USA > Connecticut > The records of convocation, 1790-1848 > Part 1
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org.
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17
2
ARCHIVES
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015
https://archive.org/details/recordsofconvoca00epis_0
Canons should be adopted, The motion was not agree " as the majority of the Invocation wished for further consideration. 1 Ajourned till the afternoon. -
The At Revo Bishop Seubury, - The Recia Mejs" Fog, Tyler , I Fior , joined the convocation ..
Het in the Church at 3' clock - and the Bishop took his seat as President , ex officio. - The Rec & MT Bfilvie took his feat as a member of the convocation
The alterations in the Book of Common Prayer , made by The General Convention at Philadelphia , we're read by con- - videred. -
In motion , The question was put , in These words , " Whether " we confirm The Doings of our Proctors in the General Conven- "tion at Philadelphia , on the 2" Day of Ochot" 17 00g ."
Which hafer in the affirmative by the votes of every member. present , the Rec'd M. Sayre excepted : - Who then entered the following Protest against The aforesaid Vote of proceedings of the Convocation. Which Protest is here recorded at his defire, by order of the Convocations vis .. A - "In the Name of our Lord Jefus Christ , Amen.
" I James Sayre, a Minister, in Presbyter's Orders, of " The Church of England , of late having officiated as a Presbyter " of the Church of England in Connecticut , & having been a " member of a Convention of the blargy of Connecticut , for the
A PAGE FROM THE "RECORDS "
Containing the Approval of the Union of the Church in America
The records of convocation, 1790-1848
Edited and annotated For The Diocesan Commission on Archives By Joseph Hooper.
PREFACE.
With the printing of these "Records" the documentary history of the Diocese is made more complete. Some acts of the earlier Conventions seem obscure until explained by the discus- sions and conclusions of the Bishop and clergy in Convocation.
While the "Records" have been recognized as of great historic value by all Connecticut Churchmen, and especially by those who have carefully studied "the spotless history," as Bishop Williams styled it, of this the mother diocese of the American Church, there has been but one previous proposal to publish them.
This was in 1851, when the lovable and erudite Rev. Dr. Alonzo B. Chapin, editor of The Calendar, contemplated issuing them with some historical notes after publishing extracts in the columns of The Calendar; and for this purpose had a copy made which apparently has disappeared.
The historian of the Church in Connecticut, the revered and learned Dr. Eben Edwards Beardsley, consulted them while preparing his "History" and incorporated some extracts into his text. He also used them freely in his "Life" of our first Bishop, Dr. Samuel Seabury.
At the annual meeting of the permanent Commission upon Parochial Archives held on April 10, 1899, it was resolved that the Convention "have the existing Records of the Convocations of the clergy carefully printed with notes for preservation."
No measures were then taken to bring the subject before the Convention.
The consideration of the "Records" was resumed at the annual meeting of the Commission on May 13, 1902. The former resolution was unanimously reaffirmed and a member of the Commission appointed to present it to the Convention.
At the Convention of the Diocese held in Trinity Church, Hartford, on June 10, 1902, the present publication was unani- mously authorized.
-4-
The Commission subsequently appointed the Rev. Dr. Samuel Hart, Registrar of the Diocese, and the Rev. Joseph Hooper, a committee to superintend its annotation and publication.
The desire of the Committee to verify every detail of both the text and the notes has made an earlier publication imprac- ticable.
The Committee has in all matters connected with the pub- lication acted as a unit.
Dr. Hart kindly undertook the comparison of the transcript with the original and read the proof of the text also with the original. Mr. Hooper is responsible for the "Introduction," which is intended to give such information as is available con- cerning the "Voluntary Conventions" and earlier Convocations in Connecticut. He has also compiled such "Notes" as seemed necessary. He gratefully acknowledges his indebtedness to his colleague's profound knowledge of our history.
The "Records" are printed exactly as found in the original minute books with these exceptions: the years are inserted in bold-faced type and a few emendations necessary to complete the sense have been made. They are enclosed in square brackets.
JUNE, 1904.
J. H.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
It was the custom of the clergy of the Church of England in the Colony of Connecticut to meet from time to time in "volun- tary convention."
At these meetings matters of common interest were discussed, and often protests were made and measures taken to maintain the rights of oppressed Churchmen in some of the towns.
Although a yearly gathering of the clergy in each colony or province, or if there were very few in any colony the clergy of two or more colonies, was favored by the venerable Propa- gation Society, the Conventions were held at irregular intervals until the middle of the eighteenth century. Each meeting in New England generally, and in Connecticut especially, had the warrant of some special need of their various cures or the pres- ence of some danger or menace to the Church of which they were ministers.
The same irregularity is noticed in the Conventions in the other North American colonies and provinces until after 1750. At that time the agitation for an American Episcopate became more active, and appeals and plans for its successful accom- plishment were frequently sent to the venerable Society, "his Grace of Canterbury" or "my Lord of London."
An organized opposition to this design, and the union against it of all those dissenting from the Church of England, caused the clergy of the more northern colonies to meet more frequently until the Revolution.
We know certainly from letters of missionaries, notices in the newspapers, and the formal documents sent "home" to the venerable Society or the Bishop of London, that seventeen Con- ventions were held in Connecticut from 1739 to 1776.
Probably there were other meetings more purely social in their character of which no record was made.
The first recorded Convention is that held at "Fairfield in New England" on March 20, 1739. It was attended by seven clergy- men, the six then laboring in Connecticut and the Rector of Christ Church, Rye, New York, who ministered to the Connecti-
-6-
cut Churchmen on the border of New York at Horse Neck (now Greenwich), and Stamford.1 From the "representation" sent to the venerable Society the meeting was occasioned by the aggressions of the "Standing Order" upon Churchmen. Taxes for the support of the ministry were levied in every town. These taxes were to be the provision for the salary of the ministers of the "Standing Order," that is, those who subscribed and conformed to the Saybrook Platform of 1708. All "sober dis- senters," including Churchmen, who were certified to belong to other religious bodies could have their ministerial taxes paid to their respective pastors. In practice very few towns were willing to divert any portion of their tax from the local pastor without a formal suit and mandamus. The particular case of aggression in 1739 was that of the Churchmen in Horse Neck and Stamford, where the collectors refused to pay their pro- portion of the tax to Mr. Wetmore. This treatment of a just claim demanded redress.
The Convention also mentioned the indignity offered to the Rev. Mr. Arnold of West Haven and his servants, who were forcibly ejected by a mob of about one hundred and fifty people from the "Gregson Glebe" in New Haven, of which he was taking possession by ploughing.
This plot had been deeded to the Rev. Jonathan Arnold by Mr. William Gregson of London in trust for the Church of England in New Haven. The actual title was obscure and disputed.2
1 The Rev. Samuel Johnson, of Stratford ; John Beach, of Newtown ; Samuel Seabury, of New London ;
Jonathan Arnold, of West Haven ; Ebenezer Punderson, of North Groton ; Henry Caner, of Fairfield ; James Wetmore, of Rye, New York.
2 The " Representation " is on pp. 166-169 of Documentary History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. I. Con- necticut. Francis L. Hawks, D.D., LL.D., William Stevens Perry, A.M., Editors. Vol. I. New York, James Pott, 1863. Usually quoted as " Con- necticut Church Documents." For the "Gregson Glebe," see pp. 114, 115, 168, 170, 171, 224, 227 of The History of the Episcopal Church in Con- necticut, from the Settlement of the Colony to the death of Bishop Seabury. By E. E. Beardsley, D.D. Vol. I. Third edition. New York, Hurd and Houghton, 1874. Also pp. 19, 20, 22, The Beginning of the Episcopal Church in New Haven. By Edwin Harwood, D.D. 1894.
-7-
The second Convention was held at New London on May 4, 1740. It was attended by representatives of the clergy through- out New England. An extract from its proceedings relating to the establishment of a parish at "Hopkinston," probably the town in Massachusetts, is the only item concerning its delibera- tions available.1 At Hopkinston, Mass., the Rev. Commissary Price of King's Chapel, Boston, afterward built and endowed with a glebe a commodious church.2
On August 24, 1742, the clergy of Connecticut met at Fair- field, Their special object was to ask the Bishop of London to appoint a Commissary for Connecticut. The Rector of Stratford, the Rev. Samuel Johnson, was nominated to Dr. Edmund Gibson, their diocesan, as the most suitable person. The chief reason for such an appointment was: "our distances from the Commissary at Boston is such as makes it impracticable for us to attend upon the yearly Convention, and, consequently to receive the benefits of that appointment."3
The research of Mr. George E. Hoadley has enriched the archives of the Diocese with these particulars of several Con- ventions from the files of The Connecticut Courant. As the files are not complete it is probable that other sessions were mentioned in the Courant.
[Courant, Monday, June 10, 1765.]
HEBRON, June 6th, 1765.
Yesterday being the Wednesday after Trinity Sunday, there was in this town a convention of the Clergy of the Church of England, belonging to Conn. The Rev. Mr. Leaming of Norwalk preached an ingenious and pathetic Sermon on Ist Cor. IV I to great satisfaction. The Rev. Mr. Hubbard of Guilford read prayers with much approbation. The Convention for the year 1766 is appointed to be held at New Milford, when the Rev'd Mr. Mansfield of Derby is nominated to preach.
1 p. 170, Connecticut Church Documents, I.
2 p. 73, Annals of the American Pulpit, V. Wm. B. Sprague, D.D. New York, Robert Carter and Brother, 1861.
s pp. 181, 182, Connecticut Church Documents, I. pp. 135, 136, Dr. Beardsley's "History," I.
-8-
[Courant, June 2, 1766.]
WALLINGFORD, May 29, 1766.
Yesterday in this town was a meeting of the Clergy of Conn. when a very rational sermon was preached by the Rev. Mr. Mansfield of Darby. Prayers were read by the Rev. Mr. Leaming of Norwalk.
[Courant, June 29, 1767.]
TURKEY HILLS IN SIMSBURY, June 18, 1767.
Yesterday was held in this place the annual Convention of the Church Clergy in Connecticut, before whom a sermon was preached by the Rev'd Mr. Newton of Ripton in Stratford. Prayers were read by the Rev'd Mr. Jarvis of Middletown.
[Courant, June 5, 1769.]
On Wednesday the 24th last, was a full convention of the Church Clergy at New Milford, at which two sermons were preached by the Rev. Mess. Scovil and Kneeland respectively.
[Courant, Tuesday, May 28, 1771.]
On Wednesday last there was a Convention of the Church Clergy of this Colony at Norwich. The Service of the Church was read by Mr. Bostwick of Great Barrington, and a Sermon preached by Mr. Andrews of Wallingford.
[Courant, Tuesday, June 30, 1772.]
Wednesday of last week was the annual Convention of the Church of England Clergy, when more than twenty Gentlemen of that Character met at Fairfield, to whom a Sermon was preached by the Rev. Mr. Viets of Simsbury.
An interesting Convention was held on July 23, 1776, at the house of the Rev. Bela Hubbard in New Haven. The Church of England clergy in the colony were firm loyalists with scarcely an exception. When arms were taken up against the King their consciences would not allow them at the bidding of the patriots to omit the prayers for the King and Royal Family in public worship. Threats and imprisonment did not frighten them or cause them to decline "mutilating" the Prayer Book. They could not break their oath of allegiance taken at their solemn
-9-
ordination, they were reluctant to close their churches provided they could keep them open with comparative safety to them- selves and their parishioners. After much deliberation they devised a form of service which dispensed with the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and which the Convention authorized for use. "It was voted, that the following mode of public wor- ship should be carried out in their respective churches. Ist singing. 2dly a chapter out of the Old Testament. 3rdly Psalms of the Day out of the Old Testament. 4thly some commentary. 5thly a Psalm. 6thly a Sermon. And lastly, Part of the 6th Chap'r of St Math'w, ending with the Lord's Prayer, all kneel- ing. The Blessing."1 It was not practicable in every place to maintain the accustomed services. Mr. Hubbard at New Haven, Mr. Jarvis at Middletown, Mr. Tyler at Norwich, John Beach at Newtown and Redding Ridge, Richard Mansfield at Derby and Gideon Bostwick in his extensive mission at Great Barrington and the surrounding country in Massachusetts, New York and Vermont, appear to be those who were able without serious disturbance to go about their clerical work and keep open their churches during the Revolution.
In the closing days of the war, the clergy that remained in Connecticut gathered at Middletown and were welcomed by the hospitable rector, the Rev. Abraham Jarvis. In old Christ Church, near the present South Green, they met in Convention on May 29, 1782. Our only knowledge of this session is from the manuscript of the sermon preached before it by the Rev. Gideon Bostwick of Great Barrington, Mass.2
As even then it was known that the United States would be acknowledged as an independent power by Great Britain, it is possible that these stanch adherents of the Episcopal form of Church government discussed at this session the measures neces- sary to introduce into the independent State of Connecticut "a pure, valid and free Episcopacy." While contemporary docu-
1 Ms. from the Rev. Dr. Slafter, Registrar of the Diocese of Massa- chusetts, extracted from the papers of the Rev. Wm. Clarke, Rector of St. Paul's Church, Dedham, Mass. ; in the Archives of the Diocese of Con- necticut.
2 This is in possession of the writer. It is in a volume of manuscript sermons collected by the Rev. Dr. Daniel Burhans. The text is: "Take heed unto thy self and thy doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this thou shalt both save thy self and them that hear thee." I S. Timothy, iv, 16.
-IO
ments concerning the preliminaries to the momentous Conven- tion held at the Glebe House in Woodbury on the feast of the Annunciation, 1783, are very few, it is certain that the plan of completing the organization of the Church by the election and consecration of a Bishop was known and discussed by the clergy and leading laymen long before ten out of the fourteen clergymen then connected with Connecticut journeyed over the bad roads of springtime to that town among the Litchfield hills where the courtly John Rutgers Marshall was rector, and there made choice of our first Bishop.
The letters of the Rev. Daniel Fogg of Pomfret, written in the summer of 1783 to his friend, the Rev. Samuel Parker of Trinity Church, Boston, and the official documents prepared by the ready pen of the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, the Secretary of the Convention, are all that give us any information in writing of the proceedings. Tradition is also quite silent and we know the Convention at Woodbury only by its important conse- quences.1
When Dr. Seabury soon after his arrival in England applied to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York for consecration he was met by three objections : that they had no right to send a Bishop into Connecticut without the consent of the State; that the Bishop would not be received in Con- necticut; that no provision had been made for the support of a Bishop. The Bishop-elect communicated these objections to the Clergy of Connecticut in a letter dated August 10, 1783, and more fully to the Rev. Mr. Leaming on September 3, 1783.
Acting upon his suggestion, the clergy were summoned to meet at Wallingford to consider the best method of meeting these objections. The date of the Convention is given by Dr. Beardsley as January 13, 1784. The Rev. Mr. Leaming, the 1 The best accounts of the Woodbury Convention will be found in these authorities : The Seabury Centenary, 1883-1885. Edited by the Rev. Sam- uel Hart. New York, James Pott & Co., 1885. pp. 3-10, The Service at Woodbury, March 27, 1883. pp. 11-29, Men for the Times. Bp. Williams' Convention Sermon, June 12, 1883. The Election of Bishop Seabury. A sermon by the Rev. Samuel Hart, preached in Christ Church, Hartford, April 1, 1883. The Election in order to Consecration of the first Bishop of Connecticut. A Discourse delivered in the Church of the Annunciation, New York City, Annunciation Day, 1883, by the Rev. Prof. Wm. Jones Seabury, D.D. See also Note, p. 26, Bishop Seabury and Connecticut Churchmanship. Dr. Hart's Convention sermon, June 9, 1896.
-II-
Rev. Mr. Hubbard and the Rev. Mr. Jarvis were chosen a com- mittee "to collect the opinions of the leading members of the Assembly concerning an application by the clergy of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut for the legal protection of a Bishop for said Church when they shall be able to procure one agreeable to the Common rights of Christians, as those rights are now claimed and understood by all denominations of Christians in the State." The result of their inquiry was transmitted to Dr. Seabury in a letter from Middletown, dated February 5, 1784.1
At length the good deed of the Catholic remainder of the Church in Scotland was known in this country and gratefully acknowledged by all true Churchmen.
Bishop Seabury was as anxious to meet the clergy as they were to greet their Bishop.
On June 29, 1785, two days after Bishop Seabury's arrival at New London, which was to be his future home, he wrote to the Rev. Mr. Jarvis of Middletown, concerning "the time and place of the clergy's meeting." It was finally arranged to be in Mid- dletown early in August.
In that pleasant city, in the quaint building known as Christ Church, the clergy met in Convention on Tuesday, August 2, 1785, under the presidency of Dr. Leaming with the Rev. Mr. Jarvis as Secretary. Eleven were in attendance. The Con- vention also welcomed the Rev. Benjamin Moore of Trinity Church, New York City, who came to salute his old friend the Bishop of Connecticut, and to note the manner in which the Bishop and clergy dealt with the problem of changes in the Prayer Book to conform to American independence. He had no representative character since many in New York and to "the southward" thought with Dr. Samuel Provoost, Rector of Trinity Church, New York City, that Dr. Seabury's consecration was illegal and schismatical.
The Rev. Samuel Parker, Rector of Trinity Church, Boston, came at the request of his brethren of the clergy to convey to the
1 Dr. Beardsley's "Life of Bishop Seabury" gives Dr. Seabury's letters and an account of the Convention. He does not mention any authority for the transactions of the Convention; see pp. 108, 109, 110, 112. An undated draught of the reply of the Committee will be found on pp. 158-160 of The Churchman's Magazine, volume III, No. 4, April, 1806.
-12-
Bishop the respectful congratulations of the clergy of Massa- chusetts and Rhode Island, and to observe carefully the pro- ceedings for the use of his brethren when a Convention should be summoned to meet in Boston.
On the following day the Bishop was formally received, greeted and accepted as their Bishop, by the clergy; and the first four deacons of the American Church were ordained. On Thursday, the first Episcopal charge was delivered.1
At the conclusion of the ordination service "the Bishop dis- solved the Convention and directed the clergy to meet him at five o'clock in Convocation."2
This is the first time the term is applied to a meeting of the clergy in Connecticut. The learned Dr. Jarvis, a son of the second Bishop, says: "What had before been only a voluntary Convention was now resolved into a Convocation ; a term which implies being convoked by Episcopal authority.""
In England the term is used to indicate "an assembly of the spirituality of the realm of England which is summoned by the Metropolitan Archbishop of Canterbury and of York respec- tively within their ecclesiastical provinces, pursuant to a royal writ, whenever the Parliament of the realm is summoned, and which is also continued or discharged as the case may be when- ever the Parliament is prorogued or dissolved."4
1 See The Address of the Episcopal Clergy of Connecticut to the Right Reverend Bishop Seabury, with the Bishop's Answer and a Sermon before the Convention at Middletown, August 3, 1785, by the Rev. Jeremiah Leaming, A.M., Rector of Christ's Church, Stratford. Also, Bishop Sea- bury's first Charge to the Clergy of his Diocese, delivered at Middletown, August 4, 1785. New Haven, printed by Thomas and Samuel Green. Also, Seabury Centenary, pp. 113-142, Services at Middletown, Connecti- cut, August 3, 1885.
2 pp. 213, 214, Life and Correspondence of the Right Reverend Samuel Seabury, D.D., by E. E. Beardsley, D.D. Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1881. This sentence is quoted from a "Life of Bishop Jarvis," in The Evergreen III, pp. 98 et seq., written by his son the Rev. Samuel Farmar Jarvis, D.D., and evidently from the minutes of the Convention. These minutes seem to have entirely disappeared.
8 p. 24, A Voice from Connecticut ; occasioned by the late Pastoral Letter of the Bishop of North Carolina to the Clergy and Laity of his Diocese. By the Rev. Samuel Farmar Jarvis, D.D., LL.D., with the approbation of the Bishop of Connecticut. Hartford, A. C. Goodman & Co., MDCCCXLIX.
4 p. 325, The Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. VI, ninth edition, 1878. From the article on "Convocation," by Sir Travers Twiss, Q.C.
-13-
It is divided into two Houses. In the Upper House the Bish- ops of the province sit under the presidency of the Archbishop. In the Lower House the Deans of the Cathedrals, proctors for the Cathedral chapters and proctors for the Clergy sit under the presidency of a prolocutor chosen from among the clergy and approved by the Archbishop.
Anciently Convocation had in all spiritual matters the same power as the Parliament in civil matters. In 1717 its legislative and consultative functions were suppressed and it met only pro forma until 1853, when its consultative function was resumed, and in 1861 its deliberative function was again exercised and has continued to be since.
The exact powers that Bishop Seabury intended the Convo- cation of Connecticut to exercise must be ascertained from the scanty material available concerning the early meetings and its course when most active from 1790 to 1820.
From a survey of its work we can formulate this definition of the term as applied to the assembly of the clergy of Con- necticut : The Convocation is the body of the clergy of a Diocese called together by its Bishop to consult upon the spiritual inter- ests of the Diocese, to determine and act upon all matters con- cerning the welfare and edification of the Diocese, and to advise the Bishop in regard to such cases of discipline as he may see fit to lay before it. After the organization of the Convention of clergy and lay delegates in 1792, the Convocation ceased to consider and act upon affairs concerning the temporal interests of the Diocese, while it still occasionally, if requested, advised upon them.
When the Convocation of Connecticut held its primary session on Wednesday, August 3, 1785, it gave honorary seats, as the Convention had done, to Mr. Moore and Mr. Parker. With the Bishop in the chair, it applied itself to the consideration of the changes necessary in the English Prayer Book.
Whether any formal scheme of alterations was presented by any member is not known. The subject had been widely dis- cussed; much had been said about the grand opportunity to make a new Book free from superstition, free from ambiguity, and attractive to those who were beginning to be doubtful of our Blessed Lord's divinity. Neither the clergy nor the laity of
-14-
Connecticut sympathized with such views. They knew the Prayer Book and its teaching and were unwilling to do more than revise the State Prayers, strike out all allusions to the King and Royal Family, and possibly substitute modern for some archaic expressions.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.