During the spring of 1882, The Kansas Methodist
printed a series of letters from readers with divergent viewpoints on the issue
of integration of blacks and whites into the previously established districts of
the Methodist Episcopal Church. Some prominent black clergymen felt that the
needs of their people were better served by maintaining a separate district.
Others argued for eventual integration. As
a white pastor of a black congregation, and with a black presiding elder as his
superior, Rev. James S. Griffing probably found himself often the focus of
controversy. A couple of the letters are reproduced here, in part:
Source: The
Kansas Methodist, February 2, 1882
Advocating Segregation:
…The Kansas District Conference [the Black
Conference] at its last session, by resolution, asked that the Bishop make no
change in the district other than that made at the Annual Conference. I am
satisfied that it will be best for our people to continue the district, and it
seems to me that those who are advocating the wiping out of the district should
consider the matter well. If there is any brother in the district who thinks he
cannot work and do good, either as a pastor or otherwise, unless there is a
change, he ought to quit at once, for the work’s sake, and let the district
still live. Some may be ready to say that I am advocating the color line, but I
am not. It does not need any one to advocate it. I am satisfied that it is
firmly fixed, and has been for over a century, and I think will last for all
time to come. I do think that we as colored members of the church ought to have
as much pluck and get up and go ahead about us as our good German brethren have.
They saw what they thought was best for them, and asked for it, first asking for
districts, and then for annual conferences, and I am sure that this will be the
best for the colored people of Kansas to do. If there is a colored brother in
the Conference that wants to be pastor of a white, or a white brother who wants
to be pastor of a colored congregation, I am sorry for them, and shall not
expect much success from such. You may say, let the white and colored come
together if you wish, but I say we are like our German brethren. We think we
know best what we need. Has any of the Conference brethren anything to say on
this subject? -- W. E. WILSON.
Source: The Kansas Methodist, February 7,
1882
Advocating Integration:
…[Brother Wilson] says “the color line is fixed
for all time to come.” It may be in his opinion, but it is not in the
Methodist Episcopal Church. The M. E. Church has claimed, and does claim, to
have no respect of person. And we think she has never fallen below what she
claims in this respect. The Brother says further, if there is a colored Brother
in the Conference that wants to be pastor of a white, or a white Brother who
wants to be pastor of a colored congregation, he is sorry for him, and does not
expect much from such an one. It seems just here that the Brother gets into the
wrong intellectual pew. When he understands that dividing the work among the
Presiding Elders will not make a colored man pastor of a white congregation, nor
will it necessarily make a white man pastor of a colored congregation, he will
be satisfied. The plan of the Methodist Episcopal Church is not to preach color,
but to preach Christ and him crucified, in obedience to the injunction, “Go ye
into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.”
Our beloved Bishop, Gilbert Haven, labored all through
the South, trying to break down prejudice between the two races, and wrote a
book, bearing the symbol of a white and colored hand joined together in token of
eternal friendship. Why should we at so late an hour of the day tear them loose,
and disturb the quiet dwelling place of the dead? This is free Kansas, Brethren,
and “together let us sweetly live, together let us die.” -- G. W. PATTON.
