This book - Centro de Estudos Anglicanos

74THE EPISCOPALIANSthe poor. As teachers, the sisters also nurtured a social conscience in many of theupper-class young women whom they instructed. In sum, the sisterhoods identifiedimportant new areas of lay ministry, trained workers to serve in those fields,and provided meaningful roles in which Episcopal women could serve. 38THE MUHLENBERG MEMORIALAt the 1853 General Convention, a group of clergy under the leadership ofWilliam Augustus Muhlenberg presented a “memorial” (petition) to the House ofBishops in which they raised questions about the relationship of the EpiscopalChurch to what they termed “the great moral and social necessities” of their day. 39Muhlenberg was then a highly respected figure in the denomination, known forhis broad-minded spirit and for his opposition to narrow sectarianism. Althoughhe was a steadfast member of the evangelical party, he had not only supportedthe work of Anne Ayres’s sisterhood but also introduced liturgical innovationssuch as weekly (rather than quarterly) celebrations of the Eucharist and the placingof candles on the altar at his parish in New York. 40 Muhlenberg and his colleaguesfeared that internal dissension caused by the ongoing conflict between high churchand evangelical Episcopalians was starting to hinder the mission of their denomination.The Episcopal Church was socially too narrow, geographically too restricted,and liturgically too rigid, they suggested, to be effective in the criticalevangelistic task of “preaching and dispensing the Gospel to all sorts and conditionsof men.” They sought to create instead a “system, broader and morecomprehensive than . . . the Protestant Episcopal Church as it now is, . . . providingfor as much freedom in opinion, discipline and worship as is compatible withthe essential faith and order of the Gospel.” 41Muhlenberg’s group advanced two distinct reform proposals—one liturgicaland the other ecumenical. First, they suggested changes that would introducegreater flexibility in the church’s worship. At this time, worship on a typicalSunday morning consisted of the prayer book services of Morning Prayer, Litany,and Ante-Communion (the initial part of the Eucharist through the sermon), allread successively in one sitting. Clergy, Muhlenberg believed, needed to have thefreedom to alter this liturgy as well as to use biblical lessons and prayers thatwere not available in the official 1789 Book of Common Prayer. The petitionersfeared that, because of the manner in which Episcopal worship was conducted,it had little appeal either to “the low classes of our population” or to people whodesired a liturgy that was aesthetically and emotionally appealing. Second, theyurged the recruitment of clergy in other denominations, “sound in the faith” and“able ministers of the New Testament,” who would be willing to be ordained byEpiscopal bishops but who would not be required to follow all the distinctive“prescriptions and customs” of the Episcopal Church. An ecumenical gesture likethat would not only extend the reach of the Episcopal Church but also representa major step toward effecting the union of all Protestants in the United States. 42The House of Bishops responded by appointing a special commission of five