A pop question

greenspun.com : LUSENET : A.M.E. Today Discussion : One Thread

I would like to pose the following question to this BB. Give yourself only 60 seconds to respond and please refrain from using another poster's response or supporting materials for your answer. The first poster who responds with the correct will be eligible for a grand prize drawing :-) The question is........Who was the first elected Bishop of the AMEC? QED

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001


OK Bro Bill, Is this a trick question? My gut reaction was Richard Allen. I am sure it shouldn't be that easy. Maybe he was not elected.. umm! Took more than 60 sec Bob

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

Actually, Daniel Coker was the first elected. He declined. Then on April 11, 1856 Richard was consecrated as Bishop.

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

Bishop Daniel Coker was elected first, but Richard Allen was consecrated first.

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

Well, well, looks like both Barbara & Michael have submitted "winning" entries to the question. Now, for extra credit, do you know why Bishop-Designate Coker declined to accept the position as Bishop? Barbara, before you can claim your "prize" I need some information about the Civil Rights Museum located in Detroit, MI :-) QED

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

Sorry, the date of Allen's consecration was 1816, not 1856. I was writing too quickly!

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

Come one and come all to see the magnificent Charles H. Wright Museum of African American History when you visit Detroit! The archchtecture is absolutely breathtaking. The exhibits and programs are second-to-none. Dr. Wright's dream was turned into a reality due to his persistence over the years.

Please visit their site at: http://www.maah-detroit.org

(Now may I please have my prize? :o)

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

The late Bishop William Franklin Ball, Sr., made the statemnt, 'The AME Church is a political Church Cocker was tricked out of becoming the first consecrated Bishop of the Church. Ball was considered to be a historion of the AME Church. He was old enough to recite dates and historical events. I was to young to keep up with his accounts.

-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

For primary source information of persons who lived at the time of the founding of the A.M.E. Church, were present at the first General Convention, and lived long enough to tell or record the story we should look at Bishop William Paul Quinn and The Reverend David Smith.

The document by Reverend David Smith is one of the most comprehensive and accurate accounts I have found to date. It not only spans several decades but lists several major details about the early development of the Church.

The online document of Reverend David Smith, as recorded by Bishop Daniel Alexander Payne, may be found at:


-- Anonymous, October 08, 2001

Can anyone verify/corroborate the claims advanced by Brother Smith about Cocker being "tricked out of the Bishoprick"? It is my understanding that Coker declined the position due to concerns about his mulatto appearance and the negative effect it would have on leading dark-skinned Negroes. Interestingly, Coker was born of an atypical mixed union. His mother was white and father was black. QED

-- Anonymous, October 10, 2001

The responses are interesting. To add a bit, and I don't know if it is true, but I did hear in one presentation that Coker's turning down the bishopric was not entirely voluntary. And yes, his light skin seemed to have been part of the problem. Also, it seems Allen was not present at the conference for the election, but attended the next day and was then elected and subsequently consecrated, becoming the first bishop of the church.

It was politics then; politics now. Some things just don't change much much.

-- Anonymous, October 23, 2001

Moderation questions? read the FAQ