ART. V.-BISHOP PROVOOST AND BISHOP SEABURY.

AN HISTORICAL FRAGMENT.

THE animosity cherished by the first Bishop of New York towards his Episcopal brother of Connecticut, had a marked effect upon the fortunes of the American Church. Springing from political differences, the influence of which, though we fail at this day fully to appreciate their strength, must then have been very great, this unkindness of feeling and wanton disregard of courtesy on the part of Bishop Provoost, tended for a time to an open rupture and schism in the feeble Church then struggling for existence. To trace briefly, and, in the main, from hitherto unpublished documents, the growth and decline of this untoward disagreement; to bring to light from private correspondence the hidden springs of action, and lay bare the secret machinations of one who used his high position in the Church of God, for party purposes and the gratification of personal spleen and caprice; and to place in strong contrast with this excuseless course the noble forbearance and exemplary endurance of Seabury, first of American Bishops and one of the best of men, is our task. Save in the last feature, it is far from being a pleasant one; but it is the duty of the annalist and historian to lay bare the follies and even the sins of a forgotten age, the better to warn and advise the men of his own and succeeding times.

When, in a little gathering of the half a score of Connecticut Clergymen remnant of a band of worthy confessors, and martyrs too, for loyalty to Church and State,-choice was made of the faithful Seabury for their Bishop, and instructions given him to seek for Consecration either in England or Scotland, as the case might be, Provoost, an ardent Whig, was at his country-seat on the Hudson, sharing none of the discomforts of his loyalist brethren, and, in fact, exercising none of the functions of his ministry. He had left New York and his post at Old Trinity, in consequence of a disagreement with Clergy and people on the absorbing subject of politics. But,

while we find no fault with his patriotism, in which he was doubtless conscientious, as were those too, who were firm to their oaths of allegiance and the vows of their ordination, we must condemn his disregard of his ministerial functions, and his seeming indifference to the fate of the Church of his choice. Other patriot clergymen found plenty to do in the field or in the camp; but the accomplished and erudite assistant-minister of Trinity preferred inglorious ease at his place on the Hudson, and the careful watchfulness, not indeed over souls, but of his goods and grounds at East Camp.

Fourteen years of retirement from the exercise of his ministry, hardly fitted Provoost for the Episcopate; but the reputation of "proscription" for his country proved an incontrovertible argument in his favor, and amidst the rejoicings over the evacuation, and the welcomings of peace, the Whig Episcopalians of New York fixed upon the patriot minister in Dutchess County as Rector of Trinity, and first Bishop of New York.

In the meantime the pains-taking Seabury, repulsed in England, had sought and secured from the remnant of the Church in Scotland, the Consecration to the Episcopate he had been sent to obtain. Passing through difficulties unnumbered, hazarding the loss of the missionary stipend which had long been his laboriously-earned support, and all on account of this alliance with the persecuted Church at the North, the newly made Bishop, after a brief sojourn in London, sailed for his Diocese in the United States. He was received with open arms. The interesting correspondence of the excellent Parker, second Bishop of Massachusetts, still preserved, and well worthy of publication, from its many contributions to our Ecclesiastical history, is full, at this period, of expressions of the deep interest and solicitude felt all over New England, and even in New York and at the South, in the success and safe return of the indefatigable Seabury. And so, when the Clergy of Connecticut met at Middletown in glad Convocation to meet their newly arrived Bishop, there were representatives of other sections of the Church present; and not only the little band of Connecticut Churchmen, but the scattered Episcopalians throughout New England and

New York, seemed full of rejoicing at the completion of the Succession in the American Church.

Amid these jubilant expressions of feeling, one discordant voice was heard. Mr. Granville Sharp, of London, renowned for his philanthropic labors in defence of the rights of enslaved Africans, and a pioneer in that noble work subsequently carried on to distinguished success by Clarkson, Wilberforce, and Buxton, had, in common with other English Churchmen, ardently desired the introduction of the Episcopate into America, in the English Succession. In one of his numerous publications, he had, even during the progress of the war, endeavored to call the attention of the American public to this measure, and immediately upon the cessation of hostilities, he recommenced his exertions to that end, with most commendable zeal. In one point only did his zeal outrun his knowledge. Inheriting certain traditional family antipathies, and possessing also documents belonging to his ancestor, an Archbishop of York, throwing doubt upon the regularity and consequent validity of the Scottish Consecrations, he entered into correspondence with individuals in the Northern States of America, with the avowed intention of preventing, if possible, the general recognition of the Scottish line. Thus he hoped to make a more evident necessity for the introduction of the Episcopate, through consecrations in the English Succession. Among the correspondents of this excellent, but somewhat erratic man, were President Manning, a Baptist Minister, and head of the College of that Denomination in Providence, and the Rev. Mr. Provoost, in New York. It was the old scene at Jerusalem re-enacted. Herod and Pilate,—the determined Dissenter and the jealous Churchman, were made friends, in their common antipathy to one both innocent and unsuspecting. The activity of the Baptist President received the especial thanks of Mr. Sharp, and his published Memoirs give abundant proof of the pains taken by Provoost, as well, to accomplish this malicious end.

Well may honest Fitch Oliver, then a student for Holy Orders, at Providence, and soon after one of the first applicants to Bishop Seabury for Ordination, give vent to his righteous indignation, in a letter to the Rev. Mr. Parker, of Boston, as follows:

"I have lately seen a letter from Granville Sharp, Esq., (London), on the subject of Dr. Seabury's being nominated by the Scottish Nonjuring Bishops, which I shall endeavour to show you when I see you in Boston, if I can obtain permission. 'Tis addressed to President Manning. Has Mr. Sharp no correspondence with any Clergyman of the Episcopal Church in this Country, that he writes on a subject of that Nature to a Baptist Minister? He seems to be dubious as to the Validity of Consecration obtained thro' that Channel, but if the Succession has been preserved, I cannot perceive why it should not be sufficient."*

God maketh the wrath of man to praise Him. The success of Seabury, his welcome by the Churchmen of the North, the indifference manifested by the civil authorities of Connecticut to his assumption of the Episcopal name and authority, and the failure of the presence of a Bishop among them to arouse the jealousy of the predominant Sects, served as opening wedges for securing success, at a later day, in the English line. It may be doubted whether it would ever have been sought, but for the encouragement thus afforded, by the persevering determination of the first Bishop of Connecticut. White, the most prominent of the Pennsylvania Clergy, had, at an earlier date, written a pamphlet, looking, at least, to an establishment of the Church, de novo, in the event of certain supposable necessity. Smith, the Bishop-elect of Maryland,the sad history of whose unsuccessful attempt to obtain consecration, is a dark page in the unpublished annals of the Church, was himself casting about for receiving the Episcopate from the Schismatics in Scotland who refused Canonical obedience to the Church in regular line. In Virginia, so great was the laxity of morals and latitudinarianism in belief, on the part of the Clergy, that they first despoiled the Episcopal Office of all its prerogatives of discipline, and then, even after going through the form of an election of a Bishop, placed every obstacle in their power in the way, to hinder the man of their choice from success. In South Carolina, so great was the indifference to the fate of the Church, that the Clergy only entered the Confederation at Philadelphia, on the stipulation, that no Bishop should be sent to them; while, in North Carolina and Georgia, unpublished letters represent the feeling of the remnant of Clergy and people to have been the same. Even in New

*Reprint of the Journals of General Conventions, Vol. I, page 642.

York, with the exception of the vindictive Provoost, the main body of the Clergy were united with their brethren of New England, in their recognition of the authority of Seabury; the more so, as he had been at the first elected in that city, and that too, with the approbation and concurrence of themselves.

It is, then, not too much to assert, after a careful examination of both the published and manuscript authorities of the time, from patient searchings of contemporary letters, filled with expressions of hesitancy, doubt, and even excuseless indifference, and from the recorded action of Conventions in Resolutions, preambles, and Canons, that, but for the success of the good Bishop of Connecticut, in securing Consecration from the Church in Scotland, no application to the English Archbishops and Bishops would have been made, at least, till, from the want of Episcopal authority in guiding and restraining its Councils, the American Church had lapsed into Presbyterianism, or fallen into the sadder disgrace of a departure from the Catholic Faith. God be thanked for Samuel Seabury, the corner-stone of the American Episcopate!

The else inexplicable strangeness of his course at the time, confirmed by his whole subsequent career, gives us reason to believe that it was mainly from feelings of personal pique against his old Tory rival that Mr. Provoost gave his countenance to the plans of the Whig Episcopalians of New York, for securing him the Bishopric from the Mother Church of England. This was now comparatively easy. The question was already settled, that the Americans no longer feared the introduction of the Episcopal Office among them. The fact was patent, even to the cautious and time-serving Ministry of the English government. It could no longer be doubted by the scrupulous and procrastinating Prelates. Informal gatherings of Clergy and Laity soon developed into more authoritative and respectable Conventions. The Parishes sent delegates to the State Assemblies; the States accredited representatives to the General Convention. The analogy of Republican Institutions was closely followed, and every care taken, by the admission of the Laity and the consulting of the authorities of the State, to prevent the arising of any misrepresentations in