 |
Arms of the Episcopal Church.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024. |
As a baptized and confirmed member of the Episcopal Church, I've long held a fascination with the arms of my church. From the ubiquitous "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You," sign to the banner of arms flown within my childhood parish, St. Peter's in Huntington, West Virginia, I simply grew up surrounded and nurtured by this familiar symbol within a loving community. For the greater portion of my life, I did not know, much less understand, the particulars of how this flag could represent both history and faith at the same time.
When I began researching the heraldic work of Pierre de Chaignon la Rose (1872-1941) in 2014, I went searching for the real history behind these attractive arms. Sure, there was a lot of surface-level data, incorrectly identifying William M. Baldwin (d.1942), from the Diocese of Long Island, as the designer. Even my own church history professor and co-editor of An Episcopal Dictionary of the Church (2000), The Rev. Dr. Donald S. Armentrout (1939-2013) got it wrong too (page 174). To be fair, many of the works cited herein are out of print and have since been digitized and readily found through the internet--that powerful search tool was not so well established at the time of Slocum and Armentrout's book. Progress indeed.
I remember early on discovering Hertell's (1941) article published in The Layman's Magazine of the Episcopal Church, in which the author attributes the design of the Episcopal Church's arms to la Rose. Furthermore, Luce (1958) also concurs with Hertell (1941) regarding la Rose's hand in the design. More recently, Egleston and Sherman (2019) broke the news revealing the herald's design and provided a needed contribution to the story. To be clear, la Rose did not actually make the physical flag or banner of arms, that was the work of Baldwin--and this confusion is likely what led many within the church to credit Baldwin for the design. Nonetheless, Hertell (1941) set my course to dive into the journals of past General Conventions and even contact the Archives of the Episcopal Church for more data. Thus, I've been stewing on this article for nearly 10 years, it's time to hit the publish button.
This article--offered in two parts--will examine in chronological order all known data and events revealing the evolution of the arms of the Episcopal Church. It's a fascinating story, but one that has not been completely told, until now.
20th Century American Ecclesiastical Heraldry
Interest in heraldry within the Episcopal Church was growing at the turn of the 20th Century. In 1901, Ralph Adams Cram (1863-1942) published an article, "The Heraldry of the American Church," fueling a discussion on the state of affairs regarding diocesan seals and arms in the Episcopal Church (Cram, 1901 June 29). Cram's introduction reflects his high-minded ideals of aestheticism:
 |
Ralph Adams Cram in 1911.
Image is from Wikipedia. |
"Heraldry is at once a science and an art: it is a language of symbols; it is expressed through conventionalized forms of the most decorative nature and through colors of great beauty, therefore it is an art: it is governed by unchangeable laws that became finally fixed after centuries of development, laws that are recognized and obeyed by all civilized Western peoples, therefore it is a science" (Cram, 1901 June 29, 813).
After establishing the subject as both art and science, Cram continues with a lament of heraldry in America:
"Most unfortunately for us of the United States, our independence was achieved at a time when heraldry in England was sinking into a slough of deep disgrace, and therefore the states and cities of the new Republic simply perpetuated the scandals of contemporary England; for one correct coat of arms like that of Maryland, we have ten such effigies as the arms of New York, New Hampshire..." (Cram, 1901 June 29, 813).
Cram would continue his article by surveying the extant arms and seals of Episcopal dioceses in the US with amendments for those arms failing to meet basic heraldic standards. Much to the chagrin of others, Cram offers praise and approval for the seal and arms of the Diocese of Washington, DC used at that time--an example of one instance in Cram's article which would drawl ire from the magazine's readers.
Cram's article sparked numerous letters to the editor offering criticism of the architect's understanding of heraldry. The Rt. Rev. Henry Benjamin Whipple (1822-1901), Bishop of Minnesota, wrote a letter to the editor of The Churchman defending the diocese's seal, writing, "I believe the seal of a diocese should tell something of its history, setting forth a high ideal of the Church's mission" (Whipple, 1901 July, 77). The Rev. Dr. C. Ellis Stevens (d. 1906) wrote to the editor pointing out several items in Cram (1901 June 29) such as the inappropriate use of quartering for diocesan arms (Stevens, 1901 August, 171). As a result of Stevens' letter, the cleric would later publish a full article on the subject.
.png) |
The armorial flags of the Church of England and the Episcopal Church.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024.
|
Perhaps the harshest criticism of Cram (1901 June 29) can be found in another letter to the editor of The Churchman from Mr. Frederick W. Story of Baltimore, Maryland. Story (1901 August 10) writes:
"Against Mr. Cram's article in The Churchman of June 29, we must protest. We do not wish to be unkind to the living, but we do mean to be just to those who are gone. Heraldry is not 'at once a science and an art,' neither is it, 'a language of symbols': it is a body of fixed rules of description--historic rules, by the way, which Mr. Cram himself seems not entirely to understand" (172).
Story (1901 June 29) goes on to offer additional criticism regarding Cram's praise for the seal and arms of the Diocese of Washington, DC, an insightful critique of the diocesan arms that la Rose would later echo in his own words as well. In Cram's defense, the father of collegiate gothic architecture was viewing heraldry through his distinctly high Anglo-Catholic lens of aestheticism--heraldry could hold in tension art and science, identity and abstraction, language and symbols for the commoner to inhabit. Perhaps this view may be overly "romanticized," but it provides space for this arcane subject to become relevant in the modern age.
On August 31, 1901, Cram defends his article with his own letter to the editor of The Churchman. Cram points out that he was correct in judging American ecclesiastical heraldry by the standards set forth in English private heraldry rather than by any standards employed throughout the Anglican Communion as suggested by Stevens because, "much of the ecclesiastical heraldry of Great Britain is absolutely bad--witness the half-dozen aberrations referred to by Mr. Story in his severe attack on my article" (Cram, 1901 August 31, 263).
Given the reception of his article on ecclesiastical heraldry, Cram would later defer all things heraldry to his friend and colleague la Rose--Cram would stay out of the national spotlight concerning this subject.
In 1902, The Rev. Dr. C. Ellis Stevens would follow up his editorial comments through his own contribution to the cause with his article, "Anglican Episcopal Seals" (Stevens, 1902 April 5). Stevens maintains his focus on reviewing the seals and arms found throughout the wider Anglican Communion and generally avoids singling out any American see; however, Stevens poses an important question to his audience regarding designs for new arms. "How do the new dioceses in the mother and daughter lands apply the old heraldic principals" (Stevens, 1902 April 5, 435)? Unfortunately, Stevens does not provide any clear framework in response to his own question. "The future of American episcopal seals is sure increasingly to tend in such direction [viewing ancient Anglican arms as the standard measure], unless we develop an ecclesiastical eccentricity which we have never yet shown in anything" (Stevens, 1902 April 5, 435).
 |
Showing unification and differencing in arms, L-R: Diocese of Quincy, St. John's Cathedral.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024 |
La Rose successfully landed his first commission for an Episcopal diocese just three years later in 1905. The herald's design for a seal and coat of arms was adopted during the Diocese of Quincy's 28th annual convention held in May 1905. Additionally, la Rose would also complete his first commission for an Episcopal cathedral, St. John's Cathedral for Quincy between 1906-1907 (Diocese of Quincy, 1906; The Living Church, 1906; Wright, 1908).
To learn more about the arms of the Diocese of Quincy and its cathedral, please click here. Taken together, both coats would effectively set a new standard for armorial bearings within the church.
La Rose would make his own written contribution to advance perspicuous heraldry in 1907. In a series of articles published in Cram's Christian Art, la Rose took aim at the deplorable state of heraldry found within the seals and arms of the Episcopal dioceses. Much like his own coat of arms, la Rose's pen would roar like the lion bearing a sword cutting to the heart of American heralditis.
In his first article, la Rose cites foundational literature on the subject in order to provide context to the readers concerning popular misunderstandings of heraldry. La Rose writes:
"The Editors of 'Christian Art,' have invited me to criticise in detail and without reservation, the Diocesan arms and seals of the [Episcopal] Church, considered as heraldry and as design. I regret that I have felt obliged to devote an entire article to establishing a point of view, but several years' experience with American Prelates and Diocesan Committees convinces me of the necessity of this" (La Rose, 1907 May, 70).
Already we see the herald's growing frustration working with committees attempting to convince them to adopt his designs and rationale for new armorial bearings. In his follow up article in Christian Art, la Rose would pick apart, piece-by-piece, those Episcopal diocesan seals and arms without reservation, adding fuel to the discussion started by Cram in 1901.
La Rose (1907 November) notes the hazard of designing arms by committee and the prevailing heralditis concerning "compound" coats:
"With two exceptions [for compound coats], every diocesan 'Committee on Arms and Seal' with which I have had dealings has been pestered by the demand from some untrained amateur for a quartered diocesan coat. Now among the one hundred and thirty-six coats of British and colonial sees known to me there is not a single instance of a compound coat standing for a single diocese" (60).
La Rose continues the article with arguments for clear simplicity in designs for new diocesan coats in order to provide those arms with distinctive "carrying power." Regarding a proposed design for the Diocese of Newark, la Rose offers his opinion of Stevens' article from 1902:
"Two years ago the late Rev. C. Ellis Stevens, whose enthusiasm for heraldry outstripped his scholarship, but who nevertheless performed much good service in the subject, sent me a drawing of proposed arms for the diocese" (La Rose, 1907 November, 71).
La Rose would save his greatest condemnation regarding the "compound" arms of the Diocese of Washington, DC.
"Perhaps the worst of all, as even though unconsciously, the most impudent and misleading of American coats [Diocese of Washington, DC]...From the foregoing it will be seen: first, that the dexter impalement of the diocesan arms is an incorrect version of the arms of the kingdom of Jerusalem; and secondly, that in using these arms the diocese and bishop are guilty of a bit of heraldic assumption which even the Patriarch of Jerusalem or the Anglican bishop in Jerusalem would never dream of" (La Rose, 1907 November, 64).
 |
Arms of the Diocese of DC.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024. |
While never one to criticize without proffering a solution, la Rose illustrates a clear and simple revision for the Diocese of Washington, DC as seen on the left. While la Rose offered this design in 1907, the diocese would not adopt these arms until 1946.
In 1914, la Rose publishes another essay, this time in The Living Church, illustrating the herald's scholarship in describing the origins of ecclesiastical heraldry in the Church of England by categorizing those diocesan seals and arms into three distinctive categories: sacerdotal, hagiological, and armorial (La Rose, 1914 April 11, 835). Moreover, the herald brings up his ongoing frustration with committees. La Rose (1914 April 11) notes:
"Certain conclusions pertinent to American diocesan heraldry may be drawn from this group. Probably the first impulse of a committee on Diocesan Seal (and I have dealt with many), is to insist that a mitre, a key, or a crozier-sometimes all of these--appear as a charge on the diocesan shield, the shield in their mind not being truly 'episcopal' without at least one of them. They also forget that all this episcopal hardware may appear as 'external ornaments' to the shield, and that therefore the appearance of any of it on the shield itself without especial reason (as in the cases of Norwich, Meath, etc.), results in an aimless and tiresome reduplication" (836).
From la Rose's article, we begin to understand the collective mind regarding heraldry in the Episcopal Church at that time. Furthermore, when these minds come together in the form of an appointed committee to design a see's coat, heralditis sets in causing problems for the herald. When compared to the US Roman Catholic Church, la Rose would seemingly have a far easier time convincing Roman prelates to adopt his armorial designs than a roomful of committee members each possessing ideas for designs.
Nonetheless, la Rose's articles reflect the herald's attempt to educate the church on the laws and customs of heraldry to combat fomenting heralditis from the pews. Unquestionably, the herald would be worn down over the years by committees on seals or arms and his focus would shift entirely to Rome; la Rose's article in 1914 would be his final publication concerning Anglican and Episcopal heraldry.
Baldwin's Lament
In 1918, we learn of William Baldwin's attempt to spark a national conversation regarding the need for the Episcopal Church to adopt some form of a national symbol. Baldwin (1941) recounts the events of 1918 generating such need:
"When the Diocese of Long Island celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of its founding, Bishop Burgess appointed the writer [William M. Baldwin] to take charge of the grand procession through the Cathedral's ample grounds that preceded the special service in the Cathedral. I thought it would be most impressive if each parish, mission and diocesan organization could carry a specially designed ecclesiastical flag or banner.
"When these flags and banners were being made it was found there was no flag or banner of the General Church" (page 408).
Baldwin's lament of a non-existent banner for the Episcopal Church sparked a discussion within the church that would reach its zenith 22 years later during the 1940 General Convention in Kansas City, Missouri. Thankfully, Baldwin's work for the diocesan celebration effectively gave him a cause that he would see through until the church took action. Presently, there are no known arms in use designed by Baldwin; it is likely the layman simply held a deep appreciation for the subject and nothing more.
By comparison, however, la Rose's portfolio of armorial designs within the Episcopal Church by 1918 would number as follows: 16 dioceses adopting arms, the Diocese of New York rejecting two design proposals for arms in 1912, a proposed design for the Diocese of Washington, DC in 1907 but not adopted until 1946 (Chandler, 1946 December), one Episcopal seminary, two cathedrals, one parish church, and one missionary district all employed arms designed by the herald.
As if la Rose's portfolio was not impressive enough, Cram would offer his highest praise for the herald to a potential client to cement la Rose's reputation in the field of heraldry. In a letter housed in the Archives of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City, Cram writes a formal introduction of la Rose to The Rt. Rev. David H. Greer (1844-1919), Bishop of the Diocese of New York, in preparation for the diocese to consider adopting arms. Cram (1912) proudly gives the following summation of la Rose to the prelate, "Mr. La Rose, who is certainly the greatest herald in America, and possibly the foremost ecclesiastical herald in the world." High praise indeed.
After listing la Rose's completed commissions for Episcopal dioceses up to 1912 in the letter, the architect adds, "he [la Rose] and I together have done the arms for Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. On my own account I have done Chicago, Los Angeles, and Rhode Island, but La Rose is a far better herald than I am, and knows about a hundred times as much" (Cram, 1912). Cram's letter to the bishop illustrates the architect's deference to la Rose for all matters related to heraldry and likely signals the lessons learned following his 1901 article on the subject.
Quite simply, there was no one else more suited to the task of devising national symbols for the Episcopal Church than la Rose.
La Rose's First National Commission
 |
Arms of the National Student Council of the Episcopal Church.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024. |
In 1919, la Rose landed his first national commission for an Episcopal Church organization with his armorial design for the National Student Council of the Episcopal Church (National Student Council of the Episcopal Church, 1920 March, 12). In the absence of any national symbols for the Episcopal Church at this time, the herald rendered the coat within one of his key themes, a "cross in national colors." To read a thematic analysis of the cross in national colors found within 13 designs in la Rose's portfolio, please click here.
.JPG) |
Arms of the National Student Council
of the Episcopal Church
appearing in Morehouse (1941 September),
page 27. |
According to Turner (2010), the National Student Council was formally organized in May 1918 by the Conference of Episcopal College Workers to function as an advisory council of students to the Presiding Bishop (32). The following year, la Rose's design for arms were adopted and published in the council's March 1920 bulletin.
In 1935, the Church Society for College Work, also an Episcopal-affiliate, would be established separately from the student council and organized to assist college ministry in a variety of ways including fundraising (Turner, 2010, 34). By the early 1940s, the Church Society for College Work would use the same arms for their advertisements in The Layman's Magazine of the Living Church (Morehouse, 1941 September, 27).
I believe la Rose pulled together several elements into this design to clearly identify the owner as a quasi-academic institution within the Episcopal Church. Here we see the herald employing one of his favorite charges to represent scholarship, the open and inscribed book containing a fitting motto, "for Christ and the Church." The blue bordure containing eight white bishop's mitres was most likely la Rose's illustration representing the then eight provinces of the Episcopal Church.
The blazon for the armorial bearings of the National Student Council of the Episcopal Church/Church Society for College Work is: Argent, a cross throughout gules cotised azure, over all an open book bound and edged with two clasps or thereon inscribed PRO CHRISTO PER ECCLESIAM, and on a bordure azure eight bishop's mitres argent.
A Need for National Symbols
The next discussion concerning heraldry for the national church would occur in 1921 during the February 15-16 meeting of the Presiding Bishop and National Council in New York City. According to The Spirit of Missions (1921 March) we learn the following from the Council's meeting:
"Several prominent Churchwomen of New York have submitted to the Council a design for a coat of arms. The Council is at present using as its official seal the coat of arms of the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society.
"Mr. Pierre LaRose [sic], of Harvard, a recognized authority on such matters, has made a design which was exhibited to the Council. Much appreciation was expressed for the generous thought of the originators of the scheme, who propose to bear all expense in the matter, but it was felt that longer consideration should be given to it and a committee was asked to report at the next meeting" (182).
La Rose was involved from the very beginning concerning new arms for the Episcopal Church. Unfortunately there is no existing data such as a blazon or description of la Rose's proposed design. Additionally, from a review of the Council's minutes, housed at the Archives of the Episcopal Church, William Baldwin was appointed to join this special committee along with, "The Rt. Rev. Dr. Murray and The Rev. Dr. Freeman" (National Council, 1921a February 17). Baldwin was indeed serious about his quest to see the church adopt armorial bearings.
 |
| Illustration of evidence informed design of la Rose's 1921 proposal for national arms of the Episcopal Church. It is entirely possible he incorporated the 1515 miter which he loved to use in diocesan arms. Blazon: Argent, a cross throughout Gules, on a bordure Azure eight bishop's mitres of the field. Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024. |
In the absence of any known blazons or descriptions of la Rose's design, we can use existing data to render an informed guess. First, we know the herald recycled designs due to their perspicuous nature. For example, la Rose's initial design for arms of the University of Chicago in 1910 would later be proposed and adopted by Mundelein College in 1930--with slight differencing by inscribing the open book on the breast of the phoenix and two roundels on the wings. To read more about la Rose's work for the Archdiocese of Chicago in 1930, please click here.
Secondly, the importance of showing unification and differencing from the corporate sole to its subsidiary foundations were two critical tasks la Rose mastered as early as 1905, as evidenced in the previously discussed arms of the Diocese of Quincy and its cathedral.
La Rose had already worked out an appropriate national symbol for the Episcopal Church in the arms of the National Student Council through the blue bordure with eight white bishop's mitres. It seems doubtful that the herald would have changed his mind regarding an appropriate display. It is probable that la Rose took the blue bordure and eight bishop's mitres from the National Student Council and incorporated the Cross of St. George for a clear and simple design. This design assertion mirrors la Rose's well known philosophy and methods for devising new corporate arms.
La Rose would have readily wanted to prominently feature the arms of England--sometimes referred to as the Cross of St. George--blazoned: Argent, a cross gules, to clearly identify the English heritage of the Episcopal Church. In his rationale for the design of arms for the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia in 1913, la Rose clearly notes the use of the red cross to symbolize the Anglican Communion (Diocese of Olympia, 1913, 20).
The red cotised blue cross from the arms of the National Student Council would confuse this symbolic heritage and thus likely dropped.
 |
Arms of the Catholic Church Extension Society.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024. |
Furthermore, la Rose also employed the red cotised blue cross in the arms of the Catholic Church Extension Society in 1918, albeit charging the cross with a silver/white star in chief (La Rose, 1918, 192). With two different denominational coats using the same ordinary, the simple red cross of St. George for the Episcopal Church becomes the logical solution.
La Rose's selection of a bordure would not only difference an otherwise established coat, but plays upon the Scottish roots running deep within the Episcopal Church; a bordure in Scottish heraldry can be used to show cadency. Thus, the symbolism of an American Church with direct ties to England and a "child" of sorts from the Scottish Episcopal Church is made clear in one coat for identification. Using eight mitres to represent the provinces of the Episcopal Church adds national symbolism connecting geographically the wider church. The blue bordure with mitres would furthermore show unification with the National Student Council's established arms and follows the exact ordering of designs la Rose rendered for the Archdiocese of Chicago and its foundations in 1930. Overall, la Rose's 1921 proposal for arms reflects the national colors of red, white, and blue.
An evidence informed blazon of la Rose's 1921 proposal for arms of the Episcopal Church: Argent, a cross throughout gules, on a bordure azure eight bishop's mitres argent.
An Official Proposal
At the April 27, 1921 meeting of the National Council, the minutes record the new committee was now named "Committee on Corporate Arms," and that Baldwin reported several designs were submitted and that two additional members be appointed, "Bishop Perry and The Rev. Dr. Mann be added to the Committee and the Committee asked to continue its investigation" (National Council, 1921b April 27, 62). Here again we do not have any data regarding blazons or descriptions of the proposals.
Nearly one year later, there was no official proposal from the committee. Bishop Perry reported during the February 8-9, 1922 meeting of the National Council that, "the Committee had this matter [new corporate arms] under consideration and had a number of plans but was not yet ready to make a final report" (National Council, 1922a February).
Three months later, the National Council met again on May 10-11 in preparation for the General Convention to be held later that fall. Finally, the Committee on Corporate arms submits an official proposal for consideration.
 |
llustration of the 1922 proposal for arms of the Episcopal Church.
Rendered by Chad Krouse, 2024. |
According to National Council (1922b), we have the following description: "Committee on Corporate Arms: This committee reported through Bishop Perry by submitting a design showing a red cross on a white shield, surrounded by a blue border, with thirteen silver stars, and surmounted by a bishop's mitre."
No designer is mentioned in the Council's minutes, nor is a blazon for the proposed design recorded. Furthermore, without the minutes from the Archives of the Episcopal Church, we would not know how many stars were incorporated in the bordure. In order to visualize the 1922 proposal, I recreated these arms above with the following blazon: Argent, a cross throughout gules, on a bordure azure 13 mullets of the field.
By comparing the 1922 committee proposal seen above to la Rose's design in 1919 for the National Student Council, we see the use of the blue bordure containing white/silver charges in both coats--the final data point supporting the likely blazon of the herald's 1921 design. Moreover, by taking all three designs into consideration, the 1922 proposal by the committee was clearly based on la Rose's design from 1921.
I believe the Committee on Corporate Arms reworked the charges and their numbering on the bordure effectively rendering a fussy design--replacing the eight bishop's mitres with thirteen stars due to the committee's desire to have the mitre placed above the shield as an external ornament. It is simply remarkable that this otherwise simple change from la Rose's 1921 proposal took the committee more than a year to complete--the dangers of designing arms by committee.
At the time of the Episcopal Church's establishment in the US, there were originally nine dioceses--what does the number 13 represent in the committee's proposal? Perhaps the 13 original colonies? No design rationale is offered in the minutes or the General Convention journal.
When the church gathered in Portland, Oregon for General Convention that September, the committee would put forth its design for formal adoption, but ultimately the design was not adopted.
Please click here to read the second and final installment.
Works Cited
Baldwin, W.M. (1941). History of the church flag. Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 10(4), 408-409.
Chandler, G.M. (1946 December). Seal of the Diocese of Washington--1946. Washington Diocese, 5-6.
Cram, R. A. (1901 June 29). The heraldry of the American church. The Churchman, 83(26), pp. 813-818.
Cram, R.A. (1901 August 31). The heraldry of the American church [Letter to the editor]. The Churchman, 84(9), pp. 263-264.
Cram, R.A. (1912 September 5). Letter from Ralph Adams Cram to The Rt. Rev. David H. Greer. Unpublished letter.
Diocese of Olympia. (1913). Journal of the third annual convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Olympia. Ranch Press.
Diocese of Quincy (1906). The 28th annual convention of the Diocese of Quincy. Review Printing Company.
Egleston, C.L. & Sherman, T. (2019 May 19). A flag and a seal: Two histories. In C. Wells (Ed.), The Living Church, 258(9), pp. 16-17.
General Convention (1922). Journal of the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church. Abbott Press.
Hertell, E.S. (1941). Our church's flag. In C.P. Morehouse (Ed.), The Layman's Magazine of the Episcopal Church, no.15, 14-15.
Morehouse, C.P. (Ed.) (1941 September). The Layman's Magazine of the Living Church, 20, 27.
National Student Council of the Episcopal Church (1920 March). 1919 annual report of the National Student Council, bulletin 6. National Student Council of the Episcopal Church.
La Rose, Pierre de C. (1907 May). Ecclesiastical heraldry in America. In R.A. Cram (Ed.), Christian Art, 1(1), pp. 64-70.
La Rose, Pierre de C. (1907 November). Ecclesiastical heraldry in America II. Diocesan arms. In R.A. Cram (Ed.), Christian Art, 2(2), pp. 59-71.
La Rose, Pierre de C. (1914 April 11). Ecclesiastical heraldry. The Living Church, 50(24), pp. 835-836.
La Rose, Pierre de C. (1918). Some examples of Catholic corporate heraldry. In H.J. Heuser (Ed.), The Ecclesiastical Review, 58(February), pp. 189-198.
Luce, J.H. (1958). The history and symbolism of the flag of the Episcopal Church. Historical Magazine of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 27(4), 324-331.
Morehouse, C.P. (Ed.) (1941 September). The Layman's Magazine of the Living Church, 20, 27.
National Council. (1921a). Minutes from the February 17th meeting of the National Council of the Episcopal Church [unpublished document]. The Episcopal Church, New York, NY.
National Council. (1921b). Minutes from the April 27th meeting of the National Council of the Episcopal Church [unpublished document]. The Episcopal Church, New York, NY.
National Council. (1922a). Minutes from the February 8-9 meeting of National Council of the Episcopal Church [unpublished document]. The Episcopal Church, New York, NY.
National Council. (1922b). Minutes from the May 10-11 meeting of National Council of the Episcopal Church [unpublished document]. The Episcopal Church, New York, NY.
Slocum, R.B. & Armentrout, D.S. (Eds.) (2000). An Episcopal Dictionary of the Church: A user-friendly reference for Episcopalians. Church Publishing, Inc., 174.
Stevens, C.E. (1901 August 10). Heraldry of the American Church [Letter to the editor]. The Churchman, 84(6), pp. 171-172.
Stevens, C.E. (1902 April 5). Anglican Episcopal seals. The Churchman, 85(14), pp. 431-435.
Story, F.W. (1901 August 10). To the editor of The Churchman [Letter to the editor]. The Churchman, 84(6), 172.
The Living Church (1906). Diocesan seal for Quincy. The Living Church, 35(24), 1007.
The Spirit of Missions (1921). Meeting of the Presiding Bishop and council. The Spirit of Missions, 86(3), 182.
Turner, B.W. (2010). Pro Christo Per Ecclesiam: A history of college ministry in the Episcopal Church [Unpublished master's thesis]. Protestant Episcopal Theological Seminary in Virginia. https://issuu.com/janus532/docs/cmthesis/19
Whipple, H.B. (1901 July 20). Seal of the Diocese of Minnesota [Letter to the editor]. The Churchman, 84(3), 77.
Wright, J. (1908). Some notable altars in the Church of England and the American Episcopal Church. MacMillan Company.
.png)
.JPG)
.PNG)
