ARTICLE XI.

        It is provided and declared that no powers and authorities hereby given to the aforesaid trustees shall be understood, taken, or construed, in anywise to prohibit or prevent the elder for the time being, duly authorized and appointed as aforesaid, the religious use, benefit and enjoyment of the church known as the Zion Church, or any other church or churches, which at any time hereafter may be purchased or built by the said corporation, or in any other way become their property, in the city of New York or the suburbs thereof, but that the same shall be, and forever hereafter continue to be had, used, and enjoyed by the said elder for the time being as heretofore, and by no other person whatsoever of another denomination, unless by particular license and consent of the elder for the time being, with the concurrence of two-thirds of the trustees for the time being, any thing to the contrary in these articles notwithstanding.

Signed
X     FRANCIS JACOBS, his mark,
GEO. E. MOORE,
GEORGE WHITE,
GEORGE COLLINS,
THOMAS SIPKINS,
X     PETER WILLIAMS, his mark,
THOMAS COOK,
X     WILLIAM BROWN, his mark,
DAVID BIAS.

CHAPTER II.

LEASING AND PURCHASING GROUND ON WHICH TO ERECT A PLACE OF WORSHIP.

        They then appointed nine trustees to attend to the business of the church, and to the getting up of the house of worship. Among the said appointed trustees were Francis Jacobs, William Brown, Thomas Miller, and George Collins; the names of the others have not been preserved. Francis Jacobs was appointed chairman of the Board of Trustees, Thomas Miller, treasurer, and George Collins, secretary. The trustees then issued subscriptions, and solicited the citzens of New York for aid to build the contemplated house of worship, and having collected eighty dollars and deposited it in the hands of Thomas Miller, treasurer, and being anxious to commence the operation of building they immediately appointed him to go forward and purchase a lot of ground upon which to erect a church. According to appointment, the said Treasurer, Thomas Miller, purchased a lot of ground twenty five feet front and one hundred feet deep, on Orange street, for which he paid the eighty dollars on account and obtained a deed for the same, in his own name. But upon examination it was found to be an unsuitable place upon which to erect a church,

and especially when they found he would not consent to have the deed altered, which caused much dissatisfaction in the minds of the trustees. Being thus disappointed, (though not discouraged) Francis Jacobs, chairman of the trustee board, a very intelligent man, and of good report, undertook the purchase of a suitable place for a church, and in connection with William Brown they succeeded in securing two lots of ground each twenty-five feet front and seventy-five feet deep, on the corner of Church and Leonard streets. This success gave the trustees new courage and they accepted the said lots of ground and resolved to erect a church thereupon, the lots of ground being now purchased, and the erection of a church thereupon determined. The trustees then renewed their efforts to collect funds and for that purpose went forth with their subscription books, and appealed to the public for help, in the great and laudable work which was intended to benefit the colored people of New York generally. In the month of September, in the year 1800, they completed the erection of a place of worship on the said lots of ground 35×45 feet. Thus established under the supervision of the Methdist Episcopal Church as a colored incorporated society they remained so until 1820. During this period the lease of the two lots on the corner of Church and Leonard streets, on which they had erected their frame building, expired, and an adjoining lot 25×100 feet was offered for sale, which the trustees bought with the two leased lots, by the advice of their elder

in charge, Rev. John Wilson, the appointee from the M. E. Conference over them. The trustees of the A. M. E. Zion Society having purchased the said two lots by taxing the members and issuing a subscription among the colored population and by great effort, the necessary amount to pay for the lots was raised, it being the first time the colored citizens were asked for aid to secure a place of worship. They had now a frontage of 75 feet by 75 depth; with this flattering prospect, and with the arrangement for the management of their religious services with their white elder of the M. E. Church being satisfactory, which was as follows:--The white elder was to preach in the Zion Church on Sunday afternoons and on Wednesday nights during the week, except on Sacrament Sunday, the second Sunday in every month; that Sunday his appointment was in the morning. Our colored preacher was to preach on Sunday mornings on all other Sundays, and at night all Sundays, and on Friday nights. Thus was the spiritual work arranged, and now the work went on prosperously, the members and congregation increasing rapidly. But the enemy of souls became angry with our success and prosperity, and sought opportunity to hinder our work through two of our oldest preachers, Abraham Thompson and June Scott, who from selfish motives sought to create a schism in the church, by establishing another society. They were prompted in this by one John Edwards, who had been expelled from the Friends' Society. He owned a lot

on Green street, and having a desire to preach, he built a house upon it, as a place of worship with a parsonage for any preacher that might connect with his society. Abraham Thompson and June Scott being made acquainted with his movement, united with him and formed a society, which they called the Union Society.

        At this time our colored brethren were not allowed any compensation for preaching to their brethren, as the white elders in charge of the church from time to time required whatever the trustees could pay them for salary. In view of this disparity in remunerating the services of white and colored laborers in the vineyard of the Lord, no doubt, Thompson and Scott were actuated in their attempt to organize another society. This movement on the part of those brethren caused a division in the minds of a number of the members of the Zion Church, and some of them seemed inclined to follow those two brethren; but this stratagem of the enemy soon failed. When the official members of the Zion Church found out this intrigue of the enemy, and were about to expel those members that had aided in the formation of the Union Society, Abraham Thompson recanted and left June Scott, pleading ignorance in what he had done, and thus saved his membership in Zion Church, as did also the others that had taken part in this movement, except June Scott, who continued in the Union Society until it went down. Then he connected with another church; thus the

attempt was a complete failure. The next attempt of the enemy to impede the progress of Zion Church occurred in 1813, which was also instigated by selfish motives. Thomas Sipkins, who had been a member of Zion Church and a trustee, but had been expelled for insubordination, determined to get up a society under his own supervision. Finding a small church on Elizabeth street, between Walker and Hester streets, he resolved upon securing it, that he might organize a society separate from Zion Church. He consulted with William Miller, who was then a deacon in Zion Church, who approved of his movement and joined him, and the two went forward and secured the place of worship, and organized a society, which they titled the Asbury Church. This stratagem of the enemy to Zion's success proved more effectual than the former, relative to forming a society. Brother William Miller, was a deacon ordained in the M. E. Church. He was very active, and exerted his influence to entice as many as he could to join them from Zion, but it did not effect any essential injury to her, notwithstanding. It was thought by the observers of this movement that the Asburians did not intend to be under the government of the whites, as the Zioners; but being disappointed in their expectations, they found it necessary to make application to Rev. Phineas Cook, the elder in charge of Zion Church at that time, requesting of him a consideration of their case relative to the spiritual concerns of their church. Brother

Cook then sought an interview with the trustees of Zion Church on the subject; he and Rev. Thomas Ware, an elder in the white M. E. Church, held an interview with some of the trustees of the Zion Church, and those two elders having obtained the consent of the trustees, received the Asburians into the M. E. Church. Notwithstanding those impediments thrown in the way of Zion Church's progress, the work of the Lord continued to prosper in her, and membership and congregation continued rapidly to increase, so much so, that the trustees were necessitated to undertake the erection of a more commodious and substantial church on the site of the old one, and on the 25th day of November 1818, a committee was appointed to obtain estimates from master builders for the erection of a suitable church for the society. On the 13th of July, 1819, they contracted with Messrs. James Dubois & Thompson Price to build a house fifty-five feet by seventy-five, to be of stone, for the sum of eleven thousand five hundred dollars. On the 16th of July, 1819, the trustees agreed to commence building the foundation around the old frame house, which was done, and the building carried up nearly to the water table, except the front; but in consequence of the want of money, they were obliged to stop the work, and have the builders cover up the walls, hoping to be able by the following spring to proceed. The trustees petitioned the Legislature of the state for aid toward the school-room that

they had connected with the structure, hoping to obtain from them at least a small portion of the amount allowed by law for school purposes, but they were unsuccessful. The next spring in the month of May, 1820, the old house was taken down, by the agreement of the trustees, and being unable to procure a suitable place to accommodate the congregation, they were necessitated to hire the use of a riding circus, in Broadway, between Hester (afterward called Howard) and Grand streets; in this they held meetings Sunday mornings, afternoons, and evenings; week nights they held their meetings in a house on Rose street, called the Rose Street Academy, between Pearl and Duane streets. The old church being pulled down, and wanting means to proceed with the new edifice, the trustees were necessitated to borrow three thousand dollars in order to proceed with the work, which they obtained on bond and mortgage from Mr. James Bogert. The Mastery of Chancery granting the trustees permission to negotiate the said loan; and on the fifth day of June they recommenced the building. Following these impediments difficulties arose from an unexpected quarter.

CHAPTER III.

THE ALLENITES ENTER NEW YORK.

        Soon after recommencing the building opposition arose to Zion through the instigation of a man named William Lambert who had left Zion Church and connected with Asbury Church, and who, though not qualified, had a conceited desire to preach, having been recommended by William Miller, of Asbury Church, to Rev. Richard Allen of Philadelphia, as he wished to get rid of him. This man (Lambert) went on to Philadelphia, and attached himself to Bethel Church in Philadelphia, and Rev. Richard Allen made him a kind of missionary. He then returned to New York, and being denied the pulpit in Asbury Church on his return from Philadelphia, he determined to raise a church or congregation for Rev. Richard Allen (who was styled a bishop), and to accomplish his purpose, he obtained a school-house on Mott street, and with the assistance of George White, a member and ordained deacon in Zion Church, they had the school-house fitted up for a church, or place of worship. At this time there was considerable private communication between some of the officials of Zion Church and Rev. Richard Allen of Philadelphia, while the Zion Church edifice

in New York was under erection; which private correspondence was unknown to the general body of Zion Church members and officials, and while Zion Church members were scattered, for the want of a suitable place of worship and their church was under erection, and as some of them were much opposed to worshipping in the circus, their minds were unsettled. At this time, Richard Allen sent an elder named Henry Harden to New York, who, when he arrived in this city, assisted by the aforesaid Wm. Lambert and George White, organized a Bethel Society. The preachers of Zion Church, considered that Allen had acted very unkindly toward Zion Church, by sending an elder into the city of New York, with an intention of establishing a third African Methodist Society, to the detriment of the Zion Church, and the religious interests of the colored people of New York generally. They, therefore, resolved not to preach for the Alenites, nor tender them our pulpits; in this resolution the Asbury Church acquiesced. The church (Bethel) was dedicated on Sunday, the 23d day of July, 1820, shortly after which Rev. Richard Allen himself, arrived in New York, and sanctioned all that had been done by those men acting under his supervision. Thus he laid the foundation of a connectional strife that has been perpetuated against Zion Connection by the Bethel Church to this day. Had Bishop Allen and his followers pursued a different course at this time, as the leader of his body, there is no doubt but Zion and Bethel Connections

would have been one body to-day. (For an account of these facts, see Bishop C. Rush's work on the Rise and Progress of the African M. E. Zion Church in America, page 32.)

CHAPTER IV.

THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE ZION CHURCH FROM THE WHITE M. E. CHURCH; CAUSES AND PROGRESS OF THE MOVEMENT, AND ITS CONSUMMATION.

        On Sunday evening, July 16, 1820, Elder William M. Stillwell, who was the employed pastor of the Zion Church, and Asbury Church, visited the divine service in the Zion Church on Rose street, and at the close of the service informed the official brethren of the Zion Church that he and several hundred of the other white brethren had withdrawn from the White Methodist Episcopal Church on account of some resolutions the preachers had passed in the General Conference, which they considered improper measures for ministers of the Gospel to resort to, and which would be injurious to the temporal concerns of the church. Among the objectionable resolutions was one petitioning the Legislature of the State of New York, for a special act of incorporation that would give the preachers more power over the temporalities of the churches under their government in the State of New York. This information alarmed the trustees, and the other official members of our church, whose official rights had been threatened

several times by elders who served those churches who frequently treated them unkindly; which conduct, of said elders, had already caused considerable dissatisfaction in the minds of the official brethren. And now, learning of the attempt on the part of the preachers to secure this special act of incorporation, they were aroused to a consideration of what they should do for the best interests of our Zion Church. They had already imbibed the opinion that the time had come when they should dissever the Zion Church from under the government of white bishops and preachers of the M. E. Church. On the following Tuesday, the 18th day of July, the trustees were notified to meet the presiding elder at the residence of Peter Williams, on Liberty street. They went, accordingly, and Abraham Thompson, the oldest preacher, and a deacon in our church, accompanied them to the place appointed, where they found the Presiding Elder, Peter P. Sanford, Aaron Hunt, Joshua Souls and Thomas Mason, of the M. E. Church. After several questions and answers had been interchanged by the parties, the Presiding Elder informed the trustees of Zion Church that, as William M. Stilwell had withdrawn from the M. E. Church, he had no further charge of our church, and that he wished to know what our church intended to do. The trustees told him they would consult on the subject, and give him an answer as soon as possible. The preachers of Zion Church were unpleasantly exercised in mind about a resolution of the white

Methodist preachers, in one of their conferences relative to a Local Preachers' Conference. They had previously appointed a meeting, and had requested our trustees to meet and consult each party in regard to what they had heard. The appointed time happened to be on the night of the same day that the trustees met the aforesaid preachers at Peter Williams' house, on Liberty street. They accordingly met at the residence of James Varick, and after consultation, John Dungy, George Collins and Abraham Thompson were appointed to call on Doctor Phoebus, an old elder of the Methodist Episcopal Church, (who was said to be neutral in the case of the division and William M. Stilwell.) To gain some further information on the subject, and to obtain from Rev. Stilwell a copy of the resolution of the late General Conference of the M. E. Church, which had caused the schism in the White M. E. Church; they also agreed to request a meeting of all the official members of the Zion Church at the Rose Street Academy the following Friday night, at which time they hoped to come to a final decision among the official brethren. On Friday night, July 21, 1820, the official members met in the Rose Street Academy, according to request, and after due deliberation, they agreed upon the following:--

        Whereas--A very grievous schism has taken place in the White M. E. Church, in this city, in consequence of a resolution passed in the last General Conference and that the resolution acted upon by

the Annual Conference of the New York District, the substance of which is (as we are informed) that a memorial shall be drawn up, signers obtained by the preachers, and the same to be presented to the Legislature of the State of New York, at their next session, praying for a special act of incorporation, to suit the peculiarities of the Methodist discipline, so that the preachers may have more authority to exercise their functions in the church than they now have; and Whereas, it is reported that, should the Legislature deem it expedient to grant the request of the Memorialists, and enact the said special act of incorporation, it will very materially change the present manner of conducting the temporal concerns of the said church; as the trustees or stewards who are to be appointed, according to the contemplated mode, will hold the property of the society in trust for the preachers in conference instead of for the society; and Whereas, in consequence of the aforementioned schism, a very different explanation is given, relative to the contents of said Memorial, and fearing that the said report is true, and that our church property will be involved in the same difficulties, should the act of incorporation be obtained, and having no desire to transfer our church property to the Methodist preachers in conferences, we have

        Resolved--I. That, as we cannot fully understand the intention of the said preachers in praying the Legislature for a special act of incorporation, and having some reason to fear that the abovementioned report is correct, we are much dissatisfied and highly

disapprove of the said memorial, praying for a special act of incorporation, to suit the peculiarities of the Methodist discipline.

        2. That in consequence of the dissatisfaction and doubts existing in our mind, relative to the intended special act of incorporation, and to the conduct of the preachers in conference requiring such an act, we decline receiving any further services from them.

        3. That George Collins, Tobias Hawkins and William Brown, be a committee appointed to inform the Presiding Elder of the district, or the Ruling Elder in the city of New York, of the above resolutions.

        4. That we request William M. Stillwell to continue his services with us the remainder of the year.

        5. That we recommend the above to the members of our Society.

        They also agreed to call a meeting of the whole society, male and female, which they did on the next Wednesday evening, the 26 of July; whereupon a large number of the members crowded the Rose street Academy, and unanimously sanctioned the foregoing resolutions. The trustees being informed that they could not hold meetings any longer in the circus, were now obliged to turn their attention toward their new edifice under erection, on the corner of Church and Leonard streets; which building was a little more than half up. A portion of it they

fitted up temporarily with seats, so as to accommodate several hundred persons; and on Sunday morning, July 30, 1820, Rev. William L. Stillwell preached for the first time in our new Church. Though rain commenced to fall shortly after he took his text, which continued during divine service, yet few left the meeting, though the building was not yet under roof. In the afternoon, the weather having cleared up, they held services in the building again. Abraham Thompson and James Varick, (Preachers), conducted the services, and in the evening they held the third service. Thus the trustees endeavored to accommodate the society, and others attending divine service; and on week nights they held meetings in the Rose street Academy. While the trustees were thus struggling under three difficulties, (which were; I: the refusal to receive further service from the ministers of the white church, 2: the effort of Bishop Allen to take advantage of their necessities, 3: the unsettled minds of many of the members of the church). Besides these they learned that some of the Zion preachers were inclined to join Richard Allen's Connection and had called a meeting to consult about it. This so early apparent change in the minds of the preachers, together with a notice they received from Rev. Enoch George, Bishop of the White Methodist Episcopal Church, on the subject of our refusal to receive further service from the whites, sickened the hearts of the trustees; but trusting the great Head of the church for aid, they took courage and

went forward. The preachers accordingly held their meeting at the residence of Rev. William Miller, in Mulberry street, and after some consultation, they requested a meeting of all the official members of our church. The official members therefore met together in the Rose street Academy, on Friday night, August 11, 1820, and the preachers informed them, (the official members), that they had held a meeting for the purpose of considering the present state of our church, and that there were two grand questions put and answered at the meeting; viz: 1: Shall we join Bishop Allen? Answer, No; 2: Shall we return to the white people? Answer, No; and that they therefore determined to consult with the rest of their official brethren upon the subject of completing the establishment of a form of church government of our own. After several of the brethren had given their opinions, it being late, the meeting was adjourned to the following Tuesday night.

        On Saturday morning, the 12 of August, 1820, Tobias Hawkins, William Brown and Thomas Jenkins, trustees, called upon Bishop George, at the residence of Mr. Morris Carter, in Church street, pursuant to a notice, and were in conversation about two hours with the Bishop, and several elders of the white M. E. Church; after which they parted in apparent friendship, with the Bishop's request that the trustees of Zion's Church would grant Rev. Joshua Souls the privilege of explaining to the society the true nature of the business, in regard to

the schism which had taken place in the white Church, in order to clear the preachers of some censure attached to them; which request the trustees told him, (the Bishop), they would mention to the rest of the brethren, as they, being only three in number present, were too small a number to decide upon the Bishop's request.

        On Tuesday night, August 15, the official members of Zion Church met, according to adjournment of the meeting at William Brown's in Leonard street; Abraham Thompson was appointed chairman and Charles Anderson secretary. At this meeting Rev. William Miller was present as a representative of the Asbury Church, and acknowledged his willingness to acquiesce with what ever was determined upon, by the official members of the Zion Church, in relation to their spiritual government. The church, after considerable talk, resolved that William Miller, Thomas Jenkins and Lowther Bruce, be appointed a committee to inquire of Bishop Hobart, of the Protestant Church (in the city of New York), whether he would assist to ordain one of our Deacons to the order of Elder: some of the ministers of Zion Church took exceptions to requesting aid from a white Bishop, instead of applying to Bishop Allen, who was then in the city. But on account of Rev. Allen's acting unfriendly toward Zion Church, and he, having establisded a separate colored Methodist Society in New York city, the majority of them were in favor of soliciting a white Bishop.

        At that time, the official brethren learned that Bishop Allen was disposed to be friendly with Zion Church, and wished to have an interview with some of the trustees and preachers: whereupon, the official members of the Church resolved to appoint a committee of five trustees, and four preachers, to meet with him, whom he met. The following were the trustees and preachers composing the committee: Tobias Hawkins, William Brown, Thomas Jenkins, George Collins and Charles Tredwell, (trustees), Abraham Thompson, William Miller and Christopher Rush, (preachers). On Thursday night, August 17, 1820, the committee met Bishop Allen at William Brown's in Leonard street. After some conversation between the parties, it was owned that the interview only served to let them know that he, Allen, was not a child, that he knew his business, (as he said), and that he had no intention to assist in ordination, unless we put ourselves under his charge. Thus we discovered to what extent he was friendly disposed toward Zion Church, and the object of his interview with us. His conduct toward us in this interview, revealed to us a selfish and ungenerous motive on his part, and a seeming design to take advantage of the unsettled state of Zion's Church affairs at this critical moment of our early struggles.

        During this time the preachers who were attached to his connection in New York city were going on to make proselytes of all they could, to his church, from Zion Church, both of individuals and of

churches. With the influence of the afore-named George White, and bad management, the Allenites obtained the consent of the African Zion Church at Brooklyn, to unite with them, and thus they proceeded in making all the proselytes they could, in opposition to Zion Connection. On Sunday, Aug. 20, 1820, the sacrament of the Lord's supper was administered for the first time, within the walls of the new church, by Rev. William M. Stillwell. On Friday night, September 1, 1820, the official members met in the Rose street Academy, for the purpose of receiving the reports of those committees which were appointed to make inquiry relative to ordination; and to have an interview with Bishop Allen. Abraham Thompson, the chairman, Charles Anderson, secretary. The chairman being called upon to report the result of their interview with Bishop Allen, stated that Bishop Allen refused to assist in ordaining elders for our church, that he could not do anything for us in that respect unless we put ourselves under his government. This ended all interview with Allen; and greatly to the disappointment of Father Thompson, who had been all the while a great Allen advocate. At this same meeting, Rev. William Miller, chairman of the committee sent to Bishop Hobart, was called on to report. He stated that he called on Rev. Thomas Lyell, a presbyter of Christ's Church, on Ann street, known afterwards as North street. Rev. Lyell informed brother Miller that Bishop Hobart was out of the city; but when the

Bishop returned he would speak to him upon the subject. Rev. Lyell thought there would be no difficulty in obtaining ordination. Rev. Lyell also stated to brother William Miller, that Rev. William M. Stillwell would be a very suitable person for us to apply to for ordination, he being a presbyter of the Methodist Church, newly formed, which he thought would be a much easier way to obtain the desired end. During the interval of our meeting, several of the official brethren having had an interview with Rev. Stillwell, to gain information in regard to church government, had their minds fully satisfied that ordination could be easily obtained from that source. They made known the information they had obtained, which afforded much comfort and satisfaction to the brethren. As matters now began to wear an aspect of regularity, uniformity, and reconciliation, George Collins, a leading official member, and anxious to see Zion fully established under her own government, suggested to the official brethren the utility of preparing for the completion of the establishment of a permanent organization, under our own ecclesiastical government. At a meeting of the official members convened to consider this subject, a committee of the following named brethren were appointed, namely: James Varick, George Collins, Charles Anderson, Christopher Rush and William Miller. They were to form a discipline for our church by making suitable selections from the discipline of the White Methodist Episcopal Church to secure us our needed church

government as a self governing Colored Methodist organization.

        The preachers now unanimously agreed to exert themselves in giving such necessary assistance to our African brethren, elsewhere, as they might require. After discussing the case of the Brooklyn church, the meeting adjourned. The church building on the corner of Church and Leonard streets, now progressed rapidly, being favored with fair weather, and on Monday, September 4th, 1820, the builders commenced shingling the roof. On Monday evening, September 4th, 1820, the committee appointed to form a discipline met at William Miller's in Mulberry street, but they did not accomplish much, except to determine on the title, including the established doctrines of Methodism, for the Discipline of the African Methodist Episcopal Church in America. They also resolved to call to their assistance John Dungy and Abraham Thompson, and to meet the following Wednesday night, at the same place; requesting George Collins in the meantime to draw up a preamble for the said discipline.

        At a regular monthly meeting of the trustees held at William Browns, there appeared to be some dissention among the trustees. Some of them manifesting an inclination to go under Allen; others favoring the maintaining of our own church government. At this meeting a letter was read addressed to them by Bishop Allen, directed to William Brown, advising them to agree to join his connection, but

there was but little attention paid to it. The discipline committee persued their work. The preamble was prepared by brother Collins, as requested by the committee, which they examined and adopted. They then proceeded to complete the form of discipline they were to prepare and, on Tuesday night, September 26, 1820, they completed and adopted it, and authorized George Collins to prepare the manuscript for printing. Our church at this time, was in a very precarious situation, particularly from the want of elders of our own church, and it became necessary that something be done immediately to relieve her from that religious embarrassment. Whereupon a meeting of all the official members of the church was convened in the Rose street Academy, on Wednesday night, September 13, at which time the elder William M. Stillwell informed the brethren that his purpose in calling them together was to consult upon the propriety and necessity of electing an elder, and read to them several extracts from books written by Methodist preachers to prove the validity of such a course in case of necessity. He also advised them to adopt the same plan, as it would be a case of real necessity with them, being an African Methodist Church without elders, and as he had not sufficient numbers of elders connected with him at present to perform ordination. A vote was then taken in order to ascertain whether the official brethren approved of the measure, and if they were

ready to act upon it. The vote was carried in favor of the measure, and immediate action. They then proceeded to nominate Abraham Thompson and James Varick, to be reccommended to the society as persons to be elected to the office of elders in the church. Bishop William McKendree, having arrived in the city, expressed a desire to see some of the official members of the church, and nine of them accordingly waited on him; comprising the following brethren: Abraham Thompson, Leven Smith, John Dungy, Christopher Rush, Timothy Eato, Samuel Bird, Tobias Hawkins, William Brown and George Collins. They called on him on Sunday, September 24, 1820, immediately after divine service, in the afternoon, at his lodging, (he being indisposed), at the residence of Joshua Souls. Here they had a mutual conversation on the subject of our refusing the further service of the white brethren. The Bishop said he desired to see them, to know what they wanted him to do forthem. They told him what they wanted, what theyhad done, and how far they were willing to go in order to be in union with, or under the care of the white Bishops and Conference, and asked him whether he could ordain elders for them. He said that he was limited in his office and could not at present: But he advised them to wait until the sitting of the ensuing Annual Conference, and have the case brought regularly before that body, so that if they should agree on the subject, our preachers might be ordained by

him. Our brethren then informed him that such was the state of their spiritual affairs, that they could not wait until that time, but would be obliged to proceed and elect elders as was contemplated by them, and gave him to understand that probably they would wait the result of the said Conference relative to ordination. Sunday afternoon, October 1, 1820, being the time appointed to elect the two brethren who were nominated on the 13th of September for that purpose, at the close of the divine service the members, male and female, were requested to remain after the congregation was dismissed for special business. After the elder, William M. Stillwell, had given satisfactory explanation of the purpose for which the members of the society were detained, Abraham Thompson was offered for election, and he was most solemnly elected by a large majority (if not by the whole body). Then James Varick was offered and was also solemnly elected an elder. These two brethren being thus elected, were considered as having full power to exercise the peculiar functions of elders in the church with us, or any other society of colored people in connection with us, until an opportunity offered to ordain them by the imposition of the hands of proper authority. The whole procedure was conducted with general satisfaction. On the evening of the 3d of October, the trustees held a very harmonious meeting in which it was stated that the church building was progressing rapidly, the floor being laid and ready for seating,

all of which gave the official brethren renewed encouragement, and the members generally. Thus another important chapter of our progress was completed.

CHAPTER V.

HOW ZION CHURCH IN NEW YORK CITY BECAME THE MOTHER CHURCH OF THE AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL ZION CONNECTION OR CHURCH IN AMERICA--THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THEIR CHURCH POLITY --THE COMPLETION OF THE FORMATION OF OUR CONNECTION AS AN ECCLESIASTICAL BODY.

I The adoption of a Discipline for our Government.

        On Wednesday evening, October 25, 1820, there was a meeting held by the official members of the church to decide upon the adoption of the form of Discipline that the committee had prepared for our Government, (which George Collins had arranged and prepared for the printer, and which had been submitted at another meeting of the official members), which being read and carefully examined, was adopted and it was decided that it should be printed. The following brethren were selected as a committee to have it published; namely, George Collins and

Christopher Rush. On the first of November following, the manuscript was put into the hands of John C. Totten, printer, who was ordered to print 1,200 copies. Our Discipline embraced in full the Faith, Religious Practice and Modified Ritual of the (Mother, the White Methodist Episcopal Church), with such modifications of other departments of it as were necessary to our church as a distinct body. Having secured our form of church government, the official members of the church being now fully determined upon gathering into the connection such churches of their colored brethren as were willing to unite with them in the formation of a uniform system of church government, they held a meeting on the subject. It was known at this time that there were several places open where our preachers might have formed societies or taken charge of those already formed under the White Methodist Episcopal Church, but being inexperienced, they did not succeed very rapidly in organizing societies. This, and the want of means, hindered them considerably in their work of extending Zion's borders. Sometimes, the Allenites did not hesitate to represent themselves to be the same as the Zion preachers, when they found it necessary to make a point. Generally our colored brethren, having formed societies, sent for Zion preachers. In this same year, 1820, a society in New Haven, Connecticut, sent for a preacher to visit them from our body, and for our church disciplines to which

application we responded by sending deacon Leven Smith. In this same year, Abraham Thompson received a letter from Philadelphia, from the president of a committee of twelve persons, who superintended the erection of a church they were building in that city; which was separate from Richard Allen's connection. The letter contained a request from that committee, asking for one or two of our preachers, to be sent on to Philadelphia in five weeks from that date, by which time the building would be completed and ready for consecration; that they might mutually consult about the Zion connection.

        The Zion church edifice in New York on the corner of Church and Leonard streets, still progressed in its erection and on the 2d of November they began to put the seats up. At this date information was received by some of the officiary, that there was an African Methodist society at Flushing that wished to connect with us, but before we could send a preacher, George White, one of Bishop Allen's preachers, visited the society, and although we sent two preachers, Mr. Miller and George Collins, with whose visit the society seemed pleased, yet through the influence of White, one of Allen's preachers, they were induced to join Allen's connection.

        November the 2d, 1820, being the first Tuesday of the month, the leaders meeting and Quarterly Conference of the Zion Church convened together by the advice of the elder in charge, at the residence

of William Brown, on Leonard street. A large number of the official brethren were present. The secretary, George Collins of the leaders meeting, made a financial report at this meeting of the monies received and disbursed during the three years last past, which was as follows:

        Money received during three years ending October 1820, $4,654.62½, church borrowed $3,000, making $7,654.62½, disbursed in the same time, $7,238.78, leaving a balance in hand of $415.91½, which was ordered to be paid over to the builders. He also reported the amount paid in cash to the builders, viz: $5,542.78, in addition to which the old house was sold to the carpenters and stone sold to the mason, together with some money which the builders had collected for the church all which amounted, (with the cash paid) to about $5,842.78, all of which gave general satisfaction.

        After which the leaders' business meeting closed. At this meeting, held on the 2d of November, the business of the Quarterly Conference was taken up. During this meeting, the elder handed over to the trustees $10.37½ which was all he had received for his salary from Zion Church that year. This amount he gave to the church as his subscription for the new church, also informing the brethren that the money collected in the future for him in the Zion Church should be given to the preachers to assist them to travel. This was pleasing news, for the brethren did not know how they should raise money to assist our

preachers to travel, when visiting places, to organize societies. At this meeting, the subject of drafting articles of agreement between the Zion and Asbury Churches was considered and decided upon; George Collins was appointed to draw up the proposed articles and present them to the official members of Zion Church for their ratification, then to the officials of the Asbury Church for their concurrence.

        The following were the articles of agreement, to wit:

        Whereas, the official members of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church and of the Asbury Church are desirous of becoming more united in their spiritual government and privileges, the two churches being separate incorporations, and their temporal concerns being managed by two separate Boards of Trustees, it is deemed necessary to have a definite arrangement or understanding set forth in Articles of Agreement between the two Churches, as set forth in the following:

        First, It is provided and agreed between the two parties, that the two Boards of Trustees shall not interfere with each other in the temporal management of the affairs of their respective churches.

        Secondly, It is provided and agreed, that in every case when persons apply for admission into either of said churches, by letter or on probation from other circuits or stations, the elder having charge of said Asbury or Zion Church shall inquire of said applicants which church register he or she wishes to be

placed upon, and shall enroll the applicants according to their desire.

        Thirdly, It is provided and declared that no person shall at any time receive applicants into either of the said churches, on probation or otherwise, except the elder in charge of said churches, or a deacon, or a preacher whom he may authorize or request so to do.

        Fourthly, It is provided and declared, that the sick and the poor members of the churches respectively, shall have no claim upon the poor funds of the other; that each church shall give relief to their own sick and poor members.

        Fifthly, It is provided and declared, that there shall be but one Quarterly Conference to transact the spiritual business of the two churches, according to the Discipline of the Church. The official members of both churches shall have equal voices and privileges in the said Quarterly Conference. Each church shall have separate leaders' meetings and Trustee meetings.

        Sixthly, It is provided and declared, that in all cases when houses are to be built, hired, or enjoyed gratis, for the purpose of divine worship, and wherein collections of money are to be made in any place under the jurisdiction of the incorporation of either Church, a fair representation of the same shall be made at the Quarterly Conference from time to time, by the party intending to build, hire, or enjoy any place gratis; thus securing a clear understanding between

the two Boards of Trustees, relative to the revenue arising from such establishments.

        Seventhly, It is further provided and declared between the said churches, that in all cases of differences between the two bodies, which cannot be settled at the Quarterly Conference where it was first considered, the Elder in charge shall call an extra Quarterly Conference, where the case shall be finally settled.

        Eighthly, It is further provided and declared, that these Articles shall not be so construed as to affect any former agreement made by the Asbury Church and its stated minister.

        The foregoing articles were agreed to by the officiary of each church and signed by the elder, Wm. M. Stilwell, for both parties, with Abraham Marks Secretary for Asbury Church, and George Collins Secretary for the Zion Church.

        On November 12th, 1820, the second Sunday in the month being communion Sunday, James Varick and Abraham Thompson, the two elders elected, administered for the first time the communion, being assisted by Leven Smith, a deacon. At that time the official brethren of a society under the Methodist Episcopal Church in New Haven, Connecticut, desiring to connect with our body, sent an exhorter to New York, to be licensed by our church; and also the society made application to join our connection; the applicant for preacher's license was Jeremiah Jacobs. On the 15th of November, he had determined

to embark on a vessel for Port-Au-Prince, as a missionary; having received his license, he set out on his journey. At that time an application to connect with our body was made by a religious society established in Philadelphia, separate from the Allenites. The application from the New Haven Society having been responded to by sending Christopher Rush, a preacher, to visit them, and arrange with them to unite with us, a union was agreeably effected.

        On the first of December, Abraham Thompson and William Miller were sent from New York City to visit the society in Philadelphia that had applied for union with the Zion body in New York City; their mission resulted in the consummation of the union of the Philadelphia society with the Zion body of New York.

        Abraham Thompson while in Philadelphia on the above named mission, had an interview with Ezekiel Cooper, Esq., an old and prominent member of the Methodist Episcopal Church, (our mother church,) who advised him to have an address prepared in reference to ordination, and sent by our body to the Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church the following spring, which was to convene in Philadelphia; and thence to the New York Annual Conference, also of the M. E. Church, for their consideration. The advice of Brother Cooper was accepted, and, accordingly, at an official meeting of members of the Zion and Asbury Churches, John Dungy, James Varick, Charles Anderson, and William Miller

were appointed a committee to draft an address for that purpose. On the 22nd of February, 1820, they engaged in drafting the address, which was as follows:

        "To the bishops and preachers of the Philadelphia and New York Annual Conferences of the Methodist Episcopal Church, assembled:

        "Respected Brethren:--We the official members of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church and Asbury Church of New York, of the Wesley Church of Philadelphia, of Zion Church of New Haven, Conn. and Zion Church of Long Island, in consolidation, forming a Methodist body, beg leave to present to your Honorable body an address on a subject, to us of great importance, and we trust not a matter of indifference to you. In the first place, permit us to humbly and sincerely tender our thanks for what you have done for us, in the kind service you have rendered us when in our infant state. We trust the Great Head of the Church in His goodness may continue to reward you for your labors among us; you, who have been the instruments in bringing us from darkness to light, from the power of sin and Satan to God. Permit us further to say, that when the Methodist Society in America was small, the Africans enjoyed comfortable privileges among their white brethren, but as the white element increased, the Africans were pressed back; therefore, it was thought necessary for them to have separate places of worship, giving the Africans a better opportunity of full religious enjoyment and privileges. It is well known

that our number has greatly increased within the last few years. Many are still coming into the fold of Christ. Among us preachers have been raised up, whose labors God has blessed; but hitherto they have been too limited in their ministerial privileges; they have not had the opportunity of travelling, as we think God designs they should have, at least to reach our own race in the evangelical work of the Christian Church. There is no provision in the mother church, the Methodist Episcopal Church, for us in the itinerant work, that colored preachers might go forth and dispense the Word of life among our own race. And now it seems the time has come that something should be done for the improvement of the colored brethren in the ministry. But how shall this be accomplished? We have not the least expectation that the African preachers will be admitted to a seat and vote with their white brethren in ecclesiastical assemblages. (This is not what they ought to have expected among christian brethren, who could not fail to understand the divine lesson on it being a sin to have respect of persons, and if simply on account of clothing, much more a sin on account of race or color. James ii. 9, 10.)

        "We do not desire to unite with the R. Allen party, being dissatisfied with their general manner of procedure. The brethren in the city of New York, after due consideration, have concluded to form an itinerant plan, and establish an Annual Conference for the African Methodist Episcopal Zion preachers,

under the patronage of the white bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church. We believe that such an arrangement effected, would tend greatly to promote the spiritual interest of our people generally our preachers would receive new encouragement in their ministerial labors. If we should commence this important work of forming the said itinerant plan and establishing an African annual conference, under the supervision of the bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the two societies, the Zion and Asbury Churches in New York City with the Philadelphia society, with their connectional title, shall be the AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL ZION CHURCH IN AMERICA. We have also selected a portion of the Discipline of the mother church (the M. E. Church), for our government, with the necessary modifications to meet the circumstances of our organization; to this we beg leave to refer you for perusal. After you have considered our case, should our proceedings meet your approval and should you decide to comply with our wishes, we will stand ready to receive such advice or instructions as you may think proper to give us through our Rev. Father in the Lord, Bishop McKendree, or any other whom the conference may see fit to select. On the subject of ordination to eldership, of which our preachers have all been deprived, we might have obtained it from other sources, but we preferred to follow the advice of Bishop McKendree, given to us in New York, to wait until the meeting of your annual conference in this and the New York

District; then we could fully understand what the mother church could do for us in the matter. In consequence of some uneasiness in the minds of some of our brethren or members in New York, occasioned by Richard Allen determining to establish a society of his connection in New York City, we have been under the necessity of electing three of our deacons to the office of elders and some of the preachers to the office of deacons; we thereby show our people that their preachers can be properly authorized to administer the ordinances of God's Church. We believe it has had the desired effect of settling the minds of our brethren and advancing the work of the Lord. We expect our first yearly conference to be held in the city of New York, on the 24th day of June next, at which time we hope to have the happiness of hearing that our Rev. Father, Bishop William McKendree presided and took jurisdiction of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Conference formed under the patronage of the Methodist Episcopal Church. With this hope we rest, awaiting your answer; meanwhile praying that the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls may guide you in your deliberations, in ours, and in all other cases; that your conclusions may be pleasing in his sight and tend to advance the kingdom of Christ among the African Race.

        "N. B.--Should the above address be sanctioned by your Honorable body, and should you be pleased to act upon it immediately, you will forward it on to the New York Annual Conference for their consideration

and action. Should the time appointed by us for the sitting of the African Conference be inconvenient to the person who might be appointed to organize the same, we are willing to change the time a few days sooner or later, provided you will be pleased to give us timely notice for such change. But should you see fit not to favor the address in any respect, you will have the goodness to return it to the bearer.

        "Signed in behalf of the official members of both societies, at a special meeting called for that purpose, March 23rd, 1821, in the city of New York:

George Collins, Sec. James Varick, Chairman."

        The address being prepared, Rev. Abraham Thompson and Leven Smith were appointnd a committee to present it to the official brethren of the society at Philadelphia (the Wesley). They presented the same, and it was approved by them. Brothers Thompson and Smith then conveyed it to the Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, convened at Milford, Delaware. The conference received it and acted upon it with the following result:

        "We, your committee, to whom was referred the memorial presented by the delegation from the African Methodist Episcopal Zion and Asbury Churches in the city of New York, and Wesley Church in Philadelphia, on behalf of themselves and others of their colored brethren, proposing and requesting the establishing of an African Methodist Episcopal Zion Conference for the African Methodist

preachers, under the Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, having had the matter under consideration in all its bearings and relations, beg leave to report the following: First, we view it as a subject of great importance to the colored people, demanding from us our friendly patronage and pastoral attention, so far as circumstances will admit. We have always acted on the principle toward the colored people of doing them all the good that was in our power. We have aimed at the promotion of their moral and religious condition, protecting and defending them in all their just rights and privileges; and more particularly, as instruments under God, we have labored among them for the conversion of their souls. They know, and it is generally known and acknowledged, that our labors of love and good will toward them for many years past have been crowned with much good effect and gracious success, greatly improving their social condition and circumstances in life.

        "Secondly, There are at this time various societies and congregations of colored people in different parts, who have been collected and raised under our ministerial labors, who have erected for themselves houses of worship, in which they worship separately from the white people. There are among them a number of pious colored men who, we have reason to believe, are qualified to preach the word of life and salvation, and to be useful among their own race; but on our present plan, their privileges as ministers are very much circumscribed, and their opportunities

for improvement and usefulness very limited. There exists no expectation or prospect of the colored preachers being admitted to a seat or vote in our white conferences, or a participation in other privileges among us white preachers in our labors or pastoral care of churches; neither is it understood that they so desire. Their request is, that we establish them in a conference by themselves, in unity and friendship with us, and under the patronage of our bishops and conference, having our bishops to preside over their conferences, and superintend, counsel, direct and protect their itinerant regulations. It appears that they could obtain the ordination of their preachers from other sources and become independent of our bishops and conferences, but they prefer and desire our patronage and a certain degree of union with us. They have refused to unite with Richard Allen, being dissatisfied with his general manner of proceedings.

        "Thirdly, From every view we have been able to take of the subject, we are of the opinion that the time has come when something must be done, more than has been, for our colored people, especially such as are situated as our memorialists, in order that their sphere of labor and usefulness, privileges and opportunities to operate among themselves may be extended under our protection and direction. Otherwise we shall lose their confidence and our influence over them. They will become separate from and independent of us, and thereby our usefulness among

them will in a great measure be lost. It appears in the present case under consideration that they have determined and arranged to have a conference of their preachers established, whether patronized by us or not; and they have appointed the time and place for holding it. Therefore, your committee proposes the following resolutions to the conference for adoption, viz: I. RESOLVED, that the Philadelphia Conference do advise and recommend, that one of our bishops do attend and preside in the African Conference appointed to sit in New York, and that he superintend their organization, as an African Methodist Conference under the supervision of our bishops and conferences, agreeably to the proposed plan, if the New York Conference concur with us in the following arrangement, viz: First, that one of our bishops is always to preside in the said conference; or, in case no bishop be present, then such white elder as the bishop shall appoint, shall preside. Secondly, our bishops to ordain all deacons and elders, such as shall be selected by their own conference and approved of by the bishop, as being qualified for the office. Thirdly, the bishop, or elder appointed by him to preside in the conference, with an advisory committee chosen by the conference, shall make out the appointments of the preachers. Fourthly, all other proceedings of the conference to be as conformable to the rules and regulations generally followed in our conferences as circumstances will admit. Fifthly, their discipline, doctrines, government, and rules of order in all things

to be as conformable to ours as possible, so as to procure to themselves their own peculiar rights and privileges. Sixthly, the bishop, or such elder as shall be appointed by him, with his proper instructions, together with the said African Conference, to agree upon the several points, terms, and considerations of unity and amity, mutually to exist as reciprocal duties and obligations between them and us. This agreement to take place and be entered into at the time of organization of the said conference.

        "II. Resolved, that a copy of this report be forwarded with the African Memorial to the New York Annual Conference, and that their concurrence with this report be requested in the proposed plan of the organization of an African conference under our patronage, with any additions or alterations that may appear to them best."

Committee
EZEKIEL COOPER,
THOMAS WERE,
ALWAR WHITE.

        The above report was adopted by the Philadelphia conference, and the secretary was instructed to forward a copy of the same to the New York Conference of M. E. C.

Samuel Cox, Secretary.

        The foregoing report was highly approved by the official brethren of the Zion, Asbury, and Philadelphia Churches, giving them great encouragement, hoping their desires would be realized; but they found

their hopes to be of short duration. The New York Conference in their action refused to concur with the Philadelphia Conference. They decided that they could do nothing for them, except they renounced the form of discipline they had selected, and adopted and were willing to be governed by the Methodist Discipline of the mother church (whites). The following is a copy of the report uf the committee of the New York Conference:

        "We, your committee on the African Memorial, as acted and decided upon in the Philadelphia Annual Conference, convened at Milford, Delaware, beg leave to report the following:

        "First, The committe conceive that humanity and religion combine to influence us to do all we can for the instruction and salvation of the colored people, to have the pure Word of God preached among them, and the discipline and ordinances of the Gospel faithfully administered, as indispensably necessary to their happiness and prosperity. It is believed that in these respects we have cause to charge ourselves with too little attention to their spiritual interests, and as though they were an inferior class of beings; they have too often been treated with unwarranted neglect. It is to be feared that their loss of confidence in us and the consequent measures which many of them pursued, may in a considerable degree be traced to our neglect as a cause. But painful as this consideration is, we cannot approve of the course our colored brethren have taken, in separating themselves

from us, and forming themselves under a distinct and independent body. This course places them in a position that the constitution of our church cannot cover. Your committee conceives that the primary object contemplated in the memorial and accompanying document lies beyond the limits of the constitutional power of an Annual Conference. It is a matter that can only be reached through the General Conference. An Annual Conference, or Conferences, connot organize such a conference, much less, one acting under a distinct discipline and an independent authority. With this view of the subject, your committee are of the opinion that the African Conference specified in the memorial cannot be constitutionally organized or adopted; that it would not be advisable for our bishops, or any one appointed by them, officially to preside at said conference, or to ordain a deacon or elder for said African Conference. But, although we deem it inexpedient to prostrate the constitution and government of our church to accommodate any case whatever, we firmly believe the evil would overbalance the good that we might hope to effect. We consider the condition of the Africans such as demands every prudent exertion in our power to recover them from their wandering, and preserve them in the confidence and communion of our church. Your committee therefore recommend the adoption of the following resolutions:

        "First, RESOLVED, that if the African brethren who have addressed the memorial to the conference

will agree to be subject to the government of the Methodist Episcopal Church, in common with their white brethren, in such cases under existing circumstances as it is expedient and advisable that such colored preachers as are regularly constituted be appointed to labor among them, and take the pastoral charge of them until the next General Conference.

        "Secondly, RESOLVED, that the colored brethren submitting themselves to the order and discipline of our church are entitled to the same rights and privileges as their white brethren, in regard to the ordination of local deacons and elders, the same form of our order of discipline applying to both.

        "Thirdly, RESOLVED, that the organization of the African Annual Conference, on the same principles and subject to the same order and government as other conferences, may be affected by General Conference.

        "Fourthly, RESOLVED, that it is advisable that a member, or members, be appointed by the bishop to present the above resolutions to the African brethren in New York, together with any explanation and instruction that may be thought proper, and receive their answer."

        Joshua Soule was appointed to present the foregoing report to the Zion and Asbury Churches of New York, Mr Thomas Mason accompanying him. On the 12th of June, 1821, our official brethren met for the purpose of considering the action of the New York Annual Conference, which had failed to concur

with the Philadelphia Conference. The action of the New York Conference was received with great disfavor by the official brethren of the New York and Philadelphia Churches. After deliberating upon the subject, they resolved upon proceeding according to the plan proposed by the Philadelphia Conference of the Methodist Church, viz: "That one of the white bishops be selected and solicited to preside at all our conferences, ordain all our ministers, and appoint them to their charges; and that we agree to come on terms of unity and amity to that effect, if the next General Conference will receive us under their patronage."

        George Collins and Charles Anderson were appointed a committee to inform Joshua Soule of the above decision of our brethren. The committee had an interview with Joshua Soule; they also had an interview with Bishop Enoch George on the subject. He informed them that the other two bishops were sick, and that it was out of his power to attend the African Conference by reason of his pressing engagements. He advised them to do the best they could in holding the aforesaid conference or meeting. For the above, see Christopher Rush's Rise and Progress of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in America.

OUR CHURCH POLITY.

        The object of a system of Church Government, is to formulate a system of ecclesiastical rules by which the votaries of a religious sect may most effectually disseminate and practically apply the religious principles they have espoused; which system of rules is generally shaped in accordance with the force of circumstances, as are all systems established and regulated by human judgment. It has been fully established, and generally admitted by the ablest writers on Church Government, that the New Testament Scriptures do not contain any formulated system of rules as a model of Church Polity, or ecclesiastical economy, the integrity of which was to be perpetuated throughout the church's history, coming down from the apostles to us. Therefore true Church Government has, and must mostly depend upon enlightened, human judgment. This position is fully sustained by such able writers on Church Government as Stillingfleet, Arch-bishop Cranmer, Archbishop Whitgift, Dr. Low and Abel Steven, of the M. E. Church, and a host of others.

        Therefore, each Christian denomination has been led to adopt such religious polity, or form of Church Government, as they under the force of circumstances deemed the most suitable for the propagation and the practical application of the principles of religion they

had espoused. The form of Church Government depends primarily on the idea men entertain of the Constitution of the Church, or what constitutes the Church of Christ.

        The Congregationalists place the Church Government in the hands of the members of the congregation, and the office bearers whom they have elected, without any distinction between the congregation and the church proper, consisting of the regenerated.

        The Baptists distinguish between the church proper and the congregation; and hence they lodge the Church Government in the church, as the primary body.

        The Episcopalians, Presbyterians and various Methodist branches agree that many congregations may be united under a common government. This common government, with the Presbyterians, is carried on properly by members of the church, and elders. These congregations united under a common government, may meet for the purpose of acting in legislative, judicial and executive capacity constituting a Church Government. The government of the Episcopalians is more absolutely in the hands of the bishops. The government of the Methodist Episcopal Church is chiefly in the hands of three distinct branches of their ecclesiastical or conventional economy, as a Quarterly Conference, an Annual Conference and a General Conference: the Laity having but a small share in the government. The African Methodist Episcopal (or Bethel) Church, is under the

same form of government as that of the M. E. Church. In our own body, (the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church), the government is lodged in the hands of the ministers and laymen, as set forth in our church polity, a synopsis of which we give in the following system. Our Church Polity, or form of government, originally embraced and does now embrace all the doctrines of religious faith and Christian practice contained in the government of the mother Church, (white M. E. Church), which see in full, in the present form of Discipline.

        First. In the following we give an epitome of our articles of religious Faith, fundamentally:

• 1 Faith in the Holy Trinity.
• 2 Of the Word or Son of God, who was made man.
• 3 Faith in the Resurrection of Christ.
• 4 In the Holy Ghost.
• 5 In the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for salvation.
• 6 Faith in the following named Canonical Books of the Old and new Testaments, as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, The First Book of Samuel, Second Book of Samuel, The First Book of Kings, Second Book of Kings, First Book of Chronicles, Second Book of Chronicles, The Book of Ezra, The Book of Nehemiah, The Book of Esther, The Book of Job, The Psalms, The Ecclesiastes, The Song of Solomon, The Four Prophets the great, The Twelve Prophets

  ---

  Page 77

  the less, all the Books of the New Testament, as they are received and as we account them as canonical.

• 7 That the Old and New Testament are in harmony with each other; that in both everlasting life is offered to mankind by Christ, who is the only mediator between God and man.
• 8 OF ORIGINAL SIN. We believe that original sin, standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians vainly say), but in the corruption of the nature of every man, that is naturally of the offspring of Adam.
• 9 OF FREE WILL. The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and work to faith, and calling on God. Wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasing and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ assisting us that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will.
• 10 OF JUSTIFICATION. We are accounted righteous before God only for the merits of Jesus Christ, by faith and not for our own works or deserving; wherefore that we are justified by faith only, which is a most wholesome doctrine and full of comfort.
• 11 OF GOOD WORKS. Although good works, which are the fruits of saving faith, and follow justification, they cannot put away our sins and endure the severity of God's judgments, yet they are pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ and spring out of a

  ---

  Page 78

  true lively faith, insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently seen as a tree is known by its fruits.

• 12 OF WORK OF SUPEREROGATION. Voluntary works, besides, over and above God's commandments, which are called works of Supererogation, cannot be taught without arrogance and impiety, for by them men do declare, that they do not only render unto God as they are bound to do, but that they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is required, whereas Christ saith, when ye have done all that ye can, as command you, ye are unprofitable servants.
• 13 OF SIN AFTER JUSTIFICATION. Not every sin willingly committed after justification is a sin against the Holy Ghost. For other fundamental Methodist doctrine of faith entertained by us see our Book of Discipline.

        Secondly. OUR GENERAL RULES OR FORM OF GODLINESS:

        This section of our Ecclesiastical Economy embraces the general rules or form of Godliness by which all persons connecting with our church give:

• 1 The most solemn attestations of their religious sincerity, and desire of salvation;
• 2 It is intended to interpose all possible restraints upon carnal indulgences that tend to stifle the spirit of religious aspiration and Christian devotion, and alienate the heart from God, and that would chill the spiritual affections;
• 3 The said form of Godliness is intended to

  ---

  Page 79

  secure a distinction between the religious confessor of our church and the ungodly; it draws a line of social discrimination between the world and the church.

• 4 It is to aid the professor of religion in the devotion of his soul, body and spirit to the service of God.
• 5 In this form of Godliness are ritual injunctions laid, that promote religious devotional duties of the confessor in the church, that tend to perpetuate in him a constant desire for Spiritual Communion with God, and which cherish in him a perpetual religious zest. For a full and detailed account of our Form of Godliness, see our Discipline.

        Thirdly. THE TEMPORAL ECONOMY OF OUR CHURCH.

• 1 The conveyance of property. In our original temporal economy, our church property was deeded to the Trustees, held in trust for the members of each local society. The trustees themselves being members of the church or society. Our present form of conveyance deeds our church property to trustees held in trust, for the ministers in conference, and members of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in America, giving the ministers in conference an equal claim with the local members, to the church property of the connection.
• 2 The second feature of our temporal economy is our official provisions. The first grade of officers is STEWARDS. They are constituted by the Quarterly conference, holding office for one year. They

  ---

  Page 80

  fill the functions of incorporated trustees, where our societies or churches are not incorporated by law. They take charge of the temporalities of the society.

• 3 TRUSTEES ARE THE SECOND GRADE OF OFFICIALS. Trustees are elected by the members of the society; they are to serve according to the statute of the particular state as provided for incorporating religious society. They are amenable to state law and also to the Quarterly Conference, a local court of the church or society for their official and moral conduct. They take full control of the temporal interests and church property of the church society they serve. They are elected annually. Their line of duty is laid down in our Book of Discipline.

        OUR ECCLESIASTICAL ECONOMY. The Hierarchical arrangements, clerical and common licentiates are as follows:

• 1 Exhorters. They are religious public Speakers, licensed, by the Quarterly Conference, a local court of the society. For particulars on their appointment, see our Book of Discipline.
• 2 Local Preachers. A higher order of Licentiates, they are licensed by the same local court of the society, to preach as local clergymen.
• 3 Itinerant Preachers. Are those sent out by an Annual Conference, appointed by a bishop to their field of labor, to collect and organize societies, and to serve those already organized as pastors. In relation to them see our Book of Discipline.
• 4 Ordained Ministers. Consisting of two

  ---

  Page 81

  orders, as Deacons and Elders, sacredly set apart by the church, and elected by the Annual Conference, and ordained by Elders and a Bishop, by the imposition of hands.

• 5 Our Bishops. A third modern Episcopal order in the Christian church. They are elected by the General Conference, consecrated and installed into that office, and appointed to their diocese by that body. The Bishop remains in office during good standing and efficiency for duty. Until 1880 he was quadrennially elected, but at that time the quadrennial election was abolished. The title of our Episcopal officers was changed in the General Conference of 1868, from Superintendent to Bishop, in the modern sense, as used by Episcopal Methodists.

        Although bigots have questioned the Christian authenticity or validity of our Bishopric, the ablest writers on primitive Church Government sustain the ground upon which we base our Episcopal economy; writers whom we have already mentioned in this work.

        That elders can ordain elders, legitimately, or can constitute or set apart a modern Bishop, no one can successfully controvert. That elders and presbyters were the only two sacred orders in the primative Christian Church, is a settled point with the best Biblical expositors. That elders and presbyters were in the primative church also styled Bishops, and exercised similar functions to those of a Methodist Bishop, as far as was necessary in that period of the church, is

also fully established by scripture. Elders, or presbyters, regulated in the primitive Christian Church or churches their ecclesiastical interests, as do the executives that we now set apart and entitle Bishops, who are our general overseers. Let us examine the word Bishop, derived from the Saxon word Biscop. The Saxon word is a corruption of the latinized Greek word, Episcopus. Its analogy to the second and third sylables of the latter is obvious. Then the English word Bishop is derived from the Saxon word Biscop, which is from the latin word Episcopus, which is from the Greek word Episkopos, which Greek word signifies an Overseer or Superintendent. Thus the word from which we get our English word Bishop, was used by the Apostle to express or represent the office or function of an elder in the church of God, and of no higher office. The word Bishop, is used five times in the New Testament, and in each case, it is evidently synonymous with Presbyter or Elder (Acts xx. 17-28). Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops in our English text: in the Greek text Episkopos: which means overseers or superintendents. In the seventeenth verse the Apostle sent for the Elders or ordained Ministers and in the twenty-eighth verse he reminds them of their high relation to the church as ordained ministers, they were overseers or superintendents or Bishops, all being synonymous terms. Again Phil. i. 1. Here he addresses the church at Philippi.

• 1 The members, whom he calls saints.
• 2 Then the Bishops and Deacons. Surely if the Bishops had been a separate and distinct order of the ministry of the church from elders or presbyters he would not have passed them in his address and descended to the Deacons, the order below elders in the church. See A. Steven's (of M. E. C.) work. In Titus i. 7, it is said, "For a Bishop must be blameless as the steward of God," The Apostle had left Titus in Crete to organize the Christian converts into churches, and ordain Pastors among them. He describes the qualifications of these Pastors. What were those Pastors? were they Elders? He tells us in the fifth verse, "For this cause left I thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city." After describing the necessary qualifications of these elders, he assigns the reasons thata Bishop or Episkopos or an overseer, must be blameless. That a Bishop and an elder were indentical, what could be more evident. The word occurs again (1 Tim. iii. 2). "A Bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife."

        "The Apostle in this chapter, instructs Timothy respecting the qualifications of a Bishop and then immediately describes those of a Deacon without a single reference to presbyters though these were an unquestionable order of pastors in the Ancient Church and though he was expressly directing Timothy in the appointment of its necessary officers. This fact in connection with the passages already examined

renders it evident, that he called presbyters Bishops; and that he did not neglect them by oversight." (See Coleman on Primitive Church, also Rev. Abel Stevens of the M. E. Church, and also Dr. Campbell, the able writer on Philosophy of Rhetoric).

        Now, if it be admitted, which it must be, that the elders were the highest order of pastors and Gospel ministers in the Christian church, then it must be admitted that there is no higher ordaining power than they are in the church since the Apostles' time, and that they were an ordaining power in the time of the Apostles, then elders have the power to ordain elders and to appoint them as local Bishops, which elders or presbyters, were in the primitive church, and with the consent of the churches they had power to appoint an elder or presbyter or Bishop (which were synonymous terms in the scripture), over several local churches, and the elder so appointed would be a Bishop in a general sense and in accordance with our more modern Episcopacy.

        The source of ordination in the Zion's Connection. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in America, obtained its ordination from the M. E. Church, (the Mother Church); our first ordination of elders was by elders, ordained in the M. E. C. who were in good standing, and those elders, ordained in our church by them, established our Episcopacy; establishing it upon the same principles our Mother Church (the M. E. Church) established her Episcopacy.

We have the great satisfaction and pleasure, to kn