CONGREGATIONAL METHODIST CHURCH
Chapters IV
thru IX
CHAPTER IV
The meeting at brother Merritt's on the 8th of May, 1852 was indeed the "small' beginning;" of a great Work. Two characteristics of the meeting I desire to notice in this is number 1. There was not a single one of those who then and there took the important step of organizing a new Church, who did so hastily--or in a spirit of envy or ambition. They would have made any reasonable sacrifice, or concession to maintain their former Church relations, would have been willing to labor resolutely or wait patiently for needed reform. If there bad been any prospect that labor or waiting would have brought them about but no such prospect appeared in any quarter, and the course which they then pursued presented the only course proper for them to adopt. Such has ever been the conduct of reformers, either in Church or State, when they have been good men. Luther, Zwingle and Melancthon, were lothe to sever their relationship with the Roman Church, and only did so because it was their duty. John and Charles Wesley, George Whitfield, and their co-laborers maintained their relations with the Episcopal Church as long as possible. And so did these good men in 1852 reluctantly do that the voice of duty demanded at their hands. 2. This action on
the part of these men, met with the most determined opposition from the Church from which they separated. This also has ever been the case with similar movements. To a disinterested and unbiased judgment it would seem quite unnatural, that any Church should not willingly consent that any number of its members who were dissatisfied with either its doctrines or polity, should “depart in peace, "but history shows that they have scarcely ever been willing for their brethren to leave their fold, and go where they would be better satisfied. The ministers in charge of the churches and circuits where this movement first took root, strove hard to drown it out and prevent its spread. And in doing so, did many things which seemed at the time to be harsh, but of this I do not complain, nor does the Congregational Methodist Church; they were good men and doubtless were honestly of the opinion that this movement would eventuate in much evil and little good. But time has demonstrated that these opinions of theirs were incorrect. Those men could never have been of much service to a Church whose polity was so entirely at variance with their views of right and propriety as that of “The Methodist Episcopal Church, South,” It but in a Church whose polity they believed in--and whose government they devotedly loved, they have accomplished great good. This was a very small meeting, scarcely as many persons in it as were on the little fishing-boat with Peter on the night of "fruitless toil,” yet this was a meeting destined to exercise a powerful influence on the world of Methodism. And those humble, good men had perhaps as little idea of the stupendous results to follow their humble action on that quiet May day, as Peter had of the effect to follow his sermon when he began to preach on the day of Pentecost. Of these men I shall write more at length when I shall have closed these historical sketches of the early days of our Church, but of the results which have thus far been realized from this meeting I shall say something, and with that close this number.
From the day when Rev. Francis Asbury, called himself or allowed others to call him a "Bishop," to the 8th day of May 1852, the government of the Methodist Church in its various branches, except that of the “Methodist Protestant," had been entirely in the hands of the itineracy, and the authority of the Episcopacy growing stronger and stronger. In no Conference was a layman entitled to a seat, save the quarterly Conference, and in these only such laymen took part as the itineracy chose to have there, and who could be put in, and put out, of said Conference with the care of uttering a single command, and the placing them in such positions did not amount to as much as the tantalization of a sailor in throwing a tub to a whale, for when a whale was once in possession of the tub, although he could accomplish nothing by its possession or use outside of amusing himself, still he could keep it as long as he chose, but these laymen could only play with the tub until it was taken from them, or rather, until they wore taken from it. The great movement resulting in the formation of the Methodist Protestant Church nearly twenty-five years before had not changed this feature of either branch of the parent Church. But how stands the case to-day? No where in all this land, either North or South, does a Methodist Conference assemble now without the laymen being there. And these thousands of laymen who hold seats in "the General and inferior Conferences (most of them being ignorant that such a meeting was ever held) are indebted to the actors of May 8th, 1852, for the privileges they thus enjoy. Where is the week-day system of serving country churches in operation prior to that time? Why are nearly all supplied with Sabbath preaching? The hundreds of' thousands of country Methodists all over this country who now have preaching on the Holy Sabbath instead of on a working-day, are indebted for these blessings to the good men who so manfully struck for this privilege amid the opening flowers of May 1852.Why so many hundreds of good local preachers now exercising all their functions as pastors of churches to-day? Whence came these privileges to local ministers and blessings to the people? The answer is they came from the "quiet chambers at brother Merritt's house, where these good men united their feelings, their prayers and their tears, a little more than a quarter of a century ago.
And what more shall I say of too gracious result which have grown out of this "day of small things." For the time would fail me to toll of the many thousands who have thus been privileged to attend the Methodist services on Sabbath, of the tens of thousands of faithful local ministers whose hearts before that burned within them as Jesus talked to them, "by the way,” as they looked for an open door where they might feed the flock of God, and have thus been given a door of utterance, and of the great host of sinners, to whom they have successfully pointed out the Lamb of' God which taketh away the sins of the world. Faithful and highly favored little band standing in the fore-front of the battle listening only to the voice of their Captain and responding to the roll call "here am I." And down in their hearts, so full of anxiety and yet so full of peace, a still small voice was heard saying. "fear not little flock for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom."
CHAPTER V
I have dwelt at some length on the history of the first meeting held in the interest of the Congregational Methodist Church, because I regard it as an important meeting; and although the principal part of the two preceding chapters has been devoted to its history, I do not feel that I should dismiss this part of my subject without noticing one other characteristic thereof.
From the time of Wesley’s administration in America, there had been, prior to the 8th of May, 1852, one hundred meetings in different parts of the United States, similar in many respects to the one I have been writing of as occurring on that day, and nearly all of them have been confined almost entirely to the communities respectively where they occurred and have passed away with those who took part in them, and there are today a large number of independent Methodist churches in the Southern States who have no connection with each other or with any other church. The Church which was formed at brother Merritt’s had a connexional as well as a congregational and republican element in its form of government, and to this cause may be ascribed the popularity and spread of the Church which had its birth in Monroe county, Georgia, on the 8th of May, 1852.
There is one feature of the subsequent history of the C. M. Church which I desire here to notice. Within a short time from the organization of the first church the movement has spread over several counties in Middle Georgia, and found foothold in the States of Alabama and Mississippi, and has, from that day until this, been prospering in all three of said States, and has now State Conferences in six States, and organizations in several others with many thousands of members; still in the county where it has its origin and has lived and flourished for more than a quarter of a century, there are many persons ignorant of the existence of such a Church and more ignorant of its characteristics and doctrines. Those who desire to impede its progress soon ascertained that the best way to prevent its spread was to say nothing about it. Hence their papers (whether under the influence of the gag-law or not I cannot say) have refused to publish anything about it. Its ministers as a general rule receive such notice and courtesy as the rules of good breeding absolutely require at the hands of their ministers and nothing more. I do not complain at this as unkindness or persecution, for one who attempts reform in an existing Church organization of an important character and does not expect to meet persecution, calculates improperly and is deemed to disappointment. It has ever been so, and ever will be so. But n dismissing this part of the subject I feel impelled to say simply this: The organs of the M. E. Church, South, by their conduct ignore and appear to be ignorant of the existence of the C. M. Church, although their Discipline has many features in it which were taken from that of the C. M. Church. If we shall be true to ourselves, true to our Church paper, true to our principles as Christians, and true to the Great Head of the Church, the time will soon come when the existence of the Congregational Methodist Church will no longer be ignore.
CHAPTER VI
Having dwelt at length on the first meeting of the friends of Congregational Methodism, for the reasons already stated, I have now to speak of the second meeting. This meeting was held at Rehoboth Church about the third Sunday in May, 1852. Between the time of the first and second meetings the feeling had spread over a considerable section of Middle Georgia, and quite a number of ministers and members from the M. E. Church South, came forward and united with the organization. Among the former I can mention, Rev. J. F. N. Huddleston and Rev. J. Fletcher Wethersbee, and among the latter I should name John Ham, John H. Phinazee, David Ogletree, John E. Petigrew, Edward White and others.
Quite a number of these who had allied themselves with the new movement were members of the M. E. Church, South, at Rehoboth; indeed nearly the whole of the membership at that place went with the C. M.Church, and this was probably the reason why they felt like they had the liberty to use the church-house at Rehoboth to meet in. But they were not permitted to occupy the house—the same, under the economy of the M. E. Church, , having been deeded to the Georgia Annual Conference, and its officers not being willing for “the seceders”, as they were called, to use it.
By way of parenthesis I will here say: This reference to the persecution which the pioneers of Congregational Methodism met with, is not lugged in here to excite any sympathy for the C. M. Church, nor to cast reflections on the M. E. Church, South, but is done in the discharge of the duties of the historian, who, if he does his duty to posterity (for whose benefit be principally writes) states transactions just as they occurred, leaving the reader to draw his own conclusions.
Not being permitted to hold their meetings in the church-house they withdrew to the arbor of the camp-ground nearby, and there held their meeting. The business of this meeting consisted principally (so far as its secular affairs were concerned) in the appointment of a committee of three to prepare a book of Discipline, with rules and regulations for the government of the Church. That committee consisted of Revs. H. Phinazee, A. Ogletree, and J. F. N. Huddleston. And here again “those good men and true” committed themselves and commended the cause of the infant Church in prayer to the Great Head of the Church, with abiding confidence in the propriety of the step they had taken, and in grateful remembrance of the partial success which had attended them thus far in their unabated zeal in devotion to duty, and humble reliance on Divine assistance and guidance in the future, they parted with “the benediction” of peace. Rev. Allen Turner, a good old man of the M. E. Church, South, who was present to forbid the use by the new organization of the church-house, was requested to pray in the meeting. He led in prayer, asking fervently that if the move was not of God it might come to naught; but if it was of God that it might prosper, and all the brethren said “amen”, and the prayer has been heard and answered.
CHAPTER VII
The meeting at Rehobeth Church, as before stated, appointed a committee to prepare a book of Discipline, and report to the next meeting. When and where this third meeting was held, I have been unable to ascertain, and I regret to inability to now state, what would be of great interest, and which perhaps may never be known hereafter. It is however, pretty certain that it was not long after the second meeting, as the book of Discipline was published and given to the world early in the month of August, 1852. The character of the book, as reported by the committee and adopted by the Church, I shall now notice, only so far as to refer to the freface, as embodying some of the leading features of the Church.
The Rev. H. Phinazee, of the committee above stated, was the author of the above preface. The book was a small pamphlet of 48 pages, published by A. G. Murray, Griffin, GA., and in order that the reader may fully understand the same, I here insert that preface just as it there occurred:
(See Preface in the Discipline of the Congregational Methodist Church.)
With this declaration of the foundation of their action, the Congregational Methodist Church took its place among the ecclesiastical organizations of the country, trusting to the correctness of its principles and the purity of its motives for that success which was afterwards to attend it.
Thus we have presented the history of the completion of the organization of the first individual Church, the nucleus around which all in the future were to gather. Less than three months had been consumed in perfecting this machinery, and the enduring character of the work thus done, declares most emphatically that it was well done, as the leading features of the original Discipline are preserved to the present time by the C. M. Church, and many of its peculiar features have been adopted by other populous members of the great Methodist family.
The body of the Discipline was written by Rev. J. F. N. Huddleston, and when reported by him to his two fellow-committeemen, was adopted by them with very slight alteration, if any at all, and was adopted by the Church as it came from the Committee.
CHAPTER VIII
The first Congregational Methodist Church constituted was called Rocky Creek, its membership principally were formerly members of Rehoboth, the name of this church was afterwards changed, as we shall see hereafter. Between the 8th of May and the 1st of August, other organizations had been effected. Mt. Hope, in Spalding county, Rock Springs, in Monroe County, Pleasant Grove, in Butts county, New Market, in Monroe county, New Hope, in Pike county, and Providence in Monroe county, making, in all, seven churches, and all in the same section of country.
As the Discipline provided for District Conferences, those seven churches, on the 12th day of August, 1852, by their delegates, hold their first District Conference, at Rocky Creek Baptist church—that church kindly tendering to said body the use of their church-house. Upon the assembling of the Conference, the following named delegates, with proper credentials, came forward and had their names enrolled, viz:
From Rocky Creek church, A. Ogletree, J. F. N. Huddleston and H. Phinazee from Mount Hope Church, Robert Walker and Joshua Shoptrino, from Rock Spring church, Allen Reeves from Pleasant Grove church, George W. Barber and William A. McCune, from New Market church, J. F. Wethersby and Benjamin Davis, from Providence church, William H. Graham, from New Hope church Daniel Carroll. Rev. J. F. Wethersby was elected President, and Rev. H. Phinazee, Secretary.
The President opened the Conference with prayer. At the organization of the first church at brother Merritt’s house, we have soon the little company gathered, bowing reverently before their Great Head, and heard the voice of ascending prayer for Divine protection, and now when we behold the first District Conference we see them bending the knee to God and begging for Heaven’s direction, their hearts in unison responding in the language of Scripture, “Without me ye can do nothing.”
This was the first District Conference ever held by any Methodist body, and therefore a center of curiosity. So far as history shows, this was the first Conference ever held by any Methodist body, except Quarterly Conference, which was composed more largely of laymen than of ministers, and the first body of Methodist, which was purely a representative body, and whose members all held their seats only by the choice of their brethren. This conference was therefore clearly an experiment; but the developments have shown that it was a success. The thousands of District Conferences and District Meetings which have been since held among Methodist of this country declares that a District Conference is a success. The President of the Conference had once been an itinerate of note, and had frequently been a member of Conferences, and in case of Quarterly Conferences, some times its presiding officer, I suppose; but there were two new features to him, even in this assembly. 1. He was there on a perfect equality with every other member (except what privileges were conferred on him by his election to the Presidency), and 2. He was there by the election of his brethren. Hitherto he had held seats in Conferences, where some of the members were on a shelf above him, some on the same shelf with him, and some on the shelf below him, but here all the members were on the same platform. Before that time he had held his seats in Conferences, because he was an itinerant, here he held his seat because he was the coince of his brethren.
Non of the other members of this conference had ever been members of any Conference before, save Quarterly Conferences, and when we consider that a majority of them were laymen we will very naturally suppose they felt a little awkward, having belonged, some of them, for many years where they had no right guaranteed by their Discipline of voting, much less of holding office, save as put in office by the preacher in charge, and not ever owing any interest in the houses in which they worshipped. But inexperienced as they were, the duty was upon them of putting in operation the new machinery of a new organization, and well and faithfully did they acquit themselves.
One of the first things done by the Conference after organization was to recognize the license of brother Carey Cox, a licentiate from the M. E. Church, South, and to pass a resolution that all ministers coming from other orthodox denominations be received as such in our Church, upon presentation of their credentials in proper form. The Conference then granted exhorter’s license to Brother John Ham, Daniel Carroll and Travis Ivey, they all having been duly recommended for such license by the churches to which they respectively belonged.
The Conference being impressed with the belief that a Church paper was essential to its prosperity, lost no time in looking to this important interest, and after discussing the matter at length, in which a free interchange of opinions were had among all the delegates, the Chair, upon motion, appointed a Committee of five “to take into consideration the subject of establishing a press, and report to the Church as early as practicable, for their ratification.” That Committee consisted of brother J. F. N. Huddleston, W. LK. Frambrough, Mickleberry Merritt, Absalom Ogletree and John Ham.
And here I may remark (by way of parenthesis) that this subject has ever been before us as a Church, but at no time in our history have we been sufficiently alive to its importance, and have too often contented ourselves with the passage of resolutions, or the “appointment of a committee”, as to what the Church, in its then novel and untried condition, needed I am not in any wise competent to say, but, now we need something more tangible, more real, more substantial than resolutions, or committees of investigation, we need money, subscribers, contributors for the paper. My dear brethren, pardon me for exhorting you throughout our connection to wake up, work for our paper among the people, write for the paper, encourage our worthy editor and don’t leave him neglected to do so much work for us, but lend him a helping had.
The Conference, before adjourning, adopted the following resolution, then found at the close of the book of Discipline:
“Resolved, unanimously, That in view of the great importance of this work of reformation, upon which we have voluntarily entered, the hasty manner in which it has been thus far prosecuted, the imperfections which may be consequently be found in it, we reserve to ourselves the right and will do ourselves and the cause we advocate the justice to call a convention of delegates from all the churches in our connection; and that said Convention shall appoint a committee, whose duty it shall be to revise this work throughout critically, after which it shall be put up permanently. Said Convention will be called as soon as practicable.”
The Conference appointed next District Conference to be held at Mt. Hope church, Spalding county, Georgia.
This session of the Conference lasted three days, and was remarkably quiet and harmonious session. It did much work and did it well, setting a worthy example of the many similar Conferences to come after it.
CHAPTER IX
Having in the last chapter related the history of the first District Conference, I propose here to follow up the history of the District Conference at its various sessions up to the formation of different District Conferences and a State Conference in Georgia. The idea of what the term “District” signified seems at first to have been construed as indicating a Congressional District; accordingly, the heading of the minutes of the first and second District Conference designates the body as “The District Conference of the Congregational Methodist Church for the Third District of Georgia.” After the third session, it was no longer designated as “The Third Congressional District,” but simply as “the District Conference of the Congregational Methodist Church,”, and they were certainly entitled to be called the District Conference, as there was at that time no other organized District Conference in the known world. All the churches organized in Georgia, and evensome in Alabama, were connected with this District Conference.
The second session of this body was held at Mount Home church, Spalding county, and four and one-half miles east of the city of Griffin, on the 11th day of December, 1852. A temporary organization was offered by calling Rev. J. F. N. Huddleston to the chair and upon examination it was found that the following delegates were present, with proper credentials to take their seats in the Conference, viz: From Rocky Creek—J. F. N. Huddleston, W. L. Fambro, M. Merritt and H. Phinazee; Rock Spring—A. H. reeves, Theo. Williams and C. G. Harper; Providence – W. F. Mapp; New hope—Daniel Carroll; Mount Hope—S. F. Speer and Thomas Thruwer. An election of William L. Fambro as President, and Rev. Hiram Phinazee as Secretary.
Brother Fambro, although a layman, had been called to preside over the first meeting of the denomination at brother Merritt’s home, as before stated, and was now called on to preside over the District Conference, composed, in a large proportion, of ministers and the best talent in the young Church, and such as the ability and zeal which he brought to the discharge of his duty as presiding officer, that he was not only elected to preside over District Conferences thereafter, but was the presiding officer of the first State Conference ever organized, and subsequently presided with ability over the General Conference of the C. M. Church. I shall have more to say about this good man hereafter, when I shall have finished these historical sketches, and come to present some pen portraits of the founders of Congregational Methodism.
Four new churches sent delegates to this Conference, who were received and seated viz:
From New Prospect, in Monroe county—Carey Cox and P. D. Pringle; Mount Zion, Carroll county—J. G. Pearson; Antioch and Mount Pisgah, in Alabama—James M. Adams. In addition to the duly elected delegates, as before stated, there were a large number of visiting brethren, who were duly invited to seats as honorary members of the body. Also, William Griffin, John Bass and Isaiah Wallis, fraternal messengers of the Methodist Protestant Church, and Rev. Mr. Roddingham, from the Lutheran Church. Two-thirds of the members of this conference were laymen, showing a large proportion of the lay element than the conference which preceded it. I suppose if some of the advocates of the theory of the ministry governing by divine right, or some of the opposers of lay representation, could have beheld this Conference entering on their duties, they would probably have adopted the language which a colored preacher once said Adam used when he woke up out of his deep sleep, and “put on his spocks and looked at Eve,” “This is a bad job.”
Nathaniel was a good man, yet when approached by one of his friends who informed him that the promised Messiah had been found and he hailed from Nazareth, asked with much of honest doubt, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth”? So in like manner those who had been educated to believe that the governing power of right rested in the hands of the ministry, and that the laity had neither the right nor the capacity to share in the government of the Church, had serious misgivings of the success of a government where the laity had the balance of power. But their doubts were as unfounded as were those of Nathaniel. And although there were not a few who looked at the part of the little new church was taking in the battle of the ecclesiastical world against the power of darkness, and predicted its early downfall and signal failure, the long and eventful years which have since intervened---eventful as they have been ---have left us a record of the labors of those laymen in Conference, which demonstrates that the confidence of their brethren was not misplaced when they chose these laymen to represent them in Conference.
The time had now come when the world was to have a demonstration of the fact that the masses of Methodist were as capable of transacting the business of their Church as the masses of other denominations, and the idea that nothing could be done except by the ministry was now to be expoded, and the great truth was to be discovered by both preachers and people, that the function of the minister would be in chief be exercised in the pulpit, while the layman was to labor in the pew and in the government of the Church. Christ was to be the Head and both the laity and the clergy were to be co-workers, each in his proper sphere, doing the allotted work, showing that one was not to exist without the other, and that neither was independent of the other, nor exalted above the other, but formed separate parts in the grand and glorious whole, wherein all things work together for the glory of God and the good of his people.
The Conference was entertained by fraternal greetings between the representatives of the other sister churches and those of the C. M. Church, and the best and kindest of feeling prevailed. Theo. Williams having been properly recommended for license to exhort, was duly licensed as an exhorter by the Conference.
J. C. Pearson, James M. Adams, J. F. N. Huddleston, Robert Walker and W. A. McCune were appointed fraternal messengers to the next Conference of the Lutheran Church in Georgia. The next meeting of the Conference was appointed with the church at Rock Springs, Monroe county, beginning on Friday before the Third Sabbath in May, 1853.
And thus ended the second session of the District Conference. Seven months and three days had passed from the meeting at brother Merritt’s to the meeting of this conference, and eventful months and days they has been—months of watching, weeping, praying and hoping on the part of the movers in this “departure”; months of persecution, bitterness and distrust on the part of its enemies, and months of anxious curiosity and speculation on the part of the outside world. But the fathers of Congregational Methodism took their cause “To the Lord in and prosperity and advancement attended them, and now the fire had spread until eleven churches came from different sections of Georgia, and even from Alabama, and stood by the side of the twelve individuals who joined hands at brother Merritt’s, saying, “Your God shall be my God; where you dwell, there will we dwell; where you die, there will we be buried.”
Return to Congregational Index
Compilation Copyright 1997 - Present by The GAGenWeb Project Team