Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH.

BY THE REV. R. C. SHIMEALL,

RECTOR OF ST. JUDE'S EPISCOPALIAN FREE CHURCH, N. Y.

NUMERICALLY, the Episcopalians of this country, prior to the revolution, may be fitly compared to "an handful of corn in the earth. upon the top of the mountains." They were principally confined to the older colonial settlements of Maryland and Virginia, and in those of the south. To the north and east of Maryland, at the commencement of the revolution, the church had in her employment only about eighty parochial clergymen; all of whom, except those "resident in the towns of Boston and Newport, and the cities of New York and Philadelphia," derived their support from the society in England, instituted for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts. In the entire province of Pennsylvania, the missionaries of this society never exceeded six in number.

Under the reign of James I., what the Puritans, through the instigation of Archbishop Bancroft failed to accomplish, in their attempt to migrate to the New World, they finally effected by obtaining a charter from the crown of England. The first emigrants consisted of a company of the Brownists, who, having retired to Holland, under the pastoral care of Mr. Robinson, resolved, A. D. 1620, to transport and nourish their religious sentiments in America. They settled at Plymouth.

The rigour and cruelty exercised by Bancroft and the high commissioners toward the separatists, has, not without reason, been considered by historians, as conducive to the troubles which ensued in the following reign, under Charles I. Laud, if he possessed not the ambition and the cruelty, yet he certainly inherited the spirit, and adopted the policy, of the above named zealous but misguided prelate. As an illustration of this fact, our limits will only allow us to record that, during the period of his administration of twelve years, no less than four thousand Puritans, whose principal object was-liberty to serve God in the way their consciences approved-migrated from

their native country, and, with those who had preceded them, from Holland, laid the foundation of a new nation in North America. Their places of settlement were, Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, and New Haven. Their chief leaders were non-conformist or Puritan ministers, who, "being hunted from one diocese to another, at last chose this wilderness for their retreat." Mr. Neale, their historian, speaks of a list of seventy-seven divines, "who became pastors of sundry little churches and congregations in America, before the year 1640, all of whom were in orders in the Church of England, men of strict sobriety and virtue; plain, serious, affectionate preachers, exactly conformable in sentiment to the doctrinal articles of the Church of England."

It is superfluous to add that, in the settlement of their ecclesiastical state in this western hemisphere, they adopted the Congregational form of ministry and government. And, as a consequence, and under the promptings of such fears, as the recollection of the past very naturally awakened, they looked with a jealous eye on the movements of that religious body, holding views in common with the Episcopal establishment of their "mother land." Of an "existing jealousy in the colonies, of the parent power," there can be no doubt. It formed the germ of the revolution. Hence their apprehension that the Episcopal Church might, at some future day, be an engine aiding in the introduction of a new system of colonial government.

It is also proper to remark, in this place, that other parts of Europe also contributed to the tide of emigration which was now populating the New World, of which, however, the German States were the principal. In 1623, a colony of the Dutch settled in this state, (New York,) then called "New Netherlands," and selected the southern extremity of Manhattan Island as their principal mart, to which they gave the name of New Amsterdam, now known as the city of New York. These, though "busily engaged in the pursuit of worldly gain, were by no means regardless of religion." Their first church was organized in this city (New York), A. D., 1639. Being planned under the immediate patronage of the Dutch West India Company, they very naturally solicited the aid of that body in procuring ministers for their churches. The ministers they supplied were ordained and sent forth by the Classis of Amsterdam, (Presbyterian,) with the approbation of the Synod of North Holland, to which that classis belongs. Through the medium of the same classis, the German Reformed Churches of Pennsylvania also procured their ministry from Germany; to which ecclesiastical body, both, accordingly, for the time being, were dependant and subordinate.

From 1639 to 1664, the period during which the colony was under the government of the West India Company, the Dutch Church in the New Netherlands was the established church. But in 1664, the colony surrendered to the forces of the British army, and came under the government of the Duke of York. To the Dutch inhabitants, however, though they lost their church establishment, yet at the time of the surrender, and afterwards in the treaty of peace, concluded in 1676, it was expressly stipulated, that the "rights of conscience with regard to worship and discipline," should be secured to them.

At the last mentioned period, the Dutch constituted the mass of the population in the state. In the colony, there were but few Episcopalians. These chiefly resided in the city of New York, and in the country immediately adjacent. They consisted, for the most part, of the officers of government and their dependants, and a portion of the military force. Indeed, the same was true of them elsewhere. Even in Maryland and Virginia, subsequently to the period of which we now speak, in all the more newly settled counties, the people for the most part were of other communions. Moreover, the Dutch were as well pre-eminent in wealth, as predominant in numbers, and embraced within the pale of their church, some of the most distinguished men in the colony, among whom was Governor Stuyvesant-a name as illustrious in our history, as it is rendered familiar to our ear, by those of his distinguished descendants of our city who still bear it.

Such was the situation of the Dutch Church, from 1664 to 1693. During the interval from 1639 to the year last mentioned, a number of churches were organized, besides those in New Amsterdam, Flatbush, New Utrecht, Flatlands, Esopus, and Albany; the ministers of the oldest and most conspicuous of which, viz. New Amsterdam, Esopus, and Albany, claimed and enjoyed a kind of episcopal dignity, having all the churches round them under their care, especially those which were not furnished with pastors; a prerogative exercised by them, not, as we may suppose, out of any leaning towards Diocesan Episcopacy, but that, under the circumstances, such supervision was deemed by them, not only expedient, but necessary.

Thus much, in reference to the church affairs of the emigrant Hollanders, is deemed essential to a proper understanding of the position of the Episcopal Church in this early period of the colony. The year 1693 marks the first step of her advance to ecclesiastical distinction. Under the auspices of "Colonel Benjamin Fletcher, who had been appointed governor the year before, a man of great ardour and boldness, and warmly attached to the Episcopal Church," a foundation was laid for a church establishment in her favour, which had been

lost to the Dutch since the surrender of the colony in 1664. To this measure the House of Assembly was at first decidedly hostile; and nought but the untiring vigilance of the governor secured the passage of an act in its favour. In Maryland and Virginia also, where, as we have said, the Episcopal Church was much more numerous, it had legal establishments for its support.

The advantages thence arising to the Episcopal Church, however, were not so great as might be supposed. Separated from the mother church by the Atlantic, with an unavoidably inefficient episcopal supervision; the difficulties of obtaining regular and proper supplies of ministers for the churches; the consequent absence of wholesome discipline, and the constant jealousies of the proprietary government, particularly that of Maryland, of an encroachment of its ecclesiastical prerogatives by the Bishop of London; all tended in no small degree to cripple her otherwise inherent energies. In a word, she was virtually without an episcopal head, as the source of a regular supply of all the orders of the ministry, as recognised by her ecclesiastical system. That system, as is well known, involves the principle, that a succession from the apostles in the order of bishops, as an order distinct from, and superior to, presbyters, is a requisite without which a valid Christian ministry cannot be preserved.

At this stage of our advance, it becomes necessary to advert to the existence of another religious body, a knowledge of the circumstances of whose early origin and career in the colonies, as claiming an affinity, at least, to the order of ministry and polity of the Episcopal Church, is requisite to a proper view of the position of that church at the period to which we have just alluded. This body was the society of Methodists. Originating first in England, the seeds of Methodism were transplanted to the American colonies by their joint founders, the two Wesleys, John and Charles, who came to this 1 country in the capacity of missionaries, in company with Gen. Oglethorpe, and arrived in Georgia, A. D. 1736. John took the charge of Savannah, and Charles of Frederica. Within a year and a half, however, they returned to England.

These clergymen were both regularly ordained presbyters of the English Episcopal Church. In the exercise of their functions, however, whether at home or abroad, their ministrations were adapted to what they considered a state of general declension of the life and power of religion in the established church. Their course, conse

The Bishop of London was considered as the diocesan of the Episcopal Churches in America.

1

quently, was marked by peculiarities which were deemed inconsistent with long established usages; and after their return, as above related, they were no longer permitted to preach in the churches." They then had recourse to private houses, and adopted the system of field preaching. In the American colonies, their followers adopted a similar course. Multitudes in both countries attended upon their ministrations, and of those who officiated by the sufferance of the elder of the two brothers, the Rev. John Wesley, the reputed founder of the society.

The Rev. Charles Wesley, speaking of these times in a letter to the Rev. Dr. Chandler, bearing date April 28, 1785, says of himself and his brother, that "Their only design was to do all the good they could, as ministers of the Church of England, to which they were firmly attached, both by education and principle." Again speaking of himself, he says "I never lost my dread of a separation, or ceased to guard our society against it." To which he adds: "I frequently told them, I am your servant as long as you remain members of the Church of England, but no longer. Should you ever forsake her, you renounce me.'" And, if we may judge from his nine notable “reasons for not separating from the church," as occasioned by the discovery of an early indication on the part of some of his lay-preachers to do so, the Rev. John Wesley was, during the most of his long, arduous, and eventful life, less opposed to such an event than his brother Charles. We regret that our limits will not allow us to transcribe them. We have only space for the following quotations, with which they are closed. Mr. Wesley says-"We look upon ourselves, not as the authors or ringleaders of a particular sect or party." "This would exceedingly obstruct the grand design for which we conceive God has raised them (the Methodists,) up." "We look upon the clergy, (i. e. of the English Church,) not only as part of our brethren, but as that part whom God, by his adorable providence, has called to be watchmen over the rest, for whom, therefore, they are to give a strict account." He also urges as a "prudential rule," that neither preachers nor people frequent any dissenting meeting, which, he says, "is actually separating from the church." And, he adds-"If it be said, But at the church we are fed with chaff; whereas, at the meeting we have wholesome food:' we answer-1st. The prayers of the church are not chaff; they are substantial food for any who are alive to God. 2d. The Lord's Supper is not chaff; but pure and wholesome for all who receive it with upright hearts. Yea,-3d. In almost all the sermons, we hear there, we hear many great and important truths. And whoever

[ocr errors]
« PredošláPokračovať »