USA > Connecticut > The history of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut, Vol. I > Part 27
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 (link on the Part 1 page).
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 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33
It is necessary, at this stage of the history, to look out upon certain proceedings begun and carried on
374
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
elsewhere. As early as May, 1784, ten clergymen and six laymen, from the States of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, assembled at New Bruns- wick, ostensibly to examine into the condition of the Corporation for the Relief of Widows and Orphans, a charitable society whose funds had been dissipated by the war, but really to concert plans for "a Conti- nental representation of the Episcopal Church, and for the better management of its concerns." "The opportunity," says Bishop White, "was improved by the clergy from Pennsylvania of communicating cer- tain measures recently adopted in that State, tend- ing to the organization of the Church throughout the Union." Before they separated, they arranged for an- other informal meeting in October, at the city of New York, and requested three of their number to wait upon the clergy of Connecticut, who were to hold a convention in Trinity week next ensuing, and solicit their cooperation in the projected scheme.
At the voluntary meeting held in New York, Octo- ber 6th and 7th, sixteen clergymen were present from nine of the thirteen States, and eleven laymen. From Massachusetts and Rhode Island appeared the Rev. Samuel Parker, and from Connecticut the Rev. John R. Marshall,-not, as the result showed, to lend any direct aid to the measures in contemplation, but rather in courteous obedience to the request of their breth- ren, and to state distinctly their own views and condi- tion. Mr. Marshall especially, who read his paper of instructions, was only empowered to announce that the clergy of Connecticut felt themselves re- strained by the previous steps which they had taken to obtain the Episcopate, and until the event of their
375
IN CONNECTICUT.
application could be known, it would be improper for them "to do anything which might change the ground on which the gentleman of their choice was then standing." There was another objection which was fundamental in their view, and that related to the constitution of the Convention. They were in favor of leaving all ecclesiastical matters to the clergy; and the idea of lay representation in a body legislating for the Church was associated in their minds with that of "the trial and the degradation of clergymen by the same authority." They were opposed also to a revision of the Liturgy, and the adoption of any measures affecting the general interest of the Church in this country, until there was a Bishop to preside over the councils and check undue legislation.
Notwithstanding the refusal of Connecticut by her representative to join in the business of this volun- tary meeting, the body thus assembled recommended to the clergy and congregations of their communion in the several States, to unite in a general ecclesias- tical constitution on certain fundamental principles, which they proceeded to set forth. Among them the first was: "That there shall be a general Convention of the Episcopal Church in the United States of Amer- ica;" and another, "That the clergy and laity assem- bled in Convention shall deliberate in one body, but shall vote separately; and the concurrence of both shall be necessary to give validity to every measure." They appointed the first meeting of the Convention at Philadelphia, and fixed the time to be "the Tues- day before the Feast of St. Michael," 1785, when they "hoped and earnestly desired that the Episcopal churches in the respective States would send their
376
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
Clerical and Lay Deputies, duly instructed and author- ized to proceed on the necessary business proposed for their deliberation."
The clergy of Connecticut, after they had secured the Episcopate, and fixed the time for their first meet- ing at Middletown, reciprocated the courtesy of their brethren in the Middle and Southern States; and Mr. Leaming, writing to the Rev. Dr. White from Strat- ford, under date of July 14, 1785, invited him and the rest of the Pennsylvania clergy to be present, and then added: "We must all wish for a Christian union of all the churches in the thirteen States, for which good purpose we must allow private convenience to give way to public utility. We have no views of usurping any authority over our brothers and neighbors, but wish them to unite with us in the same friendly man- ner that we are ready and willing to do with them. I must earnestly entreat you to come upon this oc- casion, for the sake of the peace of the Church, for your own satisfaction, in what friendly manner the clergy here would treat you, not to mention what happiness the sight of you would give to your sincere friend and brother."
The only response which came from the Philadel- phia clergy to this cordial letter was an invitation to attend the approaching General Convention. But the Church in Connecticut could not, with self-respect, accept this invitation, for the reason that she was now completely organized, with a Bishop at her head; and the clergy were unwilling to join in any Convention where he was reduced to the level of a Presbyter, or where the validity of his consecration was not fully admitted and recognized. This interchange of civil-
377
IN CONNECTICUT.
ities, however, opened the way for a free and inter- esting correspondence, conducted on the one side by Bishop Seabury and the venerable Dr. Chandler, -who by this time had returned to the scene of his early labors in New Jersey, to await the last summons,- and on the other by the Rev. Dr. William White and the Rev. Dr. William Smith. The latter gentleman, who was himself not without desire for a mitre, had been opposed to the nonjuring Bishops in Scotland communicating the Episcopate to Connecticut; and he had said some things not very complimentary to the candidate from this State, in his steps to reach the Apostolic office. The change which came over him will be seen in a later chapter. Dr. Chandler, though clearly of opinion that the Laity ought to be consulted in the matter of organizing the Church, still thought that it was "contrary to the established maxims of ecclesiastical polity" to admit them to vote in councils, and he particularly objected to the prominence which had been given them in the Con- vention of Virginia. He accepted the constitution of the Church in Connecticut, and believed that the Christian world could not afford one, all things con- sidered, more conformable to the primitive pattern. Bishop Seabury, in a long and closely reasoned letter to Dr. Smith, set forth the various objections which rose to his view, and in reference to the Laity said: "I have as great a regard for them as any man can have. It is for their sake that ministers are ap- pointed in the Church. I have no idea of aggran- dizing the clergy at the expense of the Laity, or, in- deed, of aggrandizing them at all. Decent means of living is all they have a right to expect. But I can-
378
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
not conceive that the Laity can, with any propriety, be admitted to sit in judgment on Bishops and Pres- byters, especially when deposition may be the event, because they cannot take away a character which they cannot confer. It is incongruous to every idea of Episcopal government." This sentiment accorded with the arrangement of the Church in Scotland. He was willing to admit them into a participation of the government as far as the external or temporal state of things might require, but he was opposed to their meddling with matters strictly ecclesiastical. In concluding his frank and admirable letter, which he expected Dr. Smith to lay before the Convention, to- gether with a copy of his letters of consecration which he enclosed, Bishop Seabury gave utterance to his "most earnest wish to have our Church in all the States so settled that it may be one Church, united in government, doctrine, and discipline; that there may be no divisions among us, no opposition of inter- ests, no clashing of opinions." "Human passions and prejudices," said he, "and, if possible, infirmities, should be laid aside. A wrong step will be attended with dreadful consequences. Patience and prudence must be exercised; and should there be some circumstances that press hard for a remedy, hasty decisions will not mend them. In doubtful cases they will probably have a bad effect. May the Spirit of God be with you at Philadelphia; and as I persuade myself the sole good of His Church is the sole aim of you all, I hope for the best effects from your meeting."
Not satisfied with this communication, and fearful that his request might still be disregarded, he wrote a few days later to Dr. White, expressing the hope
379
IN CONNECTICUT.
that the several matters which he had pointed out might be reconsidered, and said: "It is a grief to me that I cannot be with you at your ensuing Conven- tion. Neither my circumstances nor my duty will permit it. I am utterly unprovided for so long a journey, not being at present master even of a horse." He sent him also, as he had sent Dr. Smith, a copy of the alterations which it had been thought proper to make in the Liturgy to accommodate it to the dif- ferent condition of the civil state, and intimated that, should other changes be made, they must be the "work of time and great deliberation."
A similar spirit was evinced by the clergy in Mas- sachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire; and, with eleven laymen, they assembled at Boston, a month after the meeting at Middletown, and delib- erating in one body, but voting separately, assented substantially to the omissions and alterations in the Liturgy agreed upon by Bishop Seabury and his cler- ical associates. Mr. Parker, in communicating their action to him, said: "The only material ones that we have not agreed to, are the omitting the Second Les- son in the Morning Service, and the Gospel and Ex- hortation in the Baptismal Office. The additional alterations in some of the offices are such as were mentioned at Middletown, but which we had not time to enter upon then. The churches in these States appear very desirous of maintaining a uniformity in divine worship, and for that purpose have voted that the alterations agreed to shall not be adopted till the Convention meet again, that we may have an oppor- tunity of comparing our proposed alterations with those that shall be adopted and enjoined in Connec- ticut, and at the Convention at Philadelphia. . . ·
380
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
"We have voted not to send any delegate from these States to the Convention at Philadelphia, but only to acquaint them with our proceedings; and I flatter myself that no other alterations will be adopted by them than those we proposed at Middletown, and have agreed to here. If they are so prudent as to pursue the same steps, the desired object of a general uniformity will thereby be obtained. As to any fur- ther revision of the Book of Common Prayer, I shall strenuously oppose it, till there are three or more Bishops in these States, and then let the power of revising the Prayer Book be vested solely with them and the clergy. Should the alterations now pro- posed take place, the laity, I have no doubt, will be perfectly contented."
But the laity in Connecticut were not "contented," and seemed indisposed to adopt any changes except those which were required by their new civil rela- tions. For Bishop Seabury, replying to the Rev. Mr. Parker from Wallingford, near the end of November, mentioned, "Between the time of our parting at Mid- dletown and the clerical meeting at New Haven, [Sep- tember 14,] it was found that the churchpeople in Connecticut were much alarmed at the thoughts of any considerable alterations being made in the Prayer Book; and, upon the whole, it was judged best that no alterations should be attempted at present, but to wait till a little time shall have cooled down the tempers and conciliated the affections of people to each other."
When the General Convention assembled at Phil- adelphia on the 27th of September, no delegate from any of the New-England States appeared; but all the other old thirteen States, except Georgia and North
381
IN CONNECTICUT.
Carolina, were represented, embracing the names of sixteen clergymen and twenty-six laymen. The Rev. Dr. William White was chosen chairman, and the ses- sion continued for ten days. Attention was directed mainly to these three leading subjects: the General Ecclesiastical Constitution of the meditated union; the formation or adoption of a Common Liturgy; and the measures to be taken to secure an American Episco- pate in the Anglican line of succession. The Eccle- siastical Constitution, and the draught of "an Address to the Most Reverend the Archbishops, and the Right Reverend the Bishops of the Church of England," were first disposed of, and then their care was directed to the revisal and amendment of the Liturgy. "If they touched it with trembling hands," very graphically wrote a New - England Presbyter afterwards to a friend, "I fancy their hands were paralytic during the whole session." When they had completed their work, which was attended with warm controversy, they had not only made the changes necessary to the new and independent relations of the States, but had thoroughly revised the Liturgy, omitting entirely some cherished forms, such as the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds, and reducing the Articles of Religion from thirty-nine to twenty. The Book of Common Prayer, thus "revised and proposed to the use of the Protestant Episcopal Church," was published under the direction of a committee of the Convention, "ac- companied with a proper Preface or Address, setting forth the reason and expediency of the alterations." It is known in the early history of the American Church as "THE PROPOSED BOOK," and it was received with evident distrust in England, and by the true
382
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
friends of Episcopacy in this country. Bishop Sea- bury, whose letter to Dr. Smith was laid before the Convention to little purpose, spoke of it, and of the authority by which it was set forth, in very temper- ate, yet decided terms, when he delivered his Second Charge to the clergy of Connecticut, at Derby, in 1786. After an unfavorable allusion to the merit of the al- terations, he added: "But the authority on which they have acted is unknown in the Episcopal Church. The government of the Church by Bishops we hold to have been established by the Apostles acting under the commission of Christ and the direction of the Holy Ghost, and therefore is not to be altered by any power on earth, nor indeed by an angel from heaven. This government they have degraded by lodging the chief authority in a convention of clerical and lay delegates, making their Church Episcopal in its orders, but Presbyterian in its government. Lit- urgies are left more to the prudence and judgment of the governors of the Church; and the primitive practice seems to have been that the Bishop did, with the advice no doubt of his Presbyters, provide a Lit- urgy for the use of his diocese. This ought to have been the case here. Bishops should first have been obtained to preside over those churches. And to those Bishops, with the Proctors of the clergy, should have been committed the business of compiling a Liturgy for the use of the Church through the States. This would have insured unity in doctrine, worship, and discipline through the whole, which upon the present plan will either not be obtained, or, if ob- tained, will not be durable."
Without lingering now over these general topics,
383
IN CONNECTICUT.
we may return to look at the condition and advance- ment of the Church in Connecticut under her com- plete organization. Though her members numbered at least 20,000 persons, the long and exhausting war had spread desolation in many of the parishes, so that she was poor, and had little, if anything, in the way of support, to offer her newly consecrated Bishop. But it had been expected from the first that he would become the Rector of the parish at New London, the parish which his father had served many years before, and which at the time of his arrival was proceeding, to quote the language of the record, to "reestablish their sacred dwelling," burnt, when the town was burnt by the British troops, under the command of that traitor to his country - Benedict Arnold. New London, therefore, was henceforth the residence of Bishop Seabury, and it was convenient for him to exercise his office in Rhode Island, a State which subsequently came under his Episcopal jurisdiction. Through the influence of this zealous and accom- plished prelate, the churchmen of Connecticut were inspired with fresh hopes and more earnest efforts. The parishes rose from their depression, and qualified according to the law of the State. New ones were formed in favorable localities, and the number of can- didates for Holy Orders increased.
Of those set apart to the sacred office at the first ordination in Middletown, the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin had been sent to Litchfield, his native place, and the Rev. Philo Shelton had returned to Fairfield, where he had acted in the capacity of a lay reader since the burning of the town by General Tryon in 1779; both were graduates of Yale College. Steps were taken
384
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
shortly after the acknowledgment of Independence to erect a new church at Fairfield ; and though divisions and disagreements among the members of the parish as to the location prevented their accomplishment for many years, yet Mr. Shelton was employed to read one third part of the time at a private dwelling in Greenfield, and the remaining two thirds at Stratfield and North Fairfield, where churches had long drawn within their walls faithful worshippers. So deter- mined were the people to have no interruption in their religious services, that when Mr. Shelton, two years after his ordination, was disabled by protracted sickness, they held a legal meeting to adopt measures to supply his place. The quaintness of the original records may provoke a smile; for the meeting being warned "to hire some person to carry on instead of Mr. Shelton, until he should get better," it was voted that the moderator of the meeting should "carry on"; and still later a definite arrangement was authorized with the contiguous churches to "hire a man to carry on for three months." 1
At Norwalk, another of the burnt fields of the Church, signs of returning life were carly visible. Immediately after the conflagration which destroyed that town, and before they had reconstructed their own dwellings, the Episcopalians erected a temporary edifice in which to resume the public worship of God; and the Rev. Mr. Dibblee, the Missionary at Stamford, frequently officiated therein, and strengthened and encouraged the unfortunate flock. When the Con- gregationalists petitioned the General Assembly for assistance to rebuild their meeting-house, and received
1 Rev. N. E. Cornwall's Historical Discourse, 1851, p. 42.
385
IN CONNECTICUT.
£500, which was chiefly, if not wholly, paid out of the confiscated property of churchmen who had re- moved to the British Provinces, a similar petition was preferred in 1785 by the members of the Episcopal parish, but refused. Nothing daunted by this par- tiality, they proceeded, under the administration of the Rev. John Bowden, who had been called to the Rectorship, to "rebuild their church in an elegant manner, the foundation and dimensions continuing the same as before the fire." So great were their unanimity and zeal, that, with the aid of a generous donation from friends in New York, they accomplished their work without recourse to taxation. The Rectory was also rebuilt, and a lot of four acres added to the already spacious glebe. But while the old church and parsonage have both disappeared, and a later hand1 has been seen guiding the liberality of the people to "good deeds for the house of God and for the offices thereof," the sapling elms which Bowden planted, having struck their roots deep into the earth, and thrown aloft their spreading branches, still grace- fully shade the pleasant avenues that conduct to the new church, and to the finest rural Rectory in Con- necticut.
In Branford, the churchmen, and those who indi- cated their preference for the Episcopal form of wor- ship, became so numerous that a parish was organized June 2d, 1784, and an ill-proportioned edifice erected and occupied as early as May, 1786. Farther back from the shore, the revival of affection for the Church was seen; and at Hartford, the land which had re- mained in the possession of a hostile party during the
1 Rev. William Cooper Mead, D. D.
VOL. I. 25
386
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
Revolution, was recovered by legal process, and re- stored to the "associated brethren." At Woodbury, that energetic and faithful Presbyter, John R. Mar- shall, no longer willing to be straitened for room in the Town House, directed the efforts of his parish- ioners to the erection of a church, immediately upon the close of the war, and bore himself a liberal pro- portion of the first expense. The edifice is still stand- ing, and is now one of the oldest Episcopal houses of worship in the Diocese, though so much improved and beautified within the last few years as to have the appearance and freshness of youth.
These were among the movements which sprung from the hopes and prayers of churchmen awakening to a sense of their responsibilities under a new form of civil government, and with the Apostolic office se- cured and accepted. Up to September 21st, 1786, Bishop Seabury had admitted twenty candidates to the Diaconate, and nineteen of this number to the Priesthood; and on that day, at Derby, he clothed with authority as Deacons, Philo Perry, David Belden, Tillotson Bronson, and Reuben Ives,-all natives of Connecticut and graduates of Yale College. The first was elected a successor to the lamented Beach at New- town; Mr. Bronson was sent as a pioneer into Ver- mont and New Hampshire; and Mr. Ives was taken for a time as his own assistant at New London. Mr. Belden exercised the ministry for a short time in Fairfield County, but ill health compelled him to relinquish it before he was advanced to the Priest- hood, and his name disappeared from the list of the parochial clergy. He retired upon a farm, and passed the remainder of his days without dishonor-
387
IN CONNECTICUT.
ing the Communion at whose altar he had begun to serve.
The clergy and laity were entirely united in their efforts to promote the prosperity of the Church, and if any fears or doubts had existed in regard to the election or qualifications of their Episcopal Head, they were dissipated by personal intercourse with him, and by the ability, frankness, prudence, and firmness with which he exercised his office, and weighed all the measures that were to assimilate our communion to Jerusalem of old, "builded as a city that is compact together."
-
388
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
CHAPTER XXIX.
CHANGES IN THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER, AND THEIR RE- CEPTION IN ENGLAND; CONSECRATION OF DRS. PROVOOST AND WHITE; THE CHURCH IN CONNECTICUT, AND CORRE- SPONDENCE OF BISHOPS AND CLERGY.
A. D. 1786-1789.
Ir has been stated that Bishop Seabury and his clergy at first made no other changes in the Book of Common Prayer except those which were necessary to adapt it to the new and independent relations of the Government. But in 1786 he set forth "The Communion Office, or, Order for the Administration of the Holy Eucharist," for the use of the Episcopal churches in Connecticut. It followed, with a few ver- bal alterations, the form in the Scottish Liturgy, rather than the arrangement of the office in the Eng- lish Liturgy; and the Connecticut clergy of that period became very much attached to it, not only from the recommendation of their Bishop, but from the convic- tion that this order was in more exact conformity with the earliest usage of the Christian Church. By an article of the Concordate, Bishop Seabury "agreed to take a serious view of the Communion Office recom- mended by the Scottish prelates, and if found agree- able to the genuine standards of antiquity, to give his sanction to it, and by gentle methods of argument and persuasion to endeavor, as they had done, to intro-
389
IN CONNECTICUT.
duce it by degrees into practice, without the com- pulsion of authority on the one side, or the prejudice of former customs on the other."
The reception in England of "the Proposed Book" of Common Prayer, as set forth by the General Con- vention assembled at Philadelphia in the autumn of 1785, was unfavorable; and the application for an Epis- copate in the Anglican line was prudently held for fu- ture disposal. A letter, full of Christian affection and kindly regard for their Episcopal brethren in Amer- ica, was signed and sent over by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the seventeen Bishops of England, in answer to the formal address of that body. While they evinced a desire to further the prayer of the Address, and were disposed to make every proper allowance for the difficulties which surrounded the Church in this country, these prelates at the same time suggested their fears "that in the proceedings of the Convention some alterations had been adopted or intended which those difficulties did not seem to justify." They waited for an explanation upon this point, and closed their letter by saying, "We cannot but be extremely cautious, lest we should be the in- struments of establishing an Ecclesiastical system which will be called a branch of the Church of England, but afterwards may possibly appear to have departed from it essentially, either in doctrine or discipline."
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.