Leadership in the Army is no longer one-size-fits-al

Leadership in the Army is no longer one-size-fits-all. If we truly accept the “priesthood of all believers,” then we need opportunities for lay leaders to take a greater role.

It is entirely reasonable to expect that officership will be a lifelong commitment. After all, it’s not a calling to a particular service path or vocation, but rather a covenanted life—or, to use the language of the Church, a joining of holy orders. The question we should ask ourselves is whether or not officership is a prerequisite for spiritual leadership.
Given our belief in the “priesthood of all believers,” the response seems obvious to me. However, our tradition of reserving certain roles and functions for officers seems to call our belief into question.

Throughout Africa, the ever increasing number of converts and soldiers necessitates the appointing of lay leaders. Constraints faced by territories in the training of officers make it impossible to produce an officer for every ministry unit. These lay leaders are selected on the basis of their spiritual maturity, competency and potential for future development. While considered a local officer, these individuals do not fill the traditional local officer positions but rather take on the role and function of the officer appointed to lead a particular ministry unit. These lay leaders serve on officer terms, but only for a specific time of service.
This practice replicates the early methodology of John Wesley. Having formed a small group of believers who studied and prayed together, he would then appoint a leader to encourage and monitor the group. The leader would be provided with organizational instructions and a small library of books to encourage their development and capacity. Wesley never intended these leaders to be ordained or take on the vestments of clergy.

For the first time, the Canada and Bermuda Territory is faced with the reality of fewer active officers than there are retired officers. This means we may soon have more ministry units than officer personnel to serve them. Unless there is an increase in cadets entering the training college, the gap between the number of available officers and the number of ministry units requiring leadership will only grow.

It would seem that for many potential candidates, a lifelong commitment is not something they are prepared to make.
One solution might be to prioritize mission opportunities and then close ministry units that are only marginally productive but are high consumers of mission resources. Alternatively, a proactive recruitment of lay leaders for a contracted service period may attract willing hands to the task of discipleship and mission expansion. This approach has worked in Australia and Hong Kong. New corps and ministries have been built and, in time, handed over to officer personnel. Similarly, Africa heavily relies on its envoys (lay leaders) to minister to its many congregations. The contracts for these envoys are reviewed annually and are subject to divisional and territorial approval. This process provides great flexibility and control while encouraging performance reviews and evaluations to be based on mission achievement.

When it comes time to release these lay leaders from service many have asked: What is the advantage of appointing a commissioned officer rather than a lay leader?

The advantage of officer leadership over lay leadership lies not in the “priestly function and role” but rather in trained leadership ability. Let me give an example from the field of project development. When building a school, a leader oversees the overall project and its component parts. However, that leader will gladly welcome assistants who complete the various components, be it the foundation or roof. Similarly, in mission, where there is not long-term consistent leadership, the broader vision and individual objectives may be lost.

Lay leaders on contracted service would need to demonstrate capacity for their particular ministry appointment or take training which would equip them for the task. They should also be under the care and supervision of qualified, informed leaders who understand the mission objectives and can ensure that short-term mission leaders contribute to the whole.

Lay service contracts have existed for overseas appointments where need is recognized and local resources are lacking. Perhaps it is time we recognized the need in our own backyard and provided a means whereby willing hands may be encouraged to serve without requiring them to commit to a lifetime.

Major Ian Swan is the associate dean for extended learning at William and Catherine Booth College.