 |
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
The history of this religious organization divides itself naturally into two portions: the period of its dependence upon theChurch of England and that of its separate existence with ahierarchy of its own.
TheChurch of England was planted permanently in Virginia in 1607, at the foundation of the Jamestown Colony. There had been sporadic attempts before this date — in 1585 and 1587, under the auspices of Walter Raleigh in the Carolinas, and in 1607, under the auspices of Chief Justice Popham and Sir Ferdinando Gorges inMaine. The attempt to found colonies had failed, and with it, of course, the attempt to plant the Englishecclesiastical institutions.
During the colonial period theChurch of England achieved a quasi-establishment inMaryland and Virginia, and to a lesser extent in the other colonies, with the exception of New England, where for many years the few Episcopalians were bitterlypersecuted and at best barely tolerated. In the Southern states — notably inVirginia andMaryland, in the latter of which theChurch of England has dispossessed theCatholics not only of their political power, but even of religious liberty — theChurch of England, although well provided for from a worldly point of view, was by no means in a strong state, either spiritually or intellectually. The appointment toparishes was almost wholly in the hands of vestries who refused to inductministers and so give them a title to the emoluments of their office, but preferred to paychaplains whom they could dismiss at their pleasure. This naturally resulted in filling the ranks of the ministry with very unworthy candidates, and reduced theclergy to a position of contempt in the eyes of thelaity.
As there were nobishops in America, the churches in the colonies were under thejurisdiction of theBishop ofLondon, who governed them by means of commissaries; but, although among the commissaries were men of such eminence as Dr. Bray inMaryland, and Dr. Blair, the founder of William and Mary College inVirginia, the lay power was so strong and the class of men willing to undertake the work of the ministry so inferior that very little could be done. Even the efforts of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospelproved of very little effect in the South, though inPennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey it bore much better fruit.
But, while theAnglican church was sunk in spiritual andintellectual lethargy in the South, and while it had a rather attenuated existence in the Middle states, an event occurred in New England in 1722 which was of the greatest promise for the future ofAnglicanism, and which shook Congregationalism in New England to its very foundations. Timothy Cutler, therector of Yale College, with six other Congregationalministers, all men of learning andpiety, announced to their brethren in the Congregational ministry of Connecticut that they could no longer remain out of visible communion with an Episcopal Church: that some of themdoubted of the validity, while others were persuaded of the invalidity, ofPresbyterian ordinations. Three of them were subsequently persuaded to remain in the Congregational ministry, the rest becoming Episcopalians, and three of them, Messrs. Cutler, Johnson, and Brown, wereordained to the ministry of theAnglican Church.
During the period of the Revolution theChurch of England in America suffered greatly in the estimation of Americans by its strong attachment to the cause of the British Crown. But there were not wanting bothclergymen andlaymen most eminent in their loyalty to the cause of the colonies and in the patrioticsacrifices which they made to the cause of independence. Among theclergy two such men were Mr. White, an assistant of Christ Church, Philadelphia, and Mr. Provost, assistant of Trinity Church, New York. The rectors of these churches being Tories, these gentlemen subsequently succeeded them in the pastorate of their respectiveparishes.
At the close of thewar, Episcopalians, as they were already commonly called, realized that, if they were to play any part in the national life, their church must have a national organization. the greatest obstacle to this organization was the obtaining ofbishops to carry on a nationalhierarchy. In Connecticut, where those who had gone into the Episcopal Church had not only read themselves into abelief in the necessity of Episcopacy, but had also adopted many other tenets of the Caroline divines, abishop was considered of absolute necessity, and, accordingly, theclergy of that state elected the Rev. Samuel Seabury and requested him to go abroad and obtain the episcopal character.
It was found impossible to obtain the episcopate inEngland, owing to the fact that thebishops there could not by lawconsecrate any man who would not take theoath of allegiance, and, although during the War of the Revolution, Seabury had been widely known for his Tory sympathies, it would have been impossible for him to return to America if he had receivedconsecration as a British subject. Upon the refusal of theEnglishbishops to confer the episcopate, he proceeded toScotland, where, after prolonged negotiations, the Nonjuringbishops consented to confer the episcopal character upon him.
Thesebishops were the remnant of the Episcopal Church which the Stuarts had so ardently desired to set up inScotland and which had lost the protection of the State, together with all its endowments, by its fidelity to James II. Their religious principles were looked upon by ScottishPresbyterians as scarcely less obnoxious than those ofCatholics and politically they were considered quite as dangerous. They were indeed exceedingly High Churchmen, and had made such alterations in the liturgy as brought theirdoctrine of theHoly Eucharist very near to that of theCatholicChurch. They had even been known to usechrism inconfirmation, and they were strong believers in thesacerdotal character of theChristianministry and in the necessity ofApostolic succession and episcopalordination. Dr. Seabury wasconsecrated by them in 1784, and, being of very similartheological opinions himself, he signed a concordat immediately after hisconsecration, where by he agreed to do his utmost to introduce theliturgical anddoctrinal peculiarities of theNonjurors intoConnecticut. Upon his return to his own state he proceeded to organize and govern hisdiocese very much as aCatholicbishop would do; he excluded thelaity from all deliberations andecclesiastical councils and, as much as he could, from all control ofecclesiastical affairs.
But if sacerdotalism was triumphant inConnecticut, a very different view was taken in New York,Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Dr. White, nowrector of Christ Church, and a doctor of divinity, believed that if the Episcopal Church was ever to live and grow in America it must assent to, and adopt as far as possible, the principle of representative government. He would have been willing to go on without the episcopate until such time as it could have been obtained fromEngland, and in the meantime to ordain candidates to the ministry by means ofPresbyterianordination, with the proviso, however, that upon the obtaining of abishop these gentlemen were to be conditionally re-ordained. This last suggestion, however, found little favour among Episcopalians, and at last, after considerable difficulty, an Act was passed in Parliament whereby theEnglishbishops were empowered to confer the episcopate upon men who were not subject to the British Crown. Accordingly, Dr. White, being electedBishop ofPennsylvania, and Dr. Provost,Bishop of New York, proceeded toEngland and receivedconsecration at the hands of the thenArchbishop ofCanterbury, Dr. Moore, onSeptuagesima Sunday, 1787;
Upon their return to America, although there were now threebishops in theUnited States there were so many differences between the Connecticutchurchmen and those of the Middle and Southern states, especially with regard to the presence oflaymen inecclesiastical councils, that it was not until 1789 that a union was effected. Even after thatdate, when Dr. Madison was elected by Virginia to be itsbishop, he proceeded toEngland for hisconsecration because Bishop Provost, of New York, refused to act in conjunction with theBishop ofConnecticut. The union, however, was finally cemented in 1792, when Dr. Claggert being electedBishop ofMaryland, and there being threebishops in the country of theAnglican line exclusive of Dr. Seabury, theBishop of New York withdrew his objections as far as to allow Dr. Seabury to make a fourth. If Dr. Seabury had not been invited to take part in theconsecration of Dr. Claggert, aschism between Connecticut and the rest of the country would have been the immediate result.
Almost from the very beginning of its independent life, the tendencies which have shown themselves in the three parties in the Episcopal Church of the present day were not only evident, but were even embodied in the members of the Episcopate.
Bishop Provost, of New York, represented the rationalistic temper of the eighteenth century, which has eventuated in what is called theBroad Church Party.
Bishop White represented theEvangelical Party, with itsbelief in the desirability rather than the necessity ofApostolic succession and its desire to fraternize as nearly as possible with the other progeny of theReformation.
Bishop Seabury, on the other hand, represented the traditionalHigh Church position,intellectual rather than emotional, and laying more stress upon the outwardecclesiastical organization of theChurch than upon emotional religion.
Thisschool has played a very important part in the history of the Protestant Episcopal Church in theUnited States; and, while it was undoubtedly influenced to a large extent by theOxford Movement, it was existent and energetic long before 1833. Indeed, in the twenties Bishop Hobart was already presenting that type of evangelicalpiety, united with high sacramentalideas, which has been the principal characteristic of the party ever since.
TheOxford Movement, however, was not without its influence, and as early as 1843 the disputes between the extreme High Churchmen and the rest of the Episcopal Church had reached a condition of such acerbity that when the Rev. Arthur Cary, in his examination for orders, avowed the principles of "Tract 90" — and in spite of that fact was not refusedordination — the controversy broke out into an openwar. TheBishop of Philadelphia, Dr. Onderdonk, was suspended from his office on a charge of drunkenness, the real reason being his sympathy with High Churchmen; and his dispossession was sounjust that it was declared by the famous legal authority, Horace Binney, to be absolutely illegal. He was not, however, restored to the exercise of his functions for more than ten years. His brotherbishop of New York fared even worse. Charges of immorality were preferred against him, and he was suspended from his office for the rest of his life, despite the fact that the vast majority of his fellow-citizens, whether they belonged to his communion or not, firmly believed in his innocence. An attempt, however, to suspend a thirdbishop of High Church views, the father of the late Monsignor Doane, failed after he had been presented four times. Bishop Doane, not only by his unrivalled diplomatic skill, but by thegoodness and probity of his life, made anecclesiastical trial impossible.
In 1852 theBishop ofNorth Carolina, Dr. Ives, resigned his position in the Episcopal Church and submitted to theApostolic See, and he was followed into theCatholicChurch by a considerable number, both ofclergymen andlaymen. His secession drew out of the Episcopal Church all those of distinctly Roman sympathies, but the High Church Party lived on, grown, and in some degrees prospering, in spite of hostile legislation, while in course oftime a pro-Roman party sprang up again. After the passing of the open-pulpit canon in the General Convention of 1907, some twentyclergymen and a large number of thelaity submitted to theCatholicChurch.
On the other hand, the extreme Evangelical Party, disturbed by the growth of ritualism, and unable to drive out High Churchmen in any large numbers, themselves seceded from the Protestant Episcopal Church in 1873, and formed what is known as the Reformed Episcopal Church. Unlike many of theProtestant bodies, the Episcopal Church was not permanently disrupted by the Civil War, for with the collapse of the Confederacy the separate organization of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Confederate States ceased.
The Broad Church party, however, have remained in the Protestant Episcopal Church, and of late years have seriously affected its attitude towards such subjects ashigher criticism and the necessity of episcopalordination. The most outspoken advocates of thisschool, who in their conclusions differed little or not at all from the extrememodernists, have not been able seriously to alter the teaching of the Episcopal Church upon such fundamentaltruths as theTrinity andIncarnation; and in a few cases the High Church Party and the Evangelical, by combining, have been strong enough to exclude them from the Episcopal Church. The party, however, is gaining strength; itsclergymen are men ofintellect and vigour, and thelaity who support the party are in the main people of large means. To it the future ofAnglicanism belongs more than to any other school of thought within theAnglican body.
In 1907, the Protestant Episcopal Church of theUnited States of America possessed a hierarch of 5413clergy, 438 candidates for orders, and 946,252 communicants. These communicants should be multiplied at least three times in order to give anidea of the adherents of the Protestant Episcopal Church. It possessed nine colleges anduniversities and fifteentheologicalseminaries.
TIFFANY,Hist. of the Prot. Episc. Church in the U.S. of America, inAmerican Church History Series, VII (New York, 1907); McCONNEL,Hist. of the Am. Ep. Church from the Planting of the Colonies to the End of the Civil War (New York, 1890); WHITE,Memoirs of the Prot. Ep. Church in the U.S. (New York, 1880); COLEMAN.The Church in America (New York, 1895).
APA citation.Fay, S.(1911).Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12493a.htm
MLA citation.Fay, Sigourney."Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 12.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1911.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12493a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Bryan R. Johnson.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. June 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor.Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.