Comparatively little is known of this holy man, as no extended account of his life and labors has ever been written; a circumstance that is deeply to be regretted, the more especially as the subject of this chapter was so intimately connected with the organization of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States. It is, however, less surprising that the life of Bishop Whatcoat has not been given to the Methodist public, when we consider that the same is true of his venerable colleague, Bishop Asbury, who, were it not for the public documents of an ecclesiastical nature, in relation to which he bore so conspicuous a position, and which have been happily preserved from oblivion and destruction; and more especially for his journal, which has been providentially preserved, but little would have been known of that great man. The fault, however — if fault there is — if not having a written history of these early fathers of Methodism, does not rest on the shoulders of their sons in the gospel, some of whom have done what they could to rescue their names and memory from oblivion. To no person more than to Dr. Nathan Bangs, is the Church indebted for an attempt of this character, and it is justly due to this voluminous writer and ecclesiastical historian to say, that had it not been for his unwearied efforts to bring to light facts which otherwise would have been entirely forgotten among the transactions of the past, the little that we now know in reference to some of the burning and shining lights of Methodism, would be entirely unknown to the present or succeeding generation. In the preparation of this short chapter, therefore, we are obliged to acknowledge our indebtedness to the “History of the Methodist Episcopal Church,” for the principal facts found therein.

Richard Whatcoat was born in England, in the year 1736, and being brought up in the “nurture and admonition of the Lord,” was saved from those habits of vice and sin, into which many of the youth plunge thoughtlessly and heedlessly. At the age of twenty-two years, he was converted to God, and received the witness of his adoption into the family of God and as the result of such conversion, he began immediately to bring forth the “fruits of the Spirit,” and to live, not only “a sober and righteous,” but a “godly life.” He appears to have connected himself with the Methodists soon after his conversion, and labored for some time as one of Mr. Wesley’s local preachers. In 1769, he joined the traveling connection in England, and labored for a period of fifteen years, as a faithful minister of the Lord Jesus Christ, under the direction of Mr. Wesley. During this period, he made full proof of his ministry, and by his zeal and fidelity rendered himself useful and acceptable as a preacher, wherever he was known.

In the year l784, the Macedonian cry was heard from the western shore of the Atlantic, saying, “Come over and help us.” This cry was made by the thousands of Methodists in America, who were like sheep without a shepherd, having, indeed, to some extent, the preaching of the Gospel among them, but from various causes alluded to in a preceding chapter, were deprived of the ordinances of baptism, and the Lord’s Supper. The request was made to Mr. Wesley, that he would adopt some measures for the relief of his American children. After proper consultation, Mr. Wesley resolved on sending a partial supply of ministers, and Mr. Whatcoat, who, although he was past the meridian of life, had all the zeal and missionary fire of youth, at once volunteered his services for that distant field of labor; and dear to him as was his own native land, and thrice dear as were the thousands of friends he must leave behind him, he nobly resolved to forsake all for the sake of preaching the gospel to the poor.

As before stated, Mr. Whatcoat, previous to his embarkation for America, was solemnly set apart by presbyterial ordination, performed by Messrs.

Wesley, Coke, and Creighton, presbyters of the Church of England, to the office of an elder in the Church of God, and in the mouth of September, 1784, left the shores of England, and landed in the City of New York, in company with Dr. Coke, on the 3d of November, in the same year. After landing in New York, Mr. Whatcoat, accompanied by the doctor, proceeded to Philadelphia, and from thence to the State of Delaware, and on the 15th of the same month, they met Mr. Asbury, at Barratt’s Chapel, in that State, where Dr. Coke apprised the latter of the provision made by Mr. Wesley, for the organization of an independent Methodist Episcopal Church. In reference to this meeting, Mr. Asbury says, in his Journal, “Sunday, 15. I came to Barratt’s Chapel. Here, to my great joy, I met those dear men of God, Dr. Coke and Richard Whatcoat. We were greatly comforted together. The doctor preached on Christ our wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption. Having had no opportunity of conversing with them before public worship, I was greatly surprised to see Brother Whatcoat assist, by taking the cup, in the administration of the Sacrament. I was shocked when first informed of the intention of these, any brethren, in coming to this country; it may be of God. My answer then was, “If the preachers unanimously choose me, I shall not act in the capacity I have hitherto done, by Mr. Wesley’s appointment. The design of organizing the Methodists into an independent Episcopal Church, was opened to the preachers present, and it was agreed to call a General Conference, to meet at Baltimore the ensuing Christmas; as also that Brother Garrettson go off to Virginia to give notice thereof to the brethren in the South.” The surprise manifested by Mr. Asbury, at seeing Mr. Whatcoat assist in administering the Lord’s Supper, by “taking the cup” and passing it, arose from the fact that he (Mr. Asbury) had not as yet been informed, that Mr. Wesley had ordained any of his preachers, and knowing that Mr. Whatcoat had always been considered simply as a preacher, without ordination, he wondered greatly why be should assist in a work which belonged to ordained ministers alone; but when informed of what Mr. Wesley had done, and of what he intended to be done for his Societies in America, Mr. Asbury’s “surprise” no doubt quickly fled, and he heartily acquiesced in what appeared to be the indications of divine providence in relation to his church in America. The extraordinary Conference, called as above, met in Baltimore, at the time appointed. There were at this period, eighty-three preachers in the traveling connection in America, and out of this number sixty were present, which, considering the brief notice given of the calling of the same, shows the unanimity with which Mr. Wesley’s proposition was received, and the relief sent accepted.

At this Conference, Mr. Whatcoat was present, and although we know but little of his acts during the session of the same, he no doubt cheerfully acquiesced in the proceedings of his American brethren, with the utmost cordiality and pleasure, and after the session had closed, he went to the field of labor assigned him by his superiors in office, and continued to labor for many years, as a faithful servant of the Church, and as a devoted minister of Christ. During the most of the time intervening between the organization of the church and that of his being elected bishop, Mr. Whatcoat labored as a presiding elder, or assistant to the bishops of the church; and as in these days, the field of a presiding elder’s labors was very extensive, embracing entire States, we may well imagine that Mr. Whatcoat’s office was no sinecure, whatever the honor might be, and that the salary, sixty-four dollars per annum, was not sufficiently great to be tempting. To those who live at the present day, it may be a matter of wonder how such men as Asbury, Whatcoat, and McKendree could be satisfied with the paltry sum of sixty-four dollars, as and annual salary; and the only reason we can assign for the fact is, that the Societies being weak, and the members few, and poor, it was thought by the preachers themselves, to be as much as could be raised for their support; another reason might be found in the fact that expenses were not as great in these days as at the present. Then preachers and people were contented to be clothed in the coarsest garb; while at the present day, the people not only array themselves in clothing of better materials, but expect the preachers to do so likewise. In fact, were a minister of the present day to clothe himself as our forefathers did, he would be considered quite eccentric, and his usefulness would no doubt be greatly impaired.

Besides, the necessary expenses and outlays in the early days of Methodism, were not equal by one half what they now are, for example: in the article of books alone; then, if a Methodist preacher had a Bible, hymn book, and discipline, with a copy of Wesley’s sermons, and a few other books, he was fully equipped for the moral warfare; but at the present, a minister of the Methodist Church who would confine himself to these, would be considered as a perfect ignoramus. It is expected and required of him, that he keep pace with the improvements of the age in which he lives, and not only must he avail himself of the knowledge afforded by reading and studying the Word of God, and the discipline of the Church, but he must as a matter of necessity, keep pace with his heaters in regard to literature and science of every description. But to do so, he must have books and periodicals, and these cannot be obtained without money.* Another consideration is, that the most of the early preachers, including the bishops, were unmarried. Such was the demand for their continual services at different points of the work, that they were constantly on the move, and as in the case of Bishop Asbury, they did not think it morally right to win the affections of any lady, knowing that they could enjoy her society but a few weeks in the course of the year. Besides, they felt that they could more exclusively devote themselves to the work of the ministry, if they remained free from the burdens and cares of a family: hence, their expenses were comparatively small, and as they had no board bill to pay, they could as well afford to live on sixty-four dollars a year, as their successors can on five times that amount. Still it is evident, that no men possessed of as much enterprise and knowledge as they, would have for the sake of the paltry sum alluded to, forsaken home and kindred, and consented to become strangers and pilgrims in the most emphatic sense. Neither could they have been desirous of securing the applause of men; for a very short experience must have taught the most of them that worldly honor and esteem was not to be found by serving in the ranks of the Methodist itinerancy of those days. Still they were actuated by motives, and these motives were begotten in the heart by the spirit of grace; they were impelled to act, and this impulsion was the effect of God’s love shed abroad in their hearts; they had an ambition, but it was the ambition of doing good — a desire to save men from the wrath to come; and to secure the salvation of their fellowmen, they “could not their lives dear, so that they might finish their course with joy, and the ministry which they had received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.” But let us return to the subject of the chapter.

At the General Conference of 1800, it became necessary to release Dr.

Coke partially from his engagements to the American Church, at the urgent solicitation of the British Conference, who earnestly desired his services as the superintendent of various missions, and as the President of the Irish Conference. In consenting to the partial release of the Doctor, it became necessary in view of Bishop Asbury’s infirm health, to elect an additional bishop. Much discussion was bad previous to the election, in relation to the powers of the new bishop, sonic contending that he should be considered only as the assistant of Bishop Asbury. It was, however, resolved by the majority, that the bishop to be elected and consecrated, should be equal in power and authority with the senior bishop already in office.

After the above point was settled to the satisfaction of all parties, the next important question to be settled was in relation to the person who should be selected for the office. There were two candidates in the field — Mr. Whatcoat and Rev. Jesse Lee, each of whom had his friends, and both of whom had peculiar qualifications for the office of a bishop in the Church of God. Mr. Whatcoat was an Englishman, an old and valued minister; one too, who had been designated three years previously, by Mr. Wesley himself, as a proper person to be selected as a bishop of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and who had even requested his election to that office.

On the other hand, Mr. Lee was an American by birth, and a favorite among the preachers; his talents also were of a more popular character, and commanded for him the respect and esteem of all who were acquainted with him.

On balloting for a bishop, it was found on the first count, that there was a tie between them, each having received an equal number of votes. On the second ballot being counted there were found fifty-nine votes for Mr. Whatcoat, and fifty-five for Mr. Lee, whereupon the former was declared to be duly elected. On the 18th of May, he was publicly consecrated to the episcopal office by the imposition of the hands of Bishops Coke and Asbury, assisted by some of the elders present.

After the adjournment of the General Conference of 1800, Bishop Whatcoat labored efficiently and successfully as a bishop of the Church, and made full proof of his ministry in this new and important relation. He greatly assisted the senior bishop in the discharge of his onerous and responsible duties, and as long as his health would allow him to do so, he traveled extensively over the continent. At the General Conference of 1804, he was present, and assisted Bishops Coke and Asbury in presiding over the deliberations of the body, but his health was greatly impaired, and in 1806, it was thought necessary by Bishop Asbury to recommend the calling of a special General Conference in May, 1807, for the purpose of strengthening the episcopacy, as Bishop Whatcoat was supposed to be near his end. Each of the Annual Conferences promptly recommended the same, except the Virginia Conference, of Which Rev. Jesse Lee was an influential member, which refused to concur in the recommendation; and in consequence of this refusal, the special session could not be called, as the plan proposed required the concurrence of all the Annual Conferences, in order to call a special session.

While the proposal to call a special General Conference, was being presented to each of the annual Conferences, Bishop Whatcoat departed this life at the residence of ex-governor Bassett, in the State of Delaware, on the 5th day of July, 1836, after an illness of thirteen weeks, during which time his bodily sufferings were of the most excruciating character.

But in the midst of them all, he possessed his soul in perfect patience, and expressed from time to time his firm trust and confidence in Jesus Christ his Saviour, and even amidst the agonies of dissolving human nature, became a “conqueror; yea, more than conqueror, through Him that loved him.” Thus died the venerable Bishop Whatcoat in the seventy-first year of his age, and in the thirty-seventh year of his ministry, and sixth of his episcopate.

Shortly after his death, Bishop Asbury visited the place of his sepulcher, at the Wesleyan Chapel, in Dover, Del., and preached his funeral sermon from the words: “But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, long. suffering, charity, patience.” 2 Timothy 3:10. In the course of this sermon, Bishop Asbury remarked as fellows: “I have known Richard Whatcoat, from the time I was fourteen years of age to sixty-two years most intimately, and have tried him most accurately in respect to the soundness of his faith. On the doctrines of human depravity, the complete and general atonement of Jesus Christ, the insufficiency of either moral or ceremonial righteousness for justification in opposition to faith alone in the merit and righteousness of Christ, and the doctrine of regeneration and sanctification. I have also known his manner of life at all times and places, before the people as a Christian, and a minister; his longsuffering, for he was a man of great affliction, both of body and mind, having been exercised with severe diseases, and great labors.” Bishop Asbury declared that such was his unabated charity, his ardent love to God and man, his patience and resignation amid the unavoidable ills of life, that he always exemplified the tempers and conduct of a most devoted servant of God, and of an exemplary Christian minister.

The following remarks are from Dr. Bangs: “As he lived for God alone, and had assiduously consecrated all his time and powers to the service of his Church, so he had neither time nor inclination to ‘lay up treasures upon earth,’ — hence it is stated that he died with less property than was sufficient to defray the expenses of his funeral. He could therefore say, wore in truth than most, of the pretended successors of St. Peter, who is claimed by some as the first link in the episcopal succession, ‘Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have’ — my soul and body’s powers,’ I cheerfully consecrate to the service of God and man. These remarks of themselves sufficiently indicate the character of the deceased, without saying anything more; yet it may be proper to add, that though we do not claim for him deep erudition, nor extensive science, he was profoundly learned in the sacred Scriptures, thoroughly acquainted with Wesleyan theology, and well versed in all the varying systems of divinity with which the Christian world has been loaded, and could therefore ‘rightly divide the word of truth, giving to every one his portion of meat in due season.’ For gravity of deportment, meekness of spirit, deadness to the world, and deep devotion to God, perhaps he was not excelled, if indeed equaled by any of his contemporaries or successors. ‘Sober without sadness, and cheerful without levity,’ says the record of his death, he was equally removed from the severe austerity of the gloomy monk, and the lightness of the facetious and empty-brained witling. His words were weighed in the balance of the sanctuary, and when uttered either in the way of rebuke, admonition, or instruction, they were calculated to ‘minister grace to the hearer.’ It is said, that on a particular occasion, when in company with Bishop Asbury, the latter was complaining loudly of the perpetual annoyance of’ so much useless company, — Bishop ‘Whatcoat with great modesty and meekness, mildly remarked, ‘O bishop, how much worse should we feel, were we entirely neglected.’ The former bowed an acquiescence to the remark, and acknowledged his obligations to his amiable colleague, for the seasonableness of the reproof, but much more for the manner in which it was administered, an occurrence alike creditable to them both. “His preaching is said to have been generally attended with a remarkable unction from the Holy One. Hence those who sat under his word, if they were believers in Christ, felt it good to be there, for his doctrine distilled as the dew upon the tender herb, and as the rain upon the mown grass. One who had heard him, remarked, that though he could not follow him in all his researches — intimating that he went beyond his depth in some of his thoughts — yet he felt that he was listening to a messenger of God, not only from the solemnity of his manner, but also from the ‘refreshing, from the presence of the Lord,’ which so manifestly accompanied his word.