Reform Movements in Methodism and How They Were Treated (1784–1830)

By Xlibris US

Rev. Paul F. McCleary is a graduate of Olivet Nazarene University, Bourbonnais, Illinois, Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, and Northwestern University, both in Evanston, Illinois. He has an honorary Doctorate of Divinity from MacMurray College, Jacksonville, Illinois. Paul served student appointments in Illinois Great Rivers Conference of the United Methodist Church before going to Bolivia as a missionary, where he served as district superintendent and executive secretary of the Annual Conference. He has served denominational posts as executive secretary of the Structure Study Commission of the General Conference, assistant general secretary for Latin America of the Board of Global Ministries, and as associate general secretary of the General Council on Ministries. He also served as executive director of Church World Service of the National Council of Churches of Christ. For several years, he served with nongovernmental organizations, such as Save the Children, Christian Childrens Fund, and Feed the Children. He served two terms as president of the NGO Committee to UNICEF and chair of the Board of InterAction. He served as a consultant to the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. McCleary served for eight years as an advisor to the Bishops Task Force on Children and Poverty of the United Methodist Church. McCleary is married to Rachel P. and has four children, seven grandchildren, and five great-grandchildren. They currently reside in Tempe, Arizona.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Apr 8, 2014
• ISBN: 9781493196890

Book preview

REFORM MOVEMENTS IN METHODISM AND HOW THEY WERE TREATED (1784-1830)

________________________

Paul F. McCleary

Copyright © 2014 by Paul F. McCleary.

Library of Congress Control Number:      2014906415

ISBN:   Hardcover   978-1-4931-9648-7

Softcover   978-1-4931-9649-4

eBook        978-1-4931-9689-0

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Rev. date: 04/02/2014

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Xlibris LLC

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

[e-mail]

552992

CONTENTS

Strongly Recommended Reading

Preface

Introduction

Chapter One: Reform, Vitality, and a Connectional Structure

Chapter Two: Was American Methodism Predestined to be Episcopal?

Chapter Three: To Other Shores in Quest of Religious Freedom

Chapter Four: Democracy: The Political Seedbed for American Methodism

Chapter Five: What Wesley Intended and What Resulted

Chapter Six: Schisms in the South

Chapter Seven: Schism in the North

Chapter Eight: Anatomy of a Schism

Appendix I

Appendix II

Bibliography

In gratitude to those faithful servants who guided me into the ministry

Rev. Eugene Darling

Dr. Fred Melvin, DS

Dr. Walter Day, DS

Bishop Charles Wesley Brashares

Cover

The first four bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church

Bishop Thomas Coke, 1784–1813

Bishop Francis Asbury, 1784–1815

Bishop Richard Whatcoat, 1800–1806

Bishop William McKendree, 1808–1835

STRONGLY RECOMMENDED READING

Andrews, Dee E., The Methodists and Revolutionary America 1760-1800 The Shaping of an Evangelical Culture, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2000

Bucke, Emory Stevens, The History of American Methodism, Three Volumes, Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1964

Colhouer, T.H., Non-Episcopal Methodism Contrasted with Episcopal Methodism, Published by Daughaday & Co., Philadelphia, 1889

Colhouer, T.H., Sketches of the Founders of the Methodist Protestant Church and Its Bibliography, Methodist Protestant Book Concern, Pittsburgh, 1880

Drinkhouse, Edward J., History of Methodist Reform 1703 to 1898 with Special Reference to the Methodist Protestant Church, The Board of Publication of the Methodist Protestant Church, Wm. J.C. Dulany, Agent, Baltimore, Maryland, 1899 (two volumes)

Emory, John, The Episcopal Controversy Reviewed, Published by Mason & Lane, for the Methodist Episcopal Church at the Conference 200 Mulberry, New York, 1838 (Edited by his son Robert)

Emory, John, A Defence of Our Fathers and the Original Organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church against the Rev. Alexander McCaine, Phillips & Hunt, New York & Cranston & Stowe, Cincinnati, 1827

Kirby, James E., Richey, Russell E., Rowe, Kenneth E., The Methodists. Denominations in America, Number 8, Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut & London, 1996

M’Caine, Alexander, A Defence of Our Fathers and of the Original Organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Phillips and Hunt, New York, Cranston and Stowe, Cincinnati, 1827

Schmidt, Martin, John Wesley, A Theological Biography, Vol. I, June 1703-24 May, 1738, Epworth Press, London, 1962

Wilentz, Sean, The Rise of American Democracy Jefferson to Lincoln, W.W. Norton and Company, New York & London, 2005

PREFACE

The major issue dominating the schedule and debate at the General Conference of the United Methodist Church in 2012 was organizational structure. Having served as the staff to the Structure Study Commission of the General Conference of 1968, I want this generation of church leadership to be aware of our institutional history and the debate on structure that continues to give form to our current polity to continue. For that reason, I wrote the book Structure, Governance and the United Methodist Church. My effort was not meant to be a political one. Then, as now, my purpose is to inform the current discussion among church leaders as well as the wider Methodist membership. As of this year, only a handful of the twenty-nine members of the Structure Study Commission are still alive. In the successive general conferences since 1972 (1), when the commission presented its report, little was written concerning the criteria behind the organizational design. The commission disbanded. The members returned to their full-time work. The field was left to the critics. The basic design, however, has continued intact until today.

The church legislation resulting from the 2012 debate brought few changes to the structure. The changes ultimately made can be classified as modified downsizing. The proposal made to the delegates of the 2012 General Conference was a radical alteration of the overall polity of the church; for which, at least, the majority of the delegates was not ready.

Once the general conference was over, one of the major criticisms by some of the delegates themselves was that so much time was spent with so little to show for it. Since the last general conference it seems that the denomination has moved on to other issues. A pejorative evaluation of the 2012 General Conference by the membership of the church was that we had neglected program for structure and then failed to produce. There is little likelihood that the next general conference in 2016 or, perhaps the next several, will dedicate more attention and resources on an analysis of structure.

This would be unfortunate. Surely, there may be some, such as myself, who continue to express serious concerns about the need for change in the form of government of the United Methodist Church. Methodists do not believe that structure is divinely determined. However, we do believe we must be appropriately organized to be effective in carrying out the church’s mission.

That which is receiving a great deal of attention is the vitality of the local church. Is it possible that the vitality of the local church is affected by the form of government of the denomination? While the lack of vitality in the local church cannot be completely due to the denomination’s form of government, it is possible that the form of government can be and has been detrimental to the fulfillment of our spiritual mission. Otherwise, the leadership of the United Methodist Church would not have expended the effort on structure it did for the 2012 General Conference.

What follows is a personal quest to explore how and to what degree the Methodist denomination’s form of government is contributing to our current malaise. Why does the United Methodist Church suffer such a loss of members and why is it unable to stem this loss? To answer these and other troubling questions, several possible approaches are possible. The method selected is to study the renewal or reform movements in the past within the denomination.

10812.png

1.   There have been ten general conferences since the one in 1972, a total of forty years. Among the retired bishops, there are several who were present.

INTRODUCTION

This book examines early reform movements in American Methodism and their impact on the governance within the denomination. A secondary purpose is to initiate a study of the ramifications the episcopal form of government has on the vitality of a local congregation of the United Methodist Church. These two objectives may seem unrelated. However, an organization’s ability to accommodate reform movements and accept change has consequences for its vitality.

In one respect, Methodism has been fortunate in that there have been efforts to reform and renew the church throughout its long history. The church has responded differently to each. With some, it has stoned-walled change and provoked a schism. With others it has been open and willing to negotiate and compromise to keep the reform movement in the church. With others, it has been indifferent and ignored the reform movement with the hope it would quietly disappear.

These reform movements can be clustered and classified into groupings for concentrated analysis. Such a clustering would suggest the following:

1)   Small and isolated attempts at reform: the first three decades of the nineteenth century (i.e., 1790-1820) experienced the emergence of numerous groups who modification in the structure Methodism, generally a more democratic and inclusive structure. Among them, Republican Methodists, the United Societies of the People called Methodist in Philadelphia, the Independent Methodists in New Jersey, the Samaritans in New York, and the Reformed Methodists in parts of New England, succeeded from the Methodist Episcopal Church.

2)   Large, national reform movements: during the decades of the 1820-1830s, new Methodist reform movements emerged to replace those who had left, but now were much better organized and national in character. An example was the one out of which emerged the Methodist Protestant Church.

3)   The antislavery movement evolved into the abolition movement: during the 1840s and 1850s, the abolitionist movement culminated in the establishment of the Wesleyan Methodist Connection and the separation of Methodism into two denominations.

4)   The Women’s Movement: in May 1888, the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church met. The lists of those chosen as delegates by annual conferences included the names of five women as representatives. After heated debate, the conference voted not to seat the five women, but it offered to reimburse their travel expenses. This was the beginning of the political battle by women for a place in the leadership of the church.

5)   The Holiness Movement: a reform-renewal movement based on sanctification as a second work of grace. It was first found within several denominations until there was a call to come out when the movement formed several holiness denominations. A process began in the 1850s that culminated about 1910.

6)   Social action reform movement: a renewal movement found in most of the mainline denominations just after the turn of the century. The Methodist Federation for Social Action, formed in 1907, embodied this movement and has maintained an active and cordial relationship with the denomination.

7)   The Evangelical Movement: Following World War II, in most mainline denominations, there appeared a reform/renewal movement for Evangelicals. Its first institutional form in Methodism was the Good News Association, which developed several departments or affiliated organizations, one of which that has been quite active is the Mission Agency.

8)   Ethnic Caucuses: Several reform movements of a similar nature have affected most mainline denominations. This movement has given rise to denominationally affiliated organizations to lobby for minority representation and ethnic recognition.

9)   Same gender marriages: the reform movement the church in current involved in.

This study focuses on the reform movements during the period of 1790-1830: the first two stages discussed above. There are several similarities to these reform efforts that make them a useful study. Without exception they all emerged within Methodism. They sought some reform of the church organization as they experienced it. And each was unsuccessful in attaining reform, thereby causing them to seek redress outside of Methodism.

To begin such an inquiry, it seems useful to explore Methodism’s history from the point of view of its polity as a foundation for the study. At the formation of the Methodist Episcopal Church in America, it adopted the episcopal form of church government. The great excitement at the Christmas Conference of 1784 over Wesley’s decision to give consent and support for the societies in America to become autonomous from the British Methodist movement meant there was less attention paid to the decision over the form of government the autonomous church would take. The autonomous church seems to have assumed that its form of government would be episcopal as the Anglican Church was. It was not long, however, until vocal opposition arose within American Methodism. The acrimonious debate over Methodism’s form of governance in the General Conference of 1792 resulted in schism. This schism was a preliminary foretaste of more to follow.

The hierarchical rule inherent in the episcopal form of government was out of step with the new political theory hammered out in the heat of the Revolutionary War. The War of 1812 provided an even clearer identity for America, both politically and geographically. The liberal democracy supported by the national election of Jefferson and the egalitarian democracy articulated by Andrew Jackson challenged Methodism’s expression of the episcopal form of church government. Methodism’s redeeming feature was as follows: while the clergy contested the episcopal form of government, the Methodist theological position on prevenient grace won out against the strict Calvinism predominant in America. Methodism professed the salvation available to all sinners, whereas Calvinism held to the doctrine of election. Theologically, the egalitarian nature of Methodism of free grace and good works was compatible with the democratic values of the new nation. These theological values were significant in Methodism’s ability to overtake Calvinist Congregational New England starting in the late 1700s.

At the same time that Methodism was establishing itself in the colonies, opponents to Methodism’s form of episcopal governance left the church beginning in 1792 to form new denominations. The internal debate continued for decades. There were those who could no longer tolerate the autocratic power of the episcopacy. Yet others remained to continue the struggle for renewal from within.

A more organized, articulate reform movement developed in the 1820s. It was unsuccessful in its efforts to bring change in the General Conference of 1828. It left to form a new denomination. With the departure of these reformers, another group formed and withdrew in 1840, resulting in yet an additional Methodist denomination. Each will be examined.

In the post-Civil War years, a great revival swept Methodism. The opening of the West, begun before the Civil War, now moved at a rapid pace caused by the construction of railroads linking the two coasts. Methodism’s unique ability to project itself into new areas continued to be operative. Centralized authority could mobilize limited resources to the points of greatest challenge.

A new internal conflict around the Holiness Movement emerged and grew until it, too, chose to leave Methodism. It lodged itself in multiple new ecclesiastical structures. Though the primary issue for separation was stated to be theological in nature, almost without exception, the new denominations chose a modified episcopal form that is much more favorable to congregational authority and democratically chosen leadership.

Internal opposition, not severe enough to leave the Methodist Episcopal Church, turned to legislative steps that would bring about modifications to the episcopal system. By the turn of this century, the Methodist Protestant Church, a denomination created by one of the schisms, considered the modifications adequate enough to seek reunion with Episcopal Methodism. At the same time, there was afoot in the Southern Methodist church a sufficiently strong progressive movement to threaten the power of the bishops. The 1939 union of the three branches of Methodism accommodated these streams of reform by reflecting some of their concerns in the new constitution.

Among the challenges today are predominately internal ones. The historic definition of a schism is a split or rent; a division in or from the church. The one leading a schism is thought of negatively as a troublemaker. However, in more objective terminology, this troublemaker would be recognized as a reformer. The Christian Church has had a number of persons who have qualified as reformers. A reformer from the Christian Church can be defined as a person who holds strong beliefs and practices these beliefs to the point of seeking to change or make over a part or all of the church.

Universally throughout the denomination, the word vitality is used and applied to a local congregation. When the problem is defined to be vital, the issue is an internal not an environmental or external one. Vitality is defined as something that is existing, capable of living, full of energy, and creativity.

This study is exploring the source of the vitality of reform movements. How has the church dealt with reform movements? How has these movements and subsequent schisms affected the church?

CHAPTER ONE

Reform, Vitality, and a Connectional Structure

To the casual student of American Methodism, the question of episcopal polity would seem to be based on Wesley’s association with Anglicanism. However, there is no clear and easy answer for the question of why American Methodism chose the episcopal form of government. It is not that other choices did not exist or that there were not proponents of other forms of church government. The decision to follow an episcopal polity seems to have run counter to the desires of the founder of Methodism, John Wesley; to have run head long into the polity of the dominant Protestant churches in America; and was completely counter to the evolving political mood of the general public following the Revolutionary War. It was even counter to many within the American Methodist movement until they finally withdrew to form other non-episcopal Methodist churches.

How was that decision arrived at then? What can be said for Methodism’s episcopal form of church polity?

Wesley ruled early Methodism with a firm hand. If there were those who did not like it, they were encouraged to find a church to fit their needs. Yet when he finally was willing to recognize that the time had come to give to the societies in America their independence from the movement