USA > Connecticut > The story of the Diocese of Connecticut : a new branch of the vine (Espiscopal Church) > Part 38
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 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51
·[ 420 ]·
"Lambeth" continually gained popularity among Connecticut Churchmen, but many felt that it did not go far enough. Among them was Bishop Gray, who in 1944 forcefully reminded the Con- vention of the need for greater unity in the Anglican Communion, which had already proved its ability to comprehend different views.
THE ANGLICAN CONGRESS
Bishop Gray contemplated a general Anglican Congress, in- cluding diocesan clerical and lay delegates. The response really surprised him by its expression of a longing for closer and more democratic fellowship. He even suggested a federation of the twenty-three Anglican churches as "a long step towards the ulti- mate reunion of Christendom."
Neither he nor Bishop Budlong wanted to abandon the Lambeth Conferences. They regarded these as part of the program for greater unity which the Archbishop of Canterbury boldly presented to the General Convention in 1946.
Bishop Gray's persistent hard work made Connecticut a cen- ter of activity for greater Anglican unity. He wrote a widely-read essay, "The Future Course of the Anglican Communion," pub- lished in the Anglican Theological Review for January, 1946. In this he stressed the Episcopal Church's favorable position in pro- moting unity and close cooperation in the mission field to confront paganism. He promoted the concept of unity, and at the Lambeth Conference in 1948 he proposed an advisory council on missionary strategy, a central college at Canterbury for post-ordination study, and a Pan-Anglican Congress in 1953. His interest awakened in members of the Diocese a loyalty to the ideal equal to his own. A stream of queries poured into the Diocesan House about relations between the American Church and the Anglican churches abroad.
Inspired by this rising interest, in 1949 the General Con- vention authorized the Presiding Bishop to issue invitations to a Pan-Anglican Congress of bishops and clerical and lay delegates, to meet in the United States. Enthusiasm was promoted especially by the semi-annual review, Pan-Anglican, established and edited by Bishop Gray to spread news and opinions of the worldwide Anglican Communion. The Bishop felt that stronger ties would increase interest in the Ecumenical Movement to unite all Christian churches. He bore a toilsome burden in preparing for the Congress
·[ 421 ].
at Minneapolis in August of 1954, serving as chairman of arrange- ments and Episcopal Secretary. For the first time, the Anglican Communion achieved a complete representation of its many nations and cultures meeting outside England. The assembly of six hun- dred fifty-seven delegates impressed the newspapers and the American people, and revealed to many American Episcopalians the truly international and catholic character of their Church.
THE NEAREST NEIGHBORS
Connecticut's interest in Pan-Anglicanism accompanied efforts to befriend other American churches and to prepare the way for participation in the worldwide Ecumenical Movement. Bishop Williams encouraged this ecumenical spirit in his Convention ad- dress of 1888, welcoming the change from complacent acceptance of Christian divisions as "wholesome competition." Seeking unity for a conversion of the world appeared to him like Ezekiel's vision of the stirring in the valley of dry bones. The General Convention's appointment of a Commission on Christian Unity was not, he de- clared, an invitation to uncertain reliance upon individual plans. It was an opportunity to avoid a narrow temper, while awaiting unity in the Church as a visible institution. Unity, he thought, would come through interdenominational cooperation, by prayer rather than plans, and by use of the Holy Communion, the great sacrament of unity.
The ecumenical spirit was not seriously tested for about twenty years. Then, in 1908, the Diocese was startled by an earnest proposal for visible unity between the Episcopal and Congregational churches. It was suggested by Doctor Newman Smyth, a prominent Congregational minister, in a meeting of Con- gregational and Episcopal clergymen. Doctor Smyth had recently surprised the religious world by his book, Passing Protestantism and Coming Catholicism. Episcopacy, he claimed, was the key to unity, and the Anglican Church should initiate action by appealing to other Christians. It might adopt a form of ordination not dis- crediting previous ministry and adapt episcopal authority to con- gregational liberty.
At the next Convention Bishop Brewster pleaded for patient and charitable consideration of all such proposals. The world's tendency, he said, was toward greater unities, and the becoming
· [ 422 ] .
attitude for Churchmen should be "Christian and Catholic ... not polemic but irenic."13 The Congregational proposal was occa- sionally discussed for many years, and Bishop Brewster still hoped for unity beyond such "sentimental and temporary make-believe" as the exchange of pulpits. He would not minimize honest dif- erences, but seek grounds of agreement and sacrifice prejudices mistaken for principles.
In 1919 the General Convention considered a proposed con- cordat, and appointed a commission to continue conferences with the Congregationalists. Upon the commission's recommendation, the Convention enacted a canon permitting bishops to ordain ministers of other communions under certain conditions. Part of the Episcopal Church press professed to believe that sacred prin- ciples had been wantonly surrendered. Bishop Brewster saw no objections and requested the prayers of his people. He believed that the provision might also be needed to ordain priests for Eastern Orthodox communions in America. It was little used in Connecticut. In one instance a Congregational minister was or- dained and ministered to an Episcopal congregation.
Connecticut's attitude regarding unity was that of the Lambeth Conference of 1920. The bishops' appeal disavowed uniformity in belief and practice, while presenting the historic episcopate as a means of attaining fellowship in an organic unity. The Bishop and the Diocese rejected mere alliances and federa- tions, which might actually prolong separation. Bishop Brewster staked his own hope upon the coming World Conference on Faith and Order.
He made a gesture of good will toward the Congregation- alists by visiting England in 1920 to participate in commemorating the tercentenary of the sailing of the Mayflower. In his sermon to a vast congregation in St. Andrew's Church, Plymouth, he re- cognized the original Congregational separation as natural in an age of compulsive religious uniformity. He saw the trend toward unity as a "return of the Mayflower" to catholic solidarity and fellowship. He believed that the forefathers of New England had opposed not episcopacy as such, but its alliance with political tyranny. To him the passing of separation seemed evident in the suggestions of unity made to the Episcopal Church by other communions.
· [ 423 ].
None received more earnest consideration than a proposed concordat with the Presbyterians. Bishop Budlong cautiously re- marked that the groups should become better acquainted by ex- changing pulpits and visiting each other's churches. He followed Brewster's line of thought by favoring discussion without contro- versy. Full consideration should precede decision in the Con- vention, and he would wait for the next Lambeth Conference to express the mind of the whole Church.
The Bishop named a committee to study the plan and similar ones for other churches, and hoped to discover a diocesan view- point to be expressed in a resolution. In the meantime Churchmen should take an irenic attitude and work with others for community and world welfare. Unity so attained would be far better than "a premature formal agreement upon matters of doctrine and practice." He endorsed Bishop Brewster's words, many years before: "I am reluctant to take short cuts lest, in an endeavor to reach a goal too hurriedly, I may find myself confronted by an impassable chasm."14
That particular goal never has been reached but the irenic spirit has appeared on many occasions since 1940. The Diocese has cooperated with the Connecticut Council of Churches and Re- ligious Education. It has followed the recommendation of the National Council to join with other communions in the United Church Canvass to keep the claims of religion before the people. In 1948 the Rev. Floyd Tomkins addressed the Convention on re- lations with the Polish National Catholic Church, and introduced Bishop Joseph Lesniak of its Eastern Diocese to convey a greeting from his people.
In 1948 the Diocese confronted a searching test of its ecumenical sincerity, in a heated controversy over a resolution to join the Connecticut Council of Churches. A committee merely recommended cooperation with some of its activities, with freedom of decision and allowing parishes to join local councils at will. The lingering aloofness expressed a feeling that the Council might commit the Diocese to policies and acts which would cause dis- sension in the Church.
On the floor of the Convention this attitude was sharply criticized as a selfish and timid excuse for mere apathy. After all, the General Convention had joined the Federal Council of
· [ 424 ] .
Churches and many parishes belonged to local ones - the only genuine way to learn Christian fellowship. Joining would not com- promise independence and the alleged embarrassing "pronounce- ments" could scarcely be more annoying than those of some groups of Churchmen. The resolution not to join was adopted by a ma- jority of only eight votes out of two hundred and fifty. If the ecumenical spirit had not won the battle, at least it had gained ground since the turn of the century.
WORLDWIDE FELLOWSHIP
Even more encouraging was the attitude toward worldwide Christian fellowship. Bishop Brewster led the advance, and in 1911 became a member of the Church's national commission to consider a World Conference on Faith and Order. "There can be no ques- tion," he said, "that Christians of various names are drawing nearer together. Many things have concurred to create an atmosphere more favorable to Christian unity than for some centuries past. It is recognized by many outside our Communion that in this great movement the Church whereof we are members is destined to bear an important part."15 In 1914 he joined the deputation to visit the European and Eastern Churches and invite them to the World Conference.
In that year the Diocese began to draw closer to the Eastern Orthodox Churches within its bounds. St. John's Church in Bridge- port was crowded with Russians, Greeks, Bulgarians, and Anglo- Americans for an Orthodox evening service with music by a large Russian choir. They gathered under the auspices of the Anglican and Orthodox Churches Union, whose American secretary gave an address. Russian and Greek priests also spoke and Bishop Brewster suggested an eventual reunion "through the constraining power of love," and closed the service with his blessing.
His hopes for the World Conference soon were shattered by the outbreak of war, which prevented the American deputation from sailing. The movement revived in 1919, and although the Bishop's pressing duties would not allow him to participate then, he was happy when the Conference seemed to be assured. He re- quested prayers for its success at Communion and especially on Whitsunday. Later he attended meetings of the Preparatory Com- mission, and urged prayer and interchurch conferences.
· [ 425 ] .
Several years passed in the course of making arrangements for the meeting at Lausanne in 1927. Bishop Brewster believed that anticipation had begun to create a new spirit in the Christian world - "conference in place of controversy." The Diocesan Convention endorsed the Conference and commended it to the people's interest and prayers, and the Bishop appointed a committee of clergymen and laymen to work with the national Preparatory Commission.
The historic meeting on the shore of Lake Geneva is generally regarded as the most momentous Christian religious event in generations. It crowned the hopes and prayers of Bishop Brewster, who had been heart and soul in the movement since Bishop Charles H. Brent started it in 1910. To him it was the religious aspect of the drive toward international cooperation. He hoped and prayed that the discussions had set the Christian world on the path to a broader outlook. "Everything," he said, "is calling Christians from narrowing and divisive denominationalism to the larger spaces and wider horizons of the Kingdom of God."16
Even a worldwide economic depression failed to check the surge toward unity. Mending the rents in Christendom was fur- thered by the second Conference at Edinburgh in 1937, where the delegates met in a common spirit of opposition to pagan fascism and national socialism. The movement culminated in 1948, in a central council representing most Christian churches which had originated in the vision of Bishop Brent.
The formation of the World Council at Amsterdam seemed to reverse the fragmentation of Christianity, which had begun with the schism between the Eastern and Western Churches in the eleventh century. It did not create one united church but, as Bishop Gray observed, it was "an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual unity."
Bishops Budlong and Gray kept the Diocese in touch with the currents of Anglican unity at Lambeth, and of Christian unity in the World Council. Intelligent Churchmen also followed every move in the new United Church of South India. It was the first act of union since the Reformation, representing both Catholic and Protestant traditions.
Connecticut's trend into the main stream quickened in 1950. The Diocesan Committee on Church Unity pleaded for interest in the General Convention's Commission on Ecumenical Relations.
· [ 426 ]·
The Commission would cooperate with the World Council, and at the discretion of the Presiding Bishop would develop plans to work with groups established by other churches. The diocesan committee expected interest in the collaboration with the National Council of the Churches of Christ, which would include twenty- nine Episcopalian members.
A great change had come since the days of Bishop Seabury. Church unity then seemed to require only an occasional polite reference to a very distant vision. The small, isolated diocese of 1785 - associated only with the obscure Episcopal Church of Scotland - had become a powerful influence in the movement to present a united Christian front to the world. That challenge can be met only by a Diocese awake to the necessity of keeping pace with the growth of the society in which it lives.
·[ 427 ].
· [ 428 ].
CHAPTER TWENTY-EIGHT
OUR OLDEST DIOCESE LOOKS FORWARD
A S the Diocese of Connecticut attained the second half of the twentieth century, an adequate review of its accomplish- ments seemed in order. The year Nineteen-fifty-one was the one hundredth anniversary of Bishop Williams's consecration, and the year of Bishop Walter Henry Gray's accession as diocesan. The new Bishop of the Diocese asked himself: How far has this Diocese fulfilled Bishop Williams's eager expectations of its growth? Has it kept pace with Connecticut's transformed and growing society?
When Bishop Gray prepared his address to the Convention of 1951, he spent much time in the dry but enlightening examination of comparative statistics. He was pleased to note that within fifty years baptized membership had doubled, from 53,000 to nearly 107,000. The rate of growth had approximated that of the State's population.
Certain other figures, however, would have disturbed any but a very complacent bishop, and Bishop Gray wanted them to trouble every thinking Churchman in the Diocese. The number of clergymen had doubled between 1851 and 1901, but actually had declined slightly in the following half-century. The same was roughly true of the number of parishes and missions, while Con- necticut's population had more than doubled since 1901.
The conclusions, which the Bishop frankly exposed, were obvious and painful. The supply of clergymen and the places of worship lagged far behind the increase in membership. The Church appeared to have lost territory while gaining in numbers. While cities, suburbs, and even country towns had profited from in- dustrialism and immigration, the Diocese had been content to hold its larger parishes and close some small churches. For want of a farsighted missionary strategy, it had steadily lost chances to pene- trate new communities.
· [ 429 ] .
There were too many unpromising old churches in "blighted" urban areas. Others languished in parts of outlying towns which the rush to suburbia had avoided or never reached. Bishop Gray calmly appraised the situation and suggested that the dwindling city parishes should build chapels in flourishing suburbs, with the in- tention of an eventual removal. Others had become too large and impersonal to preserve the intimate quality of parochial ministry, but might recover it in dispersed missions.
Even if the Diocese should advance its frontiers, where would it find the clergy to man them? It was an uncomfortable fact that young men appeared to be shunning the ministry. A practical cause of their indifference was the failure of clerical salaries to rise with the cost of living. They were not down to rock bottom - in comparison with those of other dioceses - but rectory budgets were cracking under the strain of postwar inflation, and especially the soaring cost of buying and maintaining the indis- pensable automobile. The rector bought in the same market as the factory mechanic, but no union could summon him to strike for a boost in pay. It was no wonder that there were fewer clergy in 1951 than in 1901. When young parsons sought greener pastures, there were embarrassingly long vacancies.
One fundamental cause of the situation became clear, when the Bishop considered the statistics of contributions. During the past five years the Diocese had failed to maintain the noble record of wartime. This seemed to be convincing evidence that many of the laity, when not inspired by an emergency, did not understand the importance of evangelism. Parochialism was undercutting the Church's missionary enterprise in Connecticut.
There were, of course, some lay leaders who could see be- yond the vestry meeting and the round of parish-house activities. They were uneasy, and requested the Bishop to present a frank, detailed statement of the needs of the Diocese, together with plans to realize his and their hopes for its welfare. His answer was given to the Diocesan Convention of 1951. If the delegates were startled by its comprehensiveness and great expense, it was because they had not realized how much the emergency demanded.
The Bishop's plan, which was named the "Episcopal De- velopment Program," included only the most urgent necessities. An enlarged Conference Center at East Morris would frce the Diocese
·[ 430 ].
from dependence upon private schools and parish houses to ac- commodate its retreats and schools of religion. Expansion of the summer camp was imperative to prevent the annual embarrassment of turning away many youngsters who needed instruction and re- creation. The youth program desperately required a full-time di- rector, who would also manage the Conference Center and the camp. The chaplaincies at Yale University and the University of Connecticut could not thrive without adequate houses, offices, and chapels.
The most pressing of all necessities was a fund to plant mis- sions in mushrooming industrial and suburban areas, and to pro- vide churches, parish houses, rectories, salaries, and automobiles. One diocesan missionary could not satisfy all the calls for his ser- vices, which might easily fill the time of two or more. The Diocese must have a trained, full-time social relations expert to cope with the problems of newcomers, and minister to inmates of public welfare institutions. Diocesan House was overcrowded to the point of inefficiency and discomfort, and must soon be abandoned for a new building. Finally, the Diocese must raise an expansion and maintenance fund of one million dollars, to inaugurate and operate the program until ordinary giving could sustain it.
"Do these . . . needs seem to be too much?" the Bishop asked. "Well, I could add more; but from the many you have stressed to me I have picked out only those which have appeared to be the most insistent. Whether it is possible for us to do all the things we need to do, I cannot say; but it is hard to believe that a Diocese with over 106,000 members cannot at least begin the necessary program."1
Some appeared to think that the program was too ambitious for a time of uncertainty. Bishop Gray reminded them that such times often have inspired men to perform superb acts of faith in disregard of danger, like the building of the mediaeval cathedrals.
The Bishop's intention was that the Diocese undertake his program in a spiritual as well as material sense - in short, as a re- ligious rededication. This ideal he explained to a special convention in 1951. The address was based upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, 12, 28: "Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear."
·[ 431 ].
This discourse challenged the members of the Diocese to live always at their best. They should not cherish a "soft" religion, or social service instead of believing and living Christian doctrine, or leaning upon God's mercy and forgiveness and forgetting his demand for justice and righteousness. Living and spreading the Christian gospel should be the first duty. The negligence of pro- fessed Christians had been one cause of the spread of secular ma- terialism. The Diocese should undertake the program in a spirit of penitence for past failures, realizing that "even the eleventh hour is not too late." Acceptance of the challenge in this spirit might prove to be the life in the "kingdom which cannot be moved." With this hope, the Bishop summoned the Diocese to "a new life with God"" - one step at a time, always in the direction of the Kingdom.
Sharing his hope, the Convention after a thorough discus- sion unanimously approved a resolution authorizing the Executive Council to raise the proposed million-dollar fund by subscription. In June, 1951, the Council definitely planned the campaign. They engaged the New York firm of Marts and Lundy to conduct it, and appointed the officers, headed by Doctor Lewis B. Franklin, formerly treasurer of the National Council. For the success of the campaign, the Diocese owed far more than perfunctory gratitude to him and to his colleagues: John H. Esquirol, vice-chairman, and now suffragan bishop; Ostrom Enders, treasurer; F. Minot Blake, assistant treasurer; and the Hon. Raymond E. Baldwin, chairman of the Advance Gifts Committee. Equal if not greater thanks were due to the many committees and parishioners who devoted them- selves to making the campaign a success at the "grass roots."
No such effort ever had been attempted before in the Diocese. The vast amount of organizing revealed a sincere will- ingness to work hard. It also uncovered a prevalent ignorance of diocesan organization, work, and responsibilities which demanded earnest education. Few opposed the campaign but many were also obligated to devote part of their time to competing charitable and civic enterprises. In spite of all obstacles, by Junc, 1952 about sixty per cent of the fund had been pledged. The intangible effects were clearly discerned in the thousands of better informed mem- bers and a growing spirit of diocesan fellowship. One of the most astonishing aspects was the generosity of the far-from-wealthy clergy.
·[ 432 ].
The campaign brought forward new leaders, especially laymen, many of whom never had been deeply interested. Pa- rochialism yielded to a new understanding of the true meaning of that much misunderstood term, "missionary work." People per- ceived the broad front where the Church was ministering to the needs and combatting the evils of the age. Parish life benefitted from the new zeal, as members became convinced that the time to advance had arrived. Publicity awakened outside interest in the Episcopal Church and stimulated inquiry about its faith and practices.
Bishop Gray repeatedly declared that the program would gain its best results in sacramental worship, prayer, service, and sacrifice. He wrote a special prayer for its success and requested its continual public and private use. He also emphasized the value of this effort in arousing a sense of duty to express faith by works, in public as well as church life.
When the Diocesan Convention met in 1953, more than seventy-three hundred generous givers had pushed the pledges to nearly eight hundred thousand dollars. Improvements and new enterprises already had enriched the Diocese beyond the proposed goal, through the campaign itself, and by the special gifts it had inspired, such as the new Diocesan House. Because donors were privileged to designate the uses of their gifts, some needs were oversubscribed, leaving two hundred thousand dollars still to be obtained for others.
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.