Globally, there are many Methodist Churches and so this type of ecclesiology is more common than might at first appear. At first sight, Methodism seems to have a lot in common with congregationalist churches. However, Methodism is not congregationalist. The full church is not found in the local church but in the conference.
Perhaps three words summarise connexionalism; coincidentally they all begin with the letter 'm':
- Mission forms connexional ecclesiology. A connexion is not a permanent structure; it was designed to enable deployment of resources for mission. When a piece of work is finished, maybe after many decades, the church will close, the building will be sold and the proceeds go elsewhere to further mission.
- Membership - unlike the Church of England, Methodism does not try to be everywhere. In the early days, people elected to join a society. Joining the Methodist Church is still like joining a society today. Members still receive annual tickets. Membership implies commitment to furthering the work of the church and so members sit on committees and contribute to assessments to keep the cause going.
- Mutuality - everything is in shared ownership. The Methodist Church's members hold property and finance in common.
I have written at some length about early Methodism and its contribution to the development of the working class. The contribution connexionalism has made is perhaps typically found in the ways it was copied by a wide range of institutions during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Explore posts around the link to find out more.
It is easy to forget the connexion is not a hierarchy. It is a network of local churches, circuits and districts with the annual conference at its centre and nodes formed by the circuits. Although much smaller, the circuits play a similar role to dioceses in episcopal churches. They exist to resource the mission of their local churches. These days the main resource provided is paid ministry, exercised by presbyters, deacons and lay people.
Lay and ordained work together throughout the church. There is an ordained President of Conference and also a lay Vice-President. At all levels, ordained and lay collaborate over the running of the church.
If the Circuit is like a Diocese, the Conference is like a Bishop. Ordinands become full members of the Conference a few hours before they are ordained. Ordination is authorised by conference and they are ordained under the authority of conference. This is one reason why Methodist Bishops have proved so difficult in Britain; if conference has the power to ordain, why do we need Bishops?
These difficulties have in no way dented Methodism's commitment to ecumenism. Like the Church of England, Methodism sees itself as part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. It's connexionalism does create problems for its two closest partners, the Church of England and the URC, but somehow on the ground close collaboration is possible.
Disclaimer: My aim in these accounts of ecclesiology is to paint a positive overall picture, although I may from time to time touch upon problems and issues. I am not an expert in this field and may make some mistakes. I welcome any comments that will help me present a clearer and more accurate picture. Please note I am not aiming for an in-depth analysis at this stage.
Comments