21.07.2013 Views

History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

appointed a moderator.' Many ends were thus subserved. He was in poor health and might find it a<br />

burden. It flattered the well-known vanity of Dr. Coke. It enabled him to be present or not as he<br />

deemed best. His knowledge of human nature had led him to measure the strength and mark the<br />

weaknesses of his principal foeman in the debates, James O'Kelly. He knew that he was irate and<br />

impetuous, and he foresaw that in his own absence from the chair and from the Conference at times,<br />

he would probably be provoked into indiscretions and extremes, and so defeat himself, and this<br />

forecast proved to be true. It enabled him to confer with his tried adherents and so direct the course<br />

of events. With Dr. Coke and the committee he had a full understanding. Self-poised, he viewed the<br />

field, and in the hottest debates he was calm. He saw a large majority against him dwindle into a<br />

small minority His voice was seldom, if ever, heard, and his manipulating hand, gloved in velvet,<br />

seldom seen.<br />

Let the devious course of the proceedings be traced as far as the meager information that has come<br />

down will allow. Quite promptly Dr. Coke reported from the committee the final regulations, and<br />

said: "The members of this Conference are the representatives of the People, and we are to all intents<br />

the legislature of the <strong>Methodist</strong> Episcopal Church, and the government is aristocratical. You may<br />

[2]<br />

call me a weathercock," O'Kelly has preserved this deliverance in part. Asbury, Lee, Bangs, and<br />

Stevens are all silent about it. The reason for their silence need not be pressed. Alas, for Dr. Coke!<br />

How these sentiments compare with his letter to O'Kelly in May, 1791. How amazed must have been<br />

the numerous preachers to whom he had sent at the same time his private circular outlining the<br />

reforms he and O'Kelly would inaugurate at this Conference. His conscience extorted from him the<br />

confession, however ignoble — you may think me a weathercock! O'Kelly was left no longer in<br />

doubt that he was not only deserted, but turned upon by his quondam friend and ally; but he did not<br />

quail or despair. In this regard he was made of much the same clay as Wesley and Asbury. The<br />

committee reported revisions of the Discipline for Conference action. Some of the leading preachers<br />

demanded the Council business, to pass upon which they had joined in the call for this General<br />

Conference. Let O'Kelly be called again. There is something naive about his manifestly truthful<br />

story, maugre some lapses of memory as to dates, as when he puts this Conference "in the latter end<br />

of the year 1791." It may be in this case a misprint only. He says "This speech [of Coke's just cited]<br />

affected many minds, because they justly expected the affairs of the council to have come before<br />

them; that being the business for which they were called together. Some of the members at sundry<br />

times would interrupt the president after this manner: but where is the council affairs, etc. Thomas<br />

[Coke] would arise and warmly oppose, and demand silence on the subject: and silence it was. In<br />

our debates if at any time we were led to speak of the conduct of Francis [Asbury] he would leave<br />

the house." Among the interrupters of the president were James O'Kelly, Freeborn Garrettson, Ivy<br />

Harris, Rice Haggard, Hope Hull, Stephen Davis, William McKendree, and others, the last named<br />

then a young preacher, but exhibiting all the characteristics that afterward as a Bishop in the Church<br />

made him a worthy successor of Francis Asbury. He was quite intemperate in his speech, and one<br />

of his impassioned utterances has been preserved and was used as a slogan by the <strong>Reform</strong>ers of<br />

1820-30. It must not be forgotten that not a few of the ringing, epigrammatical, and pungent sayings<br />

of these <strong>Reform</strong>ers were the coinage of such changelings as McKendree, Emory, and Waugh, all of<br />

them afterward bishops.<br />

On the second day of the Conference, according to Colbert, but according to the drift of the<br />

discussion as reported by O'Kelly it must have been later, this great leader of the opposition brought

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!