USA > Connecticut > The history of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut, Vol. II > Part 4
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
24
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
Treasurer, Isaac Beers, one of the new Trustees, was a resident of New Haven, and pains were taken to secure subscriptions to increase the fund, both from individuals and from the several parishes in the Dio-
cese. By a vote of the Board, all persons who should subscribe and pay to the treasurer of the corpora- tion the sum of thirty dollars each were entitled to have their names inserted on the records, but this in- ducement appears not to have been a very powerful one, for only eight names are thus entered, two of them heading the list from Stratford, - the Johnsons, father and son, - the rest were from Hartford, and the aggregate of their subscriptions was three hun- dred and ninety dollars. "A donation from a bishop in Scotland," of sixty pounds sterling, appears among the earliest credits.
The Annual Convention of 1804, held at Litchfield, provided for an "address " on the subject "To the members of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut," and the Trustees, meeting in October, requested the clergy to read it to their respective congregations at some convenient time previous to Easter Monday, when the parishes or individual members thereof were desired to consult together and make liberal do- nations. An extract from this address will show the earnestness of the Committee by whom it was prepared.
" Brethren, believing that entreaties will not be necessary to persuade you to make provision for the supreme officer in our ecclesiastical polity, we con- gratulate you on the opportunity now presented, of showing your zeal for the house of the Lord, and of giving to the honor of his name, 'according to the
25
IN CONNECTICUT.
blessings wherewith he hath blessed you.' We are also putting you in mind to pay a debt, - a debt of gratitude to our common benefactor, for his merciful providence in granting to us a valid and regular succession in the ministry, with all the blessings and benefits which are connected therewith : and for such inestimable favors how disproportionate are all the returns that can be made! God hath been liberal to you in spirituals and in temporals, his goodness and his mercy accompany you - your land yields her increase and your barns are filled with plenty - but no provision is made for the fountain of Holy Or- ders, no maintenance made for Christ's chief minister among you! Will any of you then grudge to make God some small return ? Will any of you be back- ward to honor with a part of your substance that office which is the grand vinculum that binds and unites Christians throughout the world ? No ! breth- ren : rather consider the office of a bishop, as the representative of Christ, and receive those who bear it, as you would the Apostles. Remember those words of Christ to his Apostles, and in them every succeeding Bishop of his Church - 'he that receiv- eth you, receiveth me, and he that receiveth me, re- ceiveth him that sent me.'
" Disposed to honor the person sent, on account of the religious reverence due to the Sender, ye need not, brethren, the force of multiplied arguments to persuade you to do in the present case what is highly for your honor, your temporal and spiritual emolu- ment. By being liberal in your donations for this confessedly praiseworthy purpose, ye will honor the memory of your departed friends, who have 'desired
26
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
to see the things which ye see,' namely, ordinations and confirmations, 'and have not seen them ; and to hear the things which ye hear,' the voices of the An- gels of the Churches, 'and have not heard them.' A blessing will descend upon you and your posterity ; and whenever mention shall be made of the Church in Connecticut, the Bishop's Fund will be mentioned for a perpetual memorial of your zeal for the cause of God and his Church."
Notwithstanding this earnest appeal, the enlarge- ment of the fund for several years was inconsiderable, and the support of Bishop Jarvis was regarded with a languor which neither his own private means nor any poverty of the parishes could justify.
The plans in reference to the Academy at Cheshire had not been accomplished, and steps were taken to increase its endowment in a way which was then sup- posed to be perfectly consistent with the dictates of Christian morality. A petition to the General As- sembly for a lottery to raise the suin of fifteen thou- sand dollars was granted at the October session of 1802, but the net proceeds of the grant, owing to loss and perplexity and expense attending the manage- ment, were considerably less than the amount desired. The financial affairs of the institution being thus im- proved, its friends began to turn their attention to the original design of erecting it into a college, and, therefore, in accordance with a vote of the Annual Convention, the Board of Trustees in 1804 applied to the Legislature for a charter, empowering them to confer degrees in the arts, divinity, and law, and to enjoy all other privileges usually granted to colleges. This application failed, and no renewal of it was
27
IN CONNECTICUT.
made until the occurrence of more propitious events. The resignation of Dr. Bowden and his removal to New York led to another change in the residence of Bishop Jarvis. He was himself a graduate of Yale College, and his son being now well prepared, he de- termined, in 1803, to remove to New Haven and enter him as a student at the same institution. His wife had died two years before, and this event made him more unwilling than ever to be separated from the child for whose success and welfare he was deeply so- licitous. Besides, New Haven was the largest city in Connecticut, and the best located, as things then were, for a convenient administration of the Diocese.
Under the editorship of " a Committee appointed by the Convocation of the Episcopal Church in Con- necticut," a periodical was commenced with the year 1804, called " The Churchman's Monthly Magazine or Treasury of Divine and Useful Knowledge." The ob- ject of it was to diffuse information concerning the Church - to furnish brief historical accounts, com- ments, and explanations of her feasts and fasts, her Sac- raments, Liturgy, and Offices, to give a right under- standing of the economy of redemption and the insti- tuted means of salvation, and also to procure, publish, and preserve records of " the origin and progress of the individual congregations in the Diocese." The ed- itors, in their introductory address, said : -
" That the object may be the more completely em- braced, the whole will be calculated to guard against the plausible but dangerous reasonings of infidels and latitudinarians - reasonings the more dangerous, be- cause plausible, for the laying all religions upon a level ; and whose pretended liberality towards relig-
28
HISOTRY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
ion in every form, arises from a real coldness towards it in any, and from their wishes to bring the thing itself into contempt and insignificance.
" We have a very encouraging and noble example set us, in that country from whence we emanated, and by numbers of that Church which gave origin to ours, and under whose fostering care it was for many years nurtured. The writings of those learned and virtuous men brought over to us, exhibit the most pleasing proofs of their vigilance and ever to be admired abilities in detecting the falsehoods and re- pelling the subtle efforts of the enemies of their re- ligion and peace."
It was the first and for some time the only period- ical publication in this country devoted to the inter- ests of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and though it had a precarious and troubled existence, appear- ing for a few years in Connecticut and then being removed to New York and New Jersey, and finally brought back and restored to life in the land of its birth, yet it must be confessed that it fulfilled a good purpose in its day, and was conducted with a spirit and ability which served to promote both the
Not glory of God and the edification of his people. feeling and therefore not expressing any of that spu- rious liberality which would level all distinction be- tween right and wrong, it aimed to make truth and sincerity its guide, and helped to impress those whole- some lessons which have marked the character, and lived so long in the recollections of Connecticut churchmen.
29
IN CONNECTICUT.
CHAPTER III.
ECCLESIASTICAL TROUBLE; PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF AMMI ROGERS; AND INTERPOSITION OF THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS IN- VOKED.
A. D. 1804-1805.
THE peace of the Church in Connecticut was dis- turbed by a new and mischievous trouble which arose about this time, and extended on beyond the admin- istration of Bishop Jarvis. It is necessary to the truth of history that the story be fully told - other- wise these pages would not be occupied with what may seem, in the view of many readers, to be un- profitable matter.
A young man named Ammi Rogers, born at Bran- ford and a graduate of Yale College in the class of 1790, having met with opposition in his native State where his character was best known, applied for Holy Orders in the Diocese of New York, and on the strength of a certificate signed with the name of the Rev. Philo Perry, Secretary of the Convocation of the Clergy of Connecticut, - which certificate was neither written nor signed by him,1 - he was ordained
1 While the case was under consideration, a clerical member of the standing committee, Dr. Beach, having heard of his rejection in Connec- ticut, opposed his ordination. " On this, Rogers repaired to that State, with the view of procuring from the Rev. Philo Perry, the Secretary of the Con- vention of the Diocese, a certificate that there did not appear on the min- utes any entry of the rejection of the person in question. Such a certificate
30
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
a Deacon by Bishop Provoost in June, 1792, and at a later date the same prelate advanced him to the order of the Priesthood. Of pleasing appearance and in- sinuating address, he made strong friends for himself; and reported as the result of his ministrations in Sara- toga County, in Schenectady and other places, where he first officiated, great interest in religious things and large accessions to the Church. He continued in Northern New York some nine years and employed the influence which his zealous and apparently suc- cessful labors had gained him to promote his selfish and ambitious ends. He was a delegate from New York to the General Convention which met in Phila- delphia in 1799 - having secured his election to that body over a venerable city clergyman by adroitly impressing his brethren with a conviction of his abil- ity, earnestness, and piety. In midsummer, 1801, he returned to Branford, and assumed the charge of the
parishes in that town, Wallingford and East Haven. The Bishop of Connecticut, knowing his early char- acter and the ingenious fraud which he had practiced to obtain orders, refused to receive him, and the clergy refused to admit him a member of the Convocation, until he produced satisfactory testimonials from the Bishop and Standing Committee of the Diocese in which he was ordained and to which he properly
might have been given with great truth, because no formal application had been made. But Philo Perry being from home, Ammi Rogers fabricated a certificate in his name; not only testifying to the said fact, but going to the point of the correct life and conversation of the bearer. The last circum- stance is of importance; because, although a certificate as to his not having applied for and been refused orders, was obtained from Philo Perry after- ward, yet it went no further." - Bishop White's Memoirs of Prot. Epis. Ch. p. 188.
31
IN CONNECTICUT.
belonged. Had there been an explicit canon in re- gard to letters dimissory, such as the Church possesses now, there would have been no room for diversity of sentiment upon this subject; but the law was then to be inferred from general principles, and the friends of Rogers among the clergy, at least in the earliest stage of the proceedings, appear to have felt that he had some show of right on his side and ought to be received and recognized by virtue of his parochial cure. A month before the meeting of the Annual Convention of 1803, six Rectors in Connecticut - Dr. Mansfield, Solomon Blakeslee, John Tyler, Am- brose Todd, Joseph Warren, and Smith Miles - ad- dressed a brief memorial to Bishop Jarvis in the fol- lowing words : " That each parish has a right to choose its own Rector, and that when the Bishop's approba- tion is obtained he does, of course, become a member of the Convention, and that it appears from sufficient documents that the parishes under the charge of the Rev. A. Rogers have proceeded according to their right and the Canons of the Church in choosing him for their Rector, and the Bishop's actual approbation being obtained in one case, and no objections stated in the other, we therefore pray that he may take his seat in the Convention and become one of our number."
But the memorial thus supported was of no avail, nor were the letters which Mr. Rogers procured from New York satisfactory to the ecclesiastical authority of the Diocese of Connecticut. He still insisted that he was entitled to a seat in the Convention, and his claims were urged with considerable pertinacity by one or two lay-members, whom he had succeeded in convincing that he was more the victim of private
32
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
persecution than an object of just censure. He was a most ubiquitous character and appeared in all parts of the Diocese, officiating wherever he could gain ad- mittance, calumniating the Bishop, seeking to divide the clergy, to poison the minds of the laity, and thus to create an unhappy schism in the Church. In com- pliance with the requirements of Canon second of the General Convention of 1792, official notice was given of these irregularities to the Bishop of New York, to whom the offender was amenable, but the notice was entirely disregarded and the irregular- ities were repeated in an aggravated form. Failing to reach him in any other way, the clergy, at a Con- vocation held in Litchfield on the 6th day of June, 1804, " resolved unanimously that the Bishop be re- quested to suspend the Rev. Ammi Rogers from the use of the churches in this Diocese." Accordingly a circular was issued five days afterwards of which the following is a copy : -
" The Rev. Ammi Rogers, now residing in this Dio- cese, hath for a long time conducted himself in such a way as is contrary to the rules of the Church and disgraceful to his office, - therefore, by the advice, and at the desire of the Clergy of Connecticut, We, the Bishop, do by these presents forbid, and direct the Clergy of this Diocese to forbid the said Rogers in future to officiate in their churches and within their parishes, and in all vacant parishes the wardens are desired to do the same, and the congregations are exhorted not to give countenance to a man whose disorderly and refractory conduct is subversive of the harmony and peace of the Church."
Rogers published an immediate response to this
33
IN CONNECTICUT.
circular, and declared it to be without authority and of no force. His numerous adherents, in the parishes where he had been employed, also issued their solemn protest -instigated and prepared no doubt by him- self- against the circular of the Bishop, but the clergy stood firmly by their chief pastor and sus- tained him in the act which had been performed in obedience to their request. They addressed a letter to the Standing Committee of New York, reciting generally the course of Rogers in Connecticut and en- closing a copy of his " Anti-circular" with a request that it might be laid before their Diocesan, adding, " we wish not in this communication to go into a par- ticular detail of the many irregularities which he has been guilty of since he has been in this State. We judge his circular letter will be sufficient data for some official measures to be taken respecting him." By this time he had removed from his native place and become the accepted minister in the more an- cient and wealthy parish at Stamford. Here he was quite popular, and the influence which he acquired over his supporters emboldened him to take other steps to vindicate his character and standing in the Church.
The General Convention met in the city of New York, September 1804, and confident of success, he carried his case before the House of Bishops, and in- voked their interposition. That House was then composed of White, Claggett, Jarvis, Benjamin Moore, and Parker - the latter of whom was consecrated to the Apostolic office on the fourth day of the session, and the " memorial of the Rev. Ammi Rogers, accom- panied with sundry documents and a letter " was in- VOL. II. 3
34
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
troduced on the same day. A time was fixed for hearing the case, and the desire of the Bishops was communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Depu- ties, that, if any members of that body "possessed information respecting the conduct of the said Ammi Rogers in the matters brought before them," they would appear at the specified time and produce the information. Bishop Jarvis, from motives of delicacy, absented himself when the question came up, but the clerical delegates from Connecticut appeared and the memorialist was called in, and documents on both sides were then read and a hearing was granted. Nothing was done afterwards in the business except in the presence of the parties concerned. "The cler- ical deputies from Connecticut," says Bishop White, " while they treated the man with the utmost deco- rum, produced ample evidence of a factious and mis- chievous disposition."
The final determination of the House of Bishops concerning the whole subject is entered upon their journal and quoted here without omitting a word.
" After full inquiry and fair examination of all the evidence that could be procured, it appears to this house that the said Ammi Rogers had produced to the Standing Committee of New York (upon the strength of which he obtained Holy Orders) a certificate signed with the name of the Rev. Philo Perry, which certificate was not written nor signed by him.
" That the conduct of the said Ammi Rogers, in the State of Connecticut, during his residence in that State since he left New York, has been insulting, re- fractory, and schismatical in the highest degree ; and, were it tolerated, would prove subversive of all order
35
IN CONNECTICUT.
and discipline in the Church ; and that the statement; which he made in justification of his conduct, was a mere tissue of equivocation and evasion, and, of course, served rather to defeat than to establish his purpose.
" Therefore this house do approve of the proceedings of the Church in Connecticut, in reproving the said Ammi Rogers, and prohibiting him from the perform- ance of any ministerial duties within that Diocese ; and, moreover, are of opinion that he deserves a severe ecclesiastical censure - that of degradation from the ministry.
"In regard to the question, To what authority is Mr. Rogers amenable ? this house are sensible, that there not having been, previously to the present Con- vention, any sufficient provision for a case of a cler- gyman removing from one diocese to another, it might easily happen that different sentiments would arise as to this point. We are of opinion, that Mr. Rogers's residence being in Connecticut, it is to the authority of that diocese he is exclusively amenable. But as the imposition practiced with a view to the Ministry was in New York, we recommend to the Bishop and Standing Committee of that State, to send to the Bishop in Connecticut such documents, duly attested, of the measure referred to, as will be a ground of procedure in that particular.
" We further direct the Secretary to deliver a copy of the above to the clerical deputies from Connecti- cut, and another copy to the Rev. Ammi Rogers. And we further direct that either of the aforesaid parties be permitted to have any document respect- ively delivered in by them, a copy of it being first
36
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
taken ; except the petition and affidavit of the Rev. Ammi Rogers, of which he may have a copy if de- sired - as may either of the parties have of any document delivered by the other party."
This decision, embracing the opinion of the bish- ops on all the points contained in the memorial, was not entirely free from canonical difficulties. It sent the petitioner back to Connecticut under a sentence of condemnation by the very body from which he had sought redress; and hence the impression was produced that Ammi Rogers had been tried by the House of Bishops and that nothing remained but to declare him degraded. The whole proceeding was somewhat loose and irregular. Bishop White thought that in giving an opinion, the House should have stopped with an incidental notice of "the iniquity which had come within their knowledge," during the investigation. " But unfortunately," he continued, "one of the bishops having proposed that there should be included a recommendation to degrade the man from the Ministry, the others, under the sensi- bility excited by the evidence of his great unworthi- ness and his flagitious conduct, consented to the pro- posal. This was ill-judged." It seemed to close the case to further scrutiny, and furnished the Bishop and clergy of Connecticut with a reason for their subse- quent action.
The mode of trying a clergyman in this Diocese at that time was prescribed by a Canon, which re- quired the accusers of an offending minister to make written application in the first instance to the Stand- ing Committee, and if it appeared to them that there was ground for the charges, they should report there-
37
IN CONNECTICUT.
upon to the bishop, who was then to call a conven- tion of his clergy - not less than seven-and after a full and fair trial and examination he, with the advice of those present, should pronounce sentence against the guilty party. Rogers complained that in his case the provisions of the Canon were not regarded ; and, technically speaking, there was room for complaint, unless the hearing, which he had himself invited, is to be understood in the light of a trial before a higher court. It was so understood by Bishop Claggett, whose ill-health compelled him to leave the city and return home before the business was finished or rather before any judgment had been delivered. Others could not refrain from taking the same view ; especially as witnesses were called, testimony heard, and an authoritative decision rendered.
" The ground on which the Bishops consented to give their sentiments on the question, as to the juris- diction to which Ammi Rogers belonged, was," says White "in the urgent solicitations of both the par- ties ; which were thought to justify the expression of opinion." His amenability to the Diocese of Connec- ticut having been affirmed, a Convocation was held in Cheshire on the 3d day of October, - two weeks after the adjournment of the General Convention, - when the Bishop and ten presbyters were present. No allusion to the episcopal decision appears upon the records of that meeting, but simply this entry : " Bishop Jarvis presented a sentence of degradation against the Rev. Ammi Rogers, which was unani- mously approved and the same ordered to be pub- lished in the usual form," an order which was, of course, immediately obeyed. A terrible storm now arose
38
HISTORY OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
and threatened to be followed by serious conse- quences to the Church in Connecticut. The friends of the degraded minister rallied around him with in- creased earnestness and the congregation of St. John's Church in Stamford, for which he had been hired on the previous Easter Monday to officiate six months, held a meeting, and by a major vote called and settled him as their Rector, and stipulated to pay him annually a definite sum during his natural life, " any order, determination, or decree of the Bishop and clergy of this or any other State to the contrary notwithstanding." . The minority, who endeavored in vain to get the Bishop's circular and documents from the General Convention read, remonstrated against this proceeding, and claimed that those who instituted it had forfeited their right to be the representatives of the parish and the guardians of its interests. Internal troubles followed, and suits at law were commenced against Rogers to eject him from the incumbency on the ground that he was a trespasser, and in the trial of these suits came up the question of his displace- ment from the ministry in due and canonical form. The courts decided virtually in his favor, and held that the papers issued and published by Bishop Jar- vis concerning him were not, in themselves, sufficient to deprive him of his standing in the Church, and consequently of his living amongst those who had ac- cepted him as their lawful and settled minister. The points of law turned upon the nature of the Epis- copal office, and the interpretation of the Canons which prescribed the mode of trying a clergyman in Connecticut. Disorderly and schismatical conduct, unbecoming a priest of God, and subversive of the
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.