1785 J REV. WILLIAM SMITH, D. D. 22/ 



necticut" writes to Bishop White, in 1787, "proposing a personal 

 interview with him and Bishop Provoost previously to any decided 

 steps being taken respecting the Liturgy and Government of the 

 Church, and mentioning the old Liturgy as the most likely bond 

 of union," Bishop White, May 21st, 17S7, with a foresight that in 

 his day seems prophetic, replies : 



There is nothing I have more at heart than to see the members of our 

 communion, throughout the United States, connected m one system of 

 Ecclesiastical government ; and if my meeting of you, in concurrence 

 with Bishop Provoost, can do anything towards the accomplishment of 

 this great object, my very numerous engagements shall not hinder me 

 from taking a journey for the purpose 



If it should be thought advisable by the general body of our Church 

 to adhere to the English Book of Common Prayer (the political parts 

 excepted) I shall be one of the first, after the appearance of such a dis- 

 position, to comply with it most punctually. 



Further than this, if it should seem the most probable way of main- 

 taining an agreement among ourselves, / shall use my best endeavors to 

 effect it. At the same time, I must candidly express my opinion, that 

 the review of the liturgy would tend very much to the satisfaction of 

 most of the members of our communion, and to its future success and 

 prosperity. The worst evil which I apprehend from a refusal to review 

 is this, that it will give a great advantage to those who wish to carry 



^ - ~~ _ 



occasion. A young man, the Rev. John Waller James — burning with apostolic zeal — 

 had lately been invited to become Assistant Minister in Christ Church. The church 

 was an ancient church, with high, old-fashioned square pews, and the congregation was 

 composed of the aristocracy of Philadelphia. Mr. James had never ministered in any 

 large city. In Christ Church, Meadville, where he had been before, was a young, 

 very active, enthusiastic congregation. Mr. James was rather disappointed not to find 

 exactly the same sort of spirit in the venerable cote of which he was now to take 

 charge. He attributed what he thought a lack of zeal in part to the great high, old- 

 fashioned pews of which we speak. At any rate, he thought them unsuited to modern 

 necessities, and was earnestly desirous to change them to those common in the present 

 day. A considerable portion of the congregation were of his inclination. He pro- 

 posed to remodel the interior of the church. We can well conceive, after reading the 

 passage which we have quoted {supra, page 217 — note), describing his early connec- 

 tions with the pews and pulpit of this church, how such a pro]iosition must have 

 affected the venerable Bishop. But he made no opposition to the change. If it was 

 thought by those around him to promote the spiritual interests of the congregation, he 

 was ready to make it, however painful to his own feelings. The alterations were 

 begun in the summer of 1836, but during their progress both Bishop White and Mr. 

 James died. Neither ever saw the completion of them. As it turned out, the alter- 

 ations did nothing to change the condition of the parish. Under such a man as Mr. 

 James any parish, sooner or later, would have prospered, irrespectively of whether 

 the parishioners sat in pews with high backs or pews with low one^ 



