Movements that change the world

In 1771 there were just 300 Methodists in the American colonies led by four ministers. By the time of Francis Asbury’s death in 1816, Methodism could claim 2,000 ministers and over 200,000 members in a well-coordinated movement.

This is the second in a series of case studies through the movement lifecycle. The first was on St Francis of Assisi and the birth of a movement.

The second involves St Francis of Asbury and the growth of a movement. It looks at the amazing story of the Methodists and Baptists on the US frontier.

Here’s what I’m learning. . .

1. The “fringe principle” again
Without exception, the breakthroughs in the expansion and the renewal of the church occur on the fringe and never at the centre of ecclesiastic power (Paul Pierson, Fuller Seminary).

2. Without faith it’s impossible
The upstart Methodists and Baptists had none of the resources, education, or social prestige of the mainline churches, but they had faith. By faith they were willing to risk everything in order to win a new generation to Christ. A white-hot faith alone was sufficient to conquer the US frontier.

3. Apostolic leadership
You cannot explain the rise of British Methodism without reference to John Wesley. So you cannot explain the rise of American Methodism without reference to Francis Asbury. His apostolic vision and example, inspired a new generation of pioneering leaders who functioned like a Protestant version of the Catholic religious orders.

4. Rapid deployment
In a crisis you do not ask: Who has proper qualifications? You ask: Who can get the job done? The US frontier confronted the churches with a crisis of opportunity. The movements that deployed under-educated, under-funded, gifted, called and committed lay people, got the job done.

5. Growing leaders
The upstarts were not opposed to training their leaders. They just did their training on the job. The mainline churches preferred well-paid and educated clergy whose faith had been tamed by secularized theology in a classroom environment. The outcome was predictable.

6. Mission structures
Both movements structured for mission and rapid growth. They allowed maximum authority and responsibility on the front line. The “glue” that held these movements together was not a tight organizational structure but their commitment to a common cause. The Methodists had the best of both worlds. Local autonomy supplemented by itinerant circuit riders who pioneered new territory and strengthened the growing network of churches.

7. Eventual but not inevitable decline
Eventually the Methodists joined the ranks of the more sedate mainline churches and moved into decline. Why? Their circuit riders got off their horses to become settled parish clergy. Secularized theological education replaced life-long, on the job, ministry training. A professional elite disempowered ordinary people called and willing to serve. Perhaps some of them went off and planted Baptist churches instead!

Tomorrow I’ll post the full article for the brave to download.

Previous post: How the West was won