Project Canterbury

Address of the Right Reverend Frederick Joseph Kinsman, D. D., Bishop of Delaware,

Delivered before the One Hundred and Twenty-third Annual Convention of the Diocese of Delaware in St. Peter's Church, Smyrna, on the second of June, 1909.

Wilmington, Delaware: Mercantile Printing Co., 1909.



Sixty-seven years ago, the Convention of the Diocese of Delaware assembled in St. Andrew's Church, Wilmington, was addressed for the first time by a Bishop of its own. The opening words of Bishop Lee's first address might be uttered with almost no change by his second successor. "The action of your last Convention placed him who now addresses you in a most trying and difficult situation. A call wholly unexpected from a portion of the Church, to which he was personally a stranger, imposed upon him the necessity of deciding one of the most serious and important questions, which can be presented to the mind of a minister of Christ. Before venturing to determine it, it seemed incumbent on me to visit my brethren who had honoured me with such a mark of their confidence, and acquaint myself with the condition and circumstances of the Church over which I was invited to preside. That I found most of the churches in an exceedingly feeble and depressed condition I need not inform you. I surely saw much to discourage in the field of labour proposed. * * * I could not but regret that your choice had not fallen upon one more experienced and better qualified. * * * But the unanimity of the election invested it with a ten-fold weight, and I shrank from the responsibility of declining a burden which the hand of Providence appeared to lay upon me."

The Diocese of Delaware has grown much in the course of time which has elapsed since the utterance of these words by Bishop Lee. Yet when we regard the comparatively greater growth of almost all else which constitutes our complex life, and the greater demands made every year on the time and ability of the clergy, the substance of the words is as true for 1909 as it was for 1842. I came to the Diocese of Delaware with no illusions as to the work of a Bishop, and with no illusions as to my own particular task. Experience has verified the accuracy of my forecast. I have daily proofs of the difficulties of my post and of [3/4] my own limitations. But I only say this because I wish to add that I have never for one moment regretted my decision, and am every day more thankful that my lot is cast where it is.

It is less than a year since I first set foot in Delaware, and little more than seven months since I came here to be consecrated Bishop; yet so much has been crowded into that short time that it is hard to realize that I have ever really lived anywhere else. Nevertheless that time has been too short for me accurately to learn the exact state of many things in the Diocese, and the time has been too crowded to allow reflection, by which alone it is possible to see relations and proportions. Already I have a more intimate knowledge of the Diocese as a whole than is possible for anyone else, because no one but the Bishop is brought constantly in touch with the Diocese in all its parts; but not yet has the time come when I should be justified in speaking positively of many lines and principles of a Diocesan policy. I see some things very clearly, and every day's experience goes to confirm instincts and findings; but I do not yet venture to speak of some matters of importance which must before long engage our serious attention. In this first address, I shall not endeavour to deal with concerns of the Church at large, nor to speak fully of the history of the Diocese during the past year; nor need I repeat what I have elsewhere said of my growing appreciation of the work and character of my predecessors. I propose to confine myself closely to a few matters of business, in regard to which I have strong and, I believe, unalterable convictions, indicating lines of business-like and sensible procedure of special importance at this stage in the history of the Diocese.


In some neighbouring Dioceses of the Church, action has been taken to establish a standard for minimum salaries for the clergy. The Diocese of Pennsylvania years ago set $1,000 as minimum salary for a clergyman engaged in active work, and at the present time gives all its missionaries at least $1,100 a year. The Diocese of New York last year voted that no curate in city parishes should receive less than $1,000 and rooms or $1,200 without rooms. New York and Pennsylvania standards do not apply directly to Delaware; but they do indicate a duty on our part of considering what our own standards should be. I wish to express my own conviction on this first occasion of my addressing the Convention, that the minimum salary which can be regarded as affording a living for any man engaged in active ministerial work in this state is $1,000 and a house.

The standards of salaries were in many places established in times when conditions were not the same as at present. Twenty years ago it was possible for a man with a family to get on in comparative comfort on $700 or $800 a year. But the cost of [4/5] living has increased more than one-third in ten years, and the requirements of the clergy grow constantly more exacting. The work they are expected to do becomes more varied from year to year; and they all have some official expenses from which other men are exempt. Their salaries should be increased in precisely the same degree as the salaries of all other professional and working men. I urge therefore that we take in this Diocese as the minimum that ought to be offered to any clergyman doing full work $1,000 and a house.

I am well aware that we can not get that everywhere at once, and that we can not, as some Dioceses do, require a minimum salary; but what we can do is to make no pretense of offering a living salary when we ask a man to accept less. We can face facts and rightly describe them; and that is one step toward trying to alter them. In any parish where less than $1,000 is offered, let there be frank recognition that the salary is below standard; and then let every effort be made to bring it up a notch higher. If the fact be fairly and squarely faced, something will be done to remedy the deficiency. Only by degrees can we accomplish our aim; but recognition of deficiency is the first step toward remedy.

One practical suggestion may be made. Delaware people in the country and small towns have always been generous with their clergy in the matter of gifts of food-supplies, enabling their ministers to share directly in the blessings of "the garden-spot of the world." In one parish at the present time, the care and activity of a single member of the Vestry has ensured a clergyman's family the equivalent of from $150 to $200 worth of supplies for the ensuing year. By so doing the stipend in the parish alluded to has been brought fairly close to the $1,000 mark. I believe that in a number of places a real increase might be made in some such way as this. But three words of warning are necessary in regard to such a plan. (1) Gifts of produce should be made as a matter of business and justice, not as alms. (2) There should be system in the offerings, lest the Rectory become a mere dumping-ground for poor and superfluous crops. This means work for some one or two Vestrymen. (3) Offerings of this sort ought to be over and above the part of the stipend paid in money, and ought never to be allowed to interfere with effort to make that as near the standard as possible.

I am not urging that the clergy be enabled to live in luxury. A man abandons any hope of living at ease when he takes Orders. Nor am I emphasizing the need of some sort of provision for the clergy above starvation-level solely in the interests of justice. The point on which I wish to lay greatest stress is that the laity by being stingy (that is the proper word) with the clergy cheat themselves. The clergy are set in parishes to give uplift and spirit to the communities in which they live. They cannot do [5/6] this, if they are ground and pinched by the cares of poverty and stung by a sense of unnecessary degradation. It is very easy to criticise the clergy for lack of gifts and graces; but imagine yourself in your own parson's place, and think for a moment whether you would be more likely to prove an element of sweetness and light than he!

I know very well the difficulties of small and struggling parishes, and how impossible it seems to make up even such meager stipends as we have. But Delawareans are not a poor people. They are in all parts of the state comparatively well-to-do; and the plea of being poverty-stricken, often made when the Church's needs are in question, would be angrily resented if made as a charge by people outside. It ought to be a matter of pride, just pride, pride in the State or pride for the Church, that those whom we call to be leaders in all that makes for the higher levels in life should not be themselves exposed to needless humiliation and be crippled for their appointed work. To withhold bare subsistence from a workman is to bind him hand and foot. No man eager to do his best will permit himself to be deprived of his efficiency. In this Diocese we want men of the finest quality for small places as well as great; but we cannot expect to have anything but ecclesiastical driftwood, if in effect we ask men to abandon their chances of vigourous activity by trying to work under conditions which prevent free action. Decent maintenance of the clergy is a matter not only of simple justice, but also of business common-sense.


In line with this is the matter of clerical vacations. Every clergyman should have some recognized opportunity for a vacation each year, which should be looked upon not as a special favour to him, nor as a luxurious privilege, but as a necessary means of keeping him in condition for his work. If he is to lead and instruct and to give spirit and tone to things, he is absolutely in need of the tonic that comes from a change and a chance to get in touch with the world outside. The Rector's vacation is part of the parish machinery for keeping the Church alert and inspirited and brings benefit to the whole parish. Every man, whether in one of the learned professions or in business, whose work compels him to undergo the stress and strain of wrestling with other personalities, is in special need of breathing-space. He must sometimes get away from his ordinary cases and struggles to store up energy for the next round. His fitness depends on rest after this special strain.

In some parishes in the Diocese, there is no rule and clear understanding in regard to the time during which the Rector may as a matter of right, or--as I had better say--ought as a matter of duty, to go away from his parish to store up vigour for another [6/7] year's work. I recommend that the Vestries of such parishes adopt a rule as to the number of Sundays during the year, when in the Rector's absence the necessary expense of providing services will be sustained by the parish. Four Sundays--not necessarily consecutive--is usually regarded as minimum vacation. A Rector can often provide for services during his absence and save his vestry trouble and even expense; but it is fair to recognize the duty of the Vestry to arrange for the Rector's vacation as a means of keeping up the tone of things in the work for which he and they are chiefly responsible.


The function of the Missionary and Education Committee is one of great importance. As it is defined by the canons, the Committee constitutes a working-body "to which shall be entrusted the charge of conducting the operations of the Church in behalf of Missions, Education and benevolent objects connected therewith." This means that the Committee forms a sort of cabinet for the Bishop in regard to the practical management of many Diocesan projects; somewhat in the same way as the Standing Committee are his official advisers in all that pertains to the welfare of the Church at large. It is likely that in the future of the Diocese the Missionary and Education Committee will be called upon to undertake work of greater and greater importance.

I wish to say one word of the constituent members of this Committee. According to canon, it is to consist of "the Bishop, ex-officio, and two clergymen and two laymen elected by ballot." The Committee is so important that it may well be larger. Moreover there is an anomaly which might be remedied by increasing its membership.

The Diocese of Delaware has not yet worked out its complete system of using Archdeacons. It is not unlikely that the number might some time be altered; and it is certain that we must have some more clearly defined idea of their functions. The simplest idea attaching to the post of Archdeacon is that he is one who acts as the Bishop's representative in reference to affairs needing attention from the Bishop, which he cannot give in person. The earliest Archdeacons had oversight of charitable work in great cities; in modern times their chief function has been to act for the Bishop in reference to Missions. In our own Church, their usual duty is to have direction of Diocesan Missions and to assist in the care of vacant parishes. In large Dioceses like Massachusetts or New York, where the Bishop is unable to give his personal attention to the details of missionary work, he delegates this responsibility to the Archdeacon of the Diocese; in large and scattered jurisdictions, the Archdeacon is a General Missionary. In a small Diocese like Delaware, however, the Bishop is able in person to attend to his few missions without having to make much use of a proxy. He is nevertheless in need [7/8] of advice and assistance in regard to many things, concerning which the Archdeacons are the natural men for him to consult. During this past year I have had invaluable help from both Archdeacons and have discovered in all parts of the Diocese how greatly they are respected and beloved.

The object of this preamble is to call attention to the fact that the affairs in the Diocese in which the Archdeacons are expected to take special interest are almost identical with those which in Delaware are entrusted to the Committee on Missions and Education. This year, in taking pains to consult my constitutional advisers; I have had to talk over the same things with both Archdeacons and the Committee, and have been constantly struck with the feeling that it was anomalous that Archdeacons, whose duty it is to be especially interested in Missions, were not ex-officio members of the Missionary Committee. I believe that it would be wise as well as appropriate to enlarge the Committee by making its constituent members the Bishop, the Archdeacons, one or two other clerical and at least three lay members to be elected annually by ballot.

I have recently received a letter from the Secretary of the Board of Missions calling attention to the establishment of Diocesan Commissions for the promotion of intelligent interest in General Missions. It seems to me that our Missionary Committee is competent to discharge the functions of such a Commission for Delaware; and that to this Committee also might be referred the Resolution adopted by the Missionary Council of the Third Department in reference to arrangement "for a Department meeting in a principal city of each Diocese in the Department, the same to be addressed on Diocesan, Domestic and Foreign Missions."

I wish especially to speak of an important principle or policy of the Missionary Committee in reference to grants of money. My own convictions are clear on this point and I have the entire approval and support of the present Committee. We are trustees for the distribution of the small sum of about $2,000 a year for the support of Diocesan Missions and for the reinforcement of weak parishes. With so little to disburse our responsibility is all the greater for wise and judicious use of our scanty resources.. The little fund makes more exacting requirements than a great one. The demands made upon us and the needs presented to our notice would make it an easy task to dispose of much larger sums than we have or are ever likely to get. We have to discriminate between applicants. Every dollar given to one place means that the same dollar is withheld from half a dozen others and our selection has to be made cautiously and impartially. There are two principles which will chiefly guide us in making grants:

(1) Special aid shall be given to those who are making most vigourous efforts to help themselves.

[9] (2) Effort shall be concentrated on those points which give most promise of building up strong and permanent work.

In the task of selection between applicants for aid, all of whom we should like to gratify, we propose invariably to give what help we can to those showing clearest indications of heroic effort to carry their own burdens. We will help a Mission or Parish struggling sturdily in preference to one whose efforts are only feeble; and with many calls for help from the struggling, we cannot afford to use our small resources for the benefit of those who lie down and ask to be carried. It is our duty to encourage and cultivate the spirit of self-respect and self-help. In no case will we make ourselves responsible for the care of church buildings, for the expenses for repairs, insurance and taxes, for heating and lighting. The general plan which commends itself to us is the one adopted by the Board of Missions in reference to the only grant for special work which this Diocese receives. Our funds shall invariably be given for the stipends of the clergy, and the amount given shall be in some way conditional upon the amount contributed by the Mission or Parish for the same purpose. For example, where a grant of $100 is made to a particular Mission, the Committee might stipulate that at least an equivalent sum be raised by the Mission itself. This would involve full reports of money given in-the Missions and, probably also, the payment of the full stipend through the Treasurer of the Committee. It ought also perhaps to involve remission of assessments on Mission Stations, for the general fund for Diocesan Missions. Our object will be to induce any given Mission to carry more of its own burden, contributing thereby to the cause of Diocesan Missions by leaving us freer to help others. This system would have to be worked out carefully in detail, and it could not abruptly be put into operation, lest it entail injustice upon some hard-working missionary or unprepared group of workers. But in time some such system must be enforced, if we are to disburse our fund as judicious loans rather than as alms, and if we are to build up parishes strong enough to stand alone rather than sustain private chapels by a system of pauperization.

We are bound also to act as a strategic board in determining at what points to make special efforts. Our aim is to build up self-supporting parishes, and concentration of effort at certain points at given times may accomplish this. If an experiment succeeds, money is released for another place; if it fail after reasonable trial, we are then justified in transferring our aid to some other point. We are concerned with every effort to sustain parishes which are alive; but we cannot afford to use resources on those which are moribund or dead. It must be our aim to bring what force we can to bear on such work as promises genuine growth and the developement of something stable. If we are to be [9/10] justified in our appeals to the Diocese for funds, the Diocese must feel assurance that the resources of which the Committee have control will be so invested and so intelligently directed, that there is a reasonable prospect of some real and permanent addition to the strength of the Diocese.


The canons enjoin upon the Bishop the duty of making a special report to Convention of the state of the organized missions. This is a pleasant duty for our three organized missions are all prospering and are all capital arguments for organization.

St. Paul's, Camden and Wyoming, our latest-born, is in one sense at least our banner mission, in that, in a spirit of sturdy youthful independence, it receives and asks no money from Diocesan funds. It provides the money necessary for the maintenance of its own services, which are well-attended and have recently been made more attractive by a well-trained choir of children. It is alert to take its part in the affairs of the Diocese. A parish-house and enlargement of the church are both needed, and the spirited efforts of the people of the Mission are likely to achieve both aims. The Rector of Dover and his helpers in the work are entitled to take solid satisfaction in the Mission's present condition.

All Saints', Delmar, is also a promising center. The past year has seen a number of outward improvements, the church painted, the church-lot put in order and a Bishop's chair placed in the sanctuary. A good work is being done for the children of the Sunday-School and Choir, in which the Priest-in-charge receives invaluable aid from Mrs. James H. Tyre, Mrs. Murray Stewart and others. If the town of Delmar retains its present importance, there is a good chance here for the developement of a self-supporting parish.

St. Barnabas', Marshallton, is a source of constant satisfaction to those who are interested to observe the growth of the Church from below. Mr. and Mrs. Grantham, with the cooperation of the inimitable Mr. Frederick Bringhurst, have in training a body of young people second to none in the Diocese in interest and in energy. The new Sunday-School room now under construction will be ready none too soon for the needs of a congregation like that of St. Barnabas'. As a center of varied activities, and as an example of the way in which the Church can make itself felt in the life of a small village, St. Barnabas' is well worth inspection.


There has been some discussion among the clergy of late touching the advisability of making changes in the canons of the Diocese in regard to (1) the date of the Annual Convention and a fixed date for the ending of the parochial fiscal year, and (2) the [10/11] method of electing a Bishop. I have already suggested that it would seem to me wise to modify the canon concerning membership of the Missionary Committee; and I wish also to call attention to another matter which calls for serious consideration.

Our canons expressly provide for the organization of congregations into Missions and for the advancement of Missions to the position of Parishes in union with the Convention. They are explicit in regard to the requirements for parochial status. But they are silent in regard to parishes which may have ceased to fulfil the requirements and so actually to have forfeited parochial status as the canons define it. The canons seem not to consider the possibility that a congregation once able to satisfy the requirements for admission as organized parish should cease to maintain them, and to make it possible for a parish once admitted to parochial privileges to abandon the dicharge of parochial responsibilities. This involves misrepresentation as to actual facts and does a two-fold injustice. In the first place, it deprives those parishes, which consistently discharge their obligations, of that proportionate representation to which in equity, if not in strict legality, they are entitled; and in the second, it puts difficulties in the way of those whose duty it is to assist weak parishes, and whose aim it should be to enable parishes falling below standard to regain their lost position. Justice to the strong and wise care for the weak both make it important that what the canons require the canons should maintain. It would seem desirable that we have, what some other Dioceses possess, a new canon relating to parishes which have forfeited parochial status, and perhaps also to the best methods of enabling them to regain it. It is a matter demanding careful and deliberate consideration, and one which could not for several years receive final action; but it would certainly be well to have the matter discussed, and possibly to have some definite proposal made at the next Annual Convention.


The work on The Delaware Churchman has been much interrupted this year and handicapped by the illness of the Editor, the Rector of Newark. Thanks to the assistance given by the Rectors of Dover and Calvary Church, Wilmington, the Churchman was issued with regularity, and to Mr. Peckham is due credit for an especially satisfactory number at the time of the Bishop's consecration. To our great regret, Mr. Phelps last month, owing to an illness from which he is now happily recovering, was compelled to give up all further responsibility for the paper; but the Diocese has been so fortunate as to secure the consent of the Rector of Christ Church, Christiana Hundred, to assume the editorship.

The Convention Number will contain a prospectus for next year. It is our wish to maintain all good traditions in the [11/12] management of the paper and to make steady improvement in securing news of general interest and importance to the Diocese and in business-like methods of arranging for the paper. We ask special interest in The Delaware Churchman during the next year, asking no support for the paper if it is unworthy of it; but we do ask that you will examine the paper to see what we are trying to accomplish by using it as an effective means of keeping alive interest in all that pertains to the welfare of the Church. At any rate, we have Mr. Laird for Editor; and our prospects could not therefore be better.


I shall make no attempt to enumerate all the changes in the Diocese during the past year; but I wish to call attention to a few recent events which give some ground for encouragement.

The number of vacant parishes in the Diocese has been unusual; but several of them have been satisfactorily filled and there is hope that the near future may have good fortune in store for the others. At the time of my coming to the Diocese, there were Ave vacancies, and in the course of the winter two others have occurred. The Rev. Martin Damer, owing to ill health, was compelled to resign the Rectorship of St. John Baptist's, Miton; the Rev. J. Leighton McKim after two Rectorships, one of twenty-seven and the other of fifteen years, on Ash Wednesday last resigned the Rectorship of Christ Church, Milford. Christ Church, Delaware City, and Christ Church, Milford, are still unprovided for; but the other parishes are now supplied with clergy. St. Michael's, Wilmington, is being served by the Rev. J. R. Peckham of Calvary Church, Wilmington; St. John Baptist's, Milton, by the Rev. J. Leighton McKim. St. Matthew's, Wilmington, is prospering under the care of the Rev. Maximo F. Duty. St. Paul's Georgetown, is rejoicing in the possession of the Rev. D. Wilmot Gateson, now established as Deacon-in-charge under the direction of the Bishop. St. Peter's, Smyrna, has since had a new Rector in the person of the Rev. Charles Henry Holmead, whose work has begun under most promising auspices.

Only one plan undertaken this year looks to the establishment of a new church and parish. For several years, Calvary Church, Brandywine Hundred, has been in a state of ruin, having fallen into disuse since the deaths and removals of those who worshipped there in the past. By the efforts of the Rev. Samuel F. Hotchkin, formerly Rector of Claymont, and the generosity of Mr. William F. Clyde of New York City, it has been made possible to remove the church building and to re-erect it at Hill Creston a lot given for the purpose by Mr. Ernest B. Macnair. The Rector and Vestry of Claymont have with commendable caution and foresight taken the necessary steps to arrange for the removal, with the consent and approval of the Bishop and Standing Committee. It is likely that the new church will be [12/13] completed and in use before the end of another year. Hill Crest is a rapidly growing suburb of Wilmington, and there is every reason to believe that a church in this location will have an opportunity for work of assured usefulness. The plan to establish a new church there at this time is an instance of wise foresight, which results in the near future ought to vindicate.

One new building has been secured for the Diocese. By the care and personal generosity of Mr. Henry B. Thompson of Wilmington, the Babies' Hospital has secured possession of a house adjoining the present building, which will make it possible greatly to enlarge the work and to realize more fully some of the cherished wishes of Bishop and Mrs. Coleman to whom the new building is to be regarded as a memorial. In the matter of Diocesan property, the securing of this building is the most important event of the year.

Mention ought also to be made of the changes and improvements at Bishopstead to make it a suitable and convenient residence for the Bishop and his family. Of this I am tempted to speak at length, as I have daily proofs of the care of the Committee who had the matter in charge; but I must content myself with a single word of allusion, and express my own hope that the uses to which Bishopstead may be put will make it a home not only for the Bishop's family but for the people of the Diocese.

In the church-buildings of the Diocese there have been various minor improvements during the year. Of these the most important is the redecoration and rearrangement of Old Swedes', Wilmington, which has secured the much-needed addition of a new organ. Of the increase in parochial funds during the year, perhaps the most notable instance is the large addition to the endowment of St. Andrew's, Wilmington.

At the risk of seeming to make invidious distinctions, I wish to speak of several pieces of work which give special ground for congratulation and encouragement. All faithful, and effective service is common property and the Diocese may justly appropriate some of the satisfaction to which individuals among us and particular parishes are entitled.

Old, Swedes', Wilmington, is in a sense the Palladium of Delaware. With all deference to the claims of New Castle to historic interest and associations, and to those of Lewes which are this summer to receive ample recognition in a local celebration due chiefly to the indefatigable efforts of Archdeacon Turner, it may be said without fear of contradiction that Old Swedes' has a unique place in the attention and affections of Delawareans. It is a possession not of a Parish, nor of the Diocese, but of the whole State. It will always be a monument of peculiar interest, and its preservation in a way fitting its associations and dignity seems assured by the intelligent care bestowed upon its fabric by its [13/14] custodians in this generation. But it is not of Old Swedes' as an historic monument that I wish to speak.

Those who know what is going on at Old Swedes'--and the number of such in the Diocese is increasing--are aware that Old Swedes' is the center of an active and effective work, unique in the Diocese of Delaware and of a rare quality which would not suffer by comparison with similar work in any part of our Church. The versatile Vicar and his tactful wife are accomplishing a work of uplifting and refining large numbers of boys and girls in the community, which has at present no parallel in the work of this Diocese. They are using to the utmost all their equipment and opportunities. There is no apparent limit to the good they might accomplish were their means of working at all commensurate with their needs. They deserve all possible encouragement and help, because their work could not possibly be better done than they are doing it. The secret of their success is not far to seek. They have in the first place identified themselves with their people and gained that peculiar power that comes of mutual sympathy and respect. They are supremely devoted to Old Swedes' and think that there is no place like it and no, people so interesting; and of course Old Swedes' is supremely devoted to them. In the second place they give all that they have unreservedly to the work. With peculiar gifts and accomplishments, they have found use for everything in the various activities of the Parish; until now to belong to Old Swedes' is to be in a fair way of gaining a liberal education. This work is of Diocesan interest and is a valuable asset in our Diocesan resources. It is to be hoped that it will not lack means of support and extension and that its spirit and method will make themselves widely felt.

Of our mission-workers, the man with the most complicated task and with the greatest demands on his powers of physical endurance is the Rector of Laurel. With six churches under his care and parishioners scattered over the whole south-western corner of Sussex County, he has a more exacting piece of work than often falls to a clergyman outside of a missionary jurisdiction. The intensity with which Mr. Higgins attacks his problems is wearing to the workman; but it makes itself felt in obvious results.

In the town of Seaford there has recently been an awakening. of the conscience of the community to a sense of the evil and danger of certain influences on the young people of the town., The citizens have been roused to interest and action which promise to bring about a permanent betterment of conditions in the place. This result is due in no small degree to the bold yet cautious action of the Rector of St. Luke's and of leading members of his Vestry and congregation. It is gratifying to have [14/15] Churchmen take a bold stand when clearly defined moral issues are at stake; and it is further satisfactory that in this movement there has been cordial cooperation between members and congregations of different churches. It is in ways of this sort that the spirit of Christian unity is best promoted. Another encouraging sign in Seaford is the activity of the younger members of the congregation in working for a new parish-house. As the result of the initiative of one young lady almost $400 was raised for this purpose. This is a most practical way of contributing to the solution of the problem of how best to ensure the healthy developement of the young people of the community.


Since my consecration on October 28, last, I have visited every church in the Diocese save one, Old St. Anne's, Middletown, which is only opened for service on the second Sunday in June. With a few exceptions I have made at least three visits to each parish, and in the case of some of the vacant parishes, I have held service once a month.

My ministerial acts have been as follows:

Celebrations of the Holy Communion;

In public, 42

In private, 9


Baptisms, Infants, 5

Baptisms, Adult, l

Marriages, 4

Burials, 2

Sermons and Addresses,

In the Diocese, 141

Out of the Diocese, 14


Confirmations, 242

St. Paul's, Camden, 2

Christ, Christiana Hundred 9

Ascension, Claymont, 9

Trinity, Clayton, 2

Christ, Dover, 4

St. Philip's, Laurel, 3

St. Peter's, Lewes, 2

St. Mark's, Little Creek, 1

St. John's, Little Hill, 3

Trinity, Long Neck, 3

St. Barnabas', Marshallton 20

St. Anne's, Middletown, 2

Christ Church, Milford, 3

St. Mark's Millsboro', 2

St. Thomas', Newark, 9

Immanuel, New Castle, 15

St. James', Newport, 1

St. Luke's, Seaford, 7

St. Peter's, Smyrna, 5

St. James', Stanton, 3

Calvary, Wilmington, 14

Immanuel, Wilmington, 9

St. Andrew's Wilmington, 13

St. John's, Wilmington, 38

St. Matthew's, Wilmington, 22

Trinity, Wilmington, 26

Old Swedes', Wilmington, 35


All these acts are recorded in parochial registers.

On May 6, in the Church of the Holy Apostles', Philadelphia,

I assisted in the consecration of the Rev. Nathaniel Seymour Thomas as first Bishop of Wyoming.

On Tuesday, May 25, acting by commission from the Bishop of Long Island, in the Church of St. Mark, Brooklyn, I ordained to the Diaconate Mr. Daniel Wilmot Gateson, graduate of Trinity College, Hartford, and of the General Theological Seminary, New York. The candidate was presented by the Rev. J. D. Kennedy, Rector of the Church of St. Mark, and the sermon preached by the Rev. Dr. Loring W. Batten, Rector of St. Mark's-in-the-Bowery, New York. Immediately after his ordination, Mr. Gateson came to Delaware to assume charge of St. Paul's, Georgetown.

On November 7, 1908, I admitted Mr. William Homewood, as Candidate for Holy Orders, and on June 1, acting with the advice and consent of the Standing Committee, I shortened the time of his candidacy to six months.

I have given consent to the consecration of the Rev. Dr. Alfred Harding to be Bishop of Washington, and have signed the testimonials of the Rev. Nathaniel Seymour Thomas to be Bishop of Wyoming and of the Rev. Benjamin Brewster to be Bishop of Western Colorado.

I have transferred the Rev. Clinton Durant Drumm to the Diocese of New York, and the Rev. Jesse Church Taylor to the Diocese of Easton.

I have received into the Diocese of Delaware, the Rev., John Rigg from the Diocese of Jamaica, the Rev. Herbert William [16/17] Barker from the Diocese of Massachusetts and the Rev. Charles Henry Holmead from the Diocese of Washington.

I have instituted the Rev. Charles H. Holmead as Rector of St. Peter's, Smyrna, and have dedicated a new organ in Old Swedes', Wilmington, and the tower, and bell in All Saints' Church, Delmar.

I have licensed the following Lay-Readers in the Diocese, all licenses dating from January 1, 1909:


William Homewood under direction of the Bishop.


William Draper Brinckle under direction of Rev. K. J. Hammond.


Edmund B. Coy under direction of Rev. Hubert W. Wells.


Victor Dure Hanby under direction of Rev. George C. Hall, D. D.
William J. Fisher under direction of Rev. George C. Hall D. D.
George W. Lewis under direction of Rev. George C. Hall D. D.


John S. Grohe under direction of Rev. Frederick M. Kirkus.
Charles M. Curtis under direction of Rev. Frederick M. Kirkus.
Charles A. Cook under direction of Rev. Frederick M. Kirkus.


Benjamin W. Ward under direction of Rev. William H. Higgins.


For a small Diocese, Delaware has a long list of non-parochial clergy, only one of whom lives within the limits of the state. The Rev. John Linn McKim of Georgetown has not inappropriately been called "the Patriarch of the American Church." Last January he observed the seventy-third anniversary of his Ordination to the Diaconate and next month he enters upon his ninety-seventh year. It is striking to reflect that we still have in our midst one of the clergy of Bishop White, now senior to all the clergy of our Church if not to all in the Anglican Communion..

Of our invalided clergy we cannot fail to make kindly and affectionate remembrance, of Mr. Bond, Mr. Henry, Mr. Kidder, Mr. Braddock and Mr. Gilreath. From all of these I have had interesting reports, and I am glad to say that except Mr. Bond, they are all able to discharge a limited amount of pastoral work. Father Paul James Francis of the Society of the Atonement is [17/18] still working at the Priory at Graymoor near Garrisons-on-the-Hudson; the Rev. George R. Savage is doing some work in Brooklyn, New York; the Rev. Charles G. Snepp is in Philadelphia; the Rev. Francis L. Wells has given up ministerial work and is living in Burnside, Connecticut. Of the Rev. G. G. Miller and the Rev. Herman Shaffer I have no knowledge, as my efforts to get into communication with them and to secure a report before Convention have not been successful.


I wish to make a statement concerning the funds entrusted to me for use in the Diocese, as there seems to be misapprehension in some quarters as to the amounts of money which the Bishop of Delaware has to disburse. The specific demands made upon me during the last few months, not to speak of general hints and suggestions, have far exceeded such amounts as are placed at my disposal. No, portion of my salary can be used for Diocesan purposes so long as I live in Bishopstead; for it will only be by close management that I can make it meet the expenses of maintaining the Bishop's House and my travelling-expenses which are considerable. For use for Diocesan expenses such as printing, for parochial and mission expenses such as are constantly brought to the Bishop's notice, and for the relief of worthy individuals and assistance of worthy causes, I have now money to use from four sources.

1. Clergy Relief Fund. The income from this amounts to about $500 a year. I have distributed it to the same persons who received grants last year from the Standing Committee. As almost the total amount was assigned, it has not been possible for me to make allowances from this to any new beneficiaries.

2. Bishop's Discretionary Fund. In accordance with a suggestion made to me by the Presiding-Bishop on the day of my consecration, I have asked that once in the year each parish would give me an offering for use in various ways in the Diocese. For this purpose I have received in all $262.93 in offerings from eighteen parishes. The specific items follow.

3. The Coleman Memorial Fund of the Woman's Auxiliary. From this I have received $214, some given for specified objects, and all used in some way to perpetuate the special work and to keep alive the memory of Bishop Coleman.

4. The Margaret D. Sharp Fund. The income from this is left to the Bishop for religious and charitable purposes. I have disbursed $320 for purposes reported to the Trustees of the Diocese.

The actual amount which I have had to use for all purposes during seven months, representing most that will come to me this year, has been $1,171.93. I have had nothing else to use for the many objects which attract a Bishop's attention, for [18/19] some of which he has to make himself personally responsible. I make this statement by way of explanation of my repeated refusals to give money to some who have assumed that my resources were much greater than is actually the case. I feel the need of such a Discretionary Fund, because the Bishop has many opportunities to help that come to no one else, and excellent opportunities of knowing the times and seasons when help will be most effective. Yet I have no desire for anything like a system of paternal philanthropy in the administration of Church moneys. A Bishop's chief function is not that of a financier, and he must of necessity neglect the proper duties of his office, if he is constantly immersed in money-matters. His need for a Discretionary Fund is precisely the same as that of the Rector of a Parish, only that with a Diocese to think of instead of a Parish, the demands are rather more complicated, and there is perhaps greater need of keen scrutiny of applications and careful cultivation of the art of saying No. It is constantly his duty to let the needs of people be known; but it is better for him to serve as medium of distribution than as himself the distributor. It ought not to be the Bishop's duty in a Diocese like this to go outside to beg. We in Delaware are perfectly able, if we only think so, to bear our own financial burdens, and to do easily. We do need, however, to make fresh efforts to develope our own resources. I am far from wishing to urge anything like self-centered satisfaction; but I do urge that we cultivate greater self-respect and self-dependence.

Bishop's Discretionary Fund

All Saints', Rehoboth, $ 1.25

St. Mark's, Millsboro', $ 8.60

St. Peter's, Lewes, $ 15.48

Immanuel, Wilmington, $ 13.68

Trinity, Wilmington, $ 60.00

St. George's, Indian River, $ 1.75

St Paul's, Georgetown, $ 10.00

St. Anne's, Middletown, $ 3.04

St. James', Newport, $ 3.14

$ 11.83

St. Thomas', Newark,

St. Andrew's, Wilmington, $ 17.42

Christ Church, Dover, $ 17.75

Trinity Church, Clayton, $ 7.76

St. Barnabas', Marshallton $ 3.62

Christ Church, Christiana Hundred, $ 16.00

St. John's, Wilmington, $ 54.79

St. Mark's, Little Creek, $ 2.17

St. John's, Little Hill, $ 3.40

St. Philip's, Laurel, $ 4.60

Special Offertories, $ 6.65

$ 262.93

Woman's Auxiliary Coleman Memorial Fund, $ 214.00

Sharp Fund, $ 320.00

Clergy Relief Fund, $ 375.00


It is impossible for me to conclude this first address to the Convention of the Diocese without some expression of thanks for the many kindnesses of which I have been the recipient during these recent months. The pains taken by the Standing Committee and the Rector of Trinity Church, Wilmington, to arrange for a beautiful service of Consecration and to do everything possible for the comfort and convenience of myself and my family on our first coming to the Diocese formed only the first and chief of a series of thoughtful kindnesses which call for more than a brief allusion. With this nevertheless I must content myself. I shall however do no one injustice, if I give myself the satisfaction of acknowledging supreme obligations to the Rector of Immanuel Church, Wilmington. I came to the Diocese with the desire to approach Delaware problems in the spirit and with the prepossessions of a genuine Delawarean. I wished to be open-minded to new impressions and to be careful not to let experience elsewhere constitute a criterion for judging things in Delaware. I determined therefore to undertake nothing for my first year without conference with some one who by years of experience knew the Diocese. I knew that a Bishop is expected to know his own mind, to take his own line and to be able to lead; but I knew also that a young Bishop coming from another part of the country might easily fall into error, if he trusted only his instincts and first quick impressions. I felt therefore that I owed it to the Diocese to ask and to act upon advice, and that the natural adviser for a new Bishop was the President of the Standing Committee. At any rate I sought the help I needed from Mr. Hammond, and I have never felt the necessity of going further. I have spoken freely of various matters to men especially concerned; but to Mr. Hammond alone have I gone with many problems and perplexities. No man could have had a kinder and more patient friend, and no new Bishop of Delaware a more prudent counsellor or an adviser more in sympathy with the genius of the of the Diocese. I have been fortunate in many things, but in none more than in the personal associations under which I have entered upon the work of my life.

I must also speak of my special obligations to the Chancellor--designate of the State. When I have been in need of a lay or legal point of view, I have usually appealed to the Secretary of the Standing Committee. He has never failed to give what I needed, irrespective of whether his own position was humble or exalted. If in future I shall be at all able to discharge the duties [20/21] of my position, it will be due in no small degree to the excellence of my early tuition in Delaware.

I wish in all things to take hopeful views, and to make the most of all signs of progress and encouragement. At the same time, clear vision of the condition of the Church in this Diocese cannot fail to recognize the weakness of our general condition and the comparative feebleness of many of our efforts. There is a clear call to soberness and resoluteness; but if we respond to that call, God's grace will not permit us to fail.

Bishop of Delaware.

Bishopstead, June 1, 1909.

Project Canterbury