Apostolic Networks In Britain Revisited

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

Apostolic Networks in Britain Revisited

William K. Kay

Glyndŵr University, Wrexham, Wales,uk

williamkkay@gmail.com

Abstract

This essay presents an account of the theological ideas that led to the formation of apostolic networks in Britain in the 1970s. It takes note of the function of theology as a driver of ecclesiastical innovation and offers the thesis that, while theology provides ideas and arguments, society is the receptacle into which these ideas are poured. Consequently, similar ideas are expressed in different social forms as society changes. The essay comments upon changes within apostolic networks in the last fifteen years, notes the appearance of metanetworks, and highlights the emergence of networks within denominational settings.

Keywords

networks – apostles – dual identity – internet – Toronto Blessing

Background

The charismatic movement has been viewed as an outcome or offshoot of the pentecostal movement and, although this is not the only way of viewing the historical development of the two movements, it does have considerable cred- ibility. According to this scheme, the pentecostal movement originated after a series of start-of-century revivals in the period before 1910.1 These scattered revivals—in Wales, Azusa Street, Mukti, and Pyongyang—eventually culmi-

1 G.B. McGee, “Power from on High” and “Disagreements among the Saints,” in People of the

Spirit: The Assemblies of God (Springfield, mi: Gospel Publishing House, 2004). G.B. McGee,

Miracles, Missions, & American Pentecostalism(Maryknoll,ny: Orbis, 2010).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi: 10.1163/15700747-03801003

1

6

kay

nated in the formation of pentecostal denominations that could be viewed as attempts to perpetuate the revivals by organizing their converts and by retain- ing within the new denominations a style of church life that was perpetually revivalist.2 So, just as the revivals allowed spontaneous utterances within the meetings and accepted a fluid order of service and the prominent contributions of women, so the pentecostal churches did the same, although with the added stability provided by their recognition of a doctrine of glossolalia in respect of baptism with the Holy Spirit.3

The pentecostal churches grew in the first part of the twentieth century and survived the wars, upheavals, and persecution that many of them experienced in Europe and Asia.4 When the charismatic movement began in the early 1960s, the spiritual outpouring on the mainline churches, sometimes called the second wave, produced renewal within these churches and a fresh burst of spiritual life.5 Suddenly Baptists, Anglicans, Methodists, and Roman Catholics were speaking in tongues, meeting together in homes, listening to tapes and cassettes of Spirit-filled preachers, and learning about prophecy, prayer for the sick, and a raft of other topics that quickly entered the charismatic culture.6 Yet, the charismatics, because of their moorings within traditional trinitarian churches, retained many of the doctrinal features of these churches, including an acceptance of the Trinity (thus the charismatic churches produced in this way were not Oneness) and a respect for the rudiments of church order.

The charismatic movement within the traditional denominations also led some believers to become impatient with what they saw as the dampening effect of denominational hierarchies. There was a willingness to break out of the denominational churches and to form new ones. It is not clear exactly how many people were involved in this more radical step, and it may be that their influence was out of proportion to their numbers, at least in Noncon- formist circles. Thus the neo-charismatic congregations were assembled out of Brethren, Baptist, Anglican, and other breakaways who preferred to start afresh rather than to migrate across town to the old-style and often old-fashioned

2 W.K. Kay, Pentecostalism: Core Text (London:scm, 2009).

3 J.W. Hayford and S.D. Moore,TheCharismaticCentury:TheEnduringImpactoftheAzusaStreet

Revival (New York: Warner Faith, 2006).

4 W.K. Kay and A.E. Dyer, eds., European Pentecostalism(Leiden: Brill).

5 V. Synan, “Charismatic Renewal Enters the Mainline Churches,” in V. Synan, ed., The Century

of the Holy Spirit: 100 years of Pentecostal and Charismatic Renewal (Nashville, tn: Thomas

Nelson).

6 T. Smail, “A Renewal Recalled,” in T. Smail, A. Walker, and N. Wright, eds.,Charismatic Renewal

(London:spck, 1993).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

2

apostolic networks in britain revisited

7

pentecostal churches. The neo-charismatics or, as they were first called, house churches and, as they later became to be known, apostolic networks were con- sequently the most radical Christians on the scene, at least in the uk.7 They were comprised largely of laypeople, often in business or teaching, who were frustrated by the caution and feebleness of mainline ordained clergy. The sum- mer Bible Weeks attracted growing numbers; one network of the twelve or so in existence attracted more than 20,000 people in 1986.8The vision of the radi- calswasfreshandeschatologicallyconfident with anexpectationof thecoming kingdom of God, and they had enthusiasm and money. They came to be known as the Third Wave.

These three groups (pentecostal, charismatic, and neo-charismatic or apos- tolic network) coexisted from the early 1970s onward. I observed the scene within the uk, obtained an ahrc9 grant to study what was happening, con- ducted interviews, surveyed twelve of the new groups by questionnaire, and published Apostolic Networks in Britainin 2007.10Much of the rest of this essay will reflect upon these networks, bring their story up to date, and provide addi- tional analysis. Before this, however, it is worth pointing out that the temporal scheme outlined above is based on the assumption that the three waves occur in sequence and that the last wave pushes churchgoers out of the charismatic movement and deposits them into new network structures. Such a conception is not accurate in every part of the world, and it is possible that the waves may break almost simultaneously so that the charismatics and neo-charismatics come into existence without any transition from one to the other. Nevertheless, within the uk the waves followed in order, as an examination of the dates of the registry on the Charity Commission website of the apostolic network trusts shows.11In each case they came about ten years after the first flowerings of the charismatic movement as evidenced by the tongues-speaking of the Episco- palian Dennis Bennett in 1959,12 who was followed in this three years later by the man who might be seen as hisukequivalent, Michael Harper.

7

8 9 10

11

12

A. Walker, Restoring the Kingdom: The Radical Christianity of the House Church Movement (Guildford,uk: Eagle, 1998).

Restoration(November/December 1986), 14.

Arts and Humanities Research Council, see http://ahrc.ac.uk/Pages/Home.aspx. W.K. Kay, Apostolic Networks in Britain: New Ways of Being Church (Milton Keynes, uk: Paternoster Press, 2007).

https://gov.uk/government/organisations/charity-commission. Individual charities can be searched for by name or number.

D.J. Bennett, Nine O’clock in the Morning(London: Coverdale, 1971) 68, 69.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

3

8

kay

Theological Drive

The charismatic movement of the 1960s and the apostolic networks of the 1970s (and then in their larger mutation in the 1990s, which will be mentioned later) are valuable materials for sociological theory. The social forms that emerged in the 1960s and the 1970s, and later in the 1990s, constitute the raw material for the testing and formulation of sociological theory, but my contention is that the actors within the unfolding narrative were driven by theological ideas and val- ues. In other words, theology functions as a source of theoretical justification, of morality, of intellectual concepts, and of conceiving the future, and provides the basis for personal decision making. This functional notion of theology is rather different from the notion of theology that may be advanced by theolo- gians themselves, who regard their work as the exploration of the biblical text, church history, or culturally relevant philosophical notions—indeed as the nat- ural advancement of their academic discipline. Yet, I believe that the role of theology in the lives of those caught up in the western stream of Pentecostal- ism and charismatic activity is often overlooked. Indeed, one might argue for a more general thesis: theology always provides motivation and values while the social nexus provides the choice of forms into which religious organizations pour themselves.

This general thesis might be seen in the comparison between the forms available in the nineteenth century and those in the twentieth century. In the nineteenth century, with a clearly demarcated set of social strata from aristocratic landowners down to servants and landless artisans, the established church mapped itself onto this structure so that, in theukat any rate, bishops could be drawn from the same social elite as landowners and speak on equal terms with them, and each rank within the church paralleled ranks within society so that the local vicar, perhaps on speaking terms with the local squire or land owner, came at the lower end of the gentry. In short, stratified society and stratified church matched. In Europe after 1945 the social strata began to lose salience and definition, and by the 1960s social mobility was seen as a virtue. The neo-charismatic churches coming into existence in the 1970s reflected the new classless social order.

There is certainly evidence that the first stirrings of the neo-charismatic or apostolic networks in Britain came about through theological engagement. The best documented source occurs in the writings of Arthur Wallis (1923–1988), who grew up with a Brethren background and was therefore opposed to classi- cal denominational structures and procedures. After a powerful experience of the Holy Spirit in 1951, Wallis combined a Brethren ecclesiology with a belief in charismatic gifts and the Ephesians 4 gifts of apostles, prophets, evangelist,

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

4

apostolic networks in britain revisited

9

pastors, and teachers.13 By 1956 Wallis had written a classic book on revival and by the end of the decade was beginning to circulate his ideas to others.14 Together with David Lillie, who may well have been the driving force, he held a conference with an unmistakable ecclesiological focus for about twenty-five people in May 1958, and his vision gradually gained traction over the following years.15

At its inception British Pentecostalism tied the restoration of apostles and prophets to the restoration of spiritual gifts. From 1910 onward, when the first pentecostal church building was erected in England, belief in modern-day apostles was advanced by W.O. Hutchinson (1864–1928), with the result that the Apostolic Church was founded, probably taking the name from that used by W.J. Seymour in Azusa Street but without any other connection. After an early split, the main body of the Apostolic Church settled down as a largely Welsh- speaking cluster of congregations from 1916 onward. It implemented church governance through the combined ministries of apostles and prophets func- tioning under the yoke of a constitutional document that laid down unbreak- able rules for the scope of their ministries.

The thinking developed by Arthur Wallis was certainly supplemented by Cecil Cousen (1913–1989), who had returned from Canada after being touched by the Latter Rain movement that was sparked into life in 1948.16 After his return to England, Cousen, who was expelled from the Apostolic Church in 1953, met with Wallis. The upshot of this is that Cousen must have influenced some of Wallis’s thinking and some of Cousen’s thinking must have been influ- enced by the Latter Rain revival so that, indirectly, the neo-charismatics in Britain have a link with an earlier line of tradition.

At the time, any earlier links were downplayed or forgotten since it was pos- sible to reach conclusions about the role of apostles and prophets by close examination of the text of the New Testament, and this, over next few years, is broadly what happened. Apostolic and prophetic roles were rediscovered without ransacking pentecostal history, evangelical commentaries, or Puritan writings. The theological groundwork that led to the new conception of apos- tles and prophets can usefully be followed in the writings of two magazines

13

14 15 16

P.D. Hocken, “Baptised in the Spirit: The Origins and Early Development of the Charis- matic Movement in Great Britain” (PhD diss., University of Birmingham, 1984), 16. A. Wallis, In the Day of Thy Power (Arlesford: Christian Literature Crusade, 1956). Hocken, Baptised in the Spirit, 18.

P.D. Hocken, “Cecil Cousen,” in S.M. Burgess and E.M. van der Maas, eds., The New Inter- national Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements(Grand Rapids,mi: Zonder- van), 564.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

5

10

kay

published by neo-charismatics,Fulness[sic] (founded ca. 1972) andRestoration (founded 1975). But this is to jump ahead in the story.

The prior question that needs to be asked is why charismatics decided to leave their existing denominational traditions, and to this there is a vari- ety of answers. First, for those who came straight to the Bible fresh from a spiritual experience of the Holy Spirit, it was difficult to discover similarity between the church in the book of Acts and the modern-day church. The one appeared simple, direct, effective, and endowed with a miraculous capacity and the other appeared to be formal, ceremonial, and without miracles or dynamism. Of course one could argue that the new charismatics were sorely ignorant of church history, but most of them did not see this as a failing since their attitudes were resolutely directed toward the eschatological future. Sec- ond, at some point in the 1970s within the charismatic movement there was emphatic preaching upon the subject of “the kingdom.” This turned out to be an ambiguous term. Reference to the kingdom could be seen as a way of speaking about the common ground on which all Christians stood, and they stood there because Jesus in the gospels had preached about the kingdom more than he had spoken about the church. There were preachers who argued that denom- inational labels had no place in the kingdom. Forgive Us Our Denominations (ca. 1971) is the title of a pamphlet that summarized the mood.17Indeed, it was argued from exegesis of John 17:23 that, as soon as Christians gave up denom- inational allegiances, the world would notice what happened and flock to the new unified church (“so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me”). The local church is “the entire redeemed community living in the worldly community in a given area” and not arbitrarily broken up by the accidents of church tradition.18

But the kingdom might also refer to social justice and humanitarian activ- ity. So the kingdom became a moral basis for interchurch cooperation and godly authority. It became a necessary and exemplary religious entity point- ing to the end of the age. “Jesus is delegating his government to men so that the local church becomes a microcosm of the kingdom of heaven on earth.”19 This note of authority became increasingly insistent and received support from the shepherding movement in the United States although, even without such assistance, interpretations of apostleship discovered an implicit refer- ence to authority within the term. That there were connections between the

17 18 19

Kay, Apostolic Networks, 36. George Tarleton, Fulness11 (nd): 12. John Noble, Fulness11 (nd): 7.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

6

apostolic networks in britain revisited

11

shepherding movement in the usa and the neo-charismatic movement in the United Kingdom became evident as discussion took place between members of the Fort Lauderdale Five and neo-charismatic leaders.20Although the British found the Americans helpful and impressive, it appears that the Fort Laud- erdale Five wanted to subsume the British neo-charismatics within and under the authoritative structure they were devising. The British were having none of it and the two sets of people went their separate ways.

A cynical interpretation of events might suggest that power-hungry alpha males were simply seeking biblical justification for their own ambitions, and there may well have been carnality behind what was preached. At the time, nothing was so clear. The promotion of the doctrine of contemporary apostle- ship went hand-in-hand with the doctrine of the kingdom, and the doctrine of the kingdom, however it was interpreted, pointed to a positive future and away from the premillennial worries of classic Pentecostals. Apostles, as the pages of the two neo-charismatic magazines showed, were first seen as church planters but, when the metaphor of master builder (1Cor 3:10) was emphasized, this could open up the possibility that apostles were also destroyers since they needed to clear the ground before any new building might be erected. So apos- tles were there to get rid of all the clutter and lumber of accumulated church tradition in order to prepare ground for new buildings. There was undoubt- edly a misuse of authority and even bullying by those who claimed apostleship (Bryn Jones was seen as the culprit here) and, when a belief in apostolic author- ity was combined with leanings toward the prosperity gospel, the results could be toxic. Money was demanded for “apostolic covering.” At the same time, it was argued that apostles were also a source of unity and that by “relationship” with apostles a new and genuine unity might be achieved—not the unity of denominational bylaws, committees, and conference votes, but the unity of honest personal relations and friendships. All these notions could be found in the New Testament picture of the early church.

Those charismatics who wished to leave mainline denominations came to be called “restorationists,” while those who remained were “renewalists.” There were mediating attempts to bring the parties together and written debate in 1974 within the pages of Renewal magazine, edited by Michael Harper, who allowed the topictobe discussed within his journal.21Arthur Wallis put the case for the restorationists while David Watson spoke for the renewalists. Wallis had

20

21

Walker, Restoring the Kingdom, 97, 99, 101. Two of the British preachers flew to Fort Lauderdale and at least two of the Americans preached at British events and were well received. So the relationship was not simply about accepting authority.

Renewal (August/September 1974), 52 and passim.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

7

12

kay

come to see denominations as a positive hindrance to Christian unity. Watson noted that Jesus continued to attend the synagogue even while bringing in all the blessings of the new covenant. In 1966 Martyn Lloyd-Jones had spoken to the Evangelical Alliance and called for a new pan-evangelical grouping made up of all those Evangelicals scattered in mixed denominations. John Stott opposed him by invoking the repetitious cycles of church history and by pointing to the doctrine of the remnant, the faithful few, who loyally remained within the faithless nation. There was a sense in which the dispute between Wallis and Watson was a repeat of the dispute between Lloyd-Jones and Stott. Coming out or staying in is a perennial issue at a time of change but the point made here is that the arguments in both directions were almost entirely theological, not sociological.

In arguing that denominations were at the root of Christian disunity, restora- tionists had to defend themselves from self-contradiction by insisting that they did not intend to create anything resembling new denominations. Of course, the argument revolved around the precise definition of the worddenomination. This, perhaps, was where the argument deviated from its theological begin- nings. For the restorationists, denominations were made up of church struc- tures and mechanisms that were nowhere to be found in the Bible. The denom- ination was riddled with committees, votes, legalism, and the quest for status. The new entities that the restorationists saw themselves as creating avoided all these pitfalls. Committees and voting were an anathema to restorationism and, to this day, remain outside the restorationist mode of action. The question of legalism is more interesting.

Restorationists found an implicit legalism within Evangelicalism that many of them were leaving behind. This might be the legalism of dress codes, disap- proval of sporting activities, rules about drinking alcohol, going to the cinema, and so on, or it might be about an unconscious constraint on the individual’s relationship with God, which was somehow blighted by an image of a legalistic tyrant rather than a loving father. Gerald Coates wrote a pamphlet, Not Under Law (1975), while Terry Virgo, another restorationist leader, made preaching about grace central to his ministry.22 Everything that Christians did in church and in society ought to be a manifestation of divine grace, and legalism simply had no part in this.

22

T. Virgo,God’s Lavish Grace(Eastbourne,uk: Monarch, 2004).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

8

apostolic networks in britain revisited

13

Social Forms

Once a sufficient number of people had decided to leave the established de- nominations, the neo-charismatic groups were ready to start out on their own.23The theological rationale was in place, although the feature that became most important in the setting up of the new networks concerned the recog- nition that contemporary apostles had the power to ordain elders. The link between the apostle and elders allowed networks to be held together by a strong relational bond. Although there was much talk and preaching about “relationships” and although relationships were seen as more flexible and au- thentic than the official connections between churches within traditional de- nominations, there was a special importance in the apostolic power to ordain. The apostle had the ability to empower people by giving them a particular sta- tus within the congregation.

The neo-charismatic groups that came into existence in the 1970s and 1980s were all doing so before the advent of the Internet. This meant that the scat- tered groups of Christians that at first came together needed to be visited, usu- ally by car, and this limited the geographical scope of connections. The actual building of the network happened in several ways. Sometimes a group of charis- matic Christians had left a traditional church, which was relatively easy to do if the congregation was organized into home groups. The home group was itself a discrete entity. At other times Christians came to the contemporary apostle in person to ask him (in every case it was a man24) to take them on. And once the process had started, it became possible for whole groupings within an existing denomination to move out. There was, for instance, a Baptist Revival Fellow- ship comprised of a like-minded set of believers for whom the message of the neo-charismatics was attractive, and some of them found it easy to exit the Baptist Union.

So the first base for the new grouping was the home. This immediately says something about the social status of these Christians, since most of them owned property. A number of large congregations could trace their beginnings to a dozen people meeting in a home and then, once they outgrew this, they would hire local premises, usually a school but sometimes a community center

23

24

There were good numbers of Anglican charismatics who stayed within the Anglican Church, but some joined the New Wine network, which had the capacity to sustain charismatic parishes even in the face of a non-charismatic bishop. See http://new -wine.org (accessed September 8, 2015).

There was, however, one case in which a husband and wife worked together equally as a team.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

9

14

kay

and then, perhaps five years later, seek to buy their own property. So the social forms into which these neo-charismatic groups fitted were put together from private property and rentable locations and joined together by biblically justi- fied relationships with the apostle. His own ministry might be initially funded from the larger congregation with which he was originally connected. Indeed his own congregation, which may have been built up by him, saw him less and less as he embarked on his travels. This pattern with variants occurred many times. And then, once a set of home groups or start-up congregations was in place, they might then be brought together annually for showcase celebra- tory events. Between these events local “leaders”—the term was nonbiblical but could cover everyone from elders to house group conveners—had oppor- tunities for more frequent meetings with the apostle. At the annual events, restorationist speakers preached powerfully before large crowds, set out visions for the future, and sold recordings of their sermons.

In short, the neo-charismatic networks founded in the 1970s were relatively cheap to run at first because they were situated in homes. Once they began to move to rental property and to pay their ministers and the travel of the itinerant apostle, costs gradually increased. To meet these commitments and to establish themselves on a firmer financial footing, they drew up trust deeds and registered with the Charity Commission in the uk. This allowed them to claim money from the tax authorities and thereby increase the value of gifts by about 22 percent. The actual structures of the new organizations were simple and flexible, local and congregational. Indeed, New Frontiers, one of the most successful of the networks, argued against the setting up or support of parachurch agencies. Everything should come from the local congregation because this ensured accountability to the local leadership, and a biblical justification could be given for this since there were no parachurches in the New Testament. Consequently, mission began to be conducted differently.

The desire to grow, and the experience of rapid successful growth in the uk, was translated into overseas mission. Whereas denominational missionary societies had procedures for the accreditation of missionaries and budgets for committees that oversaw strategy, the new networks allowed most missionary activity to burst out of local congregations often incentivized by spiritual gifts. Short-term mission became popular and was enthusiastically supported from larger congregations that sent their own leaders to needy areas of the world, perhaps, for instance, to Eastern Europe. When eventually the question of church planting overseas occurred, it was obvious that the main church planter ought to be the apostle. In other words, the person at the top of the organization took responsibility for church planting and, in this way, the old method of doing mission was turned on its head. For, in the old way of doing mission, the people

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

10

apostolic networks in britain revisited

15

at the top of the organization stayed comfortably at home while the missionary foot soldiers were posted overseas to all the insecurities and discomforts of a foreign culture. Now, the apostle employed his gifts in other parts of the world just as he had originally done in the uk. The most successful networks conceived of mission as designed to assist church planting rather than to give more general aid to the indigenous church. Moreover, again in the most successful networks, as a consequence of prophetic utterance the disparity in wealth between the north and the Global South was used to advantage: money raised in the richer north was given to church plants in the poorer south.25

Although no direct connection exists between apostolic networks and poli- tics, it is undoubtedly true that the first networks were planted in the context of economic stagnation. Britain’s industrial performance lagged behind much of continental Europe and, during 1974, electricity had to be rationed by a series of planned power cuts brought about by militant striking workers at power sta- tions or in coal mines. During the “winter of discontent” uncollected rubbish littered the streets and there were unburied dead as council workers struck.26 This paralysis was broken by the election of Mrs. Thatcher in 1979. She was a “conviction politician” whose childhood was shaped by Methodism, and she was determined to resist the encroachments of European bureaucracy abroad and militant unionism at home.27 By the time the 1980s were in full swing, Britain’s economic performance was rising and people had money in their pockets. This new entrepreneurial culture and the finance it released assisted the networks that benefited from generous giving and a fresh acceptance of the importance of the market.

TheukNetworks Quantified

Persistent attempts to quantify church membership and attendance within the uk have been made by Peter Brierley, whose research over more than forty years has been recognized by government statistical bodies like the Office for National Statistics and by such well-funded websites as British Religion in Numbers (http://brin.ac.uk). It was to Brierley I turned when making a survey of apostolic networks in the year 2004. According to figures from

25 26

27

Kay, Apostolic Networks, 75.

D. Sandbrook, Seasons in the Sun: The Battle for Britain, 1974–1979. Kindle edition, loc 234 and passim.

John Campbell, Margaret Thatcher: Grocer’s Daughter to Iron Lady (London: Vintage, 2009) 12, 18.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

11

16

kay

Religious Trends no 328 there are 2,094 New Churches in the uk with 2,385 leaders, but closer inspection of these figures revealed a more complicated and less solid picture. Correspondence with Brierley and the networks in 2004 reduced these figures to 647 congregations. In 2014, Brierley in uk Church Statistics no 2: 2010 to 2020 reported 781 new church congregations, which may be compared with a figure of 765 gleaned from current websites.29

table 1

Apostolic Network congregations in 2001 and 2014

Network 2001 Brierley 2014 Brierley 2014 websites

revised

c.net 50 930 Ground Level 77 105 8631 Ichthus 45 88 37 Jesus Fellowship32 53 42 5 Kensington Temple 54 130 Kingdom Faith 13 5 6 Lifelink 6 20 18 New Frontiers 200 250 279 Together 12 17 16 Spirit Connect /Pioneer 12 73 5 Salt and Light 50 75 7033 Vineyard 75 106 104 Total 647 781 765

These figures are volatile as a consequence of the relational nature of the net- works, which do not have the same central organization as the denominations.

28

29

30

31 32 33

P. Brierley, Religious Trends: 2002/2003 No. 3 (Christian Research, 2001), http://www .christian-research.org/religious-trends/uk-church-overview/.

P. Brierley, uk Church Statistics no 2: 2010 to 2020 (Tonbridge, Kent: adbc Publishers), tables 7.1.1 to 7.4.1.

In and around Southampton including small congregations in other languages. Now “New Community.”

From groundlevel.org.uk, 2014.

Also called the Jesus Army and Multiply Network.

Figure taken from Ewen Robertson, “The Distinctive Missiology of the New Churches: An Analysis and Evaluation” (PhD diss., University of Wales, 2014), 26.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

12

apostolic networks in britain revisited

17

Ministerial and church membership is less fixed and there is a tendency for some of the networks to shift and refocus. Those that have maintained a con- sistent theology and philosophy of church planting and resisted the tempta- tion to metamorphose into parachurch service agencies have either grown or held their ground. Others, sometimes with an ecumenical motive, have raised humanitarian activities up the agenda. For example, Pioneer has been active in giving help to those with aids while others have undergone internal reorien- tation by acceptance ofg12 philosophy and then rejection or modification of it (for example, Kensington Temple).34

The comparison between the 2001 and 2014 figures demonstrates overall growth in the sector, although it is also evident that some networks have been badly damaged. For instance, c.net’s leading apostle was involved in moral failure with the result that a large number of associated congregations were “released.” It shrank back to a large central congregation with a network of satellite congregations. Kingdom Faith, which was always inclined to regard itself as a network that congregations might voluntarily join, has also been depleted. Others, such as Ichthus, have suffered defections and yet others (Salt and Light, New Frontiers) have reoriented themselves with the retirement of their main apostle.

This balance between flexibility and stability is important to an understand- ing of the future choices church leaders will need to make. It is also, as we shall see, complicated by the possibility of dual membership. Yet, as the con- trast between early and recent statistics for the apostolic networks implies, one of their fundamental challenges is to find a way of transitioning from the first leader to the second generation of leaders, a problem that was early recognized. Less well appreciated has been that denominational structures, heavily criticized by network preachers in the 1970s, have the advantage of providing a rational method by which leadership is transferred from one per- son or group to others. The voting at denominational general conferences allows a new leader to emerge from the rising cohort. Within the networks the transfer of authority can take place only by the direct handover from the founding apostle to the second-generation leader. This can occur smoothly provided that the founding apostle is prepared to step down after anointing a successor. It can also lead to complexities when younger men, seeking to prove their apostolic credentials, covertly or unconsciously enter into com- petition with one another in an attempt to grasp the mantle of leadership. In the case of New Frontiers, the largest of the groups, the unity of the net-

34

“kt,” accessed Nov 21, 2014, http://kt.org/model12cellchurch12/.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

13

18

kay

work has been sacrificed or dispersed by breaking the network into a number of “spheres,” each led by its own apostolic ministry. About five new spheres have emerged in the uk, each with approximately fifty churches in them. The spheres are roughly circumscribed geographically although, overseas, there is the potential for competition between them. In most of the spheres the apostle is based in the uk and works both at home and overseas, but some of the spheres are based outside the uk and then direct their mission into it.

Repeating Cycles in the Digital Age

Once established, the apostolic networks were boosted by the arrival of the digital age. Personal computers became popular in the 1980s, Windows-based machines started to be plentiful in the early 1990s, and the first website was created in 1991. The new networks were able to project their presence interna- tionally at a tiny cost and, as further digital media became available, recordings of live events could be either streamed or placed on websites for later down- loading.35

Social commentators noticed what was happening in the secular world. Three volumes on The Rise of the Network Society were published in 2000.36 Castells noticed that the vertical bureaucracies of the past had shifted into hor- izontal corporations characterized by organization around process rather than task, team management, maximum contact between suppliers and customers, and the frequent offer of retraining to employees at all levels. The network is flat in the sense that it emphasizes a multiplicity of lateral rather than vertical con- nections and so localizes decision making. At least two of these emphases— local decision making through elders and multiple lateral connections—fitted the emerging structures of the apostolic networks. It would be wrong, how- ever, to argue that the networks shaped themselves to the digital landscape since their features pre-existed the Internet, but they were early adopters of Internet technology, desktop publishing, and electronic ministry. There were also, within the apostolic networks, inherent options for multiplication and subdivision by the potential for creating networks of networks or subnet- works inside larger systems, and these options mirrored what was possible digitally.

35 36

T.L. Friedman,The World is Flat (London: Allen Lane/Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2005). M. Castells,The Rise of the Network Society(Oxford: Blackwell, 2000).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

14

apostolic networks in britain revisited

19

Within business the network society assists the flow of capital investment and the dissemination of information. The network itself is a set of inter- connected nodes in which the node is a point of intersection. This creates a highly dynamic open system that enables “a culture of endless deconstruction and reconstruction.”37 The network society will be compatible with kinship networks by an emphasis on the importance of relationships. Yet, networks themselves have the surprising characteristic that they may create the “small world” phenomenon through highly connected clusters of teams in which each team functions as a node. Imagine a group of five church leaders in the south of the country meeting together regularly and one of these people knows someone within a team of leaders in the north of the country.38 This imme- diately creates a sense in which all the leaders in the south have access to all leaders in the north through the link person. When you add to this pic- ture the apostle as an itinerant figure moving between clusters of highly con- nected leaders, it is possible to see how the apostolic networks enable much richer connections than were common within old-style hierarchical denomi- nations.

At the same time as developments were occurring within the digital world, the Toronto Blessing and associated revivals began to impinge upon the con- sciousness of many believers, particularly in the west.39 It was feasible to hear stimulating sermons and watch the Blessing fall in faraway meetings. In theuk the Blessing quickly flowed through nearly all the networks, although the phe- nomena were interpreted in various ways. For some it was a renewal of renewal and for others it was an eschatological sign of the end that would eventuate in fiery revival at the end of the millennium. Those who treated the Blessing as a loosening and renewing flow dealt with it pastorally and avoided the risk of disillusionment. And although the effects of the Blessing were seen in the fruit of an increased incidence in spiritual gifts and charitable action,40it is also true

37 38

39

40

Castells, Network Society, 502.

See fuller discussion of this issue in Kay, Apostolic Networks, 289–292, where reference is made to P. Ball, Critical Mass (London: Arrow Books, 2004) and P. Chambers, “Social Networks and Religious Identity: An Historical Example from Wales,” in G. Davie, P. Hee- las, and L. Woodhead, eds., Predicting Religion: Critical, Secular and Alternative Features (Aldershot,uk: Ashgate, 2003).

D. Hilborn, ed.,‘Toronto’inPerspective:PapersontheNewCharismaticWaveoftheMid1990s (Carlisle,uk: Acute [An imprint of Paternoster], 2001).

M.T. Lee and M.M. Poloma, A Sociological Study of the Great Commandment in Pentecostal- ism:ThePracticeofGodlyLoveasBenevolentService(Lampeter, Wales: Edwin Mellen Press, 2009).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

15

20

kay

that justifications and interpretations of the Blessing functioned like the out- pouring of the Spirit in the 1960s to produce a theological driver that would push churches into new social forms.41

The original networks had been created by linking congregations led by elders with an itinerant apostle. Horizontal connections between churches were created when elders connected with the same apostle met one another. But other kinds of horizontal extension were also possible when apostles them- selves came into relationship with one another. Thus there might be an apos- tolic group in England and another one in France and, so long as the two apos- tolic figures cooperated, it was simple enough to set up networks of two or three networks. It was also possible to introduce a layer over the top if international apostles were accepted by local apostles. The same looseness of connection was to be found, but larger international wholes could be brought into existence. We might see this sort of linkage as a metanetwork.

Such metanetworks included those associated with the New Apostolic Ref- ormation (nar), and in this the Toronto church and John Arnott played a role,42 thoughwhatissaidabouttheTorontochurchmightequallybeappliedtoanyof thenarlarge churches with a similar emphasis and equally intentional global outreach.43 These networks allowed ministers within networks or denomina- tions to belong to, for instance, the Partners in Harvest circle while retaining membership of any other grouping. Such a dual membership option was prac- tically unheard of within denominational circles since people were exclusively Baptists or Methodists or Anglicans, and so on, and could not take out mem- bership of several churches at once. Consequently there were churches and individual ministers whose membership was bifurcated. It was not uncommon for such ministers to take what they felt they needed from whichever network

41

42

43

In this connection Christopher A. Stephenson, “Should Pentecostal Theology Be Analytic Theology?” Pneuma 36, no. 2, (2014): 246–264, is helpful. Nonanalytic theology is, or is close to, a form of rhetoric intended to persuade hearers. It is not an entirely rational or systematic discourse full of carefully defined terms arranged together intricately. C. Peter Wagner, Foreword to Dr. Bill Hamon, Apostles, Prophets and the Coming Moves of God: God’s End-Time Plans for His Church and Planet Earth (Santa Rosa, fl: Christian International, 1997). See also “Partners in Harvest (PiH) & Friends in Harvest (FiH) is our Church Network of over 500 churches internationally in over 50 Nations” on http:// catchthefire.com/media/profiles/john-carol-arnott# (accessed November 23, 2014). M.J. Cartledge, “‘Catch the Fire’: Revivalist Spirituality from Toronto to Beyond,”PentecoS- tudies 13, no. 2, (2014): 217–238. Randy Clark, Lighting Fires: Keeping the Spirit of Revival Alive in Your Heart and the Hearts of Others Around You (Lake Mary, Fl.: Creation House, 1998). M.M. Poloma, Main Street Mystics: The Toronto Blessing and Reviving Pentecostalism (Walnut Creek,ca: AltaMira Press, 2003).

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

16

apostolic networks in britain revisited

21

or denomination they belonged to. They might attend the General Conference of their denominationandthe annual conferences either of a local network or of the metanetwork and receive teaching material from all sources.

This form of dual membership led to dual identity and, within the uk, had the effect of making it easier to leave the long-established pentecostal denom- inations because the church or minister could come out of, for instance, the Assemblies of God and yet not walk into the wilderness but simply embrace more closely the network to which he or she had already affiliated and in which he or she had friends. Perhaps as a way of meeting this challenge, the traditional denominations began to react by allowing internal groupings to form within their own collections of churches. So, one might now find regional or district groups of pentecostal churches that were officially recognized by the denom- ination as well as specialized network groupings, perhaps run on an apostolic basis, that crossed over regional lines and created a hybrid between denomina- tional hierarchy and apostolic connectivity. Another way of putting this would be to say that the denominations started to take on some of the characteristics of networks while the networks moved in a variety of directions depending on the theological principles that guided them. In some respects the legacy of the apostolic networks is to be found in the adoption by other Christian groupings of those features of network life or organization that worked well: the networks, if one can use an analogy, had something of the same relationship to churches as Formula 1 racing has to the domestic car industry—an opportunity for the testing of prototypes.

And yet, to end on a darker note, some elements of the apostolic networks and their derivatives inside denominations are a cause for concern. Concerns center on the moral character and theological understanding of the people who claim apostolic status. First, the word apostle may be wrenched from its biblical context and turned into a title rather than a New Testament function. The titleapostleis applied to someone at the top of an authoritarian hierarchy rather than to someone whose church-planting, healing, and pastoral ministry is modelled on the exemplars of the early church.

Second,thedoctrineofapostolicityisonethatvestshugeamountsofauthor- ity and putative wisdom in the apostolic claimant. The installation of an apos- tolic system will often be accompanied by theremoval of any general conference with decisions by voting. As a result there is no corporate authority since it all now rests in a few “anointed” individuals who stand above contradiction and beyond any form of correction. Where there is no peer group to administer correction, humility is viewed as a sign of weakness and, worse, apostolicity is defined in terms of the acquisition and exercise of authority: the greater the authority the greater the evidence of apostolic status. This kind of teaching is

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

17

22

kay

contrary to the New Testament on a number of fronts. Not only is the virtue of humility ignored in this reading of Scripture but also a bombastic and comman- deering attitude is specifically forbidden by Christ himself: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise author- ity over them. Not so with you” (Matt 20:25, italics added).

Third, connected with an overemphasis on apostolic authority is an unwill- ingness to allow for financial transparency. Apostles of this kind believe that they have an absolute right to money and are extremely unwilling to allow their financial affairs to be investigated or queried. While they presumably observe the letter of the law and employ reputable accountants or auditors, their treat- ment of those who actually donate money is frequently nauseating. Whereas the giving of money is an act of grace and generosity, those in “apostolic” posi- tions may come to regard other people’s money as theirs by right. The notions that Christian organizations “walk in the light” or that giving flows from com- passion have been lost.

Fourth, the treatment of doctrine itself is suspect since there are indica- tions that, in some places, business practices supersede theological principles. Indeed, where Christian churches talk about their “brand” rather than their theology, it is time to ask serious questions about how long such groupings will last. Theology within the networks, as this essay has argued, functions as motivational and value-laden discourse and loses its traditional normative role; remove normativity and there is nothing beyond pragmatics by which the church guides itself. The concept of the church as the people of God in the pres- ence of God is lost and, instead of a community inspired by the Holy Spirit, we see an agency designed to hit certain targets using inflexible procedures drawn from the worlds of business or management.

It is no surprise that the problems described here reared their ugly heads during the New Testament era and that early Christians started to test the genuineness of apostleship: “I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false” (Rev 2.2). If apostolic networks proliferate in the twenty-first century, the same tests will need to be applied today.

PNEUMA 38 (2016) 5–22

18