no union before the Revolution: except what was the result of the connection which they in common had with the Bishop of London. That authority being withdrawn, the clergy and people of any district might, without unlawfulness, have acted for themselves, and in some departments such a proceeding would not have been surprising."

There could be no confirmations and no ordinations, and the supply of clergy fell off, and the authority which belonged to a Bishop was usurped or lost altogether.

Many causes were at work to prevent the appointment of a Bishop, and to make that which was not altogether easy at first more and more difficult. The primary obstacle lay in the eighteenth century idea, which friends and enemies shared alike, that a Bishop was partly an ecclesiastical functionary and at least half a State dignitary. Many who would not have objected to a "purely religious Episcopacy" did object to a "political Episcopacy." So general had this apprehension become that Bishop White declares his belief that a few years before the Revolutionary war it would have been "impossible to have obtained the concurrence of a respectable number of laymen in any measure for the obtaining of an American Bishop," and that when all were ready to avow their preference of Episcopacy and of a form of prayer." To add force to this apprehension came in the understanding that this dignitary required a large endowment to support him. But more than all other causes was the prevailing ignorance and coldness which prevailed even among professed friends of the Church in the colonies.

A writer in 1735 expresses the feeling of great many, who writes that "considering how long a time it is since the establishment (of the S. P. G.), the colonies may by this time be provided with ministers among themselves, and likewise be of sufficient abilities to support them if they were inclined to it." And still more when he adds, "in effect I know hardly any here that are disposed to do much for promoting or advancing religion, or that seems to be much concerned what becomes of it either abroad or at home." Efforts were made, but they failed. At one time matters went so far that a palace was purchased for the Bishop at Burlington, and considerable bequests were received for the endowment of the See, but the death of the queen in 1712 put a stop to all proceedings. In 1727, chiefly through the exertions of Berkeley (afterwards Bishop), a charter and a grant were obtained, but before the broad seal was attached the king died. Once the Church came near obtaining Bishops in spite of opposition, when Dr. Welton and Mr. Talbot were consecrated by one of the non-juring Bishops. But the matter went no further. Dr. Welton was summoned home, and Mr. Talbot dismissed from his post as missionary of the S. P. G. Archbishop Secker renewed the effort in

1761, and the New England clergy joined in strong representations, but all in vain.

But GOD was preparing for His Church a deliverance in His own way. England's statesmen in neglecting the Church in America had neglected the strongest of all bonds between the colonies and the mother-country, and England owes in no small degree to that neglect the loss of these colonies. When the war of the Revolution came, while in the North the Church clergy were generally loyal to the mother-country, they were weak in numbers and in influence. For a time it seemed as though the war, with its consequent hatred of England, would work the destruction of the Church. But instead, it gave her freedom. The close of the war saw most of the clergy exiles, their churches desecrated or destroyed, and their congregations broken up. In Pennsylvania only one church was left,-Christ Church, in Philadelphia, under the Rev. (afterwards Bishop) William White. Virginia entered on the war with 164 churches and chapels and 91 clergymen. At the close of the contest a large number of her churches were destroyed, 95 parishes were extinct or forsaken, and only 28 clergymen remained, and the Church was so depressed and so little zeal was found in her members that Dr. Griffith was unable to go over, with Drs. White and Provoost, to be consecrated Bishop of Virginia, because funds could not be raised to defray his expenses."

The number of those in "English America" who belonged to the Church was never so large as would be and is naturally supposed, partly owing to the fact that some of the colonies were settled by those disaffected and hostile to the Church, partly because of the immigration of those of other nations. At the beginning of the Revolutionary war there were only about eighty clergymen of the Church to the north and east of Maryland, and those, except in Boston, Newport, New York, and Philadelphia, principally supported by the S. P. G. Outside of Philadelphia there were never more than six in Pennsylvania. In Maryland and Virginia the Church was more numerous, and supported by legal establishments. Farther south they were less than in these provinces, but more than in the North. And besides this paucity of numbers, the very connection and name of England was a disadvantage. But the greatest disadvantage of all lay in its very organization, which required Bishops, who were denied.

The difficulties which stand in the way of the Church are illustrated by the fact that Mr. Adams took up the case of some candidates for orders, and through the Danish minister at the court of St. James made application for their ordination to the Danish Church, which was favorably received but never acted upon. Indeed, those who sought to supply the exigency had no idea of having recourse to any others besides the English Bishops, at least until that hope failed.

In 1784 occurred a correspondence which needs no comment to illustrate the condition of the Church. Two young men had braved the dangers of the sea to obtain ordination in England, but had been refused because the Bishops could not dispense with the oaths of uniformity, and they applied to Franklin for assistance. His answer is dated "Passy, near Paris," and with a refreshing innocence he informs them that he had applied to the Pope's Nuncio on their behalf, but advised them to give up the thought of England and go to the Church of Ireland, and if that application failed, to act as though England and Ireland were sunk in the sea; and expresses his wonder "that men in America qualified to pray for and instruct their neighbors should not be permitted to do it till they have voyaged 6000 miles to ask leave of a cross old gentleman at Canterbury, who seems, by your own account, to have as little regard for your souls as did Attorney-General Seymour for those of Virginia. Commissary Blair begged him to consider that the people of Virginia had souls to be saved. Souls!' (said he); your souls! make tobacco.'"

One curious result of the want of Bishops may well be noticed. In 1784, John Wesley ordained and sent out Dr. Coke to be Superintendent of the Methodist Societies in America, and afterwards joined Mr. Asbury with him in office. Partly as a result of this action, the Methodists were separated from the Church. For this action, so opposed to his former conduct and teaching, Mr. Wesley gave the reason that while at home he would not suffer it, inasmuch as there were in America "no Bishops with legal jurisdiction, his scruples were at an end."

The excuse is a sufficiently weak one, and it is Dr. Coke's own testimony that he went further in separation than Mr. Wesley intended, as he did in calling himself a Bishop; but such as the excuse is, it suggests some interesting questions as to the possibilities in case even this had been wanting. It was only in November of the same year that Bishop Seabury was consecrated. In 1791, Dr. Coke applied to Bishop White for the ordination of the Methodist ministers and for the consecration of himself and Mr. Asbury, and expressed a strong regret for his past action and desire of reunion. The effort came to naught, but when the question of separation turned upon such points, it is hardly possible to avoid saying to ourselves, What might have been if a Bishop had been here! So hopeless did the prospect seem of obtaining Bishops and continuing the proper ministry of the Church, that Dr. White put forth a scheme of presbyterian and provisional ordination, in order that the duty of worship and of preaching the Gospel might not utterly lapse. peace of 1783 opened a better prospect, and in 1784 several conferences were held in Brunswick, N. J., in Philadelphia and New York, which resulted in a General Conven

But the

tion in Philadelphia in 1785. But in the mean time the clergy of Connecticut had acted for themselves, and by their appointment Dr. Samuel Seabury sailed for England and applied for consecration as Bishop. But the English prelates could do nothing without the consent of the ministry, and the ministry would not give their consent without a formal request of Congress, which of course was out of the question; and after waiting some months in vain, at length following the instructions which he had received at home, and acting upon the advice of friends in England, Dr. Seabury turned his steps to Scotland, where was a Church which, if it was persecuted by the state, and its assemblies forbidden by law, was, at least, not hampered in its spiritual rights by state control. On the 14th of November, 1784, in a little upper room in Aberdeen, the first Bishop of the American Church was consecrated by three Bishops, Kilgour, Petre, and Skinner, and in June, 1785, he was at home. His consecration had a double good effect, encouraging the Churchmen of America and rousing the authorities in England, by the certainty that even if they were refused by England, Scotland could and would supply them with Bishops.

At the Convention in Philadelphia in October, 1785, seven States were represented. Dr. White presided, and it is to his meekness and wisdom that the Church owes its deliverance from the many dangers that encompassed it. There were grave differences on almost every conceivable subject. Some were afraid of a Bishop, and wanted his hands tied and himself made the creature of the Convention. Some would have excluded the laity from the Convention. Some would omit the opening petitions of the Litany. Bishop Seabury and his clergy declined to attend the Convention. By some Dr. White himself was charged with Socinianism. There were elements in the Church and in the Convention that boded neither any good, but out of them all the LORD delivered them.

64

The proposed book" of 1785, which was by order of the Convention sent out into the different States for consideration, and which embodied many radical changes from the English Prayer-Book, fell flat. Correspondence with the English Prelates resulted in bringing the mind of the Church to a general agreement that the best thing to be done was to take the English book with as few changes as possible, and when, in 1786, Dr. White and Dr. Provoost, elected for Pennsylvania and New York, arrived in England, they were favorably received, and on February 4, 1787, were consecrated in Lambeth Chapel by the two Archbishops, and the Bishops of Bath and Wells, and Peterborough. In 1789 the union between the Dioceses was happily effected, Bishops White and Seabury constituting the House of Bishops in General Convention.

When

again the alterations in the Prayer-Book came under discussion, the influence of Bishop Seabury appears in the important alterations in the Communion office, by which that office follows the Scottish model. The prayers of invocation and oblation are those of the First Book of Edward VI., but the order is that of the Scottish and of the ancient Liturgies. It was a change that "lay very near to the heart of Bishop Seabury," who even doubted whether the form of the Church of England "strictly amounted to a consecration." When the proposed change came down to the lower house, by the influence of the President, Dr. William Smith, it was accepted without opposition. By it "the Holy Eucharist is restored to its ancient dignity and efficacy," and we have an office than which nothing more magnificent and worthy can be conceived. In comparison with this great gain, for which, under GOD, we have to thank Bishop Seabury, the other changes and omissions are small. The omission of the Athanasian Creed was the only important omission. Besides changes required by the changed political condition of the country, others were made. Selections from the Psalms were added to the Psalter. The Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis were omitted, the Venite and Benedictus shortened, and other alterations were made, some of them decided improvements, some decided losses, and some for which it would be hard to give a reason, but none of them affecting any doctrine or indicating any "essential departure from the doctrines, discipline, or worship of the Church of England.'

The revolution, therefore, effected no break in the line of the Church's history. Nothing in her discipline, or worship, or practice is to be regarded as having a beginning at that time. There were portions of the Prayer-Book, as the Articles, for example, not finally acted upon until 1801, and even later, but there was no release from former obligations on that account, except from those political obligations which were affected by the war.

The Church always had the Liturgy, and that which was not expressly changed simply continued in force. The declaration which was made in the Convention of 1811, that the Protestant Episcopal Church is the Church formerly known under the name of "the Church of England in America," a declaration called for by some disputes which had arisen about land-titles, expressed the universal understanding that in no respect was this a "new Church." We look back over the long struggle for existence which culminated so successfully, and we are more and more impressed with the greatness of the leaders of the Church, of the two especially who made up the House of Bishops in 1789, and on whom so much depended; but of those two we must give the palm to one. Bishop Seabury's zeal and devotion to Church principles supplied what was lacking in the character of Bishop White,

and we owe him a great debt of admiration and gratitude But the gentle and firm hand that guided the frail bark of the Church through the dangers that beset her on every side, the one man who was to the Church what Washington was to the State, was WILLIAM WHITE.

The life was still very feeble. In 1790, one hundred and eighty-four years after the first planting of the Church of England in Virginia, Dr. Madison went over to England and was consecrated Bishop of Virginia. But nineteen years after, when the General Convention was held in Baltimore, the Bishop of Virginia considered that his duties to the college of which he was president were sufficient excuse for his absence from Convention, and the Diocese was not represented. At that Convention only Bishops White and Claggett were present, and, as Bishop Claggett was just recovering from a severe illness, it was a question not unlikely to present itself whether a single Bishop could constitute a house. Special reasons doubtless existed in some Dioceses for the weakness of the Church. In Virginia the immediate and apparent reason was the withdrawal of the stipends and seizure of the glebes by the Legislature. Patrick Henry resisted the act to the last, and as long as he lived it could never be obtained, and it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States; but, aside from the illegality of the act, such was the character of many of the clergy who received the stipends and held the glebes, that, in the opinion of Bishop Meade, the loss of them was the saving of the Church, by relieving her of the burden of unworthy ministers and throwing her upon her own resources, though for a time her condition was deplorable.

The Convention of 1811 met in New Haven under serious difficulties, since out of seven Bishops in the Church there were but two present,-Bishops White and Jarvis. Bishop Claggett was prevented from attendance by sickness; Bishop Madison by the duties of his college. Bishop Provoost was in ill health. The consecration of Drs. Hobart and Griswold was necessarily postponed, and, after the Bishops had gone down to New York, it was till the last minute doubtful whether the assistance of Bishop Provoost could be obtained. He, however, “finally found himself strong enough to give his attendance, and thus the business was happily accomplished."

The Church in America was in more ways than one hampered by its English origin. The branch had been bound, and choked almost to death by long neglect before it was broken off and planted in the American soil, and it inherited many of the defects and deformities of worship and discipline of the mother-Church at that time. In its earliest dealing with its own proper missionary work it rivaled its teacher. In 1801 several clergy of Western Pennsylva

porated, the Board of Missions was organized, the old apologetic tone was laid aside, and the Church claimed her place and her right. It is one indication of the rapid turn of the tide that the Diocese which at his consecration contained 40 clergy, twenty-four years afterwards-five years after his death "Western" Bishop consecrated,—Philander Chase for Ohio. In 1885, the last Convention at which Bishop White presided, Jackson Kemper was consecrated the first Missionary Bishop of the Northwest, and in his sermon at the consecration Bishop Doane spoke for the Church, which was wakening to new life, when he laid down the principle that this "Church is to be a Missionary Church, that her Bishops are true Apostles, and that of this missionary body every Christian by the terms of his baptismal vow is a member."

In Maryland, party spirit ran so high that at Dr. Kemp's election a party endeavored to create a schism in the Church, and after the death of Bishop Stone, in 1838, it was three years, and after two elected had declined the See, that a successful choice was made.

In Virginia, the Convention which assembled to elect Bishop Moore, after Bishop Madison's death, numbered only 7 clergy and 17 laymen, and was the first which had met for seven years. In Richmond "Episcopacy was almost dead." Churchmen assured Dr. Moore that "no man could carry out our forms in all their rubrical sign;" but the man of their choice had had a different training and held different views, and acted upon them, though he was not able to carry the body of his clergy with him. The Church in Virginia, through his efforts and those of his successor, was roused from its slumbers that were

almost death. Only three years before the election of Bishop Moore to Virginia, John Henry Hobart had been chosen Assistant Bishop of New York, and along with Dr. Griswold had been consecrated at a time when the Episcopate could with the greatest difficulty muster the necessary three for a consecration. He did not find the Church or the Churchmanship of New York what he left it, or what it has been ever since, but he roused his own Diocese from its slumbers, and the influence of his writing and preaching, and of his laborious and holy life, was felt in the State as well as the Diocese, and went out over the whole country and through the whole Church. His motto was "the Gospel in the Church," and he shrunk from no labor and from no contest in behalf of his belief. Bishop White looked forward to the future of his son in the faith with the keenest hope "that he would not cease to be efficient in extending the Church and preserving her integrity," and it was fulfilled. Schools and seminaries were established, publication societies incor

The difference between the Church of then and now is greater than appears by any mere comparison of numbers. We read in reports of General Convention, "so many Bishops present, so many Dioceses represented;" but the bodies which they represented were smaller still. In Illinois, in 1835, "three clergymen met for organization," and "this Convention unanimously appoint Philander Chase to the Episcopate of Illinois;" and at the seventh Annual Convention the Bishop reports "that neither as pioneer missionary, as a Diocesan Bishop, or as parish minister, has he received any salary except $20." In Delaware, in 1791, 3 clergymen and 11 laymen met to frame a constitution and organize the Church. In the Peninsula of which Delaware forms part, in 1827, there were only 15 clergy, while there were 40 churches in a fit state for worship. In Kentucky the "organization of the Diocese was thus happily effected, there being 16 lay delegates and 8 of the clerical order," only one of whom was "settled." In North Carolina, where, in 1770, a list is given of 18 settled clergy, and which was organized in 1817, at Bishop Ravenscroft's death, in 1830, the clergy only numbered 11. In South Carolina, where 153 clergy are recorded as laboring from 1700 to 1800, in 1786 only 9 parishes are represented. On the other hand, South Carolina, in 1882, reports 45 clergy; North Carolina, 78, and in 1883 asks for a division; Kentucky 86 clergy; and Illinois is a province including Dioceses, with 60, 26, and 45 clergy, respectively.

Bishop Doane was elected to New Jersey in 1832, and died in 1858. During his Episcopate the number of communicants in New Jersey increased from 800 to 4500, the clergy from 14 to 94, and the parishes from 81 to 79. In 1882 the two Dioceses of New Jersey and Northern New Jersey report 99 clergy and nearly 8000 communicants, and 80 clergy and 8700 communicants.

The first Convention of New York, in 1785, consisted of 5 clergy and delegates

from 7 parishes. In 1811, the year of Bishop Hobart's consecration, the number of clergy was 40. In 1835, five years after his death, the number was 194.

In 1882 the Dioceses of New York, Albany, Western New York, Central New York, and Long Island contained 748 clergy and 87,364 communicants.

Pennsylvania, which, in 1811, contained 20 clergy, in 1882 reports in the three Dioceses of Pennsylvania, Pittsburg, and Central Pennsylvania 352 clergy and 39,251 communicants.

Some figures presented at the General Convention of 1883 will give an idea of the general growth of the Church. In 1790 there were 7 Dioceses and 190 clergy; in 1800, 12,000 communicants. In 1832, 18 Dioceses, 592 clergy, 30,939 communicants. In 1883, 48 Dioceses and 15 missionary jurisdictions, with 67 Bishops, 3575 clergy, 4348 parishes and missions, 373,000 communicants. Between 1865 and 1883 the revenue of the Church increased from $6,471,669 to $23,217,765.

When the venerable Bishop Green took leave of the Convention of 1883, he said, "Of the Convention of 1823, which met in this city, I alone am alive. When I went into holy orders, sixty-three years ago, there were nine Bishops in the Church. When I looked around me to-day in the House of Bishops I cast my eyes upon more than seven times that number. How hath God wrought! His blessing hath been upon the Church and she hath prospered." Since 1800, when the first report is made of communicants, the increase has been over 30 to 1, while the population of the country has increased as 10 or 12 to 1.

If, however, the American Church suffered from the deadness of the English Church in the last century and in the first part of this century, it has felt in no less a degree the movement of life which has wrought such a reformation and restoration in that Church in the last forty years, and it is still feeling it. There was in the forties" the same panic-cry of "popery"-here as in England, and the same folly has been repeated on occasion since; but wisdom has come with advancing years only a weak handful has gone over to Rome to justify the fears, while in respect of knowledge of the Church and faith in her as a true branch of the Church Catholic, of the doctrine and practice of worship, of belief in her mission in America, there has been a general education and elevation that has brought whole "parties" forward upon ground which, forty years ago, they were almost ready to condemn as heretical. The Convention of 1844 came to the conclusion of far-sighted wisdom when, after days of excited discussion, the effort of some to procure a condemnation of the doctrine of the Oxford Tracts resulted in a vote of confidence in the "Liturgy, officers, and Articles and Canons of the Church as sufficient exponents of the sense of Holy

Scripture, and affording ample means of discipline and correction." A similar result was reached in 1868, and again in 1871, when, after a protracted and brilliant discussion, the conclusion was in effect a vote of general condemnation of all ceremonies fitted to express a doctrine foreign to that set forth in the authorized standards of the Church, and expressing confidence in the paternal counsel and advice of the Right Reverend Fathers.

Some untoward events require to be noticed. The trial and suspension of the two brothers, Bishop Henry W. Onderdonk, of Pennsylvania, in 1844, and of Bishop Benjamin T. Onderdonk, of New York, in 1846, demonstrated at least the power of discipline that existed in the Church. The attempted "trial" of Bishop Doane (1849-53) resulted not only in his triumphant acquittal, and in "making the trial of a Bishop hard," but established firmly the principles of order upon which an Episcopal Church must stand. Bishop Ives, in 1853, set the only example of a Bishop of this Church perverting to Rome. In 1873, Bishop Cummins became the leader of the only schism which has rent the Church, and which has effectually taught us the lesson that all the treachery and danger does not lurk on one side of the camp. The "Reformed Episcopal Church," commonly known as the "Cumminsite movement," still continues to exist for our warning.

A real danger was escaped at the close of the civil war of 1861-65. During the war the Southern Dioceses had organized themselves under the title of the Church in the Confederate States," and in the General Convention of 1862, which met in the midst of the war, none of them were represented. But in 1865, at the close of the war, two Southern Bishops presented themselves at the General Convention, and the reunion of the once politically-divided Church was happily and thoroughly effected. All signs of that division have long passed away, and no others appear to disturb us or to hinder our progress.

At the Convention of 1880 the new arrangement went into operation, by which the Convention is made the Board of Missions, and the session was marked by a new interest in the subject of missions. Three new missionary jurisdictions were set off and Bishops elected. The special work of the Convention of 1883 was dealing with the report of the committee on enrichment of the Prayer-Book. To some this work, and that of missions, seem to partake of the same character of catholicity with the final action upon doctrine and ritual in former Conventions, and either are a far more worthy subject of the attention of the Convention than the length of a cassock, or the conversation in a seminary student's room. It is believed that the development of the missionary work of the Church and the work of enrichment of the Prayer-Book will make the Conven