Читать книгу Henry John Cody - Donald Campbell Masters - Страница 18

Chapter 10

The Toronto Episcopal Election of 1909

Episcopal elections in the Anglican Church in Canada have often been tense and quietly competitive. They could well be examined by political scientists as well as by church historians. One of the most dramatic and significant was the Toronto election of 1909. Not only did it put two good men, H.J. Cody and Bishop George Thornloe, in apparent opposition to each other, but it crystallized the traditional rivalry between Wycliffe and Trinity and their respective adherents.

This rivalry dated back to the days of Strachan and Bethune and had precipitated a struggle in the Toronto Synod of 1879 and led to the election of Arthur Sweatman, a compromise candidate. Sweatman held the balance between the two elements. As a former evangelical from Huron Diocese he leaned backward to avoid the appearance of favouring Wycliffe. Indeed, the Wycliffe people were offended by his coolness, particularly when he failed to appear at a Wycliffe convocation.

The delicate balance Sweatman had maintained was brought to an end by his death on January 28, 1909. The election to choose his successor was fixed for February 17. Soon the clergy and others began contemplating the choice of a successor and forming preliminary organizations.

The Toronto press counselled peace. The Globe and the World hoped the election would not become a confrontation between Wycliffe and Trinity.¹ One clergyman optimistically declared that the spirit of partyism had diminished in the diocese. It was a vain hope. The “high church” party had already held an organization meeting on February 16. The evangelicals were slower to organize but no less determined. Various candidates were mentioned in the press, including Edward A. Welch, the rector of St. James Cathedral, and J.A. Richardson, the Bishop of Fredericton, but H.J. Cody, the rector of St. Paul’s Church, Toronto, and George Thornloe, the Bishop of Algoma, were most frequently mentioned. Of these two, the Canadian Churchman later declared, “it would perhaps be impossible within the Church in Canada to find ... two men of superior piety, intellect, scholarship and capacity for the high and sacred office of Bishop of the foremost diocese in the Dominion.”²

Thornloe, a graduate of Bishop’s College (1872), had been a prominent member of the Diocese of Quebec prior to his election as Bishop of Algoma in 1896–97. In churchmanship he reflected the views of Bishop G.J. Mountain and Jasper Nicolls, the principal of Bishop’s College when Thornloe was a student. Thornloe was a fine man, the saintly type of high churchman evangelicals could respect, but who might not get their vote. W.J. Armitage described Thornloe as “alert and keen and vigilant, lest there be any departure from high ideals and standards,” adding that Thornloe had brought to the prayer book committee of General Synod “a rich spiritual experience, and a most courteous presentation of his views.”³ Thornloe was 61. This was said by some to be a handicap.

T.C.S. Macklem, the provost of Trinity, played an important part in the synod of 1909 as the leader of the pro-Thornloe campaign. He was a man of great determination, a quality he shared with S.H. Blake of the opposite camp. Macklem, a graduate of Upper Canada College and Cambridge University, had been rector of a city church in Toronto prior to his appointment at Trinity. He was vigorous in mobilizing support for Thornloe, particularly among the clergy.

Cody was supported by the same group that had fought the battle of evangelicalism in the diocese since the days of Bishop Bethune (1867–79). They had founded Wycliffe, Ridley, and Havergal as well as Sheraton’s paper, the Evangelical Churchman. Their ranks had been thinned by death since 1879. Sheraton, Des Barres, Sir Casimir Gzowski, and Clarke Gamble (Gamble had negotiated the episcopal compromise of 1879) were all gone, but there were recent additions, such as W.H. Vance, the rector of the Church of the Ascension in Toronto. Some of the older leaders were still active, notably S.H. Blake and N.W. Hoyles, both of whom could now be regarded as the leaders of the group.

Hoyles, another prominent lawyer, was a close friend of Cody’s. In a long, fatherly letter, Hoyles urged Cody not to let his life of furious activity wear him out. Among the clerical delegates were many of Cody’s friends – T.R. O’Meara, George Wrong, W.H. Vance, and others.⁴ As the synod was to demonstrate, the evangelicals in the lower house were more effectively led than were the evangelical clergy in the upper house; they were also proportionately more numerous.

The election attracted a great deal more interest in the press than Anglican elections ordinarily do. The Globe and the World both favoured Cody. The World took a nationalist line, stressing the fact that Thornloe was English while Cody was native Canadian. One clergyman suggested to the World (February 17) that Thornloe was a compromise candidate, as he came from outside the diocese and was not identified with Wycliffe or Trinity. This view was not widely accepted.

The Daily Mail and Empire was more impartial, attempting to be fair to both candidates. On February 16 it reported the remarks of one of Thornloe’s friends: “In his [Thornloe’s] administration of the Diocese of Algoma he has overcome many difficulties. During his career he has had varied experience in Canada. His executive ability is of a high order.” Cody was described as “an eloquent preacher, a ripe scholar, being a professor of Wycliffe College ... In the conduct of his parish he has met with large success.” However, some small points in the paper’s coverage of the synod indicated a preference for Thornloe.

The election was held in St. James’ Cathedral. It was still called a cathedral, although St. Alban’s, in the process of being built, was officially the diocesan cathedral. Perhaps in view of all the advance publicity the synod had received, the convening circular stated “that during the Balloting there shall be no manifestation of feeling, but that all, by quiet and orderly demeanor, shall pay the deepest respect to the solemnity of the sacred duty in which they are engaged.”⁵

By today’s standards there were unusual rules of voting. The clergy voted as individuals whether attached to parishes or not, but the laity voted as parishes. Each parish was entitled to one lay vote even though a parish might be represented by three lay delegates. The rule for lay voting was a follows: “The Scrutineers, having retired, shall record the vote according to the contents of each envelope. If two Representatives vote for ‘A’ and one for ‘B’ the vote shall be recorded for ‘A.’ If the Representatives vote, one for ‘A’ and another for ‘B,’ and a third for ‘C’; or if there be only two and they each vote for a different Clergyman, the vote shall be recorded as lost.”⁶ Thus the lay vote, which was always in Cody’s favour, appeared much smaller than the clerical vote (177 clerical and 128 lay votes on the first ballot.)