For over 30 years, Church men were more or less disturbed by discussions aroused by the Tractarian Movement. Ameri can Low Churchmen were strongly opposed to the "Oxford Divinity.) The first important in cident in the agitation was the "Carey ordina tion" in 1842. Arthur Carey, a graduate of the General Theological Seminary, who had ac cepted Tractarian principles, was, in conse quence, subjected to a severe examination by the chaplains of the bishop of New York. They declined to recommend him for orders. The bishop, Dr. B. T. Onderdonk, himself examined the candidate, was satisfied with his answers and proceeded to his ordination. This occa sioned an outcry against the bishop and was the signal for a series of disputes and cam paigns of pamphlet warfare, in various parts of the country. In many instances, Low Church bishops objected to the liking of High Church clergy for "awkward chancel-arrangements" suggestive of High Eucharistic doctrine. Bishop Mcllvaine of Ohio refused to consecrate a church until the altar was removed from the east wall. Bishop Eastburn of Massachusetts refused to visit a Boston church for confirma tions because the clergy kneeled facing the altar, which was surmounted by a cross and candlesticks. These were typical examples. Therewere discussions over vested choirs, preaching in surplice, stained-glass windows, flowers on the altar and similar details. There was also an effort made by Low Church par tisans to discredit High Church doctrine by impugning the moral character of its leading champions. Partisan motives mingled with the laudable feeling that a bishop like the wife of Caesar "must be above suspicion.' A revival of controversy followed the Civil War. At two successive General Conventions, 1868 and 1871, the main discussion concerned a *Canon of Ritual.° Various proposals were made to forbid the use of ceremonies recently revived and behind this was opposition to Trac tarian teaching on the sacraments. In the Con vention of 1871, Dr. James De Koven of Racine College took a firm stand as champion of "the Real Presence" and challenged anyone to bring him to trial for erroneous doctrine. The chal lenge was not accepted. In 1875, however, be cause of his principles, the Church at large re fused to confirm Dr. De Koven's election to the see of Illinois, as it had previously refused to confirm the election of Dean George F. Sey mour. The Convention of 1874 passed a canon forbidding "ceremonies or practices not ordained or authorized in the Book of Common Prayer and setting forth or symbolizing erroneous or doubtful doctrines?' The accompanying discus sion indicates that the framers had especially in mind doctrine commonly known as Transubstantiation.° In 1878 Dr. G. F. Sey mour was elected bishop of Springfield. This time his election to the episcopate was confirmed by the Church. The event of his consecration marks the end of the effort to deny that High Church doctrine is in harmony with Anglican formularies. It marks also the end of a cru sade against ritual as such, although the Church has consistently disapproved any attempt to supersede Anghcan by Roman doctrine.
At the time of this later discussion occurred the secession of the "Reformed Episcopalians.' The occasion of this was a controversy over Baptismal Regeneration. A number of Church men who held Zwinglian views of sacraments objected to the wording of the baptismal office. They found a leader in the assistant bishop of Kentucky, Dr. G. D. Cummins. He issued a call for a conference of all who wished to re form the Church. The convention adopted an expurgated Prayer Book and organized as a new sect. Bishop Cummins was deposed by the House of Bishops. He continued, however, to act as bishop and consecrated as a colleague the Rev. C. E. Cheney, a deposed clergyman of the diocese of Illinois. Their following was never large and has now dwindled to insig nificant proportions.
The Church of the It is pleasant to turn to a striking episode in the Church's history where an unavoidable division was quickly and quietly healed. By the out
break of the Civil War, Southern Churchmen were isolated from their Northern brethren. Their position was analogous to that of colonial Churchmen at the Revolution. There was this great difference that there were 11 organized dioceses, each with a bishop. These 11 dioceses eventually united to form the Protestant Epis copal Church of the Confederate States. For five years the Church of the Confederacy pur sued its independent course. Bishop Polk of Louisiana, who had had a West Point educa tion, assumed command of a Confederate army and was killed in battle. At the end of the war the Church was confronted with the dif ficult question of the relation of these severed parts. Some Northerners were anxious to take action which would have been very offensive to Southern susceptibilities. There were two specially difficult points, the precedent estab lished by Bishop Polk and the case of Bishop Wilmer of Alabama, who had been consecrated during the war, without the consent of the Northern dioceses. Fortunately the wisdom of a few leaders, Hopkins of Vermont, Horatio Potter of New York and others, guided all to a satisfactory conclusion. The Convention of 1862 had ignored the absence of Southern dele gates. In 1865 the Southern bishops were urged to attend and to the love and honor of their brethren." Two bishops and delegates from three dioceses responded. In the Con vention of 1868, the South was fully represented. By exercise of tact and patience on both sides, Churchmen had succeeded in ignoring the late unpleasantness.° Christian As has been already noted, the Episcopal Church believes that she has a special mission to promote Church Unity. For 50 years there has been a standing Com mission to consider this subject. The occasion of its appointment was the presentation at the Convention of 1853 of a "Memorial" signed by Dr. W. A. Muhlenberg and other well-known clergymen. This "Memorial" made a plea for greater liturgical freedom and a less stringency in conferring Holy Orders. It aimed at taking an important step toward the effecting of a Church unity in the Protestant Christendom of our land? The first report of the Commis sion made valuable suggestions, but led to no immediate results. Important members of the Commission were Bishops George Burgess of Maine and Alonzo Potter of Pennsylvania. The discussion which ensued paved the way for sub sequent Prayer Book revision and conferences with representatives of other Christian bodies. Part of the aim of the °Memorial° was realized in 1898 by the passage of the °Huntington Amendment.° This relaxes the obligation al ways to use the Prayer Book in public worship and recognizes the duty of bishops to provide special forms of service for special congrega tions and special occasions. Both °MemoriaP and 'Amendment° aim at making the Church freer for evangelistic work There is another side to this work for unity. Dr. Muhlenberg had in mind °the Protestant Christendom of our land? There is a larger Christendom than this which the Church may not forget. Something has been done to estab lish friendly relations with Eastern Orthodox and Old Catholics. Bishop Horatio Southgate in 1843 was accredited, as representing the Church, to the patriarch of Constantinople; Dr. J. F. Young of New York (later bishop of Florida) in 1864, and Bishop Grafton of Fond du Lac, in 1903, have paid official visits to the Church in Russia. Bishop Whittingham of Maryland in 1872 attended the Old Catholic Conference in Cologne. Russian and Old Catholic bishops have on several occasions ac cepted the official courtesies of the American Church. Polish Old Catholics in America have made definite proposals of union. Another century may see some result from these small beginnings.