History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org
History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org
Asbury is now on a tour among the Virginia and North Carolina brethren. In July he writes, "I have thought if I had two horses, and Harry a [colored man] to go with and drive one, and meet the black people, and to spend about six months in Virginia and the Carolinas, it would be attended with a blessing." Black Harry afterward became famous in his travels with Asbury. Reaching North Carolina at Cypress chapel he says, "Here James O'Kelly met me; he spoke, and appears to be a warm-hearted, good man; but he was troubled with the people about these times." A few days later, "James O'Kelly and myself enjoyed and comforted each other: this dear man rose at midnight, and prayed very devoutly for me and himself." About twelve years later he changed his opinion of O'Kelly materially, and it seems that it was the "people" who continued to give trouble as against Asbury's Episcopal plan. Afterward he met brother Allen, "A promising young man, but a little of a Dissenter." Alas, that there should be any independent thinkers in the world except brother Asbury. September 16, 1780, he says, "Wrote to Mr. Wesley at the desire of the Virginia Conference; who had consented to suspend the administration of the ordinances for one year." This must have been in addition to the letter they authorized sent through John Dickins before noticed. There is no contemporary evidence that the "Virginia Conference," as Asbury states, authorized formally the writing of this second letter. There is no way to reconcile the discrepancy, but to assume that after the Dickins letter had been forwarded, some of the Virginia preachers suggested to Asbury, nearly six months later, perhaps because Wesley within this lapse of time had made no answer, to write again, and the early practice of his taking the consent of the part for the whole led him to say that the "Virginia Conference" desired him to do so. It met, no doubt, his personal approval, as it gave opportunity to fortify his position with Wesley. It was only a reflection of a monarchical idea: what is done by the Crown is done by the kingdom. That both the letters were written and sent is in evidence, because the answer to the Dickins letter, which the Conference at Manakintown did authorize, was received, Garrettson says, in time for the Baltimore Conference of April 24, 1781, [1] while the answer to Asbury's second letter was delayed until 1784. Why delayed until three years after? It needs only a little reading between the lines to decipher the reason. Wesley's answer to the Dickins letter covered the ground as far as he saw his way at that time. It simply directed, as has been found from Garrettson 's semi-centennial sermon, that "we should continue on the old plan until farther directed." His counselors distracted him, for it was a well-known fact that he not only listened to all the statements made him, and was impressed by the last interviewer or the last letter, until a nature ingenuous and unsuspicious as was Wesley's when he was compelled to compare conflicting statements, hesitated and delayed. It accounts for the fact that his letter to the Conference of 1781 does not recommission Asbury as General Assistant, an office now vacant for four years, or since Rankin's return to England. Neither Rankin, nor Boardman, nor Shadford, nor Rodda, in fact none of Wesley's returned missionaries, except perhaps Pilmoor, were advocates of Asbury at home nevertheless, though three thousand miles distant, it will be seen in the sequel that he out generalled them all. In dismissing for the time these two famous letters it may be worth the remark that no other historian has developed their significance. Pursuing his tour among the disaffected southrons he preaches at Manakintown in October, and finds his way to the Brokenback chapel, where the Conference was held. He is accompanied by brother Edward Bailey as a guide, but he became sick and hindered his progress. He returns rapidly to Maryland, and, as six months had expired, according to the rule, he met some of the preachers at Barratt's chapel and changed them. He had traveled during this tour, he says, 2671 miles. In November he writes, "I arranged my papers containing a brief account of the beginning and progress
of our divisions; it was transcribed into a book by Caleb Peddicord." As nothing more is heard of it he probably sent it to Wesley. About the same time he notes, "William Glendenning has handed me a book written by Jeremiah Burroughs, in the time of the Commonwealth, upon heart divisions and the evil of the times: in this work I promise myself good arguments against our separating brethren." He afterward issued it as an abridged pamphlet, together with Baxter's "Cure for Church Divisions," and made it do yeoman service against recalcitrants and dissenters from his views. It led him to the discovery that those who did not think as he did about church government had lost religion, and among such he distributed the pamphlet. Samuel Roe, a young preacher of the Virginia party, is reclaimed and takes an appointment. Asbury records his undisguised pleasure: "Samuel Roe is going to Sussex one that had happily escaped the separating spirit and party in Virginia, and the snares laid for his feet; and so also did poor William Spencer of late years. Eternal thanks to God!" After such a devout exultation who can doubt the blind sincerity of the man? Early in January, 1781, he writes, "I received a letter from F. Garrettson, and another from T. S. C. (Chew), who promise me their filial obedience in the gospel." Chew was one of the Virginia brethren, and it is seen how one by one they came again under the spell of Asbury's genius and magnetism. He was but thirty-five years of age, but the citation just given foreshadows the habit he was forming, after the style of civil magnates, and with apostolical example, of calling the preachers his "sons in the gospel." Most of them, it is true, were still younger, but the paternal spirit animated him and prompted this address. In this he imitated Wesley also. John Hagerty was a convert of John King's about 1771, and he soon found his gift as a preacher, and successfully exercised it until 1792; when, owing to the illness of his wife, he located in Baltimore, where he continued to labor effectively, no sacrifice being too much for him, until 1823, when he triumphantly expired in his seventy-seventh year. Nelson Reed was converted under the ministry of William Watters, entered the itinerancy, was present at the Conference of 1784, and continued his course for sixty-five years, dying in Baltimore in 1840, in the eighty-ninth year of his age, having the distinction of being at that time the oldest Methodist preacher in the world. He possessed substantial abilities and great courage, a striking instance of which occurred about 1796 in a bout he had with Dr. Coke and which will be narrated in its current place. Philip Cox was an Englishman, and is first named in the minutes of Asbury's Conference in 1779. Though a very small man, not weighing over one hundred pounds; he was full of mental and moral force and great energy. He remained single until he was fifty years of age. He had powerful revivals, and was cared for in his closing years by a well-to-do Methodist, with whom he languished out a life of much suffering from persecution, and died September, 1793, in peace. William Partridge, James O. Cromwell, and Thomas Foster must be mentioned. George Mair receives special notice from Stevens and deservedly. Ignatius Pigman was one of the most eloquent preachers of his day; also Stephen Black and Caleb Boyer. Pigman and Boyer received from Whatcoat and Vasey the extraordinary compliment, "they had not heard their equal in the British connection, except Wesley and Fletcher." Most of these early preachers deserved memoirs or monuments, instead of sleeping as they often do in unmarked graves. Space allows only the perpetuation of their names. The successful outcome of the so-called preliminary Conference, held by Asbury in 1779 at Judge White's in Delaware, led him to follow the precedent thus set by calling another at the same place April 16, 1781, the regular session not being appointed until the 24th, in Baltimore. He makes brief note of it in his Journal as nothing unusual, "After meeting we rode about twenty miles to brother
- Page 131 and 132: the ministry, its devotion and libe
- Page 133 and 134: METHODIST REFORM Edward J. Drinkhou
- Page 135 and 136: It is necessary to retrace steps to
- Page 137 and 138: to interfere with the internal affa
- Page 139 and 140: showed, in feasting at high dinners
- Page 141 and 142: ENDNOTE 1 The plan has since been a
- Page 143 and 144: into evil ways. Barbara Heck kept a
- Page 145 and 146: which was the vogue of a large numb
- Page 147 and 148: attended the ministry of both, conv
- Page 149 and 150: thing which I seek, a circulation o
- Page 151 and 152: ENDNOTES 1 Bangs' "History of the M
- Page 153 and 154: 13 Atkinson's "Methodism in America
- Page 155 and 156: Philadelphia, George Shadford (to c
- Page 157 and 158: Lednum has preserved the name of Jo
- Page 159 and 160: y Methodists as a constant prayerfu
- Page 161 and 162: the episcopal form of church govern
- Page 163 and 164: 1784, and he had regular work. He r
- Page 165 and 166: of our national independence, who b
- Page 167 and 168: strength of Methodism was in Maryla
- Page 169 and 170: 1 Lee's "History," p.56. ENDNOTES 2
- Page 171 and 172: METHODIST REFORM Edward J. Drinkhou
- Page 173 and 174: and their children, and they procee
- Page 175 and 176: to men whose opinions disagreed wit
- Page 177 and 178: Why do the printed Minutes take no
- Page 179 and 180: ENDNOTES 1 Stevens says, "During th
- Page 181: METHODIST REFORM Edward J. Drinkhou
- Page 185 and 186: Mr. Wesley generally held a Confere
- Page 187 and 188: under the necessity of abiding by i
- Page 189 and 190: the Methodists. At twenty years of
- Page 191 and 192: HISTORY OF METHODIST REFORM Synopti
- Page 193 and 194: His references to the Conference of
- Page 195 and 196: landly said, 'He is hard on us.' As
- Page 197 and 198: and good sense so far predominated
- Page 199 and 200: METHODIST REFORM Edward J. Drinkhou
- Page 201 and 202: on so new a plan, he afterward susp
- Page 203 and 204: of it are in the closing suggestion
- Page 205 and 206: employing the terms "superintendent
- Page 207 and 208: to be a mere formality, likely to r
- Page 209 and 210: If any one will point out a more ra
- Page 211 and 212: monotony, the "Pastorals" of Virgil
- Page 213 and 214: ace, Eclipse is first, and that put
- Page 215 and 216: METHODIST REFORM Edward J. Drinkhou
- Page 217 and 218: next day, Sabbath, he reached, with
- Page 219 and 220: esumed his labors, and died in Phil
- Page 221 and 222: [6] is the material point. There is
- Page 223 and 224: emarkable when it is considered tha
- Page 225 and 226: our societies in the United States,
- Page 227 and 228: eady to break with Wesley at any op
- Page 229 and 230: ENDNOTES 1 The reader is apprised t
- Page 231 and 232: METHODIST REFORM Edward J. Drinkhou
of our divisions; it was transcribed into a book by Caleb Peddicord." As nothing more is heard of<br />
it he probably sent it to Wesley. About the same time he notes, "William Glendenning has handed<br />
me a book written by Jeremiah Burroughs, in the time of the Commonwealth, upon heart divisions<br />
and the evil of the times: in this work I promise myself good arguments against our separating<br />
brethren." He afterward issued it as an abridged pamphlet, together with Baxter's "Cure for Church<br />
Divisions," and made it do yeoman service against recalcitrants and dissenters from his views. It led<br />
him to the discovery that those who did not think as he did about church government had lost<br />
religion, and among such he distributed the pamphlet. Samuel Roe, a young preacher of the Virginia<br />
party, is reclaimed and takes an appointment. Asbury records his undisguised pleasure: "Samuel Roe<br />
is going to Sussex one that had happily escaped the separating spirit and party in Virginia, and the<br />
snares laid for his feet; and so also did poor William Spencer of late years. Eternal thanks to God!"<br />
After such a devout exultation who can doubt the blind sincerity of the man? Early in January, 1781,<br />
he writes, "I received a letter from F. Garrettson, and another from T. S. C. (Chew), who promise<br />
me their filial obedience in the gospel." Chew was one of the Virginia brethren, and it is seen how<br />
one by one they came again under the spell of Asbury's genius and magnetism. He was but thirty-five<br />
years of age, but the citation just given foreshadows the habit he was forming, after the style of civil<br />
magnates, and with apostolical example, of calling the preachers his "sons in the gospel." Most of<br />
them, it is true, were still younger, but the paternal spirit animated him and prompted this address.<br />
In this he imitated Wesley also.<br />
John Hagerty was a convert of John King's about 1771, and he soon found his gift as a preacher,<br />
and successfully exercised it until 1792; when, owing to the illness of his wife, he located in<br />
Baltimore, where he continued to labor effectively, no sacrifice being too much for him, until 1823,<br />
when he triumphantly expired in his seventy-seventh year. Nelson Reed was converted under the<br />
ministry of William Watters, entered the itinerancy, was present at the Conference of 1784, and<br />
continued his course for sixty-five years, dying in Baltimore in 1840, in the eighty-ninth year of his<br />
age, having the distinction of being at that time the oldest <strong>Methodist</strong> preacher in the world. He<br />
possessed substantial abilities and great courage, a striking instance of which occurred about 1796<br />
in a bout he had with Dr. Coke and which will be narrated in its current place. Philip Cox was an<br />
Englishman, and is first named in the minutes of Asbury's Conference in 1779. Though a very small<br />
man, not weighing over one hundred pounds; he was full of mental and moral force and great energy.<br />
He remained single until he was fifty years of age. He had powerful revivals, and was cared for in<br />
his closing years by a well-to-do <strong>Methodist</strong>, with whom he languished out a life of much suffering<br />
from persecution, and died September, 1793, in peace. William Partridge, James O. Cromwell, and<br />
Thomas Foster must be mentioned. George Mair receives special notice from Stevens and<br />
deservedly. Ignatius Pigman was one of the most eloquent preachers of his day; also Stephen Black<br />
and Caleb Boyer. Pigman and Boyer received from Whatcoat and Vasey the extraordinary<br />
compliment, "they had not heard their equal in the British connection, except Wesley and Fletcher."<br />
Most of these early preachers deserved memoirs or monuments, instead of sleeping as they often do<br />
in unmarked graves. Space allows only the perpetuation of their names.<br />
The successful outcome of the so-called preliminary Conference, held by Asbury in 1779 at Judge<br />
White's in Delaware, led him to follow the precedent thus set by calling another at the same place<br />
April 16, 1781, the regular session not being appointed until the 24th, in Baltimore. He makes brief<br />
note of it in his Journal as nothing unusual, "After meeting we rode about twenty miles to brother