History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

METHODIST REFORM
Edward J. Drinkhouse, M.D., D.D.
Volume I
CHAPTER 29
Lee on the state of the societies — Asbury's method of holding many conferences each year; its
object; opposition to it led to the "Council" plan — The fullest account of it ever printed; O'Kelly's
connection therewith and after opposition — Asbury's "negative"; end of the Council — Dickins and
the Book Concern — Trial of members modified — Revivals — Asbury's travels and broken health
— Lee's account of the Council — Imputations on O'Kelly's motives — Bangs and Stevens
apologetic of the Council — The term "presiding elder"; when first used.
Lee is quite accurate and also supplies the facts as to the proceedings of the Baltimore Conference
of 1789 (virtually the only legislative Conference of the eleven held this year for reasons already
descanted upon in these pages) more fully than others, being not only present, but stationed in
Baltimore. He notices the changes made in the mode of trial of private members for improper
conduct, also the six months' probation, and the proposal of the "bishops" for a new plan for
directing the preachers' letters, as Bishop, Elder, Deacon, or Preacher. He also declares ''in the course
of this year religion was pretty lively and prosperous in our societies, and in some places it was very
remarkable," and gives some thrilling instances. He makes note of his transfer to New England; the
inauguration of Methodism by him in that section with a success as great as the hindrances were
formidable; the "first meeting-house ever built in that section, near the upper edge of Stratfield, and
is now called Lee's Chapel." These itinerants were in their glory when revivals flamed and the ark
of God went forward. They reveled in it, while the sufferings and deprivations only added zest to the
work.
The method of Asbury of holding a dozen or more conferences each year, Lee declares "was pretty
generally disliked." Asbury himself, blind to his assumptions of power, thought of nothing, perhaps,
but the prudential advantages of it; it saved travel, time, and expense to the preachers, and it rid him
of the trouble of their concentration when they were sure to assert their Christian manhood at times,
and criticize the methods of their beloved but not infallible chief. It was so much easier to assign
them to their posts besides, a few days' talk together and he read them out, his saddled horse near by,
which he incontinently mounted and was off before even complaint could reach his ears, and then
at Baltimore the whole Plan of Appointments was finally settled by him and published in the
minutes. These preachers some of whom in person, or in that of their fathers, were in the
Revolutionary struggle for liberty, which meant the overthrow of the principle, which England had
endeavored to fasten upon the colonists (of Passive obedience and Non-resistance) — could not but
contrast their new-found freedom in the State with this absolute subjection to the will of one man
in the Church, so the murmur, if low, was deep and full of meaning. It was not much they modestly
asked; only that they might all meet together once a year, or at least to be accorded the privilege, if
not always availed of, in a General Conference.
But history only repeated itself in the manner Asbury met it. The autocratic mind is not warned
while the storm only mutters. It has clear ideas of what is best for the underlings. The very