Friday, October 9, 2009

OUT OF SIGHT - OUT OF TOUCH ...

Recent discussion of the FSAOF blog has focused on the Army’s response or lack of it to those who ‘leave the work.’ I am hopeful that this discussion will generate some specific guidelines for use across the Army so that officers who are taking up the “former” mantle will find some systemic support for that oftentimes traumatic transition.

Yet all too often, a corporate policy is only as good as the abilities and attitudes of those who are charged with carrying out that policy. I know of very few Salvation Army officers who would say that they have too little work to do, as most of us are dealing with a plate that is overflowing with responsibility, and sadly, pastoral care doesn’t always rise to the top of the list. Like many corps officers, the typical divisional commander is hard-pressed to meet the pastoral needs of his or her active and retired officers, and the expectation that they will be able to keep in contact with those who have moved in a different direction may be unrealistic. “Out of sight, out of mind” is a fact of life, whether we like it or not. This is not to say that we shouldn’t reach out to former officers, but it’s probably not top priority at the beginning the day.

The recent posts have, however, forced me to consider my own reactions, both past and present. As an active officer, my response to someone choosing a different path than officership has generally depended upon my relationship (or lack of one) with the person involved. If I'd normally send them a note or call them were they sharing a college graduation or a death in the family, I've generally done the same upon hearing of their decision. If I had little more than a passing acquaintance, I probably wouldn't be in contact.

However, there have been times when I have gotten involved in the dynamics of an officer resignation. In a recent situation, our corps was privileged to invite a DHQ officer to be with us on her last Sunday as an active officer, where we were able to provide her with affirmation of her work, a blessing upon her new ministry, as well as a luncheon and some shower gifts for her new home. Our intention was to treat this transition for her with respect and with appreciation for her impact on our lives.

I’d suggest that what made this particular situation a positive one was our commitment to treat our friend’s decision as one that we were willing to support, even though I was sad to see her leave the Army. People do change directions in life, and working to normalize those transitions is a healthy response to people we love, even if we don’t fully agree with their decision. By helping those involved grieve the losses and celebrate the new possibilities, we are modeling a healthy approach to life in general.

The more difficult situations are those when there has been a dismissal or a marriage breakdown. What do we do? After all, there is often no public announcement, only a whispered message that implies some difficulty that can’t quite be explained. I must admit that in all too many instances, I've done nothing, excusing my inaction with the thought that perhaps someone else who is closer to them will have involvement. Sadly, that may be the thought of many officers, and the officer being asked to leave is also stripped of much of his or her support system at a time when they most need that support. No one offers to baby-sit, help clean the quarters, or lend some money.

A friend who left officership, admittedly under a cloud of her own making, told me that I was the only officer who had even called. That saddened me, knowing that there were many who were all too willing to talk to me about the ensuing scandal. Perhaps those are the situations where the administration needs to request that someone make contact and stay in contact, whether they be an active officer in the vicinity, a retired officer of discretion, or even someone from outside our denomination.

Ultimately, while the corporate response is important, all Salvation Army officers, active, former or retired, have a responsibility to each other to support, comfort, confront and care for each other. While we may not reach out every time a rumor comes our way or a bulletin crosses our computer screen, we can make an effort to call or e-mail a session-mate or a former officer whom we had served with simply to check in and to say, “I remember.” And we can do it now.
So to those whose paths have crossed with mine, you are not forgotten. Your ministry has touched my life, and I am grateful. The words of II Thess. 3:5 from The Message are my prayer for you today: “May the Master take you by the hand and lead you along the path of God's love and Christ's endurance.”

Major JoAnn Shade
Major JoAnn Shade ministers with her husband Larry as the corps officers and Directors of the Ray and Joan Kroc Corps Community Center. She received a B.A. in sociology from S.U.N.Y. at Binghamton, a M.A. in Pastoral Counseling, and a Doctor of Ministry degree from Ashland Theological Seminary in June, 2006. She is a prolific writer, lecturer, and busy counselor and has contributed to this blog since its inception.

31 comments:

Bob Deidrick said...

JoAnn,thank you for your insight.
It has been more than once that I have seen comment like words of your own that share of the transition with respect and appreciation of an officer after they leave officership and become a "former". Unfortunately most headquarters officers in leadership
do not know how to handle situations like these and it is "awkward" for them. The best appreciation that I felt was from an employee in finance that thanked me for my years of service and stewardship at my check-out audit.

USA East , residing in Arizona

Anonymous said...

These comments are in reference to the USA Central Territory initiative where retired Officers contact 'formers'.
--------------------------------
I am in the Central Territory and am stilghtly familiar with the program. I think it began in 2006 or 2007, not too long after we resigned. We have never been approached about being part of this program.

I do know, however, 2 sets of former officers who have participated in the program. One cpuple has been reinstated and have their rank back, while another has been given an "in charge" appointment, but doesn't have their rank back yet.

It seems to me that they are focusing on formers who are interested in re-entering officership.

I was approached by an active officer about a year ago who asked if I was interested in being part of this. She seemed to think that the retired officers who are part of the program are encouraged to bring healing and restoration to former officers and their relationship with The Salvation Army...I'm not sure, It might just be the formers that show an interest in being REINSTATED again.

Former
USA Central Teiitory

Anonymous said...

I believe I have indicated before on this forum that I got marginal support from THQ and a retired married officer couple. THat is, until I married "outside" the Army and it was clear I wouldn't return to officership. Then I became "non-existent". My departure was due to marriage breakdown - I have no idea what "discussion" was held after I left the division; however, I do know that my 13 years as an officer, serving GOD and the Army, were rewarding, challenging, and GOd-blessed. No matter how I was treated, or not treated, upon my resignation.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Jo for saying in a much more coherant way what I tried to say clumsily earlier.
Sometimes, by the time we know that something is wrong it is too late to do something about it. Couldn't we start thinking more pro-actively? Fellow workers in the vineyard are going to find other fields to plow. What are we going to do to ease the pain, and make sure that they are given as much care and concern as we possibly can?
Why does it seem insurmountable to create infrustructure that will help us make transitions and stay in touch?

Anonymous said...

Very often we don't know what to do with people's pain and rather than face up to it ignore it, brush it under the carpet. The person who is living with cancer and we never mention it ... the person who has recently lost a loved one, their life long partner and after the initial words of sympathy never mention it again for fear of upsetting the person or not knowing what to say. Could this sadly be similar with 'formers' a sense of awkwardness and not knowing what to say or how to handle the situation. I acknowledge it is no excuse and people should learn how ... but ... are many of us guilty of what we don't know what to do or how to deal with we ignore. Sorry for the added pain this causes!

Lindum said...

JoAnn, you are as per usual razor sharp and spot on!

The dynamics of officer terminations are very complex and complicated. Right from early days the SA has operated a revolving door policy......with people being expendable. In percentage terms to membership, the world-wide SA must have trained more people for full time ministry than any other church denomination on earth........... and also lost the most for one reason or another.

We hear usually only one side of any story - the agrieved former officer one - and then only what such good people want you and I to hear.

What we also have to realise that as there are people who move on and move out by conviction and are released as such - on the other hand, many former officers who say they have resigned by choice, they have only had a choice of resigning themselves or being dismissed for gross misconduct and/or blatant betrayal of trust.
(just fill in according to people you may know of in your territory/ division) -

I dare to say that with some of the200 FSAOF members,the SA has been very patient and generous inspite of them never being able to return to officer rank because of dismissal or resignation for gross misconduct unbefitting an officer.

How much aftercare is sufficient? For some nothing will be good enough as they have lost their ministry and living somehow.

In my medium sized UKT corps I have got 14 soldiers who are former officers - some elderly others not so - all lovely and helpful folks with no real axe to grind, this is largely because they have moved on from the past.... One married couple in particular has every reason to be agrieved with the way they were basically dismissed with only a couple of years to go to retirement and thus forfeiting, for example, pension rights build up over nearly 40 years service each. Harsh? yes it sure is.... I have only heard a little part of their story though!

I think DHQ and THQ personnel should be given a litle more credit for caring and often bending over backwards to accommodate officer' personal circumstances - sometimes at a real cost to other officers.

Just a thought..... how much aftercare do we as corps officers give former soldiers who for one reason or another have gone through a revolving door and left the fellowship?

A strongly paternalistic movement that is ruled by International O&R's ( with local discretions allowed)has very little leeway but to apply these to the letter..... may it be done with divine grace!

Every blessing to you in your ministry...

Anonymous said...

Dear Lindum,

How much after care would be sufficient is definitely one of the things that should be discussed. But, you should know that in many cases, including mine, no aftercare was offered to us. In fact, no one spoke to me personally about my reasons for resigning, or about how I was doing spiritually. No one offered to pray with me until the day before I moved out of the quarters, and that was done over the phone.

I try hard most days to not be too discouraged, because the ultimate decision was ours when it came to resignation. However, in my case - and in the case of many other formers - very little was done to keep my husband and I in the ranks of officership. And it still makes me very sad.

Former, US Central

Anonymous said...

Lindum didn't identify himself but it is assumed he/she is an active officer in the UKT.

I am responding as one of several administrator, and with the approval of the blog creator and editor. Several incorrect assumptions were made by Lindum.

Only invited/approved 'former' officers are allowed to join the FSAO Fellowship, consequently none but those in the fellowship know the identity of the 200+. I would add that most of the 200 are married to other formers, so make the number 300+. Further, many formers share in the fellowship anonymously for personal reasons, most being SA employees and/or holding senior local positions in their corps; perhaps even those formers Lindum pastors in his corps.

Clearly Lindum and the present General are at complete odds with reference to a number of Officer resignations. I would refer Lindum to the General's article 'When Crosses Come', published in the Officer magazine and this blog.
I can only assume that Lindum is a new visitor to the blog; you missed the fact that over a year ago three SA Commissioners tacitly apologized to the FSAOF and assured us of their support, and the Chief of the Staff has instructed us on how to proceed in effecting a more supportive exit program.

There are more than two dozen subjects for discussion in the formers private site with hundreds of comments. Included among the comments are scores of very personal stories of why they left Officership and where they are now. The great majority resigned due the Army's policy on divorce, however, all share that they are still active in ministry in some form. Some have returned to Officership and many are serving as pastors in other denominations. Some have entered the teaching profession and write regularly for Christian publications including the War Cry.

To suggest that a number of those in or fellowship were dismissed is absurd. First, in all likelyhood they would not have sought fellowship with those who would be aware of their failure. Secondly, any comments by them would have been quickly discredited by those who would have known of their background.

Finally, some of the devotionals and other articles shared through the blog have been used in SA periodicals and even in sermon form verbatim. Don't forget that these 200+ with an average of 15 years of Officership behind them represent more than 2000 years of religious experience and ministry.

You rightly commend Major Shade for her very fine thoughts and writing. Do you think she'd take the time to be a somewhat regular contributor to this blog if she felt about the fellowship as you do? rather than fault finding I suggest you steer the former officers in your Corps fellowship to ours, one that seeks for the best in people.

Administrator
Former
USA South

Anonymous said...

Lindum, I was saddened to read your comment and think it is attitudes like yours that give 'formers' fuel in considering us active officers to be uncaring.

I have a 'former officer' in my family and as you would no doubt imagine I have heard much of their pain, disappointments, frustration to name just some emotions. However, even being this close to a 'former' I dare to suggest that none of us will ever really know what another has been through or is going through. Just as one persons grief is very different to another's we are all individuals and respond differently.

Active UKT THQ

Anonymous said...

Lindum, your comments are offensive as they suggest active officers are uncaring and moronic. Are you familiar with those in the former's fellowship? I served under two of them and would gladly do so again; true servants...

Active DHQ
USA East

Anonymous said...

Of course, a cursory look at the many many responses from the ex-officers would prove the theory of after care went to the "good" ex-officers to be totally false. (Of course, those dozens of private comments are not available to those who are not members of our private fellowship.)

We left in very good standing, and have had absolutely NO aftercare. I take offense, once again, at the arrogance of the Army to even hint that the many officers that were left by the side of the road, deserved to be left alone.

Ray Neuman
Former
USA Central

Bob Deidrick said...

Dear Lindum,

Serve 25 years and then resign in good standing and still have people treat you with a cold attitude and see how you feel.
It is not only aftercare but appreciation for years of service that would be helpful. No one would like to think that many years of hard work and sacrifice were not respected and acknowledged
in a decent manner.
My thank you was ,"Please return your officer medical card and ID to territorial headquarters and never declare yourself as an officer again ". I enjoyed wearing my LS pin for one month on my uniform, now I wear it on my pajamas.

Sorry, but I am out of sight and you are out of touch.

USA East,residing in Arizona, USA West.

Lindum said...

To 'Former USA'

Thank you for your comment in response to my posting......

It is obvious from your posting that the total lack of after care is preceeded by a total absence of care during your period of distress as an 'active' - this is indefensible and uacceptable behaviour on the part of your line-management and the SA as a whole.

How much after care would be sufficient is definitely one of the things that should be discussed. Especially for those people who have moved on by choice and conviction into new spheres of service..... the need for intensive and extensive after care would be far less acute than for those who feel they have been put in a untenable position by the organisational structures (or maybe even by self) and feel they have not being listened to.

Personally speaking, if I left officership either by free choice or not then I would expect the SA to follow a clear exit strategy that is humane, affirming, generous and appreciative... after that I am on my own and become responsible for self and would not want to be in regular continued contact with my former employer. That is not always very easy when you have been part of a controlling, paternalistic movement that took care of most of your practical and emotional needs.

I am also a firm believer of keeping a door ajar so that after a dignified exit there is always a possibility of a dignified re-entry. Having been an officer for some decades, I have witnessed some very undignified and ugly exits that made a possible re-entry nigh impossible. Yet some of these folks have been reaccepted and serving once again as officers in the UKT.

As I said at the beginning of my original posting:

"The dynamics of officer terminations are very complex and complicated"

With much grace and good wishes to you and yours.....

Anonymous said...

Lindum, you wrote; "Personally speaking, if I left officership either by free choice or not then I would expect the SA to follow a clear exit strategy that is humane, affirming, generous and appreciative... "

From your post of yesterday and today's, I believe there is one adjective missing from your suggested SA exit strategy- how about "an exit procedure that permeates with Christian love"...

Former
Left by choice
Corps Recruiting Sgt.
UKT

Anonymous said...

lindum you wrote: As I said at the beginning of my original posting:

"The dynamics of officer terminations are very complex and complicated"

Your comments prove they're beyond your ability to comprehend them.

And, attempting to cosy up to JoAnn is embarassing to watch and no doubt painful to her...

Active
USA

Anonymous said...

Guess the flea in your ear caused a brain awakening Lindum !

We'll chat at congress in Bristol, if you care to identify yourself.

UK Active

Lindum said...

HI RS/UKT

'Personally speaking, if I left officership either by free choice or not then I would expect the SA to follow a clear exit strategy that is humane, affirming, generous and appreciative... '

I am of the belief that these attributes are Christian qualities that should be a given out of respect/ concern for anyone whether deserved or undeserved - everybody has the right to be treated with respect as a norm - never to be earned or on merit.

In the case of the SA this goes for anybody associated with the movement: friend/ soldier/ adherent/ junior soldier/ active /retired/ former etc etc

Earlier I wrote:

'Just a thought..... how much aftercare do we as corps officers give former soldiers who for one reason or another have gone through a revolving door and left the fellowship?'

Some will be much better at it than others - from non-existent to excellent - usually the reality lies somewhere in between, sadly more often than not towards the non existent. The same goes for HQ staff.

I have got two former officers in my close immediate family, each with their own story to tell. Each affirm the engrained coldness and brutality of a legalistic system governed by O & R's but also the kindness and support of HQ officer individuals away from office mentality.

General John Gowans was a brave man when he attempted to change many matters pertaining officership and bring it into the 20th/ 21th century out of the 19th.
Alas, very few of these have been adopted in some parts of the developed world,the USA included.

An important one being single spouse officership - a major cause in double officer resignations -when at least one partner could have been retained in active service even if the other half felt the need to move out of officership. I realise, with pain, that there will be many within this fellowship who fall in this catagory.


This will be the last comment I will make as I have suddenly realised that I have no right to be part of this forum anyway as an active officer. Sorry for interloping and upsetting the status quo of this forum!

Bless you all......

Anonymous said...

Thank you JoAnn for your thoughtful article. The discussion of aftercare and consideration of our own reaction to resignations and terminations is the beginning of better transitions "away" from the Army. Prior to my termination due to separation and divorce, I too needed to reach out more to fellow officers leaving the work. But busyness and awkwardness also kept me from always doing the right thing of keeping contact and offering support.
The painful experience of being "cast out" has changed me entirely. Rather than seeing people through my former legalistic, judgmental lens, I see that true grace is practiced by enduring awkward situations to show love and choosing people as a priority. Grace should be offered to all whether terminated or some other situtaion beyond a person's control. This needs to apply to former officers, soldiers as well as former Christians.
As a former officer and current Presbyterian, I accept your challenge "to support, confort, confront and care for each other." I feel uniquely qualified to understand the painful and difficult transition from the Army. Thank you for the reminder to practice grace both to all types of "formers" as well as Army administration at every opportunity.

USA West, residing in California.

Spartacus said...

I'll just add something which has been mentioned before.

When William Booth's children (well, three of them), decided that the SA was not for them, Booth cut them off completely. No contact, no love, no inheritance - they were even banned from family occasions such as funerals and weddings.

Basically, Booth was a despot, and that sort of thinking is still ingrained on the Army's psyche. To leave the ranks was seen by Booth and Bramwell as an act of betrayal for which there could be no forgiveness and no way back.

Sadly, things haven't changed much in 150 years.

Former

UKT

Bob Deidrick said...

Spartacus,
If there is to be no change, no forgiveness, no understanding...
What will God do about the situation ? It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of The Living God. God uses people filled with His Spirit and that follow His will, and where that is lacking He will look elsewhere. The Pharicees thought that once Jesus was out of the way that their "religion" was safe and that they would continue on in their pride.The Bible declares otherwise.
What about " Look how they love one another" ?

Former USA East

Anonymous said...

Lindum,

I have a few choice words for you but being a Chrisitan young man I'll simply suggest that if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. DON'T BE PART OF THE PROBLEM!

Active
USA THQ

FORMER SALVATION ARMY OFFICERS FELLOWSHIP said...

Lindum, as the creator and editor of this blog please consider yourself welcome to share your views at any time that the Spirit leads you to do so.

You will have learned in these last two days that our fellowship doesn't lack for passion and conviction. Across the board I would term our members as passionate about the cause of Christ and we are convinced that a more professional and caring exit policy is in the best interest of 'our' army. We all hope that changes will be made on the issue of aftercare for 'former officers'. I've heard from active officers in many parts of the world, including leadership, and all are in union with our fellowship's cause.

I am a former officer and served in four different countries and now live and soldier in Exeter, UK. I don't know where you are stationed but look forward to meeting you at some point in the future to share freely with you about our fellowship's contention. You are welcome to become a regular visitor, contributor and commentator on our blog.

On behalf of the fellowship, many blessings.
Sven

PS Please share our blog address with the former officers in your Corps

Peter Jamieson said...

One married couple in particular has every reason to be agrieved with the way they were basically dismissed with only a couple of years to go to retirement and thus forfeiting, for example, pension rights build up over nearly 40 years service each. Harsh? yes it sure is.... I have only heard a little part of their story though!

Help after reading that commentI am disturbed. Even if the person had committed fraud, murder which is up tot he courts to punish how do you justify removing a pension. In my country you would risk a problem with over human rights, clearly not an issue to the SA people involved here.

Lindum said...

Peter

'Help after reading that commentI am disturbed. Even if the person had committed fraud, murder which is up tot he courts to punish how do you justify removing a pension. In my country you would risk a problem with over human rights, clearly not an issue to the SA people involved here.'

In the UK, the SA operates an internal private officer retirement fund that is technically not a recognised pension by law. The SA has successfully fought very hard to keep this in-house arrangement exempt in recent years. The UKT has got the financial resources to do so.It is a non-contributory one to the officer - at around 50% of final basic allowance + full long service allowance - with the appointment being charged by assessment.


In some other territories/ commands - usually the ones that are not financially as strong - the Army often pays into an external personal pension plan to which the officer can also personally contribute by topping up - the total accrued pot then becomes the property of the plan holder regardless of status as officer or not.


I am not sure what the UK legal situation is when you have no accrued personal SA pension plan in place where no personal contributions have been included.

In very recent years a more generous resettlement allowance has been provided for on resignation/ termination that includes a lost retirement allowance provision based on service years.

A very small move in the right direction! Still a long way to go!

Lindum said...

Thank you Sven...... say 'hi' to Gladys from me!

Anonymous said...

Greetings Lindum, whoever you are ... you certainly stirred up a hornets nest over the last few days!
Glad

Spartacus said...

Hi, Bob.

I agree with you. I honestly think that Booth's refusal to forgive his own children was a heinous sin, and completely contrary to the "purity of heart" that he loved to preach.

Christianity begins in the home, and for that reason, and some others, I think that Booth may have a bit of trouble on judgement day.

Matthew 18:35

Spartacus

Anonymous said...

As A former dc I, too, may have trouble on judgement day! It's been a trying day.

Retired
USA East

Randy Savage said...

Interesting thoughts from JoAnn.

Equally interesting and passionate thoughts from all others.

Somewhere in the Army history, some basic Christian principles were abandoned for the sake of organizational survival. Perhaps care and concern for officer personnel was never in the basic DNA of the Army - especially if we accept the premise presented that Booth totally alienated his own children.

I suppose it becomes a matter of priority. If we take liberty to apply the Scripture text, "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also", it is quite obvious that the organization does not treasure its officer personnel as demonstrated by the lack of pastoral care to active officers.

The excuse of being too busy is unacceptable. The problem is a mixed-up priority list, and a distinct focuse on self preservation, self-centeredness, and self-aggrandizement (please do not forget, formers were once active officers, guilty of those same things).

When leaving officership, I had no pipe dreams that someone in the organization would chase after me. I really had no expectation that anyone would contact me, even when the current DC mistakenly called my cell phone on two different occasions and promised we would get together "soon".

The reality is, while we have been indoctronated with the idea that the Army is paternalistic, the organization is self serving and values the organization's continued success over her officers. This is demonstrated by the attitude that officers are dispensable and replaceable.

There are some well meaning officers in the Army who genuinely care for people. Over time, however, an officer must accept the organizational processes and conform to accepted behavior or get out.

Contemporary ledership theory suggests that an organization's most valuable asset is its personnel. Organizations that de-value human resources eventually wither and die. Organizational success is not dependent on popularity, money, or ability. True organizational success hinges on how an organization decides to treat its stakeholders.

FORMER SALVATION ARMY OFFICERS FELLOWSHIP said...

THIS ARTICLE IS BEING REPOSTED AS ONE SA COMMISSIONER SHARED "WE APPEAR TO BE OUT OF TOUCH WITH SOME OF THE NEEDS OF THOSE LEAVING THE WORK"....

SINCE THE ARTICLE WAS FIRST PUBLISHED OUR MEMBERSHIP AND BLOG VISITOR COUNT HAVE BOTH INCREASED BY SOME 15% AND GROWING.

Anonymous said...

And the beat goes on.....

United States former