Published Online: Jun 16, 2020
Page range: 37 - 58
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/holiness-2019-0003
Keywords
© 2019 Daniel J Pratt Morris-Chapman, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
In Wesley's time a form of hyper-Calvinism had been mis-used to justify the class system and maintain socio-economic inequality. Thus, one's place in the world, and the problems within society at large, were often accepted passively as being part of the sovereign will of God At this time the concept of predestination and election were exploited in such a way as to convince members of the lower strata of English society that their position was pre-ordained by God. Wesley's declaration that ‘all … may be saved,’ Brendlinger, p. 160. Wesley 1782, p. 16; Brendlinger, p. 161.
To a large extent, the principles of equality and social holiness, While I concur with Thompson's thesis that Wesley's conception of holiness should not be confused with the Wesley maintains that to ignore the ‘sorrow’ and ‘miseries’ of others, and yet claim that one's ‘earnest desire’ is for ‘universal holiness’ is absurd. Wesley 1872, vol. 5, pp. 308–309. Brendlinger, pp. 160–161. Wesley believed it to be ‘impossible’ for a real Methodist to keep their Christianity private. He rejected the idea that holiness flourishes in separation from the world. Wesley 1872, vol. 5, pp. 294–295, 302.
This article will explore the interplay between these different ideas as we survey Wesley's and American Methodist responses to slavery. While the article will deal extensively with the reality of slavery and racism in the United States during the Antebellum period (before the American Civil War), it is important to discuss John and Charles’ perspective on these issues. This is necessary because it helps illustrate the extent to which American Methodism departed from the views held by the Wesleys and facilitates a discussion of some of the reasons for this divergence.
During their time in America the Wesleys were first-hand witnesses of the evils of slavery. In his journal Charles Wesley recounts the barbaric treatment slave owners ‘daily practise upon their fellow-creatures’ including whipping, hammering nails through their ears, drawing their teeth, pouring hot wax and scalding water upon their flesh, and even ‘giving a [White] child a slave of its own age to tyrannise’. While surrounded While Georgia officially forbade slavery at this time one did not have to go far to witness these atrocities. Wesley 1872, vol. 1, pp. 40, 49, 70, 72.
On his return to Britain, John continued to support evangelistic work among slaves in Virginia Wesley 1872, vol. 2, pp. 337–338, 354–355, 392. Wesley 1872, vol.2, pp. 433, 464 Wesley 1872, vol.4, p. 180. He writes: ‘Man stealers—The worst of all thieves, in comparison of whom highwaymen and house breakers are innocent! What then are most traders in negroes, procurers of servants for America, and all who list soldiers by lies, tricks, or enticements.’ Wesley 1853, p. 539. Wesley 1872, vol.11, p. 145.
Wesley believed slavery (in all its forms) to be irreconcilable with any ‘degree of either justice or mercy’. Wesley 1872, vol.11, pp. 70–72. Wesley's position was contrary to Whitefield who owned slaves and even petitioned for the State of Georgia to legalise it. Brendlinger, p. 57. For further discussion see: Wesley 1872, vol. 4, p. 184; Brendlinger, pp. 64–71. Wesley 1872, vol.9, pp. 209–210. Wesley 1872, vol.11, p. 62. Wesley 1872, vol.11, p. 65. Wesley 1872, vol.4, pp. 15–16. Wesley 1872, vol.13, p. 497.
The theme of slavery arises most often in Wesley's controversy with the advocates for the independence of America from Britain. The colonies had been paying taxes without obtaining political representation. Thus, some advocates of independence argued that ‘all Americans are slaves’ because they have no voice in the British parliament. Wesley 1872, vol.11, p. 117. For example, Richard Price went as far as to argue that: ‘A country that is subject to the legislature of another country, in which it has no voice, and over which it has no control, is in slavery. The [United] kingdom has power to make statutes to bind the colonies in all cases whatever! Dreadful power indeed! I defy any one to express slavery in stronger terms.’ Price, pp. 19–20. Slavery is a state wherein neither a man's goods, nor liberty, nor life, are at his own disposal. Such is the state of a thousand, of ten thousand, Negroes in the American colonies. And are their masters in the same state with them? in just the same slavery with the Negroes? Have they no more disposal of their own goods, or liberty, or lives? Does any one beat or imprison them at pleasure; or take away their wives, or children, or lives; or sell them like cows or horses? This is slavery; and will you face us down that the Americans are in such slavery as this? Wesley 1872, vol.11, p. 109.
While Wesley was correct to criticise this hypocrisy, his opposition to American independence was highly misjudged if not outright foolish. Wesley's fears were rooted in the fact that during the 1770s he had become increasingly aware of the revolutionary spirit spreading across Europe and culminating in France, 1789. For further discussion see: Clark, J, pp. 236–240. These included Richard Boardman, Joseph Pilmore, Thomas Rankin, George Shadford and others. Melton, pp.110–111.
In a series of tracts and essays Wesley allowed his arguments against slavery to become intertwined with his critique of Republicanism, which he described as the most ‘despotic’ form of government ‘under heaven’. Wesley 1872, vol.11, p.87. For further discussion see: Raymond, pp.316–328. Equally embarrassing is Wesley's suggestion that press freedom should be curbed in order to stop the circulation of these ideas. Wesley 1872, vol.11, p.43–44. Clark, E., vol.3, p.62; Lawrence, p.157. Lee, J., pp. 54–60. Matthews 1965, pp. 56–57. Wesley's unswerving obedience to the British crown is unsurprising. During this time these ideas were taught to all students at Oxford University. Wesley himself states that he was ‘bred’ from ‘childhood in the highest notions of passive obedience and non-resistance.’ Telford, vol.6, p. 156; Gibson, pp. 29, 35–36.
When America finally gained its independence from Britain, Wesley recognised the separation of American Methodism and consecrated Thomas Coke (1747–1814) as its superintendent. However, the Americans wanted Asbury (who had remained during the war) as their bishop and the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) was formally created (1784). Melton, pp. 44–45. ‘Quest. 17. Initially Asbury considered that ‘if the Methodists [did] not … emancipate their slaves, God [would] depart from them.’ Baker, pp. 121–122. Melton, p. 31; Coke writes that: ‘We thought it prudent to suspend the minute concerning slavery, on account of the great opposition that had been given it, our work being in too infantile a state to push things to extremity.’ Person, p. 195. In 1796 individual conferences were authorised to ‘make whatever regulations they judge proper’ regarding slavery. Unknown 1798, p. 170. Brendlinger, p. 58; Matthews 1963, p. 615. A report to the 1804 general conference states that ‘When any travelling preacher becomes the owner of a slave, or slaves, by any means, he shall forfeit his ministerial character in our Church, unless he execute, if it be practicable, a legal emancipation of such slaves, conformably to the laws of the state in which he lives.’ Unknown 1804, p. 215. Emory, p. 331. ‘All our preachers shall prudently enforce upon our members the necessity of teaching their slaves to read the word of God; and to allow them time to attend upon the public worship of God.’ Emory, p. 332. For further discussion on this shameful transition see: Matlack, p. 36; Matthews 1965, p. 24.
Having illustrated how quickly Wesley's opposition to slavery became diluted within American Methodism it is necessary to survey some of the different responses to slavery by the newly formed Methodist Episcopal Church during the Antebellum period. Essentially, at least three responses to slavery can be identified within this period: (1) Racist pro-slavery response, (2) Racist antislavery response and (3) Immediate Abolition.
The degree to which leaders like Asbury, who were opposed to slavery, could influence Methodists to release their slaves was seriously impeded by the lucrative nature of the plantation economy and the doctrine of the separation of church and state. Matthews 1963, p. 627. Matthews 1963, p. 621. Matthews 1963, p. 617. Wightman, pp. 290–293. Matthews 1965, p. 71. Pinckney, pp. 4–5, 10–14, 16–18. Matthews 1965, p. 71. Matthews 1965, p. 72. Matthews 1965, pp. 77–78. They say, ‘Servants be obedient to your masters;—and he that knoweth his masters will and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes—means that God will send them to hell, if they disobey their masters. Bibb, p. 23.
In offering this form of Christianity to the slaves, Capers was offering the plantation owners a more effective workforce. Coke also engaged in preaching this deplorable gospel: ‘I bore a public testimony against slavery, and have found out a method of delivering it without much offence, or at least without causing a tumult: and that is, by first addressing the negroes in a very pathetic manner on the duty of servants to masters; and then the Whites will receive quietly what I have to say to them.’ Person, p. 185. Matthews 1965, pp. 77–78. The powerful effect of this gospel, of obedience to ones master, can be seen in Josiah Henson's, abolitionist and minister (1789–1883), autobiography, in which he narrates how he resisted the chance to free both himself and his master's slaves (who he had been charged to transport to Kentucky), because of a promise he had made to his master. The Abolitionist Frederick Douglas (
The results of the spreading of this gospel, which encouraged slaves to remain servile, were very much appreciated by plantation owners across the South. In 1837, the South Carolina Conference reported how slaves were now ‘pointed from earliest infancy to a Master in heaven, whose eye sees in darkness as in light’ Matthews 1965, pp. 79–80. Matthews 1965, pp. 83–85.
It is difficult to see how Wesley's name could ever have become attached to Methodists like Capers. We can scarce imagine what John Wesley might have said to him if the two had met. Undoubtedly there is a vast chasm between the empowering transforming theology of John Wesley and the willful misrepresentation of Caper's false gospel of white supremacy. Unfortunately, while Wesley was right about slavery, he was wrong about American independence and his opposition to it hampered the transmission of Wesley's views on this matter in the United States. As Methodism spread into the South, official church legislation against slavery was viewed as an expression of a ‘British Conscience’ imposed by a ‘British leadership’. Richey, p. 58.
In the North the situation was even more puzzling; a peculiar combination of both anti-slavery sentiments and White supremacy. Though many Northern states had legislated against slavery, their conception of liberty and equality did not entail racial equality. Thus, even as slavery became illegal in many Northern states, people still believed Blacks to be inferior and maintained restrictive laws designed to segregate Blacks and keep them from integrating into society by preventing them from taking certain jobs and restricting their right to vote. Matthews 1965, pp. 62–63; Melton, pp. 102, 240; Holm, p. 34. He writes: ‘Never yet could I find that a Black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never see even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture.’ Jefferson, p. 148. Jefferson, p. 154. Jefferson, p. 154.
Jefferson supported the We say, in the declaration of independence, ‘that all men are created equal’ … Yet it is considered impossible … with the present feelings towards [Black] people, that they can ever be placed upon this equality, or admitted to the enjoyment of these ‘inalienable rights,’ whilst they remain mixed with [Whites]. Some persons may declaim, and call it prejudice. No matter—prejudice is as powerful a motive, and will as certainly exclude them as the soundest reason. Unknown 1817, p. 6.
The profound aversion that many Whites had to the presence of free Blacks in society, fearing that it could lead to interracial marriage and the right to vote, led many (including Methodists) to conclude that the best thing to do was to send the free slaves back to Africa. Melton, pp. 31–32, 240; Holm, pp. 34, 69. Melton, pp. 259–260. Daniel Coker (1780–1846), an abolitionist who had been born into slavery in Maryland, also decided to go to Liberia and became an important figure in the church in Sierra Leone. For further discussion see: Gravely 1993, p. 109; Maclin, p. 143.
White American Methodists were extremely supportive of the colonization movement. Here the degree to which racism was entrenched within American culture, even within states where slavery was illegal, should not be underestimated. Holm, p. 19. Melton, p. 28; Garrettson himself recounts how he preached to ‘five hundred Whites, and almost as many Blacks Matthews 1963, p. 616. ‘Quest. 25. Ought not the assistant to meet the coloured people himself, and appoint as helpers in his absence proper White persons, and not suffer them to stay and meet by themselves? Answ. Yes.’ Unknown 1840, vol. 1, p. 12. Richey, pp. 58–59. Richey, p. 54; Simpson, p. 243; Garrettson, pp. 21–22. Garrettson, p. 54; Richey, pp. 58–59.
Earlier it was noted that Wesley, who generally seems to have affirmed the equality of Africans and Europeans, occasionally betrayed his surprise when encountering intelligent and virtuous Black people. At one point in his journal (June 1780) Wesley's retelling of a racist joke might be interpreted, at an unconscious level, as a collusion with the idea of White supremacy.
On Sunday, 11, preached at Kirton about eight, to a very large and very serious congregation 5 only before me stood one, something like a gentleman, with his hat on, even at prayer. I could scarce help telling him a story: In Jamaica, a negro passing by the Governor pulled off his hat; so did the Governor; at which one expressing his surprise, he said, ‘Sir, I should be ashamed if a negro had more good manners than the Governor of Jamaica’. Wesley 1872, vol.4, p. 184.
The same dynamic, though often implicit, is found in the preachers he sent to America, who were astounded by the preaching abilities of (Black) Harry Hosier (1750–1806), who they considered to be ‘one of the best preachers in the world’. Person, p. 152. Straker, p. 23; Simpson, p. 268. Coke uses the title ‘Mr’ for Asbury and brother for a certain (White) Harry Fry. However, he refers to Harry Hosier without any title at all – using the adjectives ‘Black’ or ‘poor Harry.’ Person, pp. 191, 255. Melton, pp. 49–51.
Richard Allen (1760–1831), founding Bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church (AMEC), represents a similar case. Like Hosier he was well connected with figures like Asbury and Garrettson. Allen 1833, p. 7; Melton, p. 98. Gravely 1993, p. 110; Allen 1833, p. 12. Allen 1833, p. 13. We felt ourselves much cramped [and] were considered as a nuisance... [We] usually attended St. George's Church in Fourth street; [but] when the coloured people began to get numerous in attending the church, they moved us from the seats we usually sat on, and placed us around the wall…. we bore much persecution from many of the Methodist connexion. Allen 1833, pp. 13–15. A similar situation is recounted by Frederick Douglass in his work entitled
It is not at all surprising that this ‘racial discrimination led to separate houses of worship for congregants of African descent’. Straker, p. 18. Hempton, pp. 105–106. In 1800 the conference permitted the ordination of some Black preachers as deacons. However, this rule encountered so much opposition that it was never published and only a handful of Blacks were ordained deacons – none were ordained as elders. In 1812, the historian Jesse Lee recounts how the ordination of a man purported to be a slave provoked scandal in the Church. For further discussion see: Melton, p. 30, 44–45; Lee, L., p. 471. Melton, p. 68. Straker p. 21. Melton, p. 240.
Under these racist conditions it was perhaps inevitable that a Black and Methodist denominationalism would arise out of Wesley's theological principles. First Peter Spencer founded the African Union Church in Wilmington, Delaware in 1814. In Philadelphia, 1816, Richard Allen's Bethel Church seceded along with Daniel Coker's Baltimore congregation to form the African Methodist Episcopal Church. In 1822 in New York, the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church was formed. Gravely 2009, p. 124. Sanneh, p. 190. Macquiban, pp. 3–4. Wesley's father had been jailed on two separate occasions (for debt) and the families’ comprehension of the brutal realities of incarceration during this period are graphically illustrated throughout the Wesley brothers’ writings. For example: ‘In prison within prison staked he lies, And keepers under keepers tyrannize: With weighty fetters gall’d, the sufferers groan, Or close-screw’d rivets crack the solid bone; Their only bed dank earth, unpaved and bare, Their only covering is the chains they wear: Debarr’d from cheerful morn, and human sight, In lonely, restless, and enduring night; The strongest health unsinew’d by disease, And Famine wasting life by slow degrees.’ Wesley, S., p. 1. Sanneh, p. 198.
The vanguard of Abolition (immediate emancipation) came not from the White community but from African Americans, including Methodists who connected their freedom in Christ, about which they sang in Charles Wesley's hymns, to liberty on earth and who, moreover, believed themselves capable of realising it. Sanneh, p. 190. Walker, p. 80; Melton, p. 224. Walker, p. 1. Gravely 2009, p. 129. Walker, pp. 14–5. Walker, pp. 58, 64–65. For other prominent critics of Colonisation see: Allen 1831, pp. 103–104; Adams, pp. 93–94. Melton, p. 224 Melton, pp. 224–225. William Lloyd Garrison (1805–1879), who was particularly inspired by Walker's appeal to the Declaration of Independence, founded the Liberator; which became an important periodical for the abolitionist movement. Garrison highlighting the racist motivation, the ‘master sprit’ behind the Colonization scheme, declared the United States to be the ‘legitimate home’ of ‘free people of color.’ Melton, p. 226; Garrison, pp. 14–15.
Hezekiel Grice ( Bell, p. xi. Melton, p. 226. Melton, pp. 236–238, 245. Melton, pp. 238, 245.
A leading Methodist figure in the underground railway was Josiah Henson (1789–1883) who, after escaping to Canada, became an elder in the AME church. He regularly challenged his congregations to help free their brothers and sisters who remained in captivity. Henson had taught himself to become a Methodist preacher when he was a slave. Henson, pp. 13, 26–27; 35–38, 48; Melton, pp. 212–213. Melton, pp. 239–242.
Frederick Douglass, a friend of Tubman who had also been a slave in Maryland, was also a member of the AME Zion church. Lowry, p. 6. Douglass 1849, p. 107. Douglass was an active supporter of the suffragist movement, concluding that there was no basis ‘in reason or justice’ for denying women the vote. Douglas 1881, p. 480. Salley, pp. 60–61; Melton, pp. 204–205.
At around this time, Orange Scott (1800–1847), a Methodist Episcopal presiding elder, became convinced of the anti-slavery cause. Inspired by John Wesley, and convinced that the American Methodist tradition had abandoned his values, he wrote:
Spirit of Wesley, where hast thou fled? Who now, in the M. E. Church, except the persecuted abolitionists, cry out for ‘instant’ emancipation? Who now puts ‘all slave holders, of whatever rank and degree,’ ‘EXACTLY ON A LEVEL WITH MEN STEALERS’ Who makes slave holders ‘partakers with a thief?’ Who now charges them with ‘blood guiltiness?’ (‘Thy hands, thy bed, thy furniture, thy house, thy lands, are at present stained with blood I’) Certainly not Bishop H., not President F. No, not even the abolitionists. We believe with Mr. Wesley; but alas! we have spoken in whisper tones and in soft language compared with his. Scott, p. 7.
Here Scott identifies the case for immediate abolition with John Wesley, even suggesting that Wesley was stronger in his criticism of slavery than Scott's contemporary abolitionists. Scott's writing is saturated with citations from Wesley's
Scott was a powerful critic of slavery and, using Wesley's writings, wrote a series of articles on the subject of immediate abolition in the Conference Newspaper (1835) and gave a powerful public statement against slavery in an address at the General Conference of 1836. Melton, pp. 227–228. Holm, pp. 41–43. Curtis, p. 115. Elliot, p. 229. The strength of this view is captured in the following citation from Stephen Douglas, who lost to Abraham Lincoln in the 1860 presidential election: ‘Abolitionism proposes to destroy the right and extinguish the principle of self-government for which our forefathers waged a seven years’ bloody war, and upon which our whole system of free government is founded.’ Sheahan, pp. 258–259. He wrote: ‘Is the M. E. Church such a “mother of harlots,” that to oppose theft [man stealing], robbery and adultery, will endanger her peace and safety? … No abolitionist wishes the Methodist [Episcopal] Church divided — and if it is not held together by slavery, there is no danger that abolitionism will divide it — and if it is held together by the wages of unrighteousness, no matter how soon it is divided — the sooner the better.’ Scott, p. 145. Scott, p. 145.
In surveying pro- and anti-slavery responses, it is clear that American Methodists struggled to uphold Wesley's position on this matter. While an antislavery position was initially published in the Methodist Episcopal Church's discipline, Wesley's theological principles proved difficult to apply in practice as his successors struggled to surmount the concrete reality of slavery within a totally different socio-political context, and the position was modified, even abandoned. Although the institutional church regularly compromised the integrity of Wesley's social vision of Christianity, the idea that Methodism could only flourish by engaging in struggles against societal evils like slavery was regurgitated by African Methodists and others, who recognised themselves as agents of God's transforming power in this world. Wesley observed that the ‘beauty of holiness’ is that it ‘cannot’ be hidden; Wesley 1872, vol.5, pp. 294–295. I dedicate this article to Stephen Skuce and Tim Macquiban – agents of God's redemption in my life.