CHAPTER VIII

A MOTHER OF CHURCHES

IT has been the fortune (or misfortune) of Methodism, in failing to conciliate her children by tempering the excessive clericalism and arbitrariness which were elements of her constitution, to provoke independent or separating movements, some of which have grown into large denominations. No doubt God has used this to advance his glory, for these daughter Churches have had a wonderful success in evangelism and other forms of Christian activity, but they have weakened the parent body by dividing or dissipating aggressive or conserving forces. Besides, ill-feelings and heart-burnings have resulted, and some souls thereby have doubtless been lost to Christianity.

Passing over the history of Methodism in England the first separation in America took place on account of the refusal of the Conference of 1792 to adopt a resolution of James O'Kelly that "after the bishop appoints the preachers at Conference to their several circuits, if any one think himself injured by the appointment, he shall have liberty to appeal to the Conference and state his objections; and if the conference approve his objections, the bishop shall appoint to another circuit." O'Kelly was one of the most earnest and consecrated of the preachers, but he inherited an Irish love of freedom, and desired a constitutional check to the absolute power of the bishop. Some of the ablest of the ministers agreed with him-Freeborn Garretson among others, but the majority thought that the proposed plan would be inconsistent with Wesley's idea, and that it would be impracticable, and therefore voted it down. It was a principle which O'Kelly could not give up, and he

therefore left the Conference, taking with him many laymen and ministers. These later united with others who did not believe in sectarian names, and formed the Christian Church or Christian Connection (to be distinguished from the Disciples of Christ), which in 1902 had 1,151 ministers and 97,207 churches. It has been charged by some that O'Kelly was heretical, but this is a mistake. His long and consecrated life both before and after 1792, the form he used in ordaining, the belief of the Christian Connection in Christ and atonement, and other evidence, should have saved him from this charge. As to the merits of his contention, it is evident that it is inconsistent with that military organization which Wesley stamped on Methodism and which has always been one of the chief reasons for its effectiveness. On the other hand a compromise might have been adopted.

Not only the episcopal organization of the Church, but the refusal of all governmental

rights to laymen, had almost from the first been causes of offense. The adoption of a republican constitution in 1789 by the states, as well as actual experience in selfgovernment, had accustomed the minds of men to democratic ideas, in the face of which the clerical and absolutist polity of Methodism seemed both an anachronism and a personal grievance. Besides, the work for representative government by the most statesmanlike mind of English Methodism after Wesley, Alexander Kilham, could not help but influence America. It is impossible to give the history of that great agitation here. Suffice it to say that after numerous rejected appeals a union society was founded in Baltimore in 1824 for the purpose of influencing Church opinion in favor of lay delegation. A periodical was also founded for the same purpose-"The Mutual Rights of Ministers and Members of the Methodist Episcopal Church (1824-8), an invaluable source, the files of which are

in the library of Drew Theological Seminary. A strong effort was made at the General Conference of 1828 to obtain rights for laymen. This was refused. As the friends of the movement did not desist in their agitation, many were expelled. Others left out of sympathy. These met in Baltimore, November 12, 1828, and formed a provisional Church organization. On November 2, 1830, a much larger and more representative gathering consisting of clerical and lay delegates from many states assembled in the same city,-adopted a constitution and book of discipline, and thus started the Methodist Protestant Church, which has had a great and noble part in the Christian history of America. This Church divided on slavery in 1858, but both parts came together in 1877. It has made a recent notable achievement in historiography in the most thorough discussion ever given of the internal conflicts in Methodism,-the "History of Methodist Reform and of the