History Of Methodist Reform, Volume I - Media Sabda Org

Whitehead, who also gives it nearly in full. Watson has scant reference and Stevens contents himself
with a dozen lines, and they do not give the pith of it. A paraphrase is the best the limits will allow.
"But what power is this, which you exercise over all the Methodists in Great Britain and Ireland? The
answer is, that in 1738 persons came to him in London asking him to advise and pray with them .
. . here commenced my power, to appoint, when and where and how they should meet and to remove
the unfaithful — and this power remains the same, whether the people meeting together were twelve,
twelve hundred, or twelve thousand." He rehearses how he came to appoint stewards and of
removing them, another phase of power. Then certain brethren as lay-preachers desired to help him
and he durst not refuse their assistance, "and here commenced my power to appoint each of these
where, when, and how to labor; that is, while he chose to continue with me," — the case continued
the same when the number of preachers increased. He recites that in 1744 he called together the first
Conference of a select few. "They did not desire this meeting, but I did." Afterward, when the
number of preachers increased, he invited more to attend Conference: "I sent for them to advise, not
to govern me. Neither did I, at any of those times, divest myself of any of that power above
described, which the providence of God had cast upon me, without any design or choice of mine."
"But several gentlemen are much offended at my having so much power." "My answer to them is
this: I did not seek any part of this power — I never was fond of it. I always did, and do now, bear
it as my burden; which God lays upon me; but if you can tell me any one, or any five men, to whom
I can transfer this burden, who can and will do just what I do now, I will heartily thank both you and
them." "But some of your helpers say, 'This is shackling free-born Englishmen,' and demand a free
conference, that is, a meeting of all the preachers, wherein all things shall be determined by most
votes. I answer it is possible that something of this kind after my death may take place; but not while
I live — every preacher and every member may leave me when he pleases; but when he chooses to
stay, it is on the same terms that he joined me at first." "But this is arbitrary power; this is no less
than making yourself a pope." "If it is meant that I exercise the power singly, it is true, but if by
arbitrary is meant unjust, unreasonable, or tyrannical, then it is not true." He disclaims being a pope,
and contends that the charge is injurious to him and mischievous to the people — "to whom they
really owe more, for exercising this very power, than for all my preaching put together. Because
preaching twice or thrice a day is no burden to me at all; but the care of all the preachers and all the
people is a burden indeed!" This is his vindication. You need not too carefully analyze it. Hampson,
in his History, who had been checked by Wesley, says, "He never thought his authority secure, but
when exerted to the utmost. The love of power was the chief misery of his life, the source of infinite
disgusts, and the most frequent cause of the defection of his friends." Tyerman says, of his defense,
"He assigns reasons for it, and unless he is suspected of insincerity — a thing of which he was almost
incapable — all must give him credit for being actuated by high and conscientious motives. The
wisdom of acting as he did is a fair subject for discussion; but the purity of his intention can hardly
[7]
be questioned." In this calm judgment the unbiased will readily concur. As a parent; he exercised
supervision and discipline, and for the United Societies it was best, everything considered, while he
lived. The fundamental error was in his attempt to entail parental power. If, as a matter of fact, its
exercise during his life preserved the union of the societies, it was the direct cause of the destruction
of that unity after his decease through its exercise by the Legal Hundred and their successors, as shall
be shown in the sequel of English Methodist history.
At this Conference of 1766 a heart-searching scrutiny was made of the societies. Wesley gave his
[8]
opinion in no flattering terms of the average Methodist at this period. He lectured the preachers