History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

communicated at the time from Dr. Coke to Dr. Magaw. I do not know of any person he informed
of it, unless I may except the gentleman above alluded to, by whom, if I have been rightly informed,
my letter to Dr. Coke was opened in his absence; such a freedom being understood, as I supposed,
to arise out of the connection of the two gentlemen. But for this part of the statement I cannot vouch.
It was understood between Dr. Coke and me that the proposal should be communicated to the
bishops of the Episcopal Church at the next convention, which was to be in September, 1792, in New
[12]
York. This was accordingly done." The italics are his. Citation has already been made from a
letter of Bishop White's to Alexander McCaine, of August 4, 1828, and the third paragraph of it, as
bearing immediately upon the subject, is now given: "In the conversations — for there were two —
with Dr. Coke, in the presence of Dr. Magaw, there was certainly a reference to the decease of Mr.
Wesley, to what effect I do not recollect, although I am persuaded it had no bearing on the purpose
of the visits of Dr. Coke. That gentleman did not intimate any intention of withdrawing the proposals
the letter contained; and I was left at full liberty to communicate to our convention."
Bishop White's last biographer, Julius H. Ward, gives some interesting items in the same line. He
says "He [Dr. Coke] wrote first to Bishop White, about two months after Wesley's death, and then,
three weeks later, May 14, 1791, to Bishop Seabury, proposing, in a confidential way, measures for
the union of Methodists in this country with the Episcopal Church. He evidently felt that he had no
adequate authority to his office as an overseer or bishop in the Church of God. His actual feeling is
expressed in the following extract from his letter to Bishop Seabury: 'I love the Methodists in
America and could not think of leaving them entirely, whatever might happen to me in Europe. The
preachers and people also love me; many have a peculiar regard for me. But I could not with
propriety visit American Methodists, possessing in our Church on this side of the water an office
inferior to that of Mr. Asbury. But if the two Houses of your convention of the clergy (meaning the
General Convention) would consent to your consecration of Mr. Asbury and me as bishops of the
Methodist society in the Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States, or by any other title, if
that be not proper, on the supposition of the reunion of the two churches under proper mutual
stipulations, and engage that the Methodist societies shall have a regular supply on the death of their
bishops, and so on, ad perpetuum, the grand difficulty with respect to the teachers would be removed
— they would have the same men to confide in whom they have at present, and all other mutual
stipulations would soon be settled.'" Mr. Ward adds, "It is not known that Bishop Seabury sent any
answer to this letter, but Bishop White returned an answer." He then interjects an account of Bishop
Madison's attempt to secure a union in the Convention of 1792. "The clerical and lay-deputies would
not entertain it for a moment, and the bishops asked leave silently to withdraw it. Bishop White saw
Dr. Coke three times and heard him read the letter which he had written to Bishop Seabury." He
farther says that Bishop White remarks that "it was evident that from some circumstances there was
a degree of jealousy, if not misunderstanding, between him and Mr. Asbury"; and Ward supplements,
"it is not known that the latter desired the Episcopal office." He then writes of Dr. White's visit to
England for his own consecration, and while waiting made an effort to see Mr. Wesley concerning
these things, but failed, for the reason already discovered: Wesley's engagements of travel were such
as to prevent it. Finally Ward states, interpreting Bishop White's views, that "the object of Dr. Coke
seems to have been to obtain Episcopal office on the ground that it would confer upon himself a real
[13]
authority as a leader of the Methodist body." The letter of Coke to Seabury is referred to by
"Laicus" (W. S. Stockton) in a series of articles on Methodist Episcopacy in the Methodist
Protestant, January 15, 1842; but he does not say that he ever saw a copy of it.