Ecumenical networks are largely taken for granted by those whom they involve. The longer one is active in church life, particularly at national or international level, the more significant they become. The different layers of responsibility and the timespan involved in personal friendships are both integral to any understanding of them. Recent discussion within the WCC about the ‘reconfiguration of the ecumenical movement’ has raised once again the basis of representation in the council, a topic which goes back to some of the earliest discussions about its structure in the mid 1930s. The key issue is the tension between a relatively informal grouping, based on networks of people who already know one another, and a formal structure, based on the official representatives of the churches – which also assumes that its members will be churches rather than Christian associations of various kinds. It is a commonplace of ecumenical historiography that the formation of the WCC depended heavily on a pre-existing network of personal friends. But very often there is relatively little analysis of its nature. In fact, it is inherently difficult to analyse, because the official records give next to no information about it; better sources are letters and memoirs, notwithstanding any personal bias. Such bias may actually be key evidence. This paper uses the discussions about a future WCC in the 1930s as a focus for analysing the networks involved. The issue is well summed up in a letter from Henry van Dusen to William Temple in July 1938 about whether the proposed World Council should be exclusively composed of official church representatives. Van Dusen, who clearly felt personally threatened by this, pleaded for the inclusion of co-opted members, since without them ‘elements of vital importance for the Church’ would never find their way into the Council. The issue of how to secure sufficient women, young prople and the non-ordained has never gone away.