« AnteriorContinuar »
The titles, “ Church of England" and “Church of Ireland,” had their origin in the connection of church and state. It may be said also that the present title of the church in America expresses, in a measure, the iar mission which the state of religion here has into upon her, . - - The Protestant Episcopal Church is in entire accord with the Church of England in doctrine, accepting the same creeds and articles; in worship using services which are substantially identical, and in the essential principles of church government by bishops, priests, and deacons; but she is entirely independent of the state, and, as regards the law of the land, rests upon the same ground with other religious bodies. There are besides certain peculiarities in her constitution, which still further distinguish her from the mother church. The history of this church exhibits, in a striking manner, “the vital energy of the episcopal system,' and the tenacity of catholic principles under the most unfavorable circumstances. ring the first 150 years, neglected by the authorities of the mother-country, her constitution left incomplete in the most essential particulars, her extension and welfare left almost entirely to individual and voluntary effort, the church nevertheless lived and grew. The adverse influences of the Revolution did not ol. and upon completing her organization with bishops of her own she soon entered upon a new period of rapid extension and vigorous life.
THE Colonial PERIoD (1607–1776).
The earliest expeditions fitted out in England, with the object of forming settlements in America, had in view the extension of the church as well as material interests. For example, in the expedition of Sir Humphrey Gilbert (1585) the religious objects prowere, “compassion of poore infidels captived by the devil,” and the establishment of a system of government “not against the true Christian faith professed in the Church of England.” The letters patent granted to Sir Walter. Raleigh contained similar provisions for the establishment of the “true Christian faith row professed in the Church of England.” It was during the tempo occupation of the coast of North Carolina by one of Raleigh's expeditions that the first baptism of a native Indian took place, also the first recorded baptism of a white child. Virginia.-The first permanent settlement was effected under a charter of 1606 at Jamestown, in Virinia. A decided religious feeling actuated its founo and found expression in the letters-patent. The Rev. Robert Hunt accompanied the expedition, and did much to keep the spirit of true religion among the contentious and o colonists. #. holy communion was celebrated by him for the first time in May or June, 1606. The services of the church were first held under an awning hung between the trees. “This,” says the famous Capt. John Smith, “was our church till wee built a homely thing like a barne, set upon cratchets, covered with rafts, sedge, and earth.” “Wee had daily common prayer, morning and evening, every Sunday two sermons, and every three moneths the holy communion, till our minister died. But our prayers daily, with an homily on Sundaies, wee continued two or three years after, till more preachers came.” . A new charter was granted in 1609 to a company which included a number of bishops and counted among its names Sir Edwin Sandys an Nicholas Ferrar, the friend of George Herbert. Un: der the influence of such men the religious interests of the colony were sure to be provided for. The arrival of a new governor at a critical juncture, known as ‘... the starving-time,” was celebrated by a service in the church, “which was neatly trimmed with the wild flowers of the country.” In 1619 the first legislature of Virginia set apart for each o: a glebe of 100 acres, and fixed a yearly stipend for the payment of
the clergy. The bishop of London was applied to for a body of “pious, learned, and painful ministers,” and was about this time appointed a member of the king's council for Virginia. Thus began the relation by which the bishop of London became, in a manner, the diocesan of the infant church in America. The charter of 1609 was annulled in 1625, and the company in which Sandys and Ferrar had been leading spirits was broken up. The whole property and government of the colony were assumed Y. the Crown. But the religious character, originally impressed upon, it was maintained until the o of the great Rebellion. Virginia had declared for the king, and during the troublous times which ensued became a place of refuge for the Cavaliers, many of whom were men of broken fortunes and reckless lives. During the Protectorate the church in Virginia became greatly demoralized. At the Restoration most of the parishes were without incumbents. Applications were now made to the mother-country “for help to preserve the Christian religion by supplying them with ministers.” A new class of men made their appearance in answer to these petitions, “such as wore }. coats and could babble in a pulpit, roare in a tavern, exact from their parishioners, and rather by their dissoluteness destroy than feed their flocks.” . Great scandals arose, and the urgent necessity for the presence of a bishop in America was clearly seen. A bishop was actually nominated, when the Éi of Lord Clarendon put an end to the project. The bishop of London had been invested with formal jurisdiction over English congregations abroad since 1634. But this authority had, up to this time, never been effectively exercised in the American colonies. After the failure of the scheme for sending out a bishop, the bishop of London, as a partial substitute, in 1689 appointed the Rev. James Blair his commissary. This officer had power to hold visitations, to deliver charges, and, to a certain extent, enforce discipline, but he could not confirm, ordain, or consecrate, nor could he depose a priest from his office. Nevertheless, during the fifty-three years in which Blair held this position, he did much to remedy the prevailing laxity, and to improve the state of the church. Early in the 18th century the external equipment of the church in Virginia seemed all that could be desired. There were fifty-four parishes, with about seventy places of worship. The supply of clergy was nearly sufficient, there were glebes and parsonages, and all wore a prosperous look. But, in reality, the state of affairs was far from satisfactory. The system, as an establishment, was very defective, and through certain evasions of the order provided by law the worst features of the voluntary system were introduced. By the act of 1642 a clergyman was to be inducted into his parish by the governor, and henceforth held a freehold in his living, and consequently could not be removed except o a fair trial upon charges regularly preferred. But the presentation was in the hands of the parish, and might be withheld indefinitely; this became the general practice, so that the majority of the clergy were hired from year to year. This, taken with the indifferent quality of many of those who came out from England, after failure to obtain a living at home, and the fatal defect in organization by which it was rendered impossible to remedy existing evils, fully explains the low tone of the church in Virginia. The disuse of induction was in many cases accompanied by the withholding of the glebe by the yestry. This led to a legal contest, which was decided in favor of the clergy, and reaffirmed by an act of assembly in 1748. Another contest sprang up between the clergy and the rovincial assembly in consequence of an attack made y the latter in 1757 upon the salaries of the former. An act was passed which compelled the clergy to accept a money-payment at a low valuation in lieu of the tobacco hitherto paid. This act was annulled by the king's council, and the clergy instituted suits for the recovery of the full amount of their stipends. One of these was brought to trial as a test case, and by the exertions of the celebrated Patrick Henry was decided against the church (1763). The relation of the vestries to the clergy in the first place, and these contests in which first, the clergy and the parish authorities were arrayed against each other, and afterwards the clergy and the legislature, brought the laity into a position of influence in the management of ecclesiastical affairs which taken with a similar state of things in Maryland, had an important part in the formation of the constitution of the American church of a later period. A second project for the establishment of bishops in North America had received the sanction of Queen Anne, but was defeated by her death. Petitions for this purpose sent in by the churchmen of the colonies were of no effect. A last attempt of this kind was made a short time before the Revolution. At the solicitation of the clergy of the Northern and Middle colonies a meeting of the Virginia clergy was held in June, 1771, which decided against the i. and the chief opponents received a vote of thanks from the legislature. Maryland.—The first settlers of Maryland in 1634 were Roman Catholics. Freedom of religion was, however, granted to all comers. This was secured, in the first place, by the oath of office. The colony soon had a very mixed population as regards religion, and in 1646 an act of toleration was passed by the assembly. Under the Protectorate, upon the submission of the colony after a struggle, a law was passed toleratin all forms of Christianity except “popery, prelacy, an quakerism.” The earliest trace of the Church of England is in 1676, when it appears that there were four clergymen in the province sup by private means. From 1688 to 1692 occurred the “Protestant Revolution,” which ended in the establishment of the Church of England by act of assembly in 1692. The territory of the colony was divided into parishes, and a tax payable in tobacco laid upon the people for the support of the church. Sir Francis §.. ap ...”governor in 1694, exerted himself in behalf | the church and brought the new act into operation. The number of clergy rapidly increased. Following the same course as in Virginia, the bishop of London in 1696 appointed Dr. Bray his commissary for Maryland. This officer arrived in 1700, and at a visitation held at Annapolis made a determined and partly successful effort to enforce discipline in the case of profligate clergy. At this meeting also arrangements were made to support a missionary among the Quakers of Pennsylvania. Dr. Bray was compelled in a short time to return to England in order to counteract attempts made to overthrow the Maryland establishment. In this he was at length successful. Although he never returned to America he did not relax his efforts in behalf of the church. One good work of his was the provision of numerous parish libraries for the colony, but by far the most important result of his labors was the foundation of the “Society for the Propagation of the Gospel,” which is directly traceable to his influence. No new commissary was sent to Maryland until 1716, when two were appointed—Mr. Wilkinson for the Eastern Shore, and Mr. Henderson for the Western. The latter was a man of remarkable energy, but he was not able to contend sugeessfully against the extraordinary difficulties in which he found himself involved, resulting from laxity of discipline within and hostile attacks from the civil power without. The contest in Maryland had two phases. The absence of any ecclesiastical authority empowered to enforce discipline induced the governor and assembly at different times to assert an undue control of the affairs of the church. This was carried so far as to resist all attempts to remedy existing evils through ecclesiastical channels; thus, in 1718, the assembly refused to recognize by a formal act the jurisdiction of the bishop of London, and in 1727, when the Rev. Mr. Colebatch was invited to come to
England to receive consecration to the episcopal office, he was prevented by a writ of me, e.ceat from leaving the colony. On the other hand, here, as in Virginia, attacks were made upon church property and the support of the clergy. Henderson at last, worn out by the conflict, ceased to exercise his office as commissary, and matters were henceforth allowed to drift. The church in Maryland, during the whole period of its existence before the Revolution, was under the same disadvantage as to discipline with that of Virginia, although i. were periods when, by the energy and faithfulness of such men as Bray and Henderson in their office as commissaries, the tone of clerical character was high. On the other hand, the church in Virginia was, perhaps, never subjected to such extreme claims on the part of the civil power as that asserted by the governor and assembly of Maryland on some occasions. The Carolinas and Georgia.-The early history of the church in the Carolinas unfolds the same tale of mismanagement in its relation to the civil government. Much the same arrangement also existed as regards the incumbent and his parish which was so fraught with evil in Virginia. As early as 1704 an act of assembly constituted a lay commission for the trial of causes ecclesiastical. This law was afterwards annulled on appeal to the home government, chiefly through the exertions of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. In 1707 Gideon Johnstone was appointed commissary of the bishop of London in this region, succeeded soon afterwards by Alexander Gordon. The administration of Gordon was judicious and faithful. but was chiefly remarkable for his collision with Whitefield. This famous teacher was producing great confusion in the infant church, but upon admonition he defied the authority of the commissary and treated with contempt the proceedings of the ecclesiastical court which §noid at Charleston for his trial in 1740. The Colony of Georgia was established through the benevolence of Oglethorpe in 1732. The early history of religion in this region was marked by the labors of the Wesleys, who had been recommended to Gov. Oglethorpe as fit persons to aid in carrying out his plans. Charles was engaged as the governor's secretary, while John became the first missionary at Savannah. Charles was soon so involved in disputes with the governor that he felt that his usefulness was at an end, and left the colony four months after his arrival. John Wesley endeavored to introduce, above and be: yond the requirements of the church, a system of rigid asceticism for which the society about him was utterly unprepared. After a career marked by intense ardor and devotion he became involved in an unfortunate lawsuit turning upon an injudicious attempt to ad: minister discipline, and without waiting for its fi settlement shook off the dust of his feet against the colony and departed, after a ministry of 21 months. It is interesting to remember that at this time the brothers appeared as very high churchmen, contending for an exact literalness in carrying out the law of the church which was unknown at that day. The Middle Colonies.—In New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New York the church was never established. That was precluded by the character of the first settlements. The Swedes and Dutch, who colonized these regions from 1608, brought with them the religious rites and usages of the Swedish Lu. theran and Dutch Presbyterian worship. The English element in New Jersey and Pennsylvania came in wit the Quakers, who founded Burlington in 1677, and Philadelphia under William Penn in 1681. Large bodies of Scotch Covenanters also emigrated to East Jersey in consequence of the severities inflicted upon them at this period in their native country. H. whole region, therefore, was settled under influences adverse to the Church of England. But while this was true, it does not appear that opposition to the church ever
assumed an organized form or that laws were made of an intolerant character. In the charter of Penn it was expressly stipulated that whenever twenty inhabitants requested a Church of England minister, he should be allowed to dwell among them without molestation. In pursuance of this arrangement we find the first place of worship belonging to the Church of England erected in o in 1695, and the Rev. Mr. Clayton appointed its first minister. But the growth of the church in these colonies, as in those of New England, was chiefly owing to the zeal of new converts to her fold and to the fostering care of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, founded in 1701. George Keith, a convert from the Quakers and the earliest missionary of the society, by his incessant activity in preaching, disputing, and the publication of tracts, spread the principles of the church and laid the foundation of many parishes in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. With him was associated John Talbot, who became rector of the church in o N. J., in 1704, and who remained a faithful and successful missionary of the society until 1725. The crying need of o supervision, disregarded through so many years by the church at home, induced Mr. Talbot on a visit to England in 1624 to receive episcopal orders at the hands of the non-juring bishops. Dr. Welton, also consecrated by the non-jurors, came to America at the same time, and was made rector of Christ's Church, Philadelphia. . This attempt to introduce i. necessarily miscarried. The association of the non-jurors with the Jacobite party brought all connected with them under suspicion of disloyalty to the established government. #. two bishops were compelled to keep their true position a secret, and it is not certain that they ever performed any episcopal acts, though there are traditions to that effect. When the facts became known, Welton was required to leave the ‘; and Talbot was discharged from the society and inhibited by the bishop of London. The latter, in obedience to the orders laid upon him, abstained from officiating in the public services of the church, and notwithstanding the unanimous petitions of the vestry of Christ Church, Philadelphia, and of his old congregation at Burlington, lived in retirement until his death two years later. The province of New York was surrendered to the English by the Dutch authorities in 1664, but it was not until 1693 that any move was made in favor of the Church of England. An act was passed at that time for the maintenance of the clergy. In 1696 Trinity Church, then said to be “the finest church in Nort America,” was built. . The first rector was Mr. Vesey previously a layman, but chosen by the governor an vestry and commended to the bishop of London for ordination, with the approval of all ranks of people. Vesey was rector from 1697 to 1756, and about 1713 was appointed commissary of the bishop of London. The parish was endowed soon after its foundation with the freehold of a neighboring property known as the “King's Farm.” Vesey's assistant and successor Barclay, opened St. George's as a chapel of ease, aided in the establishment of King's College, and designed St. Paul's, which was completed by his successor, Auchmuty. Under these rectors the church did effective work among the Indian tribes and the negroes. An earnest promoter of missionary work among the New York Indians was the celebrated Sir William Johnson, who was a faithful member of the church and conveyed to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel shortly before his death 20,000 acres of land as a basis for the future endowment of the episcopate. Under the methods pursued in these Middle colonies —and the same is true of New England—the congreations were represented by vestries, who did not, owever, in all cases, exercise the appointing power, but generally accepted the appointments of the bishop of London and the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. In the case of Christ Church, Philadelphia,
we meet with an exception to this in the election of Dr. Welton in 1624 without waiting for authority from England. In the case of Trinity, New York, the power of the vestry to elect its own rector was conceded from the first. The support of the minist depended chiefly upon the society, eked out by .. contributions as the people were able to afford. . In the absence of any establishment the contests, which were so disastrous to the spirit of true religion to the southward, could not arise. Nor was there here any such laxity of discipline as in Maryland and elsewhere drew the civil authorities into attempts to regulate the conduct of the clergy. The bishop of London, with the aid of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, was able to exert a direct, and wholesome authority by withdrawing the stipends and cancelling the appointment of any of the clergy who failed to fulfil the requirements of their position. New England.—The Puritans of New England were the most violently opposed to the church of all the American colonists. o in that region was a theocracy in which church and state were identical. Penal laws were brought to bear upon dissenters, under which fines, imprisonment, and banishment were the ". penalties. Two brothers among the original settlers at Salem, Mass, ventured to "uphold'' in their own house, “for such as would resort unto them, the common prayer worship,” and were ignominiously expelled from the colony. There were attempts on the part of royal governors, under the favor of Charles so to introduce the church service, but so little pains was taken to conciliate the prejudices of the people that they were rather the more exasperated against the whole system. This was especially the case under Gov. Andros in 1686, who took forcible ossession of the Qld South meeting-house. King's hapel was built in 1689, and received many gifts from the king and queen, with a valuable library from the bishop of London. This church afterwards fell into the hands of the Unitarians, who have held possession ever since. For a long time the church remained to the people of the Eastern colonies an alien institution. ut at length a spontaneous development, o: up in the heart of New o itself, changed the aspect of affairs and produced results of permanent importance. After the establishment of the Society for the Pro %ation of the Gospel Keith and Talbot had visited Connecticut, and in 1707 the arish at Stratford was organized by the Rev. Geo. Muirson, a missionary of the society. But the movement referred to sprang up within the precincts of Yale College, in 1722. Seven gentlemen connected with the college, including Timothy Cutler, the first resident, and Samuel Johnson, the first president of ing's College, N. Y. (now Columbia), were led by the perusal of certain theological works sent out from England for the college library to declare, for the Church of England. ey were all ordained pastors among the iode. and were men of mark in the colony. Four of these men subsequently went to England for holy orders, and, one having died, three returned to exercise a strong and active influence in the formation of the church in New England. Cutler became rector of Trinity Church, Boston, while Johnson continued many years at Stratford. This movement spread rapidly, and, being grounded in the study of first principles and conducted in the face of violent opposition from the authorities of both church and state, it assumed a character of strength and vigor which made an indelible impression upon the State of Connecticut, and affected | New England. Education in the Colonial Period—The most imortant educational foundations to which church inuences gave rise during this period were William and Mary ği. e, Va., founded by Dr. Blair in 1693, and King's College, N. Y., established in 1754. King's College received as an endowment a portion of the “King's Farm” from Trinity Church, on condition that the “president forever, for the time being, should be in communion with the Church of England,” and that the church service should be used in the college chapel. Churchmen were also largely concerned in the establishment of the University of Pennsylvania o , eighteen out of twenty-four members of the rSt j of trustees being attached to the church, while a large part of the funds was collected in England by the endeavors of Dr. William Smith, the first rovost of the college. Dean, (afterwards Bishop) #. came out to America in 1728 in order to establish a college in the Bermuda Islands for trainin American missionaries, but, owing to the failure f the government grant, which had been promised, was unable to carry out his project. His residence of some years in Rhode Island was not without benefit to the cause of education, which he promoted by liberal donations of books and other property to Yale oloff, and subsequently by similar gifts to Harvard. e also gave valuable assistance in the establishment of King's College, N. Y. The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel from its foundation adopted education as a proper branch of its work, and sent out schoolmasters as well as missionaries. A considerable number of parochial schools were sustained from a very early date in Philadelphia and other places of Eastern folio In New York city, Trinity School, which still flourishes, was established by the aid of the society in 1709. Summary.—Under the widely different conditions
which existed in the Southern, Middle, and Eastern colonies respectively, the tone and character of the church were so far affected that three distinct phases are readily discerned. In the South the church was organized in feeble imitation of the church at home. The system had more than the faults and none of the merits of the English establishment. In the intermediate region the rise of the church proceeded from missionary effort, and as it met no determined hostility anywhere, it grew quietly and healthfully, but attention was rarely directed, to first principles. In the Eastern colonies the real foundation of the church is due to the movement at Yale College. It proceeded from deep and candid study, and made its way in the face of a hostile religious establishment and amid the strongest popular prejudice. The result was a thorough knowledge of church principles and firm conviction of their truth.
THE ORGANIZATION OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH.
The entire dependence of the American Church upon the mother country which her peculiar position entailed upon her prevented the growth of sentiments in accord with the principles of the Revolution. In the great national movement the clergy generally joini themselves out of sympathy with their countrymen. The majority of the Northern clergy, as missionaries of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, were in constant communication with their superiors in England. Moreover, the theological }. accepted in the North, especially in New England, were of a High Church tendency, carryin with them at that period the strongest convictions o the duty of loyalty to legitimate authority. Especially they felt themselves hampered by their oath of allégiance taken at the time of ordination. The result was, that the majority of the clergy throughout the North were found on the loyal side. Many voluntarily resigned their cures, while others continued their ministrations until they were silenced by force. In the Middle region some influential churchmen, of whom Dr. William White was a representative, favored the cause of the Revolution." in the South the clergy did not, on the whole, maintain the same attitude as in the North. In fact, one-third of those in Virginia and Maryland advocated the Revolution. It was generally felt, however, that the tone and temper of the
church was opposed to extreme measures, and though Virginia and S. might present exceptions to this, the church establishments which existed in those provinces were, peculiarly odious to a majority of the people, both for their inefficiency and because they represented English ideas. In Virginia acts were soon assed repealing all former laws in favor of the church. nly the glebes and church edifices were preserved. The incomes of the clergy were summarily stopped at a time when it was impossible to make new provision. They were driven from the country unless they espoused the popular cause without reserve. Churches were everywhere abandoned, flocks broken up, and the sacraments continued to be administered only from time to time by a few zealous men who travelled through the country for the purpose. In Maryland the Declaration of Rights in 1776 secured to the church her property, but during the war a measure was proposed which threatened the very existence of the church as an episcopal body. This was the attempt on the part of the legislature, in 1782, to reorganize the church, and in particular to appoint ordainers to the ministry. is movement was defeated by the energy and earnestness of one man, the Rev. Samuel É. who obtained a hearing before the legislature and defended the cause of the church. e close of the war found the church utterly prostrate. In the North and East the work could only be resumed upon an entirely new basis, since the aid of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel could no longer be obtained. . . In New York Trinity Church had ‘... burned. A few scattered parishes remained in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Virginia, from 164 churches and chapels, with 91 clergy, was reduced to 38 in actual operation, with only 28 clergymen. In Maryland the clergy had fallen from 44 to 20. Thus at the declaration of peace, in 1783, the church was disabled and utterly disorganized. relation which had existed with the o of London was dissolved, and the bond of union with each other and with the mother church which the society had fostered among the clergy was now destroyed, so that nothing was .# to constitute, or even symbolize, eccle; siastical unity. Without bishop or even provision o without diocesan constitutions, every parl autocephalous, a slight impulse might have sent the congregations of some regions into the arms of the most congenial sect or might have led to the adoption of such a system as would have changed the character of the church in essential particulars. We have seen measures of this kind attempted in Maryland. About the same time, White, despairing of better things, proposed a scheme of organization without the episo pacy, committing to elective officers the powers of dio cipline and ordination. -, But, depressed as the church was, her traditions were still strong enough to preserve her from desto. tion or perversion. The civil division of State lines and the fellow-feeling between the clergy of the sam: locality led to the first movement in #. direction of harmonious organization. The earliest formal meeting of the clergy was in Connecticut, in March, 1783 which led to the selection of Seabury as bishop, an his departure for England to obtain episcopal ordin”: tion. The policy pursued here was to complete the organization by obtaining a bishop before any measuo were taken for settling the constitution of the chur. Seabury, unable to obtain his purpose in England with: out undue delay, was finally consecrated in śni by Bishops Kilgour, Petrie, and Skinner, on Nov. 14. 1784. At meetings held in Maryland, in 1783-84, " steps were taken to obtain the §. but decla: rations were agreed to defining the inherent power of bishops and the rights of the clergy in a Low-Chu direction; giving the appointment to a particular to into the hands of the congregation; asserting th: right of the laity to representation in ecclesiast synods; and proposing §. judicial and disciplina's
powers be exercised only by such a body of cler and laity. A meeting in #. hia, in 1784, too substantially the same ground, ...} issued a call for a
neral convention. The first convention of a general §. assembled accordingly in Philadelphia in 1785. It represented seven States. , Against the wish of Connecticut and Seabury, it was decided to proceed at once to the adoption of a permanent constitution and the revision of the Prayer Book. The constitution thus framed, in addition to the rights conferred upon the laity of sitting in council, made bishops amenable to their diocesan conventions. The Prayer Book was radically changed, and even its orthodoxy was brought into question. These measures delayed instead of hastening the desired union and the acquisition of bishops ń. England. Seabury and the church to the eastward declined to submit to this organization, and the English bishops refused to consecrate for America, while fundamental principles were left in doubt. These difficulties being subsequently removed, Provoost of New York and Wii. of Pennsylvania were finally consecrated in the chapel at Lambeth, Feb. 4, 1787. Connecticut was satisfied by the removal of the objectionable features from the constitution, and, at the convention of 1789, Bishop Seabury was present. At this time the Proposed Book was set aside, but two principles still contended—the one on the side of tradition and continuity, the other disregarding precedent and insisting upon#. novo in the settlement of the Liturgy. e influence of the bishops turned the scale, and the more catholic position was maintained, as set forth in the Preface of the revised Book: “This Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point, of doctrine, discipline, or worship; or further than local circumstances require.” Two influences are traceable in this revision in the daily offices and litany, that of the Proposed Book, or rather of the remote attempt of the latitudinarian commission of 1689; in the Communion office the influence of Seabury prevailed, and the Scotch office was adopted, of even higher liturgical and doctrinal value than that of the Church of England. In 1792 the convention assembled in New York with three bishops of the English line—Provoost, White, and Madison—besides Seabury of the Scotch succession. The bishops now felt themselves authorized, consistently with engagements entered into with the English prelates, to perform con
secrations. The first consecration to the episcopate, therefore, performed on these shores, took place at this convention, the candidate being the Rev. Thomas
James Claggett of Maryland, and all four of the bishops present uniting in the act.
†. organization of the Episcopal Church was completed in accordance with sound principles in all essential particulars. The peculiarities of this organization, while they have been defended on general principles, are easily seen to based not upon theoretical schemes, but to be a natural development from causes previously existing. The constitution, thus embraces ideas derived from the experience of the church in Virginia and Maryland and the South generally, modified by the church principles of the N.orthern clergy. The most radical innovation was the part assigned to the laity in the government of the church. It will readily be seen how naturally, this grew out of the }. existing state of things. The subsequent
istory of the church seems to justify the experiment, and the laity have often been found to be more conservative than the clergy. The limits of lay-power in legislation and government have, however, been left to adjust themselves in accordance with general principles as they may be instinctively perceived. . Such limits have never been expressly defined by legislation.
PERIOD since THE REvoluTION (1783–1882).
Growth of the Church.-The growth of the church after the organization was at last completed was for a Wol II.-2 Y
long time exceedingly slow. The reputation which she had acquired during the Revolution, of sympathy with the mother-country, her necessary connection with the Church of England, the rigidity of her working system, and its lack of special adaptation to the condi. tions about her—all combined with the general preju; olice against episcopacy to obstruct her influence and impede her growth. Many faithful churchmen almost despaired of the future. But, though progress was slow, it soon became apparent i. the church was by no means dead. In New England there was always life and activity. Pennsylvania had the advantage of Bishop White's fatherly guidance for fifty years; he died in 1836. The episcopate of Bishop Moore (1814–41) did much, to build up again the broken foundations of the church in Virginia. But the chief impulse to church life and growth was given by the influence of John Henry Hobart, D. D., bishop of New York (1811–30). His firm grasp of the distinctive principles of the church, and his ability in maintaining them, his activity and the vigor of his administration, produced permanent effects of the highest value to the whole church. The consecration of Bishop Philander Chase in 1819 marked the first
eat step in the advance of the church westward. He afterwards (1835) became first bishop of Illinois. An important step in the same direction was the consecration of Jackson Kemper in 1835 to be missionary bishop of the North-west. A voluntary movement of great interest and importance was the formation of the ‘Associate Mission'' at Nashotah, Wis., under the leadership of James Lloyd Breck (1842). This association of young priests, §. from the seminary, living in common, and devoting themselves to missionary work, evangelized Wisconsin and founded the famous theological school at Nashotah. Out of the same movement sprang subsequently the theological school at Faribault and the foundation of missions among the Indians of the North-west. Other bishops appointed over missionary jurisdictions were Kip (California, 1853) and Scott (Oregon and Washington Territory, 1854). But it was only from 1865 that the principle has been definitely acted upon that the bishop ought rather to lead than follow missionary enterprise, and the number of missionary jurisdictions has been increased as fast as circumstances seemed to warrant. The first domestic and foreign missionary society of the Protestant Episcopal Church was organized under the authority of the General Convention in 1820. It was reorganized in 1835, and became the “Board of Missions of the Protestant Episcopal Church,” comprehending “all persons who are in baptism members of this church.” Through this board the missionary bishops and their clergy are for the most part main!. The earliest bishops consecrated for foreign work were Boone for China and Southgate for Constantinople (both in 1844). The board was reorganized in 1877, and a reconciliation effected with the American Church Missionary Society, a voluntary organization founded under Low-Church * by those who disapproved of the general board. The most successful missionary work among the Indians has been carried on in the North-west. Such missions were commenced in Minnesota by Breck, and afterwards renewed and fostered with great zeal by the Rt. Rev. H. B. Whipple, of that diocese. From these efforts have sprung also a number of flourishing missions along the Missouri River in Nebraska and Dakota Territory, which now constitute the missionary jurisdiction of Southern Dakota. The numerical increase of the membership of the church has been constant, and often rapid. eanwhile, there has been a constant struggle, as her mission has opened before her, to adapt her system to the needs of all sorts and conditions of men, and to escape whatever trammels obstruct her growth and extension. This is seen in the increasing number of free churches; in attempts to make the public services attractive; in the formation of