nor doubt as to the passing of an enabling act, but these formalities required more time than could conveniently be spared. Under this difficulty, Seabury was recommended to request consecration from the depressed and almost forgotten prelates of Scotland. They were perfectly willing to gratify him; but the abject condition to which they were reduced, by the penal laws of 1746 and 1748, rendered them apprehensive of undertaking any consecration, originally contemplated by the archbishop of Canterbury, until it had been ascertained how far such a step would be agreeable in England. A correspondence being opened for this purpose, the Scottish prelacy was assured, that a compliance with Seabury's wishes, instead of offending the English bishops, would give them a more favourable opinion of their northern brethren. In consequence, the North American candidate for an episcopal commission, received one at Aberdeen, at the hands of three Scottish prelates, on the 14th of November, 1784'. Early in the following summer, the new bishop landed again in his native country, and thus Connecticut was regularly placed under a bishop of its own. Other portions of the Union however had no such advantage; and, although they had nothing to allege against the validity of the new prelate's consecration, yet there was little disposition to pay him any obedience without the limits of his proper diocese. To place, therefore, American episcopacy upon a footing commensurate with the wants of the whole community, a convention assembled in Philadelphia, on the 25th of September, 1785. It was deputed from the seven states of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina. At this, articles of union were framed, and various alterations in the liturgy were proposed; partly such as were needed by the government of the country, partly such as were not undesirable, and partly such as were decidedly so. An address was also drawn up to the English prelacy, acknowledging past favours received through the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, and requesting consecration for such individuals elected to the episcopate, as should be sent over for that purpose. To this address an answer was returned, signed by the two arch

1 Keith's Scottish Bishops, 515.

bishops, and eighteen bishops, expressing a desire to comply with the request transmitted from America, but requiring time until full information had been given as to the proposed alterations. To some of these, when submitted for consideration, the two archbishops made objections; and they were, therefore, abandoned. When this was done, application was made for the consecration of three bishops, one for New York, another for Pennsylvania, and a third for Virginia. The last, Dr. Griffith, was prevented by domestic circumstances from embarking for England; but the two former, the Doctors Provoost and White, sailed, and were consecrated by Archbishop Moore, on the 4th of February, 1787, an act of parliament having been obtained for that purpose. In 1789, an ecclesiastical convention assembled again, and was attended by Bishop Seabury, with the northern clergy. The whole terms of church-union were now permanently arranged, and the liturgy was rendered very much the same that has continued ever since. The canons also were placed in their existing state. So that 1789 proved a most important year in the American church. In the following year a bishop was consecrated for Virginia, by the archbishop of Canterbury. This was Dr. Madison, the individual originally intended for that see, having resigned when prevented from sailing for Europe. The number of bishops consecrated in England, canonically necessary for transmitting the episcopal function being now complete, three more prelates were consecrated in America. In 1796 a fourth prelate was consecrated there, to fill the see of Connecticut, which had become vacant by the decease of Bishop Seabury. Thus, when the eighteenth century closed, the North American church was in a state of complete organisation and progressive popularity. But it had not hitherto overcome, to any great extent, the mass of sectarian prejudice which the bulk of the settlers brought from Europe, and established as a kind of heir-looms in their families. The episcopal clergy were little more than two hundred, and these were dispersed, commonly far apart, over the eastern states'. A wide foundation was, however, deeply laid, and upon this, in the present century, a noble

2 Caswall's America and the American Church, Lond. 1839. p. 184.

structure has risen rapidly, the happiness of America, the glory both of her and Britain.

§ 29. It is far from satisfactory to know, that religious dissensions furnished a principal opening for effecting the flagitious partition of Poland. The protestants had once formed a numerous and important party in that country, the ground being prepared for their doctrine by a copious infusion of Hussite opinions before Luther arose. But as time advanced, they became a very divided body, many of them adhering to the Saxon confession, but more still embracing the Swiss. Their credit was also, at one time, seriously compromised by the extensive diffusion of Socinianism in Poland3. Hence the Romanists had a very plausible colour for treating them not only as men without any fixed religious opinions, but also as afflicted with a fatal leaning towards unquestionable heresy. They could likewise bring their own compact society to bear with ruinous effect upon a body so disunited and discredited. Hence the Dissidents, as Polish protestants were termed, became defenceless amidst the mass of their hostile countrymen, who took advantage of this condition to despoil them of political rights. They did not, however, tamely submit, but being powerless at home, their suit was urgently pressed upon the neighbouring courts of Petersburg and Berlin. At both it was a very welcome visitor, but especially at the former. Russia desired few things more than power in Poland, and therefore allowed the Dissidents, though really nothing more than a religious party, far from numerous, in a neighbouring kingdom, to have a regular agent in her capital, with whom the imperial ministers were in constant communication. Vainly did the Romish majority controvert the representations thus laid before the Russian government. Catharine, who then occupied with uncommon ability the throne of the Tzars, insisted upon a full restoration of the Dissidents to all their constitutional privileges. Such was, however, the storm occasioned by their claims at home, that all parties within the country became willing to see a compromise, and a partial restoration of their privileges appeared likely to give Poland repose. The

3 The Socinians were expelled by a decree of the diet in 1658. Krasinski, ii. 396.

empress no sooner became acquainted with a prospect so little in unison with her interest, than she stimulated the Polish protestants to rest satisfied with nothing short of unqualified concession, promising to aid them, if necessary, by an army forty thousand strong. The Romish party, aware of the support which its opponents were encouraged to expect, granted certain privileges to the latter, in the diet of 1766. But the Dissidents indignantly rejected them, pronouncing their actual depression a more promising condition than half measures of relief. Thus Poland, which urgently required certain civil reforms to protect her independence, was driven from arrangements to effect them, by the violence of religious dissension. This the courts of Petersburg and Berlin took effectual care to prolong by a treaty bearing a very liberal aspect, concluded in January, 1767, binding the two governments to see a restoration of the Dissidents to all their ancient rights and privileges. An overpowering Russian force extorted this concession from a committee ostensibly authorised by the diet that assembled in October, 1767, and another diet, holden in the following year, confirmed it. But this latter diet was a mere mockery of constitutional forms: it was incomplete in the number of its members, and overawed by Russian bayonets1. Hence the Dissidents recovered their privileges at the price of their country's independence, and the Romish majority was plausibly supplied with a new cause for hating them, in their intimate connection with a dangerous neighbour. That majority found, accordingly, no difficulty in organising confederacies in opposition to privileges granted under such discreditable auspices. Thus Poland was thrown into an intolerable state of anarchy and violence, to the great satisfaction of the neighbouring powers. They watched its miseries until the year 1772, and then affecting to believe them incapable of domestic cure, while they were seriously prejudicial to their own interests, Russia, Austria, and Prussia moved armies in secret concert upon the distracted country, and partitioned it among themselves.

4 Ibid. 530.

A

BRIEF SKETCH

OF THE

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

OF THE

EARLIER YEARS

OF THE

NINETEENTH CENTURY.*

§ 1. Re-establishment of religion in France.-§ 2. Renewed observance of Sunday. § 3. Opposition to the French Concordat.-§ 4. Papal coronation of Napoleon.—§ 5. Overthrow of the Pope's temporal power.—§ 6. Restoration of the Jesuits.-§ 7. Papal arrangements with France on the restoration of the Bourbons.-§ 8. Movements for the removal of Romish disabilities in England. § 9. Opposition to this removal.-§ 10. Formation of the Catholic Association.-§ 11. Repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts.-§ 12. Removal of Romish disabilities.-§ 13. Cautionary provisions.-§ 14. Continuance of Irish agitation.—§ 15. Suppression of ten Irish sees.—§ 16. Alterations in the English dioceses.-§ 17. Commutation of English tithes.-§ 18. Restraint upon English pluralities-§ 19. Reduction of English chapters.—§ 20. Colonial episcopacy.-§ 21. New academical institutions.-§ 22. American episcopalians.-§ 23. Conclusion.

§ 1. HOWEVER desirous the French republicans might be that Rome should not have another Pope, when Pius VI. expired, the great bulk of those who professed its religion felt very differently. Austria gave effect to their wishes. The emperor procured a meeting of the dispersed cardinals at Venice, then an appendage to his monarchy, and they elected, on the 14th of March, 1800, Barnabas Chiaromonti, to fill the papal see. He called himself Pius VII., and within a few weeks of his