1

BISHOP SKINNER TO THE REV. JONATHAN BOUCHER.

Aberdeen, 24th June, 1785.

"Our amiable friend, the Bishop of Connecticut, will have many difficul ties to struggle with in the blessed work he has undertaken; and particularly from certain occurrences in some of the Southern States, which will, I fear, create no small opposition to the conscientious discharge of his duty. The busy bustling President of Washington College, Maryland, seems to be laying a foundation for much confusion throughout the Churches of North America, and it will require all Bishop Seabury's prudence and good management to counteract his preposterous measures. I saw a letter from this man lately to a Clergyman in this country, wherein he proposes to be in London as last month, and wishes to know what the Bishops in Scotland would do, on an application to them from any foreign country, such as America is now declared to be, for a succession in their ministry, by the consecration of one or more Bishops for them! By this time, I suppose, he knows both what we would do and what we have done: and perhaps is not ignorant, that, as our terms would not please him, so his measures would be equally displeasing to us."(1)

REV. JONATHAN BOUCHER TO BISHOP SKINNER.

"No doubt you have long ago heard of good Bishop Seabury's arrival, and most affectionate reception among the poor scattered sheep of yonder wilderness. He carries himself with such a steady prudence, as to have commanded the respect of even the most spiteful ill-willers of his order; and, with all the countless difficulties he has to encounter, yet, by the blessing of God on his firm mind, there is, I trust, little doubt that the church will grow under his pastoral care. I have as yet heard only of his having ordained five presbyters, one or more of whom are from the Southern States, which I mention, as considering it an acknowledgment of his powers, even beyond the limits of his preferred district.

A general convention of the Episcopal Clergy of all North America, made up of an equal proportion of lay members, was to meet in Philadelphia about Michaelmas, to form some general plan for the whole Episcopal Church. Dr. Seabury, I have understood, though not from himself, was invited and pressed to attend this meeting, but he very prudently declined it, as, from its motley composition, he could not be sure of things being conducted as they ought. He will be there, however, or has been there, (and Dr. Chandler also,) with his advice and influence; and this is the only reason I have to form any hopes of any good coming from the meeting.

"I hear of some very alarming symptoms attending the poor church in the Southern States. The few Episcopal Clergymen left there are not, as you may imagine, men the most distinguished for abilities or work! The enemies of the Church see this, and avail themselves of it. I have sundry late letters from thence, which all speak far too confidently, of some wild purpose of forming a coalition (too like some other coalitions) between the Episcopalians and Presbyterians. I have, by every means in my power, put those, over whom I have any influence, in my old neighbourhood of Virginia and Maryland, on their guard against a measure

(1) Skinner's Annals of Scottish Episcopacy, page 50.

which I cannot but deem insidious, and therefore likely to be fatal. And I have also called in the aid of those stout champions, Drs. Chandler and Seabury. God grant that our united efforts may all avail! It adds not a little to my apprehensions, that all these things are carrying on within the vortex of Dr. S-th's immediate influence, who is bent on being a Bishop, per fas aut nefas,' and who, if he cannot otherwise compass his end, will assuredly unite with the Pns; and so Herod and Pontius Pilate shall again be made friends!

"You may not perhaps have heard, as I have, that he affected to be much pleased with Dr. Seabury's having returned to America, invested with the Episcopal character, all which will be abundantly explained to you when I further inform you of his having found out that one Bishop alone may, in certain cases, consecrate another. The English of this is plain, and may account for your not having seen him in Scotland! The case is a ticklish one, and will require poor Seabury's utmost skill to manage. He knows Sth well, and, of course, thinks of him as we all do. Yet if Sth is thus properly consecrated, such is his influenee, it may be the means of preventing the sad state of things in Virginia and Maryland which I hinted at above. Yet it is dreadful to think of having such a man in such a station. Daily expect further and fuller accounts, and, on your signifying that it will not be disagreeable to you, I shall have much pleasure in communicating them."(1)

BISHOP SKINNER TO MR. BOUCHER.

Aberdeen, Jan. 4, 1786.

"The accounts of good Bishop Seabury's favourable reception in America, you may believe were highly agreeable to me, and my brethren of the Episcopal Church in this country; and though as yet we have not had these accounts confirmed under his own hand, we have no doubt but that a little time will bring us these refreshing tidings, and open up a happy correspondence between the pastors of the truly little flock' here, and those of the many scattered sheep of yonder wilderness.' I observ ed in the newspapers the other day a paragraph, as quoted from the Ma ryland Journal, which gives no more, I hope, than a true account of our worthy friend's proceedings, and the honourable reception he has met with. The description you gave of the alarming symptoms appearing in the Southern States, is indeed very affecting, and shews such a miserable deficiency in point of knowledge, as well as zeal, among the Episcopal Clergy in those parts, as could hardly have been suspected among any who had received regular Episcopal Ordination. It gives me some comfort to hear that such able advocates for primitive truth and order as Dr. Chandler and yourself, are stepping forth in opposition to the wild undigested schemes of modern sectaries. God, of his mercy, grant success to your endeavours in so good a cause, and raise up many such to strengthen the hands of his faithful servant, the Bishop of Connecticut, while he stands single in the great work he has undertaken. But is there no prospect of his getting some fellow-workers of his own order, to assist him in stemming that torrent of irregularity which seems to be pouring down upon him from the Southern States? What you mention of my countryman, Dr. S-th.

(1) Skinner's Annals of Scottish Episcopacy, pp. 52–54.

is too much of a piece with his former conduct, and plainly shews what some people will do to compass the end they have in view.

"As to what the doctor has found out in favour of a SINGULAR consecration, I know nothing that can justify such a measure but absolute necessity, which in his case cannot be pleaded, because, in whatever way the Scottish Bishops might treat an application on his behalf, there is no reason to doubt of their readily concurring in every proper plan for increasing the number of Bishops in America. And as Dr. Seabury must be sufficiently sensible of their good inclinations that way, I hope he will be the better able to resist the introduction of any disorderly measure which might be made a precedent for future irregularities, and be attended with the worst of consequences to the cause of Episcopacy. If S-th must be promoted to the Episcopate at all hazards, let him at least wait until there be a canonical number of Bishops in America for that purpose. That thus, whatever opposition may be made to the man, there may be none to the manner of his promotion."(1)

Passing from this recital of the measures resulting from the failure of the first application to England for the Episcopate, we must go back a little to detail in chronological order the successful efforts of the Churches at the South for the same boon.

Letters from the Rev. Dr. Charles Inglis, subsequently the first Bishop of Nova Scotia, to the Rev. Mr. White, written in May and June of the year 1783, seem to have been designed at the time to secure the co-operation of the Clergy at the Southward in the application for consecration made in behalf of Dr. Seabury. But the publication of the celebrated pamphlet already so often referred to, "The Case of the Episcopal Churches in the United States Considered," had rendered the more conservative Clergy of the North suspicious of its Author, and unwilling to communicate to him in full the details of their plan for the preservation of the Church. This jealous reserve appears plainly in the following letter, in which Dr. Inglis, who was debarred by political causes from visiting Philadelphia, invited Mr. White to an interview in New York.

New York, May 21, 1783.

For some Time past I have very much wished to see you, and have some Conversation on the common Interests of our Church, with which Politicks have nothing to do. In the late Troubles, I firmly believe

(1) Skinner's Annals, pp. 55-57.

that you, like myself, took that part which Conscience and Judgment pointed out; and although we differed in Sentiments, yet this did not in the least diminish my Regard for you, nor the good Opinion I had always of your Temper, Disposition and Religious Principles. I ever shall esteem a man who acts from Principle, and in the Integrity of his Heart, though his Judgment of Things may not exactly coincide with mine.

In one Point I am certain We agree, that is, in the Desire of preserving our Church and promoting the Interests of Religion. This Point, I am persuaded, might be served, could we confer together. The State of Things is such that I cannot go to Philadelphia, or else I would go with pleasure; but you can come here-there is no impediment in the Way but a Pass to come within the Lines, which I shall immediately procure when you arrive at Elizabeth-Town. Think on this Matter, and let me hear from you."

The death of a child prevented the acceptance on the part of the Rev. Mr. White, of this invitation; and immediately upon the receipt of his letter, containing this information, Dr. Inglis, after exchanging words of sympathy, addressed the following communication in reply.

"I thank you for the Pamphlet which accompanied the Letter. I had seen it before, and on being told that you were the Author, concluded that you wrote it under the Impression that the Case of our Church was hopeless, and no other method left of preserving it from utterly perishing. From some Hints in your Letter, I perceive that my conclusion was right. It must be confessed that your apprehensions at that Time were not wholly without Foundation; nor is any thing more natural than when we are anxious about any Object of Moment, to cast about for some expedient to accomplish it, and to catch at whatever appears practicable, when the most eligible method is thought to be out of our Power. In making this Observation, I only give a Transcript of what has passed in my own Mind on this very subject: and therefore I cannot but applaud your Zeal in a Matter of such general and great Moment, at the same Time I tell you candidly my Opinion, with which I believe you will agree, that the supposed Necessity, on which your Scheme is founded, does not now really exist; and that the Scheme itself could not answer the End of a regular Episcopate. In short, my good Brother, you proposed—not what you thought absolutely best and most eligible, but what the supposed Necessity of the Times compelled you to adopt, and when no better Expedient appeared to be within your Reach. In this Light the Pamphlet struck me the moment I heard it was yours; and your Letter confirms me in the Judgment I had formed.

"That the Necessity, there supposed, does not now exist, is demonstratively clear; because the way to England is open, from whence an Episcopate can be obtained; to say nothing of other Episcopal Churches, from which the Relief might probably be procured for our Church. That the Scheme itself would not answer the end of an Episcopate, is no less clear; for if adopted and adhered to, our Church would cease to be an Episcopal Church! It is impossible that there can be an Episcopal Church without Episcopal Ordination; and the Ordination here proposed is not Episcopal, that is, by a Bishop, but by Presbyters. But it is needless to

enlarge on the point, as you very ingenuously own-that 'you are not wedded to the particular plan proposed;' and your good sense has prudently directed you-' to delay rather than forward measures to accom plish the Object in Contemplation, with Hopes of its being undertaken with better Information.'

"You desire to know my Sentiments as to 'the Measures to be pursued for the continuance of our Church.' One principal Reason why I wished for an Interview, was, that we might confer together on the Subject. We might receive mutual Information by an Interview, which cannot so well be obtained by Letter. Indeed there are many particulars of great Moment in such a Business that cannot conveniently be committed to writ ing; for although whatever you say to me would be perfectly safe and kept secret, as I believe what I say to you would also be, on your Part, yet there are a thousand little incidental Circumstances that are necessary to be known, in order to form a right Judgment, which do not occur, perhaps when we write, or would require much time to set down.

"My clear, decided Opinion in general, is, that some Clergyman of Character and Abilities should go from hence to England to be Consecrated and admitted to the sacred office of a Bishop, by the English Bishops, and then to return and reside in America. The next consideration to a good moral Character, sound principles, abilities and learning in this Clergyman is, that he should be held in esteem by the leading Men in Power in this Country, as it would reconcile them the better to the Measure. If such a Clergyman will undertake to go on this Design, he shall have all the Assistance and Support that I can possibly give him. But whether Matters are yet ripe for such a Step, or how far you and others may think them so, is what I am unable to determine. Were it necessary, I could adduce unanswerable arguments to evince this to be the most eligible Scheme; though I verily believe there needs no Arguments to convince you of it. What I wish you to do, is to keep your Eye upon it, and prepare Matters, as your Judgment and Prudence shall direct, for its Execution, when think the Time for it is come."(1)

you

These letters very properly introduce the correspondence of the Rev. Dr. Alexander Murray and the Rev. Jacob Duché, two of the loyalist Clergymen then resident in London, and whose kind offices in the accomplishment of the end desired are deserving of honourable mention and grateful remembrance.

REV. DR. ALEX. MURRAY TO THE REV. MR. WHITE. London, 26th July, 1783.

Dear Sir.

In the course of arranging your affairs of State, I trust you will not neglect those of the Church: there can be nothing in Episcopacy inimical to civil liberty in the United States, any more than in Switzerland, where Presbytery and Popery are established. The grievance of having had no Resident Bishops in America can now be easily and regularly remedied; it depends not now so much on the will of this as of that country. You will no doubt have an Ambassa

(1) From the Bishop White MSS.