THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1864.
Almost one year after the Emancipation Proclamation took effect by
reason of the refusal on the part of the South to return to the Union,
the nineteenth session of the General Conference met in the city of
Philadelphia. That body was composed of two hundred and sixteen
delegates. Just how any body of men, whether met for political or
religious interests, could properly attend to affairs, even to the
minutiæ, under the then existing circumstances of so exciting character
as those that occurred from May 1, 1864, until the adjournment of that
General Conference, is hard to conceive. And yet the proceedings of that
body were characterized by patient, wise, and prudent action. Some of
the delegates to that General Conference had their thoughts, however
hard they strove to prevent it, on Church interests upset, as they took
up the newspapers and found an account of the atrocious butchery of
colored troops at Fort Pillow by that enemy of the human family, General
Forrest. Before leaving the cars upon which they were traveling, they
were startled by the cry of the newsboys at every station, as they
announced the startling news that the governors of the Western States
had offered the United States government eighty-five thousand men for
one hundred days, and that the President had accepted the offer; again,
that the victory was still in the scales. They had been in session but
four days until the wires flashed the news that the irrepressible Grant
had crossed the Rapidan in Virginia, and commenced operations in the
Wilderness! The next day news came that the armies of the North and
South had met in the Wilderness—the former under that invincible hero,
and the latter under the intrepid Lee. Since our own Grant was pushing
Lee before him nearly everywhere, and knowing how the Church had begun
to love General Grant, and that her prayers and influence and sons were
with him for the preservation of the Union, it is pretty hard to
understand just how that General Conference found time and disposition
to work as it did. Its session was during the crisis of the war. As they
understood it, “God expects every man to do his best,” and they had then
an opportunity to view the whole scene, knowing that God himself was
interested, since
“Right forever on the scaffold,
Wrong forever on the throne;
But that scaffold sways the future,
And behind the dim unknown
Standeth God within the shadows,
Keeping watch above his own.”
So it was on the gory field of battle as well as in that General
Conference.
“The conference adopted a new rule on slavery, by a vote of 207 yeas to
9 nays. The small minority of dissenters were delegates from within the
then slaveholding States of West Virginia, Maryland, and Kentucky—so
that the Methodist Episcopal Church alone, of all the Churches in
America, within whose communion slaveholding had been allowed, enacted a
prohibitory law abolishing slavery, even within the States where it was
allowed to continue by President Lincoln’s Proclamation of 1863. Moving
forward on the same line, in advance of all the Churches, the same body,
already more sweeping in its prohibition of slavery than the civil
authorities, yet further anticipated the action of the government in a
formal address to the President.”
At that General Conference the special Committee appointed on the State
of the Country reported as follows:
“The committee have carefully considered the following subject,
submitted to them by the General Conference, namely:
“WHEREAS, It is a well-known fact that the Methodist Episcopal
Church was the first to tender its allegiance to the government
under the Constitution in the days of Washington; and _whereas_,
the fair record of the Church has never been tarnished by
disloyalty; and _whereas_, our ministers and people are deeply
in sympathy with the government in its efforts to put down
rebellion and set the captives free; therefore,
“_Resolved_, That a committee of five be appointed, whose duty
it shall be to proceed to Washington to present to the President
of these United States the assurances of our Church, in a
suitable address, that we are with him in heart and soul in the
present struggle for human rights and free institutions.
“The committee, after further consideration of the subject of
the delegation it is proposed to send with an address to the
President of the United States, beg leave to report that they
have instructed their chairman to present, for the approval of
the General Conference, the address contemplated in the
resolution referred for consideration. The committee still
further report that they have nominated as the delegation,
Bishop E. R. Ames, Rev. George Peck, Rev. Joseph Cummings, Rev.
Charles Elliott, Rev. Granville Moody.”
On motion of Thomas C. Golden, seconded by K. P. Jervis, the report was
adopted. The committee at once began to prepare the address, and in due
time the following was presented:
“TO HIS EXCELLENCY, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES:
“The General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, now
in session in the city of Philadelphia, representing nearly
seven thousand ministers, and nearly a million of members,
mindful of their duty as Christian citizens, take the earliest
opportunity to express to you the assurance of the loyalty of
the Church, her earnest devotion to the interests of the
country, and her sympathy with you in the great responsibilities
of your high position in this trying hour.
“With exultation we point to the record of our Church as having
never been tarnished by disloyalty. She was the first of the
Churches to express, by a deputation of her most distinguished
ministers, the promise of support to the government in the days
of Washington. In her Articles of Religion she has enjoined
loyalty as a duty, and has ever given to the government her most
decided support.
“In this present struggle for the nation’s life many thousands
of her members, and a large number of her ministers, have rushed
to arms to maintain the cause of God and humanity. They have
sealed their devotion to their country with their blood on every
battle-field of this terrible war.
“We regard this dreadful scourge now desolating our land and
wasting the nation’s life, as the result of a most unnatural,
utterly unjustifiable rebellion, involving the crime of treason
against the best of human governments, and sin against God. It
required our government to submit to its own dismemberment and
destruction, leaving it no alternative but to preserve the
national integrity by the use of the national resources. If the
government had failed to use its power to preserve the unity of
the nation and maintain its authority, it would have been justly
exposed to the wrath of heaven and to the reproach and scorn of
the civilized world. Our earnest and constant prayer is that
this cruel and wicked rebellion may be speedily suppressed; and
we pledge you our hearty co-operation in all appropriate means
to secure this object.
“Loyal and hopeful in national adversity, in prosperity
thankful, we most heartily congratulate you on the glorious
victories recently gained, and rejoice in the belief that our
complete triumph is near.
“We believe that our national sorrows and calamities have
resulted, in a great degree, from our forgetfulness of God and
oppression of our fellow-men. Chastened by affliction, may the
nation humbly repent of her sins, lay aside her haughty pride,
honor God in all her future legislation, and render justice to
all who have been wronged!
“We honor you for your proclamations of liberty, and rejoice in
all the acts of the government designed to secure freedom to the
enslaved.
“We trust that when military usages and necessities shall
justify interference with established institutions, and the
removal of wrongs sanctioned by law, the occasion will be
improved, not merely to injure our foes and increase the
national resources, but also as an opportunity to recognize our
obligations to God and to honor his law. We pray that the time
may speedily come when this shall be truly a republican and free
country, in no part of which, either State or Territory, shall
slavery be known.
“The prayers of millions of Christians, with an earnestness
never manifested for rulers before, daily ascend to Heaven that
you may be endued with all needed wisdom and power. Actuated by
the sentiments of the loftiest and purest patriotism, our
prayers shall be continually for the preservation of our country
undivided, for the triumph of our cause, and for a permanent
peace, gained by sacrifice of no moral principles, but founded
on the Word of God, and securing, in righteousness, liberty and
equal rights to all.
“Signed in behalf the General Conference of the Methodist
Episcopal Church.
“JOSEPH CUMMINGS, Chairman.
“PHILADELPHIA, May 14, 1864.”
To this address the President responded:
“GENTLEMEN,—In reply to your address, allow me to attest the
accuracy of its historical statements, indorse the sentiments it
expresses, and thank you in the nation’s name for the sure
promise it gives.
“Nobly sustained as the government has been by all the Churches,
I would utter nothing which might in the least appear invidious
against any; yet, without this, it may be fairly said that the
Methodist Episcopal Church, not less devoted than the best, is,
by its greater numbers, the most important of all. It is no
fault in others that the Methodist Church sends more soldiers to
the field, more nurses to the hospitals, and more prayers to
Heaven, than any. God bless the Methodist Church! Bless all the
Churches! And blessed be God, who, in this our great trial,
giveth us the Churches!
“A. LINCOLN.”
Memorials were sent up to this General Conference, also asking for a
colored pastorate and conference organization. Several petitions from
the colored members within the District of Columbia and the States of
Delaware and Maryland were presented, praying for this. The wisdom of
the petitioners is best seen by noting the fact that most of the best
work among the colored people within the Church is in the bounds of the
territory from whence came most petitions for a colored pastorate and
separate conferences. The Church began to see a new door open at the
sesame of belching cannons for her admission into the South. She then
declared: “As a Church we have never sought, do not now seek, to ignore
our duty to the colored population.” And besides this, the Church at
that conference declared: “Justice to those who have been enslaved
requires that in all the privileges of citizenship, as well as in all
the other rights of a common manhood, there shall be no distinction
founded on color.” These were strong words at that early day, and meant
what the Church has been teaching ever since. That General Conference
created a special committee to look after the interests, hear the
appeals, consider what ought to be done by that conference to further
the work among the colored members It was known as “the Committee on the
State of the Work among the Colored People,” to whom all such petitions
and memorials were referred. This was not one of the regular standing
committees, but a special one appointed for the occasion. After the
General Conference had been in possession of said petitions and
memorials two weeks or more, they submitted a report, in which they said
that they based their report on “direct information from delegates to
the General Conference familiar with the work; from intelligent and
trustworthy local preachers who have been deputed by the colored charges
in Delaware and Maryland and the District of Columbia to represent them
before the committee, and from various memorials setting forth the
wishes of our colored members.”
That the Church trusted and desired to honor her sable sons, no one
doubts. That she was proud of feeling herself loved by them, and an
instrument in God’s hands of helping to uplift them, is told in the
following expression of that conference: “If it be a principle potent to
Christian enterprise that the missionary field itself must produce the
most efficient missionaries, our colored local preachers are peculiarly
important to us at this time.” The memorialists were filled with ecstasy
when the committee reported the following:
COLORED PASTORATE.
“(1.) Our colored members, ministers, and laymen feel that the
times are auspicious to the development of their mental and
moral power, and request from us the facilities necessary to
this end.
“(2.) A colored pastorate they recognize as among the most
important of these facilities, securing to them a ministry
adapted to their wants, encouraging their young men to enter the
ministerial field, and offering motive and opportunity for
general ministerial advancement.
“(3.) They do not, however, propose to secure this by—indeed,
they are utterly opposed to—separation from our Church, either
with a view to a union with another, or to independent
organization. With such a feeling on their part, the General
Conference can not consistently with its own responsibility,
with their constitutional rights, or with any decent recognition
of their loyalty to our Church in all the troubles through
which, on their account, she has passed, adopt any measure which
shall, even indirectly, look to such a result.
“(4.) Conference organization is asked for from two quarters;
other memorials urge that the requests should be granted. The
local ministers who have been before us have shown deep
solicitude in this direction....
“(7.) From this exhibit of facts two convictions are natural,
namely: We must retain the oversight of this people; we must
give them efficient colored pastors.
“To retain these pastors as mere local preachers, subject to
appointment by white presiding elders, will impair rather than
increase their efficiency; will promote congregationalism among
them rather than itinerant missionary enterprise.
“To propose their incorporation with the existing annual
conferences will be attended with difficulties too formidable
every way to be readily disposed of, and the delay incident to
such a proposition is incompatible with the urgent requirements
of the times.
“In view of these considerations, we recommend to the General
Conference for adoption the following preamble and resolutions:
“WHEREAS, In the present circumstances of our country, the
colored people occupy a position of peculiar interest, appealing
to our Christian sympathy, and inviting our missionary
enterprise; and
“WHEREAS, This enterprise can not now be made efficient by the
policy of our Church hitherto pursued toward them, and especial
measures have therefore become necessary; and
“WHEREAS, The exigencies of the case require to efficiency
prompt action; therefore, be it
“1. _Resolved_, by the General Conference of the Methodist
Episcopal Church in Conference assembled, That it is the duty of
our Church to encourage _colored pastorates_ for _colored
people_ wherever practicable, and to contribute to their
efficiency by every means in our power.
“_Resolved_, That the efficiency of said pastorates can be best
promoted by distinct conference organizations, and that
therefore the bishops be, and they are hereby, authorized to
organize among our colored ministers, for the benefit of our
colored members and population, mission conferences—one or
more—where, in their godly judgment, the exigencies of the work
may demand it, and, should more than one be organized, to
determine their boundaries until the meeting of the next General
Conference, said conference or conferences to possess all the
powers usual to mission annual conferences: _Provided_, that
nothing in this resolution be so construed as to impair the
existing constitutional rights of our colored members on the one
hand, or to forbid, on the other, the transfer of white
ministers to said conference or conferences where it may be
practicable and deemed necessary.
“3. _Resolved_, That our General Missionary Committee be
requested to take into careful consideration the condition of
our colored people, and should conferences be organized among
them, make to them—consistently with other demands upon its
funds—such appropriations as may be essential to success.”
Annual or mission conferences being composed of traveling preachers, it
was necessary that some colored local preachers be admitted into the
traveling connection before they could be formed into a conference,
which gave rise to a question upon which the same committee made a
report, which was adopted, as follows (Jour. 1864, p. 253):
“We, the committee to whom this subject was finally referred,
beg leave to report that we are not aware of any legal obstacle
to the reception of colored preachers into our annual
conferences.”
This General Conference at a later day made more specific and direct
provision for the Delaware and Washington Conferences in the following
resolution (Jour. 1864, p. 263):
“The Washington Conference shall embrace Western Maryland, the
District of Columbia, Virginia, and the territory south.
“The Delaware Conference shall embrace the territory north and
east of the Washington Conference.
“_Resolved_, That in order to constitute the first conferences
of colored members, the rule of Discipline requiring a probation
of two years, be so far suspended as to allow the bishops to
organize into one or more annual conferences such colored local
elders as have traveled two or more years under a presiding
elder, and shall be recommended by a quarterly conference, and
by at least ten elders who are members of an annual conference.”
The Delaware Conference was organized July 28, 1864, and the Washington
Conference October 27, 1864. It will be noted that “the constitutional
rights of our colored members” were recognized, as well as the
difficulties of incorporating the work.
Let us now examine the above resolutions more closely.
Blessings seldom come unattended. At a glance any one can see that the
requests of the colored members had been granted. Henceforth they were
to have (1) colored pastorates, the very thing for which they had
prayed. No one doubts, we think, that the granting of that very thing
gave birth to all the other race questions that do or may arise touching
the relations of the two races within the Church. The wisdom of that
General Conference peered away out into the future. It probably saw a
time when advanced ideas would lead men within the Church to advanced
work. These pastorates created by that General Conference were to be for
“colored people.” They were to be allowed (2) separate conferences.
There was no way to avoid them where there were “colored pastorates for
colored people.” Just so. These separate conferences, however, were (3)
“not to impair existing rights of our colored members, nor yet (4) to
forbid the transfer of white ministers to said conferences where it may
be practicable and deemed necessary.” What “existing rights” had colored
members? To remain in any Church they chose within Methodism, or join
with and worship in any congregation within the Methodist Episcopal
Church. It did not stop there, but action was taken looking to the
education of the race. The General Conference Committee on Education
reported as follows:
“The committee have had before them the memorial of Rev. J. F.
Wright in reference to the Wilberforce University, and, in view
of its peculiar character and relation to the Church, we offer
for adoption the following resolution:
“_Resolved_, That we heartily sympathize with the noble purpose
contemplated in the establishment of Wilberforce University and
we do hereby earnestly commend the institution to the prayers
and liberal contributions of the friends of humanity.”
Just what “the peculiar character and relation” were, is not stated. It
may have been that the enterprise was sprung upon the Church before it
had been duly authorized. It may have been that its “peculiar character
and relation” meant that it was to be exclusively colored. It makes no
difference as to what was meant, some way or other that institution soon
passed into other hands.
[Illustration:
BENNETT SEMINARY, GREENSBORO, N.C.
]
Again, it would have been folly to grant separate conferences for the
colored membership and leave standing the old rule, and allow it to
apply in this case, requiring a probation of two years before being
admitted to an annual conference. This was brought forward at once, and
the animus of the General Conference on the subject was at once
manifested by the following resolution:
“_Resolved_, That in order to constitute the first conference of
colored members, the rule of the Discipline requiring a
probation of two years be so far suspended as to allow the
bishops to organize into one or more annual conferences such
colored local elders as have traveled two or more years under a
presiding elder and shall be recommended by a quarterly
conference and by at least ten elders who are members of an
annual conference.”
This was a wise and prudential action. Wise in that it at once
dissipated any thought that might have arisen in the minds of the less
stable members, that the matter was simply put in a complicated shape to
keep the colored members at bay, and thereby eventually drive out of the
Methodist Episcopal Church all the colored people. To have kept them
waiting under the probationary rule would probably have done much harm.
Prudential in that even the local elders were to come up well
recommended: (1) By their own people, among whom they lived and worked,
and who therefore could testify as to their moral, religious, and
literary fitness for the traveling connection. (2) To be recommended “by
at least ten elders (white) who are members of an annual conference.”
Who were better qualified than such elders to know who were and who were
not qualified for traveling preachers—our own people had no experience
in matters of that kind—in that they would naturally be able and more
willing to speak against those “wolves in sheep’s clothing” who
sometimes “climb up some other way” into our annual conferences for the
purpose of fleecing, instead of feeding, the flock of God? Our own
people might have been in some way related to the applicants or ignorant
of their devices. Why should not some precautions be observed when
clothing with authority those who, even then, must have been witnessing
“the pains, the groans, the dying strife” of an institution that had
grown gray in crime and debauchery—under which for two hundred and
forty-four years the race had suffered in more ways than the Hebrews in
Egypt? They had never enjoyed even the privilege of elementary training
in any way fitting them for happiness and usefulness in the world. They
were poor and ignorant. Poor in that even the good name of the race was
gone; and who does not know that a
“Good name, in man and woman,...
Is the immediate jewel of their souls?
Who steals my purse steals trash; ’tis something, nothing;
’Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed.”
We do not know that additional weight attaches to the above by knowing
that Shakespeare put these words into the mouth of Iago; but it is a
fair statement of the condition of the race when the Emancipation
Proclamation was issued. The morality of the race under the old _régime_
is the prodigy of the age! And yet they knew nothing theoretically of
morality, and had opportunities for but _few examples of it_. They knew
nothing of home economics, and not five in one hundred of the rank and
file could count correctly ten dollars in small change. Hence the Church
was wise in throwing around this people safeguards as well as charity.
They knew but little, if anything, of the comforts of home life, the
proper training of children; while the fantastic mode of dressing
immediately after the war tells a tale at which a heathen should blush.
They knew comparatively nothing either of Church polity or moral
science. Those who have found occasion to laugh at the huge mistakes of
some of our ministers, as well as some others who had enjoyed better
opportunities, must find a sufficient explanation in the previous
condition of the race. Was the Methodist Church not right in doing as it
did?
------------------------------------------------------------------------