History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

Church ever spoke with so clear a voice as did the Methodist Episcopal Church on the theory, and
no Church has ever been so handicapped by it as an inexorable condition. The majority of its
membership always lay in the slaveholding states. The Scylla or Charybdis was always before it, and
impartial history will give the verdict that it did the best thing possible at every period and in every
phase of it down to 1844. It is observable that to Section IX., on Slavery, no Notes are added,
exposition and exhortation are refrained. It must also be declared how vulnerable are these Notes as
to the true application of Scripture, the pertinence of examples and the conclusiveness of reasoning,
the plausibility alone is satisfying. Take an example — "'The sitting apart of men and women' was
the universal practice of the primitive church. A general mixture of the sexes is obviously improper
in places of divine worship: 1 Cor. xiv. 40, 'Let all things be done decently and in order.'" What as
to the fact, what as to the obviousness, and what as to the Scripture proof? The Disciplines of 1784
to 1796 (a copy of that of 1790 now before the writer) are substantially the same, and cover 256 pp.,
sheep., only 60 pp., however, are of the Discipline proper, the remainder consisting of essays on
doctrine, while the additions and Notes made in 1796 swell the Discipline proper to 187 pp., all the
essays omitted. The old Discipline did not contain the Forms for Ordination, while they are affixed
to the new one after the index. The term "Superintendent" nowhere occurs in it. It is an Ordination
of a Bishop, and the form is almost identical with that of the National Church of England. The
inconsistency and absurdity of it remained until the hard common sense of the preachers analyzed
it and enforced the changes congruous with the official deliverance of the modern Methodist Church
that the bishopric is an Office simply, and not an Order. It is now a "Consecration" service, and is
freed from the incongruous Churchism of Asbury and Coke.
Before closing observations on the Discipline with notes recurrence must be made to Asbury's
high estimate of it and his diligence in circulating it. Soon after it came from the press he sent a copy
with his regards to one of his lay Methodist friends whom he knew to entertain liberal views of
church government, Major Simon Sommers of the west end of Alexandria (near the line of Fairfax)
County, Va., courting his Opinion of it with apparent confidence that it was unanswerable. Major
Sommers, heretofore referred to as giving the true cause in his view of the failure of O'Kelly's
movement to prevail over the Asburyan Church, answered the Bishop's request in a letter which is
made, because of its intrinsic and antiquarian importance, and despite of its length, an Appendix to
this volume. No reader should fail to peruse it in full as furnishing an intellectual treat and as a fine
specimen of the lay-rights arguments of that early day. Such were some of the men who were denied
[2]
all participation in the government of the Methodist Church. See Appendix D.
*************************************