spirit, and y Bond of Peace.

And Alexander Murray, himself an aspirant for an American
mitre, grumbled at White, in one of his long epistles, in words to this
effect :

Why did not your last Convention at New York, of Clergy and Laity (for
whose benefit Episcopacy is chiefly intended), address the Archbishop of Canter
bury to lay your case before Parliament ? The application of such a public, respect
able Body of men
would have due weight,
after it had been made
apparent that your As-.
semblies could not,
consistently with the
Constitution of the
States, interpose in the
matter, so managing it
in a public manner as to satisfy Parliament that it would give them no offence,
which is carefully avoided here in eveiy instance, that both Powers may live for the
future on good terms, without officiously interfering in the administration of the
affairs of one another, either in Church or State, considering the Jealousies still
entertained on your side of the water.

While the bishops of Scotland, alive, now that Seabury had been
consecrated by them, to all the ecclesiastical measures set on foot
across the water, thus thought and wrote of the New York " funda
mental principles " :

I see the difficulties you will have to struggle with from the loose, incoherent
notions of Church government which seem to prevail too much even among those
of the Episcopal persuasion in some of the Southern States ; but the better princi
ples and dutiful support of your own Clergy will enable you to face the Opposi
tion with becoming fortitude and prudence. And may the great and only Head of
hi? Church strengthen you for the great work to which he has appointed you, and

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH. 35

make you the instrument of frustrating the mischievous Devices of the late Con
vention.

I see their Resolutions printed in some of the London papers exactlv as you

11 1 J_t. _ _ J , , 1 _ i IT*. .1 i ,* __ _

Articles of Union as are directly repugnant to its spirit, and
subversive of its original Design. 1

Wonderfully did God overrule these threatened dangers, and all
the apprehensions of the wisest and truest friends of the Church, at
home and abroad, by a train of providences whose unravelling forms
a striking chapter in our early ecclesiastical history.

In the meantime there had come, from the Old World to the
New, letters denouncing the episcopacy of Seabury, as derived from a
source at once invalid and irregular. Strange to say, these letters
were addressed to a Baptist preacher of Rhode Island, the president
of the college of that denomination lately erected there. One s sus
picions might naturally be roused by the novelty of such a channel of
communication. An English Episcopalian, grandson of an Archbishop
of York, corresponding with a leading Baptist minister of New Eng
land, to weaken the influence and lower the official character of the
first American bishop ! It is but due, however, to the source whence
this strange opposition came, to say that it was from no dislike of Sea-
bury personally, and from no disloyalty to the episcopal office, that
Granville Sharp, the celebrated philanthropist of England, thus assailed
the Scotch succession in his
own land and here. Misguided
as he appears to have been in
this factious attempt, and in
correct, as has subsequently
appeared, as were the data on which he proceeded in his unchari
table task, it was simply and solely that the American Church
might receive from their English mother the apostolic succession they
were seeking. Still, though not only Manning the Baptist, but even
Provoost the Episcopalian, were leagued, as of old Pilate and Herod
were, against the cause and ambassador of Christ, it was left for
White, the patient, loving, trustful one, to clear up the cloud of
obloquy this well-intentioned but misguided man had thrown upon the
name and character of Seabury, and give to the world a vindication
qfboth the Christian temper and the episcopate of our first presiding
bishop.

~"Tfc was with these signs of the coming alienation that there
gathered in convention at Philadelphia, on Tuesday, the 27th of
September, 1785, the clerical and lay deputies of New York, New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and South
Carolina. New England, with its organized dioceses and bishop,
though invited, and even urged to attend, stayed at home. Parker
writes to Dr. White, at a later elate, that the strange inconsistency in
refusing in an Episcopal convention to give to the episcopate the

1 Bp. Skinner to Bp. Seabury.

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

presidency its very nature demanded, was a principal cause of this
non-attendance on the part of the North. We cannot wonder at it.
There was no assurance, so far as the " fundamental principles " of
the body was concerned, that, as had lately been the case, both in

the Virginia and South Carolina State conventions, some laymen
might not be placed in the chair of the convention, and his casting
vote made use of in determining matters, not alone of discipline and
worship, but even of doctrine.

As it was, the choice fell on the worthiest man of all who
gathered at this autumnal meeting, and William White was made
president of the first convention of our church that can lay any claim
on the score of numbers to the title "General." The tirst basin
of the meeting was the reading once, and yet again, of the funda
mental rules. It is a little suggestive of the uneasy feeling on the
part of the chief movers in the plan for a thorough revision of the
liturgy that they have, in the printed journal of 1785, entirely
omitted to record the resolutions twice referred to of the primary
meeting of 1784, defining the powers and marking out the course of
business proposed in this first convention. The proceedings of the
gathering in New York were only printed on a single broadside sheet,
and not in full on that ; and this record was, as Bishop White tells us
in his memoirs, 1 "in very few hands at the time," and a few years
later, as he supposed, "generally destroyed or lost." In fact, these
proceedings were never made generally accessible, even in part, till
the reprint of the early journals, edited by Bishop White, appeared in
1817 ; and they were nrst reprinted in full, verbatim et literatim, with
added information obtained from the MSS. of the president, Dr. William
Smith, in the " Notes and Illustrative Documents," appended to the
reissue of the early journals, published under the authority of the
General Convention by the writer. A reason for this omission appears

in the renewal of the
effort made, as we sup-
f\ pose, by Dr. Smith at
J/ New York, and there
i defeated, that the com-
) mittee chosen to adapt
^ the service to the po
litical changes be ap
pointed to report "such
further alterations in
the Liturgy as may be advisable for this Committee to recommend
to the consideration of the Church here represented." Provoost,

1 Second edition, p. 80.

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH.

of New York ; Beach, of New Jersey ; White, of Pennsylvania ;
Wharton, of Delaware ; Smith, of Maryland ; Griffith, of Virginia, and

Purcell, of South Carolina, were the clerical members of this com
mittee, with the Hon. Messrs. Duane, Peters, and Read, Dr. Cradock,
and Messrs. Dennis, Sykes, and Page, of the laity.

Little appears in the journal of this convention indicating the
important changes their action contemplated. The abolition of two
creeds, and the omission of an arti
cle in the only creed retained, the
rearrangement of the prayers, the
reduction of the articles, the expur
gation of the imprecatory clauses
of the psalms, and the removal of
those little archaisms of the English liturgy whose only hold upon
the people for years had been their retention in the church s prayers,
and the appointment of a committee for the preparation of a new
preface and a new calendar, and for the selection of new hymns and
the reduction of the metre psalms, were all hurried through from
Saturday, October 1, when the committee first reported their ".draft
of the alterations ," to Wednesday evening, October 5, when it was
" Itesolved, That the said alterations be proposed and recommended to
the Protestant Episcopal Church in the States from which there
are deputies to this Convention."

Of course, in so brief a time attention could not be given to the de
tails of the work. A committee, consisting of Dr. White as president,)
vyith Drs. Smith and Wharton, was therefore "appointed to publish
the Book of Common Prayer, with the alterations, as well as those
now ratified, in order to render the Liturgy consistent with the Ameri-|
can Revolution and the Constitutions of the respective States, as the
alterations and new Offices recommended to this Church ; and that the
book be accompanied with a proper Preface or Address, setting fortl
the reason and expediency of the alterations ; and that the Committee
have the liberty to make verbal and grammatical corrections, but in)
such manner as that nothing in form or substance be altered." The
same committee were further "authorized to publish, with the Book
of Common Prayer, such of the reading and singing Psalms, and such
a Calendar of proper lessons for the different Sundays and holidays

38 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

throughout the year, as they think proper." Thanks were voted by
name "to the Rev. I^r, Smith for his exemplary diligence and_the;
graitassistancc he has rendered this Convention, as Chairman of the
Committee, in perfecting the important business in which they have
been engaged;" and on Friday, October 7, the day of the adjourn
ment, White read "the Liturgy as altered," and Smith preached a ser
mon, published in a little pamphlet, now among the rarest of the
printed tracts and documents of this interesting period. From its
stained, yellow pages we extract the author s summary of the conven
tion s work :

One part of the service you have just heard, and have devoutly joined in it.\
Here the alterations arc but few, and those, it is hoped, such as tend to render it(
more solemn, beautiful, and affecting! The chief alterations and amendments are\
proposed in the various offices viz., of baptism, etc., as hath been observed to J ou f
before, with the addition of some new services or offices namely, 4uUko 4th day
ol .July, commemorative of the blessings of civil and religious liberty; the first
Thursday &lt;&gt;! November, as a thanksgiving for the fruits of the earth ; and an office
for the visitation of persons under the sentence of death ; of all which you can only
form a true judgment when they shall be published and proposed to you in the new
Prayer-Book.

Besides the hurrying through of a review of the liturgy, the con-j
vcntion of 1785 proceeded to address the English archbishops and&gt;
bishops for the episcopal succession. This was done with no general
distrust of the Scotch episcopacy, but with the natural preference for
that of England, which had led Seabury to wait a year in efforts for the
same, ere he reluctantly turned his steps toward Aberdeen. But, as
White and others well knew, now that the problem so long in suspense
was solved, and the British ministry had seen, in the quiet yet hon
orable reception of Seabury as an unquestioned bishop, the fullest
evidence that the old objections to the introduction of the episcopate
in America had lost their force, and with the fires of partisan rancor
and denominational hate had at length burned out, the question of an
American episcopate was placed on a far different basis from what
it was before the Revolution, when dissenters at home and in the
colonies clamored unceasingly against it. It was secured, and the
further proffer of the boon, if sought, was but a kindly courtesy,
the rather likely to oblige than give reason for national or political
complications and dislikes. So, from the moment Seabury had been
welcomed so heartily by the clergy of Connecticut, with others from
the rest of New England and New York, at his first convocation at
Middletown, that which had been denied to him was known to be at the
call of those who sought it with the like testimonials of character,
learning, and piety, and with the approbation of the civil powers be
sides. The very response made by the Bishop of Connecticut to the
letter inviting the presence of himself and clergy at the Philadelphia
Convention, "seemed," as Bishop White himself assures us, "to point
out a way of obviating the difficulty in the present case." But still it
is the testimony of men on both sides of the ocean men who, from
their position in the Church, knew what they affirmed that, but for
Seabury s consecration at Aberdeen, there would have been no proffer

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH. 39

of the English succession to America, at least till in the lapse of years
there had been far too many opportunities for the accomplishment, l&gt;v
men of latitudinarian views and laxity of morals, of the doctrinal
changes openly advocated in this very convention by the Hon. Mr.
Page, of Virginia, and with which it was rumored, with no little show
of reason, that Provoost at the North, and Madison, Smith, and
Purcell, at the South, were more or less in sympathy. At any rate, the
assertion is directly made at a later date, both by Parker, 1 of Boston, r-
and Dr. Peters, of London, the one well acquainted with the facts on),
both sides of the ocean, and the other all the while cognizant of the
views and feelings of the dignitaries of Church and State in England,
that
for White

elated

renewedly connected our infant Church with the still loved mother,
whose "long continuance of nursing care and protection" we even now
so willingly acknowledge. To trace the steps that led to its reception,]
when the saintly White and the accomplished Provoost knelt Jn the )
chapel of Lambeth for the imposition of the hands of English prelates,
is our next task. We cannot fail to linger lovingly over it, as it re-
veals to us the excel lencevlhe piety, and the manliness of White, in
a most striking light. We are led to dwell upon it all the more as
the records of its inception, progress, and success have never before
been given to the Church. They are found in torn and tumbled letters,
stained and yellow with the lapse of time and the frequent fingerings
of those to whom they brought messages of hope, or else recorded
impressions of doubt or the misgivings of despair ; and they hav&gt;
been rescued, some from garrets, some from cellars, some even fro
the pile of kindlings ready for the flames ; and others, from the first 1
carefully preserved, are from the letter-books of Bishop White him
self. They, and they alone, tell the else untold story of our past, and
give us, in all their fulness and reality, the every-day impressions,
doings, plannings, and results, at this the birth-era of our independen
Church.

The address to the English prelates was the composition of White.
WhileUfe unsparing hands of Smith and his compeers in sub-commit
tee were busied in the elimination of the old Church words, and
doctrines, too, it would seem, from creeds, offices, prayers, psalms,
and articles alike, White was seeking to carry out the earnest
wish of the conservative churchmen of all the scattered churches,
in hastening the coming of a bishop in the English line. The\
address, manly and courteous in its tone, is highly creditable to
the head and heart of its author. It called upon the archbishops and

i Dr. Parker s words arc as follows : of orders received from him ; and I am firmly of

" I am very sorry to see with what coolness opinion that we should never have obtained the

and Indifference some of the Gentlemen in your Succession from England, had he or some other

Convention speak of Bishop Seabury, because I not have obtained it first from Scotland/ Ex-

foresee that this Conduct must create a Schism tract from a letter to Dr. White, dated September

in the Church. However eligible it may appear JJ, 1786.

to them to obtain the succession from the English Vide Perry s " Historical Notes and Docu-

Clmrch, I think there can be no real Objection ments," appended to the reprint of the

to Dr. Scabnry s Consecration or to the Validity Journals, HI., p. 325.

40 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

bishops of England, "from a tender regard to the religious interests
of thousands in this rising empire, professing the same religious prin
ciples with the Church of England," " to confer the Episcopal character
on such persons as shall be recommended by this Church in the several
States here represented, full satisfaction being given of the sufficiency
of the persons recommended, and of its being the intention of the
general body of the Episcopalians in the said States respectively, to
receive them in the quality of Bishops." It alluded to the separation
of Church and State, and the consequent inability of our civil rulers to
join officially in this application, enclosing extracts from the State con
stitutions, showing the legality of the request. It added the expres
sion of grateful remembrance of past favors from the English Church,
and paid a glowing tribute to the venerable Society for Propagating
the Gospel in Foreign Parts. As it told of life, and zeal, and churchly
taste and principle, it must have carried to those to whom it was ad
dressed the promise of a bright future for the American Church. One
cannot read it, as contained in the rare little pamphlet-journal pub
lished at the time, now lying before us, or even as found in later
reprints, without admiration of him who thus, at the outset, stamped
upon the American Church, at the inception of its plans for organiza
tion and perpetuation, the seal of his own high and holy purpose, and
his unshaken love for the old Church find the old church s ways.

Smith, hurrying home to Maryland, had hastily convened a conven
tion there, as soon as the " proposed book" was through the press. No

records of
this meet-

nals and

Remains of Journals," gathered from the papers of the secretary
of these early Maryland conventions, the Rev. Dr. William West, by
the zealous and painstaking Rev. Ethan Allen, D.D., a few years since,
give us but the minute of this meeting s action with reference to the
liturgy. This silence is ominous. From the private letters of the time,
and from the subsequent action of the General Convention at Wil
mington, to which allusion is made by Bishop White, we are forced to
draw the inference that there now began, in Maryland, that unhappy
dissension springing out of the persistent efforts of Dr. Smith for the
episcopate, which terminated a year later by the refusal of the con
vention to renew his election, and the consequent refusal of the General
Convention to recommend him to England for consecration. Thus
early was the lay element, introduced by the sagacious White, the
means of saving the Church from stain ; for it was by a small repre
sentation of laity, two only in number, that this opposition was inau
gurated, and their action was predicated on the report of the doings in
New York, to which we have earlier referred.

In New York, Provoost, whose partisan prejudices, if they were
not personal, would not suffer him to overlook the former toryism of

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH.

the Bishop of Connecticut, annoyed at the presence of Seabury on
Long Island, where he admitted to holy orders the first clergyman
ordained in New York, wrote acrimonious letters to Dr. White, filled
with misstatements as to the bishop s course, and chiefly remarkable
from the intense malignity of feeling they displayed with reference to
one who had never even indirectly injured him, and whose course,
through years of unrelenting opposition from Provoost, was uniformly
good-tempered, conciliatory, and forgiving. In a letter from Mr.
Provoost, published for the first time in the "Notes" to the late reprint
of the early convention journals, there was added to the announce
ment that the " Address to the Archbishops and Bishops" had been sent
by packet, the following characteristic paragraphs :

" I expect no obstruction to our application but what may arise
from the intrigues of the non-juring Bishop of Connecticut, who a few
days since paid a visit to this State (notwithstanding he incurred the
guilt of misprision of treason, and was liable to confinement for life for
doing so), and took shelter at Mr. James Rivington s, where he was
seen only by a few of his most intimate friends. Whilst he was there
a piece appeared in a newspaper under Rivington s direction, pretend
ing to give an account of the late Convention, but replete with false
hood and prevarication, and evidently intended to excite a prejudice
against our transactions, both in England and America.

"On Long Island, Dr. Cebra 1 appeared more openly preached

* This pertinacious misspelling of Bishop
Seabury s name, well known to all who arc
familiar with the manuscript letters of Bishop
Provoost, is noticeable as an evidence of the feel
ing he entertained towards the bishop of Con
necticut.

As for the reliability of the statements of
this letter, it need only be said that the assertion

for Monday, October 31, il"83, enables us to test
the matter in question. "We give it, in connection
with the charge, as it stands word for word in
the newspaper referred to. In our judgment, it is
a truthfnl and candid statement of the action of
the Philadelphia Convention :
, " We are informed that about twenty of the
Episcopvl clergy, joined by delegates of lay gen
tlemen from a number of the congregations in
several of the Southern States, lately assembled
in Convention at Christ Church, Philadelphia,
revised the Liturgy of the Church of England
(adapting it to the late revolution), expunged
i some of the creeds, reduced the Thirty-nine Arti
cles to twenty in number, and agreed on a letter,
addressed to the Archbishops and the Spiritual
Court in England, desiring they would be pleased
to obviate any difficulties that might arise on ap
plication to them for consecrating such respect
able clergy as should be appointed and sent to
London from their body to act as Bishops on the
continent of America, where there is, at present,
onlv one Prelate dignified with Episcopal powers.
viz., the llight Rev. Dr. Samuel Seabury,
Bishop of the Apostolical Church in the State of
Connecticut. Hitherto, Mr. Pitt, the British
minister, has vehemently opposed all applications
preferred for consecration to sees In America;
this discouragement occasioned Bishop Seabuiy

to secure his consecration from three of the
Bishops in Scotland, which proves as perfectly
valid and efficient as though obtained from the
hands of their Right Reverences of Canterbury, &lt;
York, and London, and is incontestably proved
by a list of the consccratipn and succession of the
Scottish Bishops since the revolution in 1688,!
under William III."

It must be remembered, in connection with
this newspaper notice, that the journal of the
Philadelphia Convention had not then been
printed, and that all that was known of the pro
ceedings of this meeting were the necessarily
vague rumors afloat at the time, coming from the
few who participated in its discussions as mem
bers, or were present by invitation, and that these
reports were liable to exaggeration, as the story
passed from mouth to mouth. And yet, as it ap
pears by reference to the journal and liturgy
as afterwards published, there is no misrepresen
tation in the article at all. It, indeed, sets the
number of the clergy present in Convention higher
than the journal docs, but this could only give
the impression of greater dignity to the body in
question, and the difference between the actual
number, sixteen, and the " about twenty " referred
to in the " item " published in New York, is too
trifling for further comment. The liturgy was
" revised " far more than the limiting explanation,
" adapting it to the late revolution," gave occa
sion to expect, though this was the extent of the
powers of the Convention; but the full extent of
this revision was not known till the book appeared,
and could hardly have been anticipated by others
than the committee who had it in charge. Two
out of the three creeds were " expunged." The
English archbishops were addressed and there
was then on this continent but " one Prelate
dignified with Episcopal powers," and that pre
late was Bishop Seabury.

42 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

at Hempstead church, and ordained the person from Virginia I formerly
mentioned, being assisted by the Rev. Mr. Moore, of Hcmpstead, and
the Kev. Mr. Bloomer, of New Town, Long Island.

"I relate these occurrences, that when you write next to England,
our friends there may be guarded against any misrepresentations that
may come to them from that quarter."

But to return from this episode. At length, the impatiently
awaited answer from England arrived in New York. A copy of it
was hurried off by Mr. Provoost, in charge of a Presbyterian minister
travelling southward, to Dr. White, who, in turn, informed his brethren
in the States more distant. The original of this letter lies open before
us. Written in bold, open, clerkly hand, and bearing the autograph
signatures of the English prelates, it forms one of the most interesting
documents of our Church history. We copy it, verbatim et literatim,
from the folio sheet preserved in the Bishop White correspondence ;
and we reprint it the more willingly as it is only accessible in the
rare journals of the second convention of the Church in the Middle
and Southern States, and in later reprints of these proceedings, or in
White s admirable and authoritative Memoirs of the Protestant Epis
copal Church. It is as follows :

LONDON February 20, 1786.

To the Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in sundry
of the united States of America.

The Archbishop of Canterbury hath received an address dated in Convention,
Christ Church, Philadelphia, October 5, 1785, from the Clerical and Lay Deputies
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in sundry of the united States of America,
directed to the Archbishops and Bishops of England, and requesting them to confer \
the Episcopal Character on such persons as shall be recommended by the Episcopal
Church in the several States by them represented.

This brotherly and Christian Address was communicated to the Archbishop of
York and to the Bishops with as much dispatch as their separate and distant Situa
tions would permit, and hath been received and considered by them with that true
and affectionate regard which they have always shewn towards the Episcopal
Brethren in America.

We are now enabled to assure you, that nothing is nearer to our Hearts than
the Wish to promote your spiritual Welfare, to be instrumental in procuring for
you the complete Exercise of our holy Religion, and the Enjoyment of that
Ecclesiastical Constitution, which We believe to be truly Apostolical, and for
which you express so unreserved a Veneration.

We are therefore happy to be informed that this pious Design is not likely to
receive any Discountenance from the Civil powers under which you live ; and We
desire you to be persuaded, that We on our parts will use our best Endeavors,
which We have good Reason to hope will be successful, to acquire a legal Capacity
of complying with the prayer of your Address.

With these Sentiments We are disposed to make every Allowance which Can
dour can suggest for the Difficulties of your Situation, but at the same time Wo
cannot help being afraid, that, in the proceedings of your Convention, some Altera
tions may have been adopted or intended, which those Difficulties do not seem to
justify.

Those Alterations are not mentioned in your Address ; and, as our Knowledge
of them is no more than what has reached Us through private and less certain
Channels, We hope you will think it just, both to you, and to Ourselves, if We wait
for an Explanation.

For while We are anxious to give every proof, not only of our brotherly affec
tion, but of our facility, in forwarding your Wishes, We cannot but be extremely
cautious, lest We should be the Instruments of establishing an Ecclesiastical System

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH.

which will be called a Branch of the Church of England, but afterwards may
possibly appear to have departed from it essentially, either in Doctrine or in
Discipline.

In the meantime We heartily commend you to God s holy Protection and are
Your affectionate Brethren,

Such was the voice of mingled love and warning heard from
across the water, the mother speaking to the daughter-church. Its
happy results were at once apparent in retarding the further growth
of that love of change which had been developed to such an alarm
ing extent in the Philadelphia Convention, and in inducing a spirit
of conciliation and mutual forbearance, indispensable in an effort
to unite men of varying shades of opinion and of conflicting prejudices.
To this end the gentle spirit and perfect amiability of Dr. White
contributed not a little. In fact, to him, under God, more than to
any other member of this convention, it was owing that the "strongj
appearance of a dissolution of the union, in this early stage of it," to
which he alludes in his account of the proceedings of the meeting,
were skilfully surmounted, and the danger of "falling to pieces
carefully avoided.

These representations of the course and influence of Dr. White
are fully borne out by a reference to the journal of this convention.
The changes in the proposed constitution, restoring to the Episcopal
order its precedency and some of its prerogatives, the silencing of
discussion on the " proposed book " by the reference of the " memorials "
and "instructions" concerning that short-lived effort for liturgical
revision to "the first Convention, which should meet fully authorized
to determine on a Book of Common Prayer," and the quiet application
of the " previous question " when the attempt was made by Provoost
and Robert Smith to commit the convention to an opposition to the
Scottish succession all these measures tending to peace and union

44 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

came from the prudent and conciliating White. His, too, was that
further measure, which was, indeed, a seeming concession to the
strong prejudices of the rector of Trinity, New York, the resolution
recommending the rejection of candidates for settlement " professing
canonical obedience to any Bishop, in any State or country, other

than those bishops who
may be duly settled in
the States represented
in this convention."
But even this motion he
was careful not to press

until he had proved, to the satisfaction of all fair-minded members of
the convention, by the testimony of a member thereof, that it could
have no reference to Bishop Seabury ; and he takes pains to record, in
his " Memoirs," l " that he never conceived of there having been any
ground for it, other than the apprehension which had been expressed "
by the opponents of the Bishop of Connecticut. "This temperate
guarding against the evil, if it should exist," continues Bishop White,
" seemed the best way of obviating measures which might have led to
disputes with the Northern clergy." And in succeeding years, when
the action of the convention in adopting this resolution, and another
offered by the pertinacious Robert Smith, of South Carolina, recom
mending " to the Conventions of the Church represented in this General
Convention not to admit any person as a minister within their respective
limits who shall receive ordination from any Bishop residing in America
during the application now pending to the English Bishops for Epis
copal consecration," was referred to as sustaining the charge that the
convention had denied, or questioned, the validity of Bishop Seabury s
consecration and orders, White was the first to disavow this imputa
tion, and to appeal to the record, to prove that he had never taken
part in any measures looking to this end. And it was with his ap-
proval, and assistance, too, that the convention of the Church in the
Southern and Middle States expressly " voted their opinion in favor of
the validity of Bishop Seabury s consecration, in which their Presi
dent" Bishop White, himself "concurred." 2

The response to the letter received from the English archbishops
and bishops was drafted at the outset by Dr. William Smith. As
originally reported to the convention, it was deemed too submissive
by the Hon. John Jay, of New York, who made his appearance at its
session on the afternoon of Sunday, the day before adjournment, and
on being recommitted, with the address, to a committee consisting of Mr.
Jay and Francis Hopkinson, Esq. , it was, as Bishop White tells us, " con
siderably altered." It expresses to the " most worthy and venerable
Prelates " of the mother-church the " sincere and grateful acknowl
edgments" of the convention for the "friendly and affectionate letter"
of their "lordships." It gives the assurance that the convention
w neither have departed, nor propose to depart, from the doctrines of
the Church of England." It asserts that " no alterations or omissions

i P. 116, 2d edition. * White s " Memoirs of the Church," p. 29, 2d edition.

THE EARLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH.

in the Book of Common Prayer" have been made, but such as were
necessary to render it "consistent with our civil constitutions," or
" such as were calculated to remove objections which it appeared to us
more conducive to union and general content to obviate than to dis
pute." It refers to the desire of " many great and known men of the
CEurch of England" "for a revision of the Liturgy ;" and adds, " this
is with us the proper season for such a revision." "We are now,"
proceeds the address, " settling and ordering the affairs of our Church ;
and, if wisely done, we shall have reason to promise ourselves all the
advantages that can result from stability and union."

Repeating the request of the former address for the episcopate,
and referring to the proposed constitution as revised at this session,
and to the "proposed book," which, at the time of their lordships
letter, was not in their hands, for removing their "present hesitation "
with reference to communicating to them the succession, and pressing
the English prelates for as " speedy an answer to this " " second ad
dress" as they " were pleased to give to the former," this interesting
document was signed by the twelve clergymen and nine laymen compris
ing the convention. Among these names were those of Griffith, the
president, subsequently the bishop-elect of Virginia ; Provoost and
Bloomer, of New York ; Beach, of New Jersey ; White, Magaw, and
Blackwell, of Pennsylvania; Wharton, of Delaware; William Smith,
bishop-elect of Maryland ; and Robert Smith, subsequently first Bishop
of South Carolina. John Jay and Francis Hopkinson were, per
haps, the most prominent of the laymen present whose signa
tures were appended to the address. The convention adjourned to
meet at Wilmington at the call of the " Committee of Correspondence,"
and the members returned to their homes in anxious expectancy of
the speedy attainment of their wishes in the full establishment of the
Church in the Anglican line in the United States.

The Church in New England felt no little chagrin at the evident
attempt of the friends of Provoost, in this convention, to ignore Sea-
bury and his ordinations. The Bishop of Connecticut, all the more

popular at the North because from a church untrammelled by alliance
with the State, had, in his progresses throughout New England, been
most cordially received ; and the constant stream of candidates for
holy orders from different sections of the land, including the remote
South, proved how satisfactory to the great body of the Church was
the presence of a bishop in America, though of Scottish consecration.
Already, from the more able and conscientious Methodists, had come
William Duke, of Maryland, and Joseph Pilmore, the " evangelical "

46 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

Rector of St. Paul s, Philadelphia ; and besides him, others, recom
mended by the very men who were concerned in the application to
England, were on their way, seeking the imposition of holy hands.
The list of Seabury s early ordinations proves that he supplied the
Church with clergy from Falmouth, in Maine, to Maryland and Vir
ginia, and, subsequently, to distant Georgia. Some were ordained
for every State represented in the conventions that applied to K up
land for bishops, with the exception of South Carolina ; and the reeog.
nition of their orders, in spite of the factious opposition of men like
Provoost and Robert Smith, was attested by their unquestioned recep
tion as clergymen by the various parishes, and by their admission to i
the State conventions, and their return from time to time to the general
conventions, even before the union with the New England Church was
accomplished.

Our notice of this first Convention of 1786 would be confessedly
imperfect without allusion to the "Memorial" of the New Jersey
Convention. This sound and conservative document, prepared by the
Rev. Thomas Bradbury Chandler, D.D., of Elizabethtovvn, New Jersey,

is found in full in the
appendix to Bishop
White s " Memoirs of
theChurch." Itiscer-
tainly high honor both
to the writer and to this
production of his pen, that Bishop White, in referring to it, expresses
his conviction that this paper "written on the present occasion, was
among the causes which prevented the disorganizing of the American
Church." It aided in this important work by convincing the conven
tion, as Bishop White further assures us, "t.hnt. the. rp glll t of

JL
ft/*

able changes would have been the disunion of the Church." And it
was this impression thus enforced, proceeds the good bishop, " which
contributed to render the proceedings temperate." An examination
of this " Memorial," and a remembrance of the source whence it was
derived, the bosom-friend of Seabury, and one who had himself de
clined the first colonial bishopric of the English Church, gives us the
fullest statement of the views of the conservative churchmen of the
whole land, with reference to the organization of the American Church,
as opposed to the radicalism of some of the extreme South, and the
violent partisan prejudices of others both at the North and South. It
deprecated liturgical alterations and innovations, other than those re
quired by the change in the political relations of the Church, until the
completion of the three orders of the ministry. It avows its disapproval
of the publication of the " proposed book " by the " late General Con
vention," "as altered, with the psalms and calendar transposed and
changed by their committee, without their revision and express appro
val ; " and it further adds, that " although they may not disapprove of
all the alterations made in the said new book, yet they have to regret
the unseasonableness and irregularity of them." And it begged the
revision of the proposed liturgy, and the removal of " every cause
that may have excited any jealousy or fear that the Episcopal Church

THE EAKLY CONVENTIONS, NORTH AND SOUTH.

in the United States of America have any intention or desire essen
tially to depart, either in doctrine or discipline from the Church of
England." Suggesting a return to the English prayer-book with
the simple alterations authorized by the prelimary meeting in New
York, and urging the speedy securing of the consecration of bishops
in the English line, the memorial closed with the expression of this
truly catholic desire : " And that they " (the General Convention) |
"will use all means in their power to promote and perpetuate harmony!
and unanimity among ourselves, and with the said Church of England, J
as a mother or sister Church, and with every Protestant Church in they
universe."

Thus with warning words from over the waters, and warning
words from home, the Church was, little by little, brought back from
the verge of the precipice over which it was tending, and matters were
put in train for that return to harmony and unanimity which the best
and wisest of fathers labored for and desired from the very first.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.

WE append, from tho original "Broadside" report and from the MS. minutes
preserved in the archives of the Church, the fullest record we have of the
preliminary meeting in New York :

At a Convention of Clergymen and Lay Deputies, of the Protestant EPIS
COPAL CHURCH in the United States of America, held in New York, October 6lh
and 7th, 1784 : Present as follows :

Revd. SAMUEL PARKER, A.M., Massachu
setts and Rhode-Island.

Revd. JOHN R. MARSHAL, A.M., Connecti
cut.

NEW-YORK.

Revd. SAMUEL PROVOOST, A.M.
Revd. ABRAHAM BEACH, A.M.
Revd. BENJAMIN MOORE, A.M.
Rcvd. JOSHUA BLOOMER, A.M.
Revd. LEONARD CUTTING, A.M.
Revd. THOMAS MOORE,
Hon. JAMES DUANE,
MARINUS WILLET,
JOHN ALSOP,

Esquires

NEW-JERSEY.

Rcvd. UZAL OGDEN,
JOHN DE HART, Esquire,
JOHN CHETWOOD, Esquire,
Mr. SAMUEL SPRAGG,

PENNSYLVANIA.
Revd. WILLIAM WHITE, D.D.
Rcvd. SAMUEL MAGAW, D.D.
Revd. JOSEPH HUTCHINS, A.M.
MATTHEW CLARKSON, Esquire.
RICHARD WILLING,")
SAMUEL POWELL, ^Esquires.
RICHARD PETERS, J

DELAWARE STATE.
Revd. SYDENHAM THORN, Revd.
CHARLES WHARTON, Mr. ROBERT
CLAY.

MARYLAND.
Rcvd. WILLIAM SMITH, D.D.

N. B. The Revd. Mr. GRIFFITH, from the
State of Virginia, was present by Permission.
The Clcrjry "of that State being: restricted by
Laws yet in force there, were not at liberty to
send Delegates, or consent to any Alterations in
the Order, Government, Doctrine, or Worship
of the Church.

Oct 6 th A.M.

Upon Motion, the Rev d D r William Smith was called to the Chair as President
of this Convention, & the Rev 4 M Benjamin Moore was appointed Secretary.

The Letters of appointment & other Documents produced by the several
Members above mentioned were read ; and also the following Letters from the
Clergy of Massachusetts Bay & Connecticut.

Here Insert the Letters. [These are omitted in the original MS. as preserved
in the General Convention Archives.]

48 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

It being resolved that a Committee of Clerical & Lay-Deputies be appointed
to essay the fundamental Principles of a general Constitution for this Church, the
following Gentlemen were appointed, viz

Rev* D r Smith M r Clarkson

D r White M De Hart

M r Parker M Clay

M r Provoost M Duane

The same Committee are desired to frame & propose to the Convention a
proper Substitute for the State Prayers in the Liturgy to bo used for the Sake
[of] Uniformity, till a further Review shall be undertaken by general authority &
Consent of the Church.

Oct r - 7 th - Present as above.

The Committee appointed Yesterday to essay the fundamental Principles of an
ecclesiastical Constitution for this Church, reported an Essay for this Pui-pose, which
being read & duly considered and amended, was adopted as follows, viz. :

THE Body now assembled, recommend to the Clergy and Congregations of
their Communion in the States represented as above, and propose to those of the
other States not repi esented, That as soon as they shall have organized or associated
themselves in the States to which they respectively belong, agreeably to such Rules
as they shall think proper, they unite in a general ecclesiastical Constitution, on the
following fundamental Principles.

I. That there shall be a general Convention of the Episcopal Church in the United
States of America.

IE. That the Episcopal Church in each State, send Deputies to the Convention, con
sisting of Clergy and Laity.

III. That associated Congregations in two or more States, may send Deputies

jointly.

IV. That the said Church shall maintain the Doctrines of the Gospel as now held

by the Church of England, and shall adhere to the Liturgy of the said
Church as far as shall be consistent with the American Revolution, and the
Constitutions of the respective States.

V. That in every State whore there shall be a Bishop duly consecrated and settled,

he shall be considered as a Member of the Convention, ex Officio.

VI. That the Clergy and Laity assembled in Convention, shall deliberate in one

Body, but shall vote separately; and the Concurrence of both shall be
necessary to give Validity to every Measure.

VII. That the first Meeting of the Convention shall be at Philadelphia, the Tuesday

before the Feast of St. Michael next ; to which it is hoped, and earnestly
desired, That the Episcopal Churches in the respective States will send their
Clerical and Lay Deputies, duly instructed and authorized to proceed on the
necessary Business herein proposed for their Deliberation.

Signed by Order of the Convention,

WILLIAM SMITH, D.D. President.

Resolved, that it be recommended to the Clergy in the respective Churches here
represented to appoint in each State a Committee of not less than two Clergymen
to examine Persons who in the present Exigency are desirous of officiating as
Readers, and to direct them to such Duties as they are to perform ; and that it be
recommended to the Congregations not to suffer any Lay Persons to officiate in their
Churches other than such as shall be certified by said Committee to be duly qualified.

[Signed,] W M . SMITH, Preside

CHAPTER III.

THE CONSECRATION OF THE FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS:
SEABURY AT ABERDEEN, 1784; WHITE AND PROVOOST
AT LAMBETH, 1787.

QUIETLY assembling together in a "Voluntary Convention," at
Woodbury, Conn., at the coming of news of peace, so
quietly that no minutes of their meeting are extant, and for

HOUSE AT WOODBUKY, CONN., IN WHICH THE CONVOCATION MET

the number composing their convocation, and for the particulars of
their proceedings, we are dependent on fragments of contemporary let
ters, 2 rescued a few years since by the writer from impending destruc
tion, on " Lady-day," the Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed
Virgin Mary, March 25, 1783, ten of the fourteen remaining clergy-

1 Now the residence of the Rev. John R. Brooklyn, Conn., to the Rev. Samuel Parker, of
Marshall. Boston", first published in Hawks and Perry s

2 The Letters of the Rev. Daniel Fogg, of " Connecticut Church Documents."

50 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

men of Connecticut gathered in council, and made choice of the Rev.
Samuel Seabury, D.D., Oxon., missionary of the Society for the
Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts at Staten Island, New
York, as their bishop. The convocation instructed their choice to
seek for consecration in England first of all, and if prevented from
obtaining this boon from the prelates of the mother-church, to secure
in Scotland, where the bishop-elect had been temporarily resident in
his youth, the episcopal power the Connecticut clergy felt indispensa
ble to the proper organization of the American Church.

The hurried letters addressed by the Rev. Daniel Fogg, of
Pomfret, to his correspondent at Boston, the Rev. Samuel Parker,
evidently written in reply to queries occasioned, it might be, by
rumors then rife, afford us the only detailed account of these
important proceedings, so far as the choice of the first American
bishop is concerned. They graphically depict the fear felt by the
clergy lest the old opposition to an American episcopate, so general
among the colonists before the Revolution, might again be aroused,
and serve to defeat their cherished plans on which, as they rightly
believed, the very being of the Church in this land depended.

POMFRET, July 2d, 83.

REV. SIR: There were ten clergymen met. The Connecticut clergy
have done already everything in their power, in the matter you were anxious
about. Would send you the particulars if I knew of any safe opportunity of
sending this letter; but as I do not, must defer it till I do.

Your sincere friend and brother,

D. FOGG. 1

In less than a fortnight another letter gave more in detail the in
telligence so full of interest to Mr. Parker, and to the waiting, wonder
ing churchmen of Massachusetts :

POMFRET, July 14th, 83.

DEAR SIR : I wrote you a few lines the 2d inst., by an uncertain conveyance,
hi which I mentioned that the Connecticut clergy had done all in their power
respecting the matter you were anxious about ; but they kept it a profound secret,
even from their most intimate friends of the laity.

The matter is this : After consulting the clergy in New York 2 how to keep up
the succession, they unanimously agreed to send a person to England to be conse
crated Bishop for America, and pitched upon Dr. Seabury as the most proper person

1 From the oiiginal, in the writer s possession, bury s Abilities, Learning & Moral Character, of

2 Dr. Seabury took with him among his ample which we deservedly entertain the highest Opin-
testimonials the following letter, still preserved ion, do certify, that we have for many years past
among the family papers of his descendants, been intimately acquainted with the" said D r .
which in its language and signatures commands Seabury, & that we believe him to be every Way
our interest and respect : qualified for the Sacred Office of a Bishop. And

New York, June 3, 1783. we cannot but express our earnest Wish that he

Whereas our well-beloved in Christ, Samuel may succeed in his Application, as many Incon-

Seabuiy, Doctor of Divinity, at the earnest Re- veniences may be thereby prevented, wnich no

quest of the Episcopal Clergy of Connecticut, after Care can remove, when they have once

hath resolved to embark speedily for England, taken place,

that he may be admitted to the sacred Office of a Charles luglis, D.D.

Bishop ; & afterwards to return to Connecticut, Rector of Trinity Church in the

& there exercise the Spiritual Powers peculiar to City of New York,

the Episcopal Office, by superintending the Cler- Jon". Odell, A. M.

gy, ordaining Candidates for Holy Orders, & Missionary, Burlington,

Confirming such of the Laity as chuse to be con- New Jersey,

firmed & having applied to us for Letters Tes- Benj Moore, A. M.

timonial on the Occasion ; We therefore whose Assistant Minister of

Names arc underwritten, in Justice to Dr. Sea- Trinity Church, New York.

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS. 51

for this purpose, who sailed for England the beginning of last month, highly recom
mended by all the clergy in New York and Connecticut, etc. If he succeeds, he is
to come out as missionary for New London, or some other vacant mission ; and if
they will not receive him in Connecticut, or any other of the States of America,
he is to go to Nova Scotia. Sir Guy (Sir Guy Carleton, Commander-in-chief of all
His Majesty s forces in America,) highly approves of the plan, and has used
all his influence in favor of it.

The clergy have even gone so far as to instruct Dr. Seabury, if none of the
regular Bishops of the Church of England will ordain him, to go down to Scotland
and receive ordination from a nonjuring Bishop. Please let me know, by Mr.
Grosvenor, how you approved of the plan, and whether you have received any late
accounts from England. From your affectionate brother,

D. FOGG. 1

A little later, aud evidently in answer to some expressions of doubt
as to the wisdom of selecting so avowed a " refugee " as Dr. Seabury
for an American episcopate, Mr. Fogg writes as follows :

DEAR SIR : I am very glad that the conduct of the Connecticut clergy meets
with your approbation in the main. Dr. Seabury s being a refugee was an objec
tion which I made, but was answered, they could not fix on any other person who
they thought was so likely to succeed as he was, 2 and should he succeed, and not be
permitted to reside in any of the United States, it would be an easy matter for any
other gentleman, who was not obnoxious to the powers that be, to be consecrated
by hiin at Halifax. And as to the objection of not consulting the clergy of the
other States, the time would not allow of it, and there was nobody to consult in the
State of New York, except refugees, and they were consulted. And in the State of
Connecticut there are fourteen clergymen. And in your State and New Hampshire,
you know how many there are, and you know there is no compulsion in the matter,
and you will be left to act as you please, either to be subject to him or not. As to
the matter of his support, that must be an after consideration.
Your affectionate friend and brother,

D. FOGG. 1

POMFRET, Aug. 1st, 83.

The eyes of the Connecticut and other New England churchmen
were turned anxiously toward England, where Dr. Seabury arrived on
the 7th of July. He bore with him abundant testimonials from the
clergy of Connecticut and New York that he was " in every way qualified
for the Episcopal office, and for the discharge of those duties peculiar

1 From the originals in the writer s pos- in addressing their Bishop elect 2 "as the most

session. proper person " to be consecrated Bishop. The

* The thoughts of the Connecticut clergy in testimony of Fogg cannot be reconciled with the

BIT first castings about for a spiritual head had P lon th ?t Seabury was only an " alternate," a

t^uajri; oi iiai vis, uy ma aiumme me uiiu uxuei- , . . r,r . ~j - ---

lent services merited" their "affections, esteem JfJ7 anc } united suffrages, " signified
and confidence." But, as we learn from the R * at New York, in April, 1/83, 3 points to
same authority, "debility and the many bodily nothing short of a "formal election on the part
infirmities under which he then labored" ren- of a deliberative and unanimous body. Theex-
dered him, in his own judgment, and in the tee of an unused draft of a letter recom-
opinion of others, "altogether unfitted for an memhng Learning for consecration proves at the
:__ i-L-j. : ,i x__: i .c _ most no more than that thft \V oonmirv nonvftn-

ceeds. "were conspicuous in Doctor Seabury, - ,, ,- ,.

who, in every other respect also, was the man to "P on ( as . the m st P r P er P erson &gt; declined
our wishes/ Such being the case, it is but the " appointment.

meeting, on consultation at Woodbury, 2 Hawks and Perry s "Connecticut Church Docu-

Seabury was " pitched upon the very phrase ments," n., p. 225.
used by Learning, Jarvis, and others of the clergy Ibid., p. 264.

52 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

to it, in the present trying and dangerous times." l It is not necessary
to give in full the interesting correspondence detailing each step of the
unsuccessful application to the English bishops and archbishops.
Minute as we would gladly be in detailing each step in the life of the
first American bishop, we may safely pass over a period the story of
which has been so fully and so frequently told.

Kepulsed by the English bishops, who felt hampered by the
shackles of their connection with the State, and who well knew that
the powers behind the throne, sore at the loss of a western empire,
would look but coldly on any measure tending to that new empire s
benefit, the indefatigable Seabury turned his steps toward Scotland
in search of "a valid and purely ecclesiastical Episcopacy." He
might have had his Episcopal orders more easily. The sadly
dwindled remnant of the non-juring schism which commenced, accord
ing to Lathbury, in 1733 or 1743 2 had now one of its two remaining
bishops residing at Shrewsbury, practising as a surgeon. This gentle
man, Cartwright by name, willingly offered his services to lay hands
upon the American aspirant for consecration. He entered into cor
respondence with the celebrated Drs. Thos. Bradbury Chandler and
Jonathan Boucher both like Seabury, American refugees, and deeply
solicitous for the establishment of the American Church on the sub
ject of his own consecration, which was derived from the non-juring
Thomas Deacon alone ; and intimated the concurrence of his coadjutor,
Bishop Price, in the proffer of what Seabury desired so much, "a purely
ecclesiastical Episcopacy for the Church in Connecticut." But the
providence of God had opened another door ; and a more desirable
and less obscure Episcopacy, was tendered before the negotiations
with Bishops Cartwright and Price had been fully entered upon.
To the struggling Church in Scotland, the remnant and repre
sentative of the old establishment numbering the intrepid Sharp
among its martyrs, and the heavenly-minded Leighton among its
saints, Seabury bent his steps, assured, ere he started, of a hearty
welcome and the desired success. It is a mistake into which our his
torians and annalists have repeatedly fallen to assert that this resort ,
was first thought of at this time. It is a more unfortunate blunder to
give the credit of this idea to the venerable President of Magdalen
College, Oxford, the Rev. Dr. Routh, who, in extreme old age, laid
claim to its suggestion. All this implies an ignorance of the position,
or even of the existence, of the Scottish Episcopal Church, on the part of
the Connecticut clergy. This could not have been the case. Years i
before, the young Seabury, at that time a student of medicine in Edin
burgh, had regularly attended the services of the Scottish Church, and
knew full well from its very "disabilities," its entire independence of
the authority of the State. Besides, in the letter addressed to the Rev.
Mr. Parker, of Boston, by the Rev. Daniel Fogg, which we have al-

1 Printed from the original documents in Perry s " Connecticut Church Documents," and

greater or less fulness in the " Churchman s Maga- in the Historical Notes and Illustrations forming

zine " for 1806, and in part in the successive edi- the third volume of the author s " Reprint of the

tionsofBishopWhite s"Memoirs,"theseinterest- Early Journals ; " and they have again been repro-

ing papers were woven into a consecutive narrative duced in Dr. Beardsley s "Life of Bishop Sea-

in the winter s sketch of the organization of the bury."
Connecticut Church, contained in Hawks and 2 History of the Non-jurors, p. 411.

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

ready given and which was written just after the choice of Seabury
was consummated, the alternative of seeking the episcopate in Scot
land, in the event of a refusal in England, is distinctly stated as
having been decided upon by the Connecticut clergy.

Thus instructed by the body which had designated him for the
episcopate, and having the countenance of several of the dignitaries
of the English Church, Seabury travelled towards the north. His
simple credentials, penned by men living, as were the bishops and
clergy of the Church of Scotland, under the apprehension of civil inter
ference, and discountenanced by the great body of their countrymen,
opened, at once, the hearts of those to whom they were addressed.
The glad consent, which had been earlier promised, was now accorded
him without delay, and one dull and damp November day, in the
"upper room" of Bishop Skinner s house in Long-Acre, in Aberdeen,
used for the services of the
Scottish Church, quietly, and
in the sight alone of those who
were known to be the sup
porters of this old and perse
cuted faith, Samuel Seabury
was solemnly set apart for the
work of a bishop in the Church
of God ; Robert Kilgour, Bish
op of Aberdeen, and Primus ;
Arthur Petrie, Bishop of Ross
and Moray, and John Skinner,
Coadjutor-Bishop of Aberdeen,
being the consecrators. 1 Well
may we mark that memorable
Twenty-second Sunday after
Trinity, the 14th day of No-
em 6er , A. I). 1784, in our
calendars ! It was the natal
/day of the independent Ameri
can Church. Nor should it be
forgotten that the boon refused

by the Church of England to her children across the ocean was fully,
freely bestowed by the suffering and confessing " Catholic remainder
of the Church in Scotland," and wherever the story of the American
Church is known throughout the world, this^acTor faith this great
uifi of all she had to give, shall be gratefully remembered and told
for a memorial of her.

CONSECRATION HOUSE.

1 An interesting letter from the Right Rev.
Dr. Alexander Jolly to Bishop Kemp, written No
vember 27, 1826, gives some interesting particu
lars of this consecration, as follows

" Connecticut has been a word of
peculiar endearment to me since the happy day
when I had the honour & joy of being intro
duced to the first ever memorable Bishop of that
highly favoured See, whose Name ever excites in
my heart the warmest Veneration. With a glad
& thankful heart I witnessed his Consecration,

held the Book while the solemn words were
pronounced, & received his first Episcopal
Benediction.

"Your most respectfully devoted humble
Servant,

"ALEXANDER JOLLY."

2 Dwelling-house and corner of old St.
Andrew s Chapel on Long-acre, Aberdeen, oc
cupying in part the site of Bishop Skinner s
house and chapel where Bishop Seabury was
consecrated.

54 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

tfty&j*

4&nrf

On the day following the consecration, Monday, the 15th of
November, a "Concordate" between the Episcopal Church in Scot
land and that in Connecticut was formed and agreed upon by the
bishops of Scotland and Bishop Seabury. This document, meant to
be a bond of
union betwe e n
the two church
es, first records
their agreement
" in thankfully
receiving and
humbly and
heartily embrac
ing the whole
doctrine of the
Gospel, as re
vealed and set
forth in the holy
scriptures ; " and
places on record
as the concurrent
testimony of
both churches,
"that it is their
earnest and unit-
ed Desire to
maintain the
analogy of the
Common Faith
once delivered
to the Saints,
and happily pre
served in the
Church of
Christ, thro his
divine power

and protection, who promised that the Gates of Hell should never
prevail against it." Secondly, it is asserted that the contracting par
ties agreed "in believing this Church to be the mystical Body of
Christ, of which he alone is the Head, and supreme Governour, and
that under him, the chief ministers or Managers of the affairs of this
spiritual society, are those called Bishops, whose Exercise of their
Sacred Office being independent on all Lay powers, it follows of con
sequence, that their spiritual Authority and Jurisdiction cannot be
affected by any Lay-deprivation." The two churches were further
declared to be " in full communion " in the third article, and in the
next it was urged that there should be as near a conformity in worship
and discipline between the two communions as possible. In this con
nection it was sagely suggested that " such prudent generality in their
public prayers " should be carefully observed, as might enable each

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

"to avoid any bad effects that might otherwise arise from political
Differences."

In the fifth article it was provided that " as the Celebration of the
holy Eucharist, or the Administration of the Sacrament of the Body
and Blood of Christ, is the principal Bond of Union among Christians,
as well as the most solemn Act of Worship in the Christian Church,
the Bishops aforesaid agree in desiring that there may be as little
variance here as possible," and to this article we owe(the primitive
character of our eucharistic office^

In the further articles it was provided that " brotherly fellowship "
was to be maintained ; and the gift of the episcopate to Seabury
was proclaimed to have been "made with nothing else in view, but the
glory of God and the good of the Church," and to promote " the
Cause of Truth and of the Common Salvation." l

1 The " Concordate " is as follows :

In the Name of the holy and undivided Trinity,
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, One God, blessed
for ever. Amen.

The wise and gracious Providence of the
merciful! God, having put it into the hearts of
the Christians of the Episcopal persuasion in
Connecticut in Noi*th America, to desire that the
Blessings of a free, valid and purely Ecclesiasti
cal Episcopacy, might be communicated to them,
and a Church regularly formed in that part of
the western world upon the most antient, and
primitive Model : And Application having been
made for this purpose, by the Reverend Dr.
Samuel Seabury Presbyter in Connecticut, to the
Right Reverend the Bishops of the Church in
Scotland : The said Bishops having taken this
proposal into their serious Consideration, most
heartily concurred to promote and encourage the
same, as far as lay iu their power ; and accord
ingly began the pious and good work recom
mended to them, by complying with the request
of the Clergy in Connecticut, and advancing the
said Dr. Samuel Seabuiy to the high Order of
the Episcopate ; at the same time earnestly pray
ing that this Work of the Lord thus happily be
gun might prosper in his hands, till it should
please the great and glorious Head of the Church,
to increase the number of Bishops in America,
and send forth more such Labourers into that
part of his Harvest. Animated with this pious
hope, and earnestly desirous to establish a Bond
of peace, and holy Communion, between the two
Churches, the Bishops of the Church in Scotland,
whose names are underwritten, having had full
and free Conference with Bishop Seabuiy, after
his Consecration and Advancement as aforesaid,
agreed with him on the following Articles, which
are to serve as a Concordate, or Bond of Union,
between the Catholic remainder of the antient
Church of Scotland, and the now rising Church
in the State of Connecticut.

Art. I. They agree in thankfully receiving,
and humbly and heartily embracing the whole
Doctrine 01 the Gospel, as revealed and set forth
in the holy Scriptures : and it is their earnest and
united Desire to maintain the Analogy of the
common Faith once delivered to the Saints, and
happily preserved in the Church of Christ, thro
his divine power and protection, who promised
that the Gates of Hell should never prevail
against it.

Art. 11. They agree in believing this Church
to be the mystical Body of Christ, of which he

alone is the Head, and supreme Governour, and
that under him, the chief Ministers or Managers
of the Affairs of this spiritual Society, are those
called Bishops, whose Exercise of their sacred
Office being independent on all Lay powers, it
follows of consequence, that their spiritual Au
thority, and Jurisdiction cannot be affected by
any Lay-Deprivation.

Art. rn. They agree in declaring that the
Episcopal Church m Connecticut is to be in full
Communion with the Episcopal Church in Scot
land; it being their sincere Resolution to put
matters on such a footing as that the Members of
both Churches may with freedom and safety
communicate with either, when their Occasions
call them from the one Country to the other :
Only taking care when in Scotland not to hold
Communion in sacred Offices with those persons,
who under pretence of Ordination by an English,
or Irish Bishop, do or shall take upon them to
officiate as Clergymen in any part of the national
church of Scotland, and whom the Scottish
Bishops cannot help looking upon, as schismati-
cal Intruders, design d only to answer worldly
purposes, and uncommissioned Disturbers of the
poor Remains of that once flourishing Church,
which both their predecessors and they, have,
under many Difficulties, laboured to preserve
pure and uncorruptcd to future Ages.

Art. iv. With a view to the salutary pur
pose mentioned in the preceding Article, they
agree in desiring that there may be as near a
Conformity in Worship and Discipline estab
lished between the two Churches, as is consistent
with the different Circumstances and Customs of
Nations : and in order to avoid any bad Effects
that might otherwise arise from political Differ
ences, they hereby express their earnest Wish
and firm Intention to observe such prudent Gen
erality in their public Piayers, with respect to
these points, as shall appear most agreeable to
Apostolic Rules, and the practice of the primi
tive Church.

Art. v. As the Celebration of the holy
Eucharist, or the Administration of the Sacra
ment of the Body and Blood of Christ, is the
principal Bond of Union among Christians, as
well as the most Solemn Act of Worship in the
Christian Church, the Bishops aforesaid agree in
desiring that there may be as little Variance here
as possible. And tho the Scottish Bishops are
very far from prescribing to their Brethren in
this matter, they cannot help ardently wishing
that Bishop Seaoury would endeavour all he can
consistently with peace and prudence, to make

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

It was thus that "the blessings of a free, valid, and purely
ecclesiastical Episcopacy " were obtained by the Church in, America.

The step taken by the bishops in Scotland, in advancing Seabury
to the episcopate, was approved as soon as known in England, by
the truest friends both of the English and the American Church.
That this was the light in which it was regarded by the mother-
church is shown by the speedy removal by Parliament of the civil
disabilities under which the Scottish Church had labored for nearly a
century, a result directly to be attributed to the good office they had
rendered to their brethren of a common faith and order in America.

Meeting, not only his own clergy, but some from the neighbor
ing States, in convocation at Middletown, Seabury began his epis
copate by authorizing such changes in the prayer-book and offices of
the Church as were rendered necessary by the recognition of American
independence. To these alterations a few others, suggested by a
committee, of which the amiable Parker, of Boston, and the excellent
Benjamin Moore, of New York, were members, were added for con
sideration ; and then, cheered by the addition of the newly ordained
to their numbers, the bishop and clergy separated each to their respec
tive work, the one rejoicing in the success of their efforts for secur
ing the episcopate, and the other gratified and encouraged, as he trav
ersed the country, by the glad reception accorded him, not alone in
Connecticut but throughout New England.

Agreeably to the terms of the " Concordat " between the Episco
pal Church in Scotland and that in Connecticut, it was incumbent upon

the Celebration of this venerable Mystery con
formable to the most primitive Doctrine and
practice in that respect: Which is the pattern
the Church of Scotland has copied after in her
Communion Office, and which it has been the
Wish of some of the most eminent Divines of the
Church of England, that she also had more closely
followed, than she seems to have done since she
gave up her first reformed Liturgy used in the
Reign of King Edward VI. , between which and
the form used in the Church of Scotland there is
no Difference in any point, which the primitive
Church reckoned essential to the right Ministra
tion of the holy Eucharist. In this capital Article
therefore of the Eucharistic Service, in which
the Scottish Bishops so earnestly wish for as
much Unity as possible, Bishop Seabury also
agreed to take a serious View of the Communion
Office recommended by them, and if found agree
able to the genuine Standards of Antiquity, to
give his Sanction to it, and by gentle Methods
of Argument and persuasion, to endeavour, as
they have done, to 4 introduce it by degrees into
practice without the Compulsion of Authority
on the one side, or the prejudice of former Cus
tom on the other.

Art. vi. It is also hereby agreed and re

solved upon for the better answering the pur
poses of this Concordate, that a brotherly fellow
ship be henceforth maintained between the
Episcopal Churches in Scotland and Connecticut,
and such a mutual Intercourse of Ecclesiastical
Correspondence carried on, when Opportunity
offers, or necessity requires as may tend to the
Support, and Edification of both Churches.

Art. vii. The Bishops aforesaid do hereby
jointly declare, in the most solemn manner, that
in the whole of this Transaction they have
nothing else in view, but the Glory of God, and
the Good of his Church ; And being thus pure
and upright in their Intentions, they cannot but
hope, that all whom it may concern, will put the
most fair and candid Construction on their Con
duct, and take no Offence at their feeble but
sincere Endeavours to promote what they believe
to be the Cause of Truth, and of the common
Salvation.

In Testimony of their Love to which, and
in mutual good Faith and Confidence, they have,
for themselves, and their Successors in Office,
cheerfully put their Names and Seals to these
presents at Aberdeen this fifteenth day of No
vember, in the year of our Lord, one thousand,
seven hundred, and eighty-four.

ROBERT KILGOUR, Bishop & Primus, [SEAL.]

ARTHUR PETRIE, Bishop. [SEAL.]

JOHN SKINNER, Bishop. [SEAL.]

SAMUEL SEABURY, Bishop. [SEAL.]

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

Bishop Seabury to introduce the Scottish Communion office into use
in his American diocese. At the tirst convocation at Middletown,
this measure was considered, and postponed, by general consent,
till the minds of the people had been gradually prepared for the
change. With this view, early the following year, there appeared a
thin duodecimo pamphlet of twenty-four pages, containing "The/
Communion-Office, or Order for Administration of the Holy Eucharist
or Supper of the Lord, with Private Devotions, Recommended to the

BISHOP SEABURY S HOUSE, NEW LONDON, CONN.

Episcopal Congregations in Connecticut, by the Right Rev. Bishop
Seabury." This tract, now one of the rarest of our American ecclesi
astical antiquities, failed to receive general acceptance ; but its direct
result, a few years later, was the incorporation of the distinctive features
of the Scotch office into our present American Communion service.

The adjournment of the Convention of 1785 gave to Dr. White
and his fellow-committeenjen abundant, and, for a time, engrossing
labor. Few of the records of this most important epoch are more
interesting and instructive than the voluminous correspondence between
Drs. White and Smith, with an occasional letter from the amiable
Wharton, as published from the original manuscripts in the notes to
the reprint of the early journals to which we have already referred.
The tracing of each step of the committee s progress ; the genial
interest and zeal of White, and the indefatigable labor of Smith, the
discussion of many a question having its bearing on modern theories

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS. 59

or mooted plans of the present day ; the pleasantry of two old friends
busied in a work they fondly dreamed was to be for all time ; all this
and more ; the individuality of the writers, and the life-pictures of
their times, come out in vivid coloring on the mental canvas, as we
read these scrawled and often almost illegible letters, and scraps of
notes, and postscripts, and indorsements, carrying us back a century
to other days, and to the men and scenes long since passed away.

At length, after a long delay, the book as "proposed " appeared.
Read hurriedly over from loose sheets, soiled with corrections for the
press, before a little Convention in Maryland, it was met with the pro
posal of still further changes. Hurried off by post to Parker, in Bos
ton, as folio after folio came, damp from the printer s hands, it met
with little favor from the churchmen of the North. Despatched by
water through New Jersey to Provoost at New York, after long de
lays, it received unlooked-for opposition there. In New Jersey, where
Chandler s sound conservatism still ruled, the Church definitely, and
at once, rejected it. Delaware, in its weakness, held no convention;
and Wharton, whose distance and other duties had given him so small
a share in its preparation, seems to have lost his interest in the work
of revision he had earlier been so anxious to undertake, as well as
his influence in the Church, in whose general councils, after the Wil
mington Convention of 1786, he appeared no more for years. Even
in Pennsylvania there was dissatisfaction, evidenced in the proposal
of amendments to the committee s work. In Virginia, exceptions
were taken to one of the rubrics empowering a clergymen " to repel an
evil liver from the Communion," and this action tells volumes as to the
sad condition of the demoralized and impoverished churches there.
Dr. Purcell wrote a long critique upon the committee s changes, ques
tioning their right to do so much with the scanty power intrusted
them by the convention ; but still South Carolina accepted the work
by formal vote, and then failed to carry out this determination, leav
ing the copies unsold, and even uninquired for, in the hands of the
agents appointed by the Philadelphia committee.

Bishop White, whose history of this movement for liturgical re
vision forms a most interesting chapter of his work, especially when
illustrate^ by the abundant manuscript authorities he left to sustain his
statements, tells us that the " use of the Liturgy, agreeably to the altera
tions" stipulated by many members of the convention, was never
carried into effect by "the greater number," and that the "error" of
printing a large edition, " which did not well consist with the principle
of mere proposal," and " which seemed a stretch of power designed to
effect the introduction of the book to actual use, in order to prevent a
discussion of its merits," together with the "other error," the use of it
at the close of the convention, and by the Philadelphia clergy sub
sequently, thus helping " to confirm the opinion of its being to be in
troduced with a high hand," served to account for "much of the
opposition to it." There is also, in the action of the churches of New
England and that of New Jersey, as well as in the unpublished letters
of men like Parker, Bass, Bela Hubbard, Jarvis, Benjamin Moore,
Abraham Beach, William Smith the younger, John Buchanan, and

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

William West, men representing every section of the Church from
Massachusetts to Virginia, reason to believe that the unsparing hand
with which the liturgic heritage of the Church universal had been
assailed, had much to do with the speedy return, in all quarters, to
the old book, simply changed as the primary Convention of 1784 had

BISHOP SEABURY.

resolved, to accommodate it to the requirements of our national inde
pendence and the constitutions of the respective States.

Besides the hurrying through of a review of the liturgy, the Con
vention of 1785 proceeded to address the English archbishops and
bishops for the episcopal succession. This was done with no general
distrust of the Scotch episcopacy, but with the natural preference for that
of England, which had led Seabury to wait more than a year in efforts for

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

the same, ere he reluctantly turned his steps toward Aberdeen. But, as
White and others well knew, now that the problem so long in suspense
was solved, and the British ministry had seen, in the quiet yet honorable
reception of Seabury as an unquestioned bishop, the fullest evidence
that the old objections to the introduction of the episcopate in America
had lost their force, and with the fires of partisan rancor and denomi
national hate had at length burned out, the question of an American
episcopate was now placed on a far different basis from what it was
before the Revolution, when dissenters at home and in the colonies
clamored unceasingly against it. It was secured, and the further
proffer of the boon, if sought, was but a kindly courtesy, the rather
likely to oblige than give reason for national or political complications
and dislikes. So from the moment Seabury had been welcomed most
heartily by the clergy of Connecticut, with others from the rest of
New England and New York, at his first convocation at Middletown,
&gt; that which had been denied to him was known to be at the call of those
who sought it with the like testimonials of character, learning, and
piety, and with the approbation of the civil powers. The very re
sponse made by the Bishop of Connecticut to the letter inviting the
presence of himself and clergy at the Philadelphia Convention," seemed,"
as Bishop White himself assures us, "to point out a way of obviating
the difficulty in the present case." But still it is the testimony of men
on both sides of the ocean men who, from their position in the
church, knew what they affirmed that but for Seabury s consecration
at Aberdeen there would have been no proffer of the English succes
sion to America, at least till in the lapse of years there had been far
too many opportunities for the accomplishment, by men of latitudi-
narian views and laxity of morals, of the doctrinal changes openly ad
vocated in this very convention by the Hon. Mr. Page, of Virginia, and
with which it was rumored, with no little show of reason, that Provoost
at the North, and Madison, Smith, and Purcell, at the South, were more
or less in sympathy. At any rate, the assertion is directly made at a
later date, both by Parker, of Boston, and Dr. Peters, of London, the
one well acquainted with the facts on both sides of the ocean, and the
other thoroughly cognizant of the views and feelings of the dignitaries
of Church and State in England, that the reception of the Scotch epis-
copacy by Seabury alone secured for White, Provoost, and Madison ,\
the English succession at a later date. Come how it did, we would
gratefully thank God who thus renewedly connected our infant Church
with the still-loved mother, whose " long continuance of nursing care
and protection" we even now so willingly acknowledge.

The original of the "Plan for obtaining Consecration" is still ex
tant, preserved among the archives of the General Convention, with the
original signatures of the members of the Convention of 1785. We
present it in fac-simile as one of the most interesting of our ecclesi
astical documents :

62 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

~* **~ t

JL.

&&0Mtof M ^^

^^^^^^^

^
*^^^*&lt;&

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS

Ai6,^*6*^4^b*^

^^X^;^^^^

1^%^4*^^^^^^
ZLfyj# &#u^~*^

^^.^^^^^ aiuJ****

66^^3b*^$r^s?* ~*~~~^-, -
^^^^^O^P 6^4^f *~&lt;& :

/^,A^?&*S^*&lt;*^y &lt;4^* ^&0*lf

f J

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

jfk#ud e

The reply to this address of the convention for the episcopate,
which was received in the spring of 1786, was cautious, though
friendly. It was evident that apprehension had been excited in the
minds of the English prelates that the American churchmen were

CONSECKATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS. 65

tending toward a laxity in belief, as well as displaying a disposition to
deprive the episcopate of much of its dignity and precedence. Still,
the guarded language of this communication could not fail to inspire
hope, and to encourage the conservatism that had survived, or
succeeded the radicalism of the leaders of the Convention of 1785.

The Convention of 1786 " assembled," as Bishop White tells us,
" under circumstances which bore strong appearances of a dissolution
of the union in the early stage of it." The untoward "circum
stances " are stated by the bishop as these : " The interfering instruc
tions from the churches in the different States, the embarrassment
that had arisen from the rejection of the proposed book in some of
the States, and the use of it in others, some dissatisfaction on
account of the Scottish episcopacy, and, added to these, the demur
expressed in the letter from the English bishops." 1 To these, as
appears from the correspondence of the period, should be added,
dissension arising from the Arian tendencies of some of the leading
spirits in the infant church. 2 It required the singular prudence of
White, and the pressure notably arising in view of the English ulti
matum, to allay " apprehension," and prevent the newly organized
church from "falling into pieces." 3

The session of June, 1786, was barely opened when the Kev.
Robert Smith, afterward the first bishop of South Carolina, offered a
resolution evidently intended to raise the question as to the validity of
the Scottish episcopacy, and the subject was again introduced at a later
stage of the proceedings. But the judicious application of the parlia
mentary rule of " the previous question " checked the debate, and the
convention, by a formal vote, refused to enter upon the discussion of
the validity of Bishop Seabury s ordinations. 4 Still, the " coolness
and indifference " 5 towards the Bishop of Connecticut displayed by the
convention in discouraging the settlement of clergymen who had
received holy orders from Dr. Seabury, was regarded at the North as
a declaration of war, and as foreboding "a settled and perpetual
enmity." 6 Parker, of Boston, wrote at once to Dr. White "that this
conduct must create a schism in the Church." The amiable Benjamin
Moore ascribed this action as arising from " old grudges on the score
of politics," 7 and thought that the opponents to the Bishop of Connect
icut would " not be able to affect their purpose to any great degree." 8
With such disturbing elements, the apprehension of disintegration
and destruction was only natural. That this anticipation was not)
realized was due, under God, to the forbearance of Seabury, and the^
prudence, amiability, and conciliatory spirit of White.

The communication from England, in response to " the Christian
and Brotherly address of the Convention" of 1785, was shortly fol
lowed by another from the two archbishops, written after the receipt
in England of the "proposed book," and the new ecclesiastical consti
tution, and received soon after the rising of the June Convention of
1786. This letter, which we append in full, expresses the dissatis-

1 Memoirs of the Church, 2d ed., p. 115. 4 Ibid., p. 116.

- Hawks and Perry s " Connecticut Church Hawks and Perry s " Connecticut Church

Documents," ii., pp. 298, 299. Documents," n., pp. 300, 301.

3 Memoirs of the Church, 2d ed., p. 115. Ibid. Ibid, p. 305. 8 Ibid.

66 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

faction felt by the English bishops at the omission of the Nicene and
Athanasian Creeds, and the article on the Apostles Creed relating to
the descent into hell. Objection was also made to the provision of
the proposed constitution, which seemed to render possible the trial
of bishops by the presbyters and laity of their respective Sees. This,
however, as Bishop White remarks, "does not seem to have been the
meaning of the article alluded to, which expresses no more than that
laws for the trial of Bishops should be made, not by the general, but
by each state ecclesiastical representation." With these objections
there was added the pleasing intelligence that application had been
made to parliament for the passage of an act empowering them to
consecrate bishops for America. It was expected on their part that
" satisfaction should be given in regard to the matter stated " ere
the succession was imparted. The letters proceeded to give in detail the
particulars with regard to the testimonials that would be required of
those seeking at their hands the episcopal office.

To the Committee of the general Convention at Philadelphia, the Rev/ 1 . IP. White pres
ident, the Rev*. D". Smith, the Rev d . M r . Provost, the Hon Mt James Duane,
Samuel Powell and Richard Peters Es&lt;f.

M r . PRESIDENT AND GENTLEMEN: Influenced by the same Sentiments of
fraternal Regard expressed by the Archbishops and Bishops in their Answer to your
Address, We desire you to be persuaded that if We have not yet been able to com
ply with your Request, the Delay has proceeded from no Tardiness on our part.
The only Cause of it has been the Uncertainty in which We were left by receiving
your Address unaccompanied by those Communications with regard to your Liturgy,
Articles and Ecclesiastical Constitution, without the Knowledge of which we could
not presume to apply to the Legislature for such Powers as were necessary to the
Completion of your Wishes. The Journal of the Convention, and the first part of
your Liturgy, did not reach us till more than two Months after our Receipt of your
Address ; and We were not in possession of the remaining part of it, and of your
Articles, till the last day of April. The whole of your Communications was then,
with as little Delay as possible, taken into Consideration at a Meeting of the Arch
bishops and Fifteen of the Bishops, being all who were then in London and able to
attend; and it was impossible not to observe with Concern, that if the Essential
Doctrines of our Common Faith were retained, less Respect however was paid to
our Liturgy than it s own Excellence, and your declared Attachment to it, had led
us to expect that to mention a Variety of verbal Alterations, of the Necessity or
propriety of which We are by no means satisfied, We saw with Grief, that Two of
the Confessions of our Christian Faith, respectable for their Antiquity, have been
intirely laid aside, and that even in That which is called the Apostles Creed, an
Article is omitted, which was thought necessary to be inserted, with a View to a
particular Heresy, in a very early Age of the Church, and has ever since had the
venerable Sanction of universal Reception. Nevertheless as a Proof of the sincere
Desire which We feel to continue in spiritual Communion with the Members of
your Church in America, and to complete the Orders of your Ministry, and trusting
that the Communications which We shall make to you, on the subject of these ami
some other Alterations, will have their desired effect ; We have, even under these
circumstances, prepared a Bill for conveying to Us the powers necessary for this
purpose. It will in a few Days be presented to Parliament, and We have the best
Reasons to hope that it will receive the Assent of the Legislature. This Bill will
enable the Archbishops and Bishops to give Episcopal Consecration to the persons
who shall be recommended, without requiring from them any Oaths or Subscrip
tions inconsistent with the Situation in which the late Revolution has placed them ;
upon Condition that the full Satisfaction of the Sufficiency of the Persons recom
mended, which you offer to Us in your Address, be given to the Archbishops and
Bishops. You will doubtless receive it as a Mark both of our friendly Disposition

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

towards you, and of our Desire to avoid all Delay on this Occasion , that We have
taken this earliest Opportunity of conveying to you this Intelligence, and that We
proceed (as supposing ourselves invested with that Power which for your Sakes We
have requested) to state to you particularly the several Heads, upon which that
Satisfaction which you offer, will be accepted, and the Mode in which it may be
given. The Anxiety which is shewn by the Church of England to prevent the
Intrusion of unqualified persons into even the Inferior Offices of our Ministry, con
firms our own Sentiments, and points it out to be our Duty, very earnestly to re
quire the most decisive Proofs of the Qualifications of those who may be offered
for Admission to that Order, to which the Superintendence of those Offices is com
mitted. At our several Ordinations of a Deacon and a Priest, the Candidate sub
mits himself to the Examination of the Bishop as to his Proficiency in Learning;
he gives the proper Security of his Soundness in the Faith by the Subscriptions
which are made previously necessary ; He is required to bring Testimonials of his
virtuous Conversation during the Three preceding Years ; and that no Mode of In
quiry may be omitted, publick Notice of his offering himself to be ordained is given
in the parish Church where he resides or ministers, and the people are solemnly
called upon to declare, if they know any Impediment for the which he ought not
to. be admitted. At the Time of Ordination too the same solemn Call is made on
the Congregation then present.

Examination, Subscription and Testimonials are not indeed repeated at the
Consecration of an English Bishop, because the person to be consecrated has added
to the Securities given at his former Ordinations that Sanction, which arises from
his having constantly lived and exercised his Ministry under the Eyes and Observa
tion of his Country. But the Objects of our present Consideration are very differ
ently circumstanced ; Their Sufficiency in Learning, the Soundness of their Faith
and the purity of their Manners, are not Matters of Notoriety here ; Means therefore
must be found to satisfy the Archbishop who consecrates, and the Bishops who pre
sent them ; that, in the Words of our Church, " They be apt and meet for their
Learning and godly Conversation, to exercise their Ministry duly to the Honour of
God, and the edifying of his Church, and to be wholesome Examples and Patterns
to the Flock of Christ."

With Regard to the first Qualification, Sufficiency in good Learning, We ap
prehend that the subjecting a Person, who is to be admitted to the Office of a Bishop
in the Church, to that Examination which is required previous to the Ordination of
Priests and Deacons, might lessen that reverend Estimation which ought never to
be separated from the Episcopal Character : We therefore do not require any farther
Satisfaction on this point than will be given to Us by the Forms of Testimonials in
the annexed paper ; fully trusting that those who sign them will be well aware,
how greatly Incompetence in this Respect must lessen the Weight and Authority of
the Bishop and affect the Credit of the Episcopal Church.

Under the second Head, that of Subscription, our Desire is to require that
Subscription only to be repeated, which you have already been called upon to make
by the Tenth Article of your Ecclesiastcal Constitution : but We should forget the
Duty which We owe to our own Church, and act inconsistently with that sincere
Regard which We bear to your s, if We were not explicit in declaring, that, after
the Disposition We have shewn to comply with the Prayer of your Address, We
think it now incumbent upon you to use your utmost Exertions also for the Removal
of any stumbling Block of Offence, which may possibly prove an Obstacle to the
Success of it. We therefore most earnestly exhort you, that previously to the
Time of your making such Subscription, you restore to it s Integrity the Apostles
Creed, in which you lave omitted an Article merely, as it seems, from Misappre
hension of the Sense in which it is understood by our Church. Nor can We help
adding, that We hope you will think it but a decent proof of the Attachment which
you profess to the Services of our Liturgy, to give to the other two Creeds a place
in j T our Book of Common Prayer, even tho the Use of them should be left discre
tional. We should be inexcusable too if at the Time when you are requesting the
Establishment of Bishops in your Church ; We did not strongly represent to you
that the Eighth Article of your Ecclesiastical Constitution appears to Us to be a
Degradation of the Clerical, and still more of the Episcopal Character. We per-
swade ourselves that in your ensuing Convention some Alteration will be thought
necessary in this Article, before this reaches you ; or, if not, that due Attention will
be given to it in consequence of our Representation.

On the Third and last Head, which respects Purity of Manners, the Reputa-

68 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

tion of the Church, both in England and America, and the Interest of our common
Christianity, is so deeply concem d in it, that We feel it our indispensible Duty to
provide on this Subject, the most effectual Securities. It is presumed that the same
previous public Notice of the Intention of the Person to be consecrated will be given
in the Church where he resides in America, for the same Reasons, and therefore
nearly in the same Town, with That used in England before our Ordinations. The
Call upon the Persons present at the Time of Consecration, must be deemed of little
Use before a Congregation composed of those to whom the person to be consecrated
is unknown. The Testimonials signed by Persons living in England admit of Ref
erence and Examination, and the Characters of those who give them are subject to
Scrutiny, and, in Cases of criminal Deceit, to Punishment. In Proportion as these
Circumstances are less applicable to Testimonials from America, those Testimonials
must be more explicit, and supported by a greater Number of Signatures. We
therefore think it necessary that the several Persons Candidates for Episcopal Con
secration, should bring to Us both a Testimonial from the general Convention of
the Episcopal Church, with as many Signatures as can be obtained, and a more
particular one, from the respective Conventions in those States which recommend
them. It will appear from the Tenor of the Letters Testimonial used in England a
Form of which is annexed that the Ministers who sign them bear Testimony to the
Qualifications of the Candidates on their own personal Knowledge. Such a Testi
mony is not to be expected from the Members of the General Convention of the
Episcopal Church in America on this Occasion. We think it is sufficient therefore
that they declare they know no Impediment but believe the Person to be consecrated
is of a virtuous Life and sound Faith. We have sent you such a Form as appears
to Us proper to be used for that purpose. More specific Declarations must be made
by the Members of the Convention in each State from which the Persons offered
for Consecration are respectively recommended, their personal Knowledge of them
there can be no Doubt of. We trust therefore they will have no Objection to the
Adoption of the Form of a Testimonial which is annexed and drawn upon the same
Principles and containing the same Attestations of personal Knowledge with That
abovementioned as required previously to our Ordinations. We trust We shall
receive these Testimonials signed by such a Majority in each Convention that rec
ommend as to leave no Doubt of the Fitness of the Candidates upon the Minds of
those whose Consciences are concerned in the Consecration of them.

Thus much We have thought right to communicate to you without Reserve at
present, intending to give you tarther Information as soon as We are able. In the
mean Time We pray God to direct your Counsels in this very weighty Matter and
are M r . President and Gentlemen

Your affectionate Brethren, -s

Prior to the receipt of this letter the convention had, in its
acknowledgment of the first letter from the English prelates, reaffirmed
its " attachment to the system of the Church of England," and renewed
its request for the succession. This second application, in which the
hand of the Hon. John Jay was evident, modifying the submissive-
ness of the first draft, prepared by Dr. William Smith, went on its
mission with the advantage arising from the adoption by the conven
tion, " without even an opposition," as Bishop White tells us, 1 of the
alterations in the constitution desired by the English bishops. Among
the influences tending to the adoption of this conservative course was
the presentation of a memorial from the Convention of New Jersey,

i Memoirs of the Church, 2d ed, p. 117.

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

which by the freedom of its criticisms on the proceedings in 1785,
and by its earnest advocacy of less radical measures, " was among the
causes which prevented the disorganizing of the American Church." l
The author of this memorial was the Rev. Thomas Bradbury Chand
ler, D.D., the friend and correspondent of Seabury, and the first bishop
designate of Nova Scotia. It was thus, in the midst of great physical
infirmity, and as the end of a most useful and honored life drew nigh,
that this truly apostolic man exerted himself for the guidance of the
Church he had by his pen defended, and by his piety adorned for years.
Following close upon the adjournment of the convention, and
the receipt of the letter we have given, came a communication from
the good archbishop, enclosing the long-expected act of parliament
authorizing the consecration of bishops for America :

The end desired was now at hand. The convention was reas
sembled at Wilmington, on the 10th day of October. The presidency
of this adjourned session was given to Dr. Provoost, the bishop-elect

1 Memoirs of the Church, 2cl ed., p. 117.

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

of New York. Only New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Dela
ware, and South Carolina were represented by both clerical and
lay deputies nine clerical and eleven lay at this adjourned ses
sion. Maryland had only a clerical representative present, the Rev.
William Smith, D.D., but his name is found recorded in none of the
important votes of the ses
sion, and it was at this
meeting, although the
minutes of the session are
silent on the point, that

ANNO REGNI

GEORGII III.

REGIS

Me-gnt Britatmi/e, Francite,

VICESIMO SEXTO.

At the Parliament begun and holdn at Wejlminfler, the
Eighteenth Day of May, Anno Domini 1784, in the Twenty -
fourth Tear of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord GEORGE
the Third, by the Grace of God, of Gnat Britain ffanct,
and Inland, King, Defender of the Faith, &f.

And frpm thence continued, by ieveral Prorogations, to tie Twenty-
fourth Day of January, 17861 being the Third Seffioa of the Six
teenth Parliament o Grttt Britain.

the request of this distin
guished man for recom
mendation to England for
consecration was refused.
Of the clergy present at
this convention which re
stored the Nicene Creed,
and refused to reinstate the
Athanasian, and, after a
warm debate, restored the
article on the descent into
hell to the Apostles Creed,
Drs. Provoost and White,
and the Rev. Robert Smith,
received the episcopate.
Uzal Ogden failed of confir
mation at the hands of the
convention at a later date,
and abandoned the Church.
Dr. Smith, failing of the
coveted episcopate in the
Church he had so abundant
ly served and so abundantly
honored, relaxed nothing of
his zeal in behalf of the
Church, and contributed
not a little to the happy

realization of the plans he had been so fertile in framing. The
papers of Drs. Provoost, White, and Griffith, recommending them
to the episcopate respectively of New York, Pennsylvania, and
Virginia, were duly signed, and on Thursday, the 2d of November,
1786, the two former "embarked on board the Speedy packet
for old England, with the expectation of obtaining consecration
from the English bishops." 1 Thus wrote Benjamin Moore to his
friend and correspondent, the Rev. Samuel Parker, in Boston. The
voyage was "prosperous," 2 and London was reached on the 29th of the
month. The Hon. John Adams, the minister at the court of St.
James from America, who had kindly interested himself in aiding

i Hawks and Perry s "Connecticut Church "White s "Memoirs of the Church," 2d ed.,

Documents," n., p. 305. p. 120.

LONDON":

Printed by C. EYRE and the Executors of W. STK AIIAN,
Printers to the King s moft Excellent Majefty. 1786..

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

[ 1567 ]
ANNO VICESIMO SEXTO

Georgii III. Regis.

CAP. LXXXIV.

An A61 to empower the Archbifhop of Canterbury r , or the
Archbifhop of York y for the Time being, to confecrate to
the Office of a Bifhop, Perfons being Subjects or Citizens
of Countries out of his Majefty s Dominions.

, fog tfje SLafos of tfjis Healm,
no person can be consecrateo to tfje
ftce of a Bisfjop foitfjout tfje Iting s 3Li=
cence for $is (Election to tfjat fto, ano
tfje i&ogal IHanoate untier tlje reat
for jjts Confirmation ana Consent

tton : ^no hjfjereas eberg person iwlja sfjail tie consecrateo
to tj)e sato fctce is required to take tije atfjs of ^llz-
giance ana ?u}jremaqj, ano also t|je at!) of oue tieot=
ence to tjje ^rcljiisijop : ^[ntr Snfjereas tjere are otuers
persons, Subjects or Citizens of Countries out of jjis
ftlajests s Dominions, ano inhabiting ano resioing iuitftin
tfje saio Countries, iwjjo profess tjje Pitfolirft SEorsfjip of
^[Imigf)t2 (00, according to tije Principles of tfje Cijurdj
of England, antr fofyo, in oroer to probtoe a regular ^uc^
cession of fKinisters for tfje &lt;Seroice of tfjeir Cfjurcij, are
oesirous of jjabing certain of tfje Subjects or Citizens of
tfjose Countries consecrateo Bishops, accoroing to tfje
Jform of Consecration in tfje Cfjurcfj of England : Be it
enactetr fag tfje Iting s most (Excellent J^ajestg, bg anti
foitfj tfje ^lobice ano Consent of tfje ILoros Spiritual ano
Eemporal, ano Commons, in tfjts present parliament
assemoleti, ano &jj tfje ^utfjoritg of tfje same, Efjat, from
ry anti after tfje passing of tfjis ^ct, it sfjall ano mag be
h. lawful to ano for tfje ^rcfjbisfjop of Canterbury, or tfje
^rcfjbisfjop of York, for tfje Eime being, togetfjer iuttfj
sucfj otfjer Bisfjops as tfjeg sfjall call to tfjeir Assistance,

72 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

to consecrate Person*, being Subjects or Citizens of Cowv -^oft.
tries out of &te Jftajestg s dominions, iSisftops, for tfte ShSJ"
Purposes aforesaio, foitftout tfte Hing s licence for tfteir SS*J?flf
Election, or tfje &op.al JEanUate, unoer rfte &lt;reat Seal, iSaS?
for tfteir Confirmation ano Consecration, antr britftout E r to n{ Lke
requiring tftem to tafte tfte atfts of Allegiance ano Su= StSsT 1
premacjj, ano tfje atft of oue beoience to tfte
bisftop for tfte Eime being,

II. probij&eo alfoags, Eftat no Persons sftall
consecrateo Bisftops in tfje Banner jjerein probioeo, until MS" is
tjje ^rdjbisftop of Canterbury, or tfje ^rcfjbisfjop of York, S3J|*
for tfje Eime being, sfjall fjabe first applieo for ano ob= SSS^
taineo iiis jftajestg s licence, 05 SEarrant unoer ^is cration&gt; * c -
Eogal Signet ano Sign JHanual, autijorising ano empoto

ering fjim to perform sucfj Consecration, ano expressing
tfje ^ame or Barnes of tfje persons to be consecrateo, nor
until tfje saio ^rcfjbisfjop u^s been fullg ascertaineo of
tfjeir sufKciencg in gooo iLearning, of tfje Soundness of
tfteir JFaitfj, ano of tlje Puritg of tfteir JHanners.

III. probioeo also, ano be it fjerebg oeclareo, Efjat
no Person or Persons consecrateo to tfje IRce of a
ISisjop in tjje JHanner aforesaio, nor ang Person or
Persons oeribing tfjeir Consecration from or unoer anjj
Bisfjop so consecrateo, nor ang Person or Persons ao=
mittetj to tfje rtrer of eacon or Priest bg ang Bisfjop
or Bisfjops so consecrateo, or bg tfje Successor or Succes=
sors of anjj iSisfjop or iSisfjops so consecrateo, sfjall be
tfjerebg enableti to exercise {jis or tfjeir respective fKce
or faces foitfjin P?is IHajestg s Dominions,

IV. probioeo aliwags, ano be it furtfjer enacteo, %% of
Efjat a Certificate of sucfj Consecration sfjall be giben | v n e * the
unoer tfje l^anti ano Seal of tfje &rcfjbisfjop tufjo conse= |^ hbisio p-
crates, containing tfje $ame of tfte Person so consecrateo,

foitfj tfje Monition, as biell of tfte Countrg toftereof fte is
a Subject or Citizen, as of tfte Cfturcft in tofticft fte is
appointeo iSisftop, ano tfte furtfter Description of ftis not
ftabing taken tfte saio atfts, being exempteo from tfte
Obligation of so ooing bg birtue of tftis ^ict.

FINIS.

the American Church in the accomplishment of its desire for the
episcopate, was first called upon, and then the Archbishop of Canter
bury. Later, the same courtesy was shown to the Bishop of London,
the celebrated Robert Lowth, then drawing near his end. Other
prelates were visited, and an audience was granted by the king.

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

At length the many prescribed formalities were completed, and
on Septuagesima, February 4, 1787, at the chapel at Lambeth, the lay
ing on of hands took place. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. John

LAMBETH CHAPEL.

Moore, was the consecrator ; the Archbishop of York, Dr. William \
Markham, was the presenter; and the Bishop of Bath and Wells, (
Di\_Charles Moss, and the Bishop of Peterborough, Dr. John Hinch-/
cliffe, united in the imposition of hands. The ]Jev\ Dr. Drake, one of

the primate s chaplains,
preached from 1 Cor.
xiv. 40 : " Let all things
be done decently, and
i n or( i er ; and another
chaplain read the
prayers. The congre
gation was small ; only
the family and house
hold of the archbishop,
and " very few others,"
among them the Rev.
Jacob Duche, an old
friend and fellow-
townsman of the newly
made Bishop of Penn
sylvania. The solem
nity being over, the
American bishops

74 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

dined with the archbishop and bishops, spending the remainder of the
day in their company, and on the evening of the following day Bishops
White and Provoost left London for Falmouth, which was reached on
the 10th. Detained by contrary winds until Quinquagesima Sunday,
the 18th, they embarked for New York, reaching port on the after
noon of Easter day, April 8th.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.

THE question has been raised with reference to the priority of the laying on of
hands upon Drs. White and Provoost. Dr. J. W. Francis, in his interesting and
valuable paper on "Old New York," page 1G8, states his view of the case as fol
lows : "It has been more than once affirmed, and the declaration is in print, that
Bishop Provoost, as senior Presbyter, and senior in the ministry, was consecrated
first, and Bishop White next, though in the same day and hour, February 4th, 1787.
The son-in-law of Provoost, C. D. Golden, a man of veracity, assured me such was
the case. If so, Provoost is to be recorded as the Father of the American Episco
pate. It is painful to pluck a hair from the venerable head of the Apostolic White,
but we are dealing with history." It is probable that Dr. Francis misunderstood
the statement of Mr. Golden, for, from a statement made by Bishop Smith, of Ken
tucky, relative to the consecration of himself and Bishops Hopkins, Mcllvaine, and
Doane, October 31, 1832, at New York, it appears that just after the consecration
service had been performed, Bishop White stated that the bishops at Lambeth, on
the occasion of the consecration of himself and Bishop Provoost, had observed that
the usual practice in England, where more than one bishop was to be consecrated,
of laying hands on the several candidates according to their seniority as doctors in
divinity.

Now, as the degree of D.D. had been conferred on Bishop White in 1782, and
on Bishop Provoost in 1786, Bishop White, was, of course, the senior doctor in
divinity.

In the certificate of consecration, Bishop White is named first. After stating
the time and place of consecration, and by whom performed, the document says :

"Consecrated the Rev. William White, Doctor in Divinity, Rector of Christ s
Church and St. Peter s,- in the city of Philadelphia, a subject or citizen of the United
States of North America, and the Rev. Samuel Provoost, Doctor in Divinity, Rector
of Trinity Church, in the city of New York, a subject or citizen also of the United
States of North America, to the office of a Bishop." l

In formally mentioning the consecration, on page 28, Bishop White, whose
avoidance of egotism was well known, places his own name first.

The following is a copy of Bishop Smith s remarks referred to above :

"LOUISVILLE, KY., Oct. 23, 1861.

"An incident which occurred in the Vestry room of St. Paul s Church, in New
York, on the memorable occasion of the consecration of the four bishops, may, per
haps, interest those who come after us. Before the bishops had disrobed, the
venerable Presiding Bishop claimed our attention to a brief statement. He had been
censured for giving Bishop Hobart precedence over Bishop Griswold, on the score,
as was supposed, of personal and ecclesiastical prepossession. He trusted we all
knew him well enough to believe that he was altogether incapable of such an act.
The facts were, that on the occasion of his own consecration at the same time with
Dr. Provoost, the English mode of determining priority had been adopted, i. e.
seniority as Doctors of Divinity. On the first occasion of the consecration of more
than one bishop at a time, in the American Church, the same principle had been
affirmed, perhaps without due consideration, by the bishops present. On the present
occasion, and after more mature reflection, it had been decided that another order

i Memoirs of the Prot. Epis. Church. By Bishop White. 2d ed., p. 324.

CONSECRATION OF FIRST AMERICAN BISHOPS.

should hereafter be followed, that of seniority of election. To which the Bishop
of Kentucky replied, that as he was the only one affected by the change, he was
most happy to say, that it met with his most cordial approbation.

"B. B. SMITH,
" Bishop of the Diocese of Kentucky."

Dr. Berrian, in the "History of Trinity Church, N.Y.," page 293, referring
to the consecration of Bishops Hobart and Griswold, in May, 1811, says, " Accord
ing to the usage of the Church of England, Bishop White first laid hands on Mr.
Hobart as a Doctor of Divinity, though Mr. Griswold was his senior both in age
and the ministry."

An interesting memento of the consecration of Bishop White is still preserved
in the archives of the General Convention. It is the bill of expenses incurred in
the consecration, and is as follows :

The Eight Rev 4 . William White D.D. Bishop of Pennsylvania.

To William Dickes D r .

1787. s. d.

Janry. 25. To Fees paid at the Secretary of State s Office for his^

Majesty s License authorising the Archb? of Canterbury &gt; 4. 16. 9.

to consecrate )

Febry. 4. To Fees at the Vicar General s Office, D Commons, as ) 6 r 4

by Ace 1 $

To several Attendances at Lord Sydney s Office, Doctor s S

Commons &? &. & engrossing Certificate of Consecra- &gt; 2. 2. 0.

tion & Parchment )

To a Gratuity to the Chapel Clerk at Lambeth Palace . 0. 10. 6.

To Coach hire at sundry Times 0. 7. 6.

14. 3. 1.

Consecrated ^ Expences of Consecrating the Rev? "Wf White D.D. to be Bishop of
Sy.jP 6118 ^^- g&gt; d&gt;

Apparitor s fee 1. 0. 0.

Drawing & Ingrossing the Act of Consecration & Stamp 0. 8. 8.

Registering the whole proceedings 2. 10. 0.

One half ot the Coach hire &c 0. 10. 6.

Registers Clerk 0. 10. 6.

6. 6. 4.

CHAPTER IV.

THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES OF THE NORTHERN,
MIDDLE, AND SOUTHERN STATES.

ON the return of the newly-consecrated bishops, Seabury, who
had only held aloof from their earlier measures from a con
sciousness of Pro voost s personal hostility, and an unwillingness to
submit to the radical notions with reference to the episcopate then too
much in vogue at the South, addressed a friendly letter to each, which
did credit to his head and heart. If any proof were wanted to con
vince us of the Christian charity and forbearance of the Bishop of
Connecticut, this letter, which we print from the original draft, still
preserved in Bishop Seabury s manuscript letter-book, would surely be
enough. In reading it, we should remember that it was addressed to
a man who had openly and avowedly sought to cast contempt upon
the official character and personal reputation of Seabury ; and in the
convention of his own State, and in the wider assembly of the Middle
and Southern States, had introduced resolutions aimed directly, and
even by name, against the Bishop of Connecticut, seeking to limit his
influence, and reduce him to a position inferior to those who should be
consecrated in the English line. This letter is as follows :

May 1, 1787.
THE RIGHT REV. BISHOP PBOVOOST, New York :

RIGHT REV. AND DEAR SIR, It is with pleasure I take this opportunity of
presenting my congratulations on your safe return to New York, on the success of
your application to the English Archbishops, and on your recovery from your late
dangerous illness.

You must be equally sensible with me of the present unsettled state of the
Church of England in this country, and of the necessity of union and concord
among all its members in the United States of America, not only to give stability
to it, but to fix it on its true and proper foundation. Possibly nothing will con
tribute more to this end than uniformity in worship and discipline among the
churches of the different States. It will be my happiness to be able to promote so
good and necessary a work ; and I take the liberty to propose, that, before any
decided steps be taken, there may be a meeting of yourself and Bishop White with
me at such time and place as shall be most convenient, to try whether some plan
cannot be adopted that shall in a quiet and effectual way secure the great object
which, I trust, we shall all heartily rejoice to see accomplished. For my own part,
I cannot help thinking that the most likely method will be to retain the present
Common Prayer-Book, accommodating it to the Civil Constitution of the United
States. The government of the church, you know, is already settled ; a body of
canons will, however, be wanted to give energy to the government, and ascertain its
operation.

A stated Convocation of the clergy of this State is now to be held at Stamford
on Thursday after Whitsunday. As it is so near to New York, and the journey
may contribute to the reestabhshment of your health, I should be much rejoiced to

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES.

see you there, more especially as I think it would promote the great object, THE
UNION OF ALL THE CHURCHES. May God direct us in all things !

Believe me to be, Rt. Rev. and dear sir, Your affectionate brother and humble
servant,

SAMUEL, Bishop of Connecticut. 1

In making this proffer for union and uniformity, Bishop Seabury
was acting on his own individual responsibility. The convocation of
the Connecticut clergy, held at Wallingford the February preceding,
indignant at the affronts their bishop had publicly received at the
Philadelphia Convention, had determined to send another Presbyter
from their ranks to Scotland, to be consecrated, after the fashion of
the Scottish Church, coadjutor to Seabury. Jeremiah Learning and
Richard Mansfield were successively elected to this important office ;
but age and infirmities induced them to decline, and the choice subse
quently fell on Jarvis, who was afterwards to succeed him to whom he
was now elected associate. Measures were also put in train to accom
plish in Massachusetts the choice of the excellent Samuel Parker, then
rector of Trinity, Boston, to the bishopric of that State and New Hamp
shire, that the episcopal college in the Scottish line might thus be com
pleted, and any necessity of union with the churches at the southward
effectually precluded. Had these measures been consummated, as was
the ardent wish of the great body of the New England churches, there
would have been seen in this country the spectacle of two rival churches
differing in origin, in doctrine, in ritual, and antagonistic in principle
and practice. Union would soon have been impossible, and theChurch,
a house divided against herself, could not have failed to have been
despoiled and destroyed by foes on every side.

All this was prevented, under God, by the patient forbearance and
wise conservatism of Seabury. He might have been the " Primus" of
the Church in New England. He chose rather, for the whole church s
good, to become one of a house of bishops in which he was to be a
hopeless minority. He restrained the ardor of his devoted friends and
adherents in and out of Connecticut. He returned again and again to
the effort for union and uniformity, and God at length crowned his
self-denying, self-forgetting labors and concessions with the desired
success, and made him the presiding bishop of a united American
Church.

"Mysteriously did God, in his wise providence, hedge up the way
to the completion of the episcopal college in the English line, till, in
his own good time, measures for the union had been inaugurated. The
amiable and pious Griffith, chosen Bishop of Virginia, found his journey
to England prevented ; the perfect indifference of the parishes to the
project leading them to withhold their contributions for accomplishing

mit you to do us that favour ; more especially as
I think it would greatly promote so essential an
object as the union of all our Churches must
be esteemed. May God direct us in all things !
Believe me to be, Right Reverend, & dear Six 1 ,
your affectionate Brother,
& humble Servant,
SAMUEL Bp. Connect.
" Rt. Rev. Bp. White."

1 A letter in the same words with a few
changes in the concluding paragraph was
addressed to the Bishop of Pennsylvania. These
changes were as follows :

" I have written to Bp. Provost on this subject,
& have invited him to visit us at the stated Con
vocation of our Clergy which is to be held at
Stamford Thursday after Whitsunday. I regret
that the distance & time will not probably per-

HISTOKY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

it ; and when this hindrance was in a fair way of removal, through the
proffered kindness of friends at the North , the coldness of the clergy
towards their bishop-elect made it apparent that they feared alike his
piety and zeal for the Church, should he ever enter upon the limited
episcopate to which they had chosen him. Then began a series of
petty persecutions, detailed in Dr. Griffith s unpublished letters in
language far too mild, when we think that their story was of the con
spiracy of ministers and members of the Episcopal Church, aimed at
the efficiency, and even existence of the episcopate. These annoy
ances resulted, finally, in wearing out the patience of Griffith, and in
wringing from him a resignation of the office he had never sought, but
which he would have highly honored. In Maryland, the Church was
still further removed from obtaining the episcopate. The General Con
vention at Wilmington, after a stormy discussion, had refused to sign
the testimonials of the Rev. William Smith, D.D., President of Wash
ington College, and perhaps the foremost man, in point of ability, in
the whole American Church, from a conviction that he was far from
being " blameless " in life or conversation ; and this step effectually
precluded any further nominations from that quarter, the Maryland
Convention being, at that tune, to a certain extent, under the influence
of this gifted but erratic man. In New Jersey, personal controversies
between the most prominent members of the convention, resulting

from intrigues on the
part of Uzal Ogden,
D.D., prevented the
choice of the excel
lent Dr. Beach to
the episcopate, and
plunged the Church
throughout the State
into confusion and
distress. Delaware
had too little life to
call to the highest
dignity of the Church
the distinguished
Wharton, whose
name appears on our
annals as the first
convert to the Protes-
tant faith from Ro
manism, numbered
among the ranks oi
the reorganized
American Church.
South Carolina had
stipulated, on her admission to the confederacy of churches, that no
bishop should be sent to her ; and on either side of her there was too
little church zeal even to gather a convention, and consequently there
was no hope of a popular election of an Episcopal head. At the North,

BT. REV. SAMUEL PROVOOST, D.D., FIRST
BISHOP OP NEW YORK.

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES.

Massachusetts and New Hampshire were receiving the ministrations
of Seabury, and cared not to unite themselves to the churches at the
South. In Rhode Island, the Bishop of Connecticut was, from the first,
openly acknowledged, and subsequently invested with full Episcopal
charge of the State. Vermont presented the anomalous spectacle of
an election of a bishop growing out of a gigantic land speculation, and
the well-meaning but erratic John Cosens Ogden was duped into giving
aid to a project for securing the consecration of Samuel Peters, LL.D.,
the author of a burlesque history of Connecticut, and then a refugee
in London : an act which, if consummated, would have been a dis
grace to the Church never to be wiped out. And so the eyes of all
who longed and prayed for unity were turned towards Parker, the
rector of Trinity Church, Boston, as the only means of accomplishing
this union. Seabury, who had maintained the closest intimacy with
him from that convocation of the Connecticut clergy which had been the
occasion of their first meeting, hoped to find in him, as a last resort,
the third bishop of Scottish ordination. White, on the other hand,
looked to him to fill the vacancy still existing in the number needed
for the canonical transmission of the English succession. He, with .
characteristic modesty, was deaf to hints, and, while others saw in him
the fittest person for the second New England bishopric, quietly &lt;
planned and secured, by means of his personal influence, the adoption
of measures for healing the breach, and bringing back to union and
uniformity the churches of all the United States.

To these measures we need not revert in detail. It is enough to
state that the application made to the Philadelphia convention of 1789,
by the clergy of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, nominating the
Rev. Edward Bass, of Newburyport, for the episcopate of those States,
and requesting the convention to take measures for his consecration by
the union of Bishop Seabury with the prelates in the English line,
proved the means of union. It came out afterwards, somewhat, we
infer, to the surprise of Bishop White, 1 that when this union was
effected, and Bishop Seabury received into the house of bishops, and
the obnoxious resolutions of earlier date had been either explained
away or rescinded, there was no effort made to proceed with Mr. Bass s
consecration. The fact was, that it was not the purpose of those who
brought his name before the General Convention in this connection, that
he should be consecrated. T heir object was, by presenting a case in
point, to convince the churchmen out of New England, that a further
resort to England for bishops was unnecessary ; that a full college of
consecrators was already on the ground, and that all the American
communion now needed, under God, to ensure a successful career,
was to be at unity with itself. This done, the consecration of Mr.
Bass might well afford to wait, till, in the progress of the Church in
New England, there appeared a greater need of* Episcopal supervision
and advice.

We have already given the noble letter of Seabury to Bishop
Provoost, on the latter s return from England after receiving consecra
tion. A similar letter, as we have seen, was addressed by the Bishop

i Vide " Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal Church," 2d ed., p. 148.

80 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

of Connecticut to Bishop White. To this, the following reply was
returned. It is not, we believe, contained among the Bishop White
correspondence. At least, we have it only as copied in full, in a let
ter from Bishop Seabury to Mr. Parker, of Boston, from whose papers
we now transcribe it. It is as follows :

PHILADELPHIA, May 21, 1787.

Bishop Wliite to Sisho2) Seabury, There is nothing I have more at heart, than
to see y* members of our communion throughout y* United States connected in one
system of ecclesiastical government ; and if my meeting of you in concurrence with
Bishop Provoost can do anything towards y 9 accomplishment of this great object,
my very numerous engagements shall not hinder me from taking a journey for y*
purpose. But I must submit it to your consideration, whether it will not be best
previously to understand one another as to y views of y* churches in which we
respectively preside.

We have been informed (but perhaps it is a mistake), that y* Bishop and
clergy of Connecticut think our proposed ecclesiastical constitution essentially
wrong in y* leading parts of it. As y* general principles on which it is founded
were maturely considered and comparea with y* maxims which prevail in y* eccle
siastical system of England ; as they have received y approbation of all y e Con
ventions southward of you, and of one to the northward ; as they were not objected
to by y* Archbishops and Bishops of y* English Church ; and as they are generally
thought, among us, essential to y* giving of effect to future ecclesiastical measures ;
I do not expect to find y churches in many of y* States willing to associate on any
plan materially different from this. If our brethren in Connecticut should be of
opinion that y" giving of any share of y" legislative power of y* Church to others
than those of y Episcopal order is inconsistent with Episcopal government ; and
that y* requiring of y" consent of y* laity to ecclesiastical laws is an invasion of
clerical rights ; in this case, I see no prospect of doing good in any other way than
by contributing all in my power to promote a spirit of love and peace between us ;
although I shall continue to cultivate y hope of our being brought, at some future
day, to a happy agreement.

As to y Liturgy, if it should be thought advisable by y* general body of our
Church to adhere to y* English Book of Common Prayer (y* political parts ex-
cepted) , I shall be one of y" first, after y" appearance of such a disposition, to com
ply with it most punctually. Further than this, if it should seem y* most probable
way of maintaining an agreement among ourselves, I shall use my best endeavors
to effect it. At y" same time, I must candidly express my opinion, that y* review
of y* Liturgy would- tend very much to y* satisfaction of most of y 9 members of
our communion, and to its future success and prosperity. The worst evil which I
apprehend from a refusal to review is this, that it will give great advantage to
those who wish to carry y* alteration into essential points of doctrine. Reviewed
it will unquestionably be in some places ; and y* only way to prevent its being
done by men of y above description is, y taking it up as a general business. J
have been informed that you, sir, and our brethren in Connecticut, think a review
expedient, although you wish not to be in haste in y* matter. Our brethren in
Massachusetts have already done it. The Churches in y States southward of you
have sufficiently declared their sentiments ; for even those which have delayed per
mitting y use of y* new Book, did it merely on y principles of y" want of y
Episcopal order among them. If, sir, we should be of a different opinion in any
matter, I hope we shall be so candid as mutually to think it consistent with y best
intentions, and a sincere desire to promote y* interests of our holy religion. This
justice you have already received from

Etc., etc. (Signed) WILLIAM WHITE.

The above, my dear sir, is the whole of a letter from Bishop White, that re
lates to the subject. It is an answer to one from me to him, in which I proposed a
personal interview with him and Bishop Provoost, previously to any decided steps
being taken respecting the Liturgy and government of the Church, and mentioned
the Liturgy as the most likely bond of union. I send it to you without comment,

and shall oe glad of your opinion respecting it

Your affectionate, humble servant,

S., Bishop of Connecticut.

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES.

The result of enclosing this letter to Mr. Parker, was one written
by him to Bishop White in which he urged, with his characteristic
energy, the practicability of union. To this the Bishop of Pennsyl
vania replied, under date of August 6, 1787. This letter, now in
possession of the writer, covers eleven closely written quarto pages,
and is a most interesting exposition of the plan and workings of the
newly-organized American ecclesiastical system. From that portion
of it relating to the matter in question we quote the following :

I will be very explicit with you on y" questions you put in regard to an union
with Bishop Seabury, and y* consecration of Dr. Griffith. On y* one hand, con
sidering it was presumed a third was to go over to England that y* institutions
of y* Church of that country require three to join in y* consecration, and that y*
political situation of y English Prelates prevents their official knowledge of Dr.
Seabury as a Bishop I am apprehensive it may seem a breach of faith toward
them, if not an intended deception in us, were we to consecrate without y* usual
number, and those all under y 9 English succession ; although it would not be in
consistent with this idea, that another gentleman, under a different succession,
should be joined with us. On y 6 other hand, I am most sincerely desirous of seeing
our Church throughout these States united in one ecclesiastical legislature ; and I
think that any difficulties which have hitherto seemed in y way, might be removed
by mutual forbearance. If there are any further difficulties than those I allude to
of difference of opinion they do not exist with me ; and I shall be always ready
to do what lies in my power to bring all to an agreement.

Dating from this kind communication there followed numerous
letters, all tending to the removal of prejudices, and the restoration
of the kindly feeling between the churches of New England and the
Middle and Southern States.

One obstacle to union was with difficulty removed. The irrecon
cilable Provpost, without the following of his own convention, against
the pleadings of the warm-hearted White, sought single-handed to
beat back the irresistible tendencies of churchmen, North, South, and
East, toward comprehension and charity. Little by little this oppo
sition on the part of the first bishop of New York, which it was hope
less to expect to remove, was rendered inoperative, and the year of
grace, 1789, found the longing for union well-nigh universal.

In a hurried note addressed by Bishop Seabury to his friend
Parker, the rector of Trinity Church, Boston, he says :

I believe we shall send two clergymen to the Philadelphia Convention to see
whether a union can be effected. If it fail, the point, I believe, will have to be
altogether given up.

It was, we may well believe from a comparison of dates, in conse
quence of this encouragement, that Mr. Parker set on foot, and within
the space of a couple of months brought about, the " Act of the Clergy of
Massachusetts and New Hampshire " already cited, the object of which
was to bring the question of union in such shape before the "Philadelphia
Convention " as to admit of no further evasions or strugglings on the
part of those opposed to a recognition of Seabury s orders and Epis
copal rights.

In the June following, the Bishop of Connecticut addressed a let
ter of eight folio pages to his Episcopal brother of Pennsylvania. Our

82 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

space forbids the transcription of the whole of this communication, and
the ravages of time have mutilated portions of every page ; but enough
still remains to acquaint us with the style and spirit of this able and
well-considered letter :

NEW LONDON, June 29th, 1789.

RT. REV. AND DEAR SIR : Your favor of December 9th, 1788, came safely
to me, though not till the middle of February. I heartily thank you for it, and for
the sentiments of candor and Christian unity it contained ; and beg you to believe
that nothing on my part shall be wanting to keep up a friendly intercourse with
you, and with all the Churches in the United States that our different situations can
permit.

That your letter has not been sooner attended to has not been owing to disre
spect or negligence. I was unwilling to reply to the great and interesting subject of
union between the Church of Connecticut and the Southern Churches, merely on
the dictates of my own judgment ; and as we are about to call a Convention of lay
delegates from our several congregations to provide for the support of their Bishop,
and to consider the practicability of instituting an Episcopal Academy in this State,
it was thought best that the point of sending lay delegates to the General Conven
tion should come fairly before them. The Annual Convention of our clergy was
also to meet in June, and I determined to take their sentiments on the subject of
sending some of their body to your Convention.

When the matter was proposed to the Lay Convention, after some conversation,
they declined every inteference in Church government, or in reformation of Litur
gies. They supposed the government of the Church to be fixed, and that they had
no right to alter it by introducing a new power into it. They hoped the old Liturgy
would be retained with little alteration ; and these matters they thought belonged to
the Bishop and clergy, and not to them. They, therefore, could send no delegates ;
though they wished for unity among the Churches, and for uniformity of worship,
but could not see why these great objects could not better be secured on the old
ground, than on the new ground that had been taken with you.

The clergy supposed that, on your Constitution, any representation from them
would be inadmissible without lay delegates ; nor could they submit to offer them
selves to make part of any meeting where the authority of their Bishop had been
disputed by one bishop, and, probably through his influence, by a number of others
who were to compose that meeting. They, therefore, must consider themselves as
excluded till that point shall be settled to their satisfaction, which they hope will
be done by your Convention.

For my own part, gladly would I contribute to the union and uniformity of all
our churches. But while Bishop Provoost disputes the validity of my consecration
I can take no step toward the accomplishment of so great and desirable objects.
This point, I take it, is now in such a state, that it must be settled either by your
Convention or by an appeal to the good sense of the Christian world. But as this
is a subject in which I am personally concerned, I shall refrain from any remarks
on it, hoping that the candor and good sense of your Convention will render the
future mention of it altogether unnecessary.

You mention the necessity of having your succession completed from England,
both as it is the choice of your churches, and in consequence of implied obligations
you are under in England. I have no right to dictate to you on these points.
There can, however, be no harm in wishing it were otherwise. Nothing would
tend so much to the unity and unifonnity of our churches, as the three Bishops now
in the States, joining in the consecration of a fourth. I could say much on this
subject, but should I do so it might be supposed to proceed from interested views.
I shall, therefore, leave it to your own good sense only hoping that you and
the Convention will deliberately consider whether the implied obligations in Eng
land, and the wishes of your Churches, be so strong that they must not give way to
the prospect of securing the peace and unity of the Church.

Passing in review the arguments urged by the churches at the
southward for the introduction of the lay-element into the government
of the Church, and examining quite in detail the various alterations
comprised in the " proposed book," the bishop thus concludes :

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHUKCHES.

I shall close this letter with renewing a former proposal for union and uni
formity viz.: That you and Bishop Provoost, with as many Proctors from the
clergy as shall be thought necessary, meet me with an equal number of Proctors
from Connecticut. We should then be on equal ground on which ground only,
I presume, you would wish to stand and I doubt not everything might be settled
to mutual satisfaction without the preposterous method of ascertaining doctrines,
etc., by a majority of votes.

Hoping that all obstructions may be removed by your convention, and beseech
ing Almighty God to direct us all in the great work of establishing and building up
His Church in peace and unity, truth and charity and purity, I remain your affec
tionate brother, and very humble servant, SAMUEL, Bishop of Connecticut.

A similar letter was addresed to the Rev. Dr. William Smith, now
again in Philadelphia. These manly, courteous, and sensible com
munications were laid before the first convention of 1789, immediately
on the presentation before the meeting of the "Act of the Clergy of
Massachusetts and New Hampshire." The reading of these letters
was followed by an act of simple justice, which, though it may have
been tardy, was now done with a glad alacrity which was at once
creditable to the convention, and gave promise of a speedy settlement
of the difficulties in the way of union and comprehension. The record
reads as follows :

Upon reading the said letter, it appearing that Bishop Seabury lay under
some misapprehensions concerning an entry in the Minutes of a former Convention,
as intending some doubt of the validity of his Consecration.

Resolved, unanimously, that it is the opinion of this Convention, that the
consecration of the Rt. Rev. Dr. Seabury to the Episcopal Office is valid. 1

1 Perry s "Reprint of the Journals of the to the Bishop who ordained them; and as this

Gen. Conv.," I. pp. 70, 71 ; vide also, " Historical circumstance had been urged in argument, the

Notes and Documents illustrating the organiza- proposal of rejecting settlements under such

tion of the Prot. Epis. Church in the United subjection was adopted; although Mr. Pilmore

States," p. 394. denied that any such thing had been exacted of

It will serve to show whether or not Bishop him. As the measure is stated on the Journal to
Seabury really erred in attaching such impor- have been carried on the motion of the author,
tance to the action of the Convention of 1786, he thinks it proper to mention that he never con-
as he did, if we cite the opinion of Bishop White ceived of there having been any ground for it,
with reference to this veiy matter, written years other than in the apprehension which had been
afterwards, in a calm, dispassionate review of the expressed. This temperate guarding against the
details of the church s organization : evil, if it did exist, seemed the best way of obvi-

" The question of the Scottish Episcopacy ating measures which might have led to disputes
gave occasion to some warmth. That matter with the Northern clergy." *
was struck at by certain motions which appear on In addition to the above, the Bishop of Penn-
its Journals, and which particularly affected two sylvania further observes :
members ot the body, one of whom the Rev. " In regard to the Church in Connecticut, it
Mr. Pilmore had "been ordained by Bishop had been all along an object with the author,
Seabury ; and the other, the Rev. William Smith, which he never endeavored to conceal, to bring
the younger gentleman of the Convention of its Episcopacy within the Union. But as the
that name, had been ordained by a Bishop of Scotch succession could not be officially recog-
the Church in which Bishop Seabury had been nized by the English Bishops, he wished to corn-
consecrated. The Convention did not enter into plete the succession from England, before such
the opposition to the Scottish succession. A mo- a comprehension should take place. He knew,
tion, as may be seen on the journals, was made indeed, that Bishop Provoost, although he did
to this effect, by the Rev. Mr. Provoost, seconded not appear to be possessed of personal ill-will to
by the Rev. Robert Smith, of South Carolina, Bishop Seabury, was opposed to having anything
who only of the clergy were of that mind. But to do with the Scotch succession, which he did
the subject was suppressed as the Journal not hesitate to pronounce irregular. Yet he was
shows by the previous question, moved by the very little supported in this sentiment ; and least of
Rev. Dr. Smith, and seconded by the author, all, by the clergy of his own diocese. Itwasthere-
Nevertheless, as it had been affirmed, that the gen- fore natural to infer that he would see the expe-
tlemen ordained under the Scottish succession, diency of what was the general wish, or at least
settling in the represented churches, were under- waive his objection for the sake of peace ; as
stood by some to be under canonical subjection indeed happened." 2

1 Bishop White s " Memoirs of the Church," 2d ed. (1836), pp. 115, 116.

2 Memoirs, p. 142.

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

The convention, thus put in full knowledge of the facts of
the case, gave to this vexed question :i full and patient consideration
in the " Committee of the Whole." By this parliamentary expedient,
as was doubtless intended, we are unable to trace the progress of the
discussion on the pages of the printed journal, itself in its original
among the rarest of our conventional publications. The result is
spread upon the printed minutes, and is as follows :

The Committee of the Whole, having had under their deliberate consideration
flu- application of the Clergy of Massachusetts and New Hampshire for the con
secration of the Rev. Edward Bass as their Bishop, do offer to the Convention the

following resolves :

1st. Resolved, That
a complete Order of
Bishops, derived as well
under the English as the
Scots line of Episcopacy,
doth now subsist within
the United States of
America, in the persons
of the Right Rev. Will
iam White, D.D., Bishop
of the Protestant Epis
copal Church in the State
of Pennsylvania ; the
Right Rev. Samuel Pro-
voost, D.D., Bishop of
the said Church in the
State of New York, and
the Right Rev. Samuel
Scabury, U.D., Bishop
of the said Church in the
State of Connecticut.

2d. Resolved, Tha.t
the three said Bishops are
fully competent to every
proper act and duty of
the Episcopal office and
character in these United
States, as well in respect
to the consecration of
other Bishops, and the

ordering of Priests and Deacons, as for the government of the Church according to
such rules, Canons, and institutions as now are, or hereafter may be, duly made and
ordained by the Church in that case.

3d. Resolved, That in Christian charity, as well as of dut} 7 , necessity and ex
pediency, the Churches represented in this Convention ought to contribute in every
manner in their power, towards supplying the wants and granting every just and
reasonable request of their sister Churches in these States ; and therefore :

4th. Resolved, That the Right Rev. Dr. White and the Right Rev. Dr. Pro-
voost be, and they hereby are, requested to join with the Right Rev. Dr. Seabury,
in complying with the prayer of the Clergy of the States of Massachusetts and New
Hampshire, for the consecration of the Rev. Edward Bass, Bishop-elect of the
Churches in the said States ; but that, before the said Bishops comply with the request
aforesaid, it be proposed to the Churches in the New England States, to meet the
Churches of these States, with the three said Bishops, in an adjourned Convention,
to settle certain articles of union and discipline, among all the Churches, previous
to such consecration.

5th. Resolved, That if any difficulty or delicacy, in respect to the Archbishops
and Bishops of England, shall remain with the Right Rev. Drs. White and Pro-
voost, or either of them, concerning their compliance with the above request, this

RT. REV. SAMUEL PARKER, D.D., SECOND BISHOP
OF MASSACHUSETTS, FROM A MINIATURE IN THE
POSSESSION OF MISS EDSON, LOWELL, MASS.

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES.

Convention will address the Archbishops and Bishops, and hope thereby to remove
the difficulty. 1

These resolutions of peace, unanimously agreed upon in the com
mittee of the whole, were unanimously adopted by the convention.
In a hurried note addressed to Bishop Seabury, Bishop White com
municated, without a moment s loss of time, the result of the action,
and the expression of his satisfaction at the prospect of a speedy union
on terms such as could not fail to commend themselves to all right-
minded men. The address to the archbishops and bishops recited the
request of the New England clergy and the resolutions of the conven
tion, and included the extracts from the Rev. Mr. Parker s letter to
Bishop White, and one from Bishop Seabury to Dr. William Smith. 2

Dr. Smith immediately, on the rising of the convention, sent the
following graphic account of the secret history of the session, which we
give from the original draft preserved among the Bishop White papers
in the writer s hands :

. . . You will see from our printed Journal, herewith enclosed, that in a
Committee of the whole, the business of the Eastern Churches engaged our attention
for the first five days of our sitting, and though a desire of union was everywhere
evident among the members, yet much difficulty and variety of sentiment and
apprehension prevailed as to the means, in- so-far that there appeared more of a
probability of coming to no conclusion. In this stage of the business, I requested a
postponement for one night, on the promise of proposing something against next
morning which might meet the apprehensions of all, as we all had but one great
object of union in view ; and I shall ever rejoice in it as the happiest incident of my
life, and the best service I have ever been able to render to our Church, that the
resolves which were offered the next morning were unanimously and almost in-
stantly adopted, as reconciling every sentiment, and removing every difficulty/
which had before appeared to obstruct a general union.

Bishop White, whom I consulted in framing the Resolves, and Dr. Moore, of
New York, and Mr. (now Dr.) Smith of South Carolina, were particularly zealous in
whatever tended to promote this good work ; and I am well assured that you are in
some mistake respecting Bishop White s having declined a " Proposal " for your join
ing with him and Bishop P. in consecrating a fourth Bishop. He has assured me, and
also declared in Convention, that no such proposal was ever made to him ; and I
believe he has written, or will write to you, on this subject. His whole conduct,
whenever your name and Episcopate have been mentioned, does him honor, and is
perfectly agreeable to his well-known excellent temper and zeal for the peace and
unity of the Church.

The standing committee of the convention also addressed the
Bishop of Connecticut, communicating the action respecting the con-

1 Perry s reprint of the early journals, Vol.
I., pp. 74, 75.

2 These extracts were as follows: "The
Clergy of this State (Massachusetts) are very
desirous of seeing an union of the whole Epis
copal Church in the United States take place ;
and it will remain with our brethren at the South
ward to say whether this shall be the case or
not whether we shall be a united or divided
Church. Some little difference in government
may exist in different States, withoutaffecting the
essential points of union and communion."

In like spirit, the Right Hey. Dr. Seabury,
Bishop of the Church in Connecticut, in his letter
to the Rev. Dr. Smith, dated July 23d, writes on
the subject of union, etc., as follows :

" The wish of my heart, and the wish of the

Clergy and of the Church people of this State,
would certainly have carried me and some of the
Clergy to your General Convention, had we con
ceived we could have attended with propriety.
The necessity of an union of all the Churches,
and the disadvantages of our present disunion,
we feel and lament equally with you; ajjdl a^ree -
with you that there may be a strong and emca-
eious union between Churches, where the usages
are different. I see not why it may not be so in
the present case, as soon as you have removed
those obstructions which, while they remain , must
prevent any possibility of uniting. The Church
of Connecticut consists, at present, of nineteen
clergymen in full orders, and more than twenty
thousand people, they suppose, as respectable as
the Church has in any State in the Union."

86 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

secration of Dr. Bass, and adding the further evidence of their desire
for union, in the removal of the constitutional restriction which had
seemed to hinder the admission of the Connecticut clergy to the con
vention.

By the second Article of our printed Constitution (as now amended) you will
observe that your first and chief difficulty respecting Lay representation is wholly
removed, upon the good and wise principles admitted by you as well as by us, viz. : . - /
" That there may be a strong and efficacious union between Churches, where the ) (/Jlj.
usages are in some respects different. It was long so in the different dioceses of
England. By the Article of our Constitution above mentioned, the admission of
yours and the other Eastern Churches is provided for upon your own principles
of representation ; while our Churches are not required to make any sacrifice of
theirs ; it being declared

" That the Church in each State shall be entitled to a representation either of
Clergy, or Laity, or of both. And in case the Convention (or Church) of any State
should neglect or decline to appoint their deputies of either order, or if it should be
their rule to appoint only out of one order ; or if any of those appointed should
neglect to attend, or be prevented by sickness, or any other accident, the Church in
such. State [district or diocese] shall, nevertheless, be considered as duly represented
by such deputy or deputies as may attend of either order. "

Here, then, every case is intended to be provided for, and experience will
either demonstrate that an efficacious union may be had upon these principles ; or
mutual good will, and a further reciprocation of sentiments will eventually lead to
a more perfect uniformity of Discipline as well as Doctrine. 1

The Bishop of New York, who had been detained from the con
vention by illness, raised the only protest against these measures for
union, but this opposition was of no avail. Bishop Seabury accepted
gracefully and without delay the invitation to the adjourned conven
tion in September, and churchmen everywhere seemed gratified at
the prospect of the incoming of unity and uniformity.

At length the gathering of bishops, clergy, and laity in a truly
general convention took place, and among its first results was the
reunion of the churches. A dingy, yellow half-sheet of paper care
fully preserved among the archives of the General Convention records
this act of Church comprehension.

It is this half sheet of paper, soiled and stained with the lapse of
nearly a hundred years, which attests the church s return to unity and
peace. It was not signed until the constitution had been modified in
its third article "so as to declare explicitly the right of the Bishops,
when sitting as a separate House, to originate and propose acts for the
concurrence of the other House of Convention, and to negative such
act, proposed by the other House as they may disapprove, provided
they are not adhered to by four-fifths of the other House" The words
we have italicized were not in the change as advocated by Seabury
and the New England clergy, but were agreed to as a compromise.
A few years later the full Episcopal negative, for which the Bishop
of Connecticut contended from the first, was freely accorded by the
other house.

The second result of this happy union was the return to uniformity,
as shown in the practical though not ostensible return to the English
prayer-book as the basis of the revised service-book of the American

1 Perry s " Hist. Notes and Documents," pp. 406, 407.

CONSOLIDATION OF THE CHURCHES.

church. The "proposed book," at once uncatholic and unchurchly,
thus abandoned. It had never received the approval of the

was

associated churches at the southward, and, in the comprehension of
the New England element, its fate was forever sealed.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.

" Act of the Clergy of Massachusetts and New Hampshire," than which
J_ few more important documents of our ecclesiastical history exist, was as
follows :

" The good Providence of Almighty God, the fountain of all goodness, having
lately blessed the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, by
supplying it with a complete and entire ministry, and affording to many of her
communion the benefit of the labors, advice, and government of the successors of
the Apostles :

" We, Presbyters of said Church in the States of Massachusetts and New Hamp
shire, deeply impressed with the most lively gratitude to the Supreme Governor
of the universe, for his goodness in this respect, and with the most ardent love
to his Church, and concern for the interest of her sons, that they may enjoy all the
means that Christ, the Great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, has instituted for lead
ing His followers into the ways of truth and holiness, and preserving His Church
in the unity of the spirit and the bond of peace; to the end that the people com
mitted to our respective charges may enjoy the benefit and advantage of those
offices, the administration of which belongs to the highest order of the Afinistry, and
to encourage and promote, as far as in us lies, a union of the whole Episcopal
Church in these States, and to perfect and compact this mystical body of Christ, do
hereby nominate, elect, and appoint, the Rev. Edward Bass, a Presbyter of said
Church, and Rector of St. Paul s in Newburyport, to be our Bishop, and we do
promise and engage to receive him as such, when canonically consecrated and
invested with the apostolic office and powers by the Right Reverend the Bishops
hereafter named, and to render him all that canonical obedience and submission,
which by the laws of Christ, and the constitution of our Church, is due to so
important an office.

" And we now address the Right Reverend the Bishops in the States of Con
necticut, New York, and Pennsylvania, praying their united assistance in conse
crating our said brother, and canonically investing him with the Apostolic office
and powers. This request we are induced to make, from a long acquaintance with
him, and from a perfect knowledge of his being possessed with that love of God
and benevolence to men, that piety, learning, and good morals, that prudence and
discretion, requisite to so exalted a station, as well as that personal respect and
attachment of the communion at large in these States, which will make him a valu
able acquisition to the Order, and, we trust, a rich blessing to the Church.

" Done at a meeting of the Presbyters whose names are underwritten, held in
Salem, in the County of Essex, and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the fourth
day of June, Anno Salutis, 1789.

" Samuel Parker, Rector of Trinity Church, Boston ; T. Fitch Oliver, Rector of
St. Michael s Church, Marblehead ; John Cousens Ogden, Rector of Queen s Chap
el, Portsmouth, N.H., William Montague, Minister of Christ Church, Boston;
Tillotson Brunson, Assistant Minister of Christ Church, Boston.

" A true copy, Attest : SAMUEL PARKER."

1 Perry s " Reprint of the Early Journals," I., pp. 70, 71.

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

At the same meeting of Presbyters of the Church in Massachusetts and New
Hampshire held under the chairmanship of the excellent Bass, whose recommen
dation to the episcopate was so full and hearty, the leading spirit in the assembly,
the Rector of Trinity, Boston, was appointed to attend the Convention in Phila
delphia, and "to treat upon any measures that may tend to promote an union of
the Episcopal Church throughout the United States of America, or that may prove
advantageous to the interests of said Church."

BISHOP PKOVOOST S BOOK-PLATE.

CHAPTER V.

THE PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE GENERAL ECCLESIAS
TICAL CONSTITUTION OF 1789.

r~T!HE successful issue of the war for independence had confessedly
j destroyed the sole bond of union existing between the various
congregations of the Church of England in America. That

SjO_le_-boji(L of .union was, as Bishop White tells us, "the result
of the connection which they in common hud with the Bishop of Lon
don-" 1 In the words of the celebrated Dr. Francis Lister Hawks,
"while the States were colonies, all were alike subject in ecclesiastical
matters to the jurisdiction of the Bishop of London. 3 They were con
sequently one, and but one, in the particular of Episcopal authority.* 73
In this authority they had owed a common allegiance. In the colonies
where the Church had been established, this authority had been prac
tically shown in the attempted exercise of the judicial authority of
the episcopate over the clergy, in giving or refusing induction to bene
fices, and the uniform practice of issuing and in revoking for cause,
licences to missions or parishes, as the case might be. The annals of
the older colonies afford abundant evidences of the struggle between
the colonial assemblies and governors on the one hand, and the com
missaries of the bishops, or, as in some cases, the bishops of London
themselves, for the exercise of that branch of the judicial authority
of the episcopate which relates to the induction of the clergy into
benefices. In all cases the bishops claimed the right of licensing the
clergy, and, in general, this right of the ordinary was respected. 4 In
the colonies, where the Church was not established, this license was an
indispensable prerequisite to admission to either a parish or a mission.
Besides this exercise of power by letters missive, the bishops, as we
have seen from time to time, appointed commissaries, who as acknowl
edged representatives of the bishops, respectively, from whom they
derived their power, and acting in their name, and w T ith their authority,
held formal visitations of the clergy and wardens, instituted investi
gations as to the morals of the clergy, adjudged cases under the eccle
siastical canons, and in various ways, and in spite of bitter opposition,
made the authority of the ordinary a " terror to evil-doers." It was
this common dependence upon the See of London, shared alike by
the churches throughout the thirteen colonies, that was destroyed by

1 Memoirs of the Church, 2cl ccl., p. 98.

2 The subject of the Bishop of London s
authority over the churches and clergy of the
colonies is ably treated by Hugh Davcy Evans,
in his " Essay on the Episcopate of the Ameri
can Church, * pp. 108-119.

8 Constitution and Canons, p. 2.

* The "Instructions" to the roj-al governors

especially provided that no minister should be
preferred to a benefice " without he has a certifi
cate from the Bishop of London of his being
conformable to the doctrines and discipline of
the Church of England, and of a good life and
conversation." Vicle, among other references,
Onderdonk s " Antiquities of the Parish Church,
Jamaica, L.I.," p. 13.

90 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

the successful issue of the struggle for civil independence. With the
birth of the nation there was felt and confessed to be the birth of a
national clmrch. The language of the preface of our American
prayer-book correctly expresses the fact : " When in the course of
Divine Providence these American States became independent with
respect to civil government, their ecclesiastical independence was
necessarily included."

The unity of the faith had not been affected by this civil change :
in doctrine, in discipline, in worship, save in so far as the altered
political relations required slight modifications of language in the
parts of the service referring to those in authority, there had been no
change. The American churchman was still baptized into one body,
the church catholic of Christ. At the holy table he knelt to feed
in his heart by faith with thanksgiving upon the same body broken,
and to drink the same blood shed for him and for his salvation. Polit
ical convulsions could not change the truth or destroy the Church of
the living God. The unity then existing between the American
churches and the Church of England, and between both alike and the
catholic Church of Christ was not, and could not be, affected by the
war of independence.

But not only was the bond of union existing between the churches
in the colonies and the Bishop of London, as their ordinary, dissolved;
the union among themselves was also destroyed. It could not be
otherwise since this connection with the See of London was the only
bond uniting them, the bond of a common episcopal jurisdiction,
and the exercise of the same ecclesiastical laws.

We have seen in what attitude the churches in the several States
regarded themselves and each other. In the language of Dr. Hawks :
" The testimony would seem to leave no doubt that in each State the
Church considered itself an integral part of the Church of Christ, per
fectly independent, in its government, of any and every branch of the
Church in Christendom. Such an opinion would the more readily be
adopted, from the fact that the several States considered themselves
in their civil relations, as independent sovereignties, and as such,
sought to find a bond of union, first in the articles of confederation,
and afterwards in the federal Constitution. Many of those who were
employed in laying the foundations of our civil polity were also aiding
by their councils in the establishment of our ecclesiastical system ; and
hence it is not surprising that there should be found not a few resem
blances between them." l Even in Connecticut this view of the situa
tion evidently obtained. The Connecticut clergy, at the very outset,
while acknowledging the severance of the former ties " that the
chain which connected this with the mother-church is broken ; that
the American Church is now left to stand in its own strength," 2 and
the necessity of seeking " to form a new union in the American Church,
under proper superiors, since its union is now broken with such
superiors in the British Church," felt itself capable of reorganization,

i Constitution and Canons, p. 4. White s Memoirs of the Church, 2d cd., pp.

Letter from the Connecticut clergy to the 282-286.
Rev. William White, March 25, 1783. Bishop

ECCLESIASTICAL CONSTITUTION OF 1789.

and only proposed to defer the business of union and full reconstruc
tion till the episcopate was obtained. In short, the action contem
plated and proposed in the fundamental principles of 1784, and the
measures preceding this meeting, and out of which the meeting itself was
alone made possible, prove conclusively that the Church in each in
dependent State of the federal union, when organized agreeably to its
own pleasure, deemed itself, and was regarded by each other church
respectively, as an independent branch of the catholic Church of Christ,
lacking, indeed, a perfect organization until the episcopate was secured,
but competent to seek that perfecting order, and to organize for this
purpose, and for such other purposes as the present need seemed to
require.

The Convention of 1785 comprised clerical and lay representatives
from the churches which had organized in seven States. It met in
Philadelphia on the 27th of September and continued in session until
the 7th of October. Its first resolution provided "that each State
should have one vote," and throughout the session, in the appointment
of committees, in the adoption of all measures for organization and
for securing the episcopate, and in the consideration of the proposed
changes in the liturgy, "the Church in each State," x for such is the un
mistakable language of the official record, is recognized. With the
important measures adopted or proposed by this " representative body
of the greater number of the Episcopalians in these States," 2 we have
at present nothing to do, save only in so far as they relate to the
adoption of a constitution not of " the Church in each State," but of
" the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America."

This constitution was drafted by the Rev. Dr. White. 3 It was &lt;
the outgrowth of the " Fundamental Principles" of 1784, which, as
adopted by this Convention, " became_a bond of union; jim^indee
the only one acted under until the year 1789. 4

At the Convention of June, 1780, "the proposed constitution was
taken up for a second reading, and debated by paragraph." 5 The
preamble remained unaltered. In the first section of the constitution
the time of meeting was changed from June to July. In the second
section after the words " of each order " the words " chosen by the
Convention of each State " were inserted. Sections third and fourth
were agreed to as they stood. In section fifth, the word "general"
was omitted before the Avords "Ecclesiastical Constitution" and
inserted before the word " Convention," and after the words ex-officio,
the words " and a Bishop shall always preside in the General Conven
tion, if any of the Episcopal order be present," were added. Section
sixth was amended by omitting the words "by the respective Conven
tions " and inserting instead " by the Convention of that State."

After the words " to ordain or confirm " the words " or perform
any other act of the Episcopal office " were inserted. The seventh sec
tion was agreed to without change. In the eighth, after the words
" equitable mode of trial " there were added " and at every trial of a

1 Journal of Convention, 1785, p. 6.
* Letter to the English Archbishops and
Bishops. Ibid., p. 15.

s Bishop White s " Memoirs of the Church,"
2d ed., p. 97.

4 Ibid., p. 96. 8 Journal, p. 9.

92 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

Bishop, there shall be one or more of the Episcopal Order present :
and none but a Bishop shall pronounce sentence of deposition or degra
dation from the ministry on any Clergyman, whether Bishop, or Presby
ter or Deacon." In section ninth the word "general" was inserted
before the word " desire." In place of that part of the section follow
ing the words "therefore the" there was inserted as follows : "Book
of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and other
rites and ceremonies, as revised and proposed to the use of the
Protestant Episcopal Church, at a Convention of the said Church, in
the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Mary
land, Virginia, and South Carolina, may be used by this Church in
such of the States as have adopted, or may adopt, the same in their
particular Conventions, till further provision is made in this case,
by the first General Convention which shall assemble with sufficient
power to ratify a Book of Common Prayer for the Church in these
states." In place of the tenth section the following was inserted :
" No person shall be ordained until due examination had by the
Bishop and two Presbyters, and exhibiting testimonials of his moral
conduct for three years past, signed by the minister and a majority of
the vestry of the Church where he has last resided : or permitted to offi
ciate as a minister in this Church until he has exhibited his letters of
ordination, and subscribed the following declaration : I do believe the
Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the word of
God , and to contain all things necessary to salvation ; and I do
solemnly engage to conform to the doctrines and worship of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States. " In place of
section eleventh the following was adopted : " This Constitution of
the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America,
when ratified by the Church in a majority of States, assembled in
General Convention, with sufficient power for the purpose of such
ratification, shall be unalterable by the Convention of any particular
State, which hath been represented at the time of said ratification."

From the title of the Constitution the word " Ecclesiastical " was
omitted.

In the important change in section fifth there was a return to
the provision as originally drafted by Dr. White. This draft, which, as
we learn from the " Memoirs of the Church," "provided that a bishop,
if any were present should preside," was opposed by one of the laity,
during the consideration of the draft in sub-committee. The objection
was overruled, but, on discussion in open convention, the debate " pro
duced more heat than anything else that happened during the session." l
With a view to conciliation, " the article passed, with silence as to the
point in question/ "It was considered," proceeds Bishop White, in
his narrative of the proceedings of this session, "that practice might
settle what had better be provided for by law ; and that even such
provision might be the result of a more mature consideration of
the subject. The latter expectation was justified by the event." a

i Bishop White s "Memoirs of the Church," Bishop amenable to Laymen was not, I believe,

2d cd., p. 97. the custom in the primitive Church." Rev. S.

1 "Your ecclesiastical Constitution is much Parker to Rev. Dr. White, Sept. 15, 1786.
mended, but I think not yet quite right. A

ECCLESIASTICAL CONSTITUTION OF 1780.

The addition to section eight met in a measure, and in advance,
the objection of the English archbishops, that it was "a degradation
of the clerical, and much more of the Episcopal character." As the
section originally stood, it was, as Bishop White confesses, "certainly
exceptionable." 1 But a change of temper had begun to show itself.
" In the preceding year," to quote our best informed authority, Bishop
White, "the points alluded to were determined on with too much
warmth, and without investigation proportioned to the importance
of the subjects. The decisions of that day were now reversed,
not to say without a division, but without even an opposition." 2

At the adjourned meeting of this Convention, held at Wilmington,
Delaware, in October, of the same year, the eighth article of the
constitution, as amended at the meeting in June, was unanimously
affirmed, and action was taken with respect to the important matter of
"subscription," providing an alternate form, so as to meet the case
of those seeking ordination or consecration from States where the
"proposed" Book of Common Prayer was not adopted. This measure
was adopted to meet the case of the bishop-elect of New York, Dr.
Provoost, since, as the State convention had not accepted the " pro
posed " liturgy, and the articles of religion, " the faith and worship
recognized by the convention," were not yet adopted by the Church
in New York. The alternative form of subscription bound the sub
scriber " to the use of the English Book of Common Prayer, except so
far as it had been altered in consequence of the civil revolution, until
the Proposed Book should be ratified." 3

In the interval between the meetings of the Convention at Phila
delphia and Wilmington, and the assembling of the convention of
July and August, 1789, the episcopate in the English line had been
obtained. The Church was now fully organized in the Middle States,
as well as in New England, and the minds of churchmen were
turned towards the adoption of measures for union. The " Act of
the Clergy of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, recommending the
Rev. Edward Bass, for consecration," was laid before the Convention,
but not until a "Committee, consisting of one deputy from each
State," was appointed to take into consideration the proposed consti
tution of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and to recommend such
alterations, additions, and amendments as they shall think necessary
and proper. 4 After two days deliberation, this committee, through
the Kev. Dr. William Smith, "reported a Constitution." 5 After a
first and second reading, the proposed constitution was " debated by
paragraphs," and it was then " Resolved, that the first, second, fourth,
fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth articles be adopted, and stand in this
order: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; that they be a rule of conduct for this
convention ; and that the remaining articles be postponed for the
future consideration of this convention." 5

At the close of a week, during which action had been taken pro
viding for the healing of differences and the bringing together of long-

1 Perry s "Historical Notes and Documents," * Perry s "Reprint of the Early Journals,"

p. 325. I., pp. 69, YO.
- Memoirs of the Church, 2d cd., p. 117. *Ibid., p. 72.

3 Bishop White s " Memoirs," 2d ed., p. 123.

94 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

parted men, " the Convention took into consideration the two Articles
of the Constitution which had been postponed, and which they amended
and agreed to. The Constitution was then ordered to be engrossed,
and on the following day it was signed by Bishop White and the
deputies, both clerical and lay, from New York, New Jersey, Pennsyl
vania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina." The con
stitution was as follows :

A GENERAL CONSTITUTION OP THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

ARTICLE 1. There shall be a General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America on the first Tuesday of August, in the year
of our Lord, 1792, and on the first Tuesday of August in every third year after
wards, in such place as shall be determined by the Convention ; and special meet
ings may be called at other times, in the manner hereafter to be provided for ; and
this Church, in a majority of States which shall have adopted this Constitution, shall
be represented, before they shall proceed to business, except that the representation
from two States shall be sufficient to adjourn ; and in all business of the Convention
freedom of debate shall be allowed.

ART. 2. The Church in each State shall be entitled to a representation of both
the Clergy and Laity, which representation shall consist of one or more Deputies,
not exceeding four of each Order, chosen by the Convention of the State ; and on
all questions, when required by the Clerical or Lay representation from any State,
each Order shall have one vote ; and the majority of suffrages by States shall be
conclusive in each Order, provided such majority comprehend a majority of the
States represented in that Order. The concurrence of both Orders shall be neces
sary to constitute a vote of the Convention. If the Convention of any State should
neglect or decline to appoint Clerical Deputies, or if they should neglect or decline
to appoint Lay Deputies, or if any of those of either Order appointed should neglect
to attend, or be pi-evented by sickness or any other accident, such State shall
nevertheless be considered as duly represented by such Deputy or Deputies as may
attend, whether Lay or Clerical. And if, through the neglect of the Convention of
any of the Churches which shall have adopted or may hereafter adopt this Consti
tution, no Deputies, either Lay or Clerical, should attend at any General Convention,
the Church in such State shall nevertheless be bound by the acts of such Convention.

ART. 3. The Bishops of this Church, when there shall be three or more, shall,
whenever General Conventions are held, form a House of revision ; and when any
proposed act shall have passed in the General Convention, the same shall be trans
mitted to the House of revision for their concurrence. And if the same shall be
sent back to the Convention, with the negative or non-concurrence of the House of
revision, it shall be again considered in the General Convention, and if the Con
vention shall adhere to the said act by a majority of three-fifths of their body, it
shall become a law to all intents and purposes, notwithstanding the non-concurrence
of the House of revision ; and all acts of the Convention shall be authenticated by
both Houses. And in all cases the House of Bishops shall signify to the Conven
tion their approbation or disapprobation, the latter with their reasons in writing,
within two days after the proposed act shall have been reported to them for con
currence ; and in failure thereof, it shall have the operation of a law. But until
there shall be three or more Bishops, as aforesaid, any Bishop attending a General
Convention shall be a member ex officio, and shall vote with the Clerical Deputies
of the State to which he belongs. And a Bishop shall then preside.

ART. 4. The Bishop or Bishops in eveiy State shall be chosen agreeably to
such rules as shall be fixed by the Convention of that State. And every Bishop of
this Church shall confine the exercise of his Episcopal Office to his proper Diocese
or District, unless requested to ordain or confirm, or perform any other act of the
Episcopal Office, by any Church destitute of a Bishop.

ART. 5. A Protestant Episcopal Church in any of the United States, not now
represented, may, at any time hereafter, be admitted on acceding to this Consti
tution.

ART. 6. In every State, the mode of trying Clergymen shall be instituted by
the Convention of the Church therein. At every trial of a Bishop there shall be

ECCLESIASTICAL CONSTITUTION OF 1789.

one or more of the Episcopal Order present ; and none but a Bishop shall pronounce
sentence of deposition or degradation from the Ministry on any Clergyman, whether
Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon.

ART. 7. No person shall be admitted to Holy Orders until he shall have been
examined by the Bishop, and by two Presbyters, and shall have exhibited such
testimonials and other requisites as the Canons, in that case provided, may direct.
Nor shall any person be ordained until he shall have subscribed the following
declaration :

I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the Word of God,
and to contain all things necessary to salvation ; and I do solemnly engage to conform to the Doc
trines and Worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States.

No person ordained by a foreign Bishop shall be permitted to officiate as a
Minister of this Church until he shall have complied with the Canon or Canons in
that case provided, and have also subscribed the aforesaid Declaration.

ART. 8. A Book of Common Prayer, Administration of the Sacraments, and
other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, Articles of Religion, and a Form and
Manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating Bishops, Priests, and Deacons,
when established by this or a future General Convention, shall be used in the
Protestant Episcopal Church in these States which shall have adopted this Con
stitution.

ART. 9. This Constitution shall be unalterable, unless in General Conven
tion, by the Church, in. a majority of the States which may have adopted the same ;
and all alterations shall be first proposed in one General Convention, and made
known to the several State Conventions, before they shall be finally agreed to, or
ratified, in the ensuing General Convention.

In General Convention, in Christ Church, Philadelphia, August the 8th, One
thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.

Bishop White places on record an acknowledgment of the " con
viction," as "generally prevailing, that the formerly proposed Con
stitution was inadequate to the situation" of the Church. That no
episcopal pressure was brought to bear upon the committee or the
Convention in inducing the changes which appear, is evident from the
bishop s own statement. " On this business the President of the Con
vention met the committee but once, and interested himself very little ;
being desirous that whatever additional powers it might be thought
necessary to assign to the bishops, such powers should not be under
the reproach of having been pressed for by one of their number, but
be the result of due deliberation, and the free choice of all orders of
persons within the Church, and given with a view to her good govern
ment." 1

At the adjourned Convention, which met on the 29th of September,
and continued in session until the 16th of October, Bishop Seabury,
with clerical deputies representing Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
New Hampshire, were in attendance. The Convention of July and
August had appointed a committee to notify the Bishop of Connecticut,
and "the Eastern and other Churches not included in this union," of
the time and place of the adjourned session, and "to request their at
tendance at the same, for the good purposes of union and general
government." This committee, consisting of the Bishop of Pennsyl
vania, the Rev. Drs. William Smith and Samuel Magaw, and Messrs.
Francis Hopkinson and Tench Coxe, in their letter of invitation,
assured Bishop Seabury "that nothing hath been left unattemptcd"

Memoirs of the Church, 2d ed., p. 144.

96 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

which was deemed conducive, either towards the basis or super
structure of an union, so seemly and needful in itself, and so ardently
desired by all." The letter proceeded as follows :

By the second Article of our printed Constitution (as now amended), you will
observe that your first and chief difficulty respecting Lay representation is wholly
removed, upon the good and wise principles admitted by you as well as by us, viz. :
"That there may be a strong and efficacious union betwixt Churches, where the
usages are in some respects different. It was long so in the different dioceses of
England."

By the Article of our Constitution above mentioned, the admission of yours
and the other Eastern Churches is provided for upon your own principles of repre
sentation ; while our Churches are not required to make any sacrifice of theirs ; it
being declared

That the Church in each State shall be entitled to a representation either of
Clergy or Laity, or of both. And in case the Convention [or Church] of any State
should neglect or decline to appoint their deputies of either order, or if it should
be their rule to appoint only out of one order ; or if any of those appointed should
neglect to attend, or be prevented by sickness, or any other accident, the Church in
such State (district or diocese) shall, nevertheless, be considered as duly rep
resented by such deputy or deputies as may attend, of either order.

Here, then, every case is intended to be provided for, and experience will
either demonstrate that an efficacious union may be had upon these principles, or
mutual good- will, and a further reciprocation of sentiments will eventually lead to
a more perfect uniformity of discipline as well as of doctrine.

(The representation in those States where the church appoints clerical deputies
only, or chooses to be wholly represented by its bishop, will be considered as com
plete ; and as it cannot be supposed that the clergy will ever neglect to avail them
selves of their voice and negative, in every ecclesiastical decision, so neither can
the laity complain in those States where they claim no representation, and still less
where they are declared to have a voice, and claim a representation, but neglect to
avail themselves of their claim ; which latter is too likely to be the case in some of
the States within our present union, where it is difficult to procure any lay repre
sentation, although earnestly solicited by some of the clergy, who are fully sensible
of the advantages derived to our former conventions, from the wise and temperate
counsels, and the respectable countenance and assistance of our lay-members.) 1

It was with these views and this understanding that the churches
of New England were represented at the adjourned Convention of 1789.
The Convention listened to the reading of Bishop Seabury s " Letters
of Consecration to the holy office of a Bishop in this Church, va and
immediately in a committee of the whole considered the subject of the
proposed union. The Bishop of Connecticut and deputies from New
England stipulated that the third article of the constitution should be
" so modified as to declare explicitly the right of the Bishops when
sitting as a separate House, to originate and propose acts for the con
currence of the other House of Convention, and to negative such acts
proposed by the other House as they may disapprove." The commit
tee of conference with the eastern deputies, under the chairmanship
of Dr. William Smith, reported that the proposed alteration was
"desirable in itself," and after consideration the third article was
modified as follows :

ART. 3. The Bishops of this Church, when there shall be three or more,
shall, whenever General Conventions are held, form a separate House, with a right

1 From the original draft in Perry s "Histori- of the convention. Vide Perry s "Reprint ofthe
cal Notes and Documents," pp. 405, 406. Early Journals," Vol. i., p. 93.

* This is the language of the official journal

ECCLESIASTICAL CONSTITUTION OF 1789.

to originate and propose acts for the concurrence of the House of Deputies, com
posed of Clergy and Laity ; and when any proposed act shall have passed the House
of Deputies, the same shall be transmitted to the House of Bishops, who shall have

FAC-SIMILE OF SIGNATURES OF BISHOP SEABURT AND THE NEW ENGLAND
DEPUTIES, TO THE AMENDED CONSTITUTION OF 1789.

a negative thereupon, unless adhered to by four-fifths of the other House ; and all
acts of the Convention shall be authenticated by both Houses. And in all cases the
House of Bishops shall signify to the Convention their approbation or disapproba
tion, the latter with their reasons in writing, within three day^s after the proposed
act shall have been reported to them for concurrence ; and in failure thereof, it shall

98 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

have the operation of a law. But until there shall be three or more Bishops, as
aforesaid, any Bishop attending a General Convention shall be a member ex-officio,
and shall vote with the Clerical Deputies of the Diocese to which he belongs ; and
a Bishop shall then preside.

It was further "Resolved, that it be made known to the several State
conventions, that it is proposed to consider .and determine, in the next
general convention, on the propriety of investing the house of bishops
with a full negative upon the proceedings of the other house."

This done, the "General Constitution of the Church, as now altered
and amended," was "laid before the Right Rev. Dr. Seabury, and the
Deputies from the Churches in the Eastern States, for their approba
tion and assent." *

This assent was given. The House of Bishops was at once con-} (
stituted ; T^Hap Sflfth^ry belay the first "Presiding Bishop " thereof f /
and of thp. A rflgrfcan fihorch.

Bishop While informs us "that from the sentiments expressed in
the debate, there is reason to believe that the full negative would
have been allowed, had not Mr. Andrews, 8 from Virginia, very seri
ously, and doubtless very sincerely, expressed his apprehension, that
it was so far beyond what was expected by the Church in his State,
as would cause the measure to be there disowned." 3 In the compro
mise the deputies from New England " acquiesced but reluctantly."
The truth was, as Bishop White informs us, that " they thought that
the form of ecclesiastical Government could hardly be called Episcopal
while such a matter was held out as speculatively possible." 4 In 1808
the words " unless adhered to by four-fifths of the other House " were
stricken out. Thus the episcopal veto was secured. In the language
)f Dr. HawJxS, " to Bishop Seabury belonop^jfre merit of havener made
ipps an equal and co5rdiDflt^ p^wf r |n foe work of our ecplesi-
Instead of a mere council of revision, he made the
nshops a senate, or upper house, holding their places for life; thus
I most effectually upholding, as was proper, the dignity and respecta
bility of the Bishops, giving more stability to the legislation of the
great council of the Church and guarding against the dangers of enact-
jments, made hastily under temporary excitement." 5

1 Perry s " Historical Notes and Documents," fessor in the College of William and Mary at

p. 415. Williamsburg, Va.

1 Mr. Bobert Andrews, recorded as a lay * Memoirs of the Church, p. 146.

deputy to the Convention of 1789, was a secular- * Ibid.

ized priest of the Church, who, on discontinuing * Constitution and Canons, p. 24.

the ministry, had pursued the vocation of a Pro-

ECCLESIASTICAL CONSTITUTION OF 1789.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE.

H^HE constitution of 1785, which we give as a part of the history of our organiza-
JL tion, " stood on recommendation only," and reads as follows :

A General Ecclesiastical Constitution of the Protestant Epis 1 Church in the
U d&gt; States of America.

Whereas in the course of Divine Providence, the Protestant Epis 1 Church inl
the United States of America, is become independent of all foreign Authority civil
& ecclesiastical :

And whereas, at a meeting of Clerical & Lay Deputies of the s d Church in
sundry of the said States; viz., in the States of Massachusets, Rhode Island, Con
necticut, N. York, N. Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware & Maryland, held in the City
of N. York on the 6 & 7 th days of October in the year of our Lord 1784, it was
recommended to this Church in y" s d States, represented as afores d, & propos d to
this Church in y" States not represented, that they should send Deputies to a Con
vention to be held in the City of Philadelphia on the Tuesday before the Feast of
St. Michael in this present year, in order to unite in a constitution of Ecclesiastical
Government, agreably to certain fundamental Principles, expressed in the s d recom
mendation & proposal.

And whereas in consequence of the s a recommendation & proposal, Clerical &
Lay Deputies have been duly appointed from y said Church in y" States of N. York,
N. Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia & S. Carolina:

The said Deputies being now assembled, taking into Consideration y* im
portance of maintaining uniformity in Doctrine, Discipline & worship in y s a
Church do hereby determine and declare :

1". That there shall be a general Convention of the Protestant Ep 1 Church in
y* U d States of America ; which shall be held in y City of Philadelphia on y 3 d
Tuesday in June in y" year of our Lord 1786, & for ever after once in Three years on
the 3 d Tuesday of June in such Place as shall be determined by s a Convention, And
special Meetings may be held at such other times and in such place as will be here
after provided for; and y 9 Church in a Majority of y States aforesaid shall be
represented, before they proceed to Business ; except that y" representation of this
Church from 2 States shall be sufficient to adjourn ; and in all business of the Con
vention freedom of debate shall be allowed.

2 d . There shall be a representation of both Clergy & Laity of y* Church in
each State, which shall consist of One or more Deputies not exceeding 4 of each
Order, and in all questions y said Church in each State shall have one Vote, & a
majority of Suffrages shall be conclusive.

3 d . The Book of common pi ayer & administration of y Sacraments, &
other Rites & Ceremonies of y e Church, according to the use of y" Church of Eng
land shall be continued to be used by this Church, as y" same is altered by this
Convention, in a certain instrument of writing passed by this authority, intitled
" Alterations of y Liturgy of y P. E. C. in y" U. S. of America ; in order to render
the same conformable to y* A n Revol" & y Const" of y e respective States."

4 th . In every State where there shall be a Bp duly consecrated, and settled ;
and who shall have acceded to y Articles of this general Ecclesiastical Constitution,
He shall be considered as a Member of y" Convention ex officio.

5 th . The Bp or Bps in every State shall be chosen agreeably to such Rules, as
shall be fixed by the respective Conventions : and every Bp of this Church shall
confine y exercise of his Epis 1 Office to his proper Jurisdiction ; unless requested to
ordain or confirm by any Church destitute of a Bishop.

G tb . Any Pro Episc 1 Church in any of y United States not now represented,
may at any time hereafter be admitted, on acceding to y 9 Articles of this Union.

7 th . Every Clergyman, whether Bp, Presb r or D n shall be amenable to y* au
thority of y Convention in y* State to which he belongs, so far as relates to suspen
sion or removal from Office ; and y" Convention in each State shall institute rules
for their conduct & an equitable mode of trial.

8 th . In y* said Church in every State represented in this Convention, there
shall be a Convention consisting of y* Clergy & Lay Deputies of y Congregations.

9 th . And whereas it is represented to this Convention to be y* choice of y*
Prof Ep 1 Church in these States ; that there may be further Alterations of the Liturgy,

100 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

than such as are made necessary by y* American Revolution : therefore the Book
of common Prayer & Administration of the Sacraments, and the Rites & Ceremonies
of y* Church, according to y* use of the Church of England, as altered by an Instru
ment of writing, pass* under y* Authority of this Convention, indued Altera
tions in y 4 Book of C. P & Adm" of y* Sac ! & other 11. & C. of y Ch. according to
y* use of y* Ch. of E. proposed & recommended to y* P. E. C. in y* U. S. of A.
shall be used in this Church ; when y* same shall have been ratified by y* Conven
tions, which have respectively sent Deputies to this General Convention.

10 ". No person shall be ordained, or permitted to officiate as a Minister in this
Church, until He shall have subscribed the following declaration : " I do believe
the Holy Scriptures of y* Old & New Testament to be the word of God and to con
tain all things necessary to salvation ; and I do solemnly engage to conform to the
Doctrines & worship of the Protest Episc 1 Church as settled & determined in the
Book of Common Prayer and administration of y* Sacraments set forth by the
General Convention of the Prof Episc 1 Church in these United States." l

11 th . This General Ecclesiastical Constitution, when ratified by y* Church in
y* Different States, shall be considered as fundamental & unalterable by y Conven
tion of y* Church in any State.

1 From the original MS. preserved among the archives of the General Convention.

CHAPTER VI.

THE PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND FINALLY
PRESCRIBED.

AT the opening of the war for American independence the clergy
of the Church of England, who sympathized with the popular
cause, readily conformed to the requirements of the provincial
assemblies, 1 or the recommendations of their own vestries, 2 and omitted
from the service all mention of the temporal authority of the mother
land. The further prosecution of the struggle drove the clergy, who
found compliance with the acts of Congress and the State legislatures
incompatible with their convictions of duty, within the British lines,
leaving their parishes destitute of clerical ministrations, and exposing
their churches to the outrages of those who failed to distinguish be
tween the English Church and the obnoxious measures of the crown.
The issue of the war, involving, as it did, the independence of the
Colonial Church, 3 gave opportunity for the revision of the Book of
Common Prayer ; changes in which were now necessary, in consequence
of the altered relations of Church and State.

Slowly, and with evident reluctance, did the ministers and mem
bers of the Church betake themselves, on the return of peace, to the
task thus imposed upon them. At the North, the clergy of Connect.-
icut had bent their energies, from the moment that the issue of the
strife was no longer doubtful, towards securing the episcopate. JTntil(
they had a bishop, they deemed themselves incompetent to ctFect ail;
ecclesiastical organization , or to attempt a revision of the liturgy. 4 In
this unwillingness to enter upon the discussion of these matters, the
clergy throughout New England, 5 and not a few in New York, 6 and
New Jersey, 7 sympathized. Even at the South this feeling obtained
at the first. In Virginia^ on the dar following the Declaration of In*^
dependence, the State Convention "altered the Book of Common Prayer j
to accommodate it to the change in affairs," 8 and by subsequent legis-
lative enactments restrained the clergy from consenting directly or in-

* Hawks and Perry s " Documentary History
of the Church in Connecticut," Vol. n., p. 272.

6 Perry s " Reprint of the Early Journals,"
Vol. in., pp. 64-66, 105.

Unpublished correspondence of the time in
the possession of the writer.

Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 299.

8 Reprint of the Early Journals, Vol. in.,
pp. 103, 104 ; Hawks " Ecclesiastical Contribu
tions," Vol. i., " Virginia," p. 238. Hoffman, in
his " Treatise on the Law of the Prot. Ep. Ch. in
the U. S.," p. 31, gives the particulars of these
changes.

1 Bishop White earnestly- advocated this
course. Memoirs of the Prot. Ep. Church, 2d
ed., pp. 76, 77.

* Parker, afterwards Bishop of Massachu
setts, sought the advice of his vestry, and acted
in accordance with their recommendation. His
torical Notes appended to Perry s Reprint of the
Early Journals of General Convention, 1785-
1835, Vol. in., pp. 101, 103.

8 " When, in thecourse of Divine Providence,
these American States became independent with
respect to civil government, their ecclesiastical
independence was necessarily included." Pref
ace to the American Book of Common Prayer.

102 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

directly to any alterations in the order, government, doctrine, or
worship of the Church. 1 Maryland pursued the same conservative
course, 9 and it was not till later in the progress of the war that the
.State, not the clergy, attempted by civil legislation to effect the or
ganization of the Church and the appointment of persons to exercise
episcopal functions. 3 To such an extent did these scruples obtain, that
at the informal Convention of 1784, in which the churches in Massa
chusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Penn
sylvania, Delaware, and Maryland were respectively represented, it
was recommended as a "fundamental principle " of organization for the
"Episcopal Church in the United States of America"

That the said Church shall maintain the doctrines of the Gospel as now heldH
by the Church of England, and shall adhere to the Liturgy of the said Church as fart /
as shall be consistent with the American Revolution, and the constitutions of the/f
respective States. 4

The May following, the Convention of Virginia, untrammelled by
the "fundamental principles" of this preliminary gathering, in which
it was not officially represented, gave but a limited sanction to a review
of the Prayer-book in its instructions to its delegates to the General
Convention of 1785 ; 5 and accompanied this resolution with a require
ment of the use, until further order, of the Liturgy of the Church of
England, " with such alterations as the American Revolution has
rendered necessary." 6

Bishop White assures us, with reference to the Convention of
1785, that "when the members first came together, very few or
rather, it is believed, none of them entertained thoughts of altering
the Liturgy any further than to accommodate it to the Revolution." 7
It would appear, however, from an examination of the manuscript au
thorities of this period, 8 that as the time for the assembling of this
Convention drew near, the minds of prominent clergymen and laymen
of the Church in the Middle and Southern States turned gradually in
favor of a thorough revision of the Prayer-book ; and thus occasioned
that unanimity of sentiment and rapidity of action so noticeable in the
preparation and acceptance of the alterations proposed at this session.

Measures had transpired since the informal meeting in New York
that, doubtless, had an influence in bringing about this change of

1 Folio "Broadside" Proceedings of the 4 " Broadside " Proceedings. This was the
Preliminaiy Convention of Clergymen and Lay fourth " fundamental principle."
Deputies of the Prot. Ep. Ch. in the U. S. of The language of this " instruction " is as
America, held in New York, October 6th and 7th, follows : " Should a change in the liturgy be
1784. But one or two copies of this document proposed, let it be made with caution. And in
still exist. It was reprinted from an original copy that case let the alterations be few, and the style
preserved among the archives of the General of prayer continue as agreeable as may ba to the
Convention amongthe notes appended to Perry s essential characteristics of our persuasion. " In
"Reprint of the Early Journals," Vol. in., pp. common with the churches of Massachusetts,
3-5; and in "A Handbook of the General Con- New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, the Con
vention," 1785-1880, by the same author. Afac- vention expressed itself not anxious to retain
jBimile has been issued among the papers of "The any other than that which is commonly called
Historical Club," 1874-1879. the Apostles Creed. Journal of a Convention

1 Hawks " Ecclesiastical Contributions," of the Clergy and Laity of the Prot. Ep. Ch. of

Vol. n., " Maryland," p. 284. Virginia, May, 1 785, p. 14.

8 White s " Memoirs of the Prot. Ep. Ch.," 2d Ibid., p. 17.

ed., p. 92. Hawks " Ecclesiastical Contribu- T Memoirs of the Church, 2d eel., p. 102.

tions. Vol. II., " Maryland," p. 290. Reprint of the Early Journals, Vol. in., pp.

105-109.

PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED.

103

views. Connecticut had succeeded in her effort for the episcopate,
and Samuel Seabury, D.D., the first American bishop, had been joy
fully welcomed by the clergy of that State, and was already received
in his episcopal character throughout New England. At the first
convocation of his clergy, held at Middletown, August 3d and 4th,
1785, the bishop, together with the Rev. Samuel Parker, afterwards
second Bishop of Massachusetts, the Rev. Benjamin Moore, after
wards second Bishop of New York, and the Rev. Abraham Jarvis,
afterwards second Bishop of Connecticut, gave careful attention to this
subject of alterations ; * but their action was confined to the changes
necessary to accommodate the Liturgy to the civil constitution of the
State. "Should more be done," writes Bishop Seabury to Dr. White,
in reviewing the action of the convocation, " it must be a work of
time, and great deliberation." 2 At a convention of the churches of
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, held the follow
ing month, the omissions and alterations agreed upon at Middletown
were recommended to the churches in these States, and further
changes were proposed, the use of which was postponed till there
should be definite action on the subject at the Connecticut convoca
tion, appointed to meet at New Haven, and the General Convention in
Philadelphia. 3 These proposed changes, 4 many of which were finally
incorporated into the American Book of Common Prayer, were
received with disfavor by Bishop Seabury and his clergy, 5 and were
never formally adopted by the churches to which they were recom
mended. In Connecticut it was found that the laity were averse to
any alterations, and though in accordance with the terms of the
" entered intp wif.fr foe hJahnpa nf the ficqffiah

at the time of his consecration, Bishop Seabury published an edition
of the Scottish Communion Office, and recommended it to the!
churches of Connecticut, it was not deemed wise to enforce its use, 6
and by general consent the whole subject was suffered to wait a more

fitting time.

In the midst of these discussions the first American Liturgy
appeared, the production of no Convention, clerical or lay, but issued

1 Documentary History, " Connecticut," n.,
p. 263. Notes to Reprint of Early Journals,
Hi., p. 248.

2 Documentary History, " Connecticut," II.,
p. 282.

8 Journals of the Conventions of the Prot.
Epis. Ch. in the Diocese of Massachusetts, 1784-
1828, pp. 8-15. Vide, also, Perry s " Reprint of
the Early Journals," in., p. 295.

4 These changes, in most respects identical
with those subsequently contained in the " Pro
posed Book," comprise an alteration of the Te
Deurn / the omission of the descent into hell in
the Apostles Creed ; the disuse of the Athana-
sian Creed, and the discretionary use of the Ni-
cene ; the omission of the " Snorter Litany,"
and the Lord s Prayer at the beginning of the
Communion Service ; the use of the Gloria Patri
only at the end of the Psalms ; the admission of
parents as sponsors ; the omission of the sign of
the Cross in Baptism when desired ; changes in
the Burial and Marriage Services ; and a number
of verbal alterations of less moment. Journals

of Conventions, Mass., 1784-1828, pp. 10-14. Re
print of the Early Journals, m., pp/90, 93-98.

" Documentary History of Connecticut, II.,
pp. 287-288.

8 The title of this rare tract is as follows :
"The Communion-Office, or Order for the Ad
ministration of the Holy Eucharist or Supper of
the Lord. With Private Devotions. Recom
mended to the Episcopal Congregations in Con
necticut, by the Right Reverend Bishop Sea-
bury. New London: Printed by T. Green,
M DCC LXXXVI." 12mo. 23 pp."

A reprint of this tract is appended to Perry s
"Historical Notes and Documents illustrating
the organization of the Prot. Epis. Church ; " the
concluding volume of the reprinted journals, in.,
pp. 437-447. A fac-simile reprint, with an his
torical Sketch and Notes, was issued by Professor
Samuel Hart, of Trinity College, Hartford,
Conn., in 1874, and is an exhaustive treatment
of the subject. A second edition of this valuable
reprint has subsequently appeared.

104 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

"for the use of the first episcopal church in Boston." 1 This book,
publicly denounced by Parker, and the other Massachusetts clergy,
as heretical, 2 was the result of the loss of the churchly element from
the parish by the withdrawal of the loyalist proprietors from Boston,
and the substitution in their place, during the war, and while the
chapel was in other hands, of men of unsound views and unepiscopal
training. The defection of this parish, if such it can be considered,
had no imitators. The Prayer-book, thus "Socinianized," only served
to strengthen the prejudice at the North against hasty alterations and
innovations.

The Convention of 1785, at the very outset, assigned to the com
mittee appointed to report the alterations contemplated by the fourth
"fundamental principle," the consideration of "such further altera
tions in the Liturgy as it may be advisable for this Convention to
recommend to the consideration of the Church here represented." 3
This committee consisted of the Rev. Samuel Provoost, subsequently
bishop, and the Hon. James Duane, of New York ; the Rev. Abraham
Beach, and Patrick Dennis, Esq., of New Jersey; the Rev. William
White, D.D., afterwards bishop, and Richard Peters, Esq., of Pennsyl
vania ; the Rev. Charles Henry Wharton, D.D., and James Sykes, Esq.,
of Delaware; the Rev. William Smith, D.D., bishop-elect, and Dr.
Thomas Craddock, of Maryland ; the Rev. David Griffith, subse
quently bishop-elect, and John Page, Esq., of Virginia; the Rev.
Henry Purcell, D.D., and the Hon. Jacob Read, of South Carolina. 4
Little appears on the pages of the journal of this Convention to
mark the progress of the discussions with reference to these altera
tions ; and the story of their preparation and adoption can only be
gathered from the brief recollections of Bishop White, 5 and incidental
allusions occurring in the unpublished correspondence of the time.
As the result of the action of the Convention, certain alterations,
rendered necessary by the issue of the war, were " approved of and
ratified." 6 Further changes, comprising a thorough review of the
Liturgy and Articles of Religion were "proposed and recom-

1 Procter s " History of the Book of Common those who call themselves the disciples of JESUS

Prayer," p. 164. The heretical nature of this CHRIST.

Liturgy may be inferred from the following " In compiling this Liturgy great assistance
extracts from the Preface : " The Liturgy, con- hath been derived from the judicious correc-
tained in this volume, is such, that no Christian, tions of the Keverend Mr. Lindsey ; who hath
it is supposed, can take offence at, or find his reformed the Book of Common Prayer accord-
conscience wounded in repeating. The Trini- ing to the plan of the truly pious and justly
torian, the Unitarian, the Calvinist, the Avminian, celebrated Doctor Samuel Clarke. Several of
will read nothing in it which can give him any Mr. Lindsey s amendments are adopted entire,
reasonable umbrage. GOD is the sole object of The alterations which are taken from him, and
worship in these prayers ; and as no man can the others which are made, excepting the prayers
come to GOD, but by the one Mediator, JESUS for Congress and the General Court, are none of
CHRIST, every petition is here offered in his them novelties; for they have been proposed
name, in obedience to his positive command, and justified by some of the first divines of the
The Gloria Patri, made and introduced into the Church of England."

Liturgy of the Church of Rome, by the decree 2 Greenwood s " History of King s Chapel,"

of Pope Damasus, toward the latter part of the pp. 197, 198.

fourth century, and adopted into the Book of * Journal of a Convention, etc., 1785, p. 6.

Common Prayer, is not in this Liturgy. Instead Fide, also, Perry s " Reprint of the Early Jour-

of that doxology, doxologies from the pure nals," I., p. 18.

Word of GOD are introduced. It is not our wish * Journal of a Convention, etc., 1785, p. 6.

to make proselytes to any particular system or Perry s Reprint, I., p. 18.

opinions of any particular sect of Christians. Memoirs, pp. 102-107.

Our earnest desire is to live in brotherly love Journal of a Convention, etc., 1785, p. 12.

and peace with all men, and especially with Perry s Reprint, I., p. 23.

PKAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED.

105

mended" 1 for adoption at a subsequent Convention. These altera
tions, prepared by a subdivision of the committee on the changes in
the Prayer-book, were presented to the Convention without recon
sideration by the whole committee ; and even in Convention "there
were but few points canvassed with any material difference of opin
ion." 2 They were mainly the work of the Rev. Dr. William Smith, 3
who received the thanks of the Convention for the assistance he had
rendered in perfecting the business before them, and to whom, with
the Rev. Drs. White and Wharton, the duty of publishing the "Pro
posed Book " was assigned. At the close of the session Dr. Smith
preached by request a sermon suited to the occasion of the introduc
tion of the new service, in which he alludes to the work of the
Convention as that

" Of taking up our Liturgy or Public Service where our former venerable Re
formers had been obliged to leave it ; and of proposing to the church at large, such
further alterations and improvements as the length of time, the progress in man
ners and civilization, the increase and diffusion of charity and toleration among all
Christian denominations, and other circumstances (some of them peculiar to our
situation among the highways and hedges of this new world) seem to have ren
dered absolutely necessary." 4

Authority was given to the committee of publication to prepare
"a proper preface or address, setting forth the reason and expediency
of the alterations." 5 Liberty was granted them "to make verbal and
grammatical corrections ; but in such manner, that nothing in form or
substance be altered," 6 and they were further " authorized to publish,
with the Book of Common Prayer, such of the reading and singing
psalms, and such a Kalendar of proper lessons for the different
Sundays and Holy days throughout the year as they should think
proper. " 7

With these powers the committee set about their work. Dr.
White, the chairman at Philadelphia, Dr. Smith at his college and par
ish in Maryland, and Dr. Whartou by an occasional communication and
by visit, now and then, to his colleagues, were all engaged and interested^
in the task. The result of their labors appeared the following spring,
and has always been known as the "Proposed Book," published m&lt;
jn 1 78 fi. It was reprinted in London In 17oij, and sub- 1
sequently formed aTvblume of the "Reliquiae Liturgicoe," edited by the)
Rev. Peter Hall, M.A. From its rarity and the circumstances of
its preparation, exhibiting, as it does, the peculiar views of those who
were among the foremost of our clergy and laity at the period of the
church s organization, and presented by them to the archbishops and
bishops of the mother-church in connection with the request for the

1 Journal, etc., pp. 12, 13. Perry s Reprint,
I., p. 24.

2 Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 103.
8 Ibid., pp. 104-106.

4 A Sermon preached in Christ Church,
Philadelphia, on Friday, October 7th, 1785,
before the General Convention of theProt. Epis.
Ch., in the States of New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia
and South Carolina. On occasion of the first In

troduction of the Liturgy and Public Service of
the said Church, as altered and recommended to
future Use, by the Convention. By William
Smith, D.D., Principal of Washington College,
and Rector of Chester Parish, in the State of
Maryland, p. 25.

5 Journal, 1785, p. 17. Perry s Reprint, i.,
p. 28.

Ibid.

106 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

episcopal succcession, it cannot fail to receive attentive study as a most
important document of our ecclesiastical history, both in respect to litur
gies and doctrines. We give from the original manuscripts, still pre
served among the archives of the General Convention and in the keeping
of the writer, these important alterations, noting the further changes
made in the work of the committee of the Convention by the com
mittee of publication in their revision of the same :

Alterations agreed upon and confirmed in Convention for rendering the Liturgy con
formable to the Principles of the American Revolution, and t /ie Constitutions of
the several States.

1. That in the suffrages after the Creed, instead of Lord, save the King, be
said, Lord, bless and preserve these United States.

2. That the Prayer for the Royal Family in Morning and Evening Service be
omitted.

8. That, in the Litany, the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th petitions be omitted, and
that instead of the 20th and 21st petitions, be substituted the following: That it
may please thee to endue the Congress of these United Slates, and all ot/iers in au
thority, legislative, executive, and judicial, with grace, wisdom, and understanding
to execute justice and to maintain truth.

4. That when the Litany is not said, the Prayer for the High Court of Parlia
ment be thus altered : Most Gracious God. we humbly beseech (hee, as for these
United States in general, so especially for their Delegates in Congress, (hat thou
wouldest be pleased to direct and prosper all their consultations to the advancement of
thy glory, the good of thy Church, the safety, honour and .welfare of thy people, that
all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavors, upon the best and surest

foundations, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, may be
established among us for all generations, &c. to the end. And the Prayer for the
King s Majesty altered as follows, viz. : A Prayer for our Civil Rulers. Lord,
our heavenly leather, the high and mighty Ruler of the Universe, who dost from thy
throne behold all the dwellers upon earth ; most heartily we beseech thee with thy
favour to behold all in authority, legislative, executive and judicial, in these United
States ; and so replenish them with the grace of thy Holy Spirit, tJiat they may alway
incline to thy will, and walk in thy way : Endue them plenteomly with heavenly
gifts ; grant them in health mid wealth long to live, and that, after this life, they may
attain everlasting joy and felicity, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

5. That the lirst Collect for the King in the Communion Service be omitted,
and that the second be altered as follows : instead of the hearts of Kings are in thy
rule and governance, be said that the hearts of all Eulers are in thy governance, &c. ;
and instead of the words, heart of George thy servant, insert so to direct the rulers
of these Stales, that in all their thoughts, &c., changing the singular pronouns to the
plural.

7. 1 That in the answer in the Catechism to the question What is thy duty
towards thy Neighbour 1 } for to honour and obey the King, be substituted to honour
and obey my Civil Rulers, to submit myself, &c.

8. That instead of the observation of the 5th of November, the 30th of
January, the 29th of May, and the 25th of October, the following service be used
on the 4th of July, being the Anniversary of Independence.

9. That in the Forms of Prayer to be used at Sea, in the prayer Eternal God,
&c., instead of these words, unto our most gracious Sovereign Lord, King George,
and his Kingdoms, be inserted the words to the United States of America; and that
instead of the word Island be inserted the word Country ; and in the Collect O
Almighty God, the Sovereign Commander, be omitted the words the honour of our
Sovereign, and the words the honour of our Country inserted.

Service for Fourth of July,* With the Sentences before Morning and Evening Prayer.
The Lord hath been mindful of us, and he shall bless us ; he shall bless them

iNo sixth paragraph appears in the manu- This simple title was amplified by the corn-

script, or in the printed copy appended to Bishop mittec of publication to the following :
White s Memoirs, 2d ed., pp. 362-377. " A Form of Prayer and Thanksgiving to

PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED.

107

that fear him, both small and great. 1 O that men would therefore praise the
Lord for his goodness, and declare the wonders that he doeth for the children of
rnen ! 3

Ilymn instead of the Venite.

My song shall be alway of the loving-kindness of the Lord : with my mouth
will I ever be showing forth 3 his truth from one generation to another. 4

The merciful and gracious Lord hath so done his marvellous works : that they
ought to be had in remembrance. 6

Who can express the noble acts of the Lord : or shew forth all his praise ? *

The works of the Lord are great : sought out of all them that have pleasure
therein. 7

For he will not alway be chiding : neither keepeth he his anger forever. 8

He hath not dealt with us after our sins : ubr rewarded us according to our
wickedness."

For look how high the heaven is in comparison of the earth : so great is his
mercy toward them that fear him. 10

Yea, like as a father pitieth his own children : even so is the Lord merciful
unto them that fear him. 11

Thou, O God, hast proved vis : Thou also hast tried us, even 13 as silver is tried. 13

Thou didst remember us in our low estate, and redeem us from our enemies :
for thy mercy endureth forever. 14

Proper Psalm," cxviii, except vs. 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 23, to conclude with v. 24.
First Lesson, Deut. viii. Second Lesson, Thess. v., verses 12-23, both inclusive.

Collect for the Day.

Almighty God, who hast in all ages shewed forth thy power and mercy in the
wonderful preservation of thy Church, and in the protection of eveiy nation and
people professing thy holy and eternal truth, and putting their sure trust in thee ;
We yield thee our unfeigned thanks and praise for all thy public mercies, and more
especially for that signal and wonderful manifestation of thy providence which we
commemorate this day. Wherefore not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy
name be ascribed all honour and glory, in all churches of the saints, from gener
ation to generation, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

A Thanksgiving for the Day, to be said after the General Thanksgiving.

O God, whose name is excellent in all the earth, and thy glory above the
heavens, who as on this day didst inspire and direct the hearts of our Delegates in
Congress to lay the perpetual foundations of peace, liberty, and safety ; We bless
and adore thy Glorious Majesty for this thy loving-kindness and providence. And
we humbly pray that the devout sense of this signal mercy may renew and increase
in us a spirit of love and thankfulness to thee, its only Author, a spirit of peaceful
submission to the laws and government of our country, and a spirit of fervent zeal
for our holy religion, which thou hast preserved and secured to us and our poster
ity. May we improve these inestimable blessings for the further 16 advancement of

Almighty God, for the inestimable Blessing of
Religious and Civil Liberty ; to be used yearly on
the Fourth clay of July, unless it happens to be
on Sunday, and then on the day folio-vying 1 ."

In the MS. the first sentence is stricken out.
It was as follows :

" Ye shall hallow the year, and proclaim lib
erty throughout all the land unto all the inhabi
tants thereof. It shall be a jubilee unto you, and
ye shall return every man unto his possessions,
and ye shall return every man unto his family."

The committee added three sentences (Deut.
xxxiii. 27,28,29), restricted their use to Morn
ing Prayer, and supplied an Epistle (Philip, iv. 4-
8) and Gospel (St. John viii. 31-36). This of
fice, Bishop White tells us, was " Principally ar
ranged, and the prayer composed by the Rev.
Dr. Smith." The Bishop also informs us that he
"kept the day from respect to the requisition of
the Convention ; but could never hear of its be
ing kept in above two or three places besides
Philadelphia." Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 105.

1 Ps. cxr. 12, 13. For " him " Bishop White
gives " the Lord." Memoirs, 2cl ed., p. 364.

2 Ps. cvii. 21. The references are added in
the " Proposed Book."

3 The word " forth " omitted by the commit
tee.

4 Ps. Ixxxix. 1.
Ps. cxi. 4.

Ps. cvi. 2.

7 Ps. cxi. 2.

8 Ps. ciii. 9.
Verse 10.

10 Verse 11.
"Verse 13.

12 " Like " substituted for " even " in the
" Proposed Book."

13 Ps. Ixvi. 9.

14 Ps. cxxxvi. 23, 24.

10 In the " Proposed Book " the proper Psalm
is cxviii. except vv. 7, 10, 11, 12.

""Further" omitted in the "Proposed
Book."

108 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

religion, liberty, and science throughout this land, till the wilderness and solitary
place be made* glad through us, and the desert to s rejoice and blossom as the rose.
This we beg, &c.

Alterations in the Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments,
and oilier Bites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the Use of the
Church of England, proposed and recommended to the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States of America.

The Order for Morning Service daily throughout the Tear.

1. The following sentences of Scripture are ordered to be prefixed to the
usual sentences, viz. :

"The Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him."
Hab. ii. 10. s

" From the rising of the sun to the going down of the same my name shall be
great among the Gentiles ; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my
name, and a pure offering : for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith
the Lord of hosts." Malachi. 4

[Bishop White, in his printed list of the alterations appended to the " Me
moirs, gives a third additional sentence " Let the words of my mouth, and the
meditation of my heart, be always acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength
and my Redeemer." Psalm xix. 14 ; but no trace of this appears in the manuscript
or in the " Proposed Book." This sentence was thus placed in the Prayer-book of
1789, but must have been first adopted at that time.]

" Where two or three are gathered together hi my name, there am I in the
midst of them." St. Matthew.

" The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit," &c., with one or two more of the
other sentences. But this to stand next after the sentence "where two or three."

2. That the rubric preceding the Absolution be altered thus: A Decla
ration to be made by the Minister alone, standing, concerning the forgiveness of sins. 6

3. That in the Lord s Prayer, the word who be substituted in lieu of which,
and that t/iose who trespass stand next instead of them that trespass.

4. That the Gloria Patri be omitted after the come, let us sing, and in every
other place, where by the present rubric it is ordered to be inserted, to the end of the
reading Psalms, when shall be said or sung Gloria Patri, &c., or Glory be to
God on high, and on earth peace, goodwill towards men. at the discretion of the
Minister.

5. That in the Te Deum, instead of honourable, it be adorable, true, and only
Son ; and instead of didst not abhor the Virgin s womb, didst humble thyself to be
born of a pure Virgin.

6. That until a. proper selection of Psalms be made, each Minister be allowed
to use such as he may choose.

7. That the same liberty be allowed respecting the Lessons.

8. That the article in the Apostles Creed, He descended into hell, be omitted.

9. That the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds be entirely omitted.

10. That after the response, And with thy spirit, all be omitted to the words
Lord, shew thy mercy upon us, which the Minister shall pronounce, still kneeling.

11. That in the suffrage, Make thy chosen people joyful, the word chosen be
omitted ; and also the following suffrages to God, make clean our hearts within
us.

12. That the rubric after these words, And take not thy Holy Spirit from us,
be omitted. Then the two Collects to be said. In the Collect for Grace, the
words be ordered to be omitted, and the word be inserted instead of to do alway
that is.

13. In the Collect for the Clergy and People, read Almighty and Everlasting
God, send down upon all Bishops and other Pastors, and the Congregations com
mitted, &c. to the end.

1 " Made " omitted. 4 In the "Proposed Book "the reference is

s " To " omitted. Mai. i. 11.

8 The " Proposed Book" has the number of ln the "Proposed Book" this rubric is

the verse correctly, " 20." In the original MS., transposed thus : A Declaration concerning the

at the close of this introductory sentence, the fol- Forgiveness of Sins, to be made by the Minister

lowing words are added, with a line drawn alone, standing, the people still kneeling.
through them : " N.B. A solemn pause here."

PKAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED. 109

14. That after all the reading Psalms and not at the end of each, Gloria
Patri or the Gloria inExcelsis Deo shall be used at discretion of the minister. 1

15. That the Lord s Prayer, after the Litany, and the subsequent rubric bo
omitted.

16. That the Short Litany be read as follows : Son of God, we beseech thee
to hear us. Son of God, we beseech thee to hear us. Lamb of God that takest
away the sins of the world. Grant us thy peace. Christ, hear us. Christ, hear
us. Lord, have mercy upon us, and deal not with us according to our sins ; neither
reward us according to our iniquities. After which, omit the words Let us pray.

17. That the Gloria Patri after Lord, arise, &c. be omitted, as also the Let
tis pray after We put our trust in thee.

18. That in the following prayer, instead of righteously have deserved, it be
justly have deserved.

19. That in the First Warning for Communion, the word damnation follow
ing these words, increase your % &c. be read condemnation ; and the two paragraphs
after these words, or else come not to that holy table, be omitted, and the following
one be read, and if there be any of you who by these means cannot quiet their con
science, &c. The words learned and discreet, epithets given to the ministers, to be
also omitted.

20. In the Exhortation to the Communion, let it run thus : For as the bene
fit is great, &c., to drink his blood, so is the danger great if we receive the same un
worthily. Judge, therefore, yourselves, &c.

21. That, in the rubric preceding the Absolution, instead of pronounce this
Absolution, it be Then shall the Minister stand up, and turning himself to the peo
ple, say.

22. That in the Baptism of Infants, parents may be admitted as sponsors.

23. That the Minister, in speaking to the sponsors, after these words, Vouch
safe to release him, say Release him from sin; and in the second prayer, instead of
remission of his sins, read remission of sin.

24. That the questions addressed to the sponsors, and answers, instead of
the present form, be as follow :

25. Dost thou beliece the Articles of the Christian faith, as contained in the
Apostles 1 Creed, and wilt thou endeavour to have this child instructed accordingly ?

Answer. I do believe them, and, by God s help, will endeavour so to do.
Wilt thou endeavour to have him brought up in the fear of God, and to obey
God s holy will and commandments ?

Answer. I will, by God s assistance.

26. That the sign of the cross may be omitted, if particularly desired by the
sponsors or parents, and the prayer to be thus altered (by the direction of a short
rubric) : We receive this child into the congregation of Chrisfs flock, and pray that
hereafter he may never be ashamed, &c., to the end.

27. That the address, Seeing now, dearly beloved, &c., be omitted.

28. That the prayer after the Lord s Prayer be thus changed, We yield thee
hearty thanks, &c., to receive this infant as thine own child by baptism, and to in
corporate him, &c.

29. That in the following exhortation the words to renounce the devil and
all his works, and in the charge to the sponsors, the words vulgar tongue be
omitted.

30. That the forms of Private Baptism and of Confirmation be made con
formable to these alterations.

31. That in the exhortation before Matrimony, all between these words, holy
matrimony and therefore, if any man, &c., be omitted.

32. That the words I plight thee my troth be omitted in both places, and also
the words with my body I thee worship, and also pledged their troth either to other.

33. That all after the Blessing be omitted.

34. In the Burial Service, instead of the two Psalms, take the following
verses of both, viz. : Ps. xxxix. verses 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, and Ps. xc. to verse 13. In
the rubric, that the words unbaptized or be omitted.

For the declaration and form of interment, beginning Forasmuch as, &c.,
insert the following, viz. : Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God, in his wise

1 This is a repetition in part of the fourth found a repetition of part of the thirteenth.]"

alteration. In Bishop White s Memoirs the fol- This is an error. The Bishop inadvertently

lowing statement is made : " 14th. [Here is an wrote " thirteenth " for " fourth."
erasure from the manuscript : the article being

110 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

providence, to take out of this world t/ie soul of our deceased brolJier [sister] lying
now before us ; we, therefore, commit his [her] body to the ground, earth to earth,
ashes to ashes, dust to dust (thus at sea to the deep to be turned into corruption) ,
looking for the general resurrection in the last day, and the life of the world to come,
through our Lord Jesus Christ, at whose second coming, in glorious majesty, to
judge the world, the earth and the sea shall give up their dead ; and the corruptible
bodies of those who sleep in him shall be changed, and made like unto his own
glorious body, according to the mighty working whereby he is able to subdue all
things unto himself.

In the sentence, I heard a voice, &c , insert who for which.

The prayer following the Lord s Prayer to be omitted. In the next Collect,
leave out the words, as our hope is this our brother doth. For them tliat insert
lliose who.

85. In the Visitation of the Sick, instead of the absolution as it now stands,
insert the declaration of forgiveness which is appointed for the Communion Service,
or either of the two collects which are taken irom the Commination Office and ap
propriated to Ash Wednesday may be used.

In the Psalm, omit the 3d, 6th, 8th, 9th, and llth verses. In the Commen
datory Prayer, for miserable and naughty, say vain and miserable. Strike out the
word purged.

In the prayer, " for persons troubled in mind," omit all that stands between
the words afflicted servant and his sotil is full, &c., and instead thereof say afflicted
servant, whose soul is full of trouble; and strike out the particle but and proceed,
merciful God, &c.

30. A form of prayer and visitation of prisoners for notorious crimes, and
especially persons under sentence of death, being much wanted, the form entitled
" Prayers lor Persons under Sentence of Death, agreed upon in a Synod of the Arch
bishops and Bishops, and the rest of the Clergy of Ireland, at Dublin, in the year
1711," as it now stands in the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of Ireland,
is agreed upon, and ordered to be adopted, with the following alterations,
viz. :

For the absolution, take the same declaration of forgiveness, or either of the
collects above directed for the Visitation of the Sick. The short collect Saviour
of the world to be left out, and for the woi-&lt;\ frailness say frailly.

37. In the Catechism, besides the alteration respecting the civil powers, alter
as follows, viz. :

What is your name ? N. M.

When did you receive this name? I received it in Baptism, whereby I became
a Member of the Christian Church.

What loas promised for you in Baptism^ That I should be instructed to be
lieve the Articles of the Christian faith, as contained in the Apostles 1 Creed, and to
obey Qod s holy will and keep his commandments.

Dost thou think thou art bound to believe all the Articles of the Christian faith,
as contained in this Creed, and to obey (jod s holy will and to keep his command
ments ? Yes, verily, &c.

Instead of the words verily and indeed taken, say spiritually tafan. Answer
to question How many sacraments ? Two, Baptism and the Lord s Supper.

38. Instead of a particular Service for the Churching of Women, and Psalms,
the following special prayer is to be introduced after the General Thanksgiving,
viz. This to be said when any woman desires to return thanks, &c.

. O Almighty God, we give thee most humble and hearty thanks for that thou
hast been graciously pleased to preserve this woman, thy servant, through the great
pains and perils of childbirth. Incline her, we beseech thee, to shew forth her
thankfulness for this thy great mercy, not only with her lips, but by a holy and
virtuous life. Be pleased, O God, so to establish her health, that she may lead the
remainder of her clays to thy honour and glory, through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen."

39. The Commination Office on Ash- Wednesday to be discontinued ; and there
fore the three collects, the first beginning.

1. O Lord, we beseech thee,

2. O most mighty God,

3. Turn thou us, O good Lord,

shall be continued among the Occasional Prayers, and used after the Collect on Ash-
Wednesday, and on such other occasions as the Minister shall think fit.

PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED. Ill

Articles of Religion.

1. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity.

There is but one living, true, and eternal God, the Father Almighty ; without
body, parts or passions ; of infinite power, wisdom and goodness ; the maker anil
preserver of all things, both visible and invisible ; and Lord Jesus Christ, Son of
God ; begotten of the Father before all worlds, very and true God ; who came
down from heaven, took man s nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin of her
substance, and was God and man in one person, whereof is one Christ,
who truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried, to reconcile his Father to
us, and to be a sacrifice for the sins of all men. He rose again from death,
ascended into heaven, and there sitteth until he shall return to judge the world at
the last day ; and one Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, of the same divine
nature with the Father and the Son.

2. Of the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation,
[Article VI. of the English Prayer-book, unchanged.]

3. Of the Old and New Testament.

There is a perfect harmony and agreement between the Old Testament and
the New ; for in both, everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the
only Mediator between God and man ; being both God and man : and although
the law given by Moses, as to ceremonies and the civil precepts of it, doth not bind
Christians, yet all such are obliged to observe the moral commandments which he
delivered.

4. Of Greeds.

The creed, commonly called the Apostles 1 Creed, ought to be received and be
lieved, because it may be proved by the Holy Scripture.

5. Of Original Sin.

By the fall of Adam, the nature of man is become so corrupt as to be greatly
depraved, having departed from its primitive innocence, and that original righteous
ness in which it was at first created by God. For we are now so naturally inclined
to do evil, that the flesh is continually striving to act contrary to the Spirit of God,
which corrupt inclination still remains even in the regenerate. But though there
is no man living who sinneth not, yet we must use our sincere endeavours to keep
the whole law of God, so far as we possibly can.

6. OfFree-Will.

[The Tenth English Article, with the words " Christ preventing us, that we
may have a good will," simplified to " Christ giving us a good will."]

7. Of the Justification of Man.

[The same as the Eleventh English Article, with the omission of the last
clause, " as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification."]

8. Of Good Works.

[The same as the Twelfth English Article.]

9. Of Christ alone without Sin.

Christ, by taking human nature on him, was made like unto us in all things,
sin only excepted. He was a Lamb without spot, and by the sacrifice of himself,
once offered, made atonement and propitiation for the sins of the world ; and sin was
not in him. But all mankind besides, though baptized and born again in Christ, do
offend in many things. For if we say we have no sin-, we deceive ourselves, and
the truth is not in us.

10. Of Sin after Baptism.

They who fall into sin after baptism may be renewed by repentance ; for
though after we have received God s grace, we may depart from it by falling into
sin, yet through the assistance of his Holy Spirit, we may by repentance and the
amendment of our lives, be restored again to his favour. Goa will not deny remis
sion of sins to those who truly repent, and do that which is lawful and right ; but
all such, through his mercy in Christ Jesus, shall save their souls alive.

11. Of Predestination.

Predestination to lite, with respect to every man s salvation, is the everlasting
purpose of God, secret to us: and the right knowledge of what is revealed con
cerning it, is full of comfort to such truly religious Christians as feel in themselves
the spirit of Christ, mollifying the works of their flesh and their earthly affections,
and raising their minds to heavenly things. But we must receive God s promises
as they be generally declared in Holy Scripture, and do his will, as therein is ex
pressly directed ; for without holiness of life, no man shall be saved.

112 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

12. Of obtaining Eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ.

They are to be counted presumptuous, who say that, &c. [as in the Eighteenth
English Article.]

13. Of the Church, and its Authority.

The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, wherein the
pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments are duly administered, according
to Christ s ordinance, in all things necessary and requisite. And every Church hath
power to ordain, change and abolish rites and ceremonies for the more decent order
and good government thereof, so that all tilings be done to edifying. But it is not
lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God s word ; nor so to expound
the Scripture as to make one part seem repugnant to another ; nor to decree or
enforce anything to be believed, as necessary to salvation, that is contrary to God s
holy word. General Councils and Churches are liable to err, and have erred, even
in matters of faith and doctrine, as well as in their ceremonies.

14. Of Ministering in the Congregation.
[Same as the Twenty-third English Article.]

15. Of the Sacraments.

[Same as the Twenty-fifth English Article, with the omission of the last two
paragraphs.]

16. Of Baptism.

[Same as the Twenty-seventh English Article, with two verbal changes.
Grafted into the Church, for grafted in the Church, and the forgiveness of sin for
forgiveness of sin. ]

17. Of the Lord s Supper.

[Same as the Twenty-Eighth English Article, with the omission of the last
paragraph.]

18. Of the one Oblation of Christ upon the Cross.

[Same as the first sentence of the Thirty-first English Article.]

19. Of Bishops and Ministers.

The Book of Consecration of Bishops, and Ordering of Priests and Deacons,
excepting such part as requires any oaths or subscriptions inconsistent with the
American Revolution, is to be adopted as containing all things necessary to such
consecration and ordering.

20. Of a Christian Man s Oath.

The Christian religion doth not prohibit any man from taking an oath, when
required by the magistrate, in testimony of truth. But all vain and rash swearing
is forbidden by the Holy Scriptures.

Table of Holy Days.

The following days are to be kept holy by this Church, viz. : All the Sun
days in the year, in the order enumerated in the Table of Proper Lessons, with
their respective services ; Christmas, Circumcision, Epiphany ; Easter Day, Monday
and Tuesday ; Ascension Day ; Whitsunday, Monday and Tuesday.

The following days are to be observed as Days of Fasting, viz. Good
Friday and Ash- Wednesday.

The following days are to be observed as Days of Thanksgiving, viz. the
Fourth of July, in commemoration of American Independence and the first
Thursday in November, as a day of General Thanksgiving.

The " Proposed Book " was hardly out of the printer s hands be
fore it was evident, to quote the language of Bishop White, "that, in
regard to the Liturgy, the labours of the Convention had not reached
their object. l Even the committee intrusted with the preparation
of the volume for the press felt the imperfection of their work. " We
can only in the different States," writes Dr. William Smith to the Rev.
Dr. Parker of Massachusetts, under date of April 17, 1786, "receive
the book for temporary use, till our churches are organized, and the
book comes again under review of Conventions having their Bishops,
etc., as the primitive Eules of Episcopacy require." 5 South Caro-

i Memoirs, 2d cd., p. 112. Perry s " Reprint of the Early Journals," III., p. 200

PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED.

113

Una, 1 Virginia, 2 Maryland, 3 and Pennsylvania, 4 proposed amendments.
No Convention met in Delaware. New Jersey rejected the book, ancU
memorialized the General Convention as to "the unseasonableness and\
IffeglrtaTtty w of the alterations made by the committee without the j
"revision and express approbation of the convention itself." 5 New
York postponed the question of its ratification, " out of respect to the
English Bishops, and because the minds of the people are not yet
sufficiently informed. 6 The prospect of the speedy success of the
efforts for the Episcopal Succession in the English line, served to hin
der the ratification and use of the " Proposed Book." Objections made
by Bishop Seabury and the New England churchmen, as well as by the
English archbishops and bishops, to the mutilation of the Apostles
Creed, and the omission of the Nicene, were obviated by the ac
tion of the General Convention at Wilmington, Delaware, in October,
1786. The clause, "He descended into hell," was restored, and the
Nicene Creed inserted after the Apostles Creed, prefaced by the rubric
[or this] .

This measure having removed the still remaining hindrances to/
the consecration of bishops for America, by the English archbishops)
and bishops, the " Proposed Book" was gradually laid aside,
failedlouEommend itself to th pfiyynh 1 * ffi|flf|Bffl - A *

of the General (!!ionventioil o 1789* the question of union between the
churches of New England, with Seabury as their episcopal head, and
those of the Middle and Southern States, offered a topic of absorbing
interest. When this measure was effected at the adjourned meeting
of the same year, and the Church was at unity with herself, the prep
aration of a liturgy became the first duty. TheJiew England deputies J
under the leadership of the Rev. Dr. Parker, " proposed that the\
English Book should be the ground of the proceedings held, without^
any reference to that set out and propoaed in 1785." 7

Others contended that a liturgy should be framed de novo, "with
out any reference to any existing book, although with liberty to take
from any, whatever the Convention should think fit." B The result of
the discussion so far as the House of Deputies was concerned 9 appears

1 Bishop White tell us in his Memoirs (2d
ed., p. 112) that " in South Carolina the book was
received without limitation." A reference to the
Journal of the Convention of that State for 1786,
as reprinted in Dalcho s " Hist, of the Church in
South Carolina," pp. 471-3, gives evidence to the
contrary. The changes adopted by this Conven
tion embraced not only matters of punctuation,
but comprised important alterations and omissions
in almost every part of the service.

1 In Virginia the chief exception taken to
the book was the " rubric before the Communion
Service." Journal of Va. Conv. 1786, p. 11.
Hawks Eccl. Contributions, Vol. I., p. 16, Appen
dix. Certain alterations were proposed in the
Articles, and the use of the English Psalter was
permitted " until a sufficient number of the new
books can be procured." The " rubric held to be
intolerable in Virginia, was that allowing the
Minister to repel an evil liver from the Commun
ion." Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d ed.,p. 112.

Maryland required the restoration of the
Nicene Creed, and the addition of an Invocation
to the Consecration Prayer in the Communion

Office, from the Scotch Office, with certain
changes which were afterwards incorporated into
the service as adopted in 1789. Perry s Reprint
of the Journals, Vol. in, pp. 179, 190, ltl, 199, 200.

* Pennsylvania added to the Maryland amend
ments a new question and answer in the Baptis
mal Services, and changes in the Burial Service
and the Articles.

6 Proceedings of the Convention of the
Prot. Epis. Church in the State of New Jersey ;
including the three first meetings, 1787, pp. 6, 7,
14.

Proceedings of the Convention of the
Prot. Epis. Church in the State of New York,
1788, p. 6.

7 Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 147.

Ibid.

" They would not allow that there was any
book of authority in existence : a mode of pro
ceeding in which they have acted differently
from the Conventions before and after them :
who have recognized the contrary principle when
any matter occurred to which it was applicable."
Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 148.

114 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

in "the wording of the resolves, as they stand in the journal, in which
the different committees are appointed, to prepare a Morning and Even
ing Prayer to prepare a Litany to prepare a Communion Service,"
and the same in regard to the other portions of the Liturgy. In 1785
the phraseology was to alter the said services. The latitude of change
this action of the lower house of convention might have justified, was
lessened by the general disposition of the members to vary the new
book as little as possible from the English model, and the fact that
the other house " adopted a contrary course." * The alterations, other
than those of a political nature, were mainly verbal, together with the
omission of repetitions. There was also the addition to the number
of the Occasional Prayers ; of Selections of Psalms ; of an Office for the
Visitation of Prisoners from the Irish Prayer-book ; of a Form of
Prayer and Thanksgiving for the fruits of the earth, etc. ; and of Forms
of Prayer to be used in Families. Besides these, BishoL,Seabury_ 2
securecLtJjejre^tp^aJJQn^to^the Consecration Prayerofthe Oblation jmd
Invocation foop.^ * n ^]Bg ^jKfWftTfl Y^-Br^f^ 1 Book fl,"d refryned vn
the Scotch Office iii tlio order in which they appear in the ancient
Liturgies, and with the change of a single sentence only. 3 In this he
eBEected for the American Church a closer conformity in her eucharistic
office to the primitive models, and fully answered the requirement of
the " Concordate " he had signed on his consecration.

A misunderstanding between the House of Bishops and the House
of Clerical and Lay Deputies, with respect to the printing of the con
troverted clause in the Apostles Creed concerning the descent into
hell, gave occasion for uneasiness among the clergy at the North ; but
at the next General Convention, in 1792, the matter was definitely
settled, as the House of Bishops originally intended, and as it now
stands.*

The Athanasian Creed was finally rejected at this review of the
Prayer-book, although its discretionary use was agreed to by the House
of Bishops. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies negatived this
proposition, and, even after conference with the bishops, " would not
allow of the Creed in any shape." 5

In this connection we append from the original manuscript the
opinion of the Bishop of Connecticut, concerning this creed. It is a
portion of a letter to his friend, Dr. Parker, afterwards Bishop of Mas
sachusetts, and bears the date of December 29, 1790 :

With regard to the propriety of reading the Athanasian Creed in Church, I
never was fully convinced. With regard to the impropriety of banishing it out of

1 Vide Bishop White s discussions of this preserved among the archives of the General

subject in his " Memoirs of the Church," pp. 179, Convention, and now in the keeping of the writer,

180. contains original letters that passed on this sub-

1 Vide Prof. Hart s Historical Sketch ap- ject, giving fully the views of these distinguished

pended to his " Reprint of Up. Seabtuy s Com- men on a matter so fraught with interest and im-

munion Office," pp. 37-42. portanee.

8 Vide ante. 8 White s Memoirs, 2d cd., p. 150. In this

4 Allusion to this misunderstanding appears chapter, as elsewhere, the references to Bishop

in Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d cd., pp. 150-152, White s Memoirs have been made to the second

155-100, where its bearing on the question earlier edition of this invaluable work, which was pre-

brought before this Convention as to the bind- pared for the press by the author shortly before

ing authority of the English Liturgy until altered his decease, and had the further advantage of the

is fully discussed. The unpublished corrc- careful revision of the late llcv. Dr. Francis Lismr

spoadence of Bishop White and Bishop Scabury, Hawks.

PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED.

115

the Prayer-book I am clear ; and I look upon it, that those gentlemen who rigidly
insisted upon its being read as usual, and those who insisted on its being thrown
out, both acted from the same uncandid, uncomplying temper. They seem to me
to have aimed at forcing their own opinion on their brethren. And I do hope,
though possibly I hope in vain, that Christian charity and love of union will some
time oring that Creed into this book, were it only to stand as articles of faith stand ;
and to show that we do not renounce the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, as held by
the Western Church. 1

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.

FROM page 85 of "The Proceedings of a Convention of Delegates held at the
Capitol, in the City of Williamsburg, in the Colony of Virginia, On Monday, the
6th of May, 1776. Reprinted by a Resolution of the House of Delegates, of the 24th
February, 1816. Richmond: Ritche, Trueheart & Du-Val, Printers. 1816. 4,"
we append the action of the Virginia Convention of Delegates at the opening
of the struggle for independence with reference to the Prayer-book services :

"FRIDAY, July 5, 1776.

" Resolved, That the following sentences in the morning and evening service
shall be omitted : Lord, save the King. And mercifully hear us when we call
upon thee.

"That the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th sentences in the litany, for the King s
majesty, and the royal family, &c., shall be omitted.

" That the prayers in the communion service which acknowledge the authority
of the King, and so much of the prayer for the church militant as declares the same
authority, shall be omitted, and this alteration made in one of the above prayers in
the communion seryice : Almighty and Everlasting God, we are taught by thy holy
word that the hearts of all rulers are in thy governance, and that thou dost dispose
and turn them as it seemeth best to thy godly wisdom, we humbly beseech thee so to
dispose and govern the hearts of all the magistrates of this Commonwealth, that in
all their thoughts, words, and works, they may evermore seek thy honour and glory,
and study to preserve thy people committed to their charge, in wealth, peace, and
godliness. Grant this, merciful Father, for thy dear Son s sake, Jesus Christ, our
Lord. Amen.

" That the following prayer shall be used, instead of the prayer for the King s
majesty, in the morning and evening service : Lord, our heavenly father, high
and mighty, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, the only ruler of the universe, who dost
from thy throne behold all the dwellers upon earth, most heartily we beseech thee with
thy favour to behold the magistrates of this commonwealth, and so replenish them
with the grace of thy Holy Spirit, that they may alway incline to thy will, and walk
in thy way; endue them plenteously with thy heavenly gifts; strengthen them, that
they may vanquish and overcome all their enemies, and finally, after this life, they
may obtain everlasting joy and felicity, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.

" In the 20th sentence of the litany use these words : That it may please thee
to bless and keep them, giving them grace to execute justice, and to maintain truth.

" Let every other sentence of the litany be retained, without any alteration,
except the above sentences recited."

We append, as a valuable addition to this chapter, an unpublished letter on
the alterations of the Prayer-book of 1789, written by Bishop White to the Rt. Rev.
Dr. Brownell, Bishop of Connecticut, at the time of the preparation of " The
Churchman s Family Prayer-book " by the latter : This letter is from the valuable
collection of episcopal autographs and MSS., belonging to Mr. Rollinson Colburn,
of Washington, D.C., by whose kind permission we are permitted to print it:

Ph. Feb. 8. 1822.
R Rev* & dear Sir.

The Time is expiring, within which I was to furnish you with any Facts which
may be in my Memory, tending to throw Light on y" Alterations in y* Liturgy, in
1789 ; & yet, I perceive scarcely any thing, but what is contained in my printed

1 In the collection of the author.

116 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

Memoirs. The few additional Particulars, shall be given as they occur. But there
will be no Notice of Alterations merely verbal ; y* Seasons for which will be obvi
ous. The Order in y* english Book will be followed.

Morning Prayer.

The two Texts placed in front of y 6 other initiatory Sentences, were designed
to give Solemnity to y* Opening of y* Service ; & yet, I do not know whether they
may not have had an unfavourable Consequence, not foreseen. The Compilers
evidently designed to begin with Penitence & Confession ; but we have lived to
witness an increasing Propensity to begin with a Psalm, without a special Reference
to those Subjects. Such a Thing never happened within my Knowledge, before y*
said Date : but whether it was y* Result of introducing the two Texts, otherwise so
very proper, I will not determine. Perhaps it would have been better to have
placed them after y* other Texts.

The introducing in this Place of y 2 a Absolution, y* same as in y* Communion
Service, has been objected to on a Ground not foreseen. My View of y* Subject &
I suppose that of others, was as follows. The Words of y* 1" Absolution fall short
of y precatory Form which prevailed in y* Primitive Church, & indeed, seems below
it s Name : for altho it affirms a certain Authority in y* Speaker, he is not made to
exercise y c Authority on those before him, however possessed of y 6 necessary Req
uisites. The other Form in y 8 Communion Service properly discarded from ours,
is in a Tone not warranted by Ancient Usage. The unforseen Objection, has been
grounded on a Wish to restrict y 6 precatory Form to y e Time & to y e Recipients of
y e Communion. I fear, that this countenances y 8 Delusion of Recourse to y 6 holy
Ordinance, as a periodical Sponge. Perhaps, a similar Abuse may be incidental to
M r Wheately s Notion of y e Minister s reading of y 6 Absolution in y e Service. The
correct Doctrine as apparent to me, is, that y 6 Truth in y e Form applies at any Time,
& by whomsoever said, the proper Conditions being found & that y 8 only Difference
between it s being declared by a proper Minister, or by another Person, is, that y 6
former is acting under a Commission : a Circumstance y e most likely to whig what
he says with Comfort.

We left out y e latter Part of y 6 " Venite," as being limited to y 6 Condition of
y 8 Jews ; but I wis h we had ended with y 6 7 th Verse ; as there is now an awkward
Repetition of y 8 two added Verses, hi y e 19 th Day of y 6 Month.

The " Gloria in Excelsis " was introduced under y 6 Notion, that y 8 singing of

it would add to y c Beauty of y 8 Service. I wish we had left it, in its Restriction to

y* End of y e Communion Service. It adds to y 8 length of y e other Service,

confessedly rendered too long, by y 6 Junction of Services intended to have been

distinct.

The Subject of y e Psalms, has been spoken of at considerable Length in y 8
Memoirs.

There being in y 8 english Book, select Lessons from y 8 O. Testament for Sun
days, was thought useful ; and y 8 Reason for it seemed to justify y e taking of select
Lessons from y e new. Whether it has been done with Judgement & whether y 8
same may be said of y 6 moderate Changes made in y e Column ot Lessons from y 6 old,
must be left to every Man s Opinion.

The Omission from y 8 Benedictus " was on y 8 same Principle with that from
y 8 " Venite : " but I wish it had ended with y 8 3 d Verse.

Of y e Creeds, I have spoken in the Memoirs.

The Omission of y 8 succeeding Lord s Prayer, y 8 Abbreviation of what is alter-
naitely said by y 8 Priest & y 8 People, & y 8 Conditional dispensing with y 8 Collect for
y 8 Day, rest on Grounds which must be Obvious.

Concerning y* Prayers for civil Rulers, there is little to be said. It may be
questioned, whether, in a Government which gives no Power commensurate with
Life, it be congruous to pray for y" long Life & Prosperity of y 6 first Magistrate :
but it is contemptible to cavil at y* Title of " God s Servant," as applied to an un
believing President ; when every one, who understands Greek, knows that he is so
called hi Rom. 13. 4.

Evening Prayer.

Much of what is said above, applies here.

Whether y Changes in y Psalms & y* Hymns after y* Lessons, be Improve
ments, must be left to y* Decision of Taste.

There occurred some Difficulty, in altering y* " Collect for Aid against Perils."
The play on y* Words " Light" & "Darkness," was considered as not of a Piece

\
\

PRAYER-BOOK AS "PROPOSED" AND PRESCRIBED. 117

with y* general Purity of y* Service : but I wish thei e had been enclosed in Hooks
between " this " & " Day " " or y" preceeding" and between " this " & " Night "
" or y* succeeding."

The Litany.

All y* Alterations may be considered as verbal, except, that y e civil Rulers
prayed for, are Christian Rulers only : evidently because we are praying for y*
Church Universal. In England, y* Rulers are a Part of y Church ; but it may happen
otherwise with us.

The permitted Abbreviation of y Litany, was for y shortning of y Service,
& y* avoiding of Repetition.

Prayers & Thanksgivings, &c.

The Prayer " for all Conditions of Men," & y" " General Thanksgiving," are
transferred to y Morning & to y Evening Prayer. Their Stations in y* English
Book must have been owing to their having been of later Origin than y 6 Compila
tion. This did not apply to a new arranging of y Service.

It was not from Accident but from Design, that y* Prayer for Congress was
directed to be used, like y other Prayers with which it stands, before y 9 two final
Prayers of y Morning & y Evening Service. What tho they come after y* Gen 1 :
Thanksgiving : y two Species of Devotion are not kept so entirely separate in other
Places, as to make this a Consideration. In many Churches, y* Practice is anti-
rubrical in this Paiticular.

It is to be hoped, that we added some useful Prayers & Thanksgivings. They
were selected from Bp: Taylor.

The Prayer " in Time of War & Tumults," was thought improved byy* Omis
sion of some rough Expressions.

The concluding Prayer in this Department was omitted, as being too much a
Play on Words from which y e Service in General is so free.

In y english Book, to y "Prayer for all Conditions," & to "y* General
Thanksgiving," there is attached a small Compartment, containing an Application
to y Case of any Person to be prayed for, or who should desire to return Thanks.
Our added Prayers, were suppose to supersede y" Use of these. But Cases occur,
not provided for : & therefore I wish, that there had been a Rubric to y* Purpose
of y e said Compartments.

Collects, Gospels & Epistles, &c.

I do not recollect, that there are other than verbal Alterations.

Holy Communion.

The Reason of omitting y" Lord s Prayer, & of y* Creed, if used before, was to
avoid Repetition.

What is added after y* Commandments, was to give y* Weight of Moses, y*
greater Authority of our Saviour.

The Change in y Consecration Prayer, is spoken of fully iny* Memoirs. The
Reasons of y" other Alterations must be suggested by a comparing of y" two Books ;
unless there be an Exception as to y Meaning given of y* Posture of Kneeling. And
if there had been a Dispensation from it in Case of Scruple, as of y* Cross in Bap
tism, I think Matters would not have been y" worse. As in y one Case, so in y*
other, y* Licence would have been seldom used.

Offices for Baptism.
The Alterations are few, & y" Reasons of them will probably be evident.

Catechism.

On y* Answer concerning y Lords Supper, " verily & indeed," is changed to
" spiritually : " which is more definite, & therefore better suited to y Doctrine of
our Church on y* Subject.

Confirmation requires Nothing.

Matrimony The Reasons will occur.

Visitation of y* sick. One of y* Forms of Absolution was omitted from y*
Persuasion, that it is not agreeable to y* Practice of y* Church in y* best Ages.
Ps. 71 . was thought advantageously changed for Ps. 130. Some Prayers were added
from Bp: Taylor it is to be hoped with Profit.

Burial of y dead. Whether y two Psalms had better stood entire, or Parts of
them joined as at present, is probably a Point on which there were different Senti-

118 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

ments. There was Unanimity, in clearing y Service of all Reference in y 8 Char
acter of y 8 deceased, which, often, ill suited with y 8 Words.

Commination. There is not recollected any Objection to y 8 Omission of it as
a distinct Service : but Parts of it are properly introduced, with y* Collect, Gospel &
Epistle for Ash-Wednesday.

Form for Sea. It must have been from Oversight, that y 8 Word " Minister"
designating y Person who is to pronounce y e Absolution, which had been used here
& elsewhere in y e Proposed Book was not changed to " Priest."

Our added Services, are, " For y Visitation of Prisoners " " For y Fruits
of y 8 Earth", & " Family Prayers."

The first was taken from y 8 then irish Book of Common Prayer ; & now, makes
a Part of y 8 Book of y 6 United Kingdom. The second, had been prepared in 1785,
& printed in y 8 Proposed Book. The 3 d is substantially from Bp: Gibson.

I hope, that in y e above, I have done something, altho but little, towards your
Object. It is probable that I have overlooked several Particulars, concerning which
you may wish to be informed. If so, & you will address Queries to me, I will satisfy
you to y e best in my Power.

In y 6 mean Time I remain

Your aff* 8 Brother

WM: WHITE.

CHAPTER VII.

THE ADJUSTMENT OF CONFLICTING INTERESTS AND PRIN
CIPLES IN THE CHURCH.

IN the separation of the Convention into two houses, on the adop
tion of the amended constitution by the representatives of the

Eastern churches, Bishops Seabury and White were, in the
absence of the Bishop of New York, whose opposition to the union
had continued to the latest moment, brought into the closest relation
ship. The result was mutual esteem and respect. Bishop White,
towards the close of his long and honored life, placed on record the
statement that he still " recollected with satisfaction the hours which
were spent with Bishop Seabury on the important subjects which
came before them ; and especially the Christian temper which he
manifested all along." 1

The views of the churchmen at the North" had been, from the
first, more pronounced than those of their brethren in the Middle and
Southern States. In New England the clergy and the Church people-
were mainly converts to the Church from the dissenters around theui^
Their allegiance had been secured by coa^Kftfon. They had been lea
to leave the sects in which they had been brought up, and had been
induced to unite with the Church by the force of a relentless logic ; and
their views were such as would naturally result from mental processes
of this nature. It was at no little cost and sacrifice that they had be
come members or ministers of the Church which they believed had been
founded by apostles and martyrs, Jesus Christ himself being the chief
corner-stone. To these churchly views and principles was added a
natural drawing towards the sentiments in vogue in the Scottish com
munion, from which the Church in Connecticut and Rhode Island, and,
in fact, throughout New England, had received the episcopate. The
fears excited by the circulation of the "Case of the Episcopal Churches
Considered," that the churchmen at the southward were leaning towards
Presbyterianism ; the consciousness that there was a wide-spread doc
trinal laxity among some of the leaders in the movement for organiza
tion, and the securing of the episcopate, among these churchmen, and
the dislike not only of the sweeping and ill-judged alterations contained
in the "Proposed Book," but also of the presence of the laity in the
councils of the Church, and their claim as coordinate with the clergy
to sit in judgment on matters of doctrine, discipline, and worship,
added to the gulf which had opened between the Northern churches
and those to the south of New England. The dislike of Seabury by
Provoost, arising from personal and political causes, and shown not

1 Memoirs of the Church, 2d ed., p. 149.

120 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

only in public measures, as in the resolutions in the State and General
Conventions, intended to cast a doubt on the validity of the Scottish
succession, but extending to private life, and finding expression in
conversation and correspondence, threatened to widen the breach and
to perpetuate a division in the American Church. It was in the
adjustment of these differences, in the wise and wide tolerance of
opposing views, and in the unfailing exercise of charity towards all,
that the character of William White appears in a most attractive light.
Strikingly is this seen to be the case in an incident recorded in
Bishop White s Memoirs, and giving a vivid picture of the difficulties
in the way of union overcome through the astuteness and conciliatory
spirit of the bishop himself. The time of the occurrence was at the
opening of the adjourned Convention of 1789.

But a danger arose from an unexpected question, on the very day of the
arrival of these gentlemen. The danger was on the score of politics. Some lay
members of the Convention two of them were known, and perhaps there were
more having obtained information that Bishop Seabury, who had been chaplain to
a British regiment during the war, was now in receipt of half-pay, entertained
scruples in regard to the propriety of admitting him as a member of the Conven
tion. One of the gentlemen took the author aside, at a gentleman s house, where
several of the Convention were dining, and stated to him this difficulty. His opin
ion it is hoped the right one was, that an ecclesiastical body needed not to be
over righteous, or more so than civil bodies, on such a point that he knew of no law
of the land, which the circumstance relative to a former chaplaincy contradicted
that, indeed, there was an article in the confederation, then the bond of union of
the States, providing that no citizen of theirs should receive any title of nobility
from a foreign power ; a provision not extending to the receipt of money which
seemed impliedly allowed, indeed, in the guard provided against the other that
Bishop Seabury s half-pay was a compensation for former services, and not for any
now expected of him that it did not prevent his being a citizen, with all the rights
attached to the character, in Connecticut and that should he or any person in the
like circumstance be returned a member of Congress from that State, he must
necessarily be admitted of their body. The gentleman to whom the reasoning was
addressed, seemed satisfied, and either from this or from some other cause, the
objection was not brought forward. 1

It was thus with difficulties environing every step of the progress
towards comprehension and unity that the Convention opened. Even
the formal acceptance of the amended constitution, on the part of the
Eastern deputies, and their reception on the floor of the Convention,
failed wholly to remove these differences, or to harmonize or adjust
the opposing interests of the two sections of the now united Church.
The Convention had no sooner resolved itself, after the union had been
consummated, into its two co-ordinate houses, than an incident occurred
that brought out these differences, and, in the language of Bishop
White, who was a witness of the discussion, had "an unpropitious
influence on all that followed." 2

In the consideration of the Book of Common Prayer which
claimed the attention of the House of Deputies, at the very first, the
Rev. Dr. Parker, acting indirectly in behalf of the New England
deputies, proposed that the Prayer-book of the Church of England
should be considered as the basis of proceeding, rather than the "Pro-

1 Bishop White s " Memoirs of the Church," 2d ed., 1836, p. 145. *Ibid. t p. 146.

CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN THE CHURCH. 121

posed Book" set forth by the Convention prior to the union. There were
but few to advocate the "Proposed Book, * which had so signally failed
of acceptance, but there were those " who contended that a Liturgy
ought to be formed without reference to any existing book, although
with liberty to take from any whatever the convention should think
fit." The result of the discussion was that a committee was " appointed
to prepare a calendar and table of lessons for morning and even
ing prayer throughout the year ; also collects, epistles, and gospels."
To a second committee was assigned the duty of preparing " a Morn
ing and Evening Service for the use of the Church." A third commit
tee was charged with the preparation of a "Litany, with occasional
Prayers and Thanksgivings ; " and a fourth committee was appointed
"to prepare an order for the Administration of the Holy Communion."
The influence of the New England element may be inferred from the
fact that the chairmanship of these four committees was given respec
tively to the Rev. Dr. Samuel Parker, of Massachusetts ; the Rev.
Bela Hubbard, of Connecticut ; the Rev. Dr. Abraham Beach, of New
York ; and the Rev. Joseph Pilmore, of Pennsylvania, who had been
ordained by Seabury. The committees reported in accordance with
the terms of their appointment, producing a "Morning Service," an
"Evening Service," a "Litany," a "Catechism," etc. It is evident
both from the language of Bishop White, and that of the minutes of
the Convention, that the purpose of this action was not to imply that
the English book was not of obligation till another had taken its
place by due process of law, but to avoid any recognition of the
" Proposed Book," which was especially distasteful to the Connecticut
churchmen. Certainly, neither in New England, nor in the Middle nor
Southern States, had the clergy acted on the principle thus avowed,
and the inconsistence of the House of Deputies in refusing to " allow
that there was any book of authority in existence " is clearly pointed
out by Bishop White in his references to this action of the Convention.
In fact, the clergy and members of the Church, everywhere, while
recognizing the necessity of such liturgical changes as were required
by the change in civil relations had, with few exceptions, regarded it
as their duty to adhere to the rest of the service " on the ground of
antecedent obligation." The exceptions to this adherence to the Eng
lish service-book were in the few cases where, as in Dr. Parker s own
church in Massachusetts, in a few churches in New York and Philadel
phia, and at a few places at the southward, the "Proposed Book" was
tentatively used in the expectation of its adoption after further revision.
Two other points of difference between the two houses arose in
connection with the discussion relating to the retention of the Athana-
sian Creed, and the article of the Apostles Creed respecting the descent
into hell. Nothing can add to the narrative of Bishop White on these
points :

On the former subject, the author consented to the proposal of Bishop Seabury,
of making it an amendment to the draft sent by the other House ; to be inserted
with a rubric permitting the use of it. This, however, was declared to be on the
principle of accommodation to the many who were reported to desire it, especially
in Connecticut, where, it was said, the omitting of it would hazard the reception

122 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

of the book. It was the author s intention never to read the Creed himself, and he
declared his mind to that effect. Bishop Seabury, on the contrary, thought that
without it, there would be a difficulty in keeping out of the church the errors to
which it stands opposed. In answer to this, there were urged the instances of sev
eral churches, as the Lutheran and others, in this country and Europe, and above
all, the instance of the widely extended Greek Church, confessedly tenacious of the
doctrine of the " Nicene" Creed, and yet not possessed of the Athanasiau in any
liturgy, or even of an acknowledgment of it in any confession of faith. Of the
last-mentioned instance Bishop Seabury entertained a doubt, but the fact is certainly
so, as is attested by the Rev. John Smith, an English divine held in estimation, who
wrote " An Account of the Greek Church," with the advantage of having resided in
Constantinople. He says (p. 196) after mention of the Aposues Creed and the Ni-
ceue " as to that of St. Athanasius they are wholly strangers to it." However, the
Creed was inserted by wuy of amendment, to be used or omitted at discretion. But
the amendment was negatived by the other House, and when the subject afterwards
came up in conference, they would not allow of the Creed in any shape, which was
thought intolerant by the gentlemen from New England, who, with Bishop Seabury,
gave it up with great reluctance.

The other subject the descent of Christ into hell was left in a situation
which afterwards not a little embarrassed the committee who had the charge of print
ing the book. The amendments of the Bishops, whether verbal or other, to the ser
vices sent to the other House had all been numbered. The president of the House, as
afterwards appeared on unquestionable verbal testimony, accidentally omitted the
reading of the article in its full ibrce, with its explanatory rubric. The meaning
of the article in that place was declared to be the state of the dead generally ; and
this was proposed instead of the form in which the other House had presented it, in
italics and between hooks, with a rubric permitting the use of the words "He
went into the place of departed spirits." The paper of the House, in return to that
of the Bishops, said nothing on this head, and therefore, their acquiescence was pre
sumed. This might have been the easier supposed, as there were some, who, while
they thought but little of the importance of inserting such an article, were yet of
opinion that the Convention stood pledged, on the present subject, to the English
Bishops, it being the only one on which they had laid much stress, in stating the
terms on which they were wil 1 ing to consecrate for our Church, and we, having com
plied with their wishes in that respect. This would seem very unsuitably followed
by a repetition of the offensive measure, or something very like it, in the first Con
vention held after the consecration -had been obtained. Thus, the matter passed
without further notice. But Bishop Seabury, before he left the city, conceived a
suspicion that there had been a misunderstanding. For, on the evening before his
departure, he took the author aside from company and mentioned his apprehension,
which was treated as groundless, on the full belief that it Avas so. It was a point
which Bishop Seabury had much at heart, from an opinion that the article was put
into the Creed in opposition to the Apollinarian heresy, and that, therefore, the
withdrawing of it was an indirect encouragement of the same. The author saw no
such inference ; but wished to retain the article, on the ground that the doing so
would tend to peace ; that it would be acting consistently toward the English
Church, and that a latitude would be left by the proposed rubric, for the understand
ing of the article as referring to the state of departed spirits, generally. It is
curious to remark, by the way, that when the book came out, Bishop Provoost dis
liked the form in which this part of it appeared, more than either the article as it
stood originally, or the omitting of it altogether, on the principle that it exacted a
belief of the existence of departed spirits between death and the resurrection. So
easy it is, in extending latitude of sentiment on one side, to limit it on another.

However, when the Committee assembled to prepare the book for the press,
great was their surprise and that of the author to find that the two Houses had mis
understood one another altogether. The question was, what was to be done? And
here the different principles on which the business had been conducted had their
respective operation. The Committee contended that the amendment made by the
Bishops to the service as proposed by their house, not appearing to have been pre
sented, the service must stand as proposed by them, with the words " He descended
into hell," printed in italics and between hooks , and with the rubric pemaissory of the
use of the words, " He went into the place of departed spirits." On the contrary,
it was thought a duty to maintain the principle that the Creed, as in the English
book, must be considered as the Creed of the Church, until altered by the consent

CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN THE CHUECH. 123

of both Houses, which was not yet done. Accordingly remonstrance was made
against the printing of the article of the descent into hell, in the manner in which
it appeared in the books published at that time. 1

In the introduction of the " Selections of Psalms," now prefixed to
the Psalter, after stating that " the House of Bishops did not approve
of the expedient of the other House, in relation to the selections as
they now stand," Bishop White proceeds to state : "But Bishop Sea-
bury interested himself in the subject the less ; as knowing that neither
himself nor any of his clergy would make use of the alternative, but
that they would adhere to the old practice." a

One other extract from the invaluable memoirs of Bishop White
will complete our record of the adjustment of differences and the har
monizing of conflicting prejudices and opinions that made the ad
journed Convention of 1789 memorable :

In the Sei*vice for the Administration of the Communion, it may, perhaps,
be expected that the great change made in restoring to the consecration prayer the
oblatory words, and the invocation of the Holy Spirit, left out in King Edward s
reign, must at least have produced an opposition . But no such thing happened to any
considerable extent; or, at least, the author did not hear of any in the other House,
further than a disposition to the effect in a few gentlemen, which was counteracted
by some pertinent remarks of the President. In that of the Bishops, it lay very near
to the heai-t of Bishop Seabury. As for the other Bishop, without conceiving with
some, that the service as it stood was essentially defective, he always thought there
was a beauty in those ancient forms, and can discover no superstition in them.
* * * * The restoring of those parts of the service by the American Church,
has been since objected to by some few among us. To show that a superstitious
sense must have been intended, they have laid great stress on the printing of the
words " which we now offer unto thee," in a different character, from the rest of
the prayers. But this was mere accident. The Bishops, being possessed of the
form used in the Scotch Episcopal Church, which they had altered in some respects,
referred to it, to save the trouble of copying. But the reference was not intended
to establish any particular manner of printing ; and accordingly in all the editions
of the Prayer-book, since the first, the aforesaid words have been printed in the
same character with the rest of the prayer, without any deviation from the original
appointment. Bishop Seabury s attachment to these changes may be learned from
the following incident. On the morning of the Sunday which occurred during the
session of the Convention, the author wished him to consecrate the elements. This
he declined. On the offer being again made at the time when the service was to begin,
he still declined ; and, smiling, added : " To confess the truth, I hardly consider the
form to be used as strictly amounting to a consecration." The form was, of course,
that used heretofore ; the changes not having taken effect. These sentiments he
had adopted in his visit to the Bishops from whom he received his Episcopacy. 3

We have thus given in detail the steps leading to the comprehen
sion of the disunited churches of the Northern, Middle, and Southern
States, in one "American Church." It is a portion of our annals but
little known in these days, and doubtless of but little interest to others
than those who, in learning of the past, seek to draw lessons of wisdom
for the present. There was one result of this union which should
not be forgotten. By the rules of the House of Bishops proposed by
Bishop White, with that graceful spirit of conciliation which was part
of his very nature, Bishop Scabury became, in virtue of his seniority
of consecration, the presiding bishop of the House of Bishops the iir.st

1 Memoirs of the Church, 2d ed., pp. 149- * Bishop White s Memoirs, 2d ed., p. 152.

152. * Ibid., pp. 154-155.

124 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

in the line of venerable men comprising, besides Seabury, clarum el
venerabile nomen, the well-remembered names of White, Provoost,
Griswold, Chase, Brownell, Hopkins, Bosworth Smith, and closing
long may it so remain with the present incumbent of this primacy
among brethren the venerable Alfred Lee. This presidency lasted
only till the next Convention. Willingly conceded by the excellent
White, this simple act of justice gave offence to Bishop Provoost, who
required, at the next meeting of the General Convention, in 1792, the
adoption of such a rule as should give to himself this coveted honor.
It was surrendered by the Bishop of Connecticut as meekly as it had
been assumed. His private memorandum on this requirement was
simply this characteristic sentence : " I cheerfully acquiesced in the
arrangement, having no wish to dispute who should be first in the king
dom of heaven." l

Nor was this prompt relinquishment of the position, to which he
was entitled by priority of consecration, the only concession made by
Seabury in favor of conciliation and union. The Convention met in
New York, and, agreeably to appointment, Bishop Seabury preached
the opening sermon. The Bishop of Connecticut, though justly
aggrieved at the open and continued slights cast upon his episco
pal character by Bishop Provoost, consented, in the interest of peace,
to call on the Bishop of New York, who received the courtesy kindly,
and "from that time," as Bishop White informs us, "nothing was
perceived in either of them which seemed to show that the former
distance was the result of anything else but difference of opinion."

Prior to this meeting in Convention the succession in the English
line had been completed. The excellent Griffith had resigned the
appointment as Bishop of Virginia, and after his decease, while in

1 Bishop White s recital of this matter is of Convention of New York having been, at its pre-
interest and value: "An unpropitious circum- ceding meeting, composed principally of gentle-
stance attended the opening of this Convcn- men of an opposite sentiment on this subject,
tion, but was happily removed before proceed- the deputies from that State were among the
ing to business. Bishop Seabury and Bishop foremost in producing (he resolution then come
Provoost had never, when the former had into, of recognizing Bishop Seabury s episcopal
been in New York at different times since his character.

consecration, exchanged visits. Although the " But to return to the narrative. The prcju-
author knows of no personal oifence, that had dices in the minds of the two Bishops were such
ever passed from cither of them to the other, as threatened a distance between them; which
and, indeed, was assured of the contrary by would give an unfavorable appearance to thcm-
thcm both ; yet the notoriety that Bishop selves, and to the whole body, and might, pcr-
Provoost had denied the validity of Bishop Sea- haps, have an evil influence on their dclibera-
bury s consecration, accounted, at least, for the tions. But it happened otherwise. On a pro-
omission of the attentions of a visit on either posal being made to them by common friends,
side. This veiy thing had not been without its and through the medium of the present author,
consequences on the proceeding of the Conven- on the suggestion of Dr. Smith, they consented
tions; which is here stated, as a caution against without the least hesitation, Bishop" Seabury to
such partial considerations, acted on without due pay and Bishop Provoost to receive the visit,
deliberation, and producing inconsistencies of which etiquette enjoined on the former to the
conduct. For in the Convention of June, 1786, latter, and was as readily accepted by the one
on the question of denying the validity of Bishop as it had been proffered by the other. The
Seabury s ordinations, the vote of New York is author was present when it took place. Bishop
Aye, although it was well known that t\yo of Provoost asked his vigilant to dine with him on
_ the three clergymen from that State had paid at- the same day, in company of the author and
tout ions to Dr. Seabury as a Bishop; and that he others. The invitation was accepted, and from
stood high in their esteem. But they acted that time nothing was perceived in either of
under instructions from the Church in their them, that served to show that the former dis- /
State, when the Convention of it was of a com- tance was the result of anything else but differ- )
plcxion corresponding with that vote. After- encc of opinion." *
wards, in the General Convention of 1789, the

1 Memoirs of the Church, 2d cd., pp. 161, 162.

CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN THE CHURCH.

125

attendance upon the first Convention of 1789, the
Rev. James Madison, D-D-, President, of the Col
lee ofWilllam and Mary, wn chnapp fat

office and .idministraiion, and on the Sixteenth
Sunday after Trinity, tlio liHh of September, JT JO,
was consecrated at Lambeth, by the Archbishop of
Canterbury, Dr. John Moore ; the Bishop of London,
Dr. Beilby Porteus ; and the Bishop of Rochester,
Dr. John Thomas. It was at this Convention in New
York that the first American consecration took place.
The Rev. Dr. Thomas John Claggett haclbeea elected
to the episcopate or Maryland, and on Monday,
September 17, 17!)fy he received consecration in
Trinity Church, at the hands of " Samuel Provoost,
D.D., Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church
in the State of New York, presiding bishop, Samuel
Seabury, D.D., Bishop of Connecticut and Rhode
Island, William White, D.D., Bishop of the Prot
estant Episcopal Church in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania; and James Madison, D.D., Bishop
of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of
Virginia. 1 " Thus the Englisji^ and Scottish lines of I
succession were united ]" this nnnspprntion 1 the
only one in which Seaburv took part, as his cleat
took place before another received the laying on
hands in the Amerioan Chiirnh^

Bishop White, in his account; of this Conven
tion, informs us that the alterations in the ordinal
were prepared by the bishops, and that there was
no material difference of opinion between them
except in regard to the words at the ordination of
priests, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," etc. Bishop
Seabury, who alone was tenacious of the form as
it stood in the English office, consented at length
with great reluctance to allow the alternative of
another form as it now appears. With reference
to the Thirty-nine Articles, the Bishop of Con
necticut was of the opinion at first " that all neces
sary doctrine should be comprehended in the Litur
gy." But on further thought he saw so clearly the
inconvenience likely to arise from the lack of an
authoritative rule of. faith in the hands of the people,
and forming part of the authorized book of common
devotions that he gave in his adhesion to the adoption
of the Articles of the Church of England. Bishop
Provoost was understood to be at least indifferent
to the adoption of articles, while Bishop Madison
was openly adverse to them. The Bishop of

iThis is the language and the order of the official Letter of Consecration.

126

HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

Maryland, -whose opinions were gathered from his vote and from his
conversation when not in the house of which he was so recent a mem
ber, was in favor of them. The action of the House of Deputies in
dismissing the consideration of the subject, was negatived by the
bishops, the Bishop of Virginia alone voting in the affirmative, and
there being no occasion for the president s vote. The subject was,
however, dismissed for the time by vote of the lower house.

The bishops, at the instance of Bishop Madison, put on record the
expression of their views on the matter of the comprehension of the

Methodist body in the Church, a scheme

very dear to the heart of the Bishop of Vir
ginia. The plan, as it took shape in the
mind of its author, did not embrace the
comprehending of this already large and
respectable body on the condition of their
retaining their organization ; but, " by an
accommodation to them in a few instances,"
inducing them " to give up their peculiar
discipline and conform to the leading parts
of the doctrine, the worship, and the dis
cipline of the Episcopal Church." Bishop
White, in view of a correspondence
which in common with the Bishop of Con
necticut he had had with the Rev.
Thomas Coke, LL.D., one of the superin
tendents appointed by Wesley himself, did
not conceal his conviction "how hopeless all endeavors for such a
junction must prove." The " minute " adopted by the bishop was
as follows :

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, ever bear
ing in mind the sacred obligation which attends all the followers of Christ, to
avoid divisions among themselves, and anxious to promote that union for which
our Lord and Saviour so earnestly prayed, do hereby declare to the Christian
world, that, uninfluenced by any other considerations than those of duty as
Christians, and an earnest desire for the prosperity of pure Christianity, and thel
furtherance of our holy religion, they are ready and willing 1 to unite jind form ong(
body with any religious society which shall be influenced by the same catholic:
spirit. And in order that this Christian end may be the more easily cfVectcd. ilicy.
luraier declare, that all things in which the great essentials of Christianity or the
characteristic principles of their Church are not concerned, they are willing to leave
to future discussion ; being ready to alter or modify those points which, in the
opinion of the Protestant Episcopal Church, are subject to human alteration. And
it is hereby recommended to the State Conventions, to adopt such measures or pro
pose such conferences with Christians of other denominations, as to themselves may
be thought most prudent, and report accordingly to the ensuing General Con
vention.

The House of Deputies failed to approve of this scheme of compre
hension. In their view it seemed likely "to produce distrust of the
stability of the system of the Episcopal Church, without the least
prospect of embracing any other religious body." Leave was there
upon given to the bishops to withdraw their proposition.

The Convention at which this effort for unity was rejected recog-

SEAL OF BISHOP PROVOOST.

CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN THE CHURCH. 127

nized the duty of the newly organized Church to provide for the
spiritual needs of our own people, and a committee was appointed
"for preparing a plan of supporting missionaries to preach the Gospel
on the frontiers of the United States." The "Act of the General Con
vention," reported by the committee, provided for an annual missionary
sermon and offertory, for State treasurers to take care of the funds
thus collected, and for the collection of money from the frontier con
gregations by the missionaries. The Bishop of Pennsylvania was in
structed to " frame an address " " recommending this charitable desijm "

o O

to be read at the time of the annual offertory, and the bishop and a
standing committee were to appoint a treasurer and employ mission
aries when sufficient funds had been secured.

In 1795 legislation was found necessary to prevent a repetition
of what was practically an act of intrusion by the Bishop of New-
York, in ordaining a clergyman for a church in Ehode Island which
had formally placed itself under the care of Bishop Seabury. The
proposition to give to the House of Bishops an absolute negative,
which had not been lost sight of, had excited marked opposition in
South Carolina, where even " secession " was threatened if this meas
ure prevailed. From the same source there appeared an obnoxious
pamphlet entitled " Strictures on the Love of Power in the Prelacy,"
by a member of the Protestant Episcopal Association in South Carolina,
written by a member of the House of Deputies, the Rev. Dr. Henry
Purcell, which was characterized in the house as " a virulent attack
upon the doctrines and discipline of our Church and a libel against the
House of Bishops." The writer professed his sorrow for the publica
tion and sent an ample apology for the same to avoid the expulsion
from the Convention with which he was threatened. The personal
abuse in this "licentious "pamphlet," as Bishop White styles it, was
chiefly aimed at Bishop Seabury on the ground of his supposed author
ship of a pamphlet written and afterwards acknowledged by another
reputable divine. The house declared that Dr. PurcelPs pamphlet con
tained " very offensive and censurable matter," and it was only by the
mediation of the bishops that the offender, in spite of his professions
of penitence, escaped punishment. The subsequent conduct of the
author proved the insincerity of his professed contrition, for, on the
adjournment of the Convention, Purcell challenged to mortal combat
the Rev. Dr. Andrews, to whom his exposure had been due. Bound
over before the civil courts to keep the peace, the depositions and
documents concerning this notorious affair are among the most painful
of the many papers of importance and interest preserved in the cor
respondence of Bishop White.

Within the next few years the first American bishop had passed
to his rest and reward; and, at the special Convention of 1799, with
which the century closed, but three bishops out of the seven still
living, were in attendance. The testimonial of Uzal Ogden, bishop-
elect of New Jersey, was refused confirmation by the House of Depu
ties. The ostensible ground of this action was a strict construction
of the canon fixing the number of " resident and officiating priests "
required to warrant an episcopal election. Bishop White reveals " a

128 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

more important reason at the bottom of the objection made " by the
members of the lower house. Dr. Ogden "was considered by his
brethren generally as being more attached to tho doctrines and the
practices obtaining in some other churches than to those of his own." l
The House of Deputies, in a committee of the whole, resolved " that
the articles of our faith and religion, as founded on the Holy Scriptures
of the Old and New Testaments, are sufficiently declared in our Creeds
and Liturgy, as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, established
for the use of this Church, and that further articles do not appear neces
sary ; " but this action was disagreed to by the House in open session. 2
A draft of seventeen articles, the consideration of which was postponed
in consequence of the approaching close of the session and the thin
ness of representation, was ordered to be spread upon the pages of the
journal ; and the form for the consecration of a church was agreed
upon. Thus, in comparative peace and harmony, the century closed
upon a Church united and completely organized, though small in num
bers, and, as yet, lacking that aggressive spirit which, in its subse
quent development, was yet to make the American Church a name
and a power in the land.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTES.

WE give from the Bishop White Correspondence extracts from several letters,
from which the contemporary history of these discussions may be had in the
words of the chief actors therein :

BISHOP SEABURT TO BISHOP WHITE.

NEW YORK, Nov. 1st, 1789.

RT. REV. AND VERT DEAR SIR: Your letter of October 20th, I got at
Elizabethtown, and whatever pleasure a letter from you will ever give me, the con
tents of this have given me great pain. You have stated the matter very fairly, and
I had no idea but that our proposal concerning the article of the Descent into Hell
had been adopted by the House of Delegates, till an expression from Dr. Smith,
just as we broke up, and which I mentioned to you, gave me some little alarm. It
seems plain to me, and the more so since I have seen Dr. Moore, that the point was
overlooked in the House of Delegates ; for he says our amendment never was be
fore them, but that he conceived we had agreed to the proposal sent iu to us. What
now is to be done I know not. For my part I should not then have consented, nor
can I now consent, to print the article with such a mark of reproach as crochets and
italics will be. Had it been put and carried bv three-fourths, for on that issue it
must have been put, I must have submitted. But the case at present is different.
The discharging the Athanasian Creed was one thing, and the alteration of the
Apostles another. And I do, in the spirit of meekness and candor, beseech the
good gentlemen of the Committee, to consider whether the explanatory note will
not effectually take off all misinterpretation, and enable every clergyman to repeat
the descent into hell with a good conscience ? And whether pursuing the matter

i Memoirs of the Church, 2d eel., p. 178. Clergy : Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York,
* The vote by which it was resolved in the New Jersey, and Delaware ; of the Laity : Con-
House of Deputies that the Convention now necticut, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Nay.
proceed to the framing of Articles of Kcligion Of the Clergy : Massachusetts, Pennsylvania,
for this Church," was as follows : Aye. Of the and Virginia ; of the Laity : Virginia.

CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN THE CHURCH. 129

further will not look too much like aiming at victory and triumph P With me it is
a matter of consequence that the perfect humanity of Christ be ascertained that
like other men he had a human soul as well as body ; otherwise, I cannot have the
same faith and confidence in his death, nor the same hope of rising again from the
dead as he did ; and without these I have not the faith and hope ol a Christian.
These points are, in other words, found in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, but
if we leave the Descent out of the Apostles Creed, or, by printing it in the proposed
manner, weaken its force, we, by leaving his perfect humanity uncertain, put those
points, on which the faith and hopes of the Christian stand, on a vague and uncer
tain foundation. I fear, too, that my difficulties of getting our book received in Con
necticut will be increased ; and I must not be held answerable for consequences should
the proposed method of crochets and italics be pursued. My wish is to have one
strong bond of union in our churches from uniformity in our worship ; and I flatter
myself my conduct at Philadelphia was such as to convince the convention that I
will not give that point up for trifles ; and should my influence among a people
strongly attached to old customs and expressions, be too weak to carry every point,
I shall find myself disagreeably embarrassed. Since receiving your letter, I have
persuaded myself that it would have been better to have retained the Greek word
Hades instead of Hell ; and to have left it to the minister to have explained it,
which he certainly could do to his own satisfaction without departing from the
analogy of the faith. ***********

I am, Rt. Rev. and Dear Sir, your most affectionate brother and humble
servant,

SAMUEL, Bishop of Connecticut. 1

BISHOP WHITE TO REV. DR. PARKER.

PHILADELPHIA, January 25th, 1790.

DEAR SIR : Nothing has prevented my acknowledging the agreeable Favor
of your Letter, but my Wish to give you at y e same Time, some satisfactory Infor
mation concerning the Progress of the Prayer-book ; for y e printing of which no
Bargain was made by y e Committee, until within these few Days. I hope it will
now go on expeditiously, as the Printer is strong-handed and a Man of great Exer
tion.

As you left us somewhat dissatisfied, it is a Pity you did not remain one Day
longer to be a Witness of y e good Humour and Dispatch with which y e Business
was concluded.

After y e rising of y c Convention, and at my first Meeting of y 6 Committee to
prepare y 6 Papers tor Publication, there appeared to have been an unlucky Blun
der ; a point in which jy e two Houses had entirely mistook each other. In our
amendments to our Morning Prayer, we had proposed to restore y 6 Descent into
Hell, with an Asterisk directing to an explanatory marginal Note : And, as you
had said nothing in opposition to it, in y e Margin, we presumed on an acquiescence ;
while you, it seems, not having heard of our Proposal, presumed on an Acceptance
of yours. For it appears, that ours was never read to you. At least, most of the
Gentlemen here declared it was not ; and no one pretends to affirm that it was ;
and several Gentlemen in y e neighboring States, having heard of this affair join in
y 6 Testimony ; so that I cannot doubt of y 6 Fact, although I am confident it
was an oversight. The Gentlemen of y 6 Committee think themselves bound to
act on this Principle ; that their House having negatived our Alteration of their
Rubric before y 6 Creed (which Alteration however, concerned a different matter),
the Rubric stands, and the Creed must be printed accordingly. They have, how
ever, accepted a Declaration from me, to this Purpose, mat my Signature to y e
Morning Prayer is not to be understood as an acknowledgment that y e House of
Bishops has consented to the Article in question, in y 6 Manner in which it stands.
My information to Bishop Seabury of this matter reached him at Dr. Chandler s and
seems to have given him no small uneasiness. ******

Your Affectionate Brother,

WM. WHITE.*
Rev. 8. Parker, D.D.

1 From the Bishop White Correspondence. * From the Bishop Parker Correspondence.

130 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

BISHOP SEABDBY TO BISHOP WHITE.

NEW LONDON, March 29th, 90.

RT. REV. AND DEAR SIR: Your favor of January 6th has kin long by me
unanswered owing to the perplexity my mind has been thrown into by the infor
mation it contained, and from which I see no deliverance at present. What you
have done relating to the Descent into Hell, was all you could do in your Situation.
But it is to be remembered that that Article planted in Italics and within crochets
is not the book to which I subscribed in Pliiludelphia ; and that I shall, on that
account, think myself at perfect liberty to reject the whole book. No determina
tion, however, shall I make in a hurry, though I am apprehensive the consequences
of that matter will be very serious ones here. And I fear, instead of a cordial
union, suspicion and uneasiness will be at the bottom. With regard to the Creeds,
there has appeared to mo to have been too great an aim at victory ; which appear
ance has disgusted many, and if it continues, will finally render all uniformity of
worship impracticable. No reason can be assigned, why the Creed of St. Athana-
sius should not have continued in the book with a pcrmissory Rubric, but that it
would not have afforded matter of complete triumph. Never can any other reason
be assigned for the disfiguring the Apostles Creed in the manner now done. * *

Believe me to be, Rt. Rev. and Dear Sir, with the greatest esteem and affec
tion,

Your Brother and Servant,

SAMUEL, Bishop of Connecticut. 1

BISHOP SEABURY TO BISHOP WHITE.

NEW LONDON, Sept. 1st, 1790.

RT. REV. AND DEAR SIR : From your last letter I apprehend that one letter
of mine to you has failed of getting to you. It was a letter in which I acknowledged
the receipt of the occasional offices, and requested you to make my acknowledgment
to the printer for it. I hope, however, it has since got to you. As I apprehended,
so I still fear, there will be some difficulty in bringing our book into common use in
this State, though, I flatter myself, it will be done, if not at once, yet gradually in
the course of a year or two. The principal obstructions are the omission of the
Creed of St. Athanasius, the disfiguring of the Apostles Creed, the great alteration,
or, as it is here said, the omission of the Commination Office, the Rubrics permitting
the omission of the sign of the Cross in public baptism, and the use of the burial
office for children dying without baptism.

A permission of the Athanasian Creed in such congregations as choose to
retain it, and the Commination without the Amen to the curses would have given
perfect satisfaction to all. The clergy are to meet me the last Thursday in this
month, and are to pass the next Sunday together, in hopes of getting the new
books. I must, therefore, request the printers to send me two dozen to Mr. Isaac
Beers, book-seller at New Haven, or to the Rev. Dr. Bela Hubbard, Rector of Trinity
Church, New Haven ; and at the same time to put me in the way of sending the
money for them, and their directions shall be directly complied with. Dr. Madison,
I suppose, has gone to England. I received a letter from him concerning his con
secration ; but it was so late before his letter got to me, that from the intelligence
I received, I supposed his determination to go to England would have been car
ried into execution before any letter from me could have gotten to him. In his
consecration, I should have been ready to have concurred with you and Bishop
Provoost.

I am sorry to inform you that 1 have never perfectly recovered my former
health since I left Philadelphia, and have passed rather a languid summer, but have
good hope this autumn will set me up again.

I am, with true esteem, your affectionate brother and humble servant,

SAMUEL, Bishop of Connecticut.

kept this letter to this day, Sept. 9th, and finding no private conveyance
k, I have reluctantly put it into the Post Office, in hopes it will get to

I have

to New York,

you time enough to have the books sent to New Haven, or the meeting of the Clergy
will be in vain. I must, therefore, beg that one do/en may be sent by the Stage,

From the Bishop White Correspondence.

CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN THE CHURCH.

131

if no better conveyance can be had. Whatever can be fairly done by me to make
and keep our union strong and complete shall be done cheerfully, for my heart is set
upon it, not only as being right in itself, but as being particularly necessary for the
stability and growth of our Church in the United States, but if 1 get not the books
by the first of October, we shall be thrown into some confusion, and probably new
difficulties may arise. Farewell, my Dear Sir. 1

BISHOP SEABUKY TO BISHOP PARKER.

NEW LONDON, Nov. 28th, 1790.

DEAR SIR : Mr. Warren takes the trouble of conveying this to you. He has
been, this day, put into Deacon s Orders, and, from his open and docile temper, I
please myself with the hope of his making a very worthy and useful clergyman.

I have had some trouble here with Brother Sayre about the Revised Prayer-
book, and I believe he will continue to give all the trouble he can. All the other
clergy behaved with great prudence and candor. They, however, dislike the at
tempted alteration of the Apostles Creed, the omission of the Commination Office,
and of the Creed of St. Athanasius, and hope yet for some remedy at a future Con
vention. *****

Accept, Dear Sir, the best wishes of your affectionate, humble servant,

S., Bishop of Connecticut.*

BISHOP SEABURY TO REV. DR. PARKER.

NEW LONDON, Dec. 29th, 1790.

DEAR SIR : I am much obliged to you for the information contained in your
letter of the 13th. Of Mr. Sayre I have lately heard nothing, though I doubt not
his disposition continues, to give trouble if he can. You are not singular in the
idea you have formed of partial Insanity. I only mention the dislike of the clergy
of this State to the manner of the attempt to alter the Apostles Creed, without say
ing it was right or wrong. One apprehension they have is, that it will on some
occasion endanger confusion in the Church some people will repeat it one way
and some another that this will be the case with the Clergy also. So that the
Creed will (in that article) cease to be the test or even the security of uniformity
of faith in the Church, which, I suppose, was the design of repeating Creeds in
public worship.

I am sorry that Bishop Provoost and his clergy do not read prayers uniformly ;
and imagine that as little variation from the old book as the new one will permit,
is best as present ; were it only because it will not put the people under the neces
sity of buying new ones, which, considering their enormous price is a matter of
consequence in this State. Their being so high is, I suppose, owing to the Print
er s having a patent and how that came about, I know not. According to my
recollection, the Committee were empowered to agree for one edition, and I do not
imagine they had any right to go further ; and I heartily wish, and shall be ready
to join my efforts, that their patent may be set aside, as it will forever keep Prayer-
books at an enormous price. I fear that the Committee have exceeded their pow
ers even in printing the Apostles Creed as it now stands, which was not agreed to
by the House of Bishops ; and was printed in its present form against the opinion
of Bishop White, as he will inform you if you apply to him.

With regard to the propriety of reading the Athanasian Creed in Church I
never was fully convinced. With regard to the impropriety of banishing it out of
the Prayer-book, I am clear ; and look upon it, that those gentlemen who rigidly
insisted, upon its being read as usual, and those who insisted on its being thrown
out, both acted from the same uncandid, uncomplying temper. They seem to me to
have aimed at forcing their own opinion on their brethren. And I do hope, though
possibly I hope in vain, that Christian charity and love of union will some time
bring that Creed into the book, were it only to stand as articles of faith stand ; and
to show that we do not renounce the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity as held by the
Western Church. *******

Wishing you both many happy returns of this season, I remain your affection
ate, humble servant,

S., Bishop of Connecticut. 3

1 From the Bishop White Correspondence. 2 From the Bishop Parker Correspondence. * Ibid.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE REVIVAL OF CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA
AND THROUGHOUT THE SOUTH.

IT was in 1779, during the darkest days of the war, that the
" establishment " in Virginia " was finally put down." * In the
language of the annalist of the religious body to which this
result was chiefly due, "the Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers, Deists,
and the covetous had all prayed for this." a To prayers had been
added untiring and most energetic labor. Taking advantage of exist
ing and acknowledged evils, growing out of the utter want of ecclesi
astical discipline in restraining delinquent clergymen, and the lack of
men of devout life and conspicuous ability among the incumbents of
the vacant parishes, these sectaries had multiplied on every side. It
was but natural that men of earnest convictions and inward spirit
uality should turn from those possessing only the form of godliness
to hang upon the lips of the wandering evangelists and lay preachers
whose sincerity and devotion could not be gainsaid, and who introduced
and propagated dissent in various forms throughout the length and
breadth of the land. It was not to be expected that men whose
shining parts and exemplary character made them sought after at
home would leave their comfortable livings in England to put them
selves at the mercy of sordid and ignorant vestries in a distant colony
where the " livings " yielded only a precarious support, and there was
little hope of preferment, and no possibility of redress if wronged.
Pressure was brought to bear upon the Bishops of London to fillthe
parishes clamorous for a supply with men of limited attainments
and inferior ability, and while there were notable exceptions to the
rule, and men were found possessing the loftiest spirit of devotion
and the highest intellectual power, whose lives were consecrated
to the pioneer mission-work, not only in Virginia, but throughout)
the South, many of the clergj 1 - were unfitted for their station, I
indifferent in the discharge of their official duties, and too often/
of irregular life. It was of no avail that the commissary sought)
to exercise the delegated power of the bishop, who was across the
ocean. Visitations were held and formal inquiry was made as to the
life and teachings of the clergy, from time to time ; but the unworthy
priest could not be deposed for his wickedness, and any remedy
short of this was of little use. The people, caring for nothing beyond
the form of religion, and often indifferent as to that, were preju
diced against the exercise of any ecclesiastical power save by thcm-

&gt; TIawks s " Eccl. Conti-ibutions, " I., " Vir- * The Virginia Baptist Chronicle, by John

grinia," p. 152. Vide, also, Burk s "Hist, of Leland, quoted by Hawks in "Eccl. Contritm-
Va., " iv., p. 377. tions," i., Virginia, p. 139.

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA.

133

i i lie
, and \
linis-.

selves, and, while placing every obstacle and annoyance in the way
of an upright clergyman, would often enable one who deserved
punishment to defy the commissary, and escape the penalty of the
law. The vestries claimed and exercised the right of removal,
too often this power was shown in ridding themselves of t]
trations of men whose only offence was faithfulness. The church
doors were not unfrequently shut against the clergy by the vestry,
who, to quote the testimony of a competent and trustworthy witness,
" thought themselves the parson s master." 1 There could be little, if
any, spiritual life under circumstances so adverse. The clergy could
only hope for tolerance and subsistence if subservient to the humors
of their people, and careful not to offend their hearers by the faithful
reproof of sin. The very "establishment" of the Church was made
use of to excite popular prejudice against it when, in fact, it
was established only in name and in part. The fruits of the
"establishment" in Virginia were mainly seen in placing the clergy
at the mercy of the people to whom they ministered, without the
means of securing their legal rights, or the power of obtaining
redress from wrong. That the clergy were of alien birth, drawn
generally to the colony by their failure to succeed elsewhere, or
seeking, with impaired reputations, to hide their disgrace by fleeing
to the ends of the world, was another reason for the lack of spiritual
life and the waning power of the " establishment " in the " Old Domin
ion." In Connecticut and in Massachusetts, where the clergy were, in
a majority of instances, of American birth and education, and brought
into the Church by conviction, and often at the sacrifice of all that
men hold dear, the Church grew and thrived. In Virginia William
and Mary graduated but few clergymen, and although of these few
there were those whose character and ability were conspicuous, they
could not redeem the reputation of the great body of their brethren
who were of evil or indifferent life.

It was a day of spiritual declension. The discourses of even the
better class of the clergy were too often lacking in that spirituality
and fervor which alone can awaken or deepen the life of God in the
soul of man. It is the testimony of the excellent Samuel Da vies, the
founder of organized Presbyterianism in Eastern Virginia, that while
"a great number" of those who had been "educated Presbyterians,"
and that, too, in Scotland, had, " upon their arrival here, given
scandal to their religion and country, by their loose principles and
immoral practices ; and either fell into an indiffercncy about religion
in general, or affect to be polite by turning deists, or fashionable by
conforming to the Church," 2 he had reason to hope that " there are
and have been a few names in various parts of the colony, who are
sincerely seeking the Lord and groping after religion in the Com
munion of the Church of England." 3 " Had the doctrines of the
Gospel," says the same authority, "been solemnly and faithfully
preached in the Established Church, there would have been but few

l Jones " State of Virginia," pp. 104-195. ion among Dissenters in Virginia," p. 29, note.
1 The Rev. Samuel Davics s " State of Relig- Quoted in Hawks a " Virginia, " pp. 103, 104.

* Ibid., p. 5.

134 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

dissenters in these parts of Virginia ; for their first objections were
not against the peculiar rites and ceremonies of that Church, much
less against her excellent articles, but againstthe general strain of
the doctrines delivered from the_pulpit, in which these articles were
opposed, or (which was the InorcT common case) not mentioned at all ;
so that at first they were not properly dissenters from the original
constitution of the Church of England, but the more strict adherents
to it, and only dissented from those who had forsaken it." 1 The
Church was thus untrue To herself, and, while she lost herEold upon
the more spiritually minded of the people, the cause of dissent flour
ished at her expense.

It was to be anticipated that there should arise controversies be
tween the clergy at a time when, in the language of a representation
to the Legislature by their own body, " so many who are a disgrace to
the ministry find opportunities to fill the parishes," and the people
who regarded them as hirelings and sought in every way to limit their
influence and curtail their support. The history of Virginia for many
years prior to the war is full of notices of these strifes about settlements
and stipends, which are recited in full in the representations made
by the commissaries and clergy to their diocesan, the Bishop of
London, and which, in the pulpit, and through the columns of the
press, and in a flood of pamphlets, and finally in the courts, occupied the
public attention almost to the exclusion of any other matter connected
with religion, and gave to the foes of the establishment their vantage
ground and ultimate success. It matters little that in these disputes
the clergy were technically, morally, and legally in the right. They
had in so many instances pandered to the wrong, and by a life of careless
indifference forfeited the respect as well as alienated the * affections of
their parishioners, that the popular verdict was against them, and
even a triumph would not have averted the impending and speeding
ruin. It was in connection with one of these disputes which, after
other measures had failed, had been brought into the courts, and im
which the cause of the clergy was not only right in equity, but also in,
law, that the wonderful eloquence of Pati jck_Hepry , himself a church- 1
man , and in his later day an eaiiiest^alurdcvbut communicant of the (
Church, secured a practical verdict against the clergy and made the
wrong appear the better right.

The most unrelenting opposition to the Church as an establishment
came from the Baptists, who, in the decade preceding the opening of the
war of the Revolution had grown from an inconsiderable sect to a body of
numerical strength sufficient to make their influence and support worth
any price when the question of loyalty or revolution was to be settled.
They had not been slow to take advantage of the position in which
they found themselves at the opening of the war. Remembering the
harsh treatment that had been meted out to them by the royal authori
ties, their ministers being "imprisoned and the disciples buffeted," 3 as
their chronicles describe it, they readily embraced the opportunity of
weakening the "establishment" as well as opposing the crown. Thus

1 Davies s " State of Religion among Dis- * Lclancl s " Virginia Baptist Chronicle,"

(tenters in Virginia," p. 6. quoted by Dr. Hawks.

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA. 135

their dislike of the church and state was gratified at the same time.
Conscious that a large part of the clergy, influenced by the ties of birth
and the obligation of their oaths of allegiance, had espoused the cause
of the king, they showed themselves to be "inspired by the ardors of
a patriotism which accorded with their interests," and were "willing
to avail themselves of a favorable opportunity to present an advantageous
contrast to a part of the church." Consequently they formally addressed
the Convention of the delegates to the Virginia Legislature, which suc
ceeded the last royal assembly ever convened in the " Old Dominion,"
with a proffer of their cordial support. Their tenets placed no hin
drance in the way of their members taking up arms for their country,
and their preachers professed their readiness to further the enlistment
of their young men. They accompanied this tender of service with a
petition " that they might be allowed to worship God in their own way
without interruption ; that they might be permitted to maintain their
own ministers, separate from others ; that they might be married, buried,
and the like, without paying the clergy of other denominations." This
was the beginning of a series of assaults against the " establishment "
and the Church itself in which all the dissenters, with the exception of
the Methodists, who had not at this time separated formally from the
Church, united with zeal and untiring energy till the end was gained,
and the "establishment" was destroyed.

The result was such as had been anticipated by those who had stren
uously opposed the act of the Legislature. Deprived of their livings,
the clergy, many of whom were politically, if not personally, obnoxious
to the majority of their parishioners, found themselves reduced to the
necessity of abandoning their calling, in the exercise of which they
could no longer hope for support. Many left the country ; the sacra
ments were no longer administered in the parishes thus abandoned,
and, although a few faithful priests travelled over large circuits for the
purpose of administering baptism and the holy communion, they could
not supply the lack of the constant and regular services and ministra
tions which had been of old. The churches, deserted and uncared for,
went rapidly to decay. Often required for public uses in the necessities
of the State arising from the struggle then going on ; more frequently
despoiled and desecrated by the hands of the sacrilegious and sordid,
who coveted and appropriated for their private uses the very materials
of the fabric of the Church of God ; there was every prospect that the
Church, whose offices were the first celebrated on Virginia soil, would be
utterly uprooted and destroyed. The gates of hell had prevailed
against her.

At the coming of peace, measures were taken by the Assembly for
placing the Church upon a legal footing. Provision was made by this
bill, which was adopted in 1784, for making the minister and vestry
of each parish a body corporate, and for securing to this corporation
its rights and estates. It was also provided that vestries, each com
posed of twelve members, should be elected in vacant parishes, on the
call of any two reputable inhabitants, "members of the Episcopal
Church." Vestry-men, elected triennially, were required to subscribe a
declaration of uniformity to the doctrines, disciplines, and worship of

136 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

the Protestant Episcopal Church. The vestry appointed two church-
2j^flna f rr&gt;ir&gt; U 8 own number. and bad the power to fill vacancies.
I he disbursement of all moneys was solely in me control ol tne vestry.
The minister was forbidden to interpose his veto on the proceedings of
the majority of the corporation. He had the right to call meetings
of the corporators, seven being a quorum, save that only a majority of
the whole body was requisite "to demise, alien or lease the Church
property." The vestries thus constituted were allowed to " acquire,
use, and enjoy property, provided the income thereof did not exceed
eight hundred pounds per annum." The law thus enacted provided
for the meeting of the Church in Convention, to be held at pleasure,
and to determine all matters purely spiritual as well as to provide for
the orderly and good government of the whole. The clergy holding
cures were ex-officio members of the Convention, and two laymen from
each parish chosen by the vestries respectively. Forty persons were
necessary to form a quorum, and it was enacted that no clergyman
should be placed over or removed from a cure of souls without the
consent of the vestry. The Convention could for cause remove any
minister of ungodly life or neglectful of his duty.

Although this legislation displayed a jealousy of the clergy which
had doubtless grown out of the experience of the past, its passage was
hailed with delight by both clergy and laity alike, and thus was secured,
at last, the promise of a brighter day for the Church, now reduced in
number, influence, and wealth. The diminution in numbers was marked.
In 1775 there were in the sixty-one counties of Virginia ninety-five
parishes with ninety-one clergymen, ministering at one hundred and
sixty-four churches and chapels. At the close of the conflict many of
the churches and chapels were either totally destroyed or irreparably
injured. Of the ninety-five parishes twenty-three were extinct or
abandoned. Of the remaining seventy-two thirty-four were desti
tute of ministerial services. But twenty-eight clergymen remained
out of nearly one hundred in the State, and of this number fifteen only
were in the cures they held at the beginning of the war, while thirteen
had been driven from their posts by violence or want.

It was under these untoward circumstances that the Church in
Virginia organized at the close of the war in accordance with the act
of the Assembly, and in pursuance with the recommendation of the Con
vention held in New York in October, 1784. Seventy laymen and
thirty-six clergymen are recorded as members of this Convention. It
was resolved to send deputies to the General Convention appointed to
meet in Philadelphia, at Michaelmas, in 1786. Four of the funda
mental principles of the proposed general ecclesiastical constitution
were approved. These were the first, second, third, and fifth. The
fourth, pledging the American Church to maintain the doctrines of the
Gospel as held by the Church of England, and to adhere to the liturgy
of that church as far as consistent with the revolution and the constitu
tions of the respective States, was laid over for the consideration of a
subsequent Convention. The necessity of providing for ecclesiastical
discipline was strongly felt, and after adopting a resolution expressing
w the opinion of this Convention that the Canons of the Church of

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA. 137

England have no obligation on the Protestant Episcopal Church with
in this Commonwealth," forty-three " rules for the Order, Government
and Discipline of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Virginia " were
adopted. The depressed condition of the Church was the subject of
thought and discussion, and an earnest "Address" was agreed upon
to the members of the Church " representing the condition of the
Church and exhorting them to unite in its support." In this paper,
which began with the confession that " for more than eight years our
Church hath languished under neglect," there is mention of the benefits
conferred upon society by religion, and the inquiry is urged : " Of
what is the Church now possessed ? Nothing but the glebes and your
affections. Since the year 1776 she hath been even without regular
government, and her ministers have received but little compensation
for their services. Their numbers are diminished by death and other
causes, and we have as yet no resource within ourselves for a succes
sion of ministers. Churches stand in need of repair, and there is no
fund equal to the smallest want." After referring to the organization
of the Church, and the incipient measures taken at the North for effect
ing a general union, the address proceeds : " To almost everything
under the sun belongs a crisis, which, if embraced, stamps our en
deavors with success ; if lost, with ruin. In this situation does our
Church now stand, and why do you hesitate ? Are the doctrines of
our Church less excellent than at any former period ? Have you em
braced the persuasion of that Church to abandon it in the hour of
difficulty? Common justice requires that those who profess them
selves to be members of a society should unite in cherishing it ; and
let us not be the only example of a religious association withering
from the want of support from its own members." With pathetic
earnestness the address continues : " We therefore entreat you, by all
the ties of religion, to co-operate fervently in the cause of our Church.
Should then our earnest efforts be abortive, we shall always with
truth call the Searcher of Hearts to witness that the downfall of the
Protestant Episcopal Church is not to be named among our offences,
and to this admonition we shall ever appeal." l

With a view of averting the impending ruin, the provision of a
suitable support for the clergy was recommended to the several ves
tries, and measures were taken to secure at the earliest opportunity
the consecration for a bishop, and to provide for his support. The
State was divided into districts, with a view to secure discipline among
the clergy, and provisions were made for guarding the parishes from
unworthy clergymen, and for the trial of offenders, even the bishop
being made amenable to the Convention, which was constituted a court
of trial, and from the decision there rendered there was to be no ap
peal. Measures were adopted to prevent pluralities and non-residence,
and enjoining the use of the surplice and gown : preaching " once at
least on every Lord s day, and at other stated seasons ; " the adminis
tration of the Sacrament " at least four times in the year at each church
or place of worship ; " the instruction of children and the ignorant

1 Jourual of Convention of the Clergy and Virginia, begun and holden in the City of Rich-
Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church of maud, Wednesday, May 18, 1785, p. 16.

138 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

in the "Catechism and the principles of the Christian religion as main
tained by this Church," and the preparation of parishioners for confir
mation were carefully enforced. The bishop was required, " after his
promotion to the Episcopal order," to " continue to hold a parish and
do the duty of a parish minister, except when necessarily employed in
the discharge of his Episcopal office." It was resolved M that until the
farther order of the Convention, the liturgy of the Church of England
be used in the several churches throughout this Commonwealth, with
such alterations as the American Revolution has rendered necessary."
Definite instructions were adopted for the guidance of the deputies to
the General Convention, who were also desired to communicate to the
Convention the offer through the Danish minister at the Court of St.
James, the Count de Rosencrone, of the Church in Denmark, to con
fer holy orders on candidates from America. It was with this careful
and minute legislation that the first Convention in Virginia sought to
provide for the church s present and prospective needs.

The measures tending in the direction of the perpetuation and
strengthening of the Church excited the jealousy and stimulated the
opposition of her foes. The Presbyterians who had refused to avail
themselves of the liberty conferred upon them, as well as on all other re
ligious bodies, to incorporate and provide by legal methods for their
organization and growth, and the Baptists, who had never ceased their
assaults upon the Church, even though disestablished and well-nigh de
stroyed, began at once to agitate the repeal of the act incorporating
the Church ; and, not content with this, to urge that the church s
property should be disposed of for the benefit of the State.

The Virginia Convention met at Richmond, on Wednesday, the
24th of May, 1786. Sixteen clergymen and forty-seven laymen are
recorded as members of this Convention. The able and scholarly
Madison, President of William and Mary College, was again elected to
the presidency of the Convention. At the outset the general eccle
siastical constitution at Philadelphia was " approved and ratified ex
cept as to the 4th, 9th, and 10th Articles," which were " reserved for
further consideration ." l These articles related to the " Proposed Book," \
and after the discussion on the liturgy had been finished, they were I
agreed to, and the Church in Virginia^ became^ by her own act part of I
the_federation of"tiie churcftea oy the JMiddle and Southern States. -I

The " Proposed Book" elicited much more discussion than the ec-
clesiastical constitution, and ere the articles of religion, as proposed,
were finally disposed of nearly a week was consumed. The amend
ments suggested were as follows : In the second article, a verbal
amendment was agreed to, making the language, "Of whose authority
there is no doubt," instead " was never any doubt." That portion of
the article referring to the apochryphal books was stricken out. In
the fourth article, after the word creed, it was agreed that the words
should be inserted " as contained in the Book of Common Prayer rec
ommended by the late General Convention." This change was oc-

1 Journal of a. Conveutkm of the Protestant at the Public Buildings in the City of Richmond,
Episcopal Church in Virginia. Begun and held ou Wednesday, the 24th of Way, 1786, p. 4.

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA. 139

casioned by the removal from the Apostles Creed, in the "Proposed
Book," of the words He descended into hell." In the seventh article,
in place of the words justified by faith only "was inserted the phrase
thus justified by faith." The eleventh article, "On Predestination,"
was omitted. In the fifteenth article, the first clause, descriptive of
the nature of a sacrament, was omitted, as " unnecessary." In the
sixteenth article the words " as by an instrument " were stricken out.
In the seventeenth article all that related to transubstantiation was
omitted. With reference to the other portions of the " Proposed Book,"
it was resolved " that the Book of Common Prayer, as recommended
by the late General Convention, be approved, ratified, and used, except
the Rubric before the Communion Service, and such alterations of
the Articles as are referred to the consideration of the next General
Convention ; and that the Psalms be used as heretofore, until a sufficient
number of the new books can be procured." * The vote adopting this
resolution was thirty-two to twenty. Of the clergy ten clergymen
voted in the affirmative, including Drs. Griffith and Bracken, both
bishops-elect, but never consecrated. Four clergymen, Dr. Madison
being one, voted against the book.

Agreeably to the recommendation of the General Convention, it was
determined to elect a person to be recommended to the English
prelates for consecration, and out of forty-nine votes the Rev. David
Griffith received thirty-two. Ten ballots were cast for the Rev. John
Bracken, who more than a quarter of a century later was elected to the
episcopate of Virginia, though he declined the appointment. The
Convention placed on record its conviction of the need of episcopal
supervision in its instructions to the deputies-elect to the Convention at
Philadelphia, in which it is said "that the sooner our Church can have
the benefit of Episcopal Superintendence, the nearer it will approach to
perfection." The State was divided into twenty-four districts, and a
visitor appointed for each division, and the powers of the standing com
mittee were carefully and minutely defined. The attention of the
Convention was called to the efforts being made for the repeal of the act
incorporating the Church, and a counter-petition was prepared and
adopted.

It was of no avail. Early in January, 1787, the incorporating
act was repealed. The third Convention of the Church in Virginia
met at Richmond in May, 1787. The Rev. Dr. Griffith, the bishop-
elect, was unanimously elected president. To supply the lack of the
act of incorporation the Convention adopted an "ordinance for ap
pointing vestries and other purposes." This instrument was pre
pared and agreed upon under the supposition that by the repeal of
the act of incorporation "the several powers of government and
discipline in the Church" had "returned to the members at large."
By this ordinance the vestry-men who had been elected under the law
just repealed were constituted trustees to hold the glebes and other
church property, and provision was made for their election triennially.
The right of the clergy to those glebes, which had not been alienated,

i Journal, etc., 1786, p. 11.

140 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

was recognized, and the clergy were invested with a veto in the case
of the attempt to dispose of the land assigned for their residence or use.
Conventions were recognized as having the right to " regulate all the
religious concerns of the Church, its doctrines, discipline, and wor
ship." The body of canons previously adopted was substantially re-
enacted, and measures were taken to secure to the clergy a compensa
tion from the people in proportion to the tithables each one might
possess. The education of " two youths from their early years " for the
ministry of the Church was recommended, affording the first recorded
notice in the American Church of any recognition of the necessity of
providing for the perpetuation of the sacred function. For this pur
pose the preaching of an annual charity sermon with an offertory was
recommended, and the funds thus provided were to be placed at the
disposal of the bishop and standing committee, who were to have "the
direction of the education of the two youths." The consecration of
Dr. Griffith, at the hands of Bishops White and Provoost, was re
quested, and further measures were taken to raise the means to defray
the expenses of the consecration of their bishop-elect. The proceedings
of the General Convention of 1786, at Philadelphia and Wilmington,
met with the general approval of the Virginia Church. The fourth
and ninth articles of the ecclesiastical constitution were acceded to
" as articles of a temporary nature, and not as forming a part of the
general constitution." The Convention refused emphatically to agree
to the recommendation not to admit as ministers those who should
receive ordination from Bishop Seabury, while the application to
England for the consecration of bishops was pending. The deputies to
the next General Convention were instructed to seek to have the article
in the Creed "He descended into hell" expunged, and also to strive
to have the Nicene Creed removed from the book.

Thus organized, and wholly independent of the State, the Church
in Virginia offers little to record until, in 1789, we find the Convention
instructing the deputies to notify the General Convention that the Rev.
Dr. Griffith, bishop-elect of the Church in the State, had relinquished
the appointment, and that no one had been elected in his place. The
res anguslae domi, occasioning the resignation of the excellent Griffith
of an office he would have adorned, induced an earnest appeal on the
part of the Convention to the friends of the Church throughout the
State to provide " the sum necessary for defraying the expenses at
tendant on the consecration of a bishop." It was indeed time, as the
address proceeded to say, "to awake from an inattention which, if con
tinued, must prove fatal to the Protestant Episcopal Church."

In 1790 the Convention elected in the place of the amiable
Griffith, who had died while in attendance upon the General Conven-,
tiojL ofJJI&JL theJRev. J^nieAMadbpjiJDJ^-HP^&idfilit of the College

Madison was distinguished for his attainments as a scholar and his
eloquepceas aTpreacner ; but it cannot be doubted that his devotion to
the interests of the institution of learning of which he was the head,
and to the special care of which he was bound by solemn engagement,
served to militate against his efficiency as bishop and his success

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA.

141

in building up the Church over which he was made the overseer. It
was at this session, and, doubtless, in consequence of his "valuable
essay read before the Convention, containing a defence of certain
rights of the Protestant Episcopal Church," that it was formally
resolved " that it is the opin
ion of this Convention that
the Protestant Episcopal
Church is the exclusive
owner of the glebes,
churches, and other property
held by the Church of
England in Virginia at the
commencement of the Revo
lution ; that the principles
upon which the said property
is held are those only by
Avhich the rights of property
are regulated ; that the in
terference of the Legislature
in the sale of that property,
or in the disposal of it to
any other purpose than that
for which it is now held,
would be a violation of the
constitution."

Shortly after the ad
journment of the Conven
tion, Dr. Madison sailed for

BISHOP

OF VIRGINIA.

secration_atJjambeth atjbhe hands oTthe ArchbishppofCajite^uryand

_
the Bishops of London and KochesterT On his" retu^n^TandirTKis pii-

mary address to his Convention, the newly-made bishop did not hesi
tate to ascribe the unhappy condition of the Church in Virginia to the
want of a "fervent Christian zeal among the clergy." In the same ad
dress the bishop presses home upon his brethren the duty of watching
" for the souls of others, as they that are to give account," and bids
them " declare with zeal, with force, with spirit, all the counsel of
God." The neglect of the sacraments of baptism and the Lord s Sup
per is alluded to, and the clergy are enforced to press upon the people
the duty of bringing their children to baptism, and to instruct them as
early as possible in the principles of Christianity with a view to con
firmation. The "obligation and the benefit of securing at regular
stated times the sacrament" is further urged, and the exeroise of a
godly discipline is commended. It was in this spirit, and with this
clear perception of duty and obligation, that the bishop entered upon
his work.

On his first visitation Bishop Madison found the state of the Church
more encouraging than he had anticipated. Its progress was retarded
and its success prevented by two obstacles, the spread of infidelity

142 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

and fanaticism. It was a day of religious declension. The love of many
waxed cold. The lack of spiritual life and growth was not confined
to the Church. It was in the midst of these signs of a waning faith
and general worldliness that the bishop sought to check the spread of
unbelief and fanaticism by the comprehension of all believers in Chris
tianity in the Church. In his address to the Convention of 1793 he
refers to this scheme of comprehension, which had, as we have seen,
failed to win the approval of the preceding General Convention.
"There is no one here present," says the bishop, "but must cordially
wish for such a union, provided it did not require a sacrifice of those
points which arc deemed essentials by our Church ; from them we have
not the power to retreat. But in such matters as are subject to human
alteration, if, by a candid discussion, they could be found capable of
being so modified as to remove the objections of any sect of Christians
who may be actuated by the same catholic spirit, and thereby effect a
union, in that case, we should surely have reason to rejoice, not only in
the event, but also in being the first to set an example to Christians
which it is the duty of all to follow ; and, in convincing them that
there is infinitely more religion in not contending, than in those things
about which they contend." 1

Wise and temperate as were these suggestions, broad and compre
hensive as was the scheme proposed, the time had not come for the
comprehension of the various bodies of Christians in the Church of our
Lord Jesus Christ ; but we may gratefully recognize the fact that the
proposition was made and the blessings of unity ably set forth by
one of the earliest of our bishops, and by one, too, as far removed from
fanaticism as from the opposite extreme of indifference and unbelief.

In this earnest address the bishop recommended the circulation
of short treatises, and the preaching of sermons "upon such doc
trinal and institutional topics as may appear most necessary for the
information of congregations." Nor was he content with the dis
semination of knowledge on the distinctive features of our church
teaching and worship. He urged the wide dispersion of " devotional
tracts, such as would inspire and keep alive the spirit of warm but
rational piety." The duty of daily family prayer was forcibly stated,
and the gratuitous circulation of books of devotion among the poor
advised. By these and other judicious recommendations the bishop
urged the building up of the people " in the doctrine of piety, and the
apostolic institutions of the Church."

But neither the wise counsels nor the apostolic labors of the
bishop, seconded as they were by the earnest devotion of the clergy,
and many of the faithful laity, could avert the impending blow.
Kemonstrances and petitions, the opinion of learned counsel, and
the plain construction of the principles of law and equity involved,
were all unavailing to silence the popular clamor, or prevent the
triumph of sectaries and unbelievers in their sacrilegious spoliation of
the church s property.

In January, 1802, the Legislature passed the bill ordering the
sale of the glebes for the benefit of the State. With an impover-

1 Address to the Convention of 1793.

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA. 143

ished and suffering clergy, with the churches in every stage of dilapi
dation and decay, with the sacraments practically interdicted for lack
of clergymen to administer them, with a consequent increase of
unbelief and indifference, and a loosening of the hold of the old
Church upon her children, growing out of the cessation of services,
and the lack of even an effort for their revival, there was left little
more than " the hopelessness of despair." Glebes, churches, and the
sacramental plate were involved in a common fate. The Church s
temples deserted, unroofed, uncared for, crumbled to ruin, or were
torn down that their materials might be used by the rapacious pur
chasers. A marble font became a watering-trough. Sectaries pos
sessed the sacred vessels used in the administration of the sacrament
of the body and blood of Christ.

It would seem as if the bishop, himself, despaired of the Church
over which he had been placed. The duties of his academic charge,
and the infirmities of advancing years, rendered his visitations less fre
quent, and they were at length discontinued. The ranks of the
clergy were diminished by death or removal, and none offered them
selves to take the vacant places. Inexpressibly sad is the picture
drawn of the state of the Virginia Church as the close of Bishop Mad
ison s episcopate drew near, which we find in the autobiography^oJ-

/&gt; 7

William Meade. " So low and hopeless was the state of the Church at
this time, the time of my ordination, but few of the old clergy
even attempting to carry on the work, only one person having- for ^ j^flg
time been ordained by Bjjafrop Madison, and he from a distance, and a
most unworthy one, it created surprise, and was a matter of much
conversation when it was understood that a young Virginian had
entered the ministry of the Episcopal Church. 1 Some years later
the great Chief- Justice Marshall, himself a devout and devoted church
man, gave it as his opinion that the Church was " too far gone ever to
be revived." Proceeding on horseback to Williamsburg, a journey of
about two hundred miles, voungr Meade, ajarrarhmtp. at Princeton with
the highest honors, offered himself in February, 1811, for ordination.
It was w a clear, cold morning ; " the day in the calendar was Quin-
quagesima ; the " examination " took place at the bishop s, before
breakfast, Dr. Bracken and himself conducting it. It was very brief;
the young candidate thought he " saw some evidence in the course of
his examination " that the bishop, in consequence of his secular
studies, and possibly from his scholastic position and his political
views, had been led "to philosophize too much on the subject of
religion," but that he, as has been charged, " either secretly, or to his

1 Bishop Meade s " Old Churches, Ministers, and Families of Virginia," I., p. 30.

144 IIISTOKY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

most intimate friends, renounced the Christian faith," Meade did
not believe, but was " confident of the contrary." The story of the
ordination cannot be better told than in the words of the autobiog
raphy :

On our way to the old church the bishop and myself met a number of stu
dents with guns on their shoulders, and dogs at their sides, attracted by the frosty
morning, which was favorable to the chase ; and at the same time one of the
citizens was filling his ice-house. On arriving at the church, we found it in a
wretched condition, with broken windows and a gloomy, comfortless aspect. The
congregation which assembled consisted of two ladies and about fifteen gentle
men, nearly all of whom were relatives or acquaintances. The morning service
being over, the Ordination and Communion were administered, and then I was put
into the pulpit to preach, there being no ordination sermon. The religious condi
tion of the College and of the place may easily and justly be inferred from the
above. I was informed that not long before this two questions were discussed in a
literary society of the College : First, Whether thei e be a God ? Secondly, Whether
the Christian religion had been injurious or beneficial to mankind ? Infidelity,
indeed, was then rife in the State, and the college of William and Mary was
regarded as the hot-bed of French politics and religion. I can truly say that then,
and for some years after, in every educated young man of Virginia whom I met,
I expected to find a skeptic, if not an avowed unbeliever. I left Williamsburg,
as may well be imagined, with sad feelings of disappointment. 1

The following year the aged bishop, wearied with the weight of
college cares and episcopal responsibilities, and, doubtless, despairing
of the Church, died on the 6th of March, 1812. He had sought the
appointment of an assistant as far back as 1805, in view of " want of
bodily strength, and from sundry and necessary and official occu
pations," rendering him " unable to discharge the whole of the arduous
and important duties annexed to his office ; " and the Convention, while
recognizing the expediency of such an appointment, postponed the
nomination of an assistant until the next Convention. That Conven
tion was not held till after the bishop s death. Seven years later
thirteen clergymen, among them the youthful William Meade, and
twelve laymen, met at Richmond and elected to the vacant see the
Rev. John Bracken, D.D. The following year this gentleman
declined the appointment, and the Convention adjourned without
attempting to make another choice. On the 5th of May, 1814, at a
special session, at which but seven clergymen and eighteen laymen, rep
resenting fourteen parishes, were present, the Rev^Ric^ardChanning
Moore. DD; * who had lately accepted the rectorsHifToTthe^Ionumenlal
Dhurch in ^Richmond, was electedjag__thg_second Bishop of Virginia.
In making this choice, wBicE was so signally blessed of (jfooTto
the revival of his Church, and in furthering the great work under
taken by the bishop of their selection, four of the clergy, men of
mark in their day and generation, were specially prominent. These
worthies of the revived Virginia Church were the Rev. Dr. William
H. Wilmer, of Fairfax ; the Rev. Oliver Norris, of Christ Church,
Alexandria; the Rev. John Dunn, of Loudon County, and the Right
Rev. William Meade, D.D., afterwards called to the same office and
administration. Noble and venerable names are these, ever to be held
in remembrance !

1 Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia, I., p. 29.

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA.

145

The consecration of Bishop Richard Channing Moore, and his
entrance upon his new work, were followed by a steady and most
remarkable revival of church life and spirituality. The Convention
of 1815 was attended by double the number of clergy present but
a twelvemonth before, while a large increase in the lay representa
tion was equally indicative of new life and zeal. The bishop, in his
episcopal address, announced that he had discovered in every parish
which he had visited
" the most animated
wish in the people
to repair the waste
places of our Zion,
and to restore the
church of their fa
thers to its primitive
purity and excel
lence." Parishes,
seemingly dead,
were aroused to life
and vigor. Congre
gations, at the men
tion of the glories of
the past, gave tearful
assurance of their
purpose to renew
the days of old. In_
another year ten iffig
churcheswere re
ported as about to be
built, or already in
process of erection,
while eight of the
old sanctuaries were
undergoing repair,
and the work of revival, development, and growth at this time begun has
never~ceased. Years have been required for the upbuilding of that
which it tooK years to overthrow; but the work has never been
intermitted, and the episcopates of Moore and Meade and .Johns have
left few traces of the old desolation, while, under their wise and care
ful stewardship, the Church has gained a strength and position far
more durable than that of the "establishment." Twodioceses_andl
three bishops, with a noble band of clergy and a devoted, liberal and)
intelligent laity, carry on the work which was begun when Richard |
Channing Moore was set apart as a bishop in the Church of God.

At the suggestion of Bishop White, and under the inspiration of the
Rev. Charles Pettigrew, efforts were made as early as 1790 to organize
the Church in North Carolina. On the 5th of June two clergymen, the
Rev. Charles Pettigrew and the Rev. James L. Wilson, and two
laymen, Dr. John Leigh and William Clements, Esq., met in Con
vention at Tawborough, and approved and acceded to the general

RT. REV. RICHARD CHANNING MOORE, D.D.,
SECOND BISHOP OF VIRGINIA.

146 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

ecclesiastical constitution adopted in Philadelphia in 1789. In the
address of the Convention to the General Convention the state of the
Church in North Carolina is represented as "truly deplorable, from
the paucity of the clergy and the multiplicity of opposing sectarians,
who are using every possible exertion to seduce its members to their
different communions." A second Convention was held at the same
place, on the 12th of November, 1790. This body, under the presidency
of the Rev. Dr. Micklejohn, appointed deputies to the General Conven
tion of 1792, elected a standing committee, and took other measures to
perfect the organization of the Church in the State. The Rev. James L.
Wilson, one of the deputies appointed to attend the General Conven
tion, proceeded to New York for that purpose, but was delayed on his
voyage, so that he did not arrive till some days after the adjournment.
A note appended to the journal records his failure to be present. No
conventions were held in North Carolina until November, 1793, when
a second attempt was made to organize the Church in that State, three
of the clergy and three of the laity meeting at Tawborough on the
21st of November for that purpose. The Rev. James L. Wilson was
the President of this Convention, and a standing committee was chosen.
The Rev. Solomon Hailing, who had been recommended for orders by
the standing committee appointed in 1790, had been ordained by
Bishop Madison in 1792, and was the moving spirit in these renewed
efforts for organization. A letter from him to the Rev. Mr. Pettigrew
is our chief authority for this meeting and its proceedings. In May,
1794, four of the clergy, one being in Lutheran orders, and the same
number of laymen, met at Tawborough, prepared a constitution, and
elected the Rev. Charles Pettigrew to the episcopate of North Carolina,
and signed the testimonial of the bishop-elect, varying somewhat the
form set forth for this puipose by the General Convention, in con
sequence of the lack of personal acquaintance with the candidate,
consequent upon the great distance separating the clergy and laity in
the States. 1 The informality of the testimonial would have proved no
obstacle to the consecration of the bishop-elect, as legislation provid
ing for such a condition of things as that existing in North Carolina had
been enacted at the preceding General Convention. Word to this effect
was sent by Bishop White, and the Rev. Mr. Pettigrew set off to
attend the General Convention of 1795, with a view to obtaining con
secration. Interrupted in his journey by the prevalence of an epidemic
fever at Norfolk, which threatened the interruption of the ordinary
facilities of travel, he returned to North Carolina, and shortly after
wards died. The revival of the Church in North Carolina was long
deferred. The dispirited clergy were obliged to turn their attention
to secular employments to provide the means of subsistence. From
1794 to 1817 all was dark and hopeless. It was at the latter date that

1 An interesting and most valuable summary first historical publication. The work to which *

of these early proceedings of the Church in North we refer is, "The Early Conventions, held at C

Carolina has* been prepared and published by an Tawborongh, A.D. 1790, 1793, and 1794. Being ]

enthusiastic and untiring investigator of our the First Effort to Organize the Church in North I

early annals. From this work we have drawn Carolina. Collected from Original Sources, and )

the statements given above. It is not the privi- now First Published. With Introduction and I

lege of every writer on our history to contribute Brief Notes by Joseph Blount Cheshire, Jr." /

so much that is new, and also important, in his Raleigh, 1882. 8vo. pp. 29.

CHURCH LIFE AND FEELING IN VIRGINIA.

147

the coming of the Rev. Adam Empie to Wilmington, and the Rev.
Bethel Judd to Fayetteville, "laid the foundation of the restoration of
the Episcopal Church and cause in North Carolina. 1

Still further to the southward the Church in South Carolina, which
had organized and entered into the general union of the churches in
the Middle and Southern States, excepting "to the establishing of
Bishops in this State," 2 presented the name of the excellent jlobfirj;
Smith, D . D . ,jrector of St. Philip s Church and principal of Charles
ton College^ to the
Convelitionj)i 1795,
for confirmation as
Bishop of South Car
olina. Dr. Smith,
to whose exertion
it was due that the
Church in South Car
olina had entered the
general federation of
churches at all, had
been unanimously
elected. He was con
secrated at Christ
Church, Philadel
phia, on the 13th
of September, 1795,
and continued in the
exercise of his office
and ministry until
his death, on the 28th
of October, 1801, in
the seventieth year
of his age. No con
ventions were held
in South Carolina
from October 23,
17 98, until February

20, 1804, and at this latter date the election of a bishop took place,
whereupon the Rev. Edward Jenkins, D.D. , was " unanimously elected."
The bishop-elect declined the honor thus offered, " persuaded that at his
time of life he could not fully and faithfully discharge" the duties

of the episcopal office.
s9 ^ further attempt was

RT. REV. ROBERT SMITH, D.D., FIRST BISHOP OF
SOUTH CAROLINA.

the Rev Theodore De-

hem. P.P. ,jvas elected to the long- vacant episcopate. His consecrations
Took place on the 15th of October following, and his death on the !
6Y August, 1817, in the fifth year of his episcopate. At the time

1 The Church Review, Vol. in., p. 309. tion," 1786, reprinted in Dalcho s " Hist, of the

2 Vide " Journal of South Carolina Conven- Ch. in So. Car.," p. 474.

148 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

of his election the state of the Church in the interior of the State was
"truly alarming." Though continuing to hold his parochial cure he
visited not only the whole of his large diocese, but undertook the care
of the Church in Georgia. In frequent visitations, in the consecra
tion of a number of churches, in reviving the worship of the Church
where the services had long been discontinued, and in establishing it
where it had been previously unknown, in seeking out candidates for
holy orders, and in the discharge of all the functions of his office,
Bishop Dehon proved himself to be an apostle indeed. To the depri
vation of services so abundant and valuable was added the loss of :in
example at once winning and instructive ; and in his early death, in

the forty-first year of his age, the

^^^^**7~&gt; ^^ - Church at large, as well as in South

f^^^ Carolina, was bereft. On the 18th of

February, 1818, the Rev. Nathaniel

Bowen, D.D., was elected to the vacant See. It was with fitting
recognition "of the invaluable life and the distinguished services
to this Diocese and the Church in general " of the " revered and be
loved" Dehon that the Rev. Dr. Bowen received the "unanimous
suffrages of all the clergy and the churches. There was every proof
afforded, not only in the unanimity of feeling and the earnestness and
devotion of both clergy and laity to their work as Christians and
churchmen, that the Church in South Carolina was fully alive to its
responsibilities and opportunities.

ILLUSTRATIVE NOTE.

rpHE story of the Chureh in Virginia has been told with unusual fulness and
JL accuracy in the first volume of Dr. Hawks s " Ecclesiastical Contributions;"
in Bishop Meade s " Old Churches, Ministers, and Families ; " in the first volume
of the author s " Historical Collections of the American Colonial Church ; " in Dr.
Philip Slaughtei -1 s interesting and exhaustive monographs on the older parishes,
and in Dr. T. Grayson DashielPs "Digest of the Proceedings of the Conventions
and Councils of the Diocese of Virginia." To these volumes of a general nature
should be added the valuable biographies of Jarratt, Channing Moore, Meade, and
others of the leading clei gy giving a mass of matei-ial which, togetherwith the secular
histories and the rare and interesting controversial pamphlets published at different
periods, leaves little to be desired, whether our inquiries are directed to the in
vestigation of the earlier or the later annals of the Virginia Church.

CHAPTER IX.

THE EPISCOPATE OF JOHN HENRY HOBART, AND ITS
INFLUENCE AT THE NORTH.

early years of the episcopate of the first Bishop of New
I York present fe^ points of historic interest. One may turn
the pages of the brief record of the successive conventions
with little desire to linger over the scanty material for diocesan chroni
cles therein contained. In 1786 we find that action was taken re
specting the "Proposed Book," deferring its consideration, to a future
day, "out of respect to the English Bishops, and because the minds
of the people are not yet sufficiently informed." 1 The choice of the \
bishop-elect appears to have bea^ made bv a siiflflje resolution " Re- (
solved that the Reverend Mr. Provoost be recommended for Episcopal )
Consecration." 2 TIire is np
record ofjajballot. The per
sonal influence of the patriot
Rector of Trinity was such
that although friends and
correspondents of the Bishop

of Connecticut were members of the Convention, and there were
present those who had openly and formally recognized his epis
copal character and office, the deputies to the general convention]
were instructed not to consent to any act that might imply the
validity of Dr. Sealmry s Consecration." This exhibition of
.vonaland political feeling hindered for years the union and organization
of the Church. The following year "liberty to use. the Xe\v Form of
Prayer or the old as they respectively may think proper" was
granted to the congregations of the State. The bishop was formally
addressed by the Convention at a service in St. Paul s Chapel, and
fittingly responded to the kind greetings of his clergy and laity. The
bishop then delivered his first episcopal address, which was brief. As
recorded on the pages of the journal, it was to the effect "that he had
ordained several persons ; that he had lately made a visitation of
several churches on Long Island, for the purpose of Confirmation ;
and hoped that the other churches here represented would, be equally
prepared for the reception of that sacred rite, as he intended to visit
them next spring." 3 In 1788 the Convention recommended three lay-
readers Mr. Andrew Fowler, Mr. Theodosius Bartow and Mr. Elias
Cooper for orders. Each of these gentlemen became a prominent
minister of the Church. " The preservation of the episcopal Succession

1 Journal of Convention, etc., 1786. 2 Ibid. 3 Journal, etc., 1787.

150 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHUKCH.

in the English line," was voted to be "highly necessary, in the opinion
of this Convention." The union of the Church was also declared to be
"of groat importance and much to be desired," and the deputies to the
General Convention wore instructed, " fr&gt; prrm^fp f.Vmf, ]^\nr^ by e,YP r iY
prudent measure consistent with the Constitution of foe Church T a
tEe cpntinuance of the episcopal qiiflflflfl a rtT1 "^"i^jRnglTsb-lii] "

"In 1790 measures were taken to secure for " the support of a
missionary or missionaries to till the vacant congregations of the State,"
the property of the venerable society in Fort Hunter ; and donations
were solicited for the same purpose. A preamble and resolution re
specting the articles of religion were adopted as follows :

Whereas many respectable members of our Chui-ch are alarmed at the Articles
of our religion not being inserted in the Book of Common Prayer : Resolved, That
jthp ^Articles of the. Church of England, as they now stand, except such parts
thereof as aflfect the political government of the country, be held in full force and
virtue, until a further provision is made by the General Convention, agreeably to
the Eighth Article of the Constitution of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the
United States. 1

In 1791 the Convention instructed its deputies "to vote for re
taining the Thirty-nine Articles of religion as they now stand in the
old Book of Common Prayer, without any alterations, except only
such as are of a political nature." A motion to instruct the deputies
to consent to investing the House of Bishops with a full negative on
the proceedings of the other House was lost by a want of concurrence
between the clergy and laity. In 1792 the bishop reported to the
Convention the consecration of the Bishop of Maryland and the ordi
nation of the Rev. Messrs. Harris, Ireland, Gardiner, Sands, and Rogers. 2
A general application to the venerable society was authorized for a
grant of all its property, both real and personal, within the State to the
corporation of Trinity Church in trust for the Convention. In 1793
the bishop reported the consecration of Christ Church at Duanesburg,
erected solely at the expense of the Hon. James Duane, and a copy
of the deed of gift, and the letter of consecration, are recorded on
the pages of the journal. 3 Another church had been consecrated
at Ballston, and upwards of two hundred had been there confirmed.
The application of the " Trustees of a Society, formerly members
of Trinity Church, but since separated," for admission to Conven
tion was rejected. The Convention at this time sat with closed doors.
The bishop was requested " to exert the authority with which he is
invested, as Head of the Church, to enforce obedience to all the canons,
rules and regulations of the General and State Conventions, more par
ticularly the canons which respect the conduct of clergymen." In 1797
the Rev. Thomas Ellison, Rector of St. Peter s, Albany, communicated
to the Convention the interesting intelligence, " that some Lutheran
clergymen had, in the name and on behalf of the Consistory of Hie

1 Journal, etc., 1790. Ammi Rogers, ordained deacon, June 20,

* William Han-is, ordained deacon, Oct. 16, 1792, afterwards deposed. Vide Bp. Burgess s

1791; John Ireland, ordained deacon, 1792; " List of Persons ordained Deacon, from A. D.

afterwards deposed. Walter C. Gardiner, or- 1785 ; to A.D. 1857 ; " Boston, 1874.

dained deacon, June 24, 1792; John Jackson 8 Journal, etc., 1793.

Sands, ordained deacon, 1792.

THE EPISCOPATE OF JOHN HENRY HOBART. 151

Lutheran Church in the State of New York, intimated to him :i desire x
Fo fiave" it proposed to this Convention that their Church might be
united with the Protestant Episcopal Church in this State, and that N
their ministers might receive Episcopal ordination. " A A committee, of
which the Rev. Dr. Benjamin Moore was chairman, was appointed
" to meet such gentlemen of the Lutheran Church as may be duly ap
pointed by their ecclesiastical authority to confer with them on the
subject." Provision was made for bringing the matter, should it be
found advisable, before the approaching General Convention, and the
committee was instructed to report to the next State Convention.
But, unfortunately for this scheme of comprehension, the meeting of
the General Convention was deferred until 1799, in consequence of the
prevalence of the yellow-fever, and no conventions were held in New
York until the special Convention of 1801. At this session the sud
den resignation of episcopal jurisdiction on the part of Bishop Pro-
voost, which was made verbally and without previous announcement,
occupied the attention of the members present, and nothing further 1
appears on the records with respect to the compreheTisionof the $

i. i. ^^*^^^^^^^ ~"""""^^^"^-*BT^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^ r

Lutheran body hi the Church. The, resignation of Bishop Provoost
was accepted by the Convention with the expression of their " regret
that he should have judged himself under the necessity of quitting so
suddenly the exercise of the episcopal office, and those solemn and
important duties which are connected with it," and on the following
day the Rev. Benjamin Moore, D.D., Rector of Trinity Church, was
unanimously chosen to the vacant episcopate.

Bishop Provoost had long been weary of the duties devolving
upon him as a bishop of the Church of God. Chosen to f" b|gh nfflnft
main! V on_ j^plitical grounds, after many years of voluntary retire
ment from the exerciseof clerical duty, he failed from the outset to ]
appreciate cither the duties or the responsibilities of his station.
Learned and benevolent, as he undoubtedly was; upright and inflexi
bly conscientious, as he showed himself to be, lxe_ lacked that warmth
of devotion and that spirituality of life which would have conspicu
ously fitted him for leadership in the Christian Church. Accused, at
an early period in his ministry, as we learn from his own correspond
ence, of "endeavoring to sap the foundations of Christianity," in
consequence of his dwelling exclusively in his preaching on "the
doctrines of morality, his lack* of popularity seemed to have occa
sioned his removal to his farm in Dutchess county, in 1770, where
he remained for fourteen years. His refusal of preferment under
British or Tory influence, during the revolutionary struggle, and his
well-known sympathy with the revolted colonies, formed his claim, on
the evacuation of New York, to the rectorship of Trinity at the hands of
the patriot churchmen of the city, and his subsequent election to the
episcopate. But his love of ease, either constitutional or acquired
during his university life in England, hindered that devotion to the I
duties of the parish or the see which the one demanded at this junc
ture quite as much as the other. As a preacher his delivery was
monotonous and unimpassioned. Polished in style, and prepared with
studious care, his discourses lacked warmth and fervor, and at a time

152 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

when infidelity was coming in as a flood, and laxity of doctrinal belief was
too frequent in the mother land, as well as in our own, the Rector
of Trinity was regarded as latitudinarian in belief, and far from sound
in his teachings. In his depreciation of those who were chargeable
with "placing such an unbounded reliance in the merits of Christ
as to think their own endeavors quite unnecessary and not in the least
available to salvation," he seems to have fallen far short of that
recognition of the doctrine of justification, through Christ alone,
which has been held by the Church of all time. In his correspond
ence with Bishop White he betrays his indifference to the Church s
dogmatic teaching, while in his treatment of Bishop Seabury he dis
played a degree of animosity which was not warranted by the circum
stances of the case, and in which he was not supported by his clergy
or people in general. At length, wearied with the burden that had
become irksome, and bowed down with sorrow at the loss of his
wife to whom he was tenderly attached, and by other afflictions, the
saddest, perhaps, the heart can bear, he divested himself of all public
offices of trust, and sought, in the retirement of private life, the conso
lation his wounded spirit craved. In his own language, as addressed
to the presiding bishop, this step was " induced by ill-health and
some melancholy occurrences in my family, and an ardent wish to
retire from all public employment." The House of Bishops, while
demurring at the validity of the resignation of the Bishop of New
York, recognized in deed, though not in word, the necessity of mak
ing provision for the oversight of the Church in New York, and pro
ceeded to consecrate his successor. They formally protested against
the action of the bishop, and yet by their consecration of Bishop
Moore showed their acquiescence in his course. They judged it incon
sistent with the sacred trust committed to them to recognize the
bishop s act as an effectual resignation of his episcopal jurisdiction,
" but at the same time being sensible of the present exigencies of the
Church of New York," and with a view of providing " for the actual
discharge of the duties of the episcopacy," they professed their readi
ness to consecrate the choice of the Convention with the declaration
that they should consider him as " assistant or coadjutor bishop dur
ing- Qfefcoft Pro v oosfo _ life/ 1 The measure ot the asslbitUlil UliJliO^s
jurisdiction, and the exercise of his episcopal office, was, according to
the bishop s declaration, "to be dependent on such regulations as
expediency may dictate to the Church in New York, founded on the
indisposition of Bishop Provoost and with his concurrence." But the
new bishop had not been chosen as an " assistant or coadjutor," but
as w Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of New
York" 1 His letter of consecration so recognized him, and there is
nothing in the official or other records of the Convention to indicate
that he was ever regarded as an "assistant or coadjutor" by the
church over which he was placed. No reference to any other Bishop
of New York appears on the pages of the journals, and when, after an
episcopate of ten years, there was need of another bishop, it was, as

1 Journal of Convention, 1801.

THE EPISCOPATE OF JOHN HENRY HOBART. 153

the diocesan, that Bishop Moore convened a Convention to elect, forv
the first time, an assistant bishop of New York. The Convention had,

* ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^p^ I

from the first, regarded the resignation of Bishop Provoost as final
and complete. No attention was paid by the Convention to the stipula
tion of the bishops in their " declaration " requiring the concurrent
action of Bishop Provoost and the Convention in determining the
jurisdiction or measure of authority of Bishop Moore, and thatbishop
throughout his episcopate deemed himself to be, and was considered
by others as, the "Head of the Church in New York."

Bishop Moore was scholarly in his tastes and acquirements, cour
teous in manner, and truly Christian in life and character. In private
life he won all hearts by his gentleness and kindness, his consideration
for others, and thoughtful attention to all who came within the circle
of his acquaintance and friends. His daily walk and conversation was
a comment on the truths he taught, and showed to all the presence
and power of true religion in moulding and controlling the character
and life.

In his public life he was preeminently a man of God. The ex
pression of his countenance, venerable even in middle life, became
saint-like with added years, while his " tall, slightly bending and at
tenuated figure, the intellectual contour of his head, the plain-parted
hair," all "accorded well with the chastened tones of his voice and the
mild fervor of his sentiments," 1 and made up in his case what has. &gt;
hftgnjwpT[ styfcfl an "ftpnstojic character? Towards "fEbse who were
without " he " presented the Church in an aspect the most favorable to
win their good opinion." As a churchman it was evident that " by the
dignified gentleness " with which he maintained and defended the
Church s doctrines, and "the consistent propriety" which character
ized his ministerial and official course, he everywhere " disarmed^ppo-
sition, conciliated prejudice, and went further than perhaps any other
individual could then have done ~nT recommending " the Church " to
public respect and confidence." It was found by the Church s oppo
nents that it was not easy " to speak evil of a Church thus spiritually
adorned and meekly defended." 2

Disabled by a partial paralysis in 1811, Bishop Moore convened
a special Convention for the election of an assistant bishop. The
choice was not unanimous, but by the votes of a majority of both (
orders John fTp.nry fTofyirtj T).D- , one of the clergy of Trinity Church, \
and the secretary of th&lt;T Convention since his first election at the \
special Convention convened to receive the resignation of Provoost, was )
designated as the Assistant Bishop of New York.

The choice had fallen upon one who was destined to leave the i
press of a strong character and the moulding and controlling influences
of a mighty will upon the Church of his own and mter days. His
election was a turning-point in the history of the American Churc"
his episcopate was an epoch in the ecclesiastical annals of the Church
at large. Sprung from a Puritan ancestry, displaying inflexibility
of purpose, and possessing strong convictions of truth, the young

1 Dr. McVickar in his " Professional Years of Bishop Hobart." * Ibid.

154 HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

Hobart inherited predilections for piety and the priestly and prea