History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

to an appointment as superintendent by Wesley, as he had appointed Coke. The motive for such a
demurrer did not appear. It could not be that he had under the political inspiration of the American
Revolution suddenly changed his views as to voting, in which he fully agreed with Wesley for within
three years it will be found that he is dissatisfied with the General Conference idea and proposed the
Council plan of a half-dozen presiding elders of his appointment to supersede it, and over this small
group of legislators, judges, and executors to have a veto. Lying back of his action are some facts
that side-light the proceeding. Upon complaint of the preachers, Wesley had appointed Rankin as
General Superintendent, and thereby superseded Asbury, and until now he could not be induced to
restore him. In the intervening time such were the representations made to Wesley by Rankin and
other returned missionaries from America that he actually wrote a letter of recall, as has been found,
but which did not reach Asbury until countermanded. Under all this he fretted, and it must be
confessed not without reason. An election by the Conference would virtually release him from
Wesley's authority and make impossible a recurrence of such a trial as he had endured. "It was not
practical expediency," to use his own expression, to serve under Wesley he will be a king in his own
realm. Must not, then, the form of the question have been like this: Shall Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury
be received by the Conference as superintendents over the American societies? No one dissents,
'ergo', it is unanimously carried. And so probably passed other measures. Asbury was satisfied with
it as an election, and, technicals aside, so it was; but O'Kelly did not so regard it. The difference
about it may mean no more than this implies. However it was, it has been traditionally taken as an
election, and so the old preachers regarded it. It was a point to be guarded, and it was successfully
by Wesley; but not by others more keenly critical under adverse opinions. Hence it is found that
Whitehead, commenting on this very matter, as stated by Dr. Coke, says: "But Dr. Coke tells us our
bishops have been elected, or received, by the suffrage of the whole body of our ministers through
the continent, assembled in General Conference.' Now these surely were not elected in any sense
whatever, either by the preachers or the people. But they were 'elected or received' — when a writer
thus links words together of different import, as though the meaning amounted to the same thing,
we have just cause to suspect that he intends to deceive us, and lead us into a false notion of the
subject he is discussing. Received perhaps they may be under a system of arbitrary government,
which leaves no alternative to the people, nor to many of the preachers, but that of passive
[11]
obedience, or to go about their business and quit the connection." There is no way to avoid the
force of these strictures, though some allowance must be made for the severity of the reference to
Coke, whose artful methods. . . .
What else was done by this Conference of moment? The resolve already cited that they would
obey Mr. Wesley during his life in all matters of church government, and after his death do all that
would be possible to preserve the union with the English brethren. How did it get before the
Conference? No one knows. It is certain that Asbury did not father it; for his own declaration is: "It
is true I never did approve of that binding minute. I did not think it practical expediency to obey Mr.
Wesley, at three thousand miles distance, in all matters relative to church government; neither did
brother Whatcoat nor several others. At the first General Conference I was mute and modest when
[12]
it was passed; and I was mute when it was expunged." It is passing strange that a man of his
strong common sense should conclude that he thereby escaped responsibility in either case. Dr.
Coke, if he did not offer the resolution, most probably originated it and gave it his support; for it was
essential that he should have it to fall back upon when he should come to explain the organization
of a Church contrary, as he well knew, to Wesley's intentions. As has been found, Asbury stood