DOCSLIB.ORG

1858 Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the Year 1858 Methodist Episcopal Church, South

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1858 Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the Year 1858 Methodist Episcopal Church, South Asbury Theological Seminary ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange Conference Journals Methodist Episcopal Church, South 2017 1858 Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the Year 1858 Methodist Episcopal Church, South Follow this and additional works at: http://place.asburyseminary.edu/mechsouthconfjournals Part of the Appalachian Studies Commons, Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, and the Genealogy Commons Recommended Citation Methodist Episcopal Church, South, "1858 Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, for the Year 1858" (2017). Conference Journals. 14. http://place.asburyseminary.edu/mechsouthconfjournals/14 This Periodical/Journal is brought to you for free and open access by the Methodist Episcopal Church, South at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Conference Journals by an authorized administrator of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL CONFERENCES OF THE FOR THE YEAR 1 8 5 8. SOUTHERN METHODIST PUBLISHING HOUSE. 185i). BISHOPS OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH. JOSHUA SOULE, D. D., NASHVILLE, TENN. JAMES OSGOOD ANDREW, D. D., SUMMERFIELD, ALA. ROBERT PAINE, D. D., ABERDEEN, MISS. GEORGE FOSTER PIERCE, D. D., CULVERTON, GA. JOHN EARLY, D. D., LYNCHBURG, VA. HUBBARD HINDE KAVANAUGH, D. D., VERSAILLES, Ky. MIN UTE S. l.-K E N T U C K Y CON FER E N C E. HELD AT MILLERSBURG, Ky., September 1-9, 1858. BISHOP KAVANAUGlI, Presidentj DANIEL STEVE~SON, Secretary. QUESTION 1. Who are admitted on Ques. 8. What local preachers are trial? elected and ordained deacons? ANSWER. Brinkly M. Messick, 1\1. J. James W. Gunn, French Strother, W. Ambrose, Jacob 'Valk, Samuel J. Dai­ James J. Johnston, 'Villiam H. 'Waters, ley, William P. Furniss. 5. John Neal, Thomas Lop;an, (colored.) 6. Ques. 2. Who remain on trial? Ques. 9. What travelling preachers are Stephen Noland, Joshua Taylor, John elected and ordained elders? P. Grinstead, George L. Gould, Charles J ohIJ L. (}ragg, Thomas J. Godby, Wil­ W. Miller, Peter Conway. 6. liam H. Winter, David Walk, 'William F. Ques. 3. Who are admitted into full T. Spruill. 5. connection? Ques. 10. What local preachers are John S. Coxe, James Randall, Jesse B. elected and ordained elders? Locke, Hiram P. Walker, Jeremiah Stro­ Benjamin McDaniel, William H. Par­ ther, (an elder,) George W. Smith. 6. ker. 2. Ques. 4. Who are readmitted? Ques. 11. Who have located this year? John C. C. Thompson, 'Villiam F. T. Jonathan Stamper, Caleb T. Hill, Will. Spruill, John L. Scott, John R. Eads, E. Wilmott. 3. George S. Savage. 5. Ques. 12. Who are supernumerary ? Ques. 5. Who are received by transfer Orson Long, John Sandusky. 2. from other Conferences? Ques. 13. 'Vho are superannuated? G. W. Crumbaugh, Ransom Lancas­ Joel W. Ridgell, Samuel Veach; John ter. 2. Tevis, Isaac Collord, Thomas lIall, Wil­ Ques. 6. Who are the deacons of one liam. Atherton, Thomas R. Malone, John year? James. 8. 'Villiam W. Chamberlain, Seneca X. Ques. 14. What preachers have died Hall, John M. Johnson, Peter E. Kava­ during the past year? naugh, Milton Mann. 5. Benjamin T. Crouch, Sr., William M. Ques. 7. What travelling preachers are Vize.* 2. elected and ordained deacons? BENJAYIN T. CROUCH, SR., "Was born in John S. Coxe, James Randall, Hiram P. Newcastle county, Delaware, July 1, 1796. Walker, Oliver W. Landreth, George W. Smith. 5. • No memoir of Wm. M. Vize bas been furnished. '~11 4 Kentucky Oonference, 1958. His father, John Crouch, emigrated to Cecil glowin~ with an intense desire for the salva­ county, Maryland, and from thence to \Vash­ tion of his fellow-men, he moved forward, ington, Pa. Here his father died, before he fully sustained by the inspiring sentiment, was ten years old, leaving a widow with eight "The Lord will provide." In 1819 he was children to bring up under the disadvantages appointed junior preacher on the Oxford Cir­ of cheerless poverty. His father died in tri­ cuit, with the same excellent colleague, A. umph, a happy l\lethodist class-leader. His Wiley. Thi.; year he prosecuted his studies mother, afeer surviving his father thirty-six assiduously and successfully. 1820-In May years, and having li,-ed to see all her children of this year the Kentucky Conference was grown and in the Church of her own choice, laid off as a separate work, and he was ap­ and having been fifty~six years a devoted and pointed to the little Kanawha Circuit, within highly respected member of the Methodist the bounds of the new Conference. 1821- Episcopal Church, died in perfect peace, lIe attended Conference for the first time, March 7, 1842. Brother Crouch was the sub­ was ordained deacon, and was appointed to a ject of religious feelin~s and frequent awak­ kind of missionary field, lying partly in Ken­ enings and convictions from early childhood, tucky, partly in Tennessee. 1822-He was but did not join the Church till May, 1816, sent to the Shelbyville Circuit. 1823-Re­ near the close of his twentieth year. He was turned to the Shelbyville Circuit, having been prompted to this decision under the pungent ordained elder; and durin~ this year he was conviction that God would not much longer married to Miss Hannah V. Talbott, daughter bear with him jf he persisted in rejecting his of Nathaniel 'l'alhott, in the vicinity of Shel­ grace. At a camp-meeting in Ohio, in the byville. 1824-lIe was superannuated, and month of August, after he had joined the resided in New Castle. 1825-He was ren­ Church, God, for Christ's sake, pardoned his dered effective, and appointed to Lexington sins. He was impressed from early child­ Circuit. 1826-Appointed to Frankfort and hood that he would have to preach the gospel; New Castle. By the close of this year his and, coincident with his conversion, there was health, in comequence of exposure and ex­ a confirm!Ltion of that early and cherished cessive labor, had again failed, and he was impression. IIis father's house had long been induced once more to take a superannuated a home for Methodist preachers; and their relation, in which he continued for three suc­ pious conversation and earnest prayers, se­ cessive years. During this period, in 1828, conding the example and precepts of his pa­ he was elected to the General Conference, rents, made him think well of religion, and which met in Pittsburg, Pa. 1830-lIe was inspired a great veneration and love for the reappointed to Frankfort. 1831-He was ap­ ministerial character. From the period of pointed to the Ohio, subsequently Louisville his conversion, he was never able for a single District, and at this Conference elected to the hour to dispossess himself of a deep and abid­ General Conference, which met in Philadel­ ing consciousness that God had called him to phia in 1832. lIe was continued on the Lou­ the tremendous work of the Christian minis­ isville District for four consecutive years. try. N early three years, however, were per­ 1835-Appointed to Shelbyville and Brick mitted to pass after his conversion in unavail­ Chapel. 1836-Was sent to the charge of ing efforts to excuse himself in living the life the Fourth Street and Eighth Street Churches of a private Christian. And although he was Louisville. During this year he attended a~ careful to shun sin, and to perform the duties a delegate the General Conference, which met of religion faithfully, acting in the capacities in Cincinnati. 1837-Was appointed to the of a class-Ie tder and exhorter, yet his heart Louisville District, and was continued for four was constantly oppressed with the conviction successive years. 1841-Appointed to Lex­ that his duty was in the itinerant field. It ington District, where he was continued for was not, however, until arrested by disease, four successive years. During the period of and at the very verge of the grave, as all his eldership on this district, he attended the thought who saw him, that he resolved to give General Conference in New York. 1846- himself wholly to this work. Just from a Appointed to the Shelbyville District. At bed of sickness-no property j no education; this Conference he was elected to the first no horse, no money to buy one with-the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal prospect was not the most cheering that might Church, South, which met in Petersburg, Va., be imagined. lIe was licensed to exhort in in 1846, having been a member of the Con­ 1818, by William Hunt. On the 10th of vention which convened in 1845, in Louisville April, 1819, he was licensed to preach, and Ky. lIe was continued on the Shelbyvill~ commenced his itinerant career under the di­ District four years. 1849-lIe was Presiding rection of the Presiding Elder, as helper to Elder of Harrodsburg District. 1850-Ap_ A. Wiley, on the Whitewater Circuit, Ohio pointed to New Castle Circuit, and was a Conference; and as he had no horse, he member of the General Conference, which started on foot with his saddle-bags on his met in St. Louis. 1851-Reappointed to New arms, containing part of a Bible, a hymn­ Castle Circuit. 1852-Stationed at Carrollton. book, and a few articles of clothing; but 1853-Reappointed to Carrollton. 1854-Ap- Kentucky Conference, 1858. 5 pointed to Lagrange, and attended the Gene­ Lex'ington District. ral Conference at Columbus, Ga., to which he White White Col'd Cord Lac'l Mew'R. Prob'.. Mem·s. Prob's. Pr's. had been elected at the preceding Annual ---------------- Conference. 1855--Returned to Lagrange.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Minutes of the Annual Conferences of the Methodist
    M L N U T. E. S. ANNUAL CONFERENCES - Tº METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH FALL CONFERENCES OF 1895. º tº ºsºº 288 CENTRAL GERMAN CONFERENCE, 1895. CENTRAL G E R MAN CONFERENCE, Held in Cincinnati, O., Sept. 4-9, 1895. BISHOP FOSS, Presiding. J. H. HORST, Secretary. Post office of Secretary, Louisville, Ky. gatzky, Holtkamp, Quest. 21. What other Persona" QUEst. 1. Who have been Received John H. John C. Guenther—4. Motation should be made 2 by Transfer, and from what Con The orders of Otto Gilbert, an ..ferences QUEst. 10. What Members have J. Griewe, elder, from the Evangelical William F. from North Completed Luther the Conference Course Church, recognized; ern German: Franklin Ohlinger, Study? an were the of orders of Henry Huelster, an elder, from Japan—2. (a) Elected and Ordained Elders this year. from the Evangelical Association, Who have been Read recognized. QUEst. 2. Johannes, were mitted & Frederick John Muel ler, August J. Weigle, Karl B. Supernu None. QUEst. 22. Who are the Koch, Henry Metzger, Frederick merary Preachers 2 J. Baumann, Paul Wuerfel, David QUEst. 3. Who have been Received Dangel, 'Louis S. Katterhenry, George Berg, J. C. Egley,gley H. B. Credentials, E. lº,"; on and from what Kapsch—10. Churches 3 Frederick J. None. Superan (b) Elected and Ordained Elders previ. QUEst. 23. Who are the ously. nºtated I’’earchers 2 QUEst. 4. Who have been Received None. J. G. Reiber, Willian Geyer, on Trial * William Ahrens, Christian Vogel, (a) In Studies of First Year. QUEst. 11. What others have been G. A. Brenring, P.
    [Show full text]
  • The Form and Function of Methodist Autobiography
    The Form and Function of Methodist Autobiography Michael K. Turner I. INTRODUCTION Between 1778 and 1860 a large number of Methodist autobiographies were published in religious magazines, journals, and book formats in both the United States and England. While enjoying a large circulation, the autobiographies were originally intended for an audience consisting chiefly of ministers. The goal of these accounts were to educate preachers and, hence, work toward bringing them into conformity with one another. Instead, as the genre expanded in popularity, it became a vehicle of dissent. II. THE METHODIST NARRATIVE The narratives and autobiographical patterns crafted by nineteenth-century Methodists drew and expanded upon the model propagated by the denomination’s founder, John Wesley. From 1778 until his death in 17911 John Wesley published a series of personal accounts written by English Methodists in his monthly periodical, The Arminian Magazine. These accounts were formative in establishing religious biography as an integral part of Methodist devotion. Wesley created The Arminian Magazine as a response to Calvinist periodicals, particularly The Spiritual Magazine and The Gospel Magazine. The founding intention of this English magazine was, thus, to promote a belief in the universal availability of salvation. As such, Wesley sought to only include those elements in the magazine that contributed to the spreading of this doctrine. The journal, thus, was organized in a four- part format. The first section of the magazine consisted of theological tracts which defended the “grand Christian doctrine, ‘God willeth all men to be saved, and to come to 1 The periodical was published through 1797. It continued the practice of publishing these “accounts.” 2 the knowledge of truth.’”2 To meet this purpose, Wesley included in the periodical, carefully edited works of divines who looked, sounded, or could be made to look or sound like “Arminians.”3 The second part of the journal was a biographical account of a “holy” person.
    [Show full text]
  • Step up to Leadership at General Conference
    The United Methodist Church: Governance and Structure GOVERNANCE United Methodists are sometimes asked where their church is headquartered, or what officer is “in charge.” Deliberately, The United Methodist Church has no single central office, no archbishop, no pope. This reflects the representative nature of the church's organization – which also provides a system of checks and balances. The church created a system that in some ways parallels that of the U.S. government when it came to America. The church has a General Conference, its legislative branch; a Council of Bishops, somewhat like an executive branch; and a nine-member Judicial Council, the judicial branch. It’s helpful to recognize the structure of the church, but it is the mission, ministry and love of God through Jesus Christ that is of primary importance. GENERAL CONFERENCE Who makes decisions for The United Methodist Church if there is no one person in charge? Good question. The only body that can set official policy and speak for the denomination is the General Conference. The General Conference is an international body of nearly 1,000 delegates that meets every four years. The delegates are elected by annual conferences (at annual conference sessions) to attend General Conference. They represent all annual conferences around the world. Half of the delegates are laity (non-clergy members), half are clergy. Bishops attend the General Conference but cannot vote. Different bishops serve as presiding officers during the conference. Other bishops cannot speak unless permission is specifically granted by the delegates. During General Conference, delegates discuss and vote on petitions and resolutions proposed by individuals, agencies, annual conferences, and other groups within the denomination.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Conferences in the Seventh-Day Adventist
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2009 [Black] Regional Conferences in the Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA) Church Compared with United Methodist [Black] Central Jurisdiction/Annual Conferences with White SDA Conferences, From 1940 - 2001 Alfonzo Greene, Jr. Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Greene, Jr., Alfonzo, "[Black] Regional Conferences in the Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA) Church Compared with United Methodist [Black] Central Jurisdiction/Annual Conferences with White SDA Conferences, From 1940 - 2001" (2009). Dissertations. 160. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/160 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 2009 Alfonzo Greene, Jr. LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO [BLACK] REGIONAL CONFERENCES IN THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH (SDA) COMPARED WITH UNITED METHODIST [BLACK] CENTRAL JURISDICTION/ANNUAL CONFERENCES WITH WHITE S.D.A. CONFERENCES, FROM 1940-2001 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAM IN HISTORY BY ALFONZO GREENE, JR. CHICAGO, ILLINOIS DECEMBER
    [Show full text]
  • Aspects of Arminian Soteriology in Methodist-Lutheran Ecumenical Dialogues in 20Th and 21St Century
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto ASPECTS OF ARMINIAN SOTERIOLOGY IN METHODIST-LUTHERAN ECUMENICAL DIALOGUES IN 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY Mikko Satama Master’s Thesis University of Helsinki Faculty of Theology Department of Systematic Theology Ecumenical Studies 18th January 2009 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO − HELSINGFORS UNIVERSITET Tiedekunta/Osasto − Fakultet/Sektion Laitos − Institution Teologinen tiedekunta Systemaattisen teologian laitos Tekijä − Författare Mikko Satama Työn nimi − Arbetets title Aspects of Arminian Soteriology in Methodist-Lutheran Ecumenical Dialogues in 20th and 21st Century Oppiaine − Läroämne Ekumeniikka Työn laji − Arbetets art Aika − Datum Sivumäärä − Sidoantal Pro Gradu -tutkielma 18.1.2009 94 Tiivistelmä − Referat The aim of this thesis is to analyse the key ecumenical dialogues between Methodists and Lutherans from the perspective of Arminian soteriology and Methodist theology in general. The primary research question is defined as: “To what extent do the dialogues under analysis relate to Arminian soteriology?” By seeking an answer to this question, new knowledge is sought on the current soteriological position of the Methodist-Lutheran dialogues, the contemporary Methodist theology and the commonalities between the Lutheran and Arminian understanding of soteriology. This way the soteriological picture of the Methodist-Lutheran discussions is clarified. The dialogues under analysis were selected on the basis of versatility. Firstly, the sole world organisation level dialogue was chosen: The Church – Community of Grace. Additionally, the document World Methodist Council and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification is analysed as a supporting document. Secondly, a document concerning the discussions between two main-line churches in the United States of America was selected: Confessing Our Faith Together.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Workbook
    2021 CONFERENCE WORKBOOK June 13-15 www.ntcumc.org 2 NORTH TEXAS CONFERENCE WORKBOOK — 2021 Welcome to Annual Conference 2021! This Conference Workbook contains an agenda, program announcements, schedules, reports, and legislative proposals for the 2021 North Texas ANNUAL CONFERENCE in Plano, TX. VOTING MEMBERS: Lay and Clergy Members who are eligible to vote at District and Annual Conferences should contact their district offices if they have not received an email explaining registration. VISITORS: The sessions on Monday and Tuesday will be livestreamed. Visitors to Annual Conference may follow the lives- tream session of the meetings at https://ntcumc.org/annual-conference-2021, or on Facebook at https://www. facebook.com/ntcumc/. SUNDAY, June 13 3:00 pm Laity Session (ONLINE) No registration required. Follow at https://ntcumc.org/annual-conference-2021. 7:00 pm Opening Worship Service, Bishop Gregory Palmer preaching, St. Andrew UMC Plano sanctuary. LIVESTREAMED and Facebook MONDAY, June 14 9:00 am – 3:00 p.m. General session in the Sanctuary. LIVESTREAMED and Facebook 3:30 pm Ordination Service Rehearsal for All participants, St. Andrew UMC Plano sanctuary. 5:00 pm Dinners for all worship participants and special guests, St. Andrew UMC Plano, sanctuary. 7:00 pm The Service of Ordination and Commissioning, Bishop Michael McKee preaching, St. Andrew UMC Plano, sanctuary. LIVESTREAMED and Facebook TUESDAY, June 15 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. General session in the Sanctuary. LIVESTREAMED and Facebook PLEASE NOTE: If you want a bound, printed, 8 ½ x 11, black and white copy of the 2021 North Texas Conference Journal, you must complete the ORDER FORM located in the back of this work- book and mail it in OR purchase a copy ONLINE.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglicans and Old Catholics Serving in Europe 2019 Report
    Anglicans and Old Catholics Serving in Europe A Report of the Anglican–Old Catholic International Coordinating Council 2013–2019 to the Anglican Consultative Council 17 Hong Kong April/ May 2019 and the International Bishops’ Conference, Lublin June 2019 AOCICC Amersfoort 2013 Kilkenny 2014 Contents Preface by the Co-Chairs 5 Executive Summary 7 Members of the Council 2013–2019 8 1 Introduction 9 a Bonn 1931: Belonging together 9 b The context of Europe: Walking together in an evolving Europe 10 c The context of the ecumenical movement 11 2 The significance of the Bonn Agreement today 13 a An Anglican Communion perspective 13 b An Old Catholic perspective 14 3 The AOCICC’s story 1998–2019 16 4 Outworking of the AOCICC mandate 19 a The AOCICC’s work achieved 2013–2019 19 b. Mandate i: ‘To continue to explore the nature and meaning of our communion’ 20 Mandate ii: ‘To promote knowledge of our churches and their relationship’ 22 Mandate iii: ‘To assist the annual meeting of Old Catholic and Anglican bishops’ 27 Mandate iv: ‘To explore the possibility of establishing a representative body’ 30 Mandate v: ‘To advise on the establishment of appropriate instruments’ 32 Mandate vi: ‘To review the consistency of ecumenical agreements’ 34 5 Proposals for the next AOCICC mandate 36 For submission to ACC-17, 2019 36 Anglican–Old Catholic Relations 36 Appendix 1 – Communiqués 37 Appendix 2 45 Willibrord Declaration 2017 45 Endnotes 47 3 Zurich 2015 Ghent 2016 Preface by the Co-Chairs To the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) and the International Bishops’ Conference of Old Catholic Churches (IBC).
    [Show full text]
  • Current Structure of the United Methodist Church
    Current Structure of the United Methodist Church 3 Branches of Government 1. Legislative—Conference 2. Executive—Bishops 3. Judicial—Judicial Council Legislative • The Conference: The global United Methodist Church (UMC) is divided into conferences and regions for connection and accountability • The General Conference: is the official governing body of the UMC, akin to our nation’s congress. Regions around the world send elected delegates, equal number clergy and laity, to the session of General Conference, held every four years. The General Conference debates and votes upon petitions and resolutions seeking changes to our governing document, the Book of Discipline. o The Book of Discipline: consists of several different types of legislation. The constitution of the UMC can only be changed by a vote of General Conference and 2/3 ratification of all Annual Conferences globally. The Social Principles are ongoing discussions on our stance as a denomination on social issues, and it is very comprehensive. The articles of religion are our statement of core beliefs. And there are many pages detailing the administrative life of the church. o Special Session of General Conference: In February of 2019, a special session of General Conference has been called to specifically deal with the current division in our denomination on issues of theology, that have been manifested in our division on inclusion of the LGBTQ+ community. No other topic may be discussed or voted upon at the special session. • The Jurisdictional Conference: exists only with the UMC of the United States. The US UMC is divided up regionally: ▪ Northeastern (our jurisdiction) ▪ Southeastern ▪ North Central ▪ South Central ▪ Western o The Jurisdictional Conference is also made up of elected delegates, clergy and laity, from the Annual Conferences within the jurisdiction.
    [Show full text]
  • It Has Long Been Observed That the Reason the Methodist Movement
    .,.,..,.. r,r r ~ .: ·. ' Methodist History, 31:1 (October 1992) "THE ADVANTAGES OF LIBERTY": DEMOCRATIC THOUGHT IN THE FORMATION OF THE METHODIST PROTESTANT CHURCH RICK NUTT It has long been observed that the reason the Methodist movement proved overwhelmingly successful in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was its concern for the commoner. With an emphasis on religious experience and intimate community among the believers, Methodism '. I became a mass movement. As a popular movement in the upper south and Middle Atlantic states, Methodism had appealed to the dispossessed of society. Its adherents in the TJnited States tended to come from the farms of the nation, from those who served the wealthy in town, or those serving on plantations in the south. These people felt unappreciated and ignored by those who held power in the institutions that governed their lives-including the church (notice, for example, how African-Americans in the south responded to Methodist and Baptist preaching). People suddenly felt new hope in their identity , a sense of value, and release from the strictures of society. The i' . church became a world with values and expectations radically at odds with ' those of the world outside its fellowship. Donald Mathews has observed that," ... whether or not a person was a member of the gentry and had fine Clothes and a position of worldly authority was not important because I these distinctions were based on ephemeral things. They were saying i . that the conventional distinctions of society were not authoritative for I them." 1 Francis As bury, although the undisputed authority in the Meth­ odist Episcopal Church, was a man of the people and realized the value of the church to the powerless, largely unchurched, masses.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministry Leadership Models Nurture, Outreach, Witness (N.O.W.) and Single Governance Board Structure
    Ministry Leadership Models Nurture, Outreach, Witness (N.O.W.) and Single Governance Board Structure © 2016 General Board of Discipleship. Permission is given for use in United Methodist congregations, districts, annual conferences, and camp settings. John 15: 1-14(NIV) 2 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command. © 2016 General Board of Discipleship. Permission is given for use in United Methodist congregations, districts, annual conferences, and camp settings. Thanks to Generous Givers This webinar is provided as a service of the Discipleship Ministries and is funded through generous World Service apportionment giving by local United Methodist congregations. © 2016 General Board of Discipleship. Permission is given for use in United Methodist congregations, districts, annual conferences, and camp settings. © 2016 General Board of Discipleship. Permission is given for use in United Methodist congregations, districts, annual conferences, and camp settings. The Presenters Jacqui King Jason Klees Leadership Ministries Webinar Specialist © 2016 General Board of Discipleship. Permission is given for use in United Methodist congregations, districts, annual conferences, and camp settings. Goals for this webinar: Review Leadership Steps to take to move Ministry Models forward Define Ministry Leadership Models • Nurture Outreach Witness (N.O.W.) • Single Board Governance • Church Council and Leadership Positions needed for each Ministry Model • “Steps to Take” – what is needed to implement the new Ministry Model • Resources / Prayers © 2016 General Board of Discipleship. Permission is given for use in United Methodist congregations, districts, annual conferences, and camp settings.
    [Show full text]
  • Methodism and the Negotiation of Masculinity
    SERVING TWO MASTERS: METHODISM AND THE NEGOTIATION OF MASCULINITY IN THE ANTEBELLUM SOUTH by CHARITY RAKESTRAW CARNEY A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2009 Copyright Charity Rakestraw Carney 2009 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the development of a distinct southern Methodist masculinity from the 1830s to the 1860s. More than a church history, this study explores the relationship between non-religious and religious society, the tensions inherent in to relationship, and the ethical questions that emerged from that tension. As Methodism evolved in the South, it took on regional social practices and affectations while also maintaining a denominational identity that opposed southern culture. Southern Methodists served two masters—the church and society— and both demanded obedience to divergent visions of masculinity and manhood. Although they rejected many manly pursuits, ministers adopted a proslavery ideology and patriarchal practices and reflected southern attitudes in their church doctrine and structure. My study argues that the ethical shift that occurred in the southern Methodist Church in the 1840s resulted from the dual demands of southern and denominational culture, which led them to construct their own vision of masculine identity. This study uses the Methodist Church as an example of the friction caused and questions raised by the intersection of gender, religion, and ethics in a constricted, patriarchal society. ii DEDICATION To my husband, Court Carney And to my grandparents, R.A. and Juanita Rakestraw iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is certainly a labor of love and required the support and encouragement of a number of people whose contributions and efforts I would like to recognize.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Separate Unions Formed One United Church by David Oberlin, 1979
    Two Separate Unions Formed One United Church by David Oberlin, 1979 The United Methodist Church is the product of two recent church mergers – one in 1946, which brought the Evangelical and United Brethren in Christ denominations together to form the Evangelical United Brethren Church (hereafter called the EUB Church); and one in 1968, which combined the EUB and Methodist denominations to form the United Methodist Church. Each merger created a new denomination, altered church organization, and had an impact on its membership. This paper examines these two mergers and their impact on members of affected congregations in Union County, Pennsylvania. Located in a rural setting in central Pennsylvania, Union County includes many small communities and two major towns – Lewisburg with almost 9,000 residents, and Mifflinburg with a population close to 7,000. Within the county are 17 United Methodist churches – three of which are former Methodist, and fourteen of which are former EUB. While the United Brethren in Christ Church was active in central Pennsylvania, all of the former EUB congregations in Union County were originally Evangelical. Each of the former Methodist congregations has its own pastor, and ten of the fourteen former EUB congregations make up three circuits within the county. Because there were no United Brethren in Christ churches in Union County, the 1946 merger did not have much of an impact on the congregations of the county. The 1968 merger, on the other hand, had a large impact in Union County because EUB and Methodist churches were located throughout the county. In Mifflinburg and Lewisburg, for example, the 1968 merger resulted in two United Methodist churches located within a block of each other.
    [Show full text]