________________________________
The Salvation Army officer’s spouse is the only person I know
In a poll conducted in December, 2011, among non-officer spouses in five territories where the Single Spouse Officership provision is in place, less than 10% of the respondents felt they had been provided sufficient training for their role (call). And most shared that it was a learning-on-the-job through onsite experience and almost solely from the insight provided by the officer spouse.
In
some ways there are times when it would appear that the officer spouse has
their own confidant, counselor, prayer partner, supporter and much, much more
living under the same roof. However, most non-officer spouses felt totally
unprepared to assist in the ministry. The Officer spouse had received extensive
training on how to be a SA officer. There is no credible training provided to
the support spouse. The SA is not alone in having this indictment hurled at
them.
In a
random survey across Protestant denominational lines it was discovered that 85
percent of pastors’ spouses feel unprepared for the ministry lifestyle. Another,
by the Global Pastors Wives Network, found that “eight in ten pastors’ wives
say they feel unappreciated or unaccepted by their husband’s congregations.”
Most shocking was their discovery that pastors’ wives’ issues are the number
one reason pastors leave their ministries.
A
friend, the daughter of SA UKT officers, married an American Seventh Day
Adventist pastor and shared with me that; “Pastor’s wives receive no training and minimal
contact with other Shepherdesses unless one attends the annual ministerial
meetings or camp meeting in June. It's a Pastors retreat. However, on a
positive note, we even have our own web page and which can only be accessed by
a pass code. The site keeps
spouses connected providing denominational updates, meditative thoughts (many
of us have a spiritual leadership role in the church; not necessarily a paid
position), spiritual and psychological support.”
In another
survey conducted among evangelical church leaders it was learned that the most
important joys that non-pastor spouses experienced was sharing ministry that
revolved around friendships with people, seeing persons come to Christ,
nurturing the spiritual and personal growth of others, and working as team
members with their spouse. At the present time the majority of non-officer
spouses are not sufficiently trained for this type of ministry support role.
This
will call for a rethinking emphasis on the pre-acceptance and in-service
education of the non-officer spouse for their vital role of ministry. Of
course, each person is an individual coming into the non-officer role with very
different gifts, education and experience and no spouse should be forced to
take this training. Nevertheless the opportunity should be provided and presented logically, systematically and in a compelling philosophical style.
While
a grad student in New York’s Jesuit
Fordham University we were often privileged to have world-class guest
lecturers. One of those lecturers was the Brazilian Paulo Freire who was particularly
popular with informal educators with his focus
and expertise in adult education with his emphasis on dialogue, moving away from and
beyond banked learning, Freire provides a
rationale for a pedagogy of the “outsider or newcomer” and introduced the
highly influential notion of banking education and highlights the contrasts
between education forms that treat people as objects rather than subjects; and
explores education as cultural action for adults.
It’s this pegagogy
form to which adults most easily adapt; exploring a compelling subject to which
they can bring their own experience and help form the group’s outcome and
direction. This can be achieved through meeting together regionally and
nationally and also through webcasts.
The pre-acceptance
and in-service education of the non-officer spouse could also be in the form of cultural action for adults explored and
enacted online. Prior
to the advent of the WWW, pastor’s spouses had little opportunity to connect,
commune, and explore. A large percentage of non-officer spouses work outside the SA campus or their quarters, many in
professional jobs, and the convenience of teaching/sharing on PCs, IPHONES,
IPADS ought to be capitalized upon. And there is every reason to establish a
dedicated and private chat site.
THE WWW
Eight
in 10 pastors' wives say they feel unappreciated or unaccepted by their husbands'
congregations, according to surveys by the Global Pastors Wives Network (GPWN);
the same number wish their husbands would choose another profession.
"Wives' issues" is the No. 1 reason pastors leave their ministries.
In recent years, pastors' wives have
found a place to vent… websites like PastorsWives.org
SarahsTent.com and GPWN. The Web offers
more immediate and constant support.
When
I formed the FSAOF 4 ½ years ago I recognized, following communication with
scores of former officers, that our issues in many instances were very similar
yet so private--issues that as Christian men and women we might have wanted to
discuss with others, but yet they weren’t in that place we were. No one could
have been more surprised than I as our fellowship passed the 100 mark, then
200, 300, 400… We have exchanged views on hundreds of subjects special only to
ourselves- each week there are comments of gratitude for shared advice, some
requested prayer support when a loved one is ill, or a spouse or family member
PTG, and just this week, three members going out to interview for job openings.
Ours
is like a ‘closed’ order of 400 sharing about what for some matters most, life after
officership- some are in ministry
elsewhere, some serve as SA soldiers, others as Methodists, Baptists, CoE, etc.
The FSAOF support group’s focus is on how to remain and to be involved in a
committed ministry, And to explore what it is the former officer feels God
calling them; for many, it’s a return to full time SA service as officers.
There is no doubt in my mind that a SSO
fellowship could benefit a great many people by being part of a similar private
internet-community. Why does TSA not
provide a similar, very basic support structure?
Cadets
usually undertake a two-year course: year one at certificate level, year two at
diploma level. The course is divided into four 'fields' of work and is subject
to continuous assessment rather than formal examinations. The four fields are:
Personal
Growth and Spiritual Development Biblical Studies, including biblical
interpretation and Old and New Testament studies Ministry and Mission,
including pastoral ministry, management and communication skills, mission
studies,
Faith
and Practice, including Salvationist doctrine, Church and Salvation Army
history, and contemporary society and Christian ethics.
Is it
not possible to establish some type non-officer spouse fellowship on campus? It
need not be a formal curriculum, but rather a discussion fellowship meeting
weekly at a time convenient to all. The focus would be to discuss those topics
that would most benefit them once in the field; SA history, Doctrines, life
style, SA structure, theology and even how to lessen the tensions that are
certain to be a part of their “new life.”
The
non-officer spouses will include corporate
types, those coming with education and nursing backgrounds, store clerks and
skilled labourers, persons skilled in many fields but who choose to work ‘for
the Army’ in support of their spouse’s calling. Their contributions could
greatly boost TSA’s capacity to reach society, corps and social services with
the army’s mission believing that they too have a role and can contribute to the
spouse’s ministry.
Sometimes,
perhaps too often, SA leaders think corporately, thinking ‘the organization’,
wanting and wishing peak performance. Yes, the army is corporate, but it’s not
a corporation. Of course there are instances when leaders must focus on the
entire body of believers, diagnosing malformations and prescribe remedies, eg.
SSO. However when the word spiritual formation is heard on campus or the army
hall we think of individual lives. Is the non-officer spouse, the college’s
waitress and corps custodian not all persons TSA must labor and struggle with and ‘to
present everyone mature in Christ’.
SA EXCLUSION!
Finally, is it really out of the question for non-officer spouses to attend ‘In-Sunday meetings, Spiritual Days, and following Commissioning, Councils and retreats? Is it really so daft (a term learned this week!) for the Army to offer the hand of fellowship and ministry to our partners as a thank you for their support? While we are in councils or retreat could something not be offered to the non-Officer partner in the same venue that could help feed them spiritually, bring them together so they too could meet with other like-minded people and share fellowship with the Officer fraternity?
A
dilemma for many is whether a calling to ministry is defined as being for a
specific place, a distinct role, or to an itinerant denomination where others
define that role? This dilemma is one where the non-officer spouse is perhaps
the most confused and least supportive. If there was a set pattern of
instruction, a clearer role for the 'spouse', perhaps this can be prevented.
The
truth is, the Bible has no office or job description called “officer’s spouse.”
This is because the spouse is simply expected to be a Christian church member
like everyone else. And
truth be told, there is no experience to guide us; we had to create everything from scratch. At
the beginning, a lot of effort went into establishing the values that would set
a framework for the non-officer applicant; what it was going to take to sustain
both the organization’s reputation and soul saving mission. How can the support
system be strengthened?






8 comments:
WHAT OF THE FUTURE?
Ÿ Uniforms will continue to change, perhaps to more informal and comfortable designs. But the Army will remain visible, and available, even when it makes us vulnerable -- and we will remain unashamed of the Gospel of Christ which will ever be the power of God unto salvation for all who will believe.
Ÿ Musical idioms will continue to change. The bands may admit more woodwinds and their repertoire is becoming more and more contemporary. The praise worship tsunami has already swept across the world. One hopes that our rich tradition of hymnody which connects us to the whole Church in every age, will not be lost.
Ÿ Evangelism will always be our priority as a 'permanent mission to the unconverted' but it will more often be pursued in a context of caring and shared suffering, walking with the poor and together discovering God's transforming and reconciling grace.
Ÿ Our structures of administration and styles of leadership may change. The linking of Army personnel in 117 countries through the Lotus Notes network has already made our world flat in new ways (to borrow the metaphor of Thomas Friedman). It has changed our corporate culture significantly and altered the way in which we do business.
Ÿ We will not compromise our internationalism, the organic unity of the Army worldwide. But the territories will no doubt exercise greater autonomy.
Ÿ We will continue to explore developing technologies for communicating our message and facilitating our ministries.
Ÿ Our ministry will be marked by integrated mission, not just as coordination of our services to people, but by entering into the life and community of those whom we serve in the name of Christ.
Ÿ We will continue to find expanded roles for women, married and single, in pastoral leadership, preaching and leadership responsibility.
Ÿ In our globalized world we will see a freer exchange of resources and a renewed willingness to cross national and cultural barriers to share the Gospel.
Ÿ The future holds a heightened concern for justice issues addressing the challenges of global poverty and powerlessness, hunger, the exploitation and abuse of women, the increase of sex trafficking, the spreading threat of pornography and other issues.
Ÿ Without compromising who we are as soldiers of Christ, we will find new ways to work in partnership with others in pursuing our common mission and in meeting human need in the name and spirit of Jesus.
Ÿ We will watch the unfolding of God's purposes for the Church and for the Army filled with wonder and praise.
The Army will change and adapt in many ways. It is in our DNA to do so. But the Army will be The Salvation Army -- one Army, marching under one banner, women and men shoulder to shoulder, with a clear mission to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and meet human need in His name without discrimination -- marching on until our Heavenly Captain returns in glory and we rise to meet him in the air.
Paul Rader 2006
My Utmost for his Highest
"Woe to me if I preach not the gospel" 1 Corinthians 9:16
"Paul's words have to do with being made a servant of Jesus Christ and our permission is never asked as to what we will do or where we will go. God makes us broken bread and poured out wine to please himself. To be separated unto the gospel means to hear the call of God; and when a man begins to overhear the call then begins agony that is worthy of the name. Every ambition nipped in the bud, every desire of life quenched, every outlook completely extinquished and blotted out saving one thing only- "separated unto the gospel" Woe be to the soul who tries to put his foot in any other direction when once that call has come to him."
Single Spouse seriously considering resignation due to a lack of support and understanding from a non flexible and what appears to me at this moment in time a non Christlike 'personnel' team, although that title ini itself is a joke. 'Personnel' .. At least someone is trying to address issues that should have been thought through a long time ago for us. Shame it has had to come from outside of the ranks ... Shame on you present SA Officers in a position of influence.
Although I know not of any specific situation, I fail to understand how any couple would be so unequally yoked and be accepted as an officer and non-officer couple, without the non-officer being a Christian.I do not see how that would ever function properly and I do not see it as a sound Bible practice. As much as I would support SSO , I feel that the non-officer should be a soldier in good standing that would support the officer spouse. Any other standing than that support would be (in my opinion) a negative situation headed for failure.
USA Former
USA Former,
A question to think about.
What is different in TSA to any other denomination? In particular, with regard to the work our 'clergy' do. Every other denomination is capable of having priests/pastors etc married to people who aren't even of the same denomination as themselves - some I know are married to non-Christians, and at lest one couple I know, is married to a person of a different faith entirely. Yet they are effective ministers. They don't have the cataclysmic situation that is prophesied every time TSA talks about SSO. Why are they so different? Many of them work just as hard as Officers do. They have the same pressures from their parishoners as Officers do. Why can they handle it successfully and TSA can't? Are you suggesting that we are less capable then they? That we are in some way deficient compared to them? That God does not give us the same strength He gives them?
Another question in this debate that no-one has ever considered - although it is very much related. What about children of Officers? There is no manual on how an OK should live. Yet they have pressures from corps folk to be the perfect child. The Officers are scrutinised over the conduct of their children. The children did not choose to become OK's, but the SSO did. This is why there are so many OK's who have gone completely off the rails, and why proportionately there are so many more OK's who have severe problems throughout their lives.
My point is, it is not about 'how should the couple interact?', or 'what should the role of the non-officer be?' but 'how do we change the thinking of the soldiers in TSA?' 'How do we tear down the traditions in TSA?' Some officers (like my parents did) challenge corps folk when they put undue pressure on OK's, but that's few and far between - and the officers are often chastised for doing it. Things like these, we just need to challenge the corps folk. But we cannot do this if those in the Officer ranks will not accept the challenge themselves.
Just some questions to think about.
Yours in Christ,
Graeme Randall
Former Australian East in London.
PS - as to the comment about being yoked with non-believers. The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 7 talks about couples who are 'unequally yoked' (married to non-believers), and suggests that they should stay together as they sanctify each other. He also says that we do not know if we will save our non-believing partner by staying with them.
Graeme Randall
Graeme,
Just stating my opinion like so many others. Many things that we discuss are not always right or wrong.My thought about the Army (since it is a different type of animal)is that it may be best to have people working together that are of a like-mindedness. I know that does not always happen. I agree that other churches have one spouse as a pastor and the other spouse is not.That is the norm. For the Army I would like to see more marriages with one as an officer and one not.That may be what God desires.There is nothing in Scripture that would deny that. I think it would be best that the non-officer spouse would be very supportive of the officer spouse. I also think that the non -officer spouse should be a soldier for continuity and balance. If not, I think the marriage is put under undue pressure. The soldier-spouse should be able to have secular employment and not have to work for free (almost like the female officers in the USA where the allowance-salary is in the man's name and credited for social security.)I think that scene is very anti-female. As far as an officer being married to a non-Christian I fail to see how a situation got that far.I see an imbalance.That situation would not be fair to both involved.You may have seen certain situations that I have not, but that does not mean that the end result will be blessed or practical. I think for best results two people in a marriage can be more productive working in the same direction. Yes, we need diversity and we all have different gifts and talents. That is why I agree with a married couple supporting one another even if only one is an officer. Not everyone is called to be an evangelist or pastor or an administrator.All Christians are part of the priesthood of believers before God but some are called to certain (administrations)or ministries or (denominations.)My family background was Catholic and I agree with some Catholic teaching but some I totally disagree with it. I was called to a different ministry where I felt comfortable and could use my gifts.
The sad thing in all of this ,is that the Army is in need of more leaders and officers and continuing old out dated policy(because it has always been that way)does no one any good. We serve the present age. We are not serving in 1885.For some change has been too slow. That is one reason why officers resign.CHANGE is why some return. I am returning.
I am in full agreement about soldiers and their thinking. Often they can cause hurt and damage. I see officers do that too. In some areas the Army needs a paradigm shift.Soldiers need to be loved and taught to work together. There is much fighting and complaining. (Sounds like the twelve disciples.Part of the problem is the mixing of tradition and scripture (and policy)like it is all the same. there is a danger in that and we have confusion and imbalance.
I appreciate your thoughts on this topic.
USA Former
Graeme,
Something else about filling the ranks that I have seen is that of filling corps and other positions with that of an Envoy. I know of one situation in the USA where the husband is an Envoy and the spouse is not even affiliated with the Army. I saw the non -officer spouse at an officers retreat and she did not want anything to do with officers. She actually left and looked to be out of place.I tried to talk to her and she was unresponsive .If the Army leadership uses Envoys or soldiers in this status , I really fail to see why SSO cannot be used in the USA also. Are we looking at different classes of leadership and various quality of staff. It looks like a compromise has been made. I think it is all tradition but along the way (to fill or staff a position or corps) exceptions have been made. Why not go one step beyond ? I am not speaking of anything goes but some other transition for positive change and staffing.Once again, if officers and soldiers are (first of all soldiers) then what is the big difference? Many soldiers are educated and can serve in ministry as well as or better than some officers.To be true to the Army Mission change must take place to qualify it.
USA Former
Post a Comment