00000596 |
Previous | 596 of 684 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
Loading content ...
EPISCOPAL CHURCH
553
orders as a priest. He immediately returned home and took charge of All
Saints' Parish, in Calvert County, and continued as rector until the War of
the Revolution. When peace was restored, he took up his residence in St.
James' Parish, Anne Arundel County, and officiated alternately in that and in
his former charge of All Saints. In 1791 he removed to the family seat at
Croom, in Prince George's County, and there resided until his death.1 On
September 1, 1814, Rev. Dr. James Kemp was consecrated as Suffragan Bishop
of Maryland, and Bishop Claggett assigned to him the Eastern Shore, as his
principal field of labor. In 1810, the Rev. George Dashiell, rector of St.
Peter's, Baltimore, showed a spirit of insubordination and resistance to the
authority of the bishop and convention, Avhich continued under one form or
another until 1816, Avhen he, Avith the Rev. Mr. Handy, Rev. Alfred Dashiell
and the Rev. William Gibson attempted to establish what they called " the
Evangelical Episcopal Church," and by the act of ordaining, the Rev. George
Dashiell assumed to himself the exercise of Episcopal authority. They were
all dismissed from the church, and thus ended Avhat looked to be at one time
a very dangerous schism.
1 The Episcopalians, at a very early period,
had made vigorous efforts to secure the appointment of a bishop to supervise the affairs of the
Established Church in the colonies, but were
unsuccessful. They determined to make another effort, and accordingly, in September,
1770, the Revs. McGill, Addison, Hamilton,
Ross, Neill, Read, Allen, Hughes and Boucher
drew up addresses to the king, to Lord Baltimore, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to the
Bishop of London and to Governor Eden, praying for the ordination of an American bishop.
In their petition to the governor, they say that
"the establishment here cannot subsist much
longer without some form of government.
Whether this shall be that constitutional one by
bishops, to which alone a clergyman of the
Church of England can, in conscience, think it
his duty to submit, or the unconstitutional and
palpably Presbyterian system, not long ago
warmly contended for by both Houses of Assembly, is a question hardly less interesting to
the civil government of this province than it is
to its clergy. The jurisdiction of a presbytery,
and every other jurisdiction in its principles
akin to it, is so adverse to the whole frame and
•scope of our excellent establishment, both in
Church and State, that, in attempting to keep it
forever at a distance from Maryland, we trust
your Excellency will consider us as doing what
most undoubtedly it is our duty ever to do, consulting the best interests of the Lord Proprietary and the welfare of the community at large,
as well as our own in particular, On these
principles, and on these alone, we presume to
solicit your Excellency's concurrence and assistance in promoting so salutary a scheme."
To which the governor replied as follows :
"Annapolis, 15th September, 1770.
'• Gentlemen—-Though your address, I think, im
ports that it is the act of the whole clergy of
the Established Church, flowing from their general deliberation and unanimous opinion, yet,
to enable me to consider it with propriety in
this light, a clearer satisfaction is requisite than
what arises from the delivery of a paper by nine
clergymen, or from the formal attestation of a
person in an official character, unknown in our
constitution, and assumed I know not on what
grounds. The proper satisfaction would have
been given by the subscription of the clergy
individually. That the factious spirit of the
sectaries has appeared in their daily openly
calling in question his Lordship's right of patronage in disposing of the donatives of this
province, your address gives me the first information. Indiscretions and irregularities of
another kind have, indeed, occurred in some
parishes, but his Lordship's right has been vindicated ; as the laws are a sufficient security to
his Lordship and the persons collated by him,
no degree of support or assistance is needed
from episcopal authority. How far, and under
what forms, the establishment of an American
bishop may be a salutary measure, is a consideration of the most momentous concern, deserving the most serious and mature attention; and
being of so great and extensive importance, I
shall take an early opportunity of laying the
matter before the General Assembly, together
with your address and the papers attending it.
The motives both of duty and inclination, will
ever engage me to countenance the worthy
ministers of the Established Church, and to
support the just rights of the clergy of Maryland, holding it, at the same time, to be my
indispensable duty to protect all quiet and
peaceable subjects of every denomination in
the full enjoyment of their rights."
Object Description
| Title | History of Maryland - 2 |
| Creator | Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas) |
| Publisher | J. B. Piet |
| Place of Publication | Baltimore |
| Date | 1879 |
| Language | eng |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
Description
| Title | 00000596 |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Transcript | EPISCOPAL CHURCH 553 orders as a priest. He immediately returned home and took charge of All Saints' Parish, in Calvert County, and continued as rector until the War of the Revolution. When peace was restored, he took up his residence in St. James' Parish, Anne Arundel County, and officiated alternately in that and in his former charge of All Saints. In 1791 he removed to the family seat at Croom, in Prince George's County, and there resided until his death.1 On September 1, 1814, Rev. Dr. James Kemp was consecrated as Suffragan Bishop of Maryland, and Bishop Claggett assigned to him the Eastern Shore, as his principal field of labor. In 1810, the Rev. George Dashiell, rector of St. Peter's, Baltimore, showed a spirit of insubordination and resistance to the authority of the bishop and convention, Avhich continued under one form or another until 1816, Avhen he, Avith the Rev. Mr. Handy, Rev. Alfred Dashiell and the Rev. William Gibson attempted to establish what they called " the Evangelical Episcopal Church," and by the act of ordaining, the Rev. George Dashiell assumed to himself the exercise of Episcopal authority. They were all dismissed from the church, and thus ended Avhat looked to be at one time a very dangerous schism. 1 The Episcopalians, at a very early period, had made vigorous efforts to secure the appointment of a bishop to supervise the affairs of the Established Church in the colonies, but were unsuccessful. They determined to make another effort, and accordingly, in September, 1770, the Revs. McGill, Addison, Hamilton, Ross, Neill, Read, Allen, Hughes and Boucher drew up addresses to the king, to Lord Baltimore, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to the Bishop of London and to Governor Eden, praying for the ordination of an American bishop. In their petition to the governor, they say that "the establishment here cannot subsist much longer without some form of government. Whether this shall be that constitutional one by bishops, to which alone a clergyman of the Church of England can, in conscience, think it his duty to submit, or the unconstitutional and palpably Presbyterian system, not long ago warmly contended for by both Houses of Assembly, is a question hardly less interesting to the civil government of this province than it is to its clergy. The jurisdiction of a presbytery, and every other jurisdiction in its principles akin to it, is so adverse to the whole frame and •scope of our excellent establishment, both in Church and State, that, in attempting to keep it forever at a distance from Maryland, we trust your Excellency will consider us as doing what most undoubtedly it is our duty ever to do, consulting the best interests of the Lord Proprietary and the welfare of the community at large, as well as our own in particular, On these principles, and on these alone, we presume to solicit your Excellency's concurrence and assistance in promoting so salutary a scheme." To which the governor replied as follows : "Annapolis, 15th September, 1770. '• Gentlemen—-Though your address, I think, im ports that it is the act of the whole clergy of the Established Church, flowing from their general deliberation and unanimous opinion, yet, to enable me to consider it with propriety in this light, a clearer satisfaction is requisite than what arises from the delivery of a paper by nine clergymen, or from the formal attestation of a person in an official character, unknown in our constitution, and assumed I know not on what grounds. The proper satisfaction would have been given by the subscription of the clergy individually. That the factious spirit of the sectaries has appeared in their daily openly calling in question his Lordship's right of patronage in disposing of the donatives of this province, your address gives me the first information. Indiscretions and irregularities of another kind have, indeed, occurred in some parishes, but his Lordship's right has been vindicated ; as the laws are a sufficient security to his Lordship and the persons collated by him, no degree of support or assistance is needed from episcopal authority. How far, and under what forms, the establishment of an American bishop may be a salutary measure, is a consideration of the most momentous concern, deserving the most serious and mature attention; and being of so great and extensive importance, I shall take an early opportunity of laying the matter before the General Assembly, together with your address and the papers attending it. The motives both of duty and inclination, will ever engage me to countenance the worthy ministers of the Established Church, and to support the just rights of the clergy of Maryland, holding it, at the same time, to be my indispensable duty to protect all quiet and peaceable subjects of every denomination in the full enjoyment of their rights." |
