BACK TO WHAT'S TRUE AND TRIED... Part One

On our recent visit to Stockholm Sweden Major Glad and I joined in the Christmas Eve morning worship service in one of Sweden's oldest and high profile corps. There were a total of 4 persons in uniform, the corps officers and we two. During the coffee hour that followed we listened courteously to the many reasons why uniforms are no longer worn, albeit without us having asked a single question or shared any comments. The logic was tried and true but unconvincing. On exiting the modern office like structure I remarked to Glad that it’s a good thing the SA shield was mounted at the front door or one could easily have mistaken the corps for a Methodist Meeting Hall. And while there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with that picture, one can be sure that without the SA identification, the coin boxes directly inside the front door would long remain empty.

An hour later we joined with a handful of uniformed Salvationists and some 100+ volunteers in serving a Christmas meal to more than six hundred of the capitol city’s poorest and loneliest… TSA provided music, a friendly smile and where appropriate, an embrace and listening ear as our friends recalled stories of earlier Christmas joy at home and with family; tears flowed freely. 

There were the 8-10 uniformed volunteers and the hundreds in civvies. No one will be surprised to learn that Stockholm’s hundreds of homeless, lonely, cold and hungry turned to those in uniform on their departure to express their thanks and GOD JUL! (Merry Christmas) Unfortunate in a sense, but speaks clearly to our unique uniformed identity and distinctive branding; multi billion dollar global enterprises would pay dearly to have their mission known so clearly and so dearly loved and respected.

In the next few days we’ll feature articles by two SA officers; one newly commissioned and the other a veteran of 20 years speaking to this very subject and mission.

Your comments are welcome as always.

Sven Ljungholm

________________________________

My Sunday Best

There are those here (in my corps; Malmo Sweden) who think we should wear our SA uniforms each and every Sunday, it's a celebration, and therefore we should be in formal dress. It's funny how the traditions of the church change and are re-created.

Peter Rollins tells a parable about how church traditions are formed and which may be appropriate here.

There was a monk in a monastery who sat and meditated every day under the same tree. And there was a cat that always disturbed his meditations, so the monk tied the cat to the tree every day to meditate undisturbed. Some years later the monk died and so his disciples then continued to meditate on the same terrace, and each day they tied the cat to the tree as their master had done. After a period of time the cat died and the disciples purchased a new cat to tie to the tree when they meditated. A generation later or so lightning struck down the tree and it burned to the ground. In its place they planted a new tree to tie the cat to. Many cats and many trees later a group of learned theologians studied the old monk's teachings and wrote books on the importance of tying cats to trees as a valuable meditation technique.

The idea of formal wear in the church comes from the mid nineteenth century, however, prior to that period one wore ‘everyday clothes’ to church (the aristocracy wore nice clothes every day, farmers and other craftsmen wore work clothes). It was the aristocracy who introduced formal dress for use in church services to demonstrate how affluent they were compared to everyone else. Commoners usually
(owned) wore only two sets of clothes. Those worn daily in the field and the second set, which were in slightly better condition than work clothes, and which you wore when you went in to town.

The upper class, or perhaps even more so, the upper middle class seemed to think that it was important that on Sunday to show that you could afford to dress up to announce the status held in the community. This also meant that you could reserve or buy seats in the very front of the church.

Concern for the poor

Wesley turned sharply against the notion that one would require formal wear in the church and argued that it was important that everyone was seen as being equal in the church; everyone should feel welcomed and loved.

It was in this spirit that William Booth invented the uniform, not to widen the chasms between social classes, but to close the gap. If everyone wore a uniform no one could feel less worthy.

When the civil membership (Adherents) was introduced in the Salvation Army this balance was disrupted. Consequently, in that all ‘members’ are no longer soldiers they no longer wear the same identifying dress. We now have social classes in the fellowship.

The poor and homeless are often as well dressed arriving in their casual weekday clothes (albeit perhaps a bit dirtier) as our members.

In the current congregation SA setting uniform wearing no longer serves the purpose to make parishioners equal, but serves instead in contributing to fragmentation.

Lt.Patrik Olterman

translated from Swedish: Sven Ljungholm