In what seems to be shaping up as the Year of the Martyr, today's pairing involves not a whit of martyrdom. The first bishop of the Episcopal Church faces a 7th- century monastic leader and both died of natural causes!
Yesterday, in a most lopsided match-up, Oscar Romero made quick work of Elizabeth Ann Seton defeating her 68% to 32% with nearly 4,500 votes cast. Interestingly the comments were split fairly evenly between the two even if the votes were not.
Many of you, especially those new to Lent Madness (welcome aboard the SS Madness!), have asked how the official bracket is formulated. In this brief video filmed last Eastertide, Scott and Tim give you a peek behind the purple curtain of Lent Madness. You might be surprised at the "scientific/holy" methods used to create our special blend of saintly absurdity.
Samuel Seabury
Samuel Seabury (November 30, 1729 – February 25, 1796) was the First Bishop of The Episcopal Church, consecrated as the Bishop of Connecticut on November 14, 1784.
Seabury was born in Groton, Connecticut in 1729. He attended Yale College, and studied theology with his father. From a young age, he had felt a call to ordained ministry; however, canonical age restrictions prevented his ordination following his university studies. To pass the time, Seabury moved to Scotland, where he studied medicine in Edinburgh. In 1753, at age 24, he was ordained as a priest.
Seabury returned to the United States, where he served as rector of several parishes from 1754 onward. It was during his time as Rector of St. Peter’s, Westchester (now the Bronx), that the American Revolution erupted. Seabury proved himself a staunch defender of the crown, writing several tracts under the pen name of “A. W. Farmer” (an exceptionally uncreative acronym for “A Westchester Farmer”). In 1775, Seabury was arrested and imprisoned by local Patriots. During this period, Seabury’s family was beaten, his possessions ransacked – and his wife ultimately died. Seabury faced the possibility of exile in England.
In March, 1783, ten Episcopal clergymen, meeting in Woodbury, Connecticut, elected Seabury as their second choice to be Bishop. When the first choice declined, Seabury sailed to London in July of that year to be consecrated bishop. But after a year of negotiation, Seabury was unable to obtain episcopal orders from the Church of England, since, as an American citizen, he could not give the canonically required oath of allegiance to the King. Seabury turned to Scotland, whose non-juring bishops did not require an oath of allegiance. In return for reception of episcopal orders from the Scottish Church, Seabury signed a concordat agreeing to incorporate elements of the Scottish Eucharistic Liturgy – most notably the invocation of the Holy Spirit (or epiclesis) – into the new American Liturgy. In November, 1784, he was consecrated bishop. Seabury’s consecration as bishop by the Scottish church ultimately spooked the English Parliament enough to make provision for the consecration of foreign bishops: in 1786, William White and Samuel Provoost would ultimately receive their episcopal orders from the Church of England. Seabury returned to New London, Connecticut, where he served as Rector of St. James Church, and Bishop of Connecticut; in 1789, his ordination was recognized by the first General Convention of the Episcopal Church; in 1792, he joined in the first ordination to the Episcopate on American soil when he, White, and Provoost ordained John Claggett of Maryland.
Seabury was ahead of his time in many of his liturgical persuasions – some of which made him a polarizing figure within the church of his day. Today, the innovations don’t seem quite as controversial and instead ahead of their time: Seabury advocated for weekly celebrations of the Holy Communion and was among the first post-Reformation bishops to wear a mitre.
Seabury died in February, 1796, and is buried at St. James Church, New London, Connecticut.
Collect for the Consecration of Samuel Seabury
We give you thanks, O Lord our God, for your goodness in bestowing upon this Church the gift of the episcopate, which we celebrate in this remembrance of the consecration of Samuel Seabury; and we pray that, joined together in unity with our bishops, and nourished by your holy Sacraments, we may proclaim the Gospel of redemption with apostolic zeal; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.
-- David Sibley
Hilda of Whitby
Hilda was born into nobility, the grandniece of King Edwin, and was baptized on Easter Day in 627 with the entire noble court of the King. We know almost nothing about the first half of her life. Presumably she did not marry, and after King Edwin was killed in battle, she went to live with her sister in East Anglia. She then planned to join her widowed sister in a convent in Chelles in Gaul, but Bishop Aidan of Lindisfarne changed her plans, as bishops tend to do. He asked her to settle in Northumbria to be part of a monastic community there. With her companions in this monastery, she lived in the Celtic Christian tradition Aidan brought from Iona. A year later, Aidan asked Hilda to found a double monastery (which accepted both women and men) in Hartlepool. After several years there, Aidan again asked Hilda to take her monastic show on the road and establish a monastery in Whitby in 657. It, too, was a double monastery where men and women prayed, served, and learned together in community.
The Venerable Bede writes of Hilda that she established a regular life in Whitby and “taught the obedience of righteousness, mercy, purity, and other virtues, but especially peace and charity. After the example of the primitive Church, no one there was rich, no one was needy, for everything was held in common and nothing was considered to be anyone’s personal property.” Hilda was called “mother” by all who knew her.
Hilda was an early spiritual director and diplomat. Common people as well as kings and others in power came to her for advice in their spiritual challenges and questions of life. She would have eschewed the title (because she was a big fan of humility and equality) but she was most certainly a Cardinal Mother. Her monastery at Whitby produced five bishops and Caedmon, an early English holy poet who wrote in (shockingly enough) vernacular English, a first in literature of the day. Because of Hilda’s support and encouragement of his poetry and education, she is also called a mother of English literature.
As if being a Cardinal Mother, the founder of several successful monasteries, and the mother of English literature wasn’t enough, Hilda’s denouement in her life of faith occurred at the Synod of Whitby. The male leaders of the day got together to decide (argue) whether the Church in England would follow Aidan’s Celtic Christian lead or fall in line with the more Roman expression of Christianity. The big controversy between the two was not women’s ordination or the full inclusion of lesbians or gays, or the use of incense, but the date of Easter (I know, clutch your pearls). Hilda favored the Celtic tradition, but when the Synod decided to follow the Roman tradition, she spoke passionately and as one with authority that she would be obedient to the Synod’s decision and expected others to do the same.
She died in 680, surrounded by those who called her monastery home. Her last words were not of church power or ecclesiastical wealth, but of faithfully following a Gospel of love and peace. Always.
Collect for Hilda of Whitby
O God of peace, by whose grace the abbess Hilda was endowed with gifts of justice, prudence, and strength to rule as a wise mother over the nuns and monks of her household, and to become a trusted and reconciling friend to leaders of the Church: Give us the grace to recognize and accept the varied gifts you bestow on men and women, that our common life may be enriched and your gracious will be done; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.
-- Laurie Brock
Vote!
[poll id="47"]
169 comments on “Samuel Seabury vs. Hilda of Whitby”
First American bishop, yeah. A high churchman and British loyalist, he stuck to his principles. But kind of a stick-in-the-mud, too. So while we're grateful for the role ol' Sam played in the Episcopal Church's formation, gotta give the nod this time to the imaginative Hilda, on the real cutting cusp of creating Christian communities (alliteratation allowed) in England.
Hilda who set up houses of prayer.
Pearls now unclutched (nice touch). Torn by my allegiance to the Bronx, I nonetheless voted for Hilda. While Seabury's created a wider church, Hilda created a deeper one.
Well stated!
I had to vote for Saint Hilda. I’ve traveled to Whitby and the ruins overlooking the North Sea. I heard the chants of the faithful and felt I had come to the ends of the earth. A beautiful and peaceful place.
Samuel Seabury is my choice today. I do need a point guard to get us to the final four.
Besides, he does have quite a story.
Hilda...woman of power and conviction who got it done. As a lover of the Celtic tradition, how could I not vote for her?
I found myself having a hard time warming up to Seabury. It is certainly true that he contributed greatly to the Episcopal Church and his advocacy for weekly communion earns him points in my book. However his Tory leanings concern me since if things had gone his way we would today be Church of England and not Episcopal.
Hilda's overall body of work might not equal Seabury's but I find in her a special quality. While arguing the date of Easter might seem small to us I am struck by how Hilda handled it. Hilda advocated strongly for her position but in the end had the wisdom and grace to accept the decision of the group. If only our elected leaders displayed these qualities. Besides being Scots-Irish it is hard for me to vote against a Celt.
Oh dear - the patron of my seminary alma mater, or the matron of the community I serve. No contest - it is Hilda all the way! Her life, her choices, her faith inspire our church of St. Hilda St. Patrick (one of 3 churches in the US that are blessed to be named after her). We can only aspire to love and serve as she did!
I voted for Hild for all the reason stated. I cannot condone a Tory either. I am sure the Bishop is a worthy person but my inclination is to go with a winner. ( For a change).
I'm going with Hild for a bunch of reasons, but especially for presiding over what must have been a most contentious gathering at Whitby, easily rivaling any General Convention of today. I seem to remember that at the Synod of Whitby, another raging controversy that had to be resolved in the big Celtic vs. Roman smackdown was that of the official haircut for monks. The Roman tradition favored the "halo" do with the hair left all around the edges of the head and a shaved spot in the middle. The Celtic style supposedly involved shaving the head in the front from ear to ear leaving the hair from the middle of the top of the head to hang down the back of the head. ( Obviously this makes far more sense than shaving the back of the head and leaving the front of the head unshaven with hair hanging down the front.) The Romans won, as witnessed by the classic monastic tonsure. By the way, all this comes from having read this somewhere a very long time ago; I can't vouch for its veracity. I'm not sure if there was a similar controversy about the women's hairstyles. If anyone has any corrections or can add any more information about this event, certainly one of the most significant in the history of hair styling, I would be most grateful to learn more.
I cannot vote for anyone but Hild. What a woman! If Seabury had been born in a different time and place. He would not be in the bracket.
Same for Hild.
One thing that was not mentioned was that Seabury wrote many tracts in the 1760's in favor of establishing an American bishop. He understood that the church could not survive or move forward if anyone who felt the call to Holy Orders had to travel to England--a potentially dangerous and certainly expensive proposition. He wrote under a pseudonym which was wise since there was considerable opposition from the Bishop of London (under whose authority all clergy in all the colonies served) and the English establishment. Had his view prevailed it is very likely that the Episcopal church would have remained much stronger after the Revolution and would not have lost so much membership (and property) to the Methodists who had plenty of ministers because they didn't have to go to England for ordination.
So it's important to understand that he very much understood that America had a unique culture and needed a degree of self-governance. His position, like that of many loyalists, was that while changes were needed, they need not be so radical. He would certainly have preferred something along the lines of what ultimately developed in the the British Commonwealth with domestic self-governance and institutional but largely ceremonial ties to the mother country. It goes against our civic culture now, but we need to see him in his own culture. It is also very notable that unlike many clergy, he did not flee to Canada in order to remain loyal to the Crown, but rather fully embraced being an American citizen; note that he did not offer to swear allegiance to the crown in order to be consecrated.
As others have noted he was ahead of his time and though considered quite high church in his day, would be considered quite the norm in our own with his emphasis on the sacramental aspects of the Anglican tradition and the importance of the Eucharist as the primary expression of regular corporate worship.
Finally, he was renowned in his own time for his travels as Bishop and for his pastoral work for his own parish as well as his diocese. He was prickly and his subsequent conflict with leaders of the more evangelical wing and of the Southern church have tended to diminish his reputation outside of his native New England.
What Chris said! Go Sam!
My heart is still with Hilda, but what a persuasive argument Chris makes for looking at Seabury as 3-dimensional human being and spiritual leader, and not just as a church politician (my inclination prior to reading this post.)
Even so, reading about Hilda's life just moves me in ways I cannot articulate further.
This comment swayed my vote. I was on the border until I read this. Setting the example of obediently honoring the Synod's decision should be an example all of us follow.
"Hilda favored the Celtic tradition, but when the Synod decided to follow the Roman tradition, she spoke passionately and as one with authority that she would be obedient to the Synod’s decision and expected others to do the same."
Pardon the nerd comment, especially since I doubt Bishop Seabury will make it to the next round. But in yr narrative, you state he participated in the consecration of Bishop "John" Claggett. Down here in the Dio of MD, where we still remember Bishop Claggett fondly, we refer to him by his first name, THOMAS Claggett.
This is a toughie... I am a Nutmeg State native which would sway my vote toward Samuel Seabury, but I so wish Hilda had prevailed so that we might have been able to incorporate elements of the Celtic tradition earlier on, but then there's that part of Seabury getting the epiclesis inserted into the eucharistic canon... oh me, oh my. What to do?
Let's also remember that Sam Seabury also was the first bishop of Rhode Island, too. Sam all the way!!
You had me at EPICLESIS. Ok, I usually go for the contemplatives, and not for "the man," but I am so happy that the Scots insisted he take that Eucharistic gesture back to the U.S. for children who lose interest in listening to the Great Thanksgiving, they are taken by gestures and movement for prayer. For me it is a sign of covenant, which always originates with God. It is a sign of our prayer to invite God in and transform "the gifts," and we are the gifts too. And it isn't complete until the gesture of response is given: when the bread and wine are lifted in offering the great doxology (all this we ask of you...all honor and glory are yours, now and forever). I love a big hearty AMEN or an amen set to music at that point. "Amen" meaning, "Yes, we agree with all that has been said and done. So be it."
With all due respect to Bishop Seabury...not the friendliest guy. Just saying.
Thank you Lent Madness. I learned today that the local Episcopal church where I grew up (St. Peter) had such a famous rector. Not that I would have known then who Seabury was 🙂 However, I will have to go with Hild(a) for many reasons so well covered in the biography!
Hilda, because the world needs more celtic saints, and less partisan stupidity.
As much as I'm grateful for the inclusion of the epiclesis, had to vote for Hilda.
Too bad so many of our bishops and clergy don't understand that being in the Catholic tradition means being obedient with the Synod/Council/Convention. Hild understood that this is the way the Holy Spirit speaks to the church, and that our personal opinions, no matter how scholarly, are just that -- personal opinions.
Too bad so many of our bishops and clergy don't understand that being in the Catholic tradition means being obedient with the Synod/Council/Convention. Hild understood that this is the way the Holy Spirit speaks to the church, and that our personal opinions, no matter how scholarly, are just that -- personal opinions.
Oy vey vey! This is a tough one! As a longtime supporter of the epiclesis as THE moment when all Heaven breaks loose, I was going with the dead white male (every few centuries one of them gets something right), but Hilda's devotion to the Way opened by Jesus ultimately counted for more in the scales of my frequently erratic judgment (I'm neither a sheep nor a goat most of the time, but I am definitely a March Hare).
Just wanted to say that my father was rector of St James New London from 1947- 1957. I find this lent madness fascinating and hope you will do it next year.
This is such church geekdom fun .... but I must go with Hilda. I mean, a spiritual director in Lent Madness ... how awesome is that? And the pearl clutching had me laughing out loud ... not that Hilda clutched her pearls, but it's good that we know ourselves so well! It's Hilda for me ...
Celtic saint all the way. The Celtic saints kept me in the church when little else could.
When the British took over the dutch colony and renamed it New York, the original settlers were required to make an oath to the British Crown, similar to that made by all who would be clergy in the Church of England. Three members of my family fled to Canada rather than break that oath, the rest of us fought the Red Coats. I understand the situation Fr. Sam found himself in. I applaud the contribution he made to our liturgics, but Hilda got my vote.
Hild of Whitby 100%. Not being any kind of expert in this subject but having taken Whitby as my heart/soul's hometown after visiting there many times, she's the One. It seems to me that Seabury was more about HIM and Hild was more about OTHERS. That's just a laywoman's take on it.
A Bishop who advocated weekly Eucharist, had the courage to stand by his convections, and wore a miter and a Cardinal Mother who realized the value of both men and women, founded orders, was influenced by the Celtic traditions, and followed the decisions of the group. A very difficult choice. I think I'll let my gender be the deciding factor and vote for Hilda.
I have always thought we could have used more of the Celtic influence in the church so BRAVO to Hilda for supporting that at the Synod of Whitby.