History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

In addition to these letters, the one intended to emphasize his use of Wesley's death and the "ill
treatment" of him by Asbury and the Conference (a grave error of judgment as it turned out), and the
other to stiffen O'Kelly in his opposition to the Council, and for the call of a General Conference (but
it will be seen that he proved false to O'Kelly at the General Conference of 1792 itself despite these
professions), the reader will not be master of the whole situation without also citing from a letter
Asbury had written to O'Kelly about this time: "Let all past conduct between thee and me be buried,
and never come before the Conference or elsewhere; send me the dove. I saw thy face was not
toward me in all the Council, therefore did not treat thee with that respect due to one who had
suffered so much for the cause of truth and liberty. I wrote to the Doctor [Coke] that if he came here
again he would see trouble." [9]
So much is seen in these affectionate epistles, so childlike and guileless, that one marvels that they
could emanate from men of pronounced piety and intelligence; and they show also how unsupported
is Dr. Emory's averment in the "Defense of Our Fathers," that O'Kelly "took special pains to enlist
Dr. Coke in his views, and to produce disaffection between him and Bishop Asbury." It is true only
in that O'Kelly gave Coke, in his London letters, the news from America, but Coke needed no efforts
to awaken him to the situation as opportune for him to recover lost ground of authority. Alexander
McCaine accurately measured the three men when he says: "The fact is, these two ecclesiastical
leaders, in their struggle for power, were afraid of Mr. O'Kelly, and each took 'special pains' that this
gentleman's influence might be thrown into his scale." The letters are the sufficient proof. Dr. Coke
[10]
was in the greatest hurry of his life to get to London, for reasons already traversed and more than
suspected by his British brethren; but he must lay his American train carefully and apply a
slow-match till he could return. May 4, 1791, was a very busy day with him at Wilmington, despite
his indisposition. He issued a circular, which he distributed as far as he deemed prudent, in which
he says: "Five things we have in view. 1. The abolition of the arbitrary aristocracy. 2. The investing
of the nomination of the presiding elders in the Conference of the districts. 3. The limitation of the
districts to be invested in the General Conference. 4. An appeal allowed each preacher on the reading
of the stations. 5. A General Conference of at least two-thirds of the preachers as a check upon
everything. But a good superintendent will not do wrong, you fear. I answer a good superintendent
is but a man, and a man is fond of power. But a good superintendent may become a tyrant, or be
[11]
succeeded by one. Oh, stand up for liberty, be friends of mankind in all things." He had become
a radical of the radicals and he does not mince his words. What a strange spectacle of human nature
he presents, and how all ideas of consistency and constancy are shattered by his subsequent conduct!
The foot-note from Drew sets forth that he went from Wilmington to Philadelphia, where he
remained nine days. It was during this time that he had his two interviews with Bishop White in the
presence of Dr. Magaw. There are two sources of information as to the interviews: letters of Bishop
White himself and disclosures made by his biographer recently, Julius H. Ward. July 30, 1804,
Bishop White wrote a letter in answer to one of inquiry received by him, June 27, from Philadelphia.
The Bishop states in substance the reasons he was led to make Dr. Coke's letter to him known: "I
found myself under a necessity of stating facts in order to guard against misrepresentation. In the
spring of the year 1791 I received a letter from Dr. Coke on the subject of uniting the Methodist
society with the Protestant Episcopal Church. An answer was returned. In consequence of which Dr.
Coke made me a visit, having not then received my letter, but having heard that I had written." He
then gives a brief of the plan as outlined in Dr. Coke's letter, and adds: "This intercourse was