5. The Methodist Class-Leader

Transcription of article in the Primitive Methodist Magazine by R. Newman Wycherley 

BAD methods have done much to weaken the effectiveness of the class-meeting. It is a mistake for a leader to think he can successfully conduct his class on a kind of hand-to-mouth principle. Such slovenliness is offensive to thoughtful members, and inimical to the best interests of the meeting. “How to teach” is a question of great urgency to educational authorities. They see that upon the how almost everything depends. And how to lead is an equally vital matter to those who are concerned about the continued usefulness of the class-meeting.

In dealing with the question of methods I can only refer to one or two of the more important requirements. I venture to think that these are fundamental and supply a basis upon which others can be safely developed.

There is the size of the class. Leaders of late years have shown a great anxiety for numbers. They are ambitious to be at the head of a large class. They like to see twenty or thirty or forty people crowd into the room and share in the fellowship. A class with an attendance of only nine is looked upon as a failure and not worth the meeting. Quantity is everything. Quality receives scant attention.

But this is not in harmony with Wesley’s idea. In the early days of Methodism classes were limited to a membership of twelve. Wesley was convinced that this number was large enough to engage all the time the leader had at his disposal. And Wesley was right. A small class well marshalled and wisely led is of far greater value than a large class where discipline is lax and oversight is fitful.

The Rev. W.L. Watkinson recently said: “The power of a church is never in its scale. The power of a church is in the depth of its conviction, in the fervour of its spirit, in its enthusiasm, its consecration, its reality. I must say that I am not fascinated by numbers.”

Then a leader should always lead. There is a disposition to depreciate the importance of this. Some leaders are anxious not to be thought too officious. They want the feeling of communism to be strengthened and enhanced among their members. And for this reason they occasionally vacate their position in favour of one of the members. But it is foolish, as many a class can testify. The leader is chosen to be under-shepherd because of his particular aptitude. The interests of the class as a whole are confided to his care. The leaders’ meeting look to him as their representative, and are sure that he will faithfully discharge his duties. When he gives place to someone else he breaks this confidence as well as disappoints those members who have come expecting him to lead.

Another point is that the catechetical method is strictly observed. Many class-meetings have come to be band-meetings or prayer-meetings. They have surrendered the old habit of personal treatment. Wesley’s instructions to the leaders insisted that they should make personal inquiry of the religious condition of each member. There was a time when the method was universally followed, but now it is rarely met. But it is a great pity. The catechetical method is the very core of the class-meeting idea. By its means leader and member come to understand each other. The member gains confidence to tell his spiritual difficulties while the leader obtains the information necessary for intelligent and effective treatment. “If the catechetical or question and answer method were more practised it would be attended with great advantage. Indeed, no mode is better fitted to train Christians to clear, accurate, and discriminating views of Divine truth.

There are other details which are of great consequence, but these three points must be considered as fundamental. A small class regularly conducted by the duly appointed leader, in which the principal place is given to personal testimony. These are Wesley’s essentials and they cannot be bettered.

References

Primitive Methodist Magazine 1909/844