mon good ; but, practical!} . in all such matters he main- tained his ground as stoutly as any High-Churchman ever did. He held steadily to the opinion that the Protestanl Episcopal Church was much better off by keeping to itself in all ecclesiastical affairs, ami that it was entirely inexpedient to form unions or alliances of any kind, or to "exchange pulpits," as the phrase is, or, in fine, to run the risk of any sort of possible entangle- ments with other denominations. This was the result of settled conviction on bishop White's part, and it was well understood to be so on all hands. It did not, how- ever, prevent his having and presen ing personal inter- course with Christians of every name; it did not lead him to indulge in i lei i uncial ions of or interference with cithers, however far they may, in his judgment, have wandered from the true path; ami it did not produce any ill feeling towards him by those who might have complained, in his case as well as that of others, of what is often termed " exclusiveness," or "bigotry," on the part of the Protestanl Episcopal Church. If ever there have been any who have gone down to their graves without a single enemy, or without even a whisper against their characters tor purity and integrity of life, bishop White certainly deserves to lie ranked among these. Since the venerable patriarch passed away, the Protestant Episcopal church has continued to go for- ward, increasing in numbers year by year,and growing,
it i- trusted, in mace and deeper and truer devotion to the Lord and Blaster of us all. It has had its seasons of controversy and earnest struggles (as what Church lias not?) between men of differing views, conscien- tiously and .sincerely held on both sides; and it has seemed at times as if controversy were eating into the very heart of thei 'hnrch. and arousing passions and tem- pers far from accordance with the spirit of the Gospel. Some notice of these must here be given, not only as a part of the hi>tory of the Protestanl Episcopal Church. but also as illustrating its present position and its proba- ble future in the meat work of evangelizing this nation. The Oxford Tract movement (begun at the Univer- sity in 1833, culminating in Tract No. \c in 1841, and
extending over some tin years in addition) was ■
which was warmly, even hotly, debated, and produced for the time a controversy of no small magnitude and hilterness. The excitement in England, and the re- sults flowing from the movement there, were transfer* nd to America. Tarty spirit lifted its head on high. Energetic supporters of the tracts and their teaching entered the arena, and equally energetic opponents ran^cl themselves against the tracts and all who fa- vored them. tin the one side it was urged that the
tracts taught nothing more than the well-established High-Church doctrines of the old English divines, and it was claimed that this teaching was legitimate- ly within the limits allowed by the standards of the Church of England. It was also paid tha| there was gnat need of rousing the minds of (hnrch people to the importance of doctrines wh'nh had fallen greatly, if not quite, out of sight, such as tin- apostolic succession, the value and obligation of the holy Bacram nts, the real presence in the Lord's Supper, the importance ol
priestly absolution, the necessity of securing a n turn to the unity of the primitive Church, etc. < hi the other Bide, the whole movement and tin- entire teaching of the tracts wore fiercely denounced as tending directly to Romanizing and unprotestantizing the ('hnrch. When in England numerous perversions to Lome took place at this time, and especially when John Henry Newman, the coryphaeus of the whole undertaking, gave in his ad- hesion to the Roman < 'hnrch 1 1845), it was triumphantly affirmed that a similar result would happen in the Prot- estant Episcopal Church, and thus prove to tin- world how pernicious was the teaching of these tracts, No. XC last and worst of all. Quite a number of persons did abandon the communion of the Church, and submit themselves to Rome; but there was nut anything like the exodus which had been predicted, since between 1842 and 1852, including one bishop only (Ivi b, of North Carolina, in 1852), there were less than thirty who left the Church's ministry for the sake of Roman Catholic inducements, and this,-, witfa two or three exceptions, were men of little or no influence in the Church or ci m- mtinity. See Oxford Tra( rs. In connection with the
( txl'ord Tract movement, and more or less infected with the unhappy spirit of discord existing at the time, there occurred what is ordinarily known as -the Carey Ordination." Arthur Carey was a student in tin- Gen- eral Theological Seminary, a young man of excellent character and good ability. He graduated in L843. It was thought and generally understood thai he was strongly inclined to the ultra teaching of the trails in the direction of Romanism : and Drs. Hugh Smith and Henry A nt hon. both of New York, who took some pains to ascertain Carey's views and sentiments. deemed him to he unlit for ordination in the Protestanl Episcopal Church. The bishop of New Ifork, however i B.T.On- derdonk), after an examination of the young man. held by six presbyters in conjunction with Drs. Smith and Anthon. decided that he was worthy to obtain orders. Drs. Smith and Anlhoti publicly protested in the church at the time of the ordination, hut bishop Onderdonk went forward and ordained Air. Carey, duly 2, 1843. i He died in March, 1844.) As was to he expected, this action ot the' bishop of New rTork gave offence in vari- ous parts of the Church. It was much discussed in re- ligious journals and in pamphlets, and bisho] a Chase,