History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

eing a lay-revolt, that preachers were scarce. There was much unwisdom in the councils, and the
sails of the new craft were set by unskilled officers to catch favoring breezes. They adjourned to meet
again in Surry County, August 4, 1794. "We held Conference with open doors that all might see and
learn." It was a wise departure from the Asburyan rule of closed door and secrecy of administration.
But the differing opinions which cropped out overturned what they had done, and the whole question
of organization was referred to a committee of seven. The fatal immaturity of the secession became
apparent to others, if not to themselves. O'Kelly, in his "Apology," gives an outline of the long and
distracting proceedings, ending in the Conference discarding all human laws and accepting the Word
of God as their guide, and so set the new craft afloat once more. Meantime the old Conference tried
to be happy over the situation, and face with composure the heavy loss of members. They passed to
[4]
the seceders this Christian salutation, "A few indeed, who were as great enemies to the civil
government under which they lived as to our Discipline, have left us; and now we have not a jarring
string among us." Except the last sentence, and that with a sign of interrogation, the same amount
of misrepresentation could not well be put in as few words. O'Kelly, while never looking back,
admits, "We very plainly felt the loss of union with the Episcopalian brethren." The breach could not
be healed and there were no farther attempts on either side to do it. Lee gives about the same account
of the O'Kelly movement, save the bias is always strongly against it. Asbury sums it up in a fashion
which could be taken as a model for all imputators of motive, "If the real cause of this division were
known, I think it would appear that one wanted to be immovably fixed in a district; another wanted
money; a third wanted ordination; a fourth wanted liberty to do as he pleased about slaves, and not
to be called to an account," etc. Stevens says of the Bishop, "He found it necessary to recite in his
congregations the history of these disputes, to vindicate his episcopal administration, to encounter
personal rebuffs from former Methodists." It was a sad piece of business all around.
Attempts have been made to minify the extent of the secession and consign to a swift oblivion its
leader. Let this aspect be examined. The minutes, as published by John Dickins in 1795, and attested
by those of 1813, make the statistical showing as follows: for 1791-92, 63,269 whites, 12,884 blacks;
for 1792-93, 52,109 whites, 13,871 blacks; for 1793-94, 51,416 whites, 16,227 blacks; for 1794-95,
52,794 whites, 13,814 blacks. So, for the General Conference year of 1792, there is a decline in
numbers of 11,000 whites, and for the succeeding years, despite the fact that the average increase
from conversions was about 5000, there is no increase until 1794-95, when it gains about 1400. This
confirms the estimate given in the introductory chapter that the secession of 1792-93, with collateral
causes, cost the Methodist Episcopal Church about one-fifth of its whole membership. This
aggregate loss did not go to swell the numbers of the Republican Methodists as such. Many simply
fell away from religion, preachers withdrew and located, many people stood aloof from the
Methodists for no other reason than the hierarchical nature of the government. The liberal principles
of 1779, in Virginia, were not dead — this schism revived them, and the agitation continued within
the Methodist Church. Lee, speaking for 1794-95, says: "This was a year of great trouble and distress
among the Methodists in the Southern states, partly owing to the divisions that had taken place, as
mentioned in the foregoing chapter, and partly to an uneasy and restless spirit that prevailed in many
places, both among our local preachers and private members. Some of them contended that the local
preachers ought to have a seat and a vote in all our Conferences; and others said there ought to be
a delegation of lay-members."