'' 1 4 << f-itfv/ t ar- rived. In 1707 Mr. Rudman, of the Swedish Church, served Christ Church, the regular minister being absent. In 1711, while Christ Church was being enlarged, the congregation worshipped in Gloria Dei Church, and Swedish hymns were sung in the service. Later, the Propagation Society made an appropriation for the Swedish ministers who served va- cant English Churches. In 1712, it is said, the " Surplice " was first mentioned at Christ Church. In 1716 Rev. Mr. Evans was made minister at Oxford and Radnor, in addi- tion to his duties at Christ Church, of which he was rector seventeen years. In 1724 the congregation invited Dr. Richard Welton, of Burlington, to take charge of Christ * Anderson, iii. 310. t See Hawks' "Maryland." J On the Welsh Episcopalians who entered Pennsylvania, see Day's "Penn. Hist. Coll.," p. 484. THE COLONIAL CHURCH. xxxv Church. It has been stated that this person was conse- crated a bishop by the Nonjurors, but the case appears dubious. In 1750 Christopher Gist went through Western Pennsylvania as an explorer and did something to call at- tention to church services. In 1731 there appear to have been about seven clergymen in the colony, of whom five were missionaries of the Propagation Society. In 1760 a Convention of the Clergy was held in Philadelphia, and missionary reports were read. Dr. Jenney, Dr. William Smith and seven other Pennsylvania clergy were present. Irf 1763 Whitfield preached in Christ Church. In 1770, the last Swedish missionary, the Rev. Nicholas Collin, of Upsal, came over to Gloria Dei Church; and, eventually, the f Swedes became a part of the Protestant Episcopal Church. ' In 1772 the Rev. William White commenced his labors in / V 7 Philadelphia as deacon at Christ Church and St. Peter's. December 3d, 1775, Mr. White was elected chaplain to the Continental Congress, and the members of the Church in Philadelphia entered heartily upon the work of achieving American Independence. July 4th, 1776, it was resolved, at the house of Mr. Duche, to omit the prayer for the King. April 1 5th, 1779, Mr. White was elected rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's. The Church struggled on through the Revolution; and, November, 1783, with Drs. Morgan and Blackwell, he took measures which led to the Primary Convention of May 24th, 1784.* This convention was at- / y tended by about twenty-five delegates from sixteen par- ishes. Six principles were drawn up and recommended.f In North Carolina religious liberty prevailed from the ftf k outset, and the first movement to plant the Church was that of Dr. Bray, Commissary of Maryland, who, in 1692, brought the subject to the notice of the Bishop of London. * On Pennsylvania, see the "Churchman's Calendar," 1866, p. 129. The "Pennsylvania Papers," pa ssim. t These may be found on page 92 of the Memoirs. They were printed on a broadside with a preamble, the names of the delegates being appended. The editor at present knows of only one copy of this broadside. XXXvi THE COLONIAL CHURCH. In 1701, the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel sent out the Rev. Daniel Brett, though within a year he disap- peared under scandalous circumstances. The first church appears to have been built in 1702,* and the Church of England was established Jjy law, though not without oppo- sition. In 1703-4 Mr. Blair went out as missionary, but, after a severe struggle, the opposition induced him to re- turn. Messrs. Adams and Gordon followed in 1708. In 1710 Mr. Adams died, and Gordon went back to England, being unable to endure the opposition excited, chiefly by Quakers, though North Carolina had always proved more or less irreligious. The Rev. John Urmston came over in 1711. He was unaimable, quarrelsome and covetous. He administered the Communion but twice in five years, and was punished by the court for drunkenness and profanity. Like scores of similar men in the colonies, he was a dis- grace to Christianity.t The Rev. Mr. Rainsford was of good character, but had no zeal. One of his successors, Taylor, was murdered for his money. In 1722 Mr. New- man came out, but the colony was unpopular with the clergy. In 1725 Blacknall appeared, and on one occasion informed agjainst himself, with respect to an illegal mar- riage, to get one half of the fifty pounds due to an informer. Others followed who shed almost equal credit upon the Church, yet, notwithstanding such scarraals, her strength \ gradually increased. In New Jersey the proprietary government was kindly to all denominations of Christians. About 1695 some of the East Jersey proprietors addressed Compton, Bishop of London, requesting the services of the Church; and the Rev. Edward Perthuck was sent over near the close of 1698. He commenced services at Perth Amboy, though he did not remain permanently. Queen Anne's instruc- * Hawks' "North Carolina," ii. 341. t Dorr's "History of Christ Church, Philadelphia," p. 51. Urmston served in PhiladelpTiia for a while, but was dismissed in disgrace. THE COLONIAL CHURCH. xxxvii tions to Lord Cornbury, in 1702, enjoined the maintenance of worship and the sacraments according to the Book of Common Prayer, ordered the building of churches and a provision for the maintenance of the clergy. He was to prefer none who could not produce the certificate of the Bishop of London. Accordingly he proceeded against va- rious clergymen who officiated contrary to law; and the Assembly of New Jersey, Oct. 24, 1707, reproached him in their address, because one minister of the Church of England was "dragged by a sheriff from Burlington to Am- boy" and afterwards confined like a malefactor in "another government." * In 1732 the Rev. George Keith came out, and the Rev. John Talbot was associated with him. Through their ef- forts a church was gathered at Burlington, the present St. Mary's. In 1704 Mr. Brook was missionary at Elizabeth- town, and Vaughn in 1709, with Halliday, in 1711. Perth Amboy lost some of its importance when the governor moved to Trenton. The history of the Church at Amboy gives a fair idea of the progress made elsewhere. t St. Mary's, Burlington, also serves a similar purpose, exhibit- ing the career of Talbot, though there appears to be no * Smith's "New Jersey," 333. t See Whitehead's "Early History of Perth Amboy," p. 208. \ "History of the Church in Burlington," by the Rev. George M. Hills, D.D., 1876. The theory of Talbot's "Episcopal Consecration" is there set forth (p. 168); and again by Dr. Hills in the "Pennsylvania Magazine," vol. iii. p. 32. See the "Living Church," Chicago, April igth, 1879, p. 439. The charge that Talbot demanded Episcopal obedience seems to rest chiefly upon the authority of the profligate Urmston. "Pennsylvania Papers," p. 143. Dr. Hawks ("Mary- land," p. 183) thinks that there is "no doubt" about the consecration of Welton find Talbot, but how far he had examined the subject we can not say. See also Anderson's "Colonial Church," iii. p. 351. See Bishop White's "Story" in this connection in Hawks' "Maryland," p. 185. The consecration of Wellon and Talbot was the subject of rumor, but the authority offered in its support is Per- ceval, in his "Apology for Apostolical Succession" (second ed., p. 247), who drew his information, partly from some curious printed documents, and partly from information furnished by two clergymen not adherents of the nonjurors. But what were the pamphlets and who were the men ? If the information was reliable, why did he withhold essential points ? xxxviii THE COLONIAL CHURCH. evidence that the Church can accept of the Episcopal character claimed for him. He never performed any Epis- copal act, and he denied that he ever attempted to exer- cise any supervision of his brethren. In Delaware, as in Pennsylvania, the Swedish Church appeared first, colonizing the west side of the Delaware in 1636-7. In 1703 Keith visited Delaware, and in 1704 the Rev. Thomas Crawford was sent over as a missionary by the Propagation Society. In 1726 there were four churches. In 1792 the Swedes were merged in the Prot- estant Episcopal Church.* Georgia was colonized by Oglethorpe in 1733, the Arch- bishop of Canterbury and many of the clergy of England making contributions in aid of the work. The Rev. Dr. Herbert came as missionary, and brought a quantity of religious books contributed by friends. The Rev. Samuel Wesley gave a chalice and patine. Herbert was succeeded by Channey, and the latter by the Rev. John Wesley, who reached Georgia in February, 1736, accompanied by his brother Charles, who was secretary and chaplain to Oglethorpe. John Wesley was at this time a very rigid! churchman, and his views of duty finally brought him/ into collision with some of the people. This led to his\ flight from the colony, where he and his brother had been j treated in the most outrageous manner. George Whit-/ field came out in 1737, and founded an Orphan House, Norris being a co-worker with Whitfield. The Church' grew, and, in 1758, was established by law. When the Revolution dawned, Georgia had but few settled clergymen. Some of these took sides with the Crown and left the country. One of the first acts of the legislature, however, after the war, was to recommend measures to maintain public worship.f * See Diocese of Delaware, in "Churchman's Calendar," 1865, p. 118, and the Delaware " Church Papers," passim. \ See Bishop Stevens' " History of Georgia," Philadelphia, 1859. THE COLONIAL CHURCH. xxxix Returning to New England, we commence with the case of Rhode Island. The first white man who estab- lished a permanent home in Rhode Island, was the Rev. William Blackstone, who, as we have already seen, left Boston in the spring of 1635, an< ^ to ^ ms wav mto tne wilderness, eventually selecting for his abode a place called " Study Hill," on the banks of the Blackstone River, and now included within the boundary of Attleborough, Mas- sachusetts. Anticipating Roger Williams as a colonist in Rhode Island, he excelled that stern man in gentleness of manners and sobriety of speech. Williams, who is held up as a pattern respecting religious toleration, denounced the hearing of the Church of England clergy as sinful; but / Blackslone was kindly to all, and may even be regarded as the founder of Rhode Island. At " Study Hill " he was something of a recluse, but it is known that he exercised his vocation, and occasionally preached in Providence, where he was the first representative of the Church of England.* Prior to 1700 some families attached to the Church settled in Narragansett County. They worshipped in private houses until 1706, when the Rev. Christopher Bridge became their minister. McSparran says that he officiated in a little church at Newport in 1707. In 1717 the Rev. Mr. Grey, of the Propagation Society, officiated in Narragansett. The first church record commences April I4th, 1718. In 1730 the Attorney General, Updike, was baptized in the Petaquamscut River, by immersion, Mr. McSparran officiating. This clergyman served the Church in Rhode Island until 1757. The advent of Dean Berkley, I [*) V* however, constituted a great feature in the Colonial His- i tory of the Church in Rhode Island. He reached Newport in 1729, and left in 1731, but his visit produced marked ; resuTfsT His donations"~"of books to the libraries of Yale * The "History of the Episcopal Church in Narragansett," compiled by order of the Diocesan Convention, does not even contain the name of Blackstone, a mem- orable oversight. See Bliss' "History of Rehoboth," pp. 2-14, and Newman's "Address," Pawtucket, 1855. Xl THE COLONIAL CHURCH. and Harvard proved very important, and the weight of his character was felt for a long period.* Mr. Fayerweather, the successor of McSparran, labored with good results; though, having his scruples, he sided with the King when the Revolution dawned, and his church was closed. The last record made by him was dated November 6th, 1774. He died in 1781. Toleration prevailed in Rhode Island, yet in 1722-3, in Bristol, twelve churchmen were impris- oned by the Connecticut authorities for refusing to pay dues for the support of the non-episcopal minister, Mr. Nathaniel Cotton. In 1775, the Propagation Society main- tained three or four clergymen and a schoolmaster in Rhode Island, and they struggled on through the Revolution, but at its close the Church was very feeble. t The Connecticut Congregationalists formed a com- pact body in church and state; but, in 1665, the Royal Commissioners were assured that the local authorities would not interfere with those who might desire to maintain public services, according to the Book of Com- mon Prayer. It was not, however, until 1708 that the "Act of Toleration" was passed. Nevertheless at Strat- ford, in 1690, there were a few churchmen. When Keith and Talbot came over as missionaries, curiously enough, they were entertained by the Congregational minister at New London, who spoke kindly of the Church, and treated them with much civility. In 1705 Mr. Muirspn settled at Rye, then in Connecticut, and in 1706, he went with Col- onel Heathcote to Stratford on a missionary tour, where a local officer stood in the highway and threatened them with a "fine of five pounds." Mr. Muirson, died in 1708. From this time the work went on with great success, and, in 1722, President Cutler of Yale College, and six others, f\ S I "" ' * ***T* ; assembled in the College Library, declared for Episco- * Anderson's "Colonial Church," iii. 371. t See " Narragansett Church," passim, and the "Torrey Papers of the Prince Library," in the Boston Public Library. THE COLONIAL CHUKCH. xli pacy, having been led to this course by the study of books which they found upon the shelves. The community was astounded, but the Congregationalists could not undo the work. The axe had been laid at the root of the tree. Cutler, Johnson and Brown embarked for England, and re~ceived Orders. With' the growth of the Church a cor- responding increase of hostility was developed. In 1742 there were " fourteen churches built or b"uiTHing and seven clergymen," the Rev. Roger Price, as commissary for New England, supervising the work. At this period Whitfield introduced an element j)f jdiscord, but in 1747, the undue excitement was followed by corresponding depression. About the year 1763, Mayhew and others of Boston /Hy commenced the discussion of Episcopacy, and were re- / plied to by Archbishop Seeker, who showed clearly that the system was not aimed, as the Congregationalists taught, at the subversion of popular rights. As early as 1766, twelve of tfie clergy, assembled at Stratford, and addressed the Bishop of London in favor of the Episco- pate. They did so again in 1771. In 1774, the report of Goodrich "makes the Episcopalians about one in thirteen of the whole number of the inhabitants." With the ap- proach of the Revolution, Connecticut experienced the same troubles that overtook other colonies, and such /churchmen as Seabury and Samuel Peters were roughly \ used. Seabury ofWestchester, orTaccdunt of certain writ- x ings was arrested, and held a prisoner for some time, being finally released.* Peters, of Hebron, did not find the peo- * Seabury was the author of pamphlets, by "A. W. Farmer," signifying, "A Westchester Farmer," replied to by Alexander Hamilton (Shea's "Hamilton," p. 292). Their authorship has been attributed to Seabury and Wilkins jointly, and by Mr. Pintard to Wilkins alone. A manuscript Memorial in Bishop Seabury's hand- writing, drawn up while in England in search of consecration, and supported by the certificates of Drs. Chandler and Cooper, proves his authorship beyond question. The MSS. are in the possession of his grandson, Prof. VVm. J. Seabury. The pam- phlets show decided literary ability. There appears to be no room, in this connec- tion, to enter upon any estimate of the part performed by Bishop Seabury in laying the foundations of the Church, though he is entitled to a very high place in the esti- mation of our people. See his petition, "Ch. Review," vol. ix. xlii THE COLONIAL CHURCH. pie so lenient, and finally fled the country, while others of the clergy fell under popular displeasure, owing to their devotion to the Crown. As the work progressed, churches \ were closed, desecrated, or burnt, notably at Fairfield and / Norwalk. Mr. Learning, one of the most prominent of I the clergy, fled to New York, and Beach and Kneeland died; Seabury taking duty as a chaplain in _the British service. At the* close of the war, however, something re- mained. When the smoke rolled away, on the last week of March, ten out of the fourteen parochial clergy who held their places, assembled at Woodbury to reorganize; and in due time Dr. Samuel Seabury was sent to England with a view to Episcopal consecration,* which he received from the Nonjurors, November 24th, 1784. The sketch of Episcopacy in Massachusetts has already been brought down to the year 1662. At this period Crom- well had fallen, and Charles II. had ascended the throne. June 28th, 1662, the King addressed a letter to the Massa- chusetts authorities, which was of the nature of a procla- mation, enjoining freedom for churchmen to " use the Book of Common Prayer, and perform their devotions in that manner." The Rev. Joshua Moody of Portsmouth thought this " a very tremendous thing to us," and for a long time the Congregational party sought the means of eluding the command. In 1664, four commissioners were sent over by the King to inquire into the general adminis- tration. One of these commissioners was Samuel Maverick, who had been obliged to leave Boston and go to England, on account of his churchmanship. Maverick and his asso- ciates, finding that the letter of the King had been disre- garded, demanded, among other things, that his co-relig- ionists " should no longer be fined for not attending the religious meetings, as they had hitherto been," and that * For the narrative of this period of Connecticut history, see Beardsley's " His- tory of the Church in Connecticut," two volumes 8vo., also his Lives of the two Johnsons, and his Life of Bishop Seabury. THE COLONIAL CHURCH. xliii .they should "let the Quakers alone."* They also de- manded that the restoration of the royal family should be celebrated by an annual thanksgiving as at home, which was agreed to. In New England, at this period, thanks- giving days were irregular and sporadic, the festival which was finally established being the outgrowth of customs observed in the Church of England. t With respect to tol- eration, however, the Massachusetts authorities were amus- ingly evasive and well nigh impertinent. Their answer was, "as to ecclesiastical privileges they had commended, to the ministry and the people here the Word of the Lord for their rule."^ Thus unfavorable was their reply, though' when visited by the Royal Commissioners, their co-religion- ists of Connecticut, in theory, accepted toleration. It was clear that Massachusetts must soon yield. Drake says, " It was not until 1664, that the Church service was per- formed in Boston without molestation. " In 1665, the commissioners had a chaplain with them, but there was no place of worship in Boston for churchmen.il In 1677, how- ever, the general court being unable to stand the pressure, it was ordered, that no person should be hindered from performing the Church of England service ;T yet, such was the local hostility, that, as late as 1682, it was necessary for Randolph to assure the Archbishop of Canterbury that clergymen of the Church would not be interfered with. Early in 1685, a great change took place in the colony. Its charter was then taken away by James II., who set up a royal government, appointing Joseph Dudley President. May 1 5th, 1686, he arrived in the Rose Frigate. With * Drake's "Boston," p. 371. t See article "Genesis of Thanksgiving," the "Churchman," Nov. 22, 1879, and Dexter's "Congregationalism," p. 457. \ Hutchinson's " History," i. 243. Drake's "Boston," p. 467. On the period see Mass. Coll., 2d series, vol. viii., p. 52. || "History of King's Chapel," p. 16. H Hutchinson's "History," i. 355. xliv THE COLONIAL CHURCH, him came the Rev. Robert Ratcliffe, a clergyman of the Church of England, and the first parochial minister of Boston. The same day the organization of a parish was effected, when Dr. Benjamin Bullivant and Mr. Richard Banker were elected wardens. It was voted to take up a collection " every Sabbath day after evening sermon," while the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London were requested to favor " our Church." The first collection, made Sunday, June 2Oth, when services were commenced, amounted to ^3~TfsTOd. A room was taken in the Town House, and a movable pulpit and twelve benches were ordered. Mr. Ratcliffe was voted a salary of 40 per annum; while a "sober and fitt person," as " clarke," was to receive "for his paynes 2Os. a weeke."* Thus humble was the beginning, though at the time there appear to have been several hundred persons in the colony favorable to the Church. Dunton, the bookseller, de- scribes Ratcliffe as a preacher. The next place of meet- ing was the Exchange, where, at the Wednesday and Friday meetings, Mr. Ratcliffe could overhear the citizens / outside referring to " Baal's priest," while from the Congre- 1 gational pulpits the Church prayers were called, " Leeks, ^ garlic and trash. "t Randolph in his letter to the Arch- bishop of Canterbury gives a vivid picture of the condition of things, and coolly proposes .that the " three meeting- houses of Boston," should pay " twenty shillings a week, apiece," to support the Episcopal services. December I9th, 1686, Sir Edmund Andros superseded Dudley, and on the 23d of March, 1687, he demanded the keys of the " Old South Meeting-house," that the Church service might be celebrated. Judge Sewall, with the com- mittee, waited upon the governor and refused, but on the * "Hist. King's Chapel," p. 22. t Hutch. "Col. Papers," p. 549, and John Dunton's "Journal." Also Se- wall's "Diary," vol. i. p. 141. In "St. Chrysostom's Magazine," vol. ii. nos. II and 12, are letters purporting to have been written by Ratcliffe. THE COLONIAL CHURCH. xlv 25th, Good Friday, Andros ordered the sexton to open the doors and ring the bell.* This, of course, was a plain case of usurpation. On February loth, the funeral of Lady Andros took place at the " Old South," the ceremonies exciting great attention. About this time Mr. Ratcliffe was interrupted at the funeral of Lilly by a deacon of the "Old South." t April i8th, 1689, Andros was deposed by the people, and Randolph, Warden Bullivant, and others, were thrown into the fort. Upon the accession of William and Mary they were sent to England with Andros for trial. Ratclifife and Clarke also disappeared, but in the mean time a wooden church had been built. In 1694 it was still without pews. The Rev. Samuel Myles was on the ground July 1st, 1689. He went to England in 1692; and a Mr. Smith and a Mr. Hatton officiated until his return, July 24th, 1696. In 1702 Dudley reappeared in Boston, now as Governor of Massachusetts, and while a vestryman of the Church attended the Congregational Communion at Roxbury. In 1710 " Queen's Chapel" was enlarged, and the people ad- dressed the Queen with respect to the appointment of bishops, saying that about eight hundred persons were attached to the congregation. In 1723 Christ Church was established under the Rev. Mr. Cutler, formerly president of Yale College; and in 1729 Mr. Price succeeded Mr. Myles at what had become " King's Chapel." Services were commenced at Newbury, \ Marblehead, and other places. We do not wish, however, to pursue these matters in detail, but simply to indicate the general course of * Sewall's "Diary," i. p. 171. t Greenwood's " King's Chapel," p. 42. J See "Mass. Papers," p. 109. Roads' " History of Marblehead." In 1768, the Boston "Chronicle," of Sept. 26th, says, " Wednesday last a convention of the Episcopal clergy was held in this town, when the Rev. Mr. Arthur Browne, of Portsmouth, New Hampshire, preached a sermon on the occasion at King's Chapel." As early as 1742 mission work was in progress at St. George's River. See on Maine the " Mass. Papers." xlvi THE COLONIAL CHURCH, events. Price was appointed commissary, and was suc- ceeded by Dr. Caner, who served until the church was closed at the commencement of the Revolution; though it should be noted that the church was rebuilt of stone in 1749. Trinity Church had also been established, the pulpit being supplied by the clergy of the Chapel and Christ Church until 1740, when Mr. Davenport became minister; who, in turn, was succeeded by Messrs. Hooper, Walter, and Parker, the latter being connected with the church from 1774 until his death in 1804. At Christ Church, Cutler, who died in 1765, had for his successors Messrs. Greaton, Byles, Lewis, and Montague.* Dr. Cutler had four hundred regular attendants at the ser- vices. This ancient church contains the first chime of bells cast for America, and the first monument erected to Wash- ington. From the tower was hung out the signal lantern, on the eve of the battle of Concord and Lexington.f During the Revolution services were maintained at Christ Church and Trinity, but at "King's Chapel" they were suspended March loth, 1776. Caner, who was a royalist, left the city upon its evacuation by the British troops; tak- ing with him the records, the vestments, and the plate, the latter amounting to two thousand eight hundred ounces of silver, the gift of three crowned heads. The records were returned in 1805, but the vestments and plate were not found. This brings us to an event that should be touched upon, the loss of this building to the Protestant Episcopal Church which was rebuilt of stone. It appears that the Chapel remained closed until 1777, when the proprietors granted the use of it to the con- gregation of the Old South Church, so unjustly treated by Governor Andros. This congregation held possession gratuitously for about five years, at the end of which time, their own house, which had been taken as a train- * Drake's "Boston," p. 567. t Proceedings of "Mass. Hist. So.," 1876, p. 179, and "Mass. Papers," 142-3. THE COLONIAL CHURCH. xlvii ing school for Burgoyne's cavalry, was repaired.* They left the Chapel in February, 1783; but during the previous summer a number of the old proprietors concluded to re- establish services. September 8th, 1782, they invited Mr. James Freeman, of Walpole, to officiate as lay reader for six months. The invitation was sent through the wardens, Dr. Thomas Bulfinch and James Ivers. Mr. Freeman en- tered upon his duties October i8th, 1782; and the Episcopal and Congregational Societies appear to have held joint oc- cupancy until the latter removed the following February. April 2ist Mr. Freeman was elected minister on a salary of two hundred pounds. At this time the wardens say, "the proprietors consent to such alterations in the service as are made by the Rev. Dr. Parker; and leave the Atha- nasian Creed at your discretion."! These alterations were simply such as the changed political condition of the coun- try demanded. The congregation appears as an Episco- pal organization, Mr. Freeman, for whom Episcopal or- dination was contemplated, carefully abstaining from the assumption of priestly functions. It has been claimed, that in the summer of 1784 " King's Chapel" and its lay reader were supposed to be in harmony with the Church. It has also been claimed that at that time the parish received a notice from Bishop White of the action of the Church in Pennsylvania, of May 25th, 1784. At least a copy of the Broadside already referred to came into the possession of Mr. Freeman. This document states that the Pennsyl- vania convention empowered its committee "to correspond and confer with representatives from the Episcopal Church * Wisner's "History of the Old South," p. 34, January I4th, 1776, Dr. Caner says, "The wealthier part of my parish have provided for themselves by removing to England and elsewhere," and speaks of "the poverty of the few remaining par- ishioners," "Mass. Papers," p. 584. f Or. Dr. Parker's "Troubles and the menaces he endured," see "Mass. Pa- pers," p. 696. These papers should be consulted on the entire period. f The Broadside is now in the possession of the Rev. James Freeman Clarke, a grandson of Mr. Freeman. xlviii THE COLONIAL CHURCH, in the other states, or any of them, and assist in forming an ecclesiastical government." It may perhaps be con- ceded that this communication, signed in autograph by Bishop White, was addressed officially to the parish of 44 King's Chapel," but of this there is no proof. If, how- ever, they were thus invited to share in the deliberations, it was with the distinct understanding that the Doctrine and Orders of the Church of England were to be adhered to without question, as the principles of the Broadside state. Under the circumstances, therefore, such an invi- tation would have been proper. The Church welcomed all who came in accordance with the principles recognized; which, in substance, were endorsed by the convention in Massachusetts, September 8th, 1784. New England, how-\ ever, was not represented at the primaryTjefieraT Conven- I tion, held at Philadelphia, September 27th, 1785. . In the mean while, Mr. Freeman's changi by the late Alonzo Potter, Bishop of Pennsylvania, who i'V attributes to Bishop White commanding intellectual and moral qualities; saying, "If his rhetorical powers had equalled his erudition and his capacity for thought, and had we been ready to honor as we ought the writers of our own country, the name of White had now stood side by side with those of Seeker, Porteus, Horsley and Home." The time, however, is coming, he says, "when Bishop White will be recognized as the Founder and wise Master-builder of a system of Ecclesiastical Polity, which, though not faultless, is as perfect as the condition of things then ad- mitted, and of which the essential excellence is likely to be demonstrated by the progress of events." * Yet the opinion of the large-hearted and able prelate, whose words we quote, goes farther. Bishop White is regarded by him as a providential character, and as ac- complishing for the Church what Washington did for the Nation. Therefore, after speaking of Washington's singu- * The Address of Bishop Alonzo Potter, delivered on the occasion of laying the corner-stone of Calvary Monumental Church, Philadelphia, April, 1851. See Sprague's "Annals of the American Pulpit," also the "Memoir of Bishop White," by his friend and admirer Dr. Bird Wilson, and the very valuable work entitled, "Account of the Meeting of the Descendants of Colonel Thomas White of Mary- land," Philadelphia, 1879. hi THE COLONIAL CHURCH. lar adaptation to his mission, and of the impossibility of ac- counting for it on any human principle, Bishop Potter says, referring to Bishop White, " It was the same with him who was called, like another Moses, to lead our Church out of her long captivity, and through a wilderness of suffering and humiliation, he was sent of God." This is a generous estimate, but it is evidently just; there being, however, no desire to overlook the claims of those who early shared with him the onerous duties of the Episcopal office, nor any wish to ignore the services of presbyters and faithful laymen who from the beginning stayed up his hands. Bishop White was fortunate in his associates, of whose reputation he was never envious; and the care which he took to secure to them their true posi- . tion in the public estimation will render his own fame safe to the end of time. MEMOIRS PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH. DEDICATION. TO THE BISHOPS OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH. MY MUCH ESTEEMED BRETHREN, THE motive to the prefixing of a dedication to these Memoirs, is the opportunity thus afforded of testifying to the Church at large, the harmony which has subsisted among us in our joint counsels for the conducting of our ecclesiastical concerns. If, at any time there has been a shade of difference of opinion, it has been overbalanced by the pleasure of mutual concession, and by the profit of amicable discussion. AH of you have been ordained to the Episcopacy by my hands. Submission of opinion on this account, is what I have never had the arrogancy to claim : but if any degree of personal respect should be supposed a natural consequence, I can thankfully acknowledge that it has been bestowed. Having lived in days in which there existed prejudices in our land against the name, and much^more against the office, of a bishop; and when it was doubtful whether any 2 DEDICA TIOJV. person in that character would be tolerated in the com- munity; I now contemplate nine of our number, conduct- ing the duties of their office without interruption; and in regard not to them only, but to ten of us who have gone to their rest, I trust the appeal may be made to the world, for their not being chargeable with causes of offence to our fellow Christians and our fellow citi- zens generally, or with the assuming of any powers within our communion, not confessedly recognized by our ecclesiastical institutions. Being your senior by many years, I enjoy satisfaction in the expectation of the good which you may be ex- pected to be achieving, in what is now our common sphere of action, when I shall be removed from it: and, with my prayers for the success of your endeavors to this effect, I subscribe myself, Your affectionate brother, THE AUTHOR. PEEFAOE THE FIRST EDITION MANY years ago, the author of the following work began to com- mit to writing the most material facts which had occurred, relative to the Church of which he is a minister: intending, in the event of the continuance of life and health, to carry on the recital. This was not with a view to early publication, because of the small extent of the sphere, in which the detail of very recent events was likely to interest curiosity. Accordingly, what was thus prepared lay unnoticed, until an application was made, about twelve years ago, by the editor of the American edition of Dr. Rees's Cyclopedia, requesting attention to certain parts of that work, with a view to other objects. On this occasion it occurred, that there might be propriety and use in insert- ing, in a work of that kind, a brief account of what had been trans- acted during some years preceding, within the Episcopal Church. For this reason, there was made a draft from the notes before taken, for the purpose stated. As what remained comprehended sundry matters, not of sufficiently general concern for insertion in the Cyclopedia, it was afterwards reviewed under the impression that the time might come, when the former labor would not be unacceptable, within the communion for which it had been designed. In the present publi- cation, the narrative has been continued to the present time. With it, there are given the matters kept back from the publication in the Cyclopedia; and a continuation of similar statements and remarks. It has been occasionally suggested, from a knowledge of the mate- rials in the hands of the author, and in consideration of the oppor- tunities which he has possessed of personal observation of characters 4 PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. and of facts, that it would be better to embody the narrative with the remarks, and to make a history of the whole. The mere melting of them into one mass, after the separation of them as related above, did not seem likely to be fruitful of any considerable advantage; and as to the name of "a history," it would not only be disproportioned to the work, but perhaps pledge to an attempt, beyond what there are mate- rials to accomplish. Of materials concerning the aggregate Church, the author possesses all that are necessary, and more than will be here given; the view being confined to the more important: but his collec- tions in regard to the Church in the different dioceses, are perhaps incomplete, although he is furnished with almost all their journals, and thinks himself well informed as to all the material events which have occurred for half a century backward. Besides, there are a few points on which he wished to retain a liberty that would be incon- sistent with the fulness, and, considering what is to be expected in such a work, the fidelity of a history. One of these points is, that he^~ chooses to be silent in regard to a few transactions, which, although*/ ^ sufficiently known and discoursed of when they happened, are not of j so much importance to the future concerns of the Church, as to in-/ duce a wish to perpetuate the remembrance of them; and thereby the J personal irritation by which they were accompanied. ^ Besides these reasons, there is one arising from the desire of avoid- ing such a development of the characters of agents, as might induce the relating and the unintentional mis-stating of what may have passed in unguarded conversation. It is an unfair advantage taken of a de- ceased character, for an author to represent him as his own prejudices or his passions dictate; when, perhaps, the other party would have had the precaution to make his own story known, had he foreseen such a result of the freedom of social intercourse. Another license which has grown out of the adopted plan, is the anticipating of some circumstances which took place in England, dur- ing the intercourse with his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury; when such anticipation might illustrate any matter previously under review. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. 5 The motive, was the desire to record the said intercourse in the form in which it now appears, that is, in letters to the committee of the Church in Pennsylvania; which, having been written when the mat- ters related were fresh on the mind of the narrator, is the more likely to be a faithful exhibition of them. To have enlarged the letters would have been incorrect; and yet, in what passed in the intercourse, there was such connection with some points in an earlier part of the work, as was too material to be disregarded. Although there has not been an enlargement of the letters, nor an alteration of them in any instance, there have been attached to them a few notes, containing matters of less moment The motive of the author in the Statements, is principally to record facts, which may otherwise be swept into oblivion by the lapse of time. For the mixing of his opinions with the facts, a reason may be thought due. It is, that the habits of his life having exercised him much, on subjects which have bearings on the concerns of the Church in doc- trine, in discipline, and in worship; and his principles having been formed with deliberation, and acted on with perseverence, not with- out prayer to the Father of Lights for His holy guidance; there seems to him nothing unreasonable in the wish, to give the weight of long observation, to what are truth and order in his esteem. He' has not the presumption to aspire to, nor the vanity to expect to share in the direction of the concerns of the Church, after the very few years in which there will be a possibility of his being present in her councils: but he commits his opinions, to the issue of what may be thought in reason due to them. On the author's review of his Statements and Remarks, he had often a painful sensation of the frequent prominence in them of himself. In the way of apology, let it be remarked first, that the apparent fault is in a great degree inseparable from the delivery of the results of personal observation; and, secondly, that he has had more agency than any other person, in the transactions recorded : owing to the cir- cumstances in which he was placed; to a cause for which he can not 6 PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION 1 . be sufficiently thankful, the continuance of his health and strength; and to his having attended every General Convention, from the be- ginning to the present time. Under the weight of these considera- tions, he commits himself to the candor of the reader. Of the papers in the Appendix, a great proportion are what may be read in the printed journals; but they were thought necessary to the series of the events presented. Those papers which were in the private possession of the author, and were designed to have an influ- ence on the concerns of the Church, he has thought it due to the ob- ject of this work, to perpetuate. The printing of any document which took the shape of a canon, has been judged unnecessary. In regard to letters, let it be noticed, that there are none besides those, which, like the papers above referred to, were designed to have public influence. In private letters, there is much to confirm the statements made, and to enlarge them, if that were the design. PEEFAOE TO THE SECOND EDITION. THE Memoirs of the Episcopal Church edited some years ago by the present author, being out of print; and there being none on hand so far as is known to him, except a few copies in his posses- sion; he lays by the following sheets, under the idea, that in the event of a future reprint, they may be thought a desirable addition to the volume. It will then contain whatever relates materially to the concerns of the Episcopal Church for the space of fifty-two years; of which the former publication was devoted to the first thirty; and the present is limited to the remaining twenty-two. The author can not expect, at his time of life, that he will much longer live to be present at the councils of the Church; or that, if living, his mind will be competent to the continuation of the present work. Accordingly, in these considerations, he per- ceives a call on him, to say, in accordance with a sentiment of the Mantuan poet "Claudite jam Rivos." To whatever period the days of his earthly pilgrimage may be extended; and whatever may be the dispensations of Providence in the course of them; whether, as hitherto, the uninterrupted enjoy- ment of health, and a considerable measure of worldly comforts; or such visitations, as he has witnessed in the persons of many, whose merits and usefulness, had they been the rule of divine procedure, in this life of uncertainty of change, as they are not, are far beyond what can be supposed his own; it will be his endeavor and his prayer, that he may live in daily dependence on the gracious Providence which 8 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. has conducted him to an advance in years beyond that of the usual lot of man; and under the assurance, that if there should be for him, in reserve, any portion of bodily suffering or of sorrow, it will be sent in mercy, and will be no more than is necessary for the cor- rection of his frailties. Whether prosperity or adversity be his appointed lot, he is sure, that if his reason should be continued to him, his life will not end, without prayer for the Church, in the concerns of which he has been so long engaged; and especially for the divine blessing on her ministry and her institutions; to be manifested in the conver- sion of sinners, in the edification of the godly, and in the end of both the glory of God, and the enlargement of the kingdom of His Son, the adorable Redeemer. April, 1836. CONTENTS. I. NARRATIVE OF THE ORGANIZATION AND OF THE EARLY MEASURES OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH. Page State of the Church before the Revolutionary War, and at the conclusion of it 13 Intercourse with Denmark .......... 17 A Meeting in New Brunswick, New Jersey ....... 19 A Meeting in New York 19 Convention of 1785 20 1786 24 Consecration of Bishops White and Provoost 25 Convention of 1789 27 I79 2 3 1795 30 1799 3 1801 31 1804 33, 1808 34 1811 35 1814 37 1817 41 1820 46 1821 51 1823 53 1826 56 1829 60 1832 65 1835 7<> II. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS AND REMARKS. Of the Question of American Episcopacy, as agitated in the Colonies . . 73 Of the Question of using the Liturgy, exclusively of the Prayers for the King and the Royal Family ......... 82 Of the Meeting in New Brunswick, in May, 1 784 83 Of the Meeting in New York, in October, 1784 86 Of Proceedings in sundry States, previous to the Meetings in 1784, at New Brunswick and at New York ......... 89 10 CONTENTS. Page Of the General Convention, in Philadelphia, in September and October, 1785 ; . . 107 Of the Convention in Philadelphia and Wilmington, in 1 786 . . . 130 Of Personal Intercourse with the Archbishop of Canterbury . . . 142 Of the Convention in 1789 161 179 2 187 1795 2> 1799 207 iSoi 210 1804 221 1808 226 1811 247 1814 256 1817 266 Postscript 274 Of the Convention of 1820 281 1821 290 1823 295 1826 299 1829 309 1832 313 1835 319 Conclusion 324 III. AN APPENDIX OF ORIGINAL PAPERS. Communication with the Court of Denmark ...... 327 Communication of the Clergy of Connecticut, to the Archbishop of York . 330 A Letter from the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, in the Name of the Clergy of Connecticut . . . . 336 A Letter from the Right Rev. Bishop Seabury, to the Rev. Dr. Smith . 340 Address of the Convention of 1785, to the English Prelates .... 348 Letter of the English Prelates 353 A Memorial from the Convention in New Jersey, to the General Conven- tion of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America, to be held in the City of Philadelphia in June next 355 Second Address to the English Prelates 358 Communications from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York . . . 360 Communication from the Archbishop of Canterbury 367 Address to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York 369 A Letter from Granville Sharp, Esq., to Dr. Benjamin Franklin, with Extracts of Letters 370 An Act of the General Convention of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and South Carolina, held at Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, on Wednesday, the nth of October, 1786 . . 378 CONTENTS. 1 1 Page Instrument of Consecration . . . . . . 3% l Note of the Archbishop of Canterbury 3&6 Letters from the President of Congress (Richard Henry Lee, Esq.), and from the Minister of the United States at the Court of Great Britain (John Adams, Esq.), and from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Mr. Adams: also Certificates from the Executive of Pennsylvania and Vir- ginia 3^6 Letter from Richard Peters, Esq 392 An Act of the Clergy of Massachusetts and New Hampshire . . . 395 An Address to the Most Reverend the Archbishops of Canterbury and York 398 A General Constitution of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America 402 A Letter from the Rev. Dr. Coke, and the Answer 408 Testimonial of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew 414 Circular of a Committee in South Carolina 415 A Letter from Bishop Provoost, and the Determination of the Bishops . 418 Forms of Subscription 419 Decision of the Bishops on the Case of Ammi Rogers 420 Of the Homilies 421 Concerning Posture during Psalmody 422 Of a Proposal of new Anthems, and of Sanction requested in favor of a proposed Book ........... 422 Concerning the Identity of this Church with the former Church of England in America ............ 424 Concerning certain Amusements 425 Acts of the Convention of 1 785 428 Of the Office of Confirmation 449 Concerning the last Rubric in the Communion Service .... 450 Thoughts on the Proposal of Alterations in the Book of Psalms in Metre, and in the Hymns, now before a Committee of the General Convention : By a Member of the Committee 457 Constitution of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Prot- estant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, as established in 1820, and amended in 1823, 1829, 1832, and 1835 .... 461 Concerning the Division of Dioceses 464 I. A NARRATIVE ORGANIZATION AND OF THE EARLY MEASURES OF THE CHURCH. ALTHOUGH it happened, as might be expected, that a proportion of the settlers of English America were of the profession established in England; yet the number was not so considerable as might be supposed from the existing relation; owing probably to the circumstance, that several of the colonies arose in a great measure from dissatisfaction with the establishment at home, and partly to an influx of subsequent settlers, not only from other countries, subject to the same crown, but also from countries on the continent of Europe; principally some of the states of Germany. In the northern and eastern states, the comparatively small number of the Church of England may be seen in the fact, that when the revolutionary war began, there were not more than about eighty parochial clergymen of that Church to the northward and to the eastward of Maryland; and that those clergymen derived the greater part of their subsistence from the society instituted in England, for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts; with the ex- ception of those resident in the towns of Boston and New- port, and the cities of New York and Philadelphia; there being no Episcopal congregations out of those towns and cities, held to be of ability to support clergymen of them- 14 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. selves.* In Maryland and in Virginia the Episcopal Church was much more numerous, and had legal establishments for its support. It was especially numerous in those parts of the said provinces which were settled when the establish- ments took place; for in the more recently settled counties, the mass of the people were of other communions, scarcely known among them in the early period of their histories. In the more southern colonies, the Episcopalians were fewer in proportion than in the two last mentioned; but more than in the northern. It may be supposed, that however comparatively few the original emigrants of the Church of England in the northern and the middle colonies, yet they must have derived aid from the executive of the parent state, through the medium of its representatives, the governors. This was, indeed, the case in a degree; but the aid was incon- siderable, and confined to two or three of the earliest seats of population. Besides, it may well be doubted, whether, under the continually existing jealousy in the colonies of the parent power, there did not result some disadvantage to a denomination comparatively small, from a community of profession : for this circumstance may have had a tendency to render the denomination unpopular among a great propor- tion of their fellow-citizens; especially under the apprehen- sion that it might, at some future day, be an engine aiding in the introduction of a new system of colonial government.! But even if the Episcopal Church found any source of in- crease in the connection, this was more than counterbal- anced by the peculiar circumstances under which it existed; which prevented, and probably, under the old regimen, would have continued to prevent its organization. Sep- * The clergy in the province of Pennsylvania, exclusive of those in the City of PhHadelphia, were never more than six in number; all of whom were missiona- ries, receiving salaries from England. The parochial clergy of the city were four. t Perhaps the only considerable endowment by the English government was of lands to Trinity Church, New York. Its being considerable, is owing to its having become of great value by the increase of that city. = NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 15 arated by the Atlantic ocean from the Episcopacy, under which it had been planted, it had no resource for a minis- try, but in emigration from the mother country, and by sending its candidates for the ministry to that country for Orders. The first could not be the channel of a respectable permanent supply. And the second, which was the most depended on in the latter years of the colonies, was very troublesome and expensive. The evil of the want of an internal Episcopacy did not end here. For although the Bishop of London was considered as the diocesan of the Episcopal churches in America, it is evident, that his au- thority could not be effectually exerted, at such a distance, for the removing of unworthy clergymen; besides which, there were civil institutions supposed to be in opposition to it, in the provinces where establishments had been pro- vided^ In Maryland, in particular, all injterference of the \ Bishop of London, except in the single matter of ordina- ^ tion, was held by the proprietary government to be an en- croachment on its authorities.* For these reasons, and on the ground of the evident propriety of being supplied with all the orders of the minis- try, recognized by their ecclesiastical system, application had been made to England, at different times, by the clergy, especially those in the northern colonies, for the obtaining of an Episcopate. These applications had pro- duced much contention in pamphlets and in newspapers; * The author, before his being in the ministry, knew a gentleman (the Rev. Mr. Edminston) who, being in London for Orders, had brought with him such recommendations to Lord Baltimore, proprietary of Maryland, as induced the promise of an order to his governor, for any future parish that might be vacant. It was necessary after ordination, to show the testimonial of the transaction to the , proprietary: who, perceiving with the instrument a license to preach in the I province of^Maryland, was much dissatisfied with the Bishop of London on that t account. The bishop usually gave such a license, according to the province for which the party was ordained: a practice similar to what obtains in England. From this, and from other circumstances, the conviction is felt, that his lordship would not have endured in his province any Episcopal authority distinct from his designation of the person. It is mentioned, as one of the difficulties attendant on the subject of an American Episcopacy. 1 6 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the writers on the Episcopal side pleading the reasonable- ness of being indulged in the full enjoyment of their relig- i ion; and their opponents objecting, that bishops, sent from England to America, would of course bring with them, or, \ if not, might be clothed by the paramount authority of Britain, with the powers of English bishops, to the great prejudice of people of other communions, and in contra- riety to the principles on which the_settlement of thecoTo- nies had taken place. What would have been the event, in this respect, had the Episcopal clergy succeeded in their | desires, is a problem, which it will be forever impossible to \ solve. In regard to the motives of the parties in the dis- pute, there are circumstances which charity may apply to the most favorable interpretation. As the Episcopal clergy disclaimed the designs and the expectations of which they were accused; and as the same was done by their advocates on the other side of the water, particularly by the principal of them, the great and good Archbishop Seeker, they ought to be supposed to have had in view an Episcopacy purely religious. On the other hand, as their opponents laid aside their resistance of the religious partf of it, as soon as American independence had done away all political danger, if it before existed, it ought to be be- lieved, that in their former professed apprehensions theyi were sincere, a* If such was the difficulty of being supplied t with a min- istry during the acknowledged supremacy of the British crown, much greater, as may be supposed, was the same difficulty during the struggle which ended in the elevat- ing of the colonies .to the rank of independent states. During that term, there was no resource for the supply of vacancies; which were continually multiplying, ri^ot only , from death, but by the retreat of very many of the Episco- pal clergy to the mother country, and to the colonies still | dependent on her. To add to the evil, many able and * These letters refer to corresponding letters in Part II., Additional Statements. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 17 worthy ministers, cherishing their allegiance to the king of Great Britain, and entertaining conscientious scruples against the use of the liturgy, under the restriction of omit- ting the appointed prayers for him, ceased to officiate. i^j^ Owing to these circumstances, the doors of the far greater I '^MSM**/* number of the Episcopal churches were closed for seVeral ; years. In the State in which this work is edited, there was ' ftL -//A a part of that time in which there was, through its whole * extent, but one_resident minister of the church in question, he who records the fact. b. No sooner was it known in America, that Great Britain had acknowledged her independence, than a few young gentlemen to the southward, who had been educated for the ministry, but kept back from it by the times, embarked for England, and applied to the then Bishop of London, Dr. Lowth, for Orders. As the Bishop could not ordain them, witfio"ut requiring of them engagements inconsistent with their allegiance to the American sovereignty, he applied for, and obtained, an act of parliament, allowing him to dispense with requisitions of that sort. While this matter was depending, and the success of the candidates was doubtful, there was an incident, which it may be proper to record, in justice to the intended good offices of a foreign sister church. Mr. Adams, then the minister of the United States at the court of St. James, being in company with M. de St. Saphorin, the minister of the crown of Denmark, mentioned to him the case here stated, of the candidates for Orders, with a view to his opinion, whether they could be gratified in the kingdom which he represented. Some time after, the Danish minister made a communication to the Ameri- can, from which it appeared, that the inquiry of the latter had been notified to the Danish court; that the consequence had been a reference to the theological faculty of the king- dom; and that they had declared their readiness to ordain j candidates from America, on the condition of their signing of the Thirty_Miine Articles of the Church of England, with 1 8 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the exception of the political parts of them; the service to be performed in Latin, in accommodation to the candi- dates, who might be supposed unacquainted with the lan- guage of the country. This conduct is here the more cheerfully mentioned to the honor of the Danish Church, as it is reasonable to presume, that there would have been an equal readiness to the consecrating of bishops, had necessity required a recourse for it to any other source than the English Episcopacy, under which the American churches had been planted. The proceeding in Denmark was made known to the American government by Mr. Adams; a copy of whose letter to the president of con- gress, was sent to the author by the then supreme execu- tive council of Pennsylvania. Mr. Adams stated, that the transaction arose from his having been applied to by an American gentleman, in behalf of the candidates for ordi- nation referred to. Mr. Adams mentioned the matter to M. de St. Saphorin, the Danish minister; who accordingly wrote to the Count de Rosencrone, privy counsellor and secretary of state to the king of Denmark. The result was as above given. In truth, there was no idea of having recourse, in the first instance, to any other quarter than that of the English Episcopacy, in the minds of those who had begun to direct their attention to the supply of the present and the future exigencies of the churches. But it seemed to those at least who took up the subject in the middle states, that nothing could be done to effect, without some association, under which the churches might act as a body: they having been heretofore detached from, and independent on* one another; excepting the bond of union which had subsisted through the- medium of the Bishop of London. That me- dium of connection had been confessedly destroyed by the revolution; and therefore it was evident, that without the creating of some new tie, the churches in the different / / * This mode of expression is peculiar" to Bishop White and frequently occurs. Ed. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 19 states, and even those in the same state, might adopt such varying measures as would forever prevent their being com- bined in one communion. The first step towards the forming of a collective body ' of the Episcopal Church in the United States, was taken at a meeting for another purpose, of a few clergymen of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, at Brunswick, in Xew Jersey, on the I3th and 141)1 of May, 1/^4.* These clergymen, in consequence of prior correspondence, had ,-. met for the purpose of consulting, in what way to renew a society that had existed under charters of incorporation from the governors of the said fhree states, for the Support of^ Widows and Children of deceased Clergymen. Here it $_// {"* was determined, to procure a larger meeting on the fifth of the ensuing October, in New York; not only for the pur- pose of reviving the said charitable institution, but to con- fer and agree on some general principles of an union of the Episcopal Church throughout the states, c. Such a meeting was held, at the time and place agreed on: and although the members composing it were not vested with powers adequate to the present exigencies of the Church, they happily, and with great unanimity, laid down a few general principles, to be recommended in the respective states, as the ground on which a future ecclesi- astical government should be established. These principles were approbatory of Episcopacy and of the Book of Com- mon Prayer; and provided for a representative body of the Church, consisting of clergy and laity; who were to vote as distinct orders. There was^also a recommendation to the Church in the several states, to send clerical and lay deputies to a meeting to be held in Philadelphia, on the 27th of September in the following year. d. * This should read I ith. See Bishop Perry's " Reprint of Journals of General Convention," III., pp. 8-12, (printed at Claremont, 1874). Dr. Beach appears to have been very active in this movement. See Note C. for this page, and " Reprint of Journals," III., 8. See also on "Convention Journals," in, 13, and 21. Ed, 20 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Although at the meeting last held, there were present two clergymen from the eastern states; yet it now ap- peared, that there was no probability, for the present, of the aid of the churches in those states, in the measures begun for the obtaining of a representative body of the Church at large. From this they thought themselves re- strained in Connecticut, in particular, by a step they had antecedently taken, for the obtaining of an Episcopate from England. For until the event of their application could be known, it naturally seemed to them inconsistent to do any thing which might change the ground on which the gen- tleman of their choice was then standing. This gentleman was the Rev. Samuel Seabury, D.D., formerly missionary y-fon Staten Island, who had been recommended to England for consecration before the evacuation of New York by the British army. On the 27th of September, 1785, there assembled agree- |\i^ ably to appointment, in Philadelphia, a convention of cler- ical and lay deputies, from seven of the thirteen United Jlr"^ ; iv.cu aiiu \<\y ucjjuiics, iiuui seven ui inc LUII iccu ^IHICU States, viz., from New York to Virginia, inclusive, with the addition of South Carolina. They applied themselves to the making of such alterations in the Book of Common Prayer, as were necessary for the accommodating of it to the late changes in the state; and the proposing, but not establishing, of such other alterations in that book and in the articles, as they thought an improvement of the service and of the manner of stating the principal articles of faith; these were published in a book, ever since known by the name of the Proposed Book. e. The convention entered on the business of the Episco- pacy, with the knowledge that there was now a bishop in .\ Connecticut, consecrated, not in England, but by the non- ^f\ J urm g bishops of Scotland. For Dr-Seabury, not meeting assurance of success with the bishops of the former coun- \)(* % try, had applied to the latter quarter for the succession, ty vC^ which had been there carefully maintained; notwithstand-"^ ing their severance from the state in the revolution of 1688. / NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 21 Bishop Seabury had returned to America, and had entered on the exercise of his new function, in the beginning of the preceding summer, and two or three gentlemen of the southern states had received ordination from his hands. Nevertheless, the members of this convention, although generally impressed with sentiments of respect towards the new bishop, and although, with the exception of a few, alleging nothing against the validity of his Episcopacy, thought it the most proper to direct their views in the first instance towards England. In this they were encouraged by information which they thought authentic, assigning for Dr. Seabury's failure these two reasons: that the adminis- tration had some apprehension of embroiling themselves with the American government; the sovereignty of which they had so recently acknowledged; and that the bishops were doubtful how far the act of some clergymen, in their individual capacities, would be acquiesced in by their re- spective flocks. For the meeting of the former difficulty, it was thought easy to obtain, and there were afterwards ob- tained, from the executive authorities of the states in which the new bishops were to reside, certificates, that what was sought did not interfere with any civil laws or constitutions. The latter difficulty was thought sufficiently obviated by the powers under which the present convention was assembled. Accordingly, they addressed the archbishops and bishops of England, stating, that the Episcopal Church in the United States had been severed, by a civil revolution, from the jurisdiction of the parent Church in England; acknowl- edging the favors formerly received from the bishops of London in particular, and from the archbishops and bish- ops in general, through the medium of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel; declaring their desire to perpet- uate among them the principles of the Church of England, in doctrine, discipline, and worship; and praying, that their lordships would consecrate to the Episcopacy those per- sons who should be sent, with that view, from the churches' in any of the states respectively. 22 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. In order that the present convention might be succeeded by bodies of the like description, they framed an ecclesias- tical constitution, the outlines of which were, that there should be a triennial convention, consisting of a deputation from .the ^Church in each state, of not more than four clergymen, and as many laymen; that they should vote statewise, each order to have a negative on the other; that when there should be a bishop in any state, he should be officially a member of the convention; that the different orders of clergy should be accountable to the ecclesiastical authority in tTie state only to which they should respec- tively belong; and that the engagement previous to ordi- nation sKould be a declaration of belief in the holy Script- ures, and a promise of conformity to the doctrines and the worship of the Church. Further, the convention appointed a committee, with various powers; among which was, that of corresponding, during the recess, with the archbishops and bishops of England; and they adjourned, to meet again in Philadel-' phia, on the 2Oth of June, in the following year. After the rising of the convention, their address to the English prelates was forwarded by the committee to his 'Excellency John Adams, Esq., the American minister, with the request, that it might be delivered by him to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury. There were also forwarded certificates from the executives of the states in which there was a probability of there being bishops chosen. The ex- ecutives who gave these certificates were those of New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. These evi- dences, agreeably to instructions of the convention, were applied for by the members of that body from the said states respectively. Mr. Adams willingly performed the service solicited of him, and in a conversation which he held with the Archbishop of Canterbury, on the subject of the address, gave such information, and expressed such sentiments, as were calculated to promote the object of it. / NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 23 In the spring of the year 1786 the committee received an answer, signed by the two archbishops, and eighteen of ^ ^ the twenty-four bishops of England, acknowledging the A.-/ el receipt of what they were pleased to call the Christian and Brotherly Address of the Convention, and declaring their wish to comply with the desire of it; but delaying measures to the effect, until there should be laid before them the alterations which had been made by the convention: it having been represented to the bishops, through private channels, that the alterations were essential deviations from the Church of England, either IrfSoctrine or in discipline. Not long after the receipt of this letter, the committee received another from the archbishops of Canterbury and York, to whom the management of the business had been left by their brethren, after a second meeting of the body, informing [the committee], that they had received the edited Book of Common Prayer, in regard to which they declared, that besides their seeing of no^occasion for some smaller alterations, which they do not specify, they are dissadsfied with the omission of the Nicene and the Atha- j . nasian Creeds, and of jthe Descent into Hell in the Apos- - ties' Creed. And they further declare their disapprobation j A of an article in the proposed constitution, which seemed toj them to subject the future bishops to a trial by the pres-( byters and the laymen, in the respective states. This, how- ever, does not seem to have been the meaning of the ar- ticle 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 representative. The prel- ates went on to inform the committee, that they were likely to obtain an act of parliament, enabling them to consecrate for America. They, however, expected, that > before they should proceed under the act, satisfaction ) should be given in regard to the majtters stated. The ) same communication laid down what would be required, in regard to the characters individually, who should be sent 24 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. for consecration. As to faith, they were to make the sub- scription which the American Church had prescribed, to future candidates for Orders. On the subject of learning, it was thought disrespectful to the persons to be sent, to subject them to an examination, it being at the same time trusted, that the American Church would be aware of the disparagement of the Episcopacy which would be the result of its being conferred on persons not sufficiently respectable in point of literary qualification. In order to give satisfaction in regard to the religious and moral char- acter of each person to be sent, the archbishops required, , that it should be testified by the convention choosing him; ? and, in addition, that there should be a certificate from the General Convention, to the effect that they knew no reason why the person should not be consecrated to the Episcopal office. These determinations are given as the result of a consultation of the two archbishops and fifteen of the bishops, being all who were at the time in town. Soon after the letter from the two archbishops, there came one from the Archbishop of Canterbury alone, enclosing the act of parliament. After the receipt of the first of the letters of the English prelates, and before the receipt of the second, the General Convention assembled, agreeably to appointment, in Phila- delphia, on the 2Oth of June, 1786. The principal business transacted by them, was another address to the English prelates, containing an acknowledgment of their friendly and affectionate letter, a declaration of not intending to depart from the doctrines of the English Church, and a determination of making no further alterations than such as either arose from a change of circumstances, or appeared conducive to union; and a repetition of the prayer for the succession. Before their adjournment, they appointed a committee, with power to reassemble them, if thought expedient, at Wilmington, in the State of Delaware. On the committee's receipt of the second letter, they summoned the convention to meet, at the place appointed, NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 25 on the loth of October following. The principal matter which occupied the body when assembled, was the question, how far they should accommodate to the requisitions of the *. English prelates. (/> I The difficulty concerning the offsnsi^ article of the constitution had been done away before the arrival of the objection of the archbishops. This objection, as already observed, was grounded on a misapprehension of the design of the article. But another objection had been made within the American Church, on the score of there being no ex- press provision for the presidency of a bishop in conventions < and in ecclesiastical trials. This objection had gained so much ground, that, in the session of June, it had been fully satisfied; which had more than done away the ground of the censure of the prelates. The omission of the Nicene ( Creed had been generally regretted; and, accordingly, it was now, without debate or difficulty, restored to the Book of Common Prayer, to stand after the Apostles' Creed, with permission of the use of either. The clause in the latter creed, of the Descent into Hell, occasioned considerable \ debate, but it was finally restored. The~*restoration" of the ' Athanasian Creed was negatived. The result of the de- liberations of the convention was addressed to the two archbishops, with thanks for their fatherly attention to the Church, especially in procuring legal permission for the conveying of the succession. The deputies from the several states were called on, beginning from the northward, for information, whether any persons had been chosen in them respectively, to pro- ceed to England for consecration: when it appeared, that the Rev. Samuel PrQyopst, D.D., rector of Trinity Church, in the City of New York, had been chosen for that purpose by the convention in that state; that the Rev. William White,_D.D., rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's in the City of Philadelphia, had been chosen by the conven- tion in Pennsylvania; and that the Rev. David Griffith, D.D., rector of Fairfax Parish, Virginia, had been chosen 26 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. by the convention there. Testimonials in their favor from the conventions in the respective states, agreeable to the form prescribed by the archbishops, were laid before the General Convention, who immediately signed, in favor of each of the bishops-elect, a testimonial, according to the form prescribed to them by the same authority.* g. The two former of the above-named clergymen, having embarked together early in the next month, arrived at Falmouth, after a passage of eighteen days. On their reaching of London, they were introduced to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, by his Excellency Mr. Adams, who, in this particular, and in every instance in which his personal attentions could be either of use or an evidence of his respect and kindness, continued to manifest his concern for the interests of a church, of which he was not a member. Before the accomplishing of the object of the voyage, there occurred the delay of a few weeks; owing to the archbishop's desire of previously laying before the bishops the grounds of his proceeding to the accomplishment of the bu iness, in the early stages of which they had been con- sulted. The greater number of them were at their dio- ceses, but were expected to be in town at the ensuing * Dr. William Smith was elected Bishop of Maryland in 1783, but the election ( was never confirmed. From the statement of Bishop White, that the testimonials \ of Drs. White, Provoost, and Griffiths were "immediately signed," it might appear as though no direct Issue was made with Dr. Smith by the convention, but else- where such an issue is indicated. (See "Journals of Convention," III., pp. 34, ' 216, 245, 268, 328; and "Wilson's Memoirs," pp. 19, 20.) Dr. Smith, it is < affirmed, entertained the idea of obtaining consecration; and, Nov. 27th, 1786, , Mrs. White wrote to Dr. White, then in England, that Mr. Styles had told her I that Dr. Smith had told him that he was soon to go to Scotland for consecration, , and that he had a recommendation signed by more than thirty persons. ("De-j scendants of Col. Thomas White," p. 165.) Upon what ground the opposition to f Dr. Smith was based does not officially appear. Bishop White opposed his con- ^ f formation, but the objections of the Bishop, whatever torm they^nay 'have" taken, / ^r did not interfere with the cordial relations that always existed between them. It ' should not be forgotten that the act of parliament contemplated the consecration of only three bishops./" (See "Churchman's Magazine," 1807, p. 236. Also Bishop White's Letters of Dec. 6th, 1786 and June 2' -*== ^ _r Dr. Claggett was consecrated by Bishop Provoost, who presided at this con- vention, assisted by Bishops Seabury, White, and MadisonT" NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 31 St. Philip's, in Charleston, South Carolina; who had been elected by the convention in that state their bishop.* /. Between this and the next convention, there was con- secrated the Rev. Edward Bass; again recommended from Massachusetts and New Hampshire: the certificate usually ^yj/ifi given on such occasions by the General Convention being ' in this instance given by a standing committee of that body, agreeably to a provision which had been made to that effect.t fl} And on the i8th of October of the same year, there was consecrated, in Trinity Church, in the City of New , ; Haven, the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, D.D., for the State of r yp^ Connecticut.:}: There would have been a convention in Philadelphia, in / * September, 1798; but the prevalence of epidemical disease 2 preventing th^ir assembling, 'the bishops, agreeably to a power vested in them when desired by a standing commit- tee of the convention, summoned that body to meet, in the same city, on the nth of June, 1799. On this occasion, the review of the articles was moved in the House of Cler- ical and Lay Deputies. And a committee was appointed, who drew up a body of articles; which were not acted on, but ordered to be printed on the journal, as a report of a committee of one of the houses, to lie over for the consid- eration of the next convention; which was appointed to be in the City of Trenton, New Jersey, m. It assembled there, in September, 1801; when there was' brought before the bishops present at it, three in number, the question of the admissibility of a resignation of the Episcopal charge. A letter from Bishop Provoost had been * The consecration of Dr. Smith was by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Provoost, Madison, and Claggett. t The consecration of Dr. Bass was in Christ Church in the City of Philadel- phia, May jth, 1797, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Provoost and Clagget. J The consecration of Dr. Jarvis was by Bishop White, assisted by Bishops Provoost and Bass. 32 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. addressed to one of the bishops present, and by him laid before the house, stating, that, induced by ill health and some circumstances of a domestic nature, he wished to retire from all public employment; and had therefore re- signed, at_ajate meeting of the convention in New York, his jurisdiction of bishop in that state. In consequence of this resignation, the Rev. Benjamin Moore, D.D., who, on account of Bishop Provoost's resignation of the rectory of Trinity Church, in the City of New York, had been chosen to that place, was also elected to succeed to the Episco- pacy. The House of Bishops having taken this subject under their serious consideration, and doubting of the pro- priety of sanctioning Episcopal resignation, declined any act to that effect. But being sensible of the exigency ex- isting in the State of New York, they consented to the consecration of an assistant bishop; it being understood, that he should be competent in point of character to all the Episcopal duties; and, that the extent in which the same were to be discharged by him, should be dependent on such regulations as expediency might dictate to the Church in New York; grounded on the indisposition of Bishop Provoost, and with his concurrence. Conformably with the line of conduct thus laid down, Dr. Benjamin Moore, being duly recommended, was consecrated during the session, in St. Michael's Church, Trenton; and took- his seat in the House of Bishops. In this convention, the important business of the Arti- cles was again taken up; and now, for the first time, au- kthoritatively acted on. After repeated discussions and propositions, it had been found, that the doctrines of the Gospel, as they stand in the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, with the exception of such matters as are local,* were more likely to give general satisfaction than the same doctrines in any new form that might be * Article XXI. was omitted, being partly Iccal and civil, while it is also pro- vided for in other Articles. Ed. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 33 devised. The former were therefore adopted by the two houses of convention, without their altering of even the obsolete diction in them; but with notices of such changes as change of situation had rendered necessary. Exclusively of such, there is one exception, that of adapt- ing the article concerning the creeds, to the former exclu- sion of the Athanasian. It is further to be remembered, that, in regard to sub- scription to the articles, there is a considerable difference between the form required in the Church of England, as! " & laid down in her thirty-sixth canon, and that prescribed in ^ y^C*^ the constitution of the American Church. The latter form had so far acquired the approbation of the English prelates, as to be thought sufficient on the part of those who came to them for consecration from America, n. Throughout this Narrative, it must have appeared, that the object kept in view, in all the consultations held, and the determinations formed, was the perpetuating of the Episcopal Church, on the ground of the general principles which she had inherited from the Church of England; and of not departing from them, except sojar as either local circumstances required, or some very important cause ren- dered proper. To those acquainted with the system of the Church" of England, it must be evident, that the ob- ject here stated was accomplished on the ratification of ; the articles. The next Triennial Convention was in the City of New York, September nth, 1804. Canons were passed, extend- ing to a greater variety of objects than had been provided l for before. An office was framed and ordered to be used, '' L at the induction of ministers to the rectorship of churches. A course of ecclesiastical studies of candidates for Orders, was prescribed by the bishops. And the constitution was altered, agreeably to a proposition made in the preceding convention, and notified to the conventions in the states, so as that the future Triennial Conventions shall be in the month of May, instead of September. During the session. 34 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the Rev. Samuel Parker, D.D., rector of Trinity Church, in Boston, was consecrated bishop in Trinity Church, New York, in the room of Bishop Bass, who had departed this life. There had also died, since the last convention, Bish- ^ op Smith, of South Carolina. And it was understood, that >fU*^- ." Rev. Edward Jenkins, D.D., who had been elected to supply his place, had declined the station. Since the events here recorded, Bishop Parker departed this life, a v i few months after his consecration. - o. /j v. The next meeting of the General Convention was in the ,City of Baltimore, from May i/th, 1808, to the 26th of the same month. Two bishops only (Bishops White and Clag- gett) were present at this convention: and the Church in sever^states_only was represented. There was now ratified the long proposed amendment ' < of the constitution; annulling the provision, by which ) i four-fifths of the House ofCTTerical and Lay Deputies could r accomplish a measure, without the concurrence of the House \ of Bishops. There was also proposed another amendment of the/ constitution, for the preventing of alterations in the liturgy, J unless the same should have been proposed at a previous [ convention. The whole body of the canons was reviewed, and under- went considerable alterations. A committee was appointed, to address the Church in\ the different states. The objects in view, were to procure^ *, a more full attendance on future conventions, and to ex-], tend the Episcopacy to the western states. "The Office of Induction," established by the last con- vention, was changed in name to "The Office of Institu- tion," and rested on recommendation, not on requisition, as before. The sense of the two houses was given on two points, ~~ * - ~ which had created diversity of opinion and of practice / Whether a minister ought to officiate at the funeral of any \ person killed in a duel; and Whether a minister should NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 35 unite in marriage any person who has been divorced; un- less it be on account of the other party's having been guilty of adultery. Both these questions were decided in the negative. There was also introduced into the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, on recommendation of the Church in Maryland, the subject of marriage, as connected with the degrees of consanguinity and affinity. But on communica- tion of the matter to the House of Bishops, it was, on their recommendation, referred to a future convention. Thirty hymns were added to the Book of Psalms and Hymns. As ordained by a canon of the last convention, a pas- toral letter from the House of Bishops to the members of this Church was drawn up by them, communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and there read. On the rising of the convention, New Haven, in the State of Connecticut, was appointed as the next place of meeting. The session was ended, by an attendance on the morning service of the day, which was the festival of the Ascension. /. Agreeably to the aforesaid appointment, the next Gen- eral Convention was held in the City of New Haven, on Tuesday, the 2 1st of May, 1811. It continued in session until Friday, the 24th. Only Bishops White and Jarvis, of the House of Bishops, were present. The Church in nine states was represented. They ratified the amendment to the constitution pro- \ S-fJguJP posed at the last convention, restraining from alterations r of the liturgy, except such as may be proposed at one con- ) vention and determined on at another. On the subject of the canons, nothing was done, except the repealing of the last, or forty-sixth of the canons, as passed at the last convention, entitled, "Providing for mak- ing known the Constitution and Canons of the Church." The rule prohibiting the officiating at the funerals of persons killed in duels, was so far moderated, as to allow of 36 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. / the same, |f,_on any occasion, the party in question had ) manifested repentanceT" There were some communications made in regard to the western churches, and the extending of the Episcopacy to them; but a plan to that effect was not yet matured. Fur- ther attention to the subject was committed to the bishops of this Church in Pennsylvania and Virginia. The attendance of so few of the bishops; three of the ( four absent bishops being prevented by bodily indisposition, \ and the remaining bishop being absent by indispensable engagements; it was agreed not to take up, at present, thef important subject of marriages, within certain degrees of j consanguinity and affinity. A pastoral address was sent by the bishops to the other house to be printed with the journal, agreeably to a requi- sition of the forty-fifth canon. It had been expected, that on the occasion of this con- vention, there would have been a consecration of two bish- ops: of the Rev. Dr. John Henry Hobart, chosen assistant ^ t kn> bishop for the State of New York; and the Rev. Alexander ' ',.'' Viets Gri^wold, chosen bishop for the four states of Massa- 'chusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island. The expectation was disappointed, by the want of the ca- ' nonical number on the spot. But the testimonials of the t'^ff r r^. bishops-elect were signed; and the two bishops present re- paired with them to the City of New York; where, with the assistance of the Right Rev. Bishop Provoost, whose indis- position, although, with difficulty, permitted his attend- ance in the place of his residence, and with the assistance of Bishop Jarvis, the consecration was performed, by the presiding bishop, on the 29th of May, in Trinity Church, in ' the said city. It was referred to the presiding bishop, "to address a letter, in behalf of this convention, to the venerable Soci- ety in England for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, informing them that the Church in the State of Ver- mont is duly organized, and in union with the Protestant NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 37 Episcopal Church in the United States, being placed under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of New Hampshire, Massa- chusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont; that a board of trustees of donations to the Church has been incorporated in the State of Massachusetts; and that, in the opinion of this convention, the society may safely confide the care of their lands in Vermont to such attorney or attorneys as may be recommended by the said board of trustees, and approved of by the ecclesiastical convention of Vermont." When the convention arose, it was agreed to hold the next Triennial Convention in the City of Philadelphia, q. The next Triennial Convention was held, agreeably to appointment of that of 1811, in the City of Philadelphia, from Tuesday, the i/th of May, to Tuesday, the 24th of ^ ^ the same month, in the year 1814. The bishops present at it were, Bishop White, of the Church in Pennsylvania; \ , Bishop Hobart, the assistant bishop of the Church in New f 1, York; Bishop Griswold, of the Eastern Diocese; Bishop * * Dehon, of South Carolina;* and, the second day of the kl*~ session, Bishop Richard C. Moore, of Virginia. In the last mentioned state, the Church had been for many years, more and more under a decline. On the de- cease of Bishop Madison, there had ensued a difficulty in the choice of a successor, until a few gentlemen, some of the clerical and some of the lay order, suggested the choice of the gentleman mentioned above, who had acquired con- siderable popularity in the City of New York; wherein there was a large congregation under his ministry. The defect of Episcopal maintenance was expected to be surmounted, by connecting the office of bishop with that of the rectory of a church recently erected in the City of Richmond, on . o . / the site of a theatre, destroyed a few years before by a fire, wherein a-jxmsiderable proportion of the inhabitants had ' " / * Bishop Dehon had been consecrated, October I5th, 1812, in Christ Church, in the City of Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Jarvis and Hobart. 38 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. been consumed. The requisite testimonials having been furnished, Dr. Moore was consecrated in St. James' Church, Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart, Griswold, and Dehon. The sermon preached at the opening of the convention, serving for the consecration also, was by Bishop Hobart, of New York. He supplied the place of Bishop Claggett, of Maryland, who was kept away by indisposition. There were three canons passed at this convention. One of them was concerning the alms and contributions at the holy communion. They are subjected to the distribu- tion of the minister, or such person as they may be com- mitted to by him. The provision was designed to limit munificence of this description to poor communicants, and to sustain a pastoral intercourse with them. The cause of interposition in this matter was some proposals of appro- priation said to have been made, for Church purposes in- deed, but wide of the original design of the^ oblations at the Lord's table. The next canon was explanatory of the twenty-ninth, guarding against the effect of its excluding from diocesan conventions and votes in the choice of bishops, of unin- stituted ministers and deacons, where these are not ex- clu3ed by the respective diocesan constitutions; and fur- ther, against the extending of the Office of Institution to gatherings of persons not bound together by a common interest in a place of worship. The remaining canon was a repeal of so much of the forty-fifth, as requires the reading, in the General Conven- tion, of the parochial reports entered on the journals of the different state conventions. The design of this, was to devolve on the Church in each state, the prej3anng_of_a report of its concerns. Accordingly, this was provided for by a separate resolve. There was also entered on the journal an explanation of the nineteenth canon, which regulates the dress of candi- dates for Orders, and other particulars relative to them. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 39 The explanation goes to the point, that such provisions are merely a guard against popular mistakes. At the instance of the clerical members from the diocese of Connecticut, who acted under instructions from the con- vention of that state, the bishops gave their sense of some matters in the ninth canon, and in the fortieth. Their sense, which was sanctioned by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, is as follows: The ninth canon having provided, that some literary qualifications, therein specified, may be dispensed with, in consideration of certain other qualifications of the candidate for the ministry, the bishops define the latter to be, a con- siderable extent of theological learning, a peculiar apti- tude to teach, and a large share of prudence. The fortieth canon having referred to persons who join a congrega- tion of this Church from some other religious society, the bishops rested the evidence of the membership of such a congregation on the two circumstances, of their being bap-$ tized persons, and of their possessing an interest in its con-] cerns, by express or implied permission. But there is a caution against its being supposed, that a more definite mode for the same object may not hereafter be profitably adopted. It was thought proper, in this convention, to issue a dec-/' * laration, that the Protestant Episcopal Church in the< United States, is the Church formerly known among us ( > under the name of " the Church of England in America." ' Accordingly, an instrument to this effect was drawn up by , the bishops, and received the approbation of the House of ' Clerical and Lay Deputies. At the suggestion of the bishops, the House of Clerical ( and Lay Deputies joined them in an instrument, designed for the introduction of the posture of standing during the j I singing of any portion of the psalms or hymns in metre. / This comely practice had recently been introduced in some of the congregations of this Church, in all of which it was j ) \ heretofore the custom to sit during that act of devotion. 40 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. In consideration of the scarcity of the Homilies of the Church of England, and of their being recognized by the Articles of this Church, although with due regard to the diversity of local circumstances, the two houses made a provision which has occasioned an edition of them in this country. In the event of a failure of this, they were to be provided for the use of candidates for the ministry by the bishops, or other ecclesiastical authorities in the respective r states. tL On the journal of the last Triennial Convention, the providing for an Episcopacy in the western states was held out as a desirable object. Intermediate circumstances hav- ing prevented the acting on this business, it was again held out as a matter to be kept in view. On the same journal there was recorded a measure, designed to obtain from the Society (in England) for the ' Propagation of the Gospel, a legal title to lands in Ver- mont, originally appropriated for the Episcopal Church in v' those states, but vested in that society in trust. All pro- ..\j ceeding in this business was suspended, at first by the cir- cumstance that the necessary documents were not in prep- aration; and since, by the occurrence of the war. In consequence of a communication to the bishops, pro- posing to them, what was considered as a profitable im- provement in the Book of Common Prayer, they proposed to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies a declaration, that it was not intended to bring the book under review during this convention. And in consequence of a commu- 1 nication, proposing to the bishops to give their sanction to a work on a subject of great importance in religion, they made it a rule of their house, that in future, no application of this sort shall be considered as regularly before them: and they proposed to the House of Clerical and* Lay Dep- uties, a declaration to the same effect. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies signified their concurrence in the proposals, with their thanks, for what they called "the judicious course adopted in reference to these subjects." NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 41 A question was moved in each of the houses, as to the propriety of establishing a theological school, to be exclu- sively under the patronage of the General Convention. The subject was referred to a future meeting of the body; and, in the mean time, measures were to be taken to ascer- tain the general wish on the subject in each of the states. A proposal was also made, to grant an exclusive cop; right of the Book of Common Prayer, for a valuable con- sideration. This also was delayed, under the same pro- vision, for the ascertaining of the general sense of the Church; and, with it, advice in law. As at each of the last two conventions, a pastoral letter was drawn up by the House of Bishops, and read in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The convention appointed their next triennial meeting to be in the City of New York. r. Agreeably to appointment at the last General Conven-^ tion, there assembled another in the City of New York, on the 2Oth of May, 1817. There were present all the bishops: / ^ the house then consisting of Bishops White, Hobart, Gris- \-wold, Dehon, Moore, Kemp, and Croes. The occasion I was opened by a discourse from Bishop Griswold. * In consequence of an application from the Church in , North Carolina, in which a convention had been held, the ' said Church was considered as having acceded to the ec- clesiastical constitution. From the time of the revolu- tionary war, there had been but temporary supplies of the ministry in a few places; but some clergymen, recently settled in the state, in connection with some influential lay gentlemen, had taken active measures for the revival of our communion. * During the recess of the convention, Dr. Kemp had been consecrated on the first day of September, 1814, in Christ Church, in the City of Brunswick, New / Jersey, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Moore. And Dr. Croes had been consecrated on the igth day of November, 1815, in St.' Peter's Church, in the City of Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Kemp. 42 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. The presiding bishop made report of sundry matters committed to him by the last convention. They were the certifying to the venerable Society (in England) for the Propagation of the Gospel, of certain facts in favor of the Church in Vermont, relatively to lands of which the titles were vested in the society the taking of measures rela- tively to the organizing of the Church beyond the Alleghany i Mountains, and the republishing of the journals of this Church from the beginning. The first and the last had been carried into effect, and the other had been attended to, as far as circumstances would permit. The thanks of the house were voted to the presiding bishop. Relatively to the last mentioned subjects, the House of Bishops saw cause to record their opinion as follows: " Resolved, That it be recommended to the Episcopal congregations in the states referred to in the above com- munications, where conventions are not already organized, to organize conventions, which may be received into union with this convention, and, when expedient, may unite, according to the canons, in the choice of a bishop, having jurisdiction over those states; and that this convention have received, with much satisfaction, information of the measures which have been already adopted in the State of Ohio, for the organization of the Church in that state. "Resolved, That though the measure of a convention comprising sundry states in the western country, may be a I measure of temporary expediency, it can not be authorized by this convention consistently with the general constitu- tion of the Church, wHich recognizes only a convention of the Church in each state. " Resolved, That it be earnestly recommended to the au- thorities of this Church, in each state respectively, to adopt measures for sending missionaries to our destitute brethren in the western states: such missionaries to be subjected to the direction of the ecclesiastical authority of the state or states in which they may officiate. "Resolved, That the presiding^ bishop be requested to NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 43 transmit the foregoing resolutions to such person or persons as he may judge proper." This resolve was carried into effect, partly by a canon made during the session, and partly by a forwarding of the contemplated communications. The several bishops made reports on the sense of the Church in their respective dioceses, on the subject of a theo- logical school. There was diversity of opinion, but the gen- eral sense, in both houses, was in favor of a general school; , which, on the proposal of the House of Bishops, and with 1 the consent of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, was ( determined to be instituted in New York. For the carrying J of the design into effect, there was chosen a committee, con- sisting of members of both houses. On the part of the House of Bishops, there were chosen Bishops White, Hobart and Croes; and on the part of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, Drs. Wharton, Harris, and How, Hon. Rufus King, Charles Fenton Mercer, Esq., and William Meredith, Esq. The House of Bishops thought it expedient to make a solemn call on the attention of the clergy in relation to the twenty-second canon, which enjoins on them diligence in | catechetical instruction and lectures. The bishops con- sider these as among the most important duties of clergy- men, and among the most effectual means of promoting religious knowledge and practical piety. It being represented to the House of Bishops by Bishop Hobart, that the congregation du St. Esprit, in the City of New York, having joined the communion of the Episco- pal Church, with their minister, who had lately received Episcopal ordination, which congregation consisted origi- nally of Protestant emigrants from France; and there being many to whom the French language is still more familiar than the English, it is expedient that they be furnished with the liturgy in the former language; and that there is such a liturgy, not sanctioned by this convention, it was recommended to the said bishop to cause the said French liturgy to be examined, in. order to ascertain how far the 44 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. translation is correct, and to confirm the use theieof, with such amendments and improvements as the case may call for; and to declare it to be the liturgy which may be used by any minister of this Church who may officiate in a con- gregation to whom the French language is familiar. The bishops issued the following call on the members of this Church, and sent it to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to be there read: which was accordingly done. "The House of Bishops, solicitous for the preservation of the purity of the Church, and the piety of its members, are induced to impress upon the clergy the important duty, with a discreet but earnest zeal, of warning the people of their respective cures, of the danger of an indulgence in those worldly pleasures which may tend to withdraw the affections from spiritual things. And especially on the subject of gaming, of amusements involving cruelty to the brute creation, and of theatrical representations, to which some peculiar circumstances have called their attention, they do not hesitate to express their unanimous opinion, that these amusements, as well from their licentious ten- dency, as from the strong temptations to vice which they afford, ought not to be frequented. And the bishops can not refrain from expressing their deep regret at the infor- mation, that in some of our large cities, so little respect is paid to the feelings of the members of the Church, that theatrical representations are fixed for the evenings of her most solemn festivals."* On the question referred by the last convention, to be reported on in this, relatively to the copyright of the Book ; of Common Prayer, the measure was considered as disap- \ proved of, so far as opinion could be ascertained. A proposed change in the ecclesiastical constitution was referred to the several state conventions. It was to change the time of the triennial meeting to the first Tuesday in October. See on this subject these Memoirs, page 177. Ed. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 45 The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies proposed to the House of Bishops, the designating of a standard copy of the Old and New Testaments. It was too late to enter on the business, and "the House of Bishops deeming the fulfilment of the request of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, on the subject of an authentic edition of the Holy Bible, e matter requiring very serious attention and deliber- ation, resolve, that its members will give such attention and deliberation to the subject, previously to the next meeting of the General Convention, and report at the said meeting." ,/ . I The table of degrees of consanguinity and affinity, pro-^^/M hibitory of marriage, was again referred, and a committee A was appointed on the subject, consisting of Bishops White, ^ Kemp, and Croes. There passed three canons. The first was the limiting of the operation of the second and thirty-seventh canons, s(3 far as regarded the states westward of the mountains. The professed reason was, the providing of that country with a bishop, if a suitable person should be presented, whatever might be the number of resident presbyters, and even if there be none. There was the further reason, that if it should be thought-convenient to unite with a western diocese the western counties of Pennsylvania and Virginia, and if there should be the consent of the Church in each of the said states, there might be a temporary provision for the purpose, consistent with the integrity of the Church in f each state. (~~The second canon makes a clergyman's renunciation of the ministry a cause of admonition, or of suspension, or of degradation. The third canon provided, that in the case of expulsion from the communion, and information given to the bishop as required by the second rubric before the communion ser- * vice; if the expelled party make no complaint, there shall be no inquiry instituted. The bishop, on receiving com- plaint, is to institute an inquiry, and the notice given by the minister is a sufficient presentation. 46 HfEAfOIRS OF THE CHURCH. - ) t \jl^ ^ / b ' A pastoral letter was again drawn up by the House of Bishops, and read in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. When the convention adjourned, Philadelphia was ap- pointed to be the place of the next meeting, s. \The narrative of the first edition here concluded] Agreeably to appointment, the General Convention as-^ sembled in St. James' Church, in the City of Philadelphia, l on Tuesday, the i6th of May, 1820, and continued in ses- J sion until Wednesday, the 24th of the same month. The bishops present, were Bishops White, Hobart, Griswold, Moore, Kemp, Croes, Bowen, and Brownell; being the : < whole of the Episcopal body, with the exception of Bishop , Chase. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, j and Dr. William Wilmer in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies! The Rev. William Augustus Muhlenberg was secretary of the former house, and the Rev. Ashbel Bald- win, with the Rev. John C. Rudd, were secretary and as- sistant secretary of the latter. On Wednesday, the 25th, the houses having been organized on the preceding day, the convention was opened with a sermon from Bishop Moore. The territory formerly known by the name of the Dis- trict of Maine, having been received by Congress as an independent state, and the Church therein having become organized, it was admitted as a member of the ecclesias- tical union. That part of the forty-fifth canon which requires the reading of episcopal addresses from the journal of the state conventions, being thought to occasion an unnec- essary spending of time, was repealed by the first canon of this convention. The first canon of 1816 having been accommodated to the existing circumstances of the Church in the State of Ohio, and the object of it having been accomplished, it was repealed by the second canon of those now passed. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 47 By the third, the pastoral letters, to be issued hereafter at the times of the Triennial Conventions, are required to be read by the clergy in their respective congregations. By the fourth, an improvement was made in the seven- teenth canon of 1808, in reference to testimonials to be accommodated to the respective cases. By the fifth, the same canon of 1808 was so far altered, as to require from a candidate for the ministry, not a citi- zen of the United States, and having officiated as a minis- ter of another denomination, that he produce evidence of his residence for one year. The sixth concerned the consecration of bishops. The testimonials of the bishop-elect, instead of being presented to any three bishops, are to be presented to the presiding ( blsHop^ who is to communicate them to the other bishops. / > In the event of the consent of the major number of them, ' the presiding bishop, or any three to whom he may com- municate the testimonials and the consent of the major / 'tfr - number, may proceed to the consecration. But if a bishop , have been elected within one year of a General Conven- (&\ nt 0*Q tion, his consecration is to be deferred to the time of their -7 /, ^* assembling. It was thought conducive to the exercise of discipline, to moderate the publicity of ecclesiastical censures on any offending minister, in the event of his voluntary renunci- ation of the ministry: which is the purport of the seventh canon. The eighth provides, that in the case of a candidate for Orders, his sufficiency in the acquirements exacted for the first examination, prescribed by the tenth canon of 1808, shall be ascertained before his admission as a candidate; and further, that the said acquirements shall not be dis- pensed with, unless there be a testimonial from at least two presbyters, "stating, that, in their opinion, he possesses extraordinary strength of natural understanding, a peculiar aptitude to teach, and a large share of prudence." On an application for the sanctioning of a selection of 48 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Psalms and Hymns, made from the authorized Book of Psalms and Hymns in metre, there was a refusal, on the ground of the resolution of the two houses in the conven- tion of 1814, against the giving of a conventional sanction to any publication not issued as of authority in this Church. The convention thought it a matter of sufficient impor- tance, to give instruction concerning the title page of future editions of the Book of Common PrayerTTor th^Tecuring of, accuracy; and further, for the observing of the due distinc-' tion between the said book, and other books and documents, not the same, although of equal authority in this Church. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies requested the House of Bishops, who referred it to the presiding bishop, with such aid as he may think proper to employ, to take measures for making known any errors or omissions in the edition of the Book of Common Prayer, printed in New York, by Hugh Gaine, in the year 1793, and established by the forty-third canon of 1808, as the standard book, so that they may be avoided or supplied in future editions. There was a similar request and a similar reference to the presiding bishop, to correct or supply any errors or omissions in the calendar and tables prefixed to the said book, and to extend the table of the days on which Easter will fall for two cycles of the moon, from the year 1823. [By an evident typographical error, it is 1813 on the Journal.] The two houses appointed a joint committee, to make a collection of the journals of the General Conventions, and of the several Diocesan Conventions, and of other impor- tant documents, connected with the history of the Church in the United States, and to deposit the same, subject to the disposal of the General Convention, in such hands as may be deemed proper for the present, and until a further ' order of the convention. The difficulty of procuring sets 1 of the journals of the preceding years was strong proof of there being a use in the present measure. There was also a committee appointed by the two NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 49 houses, to take such measures in the recess of the conven- tion, as they might find suitable "for the establishment of a standard, according to which all copies of the Scriptures, to be recommended to the use of the members of this Church, shall be printed." This matter, at the rising of the General Convention of 1817, had been submitted by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to the consideration of the bishops during the recess. The bishops, in the con- vention of 1820, noticing the cause of the reference in a corruption of a particular text in a late edition, tending to * sustain a species of ordination unknown in Scripture, had reported to the following effect. They were of opinion, that in consequence of the exclusive privilege enjoyed in England for the printing of the Bible, and the heavy fines which may be inflicted on the patentees for a falsifying of the text, the English editions may in general be depended ? on; there having been noticed but few inaccuracies in any of them, and those being unimportant. An edition by Eyre and Strahan, in 1806, and another by them in 1^12, had been spoken of as the most perfect extant, but the bishops had not been able to procure a copy. They gave ^ a caution against certain fraudulent copies of the Bible imported from England, printed by unauthorized individ- ' uals, who avoided the law by a few notes in the lower margin, which may be cut from the text, but favor^the { pretence of the editing of a commentary. Such copies had ' been found exceedingly corrupt. In regard to editions issued in the United States, the bishops had found them generally as correct as could have been reasonably expected, considering the difficulty of avoiding typographical errors. Further, they were aware, that their report did not go to the desirable extent; and it was this consideration which led to the appointment of the joint committee. There came before the two houses, the proposal of the last General Convention for the changing of the time of the meeting from May to October. The House of Bishops 50 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. proposed the ratifying of it, but the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies now convened, signified their non-concur- rence. Then there came from the latter house such an alteration of the first article of the constitution, as subjects | to the discretion of every Triennial Convention, the ,time J as^well as the place of the assembling of the next, with authority in the presiding bishop, in the case of the occur- rence of epidemical disease, to make a change of place. In thjs the House of Bishops concurred, and it will rest with the next convention to decide. The principal subject of discussion related to the Theo- logical Seminary, the location of which became transferred by this convention from New York to New Haven, in Con- necticut, adopting sundry measures for the furtherance of the design. When the bishops concurred in the proposal, they unanimously declared, that they did not "mean by this concurrence to interfere with any plan now contem- plated, or that may hereafter be contemplated, in any dio- cese or dioceses, for the establishment of theological insti- tutions or professorships; and further, they esteem it their duty to express the opinion, that the various sums sub- scribed, having been thus subscribed under an act of the convention establishing the seminary in New York, the subscribers who have not paid are not now bound, except they think proper, to pay their subscriptions; the institu- tion being removed to a different city." This declaration was received, and read, and not objected to, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. There was proposed by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and concurred in by the bishops, a constitution of a missionary society, for foreign and domestic missions, which became inefficient from an irregularity in the choice of the trustees. The society was located in the City of Philadelphia, and the members there resident, after fre- quent consultations, did not think themselves authorized to proceed. The error resulted from the press of business on the last day of the session. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 51 When the convention adjourned, it was with the deter- mination that the next General Convention should meet in Philadelphia. The whole was concluded with prayer by the presiding bishop, t. The next General Convention being ^pedal, was held in 1821, in St. Peter's Church, in the City ofrmtadelphia, from October 3 were authorized to associate in the choice of a bishop. There was an alteration made in the constitution of the General Missionary Society, providing, that they shall meet triennially, in the place where the General Conven- tion shall hold its session; the body of deputies to appoint the times of meeting, and nine to form a quorum. There was corrected an error in " The Form of Private Baptism," as it stands in the editions of the Book of Com- mon Prayer. The error was pronounced to be typographi- cal, and may be perceived to be such, by a comparison of the form with that of the Church of England: no altera- tion in the premises having been made by this Church. It was proposed to the next convention, to insert among the occasional prayers, that provided for conven- tional meetings, as above stated. The bishops ordained a rule of seniority and of presi- ( i/ 2 dency, to be observed in their body; also a rule of seniority ( in relation to bishops-elect, yy. They also recorded their pointed disallowance of the / union of the Episcopacy with the presidency of a college, \ designed to be indissoluble, as constituted in Ohio. There was proposed and adopted the position, that in the rubric immediately before " The Administration of the Holy Communion," instead of "standing at the north side of the table," it should be, "standing at the right side of the table." This is certainly the most agreeable to the spirit of the rubric, and the most consistent, where a church does not stand east and west, with the table at the former, as were all the churches of England when the lit- urgy was framed, zs. 70 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. In addition to the election to the Episcopacy of the Rev. Dr. M'llvaine, for Ohio, there came before the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, that of the Revjphn H. Hop- kins, for the diocese of Vermont; that of the Rev. Benjamin WMM^ ^^-^ | ^^^^*^^Wrffc^^^ B.J5rnith, for the diocese ofKentucky; and that of the Rev. George W. Doane, for the diocese of Newjersey. A: .i meeting <>f the two houses, there was re;ul by the presiding bishop a pastoral letter, issued by the House of Bishops. The four reverend brethren elected to the Episcopacy, were consecrated in St. Paul's Chapel, in the City of New York, on the 3ist of October, in the year 1832; the day concluding the forty-sixth year since the administrator of the service embarked for England in the said city, with the v ' ew f receiving consecration.* aaa. After the said act, the convention adjourned, to meet in the City of Philadelphia, on the third Wednesday in Au- gustf in fhe^year 1835; there being previously recited some prayers by the presiding bishop, and the 1 33d Psalm sung. The next General Convention was held in the City of Philadelphia, in the year 1835, from the ipth of August to the 1st of September, inclusive. The session was opened in St. Peter's Church, when a sermon was delivered by the Right Rev. Bishop Stone; and prayers were read by the Rev. Dr. Wyatt, and the Rev. Dr. Burroughs. The Rev. Dr. Wyatt was chosen president of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies; and the Rev. Dr. Anthon, secretary of the same. In the House of Bishops there was prepared an admis- sion into the ecclesiastical union, of the diocese of Illinois, * Prior to this time, candidates were consecrated in the order of their Doctorate. In this case, the rule of priority in Election was instituted. This brought Dr. Smith into the second place. In the vestry-room, after the consecration, Bishop White referred to the change and justified it; when Dr. Smith, the only one affected by it, expressed himself entirely satisfied. Ed. NARRATIVE OF EVENTS. 71 , with their bishop, the Right Rev. Philander Chase, D.D., ; who, having resigned the Episcopacy of the diocese of \ Ohio, was considered as eligible to this new charge. The measure was concurred in by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, bbb. The House of Bishops disagreed to the proposal of the last General Convention, altering the rubric before " The Selections of Psalms"; which was concurred in by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, ccc. The House of Bishops agreed to the proposal of the last General Convention, altering the rubric before the com- munion service, by substituting the word " right " for the word " north." This also was agreed to by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, ddd. There took place an entire change in the organization of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society. The convention are, in future, to be that body. They are to act through the medium of a board, the members of which were accordingly chosen towards the close of the session. Under this board, and accountable to it, there are two committees, one for the domestic department, and the other for the foreign. They are located, the former in New York, and the latter in Philadelphia; with liability to the change of place, at the discretion of the board of missions.* eee. Provision was made for the division of the larger dio- (. ceses; when, in their opinion respectively, from increase *> of the Episcopal population, such a measure shall become ' necessary to the giving of due effect to the Episcopacy. For the accomplishing of this, there was required an alter- ation of the second article of the constitution, which was therefore recommended, fff. To the board of missions, constituted as above, the con- vention committed the providing for the support of two JL 3, missionary bishops; one for the State of Louisiana, and the territories of Florida and Arkansas; and die other for Mis- * Both boards are now in New York. [The plan was changed again in 1877.] Ed. 72 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. souri and Indiana. For the former of these departments, the House of Bishops nominated the Rev. Francis L. Hawks, D.D.; and for the latter, the Rev. Ja?fc5bn~ KemperTlXD. In each of the cases, the House of Clerical and Lay Depu- ties concurred, by a unanimous election, ggg. There was also provision made for the consecrating of a bishop for any country exterior to the United States, where such a measure should be expedient for the discharge of the commission to preach the gospel to all nations, hhk. In the House of Bishops certain proposals were matured, for the better exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. But, the proposals being sent to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, towards the close of the session, they voted a reference of the subject to the next General Convention, and in this the House of Bishops concurred. Hi. There was referred to certain clergymen, acquainted with the German language, the providing of a translation of the liturgy therein, kkk. It was determined by both houses, that in the confession in the morning and evening prayer, the voices of the minister and of the congregation should be concurrent; and that the word "Amen" should be in the Roman letter, toshow that it h is to be repeated by both. In the same letter the word is to be printedTand for the same reason, in the Lord's Prayer, after the Confession, in the Trisagion and in the Creed. ///. Directions were issued, and committees appointed, for correct editions of the Bible, and of the Book of Common Prayer in future, mmm. Both houses accepted, from the Rev. Dr. Jiawks, his V present of certain books and other documents, illustrative \ of the early history of the Episcopal Church, nnn. J Recent circumstances having rendered a few additional canons expedient, and experience having suggested the use of a few alterations of those now in force, the said exigen- cies were provided for. Of measures to that effect there is no need of a recital here; as the canons, in their present form, will, it is presumed, be printed in a separate pamphlet. OQO. II. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. A. Page 1 6. Of the Question of American Episcopacy, as agitated in the Colonies. THERE were two periods which were especially productive of pamphlets and newspaper essays on this subject. The first of these periods was about the time of the civil con- troversy, which arose on the occasion of the stamp act. The question of American Episcopacy was brought forward in a pamphlet by the Rev. East Apthorp, missionary at Cambridge, Massachusetts, a native of that province, but afterward possessed of several considerable preferments in England. His production was answered by Dr. Mayhew, a congregational minister of Boston. Several others en- gaged in the dispute; among whom was Archbishop Seeker, although his name was not prefixed to his pamphlet, which has been since printed in his works. The other period was a few years before the revolution- ary war, when the Rev. Dr. Chandler,~of Elizabethtown, New Jersey, made an appeal to the public, in favor of the object of obtaining an American Episcopate. There were various answers to the pamphlet and defences of it, in other pamphlets published by the Doctor and others. In addition to these, the newspapers abounded with periodical and other productions. The author of the present per- I formance was at that time a youth; but from what he then ' heard and observed, he believes it was impossible to have J obtained the concurrence of a respectable number of lay- 74 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. men in any measure for the obtaining of an American bishop. What could have been the reason of this, when there was scarcely a member of the Episcopal Church who would not have been ready to avow his preference of Epis- copacy to Presbytery; and of a form of prayer, to that which is extemporary? It is believed to have been owing " to an existing jealousy, that American Episcopacy would have been made an instrument of enforcing the new plan . of civil government, which had been adopted in Great ; Britain; in contrariety t_original compact and future se- curity for freedom, : a regard to which was as prevalent/ among Episcopalians, as among any description of their \ fellow-citizens. Perhaps these sentiments may be supposed to be contra- dicted by the circumstance, that during the revolutionary war, a considerable number of the American people became Linclined to the British cause; and, that of them, a great \. proportion were Episcopalians. But this is not inconsist- ent with the sentiments expressed. On the subject of par- liamentary taxation, it would probably have been impossi- ble to have found in any city, town, or vicinity of the colonies, such a number of persons not vehemently opposed to it, as would have been sufficient to form a congregation. Out of the sphere of governmental influence, there was ' scarcely a man of that description. When the controversy became ripened into war, some fell off from the cause, from / dajiger to their persons and their properties; others, from 1_ the sentiment that the public evil hazarded might prove worse than that intended to be avoided; and others per- haps, although very few, from scruples of conscience. They who were influenced by these, had stopped short at the tak- ing of arms, forwJiiQh the passion was general. To find freedom in this step, and yet to withdraw while the cause of so important a measure existed, may have been the dictate of prudence, but could not have been that of con- science. All the aforesaid circumstances operated with increased vigor, when the question of independence was ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 75 forced on the reluctant public. Had the British arms sue- '". ceedTd7and tEus the right of parliamentary taxation been established for there was no offer of relinquishment of it, until^after the alliance with France a membership of the( Episcopal Church would have been little more than a po- litical mark, to distinguish those who should advocate claims hostile to American interests. To persons who may give their attention to the colonial history, the question may occur Why did not the British government so far consult its own interests, as to author- ize the consecrating of bishops for America? This question shall be considered, on the ground of views taken of past incidents. Any ministry, who should have ventured on the* measure, would have raised up against themselves the whole; of the dissenting interest in England, and the weight of that interest was morelmportant to them in their estimation^ than the making of a party for the mother country in the colonies. The matter is resolvable into the ignorance of" government of the real state of the people, whom they ex- pected to govern so easily, at so great a distance. Again, this ignorance is resolvable into their depending on infor- mation received from persons whose judgments, or whose honesty, .they ought, the most of all, to have distrusted: an error, which hung heavily on all their proceedings, until the period when it ceased to be of consequence. Lest it should be thought, that the dissenting interest in England has been magnified, it ought to be known, that the forces of the different denominations of dissenters with the exception of the people called Quakers was concentrated in a committee in London. The author was acquainted with a member of that committee in England, in \TJi and 1772, and knew that he had free^access to the ministry. The impression then received, was its being an object of government to avoid any thing of a religious nature^ which might set the dissenters in a political opposi- tion. They had great influence in elections to parliament. | As to the laity's uniting in an application for the Episco- 7 6 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. pacy, it is natural to suppose that this, if to be found any where, would have been found in Virginia, a province set- tled by members of the Church of England, who were still the great mass of its inhabitants. How far they were from favoring the endeavor, may be learned from the following statement. In the year 1771, a convention of twelve clergymen, there being about a hundred in the province, and, after a larger convention had rejected the measure now adopted, drew up a petition to the crown for the appointment of an American bishop. Four of the clergy protested, and, be- jcause of their protest, received the thanks of the House ,of Burgesses. When it is considered, that a great majority of that house must have been of the establishment; that there never had been any attempt among them to throw off any property of its distinctive character; that they must have felt the want of ecclesiastical discipline over immoral clergymen, and the burden of sending to England for ordination; there seems no way of accounting for their conduct, but the danger resulting from the newly intro- duced system of colonial government. This is warranted by the absurdity of the reasons on which the protest of the four clergymen was bottomed; among which, perhaps the most absurd, was professed respect for the diocesan author- ity of the bishops of London; it being notorious, that the then bishop and his immediate predecessors had mani- fested zeal for the appointment now opposed. In conse- quence of the proceeding of the House of Burgesses, a con- vention of the clergy of New York and New Jersey published an address to the Episcopalians in Virginia, drawn up by Dr. Chandler. It must be evident on reading the address, that the reasoning of it was unanswerable; and that, as the address expresses, there were, on the other side "only un- reasonable jealousies and groundless suspicions"; unreason- able and groundless, so far as they were declared, and referring to titles to civil offices, and the like; while there was a sentiment silently operating, to the effect above ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 77 stated. Whether the address of the twelve clergy crossed the Atlantic is not here known. This was to depend on its being signed by a majority of the clergy of the province; which was probably prevented by the public sentiment. It is remarkable, that of the two gentlemen appointed "by the House of Burgesses to deliver their thanks to the four protesters, the first named of them Richard Henry Lee, fifteen years after, and then president of Congress, did not hesitate to furnish to the two bishops Who went for conse- cration, a certificate, that the business on which they went was consistent with the civil institutions of the American republic.* Certain it is, that no endeavors for a lay petition for Episcopacy were made. Some accounted for this, on the principle, that as the wished-for bishop would have a rela- tion to the clergy only, the matter concerned them and none others. But what sort of a bishop would he have been who should have had no relation to the laity, except through the medium of the clergy ? The well-informed advocates for Episcopacy must doubtless have known the imperfection of such a scheme: but they who suggested the proviso must have considered it as a prudential expedient. Had bishops been consecrated for America on the plan proposed by Archbishop Seeker, the civil government no further interfering than in the grant of the royal permis- sion, it is difficult to perceive, how hindrance could have been attempted by any description of persons, without an avowal of intolerance; and Avithout a disposition to un- provoked insurrection, beyond what can be supposed from * For the correctness of the opinion expressed of the utter inability of the British administrations for the government of the colonies, there may be here a reference to Bissett's History of the Reign of George III. This author wrote in opposition to Belsham, and may, therefore, Vie supposed, on the whole, favorable to government. But he points out, with candor, the contrariety between the \ views of ministers and the consequences of their_acts evidently bottomed on ' false information, and their relying on the persons whom they ought the most to * have distrusted. 78 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. any thing that passed of a political description. That good prelate's scheme is unfolded in his letter to Mr. Walpole, printed among the prelate's works. From the circumstance, that, since the revolution, an act of parliament was held necessary to permit the giving of a beginning to the Amer- ican succession, it may be thought, that the archbishop was mistaken in his opinion of the sufficiency of the license of the king. But this would not be a correct inference. The case became Altered by the event of American inde- pendence: and although there was legislative interference in regard to the Church in the United States, there have been bishops consecrated for Nova Scotia and Canada, on royal authority only, agreeably to the opinion which had been expressed by Archbishop Seeker. On the ground of the practicability of giving bishops to America, without invoking the aid of parliament, it was the opinion of the author, at the time of the controversy here noticed, that no disturbance would have happened, however threatened by some who were indeed very violent on the subject. But he is not backward to acknowledge, that he thought he foresaw difficulties to the Episcopal Church from the /"other source here hinted. It was not unlikely, that .the hlu i V British government, had they sanctioned an Episcopacy in J the colonies, would have endeavored to render it subser- K , vient to the support of a party, on the plan of the newly \ projected domination. In this case, the effects would have ^been hostile to the estimation of Episcopacy in the minds j of the people; the great mass of whom, including the best informed, and those who had the property of the country in their hands, had set themselves in a determined, and, as the author thinks, a justifiable opposition to the new system. It is well known, that religious opinion has been often made, by circumstances, the test and the instrument of a political party, when the views of the party had not any more natural connection with the opinion, than with its opposite. Thus, in England, Arminianism was conceived of as allied to absolute monarchy, and Calvinism to popular ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 79 privilege; at the same time that, in the United Netherlands," the latter supported the monarchical, and the former the re-' publican branch of the constitution. The grievances which produced the American war, were the result of claims of one people over another; and not of the question, as to what would be the wisest distribution of the internal powers of either. Besides, it may be remarked, that Episcopacy, as now settled in America, must be confessed at least as analogous as Presbytery the author thinks much more so to the plan of civil government, which mature delibera- tion has established over the union; and to those plans which, even during the heats of popular commotion, were adopted for the individual states. The sentiment wished to be here impressed, is, that Episcopacy, under the old regimen, would have probably been considered as subser- vient to an authority, of the decline and final abrogation of which there were causes, which must have produced their effect at last; if the effect had not been hastened much faster than could have been expected, by intemperate coun- sels and by injudicious measures. It would be a misinterpretation of what the author has here written, were it applied as a censure on what some of his brethren, who were before him, have advanced in favor of their right to an Episcopate. Far from this, he honors their memories, and considers the arguments on which they rested their claim as unanswerable. What has been said, ( is merely an argument from certain causes existing in the ) character and the circumstances of the American people, to what would have been the effects in a supposed case, which did not occur. It may be thought, that there should be allowed a large deduction from the weight of the observations made, on account of the proportion of the American people, whose conduct or whose wishes were in contrariety to the gen- eral sentiment of their countrymen. But this is apparent only. There were no persons more hostile to the British claims, than they who withdrew from the resistance of 8o MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. /them: this with very few exceptions. When the contro- 1 versy issued in war, and afterward in independence, at each of the periods there was a large defection from the American i cause, produced by the motives which have been detailed. No doubt, the number of dissentients was increased by unjustifiable measures of the newly erected governments in some of the states. Still, the sentiment was universal, of the sacred nature of the rights invaded, and would again have had its effect on the minds of the temporary advocates of Great Britain, had the war terminated in her favor. Further, the opinions here expressed may seem indica- tive of aversion to the British character, in the author's mind. Far from entertaining any such aversion, he prefers the laws and the manners of the British nation to those of any other; either from partiality to the country of his an- cestors, or, as he believes, in consequence of an impartial comparison. But he reasons on the principle, which he thinks warranted by the experience of all ages, that na- tional domination, under whatever circumstances, will be tyranny. An individual may be a tyrant, or otherwise, ac cording to his personal character: but no people ever stuck at any crimes which advanced their wealth at the expense of those governed by them; especially, if it were at a distance. In short, however great the inconveniences brought on the Episcopal Church in America by the revolution, the -*-' author has all along cherished the hope, that they will not A be permanently so injurious to her, as would have bee_n her .* alliance with a distant power, in hostility to the common interests of the country; accompanied by the jealousies ^ j and the odium which would have been attached to that , ( circumstance. \f Perhaps it may be thought, that a deduction should be made from any apparent weight in the theory here deliv- ered, on account of the establishments existing in Mary- land and Virginia; which would not have been overset by the British government. The subsequently prostrate con- e i) ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 8 1 dition of the Church in these states, may be urged as a proof of the advantages which would have attended a con- tinuance of the establishment. But this reasoning is inad- missible, if, as before supposed, the prostration was owing to the preceding system, of an amendment of which there was no prospect. Besides, it should be remembered, that before the revolution, the parts of those states, now the most populous, were fast settling by persons differing from the establishment. Even in the old parts, numbers were t leaving the Church, to attend the ministrations of preach- , ers, who had recently availed themselves of the very little < regard entertained for their clergy, to produce a popular \ desertion of the Church itself. Under such circumstances, it was hardly to be expected, that the establishment would have redounded to the reputation and the increase of the Church generally. It was becoming more and more unpop- 7 ular; with some, because it was not considered as promoting ; piety; and with these and others, because they thought the provision for it a useless burden on the community.* * On the question of burden, as detached from all other considerations, there is a fallacy not generally perceived. Under the present system, if the gospel should be supported in the states concerned, as may now be confidently expected, the weight of the expense will fall disproportionably on people of moderate means. During the establishment it fell on the rich in tolerable proportion to their wealth. /There is another fallacy in this business, in the reproach brought on the Church, F when it ought to have fallen on the want of wisdom in the making of ministerial I endownents, without some provision for ministerial fidelity. Hence, however, a Vgreat proportion oflhe unpopularity~whicn Ted "to the seizure and the sale of churches and glebes by the legislature of Virginia. It ought to be remembered the honor of Patrick Henry, that he resisted the said act, and that it could never be obtained until after his decease. This eminent man has been accused, of hav ing always set his sail to the popular gale. There are several facts against the charge, and this is one of them: for he had to resist, through many years, the united efforts of men hostile to revealed religion in every form, and of other men who were professors of religion, but cherished rancorous hatred against the Church of England in particular. The author is the more free in speaking of the act of the legislature of Virginia, as it will go down to posterity loaded with the reproach of unconstitutionality, by the Supreme Court of the United States: although their judgment will have no effect beyond the district of Columbia. See Cranch's Re- ports, vol. ix. wi , tof iver tav- ^ 82 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. There is a remarkable fact in Virginia, countenancing the sentiments delivered. After the fall of the establishment, a considerable proportion of the clergy continued to enjoy the glebes the law considering them as freeholds during i life without performing a single act of sacred duty, ex- ' cept, perhaps, that of marriage. They knew that their public ministrations would not have been attended. B. Page 17. Of the Question of using the Liturgy, exclusively of the Prayers for the King and the Royal Family. As the cessation of the public worship of the Episcopal Church was very much owing to scruples on this point, it *^may be thought important, in reference to such future political changes, as are rendered possible by the uncer- tainty of human affairs. So far as the author knows or believes, the difficulties which arose on this account were not of great extent in the southern states. In Maryland and in Virginia, there were many of the clergy whose connections with their flocks were rendered by their personal characters, dependent / wholly on the continuance of the establishment, and, of | course, fell with it. Again, many worthy ministers enter- tained scruples in regard to the oath of allegiance to the states, without the taking of which, they were prohibited from officiating by laws alike impolitic and severe. But it must be seen, that scruples of this sort were of another na- ture than the question here stated for consideration. In the northern states there were no such laws, but the clergy generally declined officiating, on the ground of their eccle- siastical tie to the liturgy of the Church of England. As they were generally men of respectable characters, the discontinuance of their administrations had an unhappy effect on the Church; and is here mentioned, as one cause contributing to the low state in which we were left by the revolutionary war. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 83 With all possible tenderness to the plea of conscientious scruples, it will not be rash to affirm, that there was no ground "for them in the promise not an oath, as some suppose, although of equal solemnity made previously to ordination in the Church of England. It is as follows: The candidate declares "That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering of bishops, priests, and deacons, containeth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God; and that it may lawfully so be used; and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed, in public prayer and administration of the sacraments, and no other." This promise ought to be taken in connection with the I pastoral duty generally; and with the discharge of it as stipulated for in the promises made at ordination, which require of the minister the reading of the prayers, and the administration of the sacraments. But there occurs a case, in which there is an external necessity of omitting a few petitions, not involved in any Christian duty; so far as civil rulers are identified by name, or other personal description. In such a case, it seems evident, that the promise is the most nearly complied with, by the use of the liturgy to the extent which the external necessity permits. When the Church of England was oppressed under the usurpations of parliament and of Cromwell, the clergy were molested in the use of the liturgy, because it was made illegal by act of parliament. But wherever the use of it was winked at, of which there are instances on record, they did not hesitate to avail themselves of the indulgence, ' with the exception of the political prayers; the use of which would have been highly penal. C. Page 19. Of the Meeting in New Brunswick, in May, 1784. The first communications, between the clergy of different states, were at this meeting. It took its rise from a pre- (I "84 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. vious agreement between those of the City of New York and those of Philadelphia, carried on through the medium of the Rev. Abraham Beach, then resident in or near Brunswick. The substance of what passed is as follows: There met, from the State of New York, the Rev. Messrs. Bloomer, Benjamin Moore, and Thomas Moore; from New Jersey, the Rev. Messrs. Beach, Fraser, and Ogden; and from Pennsylvania, the Rev. Dr. White, Dr. Magaw, and Mr. Blackwell. There happened to be in the town, on civil business, some lay gentlemen, who, being represented by the clergy from New York and New Jersey as taking an interest in the welfare of the Church, were requested to at- tend. They were Mr. John Stephens, Mr. Richard Ste- phens, Mr. Richard Dennis, and Mr. Hoyt.* The author presided at the meeting, and opened it with a sermon. Mr. B. Moore was secretary. The first day was chiefly taken up with discussing prin- ciples of ecclesiastical union. The clergy from Philadel- phia read to the assembly the principles just before adopted, under appointments of their vestries, as will be related hereafter, and strongly recommended their taking of similar measures. The next morning, the author was taken aside, before the meeting, by Mr. Benjamin Moore, who expressed the wish of himself and others, that nothing should be urged further on the subject, as they found themselves pe- culiarly circumstanced, in consequence of their having joined the clergy of Connecticut in their application for the consecration of a bishop. This brought to the knowl- edge of the clergy from Philadelphia, what they had not known, that Dr. Samuel Seabury, of the State of New York, who had sailed for England just before the evacua- tion of New York by the British troops, carried with him a petition to the English bishops for his consecration. In consequence of the measure taken as above stated, the gentlemen concerned in it thought, that during the Should read Hoyt, Colonel Hoyt. Former editions read "Iliel." Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 85 pending of their "application, they could not consistently join in any proceedings which might be construed to inter- fere with it. Accordingly, the conversation of that day on which the meeting ended was principally confined to the business of the revival of the corporation for the relief of the widows and the children of the clergy; which had been held out as an additional object of the interview.* But before the clergy parted, it was agreed to procure as general a meeting as might be, of representatives of the clergy and of the laity of the different states, in the City of New York, on the 6th of October following. The gentle- ^ men of New York were to notify the brethren eastward, and those of Philadelphia were to do the same southward. The author remarked at this meeting, that, notwith- standing the good humor which prevailed at it, the more ; northern clergymen were under apprehensions of there , being a disposition on the part of the more southern, to / make material deviation from the ecclesiastical system of j England, in the article of Church government; At the ! same time he wondered, that any sensible and well in- formed persons should overlook the propriety of accom- modating that system, in some respects, to the prevailing sentiments and habits of the people of this country, now become an independent and combined commonwealth. For the communication with the court of Denmark, as contained in the Narrative, see Appendix, No. I. For the application of the clergy of Connecticut to the Archbishop of York, the English primacy having become vacant, and the successor to it being not yet known in America, see Appendix, No. 2. * This corporation, by mutual consent, and with a fair partition of the funds, has since resolved itself into three corporations, under charters from the three states. 86 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. . D. Page 19. Of the Meeting in New York, in October, 1784. There were present from Massachusetts, the Rev. Mr. ^v /- 'Parker; from Connecticut, the Rev. Mr. Marshall; from I , New York, the Rev. Messrs. Provoost, Beach, B. Moore, ~ Bloomer, Cutting, T. Moore, and the Hon. James Duane, i ,. Marinus Willet, and J. Alsop, Esquires; from New Jersey, "the Rev. Mr. Ogden, and John De Hart, John Chetwood, 1 ^Esquires, and Mr. Samuel Spragg; from Pennsylvania, the Rev. Drs. White and Magaw, the Rev. Mr. Hutchins, and i Matthew Clarkson, Richard Willing, Samuel Powell, and Richard Peters, Esquires; from Delaware, the Rev. Messrs. Thorne and Wharton, and Mr. Robert Clay; from Mary- land, the Rev. Dr. Smith; and from Virginia, the Rev. Mr. Griffith. The Rev. Dr. Smith presided, and the Rev. B. Moore was secretary. The names of the members are set l Ai I b down, because they do not appear on the subsequent jour- nals; and because the short printed account of the pro- // ceedings of this meeting was in very few hands at the "time, and is probably at this time generally destroyed or lost* The present meeting, like that in May, is here spoken of as a voluntary one, and not an authorized convention, because there were no authorities from the churches in the several states, even in the appointments of the members, which were made from the congregations, to which they respectively belonged; except of Mr. Parker, from Massa- chusetts, of Mr. Marshall, from Connecticut, and of those who attended from Pennsylvania: even from these states, there was no further authority, than to deliberate and pro- pose. Accordingly, the acts of the body were in the form of recommendation and proposal. Several copies of the original Broadside containing the record still remain, and a. /etc simile was issued in 1863, the edition being limited to twenty-five copies. See also, Reprint of Journals, III. 3. 4. Ed, ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 87 , The principles of ecclesiastical union, recommended at the meeting, September, 1784, are as follows: 1st. That there shall be a general convention of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America. 2d. That the Episcopal Church, in_eachj5tate, send dep- uties to the convention, consisting of clergy and laity. 3d. That associated congregations, in two or more states, may send deputies jointly. 4th. 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. 5th. That in every state where there shall be a bishop duly consecrated and settled, he shall be considered as a member of the convention ex officio. 6th. That the clergy and laity, assembled in conven- tion, shall deliberate in one body, but shall vote sepa- rately; and the concurrence of both shall be necessary to give validity to every measure. 7th. 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 several states will send their clerical and lay deputies, duly instructed and authorized to proceed on the necessary business herein proposed for their deliberation.* The above resolves were, in substance, what had been ( determined on in Pennsylvania, in May; and after having v been discussed and accommodated in a committee, were ( adopted^ by the assembly. ~TFTs proper to remark, that although a clergyman ap- peared at this meeting, on the part of the Church in Con- necticut, it is not to, be thought, that there was an obli- * Additional illustrations of the subject are preserved in the archives of the General Convention. See Journals, III. 62-66. Ed. 88 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. gation on any in that state to support the above principles; because Mr. Marshall read to the assembly a paper, which ' expressed his being only empowered to announce, that the i clergy of Connecticut had taken measures for the obtaining ' of an Episcopate; that until their design, in that particular, i should be accomplished, they could do nothing; but that as soon as they should have succeeded, they would come for- ! ward, with their bishop, for the doing of what the general ' interests of the Church might require. With this exception, the principles laid down appeared to be the sense of the meeting; and it seemed a great mat- ter gained to lay what promised to be a foundation for the continuing of the Episcopal Church, in the leading points of her doctrine, discipline, and worship; yet with such an ac- commodation to local circumstances, as might be expected to secure the concurrence of the great body of her mem- bers; and without any exterior opposition, to threaten the oversetting of the scheme. At the present day, it may seem to have been of little consequence to gain so considerable an assent, to what was determined at this meeting. But at the time in ques- tion, when the crisis presented a subject of deliberation en- tirely new, it was difficult to detach it in the minds of many, from a past habitual train of thinking. Some were^j startled at the very circumstance, of taking the stand of anf independent Church. There_was a much more common ) prejudice against the embracing of the laity in a scheme of ecclesiastical legislation. Besides these things, the con- fessed necessity of accommodating the service to the newly established civil constitution of the country, naturally . awakened apprehensions of unlimited license. Hence the restriction to the English liturgy, except in accommoda- tion to the revolution, which restriction was not acqui- esced in, as will be seen. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 89 E. Page 20. Of proceedings in sundry States, previous to the Meetings in 1784, at New Brunswick and at New York. As this convention acted by delegation, an account of the said proceedings seems to form a part of the present work. The principles agreed on, at the said meetings, were analogous to those in the several states; with the excep- tion of what was done by the clergy, individually, in Connecticut. In Massachusetts there was held a meeting of the clergy at Boston, September 8, 1784. In a letter received by the author from the Rev. Mr. Parker, at the time, it appears, that the principal business of this meeting was the passing of the following resolves, which have evidently an allusion to what had been done in Philadelphia in the preceding May, and communicated to Mr. Parker.* The articles agreed on in Philadelphia will appear lower down. Those of Boston are, 1st, That the Episcopal Church in the United States of America is, and ought to be, independent of all foreign authority, ecclesiastical and civil. But it is the opinion of this convention, that this independence be not construed or taken in so rigorous a sense, as to exclude the churches in America, separately or collectively, from applying for and obtaining from some regular Episcopal foreign power, an American Episcopate. 2dly, That the Episcopal Church in these states hath, and ought to have, in common with all other religious so- cieties, full and exclusive powers to regulate the concerns of its own communion. 3dly, That the doctrines of the gospel be maintained, as now professed by the Church of England; and uniformity * See Documents in journals of Convention, Philadelphia, 1861, I., 432. Ed. 90 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. of worship be continued, as near as may be, to the liturgy of the said Church. 4thly, That the succession of the ministry be agreeable to the usage which requireth the three orders, of bishops, priests, and deacons; that the rights and powers of the same be respectively ascertained; and that they be exer- cised according to reasonable laws, to be duly made. 5thly, That the power of making canons and laws be vested solely in a representative body of the clergy and the laity conjointly; in which body, the laity ought not to ex- ' ceed, or their votes be more in number, than those of the clergy. 6thly, That no power be delegated to a general ecclesi- astical government, except such as can not conveniently be exercised by the clergy and vestries, in their respective < congregations. The only points in which the above differ from those which will be recorded as laid down in Philadelphia, are, that in the former they provide for an application to a foreign quarter; which was agreeable to intentions enter- tained in framing the latter, although not expressed; ancl that in the fifth article of the former it is specified, that the clergy and the laity ought to have an equal vote. This matter was afterward settled to mutual satisfaction in the meeting at New York. It is here taken notice of, because there was afterward manifested a disposition in Massa- chusetts to depart from the principles agreed on; that the clergy of that state, instead of sending a deputation to Philadelphia in September, 1785, held a meeting of their i own, about the same time, in Boston, in which they made \ considerable alterations in the liturgy. Although they doubtless acted agreeably to what seemed best to them at the different times; yet this fluctuation of counsels is recorded, lest the latter measure, contemplated singly, should seem to do away the weight of the principles ante- cedently established. In Connecticut there was a meeting of the clergy, in ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 91 March, 1783, the principal measure of which, was the rec- ommending of Dr. Samuel Seabury to the English bishops for consecration. This was an act of the clergy generally in that state, and of a few in New York; and is rather to be considered as done by them in their individual capaci- ties, than as a regular ecclesiastical proceeding; because, as yet, there had not been any organized assembly, who could claim the power of acting for the Church in conse- quence of either the express or the implied consent of the body of Episcopalians. They who consider the bishop of a diocese as related to its clergy alone, may differ from the author in this remark. But although he has heard such an opinion advanced in conversation, and even remembers it to have been sometimes published in the former contro- versies concerning American Episcopacy; yet it is so evi- dently contrary to the system as gathered from Scripture and primitive antiquity, that he does not suppose it will be maintained in deliberate argument. His recording of this circumstance is not designed, either in disparagement of the personal character of Bishop Seabury, or as doubting of the approbation of the measure by the whole Church in which he has since presided. In regard to the former, the author entertained for that bishop much affection and re- spect, the result of what was afterwards perceived in per- son, of his good sense and Christian disposition. As to the latter, it is believed from what has been since learned, that no man could have been more acceptable, independently on the inclination said to have been afterward manifested, of leaving all ecclesiastical matters to the clergy: which was done for a while, although the laity have been since j introduced into the convention, as in the other states. But the subject is here noticed, as one 'cause accounting for the failure of the application in England; a sentiment confirmed by subsequent information, as will appear in its proper place. From letters in possession of the author, he finds, that in Connecticut, the idea of lay representation in ecclesi- 92 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. astical legislation, became associated with that of the trial and the degradation of clergymen by the same authority. That there is no such necessary association, is evident in the English system. In Pennsylvania there was a convention of the Church, which began on the 24th of May, 1784. The steps leading to this convention were originated by the author, in the vestry of the churches under his parochial care, in conse- quence of a previous agreement with the Rev. Dr. Magaw, the rector of St. Paul's Church, ard the Rev. Mr. Blackwell, assistant minister to the author. The said vestry opened a communication on the subject, with the vestry of St. Paul's Church, and by agreement of these two bodies, in conjunction with their clergy, notices were given, and suit- able measures were taken, for the obtaining of the meeting of the convention. The result of their deliberations was the establishing of the following principles, as a foundation for the future form- ing of an ecclesiastical body for the Church at large. 1st, That the Episcopal Church in these states is, and ought to be, independent of all foreign authority, ecclesias- tical or civil. 2dly, That it hath, and ought to have, in common with all other religious societies, full and exclusive powers to regulate the concerns of its own communion. 3dly, That the doctrines of the gospel be maintained as now professed by the Church of England, and uniformity of worship continued, as near as may be, to the liturgy of the said Church. 4thly, That the succession of the ministry be agreeable to the usage which requireth the three orders, of bishops, priests, and deacons; that the rights and powers of the same, respectively, be ascertained, and that they be exer- cised according to reasonable laws, to be duly made. 5thly, That to make canons or laws, there be no other authority than that of a representative body of the clergy and laity conjointly. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 93 6thly, That no powers be delegated to a general eccle- siastical government, except such as can not conveniently be exercised by the clergy and laity, in their respective congregations.* * The steps preparatory to the resolves were as follows: they were the first advances towards a general organization, and are copied from the original journal in possession. i Philadelphia, March 2<)(h, 1784. (AA^ULf)^ At the house of the Rev. Dr. White, rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's. In consequence of appointments made by the vestry of Christ Church and St. ^ Peter's, as followeth: J O/ " The rector mentioned to the vestry, that he lately had a conversation with the Rev. Dr. Magaw, on the subject of appointing committees from the vestries of their respective churches, to confer with the clergy of the said churches, on the subject of forming a representative body of the Episcopal Church in this state, and wished to have the sense of the vestry thereon. After some consideration, the vestry agreed to appoint Matthew Clarkson and William Pollard for Christ Church, and Dr. Clarkson and John Chaloner for St. Peter's;" and by the vestry of St. Paul's Church, as followeth: "A copy of the minute of the vestry of Christ Church and St. Peter's, of the I3th of November last, was, by the Rev. Dr. Magaw, laid before this vestry, and is as follows, (here follows the above minute). The above minute being taken into consideration, and this vestry con- curring in opinion thereon, unanimously appointed Lambert Wilmer and Plunket Fleeson, Esquires, on the part of this church, to carry into execution the good intentions of the said minute." The clergy, together with the gentlemen named in the said appointments, (except Matthew Clarkson, Esq., and Dr. Clarkson, who were detained by sick- ness), assembled at the time and place above mentioned. The body thus assembled, having taken into consideration the necessity of speedily adopting measures for the forming of a plan of ecclesiastical government for the Episcopal Church, were of opinion, that a subject of such importance ought to be taken up, if possible, with the concurrence of the Episcopalians of the United States in general. They, therefore, resolved to ask a conference .with such members of the Episcopal congregations of the counties in this state as were then in town; and the clergy present undertook to converse with such persons as they could find of the above description, and to request their meeting the body at Christ Church, on Wednesday evening at seven o'clock. Christ Church, March $lst. The clergy and the two committees assembled, and elected Dr. White their chairman. The clergy reported, that agreeably to their promise, they had spoken to several gentlemen, who readily consented to the conference proposed. The meeting continued for some time, when it was signified to them, that 94 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. As this was the first ecclesiastical assembly in any of the states, consisting partly of lay members, and as the author was considered at the time to be the proposer of the meas- ure, the principle of it having been advocated, about a year before, in a pamphlet known to be his, he thinks it proper to give, in this place, a short statement of his rea- sons, in its favor. From what he has read of primitive usage, he thinks it evident, that in very early times, when 'every church, that is, the Christian people in every city and convenient dis- trict round it, was an ecclesiastical commonwealth, with all the necessary powers of self government, the body of the people had a considerable share in its determinations. He is not setting up Lord King's plea, of the people's having /j several gentlemen who had designed to attend, were detained by the unexpected sitting of the honorable House of Assembly, they being members of that house. The Hon. James Read, Esq., attended, according to desire. After some conver- sation on the business of this meeting, it was resolved, that a circular letter be addressed to the wardens and vestrymen of the respective Episcopal congregations in the state, and that the same be as follows, viz. GENTLEMEN, The Episcopal clergy in this city, together with committees appointed by the vestry of Christ Church and St. Peter's, and another committee appointed by the vestry of St. Paul's Church, in the same city, for the 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 the concurrence of the Episcopalians of the United States in general. They have therefore resolved, as prepasatory to a general consultation, to request the church-wardens and vestry- men of each Episcopal congregation in the state, to delegate one or more of their body to assist at a meeting to be held in this city on Monday, the 24th day of May next; and such clergymen as have parochial cure in the said congregations to attend the meeting, which they hope will contain a full representation of the 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 the body now assembled, WM. WHITE, Chairman. In consequence of the above circular, the contemplated meeting was held in l' Chnst Church, on the 24th of May, 1784. The minutes of the meeting are in ' the printed journals of the Church in Pennsylvania. The principal result was ) communicated, a few days after, to the meeting in New Brunswick. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 95 (been a constituent part of the ancient ecclesiastical synods, for which there does not seem to be any ground; the pas- sages quoted to the effect by his lordship proving no more than that some of the laity were occasionally present at the deliberations. But there is here spoken of the practice which was prevalent before the introduction of ecclesias- tical synods, of the holding of which there is little or no evidence, until the middle_of the^ second century. The / same sanction which the people gave originally in a body, they might lawfully give by representation. In reference to very ancient practice, it would be an omission not to take notice of the council of Jerusalem, mentioned in the I5th chapter of the Acts. That the people were concerned in the transactions of that body, is granted generally by Epis- copalian divines. Something has been said, indeed, to dis- tinguish between the authoritative act of the apostles and the concurring act of the lay brethren: and Archbishop Potter, in support of this distinction, corrects the common translation, on the authority of some ancient manuscripts, reading (Acts xv. 23) " elders brethren " : a similar ex- pression, he thinks, to " men brethren," in chapter ii. 29; where the and is evidently an interpolation, to suit the idiom of the English language. It does not appear, that our best commentators, either before or since the time of Archbishop Potter, have followed his reading. Mills pre- fers, and Griesbach rejects it. The passage, even with the corrections, amounts to what is pleaded for the obtaining of the conserrt of the laity; which must have accompanied the decree of Jerusalem; nothing less being included in the term "multitude," who are said to have "kept silent," and in that of " the whole church," of whom, as well as of the apostles and elders, it is said, that "it pleased " them to institute the recorded mission. On no other principle than that here affirmed, can there be accounted for many par- ticulars introduced in the apostolic epistles. The matters referred to are subjects which, on the contrary supposition, were exclusively within the province of the clergy, and not 96 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. to be acted on by the churches, to whom the epistles are respectively addressed. If then the matter pleaded for be lawful, the question of the propriety of adopting it ought to be determined by ex- pediency. That it was expedient, is judged, 1st, from its being a natural consequence of the principle of following the Church of England in all the leading points of her doc- trine, discipline, and worship. We could not, in any other \ way, have had a substitute for the parliamentary sanction ) to legislative acts of power. Such a sanction is pleaded Tor ' by Mr. Hooker and others, as rendered proper by the rea-. son of the thing, and the principles of the British constitu- tion.* On this very ground, the courts of jaw of that coun-( try have always refused to recognize the canons of 1603, as/ binding over the laity. So far as they are a declaration of/ the ancient canon law of the realm, they are held to be binding, like the common law, on the ground of imme- morial custom: but such matters as rest only on thecfe- terminations of the convocation, have been continually declared, by solemn judgments of the courts, to_be_jjot binding on the laity, for the express reason, that they were not represented in the convocation. 2dly, From a^ doubt j of our being able toj:arry E_pjscopacy in any other way.//* The prejudices of even some of the members of our own Church against the name, and much more against the office, of bishop; and, added to this, the outcry which had been made on former occasions, by persons of other de- nominations, that not spiritual powers only, but civil also, were intended, rendered it very uncertain whether we could I accomplish the design, without engaging in the measure ; such a description of gentlemen as might give it weight, and show to the world that nothing inimical either to civil " Till it be proved that some special law of Christ hath forever annexed unto the clergy alone the power to make ecclesiastical laws, we are to hold it a thing most consonant with equity and reason, that no ecclesiastical law be made in a Christian commonwealth, without consent as well as of the laity as of the clergy." Polity, B. VIII., C. vi. 8. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 97 or to religious rights was in contemplation. 3dly, Without the order of laity permanently making a part of our assem- blies, it were much to be apprehended, that the laymen would never be brought to submit to any of our ecclesias- tical laws, in such points as might affect the interests or the convenience of any of them, which, it is evident, might happen in very many cases: for instance, to mention two of the most important admission to the communion, and exclusion from it. And they would have the principles and the practice of England to plead in their favor, as already stated.* In order to show that the preceding sentiments are not uncommon in the Church of England, it will be to the pur- pose to give the following extract from Bishop Warburton's "Alliance of Church and State," p. 197 "There was no absurdity in that custom, which continued during the Sax- on government, and some time after, which admitted the laity into ecclesiastical synods; there appearing to be much the same reasons for laymen's sitting in convocation, as for churchmen sitting in parliament." On the question to which this relates, it will be pertinent to remark, that since, according to what is held by all Protestants, neither clergy nor laity can add to the truths of Scripture, what- ever either or both of them may ordain, must fall under the S head of discipline. To what extent lay interference was carried in the Eng- lish reformation, may be learned from the following ac- counts of the historian Fuller. Speaking of the convoca- tion of 1552, under Edward VI., he says " The true reason, why the king would not mtrust the diffusive body of the convocation with a power to meddle with matters of relig- ion, was a just jealousie which he had of the ill affection of the major part thereof; who, under the fair rinde of Protes- * Dr. Hawks says that Bishop White repeatedly told him "that such was the / feeling on the subject of introducing the laity, that had they been excluded, no / union or constitution would ever have been formed." Journals III., 60. Ed. 9 8 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. tant profession had the rotten core of Romish superstition. It was therefore conceived safer for the king, to relie on the ability and fidelity of some select confidents, cordiall to the cause of religion, than to adventure the same to be discussed and decided by a suspitious convocation. How- ever, this convocation is entitled the parent of those ar- ticles of religion (42 in number,) which are printed with this preface 'Articuli de quibus in Synodo Londinensi An- no Domini 1552, inter Episcopos et alios eruditos viros convenerat."' Afterward, speaking of Poinet's Catechism, Fuller says "Very few in the convocation ever saw it. But these had formerly (it seems) passed over their power (I should be thankful to him who would produce the originall instru- ment thereof) to the select divines appointed by the king, in which sense, they may be said to have done it them- selves by their delegates, to whom they had deputed their authority. A case not so clear, but that it occasioned a cavill at the next convocation, in the first of Queen Mary, when the papists, therein assembled, renounced the legal- ity of any such former transactions." However cautiously Fuller speaks, it is evident he had no faith in the transmission of the power of the convocation ^ \ to the delegates appointed by the king. If the fact could ~fy *v be established, there would remain the question of the C right to communicate, without a check, a power exclusively ( vested in the whole clerical order, as this is said to be. In the controversy between the Romanists and the Protes- tants, concerning the sanction to the principle of persecu- tion by the fourth Lateran Council, in 1225, the defence made is, that the Pope read the decrees as prepared by himself, and that they were adopted by the council without discussion. It is an insufficient plea, but more specious than that of an authority claimed for points not only not discussed, but not heard, and resting on a retrospect to the alleged delegation of power, if there should exist the proof of it unknown to Fuller. It is right to contend for the due ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 99 weight of the clergy in ecclesiastical proceedings, but when the matter is carried so far, as that without their permis- sion, there shall not be the rejection of corruptions in con- trariety to the records on which their commission rests, the claim is extravagant, and tends to the counteracting evil, of a denial of the real rights of their order. The connection of this with a pamphlet published in the summer of 1783,* by the author, although without his name, in which pamphlet was the first public suggestion, tending to the introduction of the laity into our ecclesiastical coun- cils, induces the taking of this opportunity of declaring, that, after the years which have passed, there does not ap- pear to his mind any cause to retract the leading senti- ments of that performance. The necessity urged in it ceased to exist, within a short time after the publication, and therefore, all thoughts of the measure intended to have been founded on it, were laid aside. But had Great &"! Britain dropped the war, yet continued her claims, as many / judicious persons expected would be the case, and as had happened formerly, between Spain and the United Nether- lands, it is difficult to perceive how any thing materially \ different from what is recommended in that pamphlet, / * The pamphlet in question was entitled " The Case of the Episcopal Churches in the United States considered" (Philadelphia, printed by David C. Claypole, 1783). It was reprinted in 1827 by William Staveley, Philadelphia; and in 1829 it was republished from 1224 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, with the title, "Bishop White on Episcopacy " (See "Opinions of Bishop White," Philadelphia, 1868, p. 30). It was also reproduced in the Journals, Vol. III., p. 419. The motto on the title page was from Hooker: "To make new articles of faith and doctrine, no man thinketh it lawful; new laws of government, what commonwealth or church is there which maketh not at one time or another? " Yet Bishop White, no more than Hooker, dreamed of any departure from the primitive and apostolic Church, while the nature of his proposition is explained in the present work. It may be added, however, that the blank leaves of a copy of a Charge printed in 1832 bear some additional explanations in his own hand. These leaves have been reproduced in fac simile by his grandson, Thomas H. Montgomery, Esq. The Bishop says that \ his pamphlet was put forth at a time when it was thought, that, in case American Independence was virtually achieved, it would not be acknowledged by England, j. and, consequently, that the succession could not be obtained. Ed. 100 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. could have continued us, as a religious society, in exist- ence.* Soon after the publication of the pamphlet, the author found himself in danger of being involved in a dis- pute with the clergy of Connecticut, in the name of whom, assembled in convention, their secretary, the Rev. Abra- ham Jarvis, addressed a letter, complaining of the perform- ance, although doubtless mistaking the object of it. The letter was answered it is hoped, in a friendly manner and there the matter ended. The same convention, in the ad- dress sent by them to the Archbishop of York, alluded to the pamphlet, as evidence of a design entertained to set up an Episcopacy, on the ground of presbyterial and lay authority. No personal animosity became the result of this misapprehension; and other events have manifested consent in all matters essential to ecclesiastical discipline. Before the author's subsequent visit to England, he knew that his pamphlet had been in the hands of the Archbishop not the prelate to whom the convention had addressed their letter of York, the chair of Canterbury being re- cently vacated by the decease of Dr. Cornwallis, and the appointment of his successor being not yet known in America. The latter, Archbishop Moore, did not express any dissatisfaction with the pamphlet, or with the author on its account, nor has any other English prelate, so far as is known to him. It had been enclosed to Mr. Adams, the American minister, when there was officially sent to him the address of the convention of 1785, to the archbishops and bishops of England, and was by him delivered to the Archbishop of Canterbury.! It is not to be supposed that under such circumstances, the non-juring bishops of Scotland, laboring under penal laws, not executed indeed, but to which they were obnoxious, and studying to live in quiet submission to an authority which they did not acknowledge, would have provoked it by the measure in question. It is equally improbable, that any kingdom, the establishment of which was Protestant and Epis- copalian, would have provoked Great Britain by an intercourse with those whom she would have considered as her subjects in rebellion. f The pamphlet, written at a time when there were few Episcopalian pulpits in ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. IOI On the communication from Connecticut, it will not be offensive at the present day, to make the following remarks. There pervades it the defect, of not distinguishing be- tween the then state of public concerns, and as they stood when the pamphlet was published. Nearly a year, and the acknowledgment of independence, had intervened. The in- timation in the letter, that the author of the pamphlet re- garded Episcopacy no further than for the satisfying of the people, and thus the prospect was held out of obtaining it at a future time, would have been wounding to his feelings, had his brethren of Connecticut possessed a knowledge of him. They were, at that time, strangers to one another. The intimated suspicion was then resolved, and is now re- solved by him on whom it fell, into a difference of appre- hension as to the means of accomplishing the same end. The writer of the pamphlet, although aware that there are occasions of defending Episcopacy against opposite preten- sions, entertained the opinion, that the most improper is when the subject under discussion concerned the Episcopal Church alone. The members of this Church were supposed to have been satisfied with the principles on which they the United States from which the sound of the gospel was heard, was to the follow- ing effect: It proposed the combining of the clergy and of representatives of the congrega- tions, in convenient districts, with a representative body of the whole, nearly on the plan subsequently adopted. This ecclesiastical representative was to make a declaration approving of Episcopacy, and professing a determination to possess the succession when it could be obtained; but they were to carry the plan into imme- diate act. The expedient was sustained by the plea of necessity, and by opinions of various authors of the Church of England, acknowledging a valid ministry under circumstances similar to those of the existing case, although less imperious. It was also alleged, that as much as what was now proposed might be seen to be implied, in the ground on which Episcopacy rests in the institutions of the Church of Eng- land, and in the defences of it by her most celebrated divines. Although reference was had to the position of the Church, that "from the apostles' time, there have been in the Church of Christ, the three orders, of bishops, priests, and deacons"; nothing was said in proof of the fact, because it was not questioned in this Church, and because argument to the effect would have been indiscreet, as to be stated above. 102 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. had acted, and which they still professed. To have in- volved the merits of those principles with the object in view, would have given a plausible pretense for the inter- ference of those who might be disposed to defeat the meas- ure in contemplation. It is difficult, in avoiding one extreme, not to fall under the appearance of its opposite. Many years after the pub- lication of the pamphlet, a clergyman of standing in an anti-episcopalian society, alleged some passages of the performance as sustaining ordination not episcopal. But he had the candor publicly to acknowledge his mistake, when it was pointed out to him. For the communication from the clergy of Connecticut, see Appendix, No. 3. It is no slight instance of the proneness to govern too much, and of the peculiar liability to the error in a collec- tive body, that during the war of the Revolution, the legis- lature of Maryland, although consisting of men of various denominations, took up the subject of organizing the Church, and particularly of appointing ordainers to the ministry. A clergyman of weight of character the Rev. Samuel Keene actuated by laudable ardor, repaired to Annapolis, was heard before the house, and was considered as principally influential in producing an abandonment of the design. Perhaps the hasty enterprise was over-ruled to good; for almost as soon as there became known the happy event of peace, there were held two conventions in Maryland; the first, on the I3th of August, 1783, and the other, on the 22d of June, 1784. The proceedings of these conventions, with measures taken at other times and in other matters by the clergy of that state, were chiefly orig- inated and conducted by the Rev. Dr. Smith, who, in his residence there, during the seizure of the charter rights of the College of Philadelphia, exerted his excellent talents in these and in other public works. The principal business of the convention in August, 1783, was the making of "A declaration of certain fundamental ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 103 rights and liberties of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Maryland," consisting of the following articles : ist. We consider it as the undoubted right of the said/ / ,j Protestant Episcopal Church, in common with other Chris- tian churches Tinder the American revolution, to complete and preserve herself as an entire Church, agreeably to her ancient usages and professions; and to have a full enjoy- ment and free exercise of those purely spiritual powers, which are essential to the being of every Church or congre- gation of the faithful, and which, being derived 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 of which we are members (and which, by the constitution of this state, is entitled to a perpetual enjoyment of certain property and rights, under the denomination of the Church of England), " That there be three orders of ministers in Christ's Church, bishops, priests, and deacons," and that an Episcopal ordination and commission are necessary to the valid administration of the sacraments, and the due exercise of the ministerial function in the said Church. 3d. That without calling in question the rights, modes, and forms, of any other Christian Churches or societies, or wishing the 'least contest with them on that subject, we consider and declare it to be an essential right of the said Protestant Episcopal Church, to have and enjoy the con- tinuance of the said three orders of ministers forever, so far as concerns matters purely spiritual, and that no per- sons, 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, and which, by the constitution and form of government, is secured to the said Church forever, 104 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. by_whatsoever 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 repre- sented in a synod or convention of the different orders of her ministers and people, 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 Amer- ica; which, it is humbly conceived, will and may be done, without any other or farther departure from the venerable order and beautiful forms of worship of the Church from which we sprung, than may be found expedient in the change of our situation from a daughter to a sister Church. In the convention of June, 1784, which included lay dep- uties from the different parishes, the aforesaid declaration was again approved, and certain fundamental principles of ecclesiastical government were established, of which the following is recorded on the printed journal as the substance: 1. That none of the orders of the clergy, whether bishops, priests, or deacons, who may be under the necessity of obtaining ordination in any foreign state, with a view to officiate or settle in this state, shall at the time of their ordination, or at any time afterward, take or subscribe any obligation of obedience, civil or canonical, to any for- eign power or authority whatsoever, nor be admissible into the ministry of this Church, if such obligations have been taken for a settlement in any foreign country, without re- nouncing the same, by taking the oaths required by law, as a test of allegiance to this state. 2. According to what we conceive to be of true apostolic institution, the duty and office of a bishop differs in nothing from that of other priests, except in the power of ordination and confirmation, and in the right of precedency in ecclesi- astical meetings or synods, and shall accordingly be so ex- ercised in the Church, the duty and office of priests and deacons remaining as heretofore. And if any further dis- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 105 tinctions and regulations, in the different orders of the ministry, should be found necessary for the good govern- ment of the Church, the same shall be made and estab- lished by the joint voice and authority of a representative body of the clergy and laity, at future ecclesiastical synods or conventions. 3. The third section is intended to define or discriminate some of the separate rights and powers of the clergy, and was proposed and agreed to as follows, viz., that the clergy ' shall be deemed adequate judges of the ministerial commis- sion and authority, which is necessary to the due adminis- tration of the ordinances of religion in their own Church, and of the literary, moral, and religious qualifications and abilities of persons to be nominated and appointed to the different orders of the ministry; but the approving and re- * ceiving such persons to any particular cure, duty or parish, when so nominated, appointed, set apart, consecrated, and ordained, is in the people, who are to support them and to receive the benefit of their ministry. 4. The fourth section provides, that ecclesiastical con- ventions or synods of this Church shall consist of the clergy, and one lay-delegate or representative from each vestry or parish, or &. majority of the same, and shall be held annually on the fourth Tuesday of October, unless some canon or rule should be made at some future conven- tion for altering the time of meeting, or for meeting oftener than once a year, or not so often, or with a larger or small- er representation of the Church, as may be judged neces- /sary. But fundamental rules, once duly made, shall not be altered, unless two thirds of such majority, as aforesaid, duly assembled, shall agree therein. The following heads of additional articles were set down for the consideration of the next convention. I. That the power and authority necessary for reclaiming I or excluding scan'dalous members, whether lay or clerical, (/ and all jurisdiction with regard to offenders, be exercised A ^ only by a representative body of clergy and laity jointly. 106 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. & r Q x 2. That the power of suspending or dismissing clergy- , '\ men from the exercise of their ministry, in any particular S church, parish, or district, be by the like authority. 3. That all canons or laws for church government, and all alterations, changes, and reforms, in the Church service and liturgy, or_inpointsof doctrine to be professed and taught in the^ ChurchTshall also be by the like authority. The proceedings of these conventions, besides the cir- cumstance of their showing an accommodation to the civil system, by the introduction of the laity, gave great offence to some of the clergy, by the definition of the authority of a bishop, in the second of the articles established. It is, evidently, the much controverted position of < S U Jerome. The author does not think it accurate: and although his principles on the subject of Episcopacy allow of an accom- modation of its powers to the circumstances of the Church, _at different times, he was afraid of there arising some incon- venience from the asserting, as a fundamental principle, of what was in the opposite extreme to that of the over- strained authorities of the office maintained by others. In consequence of the recommendation and proposal of ' U i the meeting of 1784, in New York, there was a convention ^ of the clergy of South Carolina, at Charleston, in the spring of 1785. This was the state in which there was the most to be apprehended an opposition to the very principle of Episcopacy, from its being connected, in the minds of some people, with the idea of an attachment to the British I government. The citizens of South Carolina were the last I visited by the British armies, and had suffered more than ' any others by their ravages. The truth is, there was real danger of an opposition in the convention, to a compliance with the invitation given. But the danger was warded off, by a proposal made by the Rev. Robert Smith, to accom- fi pany their compliance with the measure, by its being un- j derstood, that there was to be no bishop settled in that state. Such a proposal, from the gentleman who, it was presumed, would be the bishop, were there to be any ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. JO? chosen, had the effect intended. Some gentlemen, it is said, declared in conversation, that they had contemplated an opposition, but were prevented by this caution. Besides the conventions which have been mentioned, there were one in New York, and another in. New Jersey, in the summer of 1785. But as their proceedings extended no further than to the appointing of deputies to the Gen- eral Convention, it is not necessary to notice them any further, than is dictated by this circumstance. F. Page 22. Of the General Convention in Philadelphia,.^ in September and October, 1785. \J^ The president of this convention was Dr. White, and the secretary was the Rev. Dr. Griffith. There being journals of this convention, and of the con- ventions following, the matter of those journals will riot be repeated in this work, except so far as may be thought necessary to the sense of it, the design being principally the communicating of facts within the knowledge and the recollection of the narrator, tending to throw light on what has been recorded. The statements and the remarks to be now offered will be arranged under the heads of sundry sections. Section I. Of the General Ecclesiastical Constitution. It has been seen, that in the preceding year, at New York, a few general principles, tending to the organizing of the Church, had been recommended to the churches represented, and proposed to those not represented. As all the articles excej3t_the^ fourth, which recognized the English liturgy, with the exception of the political parts of it, were adopted by the present convention, they became a' bond of union, and indeed, the only one acted under, until the year 1789. For as to the general constitution, IOS MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. framed at the period now before us, it stood on recom-l mendation only, and was of no use, except in helping ton convince those who were attached to that mode of trans- \ acting business, that it was very idle to bring gentlemen , together from different states for the purpose of such in-' conclusive proceedings. The fifth and the eighth articles of this proposed con- stitution deserve particular notice, because they have been subjects of considerable conversation and censure. The former of these articles provided, that every bishop should be a member of the convention "ex official Ac- ' cordingly, the article was loudly objected to by the clergy 1 to the eastward, because of its not providing for Episcopal presidency. The constitution was drafted by the author, in a sub- committee, a part of a general committee, consisting of a clergyman and a layman from each state; and originally \ provided, that a bishop, if any were present, should preside. In the sub-committee, a gentleman, without much con- sideration of the subject, and contrary to what his good sense, with such an advantage, would have dictated, ob- jected to the clause; and insisted, that he had read, although ' he could not recollect in what book, that this had not been , a prerogative of bishops in ancient ecclesiastical assemblies. The objection was overruled, by all the other members of the sub-committee. But when the instrument, after passing in the general committee, was brought into the convention, | the same gentleman, not expecting to succeed, and merely, i as he afterwards said, to be consistent, made a motion to J strike out the clause. Contrary to expectation, he was , supported by another lay gentleman, who took an active part in all the measures, and who, in the sub-committee, had been of another mind. Thus a debate was brought .on, which produced more heat than any thing else that ( happened during the session. As the voting was by orders, the clergy, who, with the exception of one gentleman, were for the clause, might have quashed the whole article. But ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 109 this appeared to them to be wrong; because it contained nothing contrary to the principle of Episcopal presidency; and the general object was such as ought to have been provided for. Accordingly, the article passed, as it stands on the journal; that is, with silence as to the point in question. It was considered, 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 con- sideration of the subject. The latter expectation was jus- tified by the event. . The other article provided, that every clergyman should be amenable to the convention of the state to which he should belong. This was objected to by the English bish- ops; as appears in the letter of the archbishops of Canter- bury and York; who there complain, that it is "a degra- dation of the clerical, and much more of the Episcopal >, character." The foundation of this complaint, like that of the other, was rather in omission, than in any thing pos- itively declared. For the bishop's being amenable to the convention in the state to which he belonged, does not necessarily involve any thing more than that he should be triable by laws of their enacting, himself being a part of the body: and it did not follow, that he might be deposed or censured, either by laymen or by presbyters. This, how- ever, ought to have been guarded against: but to have attempted it, while the convention were in the temper excited by the altercations concerning the fifth article, would have been to no purpose. In this whole business, there was encountered a preju- dice entertained by many of the clergy in other states, who thought, that nothing should have been done towards the organizing of the Church until the obtaining of the Epis- copacy. This had been much insisted on, in the preceding year, in New York. Let us it was said first have a head, and then let us proceed to regulate the body. It was answered on that occasion let us gather the scattered limbs, and then let the head be superadded. Certainly, 1 10 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the different Episcopalian congregations knew of no union f before the revolution; except what was the result of the) connection which they in common had with the Bishop of i London. The authority of that bishop being withdrawn, what right had the Episcopalians in any state, or in any one part of it, to choose a bishop for those in any other ? And until a union were effected, what is there in Chris- tianity generally, or in the principles of this Church in particular, to hinder them from taking different courses in different places, as to all things not necessary to salvation ? Which might have produced different liturgies, different articles, Episcopacy from different sources, and, in short, very many churches, instead of one extending over the United States; and that, without any ground for the charge of schism, or of the invasion of one another's rights. The course taken has embraced all the different congregations. It is far from being certain, that the same event would have been produced by any other plan that might have been de- vised. For instance, let.it be supposed, that in any district of Connecticut, the clergy and the people, not satisfied with the choice made of Bishop Seabury, or with the contem- plated plan of settlement, had acted for themselves, instead of joining with their brethren. It would be impossible to prove the unlawfulness of such a scheme; or, until an or- ganization were made, that the minor part were bound to submit to the will of the majority. There was no likeli- hood of such an indiscreet proceeding in Connecticut. But in some other departments which might be named, it would not have been surprising. Let it be remarked, that in the preceding hypothesis there is supposed to have been, in the different neighborhoods, a bond of union not dissolved by the revolution. This sentiment is congenial with Chris- tianity itself, and with Christian discipline in the beginning; the connection not existing congregationally, but, in every instance, without dependence on the houses in which the worship of the different portions of the aggregate body may be carried on. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. Ill Section II. Of tJie Measures taken to obtain the Episcopacy. The expression should be noticed, on account of the pretence made by some, that the Episcopal Church in the United States begun with its obtaining of the Episcopacy. According to this notion, where dioceses exist independ- ently on one another, as was the condition of all Christen- dom for a long time after the preaching of the apostles, on the decease of every bishop, his church became extinct. A new name does ftot characterize the church as new, but may arise from civil changes, in various ways to be con- ceived of. What was called formerly "the Church of Eng- land in America," did not cease to exist on the removal of the Episcopacy of the Bishop of London, by the Provi- dence of God, but assumed a new name, as the dictate of propriety. It maybe matter of surprise, that, after the clamor made but a few years before this period, on the proposal of an American Episcopacy, and considering the fashion of ob- jecting to it prevailing even among a considerable propor- tion of our own communion, there should now be a unani- mous application for it, from a fair representation of the Church in seven states of the Union; the lay part consist- ing principally of gentlemen who had been active in the late revolution, and made under circumstances which re- quired the consent of the very power we had been at war with.* The truth is, that if there existed any inclination to object and there is no certainty of the contrary it was prevented by what is to be related. A few months before the present period, Bishop Seabury had arrived in Connecticut, with consecration from the non-juring bishops of Scotland. The clergy in that state, * In evidence of the unanimity, there is in possession of the author, the original instrument, signed by all the clerical and all the lay members who gave attend- ance on the business of the convention. 112 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. not liking the complexion of the measures taken for the calling of a General Convention, wrote to several of the southern clergy, inviting {hem to a convention to be held in the summer at New Haven.* What answer they received from others is not here known, but that of Philadelphia thanked them for the invitation, congratulated Bishop Sea- bury on his arrival, apologized for the not coming, by the expectation of the convention in September, and invited the clergy of Connecticut to attend the latter. When the time of the convention in Philadelphia drew near, Bishop Seabury wrote to Dr. Smith, then living in Maryland, a letter, which he enclosed, under cover, to Dr. Chandler, of Elizabethtown, who sent it, in like manner, to the author, desiring him to read, and then forward it to Dr. Smith. In this letter, a copy of which the author has now before him, Bishop Seabury, besides objecting to sun- dry of the measures taken in the southern states, declared /himself in very strong terms against the admission of the laity into ecclesiastical councils; and indeed against that of presbyters also, except into the diocesan. For although his expressions are, that they were not admitted into gen- eral councils, and this is very indefinite, yet it would seem from the connection, that he disapproved of submitting the ' general concerns of the American Church to any other than bishops. It is the arrangement of the Church in ' which Bishop Seabury received his Episcopacy. This letter, which, agreeably to a desire expressed in it, was laid before the convention, produced some animadver- sions. A few of the lay gentlemen spoke more warmly than the occasion seemed to justify, considering, that the letter appeared to contain the honest sentiments of the writer, delivered in inoffensive terms. It was addressed to According to learning, the first Convocation in Connecticut was to meet at I Middletown, Aug. 3d, 1785. The body was adjourned to meet in New Haven, ! Sept. I ith of the same year. See Journals III., 69, and Appendix, No. 4. Bishop \ White was informed of both meetings. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 113 a gentleman who had long lived in habits of acquaintance with the writer. And as for its being designed for the hearing of the body then assembled, it should have been remembered, that the clergy of Connecticut had been in- vited to the meeting, by those at whose desire they had appeared themselves. On this ground, they were answered by some of the clergy particularly by Dr. Andrews. For the letter, see Appendix, No. 4. It naturally happened in regard to any apprehensions entertained of an excessive hierarchy, that they influenced to the very application to England, which had formerly, from the very same cause, been contemplated with jeal- ousy. It was generally understood, that the door was open to consecration in Scotland; or at least, that if there should be any impediment, it must arise from some particu- lars, which had been thought too republican by many. That the clergy unanimously, and that a very great body of the laity, would adhere to Episcopacy, was well known; and therefore, how natural the recourse to a quarter in which it was thought there would be less stiffness, on the points objected to by Bishop Seabury ! it may be added in which the political principles obtaining, although monarch- ical, were not such as favored arbitrary power. It ought to be understood, that this is the supposed strain of rea- soning of a few only. The majority of the convention cer- tainly thought it a matter of choice, and even required by decency, to apply, in the first instance, to the Church of which the American had been till now a part. No doubt,] the sentiment was strengthened by the general disappro-' bation entertained in America of the prejudices which, in -the year 1688, in Scotland, had deprived the Episcopal] Church of her establishment, and had kept her ever since in hostility to the family on the throne. As to Bishop Sea-- bury's failure in England, the causes 'of it, as stated in his letter, seemed to point out a way of obviating the difficulty in the present case. The same causes had been, with no considerable variety, stated to the author in a letter from 114 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the Rev. Dr. Murray, formerly of Reading in this state, who declared his full conviction, that a proper application, from such a body as was in contemplation, that is, the present convention, of whose intended meeting he had been informed, would be followed by success. As the doc- tor was supposed to have conversed with leading charac- ters on the subject, which was found afterward to have been the case, his letter had great weight in encouraging the measure. So it was, then, that the projected application found no opposition. The duty of proposing a mode of application } was added to the other duties of the general committee i which had been appointed. As one of a sub-committee, the author drafted the resolves and the address, as they stand on the journals, with the exception of a few verbal alterations. Thus a foundation was laid for the procuring of the present Episcopacy. It was a prudent provision of the convention, to instruct the deputies from the respective states, to apply to the civil authorities existing in them respectively, for their sanction of the measure, in order to avoid one of the impediments which had stood in the way of Bishop Seabury. The address above alluded to, which was the first step in the correspondence with the English prelates, is in the Appendix, No. 5. The Episcopalian public may be supposed to be satisfied that the course taken was the best, in every point of view, and that it can never suffer by a comparison with any other mode which might have been pursued. To have aban-\ doned the Episcopal succession, would have been in oppo- \ sition to primitive order and ancient habits; and besides, J would at least have divided the Church. To have had recourse to Scotland, independently on the objections en- tertained against th r political principles of the non-jurors i of that country, would not have been proper, without pre- vious disappointment on a request made to the mother Church. Another resource remained, in foreign ordination; which had been made the easier by the act of the British ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 115 parliament, passed in the preceding year, to enable the Bishop of London to ordain citizens or subjects of foreign countries without exacting the usual oaths. But, besides that this would have kept the Church under the same hardships which had heretofore existed, and had been so long complained of; dependence on a foreign country in spirituals, when there had taken place independence in tem- porals, is what no prudent person would have pleaded for. Section III. Of the Alterations in the Book of Common Prayer. When the members of the convention first came to- gether, 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. There being no express authority to the purpose, the contrary was implied ^- " "" * * A J. ' ' * - * L in the sending of deputies, on the ground of the recom- mendation and proposal from New York, \vhich presumed that the book, with the aboyje exception, should remain entire. The only Church to which this remark does not apply, is that of Virginia; which authorized its deputies to join in a review, liable however to a rejection by their own convention. Every one, so far as is here known, wished for alterations in the different offices. But it was thought, . at New "York, in the preceding year, that such an en- '> terprise could not be undertaken, until the Church should ' be consolidated and organized. Perhaps it would have been better, if the same opinion had been continued and acted on. But it happened otherwise. Some of the members hesi- tated at making the book so permanent as it would have been by the fourth article of the recommendatory instru- ment. Arguments were held in favor of a review, from cha_nge of language, and from the notorious fact, that there were some matters universally held exceptionable, inde- pendently on doctrine. A moderate review, fell in with Il6 AfEAfOIKS OF THE CHURCH. I the sentiments and the wishes of every member. Added to ! all this, there gained ground a confident persuasion, that the general mind of the communion would be so gratified by it, as that acquiescence might be confidently expected. On these considerations, the matter was undertaken. The alterations were prepared by another sub-division of the general committee than that to which the author be- longed. When brought into the committee, they were not reconsidered; because the ground would have to be gone over again in the convention. Accordingly, he can not give an account of any arguments arising in the prepara- tory stage of the business. Even in the convention, there were but few points canvassed, with any material difference of principle: and those only shall be noticed. The first controversy of this description was introduced, on a motion made by the Hon^Mr. Page, of Virginia, since I governor of that state, to leave out the first four petitions of the Litany, and, instead of them, to introduce a short petition, which he had drawn up, more agreeable to his ideas of the Divine Persons recognized in those petitions. The mover declared, that he had no objection to the invok- ing of our blessed Saviour, whose divinity the prayer ac- knowledged, and Whom he considered as invoked through the whole of the Liturgy which, he thought, might be de- fended by Scripture. The objection lay to the word " Trin-V ity," which he remarked to be unauthorized by Scripture, 1 and a foundation of much unnecessary disputation. But he / said, that the leaving out of the fourth petition only, in which only the word occurred, would leave the other peti- tions liable to the charge of acknowledging three Gods; ^ and therefore he moved to strike out the whole. The Rev.j f Dr. West, of Baltimore, answered Mr. Page, in a speech in\ which the doctor appeared to be in great agitation, partly J because, as he said, he was unused to unprepared speaking ,f but evidently the more so, from his apprehensions arising\ from what he supposed to be the signal for aiming at very ) hazardous and essential alterations. Perhaps much morej ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 117 * would have been said, but during Dr. West's speech, it was whispered about, that there was really no use in going into such a controversy; that Mr. Page had made the motion, merely to preserve consistency of conduct; that he had at- tempted the same thing in the sub-committee, and well knew, from what had passed, that there was no prospect of success, but that he could not dispense with the bringing of the question before the body. Accordingly, as soon as Dr. West had finished, it was put and lost without a division.* The next material question, to the best of the recollec- i tion retained, was on a motion for framing a service for the ' Fourth of July. This was the most injudicious step taken by' the convention. Might they not have foreseen, that every I clergyman whose political principles interfered with the appointment, would be under a strong temptation to cry down the intended book, if it were only to get rid of the I offensive holiday? Besides this point of prudence, was it not the dictate of moderation, to avoid the introducing of extraneous matter of difference of opinion, in a Church that was to be built up? Especially, when there was in contem- plation the moderating of religious tests, was it consistent to introduce a political one ? It was said, that the revolu- tion being now accomplished, all the clergy ought, as good citizens, to conform to it; and to uphold, as far as their in- fluence extended, the civil system which had been estab- lished. Had the question been concerning the praying for the prosperity of the commonwealths, and for the persons of those who rule in them, the argument would have been conclusive; and, indeed, this had been done by all the re- maining clergy, however disaffected they might have been, * In a controversy since moved in Boston, Bishop Provoost has been named, as having endeavored to accomplish the omission of the acknowledgment of the Trinity. It is not true; and the error may be supposed to have arisen from what has been related of the effort of Mr. Page. There have been various misrepresen- tations of the matter, which have made it the more necessary to state the fact. See on this note by Bishop White Journals III., 300, and Wilson's "Memoir of Bishop White," p. 323. Ed. Il8 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. throughout the war. But the argument did not apply to a retrospective approbation of the origin of the civil consti- tutions, or rather, to a profession of such approbation, con- trary to known fact. This was one of the few occasions on which the author used the privilege, reserved by him on his acceptance of the presidency, to deliver his opinion. To his great surprise, there was but one gentleman and he a professed friend to American independence who spoke on the same side of the question; and there were very few, if any, who voted with the two speakers against the measure. Bodies of men are more apt than individuals to calculate on an implicit submission 'to their determinations. The present was a striking instance of the remark. The members of the convention seem to have thought themselves so established in their station of ecclesiastical legislators, that they might expect of the many clergy who had been averse to the American revolution the adoption of this service; although, by the use of it, they must make an implied acknowledg- ment of their error, in an address to Almighty God. What 1 must further seem not a little extraordinary, the service , was principally arranged and the prayer alluded to was < composed, by a reverend gentleman (Dr. Smith), had written and acted against the declaration of Inde- 4 * pendence, and was unfavorably looked on by the sup- I porters of it, during the whole revolutionary war. His '' conduct, in the present particular, was different from what might have been expected from his usual discernment; but he doubtless calculated on what the good of the Church seemed to him to require, in consequence of a change of circumstances; and he was not aware of the effect which would be produced by the retrospective property of the ap- pointment. The greater stress is laid on this matter, be- 'i ..cause of the notorious fact, that the majority of the clergy ^ ) /'could not have used the service, without subjecting them- */tr commodjated, not to individual condition, and to everlast-SA***** ing reward and punishment, but to national designation, v? /x 2 /- /^ and to a state of covenant with God in the present life.) ~ __ . - * _ _ _-.-^_ / t Ji Although this is a view of the subject still entertained by ~ him, yet he has been since convinced, that the introducing / y of it as an article would have endangered needless centre-' versy on the meanings of the terms predestination and 120 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. election, as used in the New Testament. If we can not do away the ground of controversy heretofore laid, it at least becomes us to avoid the furnishing of new matter for the excitement of it. As to the article in the Proposed Book, although no one professed scruples against what is there affirmed, yet there seemed a difficulty in discovering for what purpose it was introduced. The author never met with any who were satisfied with it. On the subject of original sin, an incident occurred, strongly marking the propensity already noticed, unwarily to make private opinion the standard of public faith. The sub-commfftee had introduced into this article the much controverted passage in the seventh chapter of the Epistle , to the Romans, beginning at the ninth verse; and they had I applied it as descriptive of the Christian state. The con- struction is exacted by a theory, than which nothing was further from that of the gentleman (Dr! Smith) who would have bound this sense of the passage on the Church. The , interpretation generally given by divines of the Church of England, makes the words descriptive of man's unregencr- ' ate state, in which there is a struggle between nature and grace, to the extent of the terms made use of in Scripture. This seems necessary to a conformity with the Christian character, as drawn in innumerable places. It was on a proposal of the author, that the article was altered in this particular, although the gentleman who had drafted it not / only earnestly contended for his construction of the text, but could not be made sensible of the danger which would have resulted from the establishing of that construction, as a test to every candidate for Orders. Less prominent debates on the subject of the articles are not here noticed. Whatever is novel in them, was taken from a book in the possession of the Rev. Dr. Smith. The book was anonymous, and was one of the publications which have abounded in England, projecting changes in the established articles. On this business of the review of the Book of Common ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 121 Prayer and of the articles, the convention seem to have fallen into two capital errors, independently on the merits of the alterations themselves. The first error was the or- dering of the printing of a large edition of the book, which ( did not well consist with the principle of mere proposal. Perhaps much of the opposition to it arose from this very thing, which seemed a stretch of power, designed to effect / the introduction of the book to actual use, in order to pre- vent a discussion of its merits. The other error was the ordering of the use of it in Christ Church, Philadelphia, on the occasion of Dr. Smith's sermon, at the conclusion of the session of the convention. This helped to confirm the opinion of its being to be introduced with a high hand, and subjected the clergy of Philadelphia to extraordinary difficulty; for they continued the use of the liturgy, agree- ably to the alterations, on assurances given by many gentle- men, that they would begin it in their respective churches immediately on their return. This the greater number of ( ( them never did, and there are known instances in each of ' which the stipulation was shrunk back from, because some influential member of a congregation was dissatisfied with some one of the alterations. This is a fact which shows very strongly how much weight of character is necessary to such changes as may be thought questionable.* Section IV. Of sundry Measures and Events, connected with the Acts of the Convention of 1785. The first particular claiming attention under this head, is the publication of the Book of Common Prayer; that is, of the edition which has received the name of the Proposed Book. * The Proposed Book was doomed from the outset, and the volume is now very scarce. It was reprinted in London in 1789; and afterwards at Bath in Hall's " Reliquiae Liturgicae," Vol. V.; while an incomplete issue appeared in New York in 1873. See also "Quarterly Church Review," Vol. XI., p. 302. On the opposi- tion to Proposed Book see Journals III., p. 297. Ed. 122 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Dr. Smith, Dr. Wharton, ana the author, who were ap- pointed to this service, gave their application to it without , delay. But here, unexpected difficulties occurred, which ) are taken notice of, principally with the view of guarding v against the like in future ecclesiastical proceedings. The committee had been authorized to make verbal al- terations, but were restrained from departing, either in form or in substance, from what had been agreed on. Set- ting aside the questions arising on this distmction, the im- perfections evidently remaining on some points by reason of haste, and which would have been remedied had they been attended to, and, added to this, the importunities of some of the clergy, who pressed the committee to extend their powers pretty far, in full confidence that the liberty would be acceptable to all, were such, that, in the end, ( they were drawn on to take a greater latitude than ought to be allowed in such a work. Besides discretion as to verbal alterations, the commit- tee were fully empowered on the subject of the tables, and on that of the selection of reading psalms. The author's proposal was to take whole psalms, selecting such as fall in with the general subjects of divine worship, and leaving the officiating minister to his choice, among those which should be selected. But the other members of the com- mittee were of opinion, that as much should be retained as could not well be objected to, on the score of being unsuit- able parts of Christian prayer and praise. The consequence of this, was a charge of having treated Scripture irrever- ently, by the leaving out of particular passages, on the principle of their being offensive. Although the omissions were not made on that ground, because it is not every part of Scripture that can be introduced into the exercise of devotion, yet there would apparently have been less color for the censure, on the other plan of the selection of entire psalms. The author has been since convinced, that instead'' of a selection of psalms in any shape, a better way would j have been to print the Psalter entire, and to leave every j ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 123 officiating minister to his choice, from time to time. This would have less interfered with the ideas of those who, on account of the sublime spirit of devotion running through the whole body of the Psalms, were averse to the parting with any proportion of them from the service of the Church. For although, according to the' idea here suggested, it would have been impossible to have gratified every individ- ual under the proposed alternative, yet there might have been taken which ever side of it was the most likely to be satisfactory. It has been painful to the author, that he has found him- self opposed in opinion to that of some of his brethren, whose views of the subject have the appearance of being opened to them by the sentiment of devotion. Yet, he can not perceive the propriety of putting into the mouths of a whole congregation devotions expressive of peculiar states of mind, and such as are not likely to be applicable to many persons in an ordinary assembly; for instance, strains, expressive of the highest exultation, and other strains, ex- pressive of the lowest depths of sorrow. He is aware of what is argued in favor of this, from the sentiment of Chris- tian sympathy, by which every member of a Church may enter into feelings which are otherwise not his own, but which he may reasonably suppose to belong to some who are fellow-members of the body. The author respects the plea, but can not bring it within the sphere of his own ideas of the precept, to "pray with the understanding." He has heard of another argument for the practice. It is the use of impressing the whole of those excellent compo- sitions on the memories of all the members of the Church. But on this plan it would seem, that Scripture would be honored still more, if, from Genesis to Revelation, it were embodied with the service. This, however, could not have been the object of the introduction of the Psalms. There have been urged testimonies from the Fathers, demonstra- tive of the great use of these compositions in the early ages of the Church, and its not being recorded of any particular 124 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. psalms, to the exclusion of the rest. No: the whole body of them may have been a fund of devotion, consistently with choice made, as subject and as circumstances might dictate. He has not yet found evidence, that in the primi- ^ tivc Church, as in the Church of England, the book was gone through in a routine of successive portions. Al- though these are his opinions, yet he laments the extent of the innovation, made at the period referred to, because he believes that the aiming at so much, prevented what might have been done more effectually, and brought into universal use, by allowance of the discretion which has been pleaded for. Under the foregoing head, there has been noticed what is here thought a great error in the convention the print- ing of the book, without waiting for the reception of the alterations, and their being in use. A subordinate error, accompanying the other, was the endeavoring to raise a profit from the book, although for a charitable purpose. It had two bad consequences; that of exciting the supposition that the books were made the dearer although, in reality, this was not the fact, and that of inducing the committee to send them to the clergy, in the different parts of the continent, confiding in their exertions for the benevolent . purpose declared. Several of the clergy again intrusted them to persons from whom they got no returns. Hence it happened, that when the expenses of the edition were paid, there was not so much left for the charity, as to be j an adequate consideration for such an undertaking. The ! committee were at last obliged to relinquish the design of 1 saving for the charity the usual profit of the booksellers, who, on that change of plan, made rapid sales of them. Another bad effect of the publication was, that the English prelates were not furnished with an account of the alterations so soon as they should have been, considering the application that had come before them. For the com- mittee, having had good reason to believe that the impres- sion would go on rapidly, had not furnished a copy of the ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 125 instrument containing the alterations. Their waiting first for paper from the mills, and then, for one interfering ob- ject and another occurring to the printer, brought it to spring before the edition was out. It is true, that the sheets were sent by parcels during the progress. None however arrived before the answer to the address was sent; and this inattention or what seemed such the bishops could not account for, as the archbishop afterward dis- tantly intimated to those who received consecration in England. Hence arose the caution with which the con- vention were answered by the right reverend bench: a caution evidently to be discerned, in their letter of the 24th of February, 1786. For some of the clergy in the eastern states, from what is here supposed to have been mistaken zeal, had been very early, in conveying to their clerical acquaintance in England, an unfavorable represen- tation of the spirit of the proceedings; a fact which is glanced at in the same letter. Although the impression thus produced was so far done away on the arrival of the book, as that there remained no radical impediment to the gratification of the Church, in granting her request made, which must be evident to every one who reads their subse- quent letter; yet it follows from this narrative, that their misapprehension would have been obviated, if the printing had been confined to the list of the proposed alterations. For the letter of the English prelates, see Appendix, No. 6. From the letter of their lordships it appears, that the omission of the article of Christ's Descent into Hell, in the Apostles' Creed, was the thing principally faulted. It was the objection made by Dr. Moss, Bishop of Bath and Wells, that swayed in this matter. A gentleman who had been a member of the convention Richard Peters, Esq. happen- ing to visit England a few months after, and having waited on the archbishop at the request of the committee, the said bishop expressed a wish to see him, and, in the consequent interview, declared very strongly his disapprobation of that 126 MEMOfRS OF THE CHURCH. alteration. It was learned afterward in England, from Dr. Watson, Bishop of Landaff, that the objection came princi- pally from the quarter here noticed. Indeed he expressed himself in such a manner, as led to the conclusion that the Bishop of Bath and Wells only was the objector. No doubt the bishops generally must have approved of the ob- jection, considering their concurring in the strong protest that came from them, on the subject of the omitted article. However, from the different particulars attending the trans- action, the author is disposed to believe, that, had it not been for the above-mentioned circumstance, they would hardly have started their objection to the omission in such a manner as carries the appearance of their making of a * restoration of the clause a condition of their compliance '^with the request. As to the Bishop of Landaff, he plainly said, speaking on the merits of the subject, that he knew not of any scriptural authority of the article, unless it were the passage in St. Peter (meaning I. iii. 19, 20). And this he said must be acknowledged a passage considerably in- volved in obscurity. To the two bishops who went for con- secration it was very evident, that the Bishop of Landaff was far from being attached to the objection in which he had concurred. It is probable, that the same may have been true of many others of the bench. But when the matter was pressed by a very venerable bishop, eminent as well for his theological learning as for an exemplary life and conversation, and rested by him on the ground of the ) contradiction of an ancient heresy,* it must have been difficult in the body to waive the objection, considering the novel line in which they were acting, and their inability, in a corporate capacity, to act at all. The heresy of Apollinaris (Bishop of Laodicea, 362-382) who maintained that the Logos held in Christ the place of a rational soul, and that God was united in Him with the human body and the sensitive soul. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 127 Section V. Of Proceedings of Conventions in the States subsequent to those of the General Convention. For a while there was felt the evil of the mistake made in the beginning, of not forwarding copies of the alterations: a mistake, less to be imputed to the committee than to the convention, who had given no order on the subject; / but who, perhaps, presumed on the editing of the book, . before the other conventions could be held. They were,/ 1 J, held in the months of May and June, 1786; very soon after the arrival of the letter of the bishops. In New York the question of ratifying the Book of Common Prayer was kept A U , under consideration. In New Jersey they rejected it, ex- ' pressing at the same time their approbation of the other \' proceedings of the convention, except of the constitution. V*^ In Pennsylvania some amendments were proposed. The same was done in Maryland. No convention met in Dela- ware. In Virginia it was adapted, with the exception of one of the rubrics, and with some proposed amendments of the articles; many dissenting from such adoption, not, as the author was well informed, because of the alterations ' made, but because they were so few. It is strange to tell, \ , _ ^ \that the rubric, held to be intolerable in Virginia, was that f \allowingtheministertorepel an evil liver from the com-? (munion. The author, some time after, held serious argu- fy. e^Ji ment on the point with a gentleman who had been influ- ential in the state convention. The offensive matter was /vTx,. ?t* not the precise provisions of the rubric, but that there \ should be any provision of the kind or power exercised to ; the end contemplated. In South Carolina the book was $.C,6^ received without limitation. On the whole, it was evident c^/^j that, in regard to the Liturgy, the labors of the convention ^ had not reached their object. It did not appear that the constitution was objected to in any state, except in that of New Jersey. The propriety of the application to the Eng- lish bishops was not contradicted anywhere, except in South Carolina: and even in this state there was carried an 128 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. acquiescence in it. Under the circumstances stated, the convention to be held in June, 1786, was looked forward to as what would either remedy the difficulty or increase it. There has been given an account of the proceedings of sundry conventions in the different states, prior to the meeting in New Brunswick, in May, 1784. At that period no convention had assembled in Virginia. But in May, 1785, there was one in the City of Richmond; of the pro- ceedings of which there shall be here given a general account; for the same reason as in reference to the pro- ceedings for the organization of the other churches com- prehended within the union. There had been previously passed, in the year 1784, an act of the legislature, incorporating the Episcopal Church in the respective parishes individually, and as existing throughout the state; that is, not only in each parish, the mi/iister and vestrymen chosen by the members of the church were a body corporate for their own appropriate church and glebe; but the act recognized a convention S consisting of the settled ministers and deputies from the/ different vestries, competent to self government. In this ' act, there was no vestige of the former establishment: on the contrary, it contained provisos, guarding against all claims tending to that point. Nevertheless, the current set so strong against the Episcopal Church, from the en- mity of numerous professors of religion, not a little aided by opinions inimical equally to the Church and to the soci- eties dissenting from her, that in the year 1786, the Taw | was repealed, with a proviso saving to all religious soci- ) eties the estates belonging to them respectively. In the year 1798, this statute also was repealed, as inconsistent with religious freedom.* A law, substantially the same as that of 1784, sofar as it incorporated the Church throughout the state, was passed by the legislature of Maryland in the year 1802, in favor of the Roman Catholics : which does not appear to have given offence, or to have been productive of bad effects; although the like favor has been refused to the Protestant Episcopal Church in the same, state. ~ , ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 129 In this convention, the recommendations passed in New YorkTTnT^ctober of the preceding year, were adopted, with two exceptions. They refused the acceptance of the fourth, concerning the liturgy, until it should be revised at / ~._ -j v n Qstfjr i the expected meeting in Philadelphia; and in respect to ' i ,i the sixth article determining the manner of voting, they objected to it as a fundamental article of the constitution; but acquiesced in it as regarded the ensuing convention, re- serving a right to approve or disapprove of its proceedings. Their opinions, as to the principles which should govern in the proceedings, were detailed in instruction to deputies appointed by them to the General Convention, and are as follows: "Gentlemen, during your representation of the Protes- tant Episcopal Church, we commend to your observance the following sentiments concerning doctrine and worship. We refer you, at the same time, for these and other objects of your mission, to our resolutions on the proceedings of the late convention in New York. "Uniformity in doctrine and worship will unquestion-' * ably contribute to the prosperity of the Protestant Epis- / copal Church. But we earnestly wish that this may be "^r pursued with liberality and moderation. The obstacles'" which stand in the way of union among Christian societies, are too often founded on matters of mere form. They are surmountable, therefore, by those who, breathing the spirit of Christianity, earnestly labor in this pious work. "From the Holy Scriptures themselves, rather than the comments of men, must we learn the terms of salvation. Creeds therefore ought to be simple: and we are not anx- ious to retain any other than that which is commonly ' called the Apostles' Creed. "Should a change in the liturgy be proposed, let it be 1 made with caution: and in that case, let the alterations be few,* and the style of prayer continue as agreeable as may * The original edition reads free, but it is marked as an error. Ed. 130 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. be to the essential characteristics of our persuasion. We will not now decide, what ceremonies ought to be retained. We wish, however, that those which exist may be estimated according to their utility; and that such as may appear fit to be laid aside, may no longer be appendages of our Church. " We need only add, that we shall expect a report of your proceedings, to be made to those whom we shall vest with authority to call a convention." The intercourse with the court of Denmark, noticed in the proceedings of Pennsylvania, having been communi- cated by the governor of Virginia to the body now assem- bled, their deputies were instructed to lay the same before the General Convention. This convention of Virginia issued an address to the members of the Episcopal Church throughout the state, in order to excite a zeal for the reviving of the communion. They passed rules, forty-three in number, for the gov- ernment of the Church in Virginia, extending to a great variety of particulars. In these rules they made direct pro- C i vision for the trial of bishops and other clergymen bythe < convention: the matter concerning which there hasDteen so much dissatisfaction, because of its not being directly provided against by the General Convention held within a few months after this convention held in Richmond. G. Page 26. Of the Convention in Philadelphia and Wil- mington, in 1786. The Rev. David Griffith, D.D., rector of Fairfax parish, Alexandria, Virginia, who had been elected to the Episco- pacy in that state, presided in this convention. Francis Hopkinson, Esq., was the secretary. The convention was opened with a sermon by the president of the preceding convention.* This sermon by Bishop White, from Ps. xlv. 14, was published by Hall and Sellers, in 1786, and reprinted in 1880. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 131 The convention assembled under circumstances which bore strong appearances of a dissolution of the union in this early stage of it.* The interfering instructions 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 dis- ( satisfaction on account of the Scottish Episcopacy and, \ added to these, the demur expressed IrTTrTe Tetter from the English bishops, were what the most sanguine contem- plated with apprehension, and were sure prognostics of our falling to pieces, in the opinion of some, who were dissatisfied with the course that had been taken for the organizing of the Church. How those difficulties were surmounted will be seen. In regard to the interfering instructions, they were all silenced by the motion that stands on the journal, for refer- ring them to the first convention, which should meet fully j authorized to determine on a Book of Common Prayer. The instructions, far from proving injurious, had the con- trary effect; by showing, as well the necessity of a duly f constituted ecclesiastical body, as the futility of taking measures to be reviewed and authoritatively judged of, in the bodies of which we were the deputies. Such a system \ appeared so evidently fruitful of discord and disunion, that ) it was abandoned from this time. The author, who had ) contemplated the meeting of the interfering instructions with the motion recorded as his own on the journal, was especially pleased with the effect 6TTt the silence of un- necessary discussion. Between the deputies of the churches which had re- ceived, and those of the churches which had rejected, the Proposed Book, or else been silent on the subject, the ex- pedient was adopted of letting matters remain for a time in the present state with both. The question of the Scottish Episcopacy gave occasion * See Conn. Church Documents by Hawkes and Perry, II., pp. 298, 9. Ed. 1.32 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. to some warmth. That matter was struck at by certain motions which appear on the journals, and which particu- larly affected two gentlemen of the body; one of whom the Rev. Mr. Pilmore had been ordained by Bishop Sea- bury; and the otfier, the Rev. William Smith the younger gentleman of the convention of that name had been or- dained by a bishop of the Church, in which Bishop Sea- bury had been consecrated. The convention did not enter into the opposition to the Scottish succession. A motion, j as may be seen on the journals, was made to the effect, by \ the Rev. Mr. Provoost, seconded by the Rev. Robert Smith, | of South Carolina, who only, of the clergy, were of that ' mind. But the subject was suppressed as the journal shows by the previous_quesdon, moved by the Rev. Dr. Smith, and seconded by the author. Nevertheless, as it had been affirmed that gentlemen ordained under the Scottish succession, settling in the represented churches, were understood by some to be under canonical subjection to the bishop who ordained them, and as this circumstance had been urged in argument, the proposal of rejecting settlements under such subjection was adopted; although Mr. Pilmore denied that any such thing had been exacted of him. As the measure is stated on the journal to have been carried on the motion of the author, he thinks it proper to mention, that he never conceived of there hav- ing been any ground for it, other than in the apprehen- sion which had been expressed.* This temperate guarding against the evil, if it should exist, seemed the best way of obviating measures, which might have led to disputes with the northern clergy. The line of conduct taken drew off from the meditated rejection some lay gentlemen who would otherwise have warmly pressed the objections which occur, against the circumstance that had been imagined. The letter from the English bishops, in answer to the address of the former convention, came to hand not long Conn. Church Documents, II., p. 300. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 133 before the meeting of this. All that could be done in the present stage of the business, was to acknowledge the kind- ness of their letter, to repeat the application for the Epis- copacy, and to reassure them of attachment to the system of the Church of England. This was accordingly done, in a letter drafted by the Rev. Dr. Smith, but considerably altered on a motion of the Hon. John Jay, Esq., who thought the draft too submissive. It was in substance an expression of gratitude for the fatherly sentiments contained in the letter of the right reverend prelates; an assurance of there being no intention of departing from the constituent princi- ples of the Church of England; an expectation that the proposed alterations had been received; and a repetition of the request of the former address. This second application went with no small advantage, from the alterations made in the constitution, before the receiving of the objections made against it, on the part of the English bishops. The issue of this branch of the busi- ness may serve, not only for a caution against being precip- itate, but for encouragement under inconveniences result- ing from the precipitancy of others. In the preceding year, the points alluded to were determined on with too much warmth, and without investigation proportioned to the im- portance of the subjects. The decisions of that day were now reversed not to say without a division, but without even an opposition. The general temper of moderation displayed in the let- ter of the archbishops caused it to be a matter of surprise, that the only thing which looked like a condition made on the subject of the Common Prayer Book, was the restoring of the clause concerning the Descent into Hell, in the Apostles' Creed. The undeniable fact, that the clause had been an addition to the original creed, occasioned a criti- cism on tneexpression in the letter its "integrity"; to which, it was required to be " restored." Besides, as the clause is not understood in the general acceptation of the words, and as they who hold it in the strict sense must 134 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. ground it on very uncertain authority of Scripture, it was thought, that more stress was laid on this particular than the comparative importance of the alteration merited. This ,can be accounted for no otherwise, than by the facts which have been mentioned. It is true, that the clause is stated to have been introduced, in opposition to an ancient heresy meaning the Apollinarian. Is it necessary, then, that every heresy should be denied in so short a formulary as that of the Apostles' Creed ? The members of the convention were doubtful, how far the restoring of the Athanasian Creed was contemplated by the archbishops as an essential condition. In that case, the matter was desperate; because, although there were some who favored a compliance, the majority were deter- I mined otherwise, among whom were two members pres- I ent who had~been chosen to the Episcopacy, and who voted against the restoration, as appears on the journal. It was however thought, that the words did not import absolute requisition. The author will here record his opin- ion, afterward formed in England. It is, that the inclina- tion of the archbishops on that head was, not to give any trouble, but only to avoid any act or omission, which might have been an implicating of them and of their Church. His reason is, that in one of the conversations of Bishop Provoost and himself with the Archbishop of Can- terbury, he brought this matter forwards; evidently in- tending to say as much of it as he did, and no more, and not wishing a discussion of the point. What he said, was to this effect: "Some wish that you had retained the Athanasian Creed: but I can not say that I am uneasy on the subject; for you have retained the doctrine of it in your Liturgy; and as to the Creed itself, I suppose you thought it not suited to the use of a congregation." Then, without waiting to hear whether this were the reason or not, he passed to another subject; and never introduced that of the Athanasian Creed again. It was a matter of wonder, that there was not laid in ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 135 the letter, more stress on the Nicene Creed, than on the Athanasian. To the latter, there are other objections than its protest against Arianism and Socinianism: objec- tions which have weight with many who are not either Socinians or Arians. It had been expected, that the Ni- cene, being the faith of the early Church, would have been more strongly insisted on by the English bishops; of whom not more than two or three and perhaps they unjustly were suspected of being at all inclined to the opinions alluded to. Probably the opposition to them, apparent in the Liturgy, was what principally gave satisfaction. In what is here said, it is not designed to hold up the neces- sity of the use of the Nicene Creed in the Liturgy, but there is pleaded for the making of it a part of the declared faith of the Church; which may be done, without a congrega- tional repetition of it. Even to this there is no objection made. The distinction is grounded on the circumstance that what was sufficient as a symbol of profession in the primitive Church, must be so now; unless on the principle already adverted to, of contradicting all errors in the forms of our devotions. To what this leads, is very evident; or rather, it is impossible to calculate. The question as to the Nicene Creed had been determined in the preceding session. The moderation of the letter of the Archbishops on the subject of the ecclesiastical constitution, and especially the manner of the objection to the part of it which was cer- tainly exceptionable, was universally acknowledged. Their conduct was the more agreeable on this account, that the orfence had been done away before the receipt of their letter. The silence of it in regard to the including of the' laity, gave a great advantage over those of the clergy, who were representing the introduction of that order as in oppo- sition to correct principles of ecclesiastical government. The moderation which governed in this convention must be conspicuous. One principal reason, was the moderation of the English prelates. They who were thought the least 136 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. devoted to the Episcopal regimen, acknowledged the great forbearance in there being no such high notions on the sub- ject as had been avowed by some of the clergy on our side of the Atlantic. Added to this, there was noticed the ab- sence of the most distant intimation, of offence taken at the presumed independency of the American Church. For although the bishops could not have denied this, consist- ently with the known principles of their own Church, yet it had been reckoned on as a source of difficulty. Some gentlemen, who thought that the convention had gone too far as to some points of evangelical doctrine, were highly gratified at finding more zeal in that respect than perhaps they had calculated on. The author had an op- portunity of seeing the operation of this sentiment within a few hours after his receipt of the letter. There happen- ing to pass, near his door, a worthy lay-member of the con- vention of 1785, who had been in the habit of thinking the clergy of the Church of England not sufficiently evangelical, he accepted of an invitation to walk in, and hear the con- munication of the bishops. He was highly delighted; and it is not improbable, that this very circumstance contributed towards such a zeal for our ecclesiastical system, as induced the same gentleman, at his decease, which was a few years afterward, to bequeath a considerable legacy, which fell after the decease of two relatives then living; the income to be applied toward the support of the Bishop of the Church in Pennsylvania. There was another incident, which contributed to render the proceedings of the convention temperate; because it must have convinced them, that the result of considerable changes would have been the disunion of the Church. The" incident alluded to, was the reading of a memorial from the convention in New Jersey, approving of some of the pro- ceedings of the late General Convention; but censuring others, and soliciting a change of counsels in those particu- lars. The memorial, as was conjectured at the time, and as the author afterward learned with certainty, was drawn ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 137 up by the Rev. Dr. Chandler, of Elizabethtown. This learned and respectable gentleman, after having been in England during the war, had returned to his family and former residence; laboring under a cancerous or scorbutic complaint, which had consumed a considerable proportion of his face. He had been designed for the contemplated bishopric of Nova Scotia, as the author was afterwards informed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. His complaint became too bad, to admit of his undertaking the charge. The same cause rendered it impossible for him to take an active part in the organizing of the American Church. The author has no doubt, that his letter, written on the present occasion, was among the causes which prevented the disorganizing^ of it. For this memorial, see the Appen- dix, No. 7. The present state of things induced the convention, before their adjournment, to appoint a committee, with power to re-assemble them in Wilmington, in the State of Delaware. Previously to their adjournment, they deter- mined on their second address, already noticed, to the English prelates: for which, see the Appendix, No. 8. Soon after the rising of the convention, there came to the author's hands a letter of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York: for which, see the Appendix, No. 9. Shortly afterward, there came a letter from the Arch- bishop of Canterbury only, enclosing a recently obtained act of parliament, authorizing the solicited consecrations. See the Appendix, No. 10. On the receipt of the letters, the committee exercised the power committed to them, of summoning the conven- tion to meet at Wilmington on the loth day of October. On the said day, the convention re-assembled; and, Dr. Griffith being absent, the Rev. Dr. Provoost presided. But, before a relation of what passed at this meeting, occasion is taken to record the comments generally made on the communications from England. There was expressed general satisfaction with the testi- 138 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. monials to be required of those who might come for the Episcopacy; and especially with the testimonial to be signed by the members of the General Convention. This body had not been without their apprehensions, that some un- suitable character, as to morals, might be elected: and yet for them to have assumed a control might have been an improper interference with the churches in the individual states. What was demanded by the archbishops went to the point in the general wish; and yet was not to be com- plained of or evaded by any individual. The question to be determined on at the present session was Whether the American Church would avail herself of the opportunity of obtaining the Episcopacy; which had been so earnestly desired, ever since the settlement of the colonies; the want of which had been so long complained of, and which was now held out in offer. When the author . considers how much, besides the preference due to Epis- copal government, the continuance or the restoration of divine worship in the almost deserted churches, their very existence as a society, and of course the interests of religion and virtue were concerned in the issue, he looks back with a remnant of uneasy sensation at the hazard which this question run; and at the probability which then threatened, that the determination mi^ht be contrary to what took place. " t y /y On the meeting of the convention, a committee were A/ - appointed. Those who acted in the business were, from New York, Rev. Dr. Provoost and James Duane, Esq. ;/v, from New Jersey, Rev. Uzal Ogden and Henry Waddell,^^,, 't/fjf] Esq- ; from Pennsylvania, Rev. Dr. White and Samuel^y y///>n Powel, Esq.; from Delaware, Rev. Sydenham Thorne; ,, *> " from Maryland, Rev. Dr. Smith; and from South Carolina, *' Rev. Robert Smith. We sat up the whole of the succeeding* night, digesting the determinations in the form in which \ t they appear on the journal. When they were brought into ^ the conveation, little difficulty occurred in regard to what was proposed concerning the retaining of the Nicene and^ ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 139 the rejecting of the Athanasian Creed. But a warm debate arose on the subject of the Descent into HeO, in the Apostles' Creed. Although this was at last carried, agreeably to the proposal of the committee; yet whoever looks into the jour- nal will see, that the result was not owing to the having of a majority of votes, but to the nullity of the votes of those | churches in which the clergy and the laity were divided. Had the issue "been different, there could have been no proceeding to England for consecration at this time, be- cause they who went had all along made up their minds not to go, until the way should be opened by previous ne- gotiation. As the matter now stood, there was evidently no ground on which the English bishops could have rejected the persons sent, unless they had made the Athanasian Creed an essential; which would not have been warranted by the feeble recommendation of their letter, not to say by the impossibility of justifying to the world the withholding of Episcopal succession, for no other reason than this, from a Church descended from their own, and once a part of it. It is here supposed, that the very awkward appearance on the journal of the preceding vote, must have attracted the attention of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and of those whom he consulted; for he took occasion to remark, what he thought the exceptionable plan of making the records on the journal so particular. His cautious avoiding of minute ' discussion, especially in the way of censure, induced us to account for this remark in the way stated. An address to the two archbishops was drawn up by this convention, to be forwarded by the two bishops-elect pres- ent in it, who now declared their intention of embarking for England. See for it, the Appendix, No. n. It would be a withholding of justice from a highly deserv- ing gentleman, not to notice his zeal and probably his in- fluence, in accomplishing the views of the American Church. The hostility to the Scotch Episcopacy had derived some weight from scruples on the subject, which were communi- cated by Granville Sharp, Esq., the author of many learned 140 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. publications, himself being of a religious and amiable char- acter, and zealous for the system of the Church of England. In a letter to Dr. Manning, a Baptist minister, and presi- dent of Rhode Island College, who had been recently in England, Mr. Sharp had expressed his doubts on the sub- ject of the Scotch Episcopacy, grounded on documents in his hands, of his grandfather, Archbishop Sharp, who was so conspicuous for his opposition to the arbitrary measures of James II. Dr. Manning had communicated the informa- tion in such a line, as that it was privately circulated during the convention of 1785. On its being urged in conversation, advantage was taken on the other side of the singularity of the channel of communication.* This, however, was acci- dental; it not appearing that the writer contemplated any public effect. He afterward watched the progress of the business, and gave his aid in every step of it. Before the meeting of the adjournment, there had been sent to the author by Dr. Franklin, then president of the state, a letter to him from Mr. Sharp, manifesting Christian concern in the business pending, uneasiness at some reports which had reached England, of our declining towards So- cinianism, and satisfaction from some discoveries which contradicted the reports. In the letter to Dr. Franklin, there were extracts of letters written by Mr. Sharp to the Archbishop of Canterbury, evincive of interest taken in our behalf. In some late publications in England, there have been erroneous statements of the agency of Mr. Sharp. For this reason, and to manifest the Christian zeal of that worthy person, his communications are given in the Appen- dix, No. 12. Afterward, when Bishop Provoost and the author were in England, they became acquainted with the said worthy person, who continued to interest himself for the Church. On a certain day, he made us a visit, and expressed much solicitude on the subject of our business, which he sup- See Journals, III., 272. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 141 posed, from its not having been accomplished immediately, to have met with some interruption. He was on his way to visit the Archbishop of Canterbury, intending, he said, to remind his Grace of some things by which he seemed to stand pledged, considering the shape in which the matter was now before him. Mr. Sharp was thanked for his benev-' olent zeal, but was requested not to offer to the Archbishop^ any thing in the way of complaint, and was informed that there was no room for any; his Grace having intimated that, the short delay would be only until the ensuing meeting parliament. There was also given to Mr. Sharp the reason* of this short delay, which will appear in its proper place. 1 Before the declaration made by two of the bishops-elect, of their intention to embark for England, there was per- ceived a difficulty likely to occur in the case of Dr. Pro- voost, on account of subscription to be made as proposed by the convention of 1785, and considered as satisfactory by the English bishops. The convention in New York had held in suspense the proposed Liturgy, including the Articles. This was the faith and the worship recognized in the constitution, and not yet adopted by the Church in which Dr. Provoost was to preside. To meet this difficulty, the convention adopted the ex- pedient of a form to be subscribed by him, and by any other person in the same circumstances. The form bound the subscriber 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 by the convention of the state in which the party lived, and to the use of the latter book, when so ratified. A promise to this effect was signed by Dr. Provoost, and the document is in possession of the author. It is part of an act of the present convention, predicated on the requisitions of the Archbishops. See for it, the Appendix, No. 13. The provision thus made by the convention did not altogether relieve Dr. Provoost from the difficulty. Sub- scription was to be repeated in England, agreeably to the I 4 2 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. requisition of the Archbishops, doubtless with the concur- rence of the bishops generally. It was not probable, that the Archbishop of Canterbury would accommodate to an- other form, without further consultation, which would at least have occasioned trouble and delay. Dr. Provoost candidly stated his situation in this particular to the Arch- bishop, to whom the disclosure was evidently unexpected. After a short pause the author remarked, that if in Eng-\ land any changes should be made in the ecclesiastical insti- ' tutions, by competent authority, and in themselves not con- trary to Christian doctrine, the subscription of the clergy I would not it was supposed be hindered by the ordina- y tion vows by which they were now bound. On a look of/ appeal to the Archbishop for the correctness of this senti- ment, he assented to it unequivocally. He would never have given a decision on the special case of Dr. Provoost: but the supposed case had so evident a bearing on it, that the scruple was dismissed. It had rested on the mind of the Doctor, who, on a question of truth and honor, would not have erred on the side of laxity, in regard to promise to be pledged. H. Page 27. Of Personal Intercourse luitJi the Archbishop of Canterbury. Sundry matters having passed in this intercourse which may be thought connected with the subject of these sheets, the author supposes that it may be of use to insert in this place certain letters, which he addressed from England to the committee of the Church in Pennsylvania, with notes taken for another letter intended to have been written, if an opportunity had offered. The committee were the Rev. Dr. Samuel Magaw, the Rev. Robert Blackwell, and the Rev. Joseph Pilmore of the clergy; and of the laity, the Hon. Francis Hopkinson, Dr. Gerardus Clarkson, and John Swanwick, Esquire. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 143 Westminster, December 6, GENTLEMEN: I think it my duty, and it is my inclination, to embrace the earliest opportunity of acquainting you with my arrival in England, and of the progress made, by the blessing of God, in the important business of my voyage. On Thursday, the 2d of' November, I embarked at New York, in company of my worthy friend and brother, 'Dr. Provoost. The next day we left land. After a passage, in which we had some tempestuous, although for the most part pleasant weather, we made the lights of Scilly, on Monday, the 2Oth of the same month, and the next day landed, in good health, at Falmouth. In giving this ac- / count of my prosperous voyage, I am happy in the con- \/f*7<** ^ viction that I am writing to those who, as well from pri- vate friendship, as from their interest in the great concerns of the Church, will rejoice with me on the occasion, and join me in devout acknowledgments to Almighty God. Owing to sundry incidents, we did not reach the me- tropolis until Wednesday, the 29th, when we made it our first business to wait on his Excellency, Mr. Adams, who politely returned our visit, on the evening of the same day, and finding that it was our wish to be introduced by him to his Grace, the Archbishop of Canterbury, readily undertook the office, and named Friday for the purpose. Accordingly, on that day we accompanied Mr. Adams to the palace of Lambeth. His Grace having received no intimation of the intended visit, was not at home. In the evening, Colonel Smith, the secretary of the legation, waited on him, to request the appointment of an hour: he named twelve o'clock, on Monday. At that time, we again accompanied Mr. Adams to Lambeth, where we had a polite and con- descending reception, entirely answerable to the sentiments which we had been taught to entertain of this great and good Archbishop. After some questions on his part respecting our pas- sage, we presented our papers: on which we were asked 144 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Whether we expected another gentleman, in time to be consecrated with us ? In answer to this, his Grace was informed, that the Rev. Dr. Griffith, the only gentleman recommended by the General Convention beside the pres- ent company, would not, in all probability, be over before the spring. Here I must note, that my saying of this was in consequence of a letter received from that gentleman after my embarkation. Dr. Provoost then mentioned that there was a peculiar- ity in the charter of his church, requiring his presence at the annual election at Easter: on which his Grace said, that he had.no inclination to detain us so long, and indeed would give us no delay, provided our papers should be found satisfactory, which he presumed would be the case. But at the same time he apologized for his postponing of our business for two or three days, being engaged in some ecclesiastical business, depending before the privy council, and also in some concerns of a college, of which he is the visitor. He added, that when this was done, he would see us again. In the course of the conversation, the Arch- bishop asked me, whether I had received the letter signed by himself alone, in which he had mentioned that three was a sufficient number to be sent for consecration, and whether we understood it to be the sentiment that three only should come. On his being told that the letter ha3 been received, and so understood, he gave the reason That as the present service was asked of the Church of England, in consequence of an extraordinary exigency, it seemed proper to do no more in the affair, than the exi- gency required, and to leave all subsequent measures for the continuing of our ministry, to be taken among ourselves.* This is, gentlemen, to the best of my recollection, the substance of the conversation; and we shall be daily in ex- pectation of renewing our intercourse with his Grace. Having paid our respects in the first placeto the Arch- See ante, p. 26. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 145 bishop, we were of opinion that it was our duty to> wait on the Lord Bishop of London; his Lordship's predecessors having been the diocesans of our Church; although we un- derstood, that the present Bishop the venerable DrJLowth ) had undergone a decay of his great talents, as well as labored under grievous bodily complaints. Accordingly we waited yesterday on the Rev. Mr. Eaton, his chaplain, by whom I had been hospitably entertained when formerly in this country. Mr. Eaton, after much conversation con- cerning the affairs of our Church, stated to us his Lord- ship's situation, mentioning, among other things, his debil- / ity of mind to be such, that although he should answer a question properly and pointedly, yet he might in half an hour, forget both the question and the answer: and his in- disposition was so considerable, that a morning might be appointed, and yet, when the time should come, his Lord- ship might be incapable of receiving us. These things he thought it necessary to mention, but doubted not that there would be named an early day for our introduction. Accordingly, in the evening, we received a note from Mr. Eaton, appointing to-morrow morning for the interview. I have the pleasure of acquainting you, gentlemen, that we find from many, who had conversed with the Arch- bishop before our arrival, of there not being the least doubt of our Church's having retained the essential doctrines of the gospel, as held by the Church of England. These, gentlemen, are the particulars, which I have thought it important to convey to you. By the next packet I intend, if it please God, to acquaint you with any further progress that may be made in the business com- mitted to me; and I remain, in the mean time, with my prayers for your health and happiness, Your affectionate brother, and very humble servant, WM. WHITE. The Committee of the Protestant Episcopal Church n the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 146 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. P. S. I trust there will be no occasion, that my friends should write to me after the receipt of this. But they will not expect, that in the present stage of the business, I should fix the time of my leaving England. Westminster, January I, 1787. GENTLEMEN, I embrace the opportunity of the packet of this month, to communicate to you the present state of the business, on which I am in England. Between the writing of my last and our hearing from the Archbishop, there intervened about a fortnight: during which Dr. Provoost and myself had been informed by several who had seen his Grace, particularly by the Lord Bishop of Oxford, that our papers were satisfactory. The delay was accounted for by certain business that required immediate attention. At the end of that term, we received an invitation from the Archbishop to dine with him on the 2 1 st. We accordingly attended, and had every reason to be satisfied with our reception and entertainment. His Grace did not introduce the subject of our application to him until our leaving the company, when he stepped aside with us, and mentioned, as near as my memory serves, to the following effect That having, from the beginning, con- sulted the Bench of Bishops on this business, he was de- sirous of taking their opinion, as to the manner of accom- plishing it That he had shown our papers to a few who were in town That he expected to see more of them in a short time And that he would then see us again. We have not heard from him since; for the greater number of the bishops are still at their respective dioceses, although expected to be in town soon. In my last I mentioned our intention of waiting on the Lord Bishop of London, as an instance of the respect which we thought due from us, to the successor of the for- mer diocesans of America. We accordingly attended on ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 147 the day appointed by himself, and were courteously re- ceived by this celebrated prelate, who expressed himself gratified by our waiting on him, and asked for our address, as intending to see us again; which however can hardly happen, as his Lordship has been since taken extremely ill, and, I believe, continues in imminent danger.* I fully expected to have mentioned to you, gentlemen, by this opportunity, the time of the accomplishment of the purpose, for which you desired me to come. Although disappointed in this, I can express to you my full persua- sion, that the delay does not arise from any cause, which can defeat our object. With my constant prayers for yourselves and our whole Church, I am, gentlemen, Your affectionate brother, WM. WHITE. The Committee of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Pennsylvania. >'. P. S. January 2. This morning, the Lord Bishop of Landaff did us the honor, on his coming to town, to call on us, without waiting for our being introduced to him, and to desire us to appoint a day for our dining with him. I mention this, to enable me to confirm the sentiment al- ready expressed; because his Lordship, not only showed the utmost good will as to our business, but seemed sur- prised that it was not already finished, until we mentioned the reason of the Archbishop, whom his Lordship had not seen. * We probably saw this eminent man on the last day on which our visit could have been received. His appearance was that of health, and he followed us to the head of his stairs, without any appearance of debility. We understood that he had a violent return of his disease (the stone) the next day; and he died very soon after our departure from England. In the conversation of about an hour which we held with him, he made various inquiries concerning America, and was the most pointed on the subject of slavery. On being informed of the then late act in Pennsylvania for the gradual abolition of it, he answered with strong emphasis That is a very good measure. 148 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Westminster, January 20, 1787. GENTLEMEN, I now address you, with the pleasing prospect of being soon able to re-embark for America, after the accomplish- ment of the business committed to me. It is possible, indeed, that I may arrive before the vessel, by which this letter will be conveyed. Even in that case, it may serve for a continuation of the narrative of the proceedings* of my honored colleague and myself. And as there is entire harmony between us, both of sentiment and of affection, I shall, for the sake of brevity, omit distinguishing between us in the following account; using the plural number, in stating any thing that was said by either of us on the occasion. After my last letter, we received from the Archbishop, through a friend who had spoken to him on the subject, full satisfaction, that the delay arose from no other cause than his Grace's waiting for the arrival of the bishops; and that it was his intention to finish the transaction in time for our departure by the February packet; it being the oppor- tunity, by which he had understood from us, that it was our inclination to return. The Queen's birthday, and the near approach of the meeting of parliament, have brought to town many of the right reverend bench. Accordingly, we received yesterday a note from the Archbishop, desiring us to call on him this morning. We attended, and had a conversation of two hours; of which it is now my intention to give you the substance, as far as my memory serves, and as is connected with the affairs of our Church. His Grace began with expressing his hopes that we had not thought him inattentive to our business. He said, that soon after our arrival, he had mentioned the matter to the King; that the necessary powers from government would be soon obtained; and that the consecration should be either on the 28th instant, or on that day seven-night; and that the latter day the best suited his convenience, and ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 149 should be made the appointment, provided it were consist- ent with our intentions of returning by the packet. After making the suitable acknowledgments of his good- ^ ness, and declaring our full conviction that he had used all possible expedition, we" said, that the day after the last mentioned Sunday was the intended time of our departure, in the event of our being ready for the packet; and that, therefore, we could not press for the matter to be expedited, / sooner than was convenient to his Grace. He then gently touched on the subject, in regard to which our last convention had not complied with the recommenda- ( * . ^ tion of the two Archbishops. He said, that some were dis- i^rfA-^ satisfied with the omission of the Creed here alluded to; that, for his part, he was not uneasy on the head, being satisfied that the doctrine of the Creed is retained in many places of the Prayer Book; but that, however, he did not / like the manner in which it appeared on the minutes; pre- - ferred the mode of doing business used in all the bodies with which he was acquainted; among whom, it was cus- tomary to mention the business brought before them, and the result of the debate, without specifying the votes of the individual members. Whether his Grace had here a view to the votes of those whom he was addressing in regard to ' the Athanasian Creed, we did not know; but the answer which he received was to this purpose That if the conven- nj(^} tion had taken a wrong method in the above particular, it ' proceeded from their wish to show themselves open and -*-*** did; and that the Church in one of the states, had instruct-,^ *, JL ed their deputies to move for the so specifying of the votes. His Grace then said, that in the beginning of the business, there had been many reports and apprehensions; that- this required of the bishops to be circumspect; and that even when our proceedings arrived, there were some things ** , . which they could not but wish otherwise. And here, saidC^* he, I am not alluding to the Liturgy, but to the very easy manner in which the degradation of bishops seems allowed to be done. It was remarked to his Grace, that the offen- 150 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. sivc article had been altered. He answered Yes, and . , much for the better. From this, his Grace passed to some remarks concerning the Psalter. He said, that whatever use there might be in leaving out some parts of the Psalms, he saw no pro- priety in altering the connection, in the manner in which we had done it. He did not mean to undervalue the abili- ties of those employed in it, but thought it was a work of more time and difficulty than they seem to have conceived. From a desire of taking his Grace's meaning precisely on this subject, it was here mentioned to him, that if we un- derstood him, he did not object to the omission of some portions of the Psalms, from the worship of the Church. The reply was He had not fully considered that subject; and only meant at present to remark on the connecting of portions together, in such a manner as might break the connection, and alter the sense of the original compositions; especially of such of them as are prophetical. But his Grace did not allege, that the sense had been actually altered in any place. In speaking of the Liturgy, the Archbishop expressed his / hopes, that it would not be a matter liable to alterations, at every convention. He was answered, that although it was still submitted to the Church as a proposed Liturgy, so as to allow of the correction of any part of it, which might appear, on mature consideration, to have been hastily done; yet there were no description of men in this country, who would more object to the leaving of the Liturgy in so fluc- tuating a state, than the great body of Episcopalians in America. The Archbishop took notice of a want of formality, in our not having brought a regular instrument of our election: although he allowed, that our election was fully implied in- the papers which had been produced; so as to leave no j doubt of the fact. This naturally led us to speak of the J forms of recommendation, prescribed by the two Arch- bishops. In respect to these we ventured to declare, that ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 151 the Church at large in America acknowledged great obli- gations; and would expect that their future bishops should i 1 make it a rule of their conduct. He replied, that the ap- pointment of persons to the Episcopal character was of the highest consequence; and earnestly wished that it may be . . managed with great discretion in America and that he &# **> tfiought himself obliged to use the precautions which we faUuua had mentioned. For, said he, gentlemen, you were stran- . gers to me, although I had heaid you respectfully spoken ** of. At the same time, there were some who apprehended that persons of a very unsuitable description would be sent. I thought it improbable he continued that general and particular conventions would unite in recommending such persons; and yet it was my determination, that if such should be sent, and under circumstances carrying full evidence of the unsuitableness, not to have troubled the bishops with the affair, but to have taken the brunt of a refusal on myself. The answer was to this effect That if there had been any danger of such a measure, the requi- sitions of the two Archbishops must have operated as a prevention: that we trusted, however, there was not a sufficient number of our brethren, in any state, capable of wilfully imposing an improper character on his Grace; and that, therefore, if any such character had been rec- ommended, it must have been some years ago, and from the want of due information. His Grace, in some part of the conversation, was led to speak of the act of parliament: in respect to which, we took notice of the clause, requiring the consent of the King, under his sign manual. This clause, we told him, we had under- stood from private information, not to have been in the act as proposed by the bishops. We ventured to say, however, -that the principle of the restriction was well understood in America, so as to occasion no offence there. The Arch- bishop answered, that it was not in the act, as proposed by the bishops, but that he thought it a very proper clause, and that it was particularly acceptable to himself; since 1 52 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. otherwise the matter would have rested wholly with him, which he did not wish. He introduced a subject which was unexpected to us, and may influence measures in America. He said, that, \\hen Bishop of Bangor, he had presented the Bishop-elect of the Isle of Man to the Archbishop of York for consecra- tion; and that none were concerned in the consecration besides the Archbishop and himself: that he had set on foot an inquiry, respecting past usage in the province of York: and that if the practice had been the same in times past, perhaps it might prove unnecessary for another gen- tleman to come from America. In the conversation that ensued on this head, it was thrown out on__our jide, that if the anc|ent canonical number should be dispensed with, perhaps doubts might subsist in the minds of some, in re- gard to the validity; and that such an apprehension might be productive of some irregularity and inconvenience. To this the Archbishop replied, that the latitude, if left, would be intended merely for our accommodation, but was by no means to prevent the coming of a third applicant, if that should be thought eligible by us.* I think it a matter worthy to be mentioned in this letter, that the Archbishop informed us of thoughts entertained by him, of giving to the world a publication, relative to the business before us, stating the reasons influencing him in the measures which he had adopted. We took the liberty of expressing our hearty approbation of the proposal; and as his Grace did not seem to have come to a determination, we hoped that he would find no objection to it, on further consideration. After discussing the above mentioned subjects more fully than I can be expected to relate, we apologized for taking up so much of his Grace's time, and arose to take our leave. But we were encouraged by the condescension shown, to * See ante, p. 144. The Romish hierarchy in America was founded by a s'ngle bishop, and Carroll, in turn, consecrated Cheverus. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 153 mention, that as the King was to open the parliament in a few days, it would be a gratification to us to gain admit- tance to the House of Lords, on that occasion, through the good offices of his Grace. The Archbishop took this free- dom in very good part, desired us to consider him as on terms of friendship, and assured us, that he would send us a note of admission, and express in it the time which his Majesty should appoint for his coming to the house, in order to prevent our unnecessary waiting.* I suppose that this incident reminded the Archbishop of a question which had been asked him by Mr. Adams, at our first interview Whether it would not be proper for us to wait on the King; and whether, in that case, the Archbishop or himself would be the proper person to introduce us. To ( this question the Archbishop had answered at the time, that the first step was for himself to be satisfied, before_any no- \ tice could properly be given to the King. In relation to this subject, his Grace now said, that if we were to be intro- duced to the King, it ought to be on the ground of thank- ing him for his leave given for the ensuing consecration, under his sign manual; and that whether this would be lia- ble to any objection or not, we must judge. We made no scruple to answer, that there could be no objection to it, arising out of the relations in which we stood. He then said, that he supposed Mr. Adams chose to introduce us himself. We answered, that although the proposal origi- nated with Mr. Adams, yet we believed he wished to leave it to his Grace to determine on the manner. To this he re- plied, that he would consider of it further and let us know. His Grace then said, that he was desirous of appointing some day for our dining with him again; intending to ask some of the bishops to meet us, and also some of our friends. This lead us to ask his Grace's opinion, as to the propriety of our calling at the houses of all the bishops, in order to thank them for the good office soon to be done, through the * The promise was fulfilled. 154 JlfMOfS OF THE CHURCH. favor of the whole bench, although especially of his Grace, to the Episcopal Church in America. He answered, that he thought it proper, and that it would be very kindly taken. As the gentlemen to whom I am writing are members of the corporation for the widow's fund, it may be proper for me to inform them, that I stated to his Grace the appoint- ment of Dr. Smith, Mr. Chew, and myself, for the address- ing of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, respecting the arrears due on their former grants. He promised to consider of the foundation of the intended ap- plication, and for that purpose, as I had mentioned my being furnished with a former abstract of the proceedings of our corporation, noticing the grants, he desired me to send it to him. I have given you, gentlemen, a long, and, I am afraid, tedious account of this conversation; but I hope that the motive will excuse me, which is my desire of your having as complete a view as possible of the accomplishing of a negotiation so important, as we all conceive, to our com- munion, not only of the present, but also of every future generation. That God may bless the event, which, under his good providence, is soon to take place, is the constant wish and prayer of, gentlemen, Your affectionate brother, and humble servant, WM. WHITE. The Committee of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Pennsylvania. Materials for another letter to the committee, if an op- portunity shoyld offer, before my reaching of Philadelphia. Monday^ January 2gth. We received a verbal message from the Archbishop, desiring us to call on him. We at- tended. His design was to ask some questions respecting the forms of our testimonials, and the titles to be given to ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 155 us in our letters of consecration. We staid with him nearly two hours, and had much conversation with him, concern- ing the affairs of our Church; which confirmed us in our high opinion of his regard for her, and of his desire to advance the interests of religion. Friday, February 2d. The mornings of the two preced- ing days had been spent in visiting the different bishops who were in town, agreeably to the proposal before made to the Archbishop. A few of them the Archbishop of York, and the Bishops of Oxford, Landaff, Rochester, and Bangor, had previously visited us; and we had seen the Bishops of Worcester and Exeter, a few days before, at the Archbish- op's, at dinner; an occasion which I have not particularly noticed, because nothing passed on it, interesting to our mission.* Those of the bishops whom we found at home, seemed to take the compliment in good part, expressed great good-will to our Church, and wished that our longer stay, after their coming to town, had permitted their show- ing of us attentions. f * On the said occasion, we witnessed a singular ceremony, which we supposed to be a remnant of the state of former times. Soon in the morning, we had re- ceived a note from the Archbishop, intimating, that the then day of the week was his public day, during the session of parliament; and that he should be glad to see us on any weekly day so mentioned on that day in particular, if disengaged. We waited on him, and supposed from what we saw, that the several eminent persons who entered came uninvited as to that particular time. Before dinner the Archbishop rose, bowed to the company, and left the room. They followed, all of them, no doubt, besides ourselves, understanding the transaction. After passing through a suite of rooms, we found ourselves in the chapel, in which were the two chaplains in their surplices. One of them read the Litany ; after which, we returned to the room wherein we had been received. Soon afterward we were called to dinner. It is probable, that such a visit on some Wednesday it was the weekly day during the session of parliament, is expected of every member of either house, who lives in habits of acquaintance with the primate. The reading of the Litany, including the prayers attached to it in the English Book of Common Prayer, and none other, seems a remnant of former practice; it having been originally a distinct service. It is on this account that the incident has been related. t The prelates whom we found, were the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Rochester, the very aged Bishop of Carlisle, in whom we saw the wreck of one 156 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. On this day we waited pn the Archbishop, in conse- quence of his own appointment at our former interview, in order to accompany him to Court. Thither we went to- gether in his coach. On being introduced to the King, I made this preconceived address That " we were happy in the opportunity of thanking his Majesty, for his license granted to his Grace the Archbishop, to convey the Epis- copal succession to the Church in America." The King made this answer, which I set down to show the kindness of the Archbishop* "His Grace has given me such an account of the gentlemen who have come over, that I am glad of the present opportunity of serving the interests of religion." His Majesty then asked Dr. Provoost, whether the Episcopal communion were not numerous in New York, and was answered by the Doctor in the affirmative, with further thanks for the license granted. The King then passed to the next in the circle, and after a little while we withdrew, with the Archbishop.t We had contemplated this measure of waiting on the King as of peculiar delicacy. In the character of citizens of the United States ofiAmerica, we should have thought it inconsistent in us to have made any application to the civil authority of Great Britain. The act of parliament had of the first scholars of the age, and the Bishops of Salisbury, Bristol, and Ely. The first mentioned of these three, since Bishop of Durham, commended the mod- eration manifested in our service for the Fourth of July. This was gratifying; as it had been pronounced by some on our side of the Atlantic, that the said service would of itself be sufficient to induce a rejection of the application of the American Church. It may be presumed, however, that such civility is the usual courtesy of the place. t While we were waiting in our places, until the King should come to us in his passing from one attendant to another, there occurred an additional instance of the attention of the Archbishop to the delicacy of our situation. When the King speaks to you, said he, you will only bow; adding, with a smile when an Eng- lish bishop is presented, he does something more. This alluded to the ancient form of doing homage for his barony on his knees. We were aware of the differ- ent circumstances in which we stood ; but it was considerate, to guard against the danger of mistake. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 157 laid on the Archbishop the obtaining of the consent, of the King under his sign manual. This consent had been ob- tained before our going to court; and therefore we saw no impropriety in the visit. Sunday, February 40. We attended at the palace of Lambeth for consecration. The assistants of the Arch- C&A bishop on the occasion, were the Archbishop of York, who ]J mM presented; and the Bishop of Bath and Wells, and the n + \ffi Bishop of Peterborough, who joined with the two Arch- bishops in the imposition of hands. It was particularly agreeable to us, to see among them the Bishop of Bath and Wells, because we had all along understood, that in the beginning, this aged and venerable prelate had enter- tained scruples on the subject of the application of our Church: and it was principally owing to his Lordship, that such a point was made of the Descent into Hell, in the <^ Apostles' Creed. We presumed that his difficulties were __ now removed. Dr. Drake, one of the Archbishop's chap- ,Jj*^ lains, preached; and Dr. Randolph, the other chaplain, J ^U TU -U1 J- read the prayers, ihe sermon was a sensible discussion of the long litigated subject of the authority of the Church, to ordain rites and ceremonies. The text was " Let all things be done detently and in order." I Cor. xiv. 40. The discourse had very little reference to the^ peculiarity of n. o o - the occasion. The truth was, as the Archbishop had told us on Friday, on our way to court, that he had spoken to a particular friend to compose a sermon for the occasion, and had given him a sketch of what he wished to be the scope of it. This friend had just sent him information of a do- ' mestic calamity, which would excuse him from attendance; ) and the Archbishop was then under the necessity of giving { a short notice to one of his chaplains. The consecration was performed in the chapel of the palace of the Archbishop, in the presence of his family and his household, and X|ery few others; among whom was my eld friend, the Kev7~Mr. Duche. I had asked the Arch- lishop's leave to introduce him; and it was a great satis- 158 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. faction to me that he was there; the recollection of the benefit which I had received from his instructions in early life, and a tender sense of the attentions which he had shown me almost from my infancy, together with the im- pressions left by the harmony which f had subsisted between us in the discharge of our joint pastoral duty in Philadel- phia, being no improper accompaniments to the feelings suited to the present very interesting transaction of my life. I hope, that I felt the weight of the occasion. May God bless the meditations and the recollections by which I had endeavored to prepare myself for it; and give them their due effect on my temper and conduct, in the new character in which I am to appear ! The solemnity being over, we dined with the Arch- bishop and the Bishops; and spent with them the remainder of the day. I took occasion to mention to his Grace my conviction, that the American Church would be sensible of the kindness now shown; and my trust, that the Amer- ican bishops, besides the usual incentives to duty, would have this in addition; lest the Church of England should have cause to regret her act, performed on this day. He answered, that he fully believed there would be no such cause; that the prospect was very agreeable to him; that he bore a great affection for our Church; and that he should be always glad to hear of her prosperity: and also of the safe arrival and the welfare of us individually. After spending the remainder of the evening very agree- ably, we took our leave, which was affectionate on both sides; and on our part, with hearts deeply sensible of the regard which had been shown to our Church, and of the personal civilities which we had received.* During dinner this day at Lambeth, we were surprised at a conversation intro- duced by the Bishop of Peterborough. We had been accustomed to think it a sort of adjunct to the claim of churchmanship to consider the " E.IKWV Badihtxt/ " or " Royal Portraiture " as a true expression of the feelings of King Charles I. in some of the most trying circumstances of his life. The Bishop remarked, and his brethren assented to the position, that the contrary was now clearly proved, by a ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 159 Monday, February yh. As an evidence of his Grace's delicacy, I deposit the account of fees, brought to us this morning by his secretary; and give the following narrative of the manner in which that business was conducted. On the morning of our visit to court, I mentioned to the Archbishop, agreeably to preconcert with Dr. Provoost, that there must necessarily have been some charges for the expenses of office, in carrying the business of our Church through the civil department; and requested to know the amount, that we might discharge it. The Archbishop an- swered, that if he should inform us on that point, it must be on the principle, that in an affair of no great magnitude, it might seem disrespectful to us, to withhold the satis- faction demanded. He added, that on the occasion of the consecration of an English bishop, there were very con- siderable expenses to different persons of the Archbishop's court and of his household; which expenses he thought im- proper on the present occasion, and should therefore pro- hibit them. After the consecration, he, within our hearing, informed a gentleman from Doctors' Commons, Robert ( Jenner, Esq., who had attended officially in his civil law robe, with a view to the local registry, that as we intended to leave London the next day, our papers must be ready in the morning. On the gentleman's answering, that he would wait on us with them, the Archbishop replied No; you are to bring them to my secretary, who will wait on them: evidently with the design, that the pecuniary part of the transaction should pass under his own control. The fees paid by us jointly amounted to 14 $s. id. being alto- gether in the line of public offices, and which the Arch- bishop must h?we paid, but for the request made on our part. late publication of some papers of Lord Clarendon. These papers, it was said, show the work to have been written by Bishop Gauden. The simplicity of the style of the work, and the contrary property said lo beT discernible in the writings of that Bishop, are the circumstances which inclined Mr. Hume to give the credit of the composition to the King. 160 MEtfOIRS OF THE CHURCH. For the instrument of consecration, recorded in the archiepiscopal registry, see Appendix, No. 14. On the morning of the day of our leaving of the city, I received a note from the Archbishop. Although it begins with a message of civility to a respectable divine in New Jersey, not long before in England, I take the prominent object to have been the conveying of information, guarding^ against an impression which might have been made by) what had passed concerning consecration in the province of York. The note shall be given, because of its bearing on the question concerning the number required for conse- cration in the English Church. See the Appendix, No. 15. There being in possession some documents in the civil line, sustaining facts mentioned in the statements, the present opportunity is improved to the perpetuating of them. They are, (1) A letter from his Excellency Richard Henry Lee, Esq., president of Congress, to his Excellency John Adams, Esq., minister plenipotentiary to the court of Great Britain. (2) A letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Lee, in answer. (3) A letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Mr. Adams, after an interview between them. (4) A certificate of the supreme executive council of Pennsylvania. (5) A certificate of his Excellency Governor Patrick Henry, of Virginia. In reference to the last two documents, and to a similar one in the case of Dr. Provoost, given by his Excellency Governor Clinton, of New York, but not in possession, it is to be recollected, that they were to be applied for in conse- quence of an instruction of the General Convention. They may reasonably be supposed to have had an effect in ac- complishing the views of the Episcopal Church. See the Appendix, No. 16. It was in the statements, that Richard Peters, Esq., hav- ing visited England on private business, was requested by the committee of the convention to wait on the Arch- ADDITIONAL S TA TEMENTS, 1 6 1 bishop of Canterbury on the business concerning which the English prelates had been addressed. The consequent letter of Mr. Peters to the committee has a tendency to throw light on the subject, and is therefore given in the Appendix, No. 17.* We left London on the evening of the 5th of February, reached Falmouth on the loth, were detained there by contrary winds until Sunday the i/th, when we embarked, and after a voyage of precisely seven weeks, landed at New York on the afternoon of Easter Sunday, April the /th; sensible, I trust, of the goodness of God in our personal protection and safety, and in His having thus brought to a prosperous issue the measures adopted for the obtaining of that Episcopacy, the want of which had been the subject of the complaint of our Church from the earliest settlement of the colonies, and which, we hope, will be now improved to her increase, and to the glory of her divine Head. /. Page 30. Of the Convention in 1789. The business was to have been preceded by a sermon from Bishop Provoost; but the bishop being detained by indisposition, Dr. Smith preached. The only bishop present presided, and the secretary was Francis Hopkinson, Esq. ^ ' * There being nothing more in the letters to the committee concerning the claim of the corporation of the Widows' Fund, the silence seems to require a reason. The abstract was sent to the Archbishop, agreeably to his desire. In the next interview he remarked, that he perceived the evidence of the promise of the society in England, but wished to know to what period the society in America considered it as extending. The author had not been informed on that point by the committee, and made answer accordingly. The undertaking of the settling of this would have involved him in no less a difficulty, than that of determining at / what period American allegiance ceased. If it were on the 4th of July, 1776, t there could be no claim beyond that day, on a fund appropriated by charter to the dominions of the British crown. On the other hand, to have dated inde- pendence from the acknowledgment of it by Great Britain, would have been in- consistent with American citizenship. Accordingly, nothing more passed on the subject. It should be noticed, that to the former period there was very little due. 1 62 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Previously to the meeting of the convention, it was fore- seen that the unfinished business of the Episcopacy, and the relative situation of the Church in Connecticut, would be the principal objects of attention, and must be thought important, not only in themselves, but because of the influ- ence which each of them had on the other. It may be proper to say something of these, before an entry on the narrative of what passed concerning them in the convention. There is an implication at least the author had always so understood it in the address to the English prelates, that the American Episcopal Church was to obtain from them the beginning of the succession in the number of bishops competent, according to the English rule and practice, to perpetuate it. Doubtless this sentiment was much strengthened by the consideration of the antiquity and the expediency of the rule, which required the pres- ence and the consent of three bishops in every conse- cration. Although it had been the clear sense on both sides, that the American Church was entirely independent of the Church of England; yet, on this point of procuring from England the canonical number of bishops, the prom- ise seemed to have been voluntarily pledged, so that the English prelates might, in the event of non-compliance, < have laid the charge of imposition. It is true the Arch- bishop of Canterbury seems not to have been te'nacious of the canonical number, as appears from what he said of a consecration for the Isle of Man, related in the author's letter from England.* Yet his Grace was careful to correct his jpistake in regard to that measure, as is evident from the note written by him to the author, on the day on which he left London. If some of the Archbishop's brethren, of the right reverend bench, should have been found stricter than himself on points of this nature, there was no respon- sibility on him, and the blame would have lain on those who had dispensed with the ancient number in America. See ante, p. 144. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 163 There may be acknowledged another reason for being par- ticular on this point; it is the guarding against the mis- chievous consequences of a disposition to irregularity in any future American bishop, who might have less con- cern for the peace and the order of the Church, than for the sustaining of his consequence with a party.* In regard to the Church in Connecticut, it had been all along an object with the author, which he never endeavored to conceal, to bring its Episcopacy within the union. But as the Scotch succession could not be officially recognized by the English Bishops, he wished to complete the succes- f sion from England, before such a comprehension should - l take place. He knew, indeed, that Bishop Provoost, al- though he did not appear to be possessed oTp_ersonal ill-will to Bishop Seabury, was opposed to having any thing to do with the Scotch succession, which he^ did not hesitate to pronounce irregular. Yet he was very little supported in this sentiment; and least of all, by the~cTergy of his own diocese. It was therefore natural to infer, that he would see the expediency of what was the general wish, or at least waive his objection for the sake of peace; as indeed happened.t Although these subjects would of course have engaged the attention of the convention, yet an application which came from the Church in Massachusetts, addressed to each * The case in Cummings' movement. Ed. \ In the last preceding convention of the Church in New York, they had de- clared their desire, as well in favor of the succession in the English line, as for a union of the Church throughout the United States, wkh an evident allusion to the Scotch Episcopacy. What is now referred to, are the two following resolves, passed unanimously on the 5th of November, 1788. "Resolved, That it is highly necessary in the opinion of this convention, that measures should be pursued to preserve the Episcopal succession in the English line and "Resolved also, That the union of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America is of great importance and much to be desired; and that the delegates of this state, in the next General Convention, be instructed to pro- mote that union by every prudent measure, consistent with the constitution of the Church, and the continuance of the Episcopal succession in the English line." 1 64 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. of the three bishops, and received by the author a few days before the assembling of the convention, brought the matter forward in a very strong point of view. The object of the address, was the procuring of the consecration of the Rev. Edward Bass of the said state, as the concurrent act of the/ three bishops. For the application from Massachusetts, and for the tes- timonial of the consecration of Bishop Seabury, see the Appendix, No. 18. The author, had some time before written to Dr. Parker, of Boston, that he considered the clergy of Massachusetts as peculiarly situated; in consequence of their never having been concerned, either in the application to England, or in that to Scotland: so that they had it in their power to act the part of mediators, in bringing the clergy of Connecticut and those of the other states together. Dr. Parker has"" since repeatedly declared, and it is in a letter under his! Hand, that this hint was the origin, and that the promoting,.- of the measure mentioned was the motive, of the applica-\ tion for the consecration of Mr. Bass. Dr. Parker, even after the favorable close of the subsequent session, which he had attended, intimated, that the object of the applica- tion having been accomplished, he and his brethren would be indifferent as to any thing further. A confirmation of this appeared soon afterwards in the resignation of Mr. Bass. I The application was received but a few days before the meeting of the convention, and very soon engaged the notice of that body, who, from the beginning, manifested a strong desire of complying with it. This put their presi-^ dent in a very delicate situation, standing alone as he did \ in the business, and as president of the assembled body. Many speeches were made, which implied, that the result of the deliberation must involve the acquiescence of the two bishops of the English line; while it was thought by ^ the only one of them present, that no determination of ^ theirs would warrant the breach of his faith impliedly <| pledged, as he apprehended, in consequence of measures i ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 165 taken by a preceding convention. Accordingly, he took occasion to state to several of the members, in the intervals of the meetings, the difficulty under which he lay. They urged the necessity, which they thought the Church was under, and as to the implication involved in the first address to the English bishops, they said it was intended at the time, but prevented by unexpected occurrences in the case of Dr. Griffith. On the opposite side, no such necessity was perceived; and as to the resignation of Dr. Griffith, another might be chosen. He had been himself chosen after the date of the letter to the English bishops. The issue of these conferences, were the resolves on the journal of this session, with a reference to the difficulty stated, and the directing of an address to the English prelates; which was accordingly drawn up, as it stands on the journal of the next session. For the resolves and the address to the Archbishops, see the Appendix, No. 19. The author, on being consulted in regard to this expe- dient, saw an objection to it in the call which it made on the said prelates, to declare an opinion on the subject of the Scotch Episcopacy. Perhaps they might not agree. Even if their opinion should be favorable, it must be in opposition to the positive provisions of acts of parliament, and therefore would not be officially given. For his part, the only way in which he was to be affected by the meas- ure in contemplation was the being relieved at the present time, from the pain of standing opposed to the wishes of the convention. The measure was adopted; and this seems the proper place of mentioning the result of it. When Bishop Madi- son went to England, in the following summer, for conse- cration, the Archbishop of Canterbury informed him, and desired him to inform the author, as president of the con- vention, that he (the Archbishop) had drawn up an answer, the sending of which would be rendered unnecessary by his (Bishop Madison's) coming. The Archbishop read the 1 66 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. answer to him; remarking, that it was painful to him to be in such circumstances, as required him to speak or write in terms which were not an explicit declaration on the sub- ject. In short, Bishop Madison said, that the Archbishop, in the answer, left the matter as he found it: which was what might have been expected from the caution of his character, and from the circumstances of -peculiar delicacy attending this subject.* That so little business was transacted in this session of the convention, may be seen from the journal to have been owing to the adjournment, made for the express purpose of inviting the clergy of Connecticut to meet the convention in September; an object which it was expected would be promoted by the conviction generally prevailing in the convention, that the formerly proposed constitution was inadequate to the situation of this Church, and by the new constitution entered on the journal of this session. On this business, the president of the convention met the commit- tee but once, and interested himself very little; being de- sirous, that whatever additional powers it might i>e thought necessary to assign to the bishops, such pow r ers should not lie under the reproach of having been pressed for by one of the number, but be the result of due deliberation, and * In an interview with the Archbishop, he expressed himself to Bishop Madison to the following effect, as appears from a communication of the latter to the author, dated December 19, 1790: from which the other particulars are also taken "A few days before I left London, the Archbishop requested a particular interview with me. He said, he wished to express his hopes, and also to recommend it to our Church, that in such consecrations as might take place in America, the per- sons who had received their powers from the Church of England should be alone concerned. He sjx>ke with great delicacy of Dr. Seabury; but thought it most advisable, that the line of bishops should be handed down from those who had re- ceived their commission from the same source." It was afterwards supposed, that the sense of the Archbishop was fully accom- plished by the presence and the assistance of the canonical number of the English line; and the matter was so understood by Bishop Madison. Besides, the ques-S tion had changed itsground, by the repeal of the lays against the Scottish bishops; I and by their reception, in their proper character, in England. This happened after / Bishop Madison's visit to that country. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 167 the free choice of all orders of persons within the Church, and given with a view to her good government.* In the second session, the clergy who came from the eastward, besides Bishop Seabury, were two of his presby- ters, Mr. Hubbard and Mr. Jarvis, from Connecticut; and Dr. Parker, from Massachusetts. All things now appeared to tend to a happy union. 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 * During the session there took place in the house of the author, the decease of the Rev. Dr. Griffith, of Virginia. The respect entertained for him by the con- vention appears in the arrangements made for attendance on his funeral as re- corded on the journal. He had been much indisposed from the day of his arrival. His death, however, was in one sense sudden, and certainly unexpected to the very able physician who attended him, and with whom he had been in long habits of acquaintance. His disorder was the inflammatory rheumatism, which passed to his head during sleep. The following statement is thought due to the memory of a respectable divine, who had manifested great zeal for the organizing of the Church. It has been reported, and had weight on some minds in a more recent election to the Episcopacy, that he had been under the necessity of resigning, on account of his having been elected in haste, and without due notice. The contrary is here known, and can be proved by documents in possession. His election was in May, 1786. Some private concerns, and the notjjeing supplied with money, prevented his crossing the Atlantic with the two who crossed it in November of that year. In May, 1787, about a year after his election, and about a month after the return of the bishops consecrated in England, there was held a convention in Virginia, from the printed journal of which the following is an extract : " Resolved, That the standing committee, without delay, request of the Right Rev. Dr. White, bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the Right Rev. Dr. Proyoost, bishop of the said Church in the State of New York, that they, or either of them, admit to consecration the Rev. Dr. Griffith, nominated by the last convention bishop of the Church in this state." The standing committee were the Rev. Dr. Madison, the Rev. Mr. Bracken, the Rev. Mr. Shield, the Hon. John Blair, Mr. Page, of Rosewell, and Mr. An- drews. The prominent applicant to the American bishops was Dr. Madison, who was afterwards bishop. The principle on which the bishops declined compliance, has been set forth in its proper place ; being their opinion, that they were jrtedged to their first obtaining of three bishops from England. 1 68 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. were more, having obtained information that Bishop Sea- bury, who had been chaplain to a British regiment during the war, was now in the receipt of half-pay, entertained scruples in regard to the propriety of admitting him as a member of the convention. 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 diffi- culty. His opinion 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 for- mer services, and not for any now expected of him that it did not prevent his being a citizen, with all the rights at- tached to the character, in Connecticut and that should he or any person in the like circumstances 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. The author very much apprehended, that the contrary would happen, not because of the pre- judices of the gentleman who addressed him on the sub- ject, but because of those of another, who had started the difficulty. On the day succeeding that of the above conversation, the committee was appointed, as stated on the minutes, to confer with the eastern gentlemen, on a plan of union. They met in the evening, and found no difficulty in joining in the report, as made the next day in the convention. The subsequent adoption of the report, with the reservation ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 169 as to the negative of the bishops, leads to the remark, 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, from Virginia, very seri- ously, and doubtless very sincerely, expressed his appre- hension, that it was so far beyond what was expected by the Church in his state, as would cause the measure to be there disowned. The desire that Mr. Andrews had all along shown to effect the union, and the good temper with which he had treated every subject of discussion, gave the greater force to his apprehensions: the consequence of which was, the referring of the subject of the full negative to some subsequent General Convention, to be determined according to instructions from the conventions in the several states. The eastern gentlemen~acquiesced, but reluctantly, in this compromise. Had there been no more than their apprehension of laws passing by a majority of four fifths, after a non-concurrence of the bishops, the extreme im- probability of this would it is thought have been con- fessed by them. But the truth is they thought that the frame of ecclesiastical government could hardly be called Episcopal, while such a matter was held out as specula- tively possible.* For the constitution as proposed by the session of July * The case of Mr. Andrews, of Virginia, is a strong proof of the laxity in regard to due order and discipline, under which it was necessary to begin the organization of the Church. He was a first cousin of the Rev. Dr. Andrews, with whom and with the author he had been a student in the college of Philadelphia. At the time in question, he was a professor in the college of Williamsburg, in Virginia. Al- though in priest's orders, he had discontinued his ministry, and acted in some civil employments of responsibility, with reputation. He was a very sensible and a very amiable man, in his temper and deportment. He had, doubtless, in some way reconciled his departure from the clerical character with a sincere desire of settling the concerns of the Church, and of contributing his best endeavors to that effect. Certain it is, that they were directed, not to the pulling down, but to the v building up of the Church, the ministry of which he had forsaken. Probably he *) was the easier reconciled to this measure, by the almost total prostration of the / Church in Virginia during the war of the revolution. 170 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. and August, and as acceded to in this session by Bishop Seabury and the presbyters from Connecticut and Boston, see the Appendix, No. 20. No Sooner had the convention divided into two houses, I than an incident happened in the House of Clerical and*->. Lay Deputies, which had an unpropitious influence on all ) that followed ; and as the result of the deliberations of bothj houses was, in many points, owing to this incident, occa-\ sion is taken to relate it, on recollection, after having been \ a hearer in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies at the / time. In the appointment of committees on the different de- partments of the Book of Common Prayer, Dr. Parker pro- posed that the English book should be the ground of the proceedings held, without any reference to that set out and f proposed in 178$. This was objected to by some, who con- -j4 * / /_ tended, that a liturgy ought to be formed, withojat reference () /hA*J to any existing book, although with liberty to take from/\ any, whatever the convention should think fit. The issue L of the debate, was the wording of the resolves as they stand on the journal, in which the different committees are ap- j, pointed, to prepare a morning and evening prayer to pj^- pare a litany to prepare a communion service and the t same, in regard to the other departments, instead of its be- ing said to aher the said services; which had been the ' 6 language in 1785. f / This was very unreasonable; because the different con- /.-^^ Q^wti gregations of the Church were always understood to be pos- sessed of a liturgy, before the consecration of her bishops, or the existence of her conventions. It would have been _ thought a strange doctrine in any of the clergy, had they jj,, pretended that they were released from all obligation to the use of the Book of Common Prayer, by the revolution. It v\ is true, that Dr. Parker had carried the matter too far, in-A speaking of the Proposed Book, as a form of which they couldjcjvpw nothing, considering that it had been proposed >vtvxfwvr by a preceding convention from a majority of the states. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 171 It was particularly wondered at in Dr. Parker, by those who knew that he had used the book in his own church at Boston. But as the Doctor, during the preceding part of the session, had been looked to for the opening of the sen- timents of the clergy present from Connecticut, who had said but little all along, and evidently depended on him, to press the points which they had most at heart, it is proba- ble, that in this instance, he accommodated more than was either necessary or well considered, to make matters agree- able to their minds. The direct course would have been, to have taken the English liturgy, as that in which some alterations were contemplated; and with it, the other as a proposal, agreeably to what was expressed in the title page. Certain it is, that the extreme proposed tended very much to the opposite extreme, which took effect an evident im- plication in all the proceedings of the house, that there were no forms of prayer, no offices, and no rubrics, until they should be formed by the convention now assembled. Every one must perceive, that this abridged the species of negative, lodged with the House of Bishops. For if, in any branch of the liturgy, they should be disposed to be tena- cious in any point, which should be a deviation from the English book, the consequence must be, not that the prayer, or whatever else it were, remained as before, but that no such matter were to be inserted. This, in some instances, would have operated to the extent of excluding a whole office of the .Church, if the negative of the bishops had been insisted on. They did not carry their right so far, but they reasoned and expostulated on the point, with several of the gentlemen, to no purpose. They would not allow that there was any book of authority in existence: a mode of proceeding, 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. If that adopted by the majority of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies had been acted on by the clergy and by the individual congregations, on the 172 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. taking place of the civil revolution, it would have torn the Church to pieces. On the contrary, the idea had prevailed, ' that although the civil part of the institution was destroyed, and each Christian minister lay under the necessity to dis- charge the Scriptural duty of praying for his civil rulers ac- cording to his individual discretion; the rest of the service remained entire, on the ground of antecedent obligation. The forms of proceeding in the House of Bishops, con- sisting of two only Bishop Provoost, although absent, being considered as making up the constitutional number were soon settled. They were drafted by the author, and he seized the opportunity of preventing all discussions at any time for this he hoped for as the effect on the point I of precedency, by resting the matter on the seniority of ! Episcopal consecration: which, of course, made Bishop Seabury the president of the house. This regulation was I agreeable to the judgment of the author; which is not | altered, although a different principle was adopted at the next convention, and acted on for a time. The only plau- ' sible objection heard to the other which, however, lies equally against that afterward adopted is the possible case of the presidency's devolving on a bishop, who may be disqualified for the duties of it, by mental or by bodily infirmities. But in this case, a vice-president, or a presi- dent pro tempore, might be appointed. The principal act of this session was the preparing of the Book of Common Prayer, as now the established Liturgy of the Church. It will not be noticed any further, than, on the ground of information possessed, to account for the doing or for the omitting of any important matter. The^ journal shows, that some parts of it were drawn up by s the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and other parts / of it by the House of Bishops. In the latter, owing to the\ smallness of the number and a disposition in both of them to accommodate, business was despatched with great ce- lerity; as must be seen by any one who attends to the progress of the subjects recorded on the journal. To this ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 173 day, there are recollected with satisfaction, the hours which were spent with Bishop Seabury on the important subjects which came before them; and especially the Christian tem- per which he manifested all along. In the daily prayer for morning and evening service; the principal subjects of difference arising between the two houses, were the Athanasian Creed, and the Descent into 5 Hell in the Apostles'CreedT~ ~~Dn the former subject, the author consented to the pro- posal 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 de- clared 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 of the book. It was the author's intention never T to read the creed himself, and he declared his mind to that j effect. Bishop Seabury, on the contrary, thought that with- out 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 several churches, as the Lutheran and others in this country and in Europe; and above all, the instance of the widely extended Greek V Church, confessedly tenacious of the doctrine of the Nicene Creed, and yet not possessed of the Athanasian in any J liturgy, or even of an acknowledgment of it in any confes-/ sion of faith. Of the last mentioned instance, Bishop Sea- bury 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 Apostles' Creed and the Nicene " as to that of St. Athanasius, they are wholly / strangers to it." However, the creed was inserted by way / of amendment; to be used or omitted at discretion. But the amendment was negatived by the other house: and when the subject afterward came up in conference they 174 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. 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 embar- rassed the committee who had the charge of printing the book. The amendments of the bishops, whether verbal or otherwyie, to the services sent to the other house, had all been numbered. The president of that house, as afterward appeared on unquestionable verbal testimony, accidentally omitted the reading of the article in its full force, with the explanatory rubric. The meaning of the article in that place, was declared to be the statejrf Jjie dead, g^n^raUy: 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 presumed. 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 bish- ops: it being the only one on which they had laid much stress, in stating the terms on which they were willing to consecrate for our Church; and we having complied with their wishes, in that respect. This would seem very un- suitably followed by a repetition of the offensive measure, or something very like it, in the first convention 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 de- parture, he took the author aside from company, and men- tioned his apprehension; which was treated as groundless, on the full belief that it was so. It was a point which Bishop Seabury had much at heart, from an opinion, that ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 175 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 towards the English Church; and that a latitude would be left by the proposed rubric for the understanding 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 disliked 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 princi-^ pie that it exacted a belief of the existence of departed \ spirits, between death and the resurrection. So easy is it, 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 misunderstood one another altogether. The question was what is 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 ap- pearing to have been presented, 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 permissory 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 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 appears in the book pub-- lished at the time. 176 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCff. When the convention afterwards met in New York, in ri the year 1792, this matter came in review before them: and the result was the ordering of the Creed to be printed in all future editions, with the article not in italics and between hooks as before, but with the rubric leaving it to discretion to use or to omit it; or to use, instead of it, the words con- sidered by the rubric as synonymous. Some such compo- sition seemed to be rendered absolutely necessary by exist- ing circumstances. The importance given to this article by the requisition of the English prelates, and the litigation which it has con- sequently undergone in our conventions, induce the being particular in regard to it. Therefore, as the delivery of opinion on the subject will fall within the design of these sheets, it is proposed to recur to it again, before the finish- ing of remarks on the transactions of this convention. As connected with the morning and evening prayers, the reading Psalms come under notice in this place, and the following information is to be given concerning them. The House of Bishops did not approve of the expedient of the other house, in relation to the selections as they now I stand, to be used at the discretion of the minister, instead of the Psalms for the day. But Bishop Seabury interested himself in the subject the less, as knowing, that neither himself nor any of his clergy would make use of the alter- native, but that they would adhere to the old practice. For the author's part, he disliked the course taken, from the opinion, that it was less likely to be satisfactory than an- other expedient suggested by him, for the improving of this part of the service, which, in his opinion, called for it more than any other. The expedient, was to give to the offici- ating minister the liberty to select Psalms at his discretion. This would be attended he thought with the advantage of breaking the practice of reading the Psalms, without any regard to their suitableness to the general circumstances and state of mind of a mixed congregation, and yet, not hazard such capricious omissions of particular passages as ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 177 might be construed by some into a disrespectful treatment of Holy Writ, and thus prevent all improvement in this branch of the service. Another consequence would be, that, the number and the length of the Psalms depending on the choice of the minister, there would be great encour- agement to the introduction of the practice of singing this part of the service, instead of repeating the verses by the minister and the clerk alternately. As to the selection made, he considers some of the omissions of particular verses as very capricious, and the selections in general as having added to the length of the morning and evening prayer, instead of shortening them; an object confessedly proper to be kept in view. They were indeed made with too little deliberation; of which there needs not to be given any stronger proof, than that the selections which stand as the seventh and the eighth were proposed by the House of Bishops, at his desire, as an amendment. The excellency of the Psalms overlooked by gentlemen of judgment and taste, is a proof, that the time and the care bestowed on the work were not proportioned to its importance. The proposal for the inserting of them, was owing to the desire of having the printed selections, since there were to be such, to contain as many of the Psalms as were suited to the ordinary devotions of a congregation. The selections which the bishops made contained whole Psalms, on the principle already stated. The other house accepted them as sent; only that they excluded one verse from the eighty- fourth Psalm. But this subject has been spoken to more particularly in a former department of the present work.* There has been already expressed the opinion, that this part of the service requires improvement, as much as any. The author earnestly wishes to see the time when it may be established on the principles of rational piety and good taste. But there are great difficulties in the way. On the one hand there are very many who remain attached to * Ante, p. 122. Ed. 178 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the old practice of reading all the Psalms, according to the daily arrangement. Against this, besides the objection so often made, that some of them have more of the severity of the legal than of the mercy of the evangelical dispensa- tion, there is the circumstance, that a very great proportion of these compositions are expressive of peculiar states of mind, no one of which can be supposed descriptive of any body of people, convened on a common occasion of devo- tion. Accordingly, the parts referred to seem to be not suited to such an occasion, however admirably they may be so for the private prayer and thanksgiving of particular persons. As to the plea of antiquity, little stress is to be laid on it, unless it could be proved, that the Psalms were so used in the earliest ages of the Church, the contrary to which is here taken to be the fact. But although these objections lie, as is conceived, against the past practice, there is such a propensity man- ifested to the extreme of hypercriticism, as is calculated to bring reproach on every temperate reform of this part of the service. The selections in the present Prayer Book, had they consisted of entire Psalms, would have been much more generally used than they are at present. In saying this, it is not intended to object to collections of verses, made with a professed reference to particular subjects; a beautiful instance of which it is spoken of as a mere matter of taste is in the English Prayer Book, in the hymn in the 3 joice in it, as for the good of the Church. And so far as it lately gave me much of your company and conversation, I remember it with peculiar personal satisfaction. I think further, that, on this plan, matters are more likely to be matured than on that of a single house. But it is a dictate of natural justice, that there should be no apparent, where there is no real, responsibility. If any one should compare the constitution, with the known fact and general persua- sion of our having before a liturgy, he will presume of a majority of the House of Bishops, that is, in the present case, of all of the order present, that they were in their judgments favorable to all the alterations made. This, you know, was not the fact. And although, in regard to the points given up, I shall think nothing of them, if, in the ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 187 event, the great good should be accomplished of having one service for the Church in these states; yet I wish that the thing had been otherwise contrived as to that same responsibility. And if the operation be a hard one, in re- lation to matters to which we gave our sanction, although we wished them otherwise, it will be more so, on a point to which we have given no sanction. Still I know of no ex- pedient besides that suggested. You will rejoice to find, that I have nothing to add on a subject on which I must have been at this time very te- dious to you and therefore I conclude myself, Your affectionate brother, WM. WHITE. Right Rev. Bishop Seabury. K. Page 30. Of the Convention in 1792. The bishops present at this convention, were Bishops o /*/*" Seabury, White, Provoost, Madison, and, after consecra- this, without an implied renunciation of his consecration, i and contempt cast on the source from which he had re- ceived it and that the apprehended measure, if proposed (' and persevered in, must be followed by an entire breach ' f with him, and, as he supposed, with the Church under his superintendence. The author expressed his persuasion, that no such de- sign was entertained, either by Bishop Provoost or by Bishop Madison; and his determination, that if it were, it should not have his concurrence. He believed they wished, as he also did, to have three bishops present under the 190 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. English consecration, whenever such an occasion as that now expected, should occur. The being united in the act with a bishop who should consecrate through another line, would not weaken the English chain. In regard to the question of presidency, on which Bishop Seabury had in- timated that he should not be tenacious, the author told A , him, that his opinion being the same as in 1789, he could not consistently vote for the reversing of the rule, which, I if it were done, he thought had best be by the absence that morning of one of the two now conversing, and that should Bishop Seabury think it proper in this way to waive his right under the rule, the author pledged himself, that in no event would he have a hand in the ensuing consecration, if it were to be accompanied by the rejection of Bishop Sea- bury's assistance in it; although there was still entertained the persuasion, that no such measure would be thought of, as indeed proved to be the fact. Hands were given in tes- timony of mutual consent in this design. He absented himself that morning, and the rule was altered, in the man- ner related on the journal; that is for the presidency to go f in rotation, beginning from the north; which made Bishop / Provoost the president on the present occasion. At the opening of this convention, it was no small satis- faction to many, to find lay-deputies from Connecticut. The aversion entertained by the clergy in that state, to this part of the institution in the more southern, had been( one of the principal impediments to a union: and when it' Avas at last effected, it was with a latitude to them in this article. Some of the laity, at the time, were afraid that this would be the beginning of rejecting them entirely. But the event ought to be noticed, as a proof that forbear- ance and mutual toleration are at least sometimes a shorter way to unity, than severity and stiffness. On the subject of the Prayer Book, there was nothing which could properly come before the convention without another review, and this was not intended, except the see- ing that the book had been properly executed. In the ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 191 correcting of any thing amiss touching this matter, there could be no ground of difference, except in the article of the Descent into Hell, which had been settled as already related, and the subject of the exclusive copyright of the book, which had been granted by the committee, in order to render the book the cheaper, and to raise a small sum for a charitable use; which two objects they thought con- sistent with one another: and further to secure the faithful printing of the book. The measure, however, was gener- ally censured and was reversed. The alterations of the Ordinal were prepared by the bishops. There was no material difference of opinion, ex- cept in regard to the words used by the bishop at the ordi- nation of priests "Receive ye the Holy Ghost" and C " Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven, and ? whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained." Bishop ' Seabury, who alone was tenacious of this form, consented -, at last with great reluctance, to allow the alternative of another as it now stands. The objections to the use made of the aforesaid expressions the author here speaks his own sense only, not answering for that of any other bishop were as follow: As to the first " Receive ye the Holy Ghost," it is sup- posed to express the conveyance of the ministerial char- acter, which St. Paul recognizes as the gift of the Spirit. i Tim. iv. 14, and 2 Tim. i. 6, and Eph. iv. 8, II. And as to the expressions " whose sins," etc., he supposes it to re- late, according to the intention of the service, principally, under due regulation, to the power of passing ecclesiastical / censures and of releasing from them, and partly to the de- claring of the forgiveness of sins, repented of and forsaken; such forgiveness not to apply independently on the sin- cerity of the receiver. But although each of the expres- sions will thus admit of a good interpretation, which should be given by the clergy as occasion may call for it, yet the words are not necessarily to be used in preference to every other form, in the very act of conveying the ministerial 192 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. commission. If they are not necessary, they can not be so proper in the place in which they stand, as some other words of more obvious signification. There seems the less reason to stickle for the last of the two clauses, as it was not of very early use in the Church. It may be proper to record what would not otherwise appear from the journal that the greater part of the time of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, was taken up (. with debates on the proposed absolute negative of the ( bishops, but without any interference on their part. The ' debates ended in what appears on the journal of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, Saturday, September 15 f its being notified to the churches, that it was proposed to / determine on the subject at the next convention. On the subject of the Articles, the author will begin with the opinions of the bishops in regard to the general ques- tion, so far as they are within his knowledge: and his begin- ning with his own opinion, is merely because of the com plexion which it may perhaps be supposed to give to the facts to be narrated. He professed himself an advocate for Articles, the abolish- ing of which would, he thought, only leave with every pas- tor of a congregation the right of judging of orthodoxy, according to his discretion or his prejudices, while the Arti- cles determine that matter by a rule, issuing from the pub- lic authority of the Church. When the question has been put whether the Thirty- nine Articles are the best rule that can be devised, he has | answered, that he thought them better than any other, i likely to be obtained under present circumstances. Con- I ventional business is too much hurried, and the members of the conventions are not sufficiently retired from other avo- cations, for the entering on determinations of this magni- tude. Even if the greater number of the body should b< conceded to be sufficiently learned for the work, ecclesias- tical legislation has not been of sufficiently long standing in this Church to have established the characters of those ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 193 who exercise it, as to this point, in the estimation of the world. Until such a character shall be established, a few obstinate or factious men will overset, in their respective congregations, what shall have been enacted in conven- tion. Besides, many persons among the laity, and some even among the clergy, had declared their determination to abide by the Articles at all events: which made it much to be feared that a schism would take place whenever any material change should be determined on. In this case, they who should adhere to the Articles, would claim their relation to the Church of England, while it would be ques- tionable whether the others would have any permanent tie among themselves. Therefore, the author wished for an adherence to the Thirty-nine Articles, not excepting the general principles maintained in the political parts of them; but with an ex- ception, in the ratification, of the local application of the said parts, according to the letter of them. But he did not wish to have the Articles signed, as in England, according to the tenor of the thirty-sixth canon of that Church. He preferred the resting of the obligation of them on the prom- ise made at ordination, as required by the seventh article of the constitution, considered as sufficient by the English bishops; which would render them articles of peace, as they are sometimes said to be in the Church of England; but not with such evident propriety, as they would then be in the American Church. As the author approves of the gen- eral tenor of the Thirty-nine Articles, he trusted, that however he might have supposed, in his private judgment, the possibility of omitting some of them and of altering others to advantage, yet not perceiving a probability, either that such a change, if made, would have been for the bet- ter, or, that if so, it would have found such general accept- ance as to prove a sufficient bond of union, he thought he acted consistently, in endeavoring to obtain them on the terms stated. Bishop Seabury was free to declare his dissatisfaction 194 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. with some of the Articles, and during the former conven- tion in Philadelphia, had expressed a doubt, in conversa- tion with the author and several others, whether it were expedient to have any; it being presumed by him, that all necessary doctrine should be comprehended in the Liturgy. But on this occasion, he saw so clearly the inconveniences likely to result from there being no authoritative rule in the form of public confession, that he wished to adopt one, and as the author understood him, the code of the Thirty-nine Articles. Bishop Provoost did not deliver his sentiments on the lL ly subject, which was the less exacted of him, because of the ' circumstance of his being in the presidential chair. But r*^ the author has always supposed that they do not materially differ from those of Bishop Madison, who gave his opinion ) \l against Articles altogether. He had long before declared ^ himself on this point, in a sermon preached before the con- vention of Virginia, some years previously to his election to the Episcopacy. This sermon was printed, and opposes Articles, on the principles of the Confessional and the like books. Bishop Claggett no further gave his opinion, than as it was implied in his vote on the question, in the conference between the two houses. What little had passed among the bishops, was before the consecration, the recency of which was probably the cause of his giving of his mere vote in the conference of the houses. His sense was decidedly ' in favor of Articles, as appeared also in his usual conversa- ) tion on the subject. There was no formal discussion of the subject, in the House of Bishops, but they negatived the question of refer- ( ence to a future convention, when it became the subject of ) conference between the two houses. The negative hap- ' pened by Bishop Seabury's, Bishop Claggett's, and the au- thor's votes, against Bishop Madison's in the affirmative; so that the president was not called on to vote. The au- thor takes notice that this transaction is not recorded on ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 195 the journal of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. But it happened as recorded on that of the bishops, who, by their negative vote, only showed their willingness to undertake the subject; for the postponement took place of course, as the other house, immediately after the confer- ence, determined to dismiss it for the present. It may be proper to mention a proposition made by the bishops, but not entered on the journals. '* " * ., - ~ -^ - / / Bishop MadisorPTiad communicated to the author, on // their journey from Philadelphia to New York, a design which he had much at heart that of effecting a reunion with the Methodists; and he was so sanguine as to believe, that by an accommodation to them in a few instances, they would be induced to give up their peculiar discipline, and conform to the leading parts of the doctrine, the worship, and the discipline of the Episcopal Church. It is to be ( noted, that he had no idea of comprehending them, on the \ condition of their continuing embodied, as at present. On this there was communicated to him an intercourse held with Dr. Coke, one of the superintendents* of that society, which might have showed to Bishop Madison, how hope-^ less all endeavors for such a junction must prove. Never- theless, he persisted in his well-meant design. The result of this was his introducing into the House of Bishops of a proposition, which his brethren, after some modifications, approving of the motive, but expecting little as the result of it, consented to send to the other house. The proposi- tion is as follows: "The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, ever bearing in mind the sacred obligation which attends all the followers of Christ, to avoid divi- sions 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 * This was the name that was then borne by those who presided in the Metho dist communion. 196 HfE.lfOIRS OF THE CHURCH. by any other considerations than those of duty as Chris- tians, and an earnest desire for the prosperity of pure Christianity, and the furtherance of our holy religion, they are ready and willing to unite and form one 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 effected, they further 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 altera- tion. And it is hereby recommended to the state conven-( tions, to adopt such measures or propose such conferences j with Christians of other denominations, as to themselves ) may be thought most' prudent, and report accordingly to the ensuing General Convention." On the reading of this in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, they were astonished, and considered it as alto- gether preposterous; tending to produce distrust of the stability of the system of the Episcopal Church, without I the least prospect of embracing any other religious body. The members generally mentioned, as a matter of indul- gence, that they would permit the withdrawing of the paper; no notice to be taken of it. A few gentlemen, however, who had got some slight intimations of the cor- respondence between Dr. Coke and the author, who would have been gratified by an accommodation with the Metho- dists, and who thought that the paper sent was a step in measures to be taken to that effect, spoke in favor of the proposition. But it was not to be endured, and the bish- ops silently withdrew it, agreeably to leave given. To guard against misconstruction, at some future time, of the correspondence between Dr. Coke and the author, he records it here. In the spring of the year 1791, the author received from that gentleman a letter, containing a plan of what ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 197 he considered as a union of the Methodistical Society with the Episcopal Church. The plan was, in substance, that all the Methodist ministers, at the time in connection, were to receive Episcopal ordination, as also those who should come forwards in future within the connection; such ministers to remain under the government of the then sup- erintendents and their successors. Dr. Coke's motive to the proposed union, as stated in his letter, was an appre- hension entertained by him, that he had gj3ne_further in the separation than had been designed by Mr._Wesley, from whom he had received his commission. Mr. Wesley himself, he was sure, had gone further than he would have gone, if he had foreseen some events which followed. The Doctor was certain, that the same gentleman was sorry for the separation, and would use his influence to the utmost, for the accomplishment of a reunion. Dr. Coke's letter was answered by the author, with the reserve which seemed incumbent on one who was incompetent to decide with effect on the proposal made. It happened that Dr. Coke, before he received the an- swer to his letter, hearing of the decease of Mr. Wesley, the news of which reached America during the short in- terval between the dates of the two letters, set off imme- diately from Baltimore for Philadelphia, to take his passage for England. On reaching this city and calling on Dr. Magaw, he was much disappointed on hearing of the early answer, lest it should fall into the hands of his colleague Mr. Asbury. He visited the author, in company of Dr. Magaw, and in speaking of the above incident, said, that although he hoped Mr. Asbury would not open the letter, yet he might do so, on the supposition that it related to their joint concern. The conversation was general, and nothing passed, that gave any ground of expectation of a reunion, on the principle of consolidation; or any other principle, than that of the continuing of the Methodists a distinct body and self-governed. In short, there were held out only the terms of the letter, in which there does not 198 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. seem to be contemplated any change in the relation of the Episcopal Church to that society, except the giving of them access to the Episcopal congregations, while there was sufficient security provided, to prevent the clergy of the latter from having access to congregations of the Metho- dists. At least it is here supposed, that these things would | have been unavoidably the result. The author saw Dr. Coke twice after this; once, by ap- pointment at Dr. Magaw's, where nothing material passed; and again, alone at the author's house, where Dr. Coke ^ read a letter which he had written to Bishop Seabury, similar to that which he had written to the author, but with the difference of his suggesting to Bishop Seabury as follows That although the Methodists would have confi- dence in any engagements which should be made by the present bishops, yet there might in future be some, who, on the arrival of their inferior grades of preachers to a competency to the ministry, would not admit them as pro- posed in the letter that to guard against the danger of this, there would be use in consecrating Mr. Asbury to the Episcopacy and that although there would not be the same reasons in his (Dr. Coke's) case, because he was a resident of England, yet, as he should probably, while he lived, occasionally visit America, it would not be fit, con- sidering he was Mr. Asbury's senior, that he should appear in a lower character than this gentleman. These were, in substance, the sentiments expressed; and on reading this part of the letter, he desired the author to take notice, that he did not make a condition of what he had there written. There was no comment, and he proceeded. In this conversation he said, that Mr. Asbury had opened his letter, but he had heard nothing from him on the sub- ject.* With this interview all intercourse ended. Dr. Coke soon afterward embarked for England, and was reported to have had an interview with Mr. Asbury somewhere down the river, on his journey to the ship. The author avoided speaking on the subject, until the convention in 1792, and ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 199 then mentioned it only to the bishops, towards whom there was understood to be a latitude. It was evident from some circumstances which passed in conversation with Dr. Coke, that there was a degree of jealousy, if not of misunderstand- ing, between him and Mr. Asbury. Whether this had any influence in the enterprise of the former, or he perceived advantage likely to arise to him, under the state of things which would take place in England on the decease of Mr. Wesley, are questions on which there is no judgment here formed. The determination was adopted, not to hinder any good which might possibly accrue hereafter; although it was perceived, that this could not be on the terms pro- posed. For a copy of the letter of Dr. Coke, and the answer to it, see the Appendix, No. 21. Perhaps it may not be foreign to the present subject to take notice, that the author, when in England, entertained a desire of seeing the late Mr. John Wesley, with the view of stating to him some circumstances, of which he might be uninformed, in reference to the design then lately adopted of withdrawing the Methodist Societies in America from the communion of the Episcopal Church. Under this idea, there was obtained a letter to him from the Rev. Mr. Pil- more, which the author left at the house of Mr. Wesley, when he was from home; but no notice was taken of it. Before the author's departure, intending to go on a certain day into the city, he sent to that gentleman a letter by the penny-post, expressing, that he would on the same day stop at his house, if convenient to him. An answer was received, and is still in possession, the purport of which is, that Mr. Wesley was then engaged in a periodical duty of an examination of his society, but that in the case of a stay of a week or two, he would derive pleasure from the inter- view proposed. As the stay was only ten days after, and the latter part of the time was taken up by the business of the consecration and in returning visits, there was no re- newal of the proposal of an interview, especially as doubts 200 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. were entertained of the delicacy of doing so; the resting of an hour's conversation on the event of a stay of a fortnight longer, having very much the appearance of a declining of the visit. This may have arisen from the supposition, that the object was to impugn a measure hastily adopted by Mr. Wesley, and not intended to be relinquished. The author had also carried a letter from the Rev. Mr. Pilmore to the Rev. Charles Wesley, and had a conversa- tion with him on the same subject. He expressed himself decidedly against the new course adopted, and gave the author a pamphlet published by his brother and himself, in the earlier part of their lives, against a secession from the Church of England, which, he said, was at that time pro- posed by some. And he remarked, that the whole of the pamphlet might be considered as a censure on what had been done recently in America. L. Page 31. Of the Convention in 1795. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the Rev. Dr. Smith, of Pennsylvania, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Secretaries, were the Rev. Joseph Turner, of the former house, and the Rev. James Aber- crombie, of the latter. The preacher on this occasion was Bishop Provoost. Before the assembling of this convention, there took place an incident, threatening to produce permanent dis- satisfaction between Bishops Seabury and Provoost, which, however, was happily prevented. Although Bishop Sea-C bury had been chosen bishop of the Church in Rhode Island, the congregation of Narraganset, in that state, had associated with the Church in Massachusetts, which had unwarily admitted the junction. In consequence, a clergy- man had been ordained for the congregation by Bishop Provoost. The author, during the sitting of the conven- tion, received a letter from Bishop Seabury, respectfully ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 2OI and affectionately complaining of the matter. Bishop Pro- voost, on the letter's being read to him, said, that on re- ceiving the letter from the clergy of Massachusetts, he had doubted of the propriety of the proposal in it; but that on consulting the clergy of New York, and especially those in the most intimacy with Bishop Seabury, he was advised by them to compliance; but that he perceived objections to such conduct in individual congregations, and would much approve of a canon to prevent it. Such a canon was ac- cordingly prepared and passed. It is believed that no dis- satisfaction remained. The author was enabled to lay before this convention an application from a convention in North Carolina, for the consecration of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew their bishop. This gentleman, as appears by a subsequent letter from him, set off to attend the convention with a view to conse- cration, but was prevented by an interruption of his jour- ney in consequence of an epidemic fever in Norfolk, which \ f f made him despair of arriving in time, there being some interruptions in the usual accommodations for travelling. Why nothing was done afterward, for the carrying of the design into effect, is not known, unless it be the decease ^ of the reverend person in question, which must have hap- / pened not long after. The Church in North Carolina having organized itself and sent deputies to the General Convention about three years ago, it may be an act of justice to perpetuate their former effort: rendering it probable, that the ensuing inac- tivity is resolvable into the want of some clergymen of sufficient zeal and influence to take the lead in such business. There had been, previously, an exertion to the same good effect. The Rev. James L. Wilson, ordained by the author in 1789, embarked as a deputy to the General Con- vention of 1792; but after an unusually long passage, ar- rived too late. At his special request, his arrival after the adjournment was noticed by the secretary, as it now 202 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. stands, below the journal. Mr. Wilson returned to North Carolina, and soon after died. With the recommendation of Mr. Pettigrew, there came a letter to the author, expressive of solicitude because of what he considered, and his electors appear in the instru- ment to have considered a departure in his certificate from the appointed form. The letter was answered, and the an- swer communicated the information, that the supposition of defect was owing to their not having been made ac- quainted with a canon passed at the immediately preced- ing convention, providing for such a case as that now ex- isting, in which some of the electors, because of the want of personal acquaintance, had rested their recommendation on the testimony of their brethren in the act. For the instrument referred to, see the Appendix, No. 22. Some time before the convention, there was sent to the author, by a clergyman from South Carolina, a copy of a printed circular letter, signed by two clergymen and a lay- man, and addressed to the different vestries. The signers called themselves a select committee, from a representa- tion of seven churches, and proposed the choosing of a bish- op; but gave such reasons for the measure, as indicated a design of separating from the union. The author conceived it to be his duty, to lay this paper before the bishops, who, in consequence, after the testimonials of Dr. Robert Smith had been presented to them with a view to his con- secration, desired an interview with him. In that inter- view, the author, as president, being so instructed by the bishops, asked him, whether the convention, which had...- been held in consequence of the said printed paper, had / adopted the sentiments of it. Dr. Smith then asked Whether his consecration was to depend on his answer to that question ? The president replied, that he was not instructed on the point. The Doctor then immediately said, that the convention had not adopted the principles of the paper. So all difficulty on that score was done away. There existed no evidence to the contrary, nor has there ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 203 been any subsequently received to that effect. It has never been learned, who was the penman of that wretched pro- duction. Probably, the offensive sentiments contained in it were a temporizing expedient, designed to obviate pre- judices which were known to exist in South Carolina against the having of a bishop for that state.* The ten- dency of the paper to a severance of the Church in South Carolina from the union was unequivocal. Although the principles of the paper were not adopted by the convention of South Carolina, as appears from the testimony of Bishop Smith, yet, as it was issued with a view to important consequences, and as the propriety of the conduct of the House of Bishops is implicated in its contents, it is given without the signatures, in the Appen- dix, No. 23. There appear on the journals some entries requiring ex- planation, concerning the Rev. Dr. Samuel Peters. t This gentleman had been a clergyman of Connecticut before the revolution. He had gone to England during the war, and some time before the period now referred to had endeav- ored to procure consecration in England, with the view of being bishop in Vermont: having obtained a request to that effect, from a convention held in the said State. The Archbishop of Canterbury had declined to consecrate any further for the United States, the Church here being already supplied with the succession. It is stated in the documents, that his reason was not his being authorized by the act of parliament, to consecrate any further; but this must have been a mistake of the framers of the documents. The convention of Vermont being thus disappointed, ap-^ ' tU^M^^- plied to the American bishops. There was but one clergy- man in that state The Rev. John Cosins Ogden who had not been, and who did not stay there long. Probably his going there for a time, waawith the view of effecting the * See ante, p. 30. Ed. f He is called both Samuel and Samuel C. Peters. Ed. 204 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. object now treated of. The conduct of the bishops, in de- clining any agency in the business, is rested on the circum- stance, that the Church in Vermont had not acceded to the constitution. There were besides some personal cir- cumstances, which prevented the paying of much respect to the solicitation. It was this transaction which produced jf an addition to one of the canons; requiring, that to entitle } the Church in any state to a resident bishop, there shall be ' at least six presbyters residing and officiating therein.* There are on the journals of this convention some en- tries, in which it was thought expedient to leave a trans- action unexplained, and so it might have continued, had not the very exceptionable conduct of an individual mem- ber, after the recess, rendered it questionable, whether they had not erred in not having expelled him from the body; the only punishment in their power, since there could have been no ecclesiastical trial, except before the * Of those concerned in the election of Dr. Peters, one may judge from the statements of Dr. Peters himself. He says, "After the war was ended, and the independence of America was secured, the Episcopalians who had settled the State of Verdmont, with the Presbyjterians, Methodists, and Puritans, unanimously elected him their bishop." "History of the Rev. Hugh Peters," New York, 1807, p. 95. He accepted the office, and sent forward a pastoral address to the people from England, where he was residing. Peters says that he applied to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who would have consecrated him "readily," had not "the act of parliament of January, 1786, limited the power of the king and ^l ^restricted the number of bishops to three" (p. 96); but the Archbishop himself, under date of July, 1/95, when replying to Colonel Graham, who as the agent of Peters had made himself an annoyance, says, after referring to the legal im- pediments, that "Mr. Peters could not receive consecration from us," since the requisite testimonials had not been furnished by Vermont, "where for the last twenty years he has never resided," "nor could the want of that testimony be supplied in England, where he has lived all that time, without the exercise of any ecclesiastical function within the cognizance or jurisdiction of any of our Bishops." "Churchman's Magazine," 1807, p. 237. See also Bishop Chase on the subject, Thompson's "History of Vermont," 1842, part ii., p. 194. After, wards Dr. Peters intended to proceed upon the congregational theory and accept the call of the people as consecration; but he says that illness prevented "his joining the united churches of Verdmont" (p. 107). Nevertheless he continued to Sourish for more than a quarter of a century, dying in New York State. Ed ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 205 authority of his proper diocese, where he would have been still liable to it. There also arose the question, whether the bishops had acted correctly, in rescuing him from expulsion. It appears on the journal of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, that on Friday, the nth of September, "the attention of the house was called by the Rev. Dr. Andrews to the consideration of a pamphlet lately published, enti- tled " Strictures on the Love of Power in the Prelacy, By a Member of the Protestant Episcopal Association in South Carolina " which he declared to be a virulent attack upon the doctrines and discipline of our Church, and a libel against the House of Bishops, and which was alleged to be written by a member of this house." On Thursday, the i/th, it is recorded on the journal of the House of Bishops " This house requested the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to appoint a committee of their house, to meet a committee of the House of Bishops. The committee of this house is Bishop White and Bishop Provoost. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies agreed to the request of this house, and the joint committee met in the bishops' chamber." Further, the journal of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies for the same day states as follows " The committee " (meaning that of the whole house) " rose, and their chairman reported, that they had considered the pa- per referred to them yesterday, which was from the author of the pamphlet entitled "Strictures on the Love of Powerr' in the Prelacy," in which he professes sorrow for the pub- \ lication, and that they were of opinion that the house < should accept it as a satisfactory concession. Resolved, ) that the house adopt the above report." This termination of the business, although pressed by the bishops, was not acquiesced in without considerable opposition; and to the last, three very respectable lay gentlemen, who were of a remarkably conciliatory charac- ter, pressed for permission to enter their protest. It was not granted: and as this has been the only instance, in 206 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. (which the question of a right to protest has undergone dis- cussion, the recording of a denial of the right, falls in with the design of the present work. Whether the course of conduct adopted were right or ^j^ otherwise, it happened as is here related. The author of [* the pamphlet,* seeing expulsion full before him, thought fit to look to the House of Bishops for a shelter. After con- v v siderable negotiation, in which the author was the medium of communication between the house and him, he sent to v the house an ample apology for his misconduct, which in- duced them to interfere, in order to put a stop to the pro- ' ceedings, and hence their proposal of a joint committee. ., *j I The offender gave subsequent evidence, that his professed j penitence was jnsincere, although it had been accompanied ) by a profusion of tears, when he discussed the subject with the author, in the presence of the Rev. Dr. Smith, of Penn- f sylvania. This was an issue which could not have been foreseen, and which it would have been uncharitable to have thought probable. The House of Bishops committed the apology to the keeping of the author (where it now remains), not to be made use of, unless in the case of future misconduct. When this happened, Bishops Provoost and Madison, who alone were present when the deposit was made, were written to for their permission to send a copy of the apology to the ecclesiastical authority of the diocese to which the offender belonged. Leave was given, aud the document was sent.f * This person was the Rev. Henry C. Purcell, D.D. See Journals in, 307. Ed. f The personal abuse in the licentious pamphlet, was principally levelled at Bishop Seabury; and the ground of it, was his supposed authorship of a printed defence of the Episcopal negative, written and acknowledged by another respect- able divine of this Church. On the author of the present work, the pamphleteer bestowed a commendation, which impliedly exempted him from the general charge of "Love of Power in the Prelacy." Coming from such a pen, it could be no cause of self-gratulation; but it was encouragement to assist in the exposure which took place, and which is to be attributed principally to Dr. Andrews. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 207 M. Page 31. Of the Convention in 1799. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and Dr. William Smith, of Pennsylvania, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Secretaries were the Rev._Jphn Henry Hobart, of the former, and the Rev. James Aber- crombie, of the latter. The consecration of Dr. Bass during the recess of the l convention, and his appearing on this occasion, induces the record, that on the 7th of May, 1797, he was consecrated in Christ Church, in the City of Philadelphia, by the pre- siding bishop, assisted by Bishops Provoost and Claggett. It is evident on an inspection of the journal, that the bishops had no opportunity of expressing their sense on the question of publishing the draft of Articles which it con- tains. Such a publication was certainly very injudicious; if for no other reason, because it might have been expected to be easily mistaken for the sense of at least one of the houses of the convention. Indeed it was so misunderstood: whereas it was the sense of a committee only, not an in- dividual besides having delivered in his place any opinion on any article. But this was not the worst. It tended to f excite religious acrimony, without any possible good ef- j feet at the present; and with the probable bad effect of the greater acrimony on an opportunity of settlement in future. In order to show the importance of the exercise of great care and much deliberation in any measure which may affect Christian verity, the author will here notice, that an important doctrine of the Church of England was unwarily affected in the body of the Articles, by the intro- duction of a single word. It was " priesthood," as applied . in the Ninth Article, to denote all the orders of the Chris- tian ministry; and not confined to the order of presbyters, as in the established Ordinal, of the former of which there is no example in the institutions of the Church of England. It is well known, that the English reformers took care 208 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. to show, that they did not mean to identify the names of the Christian ministry with those of the Jewish priesthood. Although they retained the name of "priest," which is IIpt6flvTEpos (or "presbyter") with an English termination, and in the Roman Catholic Church had stood alike for that Greek word and for /cpcus,- yet this Church having in Latin adopted the word "sacerdos," the last was carefully avoided by the reformers, and "presbyter" was put in its place. It would have been in harmony with this, if the Article in question had applied "priesthood" to the single order of presbyters. But it is applied to the three orders_Lcollec- ' lively, which is another matter. To perceive the effect, it is only necessary to suppose the said Ninth Article trans- lated into Latin: in which case, if the word " presbyteri- atus " should be used, it would be wide of the intended sense. On the other hand, if " sacerdotium " should be taken, the innovation would stand confessed. This would have been agreeable to the theory of the individual clergy- man who drafted the Articles, but the rest of the committee are here believed to have been unaware of it. The above \ fact is recorded in order to show, that if ever the doctrinal | system should be reviewed, it should be done under some other circumstances than during the hurry of conventional business. In short, the review should be made byjselect persons, taking due time for so important a measure. After | this, the only thing left for the convention, should be the i adoption or the rejection of what had been so prepared. , This would be as hear as circumstances permit to what was done in England at the reformation. It is not here designed to charge any other fault on the Articles proposed. They are, in substance, what is con- tained in the Thirty-nine Articles, without any superad- dition, except in the particular stated. But the remarks may serve to show, that in the work of clearing that code of what may be thought unnecessary positions, there is the danger of admitting some novelty, more fruitful of contro- versy than what may be done away. In the present in- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 209 stance, the novelty introduced is susceptible of the con- struction of obtruding on the Church the notions of " sac- rifice," in the strict and proper sense; of "altar," as the place of it; and of "priest," as the sacrificer. In this convention considerable animosity was excited in the House of Cierical and Lay Deputies, on the subject of the election of a reverend gentleman to the Episcopacy in New Jersey.* Agreeably to the distinction taken by the author of recording personal matters then only when nec- essary to illustrate ecclesiastical effects, and when some- thing appears on the journal which may be thus elucidated, it may be proper to note in this place that whatever ground was taken by the said house in the strict construction of \ the canon, fixing the number of clerical incumbents in a state in which a bishop might be chosen, there was a more important reason at the bottom of the objection made. The truth is, that the gentleman elected was considered by his brethren generally, as being more attached to the doc- trines and the practices obtaining in some other churches, than to those of his own. What rendered the management of the case the more difficult, was his being brought for- wards by some gentlemen, who had always professed the \ strongest disapprobation of the least deviation from the ) institutions of the Church. No doubt, they thought they perceived some advantages, counterbalancing the unques- tionable fact, that the bishop-elect had been not a little reprehensible in that line. The bishops^ kept themselves from taking any interest in the subject, no one of them ex- pressing his opinion, so far as is here known. It is to be hoped, that their conduct will be the same on any similar occasions which may occur! Delicacy requires this, as, in ^ the case of the requisite testimonials, the approbation of , the consecrating bishops will still be necessary. Bishop Bass having been consecrated between the dates of the last convention and the present, it may be proper, in * The Rev. Uzal Ogden, D.D. Journals i, 224. Ed. 210 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. this place, to guard against any false impressions which plight be made, at the time of the former application,* and a paper purporting to be the dissent of two clergymen. This may otherwise be thought to have influenced the determination in the first instance, and to have prevented the consecration of Dr. Bass. But it would be a mistake. The objections referred to, were generally supposed to receive no weight from the characters of the two objecting clergymen. They were represented as being not at all at- tached to the ecclesiastical system of the Episcopal Church. Of this, or of the contrary, the bishops possessed no such evidence, as was sufficient to be a ground of their conduct at the time. There was no use in looking out for evidence, as there was other ground on which the consecration was declined the want of the requisite number of bishops to be consecrated in England, t When Bishop Bass was subse- quently admitted to the Episcopacy, the bishops who con- secrated him had made up their minds on the merits of the preceding objection to him. There was also a paper, purporting to be the dissent of his own vestry, which was denied and found to be not true. N. Page 33. Of the Convention in 1801. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the Rev. Dr. Abraham Beach in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Secretaries, were the Rev. Henry Waddell, of the former house, and the Rev. Ashbel Bald- \win, of the latter. The occasion was opened with a ser- mon by the presiding bishop. * For the operation of the Peters movement in Vermont in connection with Bishop Bass's election in that state, see Thompson's Vermont, part i., p. 195. Ed. f See ante, p. 26, . and p. 144. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. . 211 No sooner were the convention organized, than there came from the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies a call for a letter which they understood to have beeji_sent to the author by Bishop Provoost, on the subject of his resigning of the Episcopal jurisdiction. This measure raised a very serious question, made the more important by its being unexpected. The whole of the merits of it, so far as it was discussed at the time, is in the entry of the House of Bishops on their journal, which is therefore given in the Appendix, No. 24. As the Articles were at last^ established by this conven- tion, the author thinks it may be of use, to give a narrative of some particulars in the management of that matter, in addition to what has been stated relative to the proceeding in 1792. When the book was edited with the proposed altera- tions of_j^8^; no sooner were they known in the different states, than the sentiment became general, that they were not to be received without alterations; while yet there was nothing like unanimity, in regard to what the alterations should be. The same may be said in regard to the Thirty- nine Articles. Some changes, independently on what was of a local and political nature, seemed desired by_all; but of any considerable agreement in particulars, there was little prospect. Accordingly, the Church was left in a situation very em- barrassing in regard to the standard of her doctrinal pro- fession. On the one hand, the Articles, with the excep- tion of the political parts, the obligation of which had been abrogated by Divine Providence through the instrumen- tality of the revolution, were still the acknowledged faith of the Church; while on the other hand, they could not be edited as such, without changes at least in the manner of exhibiting them, which no individual had a right to regu- late. What rendered the situation of the Church the worse in this respect, was, that it suited the opinions of some, to declare in consequence of it, that she had no Articles, and 212 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. could have none, until they should be framed by a con- vention, and established by its authority. In support of this sentiment, they pleaded what has been stated as the very exceptionable manner of doing business, adopted by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies in the year 1789. I That house, in regard to every part of the Prayer Book on which they acted, brought the office forward as a matter originating with them, and not their alterations, as affect- ing an office already known and of obligation.* It was answered, that this was an assumption of but one of the houses of a single convention; that the other house had even then adopted a contrary course; that the same had been done in all the preceding conventions, and that in the only subsequent convention in which there had been any alteration of a former standard meaning of the Ordinal, altered in 1792 it had^been so acted on, as to acknowledge the obligation of the old forms, with the exception of the political parts, until altered. This seems conclusive rea- soning, and yet the opposite doctrine was held by many, which threatened unhappy consequences. During the convention of 1789, although nothing was done relatively to the Articles, there was much serious conversation on the subject: when the author was surprised to find, that Bishop Seabury, the only bishop at the con- vention besides himself, doubted of the need of Articles; and was rather inclined to believe, that the object of them might be accomplished through the medium of the Liturgy. This was so wide of what might have been expected from * The Lower House in 1789 appeared to have acted somewhat differently from the same house in 1785 (Journals i, 22), in that action was taken to secure a Prayer Book without reference to the English Book (Journals I, p. 103.) Other- wise, the house commenced de novo ; while Article VIII. seems to make the book thus independently drawn up the ultimate authority on doctrine and worship. Bishop White refers to the fact, that the other house in 1789 acted on the prin- ciple that the English Book should be taken as the basis of the new book; yet at that time the House of Bishops was composed simply of himself and Bishop Sea- bury. See ante, p. 29. See "Amer. Church Review," 1880, p. 226. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS, 213 his usual turn of sentiment, that, to the author, there seemed at the time no way of accounting for it, otherwise than by the supposition, that the bishop conceived the Articles to be nearer to the height of Calvinism, than they^f are found to be on due consideration of their history, and j of contemporary controversies. But it has since appeared, . that there had never been the Thirty-nine Articles or any such standard in the non-juring Church of Scotland, in \\TiichTTshop Seabury was consecrated, and to the ways of which he was very much attached. But the said Church, very soon after the time here referred to, and when her clergyliook the oaths to the government, manifested their consent with the Church of England, by adopting her Thirty-nine Articles. Indeed, there was never supposed to have existed a disagreement in regard to doctrine: but it was the result of the independency of each Church on the other.* In the convention of 1792, the subject had been discussed among the bishops in friendly conversation, when the opinions of Bishops Provoost and Madison were directly Ay*vt*/W- against the having of Articles, while Bishop Claggett and^Y/^^^^' the author were in favor of them. The remarks of Bishop Seabury were general; rather in the way of doubt as to the-- necessity of Articles; although on the other side he acknowl- edged his inability to answer an argument pressed on him that without them, individual ministers would have to do $ln*** by their respective will and authority, what had better be done by known law, for the preventing of the delivery of opposite doctrines to their flocks, by different preachers. * In Mr. Belsham's Life of Mr. Theophilus Lindsey, Bishop Seabury is rep- resented as a Calvinist. Nothing can be further from the truth. In the same work, there is an anecdote tending to lower his character, on account of an inci- dent which took place at a commencement in New Haven, in which the bishop had no more to say than Mr. Belsham himself; as the author has been informed on the best authority. It was equally unworthy of the biographer to speak with contempt of the Scottish consecrators of the bishop, not only because their charac- ters repel the charge of ignorance thrown on them, but, because their having been j so long under the lash of the law, for adhe.rence to the dictates of their consciences, * ought to have produced a fellow-feeling in a man similarly situated. 214 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. However moderate or uncertain Bishop Seabury was on the subject, the clergy and the laity of his diocese thought differently; as appeared in the convention of 1799, held not long after his decease. At the pressing instance of the deputies from that state, and in consequence of instructions to them, the business was then entered on; although prob- ably with the presumption on the minds of the proposers, that it would be finished during the session. It however happened otherwise, the matter then ending with a proposed body of Articles wholly new in form, edited with the journal. I The opinion has been already intimated, that this was a (; very injudicious measure, but there may now be added, that \ it proved beneficial in its unexpected consequences. It ap- peared an injudicious measure, on the same ground on which the proposal of 1785 was found to be such: that is, as unsettling a present fixture, without any reasonable prospect of establishing a substitute. If it were beneficial in its consequences, this happened by its showing of the irn- / probability of agreement in a new form, and its thus con- tributing to the recognizing of the old Articles. Even the mistakes of readers contributed to this effect. For it is astonishing how many, even of the clergy, considered what was edited as proposed for the acceptance of a future con- vention, \vhereas it was only recorded by one of the houses * to be matter of future discussion. As for the bishops, they never saw the contemplated Articles, before they were print- J ed with the journal, and they who read attentively must perceive, that it was merely a report of a committee of the other house, without any evidence of their approving of a single sentence of it. These remarks should be con- sidered as having no reference to any question concerning the correctness of the report. Let it have been correct or not, and although the author thinks it substantially cor- rect, yet he is confident, that the issue must have been the same. That issue is the adoption of the Articles, as edited by the convention of the present year. Even during the ses- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 215 sion of the body, and when the sentiment had obtained generally, that no new set of Articles should be attempted, the author was often assailed by members who had adopted the principle, urging each of them that there might be an exemption in regard to some one point, the most desired by him to be corrected. To all applications of this sort, his answer was, that he was content to accept the Articles as they were (the political parts being understood to be already altered, without any conventional act), as the ground of union; that if they should be thrown open to discussion, there were various particulars in which he thought they might be improved; that all those particulars he should think himself bound in conscience to bring for- / wards; that no doubt many other members would do the r like; and that then What probability was there, of there being edited any Articles ? The author having had so much occasion, in the relation of the proceedings of this business, to refer to his own con- duct, he thinks that there' will be propriety in his present- ing of the grounds of it. On the general question Whether it be expedient to have a body of Articles, it has always appeared, as already hinted, that to establish them, is merely to accomplish by( a general regulation, what will otherwise be done by indi-i vidual ministers at will, and this, sometimes, in intemperate and scandalous opposition to one another. For instance, in relation to the Divinity of our blessed Saviour, and the Atonement made by Him for sin, it can not be conceived, that an advocate for these doctrines will knowingly permit them to be contradicted in his pulpit, or, that a denier of them will permit them to be advocated or acted on in his. Accordingly, there will be Articles, written or unwritten; and the inquiry should be confined to the~point of the most judicious depositary of the power. When the author Was in England, being one day in company with a Unitarian minister a gentleman of con- siderable note in the literary world liberty was taken to 2l6 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. inquire, in what way the societies of his faith held their places of worship, and whether, as in America, the property were vested in persons chosen by the congregations. He answered with a smile Oh no; for then, in consequence of the ease with which respectable applicants are permitted to take pews among us, it might happen, that in the choice of a minister, an interest would be created in favor of a pastor, not entertaining the belief, for the maintenance of which a house had been erected. He said, that to guard against this, the meeting-houses were vested in persons who may be depended on; and who perpetuate the trust to others of the same faith. What is this, but an indirect way of ac- complishing the object for which Articles are designed ? There was not omitted a remark to the effect in the con- versation alluded to: a freedom, which grew out of a pre- vious conversation on the subject. The house of worship especially referred to, was that known by the name of "Essex-street Chapel." Within these few years there has been published the life of the Rev. Theophilus Lindsey, its first minister, by the Rev. Thomas Belsham, who is now its pastor. From the work it appears, that the trustees of the building have ordered // the Book of Common Prayer, as corrected by Mr. Lind- // sey, to be deposited in the chest with the title deeds, to be the rule of worship in future, and no alterations to be permitted, without the consent of the major number of the trustees. It ought not to be thought an indecorum towards a mode of profession with which the author has no concern, to notice the above particular as an historic fact, and to apply it to the illustration of the impracticability of the principle on which the theory in question is grounded. In the book referred to, there is an office for infant bap- tism. Why should this be required by a permanent regula- tion, when some professing Christians confine the institu- tion to adults, and others allow of no baptism, but that of the Spirit ? The remark applies to the celebrating of the ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 217 Eucharist under the elements of bread and wine, in opposi- tion to those who contend for spiritual feeding only. In relation to both the sacraments, some, who acknowledge the external celebration of them by the apostles, affirm, that the ordinances were limited to the apostolic age. The observance of the Lord's day, commonly called Sunday, is exacted throughout the book; but why, when there are persons who conscientiously stickle for the seventh day of the week ? Other questions might be proposed; and who knows what new opinions may arise, which may be thought worthy of sufferance, and accordingly draw the book out of the chest ? The compiler of it was so sensible of this, that in his last review, he omitted the Apostles' Creed; and one of his reasons was " No man or number of men together, have any authority to make a creed for others." This brings the matter to a question of words; since, in the above, it is impossible to act without a declaration of be- lief, although not under the name of a creed. In a note, the reasonableness of the proceeding is de- fended, on the principle, that the trustees, who have the custody of the book, and thereby jurisdiction over the wor- ship of the chapel, are the proprietors of it. Let but the plea be extended to any church or chapel, in any part of England or of America, with the proviso that none are compelled to join in the worship performed in it, and there ceases all ground of complaint on the subject of confessions and creeds. These things are not said without the conviction, that, in the premises, ecclesiastical authority is liable to be ex- tended much too far. All contended for is, that this spe- cies of discipline must be exercised in one shape or in another. It is called discipline: for as to the truth of syn- odical determinations, further than as they agree with Scripture, no sound Protestant will affirm it. Accordingly, we are -necessarily led to the question, whether the proper mean be the formula of the Thirty-nine Articles. God forbid that they should be admitted, other- 2l8 MEMO/AS OF THE CHURCH. wise than on the ground of their being in substance a body of divine truth; which they maybe, consistently with incor- rect statements in sotQe__points, not necessarily involved ~In that object. For the illustrating of this distinction, there shall be here cited an instance, which, it is supposed, will admit of no dispute. In the Sixth Article, the books of Holy Scripture are affirmed to be the rule of faith; and the re- quired subscription is evidently inconsistent with the rejec- tion of any of the books specified. But when there are f introduced the incidental expressions " gf which there f ne^jLwasjtnyjdoubt in the Church;" it is apparently con- tradictory to what ecclesiastical history informs us, in re- gard to the Epistle to the Hebrews, the second Epistle of St. Peter, the Epistle of St. James, the second and third Epistles of St. JolTn, and the Apocalypse: concerning all of which there were doubts, although cleared up on full in- quiry. It is within the meaning of the form of subscription in this Church, that the prominent fact of the authenticity of those books may be acknowledged, while the subordinate fact, couched under the recited expressions, is rejected. < It is not equally manifest that the same latitude of inter- < pretation is allowable on the ground of the form of sub- ) scription in the Church of England. But it will be said, that supposing the Articles to contain the whole substance of revealed truth, it is the fault of them that they contain much more, embracing the tenets of the Calvinistic system. In contrariety to this assertion, the persuasion is entertained, that they will be found, on a diligent attention to the subject, to have been framed with a sUidied latitude on the questions, which were afterward denominated the Five Points, in the controversy between the Calvinists and the Arminians; this, with the exception of the doctrine of final perseverance, to which the whole system of the Church of England stands opposed; the doc- trine not being held at that _tim_e by^he description of people afterward called Calvinists, who as yet continued in the opinion of St. Austin in that particular. It may be ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 219 proved, that in the reign of Edward VI., when the Articles were framed, there was % diversity of sentiments on those points, and yet, that neither side complained of their being excluded. Far from it, when, in the reign of Elizabeth, Calvinism came in with greater authority from Geneva, the ^-"JBK"^* * constant complaint of the Puritans was, that the Articles were not sufficiently evangelical in that matter. Hence the framing of what were called the Lambeth Articles, and the pressing of them at that time, and afterward in the reign of King James, although without effect. It is but to compare the Thirty-nine Articles with the Westminster Confession, or with the decrees of the Synod of Dort, to perceive how general and guarded the first were, on the! topics on which the others are very particular and express. ) Let these remarks suffice on a subject, on which it ought not to be expected to be in this place more minute. For the form of subscription in this Church, and for that required in the Church of England, see the Appen- dix, No. 25. But supposing all said above to be correct, it will still be asked Are these Articles so perfect that there can be no possible improvement on them ? If this be not so, are they to remain forever, with known and acknowledged im- perfection ? And if this be not contended for, what are the circumstances which will render the altering of them an expedient measure ? To these questions it is answered, not without the answerer's distrust of his own judgment, \ first, that in a few instances, the doctrines of the Gospel / may be expressed more satisfactorily to his mind; that-* therefore, in the next place, he does not arrogate to them perpetuity; but that further, before any altering of them be attempted, these two circumstances should concur first, a^ / better establishment in the estimation of the Church gen-, erally, of the ecclesiastical authority in her, as yet a mod- ern institution; and how much this must depend on the general opinion entertained of the piety, the learning, and the lives of those who take an active part in her concerns, 220 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. it would be difficult to calculate, as also what prospect there may be of the increase of the measure of the good /> which we may have among us, in these respects. The other circumstance, as declared under a former head, is a .general conviction of the neessity of committing a matter of this sort to be prepared by a jew, with the advantages of due time and deliberation: what is so prepared to be laid I before the body, to be by them adopted or rejected, without 1 discussion. "These sentiments are given, under a sense of responsi- bility to the great Head of the Church and under the con- viction, that until the two stated circumstances shall com- bine a new code of Articles will have the effect of splitting^ the Church into no one knows how many different com- ) munions, very much to the hindrance of true -piety, and of those characteristics of our communion, in which we sup- pose it to approach nearer than others, to the standard of the best ages. In this convention, the question of recommending to the Episcopacy the clergyman elected to it, as related under the head of the last preceding convention came to a crisis. The Church in New Jersey persevered in the election of him; and there was now no longer reason to hesitate, for want of a sufficient number of incumbents: because the question of fact had been referred by the last General Convention, to the convention of the particular state which had decided in the affirmative. These things were reported to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, arid the_result was a direct refusal to recommend. The incident, although given in the journal, should not be noticed in these remarks, were it not to record, that the extreme dissatisfaction con- ceived by a few gentlemen, was prevented from ending in the inconveniences of which there was entertained an ap- prehension, by 'some controversies of a parochial descrip- tion. Until this took place, the few gentlemen referred to < had adopted so zealously the cause of the rejected clergy- | man, that they contemplated an application to the Episco- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 221 pal Church in Scotland. This would certainly have failed: but the project was communicated by one of the gentlemen to the author. The bishop-elect, a few years afterward, " joined the Presbyterian Church, probably in consequence ) J of the parochial controversies referred to, which had also < arrested the ^proceedings in his favor in regard to the Episcopacy.* O. Page 34. Of the Convention in 1804. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and Dr. Beach in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Secretaries of the two houses were the Rev. Cave Jones, of the former, and the Rev. John H. Hobart, of the latter. The opening sermon was by Bishop Moore. There needs some explanation of what appears on the journal, concerning the Rev. Ammi Rogers. He was a native of Connecticut, and educated at Yale College. During the Episcopacy of Bishop Seabury, in- terest was making among the clergy to procure the ordi- nation of Rogers. But the bishop perceiving it, and in consequence of an unfavorable opinion entertained, de- clared that he never would ordain him. He afterward went into the back parts of the State of New York; and there, by efforts of zeal and apparent prospect of useful- ness, laid the foundation of an application for holy Orders, to Bishop Provoost. While the case was under considera- tion, the Rev. Dr. Beach, having heard that Rogers had been rejected in Connecticut, made objection. On this, he repaired to that state with .the view of procuring from the Rev. Philo Perry, the Secretary of the convention of the diocese, a certificate that there did not appear on the minutes any entry of the rejection of the person in ques- * The Rev. Uzal Ogden, D.D. Journals, I, 264. Ed. 222 AfE.\fOfRS OF THE CHURCH. tion. Such a certificate might have been given with great truth, because no formal application had been made. But Philo Perry being from home, Ammi Rogers fabricated a certificate in Jiis jiarne, not only testifying to the said fact, but going to the point of the correct life and conversation of the bearer. The last circumstance is of importance, be- cause, although a certificate as to his not having applied for and been refused Orders was obtained from Philo Perry afterward, yet it went no further. With the certificate forged as above, Ammi Rogers waited on Dr. Beach; and, after thus satisfying him, re- quested permission to have the certificate in his possession for a while, in order to communicate it to some friends in New York, who had heard the story against him. This was assented to. The certificate was never returned, but' in the mean time, Dr. Beach relying on the integrity of it,' withdrew his opposition, and Ammi Rogers was ordained. In a few years after his ordination, he returned to his native state, and made himself popular at Stamford. The bishop and the clergy refused to know him as belonging to the diocese: and it was this which brought before the House of Bishops, by mutual consent, the question to which diocese he belonged. In the investigation of this question, not only was the preceding fact proved by unquestionable testimony, espe- cially the affidavit of Dr. Beach; but the clerical deputies from Connecticut, while they treated the man with the ut- most decorum, produced ample evidence of a factious and mischievous disposition in him. Still, the utmost length to which the bishops at first thought themselves warranted to go, was, in giving their opinion on the case submitted to them, to notice incidentally the iniquity which had come within their knowledge, in the investigation of the subject. j Here they should have stopped. But unfortunately, one of the bishops having proposed that there should be included a recommendation to degrade the man from the ministry, the others, under the sensibility excited by the evidence of ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 22$ his great unworthiness and his flagitious conduct, consented 1 to the proposal. This was ill judged, for these two reasons: first, it would give room, in the event of a condemnation, to object, that the opinion of the bishops, extra-judicia.ljv expressed, had obtained undue influence over the minds of S those who wer^ more properly the ecclesiastical judges of f the offender. Perhaps, the same objection may seem to lie against the noticing of the forgery. But this was too glaring a fact to be denied, and indeed was admitted; while, on a succeeding trial, there would have still been a latitude as to the degree of punishment to be inflicted. The pointing to what this should be occasioned the other reason referred to, by contributing to what is here thought to be the error into which the bishop and the clergy of Connecticut subsequently fell, of supposing that Ammi Rogers had been tried by the House of Bishops. Thisj) they never contemplated, and indeed would have been]] contrary to the ecclesiastical constitution. The recording of this transaction, may be a caution against giving way in convention in future to solicitations which will probably be occasionally made, for the obtaining of determinations on points personally and locally interest- * ing; but which may be left, without the endangering of any principle, to the judicial authority of the Church in ejach.state. That this is the most agreeable to the ecclesi- i astical constitution, will not be denied. If the said instru- ment be not wisely contrived in this particular, still it should govern, until altered by competent authority. The 1 constitution, however, is here conceived to be not liable to ] objection, on this account: and it is supposed, tbat a con- trary provision would be found impracticable, because of the long intervals between the meetings of the General Conventions, the difficulty of keeping them together, and other circumstances which might be mentioned. After the rising of the convention, this business of Ammi Rogers threatened serious consequences to the Church in Connecticut, owing to what has been already hinted its 224 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. having been there conceived, that he had been tried, and that nothing remained, except to declare him degraded. When the author found, that what the bishops had re- corded on their minutes was so materially misunderstood, he wrote to Bishop Moore, to know his sense of the matter; and found, from a letter of that bishop still in possession, that there was a perfect coincidence of opinion between them. The only bishop besides, who had been present Bishop Parker had died in a very short time after his return to Boston. Bishop Jarvis had absented himself, from a motive of delicacy; and Bishop Claggett had left the city on his journey home, before any judgment had been delivered.* In the form in which the business stands on the journal, there does not sufficiently appear the ground, on which the bishops consented to give their sentiments on the question, as to the jurisdiction to which Ammi Rogers belonged. That ground was in the urgent solicitations of both the parties; which were though~F~to justify the expression of opinion. The author supposes it due to the nature of this work, to annex to it the judgment of the bishops in the case of the said Ammi Rogers. Accordingly, it is in the Appendix, No. 26. Notice is taken on the journal of the convention, of an application from the Episcopal Church in New Jersey, relative to an unhappy dispute there subsisting between a minister and his congregation. As the issue of this was a canon, the object of which was novel in the Episcopal Church, and the consequences of which maybe important, it may be proper to record the origin of it, and the general view entertained of its tendency by the author. * The author and Bishop Moore afterward received a letter from the com- mittee of the clergy in Connecticut, requesting advice on the question of again taking up the business of Rogers, and granting a trial. Both of those applied to advised the measure, but it did not take place. It would have been more discreet in them to have withheld their advice, until they should have known that it would have effect. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 22$ The clergyman in contemplation was possessed of appar- ent zeal, and was unexceptionable in his moral conduct. It is difficult to ascertain how far these circumstances should extend lenity to what can not in itself be defended. But f certain it is, that he had manifested a__leaning to practices j very different from those of his Church. In addition to this, there were complaints of his overbearing of the vestry, and of his taking of all authority to himself, in the manage- ment of the temporal concerns of the congregation. That from dissatisfaction with him they had become very much lessened, was affirmed and believed. The former of the ( objections he confirmed, by joining another religious com- ] munion, as soon as his severance from his particular con- ' gregation took place. In regard to the merits of the canon, there may be doubts concerning the principle, on the ground that there ', should be no severance from a pastoral charge, except as i the result of a trial ifor alleged misconduct; which is the most agreeable to the idea of exalting law above will. Besides, there is evident danger, that when a clergyman should be degraded, his congregation will avail themselves of this canon, from a false tenderness, and thus, while they rid themselves of the man, send him to disgrace the Church elsewhere. Nevertheless, under the present circumstances of the Church, and until some check can be given to the ease with which ministers are admitted into congregations, the bishops consented to the canon. It deserves the name < - of a necessary, but it is hoped only temporary evil. * The apprehension of the abuse of it has been verified. There appears on the journal to have been some differ- ence of opinion between the houses, in reference to two canons, and occasioning a conference proposed by the House of Bishops. As the difference did not involve any important principle, and as it was done away by mutual concession in the conference, no notice is taken 'of it in these statements. It was in this convention that the House of Bishops 226 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. prescribed the course of ecclesiastical study, still subsist- ing, for students in theology. This was doing something towards the improving of the literary reputation of our ministry, and an advance towards the desirable object of a seminary or seminaries, in which the preparation of can- didates may be the better secured by daily examinations held by qualified preceptors. At this convention there was established, as proposed by the last, a change of the season of holding the conven- tions. There will be propriety in recording the reason. It was on account of our country's having been for some years visited by epidemic disease, in the autumn. Agreeably to a proposal from the House of Bishops, it having been there moved by Bishop Jarvis, the business of the convention was concluded by prayer, performed by the presiding bishop, in the presence of both houses. It had been the rule during every convention, to have morning prayer in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, at which the bishops, by votes of their body, had attended. The City of Baltimore was fixed on as the place of the next convention, to be held on the third Tuesday in May, 18.18. P. Page 35. Of the Convention of 1808. Bisjiop White presided in the House of Bishops, and Dr. Beach in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Secretaries of the two houses, were the Rev. Dr. James Whitehead, of the former, and the Rev. John H. Hobart, of the latter. Bishop Parker, who, at the request of the last conven- tion, was to have opened the present with a sermon, be- ing deceased, that office was discharged by the presiding bishop. The thin attendance on this convention, must attract the notice of every one who shall inspect the journal. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, the Church was ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 227 represented from seven states only; none coming from Vir- ginia, on the account of the Church in which state a city so far south as Baltimore was principally chosen. In the House of Bishops, there were two only Bishop Claggett & and the author. When the latter repaired to the place of meeting, it was under an apprehension, having learned by letter from the other his being exceedingly indisposed, that" the question would be raised Whether a single bishop can constitute a house. On this, he was prepared to sus- r tain the affirmative, as being the most agreeable to the ' letter of the constitution; and because, on the contrary supposition, there could have been nothing done. The case, however, would have been very disagreeable. It was prevented by the attendance of Bishop Claggett, although with a considerable degree of indisposition, under which he labored during the whole session. Bishop Jarvis was said to be indisposed with the asthma, and Bishop Moore was confined by an inflammation in his eyes. Why Bishop Mad- ison was absent, was not know r n; unless he were prevented by a loss sustained of a son, not long before. In revising and arranging the canons, there occurred nothing material, besides the two following particulars. One of them respected Candidates for holy Orders. The proposed canon prescribed different examinations to be held, during the time in which a case should be under consideration: and among the matters to be inquired into, was the party's being possessed of "a practical knowledge of religion." When this came before the bishops, they ) could form no idea of practical knowledge. They knew, ( that in the other house it had been consented to by the majority, in order to get rid of an expression pressed by some that of "an experimental knowledge": an expres- sion much abused by its application to feelings merely animal, and unwelcome on that account. We could, how- ever, form an idea of the sense of it perfectly unexception- able, supposing it to be such knowledge as is the result of experience. But the bishops did not perceive how the 223 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. candidate could satisfy his examiners as to this point, on any other evidence than that of his own declarations; the requiring of which was thought liable to much abuse. Ac- cordingly, they proposed to leave out the clause concern- ing "practical knowledge"; and that after the other re- quisitions, there should be inserted an admonition to the candidate, of there being required in him those inward ' graces, which can not be brought to any outward standard, and are named in Scripture " the fruits of the Spirit " by which alone his sacred influence can be " known." In addition to this, the bishops sent to the other house a paper, of which the following is a copy, to be read to them, but not entered on their journal, in the printing of which it accordingly does not appear, and is therefore in- serted in this place. " Having proposed the omission of an expression which seems designed to require inward piety, we wish to be clearly understood in this matter. " Far be it from us to suppose, that any qualifications are sufficient, without pious affections, the effects of the grace of God on the heart. But although the living piously, that is in a visible profession, and in the duties attached to it, may be certified, yet, the actual possession of piety must be the subject of the experience of the party, and not of the testimony of his fellowmen. If it should be thought, that they may ascertain his experience by an inquiry into the movements of his mind, we remark, that the issue must be precarious, independently on some manifest abuses in- cident to it. " The Church of England has always contented herself ( with a visible profession, a suitable life, and the solemn \ declarations at the altar. TTiat in these there~may be ' imposition and insincerty, is unquestionable. But how they would have been prevented by further requisition, we do not discern. We recollect within that Church many wise and holy men, who have been satisfied with her disci- pline in this particular. But we doubt of there having ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 229 been any dissentients, whose opinions we would wish to see influential in this Church. We call to mind a certain period in the history of England, when one effect of the entire prostration of her Church was the triumph of the principle here objected to. But we have learned too much of the consequent hypocrisy and tyranny to be reconciled ) to any thing which bids fair to lead to the same result. " In America, a question raised on the same ground, divided for some time a numerous and respectable body of Christians. But in consequence of more mature reflection among them, the controversy has been dying away; and, we believe, that there is now very little of it. " But what, in our opinion, should overrule all doubt, is not only the scheme of Scripture generally, as to the requi- sition in question; but that St. Paul, in his first Epistle to Timothy, where he lays down the qualifications of the Christian ministry, says not a word of any kind of scrutiny, which can be satisfied only by the testimony of the party, concerning himself. " The subject being important, we have thought it ex- pedient to make this formal profession of our opinion." When the alteration of the proposed canon by the bish- ops came into the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, it occasioned a warm debate, which turned altogether on the word "known": the word "manifested" being proposed as a substitute, by those who objected to the other. The( reason was, there being some in the convention who could / not brook its being declared in a canon, that a man could V no otherwise know the presence^ of the Spirit of God, than ' by his fruits. They evidently thought there was a more immediate communication in the matter at issue; although they rested their objection chiefly on the-supposition of its cutting off all hope from a dying penitent, as if such a person might not be sensible of new affections, which the Spirit only can produce, whatever difference there may be between him and a holy liver, as to the certainty of those around him concerning the existence of such affections. 230 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Some, without deciding on which side the truth lay, re- monstrated against the establishing by a side-blow, of what they called a controverted point. In the issue, the amendment of the bishops was accepted, but much to the dissatisfaction of the dissentients, who even talked of en- tering a protest. After the business of the day, two re- spectable clergymen, who had argued and voted in the majority, privately recommended to the consideration of the two bishops whether it would not be best for them to propose the change of "known" for "manifested"; this word not being opposed to their belief, although not so precisely suited to the sentiment intended to be conveyed. Their motive was the expectation until now entertained, that the convention would close the next day, with a con- ciliatory spirit on all sides; which expectation would be disappointed, if the recommended measure should be re- jected. The bishops, influenced by the same motive, com- plied with the proposal. But when the alteration came into the other house, there again arose a warm debate, a considerable proportion arguing against the acceptance of the revision. However, the more moderate counsel pre- vailed; but whether to any good purpose, can be known only by future events. The transaction is recorded under the mortifying reflection, that there has been an interfer- ence in the counsels of this Church of the wild and per- nicious opinion manifested in this argument. After the session was ended, in company with a member who had distinguished himself in the minority, the author remarked to him, that in the institutions of the Episcopal Church there was nothing like the opinion which he seemed to entertain. He defended himself by the Seventeenth Ar- ticle, where it speaks of election in Christ, as "full of sweet, pleasant and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things"; words evidently harmonizing with the position, ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 231 (that "by the fruits of the Spirit only his holy influence can ~* - ^^agp^ r ' be known" Should such reasoners obtain the sway in the counsels of this Church, her system will be overturned. The other matter relative to the canons, was what oc- curred concerning the Office of Induction, established at the last convention. It is to be hoped, that the consequences of the measure will be an illustration of the maxim, that /"the art of governing consists, in a great measure, in not , governing too much." No objection had been made to the office; but the requiring of induction as essential to a^yalid settlement was evidently perceived to militate against the ideas so prevalent in many places of dismissing ministers at pleasure. Now, although there can hardly be any prin- ciple more evidently hostile to the permanent respectability of the ministry, yet it would have been better to have left the correction of it to time and attendant inconveniences, than to have brought the full force of it into operation by the measure now in question. Certainly it would have been best to have rested the service on a recommendatory ru- bric. In Maryland, the measure interfered directly with the vestry-law. From Carolina there was a memorial, desiring an alteration of the canon. And in other places, complaints were known to have been made. On the other hand, the service and the result of it were with great rea- son so acceptable to some, that they refused to concur in doing away the former measure, but consented to the dis- fpensing with it in those states or dioceses in which it in- terfered with charters or usages. In this shape, the matter was brought before the bishops, who were reluctant to the saying of any thing, liable to be construed into an approba- tion of charters of usages, which they hold to be contrary to good order in the Church. Still, the consequences of rejecting the canon were so stated to them as to induce, on their part, the consenting to it: with a subjoined decla- ration, that it should not be construed as giving a sanction to the charters and the usages in contemplation, concern- ing which they also expressed the hope, that they will 'in 232 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. time be altered. This amendment was accepted, and the canon passed. A new arrangement of the canons made by this conven- tion had been pressed on every preceding occasion, and objected to by the author, who at last withdrew his oppo- sition, submitting to the alleged advantage of having all the provisions pertaining to the same subject classed to- gether. It is to be hoped that the course of conduct will end here, at least for a considerable time; or else, in the different dioceses, it will be to no purpose to refer to any particular canon, because of the uncertainty, whether it will retain its station after the next triennial convention. It will be much more convenient to exhibit the canons of each conventional body as their act, and in every edition of the canons to retain the titles of such as are repealed, print- ing the titles in italics. A repeal will be the result of the considerable improvement of a former canon. But it was obligatory in its old form, while it remained in force, and may still require to be referred to, on some question con- nected with discipline. The title will direct to the journal, which will show how the canon stood at the time to which it is desirable to apply it. The journal shows that there was accomplished at this | .convention what has been from the beginning ardently . ty desired by many, both of the clergy and of the laity the giving of a full negative to the House of Bishops. It is to be hoped, that the recollection of the course of this busi- ness, as found on the various journals, will show the pro- priety of leaving to time and mature reflection to effect what may be for a while opposed by prejudices, not to be disregarded without extreme danger. What is here said, however, is designed of those prejudices only which may be yielded to without the sacrifice of essential principle. This was the case in the present instance, and must have been perceived to be such, even by those who conceive the highest of Episcopal claims. In the year 1785, even the necessity of the presidency of a bishop, when such a char- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 233 acter should be obtained by consecration, and should be present in the convention, was rejected. Still, nothing was ' / decreed to the contrary, and in the next year, the absurd >' > prejudice against the proposal was overruled. When an- other constitution was formed, in 1789, if a provision for r/J 0j the Episcopal negative had been insisted on, it would have s been destructive of the whole system. Nevertheless, in the t many years intervening, no measure has passed, under the \ refusal of the Episcopal sanction. Indeed, it may be a f question, w r hether, had things remained on the old footing of the three fifths, made necessary to carry any resolution contrary to the opinion of the House of Bishops, the weight I of their negative would not have had more effect than un- u der the present change. This would have happened in the ' following manner. There would always be in the other house a proportion who would doubt of the validity of a measure adopted without the Episcopal sanction. Some of these would occasionally differ from the bishops on a sub- ject under consideration. But when the dissent of the bish- ops should have been declared, those of the description referred to would have thrown themselves into the scale, against the putting of the matter to the test of the three fifths. This supposition has been verified, in a transaction ( which took place between the two houses of the conven- / tion of 1804. It is evident to the author's mind, that ow- ing to the causes stated, while it would be scarcely possible ever to carry a measure against the bishops, there would be a discouragement of even that free discussion with them, which may be expected to take place sometimes, under their present full possession of a negative. On the above subject there is an error in the journal, re- specting the votes of the lay gentlemen from Pennsylvania. ( It is there said, that they were in favor of the resolution, / ftut voted in the negative, because uninstructed by their ( constituents.* The declaration of the gentlemen is, that * See Journals of General Convention (Reprint 1861), Vol. I, p. 341. Ed. 234 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. they declined voting for a measure of which they approved, because it did not appear from the journals of their state conventions, that the projected change had been laid be- fore them, as the constitution has prescribed. Neither had the gentlemen any recollection that this was done. The \ author is persuaded that the matter was notified to the j state convention; but how it happened that an entry was \ omitted, he knows not.* The reason of the bishops for postponing the considera- tion of the degrees of consanguinity and affinity prohibiting marriage, was simply as stated on the journal the weight V of the subject, and the partial attendance at this conven-y tion. They did not compare their sentiments, on the many important points which the subject brings into view. ' The last subject had been brought forward, in conse- quence of an instruction from the Church of Maryland, to the deputies from that State. From the same quarter there was a proposal made, to introduce "A Companion to the Altar," as part of the Prayer Book.f The reason of the re- jection of the proposal by the bishops, was its tending to make the book bulky. Many good treatises, may be use- * It would have been well, had the subject recurred so as to be brought before the convention of 1811, to cause notice to have been given on the journal of that year. But the fact is as here related : and the gentlemen concerned were a little pained, by the misstatement on the preceding journal; although doubtless occa- sioned by misapprehension or by inadvertence. t Many editions of the English Prayer Book had bound up with them "A Companion to the Altar." It does not appear when this policy was inaugurated, but it was continued, probably by the publishers, on their own account, down to 1812, if not later. No copy that we have seen gives any clew to the authorship, and one copy has been shown us separate. This, clearly, must have been the "Companion" referred to by Bishop White. Bishop Hobart's " Companion for the Altar," was published in 1804, yet it could not have obtained the approval of Bishop White, or the convention, as it was not well suited for the intended pnr- pose; while the English work, ling wholly devotional, and expressing the aver- age sentiment of the time, would meet with no criticism on the ground of utility in such a connection. Bishop Hobart's work also formed a I2mo. of 275 pages, while the "Companion" proposed comprised only 72 in i8mo. It is not proba- ble that any one would propose its incorporation. Ed, ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 235 fully bound up with the Prayer Book: but to make them essential parts of it, would be manifestly productive of much inconvenience. Any printer may, at his discretion, do what was solicited on this subject, although he may not notice the Companion to the Altar in the table of contents of the Book of Common Prayer. It appears from the journal, that the convention has en- deavored and with propriety as is here conceived to give a check to the growing practice of instituting associated rectorships. They destroy responsibility, and give occasion to rivalships between pastors of the same parochial church or churches. It is argued in favor of Episcopacy, that in- dependently on any arguments from divine institution or from apostolic practice, it has a better tendency than Pres- bytery to peace and order. The last argument seems to apply with more weight to a congregational than even to a diocesan. So far as the former connection, in other de- nominations, has been known in any considerable degree, to the writer of these remarks, it has been generally an illustration of the opinion here expressed. He recollects reading in the works of the celebrated Richard Baxter, that during the prostration of Episcopacy in England, the pressing instances of that good man for such he is here conceived to have been for the increasing of the number of pastors in the churches, were defeated by the experience of the jealousies constantly occurring, where more than one pastor was settled in any church. This is in a work called, " The Reformed Pastor," abridged by S. Palmer, part ii., chap. 9. At this convention, the bishops were again assailed by / the troublesome business of Amrrii Rogers, who affected I to bring before them an appeal from the judgment of Bishop Jarvis and the clergy of Connecticut. There was no doubt on the minds of the two bishops present, that there had been an oversight in not granting to this man a trial, in the Church in that State. But the oversight, if they were correct in supposing one, .was not theirs, nor was 236 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. it in their power to correct it. Nothing could have been easier, than the convicting of him of faults, which deserved degradation. But it did not become the bishops to advise the recalling of the act, and the giving of him a trial. / There was the less call on the author to do so, because he \ had already advised this very measure, as did also Bishop >'i Moore, on an application made for their opinions on the ' f f subject, by the standing committee of the Church in Con- ) necticut. But although their opinions had been asked and given, there occurred insuperable difficulty in the seeking of a compliance with them. The bishops had no confer- ence with Rogers, nor would they have noticed his busi- ness, had he not employed a gentleman of reputation in the law, to whom something was due on the score of politeness and respect. They spent a whole morning in discussing the matter with this gentleman, but persisted in declining to hear his pleadings, because not competent to decide. The grounds of the treatment of Rogers by the House of Bishops, at the last convention and at the pres- ent, were accurately recorded on the journals. The other house properly refused to intermeddle, and the only reason of the papers being sent to them by the bishops, was their being addressed to both. On the subject of the Hymns sanctioned by this con- vention, much was said, as well out of doors as in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. Some members of that body had contemplated the matter previously to the meeting, and had pressed it with great earnestness. The author of these remarks acknowledges, that it was with pain he saw the subject brought forward. This was not because he doubted either of the lawfulness of celebrating the praises of God in other strains than those of David, or of the expediency of having a few well selected hymns for the especial subjects of the evangelical economy, which can no otherwise be celebrated in the Psalms, than in an ac- \/ commodated sense. Nevertheless, there is solittle of good j I poetry except the Scriptural, on sacred subjectsTand Tnere / \ r ' "*--- ^ i. * ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 237 was so great danger of having a selection accommodated to the degree of animal sensibility, affected by those who were the most zealous in the measure, that the discre- tion of adopting it seemed questionable. It was, however, yielded to by the bishops, under the hope, that the selec- tion of a few and those unexceptionable, although some of them, perhaps, are not to be extolled for the excellence either of the sentiments or of the poetry, might prevent the ) unauthorized use of compositions which mj rational Chris- / tian can approve of. The matter, however, was executed with too much haste. The bishops had merely time to give a cursory reading to the hymns proposed, the result of which was the acceptance of them, with the exception of one hymn, containing a verse that seemed a little enthusiastic. In lieu of this they proposed another hymn, which was ad- mitted. Those who were the most zealous for the meas- ure had pressed for the admission of about two hundred. On the subject of hymns, there is ground for considera- ble apprehension. Some ministers, and other members of this Church, have so strong an inclination to multiply them, that, whatever might be in future the number of those al- lowed, there would be at every convention a wish for more. Others are aware of the inconvenience of this continual enlargement, but press for the setting aside of some of those selected, in order to introduce new ones more suited to their taste; not foreseeing, that on the same principle, there will be, in the next convention, new proposers of new hymns, and that this will happen without end. There are some religious societies, who think it ungodly to introduce into the worship of the sanctuary any other singing than that of the Psalms of David. This is unreasonable, but are / we not running into the opposite extreme ? The principles which prevail in the estimation of the author, and which he proposes under subjection to the say- ing " valeant quantum possunt valere" that is, let them pass for what they are worth are these. In regard to the general subjects of psalmody, as the 238 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. attributes of God, the mercies of creation and of providence, and what comes under the character of preceptive, or un- der that of devout desire and pious purpose, he knows of no other compositions which have proved equally interesting to his mind; and without making his feelings a test of those of other persons, he can not forget, that these compositions were the Liturgy of the Jewish Church, when its devotions were joined in by the divine Author of our religion. It is no small a'rgument in favor of the heavenly origin of the Old Testament, that strains of devotion, so far excelling whatever the world knows of prayer practised by the wis- est men among the heathen, should adorn the worship of a people far below some other nations in the .^cultivation, of the human intellect. It should be added, that there is no small proportion of the Psalms, so evidently pointing to the Messiah and His spiritual kingdom, as only to require acquaintance with the contents of the New Testament, in order to their being accommodated to the celebration of the mercies of redemption. Nevertheless, as it is by the Gospel that "life and im- mortality are brought to light," there would seem to be a suitableness to its high design, in celebrating its prominent subjects in definite terms; so that the Nativity, the Cruci- | fixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, the descent of the ', Holy Ghost at Pentecost, and other edifying events, em- bodied with Christian doctrine and essential to it, may; reasonably be rendered the more impressive, by their being '' carried to the heart on the wings of poetry and of music. ( It is not intended to allege, that we are to stop here. But there is no hesitation to confess, that additions, if made, should be with a sparing hand, and then only ad- j mitted, when besides sound doctrine and weighty sense, the composition be such, as a poet of acknowledged genius would not be ashamed to own. As to the loading of our book with the same truths in a diversity of language and of metre, or, in any other way, the seeking of variety for its own sake, there is pleasure ia ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS, 239 recording the opinion, that it will never tend to the sus- taining either of truth or of devotion. When devout feel- ings have often accompanied certain words, the one bring the other along with them by the law of association. This should be no hindrance to as much variety as is suited to the diversity of subject, yet it discountenances variety, admitted for the gratification of restless fancy. As to that species of hymns, which affects to clothe devout desire in the language of human passion, it is to be hoped, that we shall continue to repel every effort for their admission. One effect of gratifying the passion for a continued addi- tion to the number of hymns, and for expressing the same sentiments in a variety of forms, would be the swelling of the Prayer Book to an immoderate size. Again, the prob- able effect of this, would be the sometimes editing of the book without either hymns or metre psalms under the same cover, as may be done at any time without offence against any existing regulation, since they are no parts of the said book, but make a book by themselves. Accord- ingly, selections from it may be made by any parochial minister, at his discretion; and either be bound with the Book of Common Prayer, or kept in a separate manual for the use of his congregation, and of others to whom it may be eligible. Something like the latter the author has seen in sundry churches in England; in which all the metrical compositions in use are on a large sheet of pasteboard, and kept hanging in the pews. It may be proper, to guard the above from being so mis- construed, as to be a sanction for the publishing of the Book of Common Prayer with the omission of any portion of it, properly coming under any head of the table of con- tents. This was done in a former day, by an omission of the book of Psalms, and an insertion of the selections only: which unauthorized act, being made known to the conven- tion of 1801, produced the canon now numbered as the Forty-third, " Prescribing the Mode of publishing author- ized Editions of the Book of Common Prayer," etc. But 240 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. "The Articles of Religion," and "The Ordinal," are each of them a > distinct_book, although resting on the same au- thority; so that "The^Bpok of Common Prayer," with or without them, may be complete. -/ . J f . *. The subject of hymns has so evidently a bearing on that of the Psalms, that it will not be irrelevant, and will be jus- tified by the liberty which the author stipulated for in the preface, to give the outlines of his theory concerning the latter. It has produced some variety of opinion, although not in any such extent as to endanger the peace of our churches. In the primitive Church, says the learned Bingham, "the joining of all the worshippers in the psalmody was the most ancient and general practice, till the way of alternate psalmody was brought into the Church." May every at- tempt to supersede the former, by an exclusive method, prove abortive. Is there, then, to be interdicted a higher grade of mu- sical performance, calling for acquirements of more study, and confined to the select members of a choir ? Far from us be the opinion, that there should be wanting any matter which can help to swell the notes of Christian praise; and, that all improvement in this line should be surrendered to mere amusement and to licentiousness; but, let it be admit- ted on the indispensable condition, of subserviency to the worship of Him, who so framed the ear as to be delighted by melody and by harmony, and especially, rather than the permission of a contrariety to that end in sounds character- ized by levity, let it be kept at a distance from the sacred enclosure of the house of God. The same reason applies to the aid of instruments. They may contribute to the ef-\/ feet of sentiment and of voice, but when there are emitted / from them sounds hostile to every devout desire, there is^y no person impressed by a serious sense of the duties of the \/ place, who would. not rather see them committed to the/ flames. It is stated by Bishop Lowth, in his dissertation prefixed ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 241 to his translation of the prophecy of Isaiah, that the book of Psalms was originally in metre. He considers the fact as proved by certain parts of them, in which there are alphabetical marks of the beginnings of lines and of stanzas. To the same purpose Josephus affirms, that David wrote his Psalms in trimeters and pentameters. This metre was not of the same number of syllables, as among the Greeks and the Latins; but, to use the words of the bishop, "that relation and proportion of one verse to another, which arises from the correspondence of terms, and from the form of construction, from whence results a rythmus of propositions, and a harmony of sentences." The pronunciation of the Hebrew language had become lost, long before the age of the Gospel, principally in con- sequence of its want of vowels, so that the subsequent in- vention of vowels by the Masorets, has never recovered the pronunciation with certainty. Hence, the original metre is unknown, and even in the age of the Gospel, the worship of the temple was with the psalms in the prosaic form. The chanting of them in this form, will forever claim the merit of their having been so sung, in the worship attended on by our blessed Saviour and His apostles; and of their having continued to be so sung, in the primitive Church, and afterwards universally until the reformation. In the compiling of the Liturgy of the Church of England, no metrical singing was contemplated: so that when Stern- hold and Hopkins made their version it came in silently, under the general license to sing any portion of Scripture. To this day in England, it is only under the cover of the said permission, that either the said version, or the more poetic version of Tate and Brady shelters itself. In the j American Church, the latter is expressly sanctioned. How can the sanction be reasonably censured, as treating the words of Scripture irreverently ? For the singing of the psalms in the original, none contend, and as for the original measure, the recovery of it is given up as desperate. To render them intelligible in any modern language, it is 242 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. necessary to accommodate in a considerable degree to the genius of it. If the accommodation be a little extended for the making of poetic measure, it can not be unlawful in its principle, provided the sense be faithfully preserved. The same license is often taken in choral music, it being com- mon to make transpositions and other alterations of the words of anthems, although not for the purpose of tying them to metre. But the license pleaded for is denounced as a gratifying of sense, and there is an opprobrium at hand, in the expression of a tickling of the ear. What is the "se of any poetry, or of any music, but that through the inlets of the gratified senses, there may be an excitement of devout affections ? Were it not for this advantage, it were better, that divine truths should be always uttered in the plainness of a dress suited to mathematics or to metaphysics. It has been remarked, that in England, metrical psalm- ody has been instrumental to schism, having been always the most esteemed by the Dissenters from the established Church. It is difficult to perceive either the relation of the subject, or the evidence of the position. In regard to the latter, it is notorious, that metrical singing made its way not only to the parish churches, but to the cathedrals, without the sanction of command, or even of especial per- mission; and that it retains its stand in them under a provision which had it not in contemplation. If the Dis- senters have not manifested the same regard for a higher grade of singing, it should be remembered, that at their origin, there was an ideal association of this with other matters; that it has been hereditary, and that we know not how far this may have been the result of another asso- ciation meaning of the subject with the supposed attribute of levity, for which too much cause has been given in faulty performance. As to the churches of the Establishment, it is probable that there is not one of them in which metrical singing is not practiced, although any parochial clergyman might ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 243 banish it, without offence against any institution of his Church. The gratifying of popular taste by the use of metre has been urged to its disgrace. Now to sacrifice truth to the opinion of the high or of the low, must be grievous sin. But on a question of taste, if that of the people can be laid hold on for the increase of their piety, it would be difficult . to prove this an error; as much so, as to do the like in reference to the improvement of a talent for elocution, with the hope of rendering it instrumental to popular edification. After all, it must be acknowledged of our metre, requir- ing as it does lines answering to one another in the num- bers of their syllables, that it is very unequal to the force of what must have been accomplished by Hebrew verse, as described by Bishop Lowth, according to which, each line contained a complete sense. He calls the lines parallel- isms, and he distinguishes them into the synonymous, the antithetic, and the synthetic or consecutive. These names are descriptive of the diversity, and the examples given by him are proof, how exceedingly all our translations in me- tre fall short of those poems in their original forms.* * In order to illustrate the sense of the Bishop concerning parallelisms, the following examples are given from among those exhibited by him: THE SYNONYMOUS. " Bow thy heavens, O Jehovah, and descend ; Touch the mountains, and they shall smoke : Dart forth lightning, and scatter them ; Shoot out thine arrows, and destroy them." Psalm cxliv. 5, 6. THE ANTITHETIC. " They are bowed down, and fallen , But we are risen, and maintain ourselves firm." Psalm xx. 8. " For His wrath is but for a moment, His favor for life ; Sorrow may lodge for the evening, but in the morning gladness." Psalm xxx. 5. The Antithesis is in each of the lines. Sometimes it comprehends a couplet, each line having a complete sense. 244 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. As to what is commonly called rhyme, in which the lines answer to one another, not only in the number of syllables, but in sound or jingle, if, as is alleged, there is something in the genius of the English language, render- ing such an artificial construction peculiarly agreeable, it is difficult to devise any principle on which it should be inter- dicted. And yet, the opinion here entertained is, that the most to be claimed for it is endurance, until there shall be exhibited a translation stripped of it, and in other respects worthy of adoption. Certainly, there are psalms which have never been put into this chain, nor perhaps into that of syllabic measure, without material deterioration. In regard both to metre and to rhyme it must be con- fessed, that sometimes by the throwing in of a superfluous word, to suit that species of translation, there is caused a considerable departure from the original. Besides, there is commonly a suspending of the sense of one line on what is to follow in another: which is contrary to the example of Hebrew verse.* In addition to all this, it is often ne- cessary to take in so much of what has been suggested by THE SYNTHETIC, OR CONSECUTIVE. " Whatsoever Jehovah pleaseth, * That doeth He in the heavens and in the earth ; In the sea and in all the deeps : Causing the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth ; Making the lightnings with the rain ; Bringing forth the wind out of His treasures." Psalm cxxxv. 6, 7. The difference may be illustrated, by the following lines from the Fourth Psalm. In the tirst line, the sense is suspended for the second: and in the third, the same is done, in a dependence on the fourth, a disadvantage sometimes aggra- vated by an absurd flourish on the organ. But in the other four lines, what the Bishop calls a consecutive parallelism is complete, and remarkably beautiful. " 3. Consider that the righteous man Is God's peculiar choice. And when to Him I make my prayer, He always hears my voice. "4. Then stand in awe of His commands. Flee every thing that's ill : Commune in private with your hearts. And bend them to His will." ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 245 the brain of the modern poet, as that the sentiment of in- spiration is diluted in the exuberance of language, and sus- tains a material diminution of its strength.* There arises the question What is the line of conduct to be pursued in this Church, in consideration of the prem- ises ? The answer is, first, in regard to chants, if there be any who have a disrelish for them, let such persons be aware of the high sanction under which they have come down to us; and on that account, let them not dare to make an effort for the excluding of them.f Secondly, in * The two following examples are given from a comparison of the Bible trans- lation with that of the book in metre. The lines of the latter are fine, which make them serve the better for instances of the extending of a sentiment over too large a surface. The comparisons to be made are not intended in disparagement of the version of Tate and Brady: for whether on account of its merits, or from the influence of the recollection of sensibilities, extending as far back as any recollections extend, there is a preference of it to every other of the kind. The imperfections charged on it are common to all the metrical translations. BIBLE TRANSLATION. Psalm cxiv. i, 2. "When Israel went out of Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of strange language; Judah was His sanctuary, and Israel His dominion." BOOK IN METRE. " When Israel, by the Almighty led, Enrich'd with their oppressor's spoil, From Egypt march'd, and Jacob's seed From bondage in a foreign soil ; Jehovah, for His residence, Chose out imperial Judah's tent, His mansion royal, and from thence, Through Israel's camp His orders sent." BIBLE TRANSLATION. Psalm cxxxvii. r. " By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we re- membered Zion." BOOK IN METRE. When we our weary limbs to rest, Sat down by proud Euphrates' stream, We wept, with doleful thoughts opprest, And Sion was our mournful theme." The whole of these two psalms are an illustration to the purpose. f There is an advantage incidental to chants, and worthy of notice : it is the exclusion of light airs, which, tacked to the plain words of Scripture, would be offensive, not to say to every pious, but to every decent person. There are some 246 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. regard to psalms in metre, rendered by habit dear to many devout minds, and there being in the use of them, a readi- ness to the desirable object of a general joining of the peo- ple, let not the taste for a species of singing which requires more of science, invade the ground on which they stand. And thirdly, let not that high grade of choral praise be un- distinguishingly rejected by those who have no fancy for it. Rather let it be encouraged with moderation, under the condition rigorously required, not only of there being noth- ing of levity, but of there being a tendency to the excite- ment of devout affections. And let the advocates of it be aware of the disgust which will and ought to be excited by a violation of this condition, and of the dissatisfaction which will be the reasonable result even of a defect of skill in the performance. It is probable that the chants, the metre psalms, and the choral anthems, might all be profitably laid aside, in the event of an approach in the English language, to He- brew verse, as above described by Bishop Lowth, and of which he says in another part of his dissertation, that the harmony of it arose " from accents, tones, and musical modulations." But the Bishop evidently considered this as unattainable even in the Hebrew. On a retrospect of the transactions of this convention, there is entertained the trust, that it did not end without a general tendency to consolidate the communion; although, i in the course of the business, there had been displayed , more than in any other convention, the influence of some notions leading far wide of that rational devotion, which religious people it is surprising who would introduce into metre psalmody, the fashionable tunes of festivity and sport. The reason offered is why should the best tunes be exclusively the property of Satan ? The author is m>t prepared to pass such a judgment on those tunes, which are not sinful, so long as they are used within the bounds of innocency. But if they be indeed the property of the aforesaid personage, let us be just even to him, and permit him to keep his own. Rational and evangelical devotion has no occasion for them, however suited they may be to the extravagances of enthusiasm. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 247 this Church has inherited from the Church of England. The spirit here complained of was rather moderated than raised higher during the session. But it being liable to be combined with schemes of personal consequence, there is no foreseeing to what lengths it may extend in future. On the part of those inimical to the contemplated evil, the proper preservative and may God grant that it may be applied is the cultivating of an enlightened zeal in favor of the doctrines of our holy religion, as revealed in Script- ure, and hitherto maintained in their integrity by this Church.* Q. Page 37. Of the Convention in 1811. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the Rev. Dr. Wilkins in the House of Clerical and Lay Dep- uties. The Secretaries of the two houses, were the Rev. Philo Shelton, of the former, and the Rev.- Ashbel Baldwin, of the latter. Bishop Claggett, who was to have opened this convention with a sermon, being detained by sickness, that office was performed by the presiding bishop. This convention was held under very serious and well founded apprehensions, that the American Church would be subjected again to the necessity of having recourse to the mother Church, for the Episcopacy, or else of continu- ing it without requiring the canonical number, which might be productive of great disorder in future. Bishop Moore \ had been lately visited by a paralytic stroke, a"r73" was sup- ) posed to be incompetent to the joining in a consecration/ * Lest what is said concerning schemes of personal consequence should bear the appearance of an insinuation not to be sustained by any fact, the author finds himself called on to specify an attempt made to congregate some select clergymen in Baltimore, at the time of the General Convention, as a distinct body, and for the greater increase of piety. The tendency of such a scheme must be obvious. Almost all of the invited clergymen saw the matter in a proper point of view, and declined the invitation. The consequence was, that the project came to nothing. 248 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. unless in his chamber, which was contemplated as the last resort. Bishop Claggett, after severe indisposition, was so far recovered as to be encouraged to attempt the jour- ney; but after proceeding a few miles, found himself under the necessity of returning. Bishop Madison thought him- self not at liberty to leave the duties of his college.* The author left home, under the hope of inducing Bishop Pro- voost to go on to New Haven; although he had never per- formed any ecclesiastical duty, since the consecration of Bishop Moore, in 1801. But besides Bishop Provoost's being under the effects of a slight stroke of the paralytic, sustained two years before, he was, at this time, only be- ginning to recover from the jaundice. He found himself utterly incompetent to the taking of a journey, but prom- ised, if possible, to assist in a consecration, if it should be held in the City of New York. With the expectation of this, Bishop Jarvis, after the rising of the convention, came with the author to the said city, as did the two bishops- elect. To the last hour, there was danger of disappoint- ment. On our arrival, a day ateo having been publicly notified for the consecration, we found that Bishop Pro- vbost had suffered a relapse during our absence. But finally, he found himself strong enough to give his at- tendance; and thus, the business was happily accomplished. What is mentioned on the journals, in relation to the introduction of Episcopacy into the western states, arose from a correspondence which had been entered into be- tween the author and the Rev. Joseph Doddridge, who had been ordained by him many years before; and who lived near the western line of Pennsylvania, which divides it from Virginia. This gentleman wrote in behalf of himself, and of a few other clergymen settled in those western re- gions. The line of direction given to this business by the convention renders it premature to say much concerning It appears from a letter of Bishop Madison to the author, that these duties had been made the more imperative by the solemnity of an oath. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 249 it at present. The hindrances to the carrying of the de- sign of the preceding General Convention into effect, were the difficulty of selecting a suitable person, and that of supporting him. The same difficulties are to be appre- hended in the new shape of the business. There is this difference in the two designs. According to the former, the bishop would have been on the missionary plan, se- lected and paid on this side of the mountains. If the latter idea should be realized, the churches to the westward must be organized, and a bishop must be chosen by themselves. It appears on the journal, that the convention were called on to give their sanction to the endeavors of the Episcopalians in Connecticut, for the establishment of an Episcopal Academy with corporate powers. This design originated in the exclusive constitution of the college in that state, which is entirely in the hands of Congregation- alists, and is so patronized by the government, and so sup- plied with occasional grants of money frorn_Jhe treasury, as is thought to amount to a species of state establishment of a particular religious denomination. It is considerably owing to this circumstance, that there is a degree of dis- satisfaction between the Episcopalians and the dominant society, beyond what prevails in any other state in the union. The application to the Society (in England) for the Prop- agation of the Gospel, originated in the following circum- stances. Before the revolution, and when the state now known by the name of Vermont, was considered as part of the province of New Hampshire, Governor Wentworth, in his grants of the western lands of that province, laid out in every township a tract for the use of the Episcopal Church, which should in future be within the limits of the township, and conveyed the lands so given to the said society. Some of these lands are within the present bounds of New Hamp- shire, and the rest are in Vermont. After the peace of 1783, the Society conveyed the former to certain gentle- men, within the state to which they belonged. The pres- 250 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. ent application, for a similar grant of the lands in Vermont, was with the view of making them productive, for the ac- complishing of the original object of the grants. It appears further on the journal, that two Rev. gentle- men, Benjamin Benham, and Virgil H. Barber, made to the convention an application, the purport of which is not recorded, but became an object of attention in conver- sation, during and after the session, besides its occasioning of a debate at the time, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The subject is contemplated as likely to be a cause of future litigation, and therefore now noticed with sorrow. The object of the two gentlemen alluded to, was A to procure a declaration of the invalidity of lay baptism;-^ and they were said to be conscientiously scrupulous of ad- mitting as members of their congregations, persons who had received no other.* This of course precluded acces- ( sions, except on the condition of compliance with their proposal, from the most numerous denomination in the state, their baptism by the Congregational ministers, being considered as performed by laymen. Although the clergy- men referred to were singular in carrying the matter so far, yet there has been an increasing tendency in some of the clergy, to administer Episcopal baptism to such as desire it, on alleged doubts of the validity of former baptism. Even this is contrary to the rubrics, as is proved by many judicious divines of the Church of England.t It happened, that a distinguished lay member of the convention the Hon. Rufus King had brought with him a pamphlet lately sent to him from England, containing a judgment recently given in an ecclesiastical court of that country, in a case One of the two clergymen (Mr. Barber) distinguishing themselves as above, a few years after, became a Roman Catholic. In the communion thus joined by him, it is not uncommon for midwives to baptize. It is a well known property of extremes, that they are often seen making the connecting points of a circle. t Three of Mr. Barber's daughters liecame Ursulines, and a fourth, with her mother, entered the community of Visitation Nuns at Georgetown, D. C. See "In Memoriam, Sister Sainte Claire," 1876, p. 19. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. precisely to the point. It was occasioned by a suit brought by a Dissenter against a parish minister for refusing to bury a child that had been baptized by a minister dissenting from the establishment. The judge Sirjphn Nichols decided it against the clergyman. His reasons, grounded altogether on the rubrics, must carry conviction to every mind so far as concerns the question of the sense of the Church of England. It is true that this does not settle the question of the sense of Scripture. On the most serious consideration of the subject many years ago, conviction is entertained, that the Holy Scriptures and the Church arc not at variance in this matter. What adds to the sorrow felt, at the introduction of a new ground of difference in the American Church, is the observing, that it never existed in the mother Church, until about the year 1712; and that it had then the strongest appearances of a~~poTitical ma- noeuvre, played off against the fajriily on whom the succes- sion to the crown had been settled by act of parliament.* If the prejudice should prevail, it is very unfortunate p that two of our bishops (Dr. Provoost t and Dr. Jarvis)"V * never received baptism from an Episcopalian administrator./ So that who knows what scruples this may occasion, as to the validity of many of our ordinations, and among the number, those of the very two gentlemen who made the stir at the late convention ? It is true that to meet this difficulty, the distinction is devised, of the possibility of transmitting the Episcopal succession through persons who are not members of the Christian Church. This was the I*] 11* * James the First, when he ascended the throne of England, and probably his son Charles the First, who succeeded him, had been baptized in Scotland by non- episcopalian ministers. And at the restoration of Charles the Second, when the /v repealed. I>ut then, when it was proposed that a declaration of their sentiments to this purpose should be published, in order to silence or determine the debates raised on this question, it was resolved upon mature deliberation, to leave the question as much undecided by any public dec- laration, as it was left in the public offices ancTcanons of the Church, for the better / security of discipline, and to prevent any advantages that might be taken by Dissent- 1 ers, or seem to be given them, in favor of their baptisms; though they do not prop- ) erly come within the question of lay baptisms in cases of extremity." Dr. Sharp professes to have taken the above from the original papers signed by the two archbishops. The matter above referred to, as intended to be left undefined, was not the re- baptizing by the form at large, or by the hypothetical form, for against both of these measures, the archdeacon cautions his clergy. But, as in the English Book of Common Prayer, in the introductory instrument entitled, "Concerning the Ser- vice of the Church," a minister under doubt is directed to have recourse to the ordinary, and as a doubt may occur concerning the words to be made use of in the admission of a child privately baptized " I certify that all is well done, etc.," not because of the insufficiency of the administrator, but on account of the irregu- larity of the act, the minister is counselled by Dr. Sharp to avail himself of the said proviso, attached to the preface of the Book of Common Prayer. i 254 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. This is not said, without the being aware of the great abuse abounding in the department of psalmody, partly by leaving the portions to be sung to the choice of clerks des- titute of judgment, and partly by singing tunes either un- suitable to divine worship, or suitable to some of the sacred compositions, yet not to those with which they are unskil- fully connected. It was designed to guard against both of these evils, by the rubric prefixed to the Book of Psalms in metre. That provision, if applied, is a sufficient remedy for both. If any thing further should be attempted, in a field open to so great a diversity of taste, it is probable that no convention would assemble without projected im- provements prepared to be laid before them. The fault of the unnecessary extension of authority would be felt in changes without end. In consequence of a canon passed at the convention of 1804, there was drawn up by the House of Bishops, and sent to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, a Pastoral Letter, addressed to the members generally of this Church. It had been understood, that this was a transaction, over which the latter house were to have no control. Philadelphia was fixed on as the next place of meeting: and, as in the last convention, the business was concluded with prayer by the presiding bishop, in presence of both houses. POSTSCRIPT. The consecration,\yhich took place in Trinity Church, in the City of New York, May 29, 1811, soon after the rising of the convention, may be considered as in some sort the unfinished business of it. Accordingly, any important cir- cumstance attending said act, may properly have a place in these statements. Such a circumstance occurred during the service, and was the consequence of the inadvertence of the author, who, in the imposition of hands on each of the two bishops- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 255 , elect, omitted the words " In the name of the Father, and ' . of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." The officiating bishop ^ ' was unconscious of the omission, and the first intimation "/ ' of it to him was by Bishop Jarvis in the way from church. Although the author regretted what had happened, yet he had no expectation that any conclusion would be drawn from it for the impeaching of the validity of the act. Nei- ther would this have happened, if it had not fallen in with the passions which had been excited by the late^ election in New York. Not long after the consecration, it was published to the world, that the supposed act of consecration was essen- tially defective, because of the want of those solemn words. Lamentations were made concerning the conse- quences which may ensue to affect the Episcopal suc- cession through future ages, altogether owing to its in- validating of Bishop Hobart's Episcopal character, for not a word was said in trie publications, of its having of the same effect on Bishop Griswold's, although all the gentle- men who had noticed the omission testified that it applied to both the cases. The clamor thus raised was of course met with the de- nial, that any precise form of words was essential to such an occasion. But this not producing silence, inquiry was made into the history of the form, as it stands in the Ordi- nal; when it appeared, that the words in question were no ^ part of the form of the Church of England, until the reign y/) I) 2> of Charles II.; were never in that of the primitive Church; / and are not in the Roman Pontifical at this day. So that, on the principle of the opposite argument, there is not at this time a Christian bishop in the world.* Then the objection took a new turn, and was rested on the preface to the Ordinal, which requires the consecra- tion to be conducted agreeably to the form in that book. * See Bishop Sparrow's collection, and De Courayer's "Defence of the English Ordinations." 256 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. According to this, the accidental omission of a word or two, contained in the book, must invalidate any consecration or ordination in which it may happen. The absurdity being stated as a consequence, the answer was, that in this in- stance, the omitted words involve an important doctrine of our holy religion. It was replied, that the doctrine appears in many places in the service, and that it is manifestly in- consistent to yield, that the mention of the Trinity dur- ing the imposition of hands, is not essential on the mere ground of the importance of the doctrine; to yield further, that necessity is not created by positive institution only, and yet to contend that these united render the words indispensable. The disposition manifested soon spent itself, owing, as is conceived, to the circumstance, that a few gentlemen of talents, who had interested themselves on the occasion, without having been in the habit of attending to the con- cerns of the Church, would not commit their characters by joining in a criticism so indefensible. R. Page 41. Of the Convention in 1814. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the Rev. Dr. Croes in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. j The Secretaries of the two houses, were, of the former, the 'i4 I Rev._Jackson Kemper, and of the latter, the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin, assisted by James Milnor, Esq. wy'l'l' The opening sermon was by Bishop Hobart, of New ;< *York. The object at present, as in relation to transactions of former conventions, is principally to bring into view some facts which might otherwise be forgotten, after having had an influence in the determination of the measures adopted. The Ninth Canon, which dispenses with certain literary qualifications in some cases, had been misunderstood, and abused to the sustaining of the notion, that the qualifica- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 257 tion serving for a substitute, is mere fluency of speech, evi-(" dently found in some very ignorant men, and even in some/ whose understandings are naturally weak. It was thought, ' that a solemn declaration, guarding against the error, might be of use. The alteration of the Twenty-ninth Canon, was occa- sioned by a difference found in the diocesan constitutions, and by a wish not to interfere therewith, but to leave them to their respective operation. In some states, no minister, not provided with a parish, and no deacon, has a seat or vote in the convention. In others, a contrary provision had been made. What brought the subject into view at this time, was a change which had taken place in Connect- icut; the old law, of excluding non-parochial ministers and deacons, having given way to the contrary regulation, much to the dissatisfaction of some of the clergy. The difference did not come under question in the General Convention. But it seemed reasonable in this body, while they avoided including the two descriptions of persons alluded to, in the provision for the Office of Institution, not to interfere with the economy of those dioceses wherein they were admitted. The opinion is here avowed, that the latter course is the most proper, although not alleged to be necessary. Other- wise the Church may be deprived of the counsel of some of the ablest of her ministers, who are prevented from the acceptance of parishes by allowable causes; for example, the filling of professorships in literary institutions. Besides, there may be aged clergymen, unfit for active service, and yet, not the less competent to the giving of advice. It is a very great injury to religion, what has occasionally hap- pened, and will be especially apt to occur in every large city, that a man in holy Orders may find it an eligible place of residence for enjoyment or for the management of some secular business. His life may be a scandal to the Church; and yet it would be thought unreasonable to subject him to religious discipline, under a constitution not acknowledg- ing him as having an interest in it. 258 MEMOIRS OF THE ClfUKCIf. What was done in relation to the Fortieth Canon was at the instance of the clerical members from Connecticut. The canon provides, that every clergyman shall keep a list of his adult parishioners. In the said state, considerable difficulty was alleged to have arisen, as to what may be called a joint act, in the case of a person baptized in some other communion, but joining his or herself to this Church. In the case supposed, the joint act must have been of the person and of the minister recording his name. Under existing circumstances, it does not appear how the query could have been splved, except in the way suggested by the bishops; that is, by bringing the matter to the test of whatever was considered by both of the parties, as tending to the effect contemplated. It must be confessed, however, that this manifests an imperfect state of discipline. The subject is worthy of the provision of a religious form, with the view of establishing the certainty of the transaction. But to make such a provision consistent, none besides per- sons of fair characters should be admitted within the pale, others to be allowed as hearers, and even to occupy sittings within a church, but not to have votes in its concerns. There was nothing further done in relation to the can- ons, except the making of a slight alteration in the Forty- fifth; designed to dispense with the duty of reading, in the General Convention, the reports of the conventions^ in the different states. Perhaps some reason may be required for the delay still occurring in regard to the review of the Homilies, recog- nized as they are in the Articles. There had been some correspondence on the subject between two of the bishops, the author and Bishop Hobart. But it is involved in more difficulty than would easily be supposed by any person who has not attended to it particularly. That, besides verbal alterations, some others arc called for, is universally agreed. But to make the latter, without departing from the principle of avoiding the charge, and even of giving plausible ground to any to pretend, that we have deviated, ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 259 in respect to doctrine, is scarcely to be expected. On this account the author is not sure that it will not be best to leave the two books as they now stand, being referred to in the Articles, as a larger explication of Christian doctrine; without its being understood that assent to the article im- plies approbation of every sentiment in the Homilies, or of every series of reasoning whereby any doctrine of them is sustained. At the same time, if any minister incline to read a homily from his- pulpit or from his desk, and will take the trouble of clearing it from its obsolete terms and local references (if there be any), there is nothing to hinder his doing so. In another point of view, however, it ap- peared of the utmost consequence to take some measure in regard to those very instructive compositions. Their being sanctioned by the Thirty-fifth Article, which is assented to by all persons admitted to the ministry, renders it abso- lutely necessary that they should have the means of pe- rusing them, and even of well weighing their contents. This is not always easily to be accomplished. Accordingly, it was judged expedient to encourage a publication of them; with a caution against its being understood, that this Church is concerned in what relates to the civil policy of Great Britain. Under these views of the subject, they have since been printed. For the sense of the House of Bishops, delivered by them on this subject, see Appendix, No. 27. The measure which appears on the minutes, designed to introduce the posture of standing during the act of singing portions of the psalms and of the hymns in metre, requires to be accounted for. It professes to have been adopted for the avoiding of diversity of custom. But there may be an interesting question as to the cause of that diversity. It is evident that psalms in metre are not known in the rubrics of the Church of England, and yet it was provided in the very beginning of the reformation, by the act of uni- formity_then passed, that psalms or prayers, taken out of the Bible, might be used in divine service, provided it were 260 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. not done to the omitting of any part thereof. This was in the reign of Edward VI. In the course of that reign, Sternhold and Hopkins edited their version, which must have been brought into use, not by any special act of au- thority, but under the sanction of that provision. These facts have been stated, in a preceding part of the present work.* They are again referred to, in order to make them aground of the supposition, that the posture of sitting grew out of the laxity of manner, in which this_part j>f the pub- lic devotion was introduced. When the present writer was inEngland, during the whole of the year 1771, and nearly i the half of 1772, he was not in any church wherein the \ people stood at the singmg of the metre psalms. He does not remember to have seen it, during his short visit to that \ A ^\ country, about fifteen years afterwards. And yet it seems / well attested of late, that the posture of standing prevails Jfijji') ff* in London and its vicinity, and elsewhere. It is said to have been introduced by the late excellent Bishop of Lon- don Dr. Porteus, and this is very probable. The cus- . t>U^ v torn had travelled to some congregations in this country, wherein, until lately, it is not probable that there was a / single congregation that stood during this part of the ser- ) vice. In order to put an end to the diversity, and under the conviction that standing is the more fit and decent posture, the bishops proposed, and the other house ap- proved of the measure which has been adopted. For this document, see Appendix, No. 28. It appears on the journal, that on a proposal of a pres- byter of this Church, to add to the anthems serving on certain festivals, instead of the " Venite," certain forms from the psalms, etc., prepared by himself with musical accompaniments, the House of Bishops proposed, and were concurred with by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, a determination not to enter on a review of the Book of Common Prayer during the present session; which may See ante, p. 241. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 261 seem too general for the occasion. Certainly the two houses, had it so pleased them, might have proposed to the next convention a particular change, without going a step farther. But had it been moved by any member, and made a subject of discussion, any other member might have done the same, so that a general review might have been the consequence. As for the anthems, they were such as might have been expected from the musical sufficiency of the proposer. There was another matter of a different nature, comprehended under the determination of the two houses. A reverend member of the convention had brought to it a manuscript work of his own, on an important subject of religion, which he wished to be sanctioned by the body. It is not easy to calculate the time they might have been kept together, for a due examination of a work of this sort, nor how many similar applications in future would have grown out of compliance in the present instance. The reasons of the conventional measures in the above cases, are recorded with the hope, that they will have weight on the like occasions, if they should occur. For the determi- nation, see the Appendix, No. 29. The reference to- the bishops, and to other ecclesiastical authorities, for the obtaining of information on the subject of a theological school, originated thus. The convention in South Carolina, had instructed their deputies to propose the establishing of such an institution, and, accordingly, it had been moved and discussed in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and by them negatived. On the last day of the session, it was moved in the House of Bishops, by the bishop of the Church in that state. The question was argued with much interest, although with the utmost moderation, by that bishop on one side, and by the assist- ant bishop of the Church in the diocese of New York, on the other. The design interfered especially with the views of the latter, who had adopted measures, and issued pro- posals, for the instituting of a seminary under the imme- diate superintendence of himself and his successors. It 262 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. was to have been seated in New Jersey, and the bishop of that state was to have been joined in the superintendence. The present author, conscious that he had not given much attention to the subject in this comparative view of it, and perceiving that existing circumstances would prevent a determination during the present session, avoided the open- ing of his mind as to the merits of the question. The proposal respecting a copyright of the Book of Common Prayer had been suggested as a mean of obtain- ing a handsome fund for beneficial purposes. Besides the difficulties in the way, suggested in the instrument relative to the obtaining of information on the subject, there is the insuperable objection which it seemed the most prudent not to notice, that although the Church does not now contemplate alterations in her Liturgy, yet she ought not to commit herself in a measure, which would put it be- yond her power for a considerable course of years. To have given this as a reason, might have been misunderstood by the public. Independently on that circumstance, there were those who had been formerly witnesses of jealousy ex- cited by this cause, which they wished never to see renewed, so long as there are other ways of guarding the integrity of the book against corrupt copies. In most, and probably all, of the present, there are some errata, which, in general, may be detected by the reader, and which might be more effectually guarded against by an authoritative table. The declaration of the bishops, approved of by the other house, relative to the identity of this Church with the body formerly known by the name of " the Church of England in America," arose from the circumstance, that in some cause or causes pending in the courts, this identity had been denied. The bishops were informed by one of their body, that, not long ago, the sentiment had been expressed to him by a gentleman high in office, who grounded what he alleged on the Book of Common Prayer, edited in 1785. The title of this book declares it to be a proposal. It was never rat- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 263 ified, as will appear on a reference to the journals. Had a subsequent convention ratified it, the inference would have been untenable in regard to a Church, the principles of which, as of the Church from which it became separated by a dispensation of Providence, declares its competency to every act of self government. The identity of the body remained, although accompanied by a newly acquired in- dependence. Still the plea, on the ground taken from it, is invalidated by the non-acceptance of the book. It being foreseen, that this pretence will be set up, whenever the appeal shall come on in Washington, there was supposed to be a call for the declaratory instrument, which has occa- sioned the present explanation. There was a consideration which rendered the declar- ation especially expedient, but not proper to be noticed on the journal. The opposite principle was the known opinion of some leading characters of Virginia, who, on that ground, had defended the act of the legislature of thatTstate, whidi deprived our communion of its churches and its glebes. Although the question here referred to was brought be- fore the convention incidentally, yet, as it may hereafter be a subject of more considerable attention, and big with im- portant consequences, occasion shall be taken to state the reasons for supporting the position, that what is now called "the Episcopal Church in the United States of America," is precisely, in succession, the body formerly known by the name of "the Church of England in America;" the changes of name having been the dictate of a change of circum- stances, in the civil constitution of the country.* 1st. From the beginning of the organizing of this Church, the principle has prevailed. It impelled the applying to * Since the penning of these remarks, the author has seen, in print, a serious en- deavor to date the origin of the Episcopal Church, from the period of the conse- cration of her bishops. The position is rested on grounds which do not here seem to call for a professed refutation : but it may be remarked, that the sentiments expressed by the House of Bishops, and advocated in this place, apply to the notion now referred to, as well as to that of which they were professedly intended. 264 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. England for consecration, in preference to another country, where it might have been easily had, without the making of requests, not to be complied with but by the interference of the legislature of a foreign country, which the venerable persons petitioned, might not be able to obtain. 2dly. It will very much tend to check the spirit of inno- vation, on any essential point of doctrine, because if such a matter should be attempted, the original standard will be appealed to, and the adherents to it will plead, that they are the Church from which the innovators, whether many or few, have departed. This needs not to hinder altera- tions in less important matters, because, notwithstanding the parentage gloried in by us, we are an independent Church, and so acknowledged by that from which we plead to have descended. 3dly. The security of property is a consideration. This has been spoken of already; but there shall be added infor- mation received from a respectable source. It is, that on the arrival of Bishop Seabury in Connecticut, he consulted his friend, Dr. William Samuel Johnson, of Stratford, whose leaning to him and his cause, with a strong attachment to the Episcopal Church, can not be doubted, as to his right to the income of a handsome landed property, left for the support of a future bishop of the Church of England in America. Dr. Johnson is said to have been of opinion, that Bishop Seabury could not claim it. 4thly, and principally; regard is here had to there being a fence to the truths of the Gospel, prevalent in the days of Edward VI. Any superadditions, which may have been either popular, or introduced by influential churchmen afterwards, are here put out of view. The principle contended for can not be understood, with- out remarking the distinction between a sameness of two j Churches in doctrine, discipline, and worship, and their | identity in a corporate capacity. When" in the reign of James I., and afterward in that of Charles II., there were consecrated in England bishops for the Church of Scotland, ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 265 the Churches of the two countries were the same in the particulars of principle above mentioned; but were so far from being one, that to avoid the appearance of it, and to guard against a consequent ascendency of the English hier- archy over that of Scotland, it was carefully provided, at each of the times referred to, that the bishops of the latter country should not be consecrated by either of the Arch- bishops of Canterbury and York. Neither is what is here said intended to discountenance all changes, which succeeding circumstances may render expedient. In respect to doctrine, if, at any time, for the sake of comprehension, there should be silence on any points not essential to Christian verity, it would not super- sede the principle here sustained. On the subject of rites and ceremonies it is the judgment of the Church of Eng- land, that they may be regulated according to the circum- stances of different times and places. And under the head of the constitution of the Christian Church and the disci- pline of it, there is no reluctance to record the opinion, that if an important object were likely to be accomplished, there would be no difficulty in taking a ground, which would not be objected to by the more moderate of the non-episco- palians, provided there ceased objections of another kind, especially the greatest hindrance of all, in the irritation kept alive by the intemperate zeal of some o,n each side. But, if ever there should be a surrender of those evangelical truths, which are not only affirmed in the Thirty-nine Arti- cles, but pervade the services, and are generally understood to be the leading doctrines of the Reformation, its fall may be counted on, and because of such change, ought not to be regretted. The maintaining of the above principle, consistently with a strong desire of comprehending Bishop Seabury and his Church within our connection, placed the author of this in very delicate circumstances for some time; especially as he was not so happy as to have the concurrence of Bish- op Provoost on the latter subject. The author persevered 266 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. with him, in the plan of obtaining the canonical number from England; but thought there would be no inconsistency, ( after the succession had become complete, and even during / the measures leading to it, in yielding personal priority to r Bishop Seabury. Accordingly, the author will conclude with the expres- sion of a feeling, which from his very early years, has been attendant on his views of religion; and which he can not clothe in more appropriate words than those of Father Paul, of Venice " Esto perpetua " : that is, may the Church so constituted and continued, last forever. Because of the importance of the declaration of the con- vention on the preceding subject, it is given in the Ap- pendix, No. 30. S. Page 46. Of the Convention of 1817. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, first Dr. Isaac Wil- kins, of New York, and afterward the Rev. William H. Wilmer, of Alexandria, presided. The Secretanes~weFe, of theTorrnerTiouse, the Rev. Benjamin T. Onderdonk, and of the latter, the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin.* After divine service, and the sermon by Bishop Gris- wold, and in compliance with a resolve of the last_.coif vention, there was an administration of the Holy Com- munion. There having appeared at this convention two bishops, in addition to those formerly mentioned, it falls within the design of this work to record, that the first of them, the Rev. Dr. James Kemp, of Maryland, was consecrated on I the first of September, 1814, in Christ Church, in the City yA of New Brunswick, New Jersey, by the presiding bishop, Assisted by Bishops Hobart and Moore; and that the other, j>f- \/y The assistant was the Rev. Mr. Rudd, who usually did the work. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 267 the Rev. Dr. John Croes, of New Jersey, was consecrated on the I Qth day of November; 1815, in St. Peter's Church, in the City of Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Kemp. Opposition having been made to the consecration of Bishop Kemp, the three consecrating bishops weighed very seriously the objections presented to their notice; the more so, as among the signers of the protest sent, there appeared the names of persons known to have possessed respectability in the diocese. The detailing of the objections included in the protest, with the reasons of their adjudged irrelevancy, seems called for by regard to the future respectability of \ the Church, and to the consistency of the consecrating ] bishops. The first objection was, that the office of ji__suffragan X $ - // bishop was unknown in the constitution of the Church Maryland. On this point it was considered, that although neither the office of a suffragan nor that of a coadjutor or assistant bishop, was noticed in the constitution, either of them might be rendered expedient by existing circum- stances, as a character often met with in the history of the Christian Church; that a coadjutor or assistant bishop had been introduced into another diocese, without being men- tioned in its constitution, and yet without the charge of unconstitutionality; that as the bishop of the diocese now in question, in the year 1811, had proposed the electing of a bishop to aid him, he must have presumed the legality of the measure, and it has not since appeared that he al- tered his mind, or that the sentiment had been until now contradicted by any person; that in 1812, the convention had balloted on the question of having a suffragan, and although it was then carried in the negative, it does not appear that they were supposed by any of the members to be irregularly occupied. Even the signers of the protest must have thought it regular at the time. The second objection denied that Dr. Kemp had been / fl chosen by a constitutional majority: but the journal mani- '" ' 268 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Tested the contrary; there appearing to have been in his favor two thirds of the members present. This objection was stated in such general terms, that it could not have been much relied on. The third objection imported, that the general opinion concerning the measure of choosing a suffragan, had been expressed by the silence of the convention of 1813; the next after that which had negatived the measure. There may have been some reason for this, which the consecrat- ing bishops had no means of obtaining. The prospect of the returning health of the diocesan bishop, may have been the reason. The bishops however perceived, from inspec- tion of the journal, that of nineteen clergymen and thirty- two laymen present in the convention of 1813, not a third of either order had been induced to sign the protest. Al- though there were in this convention two more of the clergy, and seven more of the laity than in that of 1814, when the choice was made; yet the members of the latter were precisely those of 1812; when no fault appears to have been alleged against the balloting for a suffragan, because of the paucity of electors. It was further considered under this head, that the requisition of two thirds for the electing of a bishop, as provided by the constitution of the Church of Maryland, and which was satisfied by the issue of the election in the present instance, was probably for the pur- pose of guarding against an advantage which might be taken of a thin convention. On any other principle, it \ would seem to have been unwise to make a provision, by f which a sixth of the number and one more, would have it i in their power to arrest, at pleasure, all Episcopal adminis- i tration in the diocese. The fourth objection rested on the charge of surprise , i and management. Nothing of these was apparent on the journal. They are not a ground on which an election may be set aside. In the collision of parties they are commonly charged by each on the other. On the present occasion, no specific facts were alleged, and no evidence was offered. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. -269 On the whole subject of the objections, the bishops were of opinion, that if the substance of the protest was designed to arrest the consecration, it ought to have been communi- cated to the convention by which Dr. Kemp had been elected; and that after the neglect of this, the defect ought to have been in some measure supplied, by its being made known to the bishops called on to consecrate, that the in- strument, which was put into print for the ease of multi- plying copies, had been communicated individually to those who were so materially interested in its contents. These remarks were designed to have an especial bearing on the position of the protest, that the succession of the bishop- elect to the diocesan Episcopacy was carried by accla- mation. The bishops were possessed of evidence, that the question was put, and the vote taken, in the usual form of conventional business. They were the more in- duced to rely on the testimony to this effect by the circum- stance, that among the affirmants of the contrary, there were some who were not present at the disgraceful trans- action, if it happened. In addition to the protest, there was exhibited by the presiding bishop, a letter to him from two clergymen of the diocese, charging the bishop-elect with being unsound in the faith, and an enemy to vital godliness. If the signers of the letter had substantiated the first of the two charges, or the latter of them, in the sense understood in Scripture under the term "godliness," essentially involving reno- vation of the affections manifested in the fruits of holiness, the bishops would have rejected the application before them, from the respectable diocese of Maryland. But, the x ^ writers of the letter alleged no specific facts; they referred *' to no evidence; and the accused party declared that they\ v had^ not even notified to him the accusation. The writers of the letter demanded a hearing by coun-' sel. Setting aside the insufficiency of the applicants, the novelty of the proposal, and all question of the propriety of such a precedent to be set by any three bishops who 270 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. might be assembled, it could not but occur to those now present, that the other party in the case would be the con- vention of Maryland, who had no opportunity of being heard by counsel. Had Dr. Kemp been considered as the other party, there would have been evident impropriety in subjecting him to a hearing, under a charge brought against him unexpectedly, and remote from his place of residence. Perhaps it was expected, that the consecration would be delayed, with a view to a future hearing. But neither ought the bishops to have acceded to this, when it would have been to subject to reproach the character of a clergy- man who had been greatly respected in the diocese dur- ing nearly twenty-five years, and this at the request of two clergymen, who do not appear to have hazarded the charges in the convention; and who, in bringing them for- ward at this time, must have thought differently from those who joined with them in the protest. For it would be in- jurious to the religious profession, and to the understand- ings of the latter, to suppose that they had withheld those charges, while they were urging objections of far less mag- nitude.* These were the reasons on which the bishops rested their procedure, and they were detailed by them, in a let- ter to Bishop Claggett. Soon after the consecration of Dr. Kemp, the object of the opposition to him, as it was cherished by some of his opponents, showed itself without disguise. Fcmro_fiye clergymen, who had obtained the concurrence of some re- spectable persons in that preparatory measure, but not in what followed, applied first to Bishop Claggett, and, on his refusal, to Bishop Provoost, to consecrate singly the person ( who should be elected by the applicants. It is not neces- ' sary to prove, that the bishops so applied to were men of It was with a view to an influence on the question of the election of Dr. Kemp, that the story concerning the election of Dr. Griffith, noticed in this work (page 167), was handed about ; probably fabricated by some, but certainly be- lieved without intentional error by others. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 271 too much truth and honor, to have considered for a mo- ment of so unprincipled a proposal. But the matter should be remembered as pregnant with admonition. A bishop of this Church, during the service of consecration, after ut- tering the solemn words " In the name of God, amen," promises conformity and obedience to the doctrine, the discipline, and the worship of this Church. According to the application, all the checks designed to govern in ad- mission to the Episcopacy were to be disregarded. That small number of clergymen exhibited themselves as competent to an act, to which they had recently af- firmed an incompetency, in two thirds of the clergy and representatives of the laity, in convention. And all this was under the profession of serving the cause of vital godliness. On the subject of a theological school, discussed in the General Convention, as set forth on the journal, a plan, different from that adopted, was recommended by the con- vention of Pennsylvania. It was as follows: " 1st. That there be a recommendation to the Church in the several states, to raise a fund, the income of which may be applied, as the general wisdom of the Church may direct. " 2dly. That wherever there is such a concentration of clergymen, as that they can assemble often, and at con- venient times, they may be requested to bestow their en- deavors gratuitously, for the accomplishing of the present object; and, " 3dly. That the income of the contemplated funds be applied to such local endeavors, if thought expedient, so as to secure the especial attention of one or more of the clergy, to be devoted altogether, or in part, to the educa- ting of young men for the ministry, until a general plan be adopted, if that should be considered hereafter as more eligible." The reasons which weighed to the preference of this plan, were the time intervening between one convention 272 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. and another the expediency of limiting the views of that body, to what is essential to the keeping of us together as one Church the danger of local jealousies, and the easier maintenance of students, under their paternal roofs: which would not always apply according to either of the schemes, but would be much more frequent under that proposed than under the other. There was, however, such a lati- tude left by the suggestion from Pennsylvania, as that there might hereafter be a general seminary grafted on it, cither to the superseding of the local schools, or for the finishing of the education of the scholars, as might be ex- pedient. It is to be hoped, that the other plan, after hav- ing been generally adopted, will be universally, and with effect, supported. On the subject of improper amusements, there was a con- troversy of some warmth, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies.* In the House of Bishops, there was unanimity in the course taken. This course as recorded on the jour- nal, and including some sentiments in the Pastoral Letter, addressed to the members of the Church generally, and read as usual in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, was said to have conciliated to their disappointment, those in the latter house who had pressed for a stronger measure, which had not been carried. There having been misrepre- sentations of what passed on this subject from speakers on each side, and, as what finally proceeded from the bishops was said to have been satisfactory to each, there may be use in presenting it at large; accordingly, it is given in the Appendix, No. 31. The House of Bishops in 1817 was composed of eight bishops, and the lower house of representatives from twenty-one jurisdictions. Bishop White says that in the lower house there was a controversy of "some warmth " on the subject of " improper amusements." The Journals (in, 458) show that, May 22d, Francis S. Key, Esq., submitted the following resolution which was laid on the table: " Resolved, that the clergy of this Church be, and they are hereby enjoined to recommend sobriety of life and conversation to the professing members of their respective congregations, and that they be authorized to require and to state it. as the opinion of the convention, that conforming to the vain amusements of the ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 273 The proposal for the adopting of a standard edition of the Bible was in consequence of the discovery of a large edition, extending very widely a corruption of Acts vi. 3, by perverting it to a sanction of congregational ordination. I Instead of "whom we may appoint over this business," / which is the exact translation of the original, the edition , has it "whom/*? may appoint over this business." While the matter was before t He House of Clerical and Lay Dep- uties, a lay member, standing in a pew, and observing a Bible, took it to turn to the place in question, when he per- ceived it to be a copy of the edition in which the corrup- tion had been detected. The proposal of determining on a standard edition had been made without the expectation of its being acted on during the session. It was closed 7 with a joint vote of the two houses, to hold the next trien- / nial meeting in the City of Philadelphia, and with prayer f by the presiding bishop, before both houses, as usual. Although the object of the "Additional Statements and Remarks" is limited to the proceedings of the General Con- vention of 1817; there being no subsequent transactions which have bearings on the doctrine, or the worship, or the discipline of the Church; yet it may not be irrelevant to record, that, since that period, there have been conse- crated the Rev. Philander Chase, D.D., for the State of Ohio, and the Rev. Thomas C. Brownell, D.D., LL.D., for world, frequent horse races, theatres, and public balls, playing cards, or being engaged in any other kind of gaming, are inconsistent with Christian sobriety, dangerous to the morals of the members of the Church, and peculiarly unbecom- ing the character of communicants." The next day the resolution was called up, and the following substitute was offered by Dr. How and adopted : " Resolved, that inasmuch as ample provision is already made for the purposes of Christian discipline in the cases specified in the foregoing resolution, by the Constitution, Canons, Kubricks, Homilies, and Liturgy of the Church, it is unnecessary at this time to pass any resolution on the subject of the discipline of the Church." Thus in the house the matter ended. The bishops, however, as seen (ante p. 44, and Appendix, 31) brought the subject forward in a Pastoral Letter. In 1823 Bishop Philander Chase brought the subject to the attention of the bishops again, when he was referred to the action of 1817. Ed. 274 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the State of Connecticut: the former, on the nth day of February, 1819, in St. James's Church, Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart, Kemp, and Croes; and the latter, on the 2/th day of October, 1819, in Trinity Church, New Haven, by the presiding bishop, as- sisted by Bishops Hobart and Griswold. As the act of the convention of 1785 was authenticated by the signatures of all the members of the body, as it laid the foundation of the succeeding transactions, and as it has never been given in full to the public, the only evidence of it being the original, in the possession of the author; it has appeared to him, while the preceding sheets were in the press, that the object of this work calls for the editing of the instrument in its proper form. The address to the English prelates is referred to, but not comprehended in the act, delicacy having dictated the allowance of rea- sonable time for the delivery of it. Neither of the instruments entitled " Alterations," etc., has been published before; although the results of them have appeared, in what has been called the Proposed Book: but, as the book is gradually disappearing, it may be here- after important to have an exhibition of them as they stand in the original act. The constitution as then proposed, as ratified in 1786, and as done away in 1789, is in the book of printed journals, but not in any preceding part of this work. For the said act, see Appendix, No. 32. POSTSCRIPT. In the foregoing statements and remarks, the more im- mediate object was the recording of facts, throwing light on the measures of conventional bodies; and the expressing of opinions which arose out of the various subjects under notice: the opinions being proposed, with the hope that they will have such weight, as on examination may be thought their due. The work being brought to a conclu- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 275 sion, and the reader being qualified to judge of the merits of another motive to be disclosed, it is now declared to be the conviction, that instruction may be gathered from the detail. 1st. On a retrospect of the low condition in which the Episcopal Church had been left by the revolutionary war; of her clergy, reduced almost to annihilation; of the novelty of the business arising out of the existing crisis; of the despair of many, as to the perpetuating of the communion, otherwise than in connection with an establishment, from which it was forever severed; of an unwillingness to rec- j ognize such a severance, although brought about by the Providence of God, and the recognizing of it agreeable to a prominent principle in the institutions of the parent Church; of a difficulty, to be done away only by legislative acts, which perhaps it would be impossible to obtain, and which we could not apply for, consistently with our civil duties; of the apprehension of conflicting opinions in different sec- tions of the United States, between which there had been . hitherto no religious intercourse; of the existence of known differences, on some points; and, with all these things, of danger from selfish passions, so apt to intrude under im- posing appearances, defeating the best intended endeavors in collective bodies; it must be perceived, that there were formidable obstacles to be surmounted, in combining the insulated congregations with the respective clergy of those who had any, under an indisputable succession of the Epis- copacy: and with an ecclesiastical legislature, necessarily differing in form from that under which we had been from the beginning, yet the same with it in principle. The dif- ference between what has been thus looked back on, and the present circumstances of the Church, is a ground of gratitude to Almighty God. In what degree, this change of prospect has been promotive of piety and of correct con- duct, will not be known until the day which will "try every man's work, whether it be of gold, and silver, and precious stones," or, "of wood, and hay, and stubble." In the mean time, we have encouragement to proceed, in humble de- 2-6 ^fE^fOIKs OF THE CHURCH. pendence on Him, without whom, even "Paul may plant, and Apollos may water" in vain. 2d. It is trusted that there will be no indecorum in re- calling the attention of the reader to the absence of selfish passion in all the preceding records of the results of eccle- siastical legislation. If those who have been engaged in the proceedings have been supposed in this work to have fallen into error in some instances, it is hoped that the no- ticing of it will not give offence; especially as it is by one who, in the same work, has occasionally acknowledged er- ror in himself, and who is ready to believe, that it may have happened to him in many instances, in which he has not sufficient sagacity, nor sufficient distrust of himself, for the detecting of it. He confidently believes of the mem- bers of the conventions generally, that they have been ac- tuated by upright motives. Of his brethren in the Episco- pacy he bears testimony, that he has not seen any occasion on which any one of them has manifested a disposition to sacrifice principle to any selfish gratification. If there be thought correctness in these remarks, let the example be influential in similar proceedings in future. In all the affairs which interest the human mind, there is the danger of estimating measures according to their bearings on some purposes, prompted by ambition or by vanity. The purposes are not always discernible; and there can scarcely occur a question, on which talent, even if it amount to no more than cunning, may not be capable of drawing to itself a party. In this way, there have arisen most of the dis- sensions which have torn Christendom into sects. As yet, we have been preserved, by the grace of God, from any material inroads of it: and the noticing of the fact may serve, among other weighty considerations, to vigilance against it in future counsels. 3d. Another lesson arising out of the review, is that of mutual concession in small matters, and even in regard to others more important yet not essential, the bearing with what may not be approved of, under the expectation that it ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 277 will be found on trial better than had been expected, or, that it will be corrected after more mature consideration. Of the latter especially, many instances have occurred, on questions which, without such forbearance, would assuredly have divided the Church into communions censuring, and perhaps perpetuating hostility to one another. As to the other branch of the recommendation, it is clearly the dictate of a due consideration of the various casts of the minds of men. It would indeed be surprising, that any should run into the opposite error, did we not know, how unbending some are in favor of their own opinions, even in matters which can not be brought before the tribunal of conscience; so that, on a question of taste, they are impatient under every decision not conformable to their wishes. The way\ to bear down the influence of men so fastidious, and under I so evident a propensity to disorder, is for those more rea-/ sonable to make sacrifices to one another. 4th. It will be a most important use of the review, to notice the undeviating intention of the Church, to make no such alterations, as shall interfere with the maintaining of the doctrines of the gospel, as acknowledged at the reforma- tion. That point of time should be kept in mind, in order to protect^the Church, not only against threatened innova- tions from without, but also against others which have occasionally showed their heads in the Church of England, and may show their heads in this Church, betraying a lurking fondness for errors which had been abandoned. Neither, have there been wanting some among us, who would have drawn our system towards opinions which we ccmsider as an approach to infidelity, and a mean of rec- onciling the mind to it. We were under the suspicion of intending this,, in our first efforts for the organizing of the Church. It is impossible to verify the suspicion by any of the transactions recorded, or by any of a more private nature; and if individuals harbored the design, which is not here known to have been the case, they saw no opening for the accomplishing of it, and accordingly, permitted it to 278 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. die within their bosoms. There is this further use in the reference to the reformation, that it frowns disapprobation on endeavors tending to debase our forms of worship, by the intermixture of devotional exercises of a contrary cast of character. How far this abuse calls for the exercise of ecclesiastical authority, and how far it may be borne with, under the expectation that it carries in itself the seeds of its dissolution, is a question partly of conscience, and partly also of religious prudence. It is a property of the past proceedings of our newly organized Church, that the gold found by her in possession has not been adulterated by any debasing alloy; but that, on the contrary, she has followed the counsel given by the prophet Jeremiah to the Jews, to "ask for the old paths" and to "walk therein." In one who has kept this object steadily in view, it will not be thought inadmissible, to express his wish, and to put up his prayer, that the same integrity of principle may be sus- tained by those who are now his fellow-laborers, and may be expected to survive him, and by those who may succeed. If any thing were wanting to confirm him in his senti- ments on the present subject, the deficiency would be sup- plied by the many occasions which have occurred to him, of remarking the vanity and the love of self-exhibition manifested in endeavors to the contrary; a fault, which, if it be sometimes seen to subsist with general rectitude of intentions, is only one instance out of many, verifying our Lord's reproof of another species of misdirected zeal "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of." 5th. These Memoirs may serve for a check to the un- necessary exercise of authority; and may sustain the opin- ion, that there being retained, in profession, the essentials of Christian verity, and, in practice, the degree of sub- mission to public will necessary to social worship; much of what is made the subject of ecclesiastical law, may be safely left to the diversity of sentiment which is the result of difference of intelligence, of education, and of constitu- tional character. But, as in an army, combination of force ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 2.79 is found to excite their courage for an enterprise, more hazardous to every one engaged in it than a danger from which he would shrink in his individual Character; so, in a representative body, a member of it is prone to calculate on a ^degree of submission, beyond what he would have imag- ined in the capacity of a sole legislator, although clothed with authority greater than that in the other case supposed. In the estimation of discreet persons generally, ecclesi-^ astical legislation is thought to have been carried too far. / What the author sees cause to lament, is, that many who acknowledge this fact, and who are ready to lay unsparing hands on matters formerly established, would bind on the Church something new and needless, and likely to excite diversity of opinion. They will do this with good inten- tions, and without being aware of the inconsistency. In a Church having the secular arm for its support, what has been mentioned would be an evil; but it must be ruinous, if it should be dominant in a Church so much acted on as ours by opinion of persons of all degrees in life, under an organization as it were of yesterday, and therefore not j having the support of habitual submission to its decisions. In these circumstances, independently on other considera- tions, there is a call to the acquiring of a weight of religious character, not only in the Episcopacy, but in the other clergy, and in the lay gentlemen, to whom may be com- mitted the important work of making changes in ecclesias- itical institutions. Even with the advantage of such a character, let them be aware of the truth of the maxim, that one property of the art of governing, is the taking of care not to govern too much.* * During the convention of 1789, and while they were engaged in the review of the Book of Common Prayer, a lady of excellent understanding, being often in the way of hearing the subject discussed by some members of the body, ad- dressed them to the following effect "When I hear these things, I look back to the origin of the Prayer Book : and I represent to my mind the venerable com- pilers of it, ascending to heaven in the flames which consumed their bodies. I then look at the improvers of this book in " (naming some gentlemen not want- 2 So MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. 6th. The last contemplated improvement, is the sug- gesting of the hope, that the time which has been spent, and the cares and the labors which have been bestowed, by some who have gone to their rest from their labors, and by others who have still on their hands a part of their work to be performed, will be applied to the proper end the pro- moting of truth and godliness. In every age of the world there is open a wide field for exertions to this effect; but the remark applies especially to the present period, in which there have occurred extraordinary and successful exertions, for the propagation of the gospel; partly produced by for- midable combinations for the destruction of it, which have been overruled to events in contrariety to the licentious principles taught, and to the disorders which they were intended to perpetuate. Doubtless we are to ascribe the issue to the good providence of God, who, in a variety of ways, " makes the wrath of man to praise Him." In Amer- ica, which lays open immense countries to future popula- tion and culture, the incitement applies with extraordinary stress of argument; and while it should prompt all the members of this Church to put forth their best endeavors, each man in his sphere, and according to his ability, it ad- monishes him, to be himself in the consistent profession, in the practice of the duties, and in possession of the consola- tions of the gospel; without which, he is not likely to be influential over others; and if this should happen, his lamp will be without the oil, which is necessary to prepare him for the reception of the spiritual Bridegroom. \The Additional Statements of the first edition here concluded.'} ing in respectability, but very little furnished with theological knowledge.) "The consequence is, gentlemen, that I am not sanguine in my expectations of respect to be paid to your meditated changes in the Liturgy." Without raising any question concerning the logic of this speech, can there be a doubt with those who know human nature, that something like it is the language of many a heart in the religious world, on the introduction of any novelty of which the propriety may be doubtful ? ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 281 T. Page 51. Of the Convention in 1820. The reception of Bishop Moore's sermon, appears on the journal in such a shape as requires explanation. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies passed a vote, request- ing a copy for publication. The House of Bishops concurred /\f in the vote, with the addition of their thanks, which had ' been omitted by the other house. The reason was the preacher's having made baptismal regeneration one of the points of his discourse. Some of the gentlemen, and espe- cially those the most in habits of friendship with him, were displeased at this; and hence the resolve on the Journal of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, that it will be in- expedient hereafter to pass votes of thanks for sermons de- livered before General Conventions, and to request copies for publication. The author believes, that with the ma- jority of the house, this resolve was owing not to their f dissatisfaction with the doctrine of Bishop Moore, but to ) their general view of the subject of voting thanks; which) may have suggested the apprehension, that dissatisfaction with any point in a conventional sermon, be it even in the minds of a few members of the body, may excite an angry controversy, not having any tendency to settle the matter in question. In the House of Bishops, the vote of thanks for the sermon was passed unanimously. So far as the duty of a conventional preacher is con- cerned, the author is of opinion, that there should be care- fully avoided all questions on which the sense of the Epis- copal Church is doubtful: but it is to^be lamented, that r there should be brought under this head a doctrine, which ( we have been taught to lisp in the earliest repetitions of our ) catechism whicK pervades sundry of our devotional ser- vices, especially the baptismal which is affirmed in our > Articles also; which was confessedly held and taught dur- / ing the ages of the martyrs; and the belief of which was] universal in the Church, until it was perceived to be incon- sistent with a religious theoryTthe beginruEg r and the prog- 282 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. ress of which can be as distinctly traced, as those of any error of popery. This is not a place for a discussion of the subject, but the author has spoken fully to it in some of his publications. The recorded rejection of an application concerning psalms and hymns, is another proof of the utility of the re- solve referred to of the convention of 1814. Jt is to be hoped, that all future conventions will adhere to it. In the contrary event, conventions will have the weight of the ex- amination of many books, brought before them by authors and by editors not destitute of respectability. Either the examination will take up more time than the members will be disposed to bestow, or, on that account, errors will oc- casionally be sanctioned through haste. And what they will sanction, may unreasonably be branded as error, which will at least have the effect of unnecessarily exciting con- troversy. No objection was made to the selection pre- sented; and it is certain, that any parochial minister is at liberty to make or to adopt such a selection from the metre book of psalms and hymns, as may be agreeable to his judg- ment and to his taste. In regard to the title page, and the disregard of the due distinction of books, noticed in the Narrative, there have been some editions inaccurately set forth. A little reflec- tion will show, that, from want of precision in this matter, there may result much confusion in the public proceedings of the Church. It was the misfortune of the author, when the scheme of a theological seminary was devised in the convention of 1817, to differ from the majority of both houses, as to the expediency of the measure; and he was supported by the convention of the diocese of Pennsylvania, in proposing to the General Convention a scheme, which would have left to local seminaries the whole concern of theological educa- tion. From the time that the contrary sentiment was adopted, he has done what lay in his power for the carry- ing of the general wish into effect. It is probable that ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 283 time will decide between the two schemes, on the question of preference; but as it is a subject of increasing importance, and of increasing frequency of discussion, he will state his reasons for the preference given by him to the plan which he unsuccessfully proposed. 1st. It has been all along his opinion, and there will be more and more ground for it, in proportion as our ecclesi- astical organization shall be operative over the American territory, that the authority and the deliberations of the General Convention should be limited to matters essential to the keeping of us together as one body, and requiring agreement with a view to that end. All enlargement of the jurisdiction endangers controversy, and of course division. In "control over a theological seminary, contemplated by the Church at large, as the nursery for her ministry, there is much room for difference of opinion, and for local jeal- ousies. The complexion of the theology taught, in refer- / ence to subjects on which there may be considerable diver- sity of opinion among ourselves, the choice of professors, * with accommodation to such difference; the sufficiency of *V the professors, in their respective branches;, and other points which might be mentioned, may be sources of ani- mosity pervading our communion. Even the branch of it from which a vacant professorship should be filled, may sometimes occasion embarrassment. In the civil concerns of our country, the president of the United States, and the governor of every state, has to consider not merely who is the most proper man to fill a vacant office, but also what district is to be gratified at the time. To suppose that the same circumstance would have no bearing on our religious policy, is more than is warranted by our knowledge of human nature. 2dly. There will be required what would else be unnec- essary calls for the assembling of the General Convention. For although there may be trustees, with considerable powers for the management of the seminary, it can hardly happen, but that exigencies will arise, in which they will 284 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. hesitate to assume the responsibility of acting. It is a great injury to the essential duties of the ministry, to be unnecessarily calling the ministers from their respective spheres of action setting aside the expense incurred. We esteem it an advantage in our Church, that judicial con- cerns, conducted in other societies by legislative bodies, are acted on by us in ways which do not require their being brought into assemblies of that description. "Why should we surrender the resulting benefit, of there being very seldom need for the call of a special convention ? Per- haps in time, and after an extension of territory within our connection, it may be thought sufficient to assemble statedly once in every five years, instead of triennially, as at present.* 3dly. The jurisdiction over the seminary must be partial and unfair, in respect to the comparative influence of the different sections of our Church. It is not here proposed f to lay the chief stress on the inequality of jDur representa- / tion, and its being out of all proportion to our respective : population. When our Church was organized, it would \ haye_ been hopeless to have proposed any other schemej ' and whether it can hereafter be made conformable to exist- / ing weight of numbers, as in the civil line by the federal constitution of 1788, must be left to time to determine./ The difficulty now contemplated is of a different nature, is The frequency of ecclesiastical synods and councils, for purposes not touching] the essentials of the Christian faith, was one of the causes which produced the! domination of the Church of Rome. In the fourth century, such assemblies were multiplied : and often for the determining on questions which were more in the province of metaphysics than in that of religion. What added to the evil was,| that the emperors defrayed the expenses of the travelling of the members. At last, the burden of the expense and of the waste of time became too great ; and then, controversies were referred to the bishops of the four principal sees ; and , finally, it became still more convenient to bring all within the vortex of the Papacj This, or endless division, was necessarily the alternative. The former will not happen in our improved state of society, and with experience of the past. But the latter, if there should be very frequent conventions, extending their jurisdiction over concerns which may be left to local determination, will probably proceed indefi- nitely and without end. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 285 an immense aggravation of the other, and requires the bringing of the following circumstances under view. The establishment of the General Seminary recognized the possible instituting of seminaries supported by local in- terest. It was well that this matter should be distinctly understood, although there was no absolute necessity for any declaration to the effect; for it is a good civil maxim, that liberty is to be presumed where restraint can not be shown; and it is an unerring maxim of Scripture, that ( "where no law is, there is no transgression." Besides, can it be supposed that the General Convention, possess- ing an authority as it were of yesterday, and under the ne- cessity of considering its proceedings with the utmost cau- tion, and with tenderness to the habits and the prejudices of a people not long accustomed to look up to them for rules of conduct, would have wished to assume an authority, not yet exercised by any large communion over its whole range of country ? The Church of England, conceives of herself as deeply interested in the two universities of that kingdom; but when did she affect the government of them ? In this country, certain societies have recently given the weight of aggregate sanctions to seminaries of their im- mediate creation, but although much longer exercised and obeyed in ecclesiastical legislation, they have not ventured on the strong measure of disallowing seminaries partially instituted and patronized. Accordingly, there must have been left room for local seminaries within our communion. Let there, then, be re- marked the effect of this on our concerns, an effect dispro- portioned to any obtaining in other societies which have both species of seminary within their bounds. At the time of instituting our General Seminary there were avowed the designs of two local seminaries, and how many more of them may become instituted we know not. It is to be expected that they will principally engross the pecuniary aids of the districts in which they are respectively seated. Considering the consequent rivalship, and perhaps 286 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. hostility, is it reasonable that such districts should have an equal share of control over the General Seminary with other districts by which it will be supported ? Certainly, it is not, independently on the inequality of our representa- tion. How great then will be the disparity, from the two causes in combination ! 4thly. It has been not uncommon, that a young man within our communion, directing his views to the ministry, has been supported under the paternal roof, when it would have been difficult, or even impossible, to provide for him in a distent part of the union, and to pay the expenses of the many journeys which it would have required. 5thly. There may be perceived a difficulty, in the mass of property necessary to sustain a seminary on the contem- plated plan; a difficulty consisting not only in raising it, but in rendering it so productive, and at the same time so se- cure, as to insure the support of a collegiate body of pro- fessors. In England, no provision for literary purposes is thought stable, unless vested in real property, let out from time to time on leases for years. The circumstances of this country are so different, that no one thinks of getting from land rent bearing a tolerable ratio to its capital, or of guarding the premises from deterioration, unless by a strict- ness of personal oversight, not to be expected of a corpo- ration. To pecuniary capital, there are two objections the ease with which any portion of it may be called in, be- cause of some pressing exigency, or some favorite object, and the being liable to be reduced or annihilated by any of the national events, which are thought to justify the is- suing of an abundance of paper currency, occasioning its depreciation. Perhaps it may seem, that these possible evils are not confined to the general school, and must even be increased by there being several of the local. To obviate the sug- gestion, there shall be drawn an outline of the plan pro- posed for the latter. Although no diocese would be debarred from instituting ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 287 a seminary under its own ecclesiastical superintendence, it is not probable, that the privilege would be exercised in more than in three or four instances. In each a single professor would be sufficient, an acquaintance with every branch of theology not being too much to be found in one man of talents. In each of the two universities of England there are only two professors of divinity, and each of the professors has his distinct pupils. It is here understood, that the principal labor of the professor would be the daily examination of the pupils in the books of which he would enjoin the reading. If there should be occasional lectures, they may be few, and for the purpose of inviting general attention. In or near any of our cities, extraneous provi- sion may be made for the study of Hebrew, and for other coincident purposes. Such a school would call forth all the energies of the diocese in which it would be seated, and probably of any neighboring dioceses having no prospects of seminaries of their own. A fund for its support would the more easily be created, and the more vigilantly managed; and, until the obtaining of a sufficiency, a partial support might be annexed to a parochial cure. If the idea should occur of there being rival and even hostile seminaries, the answer is, that simple rivalship is attended by advantages, as in the instances of Oxford and Cambridge, in England. Hos- tility would be an evil; but may as easily happen between professors in the same seminary: in which case the evil would be more extensive, and productive of more passion and provocation. It may be pleaded in favor of a general seminary, that the different departments will produce a greater mass of learning in the different professors, in consequence of the devotion of each professor to his proper branch. But this has the counterbalancing disadvantage, in the danger of each professor's extending the claims of his department too far to be consistent with the necessary limits of a theo- logical course. Doubtless, as well in a theological as in a 288 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. philosophical lectureship, the principles of the professed branch should be fully taught, but it becomes a matter of prudence to draw the line between this object and the knowledge which it should be left to subsequent reading to acquire. Besides if a professor should possess a special aptitude for a particular subdivision of the whole subject to be taught, it does not appear that he may not improve his talent and gratify his taste, consistently with due attention to the other subdivisions, in which he ought not, even if he were no professor, to be imperfectly informed. It has been supposed an advantage in a single semjnary, that the pupils will be sent out with similar views, on points concerning which some shades of difference are found among Episcopalians. This is problematical; and, on the contrary, it may easily happen, that diversity shall be gendered by shades of difference among the professors. If, for the avoiding of this, there should be a strict and jealous scrutiny into the faith of those proposed for profess- orships, there will be an outcry against the favorers of the dominant opinion, and it will be well, if there be not some color of the charge of persecution. In seminaries of other religious societies, the differences subsisting among them have intruded into their theological seminaries, although, on the litigated points, the professors have been of one mind. There may be apprehended the rise of a local seminary in which the instruction shall be such as we may suppose not the best calculated to make the most of the natural talents of the students. May there not be the same disad- vantage to them, under the guidance of clergymen not ap- pointed to the employment of preparing young men for the ministry, yet not forbidden to be so occupied by any exist- ing regulation, or by any that can reasonably be made? The only remedy for both of these evils, must be in the reputation of our authorized schools, which should be such, as that young men shall feel it to be a privation not to have been students in them; an effect to be produced, not by any possible regulation, but by the influence of opinion. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 289 Of all the business which has come before our General Conventions, the branch of it which related to a missionary ( society, was the mpstjTiisrnanaged. That in the hurry of the last day of the session, there should have been over- sights, was not so wonderful, as that the most palpable should be made by gentlemen, with whom the subject had been contemplated for some months before, and who have unfortunately brought the whole scheme under what the ^ author thinks a mistaken suspicion, of its being an intended [> engine against the institutions of our Church. There were these two supposed grounds of the suspicion. Although the constitution provided that the trustees should be cho- sen by the convention, it was_so managed that the bishops had no share in the choice. They were also made the president and the vice-presidents of a society existing in idea only, and composed of all the contributors, who could never be constitutionally assembled; while in the efficient body, that of the trustees, there was no provision for the presidency or even the membership of a bishop, and no such person, if permitted to be present, could claim a right to vote or to speak in their proceedings. When the trustees, so imperfectly appointed, assembled on the business, they saw the difficulties with which they were clogged, and that a society so constituted, would not receive the support of the Church generally. Nevertheless, being aware of the responsibility attached to the fall of the design, they devised ways in which, with the advice of the major number of the bishops, they consented to give a be- ginning to the enterprise; looking to the next convention for the sanctioning of their doings, and for the supply of the manifest defects. This sanction was not obtained, and accordingly there has been a suspension of the scheme. The author attended all the meetings of the trustees, and bears witness at once to their zeal for the object, and to their concern for the order and good government of the Church. 290 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. U. Page 51. Of the Convention in 1821. The thanks of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies were voted to Bishop Kemp for his sermon: but this was afterward reconsidered, and the thanks withdrawn. No objection to the sermon was offered; but it was recollected, that at the last General Convention there had been a re- solve against such a notice of any conventional sermon. The matter was considerably agitated, but the former re- solve was persevered in. In the House of Bishops the thanks were voted, and a copy of the sermon was requested for publication. W. Page 52. The opposition to the scheme was principally from the gentlemen of Virginia: and it was thought extraordinary, that having heretofore avoided the taking of any interest in the General Seminary, they should now manifest so much f zeal on the question of its final location. They avowed A their motive, which was, the apprehension of an undue , ascendency of the diocese of New York. But it was prop- erly argued on the other side, that this was guarded against by the provisions made, relative to the future in- crease of the number of trustees. At present, the diocese of New York will have nearly half the number; but this is owing partly to the legacy, and the earlier date of measures begun in that quarter for the endowing of a seminary. In addition, it is notorious that solicitations for the General Seminary in the other states have been suspended by the circumstance of the bequest, and by the great variety of opinion which has existed, as to the measures to be pur- sued in consequence. The proper preventive of the undue ascendency of New York, if it be supposed to be fraught with danger to the Church, will be the bestowing of plen- tiful contribution in the other states: and to this there ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 29! is great encouragement in the consideration, that in fu- ture, while, in the said state, it will require $10,000 to entitle to an additional trustee, $2,000 will be sufficient elsewhere. The adopted plan had the entire consent of the writer of these remarks; notwithstanding his reasons heretofore given for the diocesan, in preference of the general scheme, As is recorded in the remarks on the proceedings of the last convention, he had sacrificed his peculiar sense of the subject, to that of the Church generally, not without fore- bodings of there being a door opened to litigation and to disunion. The prospect of this seems to him to have ma- terially lessened. Still, the record of his former objections, if it should hereafter happen to be known, may have the good effect of being a warning against the apprehended danger. X. Page 53. There was but one particular in the scheme, which cre- ated diversity of opinion between the two houses; and the diversity was owing to the not perceiving of the matter at issue in all its bearings. According to the proposal of the bishops, the meeting of the managers was to be annual; at which, it was thought, executive measures might be put in a train, which needed not to require reconsideration with- in the time prescribed. In the other house it was referred to a committee, who proposed quarterly meetings, and a correspondent amendment was sent in to the bishops. They persisted in their proposal, and the amendment was withdrawn. The difference was of more importance than may at first appear. The bishops residing in the nearer states, were willing to attend once a year, but not at the risk of quar- terly deviations from what might be then enacted; and for the preventing of these, they could not leave their dioceses so often as was proposed. It needs not be concealed, that 29? MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. ' there existed a jealousy, not without cause, of some gentle- men in different states, who might wish to make the design , hostile to the peculiar institutions of our Church; and hence ( the desire of securing such an annual assembly, as may de- feat the attempt, if made. K Page 53. The history of the rubric is this. In the English book, after the ante-communion service, it is immediately said "here follows the sermon." As, in churches in our cities, the service is often used, without either sermon or communion, there seemed wanting a direction to justify the minister in proceeding to the blessing. This is the plain sense of the words. In the case of there being either sermon or communion, the places of their being introduced are precisely noted. If there be neither, the minister, if disposed to do nothing without rubrical di- rection, might be put to a stand; and to prevent this, was the design. But the notion has been taken up lately, that in the use of the conjunction "if," the absence of the condition dis- penses with the command. This is not always the case. On the contrary, if their be a prior command of greater extent, the defect of the condition has no further effect than on the command appended to it. The matter may be illustrated thus. The executive issues a command to a proper officer, first, to perform a certain service at the place of the delivery of the command; then, to proceed to a second place, where another service is to be performed, and, finally, to go on to a third place, more distant, where also there is to be a specified act of duty. But a doubt occurs, whether, on his arrival at the second place, some circumstance may not hinder the performance of the in- tended service. On this a second command issues, that "if "any such circumstance should occur, the officer shall proceed to the end of'his destination, and to the act to be ADDITIONAL S7*ATEMENTS. 293 there done. How irrelevant would it be, on the non-con- currence of the apprehended circumstance, to say that the command for the first service is superseded ! The matter at issue is analagous to what has been sup- posed. If there be a sermon, it is positively directed to follow the ante-communion service. Ifthere be no sermon, but the communion, the latter is to follow in like manner; and the " if" has no force, except in the event of there being neither sermon nor communion. These remarks are justified by Dr. Johnson's interpreta- tion of the conjunctive particle, for which he substitutes "suppose it to be so" "whether or no," and "allowing that." The rubric was made at the review in 1789, and no cler- gyman then present is known to have taken occasion to drop the ante-communion service; which is very extraordi- nary, if this, as must be supposed to have been the case, was the wish of the major number present. The contrary interpretation is a device started within these few years, and it goes to render almost superfluous the whole body of the Epistles and the Gospels, espe- cially those for the holidays, when they happen to fall on Sundays. It may be questioned, whether this judicious selection had not the effect, in the middle ages, in preventing the corruptions of Christianity from being greater than we find them to have been; for when it was rare to find a Bible in the hands even of men of education, these precious por- tions of it must have had some effect, although in Latin. At the Reformation, they were retained by the most re- spectable of the Protestant Churches; the English, and the Lutheran in Sweden, Denmark, and Germany, and America; all which, with the addition of the American, continues the use of them to the present day, and with so high an esteem of them, that in some of those Churches the preacher is expected to take his subject from this selection. 294 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. It is also a weighty recommendation of the ante-corn- \ munion service, that the weekly reciting of the Ten Com- 1 mandments has been always supposed to have a happy J effect on morals.* / Z. Page 53. The former table, for thirty-eight years, was calculated by the author of these remarks, in 1785. He has had the mortification to find, that, in four instances, his computa- tions were inaccurate; but it has been some relief to him to learn, from Wheatley on the Common Prayer, that there is precisely the same number of errors in what are called the sealed books, and are the standard of the Church of England. The other changes are as follows: The Table of the Rules for finding Easter has been regu- lated by the change from the eighteenth to the nineteenth century. On examining the Table of Fasts, there was discovered an oversight of the committee, under whom was printed the book of 1790, after the review of 1789; the error being continued in H. Gaine's standard book of 1793; in contra- riety as well to the Proposed Book, as to the English table. The error made fast days of the Sundays in Lent, deviating from the rule of the Church in all ages, and from the Table of Feasts, which gives this name to all the Sundays in the year. The error consisted in saying "the season of Lent," instead of "the forty days of Lent"; "wnich words were accordingly restored. In the Calendar, the column of Golden Numbers, from the twenty-first of March to the eighteenth of April, was omitted as useless. This rendered it unnecessary to retain a note, found in the English book under those two months, which had been omitted in all our editions, owing, as is supposed, to the preparing of the book of 1790 from an old See Journal, General Convention, 1821, p. 651. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 295 English book edited before the change of style in 1751, for in none of these editions is the note found. The report presented a list of typographical errors in H. Game's book, made out with the assistance of Mr. Wil- liam Hall, who had edited the. Proposed Book in 1786. A A. Page 54. Of the Convention in 1823. The writer of the Narrative and of the Statements dis- charged the duty assigned to him, in regard to the points presented by Bishop Chase, agreeably to what was con- ceived to be substantially the sense of the bishops. The first point was a proposal for the appointment of an order of persons to teach in common schools, and au- thorized to read, to pray, and to catechize on Sundays. To this the answer was, that if such power should be de- pendent on engagements to be made from time to time, there is already authority to the purpose, and often car- ried into act. But if a permanent character should be con- stituted, it would look like an addition to the number of the Orders of the ministry. Secondly, they would be apt to consider their appointment as a stepping-stone to further advancement, whatever pains might be taken to caution them to the contrary. This has been too often a conse- quence of-the appointment of lay readers, without the -des- ignation of permanent character. It is a useful expedient, and not to be laid aside on that account, although to be resorted to with circumspection. The plea would be much stronger, on the terms of the proposal. The present ob- jector has thought it a matter worthy of consideration, whether it would not be wise to ordain some deacons, with an understanding to the effect stated, and with permission to follow secular occupations: the service to undergo a few corresponding alterations. The only discouragement to his mind is the danger now noticed, and the apprehension that it might tend to the lessening of the literary character 296 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. jr of our ^ministry, it being presumable that there would be exacted a less measure of literary attainments in deacons admitted*nder the conditions stated. Whether the good would not predominate, and whether the abuse might not be guarded against, may admit of a question, but as to a new order, the opinion was decidedly against it. The next point introduced was that of theatrical enter- tainments, in respect to which, the answerer took occasion to develop his sentiments. They are, that the theatre, as it has always been, and is likely to be always conducted, has a general tendency to the corruption of morals: not only because of profane and indecent words and sentiments in some plays, but because vice is often insidiously set off to advantage, by its being associated with agreeable and even estimable qualities.* Still, we can not affirm that there is sin in the introducing of fictitious characters, for a fa- vorable display of sentiments strictly moral and instruc- tive: for which reason it would seem improper in a cler- gyman, as was the object of the proposal, to repel from the communion, for being present at a play not containing any thing contrary to religion or to morals. If it should be urged, that the stage is sometimes so abuseo 1 as has been admitted, it is an argument which may be transferred to the pulpit; because of some discourses from it very dan- gerous to the consciences of the hearers; if not in the same respects, yet in some other. If a communicant should knowingly be present at an exhibition countenancing vice, it is another matter, and might justly be made a ground of exclusion. On this subject, Bishop Chase was referred to the sense of the bishops, recorded on the journal of 1817. A remaining point, was the pressing of a requisition, that the lay members of conventions should be none other than communicants. The answer to this was the decided opinion, that none but communicants should be sent: but / * See ante, pp. 44 and 272 for other declarations on this subject. Also the Pastoral Letter, p. 425. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 297 * whether it would not be too strong an act of government, and may not best be left to advice and persuasion, and of even these to be governed by fitness of character in other respects, may be made a question. When we organized our Church, the proposal of such a measure would have \ stopped us at the threshold. Whether we are now ripe for it, should be well considered before the making of the attempt. One great discouragement is the direction given to the public mind by the use made of the same test in England. Among us, it has been gone into in one diocese 1 only, and was subsequently abandoned. Should any dio- ' cese again undertake the matter, they would seem to be competent. These were the answers made to Bishop Chase: and the responsibility in which it involved the pen- man of them induces to the present record. BB. Page 54. Among the documents delivered by the writer of this, to be deposited among the materials for a future history, was a body of transcripts from the archives of the diocese of London, made by Dr. Alexander Murray, and given into the hands of the writer. The said Dr. Murray had been an officiating clergyman in the province of Pennsylvania before the revolutionary war, and in the service of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. He made the transcripts with the view to their being of service to those who were coming to England for consecration. They were of no service, in reference to that object; but Dr. Murray having subsequently returned to this country, where he died, the transcripts were delivered into the hands which have now deposited them in the conventional collection. The preserving of them may contribute to the doing of justice to those English bishops who exerted themselves for the extending of Episcopacy to the colonies; and may also show, that the neglect of it was owing to the indiffer- ence of statesmen, not aware of the importance of the sub- 298 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. ject to governmental views; and doubtless comprehending (what there has been given reason to believe in the Me- moirs) apprehended danger of offence taken by the Dis- senters; and the consequent decline of their support in elections to seats in parliament. CC, Page 54. The canon was intended for any case of insufficiency of a candidate, in classical and scientific literature; and with the view of arresting him at an early period of his intended devotion to the ministry; and to prevent disappointment, after considerable time spent in theological study. DD. Page 55. The report of the society shows too clearly that the executive committee have not been so supported, as an establishment by the general authority of the Church gave reason to expect. It is true, that there have been since in- stituted several diocesan societies, which, of course, ad- vantageously lessen the sphere of the operation of the other. This, however, ought not to prevent their aid to the general scheme, in consideration of the many states in which their fostering care is so much needed; especially, as the known existence of the institution is a cause of claims, which, as matters are, can not be complied with. EE. Page 55. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, there were some members from Virginia very ardent in pressing on the convention the concerns of the Colonization Society. It may be perceived that the proposal was waived, on the ground that it was rather of a political than of a religious nature. In addition to this, there exists in the community of Pennsylvania, and probably elsewhere, a variety of opin- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS., 299 ion on the subject; many contending that the object is not the lessening of the evil of slavery, but the getting rid of a free colored population. The writer of this believes, that the motive of the men prominent in the design are pre- cisely what they profess. Of this, it is to be hoped, there will be gradually a general conviction; but in the mean- time, it would be unwise to take a part in a controversy on a subject not within the sphere of ecclesiastical legislation. FF. Page 55. There is a prevalent sentiment in the public mind, and perhaps is more diffused among Episcopalians than among other denominations, that collegiate education should be without regard to differences of religious profession. No wish is here cherished, of obtruding on young persons forms of profession disapproved of by those who have lawful authority over them. But, in a country where every de- nomination may take its own course in this matter, why should there be lost the opportunity of instilling religious principle during the season in which it is the most likely to be effectual ? If this is to be done, it must be in some form, and they who take a broader ground, never act consistently with what they profess. Those societies flourish most who are aware of this, and who therefore conduct religious edu- cation conformably with their respective plans of doctrine, of discipline, and of worship. GG. Page 57. Of the Convention in 1826. The proposal was considered an inconsistency in them by some, who, in so judging, did not distinguish between their sustaining of existing rubrics, and the inference that there may be some changes for the better especially in this particular. Of the morning service, the bishops were aware that it consisted of three services; and this has 300 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. occasioned^repetitions, which otherwise would not have been admitteB by our reformers. Further, the bishops knew of complaints of the length of the morning service, coming from various portions of their respective dioceses; and they had witnessed, with sorrow, a wayward disposi- tion in many of the clergy, to make such omissions as the fancies of themselves or of some influential laymen might suggest. It was thought, that, by a moderate measure of , compliance with existing circumstances, there might be \ the effect of giving a check to those extravagances. As for the reluctance to the deviating in any instance from the old paths, it seems to have been worthy of consid- eration, that there is a higher antiquity than that pleaded. ( It has been stated, that the morning prayer, and the Com- munion Service, were designe~cT Tor different hours of the day Besides, the former, as at first established and used, was without the initiatory sentences, the exhortation, the confession, and the absolution; which is not now noticed, as aTBenial of the expediency of the introduction of them. The prayer for the king, that for the rest of the royal family, / - that for the clergy and people, and the two final prayers, ' were not in the morning service, until the reign of Charles *2 ^2- II. more than a century after the compiling of the service; ^ Trie conclusion of it, until then, being with the collect for peace. At the same period was composed the " General Thanksgiving," ever since used with morning and with evening prayer. So was the prayer " For all Conditions of Men," to be used only when it is allowed to omit the Litany. The Communion Service was without the Com- mandments; which ought not to be remarked, without an I acknowledgment of the edifying effect of the introduction of them; and when this service was used with the compre- hension of any one of the services of ordination, the prefa- tory rubric did not, as at present, require the precedent use of the morning service. This requisition was intro- // cfuced at the aforesaid period, and has added greatly to the time occupied on the occasions referred to. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 301 As for the Litany, although it was a part of the Book of ( Common Prayer from the beginning, it does not appear to / hayejiad_an^early introduction into the use of the morning / service. The first we read of the Litany, from the beginning of the reformation, is the command of Henry VIII. to Archbishop Cranmer, for the translation of it into the Eng- lish, in order to its being understood by the people, when usecMn processions, for which solemnities and the like, it was originally designed; or, at least, it became associated with them at an early period. Perhaps it may be suggested, that there would be a re- moval of all difficulty, if there were introduced the use of the two distinct services for morning prayer and for the communion, at different hours in the first division of the day. But if this, the original design in England, was J obliged so generally and almost universally, to give way ( to a combining of the two, notwithstanding the demarca- tion of the parishes, and the small distances around the churches within which their respective parishioners reside, f it would be far more difficult to be accomplished in America, ? where, not to mention the scattered population in the coun- try, even in our cities, a man's relation to a particular house of worship is not a proof that he lives within a mile ' of it; and in general the greater number of the worshippers may not be within convenient walking distances, to be traversed six times in the day. Yet it is to be wished, ( that in future, as at present, the form of the Prayer Book ( may be such, as to permit the severance unquestionably ( contemplated by the compilers. It may be said why not then dispense with the ante- communion service, on there being introduced a rubric to the effect ? The answer is better this, than the leaving of it on the present footing; which tends to the producing of two different books in substance, and eventually in form. But it would be far from tending to edification, to forego the moral use of a weekly recital of the commandments, and the reading of selections of Scripture adapted to the 302 MEMOIRS OF THE CHL'KCff. times to which they are assigned, and of such early use in the Christian Church: and this, for the abbreviation by one half of a quarter of an hour; which is about the average of the time spent in the recital of that portion of the service. HH. Page 57 . Had there been an accomplishment of the wish of the bishops, the services of the morning would have been ab- breviated, it is thought, to desirable limits. This would have been conformable to the purpose, for which litanies were originally framed. In the English Church, the Litany stood in the first book of Edward, after the Communion Service, with a rubric agreeable to the sentiments here en- tertained; and it was placed between that service and the office for Baptism. In the second book of Edward, it took its present station, with a rubric extending the use of it to Sundays. For these facts, see Wheatley. Further; the writer of this ought not to be backward to confess that, however convinced of the propriety of the worship of the adorable Redeemer, as sanctioned by the Word of God, he considers it as consentaneous with the same high authority that worship should be princi- pally addressed to the Father, through the merits of the Son. All of the Litany, between the first four petitions and the Lord's Prayer are to the Son exclusively. At least, this is here conceived to be the correct opinion, and it is sanctioned by the sense of the commentators on the Lit- urgy; although there are some, who think that the Father is addressed through the greater part of it, beginning at "We sinners do beseech thee," etc. To show the want of consent in this matter, it may be proper to notice that when it was discoursed of among the bishops there ap- peared an opposition of interpretation on the point. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 303 II. Page 57. It must be acknowledged, that after the withdrawing of what the bishops had contemplated in regard to the Litany, the abbreviations are very inconsiderable. Yet it is diffi- cult to perceive, with what consistency the mere permis- sion of them was argued against, by speakers who advo- cated indulgence to the much larger extent of the omission S of the ante-communion service; not because they considered ' it to be a true interpretation of the rubric for this they une- quivocally denied; but on a principle warranting any other*} omissions, which the agents are ready to declare to be rec-( oncilable to their consciences. In fact, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, the debate took such a turn, as threatens to give unbounded license to such easy consciences; and to be operative on those only who hold themselves to be bound by rubrics: for this was a construction fairly put on the reasonings of those who were in the highest grade of adherence to the integrity of the service. KK. Page 58. To the insertion of this prayer, there have been made two objections: not on the floor of the house, but in con- versation. The first is, that it would add to the sanction given to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, confess- edly contained in the original prayer. But O ! what a pur- gation must there be of our Articles, of our services, and of our homilies, if this prejudice is to be complied with ! The other objection, is its not being expressed, that the petition is put up through the merits of the Redeemer. But it is the same in this respect, with the present prayer. There can not be a more evangelical requisition, than that our persons and our devotions can claim acceptance on this ground only. But it may be questioned, whether the rec- ognition of this truth constitutes a necessary circumstance f 304 AfEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. of every subdivision of a continued service. In the prayers before sermons of our brethren of other denominations, there are divers subjects, and not such a request in regard to each of them. The great truth is usually recognized in the conclusion of the prayer: and so it is in the progress of ours, in various places. The compilers of our Liturgy, took the prayer in question from a Father of the fourth cen- tury. If there be weight in the otJjertion, it oughFtoBe applied to the dispensing with both of the prayers. We put up the Lord's Prayer without this adjunct; although, doubt- less, with the implication of it. In Acts iv. 24-31, there is a prayer, of which the subject matter is not asked through the merits of the Saviour, although He is recognized as a worker of miracles. As to that in chapter i. 24, 25, it is addressed to the Saviour Himself. LL. Page 58. Concerning the subject in the Narrative, it has appeared to the writer of these remarks, in regard to those who have pleaded for laxity, that they have uniformly avoided notice of the hinge on which the question of permitted deviation principally turns. It is not merely that the same is un- rubrical, and a violation of the promises made at ordina- tion; but, that the interpretation, if acted on consistently, would abrogate the use of all those selections of collects, epistles, and gospels, any of which may apply to days when the minister delivers a sermon. This may happen on any week day, noted by the calendar as a festival or a fast; and actually happens in every church, opened on. Christmas Day or on Good Friday. The writer will put a strong case, existing in his own person. For many years he has been in the habit, besides a sermon on Good Friday, to de- liver what he has called a lecture, on every one of the rest of the days in Passion Week, as also on Easter Monday and Tuesday. The rubric uses the word " sermon," and not the word "lecture." What is a sermon? "It is a dis- ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 305 course," say the dictionaries (see Johnson or Walker), " delivered by a divine, for the edification of the people." It would be a subterfuge, in any clergyman, were he, in order to avoid what the canons require on the subject of sermons, to call his discourses lectures, for no other reason than the not taking of a text, and perhaps the speaking from the reading desk, instead of from the pulpit. Here- after, some clergyman may deliver, on every day in Passion Week, what is more customarily called a sermon, as is done in many churches in England. Such a clergyman would more conspicuously commit a palpable violation of the ru- bric. Of those who are in the disuse of the ante-commun- ion service, it is not probable, that there are many who hold worship on the days which have been referred to, ex- cept, perhaps, on Good Friday. But why not be tolerant towards those of their brethren, who, if they should adopt the interpretation contended for, must abandon what they deem an edifying improvement of those days of humiliation? MM. Page 58. It will be pertinent, in this place, to relate an incident, relative to a matter which was passed unanimously by the bishops, and sent to the other house, where the turn taken by it dispensed with the inserting of the document on the journal. It consisted of various reasons in favor of the construction given by the bishops to what some were pleased to call the dubious rubric, in addition to the rea- sons given in the convention of 1823, and entered on their journal. The additional reasons were handed in with the proposal concerning the Liturgy, as in its first form. Of course, when this was withdrawn, as related above, the other came back with it. When the proposal concerning the Liturgy was sent again to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, it was accompanied, not as before, by the two sets of reasons, but by a canon, explanatory of what the bishops conceived to 306 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. be the true sense of the rubric. In the mean time, the rea- sons having been printed by the order of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, they were in the hands of the members; and the acceptance of the canon, together with the proposal concerning the Liturgy, accomplished the ob- ject for which the reasons had been drawn up. But, as they are important towards an understanding of the trans- action, they are committed to the Appendix, No. 34. NN. Page 58. Within the memory of the author of this work there has taken place a most remarkable change, in reference to the subject now noticed. When he was a young man, and in England, and even when he was there fifteen years after, he never, in any church, heard other metrical singing than what was either from the version of Sternhold and Hop- kins, or from that of Tate and Brady. In this country it was the same; except on Christmas Day and on Easter Sunday, when there were the two hymns now appropriate to those days: which was strictly rubrical; they being no more than passages of Scripture, put into the trammels of metre and rhyme. Of late years, in England, an un- bounded license has taken place in this respect: and even . an Archbishop of York has given his sanction to a collec- ' tion of hymns made by one of his clergy. The like liberty has crossed the ocean to this country, in a degree. Let not the remark be misconstrued. The present writer has no leaning to the theory of those who consider all sing- ing, except of David's Psalms, as irreverent and irreligious. On the contrary, he is in favor of the opinion, for the in- troducing of some hymns, expressly recognizing events and truths peculiar to the New Testament. Still, whether it be the effect of mature judgment or that of feelings ex- cited during the earliest of his years within his recollection, he declares, that in respect to the ordinary topics of prayer, of praise, and of precept, he finds no compositions so much ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 307 tending to the excitement of devotion, as what we have in the Book of Psalms: and, as they are the effusions of in- spiration, he ought to be excused for his reluctance to doubt the correctness of his theory. As chairman of the committee, he hopes his advice had some effect, towards checking the multiplicity deprecated by him, although not to the extent desired. For a more full manifestation of his sentiments on the subject, he pre- sents a document, read by him to the committee, and now to be included in the Appendix, No. 35. In this concern there was a course taken, which, it is to be hoped, will be imitated in regard to the Liturgy, in the future event of a review, if this should happen. It is, that after a preparation of the work by a committee, consisting of members from all the orders in the Church, the conven- tion should have ojnly_to_s_tamp^on it their yea or their nay. Had they gone into the consideration of the sense of every hymn, and of the criticisms which would have been made on the phraseology, the work would have taken some months at the least. All were sensible, that the time would be longer than they could sit together; and, there- fore, the dissatisfied members of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies proposed a continuance of the subject to the next Triennial Convention. It had already been before three bodies of this description. The same reason would apply at the meeting of the next: and, unless the principle should be abandoned, we should have had no addition to the hymns. Whether this would have been for the better or for the worse might be uncertain; were it not for the license now taken in many places, because of the want of more. OO. Page 59. The two canons not acted on, were directed against { very great evils, calling for immediate remedy. What was proposed, would certainly have been, in substance, accept- able to the members generally of the House of Clerical and 308 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Lay Deputies. But some of the members having proposed certain amendments to the first of the two canons, impa- tience to put an end to the session, caused a reference to the committee on the canons, previously appointed and to sit in the recess. The second of the canons would have had a beneficial effect on the present state of the Church in this diocese. There would have been no need of the delay, but because of the time wasted on the business which is to follow. PP. Page 59. There has never been before manifested so much pa- / tience under tedious repetition of the same sentiments, in reference to a point concerning which a considerable ma- jority were of opinion from the beginning, that it was foreign to the purposes for which they were assembled. In three previous conventions, there had come forward appli- cants, with their respective schemes relative to books; and they had been rejected, without examination. In the first instance, the bishops had sent to the other house, and had received their thanks for it, a resolution interdicting all conventional deliberations of that description. This trans- action is recorded on the journal of 1814; and the principle has been acted on ever since, until the present occasion/ It is to be hoped, that the bad effects produced by a deviation from the precedent so set, will prevent the like in future. Although the scheme was rejected, there were, among those who were averse to the reception of it, some who thought it good in itself, and worthy of the endeavors of a society, to be instituted for the purpose. The writer of this was of a different opinion, for many reasons. His principal reason was, that either there would be an addi tion to the calls, of which there are already too many 01 the clergy, to leave their respective dioceses and parishes for the management of the general business of the Church. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 309 while, as to the lay gentlemen, we should have no proba- bility, that they would leave their occupations for the pur- pose. The business would be at the command of a few gentlemen, at the central seat of the measures to be taken. The writer, in consequence of much experience in pecu- niary institutions, connected with religion and with litera- ture, has witnessed serious losses incurred; sometimes from neglect, accompanied by the purest intentions with the most unsullied integrity; and at other times, by the appli- cation of public stock to private and unsuccessful specula- tions. He is therefore reluctant to the encouragement of a plan, which would commit to such hazards the large stock contemplated: when the disappointment of expecta- tion may bring indelible disgrace on the Church. QQ. Page 61. Of the Convention in 1829. In the canons of the Church in Tennessee, it was pro- k vided, that, after a trial by the constituted ecclesiastical au-/H thority, there should be an appeal to the diocesan conven- tion. This was judged by the bishops to be inconsistent with Episcopal government. The opinion was concurred in by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, without a dissentient voice, so far as appears. RR. Page 61. The author of the present work, would have been grati- fied by the alterations in the Liturgy proposed by the last convention, being convinced of the expediency of shorten- ing the Sunday service for the morning, consisting, as it does, of services originally intended to be distinct, and of unintended repetitions. He was not, however, so much dissatisfied by the rejection of the proposals, as by the causes which, as he conceives, conducted to the issue: causes, operating as well with those who objected on the general ground of dislike to innovation, as with others, who 310 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. were dissatisfied with the several proposed alterations. The former were reluctant to the decisive measure of an author- itative suppression of the licentiousness of generally omit- ting the ante-communion service, where the omission of it was owing to what they confessed to be a misconstruction of a rubric. The latter, it is here believed, were averse to < the shortening of the service in such a way, as not to leave ( any excuse for omissions as individual discretion may sug- ( gest. These opposite opinions may be considered as com- ) bining in the point, of there being at last no established . uniformity in the use of the services of the Church. It is to be hoped, that the providence of God will interpose, for the prevention of such a result. To the author of these re-'" marks, the only expedient seems to be, as was suggested in a former part of this work, the appointment of a joint committee of bishops, and other divines, jbr^ a deliberate review of the Book of Common Prayer; their work, when 1 finished, to be laid before the two houses of convention, and to be by them adopted or rejected without debate.] This is a course, the nearest that circumstances admit, to the compilation of the Book of Common Prayer by the reformers of the Church of England, in the reign of Edward VI. Perhaps it will be thought by some, that, on supposition of the correctness of the apprehensions which have been expressed, the present book, if continued in what will be called its integrity, will be adhered to by a proportion of the clergy. It is not probable. There occur to many of the body, the most correcFln adherence to order, many circumstances inducing to abbreviations, countenanced by departure from original design. Such clergymen will rec- oncile deviations to their consciences, by the consideration, that it is unnoticed by the constituted authorities of the Church; and thus they will become accessory to the result of there being no form in practice. This inconsistency is known to have happened with some clergymen, who have declared their hostility to any alterations of the rubrics. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 311 SS. Page 63. The objections to the non-succession of an assistant bishop, maybe comprehended under the following heads: 1st. It was the general course relative to a coadjutor or assistant Episcopacy, although there have been some devia- tions from the general practice, and although, even in very early times, some departures from the practice have taken place, of which there was an instance in the person of Greg- ory Nazianzen. 2d. In the circumstances of this Church, it would be pe- culiarly unfortunate, if the precedent should lead to her being encumbered with bishops not possessed of dioceses. 3d. It would give an opening to factious presbyters, whose ambition may prompt them to raise parties, with views to the diocesan Episcopacy; and, 4th. That influential laymen may patronize this restric- tion, with the view of keeping the temporary bishop in sub- jection to their control. There may be proposed the question why did not these considerations weigh with the bishops, so as to induce their refusal to consecrate ? The answer is, 1st. The convention of Virginia, although deviating from the original and reasonable practice, had to plead the countenance of some precedents. 2d. From the assurances which were given by the depu- ties of the diocese interested, it was confidently believed, that there would be a correction of the error at the next session. 3d. That the canon passed against the practice by this convention, was counted on as a barrier against any further recurrence of the evil; and, 4th. That the convention of Virginia could, with the less reason, resist the canon, as they had instructed their deputies to move in the General Convention, for a regula- tion to govern on the subject in future. 312 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. It was known at the time, that Bishop Brownell had determined on a visit to the western states, and to those south of Georgia, under a mission from the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society. It is probable, that this prompted the proposal contained in the Narrative. There can be no doubt, that the contemplated visit will contrib- ute materially to the object proposed by the General Con- vention. The hope of this result is considerably strength- ened by what Bishop Ravenscroft has accomplished, in his way from his diocese to the General Convention. He made a circuit through the States of Tennessee and Ken- tucky, which not only excited the zeal of the scattered Episcopalians in those states, but contributed to the or- ganizing of the Church in each of them. There was a singular coincidence of the assistant bishop- elect of the Church in Virginia, and that of the assistant bishop who had been consecrated for Pennsylvania. In the latter case, the consecration had been strenuously objected to, on the ground, that the convention of Pennsylvania had no right to elect a successor to their present bishop, while living. In direct contrariety to this position, a Gen- eral Convention, assembled soon after, are unanimously of opinion, that to choose an assistant bishop, without the in- tention of his succeeding, is an act utterly indefensible. During the discussions, the matter which had been liti- gated in Pennsylvania, was kept out of view, and the name of the assistant bishop was not mentioned. This is evidence of what little account was the opposition made to his consecration, in the estimation of the representative body of the whole Church. It is the opinion of the author of these remarks, that the proceedings relative to the metre psalms are unnecessary, and fruitful of litigation. Such is the diversity, not only of judgment, but of taste, that be the selection what it may, there will be complaints of the omission of some passages, and of what will be thought the injudicious preference of others. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 313 Still, there will be urged the small proportion of the psalms in use. This objection is easily met. The metre psalms make no part of the Book of Common Prayer. There may be editions of the one, in severance from the other; or with selections from it, at the discretion of any parochial minister. Nothing is wanting but a moderate measure of attention, with or without the aid of consenting brethren, to a printer and to a binder. Different selec- tions will be made for different congregations, without just cause of offense. The selections will be submitted to such choice as may be prompted by judgment or by caprice, to be bound in the same covers with the Book of Common Prayer; and they who do not like any of them, may attach to the book the whole body of the psalms in metre. TT. Page 67. Of the Convention in 1832. On the reading of the journal, without the knowledge of an exterior cause having a bearing on the deliberations of the body, it can not but seem, that much time was unneces- sarily spent in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies; owing to the blending of two subjects, one of which might properly have been dispensed with. Whether a bishop have a right to resign his charge at discretion; and when the diocese being abandoned, whether it be not a duty to supply the vacancy; are questions resolvable on different grounds. It was not from the being insensible of the dif- ference, that so much zeal and so much argument were lavished on the affirmative of the first of these questions. The effect was the result of opposite opinions held rela- / tively to an event of thirty-three years' standing. There ' has been recorded in the " Memoirs," that in September, ', 1800, the three bishops, then composing a house, denied ^ the right of Bishop Provoost to resign; and consecrated ' Bishop Benjamin Moore, only as his assistant and succes- 3 14 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. son* It has also been noticed, that some years after, on < the occurrence of an unhappy controversy in the diocese of S New York, this matter came under the consideration of the 1 diocesan convention; which refused to acknowledge any other diocesan Episcopacy than that of Bishop Moore. / Although the question, as regards the circumstances which originated it, has ceased to be interesting; yet the occur- rence of another professed resignation, brought again into view the diversity of sentiment, which had so long ceased to cause any disturbance to the Church. Although, in the late convention, much time was lost in the consequent discussion; yet it will result in benefit to the Church, if the Thirty-second Canon, which was the fruit of it, should be efficient in guarding against resignations, not induced by exterior necessity, or by some other extra- ordinary consideration; and not resting altogether on the will of the party, for the consummating of the act. The threatened danger is not only that of giving occasion to faction excited and conducted by clerical ambition, and that of coveting the Episcopal grade, with the design of being speedily disengaged from its labors; but may have unforeseen consequences, by the sanction which it extends to a very pernicious assumption of the Papacy. The ad- vocates of the right of resignation constantly affirm, that there is a distinction between office and jurisdiction. The primitive Church knew nothing of this. It was a notion started by those called the schoolmen, and seized by the gopes, to favor the position that all jurisdiction is from them. This was the shield opposed to what a great pro- f portion, probably a majority of the body, anxiously desired, < but could not accomplish a determination in favor of the ( divine institution of Episcopacy. On the case of Bishop Chase, it ought to be noticed, that there was given in to both houses, a protest against the considering of him as severed from thT diocese; signed See ante p. 31. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 315 by some members of the Church in Ohio, including one of the clergy. It did not appear that the sentiment was of such extent as to claim an influence on the proceedings of the body. % UU. Page 68. It may be hoped, that no one will censure the bishops, because of their declining to exercise a visitatorial power, in their aggregate capacity. The notion that they should be called from their dioceses, on any of the innumerable cases of appeal, which may occur in such an institution, is too extravagant to be reasonably entertained. There has been already an appeal to them, on the constitutionality of the sale of a body of land, of the propriety of which they knew nothing. The appeal was made to them individually. But, had they given their determinations in that form, without discussion, and without a comparing of their opin- ions, it would surely not have been a wise expedient. As to the other proposal, of noticing the concerns of the body applying, it was perhaps from some oversight, that a copy of the proceedings was not sent. It ought not to be sup- posed, that the General Convention was expected to sanc- tion them, in utter ignorance of their nature and of their tendency. It will not be foreign to the purpose, to record from what cause, there originated the combining of the presi- dency of the college with the Episcopacy of the diocese. When Bishop Chase was collecting in England, certain contributions were made, for the declared purpose of found- ing a theological seminary, to be always under the care of the bishop for the time being. This feature of the present institution may well remain, because appendant to the Episcopacy, on such terms as not to be liable to be exer- cised to the displacing of the occupant of the latter. After the return of Bishop Chase, there was instituted Kenyon College, enlarging the sphere of instruction. This pro- 316 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. duces the incongruity complained of. It may be remedied by a legislative act; which would not interfere with the faith pledged to the English donors. WW. Page 68. The author of this continuation is still of the opinion, expressed in a former portion of it, and grounded, npt only on the discrepancies of different judgments, but on the variety of taste, that it would have been better to have left the whole book untouched. In this case every parish min- ister would have been at liberty, either to cause to be bound the whole of the said book with the Book of Com- mon Prayer, or such parts of the former as he might judge the most edifying to his own congregation, and to any other persons who might prefer the acceptance of the vol- ume in that form. It is well known, that in this Church, as in the Church of England, the use of the metre psalms rests entirely on the ground of permission. The entertain- ing of these sentiments did not prevent the author, as a member of the committee, from giving his aid to the per- fecting of the selection. Further it is not intended to deny, that there may profitably be a review of the whole version of Tate and Brady. But it is a work which would require, besides other qualifications, a very exact knowledge of the original Hebrew. XX. Page 68. The most beneficial designs are liable to drawbacks. The munificent legacy of Frederick Kohne, Esq., although the benefit of it is not to come into present efficiency, has led too many to imagine that the institution is sufficiently provided for. It will be to the dishonor of our Church, if the trustees should be under the necessity of anticipating this fund. At present, the expenses of the institution con- siderably exceed its income. Although the deficiency will ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 317 be lessened by the later legacy of George Lorillard, Esq., of $20,000, to be paid within five years; yet it will fall short of the supply which the state of the funds demands. It ought to be made known, that the seminary is under the necessity of availing itself of the gratuitous services of some of its professors, in whole or in part; and that of those who give their time entirely to the labor of instruc- tion, the compensation is far less than what is due to their talents and their assiduity. YY. Page 69. The rule of presidency is seniority merely; and seniority is to be estimated according to the dates of consecration respectively. When two or more bishops are consecrated together, seniority Is to be determined by the dates of the election of them severally. ZZ. Page 69. At the time of the Reformation, all the churches stood ) east and west. How it is with the many new churches lately built, is not here known. Certainly there is no law, ecclesiastical or civil, requiring such a position; and it may be rendered very inconvenient by the shape of a selected lot. The origin ascribed to the custom, in the expectation that the second coming of our Lord will be from the east, has been proved to be groundless, by our improved knowl- edge of the heavens and of the earth. Still, the change now made, although agreeable to the spirit of the rubric, is, in a slight degree, a departure from the letter of it. Perhaps, considering the ground on which our rubrics authoritatively rest, it would have been better to have made the present measure interpretative; affirming that when the spirit and the letter of an instrument are in opposition, the former should govern. 318 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. A A A. Page 70. What a wonderful change has the author lived to wit- ness, in reference to American Episcopacy ! He remem- bers the ante-revolutionary times, when the presses pro- fusely emitted pamphlets and newspaper disquisitions on the question, whether an American bishop were to be endured; and when threats were thrown put of throwing such a person, if sent among us, into the river, although his agency was advocated for the sole purpose of a com- munion submitting itself to his spiritual jurisdiction. It is true, that the subject was entangled with the affirmed danger of subserviency to the designs of the government of the mother country, in her hostility to the rights of her colonies. Such was the effect of the combining of these two opposite interests, and so specious were the preten- sions of the anti-episcopalian opposition to the measure, J that it would have been impossible to have obtained a respectably sigjied lay petition for it, to our superiors in England, although to relieve us from the hardship of send- ing candidates for the ministry to that country, to be ordained. When, after the revolution, it was hoped that the door would be open for the accomplishing of the object, even among those who were zealous for the obtaining of it, there arose the question, whether, in deference to prejudice, there should not be dropped the name oj bishop; and the succession be continued under another name. Behold the difference of result. The order has now ex- isted among us for nearly the half of a century; and not a j single complaint has been heard, either of usurpation to the I injury of any other denomination, or of arbitrary govern- ment within our own. If, in one instance, there has been made the charge of such a character, it has not been in the department of the Episcopacy, but in one of another nature, f In regard as well to that property of ecclesiastical ad- ministration, as the Church herself, the author prays, in the words of Father Paul, of Venice "Esto perpetua." ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 319 EBB. Page 71. Of the Convention in 1835. Bishop Chase had become severed from the diocese of Ohio, by the circumstance, that in the constitution of Ken- yon College, there was the provision, that the presidency of it should be attached to the Episcopacy. The para- mount anthority of the institution was in a board of trustees. On a disagreement between them and the bishop in the management of the concerns, the latter resigned his colle- giate station; which dre\y_ak?ngjwith it the resignation^ the diocesan^ Episcopacy. This fact ought not to be re- corded, without notice of the impropriety of a provision, subjecting the bishop to any other tenure of his ecclesias- tical station, than that provided by the canons. In a col- lege, without any charge against the bishop in his Episco- pal character, there may be dissatisfaction in the minds of the trustees, resulting in his resignation of the presidency, or, he may be dismissed by them. In the latter case, he is deposed from the Episcopacy, by a body consisting of pres- byters and laymen. There is reason to expect, that this anomaly will be corrected. CCC. Page 71. The writer of this was of opinion, that there would have been advantages beyond those of the present provision, if the choice of the psalms to be read had been left to the officiating minister. DDD. Page 71. When the Liturgy of the Church of England was framed, all the churches stood east and west, with the chancel at the east end. In America, positions different from this are frequent, there being no law to the contrary. The rubric certainly intended, that the minister should stand at the right end of the table. The author has always acted on 320 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. the principle, that the spirit of the rubric, being undeniable, should be preferred to the letter. But it was expedient, that the latter should be corrected. EEE. Page 71. In the management of the concerns of missions, there was no other embarrassment, than what arose between the domestic department and the foreign. The former has the advantage of its being a call as it were at our door, with its being less costly than the other; and of course admitting of more to be done with the same amount of means. Some, on these accounts, would have confined to it the exertions of our Church. Others, and it is here conceived the greater number, were for the making of it the prominent object, in consideration of the many and vast waste places of our Zion, but were also willing to apply to foreign missions what should be donations so designated. On the other hand, there was such an ardor for foreign missions in some minds, as seemed to make them more prominent than the domes- tic, although it was not denied, that these also should be sustained. Under the executive committee, every contrib- utor was left to his or her choice, and it is now the same under the Board of Missions. Unfortunately, with the dis- cussion of the subject, there was mixed the question of the place or the places of location. In the result, the domes- tic was located in New York, and the foreign in Philadel- phia, but with the hope of many, that both of them will be settled finally in the former city. The Board of Missions are competent to this; and it is thought, that considerable advantage will accrue from a concurrence of effort.* The said board being clothed with considerable author- ity, and their doings being, in a degree, the agency of the Church during the times intervening between the General Conventions, it is thought proper to insert their constitu- tion in the Appendix, No. 36. * Both boards are now in New York. Ed. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 321 FFF. Page 71. This measure was dictated by the great increase of pop- / o ulation, in the lately settled counties of the State of New York. That the diocese had become too extensive and too populous for a single bishop, was generally agreed. But much doubt was entertained, as to its being now the wish of the greater number of the clergy and of the laity within its limits. In this originated the measure of sanctioning the principle of expediency, and of referring to a future convention the carrying of it into operation. The author of this work, delivered at large his senti- ments on the above point, and on the points connected with it. His views were committed to the press, in the " Protestant Episcopalian," and he judges it to be agreeable to the present design, to insert that document in the Ap- pendix, No. 37. GGG. Page 72. Within a year before the convention, it had been ex- pected, that the Rev. Dr. Hawks, during the session of that body, would have been consecrated for what has beeft called the South Western Diocese. But although there was evidence that the measure would have been popular, yet, there being objections made to the election as irregu- lar, the doctor declined compliance. During the session, there were present from that quarter, several gentlemen who had regretted the failure, but were gratified by the new shape which the subject had taken, and were confident that it would be acceptable to all the states and territories concerned. HHH. Page 72. This measure arose from the consideration, that in any country to which the Church may send missionary presby- ters, there may occur the expediency of superadding the Episcopacy. 322 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. HI. Page 72. The proposals referred to are of great importance, and were introduced in the House of Bishops by Bishop Hop- kins. When our Church was organized it would have been impossible to have carried the point of jurisdiction further than as it now stands. But there is the imperfec- tion attending it, that in ecclesiastical trials, opposite de-) cisions may be passed in different dioceses; which is mani-f festly a great evil. KKK. Page 72. The providing of a German liturgy, arose from the statement, that in some districts, there are German fami- lies, desirous of attending on the services of our Church, and whose acquaintance with the English language being imperfect, as expressive of devotional sentiment and feel- ing, they would be aided by the possession of German Prayer Books, and by comparing of them with the English. LLL. Page 72. The people's repeating of the confession simultaneously with the minister, renders it the more solemn, and most probably, as in other places, was contemplated by the compilers. As for the question of "Amen," the author must confess himself not furnished with sufficient information. He does \ not know any rubric or canon prescribing the difference f of type. There is before him a Prayer Book, edited under Charles I., in which no such difference is made. In another,' under Queen Anne, it appears, not only in the places des- ignated by the convention, but in many others; although the cause of the diversity is not obvious. In Baskerville's / edition, there is the difference of type; and perhaps in all , the recent editions in England. It is to be hoped, that the ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 323 convention had sufficient cause for the provision made; and if not, it is of little moment. Since the time of the General Convention, there has been raised a question, as to the propriety of what they have required, of the concurrent voices of the minister and of the people. The doubt of the requisition rests on the meaning of the word "after," which has been con- strued as inapplicable to concurrence. In opposition to the doubt, the following considerations had weight with the convention. 1st. The exhortation calls on the congregation, to "ac- company" the minister in the ensuing act, which can not be but by a concurrence. 2d. There was not perceived any reason, why the con- fession should be different from that in the Communion Service, and from the Lord's Prayer in the morning and evening services. 3d. The word "after" can not have so restricted a mean- ing as the doubt supposes. It often stands for "accord- ing to " or "imitation of." See Johnson's Dictionary. See also many places in Scripture, among which are, Psalm xxviii. 6; Psalm xi. 3; Matthew vi. 9; and I Peter iii. 5. The Prayer Book is not without instances to the effect, as in the Twenty-eighth Article, "after an heavenly and spir- itual manner; " and in the Litany as in the English book " neither reward us after our iniquities." MMM. Page 72. In regard to the -Bible, there having been occasionally typographical errors, so difficult to be avoided, there is great reason of provision for strict accuracy. Some years ago there had been a very large edition, in one instance departing from the Greek text, in order to favor the Con- gregatiqnal form of Church government. Although there had been provided what was expected to be a sufficient preventive of incorrect editions of the 324 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Book of Common Prayer; yet, the provision having been found not entirely to answer the purpose, further security was thought necessary, and constituted. NNN. Page 72. The books and other documents, presented by Dr Hawks, will be added to those presented by the author of this, some years ago, and now in the library of St. James's Church, in this city. It is to be hoped, that they will be placed under a proper supervision. OOO. Page 72. It is remarked often, and with truth, that much legisla- tion is indicative of feeble administration. Still, there may be fruits of experience, and changes of circumstances, call- ing for corresponding changes of laws. It is to be hoped, that our Church has pursued, and will continue to pursue, a proper medium. For the enacted canons, it may suffice to refer to the journal. CONCLUSION. The author has brought to an end, a work comprehend- ing the proceedings of the Episcopal Church, for somewhat more than the half of a century. He discontinues it from this time, partly because of his advance in years, and, fur- ther, because he knows of some of the clergy, who have been lately attentive to the preservation of facts, falling under their respective notices. It has been formerly a matter too little attended to. Incidents, not exciting much interest at present, may help in future transactions, by unfolding the grounds on which those preceding them had been adopted, and by which they should in some measure be explained. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS. 325 At this finishing of these Memoirs, he lifts his heart in prayer to the Great Preserver of his health and strength, that the peace and the prosperity of the Church, of which he has been so long a witness, and to the promoting of which he has given his best endeavors, however feeble, and however in effect far short of his desires, may be per- petuated, to the glory of God, and to the best interests, re- ligious and civil, of his people. W. W. III. APPENDIX. No. i. Page 85. Communication with the Court of Denmark. Copy of a Letter from John Adams, Esq., to the President of Congress, dated the Hague, April 22, 1784. SIR, I received, some time since, a letter from an American gentleman now in London, a candidate for Orders, desiring to know, if American candidates might have Orders, from Protestant bishops on the continent, and complaining that he had been refused by the Bishop of London, unless he would take the oaths of allegiance, etc. Meeting soon afterwards the Danish minister, I had the curiosity to inquire of him, whether ordination might be had in Denmark. He answered me, that he knew not, but would soon inform himself. I heard no more of it until to- day when the secretary of his embassy, Mr. De Rosen- crantz, made me a visit, and delivered me the papers, copies of which are enclosed. Thus, it seems, that what I meant as current conversa- tion only, has been made the subject of the deliberation of the government of Denmark and their faculty of theology; which makes it necessary for me to transmit it to congress. I am happy to find the decision so liberal. I have the honor to be, etc. (Signed,) J. ADAMS. 328 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Translation of a Communication of Mr. de St. Saphorin, to Mr. John Adams, dated the Hague, April 21, 1784. Mr. de St. Saphorin has the honor to communicate to Mr. Adams the answer he has received from his excellency the Count de Rosencrone, privy counsellor and secretary of state for foreign affairs of his Danish majesty, relative to what Mr. Adams desired to know. He shall be happy if this answer should be agreeable to him, as well as to his superiors, and useful to his fellow-citizens. He has the honor to assure him of his respect. (Signed, etc.) Translation of the Copy of an Extract of a Letter from his Excellency the Count de Rosencrone, Privy Counsellor of his Majesty the King of Denmark, to Mr. de St. Saphorin, Envoy Extraordinary from his Majesty to the States General. The opinion of the theological faculty having been taken on the question made to your excellency by Mr. Adams, if the American ministers of the Church of England can be consecrated here by a bishop of the Danish Church ? I am ordered by the king to authorize you to answer, that such an act can take place according to the Danish rites; but for the convenience of the Americans, who are supposed not to know the Danish language, the Latin language will be made 'use of on the occasion; for the rest, nothing will be exacted from the candidates, but a profession conform- able to the Articles of the English -Church, omitting the oath called test, which prevents their being ordained by the English bishops. FECRETARY'S OFFICE, 6rH APRIL, 1785. SIR, Copies of the enclosed letters from Mr. John Adams and Mr. de St. Saphorin, upon the subject of conferring holy APPENDIX. 329 Orders agreeably to the principles of the Church of Eng- land, were this day received by council; who have been pleased to direct that they should be communicated to you. I must beg that they be returned to this office, as soon as you may find it convenient, and am, Sir, with the greatest respect, Your most obedient, Humble servant, (Signed,) J. ARMSTRONG, Jur. Rev. Dr. Wm. White. Answer. SIR, I request you to present to the honorable council, my grateful sentiments of their polite attention to the interests of the Episcopal Church, in your communication of this morning. Their condescension will be an apology for my troubling them with the perusal of an act of the British parliament, having the same operation with the liberal and brotherly proceeding of the Danish government and clergy. And the liberty I have taken may hereafter exempt some of my brethren from the suspicion of having entered into obliga- tions inconsistent with their duty to their country. But, sir, it would be injustice to the Episcopal Church, were I to neglect to inform the honorable board, that I take it to be a general sentiment, not to depend on any foreign authority for the ordination of ministers, or for any other matter appertaining to religion. As the light in which we shall hereafter be viewed by our fellow-citizens must de- pend on an adherence to the above mentioned principle, I take the liberty to submit to the honorable council two printed accounts of proceedings held in this city and in New York. 330 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. With my most dutiful thanks to the honorable board, and with all due submission, I am, sir, Their and your very humble servant, WM. WHITE. April, kth, 1785. y. Armstrong. Esq. No. 2. Page 85. Communication of the Clergy of Connecticut, to the Arch- bis hop of York. NEW YORK, APRIL 21, 1783. MY LORD, The clergy of Connecticut, deeply impressed with anx- ious apprehension of what may be the fate of the Church in America, under the present changes of empire and policy, beg leave to embrace the earliest moment in their power to address your Grace on that important subject. This part of America is at length dismembered from the British empire; but, notwithstanding the dissolution of our civil connection with the parent state, we still hope to re- tain the religious polity; the primitive and evangelical doc- trine and discipline, which, at the reformation, were restored and established in the Church of England. To render that polity complete, and to provide for its perpetuity in this country, by the establishment of an American Episcopate, has long been an object of anxious concern to us, and to many of our brethren in other parts of this continent. The attainment of this object appears to have been hitherto ob- structed by considerations of a political nature, which we conceive were founded in groundless jealousies and misap- prehensions that can no longer be supposed to exist: and therefore, whatever may be the effect of independency on this country, in other respects, we presume it will be al- lowed to open a door for renewing an application to the spiritual governors of the Church on this head; an applica- tion which we consider as not only seasonable, but more APPENDIX. 331 than ever necessary at this time; because, if it be now any longer neglected, there is reason to apprehend that a plan of a very extraordinary nature, lately formed and published in_Philadelphia, may be carried into execution. This plan / is, in brief, to constitute a nominal Episcopate by the united \ suffrages of presbyters and laymen. The peculiar situation of the Episcopal Churches in America, and the necessity of adopting some speedy remedy for the want of a regular Episcopate, are offered, in the publication here alluded to, as reasons fully sufficient to justify the scheme. Whatever influence this project may have on the minds of the igno- rant or unprincipled part of the laity, or however it may, possibly, be countenanced by some of the clergy in other parts of the country, we think it our duty to reject such a / spurious substitute for Episcopacy, and, as far as may be in j our power, to prevent its taking effect. To lay the foundation, therefore, for a valid and regular Episcopate in America, we earnestly entreat your Grace, that, in your archi-episcopal character, you will espouse the cause of our sinking Church, and, at this important crisis, afford her that relief on which her very existence depends, by consecrating a bishop for Connecticut. The person whom we have prevailed upon to offer himself to your Grace, for that purpose, is the Reverend Doctor Samuel Seabury, who has been the society's worthy missionary for many years. He was born and educated in Connecticut he is personally known to us and we believe him to be every way qualified for the Episcopal office, and for the discharge of those duties peculiar to it, in the present trying and dan- gerous times. All the weighty considerations which concur to enforce our request, are well known to your Grace; we therefore forbear to enlarge, lest we should seem to distrust your Grace's zeal in a cause of such acknowledged importance to the interests of religion. Suffer us then to rest in humble confidence that your Grace will hear and grant our petition, and give us the consolation of receiving, through a clear 3J2 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. and uninterrupted channel, an overseer in this part of the household of God. That God may continue your life and health, make you in His providence an eminent instrument of great and ex- tensive usefulness to mankind in general, a lasting blessing to the Church over which you preside in particular; and that the present and future sons of the Church in America, may have cause to record and perpetuate your name as their friend and spiritual father, and, when your sacred work is ended, that you may find it gloriously rewarded, is and shall be the devout prayer of the clergy of Connecticut, by whose order (in convention assembled), and in whose be- half, this letter is addressed to your Grace, by your Grace's most obedient, humble servant, (Signed), ABRAHAM JARVIS, Minister of the Episcopal Church in Midtilttmutt, and Secretary to the Convention. Testimonial. Whereas our well beloved in Christ, Samuel Seabury, Doctor of Divinity, and missionary of Staten Island, in this province, is about to embark for England, at the earnest request of the Episcopal clergy of Connecticut, and for the purpose of presenting himself a candidate for the sacred office of a bishop; and that when consecrated and admitted to the said office, he may return to Connecticut, and there exercise the spiritual powers, and discharge the duties which are peculiar to the Episcopal character, among the members of the Church of England, by superintending the clergy, ordaining candidates for holy Orders, and confirming such of the laity as may choose to be confirmed We, the subscribers, desirous to testify our hearty concurrence in this measure, and promote its success, as well as to declare the high opinion we justly entertain of Doctor Seabury's learning, abilities, prudence, and zeal for religion, do here- by certify, that we have been personally and intimately ac- APPENDIX. 333 quainted with the said Doctor Seabury for many years past that we believe him to be every way qualified for the sacred office of a bishop; the several duties of which office, we are firmly persuaded, he will discharge with honor, dignity, and fidelity, and consequently with advantage to the Church of God. And we can not forbear to express our most earnest wish, that Doctor Seabury may succeed in this application, as it will be the means of preserving the Church of England in America from ruin, and of preventing many irregularities which we see approaching, and which, if once introduced, no after care may be able to remove. Given under our hands, at New York, this twenty-first day of April, in the year of our Lor done thousand seven hundred and eighty-three. JEREMIAH LEAMING, D.D. CHARLES INGLIS, D.D. Rector of Trinity Church, New York. BENJAMIN MOORE, D.D. Assistant Minister of Trinity Church, New York, and others. Letter to the Archbishop of York. NEW YORK, MAY 24, 1783. MY LORD, The Reverend Doctor Samuel Seabury will have the honor of presenting this letter to your Grace. He goes to England at the request of the Episcopal clergy of Con- necticut, on business highly interesting and important. They have written on the subject to your Grace, and also to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of London. But, as they were pleased to consult us on the occasion, and to submit what they had written to our in- spection, requesting our concurrence in their application, their letters are dated at New York, and -signed only by the Rev. Mr. Jarvis, the secretary to their convention, whom they commissioned and sent here for that purpose. 334 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH, The measure proposed, on this occasion, by our brethren of Connecticut, could not fail to have our hearty concur- rence. For we are decidedly of opinion, that no other means can be devised to preserve the existence of the Episcopal Church in this country. We have therefore joined with Mr. Jarvis in giving Doctor Seabury a testi- monial, in which we have briefly, but sincerely, expressed our sense of his merit, and our earnest wishes for the suc- cess of his undertaking. Should he succeed and be consecrated, he means (with the approbation of the society), to return in the character, and perform the duties of a missionary at New London, in Connecticut; and on his arrival in that country, to make application to the Governor, in hope of being cheerfully permitted to exercise the spiritual powers of his Episcopal office there; in which, we are persuaded, he will meet with little if any opposition. For many persons of character in Connecticut, and elsewhere, who are members of the Epis- 1 copal Church, have lately declared they have no longer ' any objection to an American Episcopate, now that the independence of this country, acknowledged by Great Britain, has removed their apprehensions of the- bishops being invested with a share of temporal power by the British government. We flatter ourselves that any imped- iments to the consecration of a bishop for America, arising from the peculiar constitution of the Church of England, may be removed by the King's royal permission and we can not entertain a doubt of his Majesty's readiness to grant it. In humble confidence that your Grace will consider the object of this application as a measure worthy of your / zealous patronage, we beg leave to remind your Grace, that several legacies have been, at different times, bequeathed for the support of bishops in America, and to express our hopes that some part of those legacies, or of the interest arising from them, may be appropriated to the mainten- ance of Doctor Seabury, in case he is consecrated, and settles in America. We conceive that the separation of APPENDIX. 335 this country from the parent state can be no reasonable bar to such appropriation, nor invalidate the title of Amer- ican bishops, who derive their consecration from the Church of England, to the benefit of those legacies. And perhaps this charitable assistance is now more necessary, than it would have been, had not the empire been dismembered. We take this opportunity to inform your Grace, that we have consulted his Excellency Sir Guy Carleton, on the subject of procuring the appointment of a bishop for the province of Nova Scotia, on which he has expressed to us his entire approbation, and has written to administration, warmly recommending the measure. We took the liberty, at the same time, of mentioning our worthy brother, the Rev. Dr. Thomas B. Chandler, to his Excellency, as a per- son every way qualified to discharge the duties of the Epis- copal office in that province, with dignity and honor. And we hope for your Grace's approbation of what we have done in that matter, and for the concurrence of your influence with Sir Guy Carleton's recommendation in promoting the design. We should have given this information sooner to your Grace, but that we waited for Doctor Seabury's departure for England, which we considered as affording the best and most proper conveyance. If Doctor Chandler and Doctor Seabury should both succeed, as we pray God they may, we trust that, with the blessing of heaven, the Episcopal Church will yet flourish in this Western hemisphere. With the warmest sentiments of respect and esteem, we have the honor to be, My lord, Your Grace's most dutiful sons, And obedient, humble servants, JEREMIAH LEAMING, D.D. CHARLES INGLIS, D.D. Rector of Trinity Church, New York. BENJAMIN MOORE, D.D. Assistant Minister of Trinity Church, New York, and others. His Grace t^e Archbishop of York. 336 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 3. Page 102. A Letter from the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, in the Name of the Clergy of Connecticut* REVEREND SIR, We, the clergy of Connecticut met at Woodbury in vol- untary convention, beg leave to acquaint you, that a small pamphlet, printed in Philadelphia, has been transmitted to us, of which you are said to be the author. This pamphlet proposes a new form of government in the Episcopal Church, and points at the method of erecting it. As the thirteen states have now risen to independent sovereignty, we agree with you, sir, 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 and that some change in its regulations must in due time take place. But we think it premature and of dangerous consequence, to enter upon so capital a business, till we have resident bishops (if they can be obtained) to assist in the perform-< ance of it, and 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. We shall only advert to such things in the pamphlet, as we es- teem of dangerous consequence. You say the conduct you mean to recommend, is to include in the proposed frame of government a general approbation of Episcopacy, and a declaration of an intention to procure the succession as soon as conveniently may be; but in the mean time to carry the plan into effect, without waiting for the succes- sion. But why do you include a general approbation of Episcopacy, in your proposed new frame of government ? /Not because you think bishops a constituent part of an Episcopal Church, unless you conceive they derive their office and existence from the King's authority; for though See ante, p. 99. Ed. APPENDIX. 337 you acknowledge we can not at present have bishops here, and propose to set up without them, yet you say no consti- tutioflal principle of our Church is changed by the revolu- s tion, but what was founded on the authority of the King. ^ Your motives for the above general approbation, seem indeed to be purely political. One is, that the general opinion of Episcopalians is in favor of bishops, and there- fore (if we understand your reasoning) it would be im- politic not to flatter them with the hopes of it. Another reason is, that too wide a deviation from the British Church might induce future emigrants from thence to set up in- dependent churches here. But could you have proposed to set up the ministry, without waiting for the succession, had you believed the Episcopal superiority to be an_ordi- nance of Christ, with the exclusive authority of ordination and government, and that it has ever been so esteemed in the purest ages of the Church ? and yet we conceive this to be the sense of Episcopalians in general, and warranted by the constant practice of the Christian Church. Really, sir, we think an Episcopal Church without Episcopacy, if it be not a contradiction in terms, would, however, be a new thing under the sun; and yet the Episcopal Church, by the pamphlet proposed to be erected, must be in this predica- ment till the succession be obtained. You plead necessity, however, and argue that the best writers in the Church, admit of Presbyterian ordination, where Episcopal can not be had. To prove this, you quote concessions from the = venerable Hooker, and Dr. Chandler, which their exube-V rant charity to the reformed churches abroad, led them to V make. But the very words you quote from the last men- tioned gentleman prove his opinion to be, that bishops were as truly an ordinance of Christ, and as essential to His Church as the sacraments; for, say you, he insists upon it (meaning the Episcopal superiority) as of divine right, as- serts that the laws relating to it bind as strongly as the laws which relate to baptism and the holy eucharist, and that if the succession be once broken, not all the men on 333 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. earth, not all the angels in heaven, without an immediate commission from Christ, can restore it but you say, he does not, however, hold this succession to be necessary, only where it can be had. Neither does he or the Chris- I tian Church hold the sacraments to be necessary, wjiere j they can not be had agreeable to the appointment of theif (jreat Head of the Church. Why should particular acts J of authority be thought more necessary than the authority itself ? Why should the sacraments be more essential than that authority Christ has ordained to administer them ? It is truethat Christ has appointed the sacraments, and it is as true that He hath appointed officers to administer them, and has expressly forbid any to do it but those who are authorized by His appointment, or called of God as was Aaron. And yet these gentlemen (without any inconsis- tency with their declared sentiments) have, and all good men will express their charitable hopes, that God, in com- passion to a well meant zeal, will add the same blessings to those who, through unavoidable mistake, act beside His commission as if they really had it. As far as we can find, it has been the constant opinion of our Church in England and here, that the Episcopal superiority is an ordinance of Christ, and we think that the uniform practice of the whole American Church, for near a century, sending their candi- dates three thousand miles for holy Orders, is more than a presumptive proof that the Church here are, and ever have been, of this opinion. The sectaries, soon after the refor- mation, declared that the book of consecration, etc., was superstitious and contrary to God's Word, and the modera- tion you mention in the articles and canons, consists in affirming that this declaration was entirely false; and would you wish to be more severe ? The instances you adduce, wherein Presbyterian ordination has been tolerated in the Church, have, by its best writers, been set in such a point of view as to give no countenance to your scheme, and the authorities you quote have been answered again and again. If you will not allow this superiority to have an higher ori- APPENDIX. 339 pired, \ war- t y~v *-*- gin than the apostles; yet since they were divinely inspired, we see not why their practice is not equal to a divine rant ; and as they have given no liberty to deviate from their practice in any exigence of the Church, we know not what authority we have to take such liberties in any case. However, we think nothing can be more clear, than that our Church has ever believed bishops to have the sole right of ordination and government, and that this regimen was appointed of Christ Himself, and it is now, to use your own words, humbly submitted to consideration, whether such Episcopalians as consent even to a temporary departure, and set_aside this ordinance of Christ for conveniency, can scarcely deserve the name of Christians. But would neces- sity warrant a deviation from the law of Christ, and the immemorial practice of the Church, yet what necessity have we to plead ? Can we plead necessity with any propriety, till we have tried to obtain an Episcopate, and have been rejected ? We conceive the present to be a more favorable opportunity for the introduction of bishops, than this coun- try has before seen. However dangerous bishops formerly might have been thought to the civil rights of these states, this danger has now vanished, for such superiors will have no civil authority. They will be purely ecclesiastics. The states have now risen to sovereign authority, and bishops will be equally under the control of civil law with other clergymen; no danger, then, can now be feared from bish- ops, but such as may be feared from presbyters. This being the case, have we not the highest reason to hope, that the whole civil authority upon the continent (should their assistance be needed) will unite their influence with the Church, to procure an office so essential to it, and to render complete a profession, which contains so consider- able a proportion of its inhabitants. And on the other hand, is there any reason to believe, that all the bishops in England, and in all the other reformed Churches in Europe, are so totally lost to a sense of their duty, and to the real wants of their brethren in the Episcopal Church here, as 340 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. to refuse to ordain bishops to preside over us, when a proper application shall be made to them for it ? If this can not be, why is not the present a favorable opportunity for such an application ? Nothing is further from the design of this letter than to begin a dispute with you; but in a frank and brotherly way to express our opinion of the mistaken and dangerous tendency of the pamphlet. We fear, should the scheme of it be carried into execution in the southern states, it will create divisions in the Church at a time when its whole strength depends upon its unity: for we know it is totally abhorrent from the principles of the Church in the northern states, and are fully convinced they will never submit to it. And indeed should we con- sent to a temporary departure from Episcopacy, there would be very little propriety in asking for it afterwards, and as little reason ever to expect it in America. Let us all then unite as one man to improve this favorable opportunity, to procure an object so desirable and so essential to the Church. We are, dear sir, your affectionate brethren, the clergy of Connecticut. Signed by order of the convention, ABRAHAM JARVIS, Sec'ry. Rev. Mr. White. Woodbury, blarcli 25, 1783. No. 4. Page 113. A Letter of tJie Right Rev. Bishop Seabury, to the Rev. Dr. Smith. AUGUST 15, 1785. REV. AND DEAR SlR, It has not been in my power till this day, to pay that at- tention to your letter of July 19, which the importance of its several subjects demanded. The grand difficulty that defeated my application for consecration 7n England, ap- peared to me to be the want of an application from the APPENDIX. 341 State of Connecticut. Other objections are made, viz., that I tHere was no precise diocese marked out by the civil author- ity, nor a stated revenue appointed for the bishop's sup- r port; but these were removed. The other remained, for/ the civil authority in Connecticut is Presbyterian, and therefore could not be supposed would petition for a bish- op; and had this been removed, I am not sure that another would not have started up: for this happened several times. I waited and procured a copy of an, act of the legislature of Connecticut, which puts all denominations of Christians on a footing of equality, except the Roman Catholics, and to them it gives a free toleration, certified by the Secretary of the state; for to Connecticut all my negotiations were con- fined. The Archbishop of Canterbury wished it had been fuller, but thought it afforded ground on which to proceed; yet he afterwards said it would not do; and that the minis- f ter, without a formal requisition from the, state, would not I suffer the bill, enabling the Bishop of tendon to ordain 1 foreign candidates without their taking the oaths, to "pass the Commons, if it contained a clause for consecrating American bishops. And as his Grace did not choose to proceed without parliamentary authority, though if I under- stood him right, a majority of the judges and crown law- yers, were of opinion he might safely do it. I turned my attention to the remains of the old Scots Episcopal Church, whose consecration I knew was derived from England, and their authority, in an ecclesiastical sense, fully equal to the English bishops. No objection was ever made to me on account of the legacies left for American bishops; some persons had surmises of this kind, but I know not whence they arose.* I can see no good ground of apprehension concerning the titles of estates, or emoluments belonging to the Church in your state; your Church is still the Church of * While in England, and before he had obtained consecration, Seabury wrote to a gentleman in New York, saying, "I have been amused, I think deceived. "- Journals, III, 216. Ed. 342 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH, England, subsisting under a different civil government. We have in America the Church of Holland, of Scotland, of Sweden, of Moravia, and why not of England ? Our being the Church of England, no more implies dependence on or subjection to England, than being of the Church of Holland implies subjection to Holland. The plea of the Methodists is something like impudence. Mr. Wesley is only a presbyter, and all his ordinations Presbyterian, and in direct opposition to the Church of England. And they can have no pretence for calling themselves Churchmen, till they return to the unity of the Church, which they have unreasonably, unnecessarily, and wickedly broken, by their separation and schism. Your two cautions, respecting recommendations and titles, are certainly just. Till you are so happy as to have a bishop of your own, it will be a pleasure to me to do any thing I can for the supply of your churches. And I am con- fident the clergy of Maryland and the other states, will be very particular with regard to the qualifications and titles of persons to be admitted into their own order. Should they think proper to send any candidates hither, I would wish that it might be at the stated times of ordination; because the clergy here being so scattered, it is not easy, on every emergency, to get three of them together; and never with- out some expense, which they can not well afford. I can not omit to mention again the particular satisfaction Mr. Ferguson gave, not only to me, but to all our clergy. I hope he will prove a worthy and useful clergyman. I flat- ter myself he got home without any disagreeable accident. '\jr I I thank you for your communication respecting Wash- ;( ingtan College, and the various conventions you have had in your state and neighborhood. The clergy and laity have particular merit in making so great exertions, to get our Church into a settled and respectable state. But on subjects of such magnitude and variety, it is to be ex- pected that sentiments will differ. All men do not always see the same object in the same light; and persons at a APPENDIX. 343 distance are not always masters of the precise reasons and circumstances, which have occasioned particular modes of acting. Of some things therefore in your proceedings I can not be a competent judge, without minute information; and I am very sorry that my present circumstances and duty here, will not permit me to make so long a journey at this time; because by personal interview and conversa- tion only, can such information be had. But, my dear sir, there are some things which, if I do not much misapprehend, are really wrong. In giving my opinion of them, I must claim the same privilege of judg- ing for myself which others claim, and also that right of fair and candid interpretation of my sentiments which is due to all men. 1. I think you have done wrong in establishing so many and so precise fundamental rules. You seem hereby to have precluded yourselves from the benefit of after con- sideration. And by having the power of altering funda- mental laws diffused through so large a body, it appears to me next to impossible to have them altered, even in some reasonable cases; because cases really reasonable may not appear so to two thirds of so large an assembly. It should also be remembered, that while human nature is as it is, something of party passion or partiality will ever be apt, in some degree, to influence the views and debates of a numerous and mixed assembly. 2. I think you have too much circumscribed the power of your bishops. That the duty and office of a bisJiop differs in nothing from that of other priests, except in the power of ordination and confirmation, (Pamphlet, p. 16,) is a position that carries Jerome's opinion to the highest pitch. Quid , facit Episcopus quod presbyter non faciat, excepta ordina- , tione f But it does not appear that Jerome had the sup- port of the Church in this opinion, but rather the contrary. Government^ as essentially pertains to bishops as ordina- tion; nay, ordination is but the particular exercise of gov- ernment. Whatever share of government presbyters have 344 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. in the Church, they have from the bishop, and must ex- ercise it in conjunction with or in subordination to him. And though a congregation may have a right, and I am willing to allow it, to choose their minister, as they are to support him and live under his ministry, yet the bishop's concurrence or license is necessary, because they are part of his charge; has the care of their souls; and therefore the minister's authority to take charge of that congregation must come through the bishop. The choice of the bishop is in the presbyters; but the neighboring bishops, who are to consecrate him, must have the right of judging whether he be a proper person or not. The presbyters are the bishop's council, with whom he ought to do nothing but matters of course. The presbyters have always a check upon their bishop; because they can, neither bishop nor presbyters, do any thing beyond the common course of duty, without each other. I mean with regard to a particular diocese; for it does not appear that presbyters had any seat in general councils, but by partic- ular indulgence. The people, being the patrons of the churches in this country, and having the means of the bishop's and minis- ter's support in their hands, have a sufficient restraint upon them. In cases that require it, they can apply to their bishop, who, with the assistance of his presbyters, will pro- ceed, as the case may require, to censure, suspension, or deposition of the offending clergyman. If a bishop behaves amiss, the neighboring bishops are his judges. Men that are not to be trusted with these powers are not fit to be bishops or presbyters at all. This, I take it, is the constitution of the Christian Church, in its pure and simple state. And it is a constitution which, if adhered to, will carry itself into good effect. This con- stitution we have adopted in Connecticut; and we do hope and trust that we shall, by God's grace, exhibit to the world, in our government, discipline, and order, a pure and perfect model of primitive simplicity. APPENDIX. 34 5 * Presbyters can not be too careful in choosing their bish- op; nor the people in choosing their minister. Improper men may, however, sometimes succeed; and so they will, make exact rules as you can, and circumscribe their power as you can. And an improper man in the Church is an im- proper man, however he came there, and however his power be limited. The more you circumscribe him, the greater temptation he is under to form a party to support him; and when his party is formed, all the power of your convention will not be able to displace him. In short, if you get a bad man, your laws and regulations will not be effectual; if a good man, the general laws of the Church are sufficient. . Where civil states have made provision for ministers, it seems reasonable that they should define the qualifications, and regulate the conduct of those who are to enjoy the emoluments. But voluntary associations for the exercise of such powers as your convention is to have, are always apt, such is the infirmity of human nature, to fall into parties; and when party enters, animosity and discord soon follow. From what has been said, you will suppose I shall object. 3. To the admission of lay members into synods, etc. ^ V & t I have as great a regard for the laity as any man can have. It is for their sake that ministers are appointed in the Church. I have no idea of aggrandizing the clergy at the expense of the laity; nor indeed of aggrandizing them at all. Decent means of living is all they have a right to ex- pect. But I can not conceive that the laity can, with any propriety, be admitted to sit in judgment on bishops and \ presbyters; especially when deposition may be the event; because they can not take away a character which they can not confer. It is incongruous to every idea of Episco- pal government. That authority which confers power, can, for proper reasons, take it away. But where there is no authority to confer power, there can be none to disannul it. Wherever therefore the power of ordination is lodged, the } power of deprivation is lodged also. Should it be thought necessary that the laity should 346 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. have a share in the choice of their bishop, if it can be put on a proper footing, so as to avoid party and confusion, I see not but that it might be admitted. But I do not apprehend that this was the practice of the primitive Church. In short, the rights of the Christian Church arise, not from nature or compact, but from the institution of Christ; and we ought not to alter them, but to receive and maintain them as the holy apostles left them. The government, sacraments, faith, and doctrine of the Church, are fixed and settled. We have a right to examine ivhat they are, but we must take them as they are. If we new model the government, why not the sacraments, creeds, and doctrines of the Church ? But then it would not be Christ's Church, but our Church, and would remain so, call it by what name we please. I do therefore beseech the clergy and laity, who shall meet at Philadelphia, to reconsider the matter, before a final step be taken: and to endeavor to bring their Church government as near to the primitive pattern as may be. They will find it the simplest and most easy to carry into effect; and if it be adhered to, will be in no danger of sinking or failing. I do not think it necessary that the Church, in every state, should be just as the Church in Connecticut is; though I think that the best model. Particular circum- stances, I know, will call for particular considerations. But in so essential a matter as Church government is, no alteration should be made to affect its foundation. If a man be called a bishop who has not the Episcopal jxnver of government, he is called by a wrong name, even though he should have the power of ordination and confirmation. Let me therefore again entreat, that such material al- terations, and forgive me if I say unjustifiable ones, may not be made in the government of the Church. I have written freely, as becomes an honest man; and in a case which I think calls for freedom of sentiment and expression. I wish not to give offence, and I hope none will be taken. APPENDIX. 347 Whatever I can do consistently to assist in procuring bish- ops in America, I shall do cheerfully, but beyond that I can not go; and I am sure neither you, nor any of the friends of the Church, would wish I should. If any expression in this letter should seem too warm, I will be ready to correct the mode, but the sentiments I must retain till I find them wrong, and then I will freely give them up. In this matter I am not interested; my ground is taken, and I wish not to extend my authority beyond its proper limits. But I do most earnestly wish to have our churches in all the states so settled, that it may be one Church united in government, doctrine, and disci- pline that there may be no division among us no oppo- sition of interests no clashing of opinions. And permit me to hope that you will, at your approaching convention, so far recede in the points I have mentioned, as to make this practicable. Your convention will be large and very much to be respected. Its determination will influence many of the American States, and posterity will be ma- terially affected by them. These considerations are so many arguments for calm and cool deliberation. Human passions and prejudiccb, and, if possible, infirmities, should be laid aside. A wrong step will be attended with dreadful consequences. Pa- tience and prudence must be exercised. And should there be some circumstances that press hard for a remedy, hasty decisions will hot mend them. In doubtful cases they will probably have a bad effect. May the Spirit of God be with you at Philadelphia, and as I persuade myself the sole good of His Church is the sole aim of you all, I hope for the best effects from your meeting. I send you the alterations which it has been here thought proper to make in the Liturgy, to accommodate it to the civil constitution of this state. You will observe, that there is no Collect for the Congress. We have no back- wardness in that respect, but thought it our duty to know whether the civil authority in this state has any directions 348 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. to give in that matter; and that can not be known till their next meeting in October. Some other alterations were proposed, of which Mr. Ferguson took a copy; and I would send you a copy had I time to transcribe it. The matter will be resumed at New Haven the nth of September. Should we come to any determination, the brethren to the southward shall be informed of it. With my best regards to the convention and to you, I remain your affectionate humble servant, (Signed,) SAMUEL, Biihop of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. I have taken the liberty to enclose a copy of my letters of consecration, which you will please to communicate to the convention; you will also perceive it to be my wish that this letter should be communicated to them; to which, I presume, there can be no objection. No. 5. Page 114. Address of the Convention of 1785, to the English Prelates. To the Most Reverend and Right Reverend the Archbishops of Canter- bury and York, and the Bishops of the Church of England. We, the Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in sundry of the United States of Amer- ica, think it our duty to address your Lordships on a sub- ject deeply interesting, not only to ourselves and those whom we represent, but, as we conceive, to the common cause of Christianity. Our forefathers, when they left the land of their nativity, did not leave the bosom of that Church, over which your Lordships now preside; but, as well from a veneration for Episcopal government, as from an attachment to the admi- rable services of our Liturgy, continued in willing connection with their ecclesiastical superiors in England, and were APPENDIX, 349 subjected to many local inconveniencies, rather than break the unity of the Church to which they belonged. When it pleased the Supreme Ruler of the universe, that this part of the British Empire should be free, sovereign, and independent, it became the most important concern of the members of our communion to provide for its continu- ance. And while, in accomplishing this, they kept in view that wise and liberal part of the system of the Church of England, which excludes as well the claiming as the ac- knowledging of such spiritual subjection as may be incon- sistent with the civil duties of her children, it was never- theless their earnest desire and resolution to retain the venerable form of Episcopal government, handed down to them, as they conceived, from the time of the apostles; and endeared to them, by the remembrance of the holy bishops of the primitive Church, of the blessed martyrs who re- formed the doctrine and worship of the Church of England, and of the many great and pious prelates who have adorned that Church in every succeeding age. But however gener- al the desire of completing the orders of our ministry, so diffused and unconnected were the members of our com- munion over this extensive country, that much time and negotiation were necessary for the forming of a representa- tive body of the greater number of the Episcopalians in these states; and owing to the same causes, it was not until this convention, that sufficient powers could be pro- cured for the addressing of your Lordships on this subject. The petition which we offer to your venerable body is that from a tender regard to the religious interests of thou- sands in this rising empire, professing the same religious principles with the Church of England, you will be pleased 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. 350 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Whether this, our request, will meet with insurmount- able impediments, from the political regulations of the king- dom in which your Lordships fill such distinguished stations, it is not for us to foresee. We have not ascertained that any such will exist; and are humbly of opinion, that as citizens of these states, interested in their prosperity, and religiously regarding the allegiance which we owe them, it is to an ec- clesiastical source only we can apply in the present exigency. It maybe of consequence to observe, that in these states there is a separation between the concerns of policy, and those of religion; that accordingly, our civil rulers can not officially join in the present application; that, however, we are far from apprehending the opposition or even displeas- ure of any of those honorable personages; and, finally, that in this business we are justified by the constitutions of the states, which are the foundations and control of all our laws. On this point we beg leave to refer to the enclosed extracts from the constitutions of the respective states of which we are citizens, and we flatter ourselves that they must be satisfactory. Thus, we have stated to your Lordships the nature and the grounds of our application; which we have thought it most respectful and most suitable to the magnitude of the object, to address to your Lordships for your deliberation, before any person is sent over to carry them into effect. Whatever may be the event, no time will efface the re- membrance of the past services of your Lordships and your predecessors. The Archbishops of Canterbury were not prevented, even by the weighty concerns of their high sta- tions, from attending to the interests of this distant branch of the Church under their care. The Bishops of London were our diocesans; and the uninterrupted, although volun- tary submission of our congregations, will remain a per- petual proof of their mild and paternal government. All the bishops of England, with other distinguished characters, as well ecclesiastical as civil, have concurred in forming and carrying on the benevolent views of the Society for the Prop- APPENDIX. 351 agation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts; a society to whom, under God, the prosperity of our Church is in an eminent degree to be ascribed. It is our earnest wish to be per- mitted to make, through your Lordships, this just acknowl- edgment to that venerable society; a tribute of gratitude which we the rather take this opportunity of paying, as while they thought it necessary to withdraw their pecu- niary assistance from our ministers, they have endeared their past favors by a benevolent declaration, that it is far from their thoughts to alienate their affection from their brethren now under another government; with the pious wish, that their former exertions may still continue to bring forth the fruits they aimed at, of pure religion and virtue. Our hearts are penetrated with the most lively gratitude by these general sentiments; the long succession of former benefits passes in review before us; we pray that our Church may be a lasting monument of the usefulness of so worthy a body; and that her sons may never cease to be kindly affectioned to the members of that Church, the fathers of which have so tenderly watched over her infancy. For your Lordships in particular, we most sincerely wish and pray, that you may long continue the ornaments of the Church of England, and at last receive the reward of the righteous, from the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls. We are, with all the respect which is due to your exalt- ed and venerable characters and stations, Your Lordships Most obedient, and Most humble servants.* In Convention, Christ Church, Philadelphia, October $th, 1785. The preceding address and consequent measures for ob- taining the Episcopacy, were contemplated by the following plan of the convention, recorded on their journal. Ordered: First, That this convention address the archbishops and * Signed by all the members. 352 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. bishops of the Church of England, requesting them to con- fer the Episcopal character on such persons as shall be chosen and recommended to them for that purpose, from the conventions of this Church in the respective states. Secondly, That it be recommended to the said conven- tions, that they elect persons for this purpose. Thirdly, That it be further recommended to the different conventions, at their next respective sessions, to appoint committees, with powers, to correspond with the English bishops for the carrying of these resolutions into effect; and that, until such committees shall be appointed, they be re- quested to direct any communications which they may be pleased to make on this subject to the committee, consist- ing of the Rev. Dr. White, president, the Rev. Dr. Smith, the Rev. Mr. Provoost, the Honorable James Duane, Esq., and Samuel Powell and Richard Peters, Esqs. Fourthly, That it be further recommended to the different conventions, that they pay especial attention to the making it appear to their Lordships, that the persons who shall be sent to them for consecration, are desired in the character of bishops, as well by the laity as by the clergy of this Church, in the said states respectively; and that they will be received by them in that character on their return. Fifthly, And in order to assure their Lordships of the legality of the present proposed application, that the depu- ties now assembled be desired to make a respectful address to the civil rulers of the states in which they respectively reside, to certify that the said application is not contrary to the constitutions and laws of the same. Sixthly, And, whereas, the bishops of this Church will not be entitled to any of such temporal honors as are due to the archbishops and bishops of the parent Church, in quality of lords of parliament; and whereas the reputation and usefulness of our bishops will considerably depend on their taking no higher titles or style than will be due to their spiritual employment; that it be recommended to this Church in the states here represented, to provide, that their APPENDIX. 353 respective bishops may be called, "The Right Rev. A. B., Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in C. D." and, as bishop, may have no other title; and may not use any such style as is usually descriptive of temporal power and precedency. No. 6. Page 125. Letter of the English Prelates. LONDON, FEBRUARY 24, 1786. To the Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in sundry of the United States of Amenta. The Archbishop of Canterbury hath received an address, dated in convention, Christ Church, Philadelphia, Octo- ber 5, 1785, from the Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Prot- estant Episcopal Church in sundry of the United States of America, directed to the archbishops and bishops of Eng- land, 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 despatch as their separate and distant situations would per- mit, and hath been received and considered by them with that true and affectionate regard which they have always shown towards their 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 exer- cise of our holy religion, and the enjoyment of that ecclesi- astical 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 354 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. persuaded, that we, on our parts, will use our best endeav- ors, 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 candor can suggest for the difficulties of your situation; but, at the same time, we can not help being j afraid, that, in the proceedings of your convention, some ; alterations may have been adopted or intended, which those i 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 affection, but of our facility in forwarding your wishes, we can not but be extremely cautious, lest we should be the instruments of establishing an ecclesiastical system which will be called a branch of the Church of Eng- land, but afterwards may possibly appear to have departed from it essentially, either in doctrine or in discipline. In the mean time, we heartily commend you to God's holy protection, and are, your affectionate brethren, J. ROCHESTER, T. CANTUAR, R. WORCESTER, W. EBOR, I. OXFORD, R. LONDON, I. EXETER, W. CHICHESTER, THO. LINCOLN, C. BATH & WELLS, JOHN BANGOR, S. ST. ASAPH, I. LICHFIELD & COVENTRY, S. GLOUCESTER, S. SARUM, E. ST. DAVID'S, J. PETERBOROUGH, CHR. BRISTOL, JAMES ELY. T tht Reverend and Honorable the Clerical and Lay Dtputiet of the Protestant Epiteofil Church in tundry of the United States of America, Philadelphia. APPENDIX. 355 No. 7. Page 137. A Memorial from the Convention in New Jersey, to the Gen- eral Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of A merica, to be held in the City of Phila- delpliia in June next. The Memorial of the Convention of the said Church in New Jersey, now held in the City of Perth Amboy, RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH, That your Memorialists have unanimously approved of the alterations in the Liturgy as they appear in the new Prayer Book, to render it consistent with the American revolution and the constitutions of the respective states, as made and concluded on by the late General Convention of said Church, held at Philadelphia in September and Octo- ber last; they being satisfactory and agreeable to their wish. They have also approved of their plan for obtaining consecration of bishops; and pursuant to their recommen- dation, have appointed a committee to correspond with the English bishops for that purpose. They have also, with great pleasure, considered their address to the archbishops and bishops of the Church of England; which your Memorialists are of opinion, was prop- erly calculated to obtain the end proposed. But it is with the greatest concern they are constrained to remark, that the other proceedings of the said conven- tion, in their opinion, have an undoubted tendency to pro- long, if not entirely prevent, the obtaining the prayer thereof. In this opinion your Memorialists conceive they are supported by the answer of the said venerable bishops, with a copy of which they have been favored during their sitting at this place; for which reason, among others, they did not ratify, but disapproved of the other parts of the proceedings of the said late General Convention. 356 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Your Memorialists do not question the right of every national or independent Church, to make such alterations, from time to time, in the mode of its public worship, as upon mature consideration may be found expedient; but they doubt the right of any order or orders of men in an Episcopal Church, without a bishop, to make any altera- tions not warranted by immediate necessity; especially such as not only go to the mode of its worship, but also to its doctrines. Wherefore your Memorialists can not for- / bear remarking, that in their opinion, all unnecessary al- terations must be unseasonable and impolitic, and will prove highly detrimental to the Church in general. Your Memorialists can not approve of the said late Gen- eral Convention having published, in the manner they have, the new Book of Common Prayer as altered, with the psalms and calendar transposed and changed by their com- mittee without their revision and express approbation; but since they have done so, and if it was proper to have been considered, your Memorialists have to regret, that the same was not sooner published, that they might have been enabled to have declared the sentiments of their constit- uents as well as their own. The prejudices and prepos- sessions of mankind in favor of old customs, especially in religious matters, are generally so strong as to require great delicacy and caution in the introduction of any alter- ations or innovations, although manifestly for the better; which was also one reason why they could not at this time ratify the alterations, so unnecessarily made; and they are very apprehensive, that until alterations can be made con- si-tent with the customs of the primitive Church, and with . the rules of the Church of England, from which it is our boast to have descended, a ratification of them would cre- ate great uneasiness in the minds of many members of the Church, and in great probability cause dissensions and schisms. 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. APPENDIX. 357 Your Memorialists, having an anxious desire of cement- ing, perpetuating, and extending the union so happily be- gun in the Church, with all deference and submission, hum- bly request and entreat the said General Convention, now soon to meet, that they will revise the proceedings of the said late convention and their aforesaid committee, and re- move every cause that may have excited any jealousy or fear, that the Episcopal Church in the United States of \ America have any intention or desire essentially to depart, either in doctrine or discipline from the Church of Eng- / land; but, on the contrary, to convince the world that it is / their wish and intention, to maintain the doctrines of the Gospel as now held by the Church of England, and to ad- here to the Liturgy of the said Church as far as shall be consistent with the American revolution, and the constitu- tion of the respective states; thereby removing every ob- stacle in the way of obtaining the consecration of such and so many persons to the Episcopal character as shall render our ecclesiastical government complete, and secure to the Episcopalians in America, and to their descendants, a suc- cession of that necessary order: And that they will use all means in their power to promote and perpetuate harmony and unanimity among ourselves, and with the said Church of England as a mother or sister Church, and with every Protestant Church in the universe. By order of the convention, ABRAHAM BEACH, President. Perth Amboy, May 19, 1786. 358 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 8. Page 137. Second Address to the English Prelates. To Ihe Most Reverend and Right Reverend Fathers in God, the Arch- bishops and Bishops of the Church of England. MOST WORTHY AND VENERABLE PRELATES, We, the Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina, have received the friendly and affectionate letter which your Lordships did us the honor to write on the 24th day of February, and for which we request you to accept our sincere and grateful acknowledgments. It gives us pleasure to be assured, that the success of our application will probably meet with no greater obstacles than what have arisen from doubts respecting the extent of the alterations we have made and proposed; and we are hap- py to learn, that as no political impediments oppose us here, those which at present exist in England may be removed. While doubts remain of our continuing to hold the same essential articles of faith and discipline with the Church of England, we acknowledge the propriety of suspending a compliance with our request. We are unanimous and explicit in assuring your Lord- ships, that we neither have departed nor propose to depart from the doctrines of your Church. We have retained the same discipline and forms of worship, as far as was consist- ent with our civil constitutions; and we have made no alterations or omissions in the Book of Common Prayer, but such as that consideration prescribed, and such as were calculated to remove objections, which it appeared to us more conducive to union and general content to obviate, than to dispute. It is well known, that many great and pious men of the Church of England have long wished for a revision of the Liturgy, which it was deemed imprudent to hazard, lest it might become a precedent for repeated and APPENDIX. 3^9 improper alterations. This is with us the proper season for such a revision. We are now 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. We are anxious to complete our Episcopal system by means of the Church of England. We esteem and prefer it, and with gratitude acknowledge the patronage and fa- vors for which, while connected, we have constantly been indebted to that Church. These considerations, added to that of agreement in faith and worship, press us to repeat our former request, and to endeavor to remove your pres- ent hesitation, by sending you our proposed ecclesiastical Constitution and Book of Common Prayer. These documents, we trust, will afford a full answer to every question that can arise on the subject. We consider your Lordships' letter as very candid and kind; we repose full confidence in the assurances it gives; and that confidence, together with the liberality and Catholicism of your venerable body, leads us to flatter ourselves, that you will not disclaim a branch of your Church merely for having been in your Lordships' opinion, if that should be the case, pruned rather more closely than its separation made absolutely necessary. We have only to add, that as our Church in sundry of these states has already proceeded to the election of per- sons to be sent for consecration, and others may soon pro- ceed to the same, we pray to be favored with as speedy an answer to this, our second address, as in your great good- ness you were pleased to give to our former one. We are, With great and sincere respect, Most worthy and venerable Prelates, Your obedient, and Very humble servants,* In Convention, Christ Church, Philadelphia, June 26, 1786. * Signed by all the members. 3*6c MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 9. Page 137. Communications from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. To the Committee of the General Convention at Philadelphia, the Rev. Dr. White, President, the Rev. Dr. Smith, the Rev. Mr. Provoosi, the Honorable James Duane, Samuel Powell, and Richard Peters, Esqs. Mr. 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 comply 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 com- munications with regard to your Liturgy, Articles, and ec- clesiastical 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 archbishops 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 its own ex- cellence, and your declared attachment to it, had led us to expect. Not to mention a variety of verbal alterations, of the necessity or propriety of which we are by no means sat- isfied, we saw with grief, that two of the confessions of our APPENDIX. 361 Christian faith; respectable for their antiquity, have been entirely 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 partic- i ular 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 and some other alterations, will have their desired effect, we have, even un- der 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 recom- mended, without requiring from them any oaths or sub- scriptions inconsistent with the situation in which the late revolution has placed them; upon condition that the full satisfaction of the sufficiency of the persons recommended, which you offer to us in your address, be given to the arch- bishops and bishops. You will doubtless receive it as a mark both of our friendly disposition toward 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 re- quested) 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 shown by the Church of England to prevent the intru- sion of unqualified persons into even the inferior offices of our ministry, confirms our own sentiments, and points it out to be our duty, very earnestly to require the most de- cisive proofs of the qualifications of those who may be 362 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. offered for admission to that order, to which the superin- tendence of those offices is committed. At our several or- dinations of a deacon and a priest, the candidate submits himself to the examination of the bishop as to his profi- ciency in learning; he gives the proper security of his sound- ness in the faith by the subscriptions which are made pre- viously necessary; he is required to bring testimonials of his virtuous conversation during the three preceding years; and that no mode of inquiry may be omitted, public 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 impedi- ment 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 in- deed repeated at the consecration of an English bishop, be- cause the person to be consecrated has added to the secu- rities given at his former ordinations, that sanction which arises from his having constantly lived and exercised his ministry under the eyes and observation of his country. But the objects of our present consideration are very differ- ently circumstanced; their sufficiency in learning, the sound- ness 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 present 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 honor 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 apprehend 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 ordina- tion of priests and deacons, might lessen that reverend estimation which ought never to be separated from the APPENDIX. 363 Episcopal character: we therefore do not require any far- ther satisfaction on this point, than will be given to us by the forms of testimonials in the annexed paper; fully trust- ing 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 ecclesiastical 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 yours, if we were not explicit in declaring, that, after the disposition we have shown 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 subscrip- tion, you restore to its integrity the Apostles' Creed, in which you have omitted an article merely, as it seems, from misapprehension 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 your Liturgy, to give to the other two creeds a place in your Book of Common Prayer, even though the use of them should be left discretional. 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 deg- radation of the clerical, and still more of the Episcopal char- acter. \Ve persuade ourselves, that in your ensuing con- vention, some alteration will be thought necessary in this article, before this reaches you; or, if not, that due atten- tion will be given, to it in consequence of our representation. 364 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. On the third and last head, which respects purity of manners, the reputation of the Church, both in England and America, and the interest of our common Christianity, is so deeply concerned in it, that we feel it our indispens- able 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 form, 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 com- posed of those to whom the person to be consecrated is unknown. The testimonials, signed by persons living in England, admit of reference and examination, and the char- acters 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, can- didates for Episcopal consecration, should bring to_us both a_ testimonial from the General Convention of the Epis- copal 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 testimony is not to be expected from the members of the General Conven- tion* of the Episcopal Church in America, on this occasion. We think it sufficient, therefore, that they declare they know no impediment, but believe the person to be conse- crated, 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 APPENDIX. 365 members of the convention in each state from which the persons offered for consecration are respectively recom- mended. Their personal knowledge of them there can be no doubt of. We trust, therefore, they will have no ob- jection to the adoption of the form of a testimonial wHich is annexed, and drawn up on the same principles, and containing the same attestations of personal knowledge with that above mentioned, as required previously to our ordinations. We trust we shall receive these testimonials signed by such a majority in each convention that recom- mend, 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 it right to communicate to you without reserve at present, intending to give you fur- ther 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, Mr. President, and Gentlemen, your affectionate brethren, J. CANTUAR. W. EBOR. Form of a Testimonial for Priest's Orders in England. To the Right Rev. Father in God , by Divine Per- nlission Lord Bishop of . We, whose names are here underwritten, testify from our personal knowledge of the life and behavior of A. B., for the space of three years last past, that he hath, during that time, lived piously, soberly and honestly: Nor hath he at any time, as far as we know or believe, written, taught, or held, any thing contrary to the doctrine or, discipline of the Church of England. And, moreover, we think him a person worthy to be admitted to the sacred order of priest. In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands. Dated the - - day of , in the year of our Lord . 366 AfEAfOIKS OF THE CHURCH. Testimony from the General Convention. We, whose names are underwritten, fully sensible how important it is that the sacred office of a bishop should not be unworthily conferred, and firmly persuaded that it is our duty to bear our testimony on this solemn occasion without partiality or affection, do, in the presence of Almighty God, testify, that A. B. is not, so far as we are informed, justly liable to evil report, either for error in religion or for viciousness of life; and that we do not know or believe there is any impediment or notable crime, on account of which he ought not to be consecrated to that holy office, but that he hath led his life, for the three years last past, piously, soberly, and honestly. Testimony from the Members of the Convention in the State from whence the Person is recommended for Consecration. We, whose names are underwritten, fully sensible how important it is that the sacred office of a bishop should not be unworthily conferred, and firmly persuaded that it is our duty to bear testimony on this solemn occasion without partiality or affection, do, in the presence of Almighty God, testify, that A. B. is not, so far as we are informed, justly liable to evil report either for error in religion or for viciousness of life; and that we do not know or believe there is any impediment or notable crime for which he ought not to be consecrated to that holy office. We do, moreover, jointly and severally declare, that having per- sonally known him for three years last past, we do in our consciences believe him to be of such sufficiency in good learning, such soundness in the faith, and of such virtuous and pure manners and godly conversation, that he is apt and meet to exercise the office of a bishop, to the honor of God and the edifying of his Church, and to be an whole' some example to the flock of Christ. APPENDIX. 367 No. 10. Page 137. Communication from the Archbishop of Canterbury. CANTERBURY, JULY 4, 1786. To the Committee of the General Convention, etc. , etc. GENTLEMEN, The enclosed act being now passed, I have the satisfac- tion of communicating it to you. It is accompanied by a copy of a letter, and some forms of testimonials, which I sent you by the packet of last month. It is the opin- { ion here, that no more than three bishops should be con- secrated for the United States of America; who may con- secrate others at their return, if more be found necessary. But whether we can consecrate any, or not, must yet depend on the answers we may receive, to what we have \ written. I am, your humble servant, J. CANTUAR. An Act to empower the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, for the Time being, to Consecrate to the Office of a Bishop, Persons being Subjects or Citizens of Countries out of his Majesty's Dominions. Whereas, by the laws of this realm no person can be consecrated to the office of a bishop, without the King's license for his election to that office, and the royal mandate under the great seal for his confirmation and consecration: And, whereas every person who shall be consecrated to the said office, is required to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and also the oath of due obedience to the archbishop: And, whereas there are divers persons subjects or citizens of countries out of his Majesty's dominions, in- habiting and residing within the said countries, who profess the public worship of Almighty God according to the prin- 368 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. ciples of the Church of England, and who, in order to pro- vide a regular succession of ministers for the service of their Church, are desirous of having certain of the subjects or citizens of those countries consecrated bishops, according to the form of consecration in the Church of England: Be it enacted by the King's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and tem- poral, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, that from and after the passing of this act, it shall and may be lawful to and for the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, for the time being, together with such other bishops as they shall call to their assistance, to consecrate persons being subjects or citizens of countries out of his Majesty's dominions, bishops for the purposes aforesaid, without the King's license for their election, or the royal mandate under the great seal for their confirmation and consecration, and without requiring them to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the oath of due obedience to the archbishop for the time being. Provided always, that no persons shall be consecrated bishops in the maaner herein provided, un- til the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, for the time being, shall have first applied for, and obtained his Majesty's license, by warrant under his royal signet and sign manual, authorizing and empowering him to perform such consecration, and expressing the name or names of the persons so to be consecrated; nor until the said archbishop has been fully ascertained of their suffi- ciency in good learning, of the soundness of their faith, and of the purity of their manners. Provided also, and be it hereby declared, that no person or persons consecrated to the office of a bishop in the manner aforesaid, nor any per- son or persons deriving their consecration from or under any bishops so consecrated, nor any person or persons admitted to the order of deacon or priest by any bishop or bishops so consecrated, or by the successor or successors of any bishop or bishops so consecrated, shall be thereby en- APPENDIX. 369 abled to exercise his or their respective office or offices within his Majesty's dominions. Provided always, and be it further enacted, that a certificate of such consecration shall be given under the hand and seal of the archbishop who consecrates, containing the name of the person so con- secrated, with the addition as well of the country whereof he is a subject or citizen, as of the Church in which he is appointed bishop, and the further description of his not having taken the said oaths, being exempted from the obligation of so doing by virtue of this act. No. II. Page 139. Address to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. MOST WORTHY AND VENERABLE PRELATES, In pursuance of your Graces' communications to the Standing Committee of our Church, received by the June packet, and the letter of his Grace the Archbishop of Can- terbury, of July the 4th, enclosing the act of parliament, "to empower the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Arch- bishop of York, for the time being, to consecrate to the office of a bishop, persons being subjects or citizens of coun- tries out of his Majesty's dominions," a General Convention, now sitting, have the honor of offering their unanimous and hearty thanks for the continuance of your Christian atten- tion to this Church; and particularly for your having so speedily acquired a legal capacity, of complying with the prayer of our former addresses. We have taken into our most serious and deliberate consideration, the several matters so affectionately recom- mended to us in those communications, and whatever could be done towards a compliance with your fatherly wishes and advice, consistently with our local circumstances, and the peace and unity of our Church, hath been agreed to; 370 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. as, we trust, will appear from the enclosed act of our con- vention, which we have the honor to transmit to you, to- gether with the journal of our proceedings. We are, with great and sincere respect, Most worthy and venerable prelates, Your obedient and very humble servants, (By order,) SAMUEL PROVOOST, Pres't. In General Convention, At Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, October ntk. 1786. No. 12. Page 140. A Letter from Granville Sharp, Esq., to Dr. Benjamin Franklin, with Extracts of Letters. Extract of a Letter from Granville Sharp to the Archbishop of Can- terbury, dated \$th September, 1785. " All these circumstances prove that the present time is very important and critical for the promotion of the inter- ests and future extension of the Episcopal Church in Amer- ica, and that no time should be lost in obtaining authority for the archbishops and bishops of England to dispense with the oaths of allegiance in the consecration of bishops for for- eign Churches, that they may be restored to their unques- tionable right as Christian bishops to extend the Episcopal Church of Christ all over the world." "An immediate interference is become the more neces- sary, not only on account of the pretensions of Dr. Seabury, and the nonjuring bishops of Scotland (to which, however, I hope my letters will have given a timely check), but also to guard against the presumption of Mr. Wesley and other Methodists; who, it seems, have sent over some persons un- der the name of superintendents, with an assumed author- ity to ordain priests, as if they were really invested with Episcopal authority." APPENDIX. 371 "Some accounts of this were read to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in May last, from the letters of their missionaries; and I have since heard that some Methodistical clergymen have procured consecration from the Moravian CJmrches, which the latter had received from the bishops of Poland. These attempts of the sectaries prove, however, that they perceive among the Americans an increasing inclination towards Episcopal government, of which they want to take an undue advantage; and conse- quently they prove, also, that the exertions of every sincere friend to the Church of England are peculiarly necessary at this time to counteract them, and to facilitate the commu- nication of a pure and irreprehensible Episcopacy to Amer- ica, by removing the obstacles which at present restrain the archbishops and bishops of England, from extending the Church of England beyond the bounds of English government" " I should also inform your Grace, that America is not the only part wherein Protestant Episcopacy is likely to be extended, when the rights of election are better understood: for had I been prepared, in the year 1767, on this point, as I am at present, I have reason to believe that a Protestant Episcopal Church would have been promoted in Holland, and in several parts of Germany and Switzerland, long be- fore this time." " How I happened to be concerned in so important an affair (if your Grace should have leisure and curiosity to be informed), I am ready to communicate on receiving your commands," etc. Extract of a Letter from Granville Sharp to the Archbishop of Can- terbury, dated \"]th of February, 1786. " Since I had the honor of speaking to your Grace on this subject, I have perused Dr. Smith's sermon, which was preached before the convention at Philadelphia; and though 372 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. I have still great fears about the propriety of the alterations they have made in the Liturgy, yet there seems to be some ground to hope that they will be able to assign a reason- able excuse for the changes, without giving occasion to suspect any want of belief in the several articles which they have omitted; for Dr. Smith plainly insinuates, that they proceeded on the model of the alterations that were proposed to the English convocation in jjSSp; for which, several circumstances have induced me to entertain a fa- vorable opinion. In looking over the MS. account of Arch- bishop Sharp's life, I find that he was one of the King's commissioners for that business, and took infinite pains therein, being sensible that some alterations might be made with advantage. He was also the person who first pro- posed, in convocation, that Dr. Tillotson should be ap- pointed prolocutor, in order to favor the intended altera- tions. Dr. Nichols has given a short general account of that business in his ' Apparatus ad Defcnsionem Ecclesia Anglican* l> *~ ' shall have passed in the General Convention, the same^vy . shall be transmitted to the house of revision, for their con- currence. And if the same shall be sent back to the con- vention, with the negative or non-concurrence of the house of revision, it shall be again considered in the General Con- vention, and if the convention 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 Jl -&L 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 Jnjvvritmg, within two days after the proposed act shall have been reported to them for concurrence, 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 mem- ber 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 every state shall be chosen agreeably to such rules as shall be fixed by the con- vention of that state. And every bishop of this Church shall confine the exercise of his Episcopal office to his 404 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. 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 Constitution. 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 one or more of the S Episcopal order present; and none but a bishop shall pro- ) nounce sentence of deposition or degradation from the min- istry 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 be- lieve 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." 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 Con- vention, shall be used in the Protestant Episcopal Church in these states, which shall have adopted this Constitution. ART. 9. This Constitution shall be unalterable, unless in General Convention by the Church in a majority of the APPENDIX. 405 states which may have adopted the same; and all altera- tions 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. Alterations in the Subsequent Session. "The committee reported, that they have had a full, free, and friendly conference with the deputies of the said Churches, who, on behalf of the Church in their several states, and by virtue of sufficient authority from them, have signified, that they do not object to the Constitution, which was approved at the former session of this convention, if the Third Article of that Constitution may be so modified, as to declare explicitly the right of the bishops, when sitting in a separate house, to originate and propose acts for the con- currence of the other house of convention; and to nega- tive such acts proposed by the other house as they may disapprove. " Your committee, conceiving this alteration to be desir- able in itself, as having a tendency to give greater stability to the Constitution, without diminishing any security that is now possessed by the clergy or laity; and being sincerely impressed with the importance^ of a union to the future prosperity of the Church, clo therefore recommend to the convention a compliance with the wishes of their brethren, and that the Third Article of the Constitution may be altered accordingly. Upon such alteration being made, it is de- clared by the deputies from the Churches in the eastern states, that they will subscribe the Constitution, and be- come members of this General Convention." Upon special motion, the above report was read a second time; whereupon the following resolution was proposed, viz. Resolved, That this convention do adopt that part of the report of the committee which proposes to modify the 406 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. Third Article of the Constitution, so as to declare explicitly " the right of the bishops, when sitting in a separate house, to originate and propose acts for the concurrence of the other house of convention; and to negative such acts pro- posed by the other house, as they may disapprove; pro- vided they are not adhered to by four fifths of the other house." After some debate, the resolution, with the proviso an- nexed, was agreed upon, and the Third Article was accord- ingly modified in the manner following, viz. ART. 3d. The Bishops of this Church, when there shall be three or more, shall, whenever General Conventions are held, form a separate Jiouse, with a right to originate and propose acts for the concurrence of the House of Deputies, composed 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 a nega- tive 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 disapprobation, the latter, with their reasons in writing, within three days after the proposed act shall have been reported to them for concurrence: and in failure thereof, it shall have the opera- tion of a law. But until there shall be three or more bishops as aforesaid, any bishop attending a General Convention shall be a member, cx-officio, and shall vote with the clerical depu- ties of the state to which he belongs; and a bishop shall then preside. APPENDIX. 407 Acceptance by Bishop Seabury, and the Presbyters from New England. OCTOBER 2, 1789. We do hereby agree to the Constitution of the Church, as modified this day in convention. SAMUEL SEABURY, D.D., Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. ABRAHAM JARVIS, A.M., Rector of Christ Church, Middletown, Connecticut. BELA HUBBARD, A.M., Rector of Trinity Church, New Haven, Connecticut. SAMUEL PARKER, D.D., Rector of Trinity Church, Boston, and Clerical Deputy for Massachusetts and New Hampshire.* Letters of Consecration of Bishop Seabury, IN DEI NOMINE. Amen. Ommbus ubique Catholicis per Presentes pateat, Nos, Robertum Kilgpur, miseratione divina, Episcopum Aberdonien Arthurum Fetrie, Episcopum Rossen et Mo- ravien et Joannem Skinner, Episcopum Coadjutorem; Mysteria, Sacra Domini nostri Jesu Christi in Oratorio supradicti Joannis Skinner apud Aberdoniam celebrantes, Divini Numinis Praesidio fretos (presentibus tam e Clero, quam e Populo testibus idoneis) Samuelem Seabury, Doc- torem Divinitatis, sacro Presbyteratus ordine jam decora- turn, ac nobis prae Vitae integritate, Morum probitate et Orthodoxia, commendatum, et ad docendum et regendum aptum et idoneum, ad sacrum et sublimem Episcopatus Ordinem promovisse, et rite ac canonice, secundum Morem et Ritus Ecclesiae Scoticanae, consecrasse, Die Novembris * The original, as is often the case with these documents, has abbrevia- tions. Ed. 408 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. decimo quarto, Anno ^Erae Christianae Millesimo Septin- gentesimo Octagcsimo Quarto. In CIIJHS Rci Tcstimonimn, Instrumcnto huic (chirograpJtis nostris prius, munito] Sigilla nostra apponi mandavimus. Roberius Kilgour, Episcopus, et Primus. (L. S.) Arlhurus Petrie, Episcopus. (L. S.) Jotinnes Si-inner, Episcopus, (L. S.) No. 21. Page 199. A Letter from the Rev. Dr. Coke, and the Answer* RIGHT REV. SIR, Permit me to intrude a little on your time upon a sub- ject of great importance. You, I believe, are conscious that I was brought up in the Church of England, and have been ordained a presbyter of that Church. For many years I was prejudiced, even I think to bigotry, in favor of it; but through a variety of causes or incidents, to mention which would be tedious and useless, my mind was exceedingly biassed on the other side of the question. In consequence of this, I am not sure but \ I went further in the separation of our Church in America, than Mr. Wesley, from whom I had received my commission, / did intend. He did indeed solemnly invest me, as far as he had a right so to do,* with Episcopal authority, but did not intend, I think, that an entire separation should take place. He, being pressed by our friends on this side of the water for ministers to administer the sacraments to them (there being very few of the clergy of the Church of England then in the states), went further, I am sure, than he would have gone, if he had foreseen some events which followed. And \ this I am certain of that he is now sorry for the separation. / But what can be done for a reunion, which I much wish The original is in the Archives of the General Convention. Ed. APPENDIX. 409 for, and to accomplish which, Mr. Wesley, I have no doubt, would use his influence to the utmost ? The affection of a very considerable number of the preachers and most of the people, is very strong towards him, notwithstanding the ex- \ cessive ill usage he received from a few. My Interest also is not small, and both his and mine would readily, and to the utmost, be used to accomplish that (to us) very desir- able object; if a readiness were shown by the bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church to reunite. It is even to your CJiurch an object of great importance. We have now above sixty thousand adults in our society in these states, and about two hundred and fifty travelling ministers and preachers; besides a great number of local preachers, very far exceeding the number of travelling preachers; and some of those local preachers are men of very considerable abilities. But if we number the Metho- dists as most people number the members of their Church, viz., by the families which constantly attend the divine or- dinances in their places of worship, they will make a larger body than you probably conceive. The society, I believe, may be safely multiplied by five on an average to give us our stated congregations; which will then amount to three hundred thousand. And if the calculation which, I think, some eminent writers have made, be just, that three fifths of mankind are un-adult (if I may use the expression), at any given period, it will follow that all the families, the adults of which form our congregations in these states, amount to seven hundred and fifty thousand. About one fifth of these are blacks. The work now extends in length from Boston to the south of Georgia; and in breadth from the Atlantic to Lake Champlain, Vermont, Albany, Redstone, Holstein, Ken- tucky, Cumberland, etc. But there are many hindrances in the way. Can they be removed ? i. Our ordained^ ministers will not, ought not, to give up their right of administering the sacraments. I do not think 410 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. that the generality of them, perhaps none of them, would refuse to submit to a re-ordination, if other hindrances were removed out of the way. I must here observe, that between sixty and seventy only out of the two hundred and fifty haVe been ordained presbyters, and about sixty deacons (only). The presbyters are the choicest of the whole. 2. The other preachers would hardly submit to a re- union, if the possibility of their rising up to ordination depended on the present bishops in America. Because, though they are all, I think I may say, zealous, pious, and very useful men, yet they are not acquainted with the learned languages. Besides, they would argue, If the present bishops would waive the article of the learned lan- guages, yet their successors might not. My desire of a reunion is so sincere and earnest, that these difficulties almost make me tremble; and yet some- i thing must be done before^the death of Mr. Wesley, other- L wise I shall despair of success: for though my influence ) among the Methodists in these states as well as in Europe \ is, I doubt not, increasing, yet Mr. Asbury, whose influence \ is very capital, wjll not easily comply; nay, I know he will A be exceedingly averse to it. f In Europe, where some steps had been taken, tending to a separation, all is at an end. Mr. Wesley is ji determined enemy of it, and I have lately borne an open and success- ful testimony against it. Shall I be favored with a private interview with you in Philadelphia? I shall be there, God willing, on Tuesday, the i/th of May. If this be agreeable, I will beg of you just to signify it in a note, directed to me, at Mr. Jacob Baker's, merchant, Market-street, Philadelphia; or, if you please, by a few lines sent me by the return of the post, at Philip Rogers's, Esq., in Baltimore, from yourself or Dr. Magaw, and I will wait upon you with my friend Dr. Magaw. We can then enlarge on these subjects. I am conscious of it, that secrecy is of great importance APPENDIX. 411 in the present state of the business, till the minds of you, your brother bishops, and Mr. Wesley, be circumstantially known. I must therefore beg that these things be confined to yourself and Dr. Magaw, till I have the honor of seeing you. Thus, you see, I have made a bold venture on your hon- or and candor, and have opened my whole heart to you on the subject, as far as the extent of a small letter will allow me. If you put equal confidence in me, you will find me candid and faithful. I have, notwithstanding, been guilty of inadvertencies. Very lately I found myself obliged (for the pacifying of my conscience) to write a penitential letter to the Rev. Mr. Jarratt, which gave him great satisfaction: and for the same reason I must write another to the Rev. Mr. Petti- grew. When I was last in America, I prepared and cor- rected a great variety of things for our magazines, indeed almost every thing that was printed, except some loose hints which I had taken of one of my journeys, and which I left in my hurry with Mr. Asbury, without any correction, entreating that no part of them might be printed which would be improper or offensive. But through great inad- vertency (I suppose) he suffered some reflections on the characters of the two above-mentioned gentlemen to be in- serted in the magazine, for which I am very sorry: and probably shall not rest till I have made my acknowledg- ment more public; though Mr. Jarratt does not desire it. I am not sure whether I have not also offended you, Sir, by accepting of one of the offers made me by you and Dr. Magaw, of the use of your churches, about six years ago, on my first visit to Philadelphia, without informing you of our plan of separation from the Church of England. If I did offend (as I doubt I did especially from what you said on the subject to Mr. Richard Dellam, of Abington), I sin- cerely beg yours and Dr. Magaw's pardon. I will endeavor to amend. But, alas ! I am a frail, weak creature. I will intrude no longer at present. One thing only I 4 I2 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. will claim from your candor that if you have no thoughts of improving this proposal, you will burn this letter, and take no more notice of it (for it would be a pity to have us entirely alienated from each other, if we can not unite in the manner my ardent wishes desire). But if you will fur- ther negotiate the business, I will explain my mind still more fully to you on the probabilities of success. In the mean time permit me, with great respect, to sub- scribe myself, Right Rev. Sir, Your very humble servant in Christ, THOMAS COKE. Richmond, April 24, 1791. The Right Rev. Father in God, Bishop White. You must excuse interlineations, etc., as I am just going into the country, and have no time to transcribe. Answer. REV. SIR, My friend, Dr. Magaw, has this day put into my hands your letter of the 24th of April, which, I trust, I received with a sense of the importance of the subject, and of the answer I am to give to God, for the improvement of every opportunity of building up His Church. Accordingly, I can not but make choice of the earliest of the two ways you point out, to inform you that I shall be very happy in the opportunity of conversing with you at the time proposed. You mention two difficulties in the way of the proposed union. And there are further difficulties which suggest themselves to my mind. But I can say of the one and of the other, that I do not think them insuperable, provided there be a conciliatory disposition on both sides. So far as I am concerned, I think that such a disposition exists. It has not been my temper, Sir, to despond in regard to APPENDIX. 413 the extension of Christianity in this new world: And in ad- dition to the promises of the Great Head of the Church, I have always imagined that I perceived the train of second causes so laid by the good providence of God, as to be pro- moting what we believe to be His will in this respect. On the other hand, I feel the weight of most powerful discour- agements, in the increasing number of the avowed patrons of infidelity, and of others, who pretend to confess the divine authority of our holy religion, while they endeavor to strip it of its characteristic doctrines. In this situation, it is rather to be expected, that distinct Churches, agreeing in fundamentals, should make mutual sacrifices for a union, than that any Church should divide into two bodies, with- out a difference being even alleged to exist, in any leading point. For the preventing of this, the measures which you may propose can not fail of success, unless there be on one side or on both, a most lamentable deficiency of Christian temper. I remember the conversation you allude to with Mr. Del- lam: I hope I did not express myself uncharitably, or even indelicately. As to personal offence towards me, it is out of the question: for I had not at that time any connection with St. Paul's Church. But this, as well as the other parts of your letter, may be discoursed of at the proposed inter- view. Therefore, with assurance of the desired secrecy, and with requesting you to accept a like promise of candor to that which I credit from you, I conclude myself at present, Your brother in Christ, And very humble servant, W. W.* * The writer of the above answer kept silence on the subject of it, except in the permitted communication to the bishops, until the summer of 1804; when he received, in one day, two letters from the eastern shore of Maryland. One of them was from the Rev^ Simon Wilmer,, of the Episcopal Church, and the other was from the Rev. Mr. M'Klaskey, of the Methodist communion. In a conver- sation between these two gentlemen, the former had affirmed the fact of Dr. 4H MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 22. Page 202. Testimonial of the Rev. Charles Pcttigreiv. We, the subscribers, having met in convention, at Tar- borough, in North Carolina, on the 28th day of May, 1794, for the purpose of considering the declining situation of the Protestant Episcopal Church in this state, and having chosen the Rev. Charles Pettigrew as a person fit to be our bishop, and worthy to be recommended for consecration to that holy office but being sensible that the great distance at which the laity as well as the clergy of this state live from each other, deprives us of sufficient personal acquaint- ance with one another to subscribe a testimonial in the words prescribed by the General Convention of the Prot- estant Episcopal Church, have thought it necessary and proper to make some deviation therefrom, which we pre- sume to hope will be no obstacle to our laudable pursuit. We therefore do hereby recommend to be consecrated to the office of a bishop, the said Rev. Charles Pettigrew, whom, from his morality, religious principles, piety of life, from his general reputation in a clerical character, from the personal knowledge we have of him, and from his suffi- ciency in good learning, and soundness in the faith, we are induced to believe worthy of being consecrated to that im- portant office. We hereby promise and engage to receive him as such when canonically consecrated and invested therewith, and to render that canonical obedience which we believe to be necessary to the due and proper discharge of so important a trust in the Church of Christ. And we now address the right reverend the bishops in the several United States, praying their united assistance in conse- Coke's application, which was disbelieved by the other. This produced their re- spective letters, which were answered by a statement of the fact. The matter being afterwards variously reported, a copy of the letter was, after some lapse of time, delivered to the Rev. Dr. Kemp, of Maryland, and at last became published in a controversy raised in the diocese. APPENDIX. 4 1 5 crating this our said brother, and canonically investing him with the apostolic office and powers. In testimony where- of, we hereunto subscribe our names, the day and year above written. N. BLOUNT, 1 J. L. WILSON, J. GURLEY, [ Of the clergy. S. HALLING, R. J. MILLER, J J. LEIGH, M.D., J. GUION, M.D., R. WHYTE, ) T B. WOODS, '[ Law y ers - W. CLEMENTS, L. DESSEAUX, W. GRIMES, R. GODLY, -Of the laity. No. 23. Page 203. Circular of a Committee in South Carolina. GENTLEMEN,* Impressed with a fervent desire of being beneficial to the state in general, and of supporting religion among us, we, the subscribers, being a select committee from several of the united Episcopal Churches in this state, who met on the i6th of last October, are directed to address you. The subject is an important one, and requires consideration. From the proceedings of the two last General Conventions, held at Philadelphia and New York, it has, with regret, been found by the representatives of this state, that the intention of all the eastern states was to form two separate * In the document some of the words are in larger characters than the rest. The same words are here given in italics, with the view of making a faithful representation of the instrument : the framers of which were careful to give this explanation of their design ; however beneath them an attention to the laws of grammar. 416 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. houses of discussion on the forms and propagation of re- ligion. To this all consented, not foreseeing any ill effects immediately arising from it. The one composed of bishops solely, the other of clergy and laity conjointly; and that a full consent of one house, together with two thirds of the other, must be obtained, to effectually carry any proposi- tion into effect. But in these two last meetings as above, many proposed, that the House of Bishops should have "an absolute negative" over the clergy and laity. To this Vir- ginia and South Carolina were firmly opposed; the eastern states as firmly supported. The next General Convention f will be held at Philadelphia, where we wish to be repre- ) sented, but upon the same determination, if approved by the \ vestries of our associated churches in this state, of opposi- \ tion to the absolute negative; which, more than probably, will cause a secession of this state and Virginia from the general association. Considering the situation we shall then be left in, we are desirous, by the blessing of Al- mighty God directing us in our choice to select one from the clergy of this state, to be sent forward immediately to the northward, and to obtain authority solely to ordain ministers for this state, as well as to renew that ordinance which has too long laid dormant in our country, confirma- tion. We have thought proper, therefore, to request your opinion on the subject, as we conceive, from many of our rising young men having devoted themselves to the study of divinity, and by selecting some worthy and good man, resident in a parish, and desirous of taking the office of the ministry upon him, and having him ordained, we shall be better enabled to have our churches provided than we are , at present by the clergy which we have of late experienced \ from Europe, or from our northern states; and as this / country will then be their native country, and from being accustomed to reside in it, the complaints of its sickliness, / which have been the great arguments of desertion from C their parishes, will in some measure, if not totally, lose ' their effect: and as, in that case, the minister may have APPENDIX. 4 1 7 some property of his own, the subscription of parishes where small, will in this manner be rendered sufficiently ample; as well as the doctrines propagated consistent with the situation the Almighty has been pleased to allot us. We beg leave further to mention, not with an intention to bias your opinion, but as a reason for our present applica- tion, that Virginia has pursued the steps marked out, and with the blessing of heaven upon their endeavors, and under the direction and guardianship of Bishop Madison* have obtained sixty good and reputable divines, men, if but of moderate learning, of sound and good morals, who have undertaken the ministry, not from a desire of gain, but from a desire of doing good, and spreading the effects of piety, brotherly love, and charity, in the several parishes where they reside. From these motives, and from the dis-^, tressed situation we shall be in, if a secession takes place 1 before we are provided with one to confirm and ordain, for f then we must either take what they are pleased to send, or humbly entreat their favors to ordain for us, which might be refused after our secession, we have presumed to address you, hoping when these important concerns shall come before you, you will not refuse to lend us your aid, both in consulting in the most public manner the sentiments of our brethren at large, and informing us of them, by a repre- sentative or representatives, at our next state convention, to be held at St. Michael's Church, on the tenth day of next February, for the express purpose of relinquishing or carrying the above measures into effect. And we have ap- pointed this day in particular (anxiously desirous of being fully represented), as it is the day previous to the anniver- sary meeting of the Revolution society, to commemorate the birthday of General Washington, and conceiving many gentlemen may be in town upon so pleasing an occasion. And we are, gentlemen, with all respect and esteem, Your humble servants. * Who showed himself very indignant at the intended compliment. 27 4l8 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 24. Page 2 1 1. A Letter from Bishop Provoost. "N T E\v YORK, SEPT. 7, 1801. " RIGHT REV. AND DEAR SIR, " I think it my duty to request, that, as president of the House of Bishops, you will inform that venerable body, that, induced by ill health, and some melancholy occur- rences in my family, and an ardent wish to retire from all public employment, I resigned, at the last meeting of our Church convention, my jurisdiction as bishop of the Prot- estant Episcopal Church in the State of New York. " I am, with great regard, " Dear and Right Rev. Sir, " Your affectionate brother, " SAMUEL PROVOOST. "Right Rev. Bishop White." The House of Bishops having considered the subject brought before them by the letter of Bishop Provoost,* and by the message from the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties, touching the same, can see no grounds on which to believe, that the contemplated resignation is consistent with ecclesiastical order, or with the practice of Episcopal i , Churches* in any ages, or with the tenor of the office of consecration. Accordingly, while they sympathize most tenderly with their brother, Bishop Provoost, on account of that ill health, and those melancholy occurrences which have led to the design in question, they judge it to be in- consistent with the sacred trust committed to them, to j recognize the bishop's act as an effectual resignation of his ' Episcopal jurisdiction. Nevertheless, being sensible of the present exigencies of the Church of New York, and ap- proving of their making provision for the actual discharge See ante, pp. 31, 314. Ed. APPENDIX. 419 of the duties of the Episcopacy, the bishops of this house are ready to consecrate to the office of bishop, any person who may be presented to them with the requisite testimo- nials from the General and State Conventions; and of whose religious, moral, and literary character, due satisfaction may be given. But this house must be understood to be explicit in their declaration, that they shall consider such a person as assistant or co-adjutor bishop, during Bishop Provoost's life, although competent in point of character to all the Episcopal duties; the extent in which the same shall be discharged by him, to be dependent on such regulations as expediency may dictate to the Church in New York, grounded on the indisposition of Bishop Provoost, and with his concurrence. No. 25. Page 219. ,. Forms of Subscription. Form in this Church "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 wor- ship of the Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States." Form in the Church of England The Thirty-sixth Can- on requires the candidates, after reference, first, to the royal supremacy; second, to the Book of Common Prayer, with the Ordinal; and third, to the Thirty-nine Articles, to sig- nify his assent as follows: "I, N. N., do willingly and ex animp_ subscribe to those three articles above mentioned, and to all things that are contained in them." 420 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 26. Page 224. The house resumed the consideration of the matters brought before them by the Rev. Ammi Rogers, and came to the following determination concerning the same. After full inquiry, and fair examination of all the evi- dence that could be procured, it appears to this house, that the said Ammi Rogers had produced to the Standing Com- mittee of New York (upon the strength of which he ob- tained holy Orders) a certificate, signed with the name of the Rev. Philo Perry, which certificate was not written nor signed by him. That the conduct of the said Ammi Rogers in the State of Connecticut, during his residence in that state, since he left New York, has been insulting, refractory, and schis- matical in the highest degree; and, were it tolerated, would prove subversive of all order and discipline in the Church; and that the statement which he made in justification of his conduct, was a mere tissue of equivocation and evasion, and, of course, served rather to defeat than to establish his purpose. Therefore, this house do approve of the proceedings of the Church in Connecticut, in reproving the said Ammi Rogers, and prohibiting him from the performance of any ministerial duties within that diocese; and, moreover, are of opinion, that he deserves a severer ecclesiastical censure, that of degradation from the ministry. In regard to the question, To what authority is Mr. Rogers amenable ? this house are sensible, that there not having been previously to the present convention, any sufficient provision for a case of a clergyman removing from one diocese to another, it might easily happen, that different sentiments would arise as to this point. We are of opinion, that Mr. Rogers's residence being in Connecti- cut, it is to the authority of that diocese he is exclusively amenable. But as the imposition practised w r ith a view to the ministry was in New York, we recommend to the bishop APPENDIX. 421 and Standing Committee of that state, to send to the bishop < : in Connecticut such documents, duly attested, of the meas- ure referred to, as will be a ground of procedure in that . particular. We further direct the secretary, to deliver a copy of the, above to the clerical deputies from Connecticut, and an- other copy to the Rev. Ammi Rogers. And we further direct, that either of the aforesaid parties be permitted to have any documents respectively delivered in by them, a copy of it being first taken; except the petition and affi- davit of the Rev. Ammi Rogers, of which he may have a copy if desired, as may either of the parties have of any document delivered by the other party. No. 27. Page 259. Of the Homilies. The House of Bishops, taking into consideration, that the two books of Homilies are referred to in the Thirty-fifth Article of this Church, as containing a body of sound Chris- tian doctrine; and knowing, by their respective experience, the scarcity of the volume, rendering it difficult for some candidates in the ministry to possess opportunities of study- ing its contents, propose to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to make it a standing instruction to every bishop, and to the ecclesiastical authority in every state destitute of a bishop, to be furnished (as soon as may be) with a copy or copies of said work, and to require it to be studied by all \ candidates for the ministry within their respective bounds; / under the expectation, that when offering for ordination, the knowledge of its contents will be indispensably required. This was concurred in by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. 422 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No 28. Page 260. Concerning Posture during Psalmody. Whereas a diversity of custom has of late years prevailed in the posture of ministers and of the people, during the act of singing the psalms and the hymns in metre; the for- J (f mer practice of sitting during this part of the service grad- I \) < ually giving way to the more comely posture of standing; it is hereby recommended by this convention, that it be considered as the duty of the ministers of this Church, to encourage the use of the latter posture, and to induce the members of their congregations, as circumstances may per- mit, to do the same; allowance to be made for cases, in which it may be considered inconvenient by age, or by in- firmity. Practice, under this recommendation, is to begin from the time when suitable information shall have been given by the clergy to their respective flocks. And it shall be the duty of every minister, to give notice of this recom- mendation to his congregation, at such time as in his dis- cretion may be the most proper. The carrying into effect of the contemplated changeA may be delayed by the bishop of any diocese, or, where | there is no bishop, by the ecclesiastical authority therein, 7 until there shall have been time and opportunity of explain- / ing satisfactorily the grounds of the measure. No. 29. Page 261. Of a Proposal of new A nthems, and of Sanction requested in favor of a proposed Book. The following proposition was submitted and agreed to, and communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. APPENDIX. 423 . . The House of Bishops communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, the following resolve, and the following rule of the House of Bishops, to be entered on their journal after being returned by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. There was laid before the house, an address from the Rev. Dr. William Smith, of Connecticut, together with sun- dry anthems, selected from Holy Scripture, and adapted to certain fasts and feasts of the Church. The object of the address is to induce the establishment of the said anthems as parts of the Liturgy. Whereupon, Resolved, That it is not expedient, during this convention, to go into a review, either in whole or in part, of the Book of Common Prayer. It could not, how- ever, but give satisfaction to the bishops to recollect, that anthems taken from Scripture, and judiciously arranged, may, according to the known allowance of this Church, be sung in congregations, at the discretion of their respective ministers. On this occasion, a question arose, how far it may be proper, at any meeting of the convention, to give their sanction, or that of this house in particular, to any work, however tending to religious instruction, or to the excitement of pious affections. In reference to this subject, it is the unanimous opinion of the bishops present, that no such sanction should be given. And it is hereby made a rule of the house, that if any application should be made, tending to such effect, it shall not be considered as regu- larly brought before them. The above was returned by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, with their respectful thanks, for what they were pleased to call the judicious course adopted by the bishops, in reference to the two subjects. 424 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 30. Page 266. Concerning tJie Identity of this CJiurcJi ivitli the former Church of England in America. The following declaration was proposed and agreed to: It having been credibly stated to the House of Bishops, that on questions in reference to property devised before the revolution, to congregations belonging to "the Church f England," and to uses connected with that name, some doubts have been entertained in regard to the identity of the body to which the two names have been applied, the house think it expedient to make the declaration, and to request the concurrence of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies therein That " The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America" is the same body hereto- fore known in these states by the name of " the Church of England"; the change of name, although not of religious principle, in doctrine, or in worship, or in discipline, being induced by a characteristic of the Church of England, sup- posing the independence of Christian Churches, under the different sovereignties, to which, respectively, their allegi- ance in civil concerns belongs. But that when the sever-' ance alluded to took place, and ever since, this Church con-' ceives of herself, as professing and acting on the principles of the Church of England, is evident from the organization, of our conventions, and from their subsequent proceedings, as recorded on the journals; to which, accordingly, this con- vention refers for satisfaction in the premises. But it would be contrary to fact, were any one to infer, that the discipline exercised in this Church, or that any proceedings tKerein, are at all dependent on the will of the civil or of the eccle- siastical authority of any foreign country. The above declaration having been communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, they returned for an-, swer, that they concurred therein. APPENDIX. 425 No. 31. Page 272. From the Journal. The House of Bishops, solicitous for the preservation of the purity of the Church, and the piety of its members, are induced to impress upon the clergy the important duty, with a discreet but earnest zeal, of warning the people of their respective cures, of the danger of an indulgence in those worldly pleasures which may tend to withdraw the affections from spiritual things. And especially on the subject of gaming, of amusements involving cruelty to the brute creajlon^ and of theatrical representations, to which some peculiar circumstances have called their attention, they do not hesitate to express their unanimous opinion, that these amusements, as well from their licentious ten- dency, as from the strong temptations to vice which they afford, ought not to be frequented. And the bishops can not refrain from expressing their deep regret at the infor- mation, that in some of our large cities, so little respect is paid to the feelings of the members of the Church, that theatrical representations are fixed for the evenings of her most solemn festivals. From the Pastoral Letter. Both to the clergy and to the laity we desire to say, but most pointedly to the former, that the Christian profession exacts a greater abstraction from the world than that which consists in the abstaining from acknowledged sin. There are practices so nearly allied, and so easily abused to it, that we conceive of a professor of religion in duty bound either not to countenance them in the least degree; or, as is allowable in regard to some of the matters contemplated, to avoid the so employing of time, and the so lavishing of affection, as puts into a state of sin, although not necessa- 426 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. rily belonging to the subject. We would be far from an en- deavor after an abridgment of Christian liberty. But we can not forget, that in a list of the classes of evil livers, there is introduced the description of persons who are "lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God"; nor, in respect to the female professors of religion in particular, the admonition, that "she who liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." We are aware of the difficulty of draw- ing the line between the use of the world and the abuse of it: that being conceived of by different persons equally pious and virtuous, according to the diversity of natural temperament, and of the states of society in which they have been placed by education or by habit: but we know, that where the conscience can reconcile itself to the draw- ing as near to the territory of sin, as it can persuade itself to be consistent with the still standing on secure ground, deadness to spiritual good at the best, but more commonly subjection to its opposite is the result. In speaking of subjects of the above description, we would not be understood to class among them any practice which is either immoral in itself, or so customarily accom- panied by immorality, that the one is necessarily counte*- nanced with the other. Of the former description, is gam- ing in all the variety of its exercise: and the like may be said of whatever involves cruelty to the lower animals of the creation. If the same can not be affirmed of works of fiction, and of putting speeches into the mouths of feigned characters, for the purpose of instruction or of entertain- ment; yet, as the question is applicable to the exhibitions of the theatre, such as they have been in every age, and are at present; we do not hesitate to declare, unanimously, our opinion, that it is a foul source of very extensive cor- ruption. We lay little stress on the plea, that it is a mat- ter practicable in social institutions, to purge the subject from the abuses which have been attached to it. When this shall have been accomplished, it will be time to take another ground. But, in truth, we are not persuaded of APPENDIX. 427 the possibility of the thing, when we consider that the prominent and most numerous patrons of the stage are always likely to be' the least disposed to the seriousness which should enter into whatever is designed to discrim- inate between innocence and guilt. While the opinions and the passions of such persons shall continue to serve the purpose of a looking-glass, by which the exhibited charac- ters are to be adjusted to the taste of so great a proportion of the public, we despair of seeing the stage rescued from the disgusting effusions of profaneness and obscenity; and much less of that mean of corruption, more insinuating than any other the exhibiting of what is radically base, in alliance with properties captivating to the imagination. While we address this alike to the clergy and to the laity, we consider it as especially hostile to the usefulness of the former. And even in regard to some matters con- fessed to be innocent in themselves, their innocency may depend much on many circumstances, and of professional character among others. The ear of a clergyman should always be open to a call to the most serious duties of his station. Whatever n&ay render it difficult to his own mind to recur to those duties with the solemnity which they require, or may induce an opinion in others, that such a recurrence must be unwelcome to him from some enjoy- ment not congenial with holy exercise, ought to be de- clined by him. If it be a sacrifice, the making of it is exacted by what ought to be his ruling wish, the serving of God, and the being useful to his fellow-men, in the dis- charge of the duties of the ministry. 1 428 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. No. 32. Page 274. Acts of the Convention of 1785. A General Ecclesiastical Constitution of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Whereas, in the course of Divine Providence, the Prot- estant Episcopal Church in the United States of America is become independent of all foreign authority, civil and ecclesiastical: And whereas, at a meeting of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the said Church, in sundry of the said states, viz., in the States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland, held in the City of New York, on the 6th and 7th days of October, in the year of our Lord 1784, it was recommended to this Church in the said states represented as aforesaid, and proposed to this Church in the states not represented, that they should send deputies to a convention 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, agreeably to cer- tain fundamental principles, expressed in the said recom- mendation and proposal: And whereas, in consequence of the said recommenda- tion and proposal, Clerical and Lay Deputies have been duly appointed from the said Church, in the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Vir- ginia, and South Carolina: The said deputies being now assembled, and taking into consideration the importance of maintaining uniformity in doctrine, discipline, and worship in the said Church, do hereby determine and declare, i. That there shall be a General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of Amer- ica, which shall be held in the City of Philadelphia, on the APPENDIX. 429 third Tuesday in June, in the year of our Lord 1786, and forever after, once in three years, on the third Tuesday of June, in such place as shall be determined by the con- vention; and special meetings may be held at such other times, and in such place, as shall be hereafter provided for; and this Church, in a majority of the states aforesaid, shall be represented before they shall proceed to business; ex- cept that the representation of this Church from two states, shall be sufficient to adjourn; and in all business of the convention, freedom of debate shall be allovVed. 2. There shall be a representation of both clergy and laity of the Church in each state, which shall consist of one or more deputies, 'not exceeding four of each order; and in all questions, the said Church in each state shall have one 5 __. _ J " """~" ^_ \ yptej and a majority of suffrages shall be conclusive. 3. In the said Church, in every state represented in this convention, there shall be a convention consisting of the clergy and lay deputies of the congregations. 4. " The Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England," shall be continued to be used by this Church, as the same is altered by this convention, in a certain instrument of writing, passed by their authority, entitled, "Alterations of the Liturgy of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, in order to render the same con- formable to the American Revolution and the Constitutions of the respective States." 5. In every state where there shall be a bishop duly consecrated and settled, and who shall have acceded to the articles of this general ecclesiastical constitution, he shall be considered as a member of the convention, ex~ officio. 6. The bishop, or bishops, in every state shall be chosen agreeably to such rules as shall be fixed by the respective 1 conventions; and every bishop of this Church shall confine the exercises of his Episcopal office to his proper jurisdic- 430 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. tion, unless requested to ordain or confirm by any Church destitute of a bishop. 7. A Protestant Episcopal Church in any of the United States, not now represented, may, at any time hereafter, be admitted, on acceding to the articles of this union. 8. Every clergyman, whether bishop, presjby_ter, or dea- con, shall be amenable to the authority of the convention in the state to which he belongs, so far as relates to suspension or removal from orifice; and the convention in each state shall in- stitute rules for their cojiduct, and an equitable mode .oft rial. 9. And whereas, it is represented to this convention, to be the desire of the Protestant Episcopal Church in these states, that there maybe further alterations of the Liturgy, than such as are made necessary by the American revolu- tion; therefore, the " Book of Common Prayer, and Adminis- tration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of Eng- land," as altered by an instrument of writing, passed under the authority of this convention, entitled, " Alterations in the Book of Common Prayer^ and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites 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," shall be used in this Church, wjiejj ( the same shall have been ratified by the conventions which ( have respectively sent deputies to this General CoftVention. J 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 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, as settled and deter- mined in the Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, set forth by the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States." ir. This general ecclesiastical constitution, when rati- APPENDIX. 431 fied by the_Church_in the different states, shall be consid- ered as fundamental; and shall be unalterable by the con- vention of the Church in any state. Alterations agreed on and confirmed in Convention, for ren- dering the Liturgy conformable to the Principles of the A merican Revolution, and the Constitutions of the several States. 1st. That in the suffrages, after the Creed, instead of O Lord, save the king, be said, O Lord, bless and preserve these United States. 2d. That the prayer for the royal family, in the Morn- ing and Evening Service, be omitted. 3d. That in the Litany the fifteenth, sixteenth, seven- teenth, and eighteenth petitions be omitted; and that in- stead of the twentieth and twenty-first petitions be sub- stituted the following that it may please thee to endue the Congress of these United States, and all others in authority, legislative, executive, and judicial, with grace, wisdom, arid understanding, to execute justice and maintain truth. 4th. That when the Litany is not said, the prayer for the high court of parliament may be thus altered '''Most gra- cious God, we humbly beseech thee, as for these United States in general, so especially for their delegates in Congress, that thou wouldest be pleased to direct and prosper all their con- sultations to the advancement of thy glory, the good of thy Church, the safety, honor 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" etc., to the end: and the prayer for the kings majesty, as follows, viz. O Lord, our heavenly Father, the high and mighty Ruler of the imiverse, who dost from thy throne behold all the dwellers upon earth; we most heartily beseech thee, with thy favor, to behold all in authority, legislative, executive, and judicial in these United 432 MEMOIRS OF THE CHURCH. States; and so replenish them with the grace of thy Holy Spirit, t/iat they may alway incline to thy will, and walk in thy way. Endue them plenteous ly with heavenly gifts; grant them in health and wealth long to live, and that after tliis life, they may attain everlasting joy and felicity, through Jesus Christ our Lord. A men. 5th. That the first collect for the King in the Commun- ion Service be omitted; and that the second be altered as follows instead of " the hearts of kings are in thy rules and governance" be said, " the hearts of all rulers are in thy governance;" and instead of the words "heart of George, thy servant," insert " so to direct the rulers of these states" etc., changing the singular pronouns to the plural. 7th.^That in the answer in the Catechism to the ques- tion " What is thy duty towards thy neighbor?" for " to honor and obey the king" be substituted " to honor and obey my civil rulers, to submit myself" etc. 8th. That instead of the observations of the $th of No- vember, the 3 3 6 3. 441- Asbury, Rev. Francis, 197, 198, 411. Athanasian Creed, 26, 134, 135, 149, 376. Ayala, the ambassador, vi. Ayllon, the licentiate, vii. BAAL'S priest, xliv. Baker, Mr. Jacob, 410. Baldwin, Rev. Ashbel, 51, 55. Baird, Rev. Dr., xxxi. Ballads, Swiss, 459. Baltimore, Lord, xxxii., 15. Bancroft, xxvi. Banker, Richard, xliv. Baptism, lay, 252. Baptism, first English, x. ; first Spanish, x. Baptism, first in Virginia, x. Barber, Rev. Mr., 250, n. Barrow, Dr., 184. Bass, Rev. Edward, li.; elected bishop, 28, 29; consecrated, 31, 164, 210, 395- 397, 39 8 , 400. Bath and Wells, Bishop of, 384. Beach, Rev. Abraham, 84. Bede, the Venerable, iv. Bellomont, the Earl of, 1. Bells, first chime of, xlvi. Belsham, Mr., 77. Belsham, Thomas, 213, 216. Berkley, Dean, xxxix. Bermudas, the, xvii., xxiv. Bible, bad editions, 49; standard edition, 55, 273- Biddle, Charles, 39. Bingham, on the Church, 240. Bishops' churches, 468. Bishops, House of, 263. Bishop of London, xxviii., xxxiii., xxxv., xli; 15, 17, 18, 75, no. Bisset, Rev. John, 77. Blackstone, Rev. William, xviii., xx., xxi., xxxix. Blackwell, Mr., 84. Blair, Commissary, xxxvi. Bloomer, Rev. Mr., 84. Bowen, Bishop, 46, 56. Bray, Dr., xxxv. Brazil, Island of, vi. Bright, Rev. Mr., xxi. Broadside, of records, 86, n. Brownell, Bishop, 51. Brownists, xxi. Brown, the Brothers, xxi. Buck, Chaplain, xxiv. Bulfinch, Dr., xlvii. Bullivant, Dr., xliv. Burlington, xxxvii. CABOT, JOHN, discovers America, vi. Candidates, for Orders, 39, 365. Caner, Rev. Dr., xlvi. Canons, 40, 63. Canterbury, Archbishop of, xvii., xviii., xliii., xliv., liii; 22, 24, 26, 27, 30, 142, 148, 151, 152, 155, 162, 186, 333, 341, 367, 3.68, 386. Cape Cod, xv., xvii. 470 INDEX. Carlisle, Christopher, ix. Carlton, Sir Guy, 335. Carroll, Bishop, 152. Case of the Episcopal Churches, hv., 99. Chaloner, John, 93, n. Chandler, Dr., 73, 76, 335, 386; Bishop, 37- Chants and tunes, proposed, 253. Charles I., xvi, 251, 322. Charles II., 264. Chase, Bishop Philander, D.D., 53, 67; consecrated, 273; on theatres, 296, 314, 3i6, 3'9- Chetwood, John, 86. Chew, Mr., 154. Christian Knowledge Society, 59. Churches, burnt, xlii. Church, Christ Church, Boston, xlv., xlvi. Church, Danish, 1 8, 64, 328. Church of England, iv., viii. ; in the Col- onies, 14, 15; requirements of, 228. Church of Holland, 342. Church of Sweden, xxxiv. Church, the American, formation of, 19, 20, 91, 92, 93. Church, Trinity, Boston, xliv., xlvi. Claggett, Rev. Thomas John, D.D., elected bishop, 30, 34. Clarke, Dr., 374. Clarke, Dr. Samuel, xlviii. Clarke, Rev. James Freeman, li. Clarkson, Matthew, 86, 93. Coddington, xx. Coke, Rev. Dr., 195, 199, 408. Colebatch, Rev. Mr., xxxii. College of Philadelphia, 101. Colonization, 58, 298. Columbus, vi., vii. Commissioners, Royal, xxiii., xlii. Common Prayer, 172; copyright on, 262; anecdote on, 279, 294; altera- tions, 355, 378, 380. Common Prayer, Book of, established, 29, 40; copyright on, 44; editions of, 48; typographical errors in, 48, 53, 55! m French, 69; German, 72, 84, 322; Proposed Book of, xlviii, 121 ; reception of Proposed Book, 127, 170, 172; copyright on, 262; anecdote on, 279; mentioned, 294, 483; alterations, 355, 378, 380, 431, 435; anthems of, 423; sale of, 449. Communion, celebrated by Wolfall, ix. Communion, received by Ayllon, vii. Communion, the first, vii.; first Eng- lish, ix. Companion to the Altar, 234. >f, 57> Congregational ists, xl., lii. Connecticut, Church in, xl; Clergy in, xl. Constitution of the Church, 402, 405, 428. Convention, Special (General), 51. Conventions, Triennial, xlviii, 27, 30, 33. 35. 37, 4i, 53, 55, 60, 65, 230, 281. Cooper, Edward, 385. Coppin, the Pilot, xv., . Cornbury, Lord, xxxvii. Cornwallis, Dr., 100. Cotton, Rev. John, xx., lii. Council of Thirteen, xiv. Cranmer, Archbishop, 301. Creed, 23, 25. Croes, Bishop, 41, 43; consecrated, 267. Cromwell, xlii., 83. Cummings, movement of, 163. Cutler, Rev. Samuel, xl., xlvi. Cutting, Mr., 86. DARE, VIRGINIA, x. Dehon, Bishop, 37. De Hart, John, 86. De Lancy, Rev. William H., 56. Delaware, Church in, xxxviii. Dellam, Mr., 413. Denmark, Court of, 85, 130. Denmark, King of, 18, 64, 328. Dennis, Richard, 84. Dermer, Capt., xvi. Descent into Hell, 126, 133, 139, 174, 181, 191. Dickes, W., 383. Digges, Sir Dudley, xxiv. Disunion of Church, 465. Doddridge, Rev. Joseph, 248. Drake, 384. Duane, Hon. James, 86, 138. Duchd, Dr., xxxv., Hii. Dudley, Joseph, President, xliii., Gov- ernor, 1. Duels, persons killed at, 34, 45. Duke of York, xxix. Dutch, the, xiv., xxix. EASTER, finding of, 48, 294. Eaton, Rev. Mr., 145. Edminston, Rev. Mr., 1.5. Education, 51, 52. Edward, VI., 97, 264. Election, 230. Episcopacy, xxviii., 15, 19; controversy on, 72, 73, 76, 79, so, 88, 91, 96, 100, no, in, 113; Non -succession, 311, 39' INDEX. 471 Episcopal Succession, 144, 162, 163. Episcopate, non-succession in, 61. Episcopate, the, Letter on by Connecti- cut Clergy, 330. Establishments, 14. FALMOUTH, 27. Farmer, A. W., Letters of, xli. Fayerweather, Rev. Mr., xl. Fen ton, Charles, 43. Ferdinando, Simon, x. Fiddes, Dr., 184. Five Points of Calvinism, 218. Fourth of July, Service for, 1 1 7, 433, 448. Franklin, Dr. Benjamin, 140, 370, 373. Fraser, Rev. Mr., 84. Freeman, Rev. James, xlvii. French, in New York, 43. French, the, xiv. Fuller, the historian, 97, 98. GAIXE, HUGH, 48, 53. Georgia, Church in, xxxviii.; Clergy in, xxxviii. Gilljert, Sir Humphrey, ix., x. Gibson, Rev. Richard, xxii. Golden Numbers, 294. Goldsborough, Hon. Robert H., 54. Gorges, f Sir Ferdinando, iv., xii., xv., xviii. Gosnold, x. Greenland, iv., v. Greenwood, Rev. Mr., xxiii. Griffith, Rev. David, D.D., elected bish- op, 25 ; death of, 27, 130, decease of, 167. Griswold, Rev. Alexander Viets, D.D., consecrated, 36. HAKLUYT, xvii. Harris, Dr., 43. Hawks, Francis, L., D.D., x.; elected bishop, xxxviii., 72, 97, ., 321, 324. Heathcote, Col., xl. Henry, Patrick, 81, 160, 391, 392. Henry VIII., vi., 301. Hewlings, Esther, 53. Hinchliff, Right Rev. John, 27. Hobart, John Henry, D.D., consecrated bishop, 36. Homilies, 421. Homilies, the, 258. Hooker, Rev. Richard, 96, 337. Hopkinson, Francis, 130. Hopkins, Stephen, xxiv. How, Dr., 43. Hoyt, Colonel, 84. Hubbard, Rev. Mr., 167. Hudson, Henry, xiii. Hudson, the River, xiii., xv. Hunt, Rev. Mr., xxiii. Hutchinson, xvi. Hutchins, Rev. Mr., 86. Hymns, 35, 236, 458. ICELAND, iv. ; Bishop of, v.; supplies for, v. Independence, American, liv. Induction, Office of, 34, 231. Inglis, Dr. Charles, xxxii., 333. Ingram, David, viii. Irish Church, 439. Isle of Man, 162. Ivers, Mr., xlvii. Ives, Bishop, 65. JAMES I., 251. James II., xliii. Jarratt, 411. Jarvis, Rev. Abraham, D.D., consecra- ted bishop, 31, 330, 335. Jay, Hon. John, 133, 388. Jenkins, Rev. Edward, D.D., 34. Jenner, Dr. Robert, 159, 384, 385. Jerome quoted, 343. Johns, Hon. Kensey, 55. Johnson, Dr., 293. Johnson, Dr. William Samuel, 264. Jones, Rev. Cave, 221. Josephus quoted, 241. KEITH, REV. MR., xxxiv., xxxvii., xxxix. Keen, Peter, 85. Keene, Rev. J., 187. Keene, Samuel, 100. Kemp, Bishop, 41, 414. Kemper, Rev. Jackson, 54. Kennydy, Captain, 377. Kenyon College, 65, 67. Key, Francis S., 55, 273. Kilgour, Bishop, 29. King, Hon. Rufus, 43, 250. King, Lord, 94. King's Chapel, Boston, xxiii., xliv., xlv., xlvi., xlviii., 374. Kohne, Frederick, 316. LAKE, BISHOP, xix. Lambeth Chapel, Iv. Lambeth Palace Library, the Popham MS. at, xiii.; mentioned, 27, 143. Landaff, Bishop of, 147. Lateran Council, 98. Laud, Archbishop, xxvii. Lawes, xxv. Lawrence, on Lay Baptism, 251. 472 INDEX. Lay Baptism, 251. learning, Jeremiah, xlii., 112, 333. L'je, Richard Henry, 77, 160, 386. lessons, Table of, 449. Lindsey, Theophilus, 213, 216, 374. Litany, the, xlix., 57. Lorillard, George, 317. J,owth, Bishop, 17; on the Psalms, 243, 246. MADISON, Rev. JAMES, D.D., elected bishop, 28; death of, 37, 166. Magazine, the Churchman's, 26. Manning, Dr., 140. Maine, District of, 46. Marblehead, xlv. Markham, Most Rev. William, 27. Marshall, Rev. Mr., 86. Martyr, Peter, vii. Marvel 1, Andrew, his poem, xvi. Maryland, Church in, xxxii.; Roman Catholics in, xxxiii. ; toleration in, xxxiii. Maryland, declaration of, 103. Mason, of New Hampshire, xxii. Mason, Rev. Richard S., 54. Masorets, 241. Mass said, vii. Massachusetts, Bishop of, 125; conven- tion of, 1., 89; six principles of, 89. Maverick, Samuel, xviii., xxii., xlii. May Flower, the ship, xi., xii. Mayhew, Dr., xli., 73, 84. Mcllvaine, Right Rev. C. P., 66. McSparran, xxxix. Meade, William, D.D., Bishop, 61. Memorial, of New Jersey to General Convention, 355. Meredith, William, 43. Methodists, the, xxviii., 195; proposi- tions for union, 196, 197. Missionary Society, domestic and foreign, 56, 64, 71, 461. Missions, their management, 320. Miller, Mr., xlviii. Miller, Rev. John, xxx. Milnor, James, 256. Ministry Act, the, xxx. Monhegan, the landing at, xii.; sermon at, xii. Montague, Rev. Wm., xlix. Montgomery, Thomas F., 99. Moody, Rev. Joshua, xlii. Moore, Archbishop, 27, 100. Moore, G. H., xxxi. Moore, Rev. Benjamin, D.D., elected bishop, 32, 84. Moore, Rev. Richard C. Moore, conse- crated bishop, 38. Moore, T., 86. Morrell, Rev. William, xviii. Morton, of Merry Mount, xviii. xxii. Moses, Ivi. Moss, Right Rev. Charles, 27. Mount Desert, xiv. Muhlenberg, Rev. William A., D.D., 46, 5i. 54- Murray, Dr. Alexander, 114, 297. NARRAGANSETT, Church at, 200. Newbury, xlv. New Brunswick, Convention at, 19, 128. New England, Churches of, 401. New England, first sermon in, xiii. ; first colony in, xiii. ; colonization of, xvi. New England, lost city of, ix. Newfoundland, xviii. New Jersey, Clergy in, xxxvi. New Hampshire, 399. New Hampshire, Liberty in, xxii. New Haven, school at, 52. NW York, the Colonial Church of, xxix. ; Jesuits in, xxix.; Lutheran and Dutch in, xxx.; religion in, xxx. Nicene Creed, 379, 381. Nichols, Sir John, 251. Nicolls, Governor, xxix. Non-Conformists in Virginia, xxvi., xxviii. Norombega, viii., ix. North Carolina, Church in, xxxv. ; Clergy in, xxxvi. Norwich, the Bishop of, liii. Nova Scotia, Bishops of, 78, 400. OGDEN, REV. UZAL, 84, 138; left the Church, 221. Ohio, Church in, 46. Onderdonk, Rev. Benjamin T., 56, 61; Bishop, 65. Onderdonk, Right Rev. H. U., D.D., 65. Ordinal, change in, 191. Oxford, Bishop of, 146. PAGE, HON. MR., 116. Palmer, S., 235. Parker, Rev. Samuel, D.D., xlvii., li., 34, 86, in, 163, 167, 170, 399. Parliament, British, 329. Passion Week, 304. Pastoral Address, 36, 46, 60, 425. Pederson, Peter, 64. Pennsylvania, Church in, xxxiv.; Clergy of, 14; Council's Certificate, 390. Perry, Bishop, 19. Perry, Rev. Philo, 221. INDEX, 473 Perth Amboy, Church at, xxxvi. Perthuck, Rev. Ed., xxxvi. Peterborough, Bishop of, 384. Peters, Hugh, xx. Peters, Rev. Samuel, xli. Peters, Richard, 86, 125, 160, 392. Petne, Bishop, 29. Pettigrew, Rev. Charles, 211, 411, 414. Pilgrims, xiv., xx. Pilmore, Rev. Mr., 132. Plymouth, xiv.. xv., xvi. Pochahontas, xxv. Poinet, 93. Ponce de Leon, vii. Popham Colony, xiii., xiv. Position of Churches, 319. Porteus, Dr., lv., 260 Potter, Archbishop, 95. Potter, Bishop Alonzo, lv. Powell, Samuel, 86, 352. Prato, Albert de, vii. Prayers for the King, 82. Prelates, the English, 353, 354, 360. Presbyters, power of, 343. Presidency, of House of Bishops, 189. Priest's Orders, 207, 365. Principles of Union, 87, 89, 92. Pring, Martin, xi. Propagation Society, xxxi., xxxix. Provoost, Samuel, D.D., elected bishop, 25; consecrated, 27; mentioned, 30; xlix., 31, 36, 117, 132, 211, 397. Psalms and Hymns, 48, 54, 58, 122, 176, 236, 241, 243, 244, 245, 260, 306, 402, 457. Psalter, the, 150. Purcell, Rev. Dr. Henry, 206. Purchas, xvii. Puritans, xxi., xvi., xxvi. QUAKERS, xxviii., xxxv., xliii., 75. RAFN, iv. Ralegh, Sir Walter, x. Randolph, xliv. Ratclifie, Rev. Robert, xliv., xiv. Ravenscroft, Bishop, 53, 54. Read, Hon. James, 94. Read, John, 54. Rees' Cyclopaedia, 3, 1 1 1 . Reformation, the, 293. Richmond, fire at, 37. Rosencrone, the Count de, 18, 328. Rosier, xi. Rubric in Communion Service, 45 1 . Rudd, Dr. J. C., 46, 51, 54. Rush, Dr., 374. Rutt, John, viii. SAGADAHOC, xiii. Sainte Claire, Sister, 250. Salteme, William, xi. Samson, lii. Saphorin, M. de St., 17, 18, 328. Schism, 242, Science College, 60. Scotch Episcopacy, 27, 131, 139, 179. Scriptures, the, 404. Seabury, Samuel, D.D., xli, 20-21; Va- lidity of his consecration, 28; referred 10,29,30,84,91, no, in, 163; Chap- lain, 1 68; declared the Bishop of Rhode Island Churches, 200; rec- ommended by Connecticut, 330; his letter to Dr. Smith, 340; on the Methodists, 342; opposed to the ad- mission of the laity, 345; referred to, 397, 400, 407. Seeker, Archbishop, xli. Seniority of Bishops, 69. Separation, xix., xx. Sermon, the first English in North Amei- ica, viii. ; the first in New England, xiii. Sermons, rubric concerning, 292. Settlements, in New England, xiv. Sewall, Judge, xliv. Seymour, Rev. Richard, xii. Sharpe, Granville, 139, 140, 141, 370, 371- Shelton, Rev. Philo, 247. Skinner, Bishop, 29. Smith, Captain John, xiii., xiv. Smith, Dr. William, xxxv., 26, 102, 112, 120, 121, 187, 206, 371, 423, 448. Smith, Robert, D.D., consecrated bish- op, 30, 202. Smith, Rev. Ralph, xix., xxii. Smith, Rev. Dr. William, of Connecti- cut, 423. Society for Propagating the Gospel, 13, 3 6 . 42. Socinus, 374. South Meeting House, Boston, xliv., xiv. Spragg, Mr. Samuel, 86. St. Austin, 218. Stephens, John, 84. Stephens, Richard, 84. St. Esprit, Church of, 43. Stevens, Bishop, xxxviii. Stiles, Ed. J., 55. St. John's, Portsmouth, xxiii. Stone, Bishop, 65. St. Peter's, Salem, xxiii. Strachey, William, xxvi. 474 INDEX, Stratford, xli. Suffragan Bishops, 464, 466. Sunday, observance of, 217. Superintendents, 195. Synods, 284; of Dort, 219. TABLE, the right side of, 69. Talbot, Rev. Mr., xxxiv., xxxv., xxxvii., xxxix. Tale and Brady, 241, 457. Tench, Tilghman, 55. Terrick, Bishop, liii. Thanksgiving, Service for, xliii., 300, 430. Theatre, See Amusements. Theological Seminary, General, 50, 51, 52, 59, 68, 285, 290. Thorne, Sydenham, 138. Tindal, 252. Toleration, xl. Trinity Church, of New York, xxxi.; its endowment, ix. Trinity, the, 116, 117, 376. Turner, Rev. Samuel, D.D., 54. UNITARIANS, 1., li., 216. Updike, xxxix. Urmston, Rev. John, xxxvi. Ursulines, 250. VEASEY, REV. WILLIAM, xxx., xxxi. Vermont, Church organized, 36. Verrazano, vii. nmm Virginia, Colonization of, xxiii. ; laws in, xxv.; Nonconformists in, xxvi.; Clergy in, xxvii. ; legislation in, xxvi. WADDELL, REV. HENRY, 138, 211. Walford, Thomas, xviii. Walker, John, ix. Walpole, Mr., 78. Warburton, Bishop, 97. Washington College, 342. Washington, George, xlvi., Iv. Watson, Bishop, 126. Wavmouth, James, xi., xii., xv. Weller, Rev. George, 56. Welsh, the, xxxiv. Welton, Rev. Richard, xxxiv. Wentworth, Gov., 249. Wesley, Rev. Charles, xxxviii., 200. Wesley, Rev. John, xxxviii., 199, 342. Wesley, Rev. Samuel, xxxviii. West, 'Rev. Dr., 116. Westminster Confession, 219. Wharton, Dr., 43, 55, 448. Wheatley, 302. Whitbourne, xviii. White, Col. Thomas, liii., Iv., 26. White, Mrs., 26. White, Rev. John, xix. While, William, D.D., his Memoirs, iii.; mentioned, xxviii.; at Christ Church, xxxv.; Chaplain to Congress, xxxv.; his connection with King's Chapel affairs, xlvii.; correspondence with, xlix., li.; sketch of his life, liii.; Bishop Alonzo Potter's estimate of, Iv.; his death, Iv.; views on the com- position of the Memoirs, 4; elected bishop, 25, 26; consecrated, 27; men- tioned, 30, 34, 37, 53, 60, 65, 84, 94; his pamphlet, 99; reply to, 107; on the Trinity, 117; sermon before Con- vention, 130; communication with the Archbishop of Canterbury, 142; sails for England, 143; presented to the king, 156; account of consecra- tion, 157; sails for America, 161; ar- rives at New York, 161; on the De- scent into Hell, 184; views on psalm- ody, 243 ; on lay baptism, 25 1 ; omits clause in the Ordinal, 255 ; on amuse- ments, 272, 296; his retrospect of the Church, 275 ; the use of his Memoirs, 278; views on seminaries, 285, 290; remarks on Episcopacy, 318; men- tioned, 394, 396, 400; his letter to Coke, 412, 448; views on the divi- sion of dioceses, 464. Whitehead, Dr. James, 226. Whittaker, Rev. Alexander, xxiv., xxv. xxvi. Wickham, Mr., xxiv. Widows and Orphans, 19, 449. Wilkins, Mr., 55. Willet, Marinus, 86. William and Mary, xlv. William and Mary College, 28, 52. Williams, Roger, xxxix. Willing, Richard, 86. Wilmer, Dr. William, 46, 54. Wilson, Bird, Iv. Wilson, Dr. Bird, 65. Wilton, Rev. James T., 201. Winthrop, xix. Wolfall, viii., ix. Wolsey, Cardinal, viii., ix. Wyatt, Rev. William E., D.D., 61, 65. YALE COLLEGE, xl. Yeardley, Sir George, xxxvii. York, Archbishop of, 27, 85, 100, 360, 368. A '^ 1 ^ / * / a, e/ II, 2. Ti-f. /L/\ ' liti-Uc Av ^t~r 4- - MX, li <**-< C*A~ trd+Ji*. U^ (T^i 4 M Wl+-/b^bl - c /i / "/ *r CLt., 3 ^^^ 4. r THE LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE STAMPED BELOW. Series 9482 A 001 008 707 o