USA > New York > The Diocese of Central New York; the founding fathers > 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
Increased public administration by the Clergy and pas- toral instruction from house to house, with prudent zeal and fidelity, explaining and enforcing the institutions of the Church, and showing their connexion with the great and distinguishing doctrines of the Gospel, and their tendency to excite a rational yet fervent devotion will . . . prevent
27
JOHN HENRY HOBART
members of the Church from wandering elsewhere . . . will satisfy others of the high excellency of her ordinances and liturgy, as the best security for sound doctrine and for an enlightened and substantial piety . . . In new settle- ments a few, in some cases scarcely more than one zealous churchman, using the Liturgy for worship and obtaining the aid of some Missionary on Sunday, have often succeeded in establishing a respectable congregation and in erecting a house of worship.
By way of illustration he referred to Moravia where but a few years before there had been only one churchman, there was in 1826 a congregation and a church edifice. Comparable results were manifest at Ithaca and Trenton. Bishop Hobart was also proud of what happened at Brownville where in 1826 he found a number who had "become dissatisfied with certain religious views and ex- travagances" which existed in the chief religious society of the community. Their attention had been turned to the Episcopal Church by the Rev. William L. Keese upon whose departure the society had been kept together by a devoted lay reader. Later, they had a resident missionary and a house of worship.
In the pursuit of these ends and means Hobart seldom spared himself. Indications that he was pushing himself too hard had been shown in the early 1820's. For two years he dropped everything and went to England. On his return it seemed as though he had regained his former strength. Thus he drove himself at full speed. Evidence of the good fight may be found in the Messenger for Sep- tember 27, 1844, where it is stated that in the four years starting with 1827 he made two hundred and seventy-nine visits and con- firmed four thousand, two hundred and eighty-seven persons. In the late summer of 1829, enfeebled by illness and the rigors of General Convention, he set out on a missionary tour that extended into October. A year later he visited the "Western District" again. All went well until he reached Auburn where he complained of a slight cold. His spirits, however, were high and he took great pleasure in confirming a class at St. Peter's-a parish he loved so much. But that was his last service. An upset of importance fol- lowed and he died, September 12, 1830, at the parish rectory. Four days later all that was mortal of John Henry Hobart was laid to rest beneath the altar of Trinity Church, New York City.
28
CHAPTER IV
A NEW BISHOP, A NEW DIOCESE
In 1830 the Diocese of New York had been in existence fifty- four years and during that time its three bishops had all come from Trinity Church, New York City. Nor was the sequence broken when the Convention chose Bishop Hobart's successor in October of that year. The one and only person seriously considered was the Assistant Minister of Trinity, the Rev. Benjamin T. Onderdonk.1 Born in New York City, July 16, 1791, the son of Dr. John On- derdonk, a physician of some reputation for that age, and Deborah Ustick, Benjamin Onderdonk matriculated at Columbia College from which he was graduated in 1809. Three years later he was made deacon by his Bishop who also ordained him priest in 1813. Hobart thought well of the young man and brought him to Trinity where he grew and matured under the watchful eye of his patron. Reputation and approbation came his way for services rendered on the Standing Committee, the Faculty of the General Theological Seminary, and as Secretary of the Diocesan Convention and Deputy to General Convention. His election caused no surprise and on November 26, 1830, he was consecrated at St. John's Chapel, New York, as the Fourth Bishop of the Diocese.
Central New York joined in the state-wide acclaim that greeted the new Diocesan whose ministrations and leadership stimulated that area for the next eight years. In each of these years, except for 1835, Onderdonk visited Central New York helping to found new missions, baptizing and confirming many people, and consecrating in all twenty-seven churches. During the first two years he was present at every church within the fourteen counties now compris- ing the Diocese of Central New York. On this tour the following edifices were consecrated: Christ, Sherburne; Trinity, Fayette- ville; and Christ, Pompey. 1833 was far busier, the new Bishop doing in one year what had been done before in two, he consecrated St. Peter's, Auburn; Calvary, Homer ; Christ Church, Sackett's Harbor; Trinity, Watertown; St. Stephen's, Perryville; Zion, Rome; St. Peter's, Oriskany; The Apostolic Church, Geddes ;
1 Hobart's Correspondence, VI, reports that a few votes were cast for Jonathan M. Wainwright and Henry Anthon, rectors of Grace and St. Stephen's Churches, New York City, respectively. See also H. Anthon to N. Williams, of Utica March 10, 1831, Williams Papers, Oneida Histori- cal Society, Utica, N. Y.
29
THE FOUNDING FATHERS
Trinity, Constantia ; and St. John's, Speedsville. During 1834 the Bishop made only six visitations, consecrating Grace, Mt. Upton ; Trinity, Seneca Falls ; and St. Paul's, Big Flats. In 1836 a total of forty-five places were visited, chiefly during May, June, and August ; the churches consecrated were St. Paul's, Aurora ; Zion, Greene ; Christ, Guilford ; Emmanuel, Norwich ; Zion, Pierrepont Manor ; St. Paul's, Constableville ; St. Mark's, Candor ; and Christ, Danby. Only eighteen churches were visited in 1837 and but eleven in 1838 with no consecrations recorded.
Ample evidence of the lasting value of the Bishop's presence in Central New York is to be found in the Journal for these years. Onderdonk himself was highly pleased with the results. In address- ing Convention he was wont to comment on conditions as he found them. At Pompey in 1831 he felt that the services were peculiarly interesting and at the "communion . .. I was highly gratified to meet in this country church, not even situated in a village, about 100 partakers of the holy mysteries. They included many, indeed, from various surrounding parishes and neighborhoods; but their unexpected numbers added much to the interest of the occasion." Fayetteville, in the same year, was complimented for having built a church "in strict conformity to their means." Later, in 1836, he directed his listeners to the work of a devoted member of the Church-William C. Pierrepont-who "duly estimating the com- parative value of the various appropriations to which wealth may be devoted" made possible the construction of Zion Church, Pierre- pont Manor. On another occasion he remarked, at the consecra- tion of Trinity Chapel, Utica, October 23, 1837, "This building stands on the churchyard and immediately adjoining the parish church. It is intended for catechetical instruction . . . in the Sun- day School ... It was a source of great gratification to me, that the views which I had frequently expressed in favor of having con- secrated chapels for such purposes, were so readily acted upon by the rector and vestry of this parish."
Although pastoral visitations by a diocesan invariable brings strength to parishes and missions, more direct results and gains may be attributed to the policies he initiated and pursued, the distribu- tion of financial assistance, the assignment of rectors and mission- aries, the dynamics of his public relations, and to historical heritage. Regarding the latter, Bishop Onderdonk was peculiarly fortunate in being able to build upon the achievements of predecessors. On the other hand he did not permit this inheritance to remain in a
30
A NEW BISHOP, A NEW DIOCESE
state of suspension. Sensing the rising fortunes of the Church in New York he marched forward abreast of religious trends in the state and nation; and so far as Central New York was concerned the eight years it enjoyed his direction were most fruitful and progressive.
Upon the death of Bishop Hobart in October, 1830, Central New York had seven parishes and twenty-nine missions. Eight years later the figures stood at fifteen and forty-two respectively. To Binghamton, Auburn, Oxford, New Hartford, Paris Hill, Utica, and Syracuse there had now been added the parishes at Bain- bridge, Greene, Homer, Watertown, Brownville, Manlius, Os- wego, and Waterloo. New missions, moreover, had been founded at Montezuma, Aurora, Elmira, Coventry, Mt. Upton, Norwich, Cortland, Pierrepont Manor, Lowville, Jordan, Baldwinsville, Seneca Falls, and Utica (Grace Church). It will be noted that Chemung, Lewis, Tioga, and Tompkins were still without parishes though in each there were societies at Elmira, Lowville, Owego, Ithaca that possessed much promise for the future. Certain mis- sions, like Windsor, Ovid, and Tully, however, seemed about ready to yield up the ghost. Offsetting these possible losses were gains being made in the form of missions at Horseheads, Cazenovia, Speedsville, and at Syracuse "north of the Canal" (St. James').
Meanwhile the number of clergy had risen from twenty-two out of one hundred and twenty-seven in the diocese in 1830 to thirty-eight out of two hundred and forty-nine in New York in 1838. Among these mention should be made of Hiram Adams, missionary in Jefferson County for two and a half years before assuming a similar post at Christ Church, Binghamton, in May, 1831, where he remained until the early spring of 1835. Then there was Edward Andrews, one time lawyer and Presbyterian minister, who after eight years in Chenango County became Rector at Bing- hamton where he officiated for a number of years. Nor should one forget Amos G. Baldwin, former rector of Trinity Church, Utica, who labored during Onderdonk's episcopate in Lewis and Cayuga counties with much success. Seth Beardsley and Liberty A. Bar- rows are to be recalled for their work in Jefferson, Onondaga and Chenango counties while special recognition is due Leverett Bush whose long life at St. Paul's, Oxford, extended from 1818 to 1842; he was also an officer of the local branch of the New York Bible and Common Prayer Book Society. One of his many friends was Nathan B. Burgess who came to New York from Connecticut and
31
THE FOUNDING FATHERS
ministered at Richford, McLean, Speedsville, and Rome.
Meanwhile in May, 1830, there arrived at Moravia, Henry Gregory who after spending several years in the mission fields of Cayuga and Cortland was translated to Green Bay, Wisconsin, to work among the Oneida Indians. Later he returned to Calvary, Homer, where he became rector prior to moving to Syracuse in 1840, his name being associated with St. Paul's and St. James' of that city. Noteworthy also as a missionary in Onondaga County, before moving to the Diocese of Michigan in 1835 was Algernon S. Hollister whose efforts centered at Fayetteville, Manlius, and Cazenovia. One of his clerical neighbors was James Selkrig who founded a church at Fayetteville and who stimulated the erection of Christ Church, Pompey, in 1830. Finally, mention should be made of John C. Rudd who in 1826 arrived at Auburn to be Prin- cipal of the Auburn Academy and Rector of St. Peters' Church. Shortly after his arrival he began publishing the Messenger. Charles W. Hayes in his story of the Diocese of Western New York has this to say of Rudd and his paper :
For forty-five years it continued to be in reality, as well as in name, 'The Church Record of Western New York' and, like its predecessor the Christian Journal, an invaluable store house of Western New York history. In this respect I can safely say that no periodical since its day has begun to take its place. But it was more than this, not only in Western New York ... but as years went on throughout many a State and Diocese . . . Dr. Rudd was not a for- cible original writer, but he had a rare faculty of selection, both in Church news and in didactics, pastoral and devo- tional writings, which made the paper always interesting and profitable.
Dr. Rudd moved to Utica with the Messenger in 1833 which he continued to edit until his death at Utica, November 15, 1848. While at Utica he was an officer of the New York Bible and Com- mon Prayer Book Society, Professor of Moral Science and Evi- dences at Hobart Hall, and for a brief time Rector of Grace Church, Utica.
The inception of Grace Church testifies to the remarkable de- velopment of the Church in that city. Sponsored by the alert con- gregation of Trinity Church and its outstanding rector, Pierre A. Proul (1836-1857), this parish was organized in May, 1838. The event is related in the Journal for that year from which one may draw considerable information as to the life of the Church in Cen-
32
A NEW BISHOP, A NEW DIOCESE
tral New York prior to the founding of the Diocese of Western New York in the same year. According to this source the total number of communicants in this area in 1838 was over seventeen hundred, almost twice as many as in 1830. The Church was strong- est in Oneida, Chenango, and Onondaga counties where there were the largest and wealthiest groups. In the first there were three hundred and sixty-one communicants, one hundred and fifty-three being members of Trinity, Utica. Chenango was second with three hundred and one, of which seventy-one were at St. Paul's, Oxford. Onondaga had two hundred and seventy-six communicants, eighty of whom were credited to Christ Church, Manlius; St. Paul's, Syracuse, was next with half that number. St. Peter's Church, Auburn, was the second largest parish in the area with one hun- dred and twenty-five members with Christ Church, Oswego, third with an even one hundred communicants. Outside of these parishes only twenty-two and seventeen members respectively are reported for Cayuga and Oswego counties. Jefferson had one hundred and sixty-seven members-sixty-one being at St. Paul's, Watertown, while Broome had one hundred and one almost evenly divided between the churches at Binghamton and Harpursville. Seneca reported sixty-three members at St. Paul's, Waterloo, and thirty- one at Trinity, Seneca Falls; Chemung had fifty-three, all at Grace Church, Elmira ; Cortland had but forty-all at Calvary, Homer ; Tioga had forty-two scattered somewhat evenly between the groups at Owego, Richford, and Candor; Tompkins had forty-one at Mc- Lean and Danby; while none appear in the Journal for either Madison or Lewis counties.
The reliability of these statistics may be questioned. Commu- nicants most certainly existed at Hamilton, Eaton, Lowville and Constableville as well as at other centers concerning which our source has nothing to say.1 But were these available it is doubtful if the total number would have topped the two thousand mark. Nonetheless the record, small as it was, was encouraging and clear- ly demonstrated that progress had been made. Added proof of existing vitality and promise for tomorrow may also be found in the financial life of the Church in Central New York. As will be shown in subsequent chapters many of the local parishes invested sums quite respectable for that day in erecting stone and frame edifices, building rectories, and in a few instances of constructing
1 The figures for Binghamton, Syracuse, Jamesville, Brownville and Moravia are for 1837; no statistics for 1838 being available.
33
THE FOUNDING FATHERS
chapels for educational purposes. Considerable improvement also took place in church interiors such as the introduction of recessed chancels, more decorated church furniture, larger windows, organs and bells. Moreover there was a slight drift toward higher salaries among the parishes ; unfortunately this was not common among the missions. Finally, it should be noted that whereas but one hundred and forty-three dollars was raised in this area for the support of diocesan missions in 1830, the amount contributed eight years later was somewhat under five hundred dollars. Increases also are re- corded for the Diocesan and Episcopate Funds as well as Domestic and Foreign Missions. Most of the sums raised for non-parochial purposes came from Oneida, Chenango, and Onondaga counties.
None of these, however, matched the efforts of certain parishes in the western parts of the state. Trinity Church, Geneva, for example in 1838 gave more than three hundred dollars alone for missions, while at Buffalo, Trinity Church raised ten thousand dollars for parochial purposes alone. Were one to comb the records for the contributions of others in the west, and then add the same to the amounts credited to Central New York the general picture for upstate New York would be much more impressive. It is important to stress it in this way if one is to understand aright the reasons that ultimately led to the founding of the Diocese of West- ern New York in 1838.
Intimations of such action manifested themselves indirectly in a number of ways. Most if not all centered about the difficulties imposed upon the Bishop by reason of the very great distances he was forced to travel and from the parishes and missions that had to rest content with a visitation once every other year or even less on certain occasions. In no instance, however, does the evidence relate itself to the question of a new diocese, rather is it confined to dis- advantages all suffered by reason of existing conditions. Bishop Onderdonk expressed these views clearly in a letter published in the Messenger, August 16, 1834, in which he bewailed his inability to visit certain western and northwestern parts of the diocese. Many a contributor to that paper, as well as the editor himself, frequently stressed this fact as well as the hardships it imposed upon the entire diocese. Realization of the mounting tide of episcopal duties was also voiced at the 1830 Convention which, conscious of the tremen- dous load Bishop Hobart had carried and anxious to make things easier for his successor, passed a resolution favoring the release of the bishop from parochial duties at Trinity Church, New York.
34
A NEW BISHOP, A NEW DIOCESE
Finally, it should be added that Dr. Rudd, in August, 1838, re- marked in the Messenger that at this Convention the opinion was heard that the "Western District" would soon have its own bishop. Rudd says that the idea "was regarded with surprise and consid- ered as full of evil," for how could anyone at that time think of a diocese that was not coterminus with the boundaries of a state.
But the full impact of the basic problem confronting the par- ishes and missions of New York could not be denied and the need for a solution must slowly have related this problem to that of a new diocese. Doubtless the idea must have dawned upon a number of people but it was not until the fall of 1834 that the matter was brought out into the open. Writing only a month after Onderdonk had expressed regrets at not being able to visit his entire charge, "A Layman" wrote as follows in the Messenger :
I do not wish to find fault-the duties of our Bishop I know to be arduous in the extreme-but I do know that our churches in Western New York are suffering from year to year for want of more frequent and more regular visits from their Bishop. I hope, sir, this subject will claim the atten- tion of our next Convention, and that measures will be taken at once to remedy the evil by the appointment of an assist- ant Bishop, who shall reside at the West. This step will have to be taken sooner or later, and the longer it is delayed, the more tardy will be the progress of the Church.
No one at the time thought these views lacking in moderation. Rudd, himself, in an accompanying editorial was not disposed to dispute the contention that the rapid development of the Church in New York was placing too heavy a burden upon the Bishop. The day had passed when one diocesan could handle all the mani- fold duties of an expanding area. The matter, however, deserved careful consideration-a suggestion that implied some doubt in the editor's mind as to the recommendations of "A Layman." And it must have been evident to all who knew the canon that there were difficulties involved in the concept of an assistant bishop; while others may have pondered over the phrase, "who shall reside at the West."
Dr. Rudd hastened to explore the situation raised and came forward a week later with a serious and studied reply. As to an assistant bishop he wrote, "we shall not at present speak, because to our apprehension it must be utterly out of the question with nine- teen-twentieths of our communion." But "A Layman" should be
35
THE FOUNDING FATHERS
advised that the canon permits an assistant bishop only in the event of "old age or other permanent cause of infirmity" which impedi- ment, Rudd by implication held, could not be charged against Bishop Onderdonk. There were other canonical hurdles which likewise would require much time and deliberation. The sanest thing, therefore, to do would be to appoint one or two "aids" who might relieve the Bishop of many duties and chores. Let him be styled "Bishop's Commissary," "District Presbyter," or "Arch- deacon." Rudd then concludes with this comment : "We have good reason for believing that the Rt. Rev. Fathers of the Church will prefer the views we have taken to any advocate for a multiplication of assistant Bishops."
Rudd's rejoinder was issued on the same day the Diocesan Con- vention was in session at New York City. What would the Bishop have to say about the issue precipitated by "A Layman" and Rudd's editorials-though that he had knowledge of the latter's lengthy article in the Messenger for October 4 may be doubted-were questions that may have hung on the lips of many present. Finally towards the end of an unusually long pastoral address the Bishop with humility balanced by judgment stated : "The time must come, brethren, and perhaps it may not be long distant, when this Dio- cese will be too great for unshared supervision." But beyond this and certain words of caution he would not go; he left the matter to the reflections and prayers of others as to when and what action should be taken. By this time the day was far spent and it was not until the following morning that the Convention voted a committee of twelve, evenly divided between the clergy and laity, be appointed to review the matter and report at the next convention. The cler- ical members of the Committee consisted of Reverends Lyell, Reed, McVickar, Bayard, Rudd and Shelton and Messrs. Ogden, Pen- field, Dickinson, Emott, E. R. Jones, and Peter A. Jay, of whom only Rudd, Shelton and Penfield were in the "Western District."
During the remainder of the new canonical year one may be certain there was much discussion in every parish and mission as to the outcome of the issue that had been posed. As might be expected the Messenger gave considerable space to the proposition. An "Eastern Clergyman" admitted the crying need of the West; he predicted that the Church would be retarded in its mission if some- thing were not done. while a "Western Clergyman," after summar- izing several possibilities came out boldly for a division of the dio- cese-an outcome which speedily became the basic issue in all
36
A NEW BISHOP, A NEW DIOCESE
subsequent debate. Against this trend Rudd marshalled argument upon argument including the very effective statement that the west would not be able to pay for the support of a bishop. In 1832, he stated, there were sixty congregations west of the Hudson River that had made no contribution to either the Diocesan, Episcopate, or Missionary Funds.
And so the debate continued. Meanwhile on the Bishop's sug- gestion the Committee studied the matter with great care, and came to the conclusion the problem could only be solved by a division of the diocese. Concurring in this, the Bishop, at the General Conven- tion of 1835 introduced an amendment to the Church's constitution providing for such divisions. The amendment was adopted by both Houses. The handwriting was on the wall and by the time the Diocesan Convention met the same year-incidentally in recognition of the rising importance of the west this gathering convened at Utica-the heat of controversy had lessened considerably. The re- port of the committee, therefore, was old news as may have been the fact that five of the committee, one of whom was Dr. Rudd, had not signed the same. The Bishop's remarks, however, were fresh in mind and must have been listened to with considerable interest. "For myself, Brethren," he said, "the subject . . . is indeed very near my heart . .. the idea of being separated from any portion of so dear a spiritual family, cannot but be painful to me. But God forbid that I should oppose my feelings to any meas- ure which may most conduce to the best interests of all." His pastoral advice became, therefore, relatively simple. He told them of the receipt of a communication from the Secretary of the House of Deputies in the form of the proposed change in the organic law. The action of the Diocesan Convention on the alteration, he con- tinued, was not necessary, it might take place if desired, but "my understanding tells me that this Diocese must ere long do what the higher authority of the General Convention may enable it to do, to enjoy more of episcopal duty than one man can perform. When this must be done, it is for our Diocesan Convention to determine. Resolve the subject seriously in your minds, and may God, in His mercy, guide you to that decision which will promote His glory and the good of His holy Church !" Whereupon the entire propo- sition was referred to a committee to report on at the 1836 Con- vention.
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.