,-( V -• CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY ITHACA HERITAGE BOOKS Endowed in 1976 BY Alexis and Anastasia Romanoff For the Benefit of Advanced Cultural Learning in the Humanities "SlfiMm.''™**^'^"' Episcopal chur 3 1924 006 083 822 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/cletails/cu31924006083822 MEMOIRS PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PROM ITS ORGANIZATION UP TO THE PRESENT DAY: CONTAINING, I. A NARRATIVE OF THE ORGANIZATION AND OF THE EARLY MEASURES OF THE CHURCH; Ilf. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS AND REMARKS; m. AN APPENDIX OF ORIGINAL PAPERS. BY WILLIAM WHITE, D. D. BISHOP or THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. SECOND EDITION. NEW- YORK : SWORDS, STANFORD, AND CO. No. 152 Broadway, 1836. DEDICATION. TO THE BISHOPS OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH. ,My much esteemed Brethren, The motive to the prefixing of a dedication to these Memoirs, is the opportunity thus afforded of testifying to the Chufch at large, the harmony which has subsisted among us in our joint counsels for the conducting of our ecclesiastical concerns. If, at any time there has been a shade of difference of opinion, it has been overbalanced by the pleasure of mutual concession, and by the profit of amicable discussion. All of you have been ordained to the Episcopacy by my hands. Submission of opinion on this account, is what I have never had the arrogancy to claim : but if any degree of personal respect should be supposed a natural conse- quence, 1 can thankfully acknowledge, that it has been bestowed. Having lived in days in which there existed prejudices in our land against the name, and much more against the office, of a bishop; and when it was doubtful, whether any JV DEDICATION. person in that cha,gacter would be tolerated in the com? miinity ; I now contemplate nine of our number, conducting the duties of their office without interruption; and in re^ gard not to them only, but to ten of us who have gone to their rest, I trust the appeal may be made to the world, for their not being chargeable with causes of offence to our fellow Christians and our fellow citizens generally, or with the assuming of any powers within our communion, not confessedly recognised by our ecclesiastical institutions. Being your senior by many years, I enjoy satisfaction in the expectation of the good which you may be expected to be achieving, in what is now our common sphere of action, when I shall be removed from it : and, with my prayers for ^he success of your endeavours to this effect, I subscribe myself, Youj- affectionate brother, THE AUTHOR. PREFACE THE FIRST EDITION. Many years ago, the author of the following work began to commit to writing the most material facts which had occurted, relative to the Church of which he is a minister: intending, in the event of the continuance of life and health, to carry on the recital. This was not with a view to early publicatioHj because of the small extent of the sphere, in Avhich the detail of very recent events was likely to interest curiosity. Accordingly, what was thus prepared laid un- noticed, until an application was made, about twelve years ago, by the editor of the American edition of Dr. Rees's Cyclopedia, requesting attention to certain parts of that work, with a view to other objects. On this occasion it occurred, that there might be propriety and use in insert- ing, in a work of that kind, a brief account of what had been transacted during some years preceding, within the Episcopal Church. For this reason, there was made a draft from the notes before taken, for the purpose stated. As what remained comprehended sundry matters, not of sufficiently general concern for insertion in the Cyclopedia, it was afterwards reviewed under the impression that the time might come, when the former labour would not be unacceptable, within the communion for which it had been designed. In the present publication, the narrative has been continued to the present time. With it, there arc vi PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. given the matters kept back from the publication in the Cyclopedia; and a conjinuation of similar statements and remarks. It has been occasionally suggested, from a knowledge of the materials in the hands of the author, and in considera- tion of the opportunities which he has possessed of personal observation of characters and of facts, that it would be better to embody the narrative with the remarks, and to make a history of the whole. The mere melting of them into one mass, after the separation of them as related above, did not seem likely to be fruitful of any considerable advant- age ; and as to the name of " a history," it would not only be disproportioned to the work, but perhaps pledge to an attempt, beyond what there are materials to accomplish. Of materials concerning the aggregate Church, the author possesses all that are necessary, and more than will be here given; the view being confined to the more important: but his collections in regard to the Church in, the different dioceses, are perhaps incomplete, although he is furnished with almost all their journals, and thinks himself well in- formed as to all the material events which have occurred for half a century backward. Besides, there are a few points on which he wished to retain a liberty that would be inconsistent with the fulness, and, considering what is to he expected in such a work, the fidelity of a history. One of these points is, that he chooses to be silent in regard to a few transactions, which, although sufficiently known and discoursed of when they happened, are not of so much im- portance to the future concerns of the Church, as to induce a wish to perpetuate the remembrance of them ; and there- by the personal irritation by which they were accompanied. Besides these reasons, there is one arising from the de- sire of avoiding such a development of the characters of agents, as might induce the relating and the unintentional misstating of what may have passed in unguarded conver- sation. It is an unfair advantage taken of a deceased PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. TU character, for an author to represent him as his own i)re- judices or his passions dictate; when, perhaps, the other party wouhl have had the precaution to make his own story known, had he foreseen such a result of the freedom of social intercourse. Another license which has grown out of the adopted plan, is the anticipating of some circumstances which took place in England, during the intercourse with his grace the arch- bishop of Canterbury; when such anticipation might illus- trate any matter previously under review. The motive, was the desire to record the said intercourse in the form in which it now appears, that is, in letters to the committee of the Church in Pennsylvania; which, having been written when the matters related were fresh on the mind of the narrator, is the more likely to be a faithful exhibition of them. To have enlarged the letters would have been in- correct ; and yet, in what passed in the intercourse, there was such connexion with some points in an earlier part of the work, as was too material to be disregarded. Although there has not been an enlargement of the letters, nor an alteration of them in any instance, there have been attached to them a few notes, containing matters of less moment. The motive of the author in the statements, is principally to record facts, which may otherwise be swept into oblivion by the lapse of time. For the mixing of his opinions with the facts, a reason may be thought due. It is, that the habits of his life having exercised him much, on subjects which have bearings on the concerns of the Church in doc- trine, in discipline, and in worship; and his principles having been formed with deliberation, and acted on with perseverance, not without prayer to the Father of Lights for his holy guidance; there seems to him nothing unrea- sonable in the wish, to give the weight of long observation, lo what are truth and order in his esteem. He has not the presumption to aspire to, nor the vanity to expect tashare in the direction of the concerns of the Church, after the very riii. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. lew years, in which there will be a possibility of his being present in her councils : but he commits his opinions, to the issue of what may be thought in reason due to them. On the author's review of his statements and remarks, he had often a painful sensation of the frequent prominence in them of himself. In the way of apology, let it be re- marked — first, that the apparent fault is in a great degree inseparable from the delivery of the results of personal observation ; and, secondly, that he has had more agency than any other person, in the transactions recorded ; owing to the circumstances in which he was placed ; to a cau«e for which he cannot be sufficiently thankful, the continuance of his health and strength ; and to his having attended every General Convention, from the beginning to the present time. Under the weight of these considerations, he com- mits himself to the candour of the reader. Of the papers in the Appendix, a great proportion are what may be read in the printed journals ; but they were thought necessary to the series of the events presented- Those papers which were in the private possession of the author, and were designed to have an inflluence on the concerns of the Church, he has thought it due to the object of this work, to perpetuate. The printing of any document which took the shape of a canon, has been judged unnecessary. In regard to letters, let it be noticed, that there are none besides those, which, like the papers above referred to, were designed to have public influence. In private letters, there is much to confirm the statements made, and to enlarge them, if that were the design. PREFACE THE SECOND EDITION. The Memoirs of the Episcopal Church, edited some yeari ago by the present author, being out of print ; and there being none on hand so far as is known to him, except a few copies in his possession ; he lays by the following sheets, under the idea, that in the event of a future repi'int, they may be thought a desirable addition to the volume. It will then contain whatever relates rnaterially to the concerns of the Episcopal Church for the space of fifty-two years; of which the former publication was devoted to the first thirty ; and the present is limited to the remaining twenty-two. The author cannot expect, at his time of life, that he will much longer live to be present at the counsels of the Church ; or that, if living, his mind will be competent to the continua- tion of the present work. Accordingly, in these considera- tions, he perceives a call on him, to say, in accordance with a sentiment of the Mantuan poet — " Clauditejam Rivos." To whatever period the days of his earthly pilgrimage may be extended; and whatever may be the dispensations of Providence in the course of them ; whether, as hitherto, the uninterrupted enjoyment of health, and a considerable 2 X PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. measure of worldly comforts j or such visitations, as he has witnessed in the persons of many, whose merits and whose- usefulness, had they been the rule of divine procedure, iir this life of uncertainty of change, as they are not, are far beyond what can be supposed his own ; it will be his en- deavour and his prayer, that he may live in daily depend- ence on the gracious Providence which has conducted him to an advance in years beyond that of the usua:l lot of man ; and under the assurance, that if there should be for him, in reserve, any portion of bodily suffering or of sorrow, it will be sent in mercy, and will be no more than is necessary for the correction of his frailties. Whether prosperity or adversity be his appointed lot, he is sure, that if his reason should be continued to him, his life will not end, without prayer for the Church, in the con- cerns of which he has been so long engaged; and especially for the divine blessing on her ministry and her institutions ; to be manifested in the conversion of sinners, in the edifi- cation of the godly, and in the end of both — tlie glory of God, and the enlargement of the kingdom of his Son, the adorable Redeemer. April, 1836. CONTENTS. NARRATIVE OF THE ORGANIZATION AND OF THE EARLY MEASURES OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH. Pago ■State of the Church before the Revolutionary War, and at the ;onc!usion of it ]7 Intercourse with Denmark . 20 A Meeting in New-Brunswick, New-Jersey 21 A Meeting in New-York . 22 {Convention of 1785 . 22 1786 . 26 ■Consecration of Bishops White and Provoost 27 Convention of 1789 28 1792 . 39 1795 . 30 1799 31 1801 . 31 1804 . 33 1808 . 33 1811 . 34 1814 . 36 1817 . 39 1820 43 1821 47 1823 . 49 1826 . 51 1829 . . 55 1832 . 59 1835 . . 63 2. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS AND REMARKS. Of the QrUestion of American Episcopacy, as agitated in the Colonies Of the Question of using the Liturgy, exclusively of the Prayers for the King and the Royal Family ..... Of the Meeting in New-Brunswick, in May, 1784 Of the Meeting in New-York, in October, 1784 76 78 -73 -X)I CONTENTS. Of Proceedings in simdiy States, previous to the Meetings in 1784, at New-Brunswiclt and at New-York Of the General Convention, in Philadelphia, in September and October, 1785 ..... Of the Convention in Philadelphia and Wilmington, in 1786 Of Personal Intercourse vJith the Archbishop of Canterbury Of tti« Convention in 1789 1792 1795 1799 1801 1804 1808 1811 1814 : 1817 PoBtseript . Of the Convention of 1S20 1821 1823 1825 1829 1833 1835 Conclusion PnS* 96 U5 124 140 161 171 176 179 187 192 209 216 224 230 235 243 247 251 259 362 267 271 3. AN APPENDIX Of ORIGINAL PAPERS. Communication with the C<"ir' of Denmark . .• . 275 Communication of the Clergy of Connecticut, to the Archbishop of York 277 A Letter from the Rev. Abraham Jams, in the Name of tl>e Clergy of Connecticut ...... 282 A Letter from the Right R^v. Bishop Seabury, to the Rev. Dr. Smith . 286 Address of the Convention of 1785, to the English Prelates " . 293 Letter of the English Prelates ..... 297 A Memorial from the Convention in New-Jersey, to the Genwal Conven- ' tion of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United ptatea of America, to be held in the City of Philadelphia in Jui)o next . . 298 Second Address to the English Prelates .... 30] Communications from the Archbishops of Canterbury and York 303 Communication from the Archbishop of Canterbury , . 309 Address to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York . .311 A Letter from Granville Sharp, Esq. to Dr. Benjamin Franklin, with Extracts of Letters . . . . gjg An Act of the General Convention of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and South-Carolina, held at Wilmington, in tfa« State of Delaware, on Wednesday, the 11th of October, 1786 . 318 CONTENTS. Iin Pag« Instrument of Consecration .... 3ai Note of the Archbishop of Canterbury . . 385 Letters from the President of Congress, (Richard Henry Lee, Esq.) and from the Minister of the United States at the Court of Great-Britain, (John Adams, Esq.) and from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Mr. Adams: also Certificates from the Executive of Pennsylvania and Vir- ginia ....... 325 Letter from Richard Peters, Esq. . . .330 An Act of the Clergy of Massachusetts and New-Hampshire . . 333 An Address to the Most Reverend the Archbishops of Canterbury and York . . . . . . .335 A General Constitution of the Protestant Episcopal Church in tlie United States of America .... . 338 A Letter from the Rev. Dr. Coke, and the Answer . . . 343 Testimonial of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew . . 348 Circular of a Committee in South-Carolina . . 349 A Letter from Bishop Provoost, and the Determination of the Bishops . 35] Forms of Subscription ..... 253 Decision of the Bishops on the Case of Ammi Rogers . . 353 Of the Homilies . . . . .354 Concerning Posture during Psalmody . . 355 Of a Proposal of new Anthems, and of Sanction requested in favour of a proposed Book ...... 35S Concerning the Identity of this Church with the former Church of Eng- land in America . . . . . 2.' 6 Concerning certain Amusempnts .... 357 Acts of the Convention of 1785 .... 339 Of the Office of Confirmation ... . 377 Concerning the last Rubric in the Communion Service . 378 Thoughts on the Proposal of Alterations in the Book of Psalms in Metre, and in the Hymns, now before a Committee of the General Convention: By a Member of the Committee .... 384 Constitution of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Pro- testant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, as established in 1820, and amended in 1823, 1829, 1833, and 1835 . . 387 jCpncerning the Division of Dioceses .... 389 1- A NARRATIVE ORGANIZATION AND OF THll EARLY MEASURES OF TB» CHURCH. A NARRATIVE, &c. Although it happened, as might be expected, that a proportion of the settlers of English America were of the profession established in England ; yet the number was not so considerable as might be supposed from the existing relation ; owing probably to the circumstance, that several of the colonies arose in a great measure from dissatisfaction with the establishment at home, and partly to an influx of subsequent settlers, not only from other countries, subject to the same crown, but also from countries on the continent of Europe; principally some of the states of Germany. In the northern and eastern states, the comparatively small number of the Church of England may be seen in the fact, that when the revolutionary war began, there were not more than about eighty parochial clergymen of that Church to the northward and to the eastwanl of Maryland ; ana that those clergymen derivecj the greater part of their subsistence from the society instituted in England, for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts; with the ex- ception of those resident in the towns of Boston and New- port, nnd the cities of New- York and Philadelphia : there being no Episcopal congregations out of those towns and cities, held to be of ability to support clergymen of them- selves.* In Maryland and in Virginia the Episcopal Church was much more numerous, and had legal establishments for its support. It was especially numerous in those parts of the said provinces which were settled when the establish- ments took place; for in the more recently settled counties, the mass of the people were of other communions, scarcely * The clergy in the province of Pennsylvania, exclusive of those in the city of Pliiladelphia, were never more than six in number; all of whom were miasion- aries, rseeiving salaries from England. The parochial clergy of the city were four. 3 18 known among them in the early period of their histories. In the more southern colonies, the Epiacopaliane were fewer in proportion than in the two last mentioned ; but more than in the northern. It may be supposed, that however comparatiTely few the original emigrants of the Church of England in the northern and the middle colonies ; yet they must have derived aid from the executive of the parent state, through the medium of its representatives, the governors. This was, indeed, the case in a degree; but the aid was incon- siderable, and confined to two or three of tiie earliest seats of population. Besides, it may well be doubted, whether, under the continually existing jealousy in the colonies of the parent power, there did not result some disadvantage to a denomination comparatively small, from a community of profession: for this circumstance may have had a ten- dency to render the denomination unpopular among a great proportion of their fellow-citizens ; especially under the apprehension that it might, at some future day, be an engine aiding in the introduction of a new system of colonial government.* But even if the Episcopal Church found any source of in- crease in the connexion, this was more than counterbalanced by the peculiar circumstances under which it existed; which prevented, and probably, under the old regime, w.Ould have continued to prevent its organization. Separated by the Atlantic ocean from the Episcopacy, under which it had been planted, it had no resource for a ministry, but in emigration from the mother country, and by sending its candidates for the ministry to that country for orders. The first could not be the channel of a respectable permanent supply. And the second, vvhich was the rnost depended on in the latter years of the colonies, was very troublesome and expensive. The evil of the want of an internal Episcopacy did not end here. For although the bishop of London was considered as the dibcesan of the Episcopal churches in America, it is evident, that his authority could not be effectually exerted, at such a distance, for the removing of unworthy clergymen ; besides which, there were civil institutions supposed to be in oppo- sition to it, in the provinces where establishments had been provided. In Maryland, in particular, all interference of * Perhaps the only considerable endowment by tlie English government wa^ of lands to Trmity Church, New- York. Its being oonsiUerable, is owing to it» having become of great value by the increase of that city. 19 the bishop of London, except in llie single matter of ordina- tion, was held by the proprietary government to be an en- croachment on its authorities.* For these reasons, and on the ground of the evident propriety of being supplied with all the orders of the minis- try, recognised by their ecclesiastical system, application had been made to England, at different times, by the clergy, especially those in the northern colonies, for the obtaining of an Episcopate. These apphcations had produced much contention in pamphlets and in newspapers ; the writers on the Episcopal side pleading the reasonableness of being in- dulged in the full enjoyment of their religion; and their op- ponents objecting, that bishops, sent from England to America, would of course bring with them, or, if not, might be clothed by the paramount authority of Britain, with the powers of English, bishops, to the great prejudice of people of other communions, and in contrariety to the principles on which the settlement of the colonies had taken place. What would have been the event, in this respect, had the Episcopal clergy succeeded in their desires, is a problem, which it will be for ever impossible to solve. In regard to the motives of the parties in the dispute, there are circum- stances which charity may apply to the most favourable interpretation. As the Episcopal clergy disclaimed tiic de- signs and the expectations of which they were accused; and as the same was done by their advocates on the xDther side of the water, particularly by the principal of them, the great and good Archbishop Seeker, they ought to be sup- posed to have had in view an Episcopacy purely religious. On the other hand, as their opponents laid aside their re- sistance of the religious part of it, as soon as American independence had done away all political danger, if it be- fore existed, it ought to be believed, that in their former professed apprehensions they were sincere. A. * The author, before hia being in the ministry, knew a gentleman (the ReT. Mr. Edminston) who, being in London foroitders, had brought with him such recommendations to Lord Baltimore, proprietary of Maryland, as induced the promise of an order to his governor, for any future parish tliat might be vacant. It was necessary after ordination, to sliow the testimonial of the transaction to the proprietary: who, perceiving with the instrument a license to preach in the province of Maryland, was much dissatisfied with the bishop of London on that account. The bishop usuaily gave such a license, according to the province for which the party was ordained : a practice similar to what obtains m England, From this, and from, other circitmstances, tlie conviction is fell, that his lordship wpuld not have endured in his province any Episcopal authority distinct from his designation of tlie person. It ia mentioned, as one of the diffieultie* attendant on the subject of an American Episcopacy. 20 If such was the difficulty of being supplied with a rniniBtry during the acknowledged supremacy of the British crown ; much greater, as may be supposed, was the same difficulty during the struggle which ended in the elevating of the colonies to the rank of independent states. During that term, there was no resource for the supply of vacancies ; which were continually multiplying, not only from death, but by the retreat of very many of the Episcopal clergy to the mother country, and to the colonies still dependent on her. To add to the evil, many able and worthy ministers, cherishing their allegiance to the king of Great-Britain, and entertaining conscientious scruples against the use of the liturgy, under the restriction of omitting the appointed prayers for him, ceased to officiate. Owing to these cir- cumstances, the doors of the far greater number of the Episcopal churches were closed for several years. In the state in which this work is edited, there was a part of that time, in which there was, through its whole extent, but one residejjt minister of the church in question, he who records the fact. B. No sooner was it known in America, that Great-Britain had acknowledged her independence, than a few young gentlemen to the southward, who had been educated for the ministry, but kept back from it by the times, embarked for England, and applied to the then bishop of London, Dr. Lowth, for orders. As the bishop could not ordain them, without requiring of them engagements inconsistent with their allegiance to the American sovereignty, he applied for, and obtained, an act of parliament, allowing him to dispense with requisitions of that sort. While thi? matter was de- pending, and the success of the candidates was doubtful, there was an incident, which it may be proper to record, in justice to the intended good offices of a foreign sister church. Mr. Adams, then the minister of the United States at the court of St. James, being in company with M. de St. Saphorin, the minister of the crown of Denmark, mentioned to him the case here stated, of the candidates for orders, with a view to liis opinion, whether they could be gratified in the kingdom which he represented. Some time after, the Danish minister made a communication to the Ameri- can, from which it appeeired, that the inquiry of the latter had been notified to the Danish court ; that the consequence had been a reference to the theological faculty of the king- dom ; and that they had declared their readiness to ordain 21 candidates from America, on the condition of tlieir signing of the thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, with the exception of the political parts of them ; the service to be performed in Latin, in accommodation to the candidates, who might be supposed unacquainted with the language of the country. This conduct is here the more cheerfully mentioned to the honour of the Danish Church, as it is rea- sonable to presume, that there would have been an equal readiness to the consecrating of bishops, had necessity re- quired a recourse for it to any other source than the English Episcopacy, under which the American churches had been planted. The proceeding in Denmark was made known to the Arnerican government by Mr. Adams ; a copy of whose letter to the president of congress, was sent to the author by the then supreme executive council of Pennsylvania. Mr. Adams stated, that the transaction arose froml his having been applied to by an American gentleman, in behalf of the candidates for ordination re- ferred to. Mr. Adams mentioned the matter to M. de St. Saphorin, the Danish minister ; who accordingly wrote to the Count de Rosencrone, privy counsellor and secretary of state to the king of Denmark. The result was as above given. In truth, there was no idea of having recourse, in the first instance, to any other quarter than that of the English Episcopacy, in the minds of those who had begun to direct their attention to the supply of the present and the future exigencies of the churches. But it seemed to those at least who took up the subject in the middle states, that nothing could be done to effect, without some association, under which the churches might act as a body : they having been heretofore detached from, and independent on one another; excepting the bond of union which had subsisted through the medium of the Bishop of London. That medium of connexion had been confessedly destroyed by the revolution; and therefore it was evident, that without the creating of some new tie, the churches in the different states, and even those in the same state, might adopt such varying measures as would for ever prevent their being combined in one communion. The first step towards the forming of a collective body of the Episcopal Church in the United States, was taken at a meeting for another purpose, of a few clergymen of New- York, New-Jersey, and Pennsylvania, at Brunswick, in New-Jersey, on the 13th and 14th of May, 1784. These 22 elergymen, in consequence of prior eorregpondence, had met for the purpose of consulting, in what way to renew a society that had existed under charters of incorporation from the governors of the said three states, for the Support of Widows and Children of deceased Clergymen. Here it was determined, to procure a larger meeting oh the fifth of the ensuing October, in New-York; not only for the pur- pose of reviving the said charitable institution, but to confer and agree on some general principles 'of an union of the Episcopal Church throughout the states. C. Such a meeting was held, at the time and place agreed on : and although the members composing it were not vested with powers adequate ,to the present exigencies of the Church, they happily, and with great unanimity, laid down a few general principles, to be recommended in the respective states, as the ground on which a future ecclesi- astical government should be established. These principles were approbatory of Episcopacy and of the Book of Com- mon Prayer ; and provided for a representative body of the Church, consisting of clergy and laity ; who were to vote as distinct orders. There was also a recommendation to the Church in the several states, to send clerical and lay deputies to a meeting to be held in Philadelphia, on the 27th of September in the following year. D. Although at the meeting last held, there were present two clergymen from the eastern states ; yet it now ap- peared, that there was no probability, for the present, of the aid of the churches in those states, in the measures begun for the obtaining of a representative body of the Church at large. From this they thought themselves restrained in Connecticut, in particular, by a step they had antecedently taken, for the obtaining of an Episcopate from England. For until the event of their appHcation could be known, it naturally seemed to them inconsistent to do any thing which might change^ the ground on which the gentle- man of their choice was then standing. This gentleman was the Rev. Samuel Seabury, D. D. formerly missionary on Staten-Island ; who had been recommended to England for consecration before the evacuation of New- York by the British army. On the 27th of September, 1785, there assembled, agreeably to appointment, in Philadelphia, a convention of (clerical and lay deputies, from seven of the thirteen United States, viz. from New- York to Virginia, inclusive, with the addition of South-Carolina.^ They applied themselvee 23 to the making of s^ch alterations in the Book of Cominoi) Prayer, as were necessary for the accommodating of it to the late changes in the state ; and the proposing, but not establishing, of such other alterations in that book and in the articles, as they thought an improvement of the service and of the manner of stating the principal articles of faith; these were published in a book, ever since known by the name of the proposed book. E. The convention entered on the business of the Episco- pacy, with the knowledge that there was now a bishop in Connecticut, consecrated, not in England, but by the non-juring bishops of Scotland. For Dr. Seabury, not meeting assurance of success with the bishops of the former country, had applied to the latter quarter for the succession, which had been there carefully maintained; notwithstanding their severance from the state, in the revo- lution of 1688. Bishop Seabury had returned to America, and had entered on the exercise of his new function, in the beginning of the preceding summer, and two or three gen- tlemen of the southern states had received ordination fron> his hands. Nevertheless, the members of this convention, although generally impressed with sentiments of respect towards the new bishop, and although, with the exception of a few, alleging nothing against the validity of his Epis- copacy, thought it the most proper to direct their views in the first instance towards England. In this they were en- couraged by information which they thought authentic, as- signing for Dr. Seabury's failure these two reasons; that tbe administration had some apprehension of embroiling themselves with the American government, the sovereignty of which they had so recently acknowledged ; and that the bishops were doubtful how far the act of some clergymen, in their individual capacities, would be acquiesced in by their respective flocks. For the meeting of the former difficulty, it was thought easy to obtain, and there were xifterwards obtained, from the executive authorities of the states in which the new bishops were to reside, certificates, that what was sought did not interfere with any civil laws or constitutions. The latter difficulty was thought suffi- ciently obviated by the powers under which the present convention was assembled. Accordingly, they addressed the archbishops and bishops of England, stating, that the Episcopal Church in the United States had been severed, by a civil revolution, from the jurisdiction of the parent Church in England; acknow- 24 ledging the favours formerly received from the bishops of London in particular, and from the archbishops and bishops in general, through the medium of the Society for Propa- gating the Gospel ; declaring their desire to perpetuate among them the principles of the Church of England, in doctrine, discipline, and worship ; and praying, that their lordships would consecrate to the Epbcopacy those persons who should be sent, with that view, from the churches in any of the states respectively. In order that the present convention might be succeeded by bodies of the like description, they framed an ecclesias- tical constitution, the outlines of which were, that there should be a triennial convention, consisting of a deputation from the Church in each state, of not more than four clergy- men, and as many laymen ; that they should vote statewise, each order to have a negative on the <)ther j that when there should be a bishop in any state, he should be officially a member of the convention j that the different orders of clergy should be accountable to the ecclesiastical authority in the state only to which they should respectively belong ; and that the engagement previous to ordination should be a declaration of belief in the holy Scriptures, and a promise of conformity to the doctrines and the worship of the Church. Further, the convention appointed a committee, with various powers ; among which was, that of corresponding, during the recess, with the archbishops and bishops of England ; and they adjourned, to meet again in Philadel- phia, on the 20tK of June, in the following year. After the rising of the convention, their address to the English prelates was forwarded by the committee to his Excellency John Adams, Esq. the American minister, with the request, that it might be delivered by him to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury. There were also forwarded certificates from the executives of the states in which there was a probability of there being bishops chosen. The ex- ecutives who gave these certificates were those of New-York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. These evidences, agreeably to instructions of the convention, were applied for by the members of that body from the said states re- pectively. Mr. Adams willingly performed the service solicited of him, and in a conversation which he held with the Archbishop of Canterbury, on the subject of the address, gave such information, and expressed such sentiments, as were calculated to promote the object of it. F. 25 In tbe spring of the year 1786 the committee received an answer, signed by the two archbishops, and eighteen of the twenty-four bishops of England, acknowledging the receipt of what they were pleased to call the Christian and Brotherly Address of the Convention, and declaring their wish to comply with the desire of it ; but delaying measures to the effect, until there should be laid before them the alterations which had been made by the convention: it having been represented to the bishops, through private channels, that the alterations were essential dieviations from the Church of England, either in doctrine or in discipline. Not long after the receipt of this letter, the committee received another from the archbishops of Canterbury and York, to whom the management of the business had been left by their brethren, after a second meeting of the body, informing; that they had received the edited Book of Com- mon Prayer, in regard to which they declared, that besides their seeing of no occasion for some smaller alterations, which they do not specify, they are dissatisfied with the omission of the Nicene and the Athanasian Creeds, and of the descent into hell in the Apostles' Creed. And they further declare their disapprobation of an article in the proposed constitution, which seemed to them to subject the future bishops to a trial by the presbyters and the laymen, an the respective states. This, however, does not seem to have been the meaning of the article alluded to ; which expresses no more than that laws for the trial of bishops should be made, not by the general, but by each state ecclesiastical representative. The prelates went on to inform the committee, that they were likely to obtain an act of parliament, enabling them to consecrate for America. They, however, expected, that before they should proceed under the act, satisfaction should be given in regard to the matters stated. The same communication laid down what would be required, in regard to the characters individually, who should be sent for consecration. As to faith, they were to make the subscription which the American Church Jjad prescribed, to future candidates for orders. On the subject of learning, it was thought disrespectful to the persons to be sent, to subject them to an examination, it being at the same time trusted, that the American Church would be aware of the disparagement of the Episcopacy, which would be the result of jts being conferred on persons not sufficiently respectable in point of literary qualification. In order to give satisfaction in regard to the religious and 4 26 moral character of each person to be sent; the afchbishops required, that it should be testified by the convention choosing him; and, in addition, that there should be a cer- tificate 'from the General Convention, to the efFect that they knew no reason why the person should not be consecrated to the Episcopal office. These determinations are given as the result of a consultation of the two archbishops and fifteen of the bishops, being all who were at the time in town. Soon after the letter froni the two archbishops, there came one from the archbishop of Canterbury alone, enclosing the act of parliament. After the receipt of the first of the letters of the English prelates, and before the receipt of the second, the General Convention assembled, agreeably to appointment, in Phila- delphia, on the 20th of June, 1786. The principal business transacted by them, was another address to the English prelates, containing an acknowledgment of their friendly and affectionate letter, a declaration of not intending to depart from the doctrines of the English Church, and a determination of making no further alterationa than such as either arose from a change of circumstances, or appeared conducive to union ; and a repetition of the prayer for the succession. Before their adjournment, they appointed a committee, with power to reassemble them,^ if thought expedient, at Wilmington, in the state of Delaware. On the committee's receipt of the second letter, they summoned the convention to meet, at the place appointed, on the 10th of October following. The principal matter which occupied the hody when assembled, was the question, how far they should accommqdate to the requisitions of the- English prelates. The difficulty concerning the offensive article of the constitution had been done away before the arrival of the objection of the archbishops. This objection, as already observed, was grounded on a misapprehension of the design of the article. But another objection had been made within the American Church, on the score of there being no express provision for the presidency of a bishop in conventions and in ecclesiastical trials. This objection had gained so much ground, that, in the session of June, it had been fully satisfied ; which had more than done away the ground of the censure of the prelates. The omission of the Nicene Creed had been generally regretted; and, aceordingly, it was now, without debate or difficulty, restored to the Book of Common Prayer, to stand after the Apostles' Creed, witfe 27 permission of the use of either. The clause in the latter creed, of the descent into hell, occasioned considerable de- bate, but it was finally restored. The restoration of the Athanasian Creed was negatived. The result of the de- liberations of the convention was addressed to the two archbishops, with thanks for their fatherly attention to the Church, especially in procuring , legal permission for the conveying of the succession. The deputies from the several states were called on, beginning from the northward, for information, whether any persons had been chosen in them respectively, to pro- ceed to England for consecration : when it appeared, that the Rev. Samuel Provoost, D. D. rectorof Trinity Church, in the city of New- York, had been chosen for that purpose by the convention in that state ; that the Rev. William White, D. D. rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's, in the city of Philadelphia, had been chosen by the convention in Pennsylvania ; and that the Rev. David Grifiith, D. D. rector of Fairfax Parish, Virginia, had been chosen by the convention there. Testimonials in their favour from the conventions in the respective states, agreeable to the form prescribed by the archbishops, were laid before the General Convention, who immediately signed, in favour of each of the bishops elect, a testimonial, according to the £u'm pre- scribed to them by the same authority. G. The two former of the above-named clergymen, having embarked together early in the next month, arrived at Falmouth, after a passage of eighteen days. On their reaching of London, they were introduced to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, by his Excellency Mr. Adams, who, in this particular, and in every instance in which his personal attentions could be either of use or an evidence of his respect and kindness, continued to manifest his concern for the interests of a church, of which he was not a member. Before the accomplishing of the object of the voyage, there occurred the delay of a few weeks ; owing to the archbishop's desire of previously laying before the bishops the grounds of his proceeding to the accomplishment of the business, in the early stages of which they had been con- sulted. The greater number of them were at their diocesses, but were expected to be in town at the ensuing opening of parliament, appointed for about the middle of January. Very, soon afterwards, the 4th of February, was appointed for the consecration. On that day, and in the chapel oi' the archiepiscopal pa- laceof Lambeth, Dr. White and Dr.Provoost wereoidaiped and consecrated bishops, by the Most Rev. John Moore, archbishop of Canterbury. The Most Rev, William Mark- ham, archbishop of York, presented. And the bishoj)a who joined with the two archbishops in the imposition of hands, were the Right Rev. Charles Moss, bishop of Bath and Wells, and the Right Rev. John Hinchliff, bishop of Peterborough. Before the end of tlie same month, the newly consecrated bishops sailed from Falmouth for New- York, where they arrived on Easter Sunday, April the 7th, and soon afterwards began the exercise "of the Episcopacy in their respective dioces^es. H. On the 28th of July, 1789, there assembled the Triennial Convention, by whom the Episcopacy of Bishops White and Provoost, of whom the fofmer only was present, the latter being detained by sickness, was duly recognised. At this convention, there naturally occurred the importance of taking measures for the perpetuating of the succession : a matter, which some circumstances had subjected to consi- derable difficulty. The Rev. Dr. Griffith had been pre- vented by occurrences in his domestic situation, from prose- cuting his intended voyage to England, and had given in his resignation to the convention in Virginia. Tn conse- quence of their direction, the resignation was notified to the General Convention, on the first day of their entering on business. The doctol- himself had eome to attend it, as one of the deputies from Virginia ; but his attendance was prevented by sickness, which ended in his dissolution during the session. The subject of perpetuating the succession from England, with the relation which it bore to the question of embracing that from the Scotch Episcopacy, was brought into view by a measure of the clergy in Massachusetts and New-Hampshire. This body had elected the Rev. Edward Baeg, rector of St. PauPs Church in NewJj.uryport, their bishop ; and had addressed a letter to the bishops in Con- necticut, New- York, and Pennsylvania, praying them to unite in consecrating him. The last of these bishops, being the only one of them now present in convention, laid the letter addressed to him before the body, intimating his sin- cere wish to join in such measures as they might adopt, for the forming of a permanent union with the churches in the eastern states, but at the same time expressing his doubt of its being consistent with the faith impliedly pledged to the English prelates, to proceed to any consecration, without first obtaining from them the number held in their ChurcU 39 %« he canomcally necessary to such an act. This Eentiment, which he also supposed to be entertained by the gentleman who had been consecrated with him, was duly respected by the body, while they manifested an earnest desire of the union alluded to ; and, with a view to it, voted their opinion ia favour of the validity of Bishop Seabury's consecration j in which their president concurred. In order to carry the sentiments of the convention into «ffect, they signified their request to the two bishops con- secrated in England, that they would unite with Bishop Seabury in the consecration of Mr. Bass ; and they framed an address to the ai'chbishops and bishops of England, re- questing their approbation of the measure, for the removing of any tlifReutty or delicacy which might remain on the minds of the bishops vvhom they had already consecrated. And here it may be proper to record, that the difficulty was not long after removed in another way by the convention of Virginia, in their electing of the Rev. James Madison, D. D. presi- dent of William and Mary College, Williamsburg, their fcish'op; and by his being consecrated in England. At the present session of the General Convention, the constitution formed in 1786 was reviewed and new modelled. The principal feature now given to it, was a distribution into two houses, one consisting of the bishops, and the other of the clerical and lay deputies, who must vote, when re- quired by the clerical or by the lay representation from any state, as under the former constitution, by orders. The stated meetings were to be on the second Tuesday in Sep- tember in every third year; but intermediate meetings might be called by the bishops. When the convention adjourned, it was to the 29th of September following : and before the adjournment, an invi- tation was given by them to Bishop Seabury, and to their brethren generally in the eastern states, to be present at the proposed session, with a view to a permanent union. On that day the convention reassembled, when it ap- peared that Bishop Seabury, with sundry of the clergy from Massachusetts and Connecticut, had accepted the invitation given them. There was laid before the convention, and by them ordered to be recorded, evidence of that bishop's consecration ; which had been performed by Bishops Kil- gour, Petrie, and Skinner, of the non-juring Church in Scotland. There then ensued a conference between a committee of the convention , and the clergy from the eastern states; the result of which was, that, after one 30 alteration of the constitution at their de8ire, they declared their acquiescence in it, and gave it their signatures accord- ingly. It had been provided in the constitution, that the arrange- ment of two houses should take place, as soon as three bishops should belong to the body. This circumstance now occurred, although there, were present only two of them, who accordingly formed the Hoiise of Bishops. The two houses entered on a review of the liturgy , the bishops originating alterations in some services, and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies proposing others. The result was the Book of Common Prayer, as then esta,blished, and has been ever since used. Some canons had been passed in the preceding session ; but they were reconsidered and passed with sundry others, which continue to this day substantially the same ; but with Bome alterations and additions by succeeding conven- tions. I. The next Triennial Convention was held in the city of New- York, in the autumn of 1792, at which were present the four bishops already mentioned to have been consecrated abroad. Hitherto there had been no consecration in America; but at this convention, although nothing further was brought before them from Massachusetts, relative to Dr. Bass, the deputies from Maryland applied to the as- sembled bishops for the consecration of the Rev. Thomas John Claggett, D. D. who had been elected bishop by the convention of that state. Dr.- Claggett was accordingly consecrated, during the session of the convention, in Trinity Church, of'the city in which they were assembled.* The bishops, having reviewed-the ordinal of the Church of England, proposed a few alterations in it to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies ; principally such as were necessary for the accommodating of it to local circum- stances. The ordinal, thus reviewed, is now the established form for the consecrating of bishops and the ordaining of priests and deacons. K. In September, 17©S, there was held another Triennial Convention, in the city of Philadelphia; at which were present all the bishops, except Bishop Seabury. Besides other matters acted on, some canons were made ; and a service was ordered for the consecrating of a chureh or * Dr. Clsggott was consecrated by Bishop Provoost, *ho presided at thi» ifljivenlion, assisted by Bishops Seabury, White, and-Madison. 31 chapel. It is substantially the same with a service com- posed by Bishop Andrews, in the reign of James the First; and since commonly used by the English bishops in such consecration ; but without the authority of convocation or of parliament. During the session, there took place the consecration of the Rev. Robert Smith, D. D. rector of St. Philip's, in Charleston, South-Carolina ; who had been elected by the convention in that state their bishop,* L. Between this and the next convention, there was con- secrated the Rev. Edward Bass ; again recommended from Massachusetts and New-Hampshire : the certificate usually given on such occasions by the General Convention, being in this instance given by a standing committee of that body, agreeably to a provision which had been made to that effect.t And on the 18th of October of the same year, there was consecrated, in Trinity Church, in the city of New-Haven, the Rev. Abraham Jarvis, D. D. for the state of Connec- ticut.'^ There would have been a convention in Philadelphia, in September, 1798 ; but the prevalence of epidemical disease preventing their assembling, the bishops, agreeably to a power vested in them when desired by a standing commit- tee of the convention, summoned that body to meet, in the same city, on the Ilth of June, 1799. On this occasion, the review of the articles was moved in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. And a committee was appointed, who drew up a body of articles ; which were not acted on, but ordered to be printed on the journal, as a report of a committee of one of the houses, to lie over for the con- sideration of the next convention ; which was appointed to be in the city of Trenton, New-Jersey. M. It assembled there, in September, 1801; when there was brought before the bishops present at it, three in number, the question of the admissibility of a resignation of the Episcopal charge. A letter from Bishop Provobst had been addressed to one of the bishops present, and by him laid before the house, stating, that, induced by ill * The consecration of Dr. Smith was by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Provoost, Madison, and Claggett. t The consecration of Dr. Bass was in Christ Church, in the city of Philadel- phia, May 7th, 1797, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Provoost and Claggett. t The consecranon of Dr. Jarvis was by Bishop White, assisted by Bishop* FroToost and Bats. 32 health and some circumEtances of a domestic nature, he wished to retire from all public employment ; and bad therefore resigned, at a late meeting of the convention in New- York, his jurisdiction of bishop in' that state. In consequence of this resignation, the Ret. Benjamin Moore, D. D. who, on account of Bishop Provoost's resignation of the rectory of Trinity Church, in the city of New- York, had been chosen to that place, was also elected to succeed to the Episcopacy. The House pf Bishops having taken this subject under their serious consideration, and doubting of the propriety of sanctioning Episcopal resignation, de- clined any act to that effect. But being sensible of the exigency existing in the state of New- York, they consented to the consecration of an assistant bishop: it being under- stood, that he should be competent in point of character to all the Episcopal duties ; and, that the extent in which the same were to be discharged by him, should be dependent on such regulations as expediency might dictate to the Church in New- York ; grounded on the indisposition of Bishop Provoost, and with his concurrence. Conformably with the line of conduct thus laid down. Dr. Benjamin Moore, being duly recommended, was consecrated during the session, in St. Michael's Church, Trenton y and took his seat in the House of Bishops. In this convention, the important business of the articles was again taken up; and now, for the first time, authori- tatively acted on. After repeated discussions and propo- sitions, it had been found, that the doctrines of the Gospel, as they stand in the thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, with the exception of such matters as are local, were more likely to give general satisfaction than the same doctrines in any new form that might be devised. The former w6re therefore adopted by the two houses of convention, without their altering of even the obsolete diction in them ; but with notices of such changes as change of situation had rendered necessary. Exclusively of such, there is one exception, that of adapting the article con- cerning the creeds, to the former exclusion of the Athana- sian. It is further to be remembered, that, in regard to sub- scription to the articles, there is a considerable difference between the forrti required in the Church of England^ as laid down in her thirty-sixth canon, and that prescribed in the constitution of the American Church. The latter fo»ra had so far acquired the approbation of the English prelate*, 3.3 as to b6 thought sufficient on the part of those who came to them for consecration from America. N. Throughout this Narrative, it must have appeared, that the object kept in view, in all the consultations held, and the determinations formed, was the perpetuating of the Episcopal Church, on the ground of the general principles which she had inherited from the Church of England ; and of not departing from them, except so far as either local circumstances required, or some very important cause rendered proper. To those acquainted with the system of the Church of England, it must be evident, that the object here stated was accomplished on the ratification of the articles. The next Triennial Convention was in the city of New- York, September 11th, 1804. Canons Were passed, ex- tending to a -greater variety of objects than had been provided for before. An office was framed and ordered to be used, at the induction of ministers to the rectorship of churphes. A course of ecclesiastical studies of candidates for orders, was prescribed by the bishops. And the con- stitution was altered, agreeably to a proposition made in the preceding convention, and notified to the conventions in the states, so as that the future Triennial Conventions shall be in thfe month of May, instead of September. During the session, the Rev. Samuel Parker, D. D. rector of Trinity Church, in Boston, was consecrated bishop in Trinity Church, New- York, in the room of Bishop Bass, who had departed this life. There had also died, since the last convention, Bishop Smith, of South-Carolina. And it was understdod, that the Rev. Edward Jenkins, D. D. who had been elected to supply his placte, had declined the station. Since the events here recorded. Bishop Parker departed this life, a few months after his consecration. O. The next meeting of the General Convention was in the city of Baltimore, from May 17th, 1808, to the 26th of the same month. Two bishops only (Bishops White and Clag- gett) were present at this convention : and the Church in seven states only was represented. There was now ratified the long proposed amendment of the constitution; annulling the provision, by which four- fifths of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies could ac- coWipHsh a measure, without the concurrence of the House of Bishops. There was also proposed another amendment of the constitution, for the preventing of alterations in the liturgy, 5 34 unless tlie same should have been proposed at a previous convention. The whole body of the canons was reviewed, and un- derwent considerable alterations. A committee was appointed, to address the Church in the different states. The objects in view, were to procure a more full attendance on future conventions, and to extead the Episcopacy to the western states. " The Office of Induction," established by the last con- vention, was changed in name to " The Office of Institu- tion," and rested on recommendation, not on requisition, as before. The sense of the two houses was given on two points, which had created diversity of opinion and of practice — - Whether a minister ought to officiate at the funeral of any person killed in a duel ; and — Whether a minister should unite in marriage any person who has been divorced; un- less it be on account of the other party's having been guilty of adultery. Both these questions were decided in the negative. There was also introduced into the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, on recommendation of the Church in Mary- land, the subject of marriage, as connected with the degrees of consanguinity and affinity. But on communication of the matter to the House of Bishops, it was, on their recom- mendation, referred to a future convention. Thirty hymns were added to the Book of Psalms and Hymns. As ordained by a canon of the last convention, a pastoral letter from the House of Bishops to the members of this Church was drawn up by them, communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and there read. On the rising of the convention, New-Haven, in the state of Connecticut, was appointed as the next place of meeting. The session was ended, by an attendance on the morning service of the day, which was the festival of the Ascension. P. Agreeably to the aforesaid appointment, the next General Convention was held in the city of New-Haven, on Tuesday, the 21st of May, 1811, It continued in session until Friday, the 24th. Only Bishops White and Jarvis, of the House of Bishops, were present. The Church in nine states was represented. They ratified the amendment to the constitution proposed at the last convention, restraining from alterations of the 35 liturgy, except such as may be proposed at one convention and determined on at another. On the subject of the canons, nothing was done, except the vr^ealing of the ia«t, or forty-sixth of the canons, as passed at the last convention, entitled, " Providing for making known the Constitution and Canons of the Church." The rule prohibiting the officiating at the funerals of persons killed in duels, was so far moderated, as to allow of the same, if, on any occasion, the party in question had manifested repentance. There were some communications made in regard to the western churches, and the extending of the Episcopacy to them ; but a plan to that effect was not yet matured. Further attention to the subject was committed to the bishops of this Church in Pennsylvania and Virginia. The attendance of so few of the bishops ; three of the four absent bishops being prevented by bodily indisposition, and the remaining bishop being absent by indispensable engagements ; it was agreed not to take up, at present, the important subject of marriages, within certain degrees of coosaihguinity and affinity. A pastoral address was sent by the bishops to the other house, to be printed with the journal, agreeably to a requi- sition of the forty-fifth canon. It had been expected, that on the occasion of this con- vention, therince, by the occurrence of the war. " Published in 1615 hy T. & J. Swords, and may now be had at the store of Swords, Stajiford, & Go. New- York. PMisliers. 39 In consequence of a communication to the bishops, pro- posing to them, what was considered as a profitable im- provement in the Book of Common Praj'er, they proposed to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies a declaration, that it was not intended to bring the book under review diiring this convention. And in consequence of a commu- nication, proposing to the bishops to give their sanction to a work on a subject of great importance in religion, they made it a rule of their house, that in future, no application of this sort' shall be considered as regularly before them: and they proposed to the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties, a declaration to the same effect. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies signified their concurrence in the proposals, with their thanks, for what they called " the judicious bourse adopted in reference to these subjects." •A question was moved in each of the houses, as to the propriety of establishing a theological school, to be exclu- sively under the patronage of the General Convention- The subject was referred to a future meeting of the body ; and, in the mean time, measures were to be taken to ascertain the general wish on the subject in each of the states. A proposal was also made, to grant an exclusive copy- right of the Book of Cominon Prayer^ for a valuable con- sideration. This also was delayed, under the same pro- vision, for the ascertaining of the general sense of the Church ; and, with it, advice in law. As at each of the last two conventions, a pastoral letter was drawn up by the House of Bishops, and read in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The convention appointed their next triennial meeting to be in the city of New- York. R. Agreeably to appointment at the last General Conven- tion, there assembled another in the city of New- York, on the 20th of May, 1817. There were present all the bishops: the house then consisting of Bishops White, Hobart, Gris- woidj Dehon, Moore, Kemp, and Croes. The occasion was opened by a discourse from Bishop Griswold,* In conseqjience of an application from the Church in During the recess of flle convention, Dr. Kemp had been consecrated on the first day of September, 1814, in Christ Church, in the city of Brunswick, New- Jersey, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Moore. And Dr. Croes had been consecrated on the 19th day of November, 1815, in St. Peter's Church, in the city of Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Kemp. 40 North-Carolina, in which a convention had been held, the said Church was considered as having acceded to the ecclesiastical constitiitioifi. From the time of the revolu- tionary war, there had been but temporary supplies of the ministry in a few places; but some clergymen, recently settled in the state, in connexion with sonie influential lay gentlemen, had taken active measures for the revival of our communion. - The presidiijg bishop made report ^sundry matters committed to him by the last cdnvention. They were the certifying to the venerable Society (in England) for the Propagation of the Gospel, of certain facts in favour of the Church in Vermont, relatively to lands of which the titles' were vested in the society — the taking of measures rela- tively to the organizing of the Church beyond the Alleg- hatay mountains, and the republishing of the journals qf this Church from the beginning. The first and the last had been carried into effect, and the other had been attended to, as far as circumstances would permit. The thanks of the hoqse were voted to the presiding bishop. Relatively to the last mentioned subject, the House of Bishops saw cause to record their opinion as follows : — "Resolved, That it be recommended to the Episcopal •congregations in the states referred to in the above com- munications, where conventions are not already organized, to organize conventions, which may be received into union with this convention, and, when expedient, may unite, aecordiiig to the canons, in the choiee of a bishop, having jurisdiction over those states ; and that this convention have received, with much satisfaction, information of the measures which have been already adopted in the state of Ohio, for the organization of the Church in that state. " Resolved, That though the measure of a convention comprising sundry states in the western country, may be a measure of temporary expediency, it cannot be authorized by this convention consistently with the general constitution of the Church, which recognises only a convention of the Church in each state. " Resolved, That it be earnestly recommended to the au- thorities of this Church, in each state respectively, to adopt measures for sending missionaries to our destitute brethren in the western states : such missionaries to be subject to the direction of the ecclesiastical authority of the state or states in which they may officiate. " Resolved^ That the presiding bishop be requested to 41 transmit the foregaiag resolutions to such person or persons as he may judge proper." This resolve was carried into effect, partly by a canon made during the session, and partly by a forwarding of the contenrfplated communications. The several bishops made reports on the sense of the Church in their respective diocesses, on the subject of a theological school. There was diversity of opinion, but the general sense, in botli houses, was in favour of a general school ; which, on the proposal of the House of Bishops, and with the consent of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, was determined to be instituted in New-York. For the carrying of the; design into effect, there was chosen a com- mittee, consisting of members of both houses. On the part of the House of Bishops, there were chosen Bishops White, Hobart, and Croes ; and on the part of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, Drs. Wharton, Harris, and How, Hon. Rufus King, Charles Fenton Blercer, Esq. and William Meredith, Esq. The House of Bishops thought it expedient to make a solemn call on the attention of the clergy in relation to the twenty-second canon, which enjoins on them diligence in catechetical instruction and lectures. The bishops consider these as among the most important duties of clergymen, and among the most effectual means of promoting religious knowledge and practical piety. It being represented to the House of Bishops by Bishop Hobart, that the congregation du St. Esprit, in the city of New- York, havingjoined the communion of the Episcopal Church, with their minister, who had lately received Epis- copal ordination, which congregation consisted originally of Protestant emigrants from France ; and there being many to whom the French language is still more familiar than the English, it is expedient that they be furnished with the liturgy in the former language ; and that there is such a liturgy, not sanctioned by this convention, it was recommended to the said bishop to cause the said French liturgy to be examined, in order to ascertain how far the translation is correct, and to confirm the use thereof, with such amendments and improvements as the case may call for ; and to declare it to be the liturgy which may be used by any minister of this Church who may officiate in a con- gregation to whom the French language is familiar. The bishops issued the following call on the members of this Church, and sent it to the House of Clerical and 6 42 Lay Deputies, to be there read : which was accordingfy done. " The House of Bishops, solicitous for the preservation of the purity of the Church, and the piety of its members, are induced to impress upon the clergy the important duty, with a discreet but earnest zeal, of warning the people of their respective cures, of the danger of an indulgence in. those worldly pleasures which may tend to withdraw the affections from spiritualthings. Arid especially on the subject of gaming, of amusements involving cruelty to the brute creation, and of theatrical representations, to which som& peculiar circumstances have called their attention, — they do not hesitate to express their unanimous opinion, that these amusement's, as well from their licentious tendency, as from the strong temptations to vice which they afford, ought not to be frequented. And the bishops cannot refrain from expressing their deep regret at th* information, tliat in some of our large cities, so little respect is paid to the feelings of the members of the Church, that theatrical re- presentations are fixed for the evenings of her most solemn festivals." On the question referred by the last conventioii, to be reported on in this, relatively to the copy-right of the Book of Common Prayer, the measure was considered as disap- proved of, so far as opinion could be ascertained. A proposed change in the ecclesiastical constitution was referred to the several state conventions. It was to change tlie time of" the triennial meeting to the first Tuesday in October. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies proposed to the House of Bishops, the designating of a standard copy of the Old and New Testaments. It was too late to enter on the business, and " the House of Bishops deeming the fulfil- ment of the request of the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties, on the subject of an authentic edition of the Holy Bible, a matter requiring very serious attention and deli- beration, resolve, that its members will give such attention and deliberation to the subject, previously ta the next meeting of the General Convention, and report at the said meeting. The table of degrees of consanguinity and affinity, pro- hibitory of marriage, was again referred, and a committee was appointed on the subject, consisting of Bishops White, Kemp, and Croes. There passed three canons. The first was the limiting 43 "of the operation of the second and thiity-seventh canons, •so far as regarded the states westward of the mountains. The professed reason was, the providing of that country with a bishop, if a suitable person should be presented, whatever might be the number of resident presbyters, and ■even if there be none. There was the further reason, that if it should be thought convenient to unite with a western diocese the western counties of Pennsylvania and Virginia ; and if there should be the consent of the Church in each of the said states, there might be a temporary provision for the purpose, consistent with the integrity of the Church iji each state. The second canon makes a clergyman's renunciation of the ministry a cause of admonition, or of suspension, or of degradation. The third canon provided, that in the case of expulsion from the communion, and information given to the bishop as required by the second rubric before the communion service ; if the expelled party make no complaint, there shall be no inquiry instituted- The bishop, on receiving complaint, is to institute an inquiry, and the notice given by the minister is a sufficient presentation. A pastoral letter was again drawn up by the House of Bishops, and read in tKe House of Clerical and Lay De- puties. When the convention adjourned, Philadelphia was ap- pointed to be the* place of the next meeting. S. [^The narrative of, the first edition here concluded.] Agreeably to appointment, the General Convention as- sembled in St. James's Church, in the city of Philadelphia, on Tuesday, the 16th of May, 1820, and continued in ses- sion until Wednesday, the 24th of the same month. The bishops present, were Bishops White, Hobart, Griswold, Moore, Kemp, Croes, Bowen, and Brownell ; being the whole of the Episcopal body, with the exception of Bishop Chase. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and Dr. William Wilmer in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Rev. William Augustus Muhlenburg was secretary of the former house, and the Rev. Ashbel Bald- win, with the Rev. John C. Rudd, were secretary and assist- ant secretary of the latter. On Wednesday, the 25th, the houses having been organized on the preceding day, the convention was opened with a Sermon from Bishop Moore- 44 The territory formerly known by the name of the Dis- trict of Maine, having been received by Congress as an independent state, and the Church therein having become organized, it was admitted as a member of the ecclesias- tical union. That part of the forty-fifth canon which requires the reading of episcopal addresses from the journal of the state conventions, being thought to occasion an unnecessary spending of time, was repealed by the first canon of this convention. The first canon of 1816 having been accommodated to the existing circumstances of the Church in the state of Ohio, and the object of it having been accomplished, it. •was repealed by the second canon of those now-passed. By the third, the pastoral letters, to be issued hereafter at the times of the Triennial Conventions, are required to be read by the clergy in their respective congregations. By the fourth, an improvement was made in the seven- teenth canon of 1808, in reference to testimonials to be accommodated to the respective oases. By the fifth, the same canon of 1808 was so far altered, as to require from a candidate for the ministry, not a citizen of the United States, and having officiated as a minister of another denomination, that he produce evidence of his residence for one year. The sixth concerned the consecration of bishops. The testimonials of the bishop elect, instead of being presented to any three bishops, are to be presented to the presiding bfehop, who is to communicate them to the other bishops. In the event of the consent of the major number of them, the presiding bishop, or any three to whom he may com- municate the testimonials and the consent of the major number, may proceed to the consecJration. But if a bis'hop have been elected within one. year of a General Convention, his consecration is to be deferred to the time of their assembling. It was thought conducive to the fexercise of discipline, to moderate the publicity of ecclesiastical censures on any offending minister, in the event of his voluntary renunciation of the ministry; which is th^ purport of the seventh canon. The eighth provides, that in the case of a candidate for orders, his sufficiency in the acquirements exacted for the first examination, prescribed by the tenth canon of 1808, shall be ascertained before his admission as a candidate ; 9nd further, that the said acquirements shall not be dis- 45 pensed with, unless there be a testimonial from at least five presbyters, " stating, that, in their opinion, he possesses extraordinary strength of natural understanding, a peculiar aptitude to teach, and a large share of prudence." On an application for the sanctioning of a selection of Psalms and Hymns, made from the authorized Book of Psalms and Hymns in metre, there was a refusal, on the ground of the resolution of the two houses in the convention of 1814, against the giving of a conventional sanction to any publication not issued as of authority in this Church. The convention thought it a matter of sufficient import- ance, to give instruction concerning the title page of future editions of the Book of Common Prayer, for the securing of accuracy ; and further, for the observing of the due dis- tinction between the said book, and other books and docu- ments not the same, although of equal authority in this Church. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies requested the House of Bishops, who referred it to the presiding bishop, with such aid as he may think proper to employ, to take measures for making known any errors x)r omissions in the edition of the Book of Common Prayer, printed in New- York, by Hugh Gaine, in the year 1793, and established by the forty-third canon of 1808, as the standard book, so that they may be avoided or supplied in future editions. There was a similar request and a similar reference to the presiding bishop, to correct or supply any errors or omissions in the calendar and tables prefixed to the said book, and to extend the table of the days on which Easter will fall for two cycles of the moon, from the year 1823. [By an evident typographical error, it is 1813 on the Journal.] The two houses appointed a joint committee, to make a collection of the journals of the General Conventions, and of tfie several Diocesan Conventions, and of other important documents^ connected with the history of the Church in the United States, and to deposit the same, subject to the dis- posal of the General Convention, in such hands as may be deemed proper fpr the present, and until a further order of the convention. The difficulty of procuring sets of the journals of the preceding years, was strong proof of there being a use in the present measure. There was also a committee appointed by the two houses, to take such measures in the recess of the convention, as they might find suitable " for the establishment of a stand- 46 ard, according to which all copies of the scriptures, to be recommended to the use of the members of this Church, shall be printed." This matter, at the rising of the General Convention of 1817, had been submitted by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to the consideration of the bishops during the recess. The bishops, in the convention of 1820, noticing the cause of the reference in a corruption of a particular text in a late edition, tending to sustain a species of ordination unknown in scripture, had reported to the following effect. They were of opinion, that in con- sequence of the exclusive privilege enjoyed in England for the printing of the Bible, and the heavy fines which may be inflicted on the patentees for a falsifying of the text, the English editions may in general be depended on ; there having been noticed but few inaccuracies in any of them, and those being unimportant. An edition by Eyre and Strahan, in 1806, and another^by them in 1812, had been spoken of as the most perfect extant, but the bishops had not been able to procure a copy. They gave a caution against certain fraudulent copies of the Bible imported from England, printed by unauthorized individuals, who avoided the law by a few notes in the lower margin, which may be cut from the text, but favours the pretence of the editing of a commentary. Such copies had been found exceedingly corrupt. In regard to editions issued in the United States, the bisihops had found them generally as correct as could have been reasonably expected, considering the difficulty of avoid- ing typographical errors. Further, they were aware, that their report did not go to the desirable extent ; and it was this consideration which led to the appointment of the joint committee. There came before the two houses, the proposal of the last General Convention for the changing of the time of the meeting from May to October. The House of Bishops proposed the ratifying of it, but the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies now convened, signified their non-concur- rence. Then there came from the latter house such an alteration of the first article of the constitution, as subjects to the discretion of every Triennial Convention, the time as well as the place of the assembling of the next, with autho- rity in the presiding bishop, in the case of the occurrence of epidemical disease, to make a change of place. In this the House of Bishops concurred, and it will rest with the next convention to decide. 47 The principal subject of discussion related to the Theo- logical Seminary, the location of which became transferred by this convention from New-York to New-Haven, in Connecticut, adopting sundry measures for the furtherance of the design. When the bishops concurred in the pro- posal, they unanimously declared, that they did not "mean by this concurrence to interfere with any plan now con- templated, or that may hereafter be contemplated in any diocese or diocesses, for the establishment of theological institutions or professorships ; and further, they esteem it their duty to express the opinion, that the various sums subscribed, having been thus subscribed under an act of the convention establishing the seminary in New- York, the sub- scribers who have not paid are not now bound, except they think proper, to pay their subscriptions ; the institution being removed to a different city." This declaration was received, and read, and not objected to, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. There was proposed by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and concurred in by the bishops, a constitution of a missionary society, for foreign and domestic missions, which became inefficient from an irregularity in the choice of the trustees. The society was located in the city of Philadelphia, apd the members there resident, after fre- quent consultations, did not think themselves authorized to proceed. The error resulted from the press of business on the last day of the session. When the convention adjourned, it was with the deter- mination that the next General Convention should meet in Philadelphia. The whole was concluded with prayer by the presiding bishop. T. The next General Convention being special, was held in 1821, in St. Peter's Church, in the city of Philadelphia, from October 30th to November the 3d, inclusive. The bishops present, were Bishop White, of Pennsylvania, pre- siding bishop ; Bishop Hobart, of New- York ; Bishop Gris- wold, of the Eastern Diocese ; Bishop Kemp, of Maryland ; Bishop Croes, of New-Jersey; and Bishop Brownell, of Connecticut. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, the Rev. Dr. William Wilmer presided, the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin was secretary, and the Rev. John C. Rudd was assistant secretary. The Rev. William Augustus Muhlen- burg was secretary of the House of Bishops. This convention assembled on the call of the presiding 48 bishop, induced by the desire of the major nnmber of the bishops; it being induced by the desire of the trustees of the Theological Seminary, to consider whether any or what measures should be adopted, for the obtaining of a legacy of about sixty thousand dollars, bequeathed by Jacob Sher- red, of the city of New- York, to a seminary which should be instituted within the state, either by the General Con- vention or by that of the diocese in which the testator lived and died. It became a question, which of two seminaries was entitled to the legacy. On the one hand, the general seminary being the first named, was thought entitled to it, on the condition of removal to New- York r and several eminent gentlemen of the law had given their opinions in the afiirmative. On the other hand, legal gentlemen of equal eminence were of opinion, that as the diocesan semi- nary was in a capacity to go into immediate operation, it had the preferable claim. The convention was opened by a sermon from Bishop Kemp. U. The two houses became immediately occupied by the business for which they had been called together. There was appointed a joint committee, who, after contemplating the subject in its various points of view; and after discussing various projects for the combining of the seminaries now existing in New-Haven and New- York ; all in the spirit of conciliation and mutpal concession ; arrived at the result, which appears, in the organization as it now stands. All the members of the committee concurred in giving praise to Judge Cameron, of North-Carolina, for the ability and good temper manifested by him in the progress of the business : and the same were again displayed by him, when it came before the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. However, it did not pass in the house without opposition ; which was almost confined to the clerical and lay gentlemen from Virginia ; with whom it is a favourite idea, to establish a theological professorship in the college of William and Mary, in Williamsburg. The outhnes of the newly organized institution are as follow. The school of New-Haven, and that of New-York, are to be combined, and to be seated in the latter state. All the bishops are to be trustees officially. The other trustees are to be chosen in the several states, and to be residents in them respectively. In each state there is to be a trustee chosen for every eight of its clergy, and for every two thousand dollars contributed ; except, that when ten 49 thousand dollars shall have been contributed in any state, ten thousand dollars shall be required for every additional trusteeship. The seminary is empowered to establish branches ; and it is understood, that a branch school is to be forthwith established at Geneva, in New- York. W. Another business of similar importance was brought before the two houses — that of a missionary society, de- signed by the last convention, but so strangely instituted, that the gentlemen named as managers found themselves incompetent to the purpose of the appointment. There was now a new scheme proposed by the bishops, more com- plete, and in every respect more reasonable than the former. The scheme had the concurrence of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. X. The House of Bishops sent to the other house, an opinion explanatory of the last rubric in the communion service, which had been interpreted by some as dispensing with the reading of the ante-communion service, if a sermon were to follow. This was not to be acted on by the house to which it was sent, and accordingly they only noticed the communication. Y. The presiding bishop laid before the House of Bishops a report on certain subjects committed to him by the last con- vention. They were, the calculating of a table of the days on which Easter will fall for two cycles of the moon, the making of necessary alterations in the calendar, and the ascertamirtg of errors in the book published by Hugh Gaine, in 1793, and made the standard Book of Common Prayer. It was proposed in the report to appoint a joint committee to establish another standard book in the recess. The re- port was sent to the other hoUse, and required nothing on their part except concurrence in appointing a joint commit- tee, which took place. Z. When the convention adjourned, it was after prayers by the presiding bishop, and a short address by him, expres- sive of the feeling which possessed him, at so happy a con- clusion, and so different from what had been apprehended. Then followed the singing of the 133d Psalm, and the Benediction. The next General Convention was held in Philadelphia, from the 23d to the 26th day of May, 1823. The bishops present, were Bishop White, of Pennsylvania ; Bishop Griswold, of the Eastern Diocese ; Bishop Moore, of Vir- ginia ; Bishop Kemp, of Maryland ; Bishop Croes, of New-Jersey; Bishop Bowen, of South-Carolina; Bishop 7 50 Chase, of Ohio; Bishop Brownell, of Connecticut; and, (after his consecration) Bishop Ravenscroft, of North-Caro- lina. Of the two absent, Bishop Hobart was detained by sickness. Tlie Rev. Dr. WiUiam Wilnner, of Virginia, was chosen president of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The Rev. Ashbel Baldwin was chosen their secretary, and the Rev. John C. Rudd, their assistant secretary. The Rev. William H. De Lancey was chosen secretary of the House of Bishops. The Church of Georgia was received into the union. The Rev. John S. Ravenscroft, elected bishop of the Church in North-Carolina, being duly recommended to the bishops by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, was consecrated in St. Paul's Church, and took his seat in the House of Bishops. Sundry communications from Bishop Chase, of Ohio, were received through the presiding bishop, by the House of Bishops, and it was referred to the presiding bishop tO' answer them. AA. At the convention of 1820, a committee had been ap- pointed, consisting of the presiding bishop, the Rev. George Boyd, and the Rev. Jackson Kemper, to make a collection of journals and other documents, connected with the history of the Americaa Church. They made a report, which was accepted. BB. A canon was passed, regulating the admission of candi- dates for holy orders, and repealing the first paragraph of the seventh canon of 1808. CC. Another canon was passed, prescribing the mode of pub- lishing authorized editions of the standard Bible of this Church. The two houses concurred in approbation of a report made on the subject of the Theological Seminary. On the subject of the Psalms and Hymns, a joint com- mittee was appointed, consisting of the presiding Bishop, Bishop Hobart, and Bishop Croes, the Rev. William Meade, the Rev. Samuel F. Jarvis, D. D. the Rev. William A. Muh- lenburg, the Rev. Jackson Kemper, the Rev. Samuel Turner, D. D. the Rev. Richard S. Mason, the Hon. Kensey Johns, the Hon. Robert H. Goldsborough, John Read, Esq. Edward J. Stiles, Esq. Tench Tilghman, Esq. Francis S. Key, Esq. and Peter Kean, Esq. A report was made by a committee appointed at the last General Convention, on the subject of a standard edition 51 of the Holy Bible. The report was accepted ; and a mode was appointed of publishing authorized editions. The ap^ proved edition was by Eyre and Strahan (London) in 1806 and 1812. A report was made of the proceedings of the executive committee of the Missionary Society. During the session, there was a meeting held of the society in St. Paul's Church. The report of the executive committee was approTed of by both houses, and the printing of it was ordered. DD. A message was sent to the House of Bishops, concerning the American Colonization Society. The bishops, consider- ing it rather of a political than of a religious nature, declined the proposal of sending a delegate to an intended meeting of that body, but expressed approbation of their object. The resolve of the bishops was sent to the House of Cleri- cal and Lay Deputies, and was there read and returned. Nothing further was done in the business. EE. A joint committee was appointed to report on the circum- stances of different colleges in the United States, in refer- ence to religious instruction given in them respectively, and on the practicabihty of establishing a seminary or seminaries for the education of youth, under the influence and authority of the Protestant Episcopal Church. The committee were the presiding Bishop, Bishops Bowen and Brownell, Rev. Dr. Wharton, Rev. Mr. Baldwin, Rev. Mr. Hooper, Mr. Kean, and Mr. Wilkins. FF. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies drew up a re- port on the state of the Church in the several diocesses, and sent it to the House of Bishops. That house returned it with their triennial pastoral letter, which was read. There was a nomination of trustees of the General Theological Seminary, and a recommendation of further efforts for the increase of its funds. During the session, a sermon was preached before the body by the presiding bishop, in St. Peter's Church, and a collection was made for the Domestic and Foreign Mission- ary Society. A plan was adopted for the defraying of the expenses of every General Convention. The next meeting was appointed to be in the city of Phi- ladelphia, on the first Tuesday in November, 1826. As usual, the session was concluded with devotional exercises by the presiding bishop. The next General Convention was held in St. Peter's Church, in the city of Philadelphia, from the 7th to tbo 52 15th of November, in the year 1826. All the bishops were present, except Bishop Moore, of Virginia ; who, previously to the occasion, with the intention of attendance, had pro- ceeded from that state to Hartford, in Connecticut ; m which town he continued during the session, under the visitation of a very dangerous disease. The Rev. Dr. Wilmer, of Virginia, was chosen president of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and the Rev. Dr. Benjamin T. Onderdonk, of New-York, was chosen secretary ; who, with permission of the house, appointed the Rev. George Weller, of Pennsylvania, assistant secrer tary. The Rev. William H. De Lancey, of the latter state, was chosen secretary of the House of Bishops. The convention was opened by divine service, by a ser- mon from Bishop Bowen, of South-Carolina,, and by the administration of the holy communion. There was submitted to the two houses the organization of the Church in the state of Mississippi; which, being considered constitutional, the said Church was admitted into union, and a clerical deputy from it took his seat in the convention. The most interesting business brought before the body, was that presented by the unanimous vote of the bishops, to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, for the shorten- ing of the service in sundry particulars. This immediately produced a great excitement in the minds of many of the members, both clerical and lay; and it was especially a matter of surprise, that the proposal should come from the bishops, who had been thought by many too strict, and by none too lax in the requisition of conformity to the entire service. GG. It would not appear from the journal, but is a fact which ought to be recorded in this place, that the proposal for abbreviation, as at first sent by the bishops, contained the limiting of the use of the litany to seasons and days especi- ally appointed for humiliation. This occasioned so great a sensation in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, that the bishops tacitly withdrew their communication, and then presented it in the form in which it now appears on the journal. HH. So far as regards the morning and the evening services, the proposed abbreviations were a permission to exercise discretion as to the number of psalms, and to the portions of lessons ; provided, in regard to each lesson, there be at least fifteen verses. License was also given, in reference 33 to the calendar, that in churches in which there is the observance of what are called the prayer days, the minister may make his choice of a chapter intervening between ono suchi day and another. The notoriety that the calendar was constructed with a view to a daily morning and evening service, is proof, that where this does not obtain, but there is service on Wednesdays and Fridays, it is conducive to edification to admit the proposed latitude. II. Besides, the alterations in the morning and evening services, there were proposed two in the Office for Confir- mation^both of them permissive. The fijst was a preface, confessed by all to be more suited to present times than that now in the book. The other was a prayer, substan- tially the same with the present, which was to remain, and the proposed alternative was because of offisnce taken in various places, at the following words in it liable to be misunderstood — " and hast given them forgiveness of all their sins." For the preface and the prayer, see the Ap- pendix, No. 33. KK. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, there were not a few of the objectors, who would have found no diffi- culty as to the proposed alterations in the service, had they not been combined with a rubric, considered as requiring the recital of the ante-communion service, more iexpHcitly than before. There was an endeavour to divide the two subjects ; but this was impossible, as they constituted but one proposal from the bishops. In consequence of the adoption of the whole instrument, the sense of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies is now declared in favour of what the bishops have all along declared, and that unani- mously, to be the meaning of the rubric, pronounced by so many to be dubious. LL. After much discussion, the proposal of the bishops, com- prehending the particulars which have been enumerated, was adopted by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, so far as is permitted by the constitution ; that is, to be referred to the conventions of the different states, and to be acted on at the next General Convention. MM. The business which may be thought the next in import- ance, is that concerning the Psalms in metre and the Hymns. On the first of these subjects, the committee were continued; no progress being made in it at this time. The other was brought to a consummation, the number being enlarged to two hundred and thirteen. There had been many meetings of the committee on that work ; and 54 great pains had been bestowed on it. Considerable expense having been incurred by various impressions from the press of what was to be brought under consideration, there was permission given to a committee, with a view to retribution, to dispose of a copy-right of these Hymns for one year. NN. There was but one canon passed. It altered^ the former canon, requiring one year for the admission of a candidate to holy orders ; extending the term to three years ; unless, in the diocese to which he belongs, the bishop, with the advice and the consent of the clerical members of the standing committee, shall deem it expedient to ordain him after the expii'ation of a shorter term,, not less than one year. The bishops transmitted two other canons ; bnt they were referred to a committee on the canons,' who were to be in existence during the recess; in order to make an arrangement of the whole body of the canons ; with such improvements as they may devise ; to be submitted to the next convention. One of these canons restricted applica- tion for orders, to the bishop in whose diocese he had been admitted a candidate ; unless, in pursuance of letters di- missory from such bishop. The other, was for " the deter- mining of the rights and the duties of the presbyters and deacons of this Church, in respect to residence and account- ability." OO. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, two days were spent in discussing the project of a clerical deputy from South-Carolina, for the forming of a society, the object of which should be, the printing of books calculated to promote the cause of religion, and of the Episcopal Church in particular. The society was to be entitled — *' for the Promoting of Christian Knowledge." The oper- ation was to be begun with seventy-two thousand dollars, to be raised by the subscriptions of the members ; to be repaid to them in books, and the capital to be finally ex- tended to one hundred thousand dollars. A great majority of the members considered the scheme as not coming within the sphere of congregational business, and it was accord- ingly rejected: but of these there was a proportion, who were otherwise persuaded of its utility. PP. There was made a satisfactory report of the state of the Theological Seminary. It was drawn at considerable length, by a joint committee of the two houses. In the course of the session, there was a settlement of the propor- tions of the different states to trusteeships. 55 There was also a report, considered as satisfactory, of the proceedings of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society. There was the continuation of a committee, with a view to the future establishment of a college for general science, under the authority of the convention ; and to report on the interests of this Church in seminaries now existing. A committee was appointed, for the ascertaining of any errors which there may be, in the editions of the Bible. There was drawn up and adopted, as usual, a view of the state of the Church, by a committee appointed for the purpose ; and grounded on documents from the conventions of the several states. It was referred to the Church in the different states, to consider of and to adopt an amendment to the second clause of the eighth article of the constitution, so as to place the thirty-nine articles of religion on the same footing with the liturgy, in respect to any alterations which may bo pro- posed. A pastoral letter to the members of the Church having been submitted to the House of Bishops, and approved of by them, was sent to the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties, and there read. In consequence of a report from a joint committee of the two houses, it was determined, that the next meeting shall be in the city of Philadelphia, on the first Wednesday of August, 1829. The session was closed by prayer and a psalm, with a short address by the presiding bishop. The next session of the General Convention began on Wednesday, the 12th of August, 1829, and ended on Thursday, the 20th day of the same month. The bishops present at the opening of the session, were Bishop White, of Pennsylvania ; Bishop Hobart, of New- York ; Bishop Griswold, of the Eastern Diocese ; Bishop Moore, of Vir- ginia; Bishop Croes, of New-Jersey ; Bishop Brownell, of Connecticut; Bishop Ravenscroft, of North-Carolina ; and Bishop Onderdonk, assistant bishop of Pennsylvania, who had been elected and consecrated during the recess. The convention was opened with a sermon by Bishop Brownell, from Galatians iv. 18, by divine service, and by the administering of the holy communion. The Rev. William E. Wyatt, D. D. of Maryland, was chosen president ; and the R,ev. Benjamin T. Onderdonk, D. D. of New-York, secretary of the House of Clerical and 56 Lay Deputies. The Rev. Bird Wilson, D. D. of Pennsyl- vania, was chosen secretary of the House of Bishops. The Church having become organized in the state of Kentucky, it was admitted into the union ; as was also the Church in the state of Tennessee. This Church had been organized, although with a fault in one of its canons, which was strongly recommended to be corrected. From infor- mation received, this was confidently expected to be the result. 0,0,. There was the adoption of the alterations proposed by the last General Convention, requiring, in regard to any alterations in the thirty-nine articles, that they shall be presented at one General Convention, with the view of being carried into effect by the next, after intermediate submission to the churches in the several states ; in like manner as is provided for in regard to alterations in the' Book of Common Prayer. The alterations of this book, proposed by the last General Convention, were not acted on by the present, having been found unacceptable to the major number of the diocesan conventions. RR. What principally occupied the attention of this conven- tion, was the presentation of the Rev. William Meade, D. D. of Virginia, to be assistant bishop of the Church in that state ; under the proviso, that the election did not Confer on him the right of succession to the diocesan Episcopacy* The evils resulting from such an economy were so manifest,, that there was unanimity of opinion in opposition to it in both houses : even the deputies from the diocese in question not defending it ; and expressing their confident persuasion, that the ground would be changed at the next meeting of the convention. The only difference of opinion in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, during a discussion of several days, was on the point pressed by many of the members, that in the presentation for consecration, it should be made dependent on the condition of withdrawing the restriction which had occasioned the dissatisfaction. On the other hand, it was pleaded, that as the course taken in Virginia, however ex- ceptionable, was not without precedent ; as the occurrence of the like in future might be prevented by a canon; and as the deputies from the state concerned had come under instructions to move for some provision, relatively to the relation subsisting between a diocesan and his assistant ; by which they seem to have pledged themselves to submit to the declared sense of the body now assembkd ; it would 57 be a reasonable dictate of moderation, to carry the proposed measure into effect. During some days, the defeat of it seemed almost certain ; but towards the close of the con-- troversy, the matter took a different turn ; and the measure of presentation was carried, but not without the dissent of a very considerable minority. AU th« speakers against it were careful to make it known, that they had no grounds of personal dissatisfaction with Dr. Meade ; for whose character they professed great respect. When the presentation came to the House of Bishops, they determined on the consecration, and notified it to thei House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. At the same time, they declared their dissatisfaction with the non-succession scheme of the convention of Virginia; resolving, that they never would hereafter consecrate an assistant, not intended to be of course the successor ; and recommending the same forbearance to their absent and to any future brethren. They also prepared a canon against any future occurrence of the present difRculty r which canon was sent to the other house, and passed by them. SSr On the next day, being Wednesday, October 19th, the Rev. William Meade, D. D. was consecrated in St. James's Church, by the presidii^, bishop ; six oth^ bishops, to wit. Bishops Hobart, Griswold, Croes, Moore, IJrownell, and Onderdonk, joining in the imposition of hands. The ser- mon was preached by the presiding bishop, from Revela- tions ii. 10. ^ At this convention, seven canons were passed. The first was principally designed to provide for the reception of a minister from another denomination, without the delay exacted in other cases, by a provision additional to what existed in a former canon, (the fifth of 1820,) to the effect. It had been a matter of difference of opinion, wbethet it was exacted by the former provision, that the minister admitted should have undergone some species of ordination. The present canon rendered this necessary. The second canon extends the substance of the twenty- sixth of 1808, so as to enjoin inquiry into probable reports of such offences of the clergy as ought to subject them to ecclesiastical discipline. The third, in addition to the eighth of 1820, provides, that on the deposition of a clergyman, because of his declaration that he will no longer officiate as a clergyman of the Epis- copal Church, it shall be certified, if the fact be so, that his severance is not for any cause affecting his moral standing, 8 68 The fourth respects a minister's change of residenee from one diocese to another. It so far enlarges the sense of the thirty-first canon of 1808, as to provide, that in the case of his being under any charge in the diocese from- which he removes, a certificate of his acquittal of the same shall be requisite to his admission to any other. The fifth made the provision, which the crisis: called for, declaring, the succession and the duties, of an assistant bishop. The sixth abrogated the necessity, in the case of a foreigner, intending ta officiate in a foreign language, to wait a year for ordination. This provision was accommo- dated to the case of the French church in the city of New- York. The seventh was additional to tlie thirty-third of 1808, providing more distinctly, for consent to a miriister's offici- ating within the parochial boundaries of any eity, borough, village, town^ or township, of which he is not a resident. The presiding bishop presented to the convention certain documents relative to the- Church of Denmark; ^wMchhe had received through the medium of the kind offices of Peter Pederson, Esq. the minister plenipotentiary of his majesty the King of Denmark; containing considerable information,' not generally possessed. These documents have been deposited, with others formerly presented, and in the- possessiorv of the Rev. Dr. Kemper ; at whose in- stance those now given were procured by Mr. Pederson, during his late visit to his- native country, from Dr. Munter, the present bishop of Copenhagen-^ There was submitted to the convention the report of the Domestic and Foreign- Missionary Society '^ of whose pro- ceedings there was expressed very strong approbation, with an earnest recommendation of a more extensive patronage. Sundry alterations of the constitutieti, pi-o- posed by the society, were sanctioned by the convention. The proceedings of the trustees of the Theological Semi- nary were submitted ; and there was made a nomination of the requisite number of the trustees of the institution. The committee on the canons was continued. It was recommended to the bishops, to consider of and report to the next General Convention, a plan for the Episcopal superintendence of the churches in the states destitute of bishops. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies signified their wish to the House of Bishops, that in their pastoral ad- 59 'firess, they would notice the deficiency of the number of clergy, in eomfparison of the extent of the field of labour ; and that with a view to a remedy of thp evil, they would recommend the instituting of scholarships. This desire was complied with. The committee on the Psalms in metre was continued- For the meeting of the next General Convention, the two houses agreed on the third Wednesday in October, 1832— to be in New-York. The business of the session was concluded with prayer by the presiding bishop, and by singing a part of a psalm. The next meeting of the General Convention was in the year 1832, in the city of New- York. Tt began on Wednes- day, the 17th of October, and ended its session on Wednes- day, the 31st of the same month. The bishops present, were Bishop White, of Pennsylvania ; Bishop Griswold, of the Eastern Diocese ; Bishop Bowen, of South-Carolina ; Bishop Brownell, of Connecticut ; Bishop H. U. Onder- donk, assistant bishop of Pennsylvania; Bishop Meade, assistant bishop of Virginia; Bishop Stone, of Maryland; Bishop B. T. Onderdonk, of New-York^ and Bishop Ives, of North-Carolina. The House of Bishops chose for their secretary, the Rev. Bird Wilson, D. D. of Pennsylvania. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, beginning with a full deputation, chose the Rev. William E. Wyatt, D. D. their president, and the Rev. Henry Anthon, D. D. their jsecretary. The first and principal business occurring and occupying both of the houses, was the singular state of things which had taken place in the diocese of Ohio. The origin of it was as follows : — In forming the constitution of Kenyon College, located at Gambler, in that state, it was provided, that the presidency should be necessarily connected with the Episcopacy of the diocese. In the collegiate department, the principal autho- rity was vested in a board of trustees, to which that of the president, and of every professor, was subordinate and ac- countable. The incongruity of this is obvious. In the event of the charge of insufiiciency or of misconduct in the president, the trustees must sit in judgment on him, not only in that character, but as bishop. If he should resign, or be dismissed from the former of these stations, it must be S'om the latter also. Tiue matter was soon tested, in the person of the Htst 60 bishop. There arose serious and irreconcilable differences between him and all the professors ; in which each party appealed to the trustees, whose power was alike acknow- ledged by them. The trustees decided in favour of the professors. On this the bishop sent in his resignation; and, the convention ef the diocese being then in session, he notified to them the act ; considering it as indrucing a resignation of the Episcopacy. The convention, after a fruitless endeavour, by a committee, to persuade to a recall of the resignation, declared their acceptance of it. They then proceeded to the choice of a successor, and it fell on the Rev. Charles P. M'llvaine, of Brooklyn, in the state of New- York. This transaction was in September, 1831, and there the matter rested until the meeting of the diocesan convention, in the present year, owing to doubts entertained and ex- pressed in former proceedings of our ecclesiastical councils, on the subject of episcopal resignations. At the last diocesan convention of Ohio, the choice of Dr. M'llvaine was re- newed, which brought up the matter before the General Convention, combined with the case of Bishop Chase above related. On this case there was no material difference of opinion in the House of Bishops. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, it led to a wide range of debate on the questions, whether a bishop, have a right to resign for any reasons judged by him to be sufficient ; and on the supposition of the negative of this, whether the diocese of Ohio be not nevertheless vacated by the bishop's abandonment of hia charge, and by his retirement bciyond the limits of our ec- clesiastical union, which cannot be reasonably stretched to a territory not within it. Under the latter of these heads, there cbuld not be any doubt of the fact to which the argu- ment related, but it was earnestly pressed by a respectable portion of the house, that there should be adopted concilia- tory measures, through the interposition of the bishops to renew the harmony between Bishop Chase and his late diocese. This project miscarried, and it does not appear to have been held feasible by any of the bishops. The result was the recommending of Dr. M'llvaine for consecration. The bishops^ on receiving the instrument of his presenta- tion, manifested the determination, that for the acting under it, and to guard against capricious resignations, there should be a canon prescribing the circumstances in which alone such an act should be held valid. Accordinglyr the canon 61 was prepared, and sent to the other house. There it ex- cited a warm opposition, but was at last carried. It is the thirty-second of the code now in force. The bishops held it to be an indispensable preliminary, to the supply of the exigency in Ohio, which, they thought, might else be here- after pleaded, to sanction what they considered and feared a§ a future evil. TT. Out of the case of Bishop Chase, and bearing a relation to it, there arose two incidental subjects, which could not but engage the attention of the convention. To the House of Bishops there were communicated two resolves of the convention of Ohio, directed to two points. The first of the resolves invited the bishops to exercise a visitatorial power over their seminary. The second made to the convention at large the request, that they would no- tice the rules, statutes, and other proceedings of the semi- nary, with a view to the same, as contemplated in the con- stitution; meaning, to secure its adhesion to the Episcopal Church. This document was referred to a committee of both houses. As the first of the said resolves was to be acted on by the bishops only, they declared themselves incompetent to ex- ercise the power of visitors as a body, ^eaving to each bishop the privilege of acting in the premises according to his dis- cretion. The report of the joint committee, accepted by both houses, on the other resolve, contented itself with stating, that the convention of Ohio had not pointed out any con- trariety to the doctrine, or the discipline, or the worship of the Church ; and that they had not been furnished with the copies of the proceedings which they were desired to notice. With the declaration, that they could not at present accede to the request of the convention of Ohio, they said, that they did not intend thereby to accept or to refuse the autho- rity, which, by the seventh section of the constitution of the Theological Seminary in the diocese of Ohio, is conferred on this convention. UU. In this convention, the canons of the Church came under a careful consideration ; time and experience having ren- dered some alterations expedient, and there having been appointed, at the last convention, a committee for the re- modelling of the code ; whose report was made and acted on at the present session. WW. The Church of Alabama was admitted to the federal union, as was also that in the territory of Michigan. 62 There was xead a report from the trusteeis of tlie General Theological Seminary, and a call was made on every paro- chial clergyman of this Church, for an annual collection in aid of the institutio>n. XX. The prayer which has been always used in the General Conventian during their session, being the same which has been provided by the Church of England, was so prepared and enacted, as to be used in all our churches during all future sessions. It was thought not unworthy of the assembled body, to give directions as to the postures to be observed during the administration of the communion. There have been dif- ferent constructions of the rubrics, as to that point, the di- versity of positions, in persons equally desirous of rubrical conformity, bearing a very unsieemly appearance. There being something wanting, to perfect the permission given at the last convention, of the use of the Book of Common Prayer, translated into the French language, the defect was now suppUed. The churches in Mississippi, Alabama, and Lousiana,. were authorized to associate in the choice of a bi^op. There was an alteration made in the constitution of the General Missionary Society, providing, that they shall meet triennially, in the place where the General Convention shall hold its session ; the body of deputies to appoint the times of meeting, and ninejto form a quorum* There was corrected an error in "The Form of Private Baptism," as it stands in the editions of the Book of Com- mon Prayer. The error was pronounced to be typographi- cal, and may be perceived to be such, by a comparison of the form with that of the Church of Englapd : no alteration in the premises having been made by this Church. It was proposed to the next convention, to insert among the occasional prayers, that provided for conventional meet- ings, as above stated. The bishops ordained a rule of seniority and of presidency, to be observed in their body ; also a rule of seniority in re- lation to bishops elect. YY. They also recorded their pointed disallowance of the union of the Episcopacy with the presidency of a college, designed to be indissoluble, as constituted in Ohio. There was proposed and adopted the position, that in the rubric immediately before " The Administration of the Holy Communipn," instead of " standing at the north side of the table," it should be, " standing at the right side of G3 ihe table." This is certainly the most agreeable to the spirit of the rubric, and the most consistent, where a church does not stand east and west, with the table at the former, as were all the churches of England when the liturgy was framed. ZZ. In addition to the election to the Episcopacy of the Rev. Dr. M'llvaine, for Ohio, there came before the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, that of the Rev. John H. Hop- kins, for the diocese of Vermont ; that of the Rev. Benjamin B. Smith, for the diocese of Kentucky ; and that of the Bev. George W. Doane, for the diocese of New-Jersey. At a meeting of the two houses, there was read by the presiding bishop apastoral letter, issued by the House of Bishops. The four reverend brethren elected to the Episcopacy, were consecrated in St. Paul's Chapel, in the city of New- York, on the Slat of October, in the year 1832; the day concluding the forty-sixth year since the administrator of the servifce embarked for England in the said city, with the view of receiving consecration. AAA. After the said act, the convention adjourned, to meet in the city of Philadelphia, on the third Wednesday in August, in the year 1835; there being previously recited some prayers by the presiding bishop, and the 133d Psalm sung. The next General Convention was held in the city of Philadelphia, in the year 1835, from the 19th of August to the 1st of September, inclusive. The session was opened in St. Peter's Church, when a sermon was delivered by the Right Rev. Bishop Stone ; and prayers were read by the Rev. Dr. Wyatt, and the Rev. Dr. Burroughs. The Rev. Dr. Wyatt was chosen president of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies; and the Rev. Dr. Anthon, secretary of the same. la the House of Bishops there was prepared an admis- sion into the ecclesiastical union, of the diocese of Illinois, with their bishop, the Right Rev. Philander Chase, D. D. who, having resigned the Episcopacy of the diocese of Ohio, was considered as eligible to this new charge. The measure was concurred in by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. BBB. The House of Bishops disagreed to the pi'oposal of the last General Convention, altering the rubric before " The Selections of Psalms ;" which was concurred in by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. CCC. 64 The House of Bishops agreed to the proposal of the las« General Convention, altering the rubric before the com- munion service, by substituting the word " right" for the word " north." This also was agreed to by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. DDD. There took place an entire change in the organization of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society. The convention are, in future, to be that body. They are to act through the medium of a board, the members of which were accordingly chosen towards the close of the session. Under this board, and accountable to it, there are twa committees, one for the domestic department, and the other for the foreign. They are located, the former in New- York, and the latter in Philadelphia ; with liability to the change of place, at the discretion of the board of missions, EEE.* Provision was made for the division of the larger die- cesses ; when, in their opinion respectively, from increase of the Episcopal population, such a measure shall become necessary to the giving of due effect to the Episcopacy, For the accomplisliing of this, there was required an alter- ation of the second article of the constitution, which wa» therefoi-e recommended. FFF. To the board of missions, constituted as above, the con- vention committed the providing for the support of two missionary bishops ; one for the state of Louisiana, and the territories of Florida and Arkansas ; and the other for Misr souri and Indiana. For the former of thesp departments^ the House of Bishops nominated the Rev. Francis L. Hawks^ D. D. ; and for the latter, the Rev. Jackson Kemper, D. D. In each of the cases, the House of Clerical and Lay Depu- ties concurred, by a unanimous election. GGG. There was also provision made for the consecrating of a bishop for any country exterior to the United States, where such a measure should be expedient for the discharge of the commission to preach the gospel to all nations. HHH. In the House of Bishops certain proposals were matured, for the better exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. But, the proposals being sent to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, towards the close of the session, they voted a reference of the subject to the next General Convention, and in this the House of Bishops concurred. HI. * Both boards are now in New-York, 65 There was referred to certain clergymen, acquainted with the German language, the providing of a translation of the liturgy therein. KKK. It was determined by both houses, that in the confession in the morning and evening prayer, the voices of the minis- ter and of the congregation should be concurrent; and that the word " Amen" should be in the Roman letter, to show that it is to be repeated by both. In the same letter the word is to be printed, and for the same reason, in the Lord's Prayer, after the confession, in the trisagion and in the Creed. LLL. Directions were issued, and committees appointed, for correct editions of the Bible, and of the Book of Common Prayer in future. MMM. Both bouses accepted, from the Rev. Dr. Hawks, his present of certain books and other documents, illustrative of the early history of the Episcopal Church. NNN. Recent circumstances having rendered a few additional canons expedient; and experience having suggested the use of a few alterations of those now in force ; the said exigencies were provided for. Of measures to that effect there is no need of a recital here ; as the canons, in their present form, will, it is presumed, be printed in a separate pamphlet. OOO. 9 2. ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS REMARKS. Additional statements, &c. A. Page 19. Of the (Question of American Episcopacy, as agitated in the Colonies. There were two periods which were especially productive of pamphlets and newspaper essays on this subject. The first of these periods was about the time of the civil con- "troversy, which arose on the occasion of the stamp act- The question of American Episcopacy was brought forward in a pamphlet by the Rev. East Apthorp, missionary at Cambridge, Massachusetts, a native of that province, but afterward possessed of several considerable preferments in England. His production was answered by Dr. Mayhew, a congregational minister of Boston- Several others en- gaged in the dispute ; among whom was Archbishop Seeker, although his name was not prefixed to his pamphlet, which Jias been since printed in his works. The other period was a few years before the revolutionary waT, when the Rev- Dr. Chandler, of Elizabeth-Town, New- Jersey, made an appeal to the public, in favour of the object of obtaining an American Episcopate. There were various answers to the pamphlet and defences of it, in other pamphlets published by the Doctor and others- In addition to these, the newspapers abounded with periodical and other productions. The author of the present performance was at that time a youth ; but from what he then heard and observed, he believes it was impossible to have obtained the concurrence of a respectable number of laymen in any measure for the obtaining of an American bishop- What could have been the reason of this, when there was scarcely a member of the Episcopal Church who would not have been ready to avow his preference of Episcopacy to Pres- f^ytcry ; and of a form of prayer, to that which is eitcai- 70 Note to page 19. porary ? It is believed to have been owing to an existing: jealousy, that American Episcopacy would have been made an instrument of enforcing the new plan of civil govern- ment, which had been adopted in Great-Britain ; in con- trariety to original compact aad future security for freedom : a regard to which was as prevalent among Episcopalians, as among any description of their fellow-citizens. Perhaps these sentiments may be supposed to be con- tradicted by the circumstance, that during the revolutionary war, a considerable number of the American people became inclined to the British cause; and, that of them, a great proportion were Episcopalians. But this is not inconsistent with the sentiments expressed. On the subject of parlia- mentary taxation, it would probably have been impossible to have found in any city, town, or vicinity of the colonies, such a number of persons not vehemently opposed to it, as would have been sufficient to form a congregation. Out of the sphere of governmental influence, there was scarcely a man of that description. When the controversy became ripened into war, some fell off from the cause, from danger to their persons and their properties ; others, from the sentiment that the public evil hazarded might prove worse than that intended to be avoided ; and others perhaps, although very few, from scruples of conscience. They who were influenced by these, had stopped short at the taking ©f arms ; for which, the passion was general. To find freedom in this step, and yet to withdraw while the cause ©f so important a measure existed, may have been the dictate of prudence, but could not have been that of con- science. AH the aforesaid circumstances operated with increased vigour, when the question of independence was forced on the reluctant public. Had the British arms suc- ceeded, and thus the right of parliamentary taxation been established — ^for there was no offer of relinquishment of it, until after the alliance with France — a membership of the Episcopal Church would have been little more than a poli- tical mark, to distinguish those who should advocate claims hostile to American interests. To persons who may give their attention to the colonial history, the question may occur — Why did not the British government so far consult its own interests, as to autho- rize the consecrating of bishops for America? This ques- tion shall be considered, on the ground of views taken of past incidents. Any ministry, who should have ventured en the measure, would have raised up against themselves Note to page 19. 71 the whole of the dissenting interest in England, and the weight of that interest was more important to them in their estimation than the making of a party for the mother eountry in the colonies The matter is resolvable into the ignorance of government of the real state of the people, whom they expected to govern so easily, at so great a disr tance. Again, this ignorance is resolvable into their de- pending on information received from persons whose judg- ments, or whose honesty, they ought, the most of all, to have distrusted: an error, which hung heavily on all their pro- ceedings, until the period when it ceased to be of conse- quence. Lest it should be thought, that th« dissenting interest in England has been magnified, it ought to be known, that the forces of the different denominations of dissenters — with the exception of the people called Quakers — was concentrated in a committee in London. The author was acquainted with a member of that committee in England, in 1771 and 1772, and knew that he had free access to the ministry. The impression then received, was its being an object of government to avoid any thing of a religious nature, which might set the dissenters in a political opposition. They had great influence in elections to parliament. As to the laity's uniting in an appUcation for the Episco- pacy^ it is natural to suppose that this, if to be found any where, would have been found in Virginia, a province set- tled by members of the Church of England, who were still *he great mass of its inhabitants. How far they were from favouring the endeavour, may be learned from the following statement. In the year 1 771, a convention of twelve clergymen, there being about a hundred in the province, and, after a larger convention had rejected the measure now adopted, drew up a petition to the crown for the appointment of an American bishop. Four of the clergy protested, and, because of their protest, received the thanks of the House of Burgesses. When it is considered, that a great majority of that house must have been of the establishment; that there never had been any attempt among them to throw off any property of its distinctive character ; that they must have felt the want of ecclesiastical discipline over immoral clergymen, and the burden of sending to England for ordination ; there seems no way of accounting for their conduct, but the danger re- sulting from the newly introduced system of colonial govern- ment. This is warranted by the absurdity of the reasons 72 Note to page 19. on which tlic protest of the four clergymen was bottomeJ ? among which, perliaps the most absurd, was professed re- spect for the diocesan authority of the bishops of London ; it being notorious, that the then bishop and bis inmiediate predecessors had manifested zeal for the appointment now opposed. In consequence of the proceeding of the House of Burgesses, a convention of the clergy of New-York and New-Jer3ey published an address to the Episcopalians in Virginia, drawn up l^ Dr. Chandler. It must be evident on reading the address, that the reasoning of it was unan- swerable; and that, as the address expresses, there were, on the other side " only unreasonable jealousies and ground- less susjMcions;" unreasonable and groundless, so far as they were declared, and referring to titles to civil offices, and the like ', while there was a sentiment silently operat- ing, to the effect above stated. Whether the address of the twelve clergy crossed the Atlantic is not here known. This was to depend on its being signed by a majority of the clergy of the province ; which was pi-obably prevented by the public sentiment. It is remarkable, that of the two gentlemen appointed by the House of Burgesses to deliver their thanks to the four protesters, the first nanted of them — Richard Henry L«e, fifteen years after, and then presi^ dent of Congress, did not hesitate to furnish to the two bishops who went for consecration, a certificate, that the business on which they went was consistent with the civil institutions of the American republic* Certain it is, that no endeavours for a lay petition for Episcopacy were made. Some accounted for this, on the principle, that as the wished for bishop would have a rela- tion to the clergy only, the matter concerned them and none others. But what sort of a bishop would he have been, who should have had no relation to the laity, except through the medium of the clergy? The well informed advocates for Episcopacy must doubtless have known the imperfection of such a scheme : but they who suggested the proviso must ha,\e considered it as a prudle^ial eX' pedient. * For the correctness of the opinion expressed of the Ktter inability of thr British administrations for the government of the colonies, there may be here s reference to Bissett's History of the Reign of George lU. Thia antnor wrote in> opposition to Belsham, and may, therefore, be supposed, on the whole, favourable to government. But he points out, with candour, the contrariety between the views of ministers and the conseciuences of their acts — etlidently bottomed ois false information, and their relying on the persons whom they blight the most to have distrusted. Note to page 19. 73 Had l^ishops been consecrated for America on the plaa proposed by Archbishop Seeker ; the cWil government no further interfering than in the grant of the royal permis- sion ; it is difficult to perceivCj how hinderance could have been attempted by any description of persons, without an avowal of intolerance ; and without a disposition to un- provoked insurrection, beyond what can be supposed from any thing that passed of a political description. That good prelate's scheme is unfolded in his letter to Mr. Walpole, printed among the prelate's works. From the circum- stance, that, since the revolution, an act of Parliament was held necessary to permit the giving of a beginning to the American succession, it may be thought, that the archbishop was mistaken in his opinion of the sufficiency of the license of the king. But this would not be a correct inference. The case became altered by the event of American inde- pendence : and although there was legislative interference in regard to the Church in the United States, there have been bishops consecrated for Nova-Scotia and Canada, on royal authority only ; agreeably to the opinion which had been expressed by Archbishop Seeker. On the ground of the practicability of giving bishops to America, without invoking the aid of Parliament ; it was the opinion of the author, at the time of the controversy here noticed, that no disturbance would have happened, however threatened by some who were indeed very violent on the subject. But he is not backward to acknowledge, that he thought he foresaw difficulties to tlie Episcopal Church, from the other source here hinted. It was not unlikely, that the British government, had they sanctioned an Episcopacy in the colonies, would have endeavoured to render it subser- vient to the support of a party, on the plan of the newly projected, domination. In this case, the effects would have been hostile to the estimation of Episcopacy in the niinds of the people; the great mass of whom, including the best informed, and those who had the property of the country in their hands, had set themselves in a determined, and, as the author thinks, a justifiable opposition to the new system. It is well known, that religious opinion has been often made, by circumstances, the test and the instrument of a political party ; when the views of the party had not any more natural connexion with the opinion, than with its opposite. Thus, in England, Arminianism was conceived of as allied to absolute monarchy, and Calvinism to popular privilege ; at the same time that, in the United Netherlands, 10 74 Note to page to. the latter sapported the monarchical, aod the former the republican branch of the constitution. The grievances which produced the American war, were the result of claims of one people over another ; and ffot of the question, as to what would be the wisest distribution of the internal powers of either. Besides, it may be remarked, that Epis- copacy, as now settled in America, must be confessed at least as analogous as Presbytery— ^the authqr thinks much more so — to the plan of civil government, vifhrch mature deliberation has established over the union ; and to those plans which, even during the heats of popular co/nmotion, were adopted for the individual states. The sentiment wished to be here impressed, is, that Episcopacy, under the old regimen, would have probably been considered as sub- servient to an authority, of the decline and final abrogation of which there were causes, which must have produced their efFectiat last ; if the effect had not been hastened much faster than could have been expected, by intemperate coun- sels and by injudicious measures. It would he a misinterpretation of what the author has here written, were it appHed as a censure on what some of his brethren, who were before him, have* advanced in favour of their right to an Episcopate. Far from this, be honours their memories ; and considers the arguments on which they rested their claim, as unanswerable. What has been said, is merely an argurnent from certain causes existing in the character and the circumstances of the American people, to what would have been the effects in a supposed case, which did not occur. It may be thought, that there should be allqwed a large deduction from the weight of the observations made, on account of the proportion of the American people, whose conduct or whose wishes were in contrariety to the ge- neral sentiment of their countrymen. But this is apparent only. There were no persons more hostile to the British claims, than they who withdrew from the resistance of theni : this with very few exceptions. When the contro- versy issued in war, and afterward in independence, at each of the periods there was a large defection from the American cause, produced: by the motives which have been detailed .^ No doubt,, the number of dissentients was increased by unjustifiable measures of the newly erected governments in some of the states. Still, the sentiment was universal, of the sacred nature of the rights invaded, and would again Note io page W. 75 have had its effect on the minds of the temporary advocatea of Great-Britain, had the war terminated in her favour. Further, the opinions here expressed may seem indica- tive of aversion to the British character', in the author's mind. Far from entertaining any such aVersion, he prefers the laws and the manners of the British nation tothose of any other; either from partiality to the country of his an- cestors, or, as he believes, in consequence of an impartial comparison. But he reasons on the principle, which he thinks warranted by the experience of all ages, that national domination, under whatever circumstances, will be tyranny. An individual may be a tyrant, or otherwise, according to his personal character: but no people ever stuck at any crimes which advanced their wealth at the expense of those governed by them ; especially, if it were at a distance. In short, however great the inconveniences brought on the Episcopal Church in America by the revolution , the author has all along cherished the hope, that they will not be permanently so injurious to her, as would have been her alliance with a distant power, in hostility to the common interests of the country; accompanied by the jealousies and the odium which would have been attached to that circumstance. Perhaps it may be thought, that a deduction should be made from any apparent weight in the theory here deliver- ed, on account of the establishments existing in Maryland and Virginia ; which would not have been overset by the British government. The subsequently prostrate condition of the Church in these states, may be urged as a proof of the advantages which would have attended a continuance of the establishment. But this reasoning is inadmissible, if, as before supposed, the prostration was owing to the preceding system, of an amendment of which there was no prospect. Besides, it should be remembered, that before the revolution, the parts of those states, now the most populous, were fast settling by persons differing from the establishment. Even in the old parts, numbers were leaving the Church, to attend the ministrations of preachers, who had recently availed themselves of the very little regard entertained for their clergy, to produce a popular desertion of the Church itself. Under such circumstances, it was hardly to be expected, that the establishment would have redounded to the reputation and the increase of the Church generally. It was becoming more and more unpopular; with some, because it was not considered as promoting 'ye Note to page W. piety; and with these and others, because they thought the provision for it a useless burden on the community.* There is a remarkable fact in Virginia, countenancing the sentiments delivered. After the fall of the establish- ment, a considerable proportion of the clergy continued to enjoy the glebes — the law considering them &s freeholds during life — without performing a single act of sacred duty, except, perhaps, that of marriage. They knew that their public ministrations would not have been attended. B. Page 20. Of the Question of using the Liturgy, exclusively of the Prayers for the King and the Royal Family. As the cessation of the public worship of the Episcopal Church was very much owing to scruples on this point, it may be thought important, in reference to such future political changes, as are rendered possible by the uncer- tainty of human affairs. So far as the author knows or believes, the difficulties which arose on this account were not of great extent in the southern states. In Maryland an,d in Virginiaj there were many of the clergy whose connexions with their flocks were rendered, by their personal characters, dependent wholly on the continuance of the establishment, and, of course, fell with it. Again, many worthy ministers entertained scruples in regard to the oath of allegiance to the states, * On the question of burden, as detached from all other considerations, there \s a fallacy not generally perceived. Under the present system, if the gospel cshonld be supported in the states concerned, as may now be cohfidendy expected, the weight of the expense will fall dispvoportionably on peopleof moderate means. During the establishment it fell on the rich, in tolerable propoiliou to their weallh. There is another fallacy in this business, in the reproacn bronght on the Church, when it ought to have fallen on the want of wisdom In the malung of ministerial endowments, without some provision for ministerial fidelity. Hence, however, a great proportion of the unpopularity, which led to the -seizure and the sale of ohurches and glebes by the legislature of Virginia. It ought to be remembered, to the honour of Patrick Henry, thai he resisted the said act, and that it could never be obtained until after his decease. This eminent man has been accused, of having always set his sail to the popular gale. There ure several facts against the charge, and this is one of them : for he had to resist, through many years, the united efforts of men hostile to revealed religion in every form, and of other men who were professors of religion, but cherished rancorous hatred against the Church of England in particular. The author is the more free in spealsing of the act of the legislature of Virginia, as it will go down to posterity loaded with the reproach of unconstitutionality, by the Supreme Court of the United States : although their judgment will have no «gect .beyond the le of Episcopal presidency ; and the general object was such as ought to have been provided for. Accordingly, the article passed, as it stands on the jourrlal ; that is, with silence as to the point in question. It was considered, that practice might settle what had better be provided for by law; and that even such provision might be the result of a more mature con- sideration of the subject. The latter expectation was jus- tified by the event. The other article provided, that 6very clergyman should be amenable to the' convention of the state to which he should belong. This was objected to by the English bishops, as appears in the letter of the archbishops of Canterbury and York ; who there complain, that it is " a degradation of the clerical, and much more of the Episcbpal character." The foundation of this complaint, like that of the other, 13 98- Note to page 2i. was rather in omission, than in any thing positiveFy de- elared. For the bishop's being amenable to the convention in the state to which he belongedr does not necessarily involve any thing- more, than that he should be triable by laws of their enacting, himself being a part of the body r and it did not follow, that he might be deposed or censured, either by lawmen or by presbyters^ This, however,- ought to have been guarded against: but t» have attem^d it, while the convention were in the temper excited by the altercations concef nin^the fifth article,- would' have been to- no purpose. In this whole business, there was encountered a prejudice- entertained by many of the clergy in otbec states ; wh» thought, that nothing should have been done towards the organizing of the Church, until the obtaining of the Epis- copacy. This had beenmuch insisted on, in the preceding year, in New- York. Let us — it was said — first have aa head, and then, let us proceed to regulate the body. It was answered, on that occasion — let us gather the scattered linibs, and then let the head be superadd«d. Certainly,, the different Episcopalian congregations knew of no union Before the revolution ; except what was the result of the connexion Which they in common had with the bishop of London. The authority of that bishop being withdrawn,, what right had the Episcopalians in any state, or in any one part of it,^ to choose a bishc^ for those in any other f" And until an union were effected, what is there in Chris- tianity generally, or in the principles of this Church in particular, to hinder them from, taking different courses in; different places, as to all things not necessary to salvation i* Which might have produced tfifferent liturgies, different articles, Episcopacy from different sources, and, in. short, very many churches, instead of one extending over the United States ; and that,, without any ground for the charge of schism, or of the invasion of one another's rights^ The- course taken has embraced all the different congregations. It is far from being certain, that the same event would have been produced by any other plan that mig.ht have been de- vised. For instance, let it be supposed, that in any district of Connecticnt, the clergy and the- people^ not satisfied with the choice made of Bishoft Seabury, or with the contem- plated plan of settlement, bad acted for themselves, instead of joining with their brethren. It would be impossible t» prove the unlawfulness of such a scheme ; or, until an or- ganization were made, that the minor part were bound to Note to page :24. 99 wibmit te the will of the majority. There was no likeli- iiood of such an indiscreet proceeding in Connecticut. But in some other departments which might be named, it would not have been surprising. Let it be remarked, that in the preceding hypothesis there is supposed to have been, in the different neighbourhoods, a bond of union not dissolved by the revolution. This sentiment is congenial with Chris- tianity itself, and with Christian discipline in the beginning ; the connexion not existing congregationally, but, in every instance, without dependence on the houses in which the worship of the different portions of the aggregate body may be carried on. Section II. Of the Measures taken to obtam the Episcopacy. The expression should be noticed, on account of the pretence made by some, that the Episcopal Church in the United States begun with its obtaining of the Episcopacy. According to this notion, where dioceses exist independently on one' another, as was the condition of all Christendom for a long time after the preaching of the apostles, on the decease of every bishop, his church became extinct. A new name does not characterize the church as new, but may arise from civil changes, in various ways to be conceived •of. What was called formerly " the Church of England in America," did not cease to exist on the removal of the Episcopacy (rfthe bishop of London, by the providence of Ood, but assumed a new name, as the dictate of propriety. It may be matter of surprise, that, after the clamour made but a few years before this period^ on the proposal of an American Episcopacy, and considering the fashion of objecting to it prevailing even among a considerable proportion of our own communion, there should now be a unanimous applibation for it, from a fair representation of the Churth in seven states of the Union; the lay part consisting principally of gentlemen who had been active in the late revolution, and made under circumstances which required the consent of the very power we had been at war with.* The truth is, that if there existed any inclination to object — and there is no certainty of the contrary — it was prevented by what is to be related. ' In evidence of the unanimity, there is in possession'Of the authpr, the origind instrument, signed by all the clerical and all the lay members who gave atteud- juBoe on tiie business of the convention. 10§ Note to page.QA. A few months before the present period, Bishop Seabury had arrived in Connecticut, with consecration from the non-juring bishops of Scotland. The clergy in that state, not liking the complexion of the measures taken for the calling of a General Convention, wrote to several of the southern clergy, inviting them to a convention to be held in the summer at New-Haven. What answer they received from others is not here known: but that of Philadelphia thanked them for the invitation ; congratulated Bishop Seabury on his arrival; apologized for the not coming, by the expectation of the convention in September; and invited the clergy of Connecticut to attend the latter. When the time of the convention in Philadelphia drew near, Bishop Seabury wrote to Dr. Smith, then living in Maryland, a letter, which he enclosed, under cover, to Dr. Chandler, of Elizabeth-Town, who sent it, in like manHer, to the author, desiring him to read, and then forward it to Dr. Smith. In this- letter, a copy of which the author has now before him. Bishop Seabury, besides objecting to sundry of the measures taken in the southern states, declared himself in very strong terms against the admission of the laity into ecclesiastical councils; and indeed against that of presbyters also, except into the diocesan. For although his expressions are, that they were not admitted into general councils, and this is very indefinite, yet it would seem from the connexion, that he disapproved of submitting the general concerns of the American Church to any other than bishops. It is the arrangement of the Church in which Bishop Seabury received his Episcopacy. This letter, which, agreeably to a desire expressed in it, was laid before the convention, produced some animadver- sions. A few of the lay gentlemen spoke more warmly than the occasion seemed to justify, considering, that the letter appeared. to contain the honest sentiments of the writer, delivered in inoffensive terms. It was addressed to a gentleman who had long lived in habits of acquaintance with the writer. And as for its being designed for the hearing of the body then assembled, it should have been remembered, that the clergy of Connecticut had been invited to the meeting, by those at whose desire they had appeared themselves. On this ground, they were answered J)y some of the clergy — particularly by Dr. Andrews. For the letter, see Appendix, No. 4. It naturally happened in regard to any apprehensions entertained of an excessive hierarchy, that they influenced iSloie to page 24. 1(»1 to the very application to England, whicli bad' formerly, from the very same cause, been. contemplated with jealousy. It was generally understood, that the door was open to consecration in Scotland; or at least, that if there should be any impediment, it must arise from some particulars, which had been thought too republican by many. That the clergy unanimously, and that a very great body of the lajty, would adhere to Episcopacy, was well known; and therefore, how natural the recourse to a quarter in which it was thought there would be less stiffness, on the points objected to by Bishop Seabury ! it njay be added — in which the political , principles obtaining, although monarchical, were not such as favoured arbitrary power. It ought to be understood, that this is the supposed strain of reasoning of a few only. The majority of the convention certainly thought it a matter of choice, and even required by decency, to apply, in the first instance, to the Church of which the American had been till now a part. No doubt, the sentiment was strengthened by the general disapprobation entertained in Araeiica, of the prejudices which, in the year 1688, in Scotland,' had deprived the Episcopal Church of Jier establishment, and had kept her ever since in hostility to the family on the throne. As to Bishop Seabury's failure in England, the causes of it, as stated in his letter, seemed to point out a way of obviating the difficulty in the present case. The same causes had been, with no considerable variety, stated to the author in a letter from the Rev. J3r. Murray, formerly of Reading in this state, who declared his full conviction, that a proper application, from such a body as was in contemplation, that is, the present convention, of whose intended meeting he had been informed, would be followed by success. As the doctor was supposed to have conversed with leading characters on the subject, which was found afterward to have been the case, his letter had great weight in encouraging the measure. So it was, then, that the projected application found no opposition. The duty of proposing a mode of application was added to the other duties of the general committee which had been appointed. As one of a sub-committee, the author drafted the resolves and the address, as they stand on the journals, with the exception of a i^ew verbal alterations. Thus a foundation was laid for the procuring of the present EpiscQpacy* It was a prudent provision of the convention, to instruct the deputies from the respective states, to apply to the civil authorities eaisting in them 103 Note to page 24. respectively, for their sanction of the measure, in order to avoid one of the impediments which had stood in the way of Bishop Seabury. The address above alluded to, which was the first step in the correspondence with the English prelates, is in the Appendix, No. 5. The Episcopalian public may be supposed to be satisfied that the course taken was the best, in every point of view, and that it can never suflTer by a comparison with any other mode which might have been pursued. To have abandoned the Episcopal succession, would have' been in opposition to primitive order and ancient habits ; and besides^ would at least have divided the Church^ To have had recourse to Scotland, independently on the objections entertained against the political principles of the non-jurors of that country, would not have been proper, without previous disappointment on a request made to the mother Church. Another resource remained, in foreign ordination ; which had been made the easier by the act of the British parliament, passed in the preceding year, to enable the bishop of London to ordain citizens or subjects of foreign countries without exacting the usual oaths. But, besides that this would have kept the Church under the same hardships which had heretofore existed, and had been so long complained of; dependence on a foreign country in spirituals, when there had taken place independence in temporals, is what no prudent person would have pleaded for. Section HI. Of the Alterations in the Book of Common Prayer. When the members of the convention first came together, very few, or rather, it is believed, none of them entertained thoughts of altering the liturgy, any further than to accommodate it to the revolution. There being no express authority to the purpose, the contrary was implied in the sending of deputies, on the ground of the recommendation and proposal from New- York, which presumed that the book, with the above exception, should remain entire. The only Church to which this remark does not apply, is that of Virginia ; which authorized its deputies to join in a review, liable however to a rejection by their own convention. Every one, so far as is here known, wished for alterations in the different offices. But it was thought, at New- York, in the preceding year, that such an enterprise could not be undertaken, until the Church should be consolidated and Note to page 24* 103 cxrganized. Perhaps it would have been better, if the same opinion had been continued and acted on. But it happened otherwise. Some of the members hesitated at making^ the book so permanent, as it wonld have been by the fourth article of the recommendatory instrument. Arguments were held in favour of a review, from change of language, and from the notorious fact, that there were some matters universally held exceptionable, independently on doctrine. A moderate review, fell in with the sentiments and the wishes of every member. Added to all this, there gained ground a confident persuasion, that the general mind of the communion wonld be so gratified by it, as that acquiescence might be confidently expected. On these considerations, the matter was uadertaken. The alterations were prepared by another sub-division of the general committee than that to which the author belonged. When brought into the committee, they were not reconsidered ; because the ground would have been to go over again in the convention. Accordingly, he cannot give an account of any arguments arising in the preparatory stage of the business. Even in the convention, there were but few points canvassed, with any material difference of principle : and those only shall be noticed. The first controversy of this description was introduced, on a motion made by the Hon. Mr. Page, of Virginia, since governor of that state, to leave out the first four petitions of the litany, and, instead of them, to introduce a short petition, which he had drawn up, more agreeable to his ideas of the divine persons recognized in those petitions. The mover declared, that he had no objection to the invoking of our blessed Saviour, whose divinity the prayer acknowledged, and whom he considered as invoked through the whdle of the liturgy; which, he thought, might be defended by scripture. The objection lay to the word " Trinity," which he remarked to be unauthorized by scripture, and a foundation of much unnecessary disputation. But he said, that the leaving out of the fourth petition only, in which only the word occurred, would leave the other petitions liable to the charge of acknowledging three Gods; and therefore, he moved to strike out the whole. The Rev, Dr. West, of Baltimore, answered Mr. Page, in a speech in which the doctor appeared to be in great agitation, partly because, as he said, he was unused to nnprepared speaking, but evidently the more so, from his apprehensions arising from what he supposed to be the signal for aiming^ 104 NUetopage2i. at very hazardous and essential alterations. Perhaps muck more would have been said, but during Dr. West's speech ,^^ it was whispered about, that there was really no use in going into such a controversy ;, that Mr. Page had made the motion, merely to preserve consistency of conduct; that he had attempted the same thing in the sub-committee, and well knew, from what had passed, that there was no prospect of success, but that he could not dispense with the bringing of the question before the body. Accordingly, as soon as Dr. West had finished, it was put and lost without a division.* The next material question, to the bestof the recollection retained, was on a motion for framing a service for thefourth of July, This was the most injudicious step taken by the convention. Might they not have foreseen, that every clergyman, whose political priilciples interfered with the appointment, would be under a strong temptation to cry down the intended book, if it were only to get rid of the oiFensive holiday? Besides this point of .prudence, was it not the dictate of moderation, to avoid the introducing of extraneous matter of difference of opinion, in a Church that was to be built up .'' Especially, when there was in contemplation the moderating of religious tests, was it consistent to introduce a political one ? It was said, that the revolution being now accomplished, all the clergy ought, as good citizens, to conform to it ; and to uphold, as far as their influence extended, the civil system which had been established. Had the question been concerning the praying for the prosperity of the commonwealths, and for the persons of those who rule in. them, the argument would have been conclusive ; and, indeed, this had been done by all the remaining clergy, however disaffected they might have been, throughout the war. But, the argument did not apply to a retrospective approbation of the origin of the civil constitutions, or rather, to a profession of such approbation, contrary to known fact. This was one of the few occasions on which the author used the privilege reserved by him on his acceptance of the presidency, to deliver his opinion. To his great surprise, * In a controversy since moved in Boston, BishopProvoost has teen name^^ as having endeavoured to accomplish the oniission of the acknowledgment of thb Trinity. It is not true : and the error may be, supposed to have ariseu from what has been related of the effort of Mr. Page. There have been variotts- misrepresentations of the matter, Which have Jnade it the more flecessary to state the fact. Note to page 24". 105 there was but one gentleman — ^and he a professed friend ta American independence — who spoke on the same side of the question ; and there were very ievr, if any, who voted with the two speakers against the measure. Bodies of men are more apt than individuals to calculate on an implicit submission to their determinations. The present was a striking instance of the remark. The members of the convention seem to have thought themselves so established in their station of ecclesiastical legislators, that they might expect of the many clergy who had been averse to the American revolution, the adoption of this service ; although, by the use of it, they must make an implied acknowledgment of their error, in an address to Almighty God. What must further seem not a little extraordinary, the service was principally arranged and the prayer alluded to was composed, by a reverend gentleman, (Dr. Smith) who had written and acted against the declaration of independence, and was unfavourably looked on by the supporters of it, during the whole revolutionary war. His conduct, in the present particular, was different from what might have been expected from his usual discernment ; but he doubtless calculated on what the good of the Church seemed to him to require, in consequence of a change of circumstances; and he was not aware of the effect which would be produced by the retrospective property of the appointment. The greater stress is laid on this matter, because of the notorious fact, that the majority of the clergy could not have used the service, without subjecting themselves to ridicule and censure. For the author's part, having no hindrance of this sort, he contented himself with having opposed the measure, and kept the day from respect to the requisition of the convention ; but could never hear of its being kept, in above two or three places besides Philadelphia. He is thus particular in recording the incidents attached to the matter stated, with the hope of rendering it a caution to ecclesiastical bodies, to avoid that danger into which human nature is so apt to fall, of governing too much. On the subject of the articles, a dispute arose in regard to the article on justification ; not as it was at last agreed on, but as it was proposed by the sub-committee. The objection was urged principally by the secretary of the convention — the Rev. Dr. Griffith — and by the author. The proposed article was at last withdrawn, and the words of the thirty-nine articles, on that subject, were restored. In this there is certainly no superaddition to 14 105 Note to page %i. what is held generally by divines of the Church of Englaijdv- As to the substitute proposed, the objection made to it, was its being liable to a construction contrary to the great evangelical truth, that salvation is of grace. It would have been a forced construction, but not to be disregarded. Some wished to get rid of the new article introduced concerning predestination, without stating any thing in its place. This, it is probable, would have been better than the proposed article, which professes to say something on the subject, yet in reality says nothing. But many gentlemen were of opiniqti, that the subject was not to be passed over in silence altogether ; and therefore consented to the article on predestination, as it stands on the proposed book. The opinion of the author was, that the article should be accommodated, not to individual condition, and to everlasting reward and punishment, but to national designation, and to a state of covenant with God in the present life. Ahhough this is a view of the subject still entertained by him, yet he has been since convincedj that the introducing of it as an article would have endangered needless controversy on the meanings of the terms predestination and election, as used in the New Testament. If we cannot do away the ground of contro- versy heretofore laid, it at least becomes us to avoid the furnishing of new matter for the excitement of it. As to the article in the proposed book, although no one professed scruples against what is there affirmed, yet there seemed a difficulty in discovering for what purpose it was introduced^ The author never met with any who were satisfied with it. On the subject of original sin, an incident occurredj strongly marking the propensity already noticed, unwarily to make private opinion the standard of public faiths The sub-committee had introduced into this article the much controverted passage in the seventh chapter of the Epistle to tiie Romans, beginning at the' ninth verse ; and they had applied it as descriptive of the Christian state. The con- struction is exacted by a theory, than which nothing was further from that of the gentleman (Dr. Smith) who would have bound this sense of the passage on the Church. The interpretation generally giveff by divines of the Church of England, makes the words descriptive of man's unregene- rate state, in which there is a struggle between nature and grace, to, the extent of the terms made use of in scripture. This seems necessary to a conformity with the Christian eharacter, as drawn iti innumerable places. It was on a Note to page Qi. 1U7 -proposal of the author, "that the article was altered in this particular, although the gentleman who had drafted it not only earnestly contended for his construction of the text, •but could not be made sensible of the danger which would have resulted from the establishing of that construction, as a test to every candidate for orders. Less prominent debates on the subject of the articles are not here noticed. Whatever is novel in them, was taken from a book in the possession of the Rev. Dr. Smith. The book was anonymous, and was one of the publications which hav^abounded in England, projecting changes in the established articles. On this business of the review of the Book of Common Prayer and of the articles, the convention seem to have fallen into two capital errors, independently on the merits of the alterations themselves. The first error was the ordering of the printing of a large edition of the book, which did not well consist with the principle of mere pro- posal. Perhaps much of the opposition to it arose from this very thing, which seemed a stretch of power, designed to effect the introduction of the book to actual use, in order to prevent a discussion of its merits. The other error was the ordering of the use of it in Christ Church, Philadelphia, on the occasion of Dr. Smith's sermon, at the conclusion of the session of the convention. This hdped to confirm the opinion, of its being to be introduced with a high hand, and subjected the clergy of Philadelphia to extraordinary diffi- culty ; for they continued the use of the liturgy, agreeably to the~alterations, on assurances given by many gentlemen, that they would begin it in their respective churches imme- diately on their return. This the greater number of them never did ; and there are known instances, in each of which the stipulation was shrunk back from, because some influen- tial member of a congregation was dissatisfied with some one of the alterations. This is a fact which shows very strongly, how much weight of character is necessary to such changes as may be thought questionable. Section IV. Of sundry Measures and Events, connected vnth the Acts of the Convention of 1185, The first particular claiming attention under this head, is the publication of the Book of Common Prayer; that is, of the edition which has received the name of the proposed Joook. 108 Note to page 24. Dr. Smith, Dr. Wharton, and" the author, who were appointed to this service, gave their application to it without delay. But here, unexpected difficulties occurred, which are taken notice of, principally with the view of guarding against the like in future ecclesiastical proceedings. The committee had been authorized to make verbal alter- ations, but were restrained from departing, either in form or in substance, from what had been agreed on. Setting aside the questions arising on this distinction, the imperfec- tions evidently remaining on some points by reason of haste, and which would have been remedied had they been at- tended to, and, added to this, the importunities of some of the clergy, who pressed the committee to extend their powers pretty far, in full confidence that the Hberty would be acceptable to all, were such, that, in the end, they were drawn on to take a greater latitude than ought to be al- lowed in such a work. Besides discretion as to verbal alterations, the commit- tee were fully empowered on the subject of the tables, and on that of the selection of reading psalms. The author's proposal was to take whole psalms, selecting such as fall in with the general subjects of divine worship, and leaving the oflSciating minister to his choice, among those which should be selected. But the other members of the committee were of opinion, that as much should be retained as could not well be objected to, on the score of being unsuitable parts of Christian prayer and praise. The consequence of this, was a charge of having treated scripture irreverently, by the leaving out of particular passages, on the principle of their being offensive. Although the omissions were not made on that ground, because it is not every part of scrip- ture that can be introduced into the exercise of devotion, yet there would apparently have been less colour for the censure, on the other plan of the selection of entire psalms. The author has been since convinced, that instead of a se- lection of psalms in any shape, a better way would have been to print the psalter entire, and to leave every officiat- ing minister tp his choice, from time to time. This would have less interfered with the ideas of those who, on account of the sublime spirit of devotion running through the whole body of the psalms, were averse to the parting with any proportion of them from the service of the Church. For although, according to the idea here suggested, it would have been impossible to have gratified every individual under the proposed alternative, yet there might have been Note to page 24. 109 taken which ever side of it was the most likely to be satis- factory. It has been painful to the author, that he has found him- self opposed in opinion to that of some of his brethren, whose views of the subject have the appearance of being opened to them by the sentiment of devotion. Yet, he cannot perceive the propriety of putting into the mouths of a whole congregation devotions expressive of peculiar states of mind, and such as are not likely to be applicable to many persons in an ordinary assembly; for instance, strains, expressive of the highest exultation, and other strains, expressive of the lowest depths of sorrow. He is aware of what is argued in favour of this, from the senti- ment of Christian sympathy, by which every member of a Church may enter into feelings which are otherwise not his own, but which he may reasonably suppose to belong to some who are fellow-raembcrs of the body. The author respects the plea, but cannot bring it within the sphere of his own ideas of the precept, to " pray with the understanding." He has heard of another argument for the practice. It is the useof impressing the whole of those excellent composi- tions on the memories of all the members of the Church. But on this plan it would seem, that scripture would be honoured still more, if, from Genesis to Revelation, it were embodied with the service. This, however, could not have been the, object of the introduction of the psalms. There have been urged testimonies from the fathers, demonstra- tive of the great use of these compositions in the early ages of the Church, and its not being recorded of any particular psalms, to the exclusion of the rest. No : the whole body of them may have been a fund of devotion, consistently with choice made, as subject and as circumstances might dictate. He has not yet found evidence, that in the primitive Church, as in the Church of England, the book was gone through in a routine of successive portions. Although these are his opinions, yet he laments the extent of the innovation, made at the period referred to, because he believes that the aim- ing at so much, prevented what might have been done more effectually, and brought into universal use, by allowance of the discretion which has been pleaded for. Under the foregoing head, there has been noticed what is here thought a great error in the convention — the print- ing of the book, without waiting for the reception of the alterations, and their being in use. A subordinate error, accompanying the other, was the endeavouring to raise a 1 10 Noi4 to pag4 24. profit from the book, although for a charitable purpose. It had two bad consequences ; that of exciting the supposition that the books were made the dearer — although, in reality, this was not the fact; and that of inducing the committee to send them to the clergy, in the different parts of the conti- nent, confiding in their exertions for the benevolent purpose declared. Several of the clergy again intrusted them to persons from whom they got no returns. Hence it happened, that when the expenses of the edition were paid, there was not so much left for the charity, as to be an adequate con- sideration for such an undertaking. The committee were at last obliged to relinquish the design, of saving for the charity the usual profit of the booksellers, who, -on that change of pl-an, made rapid sales of them. Another bad effect of the publication was, that the Eng- lish prelates were not furnished with an account of the alter- ations so soon as they should have been, considering the application that had come before them. For the committee, having had good reason to believe that the impression would go on rapidly, had not furnished a copy of the instrument containing the alterations.' Their waiting first for paper from the mills, and then, for one interfering object and an- other occurring to the printer, brought it to spring beforethe edition was out. It is true, that the sheets were sent by parcels during the progress. None however arrived before the answer to the address was sent ; and this inattention — or what seemed such — the bishops could not account for, as the archbishop afterward distantly intimated to those who received consecration in England. Hence arose the caution with which the convention were answered by the right reverend bench ; a caution evidently to be discerned, in their letter of the 24th of February, 1786. For some of the clergy in the eastern states, from what is here supposed to have been mistaken zeal, had been very early in convey- ing to their clerical acquaintance in England, an unfavour- able representation of the spirit of the proceedings ; a fact which is glanced at in the same letter. Although the im- pression thus produced was so far done away on the arrival of the book, as that there remained no radical impediment to the gratification of the Church, in granting her request made, which must be evident to every one who reads their subsequent letter; yet it follows from this narrative, that their misapprehension would have been obviated, if the printing had been confined to the list of the proposed alte' rations. N(Ae to page %i. Ill For the letter of the English prelates, see Appendix, No, 6. Prom the letter of their lordships it appears, that the omission of the article of Christ's descent into hell, in the Apostles' Creed, was the thing principally faulted. It was the objection made by Dr. Moss, bishop of Bath and Wells, that Swayed in this matter. A gentleman who had been a member of the convention — Richard Peters, Esq.. — happen- ing to visit England a few months after, and having waited on the archbishop at the request of the committee, the said bishop expressed a wish to see him, and, in the consequent interview, declared very strongly his disapprobation of that alteration. It was learned afterward in England, from Dr. Watson, bishop of Landaff, that the objection came principally from the quarter here noticed. Indeed he ex- pressed himself in such a manner, as led to the conclusion, that the bishop of Bath and Wells only was the objector. No doubt the bishops generally must have approved of the objection, considering their concurring in the strong protest that came from them, on the subject of the omitted article. However, from the different particulars attending the trans- action, the author is disposed to believe, that, had it not been for the above-mentioned circumstance, they would hardly have started their objection to the omission in such a manner as carries the appearance of their making of a restoration of the clause a condition of their compliance with the request. As to the bishop of LandafF, he plainly said, speaking on the merits of the subject, that he knew not of any scriptural authority of the article, unless it were the passage in St. Peter (meaning 1. iii. 19, 20.) And this he said must be acknowledged a passage considerably involved in obscurity. To the two bishops who went for consecration it was very evident, that the bishop of Landaff was far from being attached to the objection in which he had concurred. It is probable, that the same may have been true of many others of the bench. But when the matter was pressed by a very venerable bishop, eminent as well for his theological learning as for an exemplary life and conversation, and rested by him on the ground of the contradiction of an ancient heresy, it must have been difficult in the body to waive the objection, considering the novel line in which they were acting; and their inability, i>n a corporate capacity, to act at all. 112 Note to page 24. Section V. Of Proceedings of Conventions in the States subsequent to those of the General Convention. For a while there was felt the evil of the mistake made in the beginning, of not forwarding copies of the alterations : a mistake, less to be imputed to the committee than to the convention, who had given no order on the subject ; but who, perhaps, presumed on the editing of the book, before the other conventions could be held. They were held in the months of May and June, 1786; very soon after the arrival of the letter of the bishops. In New- York the question of ratifying the Book of Common Prayer was kept under consideration. In New-Jersey they rejected it, ex- pressing at the same time their approbation of the other proceedings of the convention, except of the constitution. Tn Pennsylvania some amendments were proposed. The same was done in Maryland. No convention met in Dela- ware. In Virginia it was adopted, with the exception of one of the rubrics, and with some proposed amendments of the articles ; many dissenting from such adoption ; not, as the author was well informed, because of the alterations made, but because they were so few. It is strange to tell, that the rubric, held to be intolerable in Virginia, was that allowing the minister to repel an evil liver from the com- munion. The author, some time after, held serious argu- ment on the point, with a gentleman who had been influ- ential in the state convention. The offensive matter was not the precise provisions of the rubric, but that there should be any provision of the kind, or power exercised to the end contemplated. In South-Carolina the book was received without limitation. On the whole, it was evident that, in regard to the liturgy, the labours of the convention had not reached their object. It did not appear that the constitution was objected to in any state, except in that of New-Jersey. The propriety of the application to the Eng- lish bishops was not contradicted any where, except in South-Carolina : and even in this state there was carried an acquiescence in it. Under the circumstances stated, the convention to be held in June, 1786, was looked for- ward to, as what would either remedy the difficulty or increase it. There has been given an account of the proceedings of sundry conventions in the different states, prior to the meeting in New-Brunswick, in May, 1784. At that period no convention had assembled in Virginia. But in May, Nole to page 24. IIJJ 1785, there was one in the city of Richmond; of the pro- ceedings of which there shall be here given a general account ; for the same reason as in reference to the pro- ceedings for the organization of the other churches com- prehended within the union. There had been previously passed, in the year 1784, an act of the legislature, incorporating the Episcopal Church in the respective parishes individually, and as existing throughout the state ; that is, not only in each parish, the minister and vestrymen chosen by the members of the church were a body corporate for their own appropriate church and glebe ; but the act recognized a convention consisting of the settled ministers and deputies from the different vestries, competent to self-government. In this act, there was no vestige of the former establishment : on the contrary, it contained provisos, guarding against all claims tending to that point. Nevertheless, the current set so strong against the Episcopal Church, from the enmity of numerous professors of religion, not a little aided by opinions inimical equally to the Church and to the societies dissenting from her, that in the year 1786, the law was repealed, with a proviso saving to all religious societies the estates belonging to them respectively. In the year 1798, this statute also was repealed, as inconsistent with religious freedom.* In this convention, the recommendations passed in New- York, in October of the preceding year, were adopted, with two exceptions. They refused the acceptance of the fourth, concerning the liturgy, until it should be revised at the expected meeting in Philadelphia ; and in respect to the sixth article determining the manner of voting, they ob- jected to it as a fundamental article of the constitution ; but acquiesced in it as regarded the ensuing convention, reserving a right to approve or disapprove of its pro- ceedings. Their opinions, as to the principles which should govern in'the proceedings, were detailed in instruction to deputies appointed by them to the General Convention, and are as follows :— " Gentlemen, during your representation of the Protest- "^ t ~ — — .^— — * A law, substantially the same as that of 1784, so far as it incorporated the ChuTCh throughout the state, was passed by the legislature of Maryland in the year 1802, in favour of the Roman Cathohcs: which does not appear to have given offence, or to have been productive of bad effects; although the like favour has been refused to the Protestant Episcopal Chorch in the same state. 15 114 Note to page 24. ant Episcopal Church, we commend to your observance the following sentiments concerning doctrine and worships We refer you, at the same time, for these and other objects of your mission, to our resolutions on the proceedings of the late convention in New- York. " Uniformity in doctrine and worship will unquestionably contribute to the prosperity of the Protestant Episcopal Church. Eut we earnestly wish that this may be pursued with liberality and moderation. The obstacles which stand in the way of union among Christian societies, are too often founded on matters of inere form. They are sur- mountable, therefore, by those whoy breathing the spirit of Christianity, earnestly labour in this pious work. " From the Holy Scriptures themselves, rather than the comments of men, must we learn the terms of salvation. Greeds therefore ought to be simple : and we are not anxious to retain any other than that which is commonfy called the Apostles' Creed. " Should a change in the liturgy be proposed, let it be made with caution : and in that case, let the alterations be few, and the style of prayer' continue as agreeable as may be to the essential characteristics of our persuasion. We will not now decide, what ceremonies ought to be retained. We wish, however, that those which exist may be estimated according to their utility ; and that such as may appear fit to belaid aside, may nolongerbeappendagesof our Church. " We need- only add, that we shall expect a report of your proceedings, to be made to those whom we shall vest with authority to call a convention." The intercourse with the court of Denmark, noticed in the proceedings of Pennsylvania, having been communi- cated by the governor of Virginia to the body now assem- bled ; their deputies were instructed* to lay the same before the General Convention. This convention of Virginia, issued an address to the members of the Episcopal Church throughout the state; in order to excite a zeal for the reviving of the communion. They passed rujes, forty-three in number, for the govern- ment of the Church in Virginia, extending to a great variety of particulars. In these rules they made direct provision for the trial of bishops and other clergymen by the convention : the matter concerning which there has been so much dissatisfectioir, because of its not being directly provided against by the General Convention held within a few months after this convention held in Richmond, Note lo page 27. 115 G. Page 27. Of the Convention in Philadelphia and Wil- mington, in 1T86. The Rev. David Griffith, D. D. rector of Fairfax parish, Alexandria, Virginia, who had been elected to the episco- pacy in that state, presided in this convention. Francis Hopkinson, Esq. was the secretary. The convention was opened with a sermon by the president of the preceding convention. The convention assembled under circumstances, which bore strong appearances of a dissolution of the union, in this early stage of it. The interfering instructions from the churches in the different states — the embarrassment that had arisen from the rejection of the proposed book in some of the states, and the use of it in others — some dis- satisfaction on account of the Scottish Episcopacy — knd, added to these, the demur expressed in the letter from the English bishops, were what the most sanguine contem- plated with apprehension, and were sure prognostics of our falling to pieces, in the opinion of some, who were dissatisfied with the course that had been taken for the organizing of the Church. How those difficulties were surmounted, will be seen. In regard to the interfering instructions, they were all silenced by the motion that stands on the journal, for refer- ing them to the first convention, which should meet fully authorized to determine on a Book of Common Prayer. The instructions, far from proving injurious, had the con- trary effect; by showing, as well the necessity of a duly constituted ecclesiastical body, as the futility of taking measures, to be reviewed and authoritatively judged of, in the bodies of which we were the deputies. Such a system appeared so evidently fruitful of discord and disunion, that it was abandoned from this time. The author, who had contemplated the meeting of the interfering instructions with the motion recorded as his own on the journal, was especially pleased with the effect of it — the silence of un- necessary discussion. Between the deputies of the churches which had received, and those of the churches which had rejected the proposed Book, or else been silent on the subject ; the expedient was adopted, of letting matters remain for a time in the present state with both. The question of the Scottish Episcopacy gave occasion il6 Nale to page 27. to some warmth. That matter was struck at by certain motions which appear on the journals, and which particu- larly affected two gentlemen of the body ; one of whom — the Rev. Mr. Pilmore— had been ordained by Bishop Seabury; and the other, the Rev. William Smith — the younger gentleman of the convention of that name — had been ordained by a bishop of the Church, in which Bishop Seabury had been consecrated. The convention did not enter into the opposition to the Scottish succession. A motion, as may be seen on the journals, was made to the effect, by the Rev. Mr. Provoost, seconded by the Rev. Robert Smith, of South-Carolina, who only, of the clergy, were of that mind. But the subject was sup- pressed — as the journal shows— by the previous question, moved by the Rev. Dr. Smith, and seconded by the author. Nevertheless, as it had been afBrmed, that gentlemen ordained under the Scottish succession, settling in the represented churches, were understood by some to be under canonical subjection to tlie bishop who ordained them ; and as this circumstance had been urged in argu- ment; the proposal of rejecting settlements under such sub- jection was adopted ; although Mr. Pilmore denied that any such thing had been exacted of him. As the measure is stated on the journal, to have been carried on the motion of the author ; he thinks it proper to mention, that he never conceived of there having been any ground for it, other than in the apprehension which had been expressed. This' tem- perate guarding against the evil, if it should exist, seemed the best way of obviating measures, which might have led to disputes with the northern clergy. The line of conduct taken, drew off from the meditated rejection some lay gen- tlemen ; who would otherwise have warmly pressed the ob- jections which occur, against the circumstance that had been imagined. The letter from the English bishops, in answer to the address of the former convention, came to hand not long before the meeting of this. All that could be done in the present stage of the business, was to Acknowledge the kind- ness of their letter, to repeat the application for the Epis- copacy, and to re-assure them of attachment to the system of the Church of England^ This was accordingly done, in a letter drafted by the Rev. Dr. Smith, but considerably altered on a motion of the Hon. John Jay, Esq. who thought the draft too submissive. It was in substance an expression ,of gratitude for the fatherly sentiments contained in the Note to page 27. 117 letter of the ri^t reverend prelates; an assurance of there being no intention of departing from the constituent princi- ples of the Church of England; an expectation that the proposed alterations had been received ; and a repetition of the request of the former address. This second application went with no small advantage, from the alterations made in the constitution, before the receiving of the objections made against it, on the part of the English bishops. The issue of this branch of the busi- ness may serve, not only for a caution against being preci- pitate, but for encouragement under" inconveniences result- ing from the precipitancy of others. In the preceding year, the points alluded to were determined on with too much warmth, and without investigation proportioned to the im- portance of the subjects. The decisions of that day were now reversed — not to say without a division, but — without even an opposition. The general temper of moderation displayed in the letter of the archbishops caused it to be a matter of surprise, that the only thing which looked like a condition made on the subject of the Common Prayer Book, waslhe restoring of the clause concerning the descent into hell, in the Apostles' Creed. The undeniable fact, that the clause had been an addition to the original creed, occasioned a criticism on the expression in the letter — its " integrity ;" to which, it was required to be " restored." Besides, as the clause is not understood in the general acceptation of the words ; and as they who hold it in the strict sense must ground it on very uncertain authority of scripture ; it was thought, that more stress was laid on this particular, than the comparative importance of the alteration merited. This can be accounted for no otherwise, than by the facts which have been mentioned. It is true, that the clause is stated to have been introduced, in opposition to an ancient heresy — meaning the Apollinarian. Is it necessary, then, that every heresy should be denied, in so short a formulary as that of the Apostles' Creed .'' The members of the convention were doubtful, how far the restoring of the Athanasian Creed was contemplated by the archbishops as an essential condition. In that case, the matter was desperate ; because, although there were some who favoured a compliance, the majority were determined otherwise ; among whom were two members present, who had been chosen to the Episcopacy ; and who voted against the restoration, as appears on the journal. It was however 118 Note to page 27. thought, that the words did not import absolute requisition. The author will here record his opinion, afterward formed in England. It is, that the inclination of the archbishops on that head was, not to give any trouble, but only to avoid any act or omission, which might have been an implicating of themselves and of their Church. His reason is, that in one of the conversations of Bishop Provoost and himself with the archbishop of Canterbury, he brought this matter forwards ; evidently intending to say as much of it as he did, and no more; and not wishing a discussion of the point. What he said, was to this effect : — " Some wish that you had retained the Athanasian Creed : but I cannot say that I am uneasy on the subject; for you have retained the doc- trine of it in your liturgy; and as to the creed itself, I suppose you thought it not suited to the use of a congrega- tion." Then, without waiting to hear whether this were the reason or not, he passed to another subject; and never introduced that of the Athanasian Creed again. It was a matter of wonder, that there was not laid in the letter, more stress on the Nicene Creed, than on the Atha- nasian. To the latter, there are other objections than its protest against Arianism and Socinianism : objections which have weight with many, who are not either Socinians or Arians. It had been expected, that the Nicene, being the faith of the early Church, would have been more strongly insisted on by the English bishops ; of whom not more than two or three — and perhaps they unjustly — were suspected of being at all inclined to the opinions alluded to. Proba- bly the opposition to them, apparent in the liturgy, was what principally gave satisfaction. In what is here said, it is not designed to hold up the necessity of the use of the Nicene Creed in the liturgy, but there is pleaded for the mdking of it a part of the declared faith of the Church ; which may be done, without a congregational repetition of it. Even to this there is no objection made. The distinc- tion is grounded on the circumstance that what was suffi- cient as a symbol of profession in the primitive Church, must be so now ; unless on the principle already adverted to, of contradicting all errors in the forms of our devotions. To what this leads, is very evident ; or rather, it is impos- sible to calculate. The question as to the Nicene Creed had been determined in the preceding session. The moderation of the letter of the archbishops on the subject of the ecclesiastical constitution, and especially the mailner of the objection to the part of it which was cer- Note to page 21. 119 tainly exceptionable, was universally acknowledged. Their conduct was the more agreeable on this account, that the offence had been done away, before the receipt of their letter. The silence of it in regard to the including of the laity, gave a great advantage over those of the clergy, who were representing the introduction of that order as in oppo- sition to correct principleis of ecclesiastical government. The moderation which governed in this convention, must be conspicuous. One principal reason, was the moderation of the English prelates. They who were thought the least devoted to the Episcopal regimen, acknowledged the great forbearance in their being no such high notions on the sub- ject, as had been avowed by some of the clergy on our side of the Atlantic. Added to this, there was noticed the ab- sence of the most distant intimation, of offence taken at the presumed independency of the American Church. For although the bishops could not have denied this, consistently with the known principles of their own Church ; yet it had been reckoned on, as a source of difficulty. Some gentlemen, who thought that the convention had gone too far as to some points'of evangelical doctrine, were highly gratified at finding more zeal in that respect, than perhaps they had calculated on. The author had an op- portunity of seeing the operation of this sentiment, within a few hours after his receipt of the letter. There happen- ing to pass, near his door, a worthy lay-member of the con- vention of 1785, who had been in the habit of thinking the clergy of the Church of England not sufficiently evangelical, he accepted of an invitation to walk in, and hear the com- munication of the bishops. He was highly delighted ; and it is not improbable, that this very circumstance contributed towards such a zeal for our ecclesiastical system, as induced the same gentleman, at his decease, which was a few years afterward, to bequeath a considerable legacy, which fell after the decease of two relatives then living ; the income to be applied towards the support of the bishop of the Church in Pennsylvania. There was another incident, which contributed to render the proceedings of the convention temperate ; because it must have convinced them, that the result of considerable changes would have been the disunion of the Church. The incident alluded to, was the reading of a memorial from the convention in New-Jersey, approving of some of the pro- ceedings of the late General Convention ; but censuring others, and soliciting a change of counsels in those particu- 130 Note to page %!. lars. The memorial, as was conjectured at the time, and as the author afterward learned with certainty, was drawn up by the liev. Dr. Chandler, of Elizabeth-Town. This learned and respectable gentleman, after having been in England during the war, had returned to his family and former residence ; labouring under a cancerous ox scorbutic complaint, which had consiimed a considerable proportion of his face. He had been designed for the contemplated bishopric of Nova-Scotia, tts the author was afterwards informed by the archbishop of Canterbury. His complaint became too bad, to admit of his undertaking the charge. The same cause, rendered it impossible for him to take an active part, in the organizing of the American Church. The author has no doubt, that his letter, written on the present occasion, was among the causes which prevented the disorganizing of it. For this memorial, see the Appendix, No. 7. The present state of things induced the convention^ before their adjournment, to appoint a committee; with power to re-assemble them in Wilmington, in the state of Delaware. Previously to their adjournment, they deter- mined on their second address, already noticed, to the English prelates : for which, see the Appendix^ No. 8. Soon after the rising of the convention, there came to the author's hands a letter of the archbishops of Canterbury and York : for which, see the Appendix, Nor 9. Shortly afterward, there came a letter from the arch- bishop of Canterbury only, enclosing a recently obtained act of parliament, authorizing the solicited consecrations. See the Appendix, No. 10. On the receipt of the letters, the committee exercised the power committed to them, of summoning the convention to meet at Wilmington on the 10th day of October. On the said day, the convention re-assembled ; and, Dr. GriiSths being absent, the Rev. Dr. Provoost presided. But, before a relation of what passed at this meeting, occasion is taken to record the comments generally made on the communications from England. There was expressed general satisfaction with the testi- monials to be required of those who might come for the Episcopacy ; and especially with the testimonial to be signed by the members of the General Convention. This body had not been without their apprehensions, that some un- suitable character, as to morals, might be elected : and yet, for them to have assumed a control, might have been ati Note to page 21 . 121 inaproper interference with the churches in the individual states. What was demanded by the archbishops, went to the point in the general wish ; and yet, was not to be con>- plained of or evaded by any individual. The question to be determined on at the present session was — Whether the American Church would avail herself of the opportunity of obtaining the Episcopacy; which had been so earnestly desired, ever since the settlement of the colonies ; the want of which had been so long complained of; and which was now held out in offer. When the author considers ho^ much, besides the preference due to Epis- copal government, the continuance or the restoration of divine worship in the almost deserted churches, their very existence as a society, and of course the interests of religion and virtue were concerned in the issue, he looks back witli a remnant of uneasy sensation, at the hazard which this question run; and at the probability which then threatened, that the determination might be contrary to what took place. On the meeting of the convention, a committee were appointed. Those who acted in the business were, from New- York, Rev. Dr. Provoost and James Duane, Esq. ; from New-Jersey, Rev. Uzal Ogden and Henry Waddell, Esq.; from Pennsylvania, Rev. Dr. White and Samuel Powel, Esq.; from Delaware, Rev. Sydenham Thome; from Maryland, Rev. Dr. Smith ; and from South-Carolina, Rev. Robert Smith. We sat up the whole of the succeeding night, digesting the determinations in the form in which they appear on the journal. When they were brought into the convention, little difficulty occurred in regard to what was proposed concerning the retaining of the Nicene and the rejecting of the Athanasian Creed. But a warm debate arose on the subject of the descent into hell, in the Apostles' Creed. Although this was at last carried, agreeably to the proposal of the committee ; yet whoever looks into the jour- nal will see, that the result was not owing to the having of a majority of votes, but to the nullity of the votes of those churches in which the clergy and the laity were divided. Had the issue been different, there could have been no proceeding to England for consecration at this time, be- cause they who went had all along made up their minds not to go, until the way should be opened by previous ne- gotiation. As the matter now stood, there was evidently no ground on which the English bishops could have rejected the persons sent, unless they had made the Athanasian Creed 16 122 Noie to pdge 27. an essential; which would not have been warranted by the feeble recommendation of their letter, not to say by the impossibility of justifying to the wodd the withholding of Episcopal succession, for no other reason than this, from a Church descended fropi their own, and once a part of it. It is here supposed, that the very awkward appearance on the journal of the preceding vote, must have attracted the attention of the archbishop of Canterbury, and of those whom he consulted; for he took occasion to remark, what he thought the exceptionable plan of making the records on the journal so particular. His cautious avoiding of minute discussion, especially in the way of censure, induced us to account for this remark in the way stated. An address to the two archbishops was drawn up by this convention, to be forwarded by the two bishops elect present m it, who, now declared" their intention of embarking for England. See for it the Appendix, No. 11. It would be a withholding of justice from a highly deserv- ing gentleman, not to notice his zeal and probably his in- fluence, in accomplishing the views of the American Church. The hostility to the Scotch Episcopacy had derived some weight from scruples on the subject, which were communi- cated by Granville Sharp, Esq. the author of many learned publications, himself being of a religious atid amiable cha^ racter, and zealous for the system of the Church of England. In a letter to Br. Manning^, a Baptist minister, and presi- dent of llhode-Ifrland College, who had been recently in England, Mr. Sharp had expressed hfs doubts on tlie sub- ject of the Scotch Episcopacy, grounded on documents in his hands,, of his grand-father. Archbishop Sharp, who was so conspicuous for his opposition to the arbitrary measures of James II. Dr. Manning had communicated the informa- tion in such a line, as that it was privately circulated during tlie convention of 1785. On its being urged in conversation, advantage was taken on the other side of the singularity of ttie channel of communication. Thfs, however, was acci- dental ; it not appearing that the writer contemplated any public effect. He afterward watched the progress of the Business, and gave his afd in every step of it. Before the meeting on the adjournment, there had been sent to the author by Dr. Franklin, then president of the state, a letter to him from Mr. Sharp, manifesting Christian concern in the business pending, uneasiness at some reports which had reached England, of our declining towards So- einianism, and satisfaction from some discoveries which. Note to page 27. 1128 contradicted the reports. In the letter to Dr. Franklin, there were extracts of letters written by Mr. Sharp to the archbishop of Canterbury, evincive of interest taken in ou.r behalf. In some late publications in England, there have been erroneous statements of the agency of Mr. Sharp. Por this reason, and to manifest the Christian zeal of that worthy person, his communications are given in the Appen- dix, No. 12. Afterward, when Bishop Provoost and the author were in England, they became acquainted with the said worthy person, who continued to interest himself for the Church. On a certain day^ he made us a visit, and expressed much solicitude on the subject of our business, which he supposed, from its not having been accomplished immediately, to have met with some interruption. He was on his way to visit the archbishop of Canterbury, intending, he said, to remind his grace of some things by which he seemed to stand pledged, considering the shape in which the matter was now before him. Mr. Sharp was thanked for his benevo- lent zeal, but was requested not to offer to the archbishop any thing in the way of complaint, and was informed that there was no room for any; his grace having intimated that the short delay would be only until the ensuing meeting of parliament. There was also given to Mr. Sharp the reason of this short delay, which will appear in its proper place. Before the declaration made by two of the bishops elect, of their intention to, embark for England, there was per- ceived a difficulty likely to occur in the case of Dr. Provoost, on account of subscription to be made as ])roposed by the convention of 1785, and considered as satisfactory by the English bishops. The convention in New- York had held in suspense the proposed liturgy, including the articles. This was the faith and the worship recognized in the con- stitution, and not yet adopted by the Church in which Dr. Provoost was to preside. To meet thj^ difficulty, the conver^tion adopted the expe- dient of a form to be subscribed by him, and by any other person in the same circumstances. The form bound the subscriber to the use of the English book of Common Prayer, except so far as it had been altered in consequence of the civil revolution, until the proposed book should be ratified by the convention of the state in which the party lived, and to the use of the latter book, when so ratified. A promise to this effect was signed by Dr. Provoost, and 124 NoU to page ^. the document is in possession of the author- It is part of an act of the present convention, predicated on the requisi- tions of the archbishops. See for it the Appendix, No. 13. The provision thus made by the convention, did not alto- gether relieve Dr. Provoost from the difficulty. Subscrip- tion was to be repeated in England, agreeably to the requisition of the archbishops, doubtless with the concur- rence of the bishops generally. It was not probable, that the archbishop of Canterbury would accommodate to an- other form, without further consultation, which would at least have occasioned trouble and delay. Dr. ProVoost candidly stated his situation in this particular to the arch- bishop, to whom the disclosure was evidently unexpected. After a short pause the author remarked, that if in England any changes should be made in the ecclesiastical institutions, by competent authority, and in themselves not contrary to Christian doctrine, the subscription of the clergy would not — it was supposed — be hindered by the ordination vows by which they were now bound. On a look of appeal to the archbishop for the correctness of this sentiment, he assented to it unequivocally. He would never have given a decision on the special case of Dr. Provoost : but the supposed case had so evident a bearing on it, that the scruple was dis- missed. It had rested on the mind of the doctor, who, on a question of truth and honour, would not have erred on the side of laxity, in regard to promise to be pledged. H. Page 08, Of Personal Intercourse with tlie Archbishop of Canterbury. Sundry matters having passed in this intercourse which may be thought connected with the subject of these sheets, the author supposes that it may be of use to insert in this place certain letters, which he addressed from England to the committee of the Church in Pennsylvania, with notes taken for another letter intended to have been written, if an opportunity had offered. The committee were the Rev. Dr. Samuel Magaw, the Rev. Robert Blackwell, and the Rev. Joseph Pilmore of the clergy ; and of the laity, the Hon. Francis Hopkinson, Dr. Gerardus Clarkson, and John Swanwick, Esquire. Nott to page 28. 125 Westminster^ December 6, 1786. Gentlemen, I think it my duty, and it is my inclination, to embrace the earliest opportunity of acquainting you with my arrival in England, and of the progress made, by the blessing of €rod, in the important business of my voyage. On Thursday, the 2dof November, I embarked at New- York, in company of my worthy friend and brother, Dr. Provoost. The next day we left land. After a passage, in which we had some tempestuous, although for the most part pleasant weather, we made the lights of Scilly, on Monday, the 20th of the same month, and the next day landed, in good health, at Falmouth. In giving this account of my prosperous voyage, I am happy in the conviction that I am writing to those who, as well from private friendship, as from their interest in the great concerns of the Church, will rejoice with me on the occasion, and join me in devout acknowledgments to Almighty God. Owing to sundry incidents, we did not reach the metropo- lis until Wednesday, the 29th, when we made it our first business to wait on his excellency, Mr. Adams, who politely returned our visit, on the evening of the same day, and finding that it was our wish to be introduced by him to his grace, the archbishop of Canterbury, readily undertook the office, and named Friday for the purpose. Accordingly, on that day we accompanied Mr. Adams to the palac&of Lam- beth. His gj*ace having received no intimation of the intended visit, was not at home. In the evening. Colonel Smith, the secretary of the legation, waited on him, to re- quest the appointment of an hour: he named twelve o'clock, on Monday. . At that time, we again accompanied Mr. Adams to Lambeth, where we had a polite and con- descending reception, entirely answerable to the sentiments which we had been taught to entertain of this great and good archbishop. After some questions on his part respecting our passage, we presented our papers : on which we were asked — Whether we expected another gentleman, in time to be consecrated with us f In answer to this, his grace was informed, that the '.lev. Dr. Griffith, the only gentleman recommended by the General Convention beside the present company, would not, in all probability, be over before the spring. Here I must note, that my saying of this was in consequence of a letter received from that gentleman after my embarkation. 126 Not* to page 1^. Dr. Provoosl then mentioned that there was a peculiarity in the charter of his church, requiring his presence at the annual election at Easter: on which his grace said, that he had no inclination to detain us so long, and indeed would give us no delay, provided our papers should be found satis- fectory, which he presumed would be the case. But at the same time he apologized for his postponing of our business for two or three days, being engaged in some ecclesiastical business, depending before the privy council, and also in some concerns of a college, of which he is the visiter. He added, that when this was done, he would see us again. In the course of the conversation, the archbishop asked me, whether I had received the letter signed by himself alone, in which he had mentioned that three was a sufficient num- ber to be sent for consecration, and whether we understood it to be the sentiment that three only should come. On his being told that the letter had been received, and so un- derstood, he gave the reason — That as the present service was asked of the Church of England, in consequence of an extraordinary exigency, it seemed proper to do no more in the affair, than the exigency required, and to leave all sub- sequent measures for the continuing of our ministry, to be taken among ourselves. This is, gentlemen, to the best of my recollection, the substance of the conversation ; and we shall be daily in ex- pectation of renewing our intercourse with his grace. Having paid our respects in the first place to the arch- bishop, we were of opinion that it was our duty to wait on the lord bishop of London; his lordship's predecessors having been the diocesans of our Church ; although we un- derstood, that the present bishop — the venerable Dr. Lowth — had undergone a decay of his great talents, as well as laboured under gievous bodily complaints. Accordingly we waited yesterday on the Rev. Mr. Eaton, his chaplain, by whom I had been hospitably entertained when formerly in this country. Mr. Eaton, after much conversation concern- ing the affairs of our Church, stated to us his lordship's situation, mentioning, among other things, his debility of mind to be such, that although he should answer a question properly and pointedly, yet he might in half an hour, forget both the question and the answer : and his indisposition was so considerable, that a morning might be appointed, and yet, when the time should come, his lordship might be inca- pable of receiving us. These things he thought it necessary to mention, but doubted not that there would be named an Note to 'page ^. 127 early day for our introduction. Accordingly, in the evenings we received a note from Mr. Eaton, appointing to-morrow morning for the interview. I have the pleasure of acquainting you, gentlemen, that we find from many, who had conversed with the archbishop before our arrival, of there not being the least doubt of our Church's having ' retained the essential doctrines of the Gospel, as held by the Church of England. These, gentlemen, are the particulars, which I have thought it iniportant to convey to you. By the next packet I intend, if it please God, to acquaint you with any further progress that may be made in the businiess committed to me ; and I remain, in the meantime, with my prayers for your health and happiness. Your affectionate brother, and very humble servant, WM. WHITE. The Committee of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. P. S. I trust there will be no occasion, that my friends should write to me after the receipt of this. But they will not expect, that in the present stage of the business, I should fix the time of my leaving England. Westminster, January 1, 1787. Gentlemeiv, I embrace the opportunity of the packet of this month, to communicate to you the present state of the business, on which I am in England. Between the writing of my last and our hearing from the archbishop, there intervened about a fortnight : during which Dr. Provoost and myself had been informed by several who had seen his grace, particularly by the lord bishop of Oxford, that our papers were satisfactory. The delay was accounted for, by certain business that required immediate attention. At the end of that term, we received an invitation from the archbishop to dine with him on the 21st. We accordingly attended ; and had every reason to be satisfied with our reception and entertainment. His grace did not introduce the subject of our application to him, until our leaving the company, when he stepped aside with us, and mentioned, as near as my memory serves, to the following effect — That having, from the beginning, 128 Note to page 28, consulted the bench of bishops on this business, he was desirous of taking their opinion, as to the manner of ac- complishing it — That be bad shown our papers to a few who were in town— That be expected to see more of them in a short time — And that be would then see us again. We have not heard from him since ; for the greater number of tlie bishops^are still at their respective dioceses, although expected to be in town soon. In my last I mentioned our intention of waiting on the lord bishop of London, as an instance of the respect which we thought due from us, to the successor of the former diocesans of America. We accordingly attended on the day appointed by himself, and were courteously received by this celebrated prelate, who expressed himself gratified by our waiting on hini, and asked for our address, as in- tending to see us again ; which, however, can hardly hap- pen, as his lordship has been since taken extremely ill, and, I believe, continues in imminent danger,* I fully expected to have mentioned to you, gentlemen, by this opportunity, the time of the accomplishment of the pur- pose, for which you desired me to come. Although disap- pointed in this, I can express to you my full persuasion, that the delay does not arise from any cause, which can defeat our object. With my constant prayers for yourselves and our whole Church, 1 am, gentlemen, Your affectionate brother, WM. WHITE. The Committee of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Pennsylvania. P. S. January 2. This morning, the lord bishop of Lan- daff did us the honour, on his coming to town, to call on us, without waiting for our being introduced to him, and to desire us to appoint a day for our dining with him. I mention this, to enable me to confirm the sentiment already expressed ; because his lordship, not only showed the utmost * We probably saw this eimnent man on the last d&y on which onr visit conld have been received. His appearance was that of health, and he followed us t» the head of his stairs, without any appearance of debiBty. We understood that he had a violent return of his disease (the stone) the next day ; and he died very soon after our departure from England. In the conversation of abont an hour which we held with him, he made various inquiries concerning America, and was the most pointed on the subject of slavery. On being informed of the then late act in Pennsylvania for the gradual abdliti- ment of the business committed to me. It is possible', indeed, that I may arrive before the vessel, by which this letter will be conveyed. Even in that case, it may serve for a continuation of the narrative of the proceedings of my honoured colleague and myself. And as there is entire harmony between us, both of sentiment and of aflFection, I shall, for the' sake of brevity, omit distinguishing between US in the following account; using the plural number, in stating any thing that was said by either of us on the occasion. After my last letter, we received from the archbishop, through a friend who had spoken to him on the subject, full satisfaction, that the delay arose from no other cause, than bis grace's waiting for the arrival of the bishops; and that it was his intention to finish the transaction in time for our departure by the February packet ; it being the oppor- tunity, by which he had understood from us; that it was our inclination to return. The queen's birth-day, and the near approach of the meeting of parliament, have brought to town many of the right reverend bench- Accordingly, we received yesterday a note from the archbishop, desiring us to call on him this morning. We attended, and had a conversation of two hours j -of which it is now my intention to give you the substance, as far as my memory serves, and as is connected with the affairs of our Church. His grace began with expressing his hopes that we had not thought him ihattentive to our business. He said, that soon after our arrival, he bad mentioned the matter to the king ; that the necessary powers from government would be soon obtained; and that the consecration should be either on the 28th instant, or on that day seven-night ; and that the latter day the best suited his convenience, and should be made the appointment, provided it were consist- ent with our intentions of returning by the packet. After making the suitable acknowledgments of hi» good- 17 130 Note to page 2B. ness, and declaring our fidl conviction that he had used alt possible expedition, we said, that the day after the last mentioned Sunday was the intended time of our departure, in the event of our being ready for the packet ; and that, therefore, we could not press for the matter to be expedited, sooner than was convenient to his grace. He then gently touched on the subject, in regard to whicH our last convention had not complied with the recommenda- tion of the two archbishops. He said, that some were dis- satisfied with the omission of the creed here alluded to ; ttiat, for his part, he was not uneasy on the head, being- satisfied that the doctrine of the creed is retained in many places of the Prayer Book ; but that, however, he did not like the manner in which it appeared on the minutes; preferred the mode of doing business used in all 'the bodies with which he was acquainted; among whom, it was cus- tomary to mention the business brought before them, and the result of the debate, without specifying the votes of the individual members. Whether his grace had here a view to the votes of those whom he was addressing in regard to the Athanasian Creed, we did not know ; but the answer which he received was to this purpose — That if the con- vention had taken a wrong method in the above particular, it proceeded from their wish to show themselves open and candid ; and that the Church in one of tlie states, had in- structed their deputies. to move for the so specifying of the votes. His grace then said, that in tiie beginning of the business, there had been many reports and apprehensions ; that this required of the bishops to be circumspect; and that even when our proceedings arrived,., there were some things, which they could not but wish otherwise; And here, said he, I am not alluding to the liturgy, but to the very easy manner in which the degradation of bishops seems allowed to be done. It was remarked to his grace, that the offensive article had been altered. He answered — Yes, and much for the better. From this, his grace passed to some remarks concerning the Psalter. He said, that whatever use there might be in leaving out some parts ofthe Psalms, hesawno propriety in altering the connexion, in the manner in which we had done it. He did not mean to undervalue the abilities of those employed in it, but thought it was a work of more time and difficulty, than they seem to have conceived'. Erom a desire of taking his grace's meaning precisely on Note to page QB. 131 this subject, it was here mentioned to him, that if we un- derstood him, he did not object to the omission of some portions of the Psalms, from the worship of the Church. The reply was — He had not fully considered that subject ; and only meant at present to remark on the connecting of portions together, in such a manner as might break the connexion, and alter the sense of the original compositions ; especially of such of them as are prophetical. But his grace did not allegCj that the sense had been actually altered, in any place. Tn speaking of the liturgy, the archbishop expressed his hopes, that it would not be a matter liable to alterations, at every convention. He was answered, that although it was still submitted to the Church as a proposed liturgy, so •^L^ to allow of the correction of any part of it, which might appear, on mature consideration, to have been hastily done; yet there were no description of men in this country, who would more object to the leaving of the liturgy in so fluctu- ating a state, than the great body of Episcopalians in America. The archbishop took notice of a want af formality, in our not having brought a regular instrument of our election : although he allowed, that our election was fully implied in the p?ipers which had been produced ; so as to leave no doubt of the fact. This naturally led us to speak of the forms of recommendation, prescribed by the two arch- bishops. In respect to these we ventured to declare, that the Church at large in America acknowledged great obli- gations; and would expect that their future bishops should make it a rule of their conduct. He replied, that the ap- pointment of persons to the Episcopal character was of the highest consequence ; and earnestly wished that it may be managed with great discretion in America ; and that he thought himself obliged to use the precautions which we had mentioned. For, said he, gentlemen, you were stran- gers to me ; although I had heard you respectfully spoken •of. At the same time, there were some who apprehended, that persons of a very unsuitable description would be sent. i. thought it improbable — he continued — that general and particular conventions would unite in recommendiflg such persons ; and yet it was my determination, that if such should be sent, and under circumstances carrying full ■evidence of the unsuitableness, not to have troubled -the bishops with the affair, but to have taken the brunt of a a-efoisal on myself. The answer was to this effect — That if 132 Note to page ^. there had been any danger of such a measure, the requisi- tions of the two archbishops must have operated as a pre- vention: that we trusted, however, there was not a suffici- ent number of our bi-ethren, in any state, capable of wil- fully imposing an improper character on his grace; and that, therefor*, - if any such character had been recom- mended, it must have heen some years ago, and from the want of due information. His grace, in some part of the conversation, was led to speak of the act of parliament : in respect to which, we took notice of thcjclause, requiring the consent of the kjng, under his sign manual. This clause, we told him, we had under- stood from private ir^ormation, not to have been in the act as proposed by the bishops. We ventured to say, however, that the principle of the restriction was well- understood in America, so as to occasion no offence there. The arch- bishop answered, that it was not in the act, as proposed by the bishops, but that he thought it a very proper clause, and that' it was particularly acceptable to himself; since other- wise the matter would have rested wholly with him, which he did not wish. He introduced a subject which was unexpected to us, and may influence measures in America. He said, that, when bishop of Bangor, he had presented the bishop elect of the Isle of Man to the archbishop of York for consecration ; and that none were concerned in the conseci'ation besides the archbishop and himself: that he had set on foot an inquiry, respecting past usage in the province of York : and that- if the practice had been the same in times past, perhaps it might prove unnecessary for another gentleman to come from America. In the conversation that ensued on this head, it was thrown out on our side, that if the ancient «anonical number should be dispensed with, perhaps doubts might subsist in the minds of some, in regard to the validity ; and that such an apprehension might be productive of some irregularity and inconvenience. To this the archbishop re- plied, that the latitude, if left, would be intended merely for our accommodation, but was by no means to prevent the coming over of a third applicant, if that should be thought eligible by us. I think it a matter worthy to be mentioned in this letter, that the archbishop informed us of thoughts entertained by him, of giving to the world a publication, relative to the business before us, stating the reasons influencing him in the measures which he had adopted. We took the liberty Note to page 28. 133 of cxpressiBg our hearty approbation of the proposal r and as his grace did not seem to have coine to a determination, we hoped that he would find no objection to it, on further consideration. After discussing the above-mentioned subjects more fully than 1 can be expected to relate, we apologized for taking up so much of his grace's time, and ai^'ose to take our leave. But we were encouraged by the condescension shown, to mention, that as the king was to open the parliament in a few days, it would be a gratification to us to gain admittance to the House of Lords, on that occasion, through the good offices of his grace. The archbishop took this freedom in very good part, desired us to consider him as on terms of friendship, and assured us, that he would send us a note of admission, and express in it the time, which his majesty should appoint for his coming to the house, in order to pre- vent our unnecessary waiting.* I suppose that this incident reminded the archbishop of a question which had been asked him by Mr. Adams, at our first interview — Whether it would not be proper for us to wait on the Jking; and whether, in that case, the archbishop or himself would be the proper person to introduce us. To this question the archbishop had answered at the time, that the first step was for himself to be satisfied, before any no- tice could properly be given to the king. In relation to this subject, his grace now said, that if we were to be introduced to the king, it ought to be on the ground of thanking him, for his leave given for the ensuing consecration, under his isign manual ; and that whether this would be liable to any objection or not, we must judge. We made no scruple to answer, that there could be no objectiou to it, arising out of the relations in which we stood. lie then said, that ho supposed Mr. Adams chose to introduce us himself. We answered, that although the proposal originated v/ith 31r. Adams, yet we believed he wished to leave it to his grace to determine on the manner. To this hp replied, that he would consider of it further, and let us know. His grace then said, that he was desirous of appointing some day for our dining with him again ; intending to ask some of the bishops to meet us, and also some of our friends. This led us to ask his grace's opinion, as to the propriety of our calling at the houses of all the bishops ; in order to thank them for the good ofiice soon to be done, thj'ough tho * The promise was fulfilled. 134 Note to page 28. favour of the whole bench, although especiiaUy of his grace, to the Episcopal Church in America. He answered,^ that he thought it proper, and that it would be very kiiidly taken. As the gentlemen to whom 1 am writing are members of the corporation for the widow's fund, it may be proper for me to inform them, that I stated to his grace the appoint- ment of Dr. Smith, Mr. Chew, and myself, for the address- ing of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, respecting the arrears due on their former grants. He promised to consider of the foundation of the intended ap- plication, and for that purpose, as I had mentioned my being furnished with a former abstract of the proceedings of our corporation, noticing the grants, be desired me to send it to him. , I have given you, gentlemen, a long, and, I am afraid, •tedious account of this conversation; but I hope that the motive will excuse me, which is my desire of your having as complete a view as possible, of the accomplishing of a negotiation so important, as we all conceive, to our commu- nion, not only of the present, but also of every future gene- ration. That God may bless the event, which, under his good providence, is soon to take place, is the constant wish and prayer of, gentlemen, Your affectionate brother, and humble servant, ■ WM. WHITE. The Committee oftlte Protestant Episcopal Church in Pennsylvania. Materials for another letter to the committee, if an op- portunity should offer, before my reaching of Philadelphia. Mpnday, January 29th. We received a verbal message ■from the archbishop, desiring us to call on him. We at- tended. His design was to ask some questions respecting the forms of our testimonials, and the titles to be given t© ■us, in our letters of consecration. We staid with him nearly two hours, and had much conversation with him, concerning the affairs of our Church ; which confirmed us in our high opinion of his regard for her, and of his desire to advance -the interests of religion. Friday, February 2d. The mornings of the two preced- ing days bad-been spent in visiting the different bishops who were in town ; agreeably to the proposal before made to the Note to page 28. I-S.' archbishop. A few of them — the archbisho]* of York, ttmY the bishops of Oxford, LandafF, Rochester, and Bangor, had previously visited us; and we had seen tlie bishops of Wor- cester and Exeter, a few days before, at tlie archbishop's, at dinner ; an occasion which I have not particularly noticed, because nothing passed on it, iffterestin'.i: to our mission.* Those of the bishops whom we found at home, seemed to take the compliment in good part, expressed great good- will to our Church, and wished that our longer stay, after their coming tff town, had permitted their showing of us attentions. t On this day we waited on the archbishop, in consequence of his own appointment at our former interview, in order to accompany him to court. Thither we went together in his coach. On being introduced to the king, I made this preconceived address — That " we were happy in the oppor- tunity of tharrking his majesty, for his license granted to his grace the archbishop, to convey the Episcopal succession to the Church in America." The king made this answer, which I set down to show the kindness of the archbishop! — " His grace has given me such an account of the gentle- men who have came over, that I am glad of the present op- portunity of serving the interests of rehgion." His majesty * On the' said occasion, we witnessed a simgular ceremony, wliioh we sitpposEld to be a remnant of the state of former limes. Soon in the morning, we had re- ceived a note from the archbishop, intimating, tliat the then day of the week was his public day, during the session of parliament; and that he shonid be glad to see us on any weekly day so mentioned — on that day in particular, if disengaged. We waited on him, and supposed from what v;k saw, that the several eminent persons who entered, came uninvited as to that particular time. Before dinner the archbishop, rose, joowed to the company, and left the- room. They followed, all of them, no doubt, besides ourselves, understanding the transaction. After passing through a suite of rooms, we found ourselves in tlie chapel ; in which were the two chaplains in their surplices. One of them read the litany ; after which, we returned, to the room wherein we had been received. Soon allerward we were called to dmner. It is probable, that such a visit on some Wednesday — ^it was the weekly day — during the session of parliament, is expected of every member of either house, who lives in habits of acquaintance with the prinjate. The reading of the litany, including the prayers attached to it in the English Book of Common Prayer, and none other, seems a remnant of former practice; it having been originally a distinct service. It is on this account tliattlie incident has been related. t The prelates whom we found, were the archbishop of York, the bishop of 'Rochester, the very aged bishop of Carlisle, in whom we saw the wreck of one cf the first scholars of the age, and the bishops of Salisbury, Bristol, and Ely. The first mentioned of these three, since bishop of Durham, commended the moderation manifested in our iservice for the fourth of July. This was gratifying; as ifc had been pronounced by some on our side of the Atlantic, that the said ser- vice would of itself be sufficient to induce a rejection of tlie application of the American Church. X It may be presumed, however, that such civility is the usual courtesj- of tjie place. 13G Note to page 28. then asked Dr. Provoost, whether the Episcopal communion were not numerous in New- York, and was answered by the Doctor in the affirmative, with further thanks for the licensp granted. The king then passed, to the next in the circle, and after a little while we withdrew, with the archbishop.* We had contemplated this measure of waiting on the king, as of peculiar delicacy. Tn the character of citizens of the United States of America, we should have thought it inconsistent in us to have made any application to the civil autiiority of Great-Britain, The act of parliament, had laid on the archbishop the obtaining of the consent of the king, under his sign manual. This consent had been ob- tained before our going to court; and therefore we saw no impropriety in the visit. Sunday, February ^th. We attended at the palace of Lambetli, for consecration. The assistants of the arch- bishop on the occasion, were the archbishop of York, who presented ; and the bishop of Bath and Wells, and the bishop of Peterborough, who joined with the two archbishops in the imposition of hands. It wa^ particularly agreeable to ns, to see among them the bishop of Bath and Wells, be- cause we had all along understood, that in the beginning, this aged and venerable prelate had entertained scruples on the subject of the application of our Church: and it was principally owing to his lordship, that such a point was made of the descent into hell, in the Apostles' Creed. We pre- sumed that his difficulties were how removed. Dr. Drake^ one of the archbishop's chaplains, preached; and Dr. Ran- dolph, the other chaplain, read the prayers. The sermon, was a sensible discussion of the long litigated subject of the authority of the Church, to ordain rites and ceremonies. The text was—" Let all things be done decently and ir» order." 1 Cor. xiv. 40. The discourse had very little reference to the peculiarity of the occasion. The truth was, as the archbishop had told us on Friday, on our way to court, that he had spoken to a particular friend to compose a sermon for the occasion, and had given him a sketch of what be wished to be the scope of it. This friend had just * While we were waiting in oar places, rnitil the king should come to as in his passing from one attendant to another, there occurred an additional instance of the attention of the archbishop to the delicacy of onr situation. When the king speaks to you, said he, yon will only bow; adding, wijli a smile — when an Eng- lish bishop is presented, he does something more. This alluded to the ancient form of doing homage for his barony on his knees. We were aware of the dif- ferent circnmstaaces in which we stood ; but it was eonsiderate, to guard agains* the danger of mistake. Note to page 28. l"3f sent him information of a dorriestic calamity, wliich would excuse him from attendance ; and the archbishop was then under the necessity of giving a short notice to one of his chaplains. The consecration was performed in the chapel of the palace of tho archbishop, in the presence of his family and his household, and very few others ; among whom was my old li'iend, the Rev. Mr. Duche. 1 had asked the archbishop's leave to introduce him; and it was a great satisfaction to me that he wa« there ; the recoUectioti of the benefit which I had received from his instructions in early life, and a tender sense of the attentions which he had shown me almost from my infancy, together with the impressions left by the harmony which had subsisted between us in the discharge of our joint pastoral duty in Philadelphia, being no improper accompanimeYits to the feelings suited to the' present very interesting transaction of my life. 1 hope, that I felt the weight of the'orxasion. May God bless the meditations and the recollections by which I had endea- voured to prepare myself for it; and give them their due effect on my temper and conduct, in th« new character ire which 1 am to appear ! The solemnity being over, we dined with the archbishop and the bishops ; and spent with them the remainder of the day. I took occasion to mention to his grace my conviction, that tlie American Church would be sensible of the kindness now shown J and my trust, that the American bishops, besides the usual incentives to duty, would have this in addition; lest the Church of England should have cause to regret her act, performed on this day. He answered, that he fully believed there would be no such cause; that the prospect was very agreeable to him; that he bore a great affection for our Church ; and that he should be always glad to hear of her prosperity ; and also of the safe arrival and the welfare of us individually. After spending the remainder of the evening very agree" ably, we took our leave, which was affectionate on both jsides ; and on our part, with hearts deeply sensible of the regard which had been shown to Our Church, and of the personal civilities which we had received.* * During dinner this day at Lambeth, we were surprised at a conversation in- troduced by the bishop ef Peterborough. We had been accustomed to think it a tort of adjunct to the claim of cbarchmanship to consider the " Etxav Bainxixn" or ' ' Royal Portraiture" as a true expression of the feelings of king Charles I. in some oftbe most trying circumstances of his life. The bishop remarked, and hw 18 i38 Note io page 2& Monday, February Bth. As an evidence of his grace's delicacy, I' deposit the account of fees, brought to us thi» morning by his secretary; and give the following narrative of the manner in which that business was conducted. On the morning of our visit to court, I mentioned to the archbishop, agreeably to preconcert with Dr. Provoost^ that there must necessarily have been some charges for the expenses of office, in carrying the btisiness of our Church through the civil department ; and requested to know the amount, that'we might discharge it. The archbishop an- swered, that if he should inform us on that point, it must be on the principle, that in an affair of no great magnitude, it might seem disrespectful to us, to withhold the satisfactioi* demanded. He added, that on the occasion of the conse- cration of an English bishop, there were very considerable expenses to different persons of the archbishop's court and of his household; whidi expenses he thought improper ore the present occasion, and should therefore prohibit them. After tire consecration, he, within our hearing, informed a gentleman from Doctors' Commons, Robert Jenner, Esqv who had attended officially in his civil law robe, with a view to the local registry, that as we intended to leave London the next day, our papers must be ready in the morning. On the gentleman's answering, that he would wait on ug with them, the archbishop replied — No; you are to bring them to my secretary, who will wait on them : evidently with the design, that the pecuniary part of the transaction should pass under his own control. The fees paid by us jointly amounted to ,£l4 3*. Id. being altogether in the liiie of public offices, and.which the archbishop must have paid, but for the request made on our part. For the instrument of consecration, recorded in the archiepiscopal registry, see Appendix, Na. 14. On the morning of the day of our leaving of the city, I received a note from the archbishop. Although it begins with a message of civility to a respectable divine in New- Jersey, not long before in England, I take the prominent object to have been the conveying of information, guarding against an impression which might have been made by brethren assented to the position, that the eontrarj was now clearly proved, by a late publication of some papers of Lord Clsirendon. These papen, it was said, show the work to have been written by Bishop Gauden. The simpUcity of tife style of the work, and the contrary property said to be discernible in the writings of that bishop, are the circumstances which inclined Mr. Hume to give the credit tSihe composition to the king. Note to page 28. 139 wTiat had passed concerning consecration in the province of York. The note shall be given, because of its bearing on the question concerning the number required for conse- cration in the English Church. See the Appendix, No. 15. There being in possession some documents in the civil line, sustaining facts mentioned in the statements, the present opportunity is improved to the perpetuating of them. They are, (1) A letter from his excellency Richard Henry Lee, Esq. president of Congress, to his excellency John Adams, Esq. minister plenipotentiary to the court of Great-Britain. (2) A letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Lee, in answer. (3) A letter from the archbishop of Canterbury to Mr- Adams, after an interview between them. (4) A certificate of the supreme executive council of Pennsylvania. (5) A certificate of his excellency Governor Patrick Henry, of Virginia. In reference to the last two documents, and to a similar one in the case of Dr. Provoost, given by his excellency Governor Clinton, of New- York, but not in possession, it is to be recollected, that they were to be apphed for in conse- quence of an instruction of the General Convention. They may reasonably be supposed to have had an effect in ac- complishing the views of the Episcopal Church. See the Appendix, No. 16. It was in the statements, that Richard Peters, Esq. hav- ing visited England on private business, was requested by the committee of the convention to wait on the archbishop of Canterbury on the business concerning which the English prelates had been addressed. The consequent letter of Mr. Peters to the committee has a tendency to throw light on the subject, and is therefore given in the Appendix, No. 17.* * There being nothing more in the letters to the committee concerning the claim of the corporation of the Widows' Fund, the silence seems to require a reason. The abstract was sent to the archbishop, agreeably to his desire. In the next interview he remarked, that he perceived the evidence of the promise of the society in England, but wished to know to what period the society in America considered it as extending. The author had not been informed on that point by the committee, and made answer accordingly. The undertaking of the settling of this would have involved him in no less a difficulty, than thatofdetermining at what period American allegiance ceased. If it were on the 4th of July, 1776, there could be no claim beyond that day, on a fund appropriated by charter to the dominions of the British crown. On the other hand, to hare dated inde- pendence from the acknowledgment of it by Great-Britain, would have been in- consistent with American citizenship. Accordingly, nothing more passed on the subjeet. It should be noticed, that to the former period there was very little due. 140 Note to page 30. We left London on the evening of the 5th of February, reached Falmouth on the 10th, were detained there by con- trary winds until Sunday the ITth, when we embarked, and after a voyage of precisely seven ,weeks, landed at New- York on the afternoon of Eagter Sunday, April the 7th; sensible, I trust, of the goodness of God in our personal protection and safety, and in his having thus brought to a prosperous issue the measures adopted for the obtaining of that Episcopacy, the want of which had been the subject of the complaint of our Church from the earliest settlement of the colonies, and which, we hppe, will be now improved to her increase, and to the glory of her divine Head. I. Page 30. Of the Contention in 1789. The business was to have been preceded by a sermon from Bishop Provoost; but the bishop being detained by indispositiorj, Dr. Smith preached. The only bishop pre- sent presided, and the secretary was Francis Hopkinson, Esq. . . Previously to the meeting of the convention, it was fore- seen that the unfinished business of the Episcopacy, and the relative situation of the Church in Connecticut, would be the principal objects of attention-, and must be thought im- portant, not only in themselves, but because of the influence which each of them had.on the other. It may be proper to say something of these, before an entry on the narrative of what passed concerning them in the convention. There is an implication — at least the author had always so understood itr— in the address to the English prelates, that the American Episcopal Church was to obtain from them the beginning of the succession in the number of bishops competent, according to the English rule and prac- tice, to perpetuate it. Doubtless this sentiment was much strengthened by the consideration of the antiquity and the expediency of the rule, which required the presence and the consent of three bishops in every consecration. Although it had been the clear sense on both sides, that the American Church was entirely independent of the Church of England^ yet, on this point of procuring from England the canonical number of bishops, the promise seemed to have been volunta- rily pledged, so that the English prelates might, in the event however, was happily prevented. Although Bishop Seabury had been chosen bishop of the Church in Rhode-island, the 173 Note to page SI. congregation of Narraganset, in that state, had associated with the Church in Massachusetts, which had unwarily ad- mitted the junction. In consequence, a clergyman had been ordained for the eotigregation by Bishop Provoost. The author, during the sitting of the convention, received a letter from- Bishop Seabury, jrespectfully and affectionately com- plaining of the matter. Bishop Provoost, on the letter's being read to him, said, that on receiving the letter from the clergy of Massachusetts, he had> doubted of the pro- priety of the proposal in it; but that on consulting the •clergy of New- York, and especially those in the most inti- macy with Bishop Seabury, he was advised by them to com- pliance; but that he perceived objections to such conduct in individual congregations, and would much approve of a ocanon to prevent it. Such a canon was accordingly pre- pared and passed. It is believed that no dissatisfaction re- mained. The author was enabled to lay before this convention an Application from a convention in North-Carolina, for the consecration of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew their bishop. This gentleman, as appears by a subsequent letter from him, set off to attend the convention, with a view to conse- cration, but was prevented by an interruption of his journey in consequence of an epidemic fever in Norfolk, which made him despair of arriving in time; there being some interrup- tions in the usual accommodations for travelhng. Why nothing was done afterward, for the carrying of the design into effe'ct, is not known, unless it be the decease of the reverend person in question, which must have happened not long after. The Church in North-Carolina having organized itself, and sent deputies to the General Convention about three years ago, it may be an act of justice to perpetuate their former effort; rendering it probable, that the ensuing inac- tivity is resolveable into the want of some clergymen of sufficient zeal and influence, to take the lead in such busi- ness. There had been, previously, an exertion to the same good effect. The Rev. James L. Wilson, ordained by the author in 1789, embarked as a deputy to the General Convention of 1792; but after an unusually long passage, arrived too late. At his special request, his arrival after the adjourn- ment was noticed by the secretary, as it now stands, below the journal. Mr. Wilson returned to North-Carolina, and soon after died. Note io page 31. 173 With the recommendation of Mr. Pettigrew, there came a letter to the author, expressive of solicitude because of what he considered!, and hi« electors appear in the instru- ment to have considered a departure in his certificate from the appointed form. The letter was answered, and the answer communicated the information, that the supposition of defect was owing to their not having been made ac- quainted with a canon passed at the immediately preceding convention, providing for such a case as that now existing, in which some of the electors, because of the want of per=- sonal acquaintance, had rested their recommendation on the testimony of their brethren in the act. For the instrument referred to, see the Appendix, No. 22. Some time before the convention, there was sent to the author, by a clergyman from South-Carolina, a copy of a printed circular letter, signed by two clergymen and a lay- man, and addressed to the different vestries. The signers called themselves a select committee, from a representation of seven churches, and proposed the choosing of a bishop; but gave such reasons fdr the measure, as indicated a de- sign of separating from the union. The author conceived it to be his duty, to lay this papier before the bishops: whoj in consequence, after the testimonials of Dr. Robert Smith had been presented to them with a view to his consecration, desired an interview with him. In that interview, the au- thor, as president, being so instructed by the bishops, asked him, whether the convention, which had been held in con- sequence of the said printed paper, had adopted the senti- ments of it. Dr. Smith then asked — Whether his conse- cration was to depend on his answer to that question ? The president replied, that he was not instructed on the point. The doctor then immediately said, that the convention had not adopted the principles of the paper. So all difiiculty on that score was done away. There existed no evidence to the contrary, nor has there been any subsequently re- ceived to that effect. It has never been learned, who was the penman of that wretched production. Probably, the offensive sentiments contained in it were a temporizing ex- pedient, designed to obviate prejudices which were known to exist in South-Carolina, against the having of a bishop for that state. The tendency of the paper to a severance of the Church in South-Carolina from the union was une- quivocal. Although the principles of the paper were not adopted by the convention of South-Carolina, as appears from the tcs- 1 74 Note to page 31. timony of Bishop Smith ; yet, as it was issued with a view to important consequences ; and as the propriety of the conduct of the House of Bishops is implicated in its con- tents ; it is given without the signatures, in the Appendix, No. 23. There appear on the journals some entries requiring explanation, concerning the Rev. Dr. Samuel Peters. This gentleman had been a clergyman of Connecticut before the revolution. He had gone to England during the war; and sometime before the period now referred to, had en- deavoured to procure consecration in England, with the view of being bishop in Vermont: having obtained a request to that effect, from a convention held in the said state. The archbishop of Canterbury had declined to consecrate any further for the United States, the Church here being already supplied with the succession. It is stated in the documents, that his reason was his not being authorized by the act of parliament, to consecrate any further ; but this must have been a mistake of the framers of the documents. The convention of Vermont being thus disappointed, applied to the American bishops. There was but one clergyman in that state — The Rev. John Cosins Ogden — who had not been, and who did not stay there long. Probably his going there for a time, was with the view of effecting the object now treated of. The conduct of the bishopSj in declining any agency in the business, is rested on the circumstances, that the Church in Vermont had not acceded to the consti- tution. There were besides some personal cireumstances>^ which prevented the paying of much respect to the solicita- tion. It was this transaction which produced an addition to one of the canons ; requiring, that to entitle the Church in any state to a resident bishop, there shall be at least six presbyters residing and officiating therein. There are on the journals of this convention some entries, in which it was thought expedient to leave a transaction unexplained, and so it might have continued, had not the very exceptionable conduct of an individual member, after the recess, rendered it questionable, whether they had not erred in not having expelled him from the body ; the only punishment in their power, since there could have been no ecclesiastical trial, except before the authority of his proper diocess, where he would have been still liable to it. There also arose the question, whether the bishops had acted cor- rectly, in rescuing him from expulsion. It appears on the journal of the House of Clerical and Note to page 31. 175 Lay Peputiesi that on Friday, the 11th of September, " the attention of the house was called by the Rev. Dr. Andrews to the consideration of a pamphlet lately published, entitled -' — Strictures on the Lovei of Power in the Prelacy — By a Member of the Protestant Episcopal Association in South- Carolina— which he declared to be a virulent attack upon the doctrines and discipline of our Church, and a Hbel against the House of Bishops; and which was alleged to be written by a member of this house." On Thursday, the 17th, it is recorded on the journal of the House of Bishops- — " This house requested the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to appoint a committee qf their house, to meet a committee of the House of Bishops. The committee of this house is Bishop White and Bishop Provoost. The House of Clerical und Lay Deputies agreed to the request of this house, and the joint committee met in the bishops' chamber." Further, the journal of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies for the same day states as follows — " The committee," (meaning that of the whole house) " rose, and their chairman reported, that they had considered the paper referred to them yesterday, which was from the au- ther of the pamphlet entitled — Strictures on the Love of Power in the Prelacy, in which he professes sorrow for the publication, and that they were of opinion that the house should accept it as a satisfactory concession. Resolved, that the house adopt the above report." This termination of the business, although pressed by the bishops, was not acquiesced in without considerable opposition ; and to the last, three very respectable lay gentletnen, who were of a remarkably conciliatory charac- ter, pressed for permission to enter their protest. It was not granted: and as this has been the only instance, in which the question of a right to protest has undergone dis- cussion, the recording of a denial of the right, falls in with the design of the present work. Whether the course of conduct adopted were right or otherwise, it happened as is here related. The author of the pamphlet, seeing expulsion full before him, thought fit to look to the House of Bishops for a shelter. After con- siderable negotiation, in which the author was the medium of communication between the house and him, he sent to the house an ample apology for his misconduct ; which in- duced them to interfere, in order to put a stop to the pro- ceedings : and hence their proposal of a joint committee. The offender gave subsequent evidence, that his professed 176 Note to page 31. penitence was insincere, although it had been accompanied by a profusion of tears, when he discussed the subject with the author, in the presence of the Rev. Dr. Smith, of Penn- sylvania. This was an issue which could not have been foreseen, and which it would have been uncharitable to have thought probable. The House of Bishops committed the apology to the keeping of the author, (where it now remains,) not to be made use of, unless in the case of future misconduct. When this happened. Bishops Provoost and Madison, who alone were present when the deposit was made, were written to for their permission to send a copy of the apology to the ecclesiastical authority of the diocess to which the offender belonged. Leave was given, and the document was sent.* M. Page 31. OftJie Convention in 1799. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and Dr. William Smith, of Pennsylvania, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The secretaries were the Rev. John Henry Hobart, of the former^ and the Rev. James Aber- crombie, of the latter. The consecration of Dr. Bass during the recess of the convention, and his appearing oh this occasion induces the record, that on the 7th of May, 1797, he was consecrated in Christ Church, in the city of Philadelphia, by the pre- siding bishop, assisted by Bishops Provoost and Claggett. It is evident on an inspection of the journal, that the bishops had no opportunity of expressing their sense on the question of publishing the draft of articles which it contains. Such a publication was certainly very injudicious ; if for no other reason, because it might have been expected to be easily mistaken for the sense of at least one of the iiouses of the convention. Indeed it was so niisunderstood : whereas it was the sense of a committee only; not an individual besides having delivered in his place any opinion on any * The personal abase iu the licentious pamphlet, was principally levelled vX Bishop Seabury ; and the ground of it, was his supposed authorship of a printed defence of the Episcopal negative, written and ackJiowFedged by another respect- able divine of this Church. On the author of the preseiit work, the pamphleteer bestowed a commendation, which impliedly, exempted him from the general charge of " Love of Power in the Prelacy." Coming from sachapen, itcould be no cause of selF-giatulation ; bat it was encoura'gemeift to assist ibtheek- posare which took place, and whicfi is to be attributed principally to Dr. Andrews. Note to page 31. l'J7 article. But this was not the worst. It tended to excite religious acrimony, without any possible good effect at the present ; and with the probable bad effect of the greater acrimony, on an opjiortunity of settlement in future. In order to show the imporlanfle of the exercise of great care and much deliberation, in any measure which may effect Christian verity ; the author will here notice, that an important doctrine of the Church of E^ngland was unwarily affected in the body of the articles, by the introduction of a single word. It was " priesthood," as applied in the ninth article, to denote all the orders of the Christian ministry; and not confined to the order of presbyters, as in the established ordinal, of the former of which there is no ex- ample in the institutions of the Church of England. It is well known, that the English reformers took care to show, that they did not mean to identify the names of the Christian n^inistry with those of the Jewish priesthood- Although they retained the name of " priest," which is ripOT^i/TEpo; (or " presbyter") with an English termination, and in the Roman Catholic Church had stood alike for that Greek word and for itpEuf ; yet this Church having in Latin adopted the word " sacerdos," the last was carefully avoided by the reformers, and "presbyter" was put in its place. It would have been in harmony with this, if the article in question had applied " priesthood" to the single order of presbyters. But it is applied to the three orders collec- tively ; whicli is another matter. To perceive the effect, it is only necessary to suppose the said ninth article trans- lated into Latin : in which case, if the word " presbyteri-' atus" should be used, it would be wide of the intended sense. On the other hand, if " sacerdotium" should be taken, the innovation would stand confessed. This would have been agreeable to the theory of the individual clergy- man who drafted the articles ; but the rest of the committee are here believed to have been unaware of it. The above fact is recorded in order to show, that if ever the doctrinal system should be reviewed, it should be done under some other circumstances, than during the hurry of conventional business. In short, the review should be made by select persons, taking due time for so important a measure. After this, the only thing left for the convention, should be the adoption or the rejection of what had been so prepared. This would be as near as circumstances permit, to what was done in England at the reformation. It is not here designed to charge any other fault on the 23 178 Note to page ^l. articles proposed. They are, in substance, what is con- tained in the thirty-nine Articles, without any supei^ddition^ except in the particular stated. But the remarks may serve to show, that in the work of clearing that code of what may be thought unnecessary positions, there is the danger of admitting some novelty, more fruitful of contro- versy than what may be done away» In the present in- stance, the novelty introduced is susceptible of the construc- tion, of obtruding on the Church the notions of " sacrifice," in the strict and proper sense; of " altar," as the place of it ; and of " priest," as the sacrificer. In this convention, considerable animosity was excited in the Bouse of Clerical and Lay Deputies, on the subject of the election ef a reverend gentleman to" the Episcopacy in New-Jersey .^ Agreeably to the distinction taken by the author, of recording personal matters then only when neces- sary to illustrate ecclesiastical eiFects, and when something appears on the journal which may be thus elucidated ; it may be proper to note in this place, that whatever ground was taken by the said house in the strict construction of the canon, fixing the number of clerical incumbents in a state in which a bishop might be chosen ;■ there was a more important reason at the bottom of the objection made. The truth is, that the gentleman elected was considered by his brethren generally, as being more attached to the doe^ tl"ines and the practices obtaining in some other churches, than to those of his own. What rendered the management of the case the more difficult, was his being brought for- wards by some gentlemen, who had always professed the strongest disapprobation of the least deviation from the institutions of the Church. No doubt, they thought they perceived some advantages, counterbalancing the unques- tionable fact, that the bishop elect had been not a little reprehensible in that line. The bishops kept themselves from taking any interest in the subject ; no one of them expressing his opinion, so far as is here known. It is to be hoped, that their conduct will be the same on any similar occasions which may occur. Delicacy requires this ; as, in the case of the requisite testimonials, the approbation of the consecrating bishops will still be necessary. Bishop Bass having been consecrated between the dates of the last convention and the present ; it may be proper in this place to guard against any false impressions which might be made, at the time of the former application ; and % paper purporting to be the (Mssent of two clergymen. Note to page 33. 1 79 "This may otherwise be thought to have influenced the determination in the first instance, and to have prevented the consecration of Dr. Bass. But it would be a mistake. The objections referred to, were generally supposed to receive no weight from the characters of the two objecting clergymen. They were represeated as being not at all attached to the ecclesiastical system of the Episcopal Church. Of this, or of /the contrary, the bishops possessed no such evidence, as was sufficient to be a ground of their conduct at the time. There was no use in looUing out for evidence, as there wa^ other ground on which the conse- cration was declined — the want of the requisite number of bishops tu be consecrated in England. When Bishop Bass was subsequently admitted to the Episcopacy, the bishops who consecrated him had made up their minds on the merits of the preceding objection to him. There was also a paper, purporting to be the dissent of his own vestry, which was denied and found to be not true. N. Page 33. Of the Convention in 1801. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the Rev. Dr. Abraham Beach in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The secretaries, were the Rev. Henry Waddell, of the former house, and the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin, of the latter. The occasion was opened with a sermon by the presiding bishop. No sooner were the convention organized, than there came from the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies a call for a letter which they understood to have been sent to the author by Bishop Provoost, on tjie subject of his resigning of the Episcopal jurisdiction. This measure raised a very serious question, made the more important by its being unexpected. The whole of the merits of it, so far as it ■was discussed at the time, is in the entry of the House of Bishops on their journal : which is therefore given in the Appendix, No. 24. As the articles were at last established by this conven- tion, the author thinks it may be of use, to give a narrative lof some particulars in the management of that matter; in ■addition to what has been stated relative to the proceeding in 1792. When the book wa« edited with the proposed alterationii 18^ Nate to page 3^. of 1785; no sooner were they known in the di^erent states, than the sentiment became general, that they were not to be received without alterations; while yet there was no- thing like unanimity, in regard to what the alterations should be. The same may be said in regard to the thirty- nine Articles. Some changes, independently on what was of a local and political nature, seemed desired by all : but of any considerable agreement in particulars, there was little prospect. Accordingly, the Church was left in a situation very em- barrassing, in regard to the standard of her doctrinal pro- fession. On the one hand, the articles, with the exception «f the politicai parts, the obligation of which had been abrogated by Divine Providence through the instrumentality of the revolution, were still the acknowledged faith of the Church ; while, on the other hand, they could not be edited as such, without changes at least in the manner of exhibit- ing them, which no individual had a right to regulate. What rendered the situation of the Church the worse in this respect, was, that it suited the opinions of some, to declare in consequence of it, that she had no articles, and could have none, until they should be framed by a convention, and established by its authority. In support of this sentiment, they pleaded what has been stated as the very exceptionable manner of doing business, adopted by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies in the year 1789. That house, in regard to every part of the Prayer Book on which they acted, brought the office forward as a matter originating with them, and not their alterations, as affecting an office already known and of obligation. It was answered, that this was an assumption of but one of the houses of a single convention ; that the other house had even then adopted a contrary course^ that the same had been done in all the preceding conventions, and that in the only subsequent con- vention in which there had been any alteration of a former standard^ — meaning of the ordinal, altered in 1792 — it had been so acted on, as to acknowledge the obligation of the old forms, with the exception of the political parts, until altered. This seems conclusive reasoning : and yet the opposite doctrine was held by many ; which threatened un- liappy consequences. During the convention of 1789, although nothing was jdone relatively to the articles, there was much serious con- versation on the subject : when the author was surprised to .find, tha,t Bishop Seabury, the only bishop at the convention Note to page 33. 181 besides himself, doabted of the need of articles ; and was rather inclined to believe, that the object of thera might be accomplished through the medium of the liturgy. This was so wide of what might have been expected from his usual turn of sentiment, that, to the author, there seemed at the time no way of accounting for it, otherwise than by the supposition, that the bishpp conceived the articles to be nearer to the height of Calvinism, than they are found to be on due consideration of their history, and of eotemporary controversies. But it has since appeared, that there had never been the thirty-nine Articles or any suth standard in the non-juring Church of Scotland, in which Bishpp Seabury was consecrated, and to the ways of which he was very much attached. But the said Church, very soon after the time here referred to, and when her clergy took the oaths to the government, manifested their consent with the Church of England, by adopting her thirty-nine Articles. Indeed, there was never supposed to have existed a dis- agreement in regard to doctrine: but it was the result of the independency of each Church on the other.* In the convention of 1792, the subject had been discussed among the bishops in friendly conversation, when the opinions of Bishops Provoost and Madison were directly against the having of articles, while Bishop Claggett and the author were in favour of them. The remarks of Bishop Seabury were general; rather in the way of doubt as to the necessity of articles; although, on the other side, he acknow- ledged his inability to answer an argument pressed on him — that without them, individual ministers would have to do by their respective will and authority, what had better be done by known law, for the preventing of the delivery of opposite doctrines to their flocks, by different preachers. However moderate or uncertain Bishop Seabury was ou the subject, the clergy and the laity of his diocese thought differently ; as appeared in the convention of 1799, held not long after his decease. At the pressing instance of the * In Mr. Belsham'a Life of Mr. Theophilaa Lindsey, Bishop Seabury is re- presented as a Calvinist. Nothing can be further from the truth. In the same work, there is an anecdote tending to lower his character, on account of an inci- dent which took place at a commencement in New-Haven, in which the bishop iiad no more to say than Mr. Belsham himself; as the anther has been informed on the best authority. It was equally unworthy of the biographerj to spealc with contempt of tlie Scottish consecrators of the bishop, not oidy because their charaa- ters repel the charge of ignorance thrown on them, but, because their having been so long under the lash of the law, for adherence to the dictates of their con- eciences, ought to have produced a fellow-feeling in a man similarly situated. i82 Note to page 33. deputies from that state, and in consequence of instructions to them, the business was then entered on ; although pro- bably with the presumption on the minds of the proposers, that it would be finished during the session. It however happened otherwise ; the matter then ending with a proposed body of articles wholly new in form, edited with the journal. The opinion has been already intimated, that this was a very injudicious measure; but there may now be added, that it proved beneficial in its unexpected consequences. It ap- peared an injudicious measure, on the same ground on which the proposal of 1785 was found to be such- that is, as unsettling a present fixture, without any reasonable prospect of establishing a substitute. If it were beneficial in its consequences, this happened by its showing of the im- probability of agreement in a new form, and its thus con- tributing to the recognizing of the old articles. Even the mistakes of readers contributed to this effect. For it is astonishing how many, even of the clergy, considered what was edited as proposed for the acceptance of a future con- vention; whereas it was only recorded, by one of the houses to be matter of future discussion. As for the bishops, they never saw the contemplated articles, before they were printed with the journal; and they who read attentively must perceive, that it was merely a report of a committee of the other house, without any evidence of their approving of a single sentence of it- These remarks should be con- sidered as having no reference to any question concerning the correctness of the report. Let it have been corrector not; and although the author thinks it substantially .cor- rect, yet he is confident, that the issue must hav« been the same. That issue is the adoption of the articles, as edited by the convention of the present year. Even during the session of the body, and when the sentiment had obtained generally^ that no new set of articles should be attempted, the author was often assailed by members who had adopted the prin- ciple ; urging, each of them, that there might be an exemp- tion in regard to some one point, the most desired by him to be corrected. To all applications of this sort, iiis answer was, that he was content to accept the articles as they were, (the political parts beijig und^irstood to be already altered, without any conventional act) as the ground of union ; that if they should be thrown open to discussion, there were va- rious particulars in which he thought they might be im- ^raved; that all those particulars he should think himself Nate io paffe S3. ISS- bound iQ conscience to bring forwards; that no doubt many other members would do the like ; and that then — What probability was there, of there being edited any articles f , The author having bad so much occasion, in the relation of the proceedings of this business, to refer to his own con- duct, he thinks that there will be propriety in his presenting of the grounds of it. On the general question — Whether it be expedient to have a body of articles, it has always appeared, as already hinted, that to establish them, is merely to accomplish by a general regulation, what will otherwise be done by indivi- dual ministers at will, and this, sometimes, in intemperate and scandalous opposition to one another. For instance, in relation to the divinity of our blessed Saviour, and the atonement made by him for sin, it cannot be conceived, that an advocate for these doctrines will knowingly permit them to be contradicted in his pulpit, or, that a denier of them will permit them to be advocated or acted on in his. Accordingly, there will be articles, written or unwritten ; and the inquiry should be confined to the point of the most judicious depositary of the power. When the author was in England, being one day in com- pany -with a Unitarian minister — a gentleman of considera- ble note in the literary world — liberty was taken to inquire, in what way the societies of hia faith held their places of worship, and whether, as in America, the property were vested in persons chosen by the congregations. He an- swered with a smile — Oh no; for then, in consequence of the ease with which respectable applicants are permitted to take pews among us, it might happen, that in the choice of a minister, an interest would be created in favour of a pas- tor, not entertaining the belief, for the maintenance of which a house had been erected. He said, that to guard against this, the meeting-houses were vested in persons who may be depended on ; and who perpetuate the trust to others of the same faith. What is this, but an indirect way of ac- complishing the object for which articles are designed? There was not omitted a remark to the effect in the con- versation alluded to ; a freedom, which grew out of a pre- vious conversation on the subject. The house of worship especially referred to, was that known by the name of " Essex-street Chapel." Within these few years there has been published the life of the Rev. Theophilus Lindsey, its first minister, by the Rev. Thomas Belsham, who is now its pastor. From the work it appears. 184 Note to page 33. that the trustees of the building have ordered the Book of Common Prayer, as corrected by Mr. Lindsey, to be depo- sited in the chest with the title deeds, to be the rule of wor- ship in future, and no alterations to be permitted, without the consent of the major number of the trustees. It ought not to be thought an ind«corum, towards a mode of profession with which the author has no concern, to notice the above particular as an historic fact, and to apply it to the illustration of the impracticability of the principle on which the theory in question is grounded. In the book referred to, there is an office for infant bap- tism ; why should this be required by a permanent regula- tion, when some professing Christians confine the institutioB to adults, and others allow of no baptism, but that of the Spirit? The remark applies to the celebrating of the eucharist under the elements of bread and wine, in opposi- tion to those who contend for spiritual feeding only, lir relation to both the sacraments, some, who acknowledge the external celebration of them by the apostles, affirm, that the ordinances were limited to the apostolic age. The observance of the Lord's day, commonly called Sunday, is exacted throughout the book; but why, when there are persons who conscientiously stickle for the seventh day of the week? Other questions might be proposed; and who knows what new opinions may arise, which may be thought worthy of sufferance, and accordingly draw the book out of the chest ? The compiler of it was so sensible of this, that in his last review, he omitted the Apostles' Creed ; and one of his reasons was — " no man or number of men together, have any authority to make a creed for others." This brings the matter to a question of words; since, in the above, it is impossible to act without a declaration of beliefr although not under the name of a creed. In a note, the reasonableness of the proceeding is de- fended on the principle, that the trustees, who have the custody of the book, and thereby jurisdiction over the wor- ship of the chapel, are the proprietors of it. Let but the plea be extended to any church or chapel, in any part of England or of America, with the proviso that none are com- pelled to join in the worship performed in it, and there ceases all ground of complaint on the subject of confessions and creeds. These things are- not said without the conviction, that, in the premises, ecclesiastical authority is liable to be extended much too far. All contended for is, that this species of dis- Note to page 3-3. 185 cipline must be exercised in one shape or in another. It is called discipline : for as to the truth of synodical determi- nations, further than as they agree Avith scripture, no sound Protestant will affirm it. Accordingly, we are necessarily led to the question, whether the proper mean be the formula of the thirty-nine Articles. God forbid ihat they should be admitted, other- wise than on the ground of their being in substance a body of divine truth ; which they may be, consistently with incor- rect statements in some points, not necessarily involved in that object. For the illustrating of this distinction, there shall be here cited an instance, w^hich, it is supposed, will admit of no dis[)ute. In the sixth article, the books of holy scripture are affirmed to be the rule of faith; and the re- quired subscription is evidently inconsistent with the rejec- tion of any of the books specified. But when there are introduced the incidental expressions — ;" of which there never was any doubt in the Church;" it is apparently con- tradictory to what ecclesiastical history informs us, in re- gard to the Epistle to the Hebrews, the second Epistle' of St. Peter, the Epistle of St. James, the second and third Epistles of St. John, and the Apocalypse : concerning all of which there were doubts, although cleared up on full in- quiry. It is within the meaning of the form of subscription in this Church, that the prominent fact of the authenticity of those books may be acknowledged, while the subordinate fact,, couched imder the recited expressions, is rejected. It is not equally manifest that the same latitude of inter- pretation is allowa,ble on the ground of the form of subscrip- tion in the Church of England. But it will be said, that supposing the articles to contain the whole substance of revealed truth, it is the fault of them that they contain much more, embracing the tenets of the Calvinistic system. In contrariety to this assertion, the persuasion is entertained, that they will be found, on a dili- gent attention to the subject, to have been framed with a studied latitude on the questions, which were afterward denominated the five points, in the controversy between the Calvinists and the-Arminians; this, with the exception of the doctrine of final perseverance, to which the whole sys- tem of the Church of England stands opposed ; the doctrine not being held at that time by the description of people afterward called Calvinists, who as yet continued in the opinion of St. "Austin in that particular. It may be proved, that in the reign of Edward VI. when the articles were 24 J 86 Note to page 3S. framed, tliere was a diversity of sentiments on those points, and yet, that neither side complained of their being excluded. Far from it, when, in the reign of Elizabeth, Calvinism came in with greater authority froim Geneva, the constant complaint of the Puritans was, that the articles were not sufficiently evangeHcal in that matter. Hence the framing of what were called the Lambeth articles, and the pressing of them at that time, and afterward in the reign of King James, although without effect. It is but to compare the thirty-nine Articles with the Westminster confession, or with the decrees of the synod of Dort, to perceive how general and guarded the first were, on the topics on which the others are very particular and express. Let these remarks suffice on a subject, on which it ought not to be expected to be in this place more minute. For the form of subscription in this Church, and for that required in the Church of England, see the Appendix, No. 25. But supposing all said above to be correct, it will still be asked — Are these articles so perfect that there can be no possible improvement on them ? If this be not so, are they to reniiain for ever, with known and acknowledged imper- fection.'' And if this be not contended for, what are the circumstances which will render the altering of them an ex- pedient measure.'' To these questions it is answered, not without the answerer's distrust of his own judgment, first, that in a few instances, the doctrines of the Gospel may be expressed more satisfactorily to his mind ; that therefore, in the next place, he does not arrogate to them perpetuity ; but that further, before any altering of them be attempted, these two circumstances should concur — -first, a better es- tablishment in the estimation of the Church generally, of the ecclesiastical authority in her, as yet a modern institu- tion; and how much this must depend on the general opinion entertained of the piety, the learning, and the lives of those who take an active part in her concerns, it would be difficult to calculate, as also what prospect there may be of the increase of the measure of the good which we may have among us, in these respects. The other cir- cumstance, as declared under a former head, is a general conviction of the necessity of committing a matter of this sort to be prepared by a few, with the advantages of due time and deliberation : what is so prepared to be laid be- fore the body, to be by them adopted or rejected, without discussion. Note to page 33. 187 These sentiments are given, under a sense of responsi- bility to the great Head of the Church ; and under the con- viction, that until the two stated circumstances shall combine, a new code of articles will have the effect of splitting the Church into no one knows how many different communions, very much to the hindCrance of true piety, and of those characteristics of our communion, in which we suppose it to approach nearer than others, to the standard of the best ages. In this convention, the question of recommending to the Episcopacy the clergyman elected to it, as related under the head of the last preceding convention, came to a crisis. The Church in New-Jersey persevered in the election of him; and there was now no longer reason to hesitate, for want of a sufficient number of incifmbents : because the question of fact had been referred by the last General Convention, 1;o the convention of the particular state which had decided in the affirmative. These things were reported to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies ; and the result, was a direct refusal to recommend. The incident, although given in the journal, should not be noticed in these remarks, were it not to record, that the extreme dissatisfaction con- ceived by a few gentlemen, was prevented from ending in the inconveniences of which there was entertained an ap- prehension, by some controversies of a parochial description. Until these took place, the few gentlemen referred to had adopted so zealously the cause of the rejected clergyman, that they contemplated an application to the Episcopal Church in Scotland. This would certainly have failed : but the project was communicated by one of the gentlemen to the author. The bishop elect, a few years afterward, joined the Presbyterian Church, probably in consequence of the parochial controversies referred to ; which had also arresten of the proposed canon by the bishops came into the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, it occasioned a warm debate, which turned altogether on the word "known:" the word "manifested" being proposed as a substitute, by those who objected to the other. The reason was, there being some in the convention who could not brook its being declared in a canon, that a man could no otherwise know the presence of the Spirit of God,, than by his fruits. They evidently thought, there was a more immediate communication in the matter at issue; althongk they rested their objection chiefly on the supposition, of its cutting off all hope from a dying penitent; as if such a person might not be sensible of new affections, which the Spirit only can produce: whatever difference there may be between him^ and a holy liver, as to the certainty of those Mwind him concerning the existence of such affections. Note 'to page M. 1'9S Some, without deciding on which side the truth lay, re- monstrated against the establishing by a side-blow, of what they cdlled a controverted point. In the issue, the amend- ment of the bishops was accepted, but much to the dissatis- faction of the dissentients, who even talked of entering a protest. After the business of the day, two respectable clergyman, who had argued and voted in the majority, pri- vately recommended to the consideration of the two bishop^ — whether it would not be best for them to propose the change of " known" for " manifested ;" this word not being opposed to their belief, a^though not so precisely suited to the sentiment intended to beconveyed. Their motive, was the (expectation until now entertained, that the convention would close the next day, with a conciliatory spirit on all sides; which expectation would be disappointed, if the re- commended 'measure should be rejected. The bishops, in- fluenced by the same motive, complied with the proposafl. "But when the alteration came into the other house, there again arose a warm debate, a considerable proportion argu- ing against the acceptance of the revision. However, the more moderate counsel prevailed ; but whether to any good purpose, can be known only by future events. The trans- action is recorded under the mortifying reflection, that there ■has been an interference in the ^lounsels of this Church, of the wild and pernicious opinion manifested in thi^ argument. After the session was ended, in company with a member who had distinguished himself in the minority, the author remarked to him, that in the institutions of the Episcopal 'Church, there was nothing like thei opinion which he seemed to entertain. He defended himself by the seventeenth ar^ tide, where it speaks of election in Christ, as " full of sweet, pleasant and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and su«h as feefl in themselves the working of the Spirit of •Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly tilings ;" words evidently harmonizing with the position, that " by the fruits of the Spirit only his holy influence can heknomn." Should such reasoners obtain the sway in the counsels of this Church, her system will be overturned. The other matter relative to the canons, was what oc- curred concerning the ofiiee of induction, established at the last convention. It is to be hoped, that the consequences of the measure will be an illustration of the maxim, that " the art of governing consists, in a great measure, in not •govei'ning too mucii." No objection had been made to th« i96 Note io 'page 34. office; butthe reqviiring of induction as essential to a valid settlement, was evidently perceived to militate against the ideas so prevalent in many places, of dismissing ministers at pleasure. Now, although there can hardly be any prin- ciple, more evidently hostile to the permanent respectability of the ministry, yet it would have been better to have leit the correction of it to time and attendant inconveniences, than to have brought the full force of it into operation by the measure now in question. Certainly it would have been best, to have rested the service on a recommendatoi'y ru- bric In Maryland, the measure interfered directly with the vestry-law. From Carolina there was a memorial, desiring an alteration of the canon. And in other places, complaints were known to have been made. On the other hand, the service and the result of it were with great rea- son so acceptable to some, that they refused to concur in doing away the former measure, but consented to the dis- pensing with it in those states or diocesses, in which it in- terfered with charters or usages. In this shape, the matter was brought before the bishops ; who were reluctant to the saying of any thing, liable to be construed into an approba- tion of charters or usages, which they hold to be contrary to good order in the Church. Still, the consequences of rejecting the canon were so stated to them, as to induce, on their part, the consenting to it ; with a subjoined declaration, that it should not be construed as giving a sanction to the charters and the usages in contemplation, concerning which they also expressed the hope, that they will in time be altered. This amendment was accepted, and the canon passed. A new arrangement of the canons made by this conven- tion, had been pressed on every preceding occasion, and objected to by the author, who at last withdrew his oppo- sition, submitting to the alleged advantage, of iiaving all the provisions pertaining to the same subject classed to- gether. It is to be hoped, that the course of conduct will ^nd here, at least for a considerable time ; or else, in the different diocesses, it will be to no purpose to refer to any particular canon, because of the uncertainty, whether it will retain its station after the next triennial convention. It will be much more convenient, to exhibit the canons of each conventional body as their act ; and in every edition of the canons, to retain the titles of such as are repealed, printing 4ihe, titles in italics. A repeal will be the result of the con- siderable improvement of & forme^- canop. But it wa^ Note to page Si. 197 obligatory in its old form, while it remained in force, and may still require to be referred to, on some question con- nected with discipline. The title will direct to the journal, which will show how the canon stood, at the time to which it is desirable to apply it. The journal shows, that there was accomplished at this convention, what has been from the beginning ardently de- sired by many, both of the clergy and of the laity— the giving of a full negative to the House- of Bishops. It is to be hoped, that the recollection of the course of this business, as found on the various journals, will show the propriety of leaving to time and mature reflection, to effect what may be for a while opposed by prejudices, not to be disregarded without extreme danger. What is here said, however, js designed of those prejudices only, which may be yielded to without the sacrifice of essential principle. This was the case in the present instance, and must have been perceived, to be such, even by those who conceive the highest of Epis- copal claims. In the year 1785, even the necessity of the presidency of a bishop, when such a character should b& obtained by consecration, and should be present in the con- vention, was rejected. Still, nothing was decreed to the contrary ; and in the next year, the absurd prejudice against the proposal was overruled. When another constitution was formed, in 1789,; if a provision for the Episcopal nega- tive had been insisted on, it would have been destructive of the whole system. Nevertheless, in the many years inter- vening, no measure has passed, under the refusal of the Episcopal sanction. Indeed, it may be a question, whether, had things remained on the old footing of the three-fifths, made necessary to carry any resolutioa contrary to the opinion of the House of Bishops, the weight of their nega- tive would not have had more effect than under the present change. This would have happened in the following man- ner. There would always be in the other house a propor- tion, who would doubt of the validity of a measure, adopted without the Episcopal sanction. Some of these would oc- casionally differ from the bishops, on a subject under con- sideration. But when the dissent of the bishops should have been declared, those of the description referred to would have thrown themselves into the scale, against the putting of the matter to the test of the three-fifths. This supposi- tion has been verified, in a transaction which took place between the two houses of the convention of 1804. It is evident to the author's mind, that owing to the causes stated, rOS Note to page Zi^. while it would be scarcely possible ever to carry a measure against the bishops, there would be a discouragement of even that free discussion with them, which may be expected to take place sometimes, under their present full possessioit of a negative. On the above subject there is an error in the journal, re- specting the votes of the lay-gentliemen from Pennsylvania. It is there said, that they were in favour of the resolution, but voted in the negative, because uninstructed by their constituents. The declaration of the gentlehaen is, that they declined voting for a measure of which they approved, be- cause it did not appear from the journals of their state con- ventions, that the projected change had been laid before them, as the constitution has prescribed. Neither had the gentlemen any Tecollection, that this was done. The au- thor is persuaded, that the matter was notified to the state convention ; but how it happened that an entry was omitted, he knows not.* The reason of thebishops for postponing the consideration of the degrees of consanguinity and affinity prohibiting marriage, was simply as stated on the journal — the weight of the subject, and the partial attendance at this convention. They did not compare their sentiments, on the many im- portant points which the subject brings into view. The last subject had been brought forward, in conse- quence of an instruction from the Church of Maryland, to the deputies from that state. From the same quarter there was a proposal made, to introduce " A Companion to the Altar," as part of the Prayer Book. The reason of the rejection of the proposal by the bishops, was its tending to make the book bulky. Many good treatises, may be use- fully bound up with the Prayer Book : but to make them essential parts of it, would be manifestly productive of much inconvenience. Any printer may, at his discretion, do what was solicited on this subject, although he may not notice the Companion to the Altar in the table of contents of the Book of Common Prayer. It appears from the journal, that the convention has endeavoured — and with propriety as is here conceived — to give a check to the growing practice of instituting associated * It would have been well, had the subject recuned so as to be bronght before the convention of 1811, to cause notice to haviB been given on the journal of that year. But the fact is as here related : and the gentlemen concerned were a little painedi by the misstatement on the preceding journal ; although. doubtless occa- aoned by misapprehension or by inadvertence. Note to page M. 1S9 rectorships. They destroy responsibility, and give occasion to rivalships betvyeen pastors of the same parochial church or churches. It is argued in favour of Episcopacy, that independently on any arguments from divine institution or from apostolic practice, it has a better tendency than Pres- bytery to peace and order. The last argument seems to apply with more weight to a congregational, than even to a diocesan. So far as the former connexion, in other de- nominations, has been known in any considerable degree to the writer of these remarks, it has been generally an illustration of the opinion here expressed. He recollects reading in the works of the celebrated Richard Baxter, that during the prostration of Episcopacy in England, the pressing instances of that good man — for such he is here conceived to have been — for the increasing of the number of pastors in the churches, were defeated by the experience of the jealousies constantly occurring, where more than one pastor was settled in any church. This is in a work called. The Reformed Pastor, abridged by S. Palmer, part ii- chap. 9. At this convention, the bishops were again assailed by the troublesome business of Ammi Rogers ; who affected to bring before them an appeal from the judgment of Bishop Jarvis and the clergy of Connecticut. There was no doubt on the minds of the two bishops present, that there had been an oversight in not granting to this man a trial, in the Church in that state. But the oversight, if they were cwrect in supposing one, was not theirs; nor was it ia their ppwer to correct it. Nothing could have been easier, than the convicting of him of faults, which deserve degra- dation. But it did not become the bishops to advise the recalling of the act, and the giving of him a trial. There was the less call on the author to do so, because he had already advised this very measure, as did also Bishop Moore ; on an application made for their opinions on the subject, by the standing committee of the Church in Con- necticut. But although their opinions had been asked and given, there occurred insuperable difficulty in the seeking of a compliance with them. The bishops had no conference with Rogers ; nor would they have noticed his business, had he not employed a gentleman of reputation in the taw, to whom something was due on the score of politeness and respect. They spent a whole morning in discussing the matter with this gentleman ;. but persisted in declining to hear his pleadings, because not competent to decide. The 200 Note^opageM. grounds of the treatment of Rogers, by the Houae of Bi- shops, at the last convention and at the present, werer accurately recorded on the journals. The other house properly refused to intermeddle ; and the only reason of the papers being sent to them by the bishops, was their being addressted to both. On the subject of the Hymns sanctioned by this conven- tion, much was said, as well out of doors as in the Hous& of Clerical and Lay Deputies. Some members of that body, had contemplated the matter previously to the meet- ing, and had pressed it with great earnestness. The author of these remarks acknowledges, that it was with pain he saw the subject brought forward. This was not because he doubted either of the lawfulness of celebrating the praises of God in other strains than those of David, or of the ex- pediency of having a few well selected hymns for the especial subjects of the evangelical economy ; which can no other- wise be celebrated in the psalms, than in an accommodated sense. Nevertheless, there is so little of good poetry except the scriptural, on sacred subjects ; and there was so great danger of having a selection accommodated to the degree of animal sensibility, affected by those who were the most zealous in the measure; that the discretion of adopting it seemed questionable. It was, however, yielded to by the bishops, under the hope, that the selection of a few, and those unexceptionable, although some of them, perhaps, are not to be extolled for the excellence either of the senti- ments or of the poetry, might prevent the unauthorized use of compositions whidh no rational Christian can approve of. The matter, however, was executed with too much haste. The bishops had merely time to give a cursory reading to the hymns proposed ; the result of which was the; acceptance of them, with the exception of one hymn, containing a verse that seemed a little enthusiastic. In lieu of this, they pro- posed another hymn, which was admitted. They who were the most zealous for the measure, had pressed foF the ad- mission of about two hundred. On the subject of hymns, there is ground for corfsiderable apprehensions. Some ministei's, and other members of this Church, have so strong an inclination to multiply them, that, whatever might be in future Che number of those al- lowed, there would be at every convention a wish for more. Others, are aware of the inconvenience of this continual enlargement, but press for the setting aside of some of those seteGted, in order tointrodueenfew ones- more suited*© theiff Note to page 34. 20i taste; fiot foreseeing, that on the same principle, there will be, in the next convention, new proposers of new hymns,- and that this will happen without end. There are some religious societies, wiio think it ungodly to introduce into the worship of the sanctuary, any other singing than that of thjB Psalms of David. This is unreasonable : but are we not running into tbef opposite extreme? I'he principles which prevarl in the eslinration erf the aitthor, airtfi which he proposes under subjection to the say- ing— -^' valeant quantum possunt valere" — that is, tet them pass for what they are worth — are these. In rega'rd to the general subjects of psalmody, as the at- tributes of Godj- the mercies of creation and of providence, and what comies under the character of preceptive, or un- der thtft of devout desire and pious purpose, he knowsof no Other "compositions which have proved equally interesting to his mind ; and without making his feeli-ngs a test of those of other persons, he cannot forget,' that these conftpositions 'Svei'ef the liturgy of the Jewish Church, when its devotions were joined in by the divine Author of our religion. It is no small argument in favour of the heavenly OTigin of the Old Testament, that strains of devotion, so far exceliingf whatever the wtfrld knows of prayer practised by the wisest men among the heathen, should adorn the worship of a peo- ple far below some other nations in the cultivation of the human intellect. It should be added, that there is no small proportion of the' psalms, so evidently pointing to the Mes-' siah and his spiritual kingdom, as only to require acquaint- ance with the contents of the New Testament, in order to their beitig accommodated to the celebration of the mercies of redemption. Nevertheless, as it is by the Gospel that "life and im- mortality are brought to light," there would seem to be a suitableness to its high design, in celebrating its prominent subjects in definite terms; so that the nativity, the cruci- fixion, the resurrection, the ascensiorf, the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, and other edifying events, embodied with Christian doctrine and essential to* it, may feason'ably be rendered the more impressive,' by their being carried to the heart on the wings of poetry and of music. It is not intended to allege, that we are to stop here. But there is no hesitation to confb^s, chat additions, if made, shoutd be with a sparing handy and then only admitted, when besides sound doctrine and weighty sense, the compo- 26 202 NoU to page 34 sition be such, as a poet of. acknowledged genius would- acts be ashamed to own. As to the loading of our book with the same truths in a. diversity of language andoC metre, or, in any other way»- the. seeking of variety for its own sake,-thene is pleasure in» recording the opinion, that it will never tend to the sustain- ing either of truth or of devotion. When devout feelings- have often accompanied certain words, the one bring the- other along with them by the law of association. This- should be no hinderance to as much, variety as is suited to- the diversity of subject;- yet it discountenances variety* admitted for the gEatification of restless fancy. As to that species of hymns, which-aifEects to clothe devoutdesire in the language of human paSsion, it is to be hoped, that we shall continue to. repel every effort for their admission: One efffect of gratifying the passion for a continued addi- tion to the number of hynruis, and for expressing the same sentiments in a variety of forms, would be the swelling of the Prayer Book to an immoderate size. Againj the pro- bable effect of this, would be the sometimes editing of the book without either hymns or. meti?e psalms under the same cover ; as may be done at aay time without offence against any existing regulation;, since they are no parts of the said book, but make a book by themselves. Accordingly, selec- tions from it may. be made by. any parochial minister, at his discretion; and either be bound with the Book o£ Common Prayer, or kept in a separate manual for the use of his con- gregation, and of others to whom it may be eligible. Some- tJhing like the latter, the author has seen in sundry churches in England ; in which all the metrical compositions in use, are on a latge sheet of pasteboard, and kept hanging in the pews* It may be proper, to guard the above from being so mis- construed, as to'be a sanction for the publishing of the Book of Common Prayer with the omission of any portion of ity properly coming under any head of the table of contents. This was done in a former day, by an omissionof the book of Psalms,, and- an insertion of the selections only? r. which unauthorized" act, being made known to the convention of 1801, produced the canon now numbered as the foirty-tbird, " Prescribing the Mode of publishing authorized Editions of the Book of Common Prayer, &c." But " The Articles of B,eligion," and " The Ordinal," are each of them a distinct book, although resting on the same authority ; so that " The Book of Common Prayer,',' with or without them,, may be- \jora|)lete. Wok to page Si. 263 TheJBulrject of hymns has so evidently a beaiing on that ^f the psalms, that it will not be inelevant, and will be jus- tified by the liberty which the author stipulated for in the ■preface, to give the outlines of his theory concerning the Matter. It has produced some variety of opinion, althougii ^noi in any such extent, as to endanger the peace -of our churches. [n the primitive Church, says the'learned Bingham, " the joining of all the worshippers in the psalmody, was the most ancient and general practice, tfll the way of alternate psalmody was brought infto the Church." May every at- tempt to supercede the former, by' an exclusive -method, prove abortive. Is there, then, to be interdicted an higher grade of mu- sical performance, calHng for acquirements of more study, and confined to the select members of a choir.'' Far from U8.be the opinion, that there should be wanting any matter which can help to swell the notes of Christian praise; and, that allimprovement in this line should be surrendered to mere amusement and to licentiousness : but, let it be admit- ted on the indispensable condition, of' subserviency to the worship of him, >yho«o framed the ear as to be delighted i)y melody and by harmony; and especially, rather than the permission of a contrariety to that end in sounds character- ized by levity, let it be kept at a distance from the sacred enclosure of the house of God. The same reason apphes to the aid of instruments. They may contribute to the e'f- fect of sentiment and of voice ; but when there are emitted from them sounds hostile to every devout desire, there is -no person impressed by a serious sense of the duties of the place, who would not rather see them committed to the Barnes. It is stated by Bishop Lowth, in his dissertation prefixed to his translation of the prophecy of Isaiah, that the 1)ook of Psalms was originally in metre. He considers the fact «8 proved by certain parts of them, in which there are alphabetical marks of the beginnings of lines and of stanzas. 'To the same purpose ilosephus affirms, that David wrote his psali^s in trimeters and peiftameters. This metre was not of the same number of syllables, as among the Greeks and the Latins; but, to use the words of the bishop, " that relation and proportion of one verse to another, which arises from the correspondence of terms, and from the form of construction ; from whence results a irythmus of propositions, and a harmony of sentences." 204 NoieiopaqeM. The pronunciation of the Hebrew language had become lost, long before the .age of the Gospel ; principally in con- sequence pf its want ,of vowels ; so that the subsequent in- vention of vowels by the Masorets, has never recovered the pronunciation with ^rtainty. Hence, the original metre is unknown : and even in the age of the Gospel, the worship of the temple was with the psalms in the prosaic form. The chanting of them in this form, will for ever claim the merit of their having been so sung, in the worship attended on by our blessed Saviour and his apostles ; and x)f their having continued to be so sang in the primitive Church, and afterwards universally until the reformation. In the compiling of the liturgy of the Church of England, no metrical singing was contemplated: so that when Stern- hold and Hopkins made their version, it came in silently, under the general license to sing any portion of scripture. Tp this day in EngJand, it is only under the cover of the said permission,, that either the said version, or the more poetic version of Tate and" Brady shelters- itself. , In the American Church, the latter is expres^]y sanctioned. How can the sanction be reaaonarbly censured, as treating the words of scripture irreverently ? For the .singing of the psalms in the original, none contend : and as for the original measure, the recavery of it is given up,as desperate. To render them intelligible in any modern language, it is necessary to accommodate in a considerable degree to the genius of it. If the accommodation be a little extended for the making of poetic measure, it cannot be unlawful in its principle, provided the sense be faithfully preserved. The same license is ofte;n taken in choral music; it being common to make transpositions and other alterations of , the words .of anthems, although not for the purpose of tying th^m to metre. But the license pleaded for is denounced, as a gratifying 7 eary to take in so much of what has been suggested by the brain of the modern poet, as that the sentiment of inspira- tion is diluted in the exuberance of language, and sustains a material dimunition of its strength.* There arises the question — What is the line of eonduct to be pursued in this Church, in consideration of the pre- mises? The answer is, first, in regard to chants, if there be any who have a disrelish for them, let such persons be aware of the high sanction under which they have come down to us ; and on that account, le* them not dare to make an effort for the excluding of them.t Secondtyr in regard * The two following.examples are gjven from a comparison of the Bible trans- lation with that of the jwok in metre. The lines of the- latter are fine, which make them serve the better for instances of the extending of a sentiment over too large a surface. The eomparisons to be ma from a people of atrenga latiguage; Judah wasihis sanctuary, and Israel his dominion." Book ii> Metre. " When Israel, by the Almighty led, Knrich'd with their oppressor's spoil. From Egypt march'd, and Jacob's seed From bondage in a foreign soil; Jehovah, for his residence, Chose out imperial Judnh's tent. His mansion royal, and from thence. Through Israeli's camp his orders sent." Bible Translation. Psalm cxxxvii. T. "By the rfvers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when' ws letnembered Zion." Book in Metre. " Where we our weary limi>B to »est. Sat down by proud Euphrates' stream. We wept, with doleful thoughts opprest. And Sion was our mournful theme." The whole of these two psalms are an illustration to the purpose. t There tsan advantage incidental to chants, and worthy of noticeT itis the exclusion of light airs, which, tacked to tlie plain words of scripture, would b« offensive, not to say to every pious, but to eveiy decent person. There are some religious people — 'it is surprising — who would introduce into metre psalmody, the fashionable tunes of festivity and sport. The reason offered is — wny should the best tunes be exclusively the property of Satan ? The author is not prepared to pass such a judgment on those tunes, which are not sinful, so long a» they are Used within the bounds of innocency. But if they be indeed the property of the aforesaid personage, let us be just even to him, and permit him to keep his owni Rational and evangelical devotion has no occasion for them, however suited the; nay be to die extravagances of enthusiasm; 203 Note to page ^4.. to psalms in metre, rendered by habit dear to many devonU minds ; and tiiere being in the use of them, a readiness to^ the desirable object of a general joining of the people ; let not the taste for a species of singing which requires more of science, invade the ground on which they stand. And, thirdly, let not that high grade of choral praise be undistin- giiishingly rejected by those who have no fancy for it. Rather let it be encouraged with moderation, under the condition rigorously required, not only of there being nothing of levity, but of there being a tendency to the ex- citement of devout affections. And let the advocates of it be aware of the disgust, which will and ought to be excited by a violation of this condition, and of the dissatisfaction which will be the reasonable result even of a defect of skill in the performance. It is probable that the chants, the metre psalms, and the choral anthems, might all be profitably laid aside, in the event of an approach in the English language, to Hebrew verse, as above described by Bishop Lowth, and of which he says in another part of his dissertation, that the harmony of it arose " from accents, tones, and musical modalations." But the bishop evidently considered this as unattainable even in the Hebrew. On a retrospect of the transactions pf this convention, - there is entertained the trust, that it did not end without a general tendency to consolidate the communion ; although, in the course of the business, there had been displayed more than in any other convention:, the influence of some notions leading far wide of that rational devotion, which this Church has inherited from the Church of England. The spirit here complained of, was rather moderated than mised higher during the session. But it being liable to be combined with schemes of personal consequence ; there is no foreseeing to what lengths it may extend in future. On the part of those inimical to the contemplated evil, the proper preservative — and may God grant that it may be applied — is the cultivating of an enlightened zeal in favour of the doctrines of our holy religion, as revealed in scripture,- and' hitherto maintained in their integrity by this Church.* * Lest what is said concerning schemes of personal consecjuence should bear the appearance of an insinuation not to be sustained by any fact, the author finds himself called on to specify an attempt made to congregate some select clergymen in Baltimore, at the time of the General Convention, as a distinct body, and ibr the greater increase of piety. The tendency of such a scheme must be obvious. Almost all of the invited clergymen saw the matter in a proper point of view, and declined the invitation. The conseqlvfence was, that the project came to nothing. Nate to page 36. 209^ Q. Page 36. Of the Convention m 1811. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the Rev. Dr. Wilkins in the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties. The secretaries of the two houses, were the Rev. Philo Shelton, of the former, and the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin, of the latter. Bishop Claggett, who was to have opened this convention with a sermon, being detained by sickness, that office was performed by the presiding bishop. This convention was held under very serious and well founded apprehensions, that the American Church would be again subjected to the necessity of having recourse to the mother Church, for the Episcopacy ; or else of continu- ing it without requiring the canonical number ; which might be productive of great disorder in future. Bishop Moore had been lately visited by a paralytic stroke, and was sup- posed to be incompetent to the joining in a consecration, unless in his chamber : which was contemplated as the last resort. Bishop Claggett, after severe indisposition, was so far recovered as to be encouraged to attempt the journey ; but after proceeding a few miles, found himself under the necessity of returning. Bishop Madison thought himself not at liberty to leave the duties of his college.* The author left home, under the hope of inducing Bishop Pro- voost to go on to New-Haven ; although he had never per- formed any ecclesiastical duty, since the consecration of Bishop Moore, in ,1801. But besides Bishop Provoost's being under the effect's of a slight stroke of the paralytic, sustained two years before, he was, at this time, only be- ginning to recover from the jaundice. He found himself utterly incompetent to the taking of a journey ; but pro- mised, if possible, to assist in a consecration, if it should be held in the city of New- York. With the expectation of this, Bishop Jarvis, after the rising of the convention, came with the author to the said city ; as did the two bishops elect. To the last hour, there was danger of disappoint- ment. On our arrival, a day also having been publicly notified for the consecration, we found that Bishop Provoost had suffered a relapse during our absence. But finally, he found himself strong enough to give his attendance ; and thus, the business was happily accomplished. * It appears from a letter of Bishop Madison fo the author, that these dntie* had been made the more imperative by the solemnity of an oath. 27 aiO Note to page 36. What is mentioned on the journals, in relation to the introduction of Episcopacy into the western states, arose from a correspondence which had been entered into be- tween the author and the Rev. Joseph Doddridge, who had been ordained by him many years before ; and who lived near the western line of Pennsylvania, which divides it from Virginia. This gentleman wrote in behalf of himself,^ and of a few other clergymen settled in those western regions. The line of direction given to this business by the convention, renders it premature to say much concern- ing it at present. The hinderances to the carrying of the design' of the preceding General Convention into effect, were the difficulty of selecting a suitable person, and that of supporting, him. The same difficalties are to be appre- hended in the new shape of the business. There is this difference in the two designs. According to the former, the bishop would have been on the missionary plan, selected and paid on this side of the mountains. If the latter idea should be realized, the churches to the westward must be organized, and a bishop must be chosen by themselves. It appears on the journal, that the convention were called on to give their sanction to the endeavours of the Episco- palians in Connecticut,^ for the establishment of an Episco- pal academy with corporate powers. This design originated in the exclusive constitution of the college in that state, which is entirely in the hands of Congregationalists ; and is so patronized by the government, and so supplied with occasional grants of money from the treasury, as is thought to amount to a species of state establishment of a particular religious denomination. It is considerably owing to this circumstance, that there is a degree of dissatisfaction be- tween the Episcopalians and the dominant society, beyond what prevails in any other state in the union. The application to the society (in England), for the Pro- pagating of the Gospel, originated in the following circum- stances. Before the revolution, and when the state now known by the name of Vermont, was considered as part of the province of New-Hampshire, Governor Wentworth, in his grants of the western lands of that province, laid out in every township a tract for the use of the Episcopal Church, which should in future be within the limits of the township ; and conveyed the lands so given to the said society. Some of these lands are within the present bounds of New-Hamp- shire, and the rest are in Vermont. After the peace of 1783, the society conveyed the former to certain gentlemen, Note to page 36. 211 ivitbin the state to which they belonged. The present ap- plication, for a similar grant of the lands in Vermont, was with the view of making them productive, for the accom- plishing of the original object of the grants. It appears further on the journal, that two, Rev. gentle- men, Benjamin Benham, ^nd Yirgil H. Barber, made to the convention an application, the purport of which is not recorded, but became an object of attention in conversation, during and after the session, besides its occasioning of a debate at the time, in the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties. The subject is contemplated as likely to be a cause of future litigation, and therefore now noticed with sorrow. The object of the two gentlemen alluded to, was to procure a declaration of the invalidity of lay-baptism; and they were said to be conscientiously scrupulous of admitting as members of their congregations, persons who had received no other.* This of course precluded accessions, except oa the condition of compliance with their proposal, from the most numerous denomination in the state : their baptism by the Congregational ministers, being considered as per- formed by laymen. Although the clergymen referred to were singular in carrying the matter so far ; yet there has been an increasing tendency in some of the clergy, to ad- minister Episcopal baptism to such as desire it, on alleged doubts of the validity of former baptism. Even this is con- trary to the rubrics, as is proved by many judicious divines of the Church of England. It happened, that a distin- guished lay-member of the convention — the Hon. Rufus King — had brought with him a pamphlet lately sent to him from England, containing a judgment recently given in an ecclesiastical court of that country, in a case precisely to the point. It was occasioned by a suit brought by a dissenter against a parish minister for refusing to bury a child who had been baptized by a minister dissenting from the estab- lishment. The judge — Sir John Nichols — decided it against the clergyman. His reasons, grounded altogether on the rubrics, must carry conviction to every mind, so far as con- cerns the question of the sense of the Church of England. It is true, that this does not settle the question of the sense of scripture. On the most serious consideration of the sub- ject many years ago, conviction is entertained, that the * One of the two clergymen (Mr. Barber) distinguishing themselres as above, a few years after, became a Roman Catholic. In the communion thus joined by liim, it is not uncorhmon for midwives to baptize. It is a well known property Bf extremes, that they are often seen making the connecting points of a circle. 2%2 Note to page S6. holy scriptures and the Church are not at variance in this matter. What adds to the sorrow felt, at the introduction of a new ground of difference in the American Church, is the observing, that it never existed in the mother Church, until about the year 17 1 2 ; and that it had then the strongest appearances of a political manceuvre, played off against the family on whom the succession to the crown had been settled by act of parliament.* If the prejudice should prevail* it is very unfortunate that two of our bishops (Dr. Provoostt and Dr. Jarvis) never received baptism from an Episcopalian administrator. So that who knows what scruples this may occasion, as to the validity of many of our ordinations, and among the number, those of the very two gentlemen, who made the stir at the late convention? It is true, that to meet this difficulty, the distinction is devised, of the possibiHty of transmitting the Episcopal succession through persons who are not members of the Christian Church. This was the sense of Mr. Law- rence, who wrote with much zeal on the subject, about the time above referred to. But Dr. Hickes, who corresponded with Mr. Lawrence relatively to the main question, and harmonized with him in it, disagreed with him on the sub- ordinate point of a man's being a bishop, without being a Christian. Dr. Hickes is high in the esteem of all the gen- tlemen who incline to the opinion of the invalidity of lay baptism. Therefore, who can tell to what extent his senti- ment may prevail, and what inconveniences it may occasion,'' There would be no certainty of the existence of a bishop }n Christendom. In England, the scruple arose in the latter end of the reign of Queen Anne, when there opened the prospect of introducing the Pretender. It was a political measure to serve that cause, and fell with it. A reproach was thrown on the electoral family, that they were unbaptized Luthe- rans: as is noticed in Tindal's continuation of Rapin^ — (p. 725, of vol. iii. of the continuation the first.) * James the First, when he ascended the throne of England, and probably his son Charles the First, who succeeded him, had been baptized in Scotland by non- episcopalian ministers. And at the restoration of Charles the Second, when the great mass of persons who had giown up during the troubles, had been non- jepiscopally baptized ; it does not appear, that any motion was made to rebaptize them. This confirms the sentiment, that when the doctrine was broached an the reign of Queen Anne, it was in hostility to the Hanoverian family. t Bishop Provoost was of an Episcopalian family, but from some local or acci- ,dental cause, was baptized by a minister of the low Dutch Church. Bishop J^v'a tad been born and educated among the Congregationalists, Note to page 36. 213 In confirmation of the preceding statement, there shall he given in a note an extract from a charge of Archdeacon Sharp to the clergy of his archdeaconry. His book is a body of charges delivered by him on the rubrics and the canons. He gives an account of a meeting held at Lambeth, of the two archbishops, and all the bi&hops virho were in town. The year in which their conference was held — 1712 — shows the coincidence of the occasion with the existing state of politics. The assembled prelates determined unanimously in contrariety to the scruple, which the artifice had excited. As Mr. Lawrence's well known book on lay-baptism was issued about the same time, it was probably in aid of the political design. For Dr. Sharp's account of the matter, see the note.* There being notice on the journals of the rejection of a request of a clergyman in Connecticut, and no reason given, it comes within the design of these statements to record the case. The book is well esteemed ; and it was not from dissatis- faction with it, that the application was rejected; but be- cause the request to enjoin the use of the chants and tunes exclusively of all others, was thought unreasonable. The expectation of the applicant has been misunderstood by some ; who have supposed, that he included in his demand the prohibition of the singing of psalms in metre. It is true, that he disapproves of such singing, from the opinion * " In that year (1712) the dispute about the invaUdity of lay-baptism running pretty high, the two archbishops, with all the bishops of their provinces that were in town, came unanimously to this resolution-=^Aa< lay-haptism slioidd be dis- couraged as much aspossiile: but, iftlie essentials Jmd been preserved in a baptism by a lay hand, it was not to be repeated. But then, when it was proposed that a declaration of their sentiments to this purpose should be published, in order to silence or determine the debates raised on this question, it was resolved upon mature deliberation, to leave the question as much undecided by any public declaration, as it was left in the public offices and canons of the Church, for the better security of discipline, and to prevent any advantages that might be taken by dissenters, or seem to be given them, in favour of their baptisms; though they do not properly come within the question of lay-baptisms in cases of extremity." Dr. sharp professes to have taken the above from the original papers signed by the two archbishops. The matter above referred to, as intended to be left undefined, was not the re- baptizing by the form at large, or by the hypothetical form, for against both of these measures, the archdeacon cautions his clergy. But, as in the EngUsh Book of Common Prayer, in the introductory instrument entided, " Concerning the Service of the Church," a minister under doubt is directed to have recourse to tlie ordinary, and as a doubt may occur concerning the words to be made use of in the admission of a child privately baptized — " I certify that all is well done, &c." not because of the insufficiency of the administrator, but on account of the irregularity of the act, the minister is counselled by Dr. Sharp to avail himself of Jhe said proviso, attached to the preface of the Book of Common Prayer. 214 Note to page 36- that it has an alliance with schism. But he meant no further, than as regarded chanting and the singing of an- thems. Yet to have gratified him, would have been an high exercise of power. To set ecclesiastical authority at work on a subject, which heretofore, in the Church of England and in this Church, and probably in every other, has been left at large ; would not forward, but hinder the carrying of more important discipline into effect. This is not said, without the being aware of the great abuse abounding in the department of psalmody, partly, by leaving the portions to be sung to the choice of clerks des- titute of judgment; and partly, by singing tunes either un- suitable to divine worship; or suitable to some of the sacred compositions, yet not to those with which they are unskil- fully connected. It was designed to guard against both of these evils, by the rubric prefixed to the Book of Psalms in metre. That provision, if applied, is a sufficient remedy for both. If any thing further should be attempted, in a field open to so great a diversity of taste, it is probable, that no convention would assemble, without projected im- provements prepared to be laid before them. The fault of the unnecessary extension of authority, would be felt in changes without end. In consequence of a canon passed at the convention of 1804, there was drawn up by the House of Bishops, and sent to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, a Pastoral Letter, addressed to the members generally of this Church. It had been understood, that this was a transaction, over which the latter house were to have no control. Philadelphia was fixed on as the next place of meeting: and, as in the last' convention, the business was concluded with prayer by the presiding bishop, in presence of both houses. POSTSCRIPT. The consecration which took place in Trinity Church, in the city of New- York, May 29, 1811, soon after the rising of the convention, may be considered as in some sort the unfinished business of it. Accordingly, any important cir- cumstance attending said act, may properly have a place in these statements. Such a circumstance occurred during the service, and was the consequence of the inadvertence of the author ; who, in the imposition of hands on each of the two bishops Note to page 36. 215 elect, omitted the words — " In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." The officiating bishop was unconscious of the omission; and the first intimation of it to him, was by Bishop Jarvis in the way from church. Although the author regretted what had happened, yet he had no expectation that any conclusion would be drawn from it, for the impeaching of the validity of the act. Nei- ther would this have happened, if it had not fallen in with the passions which had been excited by the late election in New-York. Not long after the consecration, it was published to the world, that the supposed act of consecration was essentially defective, because of the want of those solemn words. Lamentations were made concerning the consequences which may ensue, to affect the Episcopal succession through future ages ; altogether owing to its invalidating of Bishop Hobart's Episcopal character ; for not a word was said in the pubUcations, of its having of the same effect on Bishop Griswold's ; although all the gentlemen who had noticed the omission, testified that it applied to both the cases. The clamour thus raisied, was of course met with the denial, that any precise form of words was essential to such an occasion. But this not producing silence, inquiry was made into the history of the form, as it stands in the ordinal; when it appeared, that the words in question were no part of the form of the Church of England, until the reign of Charles II.; were never in that of the primitive Church; and are not in the Roman pontifical, at this day. So that on the principle of the opposite argument, there is not at this time a Christian bishop in the world.* Then the objection took a new turn, and was rested on the preface to the ordinal ; which requires the consecration to be conducted agreeably to the form in that book. Ac- cording to this, the accidental omission of a word or two, contained in the book, must invalidate any consecration or ordination in which it may happen. The absurdity being stated as a consequence, the answer was, that in this in- stance, the omitted words involve an important doctrine of our holy religion. It was replied, that the doctrine appears in many places in the service ; and that it is manifestly in- consistent to yield, that the mention of the Trinity during the imposition of hands, is not essential on the mere ground * See Bishop Sparrow's collection, aud De Courayer's Defence of the Engliafa Oidinationa. 216 Nate to page 39. of the importance of the doctrine; to yield further, that ne- cessity is not created by positive institution only; and yet to contend that these united render the words indispensable. The disposition manifested soon spent itself; owing, as is conceived, to the circumstance, that a few gentlemen of talents, who had interested themselves on the occasion,^ without having been in the habit of attending to the con- cerns of the Church, would not commit their characters by joining in a criticism so indefensiblcr R. Page 39. Of the Convention in 1814, Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops, and the- Rev. Dr. Croes in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. The secretaries of the two houses, were, of the former, the- Rev. Jackson Kemper, and of the Mter, the Rev. Ashbel Baldwin, assisted by James Milnor, Esq. The opening sermon was by Bishop Hobart, of New- York, The object at present, as in relation to transactions of former conventions, is principally to bring into view some facts which might otherwise be forgotten, after having had an influence in the determination of the measures adopted. The ninth canon, which dispenses with certain literary qualifications in some cases, had been misunderstood ; and abused to the sustaining of the notion, that the qualification serving for a substitute, is mere fluency of speech ; evidently found in some very ignorant men, and even in some whose understandings are naturally weak. It was thought, that a solemn declaration, guarding against the error, mightbe of use. The alteration of the twenty-ninth canon, was occasioned fey a difference found in the diocesan constitutions ; and by a wish not to interfere therewith, but to leave them to their respective operation. In some states, no minister, not pro- vided with a parish, and no deacon, has a seat or vote in the convention. In others, a contrary provision had been made. What brought the subject into view at this time, was a change which had taken place in Connecticut; the old law, of excluding non-parochial ministers and deacons, having given way to the contrary regulation, much to the dissatisfaction of some of the clergy. The difference did not come under question in the General Convention. But it seemed reasonable in this body, while they avoided in- Note to page 39. 21? eluding the two descriptions of persons alluded to, in ther provision for the office of institution, not to interfere witli the economy of those dioceses wherein they were admitted. The opinion is here avowed, that the latter course is the most proper, although not alleged to be necessary. Other- wise, the Church may be deprived of the counsel of some of the ablest of her ministers, who are prevented from the acceptance of parishes by allowable causes ; for example, the filling of professorships in literary institutions. Besides, there may be aged clergymen, unfit for active service, and yet, not the less competent to the giving of advice. It is a very great injury to religion, what has occasionally hap- pened, and will be especially apt to occur in every large city, that a man in holy orders may find it an eligible place of residence, for enjoyment or for the management of some secular business. His life may be a scandal to the Church: and yet, it would be thought unreasonable to subject him to religious discipline, under a constitution not acknowledg- ing him, as havi,ng an interest in it. What was done in relation to the fortieth canon, was at the instance of the clerical members from Connecticut. The canon provides, that every clergyman shall keep a list of his adult parishioners. In the said state, considerable difficulty was alleged to have arisen, as to what may be called a joint act, in the case of a person baprtized in some other communion, but joining his or herself to this Church. In the case supposed, the joint act must have been of the person and of the minister recording his name. Under existing circumstancea, it does not appear how the query could have been solved, except in the way suggested by the bishops; that is, by bringing the matter to the test of whatever was considered by both of the parties, as tending to the effect contemplated. It must be confessed, however, that this manifests an imperfect state of discipljne. The subject is worthy of the provision of a religious form, with the vieVv of establishing the certainty of the transaction. But to make such a provision consistent, none besides per- sons of fair characters should be admitted within the pale : others to be allowed as hearers, and even to occupy sittings within a church, but not to have votes in its concerns. There was nothing further done in relation to the canons, except the making of a slight alteration in the forty-fifth ; designed to dispense with the duty of reading, in the General Convention, the reports of the conventions in the different states. 28- 218 Note to ]^ge 39*. Perhaps some reason may be required for the delay stilS occurring in regard to the review of the Homilies, recog- nized as they are in the articles. There had been some correspondence on the subject between two of the bishops, the author and Bishop Hobart. But it is involved in more difficulty than would easily be supposed by any person who has not attended to it particularly. That besides^ Verbal alterations, some others are called for, is universally agreed. But to make the latter, without departing from the principle of avoiding the charge, and even of giving plausible ground to any to- pretend, that we have deviated, in respect to doctrine, is scarcely to be expected. On this account the author is not sure, that it will not be best to leave the two books as they now stand :. being referred t» in the articles, as a larger explication of Christian doctrine ^ without its being understood, that assent to the article implies approbation of every sentiment \a the Homilies, or of every series- of reasoning whereby any doctrine of them- is sustained. At the same time, if any minister incHne to read a homily from his pulpit or from his desk, and will take the trouble of clearing it from its obsolete terms and local references, (if there beany) there is nothing to hinder his doing so. In another point of view, however, it ap- peared of the utmost consequence to take some measure in regard to those very instructive compositions. Their being sanctioned by the thirty-fifth article, which is assented to by all persons admitted to the ministry, renders it absolutely necessary that they should have the means of perusing them, and even of well weighing their contents. This is not al- ways easily to be accomplished. Accordingly, it was judged expedient to encourage a publication of them; with a cau- tion against its being: understood,, that this Church is con- cerned in what relates to the civil policy of Great-Britain Under these views of the subject, they have since been printed. For the sense of the House of Bishops, delivered by thenv on this subject, see Appendix, No. 27,. The measure which appears on the minutes, designed to introduce the posture of standing during the act of singing portions of the psalms and of the hymns in metre, requires to be accounted for. It professes to have been adopted for the avoiding of diversity of custom. But there may be an interesting question, as to the cause of that diversity. It is evident, that psalms in metre are not known in the- Bubrics of the Church of England. And yet, it was pro- Note to -page 39. 219 wided in the very beginning of the reformation, by the act of uniformity then passed, that psalms or prayers, taken out ■of the Bible, might be used in divine service, provided it were not done to the omitting of any part thereof. This was in the reignof Edward VI. In the course of that reign, Sternhold and Hopkins edited their version; which must have been brought into use, not by any special act of au- thority, but under the sanction of that provision. TheSe facts have been stated, in a preceding part of the present work. They are again referred to, in order to make them a ground of the supposition, that the posture of sitting grew out of the laxity of manner, in which this part of the public devotion was introduced. When the present writer was in England, during the whole of the year 1771, and nearly the half of 17^2, he was not in any church wherein the people stood at the singing of the metre psalms. He does not re- member to have seen it, daring his short visit to that coun- try, about fifteen years afterwards. And yet it seems well attested of late, that the posture of standing prevails in London and its vicinity, and elsewhere. It is said to have been introduced by the late excellent bishop of London — Dr. Porteus; and this is very probable. The custom had travelled to some congregations in this country; wherein, until lately, it is not probable that there was a single con- gregation who stood during this part of the service. In order to put an end to the diversity, and under the convic- tion that standing is the more fit and decent posture, the bishops proposed, and the other house approved of the measure which has been adopted. For this document, see Appendix, No. 28. It appears on the journal, that on a proposal of a presby- ter of this Church, to add to the anthems serving on certain festivals, instead of the " Venite," certain forms from the Psalms, &c. prepared by himself with musical accompani- ments, the House of Bishops proposed, and were concurred with by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, a deter- mination not to enter on a review of the Book of Common Prayer during the present session ; which may seem too general for the occasion. Certainly the two houses had it so pleased them, might have proposed to the next conven- tion a particular change, without going a step farther. But had it been moved by any member, and made a subject of discussion, any other member might have done the same; so that a general review might have been the consequence- As for the anthems, they were such as might have been ex- 220 Note to page 3S. pected from the musical sufficiency of the proposer. There was another matter of a different nature, comprehended under the determination of the two houses. A reverend member of the convention had brought to it a rnanuscript work of his own, on an important subject of rehgion, which he wished to be sanctioned by the body. It is not easy to calculate the time they might have been kept together, for a due examination of a work of this sort, nor how many simi- lar applications in future would have grown out of complin- ance in the present instance. The reasons of the conven- tional measures in the above cases, are recorded with the hope, that they will have weight on the like occasions, if they should occur. For the determination, see the Appendix, No. 29. The reference to the bishops, and to other ecclesiastical authorities, for the obtaining of information on the subject of a theological school, originated thus. The convention in South-CaroUna, had instructed their deputies to propose the establishing of such an institution ; and accordingly, it had been moved and discussed in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, and by them negatived. On the last day of the session, it was moved in the House of Bishops, % the bishop of the Church in that state. The question was argued with much interest, although with the utmost moderation, by that bislwp on one side, and by the assistant bishop of the Church in the diocese of New- York, on the other. The design interfered especially with the views of the latter^ who had adopted measures, and issued proposals, for the instituting of a seminary under the immediate super- intendence of himself and his successors. It was to have been seated in New-Jersey, and the bishop of that state was to have been joined in the superintendence. The present author, conscious that he had not given much attention to the subject in this comparative view of it, and perceiving that existing circumstances would prevent a determination during the present session, avoided the opening of his mind as to the merits, of the question. The proposal respecting a copy-right of the Book of Common Prayer, had been suggested as a mean of obtain- ing an handsome fund for beneficial purposes. Besides the difficulties in the way, suggested in the instrument relative to the obtaining of information on the subject, there is the insuperable objection which it seemed the most prudent not to notice, that although the Church does not now contem- lUate alterations in her liturgy, yet she ought not to commit Note to page 29. 231 herself in a measure, which would put it beyond her power for a considerable course of years. To have given this as a reason, might have been misunderstood by the public. Independently on that circumstance, there were those who had been formerly witnesses of jealousy excited by this cause, which they wished never to see renev^ed, so long as there are other ways of guarding the integrity of the book against corrupt copies. In most, and probably all, of the present, there are some errata; which, in general, may be detected by the reader, and which might be more effectually guarded against by an authoritative table. The declaration of the bishops, approved of hy the other house, relative to the identity of this Church with the body formerly known by the name of " the Church of England in America," arose from the circumstance, that in some cause or causes pending in the courts, this identity had been denied. The bishops were informed by one of their body, that not long ago, the sentiment had been expressed to him by a gentleman high in office, who grounded what he alleged on the Book of Common Prayer, edited in 1785. The title of this book declares it to be a proposal. It was never ratified-, as will appear on a reference to the journals. Had a sub- sequent convention ratified it, the inference would have been untenable in regard to a Church, the principles of which, aS of the Church from which it became separated by a dispen- sation of Providence, declares its competency to every act of self-government. The identity of the body remained, although accompanied by a newly acquired independence. Still the plea, on the ground taken from it, is invalidated by the non-acceptance of the book. It being foreseen, that this pretence will be set up, whenever the appeal shall come on in Washington ; there was supposed to be a call for the declaratory instrument, which has occasioned the present explanation. There was a consideration which rendered the declaration especially expedient, but not proper to be noticed on the journal. The opposite principle was the known opinion of some leading characters of Virginia; who, on that ground, had defended the act of the legislature of that state, which deprived our communion of its churches and its glebes. Although the question here referred to, was brought be- fore the convention incidentally; yet, as it may hereafter be a subject of more considerable attention, and big with im- portant consequences, occasion shall be taken to state the 223 Note to pa^e 39. reasons for supporting the position, that what is now called " the Episcopal Church in the United States of America," is precisely, in succession, the body formerly known by the name of " the Church of England in America ;" the changes of name having been the dictate of a change of circum- stances, in the civil constitution of the country.* 1st. From the beginning of the organizing of this Church, the principle has prevailed. It impelled the applying to England for consecration, in preference to another country, where it might have been easily had, without the making of requests, not to be complied with but by the interference of the legislature of a foreign country, which the venerable persons petitioned, might not be able to obtain. 2dly. Tt will very much tend to check the spirit of inno- vation, on any essential point of doctrine, because, if suet a matter should be attempted, the original standard will be appealed to ; and the adherents to it will plead, that they are the Church from which the innovators, whether many or few, have departed. This needs not to hinder altera- tions in less important matters ; because, notwithstanding the parentage gloried in by us, we are an independent Church, and so acknowledged by that from which we plead to have descended. 3dly. The security of property is a consideration. This has been spoken of already; but there shall be added in- formation received from a respectable source. It is, that on the arrival of Bishop Seabury in Connecticut, he con- sulted his friend, Dr. William Samuel Johnson, of Strat- ford, whose leaning to him and his cause, with a strong at- tachment to the Episcopal Church, cannot be doubted, as to his right to the income of a handsome landed property, left for the support of a future bishop of the Church of England in America. Dr. Johnson is said to have been of opinion, that Bishop Seabury could not claim it. 4thly, and principally ; regard is here had to there being a fence to the truths of the gospel, prevalent in the days of Edward VI. Any superadditions, which may have been either popular, or introduced by influential churchmen afterwards, are here put out of view. ' Since the penning of these remarks, the author has seen, in print, a serioas endeavour to date the origin of the Episcopal Church, from the period of the consecration of her bishops. The position is rested on groands, which do not here seem to call for a professed refutation : but it may be remarked, that the sentiments expressed by the House of Bishops, and advocated in this place, apply to the notion now referred to, as well as to that of which they were professedly intended. Note to page 39. 223 The principle contended for cannot be understood, with- out remarking the distinction between a sameness of two Churches in doctrine, discipline, and worship, and their identity in a corporate capacity. When in the reign of James I., and afterward in that of Charles 11., there were consecrated in England bishops for the Church of Scotland, the Churches of the two countries were the same in the particulars of principle above mentioned ; but were so far from being one, that to avoid the appearance of it, and to guard against a consequent ascendancy of the English hierarchy over that of Scotland, it was carefully provided, at each of the times referred to, that the bishops of the latter country should not be consecrated by either of the archbishops of Canterbury and York. Neither is what is here said intended to discountenance all changes, which succeeding circumstances may render expedient. In respect to doctrine, if, at any time, for the sake of comprehension, there should be silence on any points not essential to Christian verity, it would not super- sede the principle here sustained. On the subject of rites and ceremonies; it is the judgment of the Church of England, that they may be regulated according to the circumstances of different times and places. And under the head of the constitution of the Christian Church and the discipline of it, there is no reluctance to record the opinion, that if an important object were likely to be accomplished, there would be no difficulty in taking a ground, which would not be objected to by the more moderate of the non-episcopalians, provided there ceased objections of another kind; especially the greatest hin- derance of all, in the irritation kept aKve by the intem- perate zeal of some on each side. But, if ever there should be a surrender of those evangelical truths, which are not only affirmed in the thirty-nine Articles, but pervade the services, and are generally understood to be the leading doctrines of the reformation, its fall may be counted oa; and because of such change, ought not to be regretted. The maintaining of the above principle, consistently with a strong desire of comprehending Bishop Seabury and his Church within our connexion, placed the author of this in very delicate circumstances for some time ; especially as he was not so happy as to have the concurrence of Bishop Provoost, on the latter subject. The {(uthor persevered with him, in the plan of obtaining the canonical number from England ; but thought there would b« no inconsistency. 224 Note to page 4,Z. after the succession had become complete, and even during the measures leading to it, in yielding personal priority to Bishop Seabury. Accordingly, the author will conclude with the expression of a feeling, which from his very early years, has been attendant on his views of religion ; and which he cannot clothe in more appropriate words than those of Father Paul, of Venice — " Esto perpetua:" that is, may the Church so constituted and continued, last for ever. Because of the importance of the declaration of the con- vention on the preceding subject, it is given in the Ap- pendix, No. 30. S. Page 43. Of the Convention o/1817. Bishop White presided in the House of Bishops. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, first Dr. Isaac Wil- kins, of New-York, and afterward the Rev. ^illiam H.^ Wilmer, of Alexandria, presided. The secretaries were, of the former house, the Rev. Benjamin T. Onderdonk, and of the latter, the Rev. Asbbel Baldwin. After divine service, and the sermon by Bishop Griswold ; and in compliance with a resolve of the last convention, there was an administration of the holy communion. There having appeared at this convention two bishops, in addition to those formerly mentioned, it falls within the; de- sign of this work to record, that the first of them, the Rev. Dr. James Kemp, of Maryland, was consecrated on the first of September, 1814, in Christ Church, in the city of New- Brunswick, New-Jersey, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Moore ; and that the other, the Rev. Dr. John Croes, of New-Jersey, was consecrated on the 19th day of November, 1815, in St. Peter's Church, in the city of Philadelphia, by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart and Kemp. Opposition having been made to the consecration of Bishop Kemp, the three consecrating bishops weighed very seriously the objections presented to their notice ; the more so, as among the, signers of the protest sent, there appeared the names of persons known to have ppssessed respectability in the diocese. The detailing of the objections included in the protest, with the reasons of their adjudged irrelevancy, seems called for by regard to the future respectability of Nate to page 45. 225 the Church, and to the consistency of the consecrating bishops. The first objection was, that the office of a suffragan bishop was unknown in the constitution of the Church of* Maryland. On tiiis point it was considered, that although neither the office of a suffragan nor that of a coadjutor or assistant bishop, was noticed in the constitution, either of them might be rendered expedient by existing circum- stances, as a character often met with in the history of the Christian Church ; that a coadjutor or assistant bishop had been introduced into another diocese, without being men- tioned in its constitution, and yet without the charge of unconstitutionality; that as the bishop of the diocese now in question, in the year 1811, had proposed the electing of a bishop to aid him, he must have presumed the legality of the measure, and it did not since appear that he had altered his mind, or that the sentiment had been until now contra- dicted by any person ; that in 1812, the convention had balloted on the question of having a suffragan, and although it was then carried in the negative, it does not appear that they were supposed by any of the members to be irregularly occiipied. Even the signers of the protest must have thought it regular at the time. The second objection denied that Dr. Kemp had been chosen by a constitutional majority : but the journal man>- fested the contrary ; there appearing, to have beCn in his favour two-thirds of the members present. This objection was stated in such general terms, that it could not have been much relied on. The third objection imported, that the general opinion concerning the measure of choosing a suffragan, had been expressed by the silence of the convention of 1813; the next after that which had negatived the measure. There may have been some reason for this, which the consecrating bishops had no means of obtaining. The prospect of the returning health of the diocesan bishop, may have been the reason. The bishops however perceived, from inspection of the journals, that of nineteen clergymen and thirty-two laymen present in the convention of 1813, not a third of either order had been induced to sign the protest. AlthougJi there were in this convention two more of the clergy, and seven more of the laity than in that of 1814, when the choice was made ; yet the members of the latter were pre- cisely those of 1812; when no fault appears to have been alleged against the balloting for a suffragan, because of the 2D 22G Note tapage 43. paucity of electors. It was further considered' under this head, that the requisition of two-thirds for the electing of a bishop, as provided by the "constitution of the Church of Maryland, and which was satisfied by the issue of the election in the present instance, was probably for the pur- pose of guarding' against an advantage which might be taken of a thin convention. On any other principle, it would seem to have been unwise to make a provision, by which a sixth of the number and one more, would have it in their power to arrest, at pleasure, all Episcopal adminis- tration in the diocese. The fourth objection rested on the charge of surprise and management. Nothing of these was apparent on the journal. They are not a ground on which an election may be set aside; In the collision of parties, they are commonly charged by each on the other. On the present occasion, no specific facts were alleged, and no evidence was offered. On the whole subject of the objections, the bishops were of opinion, that if the substance of the protest was designed to arrest the consecration, it ought to have been communi- cated to the convention by which Dr. K-emp had been elected ; and that after the neglect of this, the defect ought to have been in some measure supplied, by its being made known to the bishops called on to consecrate, that the in- strument, which was put into print for the ease of multiply- ing Copies, had been communicated individually to those who were so materially interested- in its contents. These remarks were designed to have an especial bearing on the position of the protest, that the succession of the bishop elect to the diocesan Episcopacy was carried by acclamation. The bishops were possessed of evidence, that the question was put, and the vote taken, in the usual form of conven- tional business. They were the more induced to rely on the testimony to this effect' by the circumstance, that among the affirmants of the contrary, there were some who were not present at the disgraceful transaction, if it happened. In addition to the protest, there was exhibited by the presiding bishop, a letter to him from two clergymen of the diocese, charging the bishop elect with being unsound in the faith, and an enemy to vital godliness. If the signers of the letter had substantiated the first of the two charges, or the latter of them, in the sense understood in scripture under the term' " godliness," essentially involving renovation of the affections manifested in the fritits of holiness, the bishops would have rejected the application before them, Note to jjage 43. 1>27 ?from the respectable diocese of Maryland. But, the writers ■of the letter alleged no specific facts ; they referred to no evidence ; and the accused party declared, that they had not even notified to him the accusation. Thewriters of the letter demanded a hearing by counsel. Setting aside the insufficiency of the applicants, the novelty of the proposal, and all question of the propriety of such a precedent to be set by any three bishops who might be assembled ; it could not but occur to those now present, that the other party in the case would be the convention of Maryland, who had no opportunity of being heard by coun- sel. Had Dr. Kemp been considered as the other party, •there would have been evident impropriety in subjecting him to a hearing, under a charge brought against him imex- pectedly, and remote from his place of residence. Perhaps it was expected, that the consecration would be delayed, with a view to a future hearing. But neither ought the bishops to have acceded to this, vyhen it would have been to subject to reproach th« character of a clergyman, who had been greatly respected in the diocese during nearly twenty-five years, andthis at the request of two clergymen, who do not appear to have hazarded the charges in the convention ; and who, in bringing them forward at this time, must have thought diflTerently from those who joined with them in the protest. For it would be injurious to the reli- gious profession, and to the understandings of the latter, to suppose that they had withheld those charges, while they were urging objectipns of far less magnitude.* These were the reasons on which the bishops rested their procedure, and they were detailed by them, in a letter to Bishop Claggett. Soon after the consecration of Dr. Kemp, the object of the opposition to him, as it was cherished by some of his opponents, showed itself without disguise. Four or five clergymen, who had obtained the concurrence of some re- spectable persons in that prepara-tary measure, but not in what followed, applied first to Bishop Claggett, and, on his refusal, to Bishop frovoost, to consecrate singly the person who should be elected by the applicants. It is not necessary to prove, that the bishops so applied to were men of too * It was with a view to an iaflnence on the question of the election of Dr. Kemp, that the story concerning the election of Dr. Griffith, noticed in this work (page 144,) was handed about; probably fabricated by some, but certainly b«- !ie i-ed without intentional error by others. 228 Note to page A3. much truth and honour, to have considered for a moment of so unprincipled a proposal. But the matter should be re- membered, as pregnant with admonition. A bishop of this Church, during the service of consecration, after uttering the solemn words — " In the name of God, amen," promises conformity and obedience to the doctrine, the discipline, and the worship of this Church. According tothe application, all the checks designed to govern in admission to the Epis- copacy, were to be disregarded. That small number of clergymen exhibited themselves as competent to an act, to which they had recently affirmed an incompetency, in two-thirds of the clergy and representa- tives of the laity, in convention. And all this was under the profession of serving the cause of vital godliness. On the subject of a theological school, discussed in the General Convention, as set forth on the journal, a plan, different from that adopted, was recommended by the con- vention of Pennsylvania It was as follows : — " 1st. That there be a recommendation to the Church in the several states, to raise a fund, the income of which may be applied, as the general wisdom of the Church may direct. " 2dly. That wherever there is such a concentration of clergymen, as that they can assemble often, and at conve- nient times, they may be requested to bestow their endea- vours gratuitously, for the accomphshing of the present object; and, " 3dly. That the income of the contemplated funds be applied to such local endeavours, if thought expedient, so as to secure the especial attention of one or more of the clergy, te be devoted altogether or in part, to the educating of young men for the ministry, until a general plan be adopted, if that should be considered- hereafter as more eligible." The reasons which weighed to the preference of this plan, were — the time intervening between one convention and another — the expediency of limiting the views of that body, to what is essential to the keeping of us together as one Church — the danger of local jealousies, and— r-the easier maintenance of students, under their paternal roofs: which would not always apply according to either of the schemes, but would be much more frequent under that proposed than under the other. There was, however, such a latitude left by the suggestion from Pennsylvania, as that there might jb.ereafter be a general seminary grafted on it, either to tha Note to page iZ. 229 superseding of the local schools, or for the finishing of the education of the scholars, as might be expedient. It is to be hoped, that the other plan, after having been generally adopted, will be universally, and with effect, supported. , On the subject of improper amusements, there was a con- troversy of some warmth, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. In the House of Bishops, there was unanimity in the course taken. This course as recorded on the journal, and including some sentiments in the Pastoral Letter, ad- dressed to the members of the Church generally, and read as usual in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, was said to have conciliated to their disappointment, those in the latter house who had pressed for a stronger measure, which had not been carried. There having been misrepresenta- tions of what passed on this subject from speakers on each side; and, as what finally proceeded from the bishops was said to have been satisfactory to each, there may be use in presenting it at large ; accordingly, it is given in the Appen- dix, No. 31. The proposal for the adopting of a standard edition of the Bible, was in consequence of the discovery of a large edition, extending very widely a corruption of Acts vi, 3. by per- verting it to a sanction of congregational .ordination. In- stead of" whom we may appoint over this business," which is the exact translation of the original, the edition has it "whom 'ye may appoint over this business." While the matter was before the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, a lay member, standing in a pew, and observing a Bible, took it to turn to the place in question, when he perceived it to be a copy of the edition in which the corruption had been detected. The proposal of determining on a standard edition, had been made without the expectation of its being acted on during the session. It was closed with a joint vote of the two house^ to hold the next triennial meeting in the city of Philadelphia, and with prayer by the presiding bishop, before both houses, as usual. Altiiough the object of the " Additional Statements and Remarks" is limited to the proceedings of the General Convention of 1817; there being no subsequent transac- tions which have bearings on the doctrine, or the worship, or the discipline of the Church ; yet it may not be irrelevant to record, that, since that period, there have been conse- crated the Rev. Philander Chase, D. D. for the state of Ohio, and the Rev. Thomas C. Brownell, D. D. LL. D. for the state of Connecticut: the former, on the 11th day of Fe- 230 Postscript. bruary, 1819, in St. James's Church, Philadelphia^ by the presiding bishop, assisted by Bishops Hobart, Kemp, and Croes; and the latter, on the 27th day of October, 1819, in Trinity Church, New-Haven, by the presiding bishop, as- sisted by Bishops Hobart and Griswold. As the act of the convention of 1785 was authenticated by the signatures of all the members of the body ; as it laid the foundation of the succeeding transactions ; and as it has never been given in full to the public ; the only evidence of it being the original, in the possession of the author; it has appeared to him, while the preceding sheets were in the press, that the object of this work calls for the editing of the instrument in its proper form. The address to the English prelates is referred to, but not comprehended in the act. Delicacy having dictated the allowance of rea- sonable time for the delivery of it. Neither of the instruments entitled " Alterations, &c." has been before published ; although the results of them have appeared, in what has been called the Proposed Book : but, as the book is gradually disappearing, it may be here- after important, to have an exhibition of them as they stand in the original act. The constitution as then proposed, as ratified in 1786, and as done away in 1789, is in the book of printed journals, but not in any preceding part of this work. JFor the said act, see Appendix, No. 32. POSTSCRIPT. In the foregoing statements and remarks, the more im- mediate object was the recording of facts, throwing light on the measures of conventional bodiMii and the expressing of opinions, which arose out of the various subjects under notice : the opinions being proposed, with the hope that they will have such weight, as on examination may be thought their due. The work being brought to a conclu- sion, and the reader being qualified to judge of the merits of another motive to be disclosed; it is now declared to be the conviction, that instruction may be gathered from the detail. , 1st. On a retrospect of the low condition in which the Episcopal Church had been left by the revolutionary war ; of her clergy, reduced almost to annihilation ; of the novelty Postscript, 23 f ®f t&e business arising out of the existing crisis; of the despair of many, as to the perpetuating of the communion, otherwise than in connexion with an establishment, from which it was for ever severed ;' of au unwillingness to re- cognize such a severance, although brought about by the providence of God, and the recognizing of it agreeable to a prominent principle in the institutions of the parent Church ; of a difficulty, to be done away only by legislative acts, which perhaps it would be impossible to obtain, and which we could not apply for, consistently with our civil duties; of the apprehension of conflicting opinions in different sec- tions of the United States, between which there had been hitherto no religious intercourse ; of the existence of known differences, on some points ; and with all these things, of danger from selfish passions, so apt to intrude under im- posing appearances, defeating the best intended endeavours in collective bodies ; it must be perceived, that there were formidable obstacles to be surmounted, in combining the insulated congregations with the respective clergy of those who had any, under sin indisputable succession of the Epis- copacy ; and with an ecclesiastical legislature, necessarily differing in form from that under which we had been from the beginning, yet the same with it in principle. The dif- ference between what has been thus looked back on, and the present circumstances of the Church, is a ground of gratitude to Almighty God. In what degree, this change of prospect has been promotive of piety and of correct con- duct, will not be known until the day which will " try every man's work, whether it be of gold, and silver, and precious stones," or, " of wood, and hay, and stubble." In the mean time, we have encouragement to proceed, in humble de- pendence on him, without whom, even " Paul may plant, and Apollos may water" in vain. 2d. It is trusted that there will be no indecorum in re- calling the attention of the reader to the absence of selfish passion in all the preceding records of the results of eccle- siastical legislation. If those who have been engaged in the proceedings have been supposed in this work to have fallen into error in some instances, it is hoped that the no- ticing of it will not give offence ; especially as it is by one who, in the same work, has occasionally acknowledged er- ror in himself, and who is ready to believe, that it may have happened to him in many instances, in which he has not sufficient sagacity, nor sufficient distrust of himself, for the detecting of it. He confidently belieres of the mem- 233 Postscript. bers of the conventions generally, that they have been ac- tuated by iipright motives. Of his brethren in the Episco- pacy he bears testimony, that he has not seen any occasion on wrhich any one of them has manifested a disposition to sacrifice principle to any selfish gratification. If there be thought correctness in these remarks, let the example be influential in similar proceedings in future. In all the affairs which interest the human mind, there is the danger of estimating measures, according to their bearings on some purposes, prompted by ambition or by vanity. The purposes are not always discernible ; and there can scarcely occur a question, on which talent, even if it amount to no more than cunning, may not be capable of drawing to itself a party. In this way, there have arisen most of the dis- sentions which have torn Christendom into sects. As yet, we have been preserved, by the grace of God, from any material inroads of it : and the noticing of the fact may serve, among other weighty considerations, to vigilance against it in future counsels. 3d. Another lesson arising out of the review, is that of mutual concession in small matters, and even in regard to others more important yet not essential, the bearing with what may not be approved of, under the expectation that it will be found on trial better than had been expected; or, that it will be corrected after more mature consideration. Of the latter especially, many instances have occurred, on questions which, without such forbearance, would assuredly have divided the Church into communions censuring, and perhaps perpetuating hostility to one another. As to t be other branch of the recommendation, it is clearly the dictate of a due consideration of the vafiious casts of the minds of men. It would indeed be surprising, that any should ru« into the opposite error ; did we not know, how unbending some are in favour of their own opinions, even in matters which cannot be brought before the tribunal of conscience; so that on a question of taste, they are impatient under every decision not conformable to their wishes. The way to bear down the influence of men so fastidious, and under so evident a propensity to disorder, is for those more reason- able to make sacrifices to one another. 4th. It will be a most important use of the review, to notice the undeviating intention of the Church, to make no such alterations, as shall interfere with the maintaining of the doctrines of the gospel, as acknowledged at the reforma- tion. That point of time should be kept in mind, in order Postscript. 2^3' io protect the Church, not only against threatened innova- tions from without, but also against others which have occa- sionally showed their heads in the Church of England, and may show their heads in this Church, betraying a lurking fondness for errors which had been abandoned. Neither have there been wanting some among ifs, who would have dra\Vn our system towards opinions which we consider as an approach to infidelity, and a mean of reconciling the mind to it. We were under the suspicion of intending this, in, our first eiForts for the organizing of the Church. It is impossible to verify the suspicion by any of the transactions recorded, or by any of a more private nature ; and if indi- viduals hkrboured the design, which is not here known to have been the case, they saw no opening for the accom- plishing of it ; and accordingly, permitted it to die withirt' their bosoms. There is this further use in the reference to the reformation, that it frowns disapprobation on endeavours tending to debase our forms of worship, by the intermixture of devotional exercises of a contrary cast of character. How far this abuse calls for the exercise of ecclesiastical authority, and how far it may be borne with, under the ex- pectation that it carries in itself the seeds of its dissolution, is a question partly of conscience, and partly also of religi- ous prudence. It is a property of the past proceedings of our newly organized Church, that the gold found by her in possession, has riot been adulterated by any debasing alloy ; but that, on the contrary, she has followedthe counsel given by the prophet Jeremiah to the Jews, to " ask for the old paths and to walk therein." In one who has kept this object steadily in view, it will not be thought inadmissible, to express his wish, and to put up his prayer, that the same integrity of principle may be sustained by those who are now bis fellow-labourers, and maybe expected to survive Him, and by those who may succeed. If any thing were wanting to confirm Him in bis senti- ments on' the present subject, th^ deficiency would be sup- plied by the many occasions which have occurred to him, of remarking the vanity and the love of self-exhibition manifested in endeavours to the contrary ; a fault, which, if it be sometimes seen to Subsist with general I'ectitude of intentions, is only one instance out of many, verifying our Lord's reproof of another species of misdirected zeal — " Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of." ., 5tH. These Memoirs may serve for a check to the Mnnecessary exercise of autHority ; and may sustain th^ 30 2^ Postscript opinion, that there being retained, in profession, the esseK- tials of Christian verity; and, in practice, the dt^gree of. submission to public will necessary to social worship ; much, ofwhat is made tlie subject of ecclesiastical law, may be safely left to the diversity of sentiment which is the result of difference of intelligence, of education, and of constitu- tional character. But, as in an army, combination of force fs found to excite their courage for an enterprise, more hazardous to every one engaged in it than a danger from which he would shrink in his individual character; so, in a representative body, a member of it is prone to calculate on a degree of submission, beyond what he would have ima- gined in. the capacity of a sole legislator, although clothed with authority greater than that in the other case supposed. In the estimation of discreet persons generally, ecclesias-r tical legislation is thought to have been carried too far. What the author sees cause to lament, is, that many who acknowledge this fact, and who are ready to lay unsparing hands on matters formerly established, would bind on the Church something new and needless, and likely to excite diversity of opinion. Tbey will do this with good intentions,, and without being aware of the inconsistency. In a Church having the secular arm for its support, what has been men^- tloned would be an evil ;. but it must be ruinous^ if it should be dominant in a Church so much acted on as ours by opinion of persons of all degrees in life, under an organiza- tion as it were of yesterday, and therefore not having the S'Upport of habitual submission to its decisions. In these circumstances, independently on other considerations, there is a call to the acquiring of a weight of religious character, not only in the Episcopacy, but in the other clergy, and in the lay gentlemen, to whom may be committed the import- ant work of making changes in ecclesiastical institutions. Even with the advantage of such a character, let , them be aware of the truth of the maxim, that one property of the art of governing, is the taking of care not to govern too much.* • During the convention of 1789, and while they were engaged in the review of the Book of Common Prayer, a lady of excellent understanding, being often in the way of hearing the subject.diacassed by some members of the body, ad- dfessed them to the following effect — " When I hear t^ese things, I look back tO' the origin of the Prayer Book : and I represent to my mind the venerable com- pilers of it, ascending to heaven in the names which consumed their bodies. I then look at the improvers of this book in" — (naming some gentlemen not want- nig in ' respectabilitjr, but very little furnished witli theological knowledge.) "The«onBe<{,uence is, gentlemen, that I am not sanguine in my expectations. oC Note if) page 47. 235 ^th. The last contemplated improvement, is the suggest- Tng of the hope, that the time which has been spent, and the cares and the labours which have been bestowed, by some who have gone to their rest from their labours, and by others who have still 6n their hands a part of their work to be performed, will be applied to the proper end— the pro- moting of truth and godliness. In every age of the world •there is open a wide field for exertions t-o this effect; but the remark applies especially to the present period, in wfeich there have occurred extraordinary and successful exertions, for the propagation of the gospel; partly produced by for- midable combinations for the destruction of it, which have been overruled to events in contrariety to the licentious principles taught, and to the disorders which they were in- tended to perpetuate. Doubtless, we are to ascribe the issue to the good providence of God, who, in a variety of ways, " makes the wrath of man to praise him." In America, which lays open immense countries to future population and culture, the incitement applies with extra- ordinary stress of argument ; and while it should prompt all the members of this Church to put forth their best endea- vours, each man in his sphere, and according to his ability, it admonishes him, to be himself in the consistent profession, in the practice of the duties, and in possession of the conso- lations of the gospel; without which, he is not likely to be influential over others; and if this should happen, his lamp will be without the oil, which is necessary to prepare him for the reception of the spiritual Bridegroom. ^The additional statements of tlie first edition here concluded,'] T. Page 47. Of the Convention in 1820. The reception of Bishop Moore's sermon, appears on the journal in such a shape, as requires explanation. The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies passed a vote, re- questing a copy for publication. The House of Bishops concurred in the vote, with the addition of their thanks, respect to be paid to your meditated changes in the liturgy." Without raising any question voiicerning the logic of this speech, can there be a doubt with those who know human nature, that something like it is the language of many a heart in the religious world, on the introduction of any novfelt^ of which the propriet/ iniay be doubtfiJ ? 336 Note to page 47. which had been omitted by the other house. The reason, was the preacher's having made baptismal regeneration one of the points of his discourse. Some of the gentlemen, and especially those the most in habits of friendship with him, were displeased at this ; and hence the resolve on the journal of the House of Clerical, and Lay Deputies, that it will be inexpedient hereafterx to pass votes of thanks fof sermons delivered before (jreneral Conventions, and to re- quest copies for publication. The author believes, that with the majority of the house, this resolve was owing not to their dissatisfaction with the doctrine of Bishop Moore, but to their general view of the subject of voting thanks; which may have suggested the apprehension, that dissatis- faction with any point in a conventional sermon, be it even in the minds of a few members of the body, may excite an angry controversy, not having any tendency to settle the matter in question. In the House of Bishops, the vote of thanks for the sermon was passed unanimously. So far as the duty of a conventional preacher is con- cerned, the author is of opinion, that there should be care- fully avoided all questions on which the sense of the Epis- copal Church is doubtful: but, it is to be lamented, that there should be brought under this head a doctrine, which we have been taught to lisp in the, earliest repetitions of our catechism ; which pervades sundry of our devotional ■ ser- vices, especially the baptismal; which is affirmed in our articles also ; which was confessedly held and taught during the ages of the martyrs ; and the belief of which was univer- sal in the Church, until it was perceived to be inconsistent with a religious theory, the beginning and the progress of which can be as distinctly traced, as those of any error of popery. This is not a place for a discussion of the subject, but the author has spoken fully to it in some of his publica- tions. The recorded rejection of an application concerning psalms and hymns, is another proof of the utility of the re- solve referred to of the convention of 1814. It is to be hoped, that all future conventions wiJl adhere to it. In the contrary event, conventions will have the weight of the ex- amination of many books, brought before them by authors and by editors not destitute of respectability. Either the examination will take up more time than the members will be disposed to bestow, or, on that atcount, errors will oc- casionally be sanctioned through haste. And what they ^will sanction, may unreasonably be branded as error, which Note to page 41. 237 will at le^st have the effect of unnecessarily exciting con- troversy. No objection was made to the selection presented ; and it is certain, that any parochial minister is at liberty to makeor to adopt such a selection from the metre book of psalms and hymns, as may be agreeable to his judgment and to his taste. In regard to the titiei page,, and the disregard of the due distinction of books, noticed in the Narrative, there have been some editions inaccurately set forth. A little reflec- tion will show, that from want of precision in this matter, there may result much confusion in the public proceedings of the Church. It was the misfortune of the author, when the scheme of a theological seminary was devised in the convention of 1817, to differ from the majority of both houses, as to the expediency of the measure; and he was supported by the convention of the diocese of Pennsylvania, in proposing to the General Convention a scheme, which would have left to local seminaries the whole concern of theological education. From the time that the contrary sentiment was adopted, he has dpne what laid in his power, for the carrying of the general wish into effect. It is probable, that time will der cide between the two schemes, on the question of preference; bnt as it is a subject of increasing importance, and of in- creasing frequency of discussion, he will state his reasons, for the preference given by him to the plan which he unsucr cessfully proposed. 1st. It has been all along his opinion, and there will be more and more ground for it, in proportion as our ecclesi- astical organization shall be operative over the American territory, that the authority and the deliberations of the General Convention should be Umited to matters essential to the keeping- of us together as one body, and requiring agreement with a view to that end. All enlargement of the jurisdiction endangers controversy, and of course division. In control over a theological seminary, contemplated by the Church at large, as the nursery for her ministry, there is much room for difference of opinion, and for local jealousies. The complexion of the theology taught, in reference to sub- jects on which there may he considerable diversity of opinion among ourselves, the choice of professors, with ac- commodation to such difference; the sufficiency of the pro- fessors, in their respective branches; and other points which might be mentioned, may be sources of animosity pervading our comniunion. Even the branch of it from 238 Note to page 47. which a vacant professorship should be filled, may mmc- times occasion embarrassment. In the civil concerns of our country, the president of the United States, and the governor of every state, has to consider not merely who is the most proper mEin to fill a vacant oflSce, but also what dis- trict is to be gratified at the time. To suppose that the same circumstance would have no bearing on our religious policy, is more than is warranted by our knowledge of human nature. 2dly. There will be required what would else be unne- cessary calls for the assembling of the General Convention. For although there may be trustees, with considerable powers for the management of the seminary^ it can hardly happen, but that exigencies will arise, in which they will hesitate to assume the responsibility of acting. It is a great injury to the essential duties of the ministry, to be unneces- sarily calUng the ministers from their respective spheres of action — setting aside the expense incurred. We esteem it an advantage in our Church, that judicial concerns, con- ducted in other societies by legislative bodies, are acted on by us in ways which do not require their being brought into assemblies of that description. Why should we surrender the resulting benefit, of ther-e being very seldom need for the call of a special convention? Perhaps in time, and after an extension of territory within our connexion, it may be thought sufiicient to assemble statedly once in every five years, instead of triennially, as at present.* 3dly. The jurisdiction over the seminary must be partial and unfair, in respect to the comparative influence of the different sections of our Church. It is not here proposed to lay the chief stress on the inequality of our representa- tion, and its being out of all proportion to our respective population. When our Church was organized, it would have been hopeless to have proposed any other scheme; * The frequency of ecclesiastical synods and councils, for purposes not touching the essentials of the Christian faith, was one of the causes which produced the domination of the Church of Rome. In the fourth century, such assembUes were multiplied; and often for the determining on questions which were more in the province of metaphysics than in that of religion. What added to the evil, was that the emperors defrayed the expenses of the travelling of the members. At last, the burden of the expense and of the waste of time became too great ; and then, controversies were referred to the bishops of the four principal sees ; and finally, it became still more convenient to bring all within the vortex of the papacy. This, or endless division, was necessarily the alternative. The former will not happen m our improved state of society, and with experience of the past. But the latter, if there should be very frequent conventions, extending their jurisdiction over concerns which may be left to local determination, will probably proceed indefinitely and without end. Note to page 4:7. 239 and whether it can hereafter be made conformable to exist- ing weight of numbers, as in the civil line by the federal constitution of 1788, must be left to time to determine. The difficulty now contemplated is of a different nature, is an immense aggravation of the other, and requires the bringing of the following circumstances under view. The establishment of the General Seminary recognized the possible instituting of seminaries supported by local in- terest. It was well that this matter should be distinctly understood, although there was no absolute necessity for any declaration to the effect ; for it is a good civil maxim, that liberty is to be presumed where restraint cannot be shown ; and it is an unerring maxim of scripture, that " where there is no lav^, there is no transgression." Be- sides, can it be supposed that the General Convention, pos- sessing an authority as it were of yesterday, and under the necessity of considering its proceedings with the utmost caution, and with tenderness to the habits and the preju- dices of a people not long accustomed to look up to them for rules of conduct, would have wished to assume an au- thority, not yet exercised by any large communion over its whole range of country? The Church of England, con- ceives of herself as deeply interested in the two universities of that kingdom ; but when did she affect the government of them? In this country, certain societies have recently given the weight of aggregate sanctions, to seminaries of their immediate creation : but although much longer exer- cised and obeyed in ecclesiastical legislation, they have not ventured on the strong measure of disallowing seminaries partially instituted and patronized. Accordingly, there must have been left room for local seminaries within our communion. Let there, then, be remarUed the effect of this on our concerns : an effect, dis- proportioned to any obtaining in other societies, which have both species of seminary within their bounds. At the time of instituting our General Seminary, there were avowed the designs of two local seminaries ; and how many more of them may become instituted, we know not. It is to be expected, that they will principally engross the pecuniary aids of the districts in which they are respectively seated. Considering the consequent rivalship, and perhaps hostility, is it reasonable, that such districts should have an equal share of control over the General Seminary, with other districts by which it will be supported ? Certainly, it is not, independently on the inequality of our representa- 240 :Mote to page 47. tion. How great then will be the disparity, from the twcf causes in combination ! 4thly. It has been not uncommon, that a young man within our communion, directing his views to the ministry, has been supported under the paternal roof, when it would have been difficult, or even impossible, to provide for him in a distant part of the union, and to pay the expenses of the many journeys which it would have required. 5thly. There may be perceived a difficulty, in the mass of property necessary to sustain a seminary on the contem- plated plan ; a difficulty consisting not only in raising it, but ' in rendering it so productive, and at the same time so secure, as to ensure the support of a collegiaT;e body of professors. In England, no provision for literary purposes is thought stable, unless vested in real property, let out from time to time, on leases for years. The circumstances of this coun- try are so diffisrent, that no one thinks of getting from land, rent bearing a tolerable ratio to its capital, or of guarding the premises from deterioration, uTiless by a strictness of personal oversight, not to be expected of a corporation. To pecuniary capital, there are two objections — the ease with which any portion of it may be called in, because of some pressing exigency, or some favourite object, and — -the being liable to be reduced or annihilated by any of the na- tional events, which are thought to justify the issuing of an abundance of paper currency, occasioning its depreciation. Perhaps it may seem,' that these possible evils are not confined to the general school, and must even be increased by there being several of the local. To obviate the sug- gestion, there shall be drawn an outline of the plan proposed for the latter. Although no diocese would be debarred from instituting a seminary under its own ecclesiastical superintendence; it is not probable, that the privilege would be exercised in more than in three or four instances. In each, a single professor would be sufficient; an acquaintance with every branch of theology not being too much to be found in one "man of ta- lents. In each of the two universities of England, there are only two professors of divinity, and each of the profes- sors has his distinct pupils. It is here understood, that the principal labour of the professor w^ould be tbe daily exami- nation of the pupils, in the books of which he would enjoin the reading. If there should be occasional lectures,'they may be few, and for the purpose of inviting general atten- tion. In or near any of our cities, extraneous provision may Note' to page ^i. 24i te made for this study of Hebrew, and for other coincident purposes. Such a school would call forth all the energies of the diocese in which it would b^ seated, and probably of any neighbouring dioceses, having no prospects of seminaries of their own. A fund for its support would the more easily' be created, and the more vigilantly managed; and, until the obtaining of a sufBciency, a partial support might be annexed to a parochial cure. If the idea shoiild occur of there being rival and even hostile seminaries, the answer is, that simple rivalship is attended by advantages, as in the instances of Oxford and Cambridge, in England. Hos- tility would be an evil ; but may as easily happen between professors in the same seminary : in which case the evil would be more extensive, and productive of more passionr and provocation. It may be pleaded in favour of a general seminary, that the different departments will produeie a greater mass of learning iri the different professors, in consequence of the devotion of each professor to his proper branch. But this- has the counterbalancing disadvantage, in the danger of each professor's extending of the claims of his» department too far to be consistent with the necessary limits of a theo- lo*icarl course. Doubtless, as well in a theological as in a philosophical lectureahip, the principles of the professed branch should be fully taught : but it becomes a matter of prudence, to draw the line between this object, and the knowledge which it should be left to subsequent reading to acquire. Besides, if a professor should possess a special aptitude for a particular subdivision of the whole subject to be taught, it does not appear that he may not improve his talent and gratify his taste, consistently with due attention to the other subdivisions, in which he ought not, even if he were no professor, to be imperfectly informed. It has been supposed an advantage in a single seminary, that the pupils will be sent out with similar views, on points concerning which some shades of difference are found among Episcopalians. This is problematical; and, on the contrary, it may easily happen, that diversity shall be gen-' dered by shades of difference among the professors. If, for the avoiding of this, there should be a strict and jealous scrutiny into the faith of those proposed for professorships, there will be an outcry against the favourers of the dominant opinion ; and it will be vvell, if there be not some colour of the charge of persecution^ In seminaries of other refligiou3> 31 342 Note to page 47. societies, the differences subsisting among them hav« ih* truded into their theological seminajies, altliough, on the- litigated points, the professors have been of one mind. There may be apprehended the rise of a local seminar)\- in which the instruction shall be such, as we may suppose not the best calculated to make the most of the natural talents-of the students.- May tliere not be t4ie same disad- vantage to them, under the guidance of clergymen not ap- |)ointed to the employment of preparing, young, men for the ministry, yet not forbiSden to be so occupied by any exist- ing regulation, or by , any rfiat can reasonably be made? The only remedy for both of these evils-, must be in-the reputation of our authorized schools J which should be SH€h, as that young menf shall feefit to be a privation, not. to have been students in them ; an effect to be produced, not by any possible regulation, but by the influence of opinion. Of all the business which has come before our General Conventions, tlie branch of it-which related to a missionarji society, was tlie most mismanagedi. That in the hurry of the last day of the session,,tbere should have been oversights> was not so wonderfiil, asthat the most palpable should be made by gentlemen, with whom^ the sulyect had been con- tempjated for some months' before, and who have unfortu- nately brought the whole scheme undep what the authov thinks a mistak«n suspicion ; of its being^ an intended en^ gine against the institutions of our Church.- There were these two supposed grounds of the suspicion. Althougli the constitution provided, that the trustees should be chosen by the convention, it was so managedj that the bishops had no share in the choice. They were also made the president and the vice-presidents' of a society existing; in idea only^ and composed of all the contributors, who could never be eonstitutionally assembled ;' while in the efficient body, that of the trustees, there was no provision for the presidency or even the membership of a bishop; and no such person, if permitted to be present, could claim a right to vote or to »peak in their proceedings. When the trustees, so imperfectly appointed, assembled on the business, they saw the difficulties with which they were clogged ; and that a society so constituted, would not receive the support of the Church generally. Nevertheless, being aware of the responsibility attached to the fall of the design, they devised ways in which, with the advice of the major number of the bishops, they consented to give a be- j^nning: to the ©nterprize ; looking to the next conventioa Note W to page 49. 24S ^or < the sanctioning of their doings, and for the supply of the manifest defects. This sanction was not obtained,, anfl accordingly there has been a suspension of the scheme. The author attended all the meetings of the trustees, and bears witness at once to their zeal for the object, and to their concern for the order and good government of the Church. U. Page 48. Of the Convention in 1821. The thflpks of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies were votedto Bishop Kemp for his sermon : but this was afterward reconsidered, and the thanks withdrawn. No objection to the sermon was offered ; but it was recollected, that at the last General Convention there had been a resolve against such a notice of any conventional sermon. The matter was considerably agitated, but the former re- solve was persevered in. Tn the House ^f Blsko|}s .the thanks were voited, and a copy of the sermon was requested for publication. W. Page 49. The opposition to the scheme was principally from the gentlemen of Virginia : and it was thought extraordinary, that having heretofore avoided the taking of any interest in the General Seminary, they should now manifest so much zeal on the question of its final location. They avowed their motive, which was, the apprehension of an undue ascendency of the diocese of New- York. But it was pro- perly argued on the other side, that this was guarded against by the provisions made, relative to the future increase of the number of trustees. At present, the diocese of New- York will have nearly half the number: but this is owing partly to the legacy, and the earlier date of measures begun rin that quarter for the endowing of a seminary. In addition it is notorious, that solicitations for the General Seminary in the other states have been suspended by the circumstance of tlie bequest, and by the great variety of opinion which has existed, as to the measures to be pursued in conse- quence. The proper preventive of the undue ascendency •of New- York, if it be supposed to be fraught with danger vto the Church, will be the bestowing of plentiful contrihn- ^^ N^ie X to page 4a. tions in the other states : and to this tliere is great eneour.- agement in the consideration, that in future, while, in the said state, if will require % 10,000 to entitle to an additional trustee, $ 2,000 will be sufficient elsewhere. The adopted plan had the entire consent of the writer of these remarks] notwithstanding his reasons heretofore given for the diocesan, in preference of the general scheme. As is recorded in the remarks on the proceedings of the last convention, he had sacrificed his peculiar sense of the subject, to that of the Church generally, not without fore^ bodings of there being a door opened to litigation and to disunion. The prospect of this seems to him to have ma" terially lessened. Still, the record of his former objections, if it should hereafter happen to be known, may have the good effect of being a vvarnin^ against the apprehended danger. X. Page 49. There was but one particular in the scheme, which created diversity of opinion between the two houses ; and the diversity was owing to the not perceiving of the matter at issue in all its bearings. According to the proposal of the bishops, the meeting of the managers was to be annual; at which, it was thought, executive measures might be put in a train, which needed not to require re-consideration within the time prescribed. In the other house it was re- ferred to a committee, who proposed quarterly meetings, and a correspondent amendment was sent in to the bishops. They persisted in their proposal, and the amendment was withdrawn. The difference was of more importance than may at first appear. The bishops residing in the nearer states, were willing to attend once a year, but not at the risk of quar- terly deviations from what miglit be then enacted ; and for the preventing of these, they could not leave their dioceses so often as was proposed. It needs not be concealed, that there existed a jealousy, not without cause, of some gentler men in different states, who might wish to make the design hostile to the peculiar institutions of our Church ; and hence the desire of securing such an annual assembly, as may de^ ^eat the attempt, if made. Note Y to page 49. 245 Y. Page 49. The history of the rubric is this. In the English book, After the ante-communion service, it is immediately said — •" here follows the sermon." As, in churches in our cities, the service is often used, without either sermon or commu- nion, there seemed wanting a direction to justify the minis- ter in proceeding to the blessing. This is the plain sense of the words. In the case of there being either sermon or communion, the places of their being introduced are pre- cisely noted. If there be neither, the minister, if disposed to do nothing without rubrical direction, might be put to a stand ; and to prevent this, was the design. But the notion has been lately taken up, that in the use of the conjunction " if," the absence of the condition dis- penses with , the command. This is not always the case. On the contrary, if there be a prior command of greater extent, the defect of the condition, has no further effect than on the command appended to it. The matter may be illus^ trated thus. The executive issues a command to a proper officer, first, to perform a, certain service at the place of the delivery of the command ; then, to proceed to a second place, where another service is to be performed; and finally, to go on to a third place, more distant, where also there is to be a specified act of duty. But a doubt occurs, whether, on his arrival at the second place, some circumstance may not hinder the peirformance of the intended service. On this a second command issues, that " if" any such circum- stance should occur, the officer shall proceed to the end of his destination, and to the act to be there done. How irre- levant would it be, on the non-concurrence of the appre- hended circumstance, to say that the command for the first service is superseded! The matter at issue is analagous to what has been sup^ posed. If there be a sermon, it is positively directed to follow the ante-communion service. If there be no sermon, but the communion, the latter is to follow in like manner ; and the " if" has no force, except in the event of there being neither sermon nor communion. These remarks are justified by Dr. Johnson's interpreta- tion of the conjunctive particle, for which he substitutes — *' suppose it to be so" — " whether or no," and — " allowing Jhat." The rubric was made at the review in 1789, and no cler- £46 Note Z to page ^. gyman, then present, is known to hav6 taken occasion t® drop the ante-communion service ; which is very extraordi- nary, if this, as must be supposed to have been tlie case, was the wish of the major number present. The contrary interpretation, is a device started within these few years, and it goes to render almost superfluous the whole body of the Epistles and the Gospels, especially those for the holidays, when they happen to fall on Sundays. It may be questioned, whether this judicious selection had not the effect, in the middle ages, in preventing the corruptions of Christianity from being greater than we find them to have been; for when it was rare to find a Bible in fhe liands even of men of education, these precious portions of it must have had some efiiect, although in Latin. At the reformation, they were retained by the most respectable of the Protestant Churches ; the English, and the Lutheran in Sweden, Denmark, and Germany, and America; all which, with the addition of the American, continues the use of them to the present day ; and with so high an esteem of them, that in some of those Churches, the preacher is expected to take his subject from this selection. It is also a weighty recommendation of the ante-commu- Kion service, that the weekly reciting of the Ten Command- ments, has been always supposed to have a happy effect on morals. Z. Page 49. The former taMe, for thirty-eight years, was calculated by the author of these remarks, in 1785. He has had the mortification to find, that in four instances, his computatioTis were inaccurate; but it has been some relief to him to learn, from Wheatley on the Common Prayer, that there is pre- cisely the same number of errors in what are called the sealed books, and are the standard of the Church of Eng- land. The other changes tire as follows : — The Table of the Rules for finding Easter has been regulated by the change from the eighteenth to the nine- teenth century. On examining the Table of Fasts, there was discovered an oversight of the committee, under whom was printed the book of 1790, after the review of 1789 ; the error being con- tinued in H. Gaine's standard book of 1793 ; in contrariety as-well 'to the proposed hook, as to the English tabk. Ths Note to page 50. 247 erCor made fast days of the Sundays in Lent, deviating from the rule of the Church in ail ages, and from the table of Feasts, which gives this name to all the Sundays in the year. The error consisted in saying " the season of Lent," instead of «' the forty days of Lent ;" which words were accordingly restored. In the Calendar, the column of golden numbers, from the twenty-first of March to the eighteenth of April, was omitted as useless. This rendered it unnecessary to retain a note, found in the English book under those two months; which liad been omitted in all our editions, owing, as is supposed, to the preparing of the book of 1790, from an old English book, edited before the change of style in 1751 ; for in none of these editions is the note found. The report presented a list of typographical errors in H. Gaine's book, made out with the assistance of BIr. WUliam Hall, who had edited the proposed book in 1786. A A. Page 50. Of the Convention in 1823. The writer of the Narrative and of the Statements dis- charged the duty assigned to him, in regard to the points presented by Bishop Chase, agreeably to what was con- ceived to be substantially the sense of the bishops. The first point was a proposal for the appointment of an ©rder of persons to teach ia common schools; and autho- rized to read, to pray, and to catechise on Sundays. To this the answer was, that if such power should be dependent on engagements to be made from time to time, there is already authority to the purpose, and often carried into act. But, if a permanent character should be constituted, it would look like an addition to the number of the orders of the ministry. Secondly, they would be apt to consider their appointment as a stepping-stone to further advancement, whatever pains might be taken to caution them to the con- trary. This has been too often a consequence of the ap- pointment of lay readers, without the designation of per- manent character. It is a useful expedient, and not to be laid aside on that account, although to be resorted to with circumspection. The plea would be much stronger, on the terms of the proposal. The present objector has thought it a matter worthy of consideration, whether it would not lie wise to ordain some deacons, with an understanding to 248 Note to page 50, the effect stated, and with permission to follow secular' occupations: the service to undergo a few corresponding alterations. The only discouragement to his mind, is the danger now noticed; and the apprehension that it might tend to the lessening of the literary character of our minis- try : it being presumable that there would be exacted a less measure of literary attainments in deacons admitted under the conditions stated. Whether the good would not pre- dominate, and whether the abuse might not be guarded against, may admit of a question : but as to a new order, the opinion was decidedly against it. The next point introduced, was that of theatrical enter-" tainments : in respect to which, the answerer took occasion to develope his sentiments. They are, that the theatre, as k has always been, and is likely to be always conducted, has a general tendency to the corrupti&n of morals : not only because of profane and indecent words and sentiments in some plays, but because vice is often insidiously set oiT to advantage, by its being associated with agreeable and even estimable qualities. Still, we cannot affirm that there is sin in the introducing of fictitious characters, for a favourable display of sentiments strictly moral and instruc- tive: for vvhich reason, it would seem improper in a cler- gyman, as was the object of the proposal, to repel from the communion, for being present at a play, not containing any thing contrary to religion or to morals. If it should be urged, that the stage is sometimes so abused as has been admitted, it is an argument which may be transferred to- the pulpit; because of some discourses from it very dan- gerous to the consciences of the hearers ; if not in the same respects, yet in some other. If a communicant should knowingly be present at an exhibition countenancing vicp, it is another matter, and might justly be made a ground of exclusion. Oii this subject. Bishop Chase was referred to the sense of the bishops, "recorded on the journal of 1817. A remaining point, was the pressing of a requisition, that the lay members of conventions should be none other than communicants. The answer to this, was the decided opinion, that none but communicants should be sent : but whether it would not be too strong an act of government, and may not best be left to advice and persuasion, and of even these to be governed by fitness of character in other respects, may be made a question. When we organized our Church, the proposal of such a measure would have stopped us at th« threshold. Whether w€ are now ripe* Notes to page ^0; ^4^9 for it, should be well considered before the making of the attempt. One great discouragement, is the direction given to the public mind, by the use made of the same test in England. Among us, it has been gone into in one diocese only, and was subsequently abandoned. Should any diocese again undertake the matter, they would seem to be com- petent. These were the answers made to Bishop Chase : and the responsibility in which it involved the penman of them, induces to the present record. BB. Page 50. Among the documents delivered by the \Vrlter of this, to be deposited among the materials for a future history, was a body of transcripts from the archives of the diocese of London, made by Dr. Alexander Murray ; and given into the hands of the writer. The said Dr. Murray had been an officiating clergyman in the province of Pennsylvania before the revolutionary war, and in the service of the society for the Propagating of the Gospel. He made the transcripts, with the view to their being of service to those who were coming to England for consecration. They were of no service, in reference to that object; but Dr. Murray having subsequently returned to this country, where he died, the transcripts were delivered into the hands whicti have now deposited them in the conventional collection. The preserving of thenr may contribute to the doing of justice to those English bishops, who exerted themselves for the extending of Episcopacy to the colonies; and may also show, that the neglect of it was owing to the indiffer- ence of statesmen, not aware of the importance of the sub- ject to governmental views ; and doubtless compriehending (what there has been given reason to believe in the Memoirs,) apprehended danger of offence taken by the dissenters ; and the consequent decline of their support, in elections to seats in parliament. CC. Pdge 50. The canon was intended for any case of insufficiency of a candidate, in classical and scientific literature ; and with the view of arresting him at an early period of his intended devotion to the ministry ; and to pi'event disappointment, after considerable time spent in theological study. 32 250 Notes to fage 511 DD. Page 51. The report of the society shows too clearly that the- executive committee have not been *o sirpported, as an establishment by the general authority of the Church gave reason to expect. It is true, that there have been since in- stituted several diocesan societies, which, of course, advant- ageously lessen the sphere of the operation of the other. This, however, ought not to prevent their aid to the general scheme, in consideration of the many states in which their fostering care is- so much needed; especially, as the known existence of the institution is a cause of claims, which, as- matters are, cannot be complied with. EE. Page 51. In the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, there were some members from Virginia^ very ardent in pressing on the convention the concerns of the Colonization Society. It may be perceived that the proposal was waived, on the ground that it was rather of a political than of a religious nature. In addition to this, there exists in the community of Pennsylvania, and probably elsewhere, a variety of opinion on the subject; many contending that the object is not the lessening of the evil of slavery, but the getting rid of a free , coloured population. The writer of this believes, that the motives of the men prominent in the design, are precisely what they profess. Of this, it is to be hoped, there will be gradually a general conviction ; but in the meantime, it would be unwise to take a part in a controversy on a sub- ject not within the sphere of ecclesiastical legislation. FF. Page 51. There is a prevalent sentiment in the public mind, and perhaps is more diffused among Episcopalians than among other denominations, that collegiate education should be without regard to differences of religious profession. No wish is here cherished, of obtruding on young persons forms of profession disapproved of by those who have lawful au- thority over them. But, in a country where every denomi- nation may take its own course in this matter, why should there be lost the opportunity of instilling religious pripciple during, the season in which it is the most likely to be effec- ^ote to page '52. 231 Hnal? If this is to be done, it must be in some form, and they who take a broader ground, never act consistently with what they profess. Those societies flourish most who are aware of this, and who therefore conduct religious education conformably with their respective plans of doctrine, of dis- cipline, and of worship. GG. Page 52. Of the £onventiqn in 1826. The proposal was considered an inconsistency in them -by some, who, in so judging, did not distinguish between their sustaining of existing rubrics, and the inference that there may be some changes for the better — especially in this par- ticular. Of the morning service, the bishops were aware, that it consisted of three services; and this has occasioned repetitions, which otherwise would not have been admitted by our reformers. Further, the bishops knew of com- plaints of the length of the morning service, coming from various portions of their respective dioceses ; and they had witnessed, with sorrow, a wayward disposition in many of the clergy, to make such omissions as the fancies of them- selves or of some influential laymen might suggest. It was thought, that by a moderate measure of compliance with existing circumstances, there might be the eff"ect of giving a check to those extravagances. As for the reluctance to the deviating in any instance from the old paths, it seems to have been worthy of consider- ation, that there is an higher antiquity than that pleaded. It has been stated, that the morning prayer, and the com- munion service, were designed for different hours of the day. Besides, the former, as at first established and used, was without the initiatory sentences, the exhortation, the ■confession, and the absolution; which is not now noticed, as a denial of the expediency of the introduction of them. The prayer for the king, that for the rest of the royal family, that for the clergy and people, and the two final prayers, were not in the morning service, until the reign of Charles il. — more than a century after the compiling of the service; J^he conclusion of it, until then, being with the collect for peace. At the same period was composed the " General Thanksgiving," ever since used with morning and with •evening prayer. So was the prayer " For all Conditions ol' Men," to be used only when it is allowed to omit the 252 Note to page 52. Jjtany. The communion service was without the com* mandments; which ought not to be remarked, without an acknowledgement of the edifying effect of the introduction of them ; and when this service was used with the compre- hension of any one of the services of ordination, the prefa^ jtory rubric did not, as at present, require the precedent use of the morning service. This requisition was intro- ,duced at the aforesaid period, and has added greatly to the time occupied on the occasions referred to. As for the litany, although it was a part of the Book of Common Prayer from the beginning, it does not appear to have had an early introduction into the use of the morning service. The first we read of the litany, from the beginning of the reformation, is the command of Henry VI [I. to Archbishop Granmer, for the translation of it into the Eng- lish, in order to its being understood by the people, when used in processions, for which solemnities and the like, it was originally designed ; or, at least, it became associated with them at an early period. Perhaps it may be suggested, that there would be a re- moval of all difficulty, if there were introduced the use of the two distinct services for mor-ning prayer and for the communion, at different hours in the first division of the day. But if this, the original design in England, was obliged so generally and almost universally, to give way to a combining of the two, notwithstanding the demarcation of the parishes, jand the small distances around the churches within which their respective parishioners reside ; it would be far more difficult to be accomphshed in America, where not to men- tion the scattered population in the country, even in our cities, a man's relation to a particular house of worship is not a proof that he lives within a mile of it ; and in general the greater number of the worshippers may not be within convenient Walking distances, to be traversed six times in the day. Yet it is to be wished, that in future, as at pre- sent, the form of the Prayer Book may be such, as to per- mit the severance unquestionably contemplated by the compilers. It may be said — why not then dispense with the ante- communion service, on there being introduced a rubric to the effect ? The answer is — better this, than the leaving of it on the present footing ; which tends to the producing of two different books in substance, and eventually in form. But it would be far from tending to edification, to forego ^he moral use of a weekly recital of the coinmandments, Not€ to page 53. 253 and the reading of selections of scripture adapted to the ^imes to which they are assigned, and of such early use in the Christian Church : and this, for the abbreviation by one half of a quarter of an hour : which is about the average of the time spent in the recital of that portion of the service. HH. Page 52. Had there been an accomplishment of the wish of the bishops, the services of the morning would have been ab- breviated, it is thought, to desirable limits. This would have been conformable to the purpose, for which litanies were originally framed. In the English Church, the litany st.ood in the first book of Edward, after the communion service, with a rubric agreeable to the sentiments here entertained; and it was placed between that service and the office for baptism. In the second book of Edward, it took its present station, with a rubric extending the use of it to Sundays. For these facts, see Wheatley. Further ; the writer of this ought not to be backward to confess, that however convinced of the propriety of the worship of the adorable Redeemer, as sanctioned by the word of God, he considers it as consenfkneous with the same high authority that worship should be principally ad- dressed to the Father, through the merits of the Son. All of the litany, between the first four petitions and the Lord's Prayer are to the Son exclusively. At least, this is here conceived to be the correct opinion, and it is sanctioned by the sense of the commentators on the liturgy; although there are some, who think that the Father is addressed through the greater part of it, beginning at — " We sinners do beseech thee, &c." To show the want of consent in this matter, it may be proper to notice, that when it was discoursed of among the bishops, there appeared an oppo- sition of interpretation on the point. II. Page 53. It must be acknowledged, that after the withdrawing of what the bishops had contemplated in regard to the litany, the abbreviations are very inconsiderable. Yet it is difiicult to perceive, with what consistency the mere permission of them was argued against, by speakers who advocated in- dulgence to the much larger extent of the omission of the ^nte-communion service ; not because they considered it to -2S4 Note to page hZ. be a true interpretation of the rubric — for this they wne- -quivocally denied ; but on a principle warranting any other •omissions, which the agents are ready to declare to be reconcilable to their consciences. Tn fact, in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, the ■debate took such a turn, as threatens to give unbounded license to such easy consciences; and to be operative on those only who hold themselves to be bound by rubrics.: for this was a construction fairly put on the reasonings of ithose who were in the highest grade of adherence to the integrity of the service. KK. Page 53. To the insertion of this prayer, there have been made two objections: not on the floor of the house, but in con- versations. The first is, that it would add to the sanction given to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, confessedly contained in the original prayer. But O ! what a purgation must there be of our articles, of our services, and of our homilies, if this prejudice is to be complied with! The other objection, is its not being expressed, that the petitio.n is put up through the merits of the Redeemer. But it is the same in this respect, with the present prayer. There cannot be a more evangelical requisition, than that our persons and our ■devotions can claim acceptance on this ground only. But it may be questioned, whether the re- cognition of this truth constitute a necessary circumstance of every subdivision of a continued service. In the prayers before sermons of our brethren of other denominations, there are divers subjects, and not such a request in regard to each of themi The great truth is usually recognised in the conclusion of the prayer : and so it is in the progress of dirs, in various places. The compilers of our liturgy, took the prayer in question from a father of the fourth century. If there be weight in the objection, it ought to be applied to the dispensing with both of the prayers. We put up the Lord's Prayer without this adjunct; although, doubtless, with the implication of it. In Acts iv. 24 — 31, there is a prayer, of which the subject matter is not asked through the merits of the Saviour, although he is recognised as a worker of miracles. As to that in chapter i. 24, 25, it is^ddresaed to the Saviour himself* Ifotestu page 53. 25i» LL. Page 53. Cancerning the subject in the Narrative, it has appeared ft) the writer of these remarks, in regard to those who have pleaded for laxity, that they have uniformly avoided notice of the hinge, on which the question of permitted deviation principally turns. It is not merely that the same is un- rubrical, and a violation of the promises made at ordination ; but, that the interpretation, if acted on consistently, would abrogate the use of all those selections of collects, epistles, and gospels-, any of which may apply to days when the minister delivers a sermon. This may happen on any week day, noted by the calendar as a festival or a fast ; and actually happens in every church, opened on Christmas day or orv Good Friday. The writer will put a strong case, existing in his own person. For many years he has been in the habit, besides a sermon on Good Friday, to deliver what he has called a lecture, on every one of the rest of the days in Passion week, as also on Easter Monday and Tuesday. The rubric uses the word " sermon," and not the word " lecture." What is a sermon ? " It is a discourse," say the dictionaries, (see Johnson or Walker,) " delivered by a divine, for the edification of the people." It would be a subterfuge, in any clergyman, were he, in order to avoid what the canons require on the subject of sermons, to call his discourses lectures, for no other reason than the not taking of a text, and perhaps the speaking from the reading desk, instead of from the pulpit. Hereafter, some clergy- man may deliver, on every day in Passion week, what is more customarily called a sermon, as is done in many churches in England. Such a clergyman would more con- spicuously commit a palpable violation of the rubric. Of those who are in the disuse of the ante-communion service, it is not probable, that there are many who hold worship on the day? which have been referred to, except, perhaps, on Good Friday. But why not be tolerant towards those of their brethren, who, if they should adopt the interpretation contended for, must abandon what they deem an edifying: improvement of those days of humiliation? MM. Page 53. it will be pertinent, in this place, to relate an incident, relative to a matter which was passed^ unanimously by the 256 Note to page 54. bishops, and sent to the other house, where, the turn taken> by it dispensed with the inserting of the document on the journal. It consisted of various reasons in favour of the construction given by the bishops to what some were pleased to call the dubious rubric, in addition to the reasons givea in the convention of 1823, and entered on their journal* The additional reasons were handed in with the proposal concerning the liturgy, as in its first form. Of course, wliea this was withdrawn, as related above, the other came back with it. When the proposal concerning the liturgy was sent again to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, it was accom- panied, not as before, by the two sets of reasons, but by a canon, explanatory of what the bishops conceived to be the true sense of the rubric. In the mean time, the rea- sons having been printed by the order of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, they were in the hands of the members; and the acceptance of the canon,- together with the proposal concerning the liturgy, accomplished the object for which the reasons had been drawn up. But, as they are important towards an understanding df the transaction, they are committed to the Appendix, No. 34. NN. Page 54, Within the memory of the author of this work there ha* taken place a most remarkable change, in reference to the subject now noticed. When he was a young man, and in England, and even when he was there fifteen years after, he never, in any church, heard other metrical singing than what was either from the version of Sternhold and Hop- kins, or from that of Tate and Brady. In this country it was the same ; except on Christmas day and on Easter Sunday, when there were the two hymns now appropriate to those days : which was strictly rubrical ; they being no more than passages of scripture, put into the trammels of metre and rhyme. Of late years, in England, an unbounded license has taken place in this respect : and even an arch- bishop of York has given his sanction to a collection of hymns, made by one of his clergy. The like liberty has crossed the ocean to this country, in a degree. Let not the remark be misconstrued. The present writer has no leaning to the theory of those who consider all sing- ing, except of David's Psalms, as irreverent and irreligious. On the contrary, he is in favour of the opinion, for the Notei to page Si. 257 introducing of some hymns, expressly recognising events and truths peculiar to the New Testament. StilJ, whether it be the eftect of mature judgment or that of feelings ex- cited during the earliest of his years within his recollection, he declares, that in respect to the ordinary topics of prayer, of praise, and of precept, he finds no compositions so much tending to the excitement of devotion, as what we have in the Book of Psalms: and, as they are the effusions of in- :-ipiration, he ought to be excused for his reluctance to doubt of the correctness of his theory. As chairman of the committee,' he hopes his advice had some effect, towards checking the multipHcity deprecated by him, although not to the extent desired. For a more full manifestation of his sentiments on the subject, he pre- sents a document, read by him to the committee, and now to be included in the Appendix,JVo. 35. In this concern there was a course taken, which, it is to be hoped, will be imitated in regard to the liturgy, in the future event of a review, if this should happen. It is, that after a preparation of the work by a committee, consisting^ of members from all the orders in the Church, the conven- tion should have only to stamp on it their yea or their nay. Had they gone into the consideration of the sense of every hymn, and of the criticisms which would have been made on the phraseology, the work would h'ave taken some months at the least. All were sensible, that the time' would be longer than they could sit together; and, therefore, the dissatisfied members of the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties proposed a continuance of the subject to the next Triennial Convention. It had already, been before three bodies of this description. The same reason would apply at the meeting of the next: and, unless the principle should be abandoned, we should have had no addition to the hymns. Whether this would have been for the better or for the worse might be uncertain ; were it not for the license now taken in many places, because of the want of more. OO. Page 54. The two canons not acted on, were directed against very great evils, calling for immediate remedy. What was pro- posed, would certainly have been, in substance, acceptable to the members generally of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. But, some of the members having proposed 33 SS8 Nbiei to page 54. certain amendments to the first of the two canons ; impa- tience to put an end to the session, caused a reference to the committee on the canons, previously appointed and to sit in the recess. The second of the canons would have had a beneficial effect on the present state of the Church in this diocese. There would have been no need of thft delay, but because of the time wasted on the business whicb is to follow. PP. Page 54. There hasnever been before manifested so much patience' nnder tedious repetition of the same sentiments, in reference to a point concerning which, a considerable majority were of opinion froin> the beginning, that it was foreign to the purposes for which they were assembled. In three previous conventions, there had come forward applicants, with their respective schemes relative to books ; and they had been' rejected, without examination. In the first instance, the bishops had sent to the other house, and had received their thanks for it, a resolution interdicting all conventional deliberations of that description. This transaction is-re* corded on the journal of 1814; and the principle has been acted on ever since, until the present occasion. It is to be hoped, that the bad effects pjeoduced by a deviation fron> the precedent so set, will prevent the like in future. Although the scheme was rejected, there were, among those who were averse to the reception of it, some who thought it. good in itself, and worthy of the endeavours of a society, to- be instituted for the purpose. The writer of this was of a different opinion, for many reasons. His principal reason was, that either there would be an addition to the calls, of which there are already too many on the clergy, to leave their respective dioceses and parishes fo» the management of the general business of the Church ; while, as to the lay gentlemen, we should have no proba- bility, that they would leave their occupations for the pup- pose. The business would be at the command of a few gentlemen, at the central seat of the measures to be taken. The writer, in consequence of much experience in pecuniary iflstitutionsj connected with religion and with literature, has witnessed serious losses incurred; sometimes from neglecty accompanied by the purest intentions with the most un- sullied integrity ; and at other times, by the application of public stock to private and unsuccessful, speculations. H« Notes to page 56. 259 re'there'fore reluctant tothe encouragement of a plan, which would commit to such hazards the large stock contemplated : when thedisappoititmentof expectation may bring indelible disgrace on the Church. 'Q,Q. Page 56. Of tlie Convention in 1S2Q. In the canons of the Church in Tennessee, it was pro- vided, that after a trial by the constituted ecclesiastical authority, there should be an appeal to the diocesan con- vention. This was judged by the bishops to be inconsistent with Episcopal government. The opinion was concurred in by the Houseof Clerical and Lay Deputies, without a dissentient voice. -so far as appears. N IIR. Page 56. The author of the present work, would have been grati- fied by the alterations in the liturgy proposed by the last convention, being convinced of the expediency of shortening the Sunday service fur the morning, consisting, as it does, of services originally intended to be distinct, and of unin- tended repetitions. He was not, however, so much dissatis- fied by the rejection of the proposals, as by the causes which, as he conceives, conducted to the issue : causes, operating as well with those who objected on the general ground of dislike to innovation, as with others, who were dissatisfied with the several proposed alterations. The former were reluctant to the decisive measure of an authoritative sup- pression of the licentiousness of generally omitting the ante- communion service, where the omission of it was owing to what they confessed to be a misconstruction of a rubric. The latter, it is here believed, were averse to the shorten- ing of the service in such a way, as not to leave any excuse for omissions as individual discretion may suggest. These opposite opinions may be considered as combining in the point, of there -being at Jast no established uniformity in the use of the services of the Church. It is to be hoped, that the providence of God will interpose, for the prevention of such a result. To the author of these remarks, the only expedient seems to be, as was suggested in a former part of this work, the appointment of a joint committee of bishops, and other divines, for a deliberate review of the Book of 260 Note to page 5T. Common Prayer; their work, when finished, to be laid be- fore the two houses of convention, and to be by them adopted or rejected without debate. This is a course, the nearest that circumstances admit, to the compilation of the Book of Common Prayer by the reformers of the Church of Eng- land, in the reign of Edward VI. Perhaps it will be thought by some, that on supposition of the correctness of the apprehensions which |iave been ex- pressed, the present book, if continued in what will be called its integrity, will be adhered to by a proportion of the clergy. It is not probable. There occur to many of the body, the most correct in adherence to order, many cii-cumstances in- ducing to abbreviations, countenanced by departure from original design. Such clergymen will reconcile deviations to their consciences, by the consideration, that it is unno- ticed by the constituted authorities of the Church; and thus they will become accessory to the result of there being no form in practice. This inconsistency is known to have hap- pened with some clergymen, who have declared their hos- tility to any alterations of the rubrics. :SS. Page 57. The objections to the non-succession of an assistant bishop, may be comprehended under the following heads- — 1st. It was the general course relative to a co-adjutor or assistant Episcopacy, although there have been some devia- tions from the general practice, and although, even in very early times, some departures from the practice have taken place, of which there was an instance in the person of Gregory Nazianzen. ^ ad. In the circumstances of this Church, it would be pe- culiarly, unfortunate, if the precedent should lead to her being encumbered with bishops not possessed of dioceses. 3d. It would give an opening to factious presbyters, whose ambition may prompt them to raise parties, with views to the diocesan Episcopacy; and, 4th. That influential laymen may patronise this restric- tion, with the view of keeping the temporary bishop in sub- jection to their control. There may be proposed the question — why did not these .considerations weigh with the bishops, so as to induce their refusal to consecrate.'' The answer is, Jst. The convention of Virginia, although deviating from Naie to j}age 57. 261 the original and reasonable practice, had to j)lead the coun- tenance of some precedents. 2d. From the assurances which were given by the depu- ties of the diocese interested, it was confidently believed, that there would be a correction of the error at the next session. 3d. That the canon passed against the practice by this convention, was counted on as a barrier against any further recurrence of the evil; and, , 4th. That the convention of Virginia could, witli the less reason, resist the canon, as they had instructed their depu- ties to move in the General Convention, for a regulation to govern on the subject in future. It was known at the time, that Bishop Brownell had de- termined on a visit to the western states, and to those south of Georgia, under a mission from tlie Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society. It is probable, that this prompted the pi'oposal contained in the Narrative. There can be no doubt, that the contemplated visit will contribute materially to the object proposed by the General Convention. The hope of this result is considerably strengthened by what Bishop Ravenscroft has accomplished, in his way from his diocese to the General Convention. He made a circuit through the states of Tennessee and Kentucky, which not only excited the zeal of the scattered Episcopalians in those states, but contributed to ^the organizing of the Church in each of them. There was a singular coincidence of the assistant bishop elect of the Church in Virginia, and that of the assistant bishop who had been consecrated for Pennsylvania. In the latter case, the consecration had been strenuously objected to, on the ground, that the convention of Pennsylvania had no right to elect a successor to their present bishop, while living. In direct contrariety to this position, a Gene- ral Convention, assembled soon after, are unanimously of opinion, that to choose an assistant bishop, without the in- tention of his succeeding, is an act utterly indefensible. During the discussions, the matter which had been litigated in Pennsylvania, was kept out of view, and the name of the assistant bishop was not mentioned. This is evidence, of what little account was the opposition made to his consecra- tion, in the estimation of the representative body of the whole Church. It is the opinion of the author of these remarks, that the proceedings relative to the metre Psalms arc unnecessary, 26« Nate to page 61. and fruitful of litigation. Such is the diversity, not only of judgment but of taste, that be the selection what it may, there will be complaints of the omission of some passages, and of what will be thought the injudicious preference of others. Still, there will be urged the small proportion of the Psalms in use. This objection is easily met. The metre Psalms make no part of the Book of Common Prayer. There may be editions of the one, in severance from the other ; or with selections from it, at the discretion of any parochial minister. Nothing is wanting but a moderate measure of attention, with or without the aid of consenting brethren, to a printer and to a binder. Different selections will be made for different congregations, without just cause of offence. The selections will be submitted to such choice as may be prompted by judgment or by caprice, to be bound in the same covers with the Book of Common Prayer ; and they who do not like any of tliem, may attach to the book the whole body of the Psalms in metre- TT. Page 61. Of the Convention in 1832. On the reading of the journal, without the knowledge of an exterior cause hartng a bearing on the deliberations of the body, it cannot but seem, that much time was unneces- sarily spent in the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies; owing to the blentling of two subjects, one of which might properly have been dispensed with. Whether a bishop have a right to resign his charge at discretion ; and when the diocese being abandoned, whether it be not a duty to supply the vacancy; are questions, resolveable on different grounds, it was not from the being insensible of the dif- ference, that so much zeal and so much argument vvero lavished on the affirmative of (he first of these questions. The effect was the result of opposite opinions held relatively to an event of thirty-three years standing. There has been recorded in the " Memoirs," that in September, 1800, the three bishops, then composing a house, denied the right of Bishop Provoost to i-esign ; and consecrated Bishop Benja- min Moore, only as his assistant and successor. It has also been noticed, that some years after, on the occurrence of an unhappy controversy in the diocese of New- York, this mattei- came under the consideration of the diocesan con- Notes- to -page 61. 265 venoion ; which refused to acknowledge any other diocesan Episcopacy, than that of Bishop Moore. Although the question, aa regards the circumstances which originated it, has ceased to be interesting; yet the occurrence of another professed resignation, brouglu again into view the diversity of sentiment, which had so long ceased to cause any disturbance to the Church. Although, in the late convention, much time was lost in fhe consequent discussion ; yet it will result in benefit to the Church, if the thirty-second canon, which was the fruit of it, should be efficient in guarding against resignations, Hot induced by exterior necessity, or by some other extra- ©rdinary consideration ; and not resting al>oget her on the will of the party, for the consummating of the act. The threatened danger is not only that of giving occasion to faction excited and conducted by clerical ambition ; and that of coveting tiie Episcopal grade, with the design of being speedily disengaged from its labours; but may have unforeseen consequences, by the sanction which it extends to a very pernicious assumptio» of the papacy. The ad- vocates of the right of resignation constantly affirm, that there is a distinction between office and jurisdiction. The jwimitive Church knew nothing of this. It was a notion started by those called the schoolmen, and seized by the popes, to favour the position that all jetrisdietion is from them. This was the shield opposed to what a great pro- portion, probably a majority of the body, anxiously desired, but could not accomplish — a determination in favour of the divine institution of Episcopacy. On the case of Bishop, Chase, it ought to be noticed, that there was given in to both houses, a protest against the considering of him as severed from the diocese ; signed by some members of the Church in Ohio, including one of the clergy. It did not apjjear, that the sentiment was of such <>xtent, as to claim an influence on the proceedings of the body. UU. Page 61. It may be hoped, that no one'will censure the bishops, because of their declining to exercise a visitatorial power, in their aggregate capacity. The notion that they should be called from their dioceses, on any of the innumerable cases of appeal, which may occur in such an institution, is loo extravagant to be reasonably entertained. There has 264 iVoiffs to page 61. lieen already an appeal to them, on the constitutionality of the sale of a body of land, of the propriety of which they knew nothing. The appeal was made t» them individually. But, had they given their determinations in that form, with- out discussion, and without a comparing of their opinions, it would surely not havebeen a wise expedient. As to the other proposal, of noticing the concerns of the body apply^ ing; it was perhaps from some oviersight, that a copy* of the proceedings was not sent. It ought not to be supposed, that the General Convention was expected to sanction them, in utter ignorance of their nature and of'their tendency. It will not be foreign to the purpose, to record from what cause, there origihated the combining of the presidency of the college with the Episcopacy of the diocese. When^ Bishop Chase was collecting in England, certain contributions were made, for the declared purpose of found- ing a theological seminary, to be always under the care of the bishop for the time being. This feature of the present institution may well remain, because appendant to the Episcopacy, oa such terms as not to be liable to be exer- cised to the displacing of the occupant of the latter. After the return of Bishop Chase, there was instituted Kenyoii College, enlarging the sphere of instruction. This produces the incongruity complained of. It may be remedied by a legislative act; which Would not interfere with the foitb pledged to the English donors. WW. Page 61. The author of this continuation is still of the opinion, expressed in a former portion of it, and grounded, not only on the discrepancies of different judgments, b^tt on the variety of taste, that it would hare been better to have left the whole book untouched. I-n this case every parish mi- nister would have beeta at liberty, either to cause to be bound the whole of the said book with the Book of Common Prayer, or such parts of the former as he might judge the most edifying to his own congregation, and to any other persons who might prefer the acceptance of the volume in that form. ' It is well knowtt, that in this Church, as in the Church of England, the use of the metre Psalms rests en- tirely on 'the ground of permission. The entertaining of these sentiments did hot prevent the author, as a member of the committee, from giving his aid to the perfecting of the selection. ' Further, it is liot intended to deny, that there Notes to page 62, 63. 26^ may profitably be a review of the whole version of Tate and Brady. But, it is a work which would require, besides other qualifications, a very exact knowledge of the original Hebrew. XX. Page 62. The most beneficial designs are liable to drawbacks* The munificent legacy of Frederick Kohne, Esq., although the benefit of it is not to come into present efficiency, has led too many to imagine, that the institution is sfufficiently provided for. It will be to the dishonour of our Church, if the trustees should be under the necessity of anticipating this fund. At present, the expenses of the institution con- siderably exceed its income. Although the deficiency will be lessened by the later legacy of George Lorillard, Esq., of $ 20,000, to be paid within five years ; yet it will fall short of the supply which the slate of the funds demands. It ought to be made known, that the seminary is under the necessity of availing itself of the gratuitous services of some of its professors, in whole or in part ; and that of those who give their time entirely to the labour of instruction, the compensation is far less than what is due to their talents and their assiduity. YY. Page 62. The rule of presidency is seniority merely ; and seniority is to be estimated according to the dates of consecration respectively. When two or more bishops are consecrated together, seniority is to be determined by the dates of the election of them severally. ZZ. Page 63. At the time of the reformation, all the churches stood east and west. How it is with the many new churches lately built, is not here known. Certainly there is no law, eccle- siastical or civil, requiring such a position ; and it may be rendered very inconvenient by the shape of a selected lot. The origin ascribed to the custom, in the expectation that the second coming of our Lord will be from the east, has been proved to be groundless, by our improved knowledge of the heavens and of the earth. Still, the change now made, although agreeable to the 34 2&G Notes to page 63. spirit of the rubric, is, in a slight degree, a departure from, the letter of it. Perhaps, considering the ground on which our rubrics authoritatively rest, it would have been better to have made the present measure interpretative; affirming that when the spirit and the letter of an instrument are in opposition, the former should govern. AAA. Page 63. What a wonderful change has the author lived to witness, iff reference to American Episcopacy ! He remembers the ante-revolutionary times, when the presses profusely emitted pamphlets and newspaper discfuisitions on the question, whether an American bishop were to be endured ; and when threats were thrown out of throwing such a person, if sent among us, into the river ; although his agency was advocated for the sole purpose of a communion submitting itself to his spiritual jurisdiction. It is true, that the subject was entangled with the affirmed danger of subserviency to the designs of the government of the mother country, in her hostility to the rights of her colonies. Such was the effect of the combining of these two opposite interests, and so specious were the pretensions of the anti-episcopalian opposition to the measure, that it would have been impos- sible to have obtained a respectably signed lay petition for it, to our superiors in England, although to relieve us from the hardship of sending candidates for the ministry to that country, to be ordained. When, after the revolution, it was hoped that the door would be open for the accomplish- itig of the object, even among those who were zealous lior the obtaining of it, there arose the question, whether, in deference to prejudice, there should not be dropped the name of bishop; and the succession be continued under another name. Behold the difference of result. The order has now ekisted amojig us for nearly the half of a century ; and not a single complaint has been heard, either of usurpation to the injury of any other denomination, or of arbitrary government within our own. If, in one instance, there has been made the charge of such a character, it has not been in the department of the Episcopacy, but in one of another nature. Tn regard as well to that property of ecclesiastical ad- ministration, as the Church herself, the author prays, m the words of father Paul, of Venice — " Esto perpetual" Notes to page 63, 64. 267 BBB. Page 63. Of the Convention in 1835. Bishop Chase had become severed from the diocese of Ohio, by the circumstance, that in the constitution of Ken- yon College, there was the provision, that the presidency of it should be attached to the Episcopacy. The paramount authority of the institution was in a board of trustees. On a disagreement between them and the bishop in the man- agement of the concerns, the latter resigned his collegiate station; which drew along with it the resignation of the -diocesan Episcopacy. This fact ought not to be recorded, without notice of the impropriety of a provision, subjecting the bishop to any other tenure of his ecclesiastical station, than that provided by the canons. In a college, without any charge against tiie bishop in his Episcopal character, there may be dissatisfaction in the minds of the trustees, resulting in his resignation of the presidency, or, he may be dismissed by them. In the latter case, he is deposed ^from the Episcopacy, by a body consisting of presbyters and laymen. There is reason to expect, that this anomaly will be corrected. CCC. Page 63. The writer of this was of opinion, that there would have been advantages beyond those of the present provision, if ihe choice of the Psalms to be read had been left to the officiating minister. DDD. Page 64. When the liturgy of the Church of England was framed, all the churches stood east and west, with the chancel at the east end. In America, positions difierent from this are frequent, there being no law to the contrary. The rubric certainly intended, that the minister should stand at the right end of the table. The author has always acted on the principle, that the spirit of the rubric, being undeni- able, should be preferred to the letter. But it was expe- «|ient, that the latter should be corrected. EEE. Page 64. In the management of the concerns of missions, there 268 Notes to page 64. was no other embarrassment, than what arose between the domestic department and the foreign. The former has the adrantage of its being a call as it were at our door, with its being less costly than the other ; and of course admitting of more to be done with the same amount of means. Some, on these accounts, would have confined to it the exertions of our Church. Others, and it is here conceived the greater number, were for the making of it the prominent object, in consideration of the many and vast waste places of our Zion, but were also willing to apply to foreign missions what should be donations so designated. On the other hand, there was such an ardour for foreign missions in some minds, as seemed to make them more prominent than tlie domestic; although it was not denied, that these also should be sus- tained. Under the executive committee, every contributor was left to his or her choice, and it is now the same under the Board of Missions. Unfortunately, with the discussion of the subject, there was mixed the question of the place or the places of location. In the result, the domestic was lo- cated in New- York, and the foreign in Philadelphia; but with the hope of many, that both of them will be settled finally in the former city; The Board of Missions are com- petent to this ; and it is thought, that considerable advantage (Will accrue from a concurrence of effort.* The said board being clothed with considerable authority, and their doings being, ia a degree, the agency of the Church during the times intervening between the General Conventions, it is thought proper to insert their constitution in the Appendix, No. 36. FFF. Page 64. This measure was dictated by the great increase of popur lation, in the lately settled counties of the state of New- York. That the diocese had become too extensive and too populous for a single bishop,, was generally agreed. But much doubt was entertained, as to its being now the wish of the greater number of the clergy and of the laity within its limits. In this originated the measure of sanctioning the principle of expediency, and of referring to a future convention the carrying of it into operation. The author of this work, delivered at large his senti- ments on the above point, and on the points connected with * Both boardg tfre now in New-York. Notes to page 64, 65. 269 k. His views were committed to the press, in the " Pro- testant Episcopalian," and he judges it to be agreeable to the present design, to insert that document in the Appen- dix, No. 37. GGG. Page 64. Within a year before the convention, it had been ex- pected, that the llev. Dr. Hawks, during the session of that body, would have been consecrated for what has been called the South- Western Diocese. But although there was evidence that the measure would have been popular; yet, there being objections made to the election as irregular, the doctor declined compliance. During the session, there were present from that quarter, several gentlemen who had re- gretted the failure, but were gratified by the new shape which the subject had taken, and were confident that it would be acceptable to all the states and territories concerned. HHH. Page 64. This measure arose from the consideration, that in any .country to which the Church may send missionary presby- ters, there may occur the expediency of superadding the Episcopacy. III. Page 64. The proposals referred to are of great importance, and were introduced in the House of Bishops by Bishop Hopkins. When our Church was organized, it would have been impos- sible to have carried the point of jurisdiction further than as it now stands. But there is the imperfection attending it, that in ecclesiastical trials, opposite decisions may be passed jn different dioceses ; which is manifestly a great evil. KKK. Page 65. The providing of a German liturgy, arose from the statement, that in some districts, there are German families, desirous of attending on the services of our Church, and whose acquaintance with the English language being im- perfect, as expressive of devotional sentiment and feeling, they would be aided by the possession of German Prayer Books, and by a comparing of them with the Enghsh. 270 Notes to page 65. LLL. Page 65. The people's repeating of the confession simultaneously with the minister, renders it the more solemn, and most probably, as in other places, was contemplated by the compilers. As for the question of " Amen," the author must confess himself not furnished with sufficient information. He does not know any rubric or canon prescribing the difference of type. There is before him a Prayer Book, edited under Charles I. in which no such difference is made. In another, ■under Q,ueen Anne, it appears, not only in the places desig- nated by the convention, but in many others; although the causeof the diversity is not obvious. In Baskerville's edition, there is the difference of type; and perhaps in all the re- cent editions in England. It is to be hoped, that the con- vention had sufficient cause for the provision made; and if not, it is of little moment. Since the time of the General Convention, there has been raised a q-uestion, as to the propriety of what they have required, of the concurrent voices of the minister and of the people. The doubt of the requisition rests on the mean- ing of the word " after," which has been construed as in- applicable to concurrence. In opposition to the doubt, the following considerations had weight with the convention. 1st. The exhortation calls on the congregation, to " ac- company" the minister in the ensuing act, which cannot be but by a concurrence. 2d. There was not perceived any reason, why the con- fession should be different from that in the communion service, and from the Lord's Prayer in the morning and evening services. 3d. The word " after" cannot have so restricted a mean- ing as the doubt supposes. It often stands for " according to" or " imitation of." See Johnson's Dictionary. See also in scripture many places, among which are, Psalm xxviii. 6 ; Psalm xi. 3 ; Matthew vi. 9 ; and 1 Peter iii. 5. The Prayer Book is not without instances to the effect, as in the twenty-eighth article, " after an heavenly and spirit- ual manner;" and in the litany as in the English book-~ ^ neither reward us after our iniquities." Conclusion^ 271 MMM. Page 65. In regard to the Bible, there having been occasionally typographical errors, so difficult to be avoided, there ig great reason of provision for strict accuracy. Some years ago there had been a very large edition, in one instance departing from the Greek text, in order to favour the Con- gregational form of Church government. Although there had been provided what was expected to be a sufficient preventive of incorrect editions of the Book of Common Prayer; yet, the provision having been found not entirely to answer the purpose, further security was thought necessary, and constituted. NNN. Page 65. The books and other documents, presented by Dr. Hawks, will be added to those presented by the author of thif<'SO'fTre'years ago, and now in the library of St. James' Church, in this city. It is to be hoped, that they will be placed under a proper supervision. OOO. Page 65. It is remarked often, and with truth, that much legisla- tion is indicative of feeble administration. Still, there may be fruits of experience, and changes of circumstances, call- ing for corresponding changes of laws. It is to be hoped, that our Church has pursued, and will continue to pursue, a proper medium. For the enacted canons, it may suffice to refer to the journal. CONCLUSION. The author has brought to an end, a work comprehend- ing the proceedings of the Episcopal Church, for somewhat more than the half of a century. He discontinues it from this time, partly because of his advance in years, and, fur- ther, because he knows of some of the clergy, who have been lately attentive to the preservation of facts, falling un- der their respective notices. It has been formerly a matter too little attended to. Incidents, not exciting much interest 272 Conclusion. at present, may help in future transactions, by unfolding the grounds on which those preceding them had been adopted, and by which they should in some measure be ex- plained. At this finishing of these Memoirs, he lifts his heart in prayer to tjie great Preserver of his health and strength, that the peace and the prosperity of the Church, of which he has been so long a witness, and to the promoting of which he has given his best endeavours, however feeble, and however in effect far short of his desires, may be per- petuated, to the glory of God, and to the b€st interests, re- ligious and civil, of bis people« W. W. 3. AN APPENDIX O 11 1 G 1 N A L PAPERS. 35 APPENDIX. No. 1. Page-79. Communication with the Court of Denmark. (Copy of a Letter from John Adams, Esq. to the President of Congress, dated the Hague, April 22, f 784. Sm, 1 received, some time since, a letter from an American gentleman now in London, a candidate for orders, desiring to know, if American -candidates might have orders from Protestant bishops on -the continent, and complaining that he had been refused by 'the bishop of London, unless he would take the oaths etf allegiance, &c. Meeting soon afterwards the Danish minister, I had the tjuriosity to inquire of him, whether ordination might be fiad in Denmark. H« answered me, that he knew not, but would soon inform himself. I heard no more of it until to- day, when the secretary of his embassy, Mr. De Rosen- crantz, made me a visit, and delivered me the papers, copies of which are enclosed. Thus, it seems, that what I meant as current conversation orily, has been made the subject of the deliberation of the government of Denmark and their faculty of theology; which makes it necessary for me to transmit it to congress. I am happy to iind the decision so liberal. I have the honour to be, &c. (Signed,) J. ADAMS. Translation of a Communication of Mr. de St. Saphorin, to Mr. John Adams, dated the Hague, April 21, 1784. Mr. de St. Saphorin has the honour to communicate to Mr. Adams the answer he has received from his excellency 376 Appendix — No. 1. the Count de Rosencrone, privy counselloi- and secretary of state for foreign affairs of his Danish majesty, relative to what Mr. Adams desired to know. He shall be happy if this answer should be agreeable to him, as well as to his superiors, and useful to his fellow-citizens. He has the honour to assure him of his respect. (Signed, «fcc.) Translation of the Copy of an Extract of a Letter from his Excellency the Count de Rosencrone, Privy Counsellor of his Majesty the King of Denmark, to Mr. de St. Saphorin, Envoy Extraordinary from his Majesty tio the States General. • The opinion of the theological faculty having been taken «n the question made to your excellency by Mr. Adams, if the American ministers of the Church of England can be consecrated here by a bishop of the Danish Church? I am ordered hy the king to authorize you to answer, that such an act can take place according to the D,anish rites; but for the convenience of the Americans who are supposed not to know the Danish language, the Latin language will be made use of on the occasion ; for the rest, nothing will be exacted from the candidates, but a profession conformable to the articles of the English Church, omitting the oath called test, which prevents their being ordained by the English bishopsk Secretary's Office, 6th April, 1785. Sir, Copies of the enclosed, letters from Mr. John Adams and Mr. de St. Saphorin, upon the subject of conferring holy orders agreeably to the principles of the Church of England, were this day received by council; who have been pleaded Jo direct that they should be communicated to you. I must bfig that they be returned to this office, as soon as you may find it convenient, and am, Sir, with the greatest respect. Your most obedient. Humble servant, (Signed,) J. ARMSTRONG, Jur, Uey. Dr. Wm. White. Appendix — No. 2. 277 Answer. Sir, I request you to present to the honourable council, my grateful sentiments of their polite attention to the interests of the Episcopal Church, in your communication of this morning. Their condescension will be an apology for my troubling them with the perusal of an act of the British parliament, having the same operation with the liberal and brotherly proceeding of the Danish government and clergy. And the liberty I have taken may hereafter exempt some of my brethren from the suspicion of having entered into obliga- tions inconsistent with their duty to their country. But, sir, it would be injustice to the Episcopal Church, were I to neglect to inform the honourable board, that I take it to be a general sentimei^t, not to depend on any foreign authority for the ordination of ministers, or for any other ^matter appertaining to religion. As the light in which we shall hereafter be viewed by our fellow-citizens must depend on an adherence to the above mentioned principle, I take the liberty to submit to the honourable council two printed accounts of proceedings held in this city and in New- York. With my most dutiful thanks to the honourable board, and with all due submission, I am, sir. Their and your very humble servant, • WM. WHITE. April m, 1785. J. Armstrong, Esq. No. 2. Page 79. Communication of the Clergy of Connecticut, to the Arch- bishop of York. New-,York, April 21, 1783. My Lord, The clergy of Connecticut, deeply impressed with anxious apprehension of what may be the fate of the Church in America, under the present changes of empire and policy, beg leave to embrace the earliest moment in their power to address your grace on that important subject. 278 Appendix — No. 2. This part of America is at length dismembered from tljc British empire; but, notwithstanding the dissolution of our profess to the services of your liturgy, to give to the other tuvo' creeds a place in your Book of Common Prayer, even though the use of them should be left discretional. We should be inexcusable too, if at the time when you are re- questing the establishment of bishops in your Church, we did not strongly represent to you that the eighth article oS your ecclesiastical constitution appears to us to be a degra- dation of the. clerical, and still more of the Episcopal character. We persuade ourselves,, that in your ensuing convention, some alteration will be thought necessary in this article, before this reaches- you; or, if not, that due attention will be gi-ven to it in. consequence of our repre- sentation. On the third and last head, which respects purity of man- ners, the reputation of the Church, both in England and America, andthe interes,t of our common Christianity, is so deeply concerned in it, that we feel it our indispensable duty toprovide, on this subject, the most effectual securities- It is presumed, that the same previous public notice of the intention of Ihe person to be consecrated will be given in the Church where-he resides in America, for the same rea- sons, and therefore nearly in the same form, with that used in England before our ordinations. The call upon the persons present at the time of consecration, must be deemed of- little use before a congregation composed of those to whom the person to be consecrated iS' unknown. The tes- timonials, signed by persons living in England, admit of reference and examination, and the characters of those who give them are subject to scrutiny, and, in cases of criminal deceit, to punishment. In proportion as these circum- tances are less applicable to testimonials from America, those testimonials most be more explicit, and supported by a greater number of signatures. We therefore think it ne- cessary that the several persons, candidates for Episcopal consecration, should bring tous both a testimonial from the General Convention of tJie Episcopal Church, with as many signatures as can be obtained, and a more particular one from the respective conventions in those states which re- commend them. It will appear from the tenour of the let- ters testimonial used in England, a form of which is an- nexed, that the ministers who sign them bear testimony to the qualifications of the candidates on their own personal knowledge. Such a testimony is not to be expected frpm tb« members of the General Convention of the Episcopak Appendix — No. 9. 30^ 'Church in Ameriea, on this occasion. We think it sufficient, therefore, that they declare -they know no in>pe«Jiment, but believe the person to be consecrated, is of a virtuous life wnd sound faith. We have sent you such a form as api>ears to us proper to be used for that purpose. More specific declarations must be made, by the «iembers of the conven- tion in each state from which the persons offered for con- secration are respectively recommended. Their personal knowledge of them there can be no doubt of. We trust, therefore, they will have no objbctioii to the adoption of the form of a testimonial which is annexed, and drawn up on the same principles, and containing the same attestations of personal knowledge with that above mentioned, as re- cjuired previously to our ordinations. We trust we shall receive these testimonials signed by such a majority in each convention that recommend, as to leave no doubt of the fit- ness of the candidates upon the minds of those whose con- •eciences aire concerned in the consecration of them. Thus much we have thought it right to communicate .to you without reserve at present, intending to give you fur- ther information as «oon as we are able, in tlie mean time, iWQ pray God to di-rect your counsels in this very weighty matter, and are, Mr. President, and Gentlemen, your affec- tionate brethren, J. CANTUAR. W. EBOR. Farm of a Testimonial for Priest's Orders in England. To the Right Rev. Father in God , by Divine Per- mission Lord Bishop of . We, whose names are here underwritten, testify from •our personal knowledge of the life and behaviour of A. B., for the space of three years last past, that he hath, during ithat time, lived piously, soberly, and honestly: Nor hath •he at any time, as far as we know or believe, written, taught, or held, any thing contrary fo the doctrine or dis- cipline of the Church of England. And, moreover, we think him a person worthy to be admitted to the sacred order of priest. In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands. Dated the day of , in the year of au? liOrd :. 508 Appendixr-T-No. t. Testimony from the Qeneral Convention, We, whoso names are underwritten, fully sensible how important it is that the sacred office of a bishop should not be unworthily conferred, and firmly persuaded that it is our jiuty to bear our testimony on this solemn occasion without partiality or affexition, do, in the presence of Almighty God, jtestify, that A. B. is not, so far as we are informed, justly liable to evil report, either for error in religion or for viciousness of life; and that we do pot know or believe there is any impediment pr notable crime, on account of which he ought not to be consecrated to that holy office, but that he hath led his life, for the three years last past, piously, soberly, and honestly. Testimony from the Members of the Convention in the State from whence the Person is recommended for Consecration. We, whose names are underwritten, fully sensible how important it is that the sacred office of a bishop should noj be unworthily conferred, and firmly persuaded that it is our ,duty to bear testimony on this solemn occasion without partiality or affection, do, in the presence of Almighty God, testify, that^. B. is not, so far as we are informed, justly liable to evil report either for erfor in religion or for viciousness of life ; and that we do not know or believe there is any impediment or notable fcrime for which he jought not to be consecrated to that holy office. We do, moreover, jointly and severally declare, that having per^ sonally known him for three years last past, we do in our ijonsciences believe him to be of such sufficiency in good learning, such soundness in the faith, and of such virtuous and pure manners and godly conversation, that he is apt and meet to exercise the office of a bishop, to the honour pf God and the edifying of his Church, and to be an whaler mtne example to the flock of Christ. Appendix— No. 10. 309 No. 10. Page 120- Communication from the Archbishop of Carderhury. Canterbury, July 4, 178C, To the Committee of the General Ccnveniicn, \c. &{c. Gentlemen, The enclosed act being now pasi6.e3, I have the satisfac- tion of communicattng it td you. It is accompanied by a copy, of a letter, and some forms of testimonials, which I jsent you by the packet of last month. It is the opinion here, that no more than three bishops should be consecrated for the United States of Ai;nerica ; who may consecrate others at their return, if more be found necessary. But whether we can consecrafte any, or not, must yet depend ^n the answers we may receive, to what we have written. I am, your humble servant, J. CANTUAR. An Act to empower the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, for the Tipie being, to Consecrate to the Office of a Bishop, Persons being Subjects or Citizens of Countries out of his Majesty's Do/niiiions. Whereas, by the laws of this realm no person can l)« consecrated to the office of a bishop, without the king's license for his election to that office, and the royal mandate under the great seal for his confirmation and consecration: And, whereas every person who shall be consecrated to the said office, is required to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and also the oath of due obedience to the arch^ bishop; And, whereas there are divers persons subjects or citizens of countries out of his majesty's dominions, inhabit- , ing and residing within the said countries, who profess the public worship of Almighty God according to the principles of the Church of England, and who, in order to provide a regular succession of ministers for the service of their Church, are desirous of having certain of the subjects or citizens of those countries consecrated bishops, according to the form of consecration in the Church of England : Be it enacted by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and tcm- Moral, and commgns in this present parliament assembled, 310 Appendial — No. 1©. and by the authority of the same, that from and after the passing of this act, it shall and may be lawful to and for the archbishop of Canterbury, or the archbishop of York, for the time being, together with such other bishops as they shall call to their assistance, to consecrate persons being subjects or citizens of countries out of his majesty's do- minions, bishops for the purposes aforesaid, without the king's license for their election, or the royal mandate under the great seal for their confirmation and consecration, and without requiring them to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and the oath of due obedience to the archbishop for the time being. Provided always, that no persons shall be consecrated bishops in the manner herein provided, until the archbishop of Canterbury, or the archbishop of York, for the time being, shall have first applied for, and Qbtained his majesty's license, by warrant under his royal signet and sign manual, authorizing and empowering him to perform such consecration, and expressing the name or names of the persons so to be consecrated ; nor until the said arch- bishop has been fully ascertained of their sufficiency in good learning, of the soundness of their faith, and of the purity of their manners. Provided also, and be it hereby declared, that no person or persons consecrated to the office of a bishop in the manner aforesaid, nor any person or persons deriving their consecration from or under any bishops so consecrated, nor any person or persons admitted to the order of deacon or priest by ahy bishop or bishops so con- secrated, or by the successor or successors of any bishop or bishops so consecrated, shall be thereby enabled to exer- cise his or their respective office or offices within his majesty's dominions. Provided always, and be it further enacted, that a certificate of such consecration shall be given under the hand and seal of the archbishop who consecrates, containing the name of the person so consecrated, with the addition as well of the country whereof he is a subject or citizen, as of the Church in which he is appointed bishop, and the further description of his not having taken the said oaths, being exempted frojn the obligation of so doing by xirtue of this act. Appendix-^No. 1\. 311 No^ 11, Page 122. Address to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. MorsT Worthy and Venerable Prelates, In pursuance of your graces' communications to the standing committee of our Church, received by the June packet, and the letter of his grace the archbishop of Can- terbury, of July the 4th, enclosing the act of parliament, " to empower the archbishop of Canterbury, or the arch- bishop of York, for the time being, to consecrate to the office of a bishop, persons being subjects or citizens of countries out of his majesty's dominions," a (Jeneral Con- vention^ now sitting, have the honour of offering their unanimous and hearty thanks for the continuance of your Christian attention to this Church ; and particularly for your having so speedily acquired a legal capacity, of com- plying with the prayer of our former addresses. We have taken into our most serious and deliberate consideration, the several matters so affectionately recom- mended to us in those consmunications, and whatever could be done towards a compliance with your fatherly wishes and advice, consistently with our local circumstances, and the peace and unity of our Church, hath been agreed to; as, we trust, will appear from the enclosed act of our con- vention, which we have the honour to transmit to you, together with the journal of our proceedings. We are, with great and sincere respect. Most worthy and venerable prelates. Your obedient and very humble servants, (By order,) SAMUEL PROVOOST, PresH. In General Convention,^ Ai Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, October llth, 1786. tl2 Appertdix^No. I2l No. 12. Page 123. A Letter from Granville Sharp, Esq. to Dr. Benjamh^ Franklin, with Extracts of Letters. Extract of a Letter from, Granville Sharp to the Archbishop of Canterbury, dated \Zth September, 1785. " All these circumstances prove that the present time is very important and critical for the promotion of the interests and future extension of the Episcopal Church in America, and that no time should he lost in obtaining authority for the archbishops and bishops of England to dispense with the oaths of allegiance in the consecration of bishops for foreign Churches, that they may be restored to their un- questionable right as Christian bishops to extend the Epis- copal Church of Christ all over the world." " An immediate interference is become the more neces- sary, not only on account of the pretensions of Dr. Seabury, and the nonjuring bishops of Scotland; (to which, however, I hope my letters will have given a timely check) but also' to guard against the presumption of Mr. Wesley and other Methodists; who, it seems, have sent over some persona under the name of superintendents, with an assumed autho- rity to ordain priests, as if they were really invested with- Episcopal authority." " Some accounts of this were read to the Society for Propagating the Gospel in May last, from the letters of their missionaries ; and I have since heard that some Methodistical clergymen have procured consecration from the Moravian Churches, which the latter had received from the bishops of Poland. These attempts of the sectaries prove, however, that they perceive among the Americans an increasing inclination towards Episcopal government, of which they want to take an undue advantage ; and conse- quently they prove, also, that the exertions of every sincere friend to the Church of England are peculiarly necessary at this time to counteract them, and to facilitate the communi- cation of a pure and irreprehensible Episcopacy to America, by removing the obstacles which at present restrain the archbishops and bishops of England, from extending the Church of England beyond the bounds of English govern- ment." "I should also inform your grace, that America is no^ Afpeiulix — No. 12. 313 tte only part wherein Protestant Episcopacy is likely to be extended, when the rights of election are better understood i for had I been prepared, in the year 1767, on this point, as 1 am at present, I have reason to believe that a Protestant Episcopal Church would have been promoted in Holland, and in several parts of Germany and' Switzerland, long be- fore this time." " How I hapjiened to be concerned in so important aw affair, (if yoiir grace should have leisure and curiosity to be informed) I am reatly to communicate on receiving your commands," &;c. Extract of a Letter from Granville Sharp to the ArchUstiop of Canterbury, dated \lth of February, 1786. . " Since I had the honour of speaking to your grace on this subject, I have perused Dr. Smith's sermon, vvliich was preached before the convention at Philadelphia ; and though I have still great fears about the propriety of the alterations they have made in the liturgy, yet there seems to be some ground to hope that they will be able to assign a reasonable excuse for the changes,- without giving occasion to suspect any want of belief in the several articles which they have omitted; for Dr. Smith plainly insinuates, that they proceeded on the model of the alterations that were pro- posed to the English convocation in 1689 ; for which, several circumstances have induced me to entertain a favourable opinion. In looking over the MS. account of Archbishop Sharp's life^ I find that he was one of the king's commissioners for that business, and took infinite pains therein, being sensible that «ome alterations might be made with advantage. He was also the person who first proposed, in convocation, that Dr. Tillotson should be appointed pro- locutoi;, in order to favour the intended alterations. Dr. Nichols has given a short general' account of that business in his 'Apparatus ad Defemionem Ecclesiee Anglicanaf but I never heard that the transactions at length were ever printed ; and therefore am surprised to find that the conven- tion at Philadelphia had a full account of that important business before them for their guidance- Dr. Nichols highly commends the alterations that were then intended, and few men were better qualified to be competent judges of that matter. If these circumstances be duly considered, there seems room to discriminate between the motives which 40 314 Appendix— No. 12. might induce the convention at Philadelphia to make suefes large substractions fiona our liturgy, and the real propriety or impropriety of those substractions, at least so far that> the latter need not be held forth as a ground of objection- against the candidates for consecration, if in other respects the candidates themselves should be found unexceptionable ^ and should readily profess a sound and unequivocal belief in the fundamental articles of our faith ; for this will surely justify their consecration before God and man ; and more especially if they will. previously engage and promise,, that when they have received authority, they will not lay hands on any man except on the like Christian conditions, indepen- dent of all national forms and rituals of mere human autho- Hty, which cannot annul the necessity of maintaining an orthodox ministry in Christ's Episcopal Church, howsoever the governments nnder w-hich they live, should think proper* to model the public forms' of worship for their respective- jurisdictions. And therefore I beg leave humWy to submit to your grace, that if any notice is to be taken of the late rejection of creeds from the liturgy m your grace's intended answer to the American r«q.uisition, whether, instead of stating that measure as aJiM cause of refusal, it may not be more advisable to mention it rather as a just cause for your exhorting and giving them timely warning not to send over any candidates for consecration, hut such as are hnoum to pro- fess a sound belief in the fundamental articles of the Christian faith'? and more particularly in the scriptural doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and in the real personality and actual agency of the Holy Spirit as the Divine Comforter and In- structor to the end of the world.'' For these necessary articles of faith are not more perverted by the Socinians, than by a sect professing* principles diametrically opposite to them, I mean the modern Mysticlcs:, who assert that Christ is the only God; though the effect of these very oppo- site tenets is precisely the same, viz. that both sects areled to deny the personality of the Holy Spirit; and therefore, by what spirit they are so led, we may fairly judge by the fruits. Some Americans have lately adopted these strange notions,. which is the reason of my mentioning them," &c. Appendix — No. 12. 315 Letter to Dr^ Franklin. Old Jewry, London, August J9, 1786. >KAR Slil, Nothing could have been mofe truly acceptable to me .'than your excellency's obliging present of the new American Prayer Book; and the more especially as I had the happi- ness of finding that the convention have retained, in the Jitany and other prayers, as well as in the articles of re- ligion, an ample testimony to the most essential doctrines of the Church of England, and that they have really pro- ceeded upon the plan laid down by the king's commissioners in 1689, of whom any own grandfather, (afterwards Arch- Jbishop Sharp,) was one, who took a very active part in that business, though he is not mentioned in the preface of the new Prayer Book. This Ldiscovered by a MS. account of ray grandfather's life,. much about the time that many vague reports were current here, of immoderate mid unjustifiable changes made in the liturgy by the American convention; for the Socinians flattered themselves (through a mere mis- take of Dr. Price, in a note wJiich he had added to Dr. Rush's letter of October 25, 1 7S5, as published in the nevps- papers) that the proceedings of the convention had been '^similar" tothose ot one Episcopal congregation at Boston, which adopted a liturgy — ^'formed after the manner of Dr.. Clarke and Mr. Lindsey." These reports would have gi ven me much more uneasiness, if the perusal of Dr. Smith's ' sermon, (preached before the convention) had not induced me to hope that the plan of the year 1689 would really be adopted by the convention as a model of proceeding; and I was well satisfied that the said plan was sufliciently ortho- dox, because I was confident, that if it had been otherwise, .my grandfather would not ha^re endeavoured to promote it. Nevertheless, the reports of Socinianism gave great offence to many worthy people here, and more especially to the bishops, who had been sincerely disposed to promote the Church of America, as declared in my former letters ; but on hearing of the confident reports of the Socinians, they seemed to give up all hopes of being able to hold any com- munication with the convention. In this state of the busi- ness, I thought it my duty to explain in writing to our worthy primate, the archbishop of Canterbury, my reasons rfur hoping that the convention would be able to assign suoh 316 Appendix — No. 13. ^ reasonable excuse for the changes they were reported t© have made, as might be suffictent to remove that ground of objection against the candidates for consecration, if, in other respects, the candidates theijiselves were found unexception- able. An extract from that letter 1 have enclosed for you*- excellency's perusal, dated February 17, last; and I earn- estly entreated that the bishops here might, at least, fte prepared with authority to dispense with the oaths in giving consecration, a point vvhich I had also previously solicited in a letter dated September 13, 1785. As the convention trans- mitted no account of their transactions, when they wrote to the two archbishops, there was no sufficient evidence for a direct confutation of the reports respecting Socinianisju ; and therefore the great caution and reserve expressed in the joint answer of the archbishops, was unquestionably right and perfectly necessary, under such a state of uncer- tainty respecting Christian doctrine! The archbishop of Canterbury, with his usual condescen- sion and politeness, was pleased to communicate to me, very lately, the contents of that letter, as also the proposed forms of testimonials which it enclosed: and howsoever these may be received by the convention, I am bound to acknowledge my hearty approbation of them, being tho- roughly convinced that they were dictated by the most un- affected sincerity of heart, and (I may even say) apostolical concern for the promotion of the true Catholic Church in America. Neverthelesg, the archbishops have not yet received any acknowledgment that tiieir letter has reached America, except the short mention of it in your excellency's obliging letter to me. Had the gentlemen deputed by the conven- tion to correspond with the archbishops, thought proper to send them a short general description of the new liturgy, with some account also of the plan upon which it was formed, they would have prevented the apprehensions and suspicions occasioned by the late reports about Socinianism, against which the liturgy itself bears ample testimony. I had hoped, however, that nothing would have been omitted therein, but the too frequent repetitions of our liturgy : and that if more creeds than one haA heen considered as falling under the same head of correction, that, at least the Nicene Creed might have been appointed to be used instead of the /common creed, on some particular festivals, as Christmas ,day, or Trinity Sunday, with a discretionary power in the minister to use occasionally the Athanasian Creed, as al| Appendix— No. 12. 317 ^hese creeds may equally be proved by iiiic]uestiotiabIe testi- moniea of scripture. Nevertheless, Uie resolution expressed in the preface, that they do not mean to separate from the Churcii of England in principles, together with the uneqiii- vocai declarations still retained in the new liturgy, of the indispensable faith and worship due to the three dicine per- sons (whose existence in the one divine nature or godhead is so clearly revealed in scripture, and into Vvhose religious service we are equally enlisted by the baptismal profession and vows being made expressly in the names of all the three), must undoubtedly give sincere satisfaction to all true £)hristians, notwithstanding the omission of several other things which they would wish to have been also retained. And, therefore, from my confidence of the unexceptionable religious character of the English bishops in general (with- out waiting to hear their sentiments declared by themselves,) I may venture to repeat what I asserted in my former Jetters, that the bishops of England v.ill be still sincerely inclined to promote the welfare of the Episcopal Churches in America, and to maintain an affectionate communication with them as sister Churches, provided that the gentlemen elected to be sent for consecration are really in themselves unexceptionable: and I have the satisfaction to inform your excellency, that the archbishops have already prepared themselves to comply with the requisition of the American ■Churches, by obtaining an act of parliament in the last session, to remove the former difficulty about the oatbs, a <;opy of which is enclosed. The late accounts in the public papers, that the Episcopal Churches of Virginia and New- York had elected candidates for the Episcopal office iu their respective provinces, gave me very particular satisfaction, because I had understood from former accounts, that the General Convention had nominated the candidates; which would have been a dangerous precedent of infringement on the ancient rights of the clergy and people in each province respectively, to elect their own bishops ; and I should have had still much more sincere satisfaction, if these two pro- vinces had adopted the apostolical mode oi' electing two unexceptionable candidates for each see, whose acceptance should be determined by lot, as revived by the Spanish bishops in the council of Barcelona, (see my tract on Con- gregational Courts, p. 89, 90,) but perhaps^ upon the whole, it may be more prudent to defer the decision of the lot, until three or four bishops are actually resident in America; jtvho can then more effectually examine (as their apostolical 318 Appendix — No. 13- duty requires) the qualifications and characters of the elected candidates, by calling upon the people, publicly, for information, whether any just exceptions are known, before the lot is cast, because even a legal exception would seem to be made too late, if discovered afier the solemn appeal te divine Providence by lot and previous prayer ; for in such a case there seems to be no alternative : nothing but an humble submission and reliance oa the same Providence, for all the future consequences of the decision, whatever they maybe; unless some subsequent misconduct should render the interference of the other bishops necessary. I send herewith a duplicate of my letter respecting a paper currency not liable to depreciation, which was sent by ^the Mediator, Captain Kennydy; and I remain with true jespect and esteem, dear sir, ' Your excellency's most obliged, Humble servant, GRANVILLE SHARP. His Excellency Benjamin Franklin, Esq. President of the State of Pennsylvania. No. 13. Page 124. An Aotof the General Convention of Clerical and Lay De- puties of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of New-York, New- Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and South-Carolina, held at Wilmington, in the State of Dela- ware, on Wednesday^ the 11th of October, 1786. Whereas, at a General Convention of clerical and lay ^deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in sundry of the United Stales of America, viz. New- York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and South- Carolina, holden at the ci^ of Philadelphia, on the Tuesday before the feast of St. Michael, in the year of our Lord 1785, and divers subsequent days, it was agreed and de- clared, that " the Book of Common Prayer, and Adminis- tration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of tlie Church, according to the use of the Church of Eng- land," should be continued to be used by this Church, as the same was altered by the said convention, in a certain instrument of writing, passed by their authority, entitled, " Alterations of the Liturgy of the Protestant Episcopal Appendix— No. 13. 3 IS Church in the United States of America-, in order to render the same conformable to the American Revolution and the Constitutions of the respective States:" And it was further agreed and declared, that the Book of Common Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England, as altered by an instrument of writing, passed under the authority of the aforesaid convention,, entitled, "Alterations in the Book of Common Prayer, and Administration ©f the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, accordinj; to the use of the Church of England, proposed and recommended to the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of Ame- rica, sljould be used in this Church, when the same should have been ratified by the conventions which had respectively sent deputies to the said General Convention:" — And thereupon the said convention, anxious to complete their E|)iscopal system by means of the Church of England, did transcribe and transmit an address to the most reverend and right reverend the archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the bishops of the Church of England, earnestly entreating that venerable body to confer the Episcopal character on such persons as should be recommended by this Church, in the several states so represented. And whereas the clerical and lay deputies of this Church have received the most friendly and affectionate letters in answer to the said address, from the said archbishops and bishops, opening a fair prospect of the success of their said appHcations; but, at the same time, earnestly exhorting this convention to use their utmost exertions for the removal of certain objections by them made, against some parts of the alterations in the Book of Common Prayer, and Rites and Ceremonies of this Church, last mentioned ; In pursuance whereof, this present General Convention hath been called, and is now assembled ; and being sincerely disposed to give every satisfaction to their lordships, which will be consist- ent with the union and general content of the Church they represent; and declaring their steadfast resolution to main- tain the same essential articles of faith and discipline with the Church of England : Now therefore, the said deputies do hereby determine and declare, First, That in the creed commonly called the Apostles' Creed, these words — " He descended into hell," shall be and continue a part of that creed. 320 Appendix— No. 13. Secondly, That the Nicene Creed shall also be' insert^jJ in the said Jiook of Common Prayer, immediately after the Apostle's Creed, prefaced with the rubric [or this.'\ And whereas, in consequence of the objections expressed by their lordships to the alterations in the Book of Common Prayer, last mentioned, the conventions in some of th© slates, represented in this General Convention, have sus- pended the ratification and use of the said Book of Com- mon Prayer, by reason whereof it will be improper that persons to be consecrated or ordained as bishops, priests, or deacons, respectively, should subscribe the declaration contained in the tenth article of the general ecclesiasticai constitution, without some modification. Therefore, it is hereby deterniin,ed and declared, Thirdly, That the second clause so to be subscribed by a bishop, priest, or deacon of this Church, in any of the states- which have not already ratified or used the last mentioned Book of Common Prayer, shall be in the words following — " And I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine and worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church, according to the use of the Church of England, as the same is altered by the General Convention, in a certain instrument of writing, passed by their authority, entitled, Alterations oftlie Liturgy of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, in order to render the same conformable to the American Mevolution, and the Constitutions of the respective States, until the new Book of Common Prayer, recom- mended by the GeneraJ Convention, shall be ratified or used in the state in which I am (bishop, priest, or deacon, as the case may be), by the authority of the convention thereof. And I do further solemnly engage, that when the said new Book of Common Prayer shall be ratified or used by the authority of the convention in the state for which I am consecrated a bishop (or ordained a priest or deacon,) I will conform to the doctrines and worship of the Pro- testant Episcopal Church, as settled and determined in the last mentioned Book of Common Prayer, and Admi- nistration of the Sacraments, set forth by the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States." And it is hereby further determined and declared, That these words in the preface to the new proposed Book of Common Prayer, viz. " In the creed commonly called the Apostle's Creed, one clause is omitted, as beings of uncertain meaning ; and"^— together with the note re- Appendix — No. 14. 3211; ferred to in that place, be, from henceforth, do part of the pVeface to the said proposed Book of Common Prayer. And it is hereby further determined and declared, That the fourth article of religion in the new proposed Book of Common Prayer, be altered, to render it conforma- ble to the adoption of the Nicerie Creed, as follows, " of the creeds. The two creeds', naniely, that commonly called the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed, ought to be re- ceived and believed, because they," &c. &c. Done in General Convention, at Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, the day and y6dr first aforesaid. No. 14. Page 138. To all Persons to ivhom these Presents shall come, or whom the same shall or rtiay in any wise or at any time concern, we, John, by Divine Providence, Lord Archbishop of Can- terbury j Primate of all England, and Metropolitan, send greeting ;— ^ Whereas, b^ an act of parliament, passed at Westmin- ster, in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of our sovereigrt Lord George the third, king of Great-Britain, France, and Ireland, entitled, " An Act to empower the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of Yoi'k, for the time beings to Consecrate to the Office of a Bisliop, Persons being Subjects or Citizens of Countries out of his Majesty's Do^ minions," it is enacted, that it shall and may be lawful tO and for the archbishop of Canterbury, oi- the archbishop of York, for the time being, together with such other bishops as' they shall call to their assistance, to consecrate persons', being subjects or citizens of countries out of" his majesty's dominions, bishops, foi* the purposes aforesaid^ without the king's license for their election, or the I'oyal mandate under the great seal for their confirmation and consecration, and without requiring them to take the oaths of allegiance and sfupreniacy, and the oath Of due obedience to the archbishop for the time being. Provided always, that no persons sbaH be consecrated bishops in the manner herein provided, until the archbishop of Canterbury, or the archbishop of York, foi* the time being, shall have first applied for, and obtained his majesty's license, by warrant under his royal signet and sign manual, authorizing and empowering him to perform such 4ionsecrCltion> and expfessin^r the name or names of 41 323 Appendix — No. 14'. the persons so to be consecrated ; nor until the said arcR*- bishop has been fully ascertained of their sufficiency in goocf teaming, of the soundness of their faith, and of the purity of their manners. Provided also, and be it hereby declared, that n"o person or persons consecrated to the office of a bishop in the manner aforesaid, nor any person or persons deriving their consecration from or under any bishop so consecrated, nor any person or persons admitted to the order of deacon or priest by any bishop or bishops so con- secrated, or by the succesusor or successors of any bishop or bishops so consecrated', shall be thereby enabled to exer- cise his or their respective office or offices within his majesty's dominions. • Provided always, and be it further enacted, that a certificate of such consecration shall be given under the hand and seal of the archbishop who consecrates, containing the name of the person so consecrated, with the addition as well of the country whereof he is a subject or citizen, as of the Church in which he is appointed bishop, and the furtber description of his not having taken the said oaths, being exempted from the obligation of so doing by virtue of this act. — Now, know all men by these presents, that we, the said John, lord archbishop of Canterbury, having obtained his majesty's license, by warrant under his rojral signet and sign manual, did, in pursuance of the said act of parliament, on Sunday, the fourth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, in the chapel of our palace, at Lambeth, in the county of Surry, admit our beloved in Ghrist,-^ William White, clerk, D. D. a subject or citizen of the state of Pennsylvania, in North-America, and rector of Chrisr Church and St. Peter's, in the city of Philadelphia, in the said state, of whose sufficiency in good learning, soundness in the faith, and purity of manners, we were fully ascer- tained, into the office of a bishop of the Protestant Episcopal- Church, in the state of Pennsylvania aforesaid, towhiph the said William White hath been elected by the convention for the said state, as appears unto us by due testimony thereof by him produced ; and him, the said William White, did then and there rightly and canonically consecrate a- bishop, according to the manner and form prescribed and used by the Church of England, his taking the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and canonical obedience only ex- cepted, he being exempted from the obligation of taking the said oaths by virtue of the above recited act. Provided, tt&t neither be, the said bishop, nor any person or persons- Appendix — No. 14. 823 i<9eriving their consecration from or under him, nor any person or persons admitted to the order of deacon or priest hy him, or his successor or successors, shall be enabled to exercise his or their respective oiRce or offices within his majesty's dominions. In testimony whereof, we have caused our archi-episcopal seal to be affixed to these presents. Given at Lambeth House, the day and year above written, and in the fourth year of oui- translation. J. (L. S.) CANTUAR. We., William, lord archbishop of York, Charles, lord bishop of Bath and Wells, and John, lord bishop of Peter- borough, were present and assigting at the consecration within mentioned. W. EBOR, C. BATH & WELLS, J. PETERBOROUGH. The signatures of the archbishops of Canterbury and York, and of the bishops of Bath and Wells, and Peter- borough, were made in my presence, February 4th, 1787. W. DICKES, (Copy.) Secretary to the Archbishop of Canterbury, On Sunday, the fourth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, and in the fourth year of the translation of the most rever- end father in God, John, by divine Providence, lord arch- bishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, and metro- politan, in the chapel at the palace at Lambeth, in the county of Surry, the said most reverend father in God, by virtue and authority of a certain license or warrant from his most gracious majesty, and our sovereign Lord George the third, by the grace of God, of Great-Britain, France, and Ireland, king, defender of the faith, and so forth, to him, in this behalf, directed, the most reverend father in God, William, by the same Providence, lord archbishop of York, primate of England, and metropolitan, and the right a-everend fathers in God, Charles, by divine permission, lord bishop of Bath and Wells, and John, b^ divine per- mission, lord bishop of Peterborough, assisting him, conse- crated the reverend William White, doctor in divinity, rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's, in the city of Philadelphia, a subject or citizen of the United States of North-America, and the reverend Samuel Provoost, doctor .324 Appendix — No. 14. in divinity, rector of Trinity Church, in the city of Newr York, a subject or citizen also of the United States of North-America, to the office of a bishop, respectively, the rites, circumstances, and ceremonies anciently used in the Church of England being observed and applied, according to the tenour of an act passed in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of his said majesty, entitled, " An Act to em- power the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, for the time being, to Consecrate to the Office of a JBishop, Persons bei.ng Subj^ects or Citizens of Countries out of his Majesty's Dominions," in the presence of me, Robert Jenner, notary-public, one of the deputy register? of the province of Cianterbury, being then and there pre- sent, the reverend and wprshipfui William Backhouse, doctor in divinity, archdeacon of Canterbury, the Rev. — — liort, doctor in divinity, the Rev. : — — Drake, doctor in divinity, William Dicfces, Esquire, notary-public, secretary to his grace the said lord archbishop of Canterbury, with many others in great numbers then and there assembled. Which 1 attest. RT. JENNER, (Copy.) Notary-Puhlic, actuary assumed. And we, the underwritten notaries public, by royal au- thority duly admitted and sworn, residing in Doctor's Commons, London, do hereby certify and attest, to all whom it may concern, that Rober Jenner, whose name is subscribed to the aforegoing act, was and is a notary-public, and one of the deputy registers of" the province of Canter- bury, and that the letters, name, and words, " Rt. Jenner, notary-public," thereto subscribed, were and are of the proper hand writing and subscription of the said Robert Jenner, and that we saw hini sign the same, and that full faith and entire credit is and ought to be given to all the acts, subscriptions, and ajltestations of the said Robert Jenner, as well in judgment as out. In tes,timony whereof, we have hereunto subscribed our nanies, to serve and avail as occasion may require, at Doctor's Commons, London, this fifth day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven. Which we flttGSt EDWARD COOPER, Notary-Public. (Copy.) WILLIAM ABBOT, Notary^Public. ' Appendix — No. 15. 326 No. 15. Page 139. Note of the Archbishop. "The archbishop desires to have the proper direction for ,a letter to Bishop White at Falmouth ; where, if he can find time, he means to send a letter to Dr. Chandler. If he should not be able to write to Dr. Chandler, he begs the bishop to assure him of his affectionate esteem and regard, and his hearty prayers for his better health. He wishes also for such a direction, as will be most proper for a letter, should occasion call for one, to the bishop in Philadelphia. It is proper that the bishops should be informed, that the archbishop was mistaken about the consecrations in the province of York. They have always been attended by two bishops with the archbishop. No. 16. Page 139. 1. From his Excellency Richard Henry Lee, Esq. President of Congress, to the Hon. John Adams, Esq. Minister Ple- nipotentiary to the Court of Great-Britain.* New-York, October 24, 1785. Dear Sir, Having yesterday written a long letter to you, I have now only to request your attention to the following business, which is of very great importance to those whom it concerns ; and who form a considerable portion of the citizens of these states. The representatives of those professing the Church of England system of religion, having been lately assembled at Philadelphia, where lay and clerical deputies from seven states were convened in General Convention, for the purpose, among other things, of preserving and maintaining a suc- cession of divines in their Church, in a manner which they * In the answer of Mr. Adams, he calls Mr. Lee " late president of Congress." The presidency of the latter ended two days after his writuig of the letter, as ap- pears from the printed journals of the body, and the circumstance must have been known to Mr. Adams. Therefore, the letter was written while Mr. Lee was president, and must have been designed to carry with it the weight of his official character. 326 Appendix — No. 16. judge consonant to the Gospel, and do way interfering witk the reHgious or civil rights of others, havesent an address to the archbishops and bishops of England, proposing a plan for the consecration of American bishops. — It is imagined that before any thing is done in this business by the bishops of England, they will consult the king and ministry; who, it is apprehended, may now, as heretofore, suppose that any 6tep ofthe kind being taken in England, might be consider- ed here as an officious intermeddling with our affairs, that would give offence on this side the water. Should this be the case, the Church of England members of congress have the greatest reliance on your liberal regard for the religious rights of all men, that you will remove mistaken scruples from the mind of administration, by representing how per- fectly consonant it is with our revolution principles, pro- fessed throughout all these states, that every denomination of Christians has a right to pursue its own religious modes, interfering not with others. That instead of giving offence, it must give content, by evidencing a friendly disposition to accommodate the people here who are members of the Church in question. In proof of this, congress did lately show their attention to the accommodation of this class of Christians, by com- municating to the different executives your information from the Danish minister, of that king's wilHngness to facili- tate the business of ordination for our Church, and the as- sembly of Virginia hath incorporated this society, under which act of incorporation the assembly was held in that state that sent both lay and clerical deputies to the General Convention lately held in Philadelphia. I have the honour to be, with sentiments of the truest fisteem and regard, dear sir, your most obedient and very humble servant, RICHARD HENRY LEE. His Excellency John Adams, Esq. Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States of America to the Court of London, at his Rouse in Grosvenor-Square, London. Appendix— ^2^0. 16. 327 2'. I*rom Mr. Adams to Mr. Lee, in answer.* Grosvenor-Square, January 4, 1786. 1>EAB Sir, A day or two after the receipt of your letter of Norember' 1, and that of Mr. Jay's which came with it, I wrote to the archbishop of Canterbury, by Col. Smith, for an hour when I might have the honour to pay my respects to his grace, and was answered very poUtely, that he would be glad to' have the honour of seeing me next day, between eleven and twelve. Accordingly I went yesterday,- and was very agreeably received, by a venerable and a candid prelate, with whom I had before only exchanged visits of ceremony. I told his grace, that at the desire of two very respectable characters in America, the late president of congress and the present secretary 2d. Resolved, That the said three bishops are fully com- petent to every proper act and duty of the Episcopal office and character in these United States, as well in respect to the consecration of other bishops, and the ordering of priests and deacons, as for the government of the Church, accord- ing to such rules, canons, and institutions, as now are, or hereafter may be duly made and ordained by the Church in that case. 3d. Resolved, That in Christian charity, as well as of duty, necessity, and expediency, the Churches represented in this convention ought to contribute, in every manner in their power, towards supplying the wants, and granting every just and reasonable request of their sister Churches in these states; and, therefore, 4th. Resolved, That the Right Rev. Dr. White, and the Right Rev. Dr. Provoost, be, and they hereby are, requested to join with the Right Rev. Dr. Seabury, in complying with Appendix— No. 19. 335 the prayer of the clergy of the states of Massachusetts and Nevv-Hampshii'e, for the consecration of the Rev. Edward Bass, bishop elect of the Churches in the said states ; but that, before the said bishops comply with the request afore- said, it be proposed to the Churches in the New-England "States, to meet the Churches of these states, with the said three bishops, in an adjourned convention, to settle certain- articles of union and discipline among all the Churches, previous to such consecration. 5th. Resolved, That if any difficulty or delicacy, in respect to the archbishops and bishops of England, shall remain with the Right Rev. Doctors White and Provoost, or either of them, concerning their compliance with the above request, this convention will address the archbishops and bishops, and hope thereby to remove the difficulty. No. 19. Page 143. An Address to the Most Reverend the Archbishops of Can~ terbury and York. Most Venerablk and Illustrious Fathers AND Prelates, We, the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Protestant Epis- copal Church in the states of New- York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and South- Carolina, impressed with every sentiment of love and vene- ration, beg leave to embrace this earliest occasion, in General Convention, to offer.our warmest, most sincere, and- grateful acknowledgments to you, and (by your means) to all the venerable bishops of the Church over which you pre- side, for the manifold instances of your former condescen- sion to us, and solicitude for our spiritual welfare. But we are more especially called to express our thankfulness, for that particular act of your fatherly goodness, whereby we derive, under you, a pure Episcopacy and succession of the ancient order of bishops, and are now assembled, through the blessing of God, as a Church duly constituted and or- ganized, with the happy prospect before us of a future full and undisturbed exercise of our holy religion, and its exten- sion to the utmost bounds of this continent, under an eccle- siastical constitution, and a form of worship, which we !*elieve to be truly apostolical. 33G Appendix— No. 10. The growing prospect of this happy diffusion of ChTisti-' anity, and the assurance \ve can give you thatoiir Churches are spreading and flourishing throughout these United States, we know, will yield you more solid joy, and be con- sidered as a more ample reward of your goodness to us, than all the praises and expressions of gratitude which the longues of men can bestow. It gives us pleasure to assure you, that, during the pre^ sent sitting of our convention, the utmost harmony has pre-^ vailed through all our deliberations, that we continue, as heretofore, most sincerely attached to the faith and doctrine of the Church of England: and that not a wish appears to prevail, either among our clergy or laity, of ever departing from that Church in any essential article. The business of most material consequence which' hatl* come before us, at our present meeting, hath been an ap- plication from our sister Churches in the eastern states, expressing their earnest desire of a general union of the whole Episcopal Church in the United States, both in doc- trine and discipline ; and, as a primary means of such nniony praying the assistance of our bishops in the consecration of a bishop elect for the states of Massachusetts and New- Hampshire. We therefore judge it necessary to accompany this address with the papers which have come before us on that very interesting subject, and of the proceedings we have bad thereupon, by which you will be enabled to judgq con- cerning the particular delicacy of our situation, and, proba^ bly, to relieve us from any difficulties which may. be found; therein. The application from the Church in the states of Massa- chusetts and New-Hampshire is in the following words. [Here follows the application as in the preceding number.}. At the meeting aforesaid, '« Voted, That the Rev. Samuel Parker be authorized and empowered to transmit copies of the foregoing act, to be by him attested, to the right reverend the bishops in Connec- ticut, New- York, and Pennsylvania ; and that he be ap- pointed our agent, to appear at any convocation to be holden at Pennsylvania or New- York, and to treat upon any mea- sures that may tend to promote an union of the Episcopal Church throughout the United States of America, or that may prove advantageous to the interest of the said Church. EDWARD BASS, Chairman^ A true copy, (Attest) SAMUEL PARKER. Appendix — No. \Q. 337 This was accompanied with a letter from the Rev. Samuel Parker, the worthy rector of Trinity Church, Boston, to the Right Rev. Bishop White, dated June 21st, 1789, of which the following is an extract : — " The clergy here have appointed nie their agent, to appear at any convocation to Ue held at New- York or Pennsylvania ; but I fear the situa- tion of my family and parish will not admit of my being absent so long as a journey to ^Philadelphia would take. When I gave you encouragement that I should attend, I was in expectation of having my parish supplied by some gentlemen from Nova-Scotia ; but I am now informed, they will not be here till some time in August. Having, there- fore, no prospect of attending in person at your General Convention, next month, lam requested to transmit you an attested copy of an act of the clergy of this and the state of New-Hampshire, electing the Rev. Edward Bass our bishop, and requesting the united assistance of the right reverend bishops of Pennsylvania, New- York, and Connecticut, to invest him with apostohc powers. This act I have now the honour of enclosing, and hope it will reach you before the meeting of your General Convention in. July. "The clergy of this state are very desirous of seeing an union of the whole Episcopal Church in the United States take place; and it will remain with our brethren at the southward to say, whether this shall be the case or not ; whether we shall be an united or divided Church. Some little difference in government may exist indifferent states, without affecting the essential points of union and commu- nion." In the like spirit, the Right Rev. Dr^ Seabury, bishop of the Church of Connecticut, in his letter to the, Rev. Dr. Smith, dated July 23d, writes on the subject of union, «fec. as,followeth : — " The wish of n»y heart, and the wish of the clergy and of the Church people of this state, would cer- tainly have carried me and some of the clergy to your General Convention, had we conceived we could have at- tended with propriety. The necessity of an union of all tha Churches, and the disadvantages of our present dis-union, we feel and lament equally with you; and I agree with you^ that there may be a strong' and efficacious union between Churches, where the usages are different. I see not why* it may not be so in the present case, as soon as yo«' have removed those obstructions, which, while they remain^ must prevent all possibility of uniting. The Church of Connec- ticut consists, at present,- of nineteen clergymeni in full 43 338 Appendix— No. 20. orders, and more than twenty thousand people, they supposeir as respectable as the Church in any state of the union." After the most serious deliberation upon this importatit business, and cordially joining with our brethren of the eastern or New-England Churches in the desire of union, the following resolves were unanimously adopted in conven- tion, viz. — [Here follow the resolves, as given in the preceding number.] We have now, most venerable fathers, submitted to your consideration whatever relates to this important business of union among all our Churches in these United States. It was our original and sincere intention to have obtained three bishops at least, immediately consecrated by the bi- shops of England, for the seven states comprehended within our present union. But that intention being frustrated through unforeseen circumstances, we could not wish to deny any present assistance,- which may be found in our power to give to any of our sister Churches, in that way which may be most acceptable to them, and in itself legal and expedient. We ardently pray for the continuance of your favour and blessing, and that, as soon as the urgency of other weighty concerns of the Church will allow, we may be favoured with that fatherly advice and direction, which to you may appear most for the glory of God and the prosperity of our Churches, upon the consideration of the foregoing documents and papers. Done in Convention, this 8tR day of August, 1789, atid directed to be signed by all the members, as the act of their body, and by the president officially.* No. 20. Page 146. A General Constitidion of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Art. 1. There shall be a General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of Ame- rica, on the first Tuesday of August, in the year of our Lord 1792, and on the first Tuesday of August in every * Signed by the president and all the members. Appendix— No. 20. 339 third yeai" afterwards, in such place as shall be determined by the convention; and special meetings may be called at other times, in the manner hereafter to be provided for; and this Church, in a majority of the states which shall have adopted this constitution, shall be represented, before they shall proceed to business, except that the representation from two stales shall be sufficient to adjourn ; and in all business of the convention, freedom of debate shall be allowed. Art. 2. The Church in each state shall be entitled to a representation of both the clergy and the laity ; which re- presentation shall consist of one or more deputies, not ex- ceeding four of each order, chosen by the convention of the state; and in all questions, when required by the clerical or lay representation from any state, each order shall have one vote; and the majority of suffrages by states shall be conclusive in each order, provided such majority compre- hend a majority of the states represented in that order. The concurrence of both orders shall be necessary to con- stitute a vote of the convention. If the convention of any state should neglect or decline to appoint clerical deputies, or if they should neglect or decline to appoint lay deputies, or if any of those of either order appointed should neglect to attend, or be prevented by sickness or any other accident, such state shall nevertheless be considered as duly repre- sented by such deputy or deputies as may attend, whether lay or clerical. And if, through the neglect of the conven- tion of any of the Churches which shall have adopted, or may hereafter adopt this Constitution, ^no deputies, either lay or clerical, should attend at any General Convention, the Church in such state shall nevertheless be bound by the acts of such convention. Art. 3. The bishops of this Church, when there shall be three or more, shall, whenever General Conventions are held, form a house of revision, and when any proposed act shall have passed in the General Convention, the same shall be transmitted to the house of revision, for their concurrence. And if the same shall be sent back to the convention, with the negative or non-concurrence of the house of revision, it shall be again considered in the General Convention, and if the convention shall adhere to the said act, by a majority of three-fifths of their body, it shall become a law to all intents and purposes, notwithstanding the non-concurrence of the house of revision ; and all acts of the convention shall be authenticated by both houses. And in all cases, the House 340 App»ndix-^No. 20. of Bishops shall signify to the convention their approbation or disapprobation, the latter with their reasons in writing, within two days after the proposed act shall have been re:^ ported to them for concurrence, and in failure thereof it shall have the operation of a law. But until there shall be three or more bishops, as aforesaid, any bishop attending a General Convention, shall be a member ex-officio, and shall vote with the clerical deputies of the state to which he be- longs. And a bishop shall then preside. Art. 4. The bishop or bishops in every state shall be chosen agreeably to such rules as shall be fixed by the con- yention of that state. And every bishop of this Church shall confine the exercise of his Episcopal office to his proper diocese or district, unless requested to ordain, or confirm, or perform any other act of the Episcopal office, by any Church destitute of a bishop. Art. 6, A Protestant Episcopal Church in any of the United States, not now represented, may, at any time here- after, be admitted, on acceding to this Constitution. Art. 6. In every state, the mode of trying clergymen shall be instituted by the convention of the Church therein. At every trial of a bishop, there shall be one or more of the Episcopal order present ; and none but a bishop shall pro- , nounce sentence of deposition or degradation from the mi- i nistry on any clergyman, whether bishop, or presbyter, or ■Ideacon. -'; Art. 7. No person shall be admitted to holy orders, clintil he shall have been examined by the bishop, and by two presbyters, and shall have exhibited such testimonials and Other requisites,, as the canons, in that case provided, may <&ect. Nor shall any person be ordained, until he shall hive subscribed the following declaration: " I do believe 'ths holy scriptures of the OlcT and l^ievv Testament to be the ■WOTd of God, and to contain all things necessary to Salva- tiffl|: And I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrines aira worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church in theise United States." No person ordained by a foreign bishop shall be permitted to officiate as a minister of this Church, until he shall have complied with the canon or canons in that case provided, and have also subscribed the aforesaid declaration. Art. 8. A book of common prayer, administration of the sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the X^hurch, articles of religion, and a form and manner of falling, ordaining, and consecrating bishops, priests, and Appendix — No. 20. 341 beacons, when established by this or a future General Con- vention, shall be used in the Protestant Episcopal Church in these states, which shall have adopted this Constitution. Art. 9. This Constitution shall be unalterable, unless in General Convention by the Church in a majority of the states which may have adopted the same ; and all altera- tions shall be first proposed in one General Convention, and made known to the several state conventions, before they shall be finally agreed to, or ratified in the ensuing General Convention. Alterations in the Subsequent Session. " The committee reported, that they have had a full, free, and friendly conference with the deputies of the said Churches, who, on behalf of the Church in their several states, and by virtue of sufficient authority from them, have signified, that they do not object to the Constitution, which was approved at the former session of this convention, if the third article of that Constitution may be so modified, as to declare explicitly the right of the bishops, when sitting in a separate house, to originate and propose acts for the con- currence of the other house of convention ; arid to negative such acts proposed by the other house as they may disap- prove. " Your committee, conceiving this alteration to be desir- able in itself, as having a tendency to give greater stability to the Constitution, without diminishing any security that is now possessed by the clergy or laity; and being sincerely impressed with the importance of an union to the future prosperity of the-Church, do therefore recommend to the convention a compliance with the wishes of their brethren, and that the third article of the Constitution may be altered accordingly. Upon such alteration being made, it is de- .clared by the deputies from the Churches in the eastern .states, that they will subscribe the Constitution, and become members of this General Convention." Upon special motion, the above report was read a second ■time; whereupon the following resolution was proposed, viz. — Resolved, That this convention do adopt that part of the report of the committee which proposes to modify the third article of the Constitution, so as to declare explicitly " the right of the bishops, when sitting in a separate house, to joriginate and propose acts for the concurrence of the other 342 • Appendix — No. 20. house of convention ; and to negative such acts proposed by the other house, asthey may disapprove ; proyided they are not adhered to by four-fifths of the other house." After some debate, the resolution, with the proviso an- nexed, was agreed upon, and the third article was accord- ingly modified in the manner following, viz. — Art. 3d. The bishops of this Church, when there ihall he three or more^ 'shall, whenever General Conventions are held, form a separate house, mth a right to originate and propose acts for the concurrence of the House of Deputies, composed of clergy and laity; and tvhen any proposed act shall have passed the House of Deputies, the same shall be transmitted to the House of Bishops, who shall have a negative thereupon, unless adhered to by four- fifths of the other house; and all acts of the convention shall be authenticated by both houses. And, in all cases, the Home of Bishops shall signify to the convention their approbation or disapprobation, the latter, with their reasons in writing; within three days after the proposed act shall have been reported to them for concurrence: and in failure thereof, it shall have the operation of a law. Bid until there shall he three or more bishops as aforesaid, any bishop attending a General Convention shall he a member, ex officio, and shall vote Imth the clerical deputies of the state to which he belongs; and a bishop shall then preside. Acceptance by Bishop Seabury, and the^ Presbyters from New- England. October 2, 1789. We do hereby agree to the Constitution of the Church, as piodified this day in convention. SAMUEL SEABURY, D. D. Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. ABRAHAM JARVIS, A. M. Rector of Christ Church, Middletown, Connecticut. BELA HUBBARD, A. M. Rector of Trinity Church, New-Haven, Connecticut. SAMUEL PARKER, D. D. Rector of Trinity Church, Boston, and Clerical Deputy for Massachusetts and New-Hampshire, Appendix — No. 21. 343 Letters of Consecration of Bishop Seahury. IN DEI NOMINE. Amen. Omnibus ubique Catholicis per Presentes patent, Nos, Robertum Kilgour, miseratione divina, Episcqpum Aberdonien — Arthurura Petrie, Episcopura Rossen et Mo- ravien — et Joannem Skinner, Episcopum Coadjutorem ; Mysteria, Sacra Domini nostri Jesu Christi in Oratorio supradictl Joannis Skinner apud Aberdoniam ce'lebrantes, Divini Numinis Prsesidio fretos (presentibiis tam e Clero, quam e Populo testibus idorieis) Samuelem Seabury, Doc- torem Divinitatis, sacro Presbyteratus ordine jam decora- turn, ac nobis pra3 Vitse integritate, Morum probitate et Orthodoxia, comraendatum, et ad doeendum et regendum aptum et idoneiun, ad sacrnm et sublimem Episcopatus Ordinem promovisse, et rite ac canonice, secundum Morem et Ritus Ecclesise Scoticanse, consecrasse. Die Novembris decimo quarto. Anno ^rse Christianae Millesimo Septin- gentesimo Octagesimo Quarto. — Tn cujus Ret Testimonium, Instrumento huic (chirograpMs nostris prius, munito) Sigilla nostra apponi mandavimus, ROBERTUS KILGOUR, EpiscopUs, et Primus. (L. S.) ARTHURUS PETRIE, Episcopus. (L. S.) JOANNES SKINNER, Episcopus. (L. S.) No. 21. Page 170. A Letter from the Rev. Br. Coke, and the Answer. Right Rev. Sir, Permit me to intrude a little on your time upon a subject of great importance. You, I believe, are conscious that I was brought up in the Church of England, and have been ordained a presbyter of that Church. For many years I was prejudiced, even I think to bigotry, in favour of it; but through a variety of causes or incidents, to mention which would be tedious and useless, my mind was exceedingly biassed on the other side of the question. In consequence of this, I am not sure but 344 Appendix — No. 21. I went further in the separation of our Church in America^ than Mr. Wesley, from whom I had received my commission, did intend. He did indeed solemnly invest me, as far as he had a right so to do, with Episcopal authority, but did not intend, I think, that an entire separation should take place. He, being pressed by our friends on this side of the Water for ministers to administer the sacraments to them, (there being very few of the clergy of the Church of England then in the states^) went further, I am sure, than he would have gone, if he had foreseen some events which followed. And this I am certain of — that he is now sorry for the separation. But what can be done for a re-union, which I much wish' for ; and to accomplish which, Mr. Wesley, 1 have no doubt, would use his influence to the utmost ? The affection of a very considerable number of the preachers and most of the people, is very strong towards him, notwithstanding the ex- cessive ill usage he received from a few. My interest also is not small ; and both his and mine would readily, and to the utmost, be used to accomplish that (to us) very desirable object ; if a readiness were shown by the bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church to re-unite. It is even to your Church an object of great importance. We have now above sixty thousand adults in our society in these states, and about two hundred and fifty travelling ministers and preachers; besides a great number of local' preachers, very far exceeding the number of travelHng. preachers ; and some of those local preachers are men of very considerable abilities. But if we number the Methodists as most people number the members of their Church, viz. by the families which constantly attend the divine ordinances in their places of worship, they will make a larger body than you probably conceive. The society, I believe, may be safely multiplied by five on an average to give us our stated congregations; which will then amount to three hundred thousand. And if the calculation which, I think, some eminent writers have made, be just, that three-fifths of man- kind are un-adult, (if 1 may use the expression) at any given period, it will follow that all the families, the adults of which- form our congregations in these states, amount to seven hundred and fifty thousand. About one fifth of these are blacks. The work now extends iiv length.from Boston to the south of Georgia; and in bre^i, from the Atlantic to Lake Champlain, Vermont, Albany, Red^one, Holstein, Ken- tucky, Cumberland, &c. Appendix— No. 21. 845 But thftre are many hinderarrces in the way. Can they be removed? 1. Our ordained ministers will not, ought not, to give up their right of administering the sacraments. 1 do not think that the generality of them, perhaps none of them, would refuse to submit to a re-ordination, if other hinderances were removed out of the way. I must he^re observe, that between *ixty and seventy only out of the two hundred and fifty have been ordained presbyters, and about sixty deacons (only)* The presbyters are the choicest of the whole. 2. The other preachers would hardly submit to a re-union, }f the possibility of their rising up to ordination depended on the present bishops in America. Because, though they are all, I think I may say, zealous, pious, and very useful men, yet they are not acquainted with the learned languages* Besides, they would argue, — 'If the present bishops would waive the article of the learned languages, yet their succes- sors might not.- My desire of a re-'union is so sincere and earnest, that these difficulties almost make me tremble; and yet some* thing must be done before the death of Mr. Wesley, other- wise I shall despair of success ; for though my influence among the Methodists in these states as well as in Europe is, I doubt not, increasing, yet Mr. Asbury, whose influence is very capital, will not easily comply ; nay, I know he will be exceedingly averse to it. In Europe, v»^here some steps had been taken, tending to a separation, alt is at an end. Mr. Wesley is a determined enemy of it, and I have lately borne an open and success- ful testimony against it. . Shall 1 be favoured with a private interview with you in Philadelphia? I shall be there, God willing, on Tuesday, the 17th of May* If this be agreeable, I will beg of you just to signify it in a note, directed to me, at Mr. Jacob Baker's, merchant. Market-street, Philadelphia; or, if you please, by a few lines sent me by the return of the post, at Philip Rogers's, Esq. in Baltimore, from yourself or Dr. Magaw, and I will wait upon you with my friend Dr. Magaw. We can then enlarge on these subjects. I am conscious of it, that secrecy is of great importance in the present state of the business, till the minds of you, your brother bishops, and Mr. Wesley, be circumstantially known. t must therefore beg that these things be confined to yourself and Dr. Magaw, till 1 have the honour of seeing you. Thus, Tou see, I have made a bold venture on your bo- 44 346 Appendix— No. 21. nour and candour, and have opened my whole heart to ym? on the subject, as far as the extent of a small letter wili allow me. If you put equal confidence in me, you will find me candid and faithful. I have, notwithstanding, l>een guilty of inadvertencies. Very lately I found myself obliged (for the pacifying of my conscience) fo write a penitential letter to the Rev., Mr. Jarratt, which gave him great satisfaction : and for the game reason 1 must write another to the Rev. Mr. Petti- grew. When I was last in America, I prepared and cor- rected a great variety of things, for our magazines, indeed, almost every thing that was priated, except some loose faints which I had taken of one of my journeys, and which I left in my hurry with Mr. Asbury, wishout any correction, entreating that no part of them miglrt be printed which would be improper or offensive. But through great inad- Tertency (I suppose) he suffered some reflections , on the- characters of the two above-mentioned gentlemen to be in^-- serted in the magazine, for which I am very sorry : and pl-obably shall not rest till I have made my acknowledgment more public; though Mr. Jarratt does not desire it. I am not sure whether I have not al«o offended you. Sir, by accepsing of one of the offers made me by you and Dr, Magaw, of the use of your churches, about six years ago, on my first visit to Philadelphia, without infocm^ing you of our plan of separation from the Church of England. If I did offend, (as I doubt I did, especially from what you said on the subject to Mr. Richard Dellam, of Abington,) I sincerely beg your's and Dr. Magaw's pardon.. I will endeavour t-^ amend. But, alas ! I am a frail, weak creature. I< will intrude no longer at present. One thing only I wiirdaim from your candour — that if y&u have nothoughts^ of improving this proposal, you will burn this letter, and take no' more notice of it (for it would be a pity to have us entirely alienated from each other, if we cannot unite in the manner my ardent wishes desire). But if you will further negotiate the business, I will explain my mind still more fully to you on the probabilities of success. In the mean time permit me, with great respect, to sub- scribe jiiyself, Right Rev. Sir, Your very humble servant in Christ, THOMAS COKE. Richmond, April 24, 1791. The Right Rev. Father in God^ Bishop White. 'ix—No. 21. 347 You tnuBt excuse interlineations, &i.c. as I am just going uito tlie country, and have no time to transcribe. Answer. Hev. Sin, My friend. Dr. Magaw, has this day put into my hands your letter of the 24th of April, which, I trust, T received with a sense of the importance of the subject, and of the answer I ain to give to God, for the improvement of every opportunity of building «p his Church. Accordingly, I cannot but make choice of the earliest of the two ways you point out, to inform you, that I shall be very happy in the opportunity of conversing with you at the time proposed. You mention two difficulties in the way of the proposed union. And there are further difficulties which suggest themselves to ray mind. But I can say of the one and of the other, that I do not think them insuperable, provided there be a conciliatory disposition on both sides. So far as I am concerned, I think that such a disposition exists. It has not been my temper. Sir, to despond in regard to the extension of Christianity in this new world : And in ad- dition to the promises of the Great Head of the Church, I have always imagined that I perceived the train of second causes so laid Ity the good providence of God, as to be pro- moting what we believe to be his will in this respect. On the other hand, I feci the weight of most powerful discour- agements, in the increasing number of the avowed patrons of infidelity, and of others, \vho pretend to confess the divine authority of our holy religion, while they endeavour to strip it of its characteristic doctrinefi. In this situation, it is rather to be expected, that distinct Churches, agreeing in fundamentals, shotdd make mutual sacrifices for a union, than that any Church should divide into two bodies, without a difference being even alleged to exist, in any leading point. For the preventing of this, the measures which you may propose cannot fail of success, unless there be on one side, or on both, a most lamentable deficiency of Christian temper. I remember the conversation you allude to with Mr. Del- lam : I hope I did not express myself uncharitably, or even indelicately. As to personal offence towards me, it is out ol'ihe question; for I had not at that time any connection 348 Afpeadix-^No. 22, with St. Paul's Church. But this, as well as the other parts of your letter, may be discoursed of at the proposed inters view. Therefore, with assurance of the desired secrecy, and with requesting you to accept a like promise of candour jto that which I credit from you, I conclude myself at presentj Your brolher in Christ, And very humble servant, W. W.« No. 2?. Page 173. Teitimonial of the Rev, Charles Peitigretc. We, the subscribers, baFving met in convention, at Tar-^ borough, in North-Carolina, on the 28th day of May, 1794, for the purpose of considering the declining situation of tho Protestant Episcopal Church in this state, and having chosen the Rev. Charles Pettigrew as a person fit to be our bishop, and worthy tO be recommended for consecration to that holy office— rbut being sensible that the great distance at which the laity as well as the clergy of this state live fronj each other, deprives us of sufficient personal acquaintance with one another to subscribe a testimonial in the words prescribed by the General Convention of. the Protestant Episcopal Church, have thought it necessary and proper to make some deviation therefrom, which we presume to hope will be no obstacle to our laudable pursuit. We therefore do hereby recommend to be consecrated to the office of a bishop, the said Rev. Charles Pettigrew, whom, from his morality, religious principles, piety of life, from his general reputation in a clerical character, from the personal know- ledge we have of him, and from his sufficiency in good learn- * The writer of the above answer kept silence on the subject of it, except in the permitted communication to the bishops, until the summer of 1804 ; when he leceived, in one day, two letters from the eastern shore of Maryland. One of them was from the Rev. Simori Wilmer, of the Episcopal Church, and the other was from the Rev. Mr. M'Klaskey", of the Methodist communion. In a conver- sation between these two gentlemen, the former had affirmed the fact of Dr, Coke's application, which was disbelieved by the other. This produced their respective letters, which were answered by a statement of the fact. The matter Of the clergy. S. HALLING, I R. J. MILLER.J J. LEIGH, M. D. J. GUION, M. D. R. WHYTE, ) T IJ. WOODS, j^^^'y'^"-,,-,, , ., W PT.F.MP.IVTS ^ Of the laity W. CLEMENTS, L. DESSEAUX, W. GRIMES, K. GODLY^ No. 23. Page 174. Circular of a Committee in South- Carolina. CiENTLEMEN,* ' Impressed with a fervent desire of being beneficial to the state in general, and of supporting religion among us, we, the subscribers, being a select committee from several of the united Episcopal Churches in this state, who met on the 16th of last October, are directed to address you. The subject is an important one, and requires consideration. • In the document some of the words are in larger characters than the rest. The same words are here given in italics, with the view of making a faithfnl representation of the instrument: the framers of which were careful to give this explanation of their design ; however beneath them an attention to the laws of jr^nmiar. 350 Appendix — No. 2J. From the proceedings of the two last General Conventions, held at Philadelphia and New- York, it -has, with regret, been found by the representatives of this state, that the intention of all the eastern states was to form two separate houses of discussion on the forms and propagation of re- ligion. To this all consented, not foreseeing any ill effects immediately arising from it. The one composed of bishops solely, the other of clergy and laity conjointly; and that a full consent of one house, together with two-thirds of the other, must be obtained, to effectually carry any proposition into effect. But in these two last meetings as above, many proposed, that the House of Bishops should have "an ab- solute negative" over the clergy and laity. To this Virginia and South-Carolina were firmly opposed ; the eastern states as firmly supported. The next General Convention will be held at Philadelphia, where we wish to be represented, but upon the same determination, if approved by the vestries of our associated churches in this state, of opposition to the absolute negative ; which, more than probably, will cause a secession of this state and Virginia from the general associ- ation. Considering the situation we shall then be left in, we are desirous, by the blessing of Almighty God directing us in our choice, to select one from the clergy of this state, to be sent forward immediately to the northward, and to obtain authority solely to ordain ministers for this state, as well as to renew that ordinance which has ,too long laid dormant in our country, confirmation. We have tlKought proper, therefore, to request your opinion on the subject, as we conceive, from many of our rising young men having devoted themselves to the study of diviniti/, and by selecting some worthy and good man, resident in a parish, and de- sirous of taking the office of the ministry upon him, and having him ordained, we shall be better enabled to have our churches provided than we are at present by the clergy which we have of late experienced from Europe, or from our northern states; and as this country will then be their native country, and from being accustomed to reside in it, the complaints of its sickliness, which have been the great arguments of desertion from their parishes, will in some measure, if not totally, lose tfieir effect : and as, in that case, the minister may have some property of his own, the subscription of parishes where small, will in this manner be rendered sufficiently ample; as well as the doctrines pro- pagated consistent with the situation the Almighty has been pleased to allpt us. We beg leave further to 'mention, Appendix — No. 24. 351 not with an intention to bias your opinion, but as a reason for our present application, tlint Virginia has pursued the steps marked out, and with the blessing of heaven upon tlieir endeavours, and under the direction and guardianship of Bishop Madison,* have obtained sixty good and reputable divines, men, if but of moderate learning, of sound and good morals, who have undertaken the ministry, not from a desire of gain, but from a desire of doing good, and spreading the effects «f piety, brotherly love, and charity, in the several parishes where they reside. From these motives, and from the distressed situation we shall be in, if a secession takes place before we are provided with one to confirm and ordain, for then we must either take what they are pleased to send, or humbly enUe&t their favours to ordain for «s, which might be refused after our secession, we have prcsamed to address you, hoping when these im- portant concerns shall come before yon, you will not refuse to lend us your aid, both in consulting in the most public manner the sentiments of our brethren at large, and in- forming us of them, by a representativ^e or representatives, at our next state convention, to be held at St. Michael's Church, on the tenth day of next February, for the express purpose of relinquishing or carrying the above measures into effect. And we have appointed this day in particular {anxiously desirous of being fuUy represented,) as it is the day previous to the amiiversary meeting of the Revolution society, to commemorate the birth day of General Washing- ton, and conceiving many gentlemen may be in town upon flo pleasing an occasion. And we are, gentlemen, with all respect and esteem, Your humble servants. No. 24. Page 179. A Letter from Bishop Provoost- " Neic-Yorkf Sept. 7, 1801. " Right Rev. anb dear Sir, " I think it my duty to request, that, as president of the House of Bishops, you will inform that venerable body, ' Who showed himself verj indignant at the intended compliment. 352 Appendix — No. 24. that, induced by ill health, and some melancholy occof-' rences in my family, and an ardent wish to retire from all public employment, I resigned, at the last meeting of our Church convention, my jurisdiction as bishop of the Pro-' testant Episcopal Church in the state of New- York. " 1 am, with great regard, " Dear and Right Rev. Sir^ " Your affectionate brother, " SAMUEL PROVOOST. " Right Rev. Bishop White." The House of Bishops- having considered the subject brought before them by the letter of Bishop Prevoost, an«f by the message from the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties, touching the same, can see no grounds on which to believe, that the contemplated resignation is consistent with ecclesiastical order, or with the practice of Episcopal Churches in any ages, or with the tenour of the ofBce of consecration. Accordingly, while they sympathize most tenderly with their brother. Bishop Provoost, on account of that ill health, and those melancholy occurrences which have led to the design in question, they judge it to be in- consistent with the sacred, trust committed to them, to recognise the bisliop's act as an effectual resignation of hi* Episcopal jurisdiction. Nevertheless, being sensible of the present exigencies of the Church of N«w-YoFk, and ap- proving of their making provision for the actual discharge of the duties of the Episcopacy, the bishops of this house are ready to consecrate to the office of bishop, any person who may be presented to them with the requisitetestiinonials from the General and State Conventions ; and of whose religious, moral, and literary character, due satisfaction may be given. But this house must be understood to be explicit in their declaration, that they shall consider such a person as assistant or co-adjutor bishop, during Bishop' Provoost's life, although competent in point of character t&- all the Episcopal duties ; the extent in which the same shall be discharged by him, to, be dependent on such regulations as expediency may dictate to the Church in New-York^ grounded on the indispositioi^ of Bishop Provoost, and witb his concurrence- Appendix — JVo^ 25. SS/i No. 25. Page 186. Forms of Subscription. Form in this Chiirch— " I de believe the holy scriptures 6f fhe Old and New Testament to be the word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation. And I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrines and worship of the Protestant Episcopal Chin'ch in these United States." Form in the Church' of Kngland^-The thirty-sixth canon requires the candidates, after reference, first, to the royal supremacy; second, to the Book of Common Prayer, with the ordinal; and third, to the thirty-nine Articles, to signify his assent as follows i-"— " I,'N. N; do willingly and ex animo subscribe to those three articles above mentioned, and to all thinffs that are contained in them." No. 20. Page 190. The house resumed the consideration of the mattei's hronght before them by the Rev. Ammi Rogers, and came to the following determination concerning the same.' 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 fie left New-York, has been insulting, refractory, and schis- mafical in the highest degree ; and, were it tolerated, would prove subversive of all order and discipline in the Church; and that the statement which he made in justifiV:ation 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 performance of any ministerial duties withirv that diocese; and, moreover, are 45 354 Appendix — No. 27. of opinion, that he deserves a severer 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 convention, any sufficient provision for a case of a clergyman 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 practised 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 mea- sure 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 Connecticut, and another copy to the Rev. Ammi Rogers. And we further direct, that either of the aforesaid parties be permitted to have any documents respectively delivered in by them, a copy of it being first taken ; except the petition and affidavit of the Rev. Ammi Rogers, of which he may have a copy if desired, as may either of the parties have of any document deUvered by the other party. No. 27. Page 218. Of the Homilies. The House of Bishops, taking into consideration, that the two books of Homilies are referred to in the thirty-fifth article of this Church, as containing a body of sound Christian doctrine ; and knowing, by their respective ex- perience, the scarcity of the volume, rendering it difficult for some candidates in the ministry to possess opportunities of studying its contents, propose to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, to make it a standing instruction to every bishop, and to the ecclesiastical authority in every state destitute of a bishop, to be furnished (as soon as may be) with a copy or copies of said work, and to require it to be studied by all candidates for the ministry within their respective bounds; under the expectation, that when offer- Appendix — No. 28. 355" ing for ordination, the knowledge of its contents will be indispensably required. • n This was concurred in by the House of Clerical and I^ay Depfutiea. No. 28, Page 219. Concerning Posture during Psalmody. Whereas a diversity of custom has of late years prevailed in the posture of ministers and of the people, during the aci. of singing the psalms arjd the hymns in metre ; the former practice of sitting during this part of the service gradually giving way to the more comely posture of standing; it is hereby recommended by this convention, that it be con- gid&red as the duty of the ministers of this Church, to encourage the use of the latter posture, and to induce the members of their congregations, as circumstances may permit, to do the same : allowance to be, made for cases, in which it may be considered inconvenient by age, or by in- firmity. Practice, under this recommendation, is to begin from the time when suitable information shall have been given by the clergy to their respective flocks. And it shall be the duty of every minister, to give notice of this recom- mendation to his congregation, at such time as in his dis- cretion may be the most proper. The carrying into effect of the contemplated change, may be delayed by the bishop of any diocese, or, where there is no bishop, by the ecclesiastical authority therein, until there shall have been time and opportunity of ex- plaining satisfactorily the grounds of the measure. No. 29. Page 220. Of a Proposal of new Anthems, and of Sanction requested in favour of a proposed Book. The following proposition was submitted and agreed to, and communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties. The House of Bishops communicate to the House of i56 Appendix — No. 30. Clerical and Lay Deputies, the following resolve, and the following rule of the House of Bishops, to be entered on t^eir journal after being returned by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. There was laid before the house, an addi^ess from ths Rev. Dr. William Smith, of Coanecticut, together with sundry anthems, selected from holy scripture, and adapted to certain fasts and feasts of the Church. The object of the address is to induce the establishment of the said an^- thems as parts of the liturgy. Whereupon, Resolved, That it is not expedient, during this convention, to go into a review, either in whole or in part, of the Book of Common Prayer. It could not, howr ever, but give satisfaction to the bishops to recollect, that anthems taken from scripture, and judiciously arranged, may, according to the known allowance of this Church, be sung in congregations, at the discretion of their respective ministers. On this occasion, a question arose, how far it may b'fe proper, at any meeting of the convention, to give their sanction, or that of this house in particular, to any work, however tending to religious instruction, or to the excitement of pious affections. In reference to this subject, it is the unanimous opinion of the bishops present, that no such sanction should be given. And it is hereby made a rule of the house, that if any application should be made, tending to such effect, it shall not be considered as regu- larly brought before them. The above was returned by the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, with their respectful thanks, for what they were pleased to call the judicious course adopted by the bishops, in reference to the two subjects. No. 30. Page 224. Concerning the Identity of this Church with the former Church of England in America, The following declaration was proposed and agreed to : It having been credibly stated to the House of Bishops, that on questions in reference to property devised before the revolution, to congregations belonging to " the Church of England," and to uses connected with that name, some doubts hav^ been entertained in regard to the identity of Appendix — Nu. 81. 857 the body to which the two names have been applied, the liouse think it expedient to make the declaration, and to request the concurrence of the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies therein — That " The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America" is the same body hereto- fore known in these states by the name of " the Church of England ;" the change of hame, although not of religious principle, in doctrine, or in worship, or in discipline, being induced by a characteristic of the Church of England, sup- posing the independence of Christian Churches, under the different sovereignties, to which, respectively, their allegi- ance in civil concerns belongs. But that when the severance alluded to took place, and ever since, this Church conceives of herself, as professing and acting on the principles of the Church of England, is evident from the organization of our conventions, and from their subsequent proceedings, as recorded on the journals ; to which, accordingly, this con- vention refers for satisfaction in the premises. But it would be contrary to fact, were any one to infer, that the discipline exercised in this Church, or that any proceedings therein, are at all dependent on th(3 will of the civil or of the eccle- siastical authority of any foreign country. The above declaration having been communicated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, they returned for answer, that they concurred therein. No. 31. Page 229. Fro?n ilie Journal. The House of Bishops, solicitous for the preservation of the purity of the Church, and the piety of its members, are induced to impress upon the clergy the important duty, with a discreet but earnest zeal, of warning the people of their respective cures, of the danger of an indulgence in those worldly pleasures which may tend to withdraw the affections from spiritual things. And especially on the subject of gaming, of amusements involving cruelty to the brute crea- tion, and of theatrical representations, to which some pecu- liar circumstances have called their attention, — they do not hesitate to express their unanimous opinion, that these amusements, as well from their licentious tendency, as from the strong temptations to vice which they afford, ought not 358 Appendios — No. 31. to be frequented. And the bishops cannot refrain from expressing their deep regret at the information, that in some of our large cities, so little respect is paid to the feeUngs of the members of the Church, that theatrical representations are fixed for the evenings of her most solemn festivals. From the Pastoral Letter. Both to the clergy and to the laity we desire to sa}", but most pointedly to the former, that the Christian profession exacts a greater abstraction from the world than that which consists in the abstaining from acknowledged sin. There are practices so nearly allied, and so easily abused to it, that we conceive of a professor of religion in duty bound either not to countenance them in the least d^ree; or, as is allowable in regard to some of the matters contemplated, to avoid the so employing of time, and the so lavishing of affection, as puts into a state of sin, although not necessarily belonging to the subject. We would be far from an en- deavour after an abridgment of Christian liberty. But we cannot forget, that in a list of the classes of evil livers, there is introduced the description of persons who are " lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God;" nor, in respect to the female professors of religion in particular, the admonition, that " she who liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." We are aware of thedifBculty of draw- ing the line between the use of the world and the abuse of it : that being conceived of by different persons equally pious and virtuous, according to the diversity of natural tempei'ament, and of the states of society in which they have been placed by education or by habit : but we know, that where the conscience can reconcile itself to the draw- ing as near to the territory of sin, as it can persuade itself to be consistent with the still standing on secure ground, deadness to spiritual good at the best, but more commonly subjection to its opposite is the result. In speaking of subjects of the above description, we would not be understood to class among them any practice which is either immoral in itself, or so customarily accompanied by immorality, that the one is necessarily countenanced with the other. Of the former description, is gaming in all the variety of its exercise : and the like may be said of what- ever involves cruelty to the lower animals of the creation. ' Appendkn—^No. 31. 359 If the same cannot be affirmed of works of fiction, and of putting speeches into the mouths of feigned characters, for the purpose of instruction or of entertainment ; yet, as the question is applicable to the exhibitions of the theatre, such as they have been in every age, and are at present; we do not hesitate to declare, unanimously, our opinion, that it is a foul source of very extensive corruption. We lay little stress on the plea, that it is a matter practicable in social institutions, to purge the subject from the abuses which have been attached to it. Wheii this shall have been accom- plished, it will be time to take another ground. But, in truth, we are not persuaded of the possibility of the thing, when we consider that the prominent and most numerous patrons of the stage are always likely to be the least dis- posed to the seriousness which should enter into whatever is designed to discriminate between innocence and guilt. While the opinions and the passions of such persons shall continue to serve the purpose of a looking-glass, by which the exhibited characters are to be adjusted to the taste of so great a proportion of the public, we despair of seeing the stage rescued from the disgusting effusions of profaneness and obscenity; and much less of that mean of corruption, more insinuating than any other — the exhibiting of what is radically base, in alliance with properties captivating to the imagination. While we address this alike to the clergy and to the laity, we consider it as especially hostile to the usefulness of the former. And even in regard to some matters confessed to be innocent in themselves, their innocency may depend much on many circumstances, and of professional character among others. The ear of a clergyman should always be open to a call to the most serious duties of his station. Whatever may render it difficult to his own mind to recur to those duties with the solemnity which they require, or may induce an opinion in others, that such a recurrence must be unwelcome to him from some enjoyment not con- genial with holy exercise, olight to be declined by him. If it be a sacrifice, the making of it is exacted by what ouofht to be his ruling wish, the serving of God, and the bemg useful to his fellow-men, in the discharge of the duties of the ministry. 3m AppeadM—No. 33. No. 82. Page 230. Ads of the Convention of 1785. A General Ecclesiastical Constitution of the Protestant Epis-' copal Church in the -^United States of America. Whereas, in the course of Divine Providence, the Pro- testant Episcopal Church in the United States of America is become independent of all foreign authority, civil and ecclesiastical : — * And whereas, at a meeting of clerical and lay deputies of the said Church, in sundry of the said states, viz. in the states of Massachusetts, Rhode-Island, Connecticut, New- York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland, held in the city of New- York, on the 6th and 7th days of October, in the year of our Lord 1784, it was recommended to this Church in the said states represented as aforesaid, and proposed to this Church in the states not represented, that they should send deputies to a convention to be held ii> the city of Philadelphia, on the Tuesday before the feast of St. Michael in this present year, in order to unite in a con- stitution of ecclesiastical government, agreeably to certain fundamental principles, expressed in the said recommenda- tion and proposal : — And whereas, in consequence of the said recommendation and proposal, clerical and lay deputies have been duly ap- pointed from the said Church, in the states of New- York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and South-Carolina :^ — The said deputies being now assembled, and taking into consideration the importance of maintaining uniformity in doctrine, discipline, and worship in the said Church, do hereby determine and declare, 1. That there shall be a General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of Ame- rica, which shall be held in the city of Philadelphia, on the third Tuesday in June, in the year of our Lord 1786, and for ever after, once in three years, on the third Tuesday of June, in such place as shall be determined by the conven- tion; and special meetings maybe held at such other times, and in such place, as shall be hereafter provided for; and this Church, in a majority of the states aforesaid, shall be represented before they shall proceed to business f except Appendix^— No. 32. 36^ ^hlat fhe fiepresentation of this Church from two states, shall be sufficient to adjourn ; and in all business of the Convention, freedonni of debate shall be allowed. 2. There siiall be a representation of both clergy and I'aity of the Church in ea- kindness and providence. And we humbly pray, that the devout sense of this signal mercy may renew and increase ^n us a spirit of love and thankfulness to thee, its only Author, a spirit of peaceable submission to the laws and government of our country, and a spirit of fervent zeal for our holy religion, which thou haet preserved and secured to us and our posterity. May we improve these inestimable blessings for the advancement of religion, liberty, and :science throughout this land, till the wilderness and solitary place be glad through us, and the desert rejoice and blossom as the rose. This we beg through the merits of Jesus Christ our Saviour. Amen.* Aitsratiom in the Book of Common Prayer, and Administra^ Hon of the Sacraments, and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, according to the use of the Church of England, proposed qind recommended to the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. The order for morning and evening service daily, throughout the year. * The Epistle and tlie Gospel wore added by the commiltsc, agreeably to an .itpthority which they conceiyadto be vested in the^n. 363 Appendix — No. 82. 1st. The following sentences of scripture are ordered to be prefixed to the usual sentences, viz. — The Lord is in his holy temple ; let all the earth keep silence before him. Hob. ii. 20. From the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be great among the Gentiles ; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering ; for my name shall be great among the Heathen, saith the Lord of hosts. Mai. i. 11. Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be alway acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength and my Redeemer. Psalm xix. 14. 2d. That the rubric preceding the absolution be altered thus-^" A declaration to be made by the minister alone, standing, concerning the forgiveness of sins." 3d. That in the Lord's Prayer, the word " who" be sub- stituted in the room of " which" and that " those icho tres- pass" stand instead of " them that trespass." 4th. That the " Gloria Patri" be omitted after the " O come let m sing," !fc. and in every other place, where, by the present rubric it is ordered to be inserted, to " the end of the" reading psalms ; when shall be said or sung " Gloria Patri," &fc. or, "Glory be to God on high, and on earth peace, good will towards Tnen," Sfc: at the discretion of the mi- nister. 5th. That in the " Te Deum" instead of " honourable" it be " adorable, true, and only Son;" and instead of "didst pflt abhor the Virgin's womb," " didst humble thyself to be pqr^pfa Virgin." 6th. That, until a proper selection of psalms be made, >each minister be allowed to use such as he may choose. 7th. That the same liberty be allowed respecting the lesspn^. 8th. That the article in " the Apostles' Creed," " he descended into hell," be omitted. 9th. That the Athanasian and the Nicene Creeds be en- tirely omitted. 10th. That after the response, "and with thy Spirit," all be omitted to the words " O Lord, shoio thy mercy upon us;" Which the minister shall pronounce, still kneeling. 11th. That in the suffrage, " make thy chosen people joy- ful," the word "chosen" be omitted; and also the following suffrages, to " O God, make clean our hearts vdthin vs." 12lh. That the rubric after these words, " and take not thy Holy Spirit from us," be omitted. Then the two collects Appendix — No. 82. 367 to be said: in the collect for grace, the words "be ordered," to be omitted ;, and the word " be" inserted, instead of " fo do alway that is." 13th. In the collect "for the clergy and people" read — " Almighty and everlasting God, send down upon all bishops and other pastors, and the congregations committed to their charge," ifc. to the end. 14th. [Here is an erasure from the manuscript : the ar- ticle being found a repetition of part of the thirteenth.] 15th. That the Lord's Prayer after the Litany, and the subsequent rubric, be omitted. I6th. That the short Litany be read as follows — " Son of God,. we beseech thee to hear us. Son of God, we beseech thee to hear us. O Lamb of God, that takest away the sins of the world, grant us thy peace. O Christ, hear us. O Christ, hear us. Lord, have mer<.y upon us, and deal not with us ac- cording to our sins, neither reward us according to our iniqui- ties" After Avhich, omit the words — " Let us fray." 17th. That the Gloria Patri, after O Lord, arise, !fc. be omitted ; as also " Let us pray," after " we put our trust in thee." I8th. That in the following prayer, instead of " righte- ously have deserved," it be ^* justly have deserved." 19th. That in the first warning for -the communion, the word " damnation," following the words " increase your," be read " condemnation;" and the two paragraphs after these words — " or else come not to that holy table," be omitted, and the following one be read, " and if there be any of you who, by these means, cannot quiet their conscience" Sfc. The words " learned and discreet," epithets given to the minister, to be also omitted. 20th. In the exhortation to the communion, let it run thus — " for as the benefit is great, S^c. to drink his blood, so is the danger great, if we receive the same unworthily. Judge therefore yourselves," ^fi. ^Ist. That in the rubric preceding the absolution, instead of " pronounce this absolution," it be — " then shall the minis- ter stand up, and turning to the people, say," &fc. 22d. That in the baptism of infants, parents may be ad- mitted as sponsors. 23d. That the minister, in spealiing to the sponsors, in- stead of these words, " vovtchsafe to release him," S^c say — *' release him from sin ;" and in the second prayer, instead of *' remission of his sins," read — " remission of sin." 24th. That in tlie questions addressed to the sponsors. ^S Afpendix^No. ^\ and the answers, instead of the present form, it be «tsrfoilow#' — " the sinful desires of the flesh." 25th. " Dost thou believe the articles of the Christian faith, as contained in the Apostles' Creed, and wilt thou endeavour to' have this child instructed accordinglyT' Answer: " I do believe them, and, by God'^ help, vnll endeavour so to dd." " Wilf thou endeavour to have Mm brought up in the fear of God, and to obey God's holy will and commandments?" An- swer: " I will, by God's assistance." 26th. That the sign ef the cross may be oihitted, if par- ticularly desired by the sponsors or parents, and the prayer to be thus altered (by the direction of a short rubric) '' We receive this child into the congregation of Christ's flock; and pray that hereafter he may never be ashamed," Sfc. to the end. 27th. That the ?iAAvess—" seeing now, dearly beloved" &fc.- Be omitted. • 28th. That the prkyer after the Lord's Prayer be thus changed — " we yield thee our hearty thanks," Sfc. to " receive this infant as^ thirie own child by baptism,, artd to incorporate Mm," &fc. 29th. That in the following exhortation, the words *' to renounce the devil and all his works," and in the charge to the' sponsors, the words " vulgar tongue" be omitted. 30th. That the forms of private baptism and confirmation" be made conformable to these alterations. 81st. That in the exhortation before matrimony, all be- tween these words, " holy, matrimony, and therefore if any^ man" ifc. be omitted. 32d. That the words " J plight thee my troth" be omitted in both places ; and also the words — " with my body I thee worship;" and also — " pledged their troth either to other." 33d. That all after the Blessing be omitted. 34th. In the burial servicej instead of the two psalms, fake the following verses of both, viz. Psalm xxxix. t, 8, 9,' 12, 13, and Psalm xc. 13' In the rubric, the word " un- haptized" to be omitted. In the declaration and forms of interment, beginning-" " fomsmich as," &rc. insert the following — " Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God, in his wise providence, to take out of this world the soul of our deceased brother, [sister"^ we fherefore commit Ms [herj body to the ground — earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust; looking for the general resurrectioTt in the last day, and the life of the world to come, through our Lord Jesus Christ; at whose second coming, in glorims ma- jesty, to judge the world, ike earth and the sea shall give up Appendix— No. 32. 30ff iheirdead; and the corruptible bodies of those who sleep in him, shall be changed, and made like unto his glorioufbody, accord- ing to the mighty working, whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself. In the sentence " I. heard a voice,''' &fc. insert " who" for •' which." The prayer following the Lord's Prayer to be omitted. In the next collect, leave out the words " as our hope is, thisi our brother doth." For " them that," insert " those who." 35th. In the visitation of the sick, instead of the Absolu- tion as it now stands, insert the declaration of forgiveness which is appointed in the communion service ; or, either of the collects which are taken from the commination office, and appropriated to Ash- Wednesday, may be used. In the psalm, omit the third, sixth, eight, ninth, and eleventh verses. In the commendatory prayer, for " miser- able and naughty," say " vain and miserable." Strike out the word '"purged." In the " prayer for persons troubled in mind," omit all that stands between the words " afflicted servant" and " his soul is full," SfC. and instead thereof say " afflicted servant, whose soul is full of trouble," and strike out the particle " but," and proceed, " O merciful God," ^c. 36th. A form of prayer and visitation of prisoners for notorious crimes, and especially persons under sentence of death, being much wanted, the form entitled '* Prayers for Persons under Sentence of Death, agreed on in the synod of the archbishops and bishops, and the rest of the clergy of Ireland, at Dublin, in the year 1711," as it now stands in the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of Ireland, is agreed upon, and ordered to be adopted, with the following alterations, viz. — For the Absolution take the same declaration of forgive- ness, or either of the collects above directed for the visita- tion of the sick. The short collect " O Saviour of the world," fyc. to be left out; and for the word "frailness," say "frailty." 37th. In the Catechism, besides the alteration respect- ing civil rulers, alter as follows, viz. " What is your name? N. M. When did you receive this name? [received it in baptism, whereby I became a member of the Christian Church. What was promised for you in baptism ? That I should be instructed to believe the Christian faith, as contained in the Apostles' Creed, and to obey God's holy will, and keep his commandments. 47 370 Appendix— No. 32. Do$t thou think thou art bound to believe all the articles of the Christian faith, as contained in the Creed, and to obey, God's holt/ mil, and keep his commandments ? Yes, verily," fyc. Instead of the words " verily, and indeed taken," say— " spiritually taken" Answer to the question " How many sacraments'? Two^ Baptism and the Lord's Supper." 38. Instead of a particular service for the churching of women, and psalms, the following special prayer is to be i-ntroduced, after the general thanksgiving, viz.^ This to be said when, any woman desires to return thanks. " O Almighty God, we give thee most humble and hearty thanks, for that thou hast been graciously pleased to preserve this woman, thy servant, through the great pains and perils of child-birth. Incline her, we beseech thee, to show forth her thankfulness, for this thy great mercy, not only unth her lips, but by a holy and virtuous life. Be pleaded, Q God, so to establish her health, that she may lead the remainder of her days to thy honour and glory, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen." 39th. The comminalion office for Ash- Wednesday to be discontinued, and therefore the three collects, the first be- ginning — " O Lord, we beseech thee," — 2d. " O most mighty God," — 3d. " Turn us, O good Lord," shall be continued among the occasional prayers ; and used after the colject on Ash-Wednesday, and on such other occasions as the minister shall think fit. Articles of Religion^ 1. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity. There is but one living, true, and eternal God, the Father Almighty ; without body, parts, or passions ; of infinite power, wisdom,- and goodness ; the Maker and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible : and one Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, very and true God ; who came down from heaven, took man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance, and was God and man in one Person, whereof is one Christ ; who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice for the sins of all men ; he arose again from death, ascended into heaven, and there sitteth until he shall return to iudge the world at the last day : and one Holy Spirit» Appendix— No. 82. 371 ifhe Lofd and Giver of life, of the same divine nature witk the Father and the Son. 2. Of the Sufficiency oftlie Holy Scriptures for Salvation. Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salva- tion : so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the holy scripture we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. Of the Names and Numbers of the Canonical Books. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, The First Book of Samuel, The Second Book of Samuel, The First Book of Kings, The Second Book of Kings, The First Book of Chronicles, The Second Book of Chronicles, The First Book of Esdras, The Second Book of Esdras, The Book of Hester, The Book of Job, The Psalms, The Proverbs, Ecclesiastes or Preacher, Cantica or Songs of Solomon, Four Prophets the greater. Twelve Prophets the less. And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life, and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine ; such are these following : — The Third Book of Esdras, The Fourth Book of Esdras, The Book of Tobias, The Book of Judith, The rest of the Book of Hester, The Book of Wisdom, Jesus the Son of Sirach, Baruch the Prophet, The Song of the three Chil- dren, The Story of Susanna, Of Bell and the Dragon, The Prayer of Manasses, The First Book of Maccabees, The Second Book of Maccabees. All the books of the New Testament, as they are com- monly received, we do receive and account canonical. 3. Of the Old and New Testament. There is a perfect harmony and agreement between the Old Testament and the New ; for in both, everlasting life IS offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and man: and although the Jaw given by 372 AppemUat-r^No. 32. Moses, as to ceremonies and the civil precepts of it, dotfc not bind Christians ; yet all such are obliged to observe the moral commandments which he delivered. 4. Of the Creed. The creed, commonly called the Apostles' Creed, ought to be received and believed; because it may be proved by the holy scripture. S. Of Originai Sin. By the fall of Adam, the nature of man is become greatly corrupted, having departed from its primitivfr innocence, and that original righteousness in which it was at first created by God- For we are now so inclined naturally to do evil, that the flesh is continually striving to adt contrary to the Spirit of God : which corrupt inclination still remains even in the regenerate- But although there is no man living who sinneth not, y^t we must use our sincere en- deavours to keep the whole law of God, so far as we possi- ' bly can. 6. OfFree-WiU. The condition of man, after ihe MX o{ Adam, is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good works, to faith, and calling upon God : wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasing and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ giving a good will, and working with us when we have that good will. 7. Of the Justification of Man. We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, by faith ; and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by, faith^only, is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort. 8. Of Good Works. Although good works, which are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and // _.- Appendix— No. 32. 373 endure the aeverityof God's judgment; yet are they pleas- ing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith ; insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known, as a tree discerned by the fruit. 9. Of Christ alone uaithout Sin. Christ, by taking human nature on him, was made like unto us in all things, sin only excepted. He was a Iamb without spot, and by the sacrifice of himself once offered, made atonement and propitiation for the sins of the world ; and sin was not in him. But all mankind besides, although baptized and born again in Christ, do offend in many things. For if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 10. Of Sin after Baptism. They who fall into sin after baptism may be renewed by repentance : for although after we have received God's grace, we may depart from it by falling into sin ; yet, through the assistance of his Holy Spirit, we may by repentance and the amendment of our lives, be restored again to his favour. God will not deny forgiveness of sins to those who truly repent, and do that which is lawful and right ; but all such through his mercy in Christ Jesus, shall save their souls eilive. II. Of PredesUuation. Predestination to life, with respect to every man's salva- tion, is the everlasting purpose of God, secret to us ; and the right knowledge of what is revealed concerning it, is full of comfort to such truly religious Christians, as feel in themselves the Spirit of Christ mortifying the works of their flesh and earthly affections, and raising their minds to heavenly things. But we must receive God's promises as they are generally declared in holy scripture, and do his will, as therein is expressly directed : for without holi- siess of life no man shall be saved. 374 Appendix — No. 82. 12. Of obtaining eternal Salvation only by the Name oj Christ. They are to be accounted presumptuous, who say, that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he pro- fesseth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law, and the light of nature. For holy scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved. 13. Of the Church and its Authority. The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, wherein the true word of God is preached, and the sacraments are duly administered, according to Christ's ordinance in all things requisite and necessary : and every Church hath power to ordain, change, and abolish rites and ceremonies, for the more decent order and good govern- ment thereof; so that all things be done to edifying. But it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing contrary to God's word, nor so to expound the scripture, as to make one part seem repugnant to another ; nor to decree or en- force any thing to be believed' as necessary to salvation, that is not contained in the scriptures. General Councils and Churches are liable to err, and have erred, even in matters of faith and doctrine, as well as in their cere- monies. 14. Of Ministering in the Congregation. It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching, or ministering the sacraments in the congregation, before he be lawfully called, and sent to execute the same. And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent^ who are chosen and called to this work by men who have public authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard. 15. Of the Sacraments. Sacraments ordained by Christ are not merely badges or tokens of Christian men's profession ; but rather certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and (rod's good will towards us, by which he doth work invisibly in us, and Appendix — No. 32. 37& doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him. ■ There are two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the gospel^ that is to say, baptism, and the supper of the Lord. 16. Of Baptism. Baptism Is not merely a sign of profession, and mark of difference, whereby Christian men are discerned from others that are not christened ; but it is also a sign of re- generation, or new birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they who receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church; the promises of the forgiveness of sin, and of our adoption to be the sons of God by the Holy Ghost, are visibly signed and sealed ; faith is confirmed, and grace increased by virtue of prayer unto God. The baptism of young children is in any wise to be retained In the Church, as most agreeable to the institution of Christ. 17. Ojlihe hordes Supper. The supper of the Lord is not merely a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another ; but rather is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death : insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ, and likewise the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ. Transubstantlation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy writ: but is repugnant to the plain words of scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions. The body of- Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the supper of the Lord, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper, is faith. 18. Of the one Oblation of Christ upon the Cross. The offering of Christ once made, is that perfect re- demption, propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world, both original and actual : and there is none other satisfaction for sin but that alone. 376 Appendix — Ko. 32. 19. Of Consecration and Ordination. The book of consecration of bishops and ordering of priests and deacons, except such parts as require any oaths- rnconsistent with the American revolution, is to be adopted^ as containing all things necessary to such consecration and ordering. 20. Of a Christian Man's Oath. The Christian religion doth not proBibit any man from taking an oath, when required by the magistrate in testi- mony of truth : but all vain and rash swearing is forbidden- by the holy scriptures. Ordered, that the plan for obtaining consecration be again Tead r which being do^ne, the same was agreed to^ and is as follows i — [The plan follows in the instrument,^but is here omitted, because given in No. 5, p. 295.] Done in Philadelphia, Christ Church, in convention of the Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal" Church in the states under-inentioned, this fifth day of October, 1785. [Signed by the president and all the meni- bers of the convention, ranged according to their respective states : as was also the address to the English prelates, published in the journal of 1786.] Extracts from the Journal. Resolved, That the Liturgy shall be used in this Church' as accommodated to the revolution, agreeably to the alter- ations now approved of and ratified by this convention. On motion, Resolved, That the fourth' of July shall be observed by this Church for ever, as a day of thanksgiving to- Almighty Godj for the inestimable blessings of religion^ and civilliberty vouchsafed to the United States of America^ On motion, Resolved, That the first Thursday in Novem- ber in every year for ever, shall be observed by this Church as a day of general thanksgiving to Almighty God, for the fruits of the earth, and for all the other blessings of his merciful providence.* ' The preparing of a suitable service wa« left to the commiltes. Appendix — No. 83. S77 .Resolved, That a committee be appointed to publish the Book of Common Prayer, with the alterations, as well as those now ratified, in order to jender the liturgy consistent with the American revolution, and the constitutions of the respective states, as the alterations and new offices recom- mended to this Church ; and that the book be accompanied with a proper preface or address, setting forth the reason and expediency of the alterations; and that the committee have the liberty to make verbal and grammatical correc- tions ; but in such manner as that nothing in form or sub- stance be altered. The committee appointed were the S,ev. Dr. White,' (president) the Rev. Dr. Smith, and the Rev. Dr. Wharton. Ordered, That the said committee be authorized to dis- pose of the copies of the Common Prayer when printed ; and that after defraying all expenses incurred therein, they remit the nett profits to' the treasurers' of the several cor- porations and societies for the Relief of the Widows and Children of deceased Clergymen in the states represented in this convention ; the profits to be equally divided among the said societies and corporations. Resolved, That the same committee be' authorized to publish, with the Book of Common Prayer, such of thei reading and singing psalms, and such a calendar of proper lessons for the different Sundays and holy days throughouS the year, as they may think proper. [TAc Appendix of the first edition here concluded.^. No. 33. Page 58/ The bishops, in the use of the ofl5ce of Confirmation, finding that the preface is frec^juently not well suited to the age and character of those who are presented for this holy ordinance, unanimously propose the following resolution : — Resolved, That after the present preface in the office of Confirmation, the following be inserted, to be used instead of the former, at the discretion of the bishop r— " It appears from holy scripture, that the apostles laid their hands oa those who were baptized ; and this ordinance, styled by the Apostle Paul, the ' laying on of hands,' and ranked by him among the principles of the doctrine of Christ, has been retained in the Church, under the name of Confirmation; 48 378 Appendix—Ns. 34. and is very convenient, and proper to be observed, to the end that persons being sufficiently instructed in what they- promised, or vvliat was promised for them in their baptism, and being, in other respects, duly qualified, may themselves, with their own mouth and consent, openly before the Church, ratify and confirm the same, and also promise, that by the grace of God, they will evermore endeavour themselves faithfully to observe such things as they, by their own con- fession, have assented unto." And to correct the injurious misapprehension, as to the. meaning of certain terms in the first collect in the Office of Confirmation, the bishops unani?}iously propose thefoUov^ing resolution : — Resolved, That after the first collect in the Office of Con- firmation, the following- be inserted, to be used at the dis- cretion of the bishop, instead of the first collect, " Almighty and everliving God, who hast vouchsafed, in baptism, to regenerate these thy servants, by water and the Holy Ghost ; thus giving them a title to all the blessings of thy covenant of grace and mercy, in thy Son Jesus Christ, and now dost graciously confirm unto them, ratifying the promises then made, all their holy privileges ; grant unto tbem, we beseech thee, O Lord, the renewing of the Holy Ghost; strengthen them with the power of this divine Comforter ; and daily increase in them thy manifold gifts of grace, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and ghostly strength, the spirit of knowledge and true godliness ; and fill them, O Lord, with the spirit of thy holy fear, now and for ever. Amen." No. 34. Page 256. In the convention of 1821, the House of Bishops com- municated to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies, their disapprobation of what they conceived to be a mistaken construction of the last rubric in the service for the ,admi- nistration of the communion. The reasons on which their objection to the construction was founded, are recorded in the Appendix to the journal of that year ; and it is their intention to cause it to be entered on the journal of their present transactions. It is as follows : — Appendix — No. 34. 379 •■Concerning the last Rubric in the Communion Service. The House of Bishops heing informed of what they con- sider as a great misunderstanding, in various places, of the rubric at the end of the Communion Service, think it their duty to declare their sense of the same, and to commu,nicate it to the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies. ■ In the Common Prayer Book of the Church of England, the words in the parenthesis are — " if there be no commu- nion." In the review of 1789, it was put — " if there be no sermon or communion" — and this has been interpreted to mean, that if there be a sermon, what has been called the ante-communion service is to be omitted — against this con- struction the bishops object as follows : — 1st. The construction rests on inference ; deduced in contrariety to the positive direction — " Then shall follow the sermon." Had an exception been intended, it would doubtless have been expressed positively, as in other ru- brics. Further, the rubric in question prescribes, that " when there is a communion, the minister shall return to the liord's table;" which presumes him to have been there before, in the ante-communion service, unless in the per- mitted alternative of some other place. 2d. The argument on the other side proves too much, and therefore nothing. It is said of those who urge it, that they conceive themselves bound to use the whole service on a communion day; whereas it should be dispensed with, on the same principle on which it is supposed to be superseded by the sermon. On the other hand, if there being either a sermon, or the communion should be thought to warrant the omission ; can il be, that the convention designed to leave in the book the ante-communion service, with all the collects, the gospels, and the epistles attached to them, to be little more than dead letter; never to be used, except on the few occasions when the said service is unconnected with either of the said provisions ? For it is not required to be used either with tlie morning or with the evening prayer. 3d. There is a rubric prescribing the place in the service, at which notice shall be given of holy days, &;c. Can it be supposed, that a provision of this sort was intended to be done away, not professedly, but indirectly ? and that even tiiere should be no provision for notifying the communion .'' 4th. It is understood, that the morning prayer, and the administration of the communion, were designed to be dis- tinct services, to be used at different times of the day. 380 Appendix— No. 34. Probably, at the time of the reformation, the practice vva? generally conformable to the provision ; and it is said to prevail at present in some places in England. Now, alj- .though there is probably no Church in the United States of which the same can be affirmed ; yet, why raise a bar against so reasonable _and so godly a practice .'' an effort for which, would reduce the whole to the sermon ; except when the communion were to be administered; and then there would be the latter part of the service only. 5th. The construction casts a blemish on the observance of every festival of our Church. To speak in particular of Easter Sunday, Whitsunday, and Christmas day; can it be supposed, that the convention intended to abrogate the reading of the portions of scripture, the most pertinent of any in the Bible ? or that the members of the body were so careless, as not to perceive the effect of the word introduced hy them into the parenthesis ? Neither of these was the case; although they had not the sagacity to foresee the use which would be made of their super-addition: a use, which may be applied hereafter to the abandoning of the observ- ance of those festivals. For why shouid the Church -retain them, after dispensing with whatever is attached to them in the respective services. The remark applies equally to the two days of fasting or abstinence — Goad Friday and Ash Wednesday. It is here supposed, that on the former, there are the service and sermons in all our churches fur- nished with the ministry. But according to the opposite opinion, the sermon dispenses with the recital of the con^ summation of our Saviour's sufferings, and not only on Good Friday, but on every day of Passion week, if there be sermons. Could this have been intended .'' 6th. There is the magnitude of the change thus made in the liturgy, without the subjecting of the resulting conse- quences to the consideration of any General Convention: for this is here affirmed, without the apprehension of con- tradiction from any of the surviving members. The most obvious of the consequences, and such as could not have escaped the notice of the least attentive, were the dispens- ing with the reading of the Ten Commandments ; the weekly return of which may well be thought to have a beneficial effect on morals ; and the deranging of a selection of pass^ ages of scripture, always supposed to have been made with great judgment, and suited to the different seasons. of the year. They were of like use in the Church before the prevalence of the corruptions of the Papacy ; have with- Appendix — No. 34. 381 (Stood, in some measure, its systematic hostility to a general knowledge of the scriptures ; and, probably, have prevented a greater enormity of unevangelical error, than what we now find: for although the selections were in Latin, they were at least instructive to the many who understood the language, at a time when even among that description of people, the possession of a Bible was rare. To the present day, they are held in a high esteem, not only by our parent Church, but by the Lutheran Churches of Sweden, of Don- mark, of sundry German principalities, and of this country. •In some of the European states, the subject of the sermon is expected to be taken from the epistle, or from the gospel for the Sunday. There seems no reasonable objection, in any future review of the liturgy, to the making of some abbreviation, suited to the joining of services designed to be distinct : but there may be doubted the expediency of making so great an inroad as that projected on the service now in question. 7th. The ante-communion service continued to be used as before, by the clergy who were present in the convention, in which it is now imagined to have been dispensed with. 'It is confidently believed, that there was not an excejjtion of an individual ; although, on the other side, the major •number must be supposed to have been desirous of the innovation. In the interpretation of a law, immediate practice under it has been held to be a good expositor ; especially when, as in the present case, a contrary sense 4iad not been heard offer a long course of years. The question may occur — Why did the convention intro- duce the words " sermon or," into the parenthesis ? It was to reconcile the other rubric referred to, with frequent and allowable practice. The said rubric says — " then shall follow the sermon." Perhaps, when the service was com- piled there was a sermon on every saint's day, as well as on every principal festival. In modern usage it has been otherwise ; which made it convenient to provide for the mi- nister's proceeding to the Blessing. The parenthesis means, that although there be no sermon, or although there be no communion, the minister shall act as directed by the rubric. The bishops therefore deem it their duty to express the decided opinion, that the rubrics of the Communion Service, as well as other general considerations, enjoin the use of that part which precedes the sermon, on all occasions of sermon or communion, as well as on those festivals and ^asts when neither sermon nor communion occurs. 362 Appendix — No. 34. Having reviewed the above instrument, we are not only confirmed in our opinion therein expressed, but have an increased opinion of the evils, and of the dangers to which the contrary tends. Of these, although not among the most material, yet worthy of notice, is its occasional standing in the way of a courteous interchange of ministerial services among the clergy. Those of the body, who conceive of themselves to be conscientiously bound by what they know to be the in- tendment of the rubric, cannot but refuse to officiate, with the omission of the ante-^communion, however sanctioned by the custom of a particular place : and although the «tated minister should condescend to tolerate a practice different from his own, yet the diversity cannot but have a disparaging tendency in the estimation of a congregation. Secondly. The conscience of every bishop is occasionally implicated in the subject. A deacon offers for the priest- hood, after administering habitually in violation of what the other believes to be the meaning of the rubric ; while the one is to require, and the other is to promise conformity to it. On a presbyter's contemplating removal to another diocese, he finds it important to his character and to his prospects, that there should be certified conformity to the -institutions of the Church; of the contrary to which the bishop has been credibly informed. It will be said, that in each of the supposed cases, the party may have conducted himself conscientiously, and agreeably to his own interpreta- tion of the rubric. Let this be supposed the case; but let it also be granted, that the bishop, in taking his line of con- duct, has also a conscience to be satisfied, and a right of interpretation to be sustained. At the same time let it be remembered, that of those who reject the constant use of the service in question, none plead conscientious scruples .for their conduct. If there be any case in which this matter, more than in any other, may press on the conscience of a bishop, it must be, when he is called to the duty of consecrating to the Episcopacy ; and when the bishop elect, before a step is taken in the act of consecration, is to take on his lips the solemn form of .words prepared for him ; with the under- standing in the minds of his consecrators, that he intends a deviation from the order of the Church, on so extensive a branch of her services as that in question. Thirdly. The misinterpretation is an assumption of the whole legislative authority of the Church ; leading, in its Appendix — No. 34'. 3S3 oonseqirences, to the setting aside of a very great proportio ii of the Book of Cornmon Prayer. In our former communi- cation we admitted, and now admit, that the favourers of the innovation are in the habit of using the ante-communion service on all occasions of the administration of the com- munion. We remarked, that their doing so was in contra- riety to their construction; and that if others, under the shelter of it, should dismiss the ante-communion service' whenever a sermon is to follow ; and with it, the collects, the epistles, and the gospels ; no fault, on the ground taken, can be charged. In the case supposed, why should there be retained such useless lumber in the liturgy ? This was substantially set forth in our former communication ; and is now repeated, for the purpose of exhibiting the matter in the light of the exercise of the whole legislative authority of the Church ; and that, in the great extent to which it has been referred to. To prepare for a further elucidation of the part of the canon in question, we here transcribe it — " Upon the Sun-- dSays and other holy days (if there be no sermon or commu- nion) shall be said all that is appointed at the communion, unto the end of the gospel, concluding with the Blessing." The question turns on the sense of the words " sermon OF," and their dependence on the preceding preposition " if." The dictionaries explain this word, by the synonymous terras^-" suppose that" and " allow that," and etymologists deduce it from the word " give;" which must be its sense in the English rubric;" since otherwise whenever the com- munion is to be administered, the ante-communion service is to be dispensed with ; an absurdity which none will ad- Tdcate. The sense of this rubric may be perceived the more clearly, by remarking its connexion with that immediately before the sentences. The latter says — "then shall fol- low the sermon;" after which, according to the same ru- bric, the minister is to repair to the Lord's table, and to begin the offertory. The. rubric now in question does not dispense with any thing before enjoined, but supposes cases of exception, in regard to what is to follow, saying — " if there be no sermon or communion," &;c. In consideration of the premises, the House of Bishops respectfully propose to the House of Clerical and Lay De- puties the following canon : — 384 Appeiidix—No. 35. A Canon explanatory of the first Part of the Rubric at the end oftlie Communion Service. " Whereas, in the first part of the last rubric in ' The' Order for the Administration of the Conamunion,' the allow- ing of the officiating minister, there being no sermon or communion, to proceed to the Blessing; was owing to the circumstance, that without such a proviso, his doing so w»uld not have been agreeable to the rubric : it shall be the duty of erery minister of this Church, in the celebration of divine sernce on Sundays and other holy days, to recite that part of the service which commonly ha-s- the name of the ante-communion service." ■-;■ No. 35. Page 25' "Fkoughts on tJie Proposal of Alterations in the Book of P salmi in Metre, and in the Hymns, note before a Committee of the General Convention : By a Member of the Committee. « The subject shall be considered as it respects — 1st. The Book of Psalms in metre — 2dly. The Hymns already adopt- ed ; and — 3dly. The adoption of others. Let the Book of Psalms in metre, as translated by Tate and Brady, be continued entire, until another entire translation shall be presented, and thought preferable after deliberate examination by those the best qualified to judge of the worky as^ to the integrity of it, and as to its poetic merit. It is not understood that any such translation is in readiness; and, as to altering of the book in particular passages, it is a course which, once begun on, is likely to be continued, by a succession of changes without end. Probably the book will never be the same, longer than from one General Conven- tion to another.* Some are for printing only select passages of the book; and the reason given is, that the greater part of it is never used. It is here predicted, that let the selection be made with ever so much care, there will be complaints of the omission of passages, vyhich, it will be said, ought to have * These remarks were not designed to discountenance a measure subsequently adopted by the assembled members of the committee^^the appointing of a sub- committee to report to an adjourned meeting — any deviations which there may be from the most correct copies, and any mis-tcanslations of the original. Appendix- — No. 35. ^io freen retained; and of the retaining of otiiersj which, it wil' rtlso be said, might iiave been well spared. This was suffi- ciently experienced in the reception 6f what was called the Proposed Book. Where fastidiousness of criticism may grow out of mere difFerence of taste, why not leave every man to his own ? But, say they, it isan unnecessary swelling of the volume. For this, there is an easy remedy. The metre psalms are no part of the Book of Common Prayer ; and no law of the Church will be violated, if there should be editions with such selections as the favourers of the works may approve of; who woidd have none to' please but themselves. Tlife Kcense is allowaiile in reference to the hymns also. Let the hymns already adopted be retained; because there can be no material use in the contrary, and because it would counteract the tendency to perpetual change. Be it, that here and there \^e find a line or two not defensible. Let these be altered in future editions. The alterations would be slight, and not materially affect the use of the pre- sent books. In giving numbers to the new hymns, there shoidd be a continuation of those of the old. In favour of ritew hymns it is pleaded, that there are some occasions not specially provided for. Be it so : and let a few hymns be chosen for those occasions". The necessity for any more may be doubted of; considering that for the Usual subjects of praise and thanksgiving, and for the ex- pression of penitence, and for the impressing of a great variety of salutary instruction, we have an abundant supply in the Book of Psalms. Yet, if there should be proposed additional hymns, not too many, and not only correct in sen- timent, but excelling in poetic merit, no objection is here rtiade. Most decidedly is there objected to the taste of some, dis- posing them to wish for hymns, in which tlie same subjects are again and again repeated in varied phraseology. It is denied that this contributes to devotion; and the denial is grounded on the well known property of the human cha- facter, that when religious sensibiHties have been often ex- cited by certain words, the repetition of them is more likely to produce the like excitement than other words compre- hending the same sentiments. The principle is applicable to other subjects, and accounts for the long duration of the effects of popular ballads — ^especially the wonder-working one of the Swiss. Whether the itlviting feelin an Episcopat fluids , / / 50 S T A Pf D A R D W O R K S, FOR SALE BY 'V SWORDS, STANFORD, AND CO. Bishop Hoban's edition of Mant and D'Oyly's Bible, in 2, 3, or 4 vols, quarto. Posthumous Works of the late Right Rev. John Henry Hobart, D. D., 3 vols. Svo. , Sermons on the Principal Events and Truths of Redemption, by the Riglit Rev. John Henry Hobart, D. D., 2 vols. Svo. Sel-ihqins by the late Jlight Rev. Benjamin Moore, D. D., of New- York, 2 vols. Svo. Sermons by the late Right Rev. John S. RavensCroft, D. D., of North-Carolina, 2 vols. Svo. Sermons by the late Right Rev. Samuel Seabury, D. D., of Con- necticut and Rhode-Island, 2 vols. Svo. Sermons by the late Right Rev. Theodore Dehon,D. D., of South- Carolina, 2 vols. Svo. An Essay on the Life and Character, of the late RighfRev. Theo- dore Dehon.D. D., by the Rev. C.E. Gadsden, D. D. The Remains of the Rev. Charles Henry Wharton, D. D., with a Memoir of his Life, by the Right Rev. Bishop Doane, 2 vols. Bishop White's, Comparativ,e View of the Controversy between the Calvinists and Armenians, 2 vols. Svo., ' Bishop White's Lectures on the Catechism of the Protestant Epis- , copal Church, Svo. Commentaries suited to Occasions of Ordination, by the Right Rev. Bishop White. , . 'A Treatise on the Pope's Supremacy, by the Rev. Isaac Barrow, D. D., Svo. . • Waddington's History of the Church, from the earliest Ages to the • Reformation, Svo. Works of the Rev. John Newton, with a Memoir of his Life, 2 Vols. Svo. > . ■ Discourses and 'Dissertations on the Doctrines of Atonement and Sacrifice, by Archbishop Magee, 2 vols. Svo. Miiner's History of the Church of Christ, a new edition, 2 vols. Svo. Sermons by Bishop Horsle}-,'the only complete edition, 3 vols. Svo. Macknight's Translation of the Epistles, a new and beautifuledi- ' tion, Svo. Home's Introduction to the Critical Knowledge of the Holy Scrip- tures, a new edition, greatly enlarged by the author. Crude n's Concordance, a new edition, revised and corrected. Works of the Be v. William Jay, of Bath, 3 vols. Svo. Life and Sermons of the late Rev. G. T. Bedell, D.D.,2 vols.Svp. Seiinons by tlte late llev. C. R. Duffie, 2 vols. 8vo. Whole Works of Bickersteth, 8v6. Whoi%. Works of Hannah More, 7'volS. 8vo. PrayesrP adapted to vanous Occasions of Social Worship, by the Right Kev'. Alexander V. Griswold, D. D, ' The Life and Writings of the Rev. George Herbert. Keble's Christian Year, edited by B-ishpp Ddane; Morning Exercises for every Day in the Year, by the Rev. Wil- liam Jay. Evening Exercises for every I>ay In the Year, by the Rev. Wil- liam Jay.^ , ' The Pastor's Testimony, by the Rev. John- A. Clark. . Fourth .edition, revised and corrected by th^ author. Essays on Happiness, Christian Piety, ' Evidenceis of ChFistiani-ty,-by the Bight Rev. C. P. M'llvaine, D. D. Evidences of the Prophecies, by the Rev. A. Keith. The Sig^ns of the Times, by tfee' Rev. A. K.eith,^2 vols. Sumner's Exposition of the Gospels of St. Matthevt;, Mark, and Luke, 2 vols. - -.;.., ' ,.; " , Christian Ethics; or Moral Philosophy oij the Principles of Divine Revelation, by Ralph Wardlaw,-D. 0". Jeremy Taylor's Holy Living and Uying. * Sernions upon the Ministry, WoVship, and Doctrines of the'Pro- testant Episcopal Church, by G. T. Chapman, D. D. Tlie Difficulties of Rohianisra, by G. S. Faber, B. D. The Difficulties of InfideUty, by G. S. Faber, B. D. Selections from the Writings of Fehekn, wifh a Memoir of his Life. S Prague's Letters to a "Daughter.'- Natural History «f Enthusiasm. ,' Spiritual Despotism, by the Author of " Natural History of En- thusiasm." ^ X Select Sermons, by Hugh Latimer. Wilks's Christian Essays. ' Memoirs of the Life and Correspondence of the Rev. Christian Frederick Swartz, by Hugh Pearson, D. D. Lectures on the Law and the Qrospel, by S. H. Tyng, D. D,