5| He Raised Thousands of Leaders With This Strategy
How John Wesley built structure and chose leaders for his movement that changed the world
This is part five of the Boxed Wine & Bad Ideas series on how we killed a church movement and how we can get it back.
The Choosing of Leaders
“Give me one hundred preachers who fear nothing but sin, and desire nothing but God, and I care not a straw whether they be clergymen or laymen; such alone will shake the gates of hell and set up the kingdom of heaven on Earth.”― John Wesley
In 1772, John Wesley’s horse bucked as he was riding. The man of God was abrasively jolted forward into the saddle horn. Crotch first. It caused something called, “edema of the scrotum.”
I’ll save you the Google search: “a painful build up of fluid in the scrotum.”
John Wesley was allegedly still riding from place to place via horseback in 1772.
What Wesley expected out of the leaders who were appointed in the Methodist movement had far less to do with their theology than their willingness to dive crotch first into a saddle horn and keep on riding. There were specific traits he looked for in people, and when he identified them and sensed the anointing, he called it out and released them into it.
“Not only did Wesley reach the masses; he made leaders of thousands of them.”
In 1746, Wesley established a set of guidelines to evaluate those who wanted to become preachers:
“Question: how shall we try those who believe they are moved by the Holy Ghost and called to preach?
Answer: enquire
1: Do they know in whom they have believed?
2: Have they gifts, as well as grace, for the work?
3: Have they success? Do they not only speak as generally either to convince or affect the hearts, but have any received remission of sins by their preaching a clear and lasting sense of the love of God?
As long as these three marks undeniably occur in any, we allow him to be called of God to preach. These we receive as sufficient reasonable evidence that he has moved thereto by the Holy Ghost.”¹
- “Do they know in whom they have believed?”
Because if they do there’s a burden that they can’t ignore. They will pursue the lost and their particular vocation in the greater narrative with or without our permission.
2. “Have their gifts, as well as grace, for the work?”
Is there an anointing and an obvious design around what they are putting their hands to whether they notice it or not. (many times they don’t, and it’s the leader’s job to hold the mirror up and show them what we see.)
3. “Have they success?”
In other words, has there been life transformation in others as a result of their preaching?
“Now here is a remarkable thing. Church leaders today say it is hard to find enough leaders for small groups or other responsibilities in the church. Wesley put one in 10, perhaps one in five, to work in significant ministry and leadership. Not busy work. And who were these people? Not the educated or the wealthy with time on their hands, but laboring men and women, husbands and wives, and young folks with little or no training, but with spiritual gifts and eagerness to serve. Community became the incubator and training camp for Christ-like ministry.”²
They spun off leaders fast. Which looks cool on paper and negligent in practice.
A few questions:
How can we get these people who aren’t quitting their businesses or jobs or families to seminary and then through a residency and then set up with a coach to start their church efficiently enough to catch the momentum of a movement?
How can we reasonably, with any peace of mind, put people into leadership roles faster than we already do?
Even if we wanted to send leaders out fast, how can we find those that are willing?
What held the movement together and how were these leaders vetted and held accountable?
John Wesley meticulously wove structure and discipline into his own life and he expected the same intentionality out of anyone who called themselves a Methodist. Yet the structure he promoted in the movement that he founded seemed to be much less rigid than the life he lived. The necessary risk of the early Methodist movement was that it was built more on reckless trust in the Holy Spirit and people than it was on procedure and policy.
As Methodism came to take form, a somewhat loose structure emerged that promoted and provided accountability for the high standards that he held himself to while still allowing for mistakes to be made and custom tailored lessons to be learned by those involved.
The upside in this structure we will take a quick look at was that Wesley didn’t have to attempt to be that fourth member of the trinity. Meaning there was a strategic delegation of leadership development to Jesus and intimate community.
The downside was a lack of control that, to us, seems daunting and dangerous.
Structure
The Society
Wesley founded the Fetter Lane Society on May 1, 1738, just weeks before his famous “heart-warming” experience at Aldersgate Street on May 24.²
This began with Wesley’s converts meeting weekly with him in London for prayer and the best advice he could give. The Society existed for Wesley’s followers to pray together, hear a word of exhortation, and focus on the salvation of souls.
These were rallies. Training conventions. They gave greater vision and they gave the ability to see the greater picture of what God is doing.
These meetings had the most resemblance to what we would see in America as our Sunday worship service. But the caveat was that if you wanted to be a member of the Society, it was required to be a part of a Class meeting.
The Class
In essence the Classes were tiny churches of 10–15 people that in many ways mimicked the Moravians missional gatherings that became “the church within the Church.” The devotion, discipline, and radical accountability of the members in these tiny churches drove energy into the larger gatherings as opposed to our current approach of using the big to drive energy into small groups.
“The Class meeting system tied together the widely scattered Methodist people and became the sustainer of the Methodist renewal over many decades, the nurturing cellular infrastructure. Methodism was not one continuous revival flame. The movement was a whole series of sporadic and often geographically localized revivals that were interconnected and spread by the society and class network — rather than one continuous wave of revival that swept the country. Without the class meeting, the scattered fires of renewal would have burned out long before the movement could have made a deep impact of the nation.”²
These weren’t your typical small group get-togethers with a cute video, pizza, and discussion questions.
“The itinerants were taught to manage difficulties in the societies, to face mobs, to brave any weather, to subsist without means, except such as might casually occur on their routes, to rise at four and preach at five o’clock, to scatter books and tracts, to live by rule, and to die without fear.”
The structure of Wesley’s Methodist movement supported the journey of itinerants toward ministry and the role they played as pastors in the Societies. The journey was not merely education, but a way of life.
“Wesley gave them strict rules, expecting them to preach, study, travel, meet with bands and classes, exercise daily, and eat sparingly.” Who were these people? “Not the educated or the wealthy with time on their hands, but laboring men and women, husbands and wives, and young folks with little or no training, but with spiritual gifts and eagerness to serve. Community became the incubator and training camp for Christ-like ministry.”²
They took communion. They worshiped. They fasted. They served the poor. They saturated themselves in Scripture and fought in prayer and trusted each other. They were the church.
When people are trusted, they have the ability to wound and make big mistakes. And, when people are trusted, they are given responsibility that unearths the gold hidden within them and makes movement possible.
It’s easy to read about, but when we try to implement this, we are often queasy once the reality of the mess and the lack of personal recognition sets in.
Bands
Bands were “for the soul,” consisting of the smallest gatherings of two or three people meeting weekly, confessing their faults to each other, and praying for healing and deliverance from sin.
Unlike the mandatory Class participation, Bands were voluntary groups that formed organically and became the ultimate accountability tool and healing apparatus of the movement.
Maybe you’ve heard it before, “You’re only as sick as your secrets.” It’s true, and we have some nasty secrets that are more likely to come out with people you trust the most in this world than they are with people that you have to act like a superhero around.
These Scriptures come to mind. Don’t rush through them:
“Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.”
— James 5:16
“When I kept silent, my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long. For day and night your hand was heavy on me; my strength was sapped as in the heat of summer. Then I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity. I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord.” And you forgave the guilt of my sin.”
— Psalms 32:3–5
They had a structure that was built on relationship and trust. It’s how they identified leaders. It’s how they provided accountability. The structure and leadership development relied on community more than programs. And it trusted the Holy Spirit more than their own brilliance.
The glaring problem with Christianity to the rest of the world is that we talk about Jesus from stages and in public spaces yet when we get home we are living in direct opposition to the life of this Jesus whose name we love to yell into a microphone. In most cases it’s likely not malicious; it’s most likely that pastors and leaders are leading their congregations, acting put together in front of their friends, and in secret competition with other pastors.
Where is the safe place to go? Where then is the space to confess — everything? To God and to trusted people.
At what point will we realize that we can’t send somebody to an institution and train the sin out of them?
Structure, policy, and process are helpful, but not when they become a cage rather than a trellis.
The Risk of Freedom
Movement involves multiple components that are out of our control and have the capacity to make quite a mess. We don’t like messy. Therefore structure, policy, and process tend to take the driver’s seat while genuine relationship and connection to the Vine are gagged and tied up in the back.
In 1827, the Methodist Sunday School Union was formed and began to take the place of the class meetings. Sunday school was to impart biblical teaching while the Class meeting was for accountability and discipline. Sunday school became more appealing to the masses because a person could receive biblical knowledge without undergoing the often-uncomfortable spiritual discipline.²
Wesley’s leadership was ultimately built around the spiritual disciplines, proximity of relationship to him, and the practices of doing the work of serving the people and preaching the gospel. Although he valued traditional education, as an Oxford fellow at Christ College, Wesley seems to emphasize growth in grace and spiritual disciplines far more than a seminary degree.
“As to the qualifications of a gospel minister, grace is necessary; learning is expedient. Grace and supernatural gifts are ninety-nine parts in a hundred. Acquired learning may then have its place.”³
Paul writes in 2 Timothy 1:13–14, “What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you — guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.”
This was Wesley’s attitude too. God has freely given the gift of salvation and those who receive it now have a responsibility to protect it through practices of accountability, bands, and sound teaching, but to also partner with the Holy Spirit, who lives in us, to do God’s will in the world around us. The problem is we’ll gather $80,000 of debt and spend four years training in college or seminary to be a gospel minister, rather than following the teachings and practices that Jesus has already given us to pursue the other 99% of the work.
Grace is free; the degree is not.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I (Adam) have done the traditional ministry education to the nth degree from a ministry degree from Indiana Wesleyan University, MDiv at Princeton Seminary, and now working on my Doctorate of Ministry. There is value in traditional education because of how it changes and shapes the overall framework of how we think, but what is the use of knowledge without love or practice? Let us not hold so tightly to the structure and miss the fruit. What good is a wineskin without any wine?
Recorded in the Minutes of John Wesley’s Works is someone asking Wesley “What is the best way of spreading the gospel?” His response: “To go a little and a little farther from London, Bristol, St. Ives, Newcastle, or any other Society. So a little leaven would spread with more effect and less noise, and help would always be at hand.”⁴ You’ll notice this quote doesn’t mention good branding, large budgets, or even charismatic leaders. What it does highlight, however, is proximity–so the leaders and new communities would not be alone.
Furthermore, the question is targeted at effectiveness, not the size of the church or gathering. Whether 15 people are gathered in a 100-year-old church building or around a series of lattes at a coffee shop, what makes church, church? People being fed by God’s Word, gathered in community, and serving the world as the hands and feet of Jesus. It does not matter whether you’re launching large or starting small; church is church when God’s people gather, the Holy Spirit speaks, and we live out our faith by carrying the gospel a little further and farther than before.
[1] Mark of a Movement by Winfield Bevins p.68–69
[2] Howard Snyder, Radical Wesley
[3] (Watson, Kevin M., and Scott Thomas Kisker. The Band Meeting: Rediscovering Relational Discipleship in Transformational Community. Seedbed Publishing. 2017. 84)
[4] Letter of 16 April 1756 to Rev. Samuel Furly. Works, Letters III, 29.
[5] (Wesley’s Works*, Minutes,* 138)
Other sources:
