and willing to contribute toward the public debt? 5. Or to the further-
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
had occupied the mind of John Wesley during the year, and had attained greater impressiveness by reason of recent occurrences.
It was essential that the phrase 'The United Societies ' should receive additional force and reality.
The year 1749 was one of prosperity in almost all parts of the country ; but there were ominous signs of failure, division, and disturbance in a few places.
The number of members in Bristol had decreased.
We have no doubt that the building of the 'New Room' had interfered with the meetings of the Society, and had something to do with the numerical decline.
But, apart from the Western town, we cannot ignore the fact that John Wesley's projected marriage had caused disturbance in the London Society ; and probably among the Methodists of Newcastle.
We must bear the circumstances of the times in mind as we listen to the ' conversation ' on that November day in the far-off years.
Let us turn to the minutes and examine the entry concerning the first part of the business of the Conference.
It was inquired, Q. 1. Can there be any such thing as a general union of our Societies throughout England ?
A. A proposal for this was made above a year ago.
The substance of it is this: Might not all the Societies throughout England be considered as one body, firmly united together by one spirit of love and heavenly-mindedness ? Might not that in London be accounted the mother-church ? and the Stewards of this consult for the good of all the churches ?
Might they not answer letters from all parts, and give advice at least in temporal things?
But it may be asked, ' How can the temporal state of all the Societies be known to the Stewards in London?'
I answer, Very easily, by means of the Assistants.
Let each Assistant make diligent inquiry at every Quarterly Meeting concerning the temporal as well as spiritual state of each Society.
Let him inquire particularly of each, 1. Are you in debt?
2, How much, and to whom?
3. Are all in your Society poor?
4. Are not some therein both able and willing to contribute toward the public debt?
5. Or to the furtherance of the Gospel, yearly?
6. Or toward a common stock?
7. Who keeps your account?
How?
And the answers he receives, let him transmit quarterly to London.
He might also put them into a regular method of keeping their accounts, and transacting all their regular affairs.
After the Stewards in London are thus informed, may they not settle a regular correspondence with all the Societies?
By this means we might not only be able to discharge all debts, but in a little time have a small Fund, out of which a Society ' under persecution,' or in real distress, upon application made to the stewards in London,
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
might speedily be relieved.
Being thus united together in one body, of which Christ Jesus is the Head, neither the world nor the devil will be able to separate us in time or in eternity.
Q. 2. How may we make some advances towards this?
A. By appointing one of our Helpers in each Circuit to take charge of the Societies therein.
Q. 3. By what means may such a Helper be distinguished from the rest ?
A. He may be termed an Assistant.
Q. 4. How should an Assistant be qualified for the charge ?
A, Not so much by superior gifts, as by walking closely with God.
These suggestions show that John Wesley had been studying the subject of Quarterly Meetings which John Bennet had brought before him.
But they also reveal a wider scope.
No one who has studied the present constitution of Methodism will fail to recognize the importance of these suggestions.
As we watch them the outlines of present arrangements gradually emerge, and the Methodism of the future stands out with almost startling clearness.
Enough of this plan remains to cause us to admire the far-sightedness of the men ofthat distant day.
Glancing over these resolutions, we are arrested, first of all, by the suggestion, ' Might not the Society in London be accounted the mother-church?'
That question causes the ghosts of old controversies to arise.
It is usual in the present day to hear some persons affirm that 'the mother-church of Methodism is the Church of England.'
It is well to be wary in assenting to that theory.
We recall Wesley's statement in the third section of his Farther Appeal to Men of Reason and Religion.
Speaking of the Methodists in 1745 he says: 'A great part of these went to no church at all before they heard us preach.
They no more pretended to belong to the Church of England than to the Church of Muscovy.
If, therefore, they went to no church now, they would be no farther from the Church than they were before.'* In addition, we know that considerable numbers of Dissenters joined the Methodist
Societies in Wesley's day.
He strongly advised them to attend the services in their own chapels on Sundays.
When Methodist ' preaching-houses ' were built, and regular services began to be held in them, many of these Dissenters not only ' met in class,' but habitually worshipped with the Methodist
» Minutes of Conference, i, 708.
* Works, viii. 236
(8vo ed.)
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
congregation.
In numerous instances they retained their dissenting convictions, but they were known to their neighbours as members of Wesley's Societies.
We do not overlook the important fact that a large proportion of the Methodist members were Church of England people.
They held their old convictions concerning Church government, and some of them strongly resisted any movement which threatened to carry them away from the Establishment.
It was to them their ' mother-church.'
We are sure, however, that a great number of Methodists, who were comprised in the first and second sections we have mentioned, would have been surprised if they had been informed that their ' motherchurch' was the Church of England.
As the years have passed, the question of the relation of the early Methodist Societies to the Church of England has frequently emerged, and has been freely discussed.
We take this opportunity of indicating a standpoint which should be occupied by all who wish to reach a sound conclusion on this controverted matter.
In 1881 Dr. Rigg, in consultation with the Rev. Richard Green and the present writer, prepared two pamphlets which were called for by the incessant attacks of certain extreme High Churchmen.
One of the pamphlets was entitled, Was John Wesley a High Churchman?
The other, Is Modern Methodism Wesleyan Methodism?
At this point we are only concerned with the latter.
In it the following carefully considered statement appears concerning the relations of the early Methodist Societies to the Church of England.
It is not necessary to emphasize the fact that Dr. Rigg had a wide and accurate knowledge of the history of Methodism in the time of Wesley.
This is what he says in the pamphlet :
Many Methodists were themselves personally members of the Church of England—though a continually increasing number were not; but the Society, as such, was in no sense or degree any part or any dependency of that Church.
It had no organic connexion with it whatever.
The parish clergy, as a rule, had no authority in the Society ; they stood in no relation with it. Some three or four parish clergymen, during fifty years, connected themselves with Mr. Wesley as his helpers, and put themselves under his orders. These were thus brought into connexion with his Societies.
But otherwise, and as parish ministers, the clergy had no relation whatever to John Wesley's
Societies.
Nor had the bishops, nor any bishops, any authority over the Society, or in the Conference, or, so far as regarded his Methodist
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
work, and his relation to his Societies, over John Wesley.
Methodism, therefore, as an organization, was altogether outside the Church of England during Wesley's own lifetime.
Having quoted Dr. Rigg's opinion, it is necessary to produce a judgement on the question of the relation of Methodism to the Church of England in the eighteenth century.
In 1906 a volume of the valuable History of the English Church appeared.
It dealt with that history from the accession of George I to the end of the eighteenth century.
When Canon Overton died, he left a rough draft of a book which covered that period.
It became the basis of the seventh volume of the History we have just mentioned.
The reviser was the Rev. Frederic Relton.
He not only revised Canon Overton's work, but increased the value of the book by his own contributions.
He says, however, that he 'had not willingly parted with a line, scarcely a word' of what Canon
Overton had written.
The book is a composite production, and therefore it is difficult to assign the opinions expressed in it to the original writer.
Without undertaking the task of 'a Higher Critic,' it will be enough to say that the opinions expressed concerning the relation of Methodism to the Church of England are in harmony with Canon Overton's wellconsidered judgements.
In the Introduction to the book it is said :
The reader will find little in these pages about the marvellous organization which Wesley either originated or adopted, not because it is a thing of naught, but simply because it is not a part of the particular subject of this book.
For the same reason Whitefield's efforts, under the patronage of Lady Huntingdon, are lightly passed over, because they had even less connexion with the Church of England than the Wesleyan Societies ; Whitefield being far less of a Churchman than either of the brother Wesleys.
In another place it is said:
The Society of which John Wesley was the founder hardly comes within our scope.
It is impossible not to come to the conclusion that from the very first the Wesleyan movement, so far as it concerned organization, never was, and never could have been, a Church movement.
It is true that Wesley's commanding influence not only prevented any formal separation from the Church during his lifetime, but 1 Op. ctt., -p.. 6.
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
also secured the punctual attendance, at least for some time, at the public worship in the parish churches ' of all who regarded his opinion'
; that is, in other words, of all Methodists, for with them his word was law.
But all this seems beside the mark.
The real question is, What was the tendency of the movement from the very beginning?
Where did the followers of Wesley find their religion?
Surely not in the 'Church system, but in their own separate organizations.
It is a purely modern notion that the Wesleyan movement ever was—or ever was intended to be, except by Wesley—a Church movement.'
In these quotations from Canon Overton's and Mr. Relton's book there is little we should be inclined to challenge.
The fact that John Wesley strongly urged the Dissenters in his Societies to attend their own chapels is overlooked; but, on the whole, the conclusions are sound.
They are in harmony with those reached by Dr. Rigg.
It is time that ' the purely modern notion' which still lingers in some minds should be dismissed.
Wesley's suggestion that the London Society should be accounted 'the mother-church' of Methodism has strong claims to adoption.
Returning to our examination of the recommendations of the Conference of 1749, which were intended to promote a general union of the Methodist Societies throughout England, we see at once that the tentative proposal to make the stewards of the London Societies the agents in securing that union would have to be laid aside.
The Methodists at all times have shown their possession of a due allowance of 'human nature,' and we can understand that slumbering jealousies might have been aroused in Bristol, Newcastle, and elsewhere.
But we must not overlook words which seem to limit the province of the London stewards.
The Conference thought that, ' at least in temporal affairs,' the other Societies might consult them.
At this time the question of the support of the preachers and. their wives was emerging.
The cost of prosecuting persecutors had emerged, and demanded immediate attention.
Wesley thought that his scheme would lead to arrangements which would not only enable the Societies to discharge their debts, but, in a little time, would secure the formation of 'a small fund, out of which a Society under persecution, or in real distress, upon application to the stewards in London, might speedily be relieved.'
That is more than a glimmer of light on the origin of ' the connexional system,'
1 History of the English Church, vii. 6, 74-75.
A NOVEMBER CONFERENCE
A with its numerous funds, by which the unity of Methodism has been secured.
Whatever may have been the defects of the scheme that was presented to the Conference of 1749, it shows that John_
Wesley understood the power of the layman in the management of his Societies.
We have already emphasized that fact, but it needs to be remembered at every stage of our inquiry.
It must not be forgotten that nearly all his preachers were laymen ; so were his stewards and trustees.
As for his classleaders, if we examine the lists contained in Stevenson's City Road Chapel and its Associations we discover the fact that in 1742, at the Foundery, the men leaders were far outnumbered by the women leaders; of the former there were nineteen, of the latter forty-seven.
That is shown by the list Wesley himself prepared. * Wesley availed himself of all the trustworthy helpers he could find to assist him in his work, making them responsible to him for the manner in which their share of the work was done.
It was fortunate that he never abandoned his position as the final authority on all matters connected with the management of his Societies.
A church, founded on the Connexional principle, that does not possess a final authority is on its way to disunion.
That authority at an early stage may be a man; later it may be a selected assembly; but a Connexional church is always in peril if it does not possess
person or an assembly of persons to speak the decisive word.
Let no one envy the position of the final authority.
As we watch Wesley struggling with his own work, and spending hours in composing vexatious quarrels and dangerous misunderstandings, our pity is excited.
It is no wonder he sought some relief, and that he tried to devise a plan that would lighten the burden of his position.
The prosperity of Methodism continually increased the weight of that burden, and it was imperative that some arrangement should be made to assist him in the government of the Societies.
In the Minutes of the Conference of 1749 we have a view of the territorial position of Methodism in that year.
We shall have to wait for some time before we get another opportunity of seeing so clear a statement.
We will therefore 1 See Stevenson's City Road Chapel, 29.