History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

Even so partisan a writer as Rev. Dr. David Sherman says of it: "The Council had become so
generally odious to the preachers and people that Asbury requested that it might be named no more.
[6]
Highly and justly as they esteemed Asbury, they were not prepared to make him a Pope." The
comparison is not invidious, but it stands for more than its worth, considering the source of it. Dr.
Bangs' notice of the Council quotes the minutes of the first, taken from Lee without credit, and
leaves the impression that it was the joint work of the preachers and Asbury. Dr. Stevens makes note
but briefly and apologetically — so with other writers — of the Asburyan school. It is a hot iron they
do not care to handle with their bare fingers. In fine, the Council must be recorded an unmixed evil,
except so far as it once more, since the Fluvanna times, set the people to thinking and encouraged
the preachers to be something more than puppets. There can be no doubt that the struggle resulted
in worse health for Asbury, and presaged a complete mental breakdown. He recovered, however,
from the relaxation of the over-bent bow, and was ready for the contest with O'Kelly in 1792. The
title Presiding Elder first occurs in the minutes of the Council of 1789 and 1790, and does not recur
anywhere until 1797; but the prefix "Presiding" did not go into the minutes of Conference, as
Stevens alleges from the Council, for the two years of its existence. The district Elder headed the
preachers under him in the minutes of 1754, and onward without change until 1797, when
"Presiding" was prefixed.
*************************************