"THE APPLICATION OF PERFECTIONISM TO POLITICS":
POLITICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL ABOLITIONISM IN THE BURNEDOVER DISTRICT 1

by
Douglas M. Strong

In 1839, a conservative political commentator and former Presbyterian clergyman named Calvin Colton2 wrote a scathing attack on the antislavery movement.3 He warned his readers that the abolitionists were attempting to "remodel political society" according to fanatical perfectionist religious notions. Colton was not averse to individuals preaching Christian perfection in the confines of their own churches (although he did not believe in the doctrine himself). But he felt it was reckless for moral reformers, particularly abolitionists, to try "to introduce perfectionism into the social system." Colton's anxiety was not without foundation, for at this time many abolitionists confidently believed that their antislavery endeavors were helping to fulfill God's design for "a perfect state of society."4

In their efforts to bring about the consummation of a perfected post millennial society,5 some abolitionists broadened their familiar tactic of non-coercive "moral suasion" to include a more activistic political strategy.6 Specifically the abolitionists considered forming a third political party, since their traditional Whig and Democratic parties were unwilling to take a firm stand against slavery. The proposed new party was designed to be a self-consciously perfectionist political organization. Its expressed purpose was the abolition of slavery and other social evils as a preliminary step to the establishment of the government of God on earth.7 Colton was fearful of this intrusion of a religious agenda into the realm of civil affairs, believing that it was the insidious result of "the application of perfectionism to politics."8

Four years later, Colton wrote another tract against political abolitionism.9 This second attack was even more contemptuous than the first, because the dreaded abolitionist political organization about which he forewarned in 1839 was, in 1843, an established third party, the Liberty party.10 Colton was alarmed because the vote totals of the Liberty party were expanding by geometric proportions every year.11 Many "Liberty men" (as the members of this party were called) were hopeful that they would be the majority party in the North by 1848.12 Since Liberty votes were drawn away from the traditional parties,l3 Whig and Democratic political pundits were concerned.14 But more ominous than the electoral strength of political abolitionism according to Colton, was the threat caused by the combination of political abolitionism with ecclesiastical abolitionism.

"Ecclesiastical abolitionism''15 was an effort among antislavery advocates to withdraw from their denominations (which they deemed to be "pro-slavery") and to reorganize themselves into pure, independent "Abolition Churches.''l6 Colton accused these antislavery congregations of being "chiefly devoted" to the advancement of the Liberty party. It was they he charged, who "have taken lead, and are at the head of the [political abolitionist] movement." Such ecclesiastical partisanship, Colton believed, was a dangerous "junction of religion and political power." Consequently, he felt that the Liberty party deserved to be publicly stigmatized as an "Abolition Church" rather than treated as a traditional political party.17

Colton's accusation was designed as a criticism, but the "Liberty men" were not bothered by it. They would have been proud of his identification of the Liberty party with the abolition churches. William Goodell, for example, a prominent Liberty party leader, stated that "the 'political abolitionists,' especially in Central and Western New York, where that movement originated, are the very men who have . . . tak[en] measures for seceding and organization new churches."18 According to these abolitionists, a holy life and a holy society could only be realized after Christians separated from impure institutions. They believed that they needed to "come out"19 of the unholy structures that existed both in the church and in the state. Ecclesiastical abolitionism, as expressed in "come-outer" antislavery congregations, and political abolitionism, as expressed in the "come-outer" Liberty party, were two manifestations of the same movement. And the underlying theological impetus for this religious/political movement was the doctrine of Christian perfection.

The geographic focus for this unusual alliance was upstate New York an area that had already gained a reputation for being "burnedover" by the recurrent revival fires kindled by the preaching of Charles Finney and others.20 In the early 1830's, a number of itinerating ministers openly began to preach perfectionism in the Presbyterian churches21 of this burnedover district. The best known of these peripatetic perfectionist preachers was Luther Myrick.22 By 1834, rumors of Myrick's deviation from Reformed orthodoxy had circulated sufficiently to have him brought up on formal charges before the Oneida Presbytery. Fellow clergymen accused Myrick of denying "every doctrine which distinguishes the Presbyterian church from the Methodist." Consequently, at the trial the Presbytery demanded that Myrick preach a sermon to them to prove his soundness in matters of theology. Never one to shrink from a challenge, Myrick chose to preach to his ministerial colleagues on their need for "Bible perfection." The account of the trial records that "the presbytery members were very uneasy and restless" during the message. We are not surprised to learn that Myrick was summarily suspended from the Presbyterian ministry following this sermon.23

Myrick's unpleasant experience with the Presbytery led him to believe that denominational creeds and regional judicatories were evil. Such institutional trappings perpetuated sinful sectarian divisions and forced compliance to outdated doctrines. The major sects were "almost universally the stout defenders of the doctrine that saints cannot live without sin in the present life. Upon this principle they attempt to justify their party divisions."24 Denominational structures interposed an artificial, human-made authority between individuals and God, a barrier which inhibited the free investigation of religious truth. As Myrick stated: "ecclesiastical judicatories and sectarian churches deny to the people of God the right of private judgment in matters of religion."25 When a person's conscience was restricted by adherence to such hierarchical authorities, that person was not free to lead a sanctified life. Obeying the rulings of one's denomination (forbidding abolitionism, for example) would hinder one from fully obeying God's law.26

For Myrick and other abolitionist come-outers, the institution of slavery became a paradigm for tyrannical institutions that existed throughout the society.27 In particular, the legal despotism that was enslaving African Americans was compared to the "spiritual despotism" that was enslaving evangelical Americans. "The chains of sectarianism bind the souls of God's children as the chains of Southern tyrants bind the bodies of men."28 The fact that the major denominations refused to condemn slaveholders was simply an illustration of the fetters that they imposed upon the human conscience.

This ecclesiastical tyranny, according to the seceders, was most vividly illustrated by the prescribed doctrines and authoritative judicatories of the denominations. Consequently, sectarian institutions were considered inherently sinful, especially large, connectional denominations such as Presbyterianism and Methodism.29 God's government could not be established through the instrumentality of these human constructs. And since traditional ecclesiastical institutions were deemed sinful, the only recourse for Christians seeking to live a holy life was to "come out" and be separated from the impurity.30

Ecclesiastical abolitionists were determined to replace the "spiritual despotism" of their old, impure denominations with the "spiritual democracy" of reorganized and purified congregations."31 Myrick established the first of these democratic, independent, antislavery congregations in 1836.32 Following Myrick's example, further secessions from Presbyterian churches resulted in scores of abolitionist congregations.33 Since Myrick's desire was to break down sectarian distinctions and to unify all sanctified Christians, his followers became known as "Unionists," and Unionist congregations were known as "Union churches."34 Critics, however, claimed that Myrick's ideas led to "disunion" far more than union, and that this group was simply another denomination composed of those who allegedly did not believe in any denominations.35

The new Union churches were dedicated to holiness and to individual freedom of conscience. Personal holiness was to be demonstrated by one's commitment to social reforms such as antislavery36 and "spiritual democracy.37 Liberty of conscience would occur when each congregation renounced its allegiance to external authorities such as a creed or a denomination. Every church was completely independent, and polity decisions were to be strictly congregational.38 Although Unionists attended regional conventions of like-minded abolitionists, they declared that these meetings had no "binding authority' over individual congregations. The Unionists believed that the power exercised by ecclesiastical bodies above the local level would inevitably become corrupt. They considered any union of sectarian judicatories as a sinful, human-made creation. A union of individual churches, however, would occur naturally if believers would only live out sanctified lives.39 Thus the Unionist dictum: "perfect holiness and unity of the saints."40

In the early 1840's, Myrick's influence over the Union churches was overshadowed by that of William Goodell, a leading political and ecclesiastical abolitionist.41 Goodell was the one who spearheaded the Unionists into an active role in support of the Liberty party. With his encouragement the Abolition Churches became, as Calvin Colton declared, "chiefly devoted" to the advancement of political abolitionism.42 The perfectionist reasoning that led abolitionists to ecclesiastical secession now led them further to political secession.

Both Myrick and Goodell intended that Unionism would embrace and unify come-outer abolitionists from every sect. In practice, though, Union churches were composed predominantly of ex-Presbyterians.43 Instead of joining the Union churches, abolitionists from the other major evangelical denominations seceded and formed their own come-outer groups. These other groups, similar to the Unionists, were committed to supporting the Liberty party and to preaching the doctrine of Christian perfection. They also accepted the principle of "spiritual democracy" concurring with Myrick and Goodell, that sectarian hierarchies were divisive and despotic.

The other ecclesiastical come-outers, however, were not as anti-institutional as the Unionists. While they agreed with the Unionists that the power wielded by translocal organizations needed to be carefully circumscribed, they were not willing to dismantle all regional and national ecclesiastical structures.44 One non-Unionist come-outer, for example, believed that a limited ecclesiastical organization beyond the local congregation could be helpful in promoting "greater uniformity and efficiency" in the work of perfecting the society. At the same time, though, he reminded churches not to "allow their personal identity and rights to be swallowed up in the power" of any denominational organization.45

These other (non-Unionist) ecclesiastical abolitionist groups hailed from a broad spectrum of evangelical denominations in the burnedover district.46 Abolitionist Baptists, for instance, withdrew from their regional associations and formed independent "Anti-Slavery Baptist" churches.47 Other antislavery Baptists became affiliated with the Free Baptist Connection,48 a group which (in New York state at least) became a strong advocate for both the Liberty party49 and entire sanctification.50 Abolitionist Quakers in New York withdrew from their denomination, too. They formed a new group which was dedicated to perfectionist theology, antislavery politics, and a democratic church polity.51

A separate Lutheran abolitionist group was organized also, called the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod.52 Like the other ecclesiastical abolitionists, the members of this new Lutheran synod adhered to the concept of "spiritual democracy"; thus they insisted that the Synod's resolutions were to be regarded as "merely advisory" for its member congregations.53 The abolitionist Franckean Lutherans also maintained that a person's commitment to "holiness" would include the "carrying out [of] political principles."54 The particular political affiliation that they encouraged, and that was motivated by their advocacy of Christian perfection, was the Liberty party.55

The largest ecclesiastical abolitionist group in New York was the Wesleyan Methodist Connection.56 Methodists57 from various regions had, for several years, been seeking both civil democracy (the abolition of slavery) and spiritual democracy (the abolition of denominational authoritarianism). Toward this end, Methodist abolitionists in central New York held several "Seceding Methodist Conventions" in 1841.58

One of the guiding personalities behind these secessionist meetings was Wesley Bailey, an antislavery associate of Luther Myrick.59 Bailey established a weekly newspaper for the Liberty party in 1842. At the same time, he also became a leader of a congregation of come-outer Methodists in Utica, New York.60 The congregation was founded to counteract the "pro-slavery character" and the despotic "government of the [Methodist Episcopal] church.''61 A year later, in 1843, this influential Utica congregation offered to host yet another convention for seceding abolitionist Methodists, the convention which formally established the Wesleyan Methodist Connection. Indicating their desire for broad abolitionist unity, the organizers of the Utica convention invited Methodists and "all other Christian believers" who were "in favor of forming a Church free from Episcopacy and Slavery."62 By stating their opposition to "despotism" in both civil and religious institutions, the Wesleyan Methodists went on record as ecclesiastical abolitionists. In order to establish a sanctified society, the Wesleyans believed, both the church and the state needed to cease their oppression of the human spirit.

The Wesleyan Methodists' commitment to ecclesiastical abolitionism was based on their understanding of Christian perfection. "Holiness," they declared at the Utica convention, was to be their "motto."63 In order to emphasize their reliance on the doctrine of perfection, the first General Conference of the new Connection, in 1844, proposed to add an article on "Sanctification" to their Discipline. The article affirmed that sanctified believers would be delivered from the "pollution and reigning power of sin,"64 thus enabling persons to be consistently dedicated to personal and social reform.

This disciplinary article of the Wesleyans was similar to the perfectionist statements of the other antislavery come-outers. The abolitionist Franckean Lutherans declared that the Holy Ghost could "sanctify the soul, and perfect our holiness."65 The Free Baptists stated that "entire sanctification in this life, is both the privilege and the duty of every Christian, . . . a work of God's grace, by which the soul is cleansed from all the pollutions of sin."66

The leading Unionists also affirmed entire sanctification. Myrick constantly linked unionism with perfectionism; "holiness is the bond of Christian Union," he believed.67 Goodell similarly preached that "to be wholly sanctified is to be wholly free from sin."68

The common thread in all of these early holiness statements by the various ecclesiastical abolitionists was their stress on ethical earnestness as the visible fruit of entire sanctification. For the Wesleyan Methodists, holiness of heart and life provided believers with the "moral power to oppose the evils and corruption in the world." Such sanctified moral power equipped each person to be a "zealous advocate of every branch of moral reform."69 Thus the earliest Wesleyans were particular about the purpose of sanctification (specifically regarding political and ecclesiastical abolition70) while remaining relatively vague about the process by which this sanctification was attained. In a similar vein, Myrick wrote that holiness made Unionists "efficient laborers in the kingdom of Christ."71 Likewise, Goodell and other Unionists insisted that entire sanctification would result in the fulfillment of one's "political duties."72

Ecclesiastical abolitionists spoke about Christian perfection in terms of its practical effect on their efforts for political and ecclesiastical reform. Beyond this commonly perceived goal for entire sanctification, however, there was a certain lack of precision regarding the formulation of holiness doctrine.73 The 1844 Wesleyan disciplinary article, for example, was not as particular as later Wesleyan Methodist definitions of entire sanctification. In 1848, the Wesleyans changed the 1844 General Conference article to a more definitive wording, but even that wording was not as precise a statement as those that developed later in the Holiness movement, statements that insisted on the necessity of a crisic, second work of grace. The earliest Wesleyans stressed specific reform activities as normative for one's entire sanctification, while later Wesleyans stressed the normativeness of a prescribed mode for one's reception of entire sanctification.74

Although all of the ecclesiastical abolitionists affirmed that perfection in love was attainable in this life, and that total obedience was an obligation for Christians to pursue, they did not dwell on the details of the sanctification experience itself Goodell criticized those who tried to describe entire sanctification as "consist[ing] mainly . . . in sensations or emotions" without "being perfect in obedience."75 Among ecclesiastical abolitionists, the doctrine of holiness was advocated without insisting on a uniform manner in which it was to be acquired. "It is our duty to labor and pray for entire sanctification of all believers," Goodell said, "without demanding to know precisely when and how" it occurs. The controversies on the subject, he concluded, were "less profitable than curious."76 In the 1840's, this relative indefiniteness allowed ecclesiastical abolitionists from various denominational backgrounds to work together toward common ethical goals with little doctrinal squabbling.77 Only later would the development of more definitive perfectionist formulations cause division among ecclesiastical/political abolitionists.78

During the most visible years for ecclesiastical abolitionism, from 1840 to 1845, there was a significant coherence in the theological views and in the reformatory endeavors of the various come-outer groups. Ecclesiastical abolitionists articulated a common perfectionist rationale for their denominational withdrawals. They were committed to the unity of all abolitionist come-outers, as evidenced by their shared pastoral leadership and their joint use of each other's church facilities.79 They developed an elaborate network of cooperative abolitionist schools, periodicals, conventions, and itinerating lecturers.80 There was, in short, a flurry of ecclesiastical abolitionist activity in the early 1840's which culminated in their collaborative efforts on behalf of the Liberty party.

It was common sense, ecclesiastical abolitionists reasoned, for those who seceded from their churches to secede from their political parties. Goodell noted that the "Anti-Slavery secession and reorganization of churches" was "the fundamental principle upon which the Liberty party [was] founded."81 Since ecclesiastical abolitionists considered their traditional "pro-slavery" religious institutions to be despotic, it was logical for them to view their traditional "pro-slavery" political institutions in the same light.82 Until sanctified Christians refused to sustain the morally corrupt Whig and Democratic parties, slavery could not be abolished and God's perfected state of society could not be established. Wesleyan Methodists were admonished to "see the inconsistency of leaving a pro-slavery church, [while] still holding on to political parties who are sold to slavery."83 Instead of acting inconsistently, perfectionist abolitionists were urged to "come out" from political impurity and support the Liberty party.

This perfectionist justification for political abolitionism can be better understood by using an interpretation provided for us by Donald Scott.84 Scott has demonstrated how the earliest reformers who argued for the immediate abolition of slavery in the 1830's appropriated the theological discourse of revivalistic evangelicalism. These reformers drew a parallel between their conversion experience and their acceptance of antislavery; as reborn abolitionists, they repented of past pro-slavery behavior and vowed to lead a renewed life of antislavery agitation. We can extend Scott's thesis to demonstrate that, similarly, those who argued for the more specific tactic of political abolition in the 1840's appropriated the more specific theological discourse of perfectionism. "Liberty men" drew a parallel between their entire sanctification and their antislavery voting. The abolition vote was a recording of one's spiritual choice against sin and for holiness.

A Liberty ballot became a practical and definitive way for abolitionists to exhibit their sanctified resolve.85 Goodell, for example, criticized holiness preachers who thought that entire sanctification was "too spiritually minded to plead the cause of the oppressed"those who "consider it quite too profane and secular, to discharge the duties of political life." To the contrary, Goodell believed that to be entirely sanctified was to be actively obedient, including direct political involvement.86 He agreed with Luther Lee, who was the most prominent early Wesleyan Methodist leader in New York. Lee urged the Wesleyans "to vote the Liberty ticket as a religious duty."87 For ecclesiastical abolitionists who were going on to perfection, their religious duty required a specific political act. A vote in favor of a Liberty party candidate was a vote against sin.

The Liberty party was frank about its perfectionist stance. The party's ultimate intent, for instance, was stated as keeping "all men from all sin." Liberty candidates were expected to have a more "righteous moral character" than those endorsed by other parties. Liberty party conventions assumed that those who ran for office under their label would "perfect their walk" before God, and at least some Liberty voters were convinced "that their favorite candidates [were] absolutely sinless."88

Since most of the "Liberty men" in the burnedover district were ecclesiastical abolitionists, it is not surprising that so many leaders of the party espoused the doctrine of entire sanctification. Many influential "Liberty men" were Unionists, and some of them were pastors of the perfectionist Union churches in their communities.89 Liberty party leaders also belonged to the other ecclesiastical abolitionist groups such as the Franckean Lutherans, the Free Baptists, and the Wesleyan Methodists, each of which promoted Christian holiness. The Free Baptists estimated that "a large majority" of their number voted for antislavery candidates.90 The newspaper of the Wesleyan Methodists likewise asserted that "in most cases" their membership voted for the Liberty slate.91 Wesley Bailey served as the Chairman of the Wesleyans' Utica district while concurrently editing The Liberty Press, the mouthpiece of the Liberty party in central New York.92 Luther Lee was engaged in Liberty campaigning while ministering to New York State Wesleyans.93 By their increased Liberty party involvement and interaction, the networking that was already present among the various ecclesiastical abolitionists during the early 1840's became even more extensive by the middle of the decade.

In the space of only a few years, both ecclesiastical and political abolitionism grew remarkably in the burnedover district. Secessionist antislavery churches were formed from out of every evangelical denomination. The abolitionist Franckean Lutherans announced that "revival has succeeded revival" a phenomenon which was connected, they were convinced, with the greater efforts being extended for holiness and moral reform.94

These ecclesiastical abolitionist increases were in addition to the tremendous growth in Liberty vote support. In just one quadrennium as an organized political party, the Liberty party's electoral strength reached a plurality in some New York communities.95 Certainly, as the Franckean Lutherans reported, the "antislavery enterprise has advanced beyond the expectations . . . of its most sanguine friends."96

The heady excitement and anticipation within the ecclesiastical/political abolitionist movement reached its zenith in 184344. The various secessions, civil and religious, indicated to many "a signal crisis in the history of the church."97 Surely, Goodell surmised, "another era has dawned."98

The climax of these events occurred in December 1843 at a General Convention for ecclesiastical abolitionists held in Syracuse.99 The purpose of the gathering was to lay the groundwork for a grand, inclusive "General Evangelical Secession" of all perfectionistic, politically-abolitionist come-outers. It was hoped that the convention would unify the many antislavery congregations which had separated from the various evangelical denominations. On the roll of those who organized and attended this convention were the names of all of the major Liberty party leaders in New York State, as well as leading representatives from each of the largest ecclesiastical abolitionist groups the Unionists, the Free Baptists, and the Wesleyan Methodists.100 They were drawn together by their common commitment to holiness and by their shared interpretation of entire sanctification as a theological justification for innovative antislavery activities such as church reform and outright political campaigning.

It is significant that Wesleyan Methodist leader Luther Lee was an active participant and speaker at the convention.101 Lee had long been attracted to the ideals of spiritual democracy and abolitionist unity.102 Consequently, he was displeased with some of the ecclesiastical structures and regulations which the new Wesleyan Connection carried over from Episcopal Methodism.

Lee opposed these regulations at the Wesleyans' organizational convention in Utica earlier that year, feeling that such rules were inconsistent with God's design for a democratic, congregational polity.103 Burnedover district Wesleyan Methodists, like Lee, hoped that their Connection would merge into the larger ecclesiastical abolitionist organization now being proposed. In fact, Goodell was informed by some Wesleyans that if his Unionists would only give up their remaining vestiges of sectarianism, the Wesleyan Methodists in New York state would "try to do the same, and join us."104

Such religious cooperation was unprecedented. It was based on a common perfectionist dedication to ecclesiastical reorganization and Liberty party support, an agreement on ethical commitments rather than on sectarian doctrines. Contemporary observers were struck by the potential power of a movement which unified the religious and political reform efforts of abolitionists.105 One wrote:

This is a remarkable juncture in the affairs of the church and civil society. There seems to be a "turning and overturning," preparatory to some great events. The curtain of the future is rising, and new scenes in the moral government of God in this world are developing themselves.106

Seemingly, a "political millennium"l07 (as Goodell termed it) was at hand. In retrospect, these events did represent the high-water mark of postmillennial optimism and perfectionist social reform in the antebellum burnedover district.

After the mid-1840's, however, ecclesiastical and political abolitionism encountered troubled times. The influence of the Liberty party and the secessionist churches declined precipitously after their few halcyon days. The Syracuse convention, for example, did not succeed in uniting abolitionist come-outers into one "General Evangelical Secession," since the Wesleyan Methodists were not convinced that the Unionists would give up their Presbyterian practices.108 In any case, most Union churches disbanded within five to ten years.109 Along with the other ecclesiastical abolitionist groups, they had difficulty maintaining their earlier fervor and uncompromising ethical agenda.110 The disillusioned remnant of these groups continued to espouse the doctrine of entire sanctification, but without its earlier political overtones.

Likewise, the Liberty organization declined in the late 1840's as non-perfectionist professional politicians began to exert power within the party.111 Regardless of its short duration, however, Calvin Colton's analysis of political abolitionism was correct: the Liberty party was "the application of perfectionism to politics."

As a result of this exploration into the "remarkable juncture"112 of political and ecclesiastical abolitionism, it is appropriate to reexamine the character of antebellum evangelism. The 1840's were a time of religious transition and upheaval, during which the traditional Puritan/Presbyterian hegemony of American religion was being challenged. the formerly predominant Calvinist perspective was giving way to new religious configurations. Among the various competitors to this old orthodoxy was the perfectionism of political and ecclesiastical abolitionism.113

It is therefore important for historians of American religion to analyze the close antebellum connection that existed between those religious folk who were from traditionally Reformed backgrounds and those who were not. This blurring of longstanding theological lines, as represented by the joint Baptist, Methodist, and Presbyterian elements at the Syracuse ecclesiastical abolitionist convention, was indicative of shifting allegiances within American evangelicalism. All of the persons at that convention, whatever their theological heritage, shared a similar understanding of Christian perfection. They attested to a view of entire sanctification that was somewhat vague regarding precise doctrinal details but was unambiguous regarding the doctrine's ethical purpose. That is, they all believed that entire sanctification had direct implications for social and political reform.

This praxis-oriented vision of holiness brought together abolitionists of various denominational backgrounds, and caused come-outer Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, and Lutherans to assimilate one another's theological and ecclesiological concepts. For example, both the Franckean Lutherans and the Unionists (who were formerly Presbyterians) were accused of being "Methodists" because of their advocacy of holiness.114 And in another instance, the Wesleyan Methodists in New York borrowed their ecclesiological and ethical ideas from the Unionists.115 Luther Lee continued for years to press his agenda of merging the Wesleyans into a broader union of "spiritually democratic" Christians, an idea that was first proposed (among abolitionists) by Myrick, Goodell, and the Unionists. This crusade of Lee's for a larger denominational union was to have serious consequences for, and nearly caused the dissolution of, the Wesleyan Methodist Connection.116

The assimilating of ideas among perfectionist abolitionists suggests that a new evangelical consensus was emerging based on a mutual commitment to sanctified living.117 This new consensus was changing the alignments within the revivalistic tradition, and these changes had momentous implications for subsequent generations of evangelicals.

Notes

1This essay was made possible by a grant from the Wesleyan-Holiness Study Project, funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts.

2 0n Colton's life and career, see Alfred A. Cave, An American Conservative in the Age of Jackson: The Political and Social Thought of Calvin Colton (Ft. Worth: Texas Christian University Press,1969), especially vviii,3437, 4243. Although ordained as a Presbyterian, Colton became disillusioned with the revivalistic trends within that denomination and converted to Episcopalianism. He was also a spokesperson for conservative Whig politics.

3 Calvin Colton ["by a northern man," pseud.], Abolition a Seditzon (Philadelphia: G. W. Donahue, 1839), 114120.

4 Jonathan Blanchard, A Perfect State of Society (Oberlin, OH: James Steele, 1839). Within antebellum culture, there was both a general current of perfectionism in the society (see Ronald G. Walters American Reformers, 18151860 [New York: Hill and Wang, 1978], 1819, 28 39ff., 7275, 115) and a more specific propagation of the doctrine of Christian perfection among evangelicals (see Melvin Easterday Dieter, The Holiness Revival of the Nineteenth Century (Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1980, 1832; John L.Peters, Christian Perfection and American Methodism (New York: Abingdon Press, 1956), 97127; Protestantism on the Eve of the Civil War (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980), 10323.

5 Donald W. Dayton, "Millennial Views and Social Reform in Nineteenth Century America," in The Coming Kingdom: Essays in American Millennialism and Eschatology, ed. M. Darrol Bryant and Donald W. Dayton (Barrytown, NY: International Religious Foundation, 1983), 13147.

6 0n the transition from "moral suasion" to political abolitionism, see Aileen S. Kraditor, Means and Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison and His Critics on Strategy and Tactics, 18341850 (New York: Pantheon Books, 1967), and Lewis Perry, Radical Abolitionism: Anarchy and the Government of God in Antislavery Thought (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1973), 15887.

7 The "moral government of God" was a theological concept which had a wide currency in the early republic It stressed the free choice of each believer to accept or reject sin, and this correlated nicely with democratic ideas of American government. Abolitionists appropriated this concept for their own uses, God's intended moral government became identified with a perfected American government that was free from the sin of slavery. See Donald H. Meyer, The Instructed Conscience: The Shaping of the American National Ethic (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1972), 89107.

8 Colton, Abolition a Sedition, 114.

9 Calvin Colton ["Junius," pseud.], "Political Abolition," The Junius Tracts (New York: Greely & McElrath, 1844), 6580.

10 The history of the Liberty party is treated in Theodore Clarke Smith, The Liberty and Free Soil Parties in the Northwest (New York: Longrnans, Green, and Co,1897),27104; Richard H. Sewell, Ballots For Freedom: Antislavery Politics in the United States, 18371860 (New York: Oxford University Press,1976),43138; John L. Hammond, The Politics of Benevolence: Revival Religion and American Voting Behavior (Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing, 1979), 68105; Alan M. Kraut, "The Forgotten Reformers: A Profile of Third Party Abolitionists in Antebellum New York," in Antislavery Reconsidered: New Essays on the Abolitionists, ed. Lewis Perry and Michael Fellman (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1979), 11945; idem, "Partisanship and Principles: The Liberty Party in Antebellum Political Culture," chap. in Crusaders and Compromisers: Essays on the Relationship of the Antislavery Struggle to the Antebellum Party System (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1983), 7199; and John R. McKivigan, "Vote As You Pray and Pray As You Vote: Church-Oriented Abolitionism and Antislavery Politics" in ibid, 18191.

11 For the growth in the Liberty vote in the early 1840's, see Theodore Clarke Smith, op. cit,, 46, 71; Sewell op. cit., 7479, 110; Lee Benson, The Concept of Jacksonian Democracy: New York as a Test Case (Princeton Princeton University Press, 1961), 13335, and John R. Hendricks, "The Liberty Party in New York State, 18361848" (unpublished PhD. diss., Fordham University, 1959),194ff.

12 "The Right Sort of Politics," Emancipator Extra (14 September 1843): 1.

13 In New York State, the Liberty party drew its strength mostly from the Whigs. See Benson, op. cit., 13336.

14 Colton was only one of many Whig politicians who were apprehensive about the ever-increasing Liberty drain on their electoral strength. Whigs in Wyoming County, New York, for example, were "badly scared," because the Liberty men had "made sad havoc in our party." Western New Yorker (8 November 1843).

15 The term "ecclesiastical abolitionist" was coined by William Goodell in the Christian Investigator (5 [July 1847]: 426), a paper which he edited. Goodell was the pastor of an independent antislavery church in Honeoye, NY, and an active political abolitionist.

16 Some of these antislavery congregations were explicitly called "Abolition churches" (see Organization and Membership of the Free Church of Sherburne, 18471856 [n.p.: n.d., TMs in New York State Library, Albany, NY], 1) while others were known by this designation informally.

17 Colton used the term "Abolition Church" as a derogatory epithet for the Liberty party. See his "Political Abolition," The Junius Tracts, 7779.

18 Christian Investigator 5 (July 1847): 426.

19 This phrase was derived from II Corinthians 6:17, "Come out from among them, and be ye separate." See also Revelation 18:4.

20 See Whitney R. Cross, The Burnedover District: The Social and Intellectual History of Enthusiastic Religion in Western New York, 18001850 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1950). Political and ecclesiastical abolitionism existed beyond the burnedover district of upstate New York, but nowhere else with such intensity.

21 More precisely, these churches were "Presbygational"; that is, they had a mixed Presbyterian/Congregationalist polity, due to their formation as a result of combined home mission efforts under various Accommodation Plans and Plans of Union. See Philemon H. Fowler, Historical Sketch of Presbyterianism within the Bounds of the Synod of Central New York (Utica Curtiss and Childs, 1877), 5468.

22 0n Myrick's career, see Cross, op. cit., 19193, 23840. Some perfectionist preachers were led into doctrinal and behavioral extremes (of an antinomian variety) through the influence of John Humphrey Noyes and others. Myrick, however, insisted on an ethically strict brand of perfectionism which was quite similar to that preached by his Methodist neighbors. See George Walling ford Noyes, Religious Experience of John Humphrey Noyes (New York: The MacMillan Co., 1923), 190.

23 An Account of the Trial of Luther Myrick, Before the Oneida Presbytery (Syracuse: J. P. Patterson, 1834), iii, 46, 69. This manuscript is at the Presbyterian Historical Society, Philadelphia.

24 This statement was made by John Truair, one of Luther Myrick's associates "Was Paul A Sectarian?", The Union Herald, cited in The Christian Union 1 (May 1841): 11. Myrick was the editor of The Union Herald

25 The Union Herald 6 (17 June 1841): 29. It was pointed out that even the Methodist Episcopal Church, which affirmed perfectionist doctrine, nonetheless maintained a hierarchical denominational structure.

26 Ibid. 6 (20 May 1841): 9.

27 See Perry, 58.

28 George Storrs to Luther Myrick, in The Union Herald 6 (23 September 1841): 82. In a typically similar analogy, adherence to denominational hierarchies was referred to as "ecclesiastical slavery." The Christian Union 1 (August 1841): 61.

29 The Union Herald 6 (20 May 1841): 9; Orange Scott, The Methodist E. Church and Slavery (Boston: O. Scott, for The Wesleyan Methodist Connection. 1844). 90.

30 Ibid., 7298.

31 Christian Investigator 1 (May 1843): 31; ibid. 1 (July 1843): 42. The ideal of a "spiritual democracy" was not new. The "Christian Connection" and other groups had been encouraging greater democratization within American Christianity for several decades (see Nathan 0. Hatch, "The Christian Movement and the Demand for a Theology of the People," The Journal of American History 67 [December 1980]: 54567). However, Myrick and the Unionists were the first to connect the ideas of "spiritual democracy" with abolitionism, in an effort to bring democracy to all persons, both to individual Christians and to enslaved African-Americans.

32 Cross, op. cit., 19192.

33 During the next decade, approximately eighty antislavery congregations were organized as a result of secessions from the "Presbygational" churches in New York State. See Douglas M. Strong, "Organized Liberty: Evangelical Perfectionism, Political Abolitionism, and Ecclesiastical Reform in the BurnedOver District" (unpublished Ph.D. diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1990), 18485, 336.

34 The Christian Union 1 (May 1841): 10; Christian Palladium 8 (2 September 1839): 138; ibid 8 (1 October 1839): 169.

35 Ibid. 8 (1 October 1839): 170.

36The Union Herald 6 (6 May 1841): 5; ibid 6 (17 June 1841): 26.

37 Persons were expected to show their commitment to "spiritual democracy" by their activity in breaking down ecclesiastical hierarchies. Ibid 6 (26 August 1841): 70; The Christian Union 1 (May 1841): 11. Myrick could not understand how anyone could affirm a belief in entire sanctification without working for abolition and "spiritual democracy". "Holiness without Christian Union is like Christianity connected with slaveholding.... Slavery is sin, sectarianism is sin, and those who indulge in either sin against God." The Union Herald 6 (29 July 1841): 53.

38 Ibid. 6 (5 May 1841): 3; ibid 6 (29 July 1841): 51; Christian Investigator 1 (May 1843): 31; ibid 2 (July 1844): 146.

39 The Union Herald 6 (20 May 1841): 14; ibid 6 (1 July 1841): 38; The Christian Union 1 (July 1841): 4647. Free investigation would "produce a perfect unanimity in all points of evangelical truth, . . . a perfect visible communion!" Christian Palladium 7 (1 November 1838): 200.

40 The Christian Union 1 (May 1841): 11.

41 Myrick had a strident and vitriolic personality which alienated many Unionists (see The Union Herald 6 [20 May 1841]; 12. Also, Myrick's desire for broad Christian unity led him to fraternize with Unitarians and other persons considered unorthodox by the majority of come-outers (see ibid 6 [3 June 1841]: 21; ibid [1 July 1841]; 39; Christian Palladium 7 [15 September 1838]: 154; The Christian Union 1 [August 1841]: 60). Under Goodell's leadership, however, the Unionists became more explicitly "evangelical" (trinitarian) in their theology (see Christian Palladium 8 [15 October 1839]: 8687; ibid 8 [1 February 1840]: 297; Christian Investigator 2 [January 1844]: 100; ibid 2 [May 1844]; 13334. This debate over what constituted orthodoxy was indicative of what Ruth Alden Doan has called a "boundary crisis" at the edges of antebellum evangelicalism (see The Miller Heresy, Millennialism, and American Culture [Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987], 2426).

42 Colton, "Political Abolition," The Junius Tracts, 7779.

43 Christian Palladium 7 (1 October 1838): 161; ibid 7 (1 November 1838): 202; The Christian Union 1 (July 1841): 47.

44 The other come-outer groups also desired to maintain certain limited "denominational distinctions," such as their familiar, traditional names ("Methodist," "Lutheran," or "Baptist," for example). See The Union Herald 6 (26 August 1841): 68.

45 Luther Lee, "Church Government," True Wesleyan (5 August 1848), cited in Christian Investigator 6 (August 1848): 528. Lee and other upstate New York Wesleyan Methodists were critical of the polity of the new Wesleyan Methodist Connection because of some hierarchical trappings which were carried over from the polity of the Methodist Episcopal Church (see below).

46 John R. McKivigan, The War Against Proslavery Religion. Abolitionism and the Northern Churches, 18301865 (Ithaca Cornell University Press, 1984) describes these groups (93110) and mentions their support of the Liberty party (14748), but he does not explore the intimate connections between political abolitionism and "ecclesiastical abolitionism," nor does he understand the theological basis (i.e. the doctrine of Christian perfection) for this religio-political alliance.

47 The Liberty Press 3 (8 March 1845): 69; ibid 4 (13 December 1845); 23; Elliot G. Storke, History of Cayuga County, New York (Syracuse: D. Mason and Co., 1879), 294.

48 The Free Baptists in New York State were a merger of the Free Will Baptists and the Free (or Open) Communion Baptists (see J. M. Brewster, et.al., The Centennial Record of Freewill Baptists, 1780-1880 [Dover, NH: The Printing Establishment,1881],3132). The members of the merged group were comfortable calling themselves either "Free Baptists" or "Free Will Baptists."

49 The Liberty Press 3 (16 November 1844): 5; ibid 3 (15 November 1845): 59; Morning Star 18 (8 November 1843): 114; ibid 18 (18 October 1843): 103; G. A. Burgess and J. T. Ward, Free Baptist Cyclopaedia. Historical and Biographical (Chicago: The Women's Temperance Publication Association), 162, 601.

50 Free-Will Baptist General Conference, A Treatise on the Faith of the Free-Will Baptists: With an Appendix, Containing a Summary of Their Usages in Church Government, 4th Ed. (Dover, NH: Freewill Baptist Printing Establishment, 1848), 6872; J. J. Butler, Thoughts on the Benevolent Enterprises, Embracing the Subjects of Missions, Sabbath Schools, Temperance, Abolition of Slavery, and Peace (Dover, NH: The Trustees of the Freewill Baptist Connection,1840), 78; 172; Morning Star 16 (23 June 1841): 33; ibid. (1 December 1841): 127; ibid. 18 (23 August 1843): 69; Brewster, op. cit., 123.

51 Allen C. Thomas, "Congregational or Progressive Friends," Bulletin of Friends ' Historical Society of Philadelphia 10 (November 1920): 2132; Congregational Friends, Waterloo Yearly Meeting, Earnest and Affectionate Address to all people, and especially religious professors of every name, and an address to reformers; from the Yearly meeting of Congregational Friends, held at Waterloo N.Y. (Auburn: Oliphant's Press, 1849), 13, 16; Liberty Party Paper 2 (21 May 1851).

52 On the Franckean Synod, see Douglas C. Stange, Radicalism for Humanity: A Study of Lutheran Abolitionism (St. Louis: Oliver Slave, Ltd., 1970) and Harry J. Krieder, History of the United Lutheran Synod of New York and New England (Philadelphia Muhlenberg Press,1954). There were thirty-seven Franckean Lutheran churches in 1844, all in New York State (see Strong, "Organized Liberty," 336ff.).

53 Journal of the Second Annual Session of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod, Convened at Fordsbora Montgomery Ca, June 6, 1839 (Fort Plain, NY: Wm. L. Fish, 1839), 4, 21; Journal of the Third Annual Session of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod, Convened at Stone Mills, Jefferson Ca, June 4, 1840 (Fort Plain, NY: David Smith, 1840), 4, 9, 2122, 23; Journal of the Fourth Annual Session of the Evangelic Lutheran Synod, Convened at Seward, Schoharie County, N. Y., June 3d 1841 (Fort Plain, NY: Lutheran Press Association, 1841), 16.

54 Journal of the Third Annual Session, 23.

55 Lutheran Herald n.s. 1 (1844), cited in Stange, 25.

56On the history of the Wesleyan Methodists, see Ira Ford McLeister and Roy Stephen Nicholson, Conscience and Commitment: The History of the Wesleyan Methodist Church of America, 4th ed. (Marion, IN: The Wesley Press, 1976), 1452; Lee M. Haines and Paul William Thomas, An Outline History of the Wesleyan Church (Marion, IN: The Wesley Press, 1985); and Donald W. Dayton, Discovering an Evangelical Heritage (New York: Harper & Row,1976),7384. The membership of the 123 Wesleyan Methodist churches in New York State in the 1840's (see Strong, "Organized Liberty," 336) was approximately one-third of the denomination's total (see Lucius C. Matlack, The History of American Slavery and Methodism, from 1780 to 1849: An History of the Wesleyan Methodist Connection of America, In Two Parts, With an Appendix [New York: Lucius C. Matlack, 1849], 349).

57 These reformers included not only Methodist Episcopals but also Methodist Protestants and Reformed Methodists.

58 These conventions were held in Utica (Oneida County) and High Bridge (Town of Manlius, Onondaga County). High Bridge was the home of Wesley Bailey. The Union Herald 6 (15 July 1841): 47; Matlack, op. cit., 303.

59 With Myrick, Bailey published The Liberty Press and another antislavery paper called the Madison and Onondaga Abolitionist. Bailey was a leading Reformed Methodist (his father, Elijah Bailey, was one of the founders of that small denomination). Similar to Myrick, Wesley Bailey had strong convictions regarding "spiritual democracy" and the unity of abolitionist come-outers. He therefore sought to unite all anti-episcopal Methodists into one spiritually democratic group. See Wesley Bailey, "Reformed Methodist Church," in I. Daniel Rupp, ed., He Pasa Ekklesia. An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States (Philadelphia: J. Y. Humphreys, 1844), 46677.

60George Peglar is listed as the pastor, but Bailey must have had some pastoral role, as well (see McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 27, 29, 538; Matlack, op. cit., 334, 348; William Richards, compiler, The Utica City Directory, For 1844-45 [Utica H. H. Curtiss,1844],10,139). Bailey was persuaded to come to Utica by James DeLong, an active "Liberty man" and a Methodist come-outer (see The Utica Sunday Times 14 [1 March 1891]: 2. Cf. The Friend of Man 1 [28 July 1836]: 23; Christian Investigator 1 [December 1843]: 88).

61 Matlack, op. cit., 303.

62 Ibid., 332, 33845

63 Ibid., 343.

64 "Record of the Minutes of the Proceedings of the First General Conference of the Wesleyan Methodist Connection" (1844), 62, cited in McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 41.

65 Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod, Constitution and Standing Ordinances of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod Together With A Discipline, Recommended as a Guide for the Government of Churches (Cooperstown, NY: H. & E. Phinney, 1839), 1819. See also Journal of the Third Annual Session, 23.

66 Free Baptist General Conference, A Treatise on the Faith of the Free-Will Baptists: with an Appendix, Containing A Summary of Their Usages in Church Government, 4th ed. (Dover, NH: Freewill Baptist Printing Establishment, 1848), 6872.

67 The Union Herald 6 (12 October 1841): 101; ibid. (9 September 1841): 76: ibid (12 August 1841): 59.

68 William Goodell, "Entire Sanctification"[1850] (manuscript sermon in Goodell Papers, Berea College Archives, Berea, KY), 11. See also "Discussions on Perfection" [1844] (Goodell Papers).

69 Matlack, op. cit., 343.

70 A concern for ethical issues such as temperance and opposition to secret societies was also deemed essential for a sanctified life (see William H. Brackney, "The Fruits of a Crusade: Wesleyan Opposition to Secret Societies," Methodist History 17 [July 1979]: 23952).

71 The Union Herald 6 (26 August 1841): 70. Promulgation of the doctrine of entire sanctification without an insistence on demonstrable evidence of civil and ecclesiastical reform work was inconceivable to Myrick (see ibid. 6 [29 July 1841]: 53).

72 Goodell, "Discussions on Perfection" (Goodell Papers), 14. See also A Treatise on the Faith of the Free-Will Baptists, 7072, for the Free Baptists' declaration of the reformatory goal of sanctification.

73Compared to his insistence on applied sanctified living, Myrick was rather indifferent regarding particular holiness doctrines: "We make holiness of heart and life the test of fellowship.... We judge of men by their fruits, and not by what they believe" (Christian Palladium 8 [15 October 1839]: 186).

74 Peters, op. cit., 127; Haines and Thomas, op. cit., 34, 60; McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 50.

75 Goodell, "Entire Sanctification," 8.

76 Ibid, 23, 25.

77 0ther types of abolitionists (William Lloyd Garrison and John Humphrey Noyes, for example) differed greatly on the details of perfectionist doctrine, but among ecclesiastical abolitionists there was relative unconcern regarding the specific mode of the sanctification experience (see Perry, op. cit., 6370; Noyes, op. cit., 17885, 195210).

78 Free Baptists, for example, were closely associated with Wesleyan Methodists and other ecclesiastical abolitionists in the early 1840's (see McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 27; Morning Star 18 [6 September 1843]: 80; ibid 18 [21 November 1843]: 122). Later, however, the Wesleyans contended that sanctification always involved a crisis event while the Free Baptists viewed entire sanctification as a gradual progression in holiness. These more defined doctrines distanced the two groups.

79 Unionist, Wesleyan Methodist, Free Baptist, and Franckean Lutheran congregations regularly interchanged ministers, churches, and even denominational names with one another. Nicholas Van Alstine, Historical Review of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod of New York (Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1893), 12; Journal of the Third Annual Session, 7; Journal of the Fourth Annual Session, 10, 12; Journal of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod, Convened at West Sand Lake, Rensselaer Co, N.Y, June 1, 1843 (Albany: Albany Weekly Patriot Office, 1843),4; History of Oswego County, New York (Philadelphia: L. H. Everts and Co, 1877), 217, 432; Morning Star 15 (7 October 1840): 94; The Liberty Press 4 (29 November 1845): 15.

80 Young abolitionists from each of these ecclesiastical abolitionist groups were educated at Finney's Oberlin and at Beriah Green's Oneida Institute in Whitestown (near Utica). come-outer periodicals (The Union Herald, the Christian Investigator, the True Wesleyan, and the Lutheran Herald) supported both political and ecclesiastical abolitionism. And ecclesiastical abolitionist conventions brought these folks together regularly (see, for example, The Liberty Press 4 [15 November 1845]: 7; Christian Investigator 1 [December 18431: 88ffl.

81 Christian Investigator 3 (June 1845): 23738.

82 Orange Scott, op. cit., 72, 90.

83 True Wesleyan 2, (5 February 1844): 19.

84 Donald M. Scott, "Abolition as a Sacred Vocation," in Perry and Fellman, op. cit., 5174.

85 Thus, although political-ecclesiastical abolitionists were vague regarding the means of obtaining entire sanctification, they were extremely specific regarding the goal of entire sanctification (that is, Liberty party support and denominational come-outerism).

86 Goodell, "Entire Sanctification," 1011; idem, "Discussions on Perfection," 14. Such direct involvement in moral reform was clearly declared by the Wesleyans: "we desire that every member of the Wesleyan Connection should not only be a zealous advocate of every branch of moral reform, but coworkers, even in the front rank, battling side by side with those who contend with the Lord's enemies." Luther Lee, "Pastoral Address of the Convention assembled at Utica," cited in Matlack, op. cit., 343.

87 Luther Lee, Autobiography of the Rev Luther Lee, (reprint; New York: Garland Publishing, 1984), 227.

88 Liberty Party, Proceedings of the Great Convention of the Friends of Freedom in the Eastern and Middle States. Held in Boston, Oct. 1, 2, & 3, 1845 (Lowell: Pillsbury and Knapp, 1845), 15; William Goodell, Address of the Macedon Convention By William Goodell, And Letters of Gerrit Smith (Albany: S.W. Green, Patriot Office, 1847), 15; Christian Investigator 2 (October 1844): 171. See also Gerrit Smith and Cassius M. Clay, Cassius M. Clay, of Lexington, KY, to the Mayor of Dayton, O., with a Review of it by Gerrit Smith, of Peterboro, N.Y (Utica: Jackson & Chaplin, 1844),7; and Liberty party, Proceedings o f the National Liberty Convention, Held At Buffalo, N.Y, June 14th and 15th, 1848; Including the Resolutions and Addresses Adopted By That Body, and Speeches of Beriah Green and Gerrit Smith on That Occasion (Utica: S.W. Green, 1848), 31.

89 Liberty party leaders Gerrit Smith, Beriah Green, William Goodell, and David Plumb were Unionist pastors. Many other prominent "Liberty men" were members of Union churches, such as Alvan Stewart, James C. Jackson, J. N. T. Tucker, and James G. Birney.

90 Free-Will Baptist Anti-Slavery Society, Fifth Annual Report of the Free-Will Baptist Anti-Slavery Society, Read at Lebanon, Maine, October 9, 1851 (Dover, NH: Wm. Burr, 1851), 24, 28.

91 True Wesleyan 1 (8 April 1843): 155; ibid. 1 (23 December 1843): 203. See also Douglas M. Strong, "Partners in Political Abolitionism: The Liberty Party and the Wesleyan Methodist Connection," Methodist History 23 (January 1985): 10911. The pressure was so strong to be a political abolitionist that one Wesleyan who had not voted in the 1844 election felt obliged to print a public apology for his laxity in not supporting the Liberty ticket (see The Liberty Press 3 [23 November 1844]: 9).

92 McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 538. In the pages of The Liberty Press, Bailey promoted both the Liberty party and ecclesiastical abolitionism (especially the Wesleyan Methodist Connection). See The Liberty Press 3 (16 November 1844): 3, 6; ibid 3 (23 November 1844): 9; ibid. 3 (11 January 1845): 37; ibid 4 (29 November 1845): 15; ibid 5 (17 January 1846): 41.

93 Lee, Autobiography, 217.

94 Journal of the Fourth Annual Session, 5. See also Journal of the Seventh Annual Session of the Franchean Evangelic Lutheran Synod. Convened at Parishuille, Oswego Co., N.Y:, June 6, 1844 (West Sandlake, NY: The Herald Office, 1844), 24.

95 In 1845, the citizens of China (later called Arcade), Wyoming County, elected the entire local Liberty party ticket (see Historical Wyoming 26 [October 1980]: 48). Several towns in Madison County also gave a plurality to the Liberty slate.

96 Journal of the Fifth Annual Session of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod, convened at Newville, Herkimer Co, N.Y. June 2, 1842 (Milford. NY: Lutheran Herald Office. 1842). 8.

97 Christian Investigator 2 (January 1844): 97.

98 Ibid 2 (March 1844): 114.

99 There had been many similar conventions, but the intent of this one in Syracuse was to bring together the widest diversity of political and ecclesiastical abolitionists ever assembled in the burnedover district. The convention was called in order to ascertain the "appropriate form and mode of church organization" in accordance "with the great principles of human equality." Ibid 2 (December 1843): 88.

100 Unionists (ex-Presbygationalists): Gerrit Smith, Beriah Green, Alvan Stewart, William Goodell, Washington Stickney, Marcus Stickney, Joseph Plumb, John Truair. Ex-Baptist: J. N. T. Tucker. Wesleyan Methodists (ex-Methodist Episcopals): James C. DeLong, Luther Lee. Free Baptist: Hiram Whitcher. Other Liberty leaders: Charles T. Torrey, G. W. Clark, William L. Chaplin.

101 Goodell discussed the important role that Lee played at this ecclesiastical abolitionist convention in his notes on the "Syracuse Convention" (Goodell Papers, Berea College Archives) and in the Christian Investigator (2 [30 December 1843]: 8990).

102 Part of Lee's attraction to antislavery unity came from his long experience with other ecclesiastical abolitionists. He preached for Unionist and Franckean Lutheran congregations (The Friend of Man 3 [5 June 1839]: 196), traveled with leading Unionists when he was an antislavery agent (ibid [5 June 1839]: 197), and subscribed to William Goodell's ecclesiastical abolitionist paper (Christian Investigator 1 [August 1843]: 56).

103 Christian Investigator 6 (August 1848): 528. See also, ibid. 2 (August 1844): 152. Cf. Matlack, op. cit., 337; McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 38,77.

104 Christian Investigator 2 (December 1843): 88. See also Goodell, "Syracuse Convention." Goodell did not believe that the Unionists had any vestiges of Presbyterianism left, but evidently the Wesleyans did.

105 It is easy to see why Colton feared the power of a politically oriented "Abolition Church."

106 Christian Investigator 2 (January 1844): 97.

107 Ibid. 1 (September 1843): 60.

108 Ibid 2 (December 1843): 88; ibid. 6 (August 1848): 528. Lee was also displeased with the lack of any regularly constituted coordinating structure in the Unionists' polity.

109 In Madison County, for instance (which had the largest percentage of Union churches of any county in the State), every single Union church languished and then died within a few years. See Silas E. Persons, A Historical Sketch of the Religious Denominations of Madison County, New York (Cazenovia: Madison County Historical Society, 1906), 16, 18. Many ecclesiastical abolitionist churches folded after their mitial burst of enthusiasm. See Organization and Membership of the Free Church of Sherburne, 5; William Adams, ed., Historical Gazeteer and Biographical Memorial of Cattaraugus County, New York (Syracuse: Lyman, Horton, & Co. Ltd., 1893), 45152,75051,953; History of Oswego County, 432; and Gates Curtis, Our County and Its People: A Memorial Record of St. Lawrence County, New York (Syracuse D. Mason and Co., 1894), 58283.

110 "Seasons of declensions" were reported from the AntiSlavery Baptist Church of Cato (see Storke, op. cit., 294). Membership declined in Free Baptist churches after 1844 (see Brewster, op. cit., 239). After its establishment in 1845, the Wesleyan Methodist congregation in Canadice, similar to so many others, "flourished for a time and then ceased to exist" (see George S. Conover, ed., History of Ontario County, New York [Syracuse: D. Mason and Co., 1893], 462). The Franckean Lutherans also reported declension in the late 1840's (see Journal of the Ninth Annual Session of the Franckean Evangelic Lutheran Synod, Convened at Fordsbora Montgomery CQ, N.Y., June 4th, 1846 [Albany: J. Munsell, 1846], 19).

111 Theodore Clarke Smith, op. cit., 89104; Sewell, op. cit., 111, 13138, 15269. As these political professionals took control of the Liberty party, the party's focus of power and leadership moved from the burnedover district to New York City and Ohio.

112 Christian Investigator 2 (January 1844): 197.

113 The apocalypticism of William Miller and the Aventists was another one of these challenges (see Doan, op. cit., 2627, 224).

114 Henry L. Dox, Memoir of Rev Philip Wieting, A Pastor Forty Years in The Same Field (Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1870), 135; An Account of the Trial of Luther Myrick, 69.

115 Thus, the Wesleyans' ideas were not the result of "Mrs. Palmer's doctrines reach[ing] Methodist abolitionists in New England and upper New York" combined with Finney's "tradition of social responsibility." Timothy L. Smith, op. cit., 212.

116 Lee was a leading proponent of the merger discussions between the Wesleyan Methodists and Methodist Protestants which culminated in 1866. Given Lee's penchant for Goodellstyle "Unionism," it is not surprising that the impetus behind these discussions was termed the "Union Movement." When the merger talks failed, Lee and many other Wesleyans left the Connection. See Minutes of the NonEpiscopal Methodist Convention, Held in Cincinnati, Ohio May 9-16, 1866 (Springfield, OH: Western Methodist Protestant Office, 1866), 7, 37, 38, 41; McLeister and Nicholson, op. cit., 7179; and Haines and Thomas, op. cit., 6566.

117 Donald W. Dayton has developed a similar interpretation of the evangelical consensus in "Yet Another Layer of the Onion, Or Opening the Ecumenical Door To Let the Riffraff In," Ecumenical Review 40 (1988): 87110. Dayton views this consensus as deriving primarily from "Methodist" rather than "Calvinist" sources.

Edited by Michael Mattei for the
Wesley Center for Applied Theology
at Northwest Nazarene University
© Copyright 2000 by the Wesley Center for Applied Theology

Text may be freely used for personal or scholarly purposes, provided the notice below the horizontal line is left intact. Any use of this material for commercial purposes of any kind is strictly forbidden without the express permission of the Wesley Center at Northwest Nazarene University, Nampa, ID 83686. Contact the webmaster for permission or to report errors.