History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

in a resolution which Lee gives in full: "After the Bishop appoints the preachers at Conference to
their several circuits, if any one think himself injured by the appointment, he shall have the liberty
to appeal to the Conference and state his objections; and if the Conference approve his objections,
the Bishop shall appoint him to another circuit." It has become embalmed in history as the "Right
of Appeal." Lee farther says: "This motion brought on a long debate, the arguments for and against
the proposal were weighty, and handled in a masterly manner. There never had been a subject before
us that so fully called forth the strength of the preachers. A large majority of them at first appeared
to be in favor of the motion. But at last Mr. John Dickins moved to divide the question thus: 1. Shall
the Bishop appoint the preachers to the circuits? 2. Shall a preacher be allowed an appeal? After
some debate, dividing the question was carried." Dickins is the same who so stoutly and successfully
withstood Asbury at the Fluvanna Conference in a contention for a more liberal Methodism, the right
of the preachers to form a presbytery, ordain, and secure the ordinances; but a changeling too;
afterward book steward, and a stanch adherent of Asbury and his methods. A skilled parliamentarian
and adroit debater, this movement of division insured the defeat of the appeal. Lee says farther: "The
first question being put, it was carried without a dissenting voice. But when we came to the second
question, there was a difficulty started whether this was to be considered a new rule or only an
amendment to an old one. If it was a new rule, it would take two-thirds of the votes to carry it. After
a considerable debate, it was agreed by vote that it was only an amendment to an old rule. Of course
after all these lengthy debates, we were just where we began, and had to take up the question as it
was proposed at first. One rule for our debates was 'that each person if he choose shall have liberty
to speak three times on each question.' By dividing the question and then coming back to where we
were at first, we were kept on that subject called the appeal for two or three days. On Monday we
began the debate afresh, and continued it through the day; and at night we went to Mr. Otterbein's
church, and continued it until near bedtime, when the vote was taken, and the motion was lost by a
[3]
large majority." It does not appear that Lee was prominent in this debate. He was resting on his
laurels. The Council had been abolished by common consent. Lee's biographer says: "He was present
at its funeral. It had threatened to disown him as a preacher, because of his opposition to it. His
triumph had come and it was complete. He enjoyed it in silence." After Dickins came Henry Willis,
one of the ablest of the preachers, and full of Asbury's high church notions, — so full that he
persisted in wearing the gown, bands, and cassock in Philadelphia some time after even Asbury and
the other elders had sent them into an "innocuous desuetude." It greatly distracted the Church. He
was an ardent defender of the absolute powers of the Bishop. The exciting debates were relieved on
the Sabbath by preaching, — Coke in the morning, O'Kelly in the afternoon, and Willis at night.
What a green spot Stevens discloses amid the sands of this desolating debate: "Meanwhile, there was
daily preaching in the city and vicinity, and a general 'revival' kindled, for there were many of the
preachers who cared more for the prosperity of the churches than for the controversies of the
Conference."
Asbury gives more space in his Journal to this Conference than usual, and does the very
uncommon thing for him of citing entire a letter he wrote to the brethren during the session probably
in the early portion. It was not the only letter he wrote directing the storm. Let him be heard: "I felt
awful at the General Conference, which began November 1, 1792. At my desire they appointed a
moderator and preparatory committee to keep order and bring forward the business with regularity.
We had heavy debates on the first, second, and third sections of our form of discipline. My power
to station the preachers without an appeal was much debated, but finally carried by a large majority.