Like many of the Huguenot families who came to America, the Jays joined the Church of England. Augustus Jay and Peter Jay were both vestrymen of Trinity Church. Peter Jay was an intimate friend of the Reverend Samuel Johnson, a leading figure in the clergy of the northern colonies and the first President of King’s College. Despite his affection for Johnson, Peter Jay had taken a firm stand in support of the right of lay vestry to select ministers without prior consultation with the London-based Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts (S.P.G.), which attempted to gain control over such appointments.1

Jay followed his grandfather and father, and served as a church warden for Trinity, in 1785 and 1789–91. Like his father and most of his fellow parishioners, he held “broad church” views, rejecting elaborate dogma and supporting a strong vestry. He declared to the Reverend Samuel Miller that “In forming and Setting my Belief relative to the Doctrines of Christianity, I adopted no articles from Creeds, but such only as on careful Examination I found to be confirmed by the Bible—”. His wife, Sarah Livingston Jay, had been brought up a Presbyterian; indeed, her father, William Livingston, was one of the most vocal opponents of the establishment of an American bishop. However, the Jay children were brought up in the Episcopal Church. The strength of Jay’s views can be seen in a 1778 letter (albeit a playful one) written to his sister-in-law Susan Livingston, who was caring for Peter Augustus Jay. “His mother expects that by the Time she sees him his Education will be considerably advanced, and that he will by that time have been taught to d—n the King and say the Westminster Confession of Faith. However the first may be the Case, I tell her she will be disappointed as to the latter, for you may remember you promised before Parson Charlton to make a Churchman of him.”2

However, Jay’s interest in the Church was not merely one of personal faith. During the Revolution, it became a matter of security. Many of the clergy and lay people were Loyalists, either actively or passively. Samuel Johnson, for example, remained loyal to the Crown but did not participate in the war and stayed in America after it. Others, like Myles Cooper, left America, and still others were active and obnoxious Loyalists. Jay numbered among the latter “Those of the Clergy of the Church of England almost without Exception, who received annual Salaries from the Society established in England for propagating the Gospel in foreign Parts—”3 However, there were a number of active patriots within both the clergy and lay people, such as future bishops William White (1748–1836) and Samuel Provoost (or Provost, 1742–1815). These were American-born and supported financially by the vestry. Jay was active in purging the Church of the Loyalist clergy, removing them to distant sites where they were less likely to provide aid and comfort to the enemy. Notable among these were the Reverend Samuel Seabury (1728–96) of White Plains, in Westchester County, New York.4 Jay’s zeal in this drew attacks in the press from such rabid Loyalist clergymen as the Reverend Charles Inglis, rector of New York City’s Trinity Church during most of the war years.5

Even before his return to the United States, Jay was kept abreast of events at Trinity Church by his friends and family. The church building was destroyed by fire in September 1776, a fire possibly set by Patriots. Under British occupation, the Loyalist rectors of the church were protected, and clearly intended to maintain their positions whatever the outcome of the war. On 1 November 1783, just weeks before the British evacuation of New York City, the Loyalist Reverend Benjamin Moore was elected rector when Inglis resigned. Five days later, the “Whig Episcopalian” faction, led by Robert R. Livingston and James Duane, denounced the choice and succeeded in petitioning the Council for the Southern District for his removal, replacing him with the Reverend Samuel Provoost. Jay’s sister-in-law Catharine W. Livingston and friend Robert R. Livingston both wrote Jay about these events.6 When Jay returned to New York in the summer of 1784, he quickly aligned himself with the Provoost faction.

With the end of the war, the Church was in disarray. Many Loyalist clergymen fled to Nova Scotia or England. The supervision and financial support of the American churches by the Bishop of London and the S.P.G. was cut off. Before the war, those who sought ordination had to travel to England, as there was no American bishop. After the war, this option no longer existed, as the rite of ordination included oaths of loyalty. The Church had no central organization or financial structure. There was an urgent need for reorganization and reinvigoration.7

The Reverend William White, the chaplain of the Continental Congress and brother-in-law of Robert Morris, was a staunch patriot and proposed a plan that reflected his political beliefs. His pamphlet, The Case of the Episcopal Churches in the United Sates Considered (1782), with modifications, provided the blueprint for the new, democratic church, with a strong vestry.8

The political status of the Church of England as the established church of Great Britain, and the oaths of loyalty necessitated for ordination made the ordination of clergy and the creation of bishops delicate political and diplomatic issues, not just religious matters. This delicacy was equally recognized by British clergy and administration, who did not wish to start trouble with the Americans.9 These issues were further complicated by the desire of the American clergy to maintain the apostolic succession: ordination of clergy and consecration of bishops must be performed by bishops in the unbroken line of ordination from the Apostles. Once again, Jay’s involvement in these issues was partly a matter of personal faith and partly due to his role as a representative of the United States, first as diplomat and then as Minister for Foreign Affairs.

The matter of ordination was resolved in 1784, largely through the efforts of John Adams. Adams had determined through the Danish ambassador to The Hague that the Danish clergy were eligible and willing to ordain American candidates. Soon after this became known to the English bishops, Parliament passed on 13 August 1784 “an Act to empower the Bishop of London for the time being, or any Other Bishop to be by him appointed, to admit to the Order of Deacon or Priest, Persons being Subjects or Citizens of Countries out of his Majesty’s Dominions, without requiring them to take the Oath of Allegiance as appointed by Law”.10

The matter of the bishops was complicated by a faction of former-Loyalist clergy, led by Samuel Seabury. They rejected White’s democratic vision of the Church and desired a hierarchical, High Church structure. While most clergy and laypeople were willing to wait until a general convention to settle the matter of bishops, Seabury’s faction decided to force the matter. Seabury was elected bishop of Connecticut and sailed to England to gain consecration, which required the laying on of hands by three bishops. However, he faced a roadblock as the English clergy were not willing to consecrate him, in part because (once again) a Parliamentary Act was needed to remove the oath of loyalty from the rite, and in part, because they did not wish to cause a diplomatic incident. Seabury convinced the bishops of the Church of Scotland to consecrate him on 14 November 1784. However, he did not realize that because the Scottish bishops were non-juring (they did not swear the oath of loyalty after the ascension of William and Mary to the throne), his consecration was not recognized by the English church.11

Jay became immediately involved in this controversy. Jay, James Duane, and Samuel Provoost disputed Seabury’s ordination as defective, a position upheld at a general convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church (as it newly designated itself) that met at Philadelphia from 27 September–7 October 1785. Influential in reaching this decision were letters the Reverend James Manning (1738–91) of Rhode Island communicated to some members of Congress and lent to Dr. Provoost, who desired the liberty to copy them. The letters had come from Granville Sharp (1735–1813), the grandson of the Archbishop of York, one addressed to Manning and one to Benjamin Franklin. Both lengthy missives inveighed against the legal and ecclesiastical authority of Samuel Seabury and the importance of not recognizing his consecration by the Scottish bishops.12 Jay informed John Adams, then America’s minister at the Court of St. James, the opinion of the 1785 convention regarding Seabury and forwarded a letter from President of Congress Richard Henry Lee urging a resolution of the issue of the consecration of American bishops in England. While Jay believed that “Bishops are of little Importance,” he felt strongly that Seabury’s High Church principles were antithetical to both Episcopalians and the principles of the Revolution.13 William White also wrote Adams, stressing the importance of “the episcopal succession in the first instance from the English bishops.”14 Adams, while acting “in no official Character, having no Instructions from Congress nor indeed from the Convention” handled this delicate mission with tact, meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury. In June 1786, Parliament passed the “Act to impower the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, for the Time being, to consecrate to the Office of a Bishop, Persons being Subjects or Citizens of countries out of his Majesty’s Dominions.”15

In between the first convention and the second held the following year, state conventions held in New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia elected Samuel Provoost, William White, and David Griffith, respectively, as bishops, being scrupulous to obtain certificates from the Confederation government in the form of letters from Richard Henry Lee, as President of Congress, and Jay, as Secretary for Foreign Affairs, that such elections in no way conflicted with federal law. Jay used Provoost as a trustworthy courier.16

At a second church convention held in Philadelphia, 20–26 June 1786, the Church had to respond to concerns expressed to them about liturgy by the bishops of England in a letter of 24 February 1786, in response to their letter of 5 October 1785. Provoost, in a letter of 17 June 1786, below, informed Jay of the issues and asked for his advice on the matter. According to William White’s Memoirs, “All that could be done in the present stage of the business, was to acknowledge the kindness of their letter, to repeat the application for the episcopacy, and to re-assure them of attachment to the system of the church of England. This was accordingly done, in a letter drafted by the Rev. Dr. Smith, but considerably altered on a motion of the Hon. John Jay, Esq. who thought the draft too submissive.”17 Jay, who had arrived on Sunday afternoon, 25 June, was promptly chosen, along with Francis Hopkinson, to serve on a committee to redraft the letter to the archbishops and bishops of England, on 26 June. It indicated a wish to continue an affiliation with the Church of England, urging a revision of the liturgy, and renewing the request for the consecration of American bishops already elected. Jay was the principal draftsman of this communication, below, and for his efforts received the thanks of the Reverend David Griffith, formerly a New Yorker and now Virginia’s bishop.18