Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

I went further in the separation of our Church in America, than Mr. Wesley, from whom I had received my commission, did intend. He did indeed solemnly invest me, as far as he had a right so to do, with Episcopal authority, but did not intend, I think, that an entire separation should take place. He, being pressed by our friends on this side of the water for ministers to administer the sacraments to them, (there being very few of the clergy of the Church of England then in the states,) went further, I am sure, than he would have gone, if he had foreseen some events which followed. And this I am certain of that he is now sorry for the separation.

But what can be done for a re-union, which I much wish for; and to accomplish which, Mr. Wesley, I have no doubt, would use his influence to the utmost? The affection of a very considerable number of the preachers and most of the people, is very strong towards him, notwithstanding the excessive ill usage he received from a few. My interest also is not small; and both his and mine would readily, and to the utmost, be used to accomplish that (to us) very desirable object; if a readiness were shown by the bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church to re-unite.

It is even to your Church an object of great importance. We have now above sixty thousand adults in our society in these states, and about two hundred and fifty travelling ministers and preachers; besides a great number of local preachers, very far exceeding the number of travelling preachers; and some of those local preachers are men of very considerable abilities. But if we number the Methodists as most people number the members of their Church, viz. by the families which constantly attend the divine ordinances in their places of worship, they will make a larger body than you probably conceive. The society, I believe, may be safely multiplied by five on an average to give us our stated congregations; which will then amount to three hundred thousand. And if the calculation which, I think, some eminent writers have made, be just, that three-fifths of mankind are un-adult, (if I may use the expression) at any given period, it will follow that all the families, the adults of which form our congregations in these states, amount to seven hundred and fifty thousand. About one fifth of these are blacks.

The work now extends in length from Boston to the south of Georgia; and in breath from the Atlantic to Lake Champlain, Vermont, Albany, Redstone, Holstein, Kentucky, Cumberland, &c.

But there are many hinderances in the way. Can they be removed?

1. Our ordained ministers will not, ought not, to give up their right of administering the sacraments. I do not think that the generality of them, perhaps none of them, would refuse to submit to a re-ordination, if other hinderances were removed out of the way. I must here observe, that between sixty and seventy only out of the two hundred and fifty have been ordained presbyters, and about sixty deacons (only). The presbyters are the choicest of the whole.

2. The other preachers would hardly submit to a re-union, if the possibility of their rising up to ordination depended on the present bishops in America. Because, though they are all, I think I may say, zealous, pious, and very useful men, yet they are not acquainted with the learned languages. Besides, they would argue,-If the present bishops would waive the article of the learned languages, yet their successors might not.

My desire of a re-union is so sincere and earnest, that these difficulties almost make me tremble; and yet something must be done before the death of Mr. Wesley, otherwise I shall despair of success: for though my influence among the Methodists in these states as well as in Europe is, I doubt not, increasing, yet Mr. Asbury, whose influence is very capital, will not easily comply; nay, I know he will be exceedingly averse to it.

In Europe, where some steps had been taken, tending to a separation, all is at an end. Mr. Wesley is a determined enemy of it, and I have lately borne an open and successful testimony against it.

Shall I be favoured with a private interview with you in Philadelphia? I shall be there, God willing, on Tuesday, the 17th of May. If this be agreeable, I will beg of you just to signify it in a note, directed to me, at Mr. Jacob Baker's, merchant, Market-street, Philadelphia; or, if you please, by a few lines sent me by the return of the post, at Philip Rogers's, Esq. in Baltimore, from yourself or Dr. Magaw, and I will wait upon you with my friend Dr. Magaw. We can then enlarge on these subjects.

I am conscious of it, that secrecy is of great importance in the present state of the business, till the minds of you, your brother bishops, and Mr. Wesley, be circumstantially known. I must therefore beg that these things be confined to yourself and Dr. Magaw, till I have the honour of seeing you.

Thus, you see, I have made a bold venture on your ho

nour and candour, and have opened my whole heart to you on the subject, as far as the extent of a small letter will allow me. If you put equal confidence in me, you will find me candid and faithful.

I have, notwithstanding, been guilty of inadvertencies.. Very lately I found myself obliged (for the pacifying of my conscience) to write a penitential letter to the Rev. Mr. Jarratt, which gave him great satisfaction: and for the same reason I must write another to the Rev. Mr. Pettigrew. When I was last in America, I prepared and corrected a great variety of things for our magazines, indeed, almost every thing that was printed, except some loose hints which I had taken of one of my journeys, and which I left in my hurry with Mr. Asbury, without any correction, entreating that no part of them might be printed which would be improper or offensive. But through great inadvertency (I suppose) he suffered some reflections on the characters of the two above-mentioned gentlemen to be inserted in the magazine, for which I am very sorry and probably shall not rest till I have made my acknowledgment more public; though Mr. Jarratt does not desire it.

I am not sure whether I have not also offended you, Sir, by accepting of one of the offers made me by you and Dr. Magaw, of the use of your churches, about six years ago, on my first visit to Philadelphia, without informing you of our plan of separation from the Church of England. If I did. offend, (as I doubt I did, especially from what you said on the subject to Mr. Richard Dellam, of Abington,) I sincerely beg your's and Dr. Magaw's pardon. I will endeavour to amend. But, alas! I am a frail, weak creature.

I will intrude no longer at present. One thing only I will claim from your candour-that if you have no thoughts of improving this proposal, you will burn this letter, and take no more notice of it (for it would be a pity to have us entirely alienated from each other, if we cannot unite in the manner my ardent wishes desire). But if you will further negotiate the business, I will explain my mind still more fully to you on the probabilities of success..

In the mean time permit me, with great respect, to subscribe myself,

Right Rev. Sir,

Your very humble servant in Christ,
THOMAS COKE.

Richmond, April 24, 1791.

The Right Rev. Father in God, Bishop White..

You must excuse interlineations, &c. as I am just going into the country, and have no time to transcribe.

Answer..

REV. SIR,

My friend, Dr. Magaw, has this day put into my hande your letter of the 24th of April, which, I trust, I received with a sense of the importance of the subject, and of the answer I am to give to God, for the improvement of every opportunity of building up his Church. Accordingly, I cannot but make choice of the earliest of the two ways you point out, to inform you, that I shall be very happy in the opportunity of conversing with you at the time proposed.

You mention two difficulties in the way of the proposed union. And there are further difficulties which suggest themselves to my mind. But I can say of the one and of the other, that I do not think them insuperable, provided there be a conciliatory disposition on both sides. So far as I am concerned, I think that such a disposition exists.

It has not been my temper, Sir, to despond in regard to the extension of Christianity in this new world: And in addition to the promises of the Great Head of the Church, I have always imagined that I perceived the train of second causes so laid by the good providence of God, as to be promoting what we believe to be his will in this respect. On the other hand, I feel the weight of most powerful discouragements, in the increasing number of the avowed patrons of infidelity, and of others, who pretend to confess the divine authority of our holy religion, while they endeavour to strip it of its characteristic doctrines. In this situation, it is rather to be expected, that distinct Churches, agreeing in fundamentals, should make mutual sacrifices for a union, than that any Church should divide into two bodies, without a difference being even alleged to exist, in any leading point. For the preventing of this, the measures which you may propose cannot fail of success, unless there be on one side, or on both, a most lamentable deficiency of Christian -temper.

I remember the conversation you allude to with Mr. Dellam: I hope I did not express myself uncharitably, or even indelicately. As to personal offence towards me, it is aut of the question: for I had not at that time any connection

with St. Paul's Church. But this, as well as the other parts of your letter, may be discoursed of at the proposed interview. Therefore, with assurance of the desired secrecy, and with requesting you to accept a like promise of candour to that which I credit from you, I conclude myself at present,

Your brother in Christ,

And very humble servant,

W. W.*

No. 22. Page 173.

Testimonial of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew.

We, the subscribers, having met in convention, at Tarborough, in North-Carolina, on the 28th day of May, 1794, for the purpose of considering the declining situation of the Protestant Episcopal Church in this state, and having chosen the Rev. Charles Pettigrew as a person fit to be our bishop, and worthy to be recommended for consecration to that holy office-but being sensible that the great distance at which the laity as well as the clergy of this state live from each other, deprives us of sufficient personal acquaintance with one another to subscribe a testimonial in the words prescribed by the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church, have thought it necessary and proper to make some deviation therefrom, which we presume to hope will be no obstacle to our laudable pursuit. We therefore do hereby recommend to be consecrated to the office of a bishop, the said Rev. Charles Pettigrew, whom, from his morality, religious principles, piety of life, from his general reputation in a clerical character, from the personal knowledge we have of him, and from his sufficiency in good learn

* The writer of the above answer kept silence on the subject of it, except in the permitted communication to the bishops, until the summer of 1804; when he received, in one day, two letters from the eastern shore of Maryland. One of them was from the Rev. Simon Wilmer, of the Episcopal Church, and the other was from the Rev. Mr. M'Klaskey, of the Methodist communion. In a conversation between these two gentlemen, the former had affirmed the fact of Dr. Coke's application, which was disbelieved by the other. This produced their respective letters, which were answered by a statement of the fact. The matter being afterwards variously reported, a copy of the letter was, after some lapse of time, delivered to the Rev. Dr. Kemp, of Maryland, and at last became published en a controversy raised in the diocese.

W. W.

« AnteriorContinuar »