1825 to 1859, the centenary of English Methodism — Its hierarchal system compared with liberal forms — Stevens' astronomic figure defective — Perpetual warfare of the two systems in both Church and State — Ultimate result not problematical — The English Conference propagandism — The defection under Dr. Warren; merits of the case — Policy of expelling first, and then granting concessions accounted for — Early American fraternal delegates to the Wesleyan Conference — Growth of the body — Thomas Vasey; a sketch — The centenary of Methodism celebrated on both continents — Clerical pretensions of English preachers; examples — Priesthood of the people claimed for the Parent Methodisms; how not illustrated — What a hundred years of protest has accomplished.
The division of Stevens is so good a one that it may be followed for the next period, or from 1825 to 1839, the centenary year of English Methodism. He extols the Wesleyan system, or what remained after the numerous and quite radical emendations of it in some matters, in a trend to a more liberal polity, and he uses a scientific figure for illustration, which unhappily proves too much as a parallel.
The Wesleyan polity of the Conference, he says, underwent no material revision in this period except in a single instance. It will be seen that it was a very important instance. Then he eulogizes it: "It was found to be thoroughly organized, and effective for the great moral ends of the denomination.
Disturbances under it could arise only from such cases of personal discontent, ambition, or caprice as must attend the best devised schemes of government; but it proved itself capable, by the regularity and energy of its operation, of readily expelling all causes of serious discord; for, with a centripetal force which gave it unity and power, it had also a centrifugal tendency, which, while continually enlarging its range, speedily threw off incompatible men and measures." Nothing could be more apt as an illustration of the oligarchic system, but it is untrue to the law of nature, the principle of magnetic gravitation. In the starry heavens and the solar systems the centripetal force holds all the planets of the system to its central sun, and thus secures unity and power; but its centrifugal force is intended by an exact balance of attraction to hold the planets in their orbits at their respective distances from the sun. It is never exercised to "throw off" planets of the system. It represents exactly the civil code of a well-balanced republic, like that of the American Union, in secular government, or of the New Connection Methodists of England, or the Methodist Protestant Church of America, in ecclesiastical government. An autocratic or oligarchic system would promote its own destruction but for this power, found in this case in its conferential authority based upon proprietary rights, both elements of expulsive energy. It has been described as a great iron wheel, of wheels within wheels, which work smoothly enough, cog fitting to cog, until a foreign substance comes between, and then they crush and throw off the incompatible matter. It is effective and potential, it may be emphasized, but at what cost let the divisions in Wesleyan and Asburyan Methodism record. This whole History will be a frequently recurring illustration, while the successes of Church polity, which are true exponents of the balance of the spheres, centripetal and centrifugal working in coordination, stand as evidential beyond question that the paternal, autocratic, aristocratic, or oligarchic systems were never either necessary or expedient to the highest development of doctrinal, operative Methodism.
The respective theories are working out along their own lines in the history of the world. The civil governments are thus demarcated: czars and emperors and kings in civilized communities, and despots among the barbarous peoples, in all gradations of the paternal idea. Akin to these are the Church governments, — the Roman Catholic Church, the Greek Church, the Protestant Episcopal Church (national in England, but a sect among sects in America), the Methodist Episcopal Churches of various names and degrees of episcopacy, all expressions of the same paternal idea. Over against these are the republics of ancient and modern times, notably in the van the United States of America, which is beckoning the oppressed peoples of all lands, either to share individually in its blessings of civil equality, or educating them to throw off the galling yokes of anti-republican systems. Over against these also are the Presbyterian and Congregational denominations, both Calvinistic and Arminian doctrinally, but agreed that the New Testament methods of the primitive Church are to be accepted as the model for Christ's visible Church in all ages. The conflict between these, it is confessed, is not an equal one; like the forces of good and evil, the preponderance is with the ideally wrong and the practically evil. It is consonant with the depravity of human nature. There is something in it that loves lordship. It has been forcibly expressed in vulgar phrase, "Every man has a pope in his belly." Even the oppressed take the cue, and in their station begin to oppress others. The acute Snethen has luminously set it forth, "One of the deplorable effects of power is, that those who feel oppressed by it without resisting it have a strong propensity generated by it to oppress others."
It must be confessed that the ideally true can only prevail among men as intelligence and virtue make them self-governing. In the measure this is not the case men must be governed by others through brute force or arbitrary authority. There can be no question, however, on which side final victory lies in this irrepressible conflict. God reigns above and Christ is to be King of this world. His ideal kingdom is to become actual. Beginning in the hearts of men, it rules by love, and so supersedes the restraints of law. "All ye are brethren" holds the germinal truth for all ultimate governments in State and Church. For the former it is found in constitutional monarchies like England, and constitutional republics like the United States. In the latter it is found under Presbyterial and Congregational regimes. The fatal and sufficient objection to all hierarchal systems, however attempered and limited, is that their trend is in the wrong direction, and should be discouraged to the point of opposition by every friend of civil and religious liberty. These positions are held to be logically irrefutable and practically established. No claim that under arbitrary and irresponsible rule there is greater efficiency, potentiality with numerical and material extension, even if shown to be true, can be allowed. The republics in State and Church are demonstrating that it is not true. Limiting the demonstration to the objective of this History, — the Methodist Protestant Church, — this review of English Methodism and this formulation of principles is part of the task which, if successfully accomplished, will vindicate its fathers and founders with its right to exist and to perpetuate itself.
Eminent men presided over the Wesleyan Conference during these fourteen years: Watson, Stephens, Bunting twice, Townley, Morley, Marsden, Newton, Treffry, Taylor, Reece, Grindrod, Jackson, and Lessey. Stevens says, "Foreign, universal propagandism has now become the characteristic idea of the denomination." And it was so. Missionaries were sent into most parts of the world, It sent out ten, twenty, and thirty missionaries in a year. The work was systematized through the Board of Managers, composed of the most distinguished of ministers and laymen; of the latter may be named Thomas Thompson, James Wood, Thomas Farmer, Thomas and William Merriott, Launcelot Haslope, George and James Heald, Thomas Allen, and Joseph Butterworth. Its Mission House became tantamount in importance with its Publishing House. Twenty-five thousand
pounds were contributed by the people for its erection and the building of a mission ship for the South Sea Islands. For the Home work various funds were organized, to which the Methodist people contributed their wealth. The Superannuates were better cared for, and most of these measures are to be traced to the lay cooperation, which Bunting advised, defended, and successfully established in the face of the old party of preachers, who still held that the trinity of lay virtues, as already set forth, was to pray, pay, and obey, as Wesley also held for his Societies. If he had ever seriously contemplated a Church for the Methodists in either England or America, he would probably have found a place for laymen, taking his cue from the National Church at home and its congener in America, in both of which, despite extreme conservativeness, in their lower houses of legislation there is full lay representation and cooperation. Higher education, both for the preachers and the children of the people, was pressed, and schools established at various points. This very educational movement was, directly or indirectly, the occasion, if not the cause, of that serious disturbance which eventuated in expulsion and secession and the organization of another branch of Methodism, and also of important revision of the Wesleyan polity, "the one single exception for this period," as Stevens notes it.
He says of this defection: "Not a little agitation accompanied the initiation of this important measure. Many devoted members of the society and some members of the Conference suspected that its tendency would be deteriorating to the simplicity and purity of the ministry; others, restless under the government of the Church, or disappointed in their ambition for places in the management or offices of the new institutions, availed themselves of the occasion to disturb the peace of the Connection." Perhaps these reasons are fairly enough stated, though the parties implicated tell another story, as might be expected. Dr. Samuel Warren, a prominent member of the Conference, led the way. Stevens says that he at first fully agreed with the educational plan, but "finding that his own name was not reported in the nomination of its officers, he opposed the institution with extraordinary animosity." He wrote against it with severity, and organized the "Grand Central Association" for combined attack. He was in consequence suspended from the district meeting of Manchester. He threw the case into the courts, and it was decided against him, as he might have foreseen, and possibly did, as there could be no doubt about the legal validity of the Conference polity under the Poll-Deed of Wesley. He appealed to the Lord Chancellor, but the opinion of the Vice-Chancellor was confirmed. Warren then appealed to the next Conference against the district meeting which had suspended him. The Conference heard him, and then expelled him.
The Association became the basis of a new Methodist sect, "The Associated Methodists." A schism had taken place at Leeds over a church organ question in 1829, and these now joined the new body. At its second assembly it reported 20,000 members, but in the coming twenty years it had advanced numerically but about 2000. Warren labored energetically to promote its success, but finally took refuge in the National Church. No explanatory data are at hand, so the case must be left as Stevens reports it. It occurred in 1835. The gist of it is, however, that, as in other cases, the parent body had a way of first excising the disaffected and then conceding in its law about what had been contended for; for it is unreasonable to assume that all this agitation was without real grievances. The effect of the movement was considerable, but by the centenary year the old Conference had fully recovered. The result was that farther concessions were made to popular and liberal Methodism.
Bunting, the sagacious, prepared a "Special Address" of the Conference to the Societies,
"embodying," Stevens says, "explanations and some emendations of discipline, especially of rules
or usages which had been most assailed by the seceders. This document recognized decidedly the propriety of 'Mixed Committees' of preachers and laymen in the administration of the funds and other temporalities of the denomination, a policy already in practice, but now more uniformly applied. It made new provisions for accused members under trial, granting them farther opportunities of appeal. It authorized applications from the people through the 'June quarterly meeting of every year' for any changes in the government of the Connection not incompatible with its constitution as left by Wesley."
A careful consideration of the concessions as thus outlined by Stevens will disclose how vital to lay rights are some of them, and the query recurs, why the parent body should expel first and afterward concede. The reason, perhaps, is not far to find. Entrenched in authority backed by property, no serious thought is given to the unbalanced government, until an uprising demands changes by the people. Acquiescence would have acknowledged superior wisdom in the discontented. It would look too much as though rights withheld had been wrested from the power party. Hence expulsions for "moral discipline." Then in the Conference wisdom rights are voluntarily surrendered. But no one is deceived by such procedure. It remains true that men, as individuals or corporations, do not part with power except under coercive stress, and hence also the fact that reforms from within are rarely, if ever, successful, for the reason that reforms work from above downward. Revolutions work from below upward. The destiny of the Associated Methodists will be given later.
In 1828 Dr. William Capers of the South Carolina Conference was sent by the General Conference to the Wesleyan Conference. In 1835 William Lord was sent by the Wesleyan Conference to the General Conference in America. Dr. Wilbur Fisk was sent with fraternal letters in return in 1836. The slavery question was under discussion in both countries, and the British[1]
brethren had made some pointed allusions to it in their former address. An effort was made to prejudice the Wesleyans against Dr. Fisk on this score. But explanations were made, and he was cordially received, and by "his influence," Stevens says, "the form of ordination by imposition of hands was adopted for the first time by the Conference, he himself sharing in the ceremony. " It was a reactionary step and marked the influence of the American Episcopacy over them.
During the period just closed the Wesleyan Conference increased by an average of forty a year.
Three hundred and forty-nine had passed to their reward, among them notable names. Charles Atmore, David Stoner, Thomas Vasey, died in this period. The latter was sent to America with Coke and Whatcoat to assist Asbury in 1784. He remained in the American Connection a few years, but grew dissatisfied, probably with the Asburyan rule, as no other has ever been assigned, when he entered the Protestant Episcopal Church, receiving ordination at the hands of Bishop White. He returned to England, accepted a curacy, Stevens says "with Wesley's approbation," proof that he had good reasons for his course in America, and in 1789 he resumed his place as a Methodist itinerant under Wesley. He lingered to his eighty-fourth year and died in 1826. John Smith, the revivalist, also died triumphantly. In 1833 two of the greatest lights of English Methodism departed,— Richard Watson and Adam Clarke. A volume to each of them would not suffice for memorial. Among honored laymen were Butterworth, Thomas Thompson, and Samuel Drew, who from a shoemaker's bench rose to literary eminence as editor of the Imperial Magazine and as a metaphysician of high
rank. Samuel Hick and William Carvosso also departed, leaving testimony to the saving power of the faith they taught and exemplified.
The Centenary of Methodism was celebrated both in England and America with appropriate ceremonies and excusable exultation over the marvelous spread of a heart-religion on both continents. A layman, Butterworth, had suggested the commemoration. An imposing assembly met at Manchester, 1838, comprising about 250 preachers and laymen. It was resolved to raise 80,000 as a centenary offering. The actual sum raised was 216,000. In October, 1839, the Methodist world united in the celebration. Nothing like it for munificent giving was ever before known in a denomination. Wesley died at the head of 550 itinerants and 140,000 members in all quarters of the globe. A half century later these had grown to an army of 6080 itinerant preachers and four times as many local preachers, and 1,400,000 members, including the various bodies claiming to be Methodists. It had about 350 foreign missionaries, and about 3000 unpaid assistants, occupying some 300 stations. Perronet wrote years before Wesley's death, "I make no doubt that Methodism is designed by Providence to introduce the approaching millennium." Wesley caught its true spirit some twelve years before his death, regarding it not as a sect, or as a party in dogmatic theology, but a revival of spiritual Christianity designed to uplift the Christian world and furnish a lever for the moral betterment of the ungodly masses. It is doubtful whether in after years it can be claimed as an improvement, or even as a necessity, when it became in the parent bodies of England, and specially America, a pronounced sect with some exclusive pretension, and too largely intent upon[2]
denominational aggrandizement as well. Meantime most of the evangelical churches have affiliated with it more closely in the preached modification of doctrine, and particularly in experiential piety.
Its career for one hundred years has been succinctly traced; fifty more are to come, within which half-time it has fulfilled the promise of its beginning by tripling its numbers, girdling the world, and searching out its hidden corners. What remains for it no one cares to anticipate, lest the realized exaggerations of the past should make incredulous the hope of the future.
Nothing can better conclude these reflections than the words of Stevens as to a distinguishing peculiarity of this the greatest moral and spiritual force of modern times. "It has practically restored the primitive 'priesthood of the people,' not only by the example of its lay or local preachers, more than twice as numerous as its regular ministry, but by its exhorters, class leaders, prayer leaders, and the religious activity to which it has trained its laity generally." But how regrettable is it that this noble record is marred by the stultifying blindness of the founders of the parent bodies in England and America, the latter, it is true, but the echo of the former, in studiously and persistently excluding that priesthood of the people from all participation in its governmental structure. In the primitive Church nothing was done legislatively but by the consent of the people congregationally assembled.
But antiChrist — the overslaughing of the people by the preaching class — early appeared, soon consolidated, and erected itself into a hierarchy of little and big popes. That the favored class should be enamored of it is consonant with all the exhibitions of human nature, fettered in this, if nothing else, with the selfish spirit. It has taken one hundred years of better education, restive agitation, demand and denial, with its precipitation of expulsions for opinions' sake, to awaken the old bodies to a sense of its high inexpediency, not to say its wrong. Slowly, but surely, the great reform has gone forward, and it is manifest destiny for it to continue to go forward, until Methodism, not only its protesting bodies living and thriving side by side with the parents as object-lessons and modifying forces, shall emancipate itself from a false interpretation of a laity without parallel for its loyalty to