CHAPTER FOURTEEN

APOSTOLIC NETWORKS IN BRITAIN: PERSONALITY AND PRAXIS

William K. Kay

Summary

Personality theory has already shed light on the functioning of Christian denominations. There are special diffi culties, however, in the application of personality theory to new Christian groups. This is because new Christian groups are often imprecisely defi ned. Attention needs to be given to the characteristic roles and practices of these groups. Following the charismatic movement of the 1960s, apostolic networks grew up in the 1970s. No published empirical research has been carried out on their congregations. The survey-based evidence presented here suggests that extraversion and neuroticism function among congregational leaders of these groups in ways similar to those found among Pentecostal leaders, but that psychoticism is associated with church planting and ministry to drug addicts. The chapter argues that personality theory may have a useful part to play in establishing the classifi cation of religious groups.

Personality and Religion

In recent years sustained attempts have been made to relate aspects of personality theory to dimensions of the church (e.g. Francis, Craig and Butler, 2005; Francis and Jones, 1996; Francis, Payne and Jones, 2001; Francis and Pearson, 1985a, 1985b, 1991; Francis, Pearson, Carter and Kay, 1981a, 1981b). The theoretical account of this relationship is made diffi cult by the range of personality theories on offer and by the range of denominations, churchmanships, and cultural contexts in which churches are situated.

Preliminary considerations Clearly, in order to make a proper assessment of the impact of per- sonality theory on clergy, it is necessary to clarify exactly how groups of clergy may be composed. The most obvious method of classifying 322 william k. kay clergy is by identifying them with their denomination. Personality theory can be applied to groups of Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, and so on, exploring the correlations between different personality dimensions or types of each of these groups of clergy and their beliefs and priorities (Kay and Francis, 1996). The assumption here is that core doctrinal traditions are suffi ciently strong to give each group of clergy a slightly different identity. Yet this is by no means the whole story, since there is considerable variation within the larger and older Christian denomina- tions. The notion of ‘churchmanship’ encapsulates these variations, and the best shorthand distinction between different types of churchmanship is often theological. Basic theological tenets are interpreted in markedly different ways. Typically, theological liberals are inclined to interpret core beliefs symbolically and with acknowledgement to the fl exibility built into their tradition. Typically, theological conservatives are inclined to interpret core beliefs literally and without acknowledging the possibility of fl exibility. This means that a comprehensive classifi catory system of clergy will take account not only of their denominational affi liation but also of their theological conservatism or liberalism (Randall, 2005). Like any classifi catory system of this kind, there are diffi culties in applying it to clergy who are in new and emerging groups. For instance, it becomes diffi cult to apply the system to a minister who was once in a Baptist setting, worshipped for a while in an Anglican church and then joined a network. The charismatic movement of the 1960s saw many pilgrimages across the theological spectrum. The concern of this chapter is for those who ended up in what have variously been called ‘house churches’, ‘new churches’ or, more accurately, ‘apostolic networks’, which emerged mainly from Pentecostal and Baptist churches though with a mixture of Anglican, Roman Catholic and others as well (see Kay, 2007 for more details). Theological conservatism and liberalism are harder to assess in these circumstances because relics of older belief systems may be partially retained. For this reason it is probably more appropriate to direct personal- ity theory to specifi c roles and practices within apostolic networks. For instance, the role of the minister in evangelism or church planting may crucially distinguish between one network and another, or between the networks and the churches out of which they grew. Similarly, the practice of prophecy (extempore inspired utterance) within apostolic network congregations may provide measurable distinctives that are far more salient than conventional features relating to liturgy or state-