USA > New York > New York City > A history of the parish of Trinity Church in the city of New York, pt 3 > Part 25
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
N the autumn of 1823, three men, each conspicuous for ability, force of character, tenacity of purpose, firm- ness of will, and undaunted perseverance, sailed from New York to England, intending to ask their fellow-church- men across the seas for aid on behalf of struggling institu- tions in America. The Bishop of New York, compelled to visit Europe in search of health, had decided to plead, while there, the cause of the General Theological Semi- nary. The Bishop of Ohio, Dr. Philander Chase, went solely in hopes of obtaining the means of establishing seats of learning in his infant Diocese for the education of
276
277
Plans of Bishop Chase
1824]
candidates for the Sacred Ministry. The third of this notable trio, the Rev. Nathaniel S. Wheaton, went to seek help for the newly founded Washington College in Connecticut.
For the first time, the ties between the Church in America and the Church of England were to be strength- ened by personal and friendly intercourse. Communica- tion between them had been infrequent and transitory, since the consecration of Bishop White and Bishop Pro- voost in 1787 at Lambeth.
The reader is by this time well acquainted with the character of Bishop Hobart and his methods of procedure. He had confidence in himself, and believed that what he did was for the benefit of the Church. When, therefore, he had made up his mind that the General Theological Seminary was the legitimate object for the support of churchmen, and found himself in a position to obtain means for its endowment and proper equipment during his expected visit to England, he further decided that no one ought to interfere with his project by going abroad to solicit subscriptions for other objects of minor im- portance in his eyes. It was with mingled astonishment and indignation that he learned, during the summer of 1823, that the Bishop of Ohio, despairing of obtaining clergymen from the East to supply the missions under his charge in the Western country, intended to sail for Eng- land, and there ask the generous and affluent churchmen to help to build up a theological seminary in Ohio and educate the sons of the soil for the work of the ministry in their native States.
Bishop Chase, with his impulsive frankness, wrote to each Bishop of the American Church "A Note of Com- munion and Charity," announcing his intention and asking for the prayers and commendation of his brothers in the
1
278
History of Trinity Church [1823-
Episcopate. His purpose was disapproved by all of those in the high places of the American Church. The struggle to carry on the missions supported by the newly formed "Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society," to secure the funds for the endowment of the General Theological Seminary, and to maintain even the Diocesan work in the Eastern States was felt to be all that the Church could do. The money which had been collected for Ohio missions in New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and other Eastern cities and towns in 1821 and 1822, and which aggregated twenty-nine hundred and eleven dollars, could not be effect- ively used, as men would not come to the wilds of Ohio.
At first Bishop Chase stood alone in his advocacy of the plan of seeking aid from England. He summoned an informal meeting of the clergy and laity of the Dio- cese after the adjournment of the Convention held at Worthington June 4 and 5, 1823.
"The project though opened with great seriousness and the entreating of divine direction was at first opposed by nearly all. It was considered as visionary, though at last agreed to by the clergy ; and silent consent was impliedly given by the laity."1
A letter of commendation from the clergy of his Diocese was indispensable. Six of the eight clergymen in Ohio at once signed it; the other two at first refused, but finally signed as a matter of duty. Thus Bishop Chase had the unanimous, though not the hearty approval of all the clergy. As he proceeded Eastward he encountered an opposition to his design which was bitter and strong. Bishop White had written to him on August 11th ex- pressing much apprehension of grave danger to the Ameri- can Church should the plan be carried out. He based his disapproval upon the implied understanding of 1787,
1 P. 184, vol. ii., Bishop Chase's Reminiscences.
-
1824]
Opposition to Bishop Chase 279
when he and Bishop Provoost were consecrated at Lam- beth, that nothing further than the bestowal of the Episco- pate should be asked from England. He also was firmly convinced that aid from that source would lay the Bishop of Ohio and the whole Church in this country under an obligation which would impair its independence.
The Bishop of Pennsylvania was, no doubt, influenced in his opposition by the Bishop of New York, who fol- lowed up the protest of Dr. White by a vehement letter, in which he expressed the sentiments of the Bishops of Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut. His letter is dated "New York, September 11, 1823." In it he acknowledges Bishop Chase's communication, and al- ludes to a letter recently received from Bishop White, disapproving Bishop Chase's design and declining in any way to promote it. He mentions the sentiments of Bishop Croes and Bishop Brownell and "a letter from South Carolina to the same effect," and adds, "in their opinions I cordially unite."
He then examines in detail the grounds for the supposed necessity of appealing to England, first avert- ing from himself the charge of unfriendliness to Ohio and its Bishop, by recalling the fact that he had powerfully assisted the Rev. Philander Chase, Junior, when he was soliciting funds for missionary work in Ohio. He pro- ceeds to repel the accusation that Ohio had been neg- lected, since Mr. Chase had collected nearly three thousand dollars in the East, and Bishop Hobart had been informed " that the early exertions of a Missionary Society in Pennsylvania probably laid the foundation of the Church in Ohio," and that the General Missionary Society had granted four hundred dollars for work in that Diocese. Nor could he see that the claim of Ohio to consideration : was greater than that of other parts of the country.
280
History of Trinity Church
[1823-
Should each Diocese adopt Bishop Chase's plan for pro- viding for its needs there would arise many complications and conflicting interests. There was a General Mission- ary Society to supply all wants. As to the intention of training the candidates for Ohio on its own soil, it seemed to him both unwise and impolitic. Unwise, because the young men of the West needed the polish of the East which would be acquired by a course at the General Theo- logical Seminary in New York; impolitic, because they could not be as usefully trained in theology, or even in the ordinary college course, as those who studied in the East. These young men could not be kept in Ohio, and when they mingled with other clergymen their inferiority would become apparent. While there might be some reason for acting upon the liberty given in the constitu- tion and by-laws of the General Theological Seminary for a branch school, there certainly was none for an inde- pendent divinity school. The Seminary recently estab- lished in New York under the authority of the General Convention was the only one which deserved recognition and should be so considered. He adds that " the disunited view in which your application would present the Ameri- can Church to her friends in England is another formidable objection."
As Bishop Chase had announced his intention of sail- ing in the packet of the Ist of October, and the appear- ance of the two Bishops on the same boat and together in England might appear to indicate approval by Dr. Hobart of the plans of his brother Bishop, he concludes by saying that he is compelled to forego the pleasure of the company of Bishop Chase, and to take his passage in another vessel.
"Even with this precaution, I foresee a possibility of our being brought into unpleasant contact, and shall doubtless be inquired of
281
Chase Sails for England
1824]
with regard to the object of your visit, and must state the opinion en- tertained concerning it. It may appear my duty to take some pains to prevent the impression that a measure deemed so injudicious and inexpedient by my brethren and the great body of the Church here, is countenanced by them.
" I do not think it at all unlikely that I shall be requested to make known particularly your object, and the paramount claims of the General Institutions of our Church, and whatever pain it may give me, I shall not hesitate to discharge the dictates of my duty."
He was persuaded that in view of the many weighty considerations which were presented in opposition, Bishop Chase would pause. "The writer in conclusion would most respectfully and affectionately urge on you the re- linquishment of it." 1
The New York clergy and others, in letters and per- sonal interviews, upheld the opinion of their Bishop. Bishop Chase, after preparing an open letter to Bishop White, stating the facts which seemed to justify his course in proceeding to England, sailed on October Ist, in the Orbit, Captain Tinkham, one week after Bishop Hobart. The Rev. John Sellon, of Christ Church, Ann Street, and the son of Serjeant Sellon, of London, was the only cler- gyman who had the courage to accompany him to the ship. The Reminiscences deal minutely with the story of the voyage and the chilling reception in England, cheered only by the warm welcome of his friends, Mr. and Mrs. Wiggin, near Manchester.
Bishop Hobart considered it necessary, in view of rumors of the intentions of Bishop Chase, and of Dr. Wheaton, to issue a " Note " explaining that the Ameri- can Church had not "by any act of the General Conven- tion of the Bishops and Representatives of her clergy
' The letter in full is on pp. 10-16 of A Letter to the Wardens and Vestry of Christ Church, Cincinnati; in Reply to their " Declaration and Protest," &c., &c., by a Presbyter of the Diocese of New York (Henry U. Onderdonk). New York : Printed by T. & J. Swords, 8vo, pp. 73. 1824.
-
N 일
282
History of Trinity Church
[1823-
and laity, the only organ through which that authority can be conveyed, authorized an appeal on her behalf to the parent Church in Great Britain," and showing that the only general institution which had desired the benev- olence of English Churchmen was the General Theo- logical Seminary. In that document he explains the origin of the Seminary, the course of instruction, and its claim for endowment and a library. In treating the de- sign to form a theological school in Ohio, he says :
"It does not appear that this measure of a diocesan theological school in Ohio has been acted on by the Convention of the Church in that Diocese, that they have adopted any plan for its organization, or that there is any incorporated body to hold or to manage its funds."
He quotes from Bishop White's letters to Bishop Chase showing the extreme caution of that prelate and his perfect accord with Bishop Hobart in discountenan- cing the proposition laid before him. Bishop Hobart then remarks that
"notwithstanding all the remonstrances which have been urged in opposition to it, exertions will be made by the person who originated it, and who has arrived in England, to carry into effect the measures above stated, and this representation with respect to it is thus rendered necessary."
Having repeated what he had previously said of Ohio in his letter to Bishop Chase, that its claims had not been neglected, he alludes briefly to Dr. Wheaton and his errand to solicit books and apparatus, discouraging com- pliance with his request, and closes his note with an apology for his communication, and a further warning against applications in behalf of local institutions. The " Note" was immediately circulated in the chief cities and towns of England.1
1 A Note Relative to the Agency of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America in certain Applications in Behalf of local Institutions of that Church, to the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the Church of England. London, Nov. 13, 1823. Reprinted in the Christian Journal, January, 1824.
1
283
Opposition to Bishop Chase
1824]
The state of feeling in New York City is well illus- trated by passages from a letter of the Rev. Benjamin T. Onderdonk to Bishop Hobart, dated New York, Octo- ber 16, 1823.
"The business of Bishop Chase was a subject of much and pretty warm discussion. There appeared to be but one opinion respecting the expediency of his voyage to Europe for the purpose he has in hand. But there was considerable objection to the propriety of adopt- ing any opposing measures when he had taken the decisive step. After much exertion, however, we succeeded in getting the Board to pass the following preamble and resolution. You will at once per- ceive that they were penned by Bishop White.
" A motion to have attested copies of it sent to you was lost. That, however, is of no great consequence, as every member is, of course at liberty to make what use he pleases of it.
"'At a meeting of the Board of Directors of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, held at the residence of the Right Rev. Bishop White, in the city of Philadelphia, on the first day of October in the year of our Lord 1823,
"'It was stated to the Board that there has been announced the design of making an application in England for the raising of money to be applied to missionary purposes in the United States.
"' Whereupon; Resolved, as the opinion of this Board, that every expedient for the said object may have an unfavourable effect on the prospects of the Society which we represent; that it may excite other applications to the same source; and that the effects of such measures will probably be the lessening of the respectability of our Church in the estimation of our Venerable mother Church of England, and, as we believe, will have that effect with our fellow citizens of the Ameri- can Union.
"'The opinion now expressed is not designed to discountenance the thankful acceptance of any pecuniary contributions which may be pre- sented from a foreign country, either generally to the Society which we represent, or for the missionary exertions of any particular State.'
" Bishop Chase has published his answer to Bishop White's letter. You, of course, will see it. It appears to me to be a very disingenuous thing. He does not publish the letter of Bp. W. ; which he ought, in fairness to have done, that his readers might be put in possession of
284
History of Trinity Church
[1823-
the arguments on both sides. He publishes your's, but none other in opposition to his project. Although he is careful to give, at full length, those of Bishops Bowen, Brownell and Ravenscroft. Bishop Brownell's is singularly inconsistent with the sentiments which he obviously appeared to entertain while here. I thought this letter, and, in no small degree, the writer of it-was well characterised by a gen- tleman in conversation with me, the other day, who had merely glanced at the pamphlet, and felt no particular interest, one way or the other, in its contents: 'As for the Bishop of Connecticut,' said he, 'he seems cautiously to avoid decision either way.'
"By the by, on the subject of Bishop Bowen's letter I have re- ceived a letter from him in which he expresses surprise that Bishop Chase should have boasted of support from him. He fully expressed to Bishop C. the sentiment he has long cherished, that the most likely way to have our Church established in the Western States is to have clergymen who have been born and educated there; and that, therefore, provision for theological instruction in that region, is a great desideratum. As you, however, see the pamphlet, it is un- necessary to say anything further respecting the Bishop's letter. His views in writing it will be best understood by an extract from that to me : 'I, at the same time declined expressing an opinion of the ex- pediency or suitableness of his expedition to England. I did not like it; and if I had been called upon, in the exercise of any responsibility to tell him my dislike, I should unhesitatingly have done so, but asked for an "approbatory letter " in favour of a step on which he had actu- ally determined. I thought that all I had to do, in writing a reply to one with whom my personal acquaintance had been but little, was to waive his desire and refer him to others better qualified to judge of its object than myself.'
" There is one part of Bishop Bowen's letter to me which he begged me not to mention to you. I should not, however, do you justice by withholding it, although, of course, any notice you may think proper to take of it, will not be such as to lead him to suspect that I communi- cated it to you. He expressed himself both surprised and somewhat hurt, that (to use his expression) you wrote at him, instead of to him, on the subject of Bishop Chase's claiming his approbation and support. Your letter, you will recollect, was to Dr. Gadsden. The Bishop begs me to say how I can account for this. I shall simply answer (and I presume rightly) that you had occasion to write to Dr. G., and took that opportunity to notice the subject, thinking it the same thing as if you addressed the Bishop himself. He says he knows of no circumstance
285
Opposition to Bishop Chase
1824]
which would justly deprive him of your confidence. I think I can assure him that the style in which you have uniformly spoken of his correct and honourable principles and affectionate feelings, precludes any supposition of want of confidence in him. He begs to be kindly remembered to you, with assurances of the most lively solicitude for the entire recovery of your health.
" After the missionary business in Philadelphia was over, I went down to Baltimore to visit my old friend, Dr. Wyatt. There, as in Phila- delphia, I was gratified with hearing many affectionate enquiries re- specting you, and the expression of much deep solicitude on your behalf. A very pleasing instance of the respect and kindness of Bishop Kemp and Dr. Wyatt, was their having prayers offered for you in their churches the Sunday after your departure. The omission of this would have been no evidence of want of regard, while attention to it is a highly gratifying proof of the reverse.
" Dr. Barry wished very much to have an opportunity of an inter- view with you when he was last in town, of sufficient length to admit of his counselling with you on his concerns. He thinks, somewhat, of returning to this city. He is so excellent a man, and so correct, that I could not but feel pleasure at the idea of having him again con- nected with us. But I recollected that I heard you express yourself rather unfavourably of his qualifications, or at least success, as a teacher. And as it was in that capacity that he thought of returning, I felt painfully restricted in advising him on the subject, not knowing whether your views were such as would influence you to withhold your full approbation of his return. The truth is, his school in B. has very much fallen off. He attributes it to the vast increase of new and cheap teachers. Dr. Wyatt told me, however, that he feared some defect of his own was the real cause, although he acknowledged that the Baltimoreans erred very much in their ideas of education, being very much more ready to consult economy than real advantage. Dr. Barry showed me some testimonials from several of the most eminent citizens of Baltimore, who had attended his last examination, highly creditable to him.
" The immense influence, also, of St. Mary's College, even among Protestants, stands very much in the way of other classical seminaries, especially as it takes boys quite young, and at very moderate charges, owing to its funds.
" I have just received a certificate of the organization of Zion Church, Palmyra, Wayne County, and a letter calling loudly for mis- sionary aid. Converse, sometime since, wrote to me that the people of
286
History of Trinity Church
[1823-
Skaneateles and Marcellus wish his services, but must depend on mis- sionary aid.
" The clergy are beginning to assemble for Convention. I have seen Lacey, McCabe, Baldwin, Dr. Brown, and have heard that Cum- ing is here. Baldwin is trying for Rye. Wheeler has resigned North Hempstead, and I am told Clowes is likely to have it. I have received the missionary reports of Norton and Gear, who will neither of them be able to attend. Duffie made a beginning at the corner of Broome Street and Broadway, last Sunday evening. It was a very full congre- gation ; and every body seems to think his prospects very promising. Schroeder is expected next week. Ives has come in. I have not yet seen him, but am told that he is very much recovered. With regard to the parish, I recollect no other changes than the death of Mr. Ashfield, and of one of Mrs. Pray's daughters, the one who lived in Alabama; also the death of Mrs. Graham, the mother of Mrs. Wolfe and Mrs. Cooper. You may depend upon my writing by the first opportunity after the Convention.
" And in the meantime, I remain, Right Rev. and Dear Sir, " Very respectfully and affectionately "Your son in the Gospel, "BENJN T. ONDERDONK.
"To " the Right Rev: "JOHN H. HOBART, D. D. "Care of F. C. and J. Rivington, " London."
The Rev. L. S. Ives wrote Bishop Hobart on the same subject. In a letter dated October 16, 1823, he says :
"You have or will probably have the perusal of a Letter from Bp. Chase to Bp. White on the subject of Bp. C's expedition to Eng- land. This Letter so far as can now be determined, has made, on the public mind an impression altogether against the Author. Your letter to him which he so much disapproves receives general approbation."
The "Note" was followed by a " Postscript " dated London, Nov. 19, 1823, in which information was given concerning the number of Bishops in the American
287
Opposition to Bishop Chase
1824]
Church, and stating the absolute disapproval of three of them beside the Presiding Bishop; one of whom,
" who before he had become acquainted with the objects of the con- templated voyage to England, wrote a letter in approbation of it, after- wards recalled that approbation, and particularly deprecated the establishment of a local seminary in the State of Ohio ; that another, though concurring in some of the views of the plan, evidently doubted the expediency of visiting England in the prosecution of it; that from another no expression of opinion took place; and that ,one Bishop of the ten, without reference to the Diocese of Ohio, expressed his approbation of it. He is persuaded that the great body of the clergy and laity would sustain the Bishops in these sentiments."
He also emphasizes his impression that all which can be said of the episcopal and clerical labors of Ohio and its spiritual wants can also be said of other portions of the United States and many parts of Canada. For the relief of these conditions reliance should be placed on the Gen- eral Seminary and General Missionary Society. The resolution concerning the Seminary passed by the House of Bishops in May, 1823, is then given. In it the Bishops ask for "concurrent solicitudes and exertions to be con- centrated on it."
This is followed by some extracts from the report of the Lower House on the Seminary, in which gratification is expressed because of its general character. Bishop Ho- bart thinks that by this " Postscript" he had discharged an act of duty to the American Church by apprising its friends of its views as far as they had been ascertained on the subject of applications in Great Britain in behalf of Diocesan institutions. 1
The "Note" and its "Postscript" had the effect of entirely discrediting Bishop Chase. His "Statement" and "Letter to Bishop White" were read with languid interest, and he was considered to be a self-seeking and
1 P. 66, A Letter, etc.
-------------
Luin
7 goml
vId -ame
288
History of Trinity Church
[1823-
insubordinate person whose real needs had been suitably supplied.
Bishop Hobart had the full confidence of the men of influence and position in England. All that Bishop Chase could do was to wait. Dr. Wheaton also felt the effect of this practical inhibition, and could only hope that persua- sion and time might combine to change Bishop Hobart's attitude.
These three men, with much in common, and once friends to each other, were in London for nearly three months studiously avoiding one another.
It is not intended here to narrate the final outcome and success of Bishop Chase which came about in spite of the " Note" and other publications. It is sufficient to say that an introduction to Lord Gambier brought him into close relations with the great men and pious women of the Evangelical school and that his cause became theirs.
In the spring of 1824, when the Ohio case was known and approved everywhere, a proposition was made to com- bine the three appeals into one and make an equal division of the money. When this was laid before Bishop Chase and the Ohio Committee in London both rejected it. An amicable agreement was reached, however, by which the Ohio appeal was not to be injured by pamphlets or word of mouth, and a joint subscription was to be made for the Seminary and Washington College.1
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.