History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

METHODIST REFORM
Edward J. Drinkhouse, M.D., D.D.
Volume I
CHAPTER 23
The conscience of humanity rewrites history — "Methodist Episcopacy" rewritten by Alexander
McCaine — Antecedents of the Christmas Conference — "Little sketch" of Wesley fully considered;
Coke's disposition of it finally — Coke and Asbury at Barratt's chapel, 1784; interesting particulars;
their private interview; Wesley's plan rejected, and Asbury's adopted by the "superintendents"; secret
preliminaries to the Christmas Conference at Perry Hall — Asbury sees his opportunity, and his
superior strategy prevails over Wesley and Coke — The Conference; who were present; order of the
business; what was done; suppression of the Ritual paragraph in Wesley's letter and the motive for
it explained — Were Coke and Asbury "elected"? fully considered Asbury's credential from Coke
— Garrettson a dissenter to the general superintendency — A Church organized of ministers, by
ministers, and for ministers — Coke's explanation to Wesley of what they did — Asbury's
ordination; to what?
A modern author has aptly said, "History is the conscience of humanity, since we are always
looking at it from new points of view, and rewriting it in sympathy with our own feelings." No
annalist, perhaps, can entirely divest himself of these feelings. Under its influence the proceedings
of the chief actors in the Christmas Conference have been elaborately unfolded and justified in
histories and monographs, so that nothing is left to be said on that side of it. The conscience of
humanity, however, has never been satisfied with it. For three-quarters of a century it has been
doubted and rewritten, and by no one so thoroughly as by Alexander McCaine in his trio of
publications, "The History and Mystery of Methodist Episcopacy," his "Defense of the Truth," and
his "Letters on the M. E. Church," with fugitive contributions. Unhappily, like James O'Kelly, he was
irate, somewhat overbearing, bold to bluntness, and handled personal character ungloved. It shall be
the object of the writer to avoid extremes in traversing the same ground, but with the confession that
his convictions are not in sympathy with the apologists of Coke and Asbury in the transactions of
the Christmas Conference.
It has been found that Coke divulged the plan of Wesley for the government of the American
societies to John Dickins, who approved and urged its immediate publication as determined by
Wesley, and, therefore, not to be considered, but executed. Much space has been given to these
antecedents, but it will be found that satisfactorily settled much space will be saved when the heart
of this ancient controversy is touched, in thus brushing away the irrelevant ramblings and
inconsequent arguments which have entangled it. If, as Stevens says, Dickins was still an exponent
of the Fluvanna brethren, then it may be safely assumed that the "plan" did not conflict with their
liberal views, and hence did not suit either Coke or Asbury. It is difficult to ascertain precisely when
Dickins' tergiversation as to church politics began but it may be doubted whether he was at this time
even as liberal as when he led the argument for a Presbyterian polity. And, on the other hand, it must
be assumed that the "plan" was not that of Coke and Asbury, or there would have been no motive
in suppressing it so that no trace of it has ever been found. The interrogations of McCaine to the
preachers contemporary with Dickins and the early Bishops utterly failed of any admission that any