Correct -- in much the same way that Luther did not intend to break away from the Roman Catholic church; just to reform it.
Here is an interesting chart from Wikipedia's pages on the Protestant Reformation:
Mrs. Don-o --> I believe that the originators of Methodism never intended theirs to be a separate church from the broad swathe of Anglicanism but were looking for revival in strict method. however, over time the CoE and the Methodists drifted apart
In that era, what was viewed to be low church -- and especially in terms of sacramental ministry -- would be very high church today, and that even in many Catholic Churches. One Catholic Contemporary service I attended a few years back, led by a Franciscan priest, had a barely high church eucharist. And certainly, when doing joint services with priests during my Army years, they cut so many corners when we were in "field/deployed" conditions, that their service was barely distinguishable from a protestant field service. Methodism...ending slavery in the British Empire
I have no doubt that John Wesley, who was a friend of MP and British abolitionist William Wilburforce, was the major voice that turned Wilberforce against slavery. Wesley taught that liberty was God and a matter of natural law.
Wesley OFTEN spoke out that Methodism should not be separate from Anglicanism. The nature of travel and communication in the 18th century, however, made the Methodist movement evolve independent of the Anglican Church from Revolutionary War times until well past the war of 1812.
The very nature of what was happening in America -- with the westward expansion, the establishment of small settlement churches, their pastors being traveling, itinerant preachers -- all of that was a NECESSARY element to the expansion of Christianity westward in an American frontier culture. High Church Anglicanism simply would have been insufficient to the task. (For example see "The History of Methodism in Kentucky" by W.E. Arnold, Herald Presss, 1935.) The early years were simply harrowing for those itinerant Methodist preachers, and taking up that calling was too often a death sentence for them brought on by illness, accident, or native attack.
Theological liberalism won over mainstream seminaries early in the 20th century with their biblical criticism, search for a historical Jesus, and their moderate approach to "life lessons" gained from scripture. It was poisoned fruit with many seminarians thinking they were choosing "open-mindedness". They weren't. The real choice was between divinely inspired scripture and human reason. By choosing human reason, they subscribed to a fallen, flawed, inherent depravity that would gradually take them all the way to today...a rejection of scripture, God, and sound Christian doctrine.
The people learned too late what was transpiring with their "leaders". By then these had infested their hierarchies, and their only recourse was to fight or leave. The infestation was so bad in many denominations that we've lived to see the result, and we've lived to see the believers in those denomination depart them.
Methodism still struggles on, and we have our victories. The infestation in our slow-moving governmental structure is nearly impossible to dislodge. We have held the line until this era against homosexuality and have gradually moved toward a more acceptable position on life.
This culture, though, is so thoroughly indoctrinated on homosexuality that I fear that battle is going to be lost in our denomination, and I fear for every other denomination, even those with independent, local governance.
Correct -- in much the same way that Luther did not intend to break away from the Roman Catholic church; just to reform it.
Here is an interesting chart from Wikipedia's pages on the Protestant Reformation: