What would have made enough of a difference ?

I have a question that’s been nagging at me for quite some time in regards to people who resign from Salvation Army officership. It’s relatively simple: what would have made enough of a difference for you to remain as an active officer?


As a college student contemplating officership, I wrote a paper on the Adult Rehabilitation Center programming and realized that there was little research available regarding the people who took part in that program. Little did I know at that time, but that early observation was to be a common factor as I encountered Salvation Army programming in a variety of venues. We may track statistics, but at least as far as I’m aware of, we do little analysis outside of research papers for – guess what – college courses. We’ve got lots of anecdotal evidence but little solid research pretty much across the board.

If we as a movement are concerned about the retention of officers – which I believe we are – might we learn something by asking those who have left about their experience? And guess what? We now have a ready-made research base of 300+ former officers. Is it time to ask some questions?

Would a change of appointment have made a difference? Would longer appointments or more input into change have helped to avoid a resignation? Would mediation concerning divisive corps issues or disagreement with headquarters have impacted the decision? Would more money have helped – either in salary/allowance or in resources for ministry? What about single spouse officership options? A sabbatical? The possibility of secondment (assignment outside of the normal officer positions) for one or both spouses? Was professional counseling offered? Did it help to clarify the presenting problems? Was the major problem with the work you were doing, the structure of the Army, or doctrinal concerns? Did lack of affirmation play a role?

Was there adequate interaction with the supervising officer (DHQ, THQ) or the pastoral care officer prior to the termination/resignation being finalized? If asked to resign because of misconduct or ineffective service, was there a plan for restoration or improvement of service? What happened to the spouse in the case of misconduct? Was there information about resignation or early retirement options that might have helped?

And no, I don’t have the time to do the research – I’ve got my own Kroc fish to fry these days, and I’ve paid my dues with research papers over the years. Whether as a student paper or something that comes from the administration, it would seem that by asking the right questions of enough people, we could get a better sense as to whether we should give more time and effort to retention (as would appear to be the case based on the personal testimonies of those on the FSAOF blog), or if there really is little that can be done on that end, leaving us to concentrate on recruitment rather than retention. But beyond that, asking the right questions may provide a sense of hope to those on the brink of resignation as well as help those within the Army to be more sensitive to the needs of their peers and those they supervise.

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 been a valued contributor to this blog since its inception.

From the FSAOF blog Administrator
THE FSAOF RECENTLY POSTED OUR 3RD BLOG POLL IN A EFFORT TO CLARIFY CERTAIN ISSUES PERTAINING TO PROFILE OF OUR THOUSANDS OF VISITORS.

ON JUNE 5, 2010 WE WILL POST A FURTHER SURVEY FOCUSING DIRECTLY ON WHY SA OFFICERS RESIGN AND THE DURATION OF THEIR LENGTH OF ACTIVE SERVICE.

AND IN MID-JUNE WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH: WHAT, IF ANY FACTORS, MIGHT HAVE CAUSED 'FORMERS' TO REMAIN IN OR RETURN TO ACTIVE SERVICE. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FORWARD QUESTIONS YOU DEEM RELEVANT TO THE SURVEYS.

FOR THOSE 'FORMERS' WHO JOINED OUR FELLOWSHIP IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS OR SO, PLEASE TAKE TIME TO READ THROUGH SOME OF THE HUNDREDS OF COMMENTS IN OUR PRIVATE FSAOF FB SITE.

FINALLY, PLEASE READ DEB'S NOTE ON THE FB PAGE. IF YOU ARE NOT YET INCLUDED IN THE FORMERS' DISPO.

THREE YEARS OF BLOGGING and CHRISTIAN SUPPORTIVE FELLOWSHIP

The first of the 481 blog articles posted to date signaled the formation of our fellowship three years ago next month.

This fellowship was formed seeking to provide positive Christian aftercare respecting and celebrating the SA officership service of more than 330+ members internationally, averaging 14 years of service by each of the FSAOF members .

We believe there exist weaknesses in The SA resignation counseling process, exit procedure and after-care provisions. The fellowship serves several purposes which we believe to be the role of The SA and we urge them to explore and initiate procedures/programs to assist in the following areas:

1. Providing Christian supportive exit counseling to officers (and their families) contemplating resignation, or resigning their commission

2. When resigning, make absolutely clear what the SA regulations are, and don't attempt to enter into private agreements with one spouse to the detriment of the other.

3. Having access to ALL personnel files in order to correct misquotes, assertions, falsehoods, etc.

4. Establish counseling procedures (pre/post retirement) using outside agencies to include all members of the affected family.

5. Consider granting the Officer contemplating resignation a sabbatical

6. Providing practical counseling support in the areas of; separation allowances, unemployment benefits, loan assistance, tax advice, re-acceptance policy and The SA lay employment policy, etc.

7. Providing temporary housing, auto, office & equipment –computer, etc. for a fixed time while seeking employment

8. Establishing a communication system whereby officer colleagues are informed in a timely and dignified manner of an officer’s intent to move from and beyond officership.

9. Assisting officers in providing support documents/files needed in preparing a CV/dossier necessary in seeking employment

10. Determining a former officer’s choice in maintaining the status of their ordination; often required when seeking a ministerial role in other religious bodies.

11. Establishing a consistent policy in repaying student loans

12. Providing those officers desiring it, a public recognition in gratitude of their SA service

13. Establishing a policy of private restitution for those officers who wish to resign without negative consequences

14. Providing a Christian supportive welcome by the CO in SA corps visited subsequent to resignation

15. Providing address/contact info in the Dispo for those former officers wishing to be included

Dr. Sven Ljungholm
Blog Administrator
Former
Residing in the UKT

Change of Appointment Part 2

With 32 years of Salvation Army officership under my belt, I somehow am still able to have a foot in both the idealist and the pragmatist camp. While ideally I would like to see a systemic overhaul of the appointment process, my practical reaction is that this is unlikely to happen in the near future. Most of the time the system works, and when it doesn’t we’ve been conditioned to accept the changes as God’s will for our lives. This is what we signed up to do, so how dare we complain when it happens?

Yet it would appear that there could be some possible “tweaking” of the system that could consider the process as to its effectiveness and support the officers during the time of decision-making and of transition. Here’s a radical possibility – what about a survey – anonymous, of course – set up on survey monkey to ask about how the transition is experienced. Does it work well in 95% of the situations? Or are 40% of the officers on The List distressed over their up-coming move? What helps? What doesn’t? All we have to go on to actually have informed dialogue at this point are our own experiences and the stories of others, often heard anecdotally. What if we took a cue from John Gowans and actually asked those impacted?

Oh, yes, the larger question remains – is there room for informed discussion that might make this process less painful for officers and corps? That, too, is an important question in more areas than appointments, but since all officers experience these transitions 6-8-10 or more times during their lifetimes, shouldn’t there be some room for input?

I have the utmost appreciation for those who have to make the changes – and who are also subject to changes from above themselves. They’ve inherited a system from generations of SA leadership, and do work to improve its functioning. So I simply want to toss out a few possibilities for consideration from the perspective of a long-term field officer who’s never had to make those calls (for which I am grateful), but also from one who has heard the pain of my own heart, as well as from my brothers and sisters who receive those calls.

We’ve heard bandied around the term “consultation,” where there could actually be specific conversations between the leadership and the individual officer as to the possibility of a change in appointment. A respectful conversation in January or February that says, “We’re thinking about a reassignment for you to another corps, a different kind of work, another division. Are there reasons this would be difficult? What are they? What would this look like for you?” We are adults – hopefully if we can be trusted to lead a corps, we can be trusted to understand when changes in plans have to be made or changes don’t happen, but at least with honest conversation at various points in the process, the officer feels included – and that makes a huge difference.

Why? Jim Wallis writes: “The recognition that each of us is created in the image of God means that what is at stake in how we treat one another is nothing less than how we regard the image of God in us.” Do we love and respect each other, reflecting the image of God in us, when officers are totally kept in the dark in regards to decisions that will change the course of their lives – and their children’s lives? I Cor. 13:5 tells us that “love does not dishonor” (TNIV).

Even at the time when the officer is being informed of the change of appointment, it is affirming to have a conversation with the leader making that call as to at least some of the reasoning behind the change. As in: “we know this is a challenging appointment for you, but here are some of the reasons why we believe this will be a good fit.” Or, “we know this isn’t a very good time for you to move, but we really need you in East Podunk because . . .” And if there are some concerns about performance that have led to a change, it is vital to know that as well – after all, we give our employees job evaluations and warning notices.

Now, will someone please explain to me why the DC calling cannot tell the officers what position they will have in the receiving division? The “you’ll have to call your new D.C.” are words that bring their own dose of anxiety. Is that still policy or has that changed?

Timing. How hard would it be to send an e-mail to all the officers in the territory to say: it is anticipated that phone calls will be made on Wednesday, May 10 and that the moves will be posted Friday, May 12 at noon. Certainly some people seem to know that – but why leave those less connected guessing as to whether the phone will ring? What about a twitter message that "all calls have now been made - you can rest well tonight if your phone didn't ring" (I'm kind of kidding, but the anxiety of not knowing can be really hard to deal with - especially like the one year when I was at a Cleveland Indians game and was hoping for the phone to ring - and it never did - and the Indians got clobbered as well). Or simply a LN message that the appointments have been posted to the bulletin board.

And speaking of timing, how much time is actually needed to prepare for a move? Does the timeframe used in the United Kingdom make more sense when moves are announced months in advance? From a practical standpoint, how much time is needed to do everything that has to be done and to be emotionally and spiritually healthy to provide a supportive environment for our children, congregation and staff – and to enter the new assignment without being utterly exhausted? It did seem as though the moves were announced a week earlier this year, and if that was deliberate, thank you, whoever did that. An extra week might actually give me enough time to go through my Lotus Notes.

What about something that could be extremely practical? What might be the possibility of a territorial database of information that could include pictures of the quarters, the corps building, and the local elementary and secondary schools. We have the technology to make that secure, and we have most of the information through the annual ACR – wouldn’t it be great to be able to show our children a picture of our new house and our new corps, as well as the school they will attend?

And let's not even talk about the farewell brief . . .

And, just like last night's NCIS, this is to be continued . . .


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 been a valued contributor to this blog since its inception.

Salute and Go???

So what have you done wrong? That question was raised four years ago when we were appointed as the Corps Officers in Ashland, Ohio, traditionally seen as a first appointment type of corps by most in the know. Our friend was unaware of the Kroc designation for the Ashland community, so thought that something was wrong that we now needed to go to such a small appointment after 28 years of officership. His comment wasn’t unusual, for as Salvation Army officers just experienced once again, the publication of the Change of Appointment list brings a number of comments regarding the various changes, ranging from “that’s a perfect fit” and, “that makes a lot of sense” to “oh, my.”

With the release of the most recent LIST, my thoughts turn to those who, with the stroke of a pen (or a few computer keys) and the answering of a phone, find their lives once more in transition to a new place of ministry. Some find it a welcome designation, needing to shake the dust off their feet in a placement where they weren’t accepted or that didn’t fit very well, or coming at a time when both the congregation/corps and the officer sense that it’s time for a leadership change. Others may face the change with ambivalence, happy and productive in their present assignment but open to what the next challenge may bring. However, a third group of officers may find themselves in a place of confusion and grief, as the farewell orders and the marching orders simply don’t make sense, come at a difficult time in their lives, or leave them asking: can I/we even do this?

Like much else in the Salvation Army, when you’re in the first two groups, the system seems to work relatively well. It fits with our initial commitment as officers to live in submission to the placements determined by those in leadership, accepting that God directs those who wrestle with deciding those placements. However, when the phone call from the divisional commander is devastating, what do we do?

Recognize that you are not alone. While I have no statistics for the number of calls to the Secretary for Personnel the week of moves, it is likely that the reassignment phone call is unwelcome by at least 10-20% of officers (a good research project for someone). As one of my leaders once said, “I know that change is never easy. That's why, for most of us, it's one of the hardest things we face in this ministry.” Change is difficult enough when it is expected and/or welcomed – it is excruciating when our world is turned upside-down overnight. And while they may not shout it from the mountaintop or post it on Facebook, there are a good number of officers who are struggling to see the hand of God in their particular reassignments. Trust me – you are not alone. (Remember the roots of the Salvation Army - William and Catherine struggled to submit to the authority of their early church body).

Find a safe sounding board. When we’re in crisis or shock, our judgment may not be the best. Taking our concerns to a safe, relatively neutral sounding board can give perspective that we might miss in the initial hours following the phone call.

Request more information. While there are no EEOC regulations that apply to officers, and no union representatives that can speak up for those who need a voice, it is possible for the officers to request to talk with someone in leadership about the reasoning behind the placement. Years ago, one divisional leader told us that he had looked through the dispo and couldn’t see anyone else more qualified to fill an open position. I would have preferred a more realistic assessment: we had a commitment to inner city ministry, there had been an unexpected breakdown, and the Salvation Army needed officers who would be willing to walk into a difficult situation with at least some prior experience in a cross-cultural setting – and we were trusted enough to be able to do the job requested.

We can hope and pray that our leaders are willing to tell us the truth about ourselves, our performance, and the needs of the appointment awaiting us. Sometimes we feel like we’re a part of the kind of quiz that matches questions from one column with answers from the other column – and we were the left-over answer. Appointments are not made that lightly, but sometimes there are moves that may not make much sense to us. Jesus encourages us to ask, seek and knock. If we’re entrusting our lives and families to the direction of our leaders, it is not unreasonable to request a conversation that can address our questions.

Know that changes can be made. While not common, it is possible for adjustments to be made, either in the current round of assignments or at a later date. Even with as much care and prayer that goes into the process, sometimes mistakes are made. Pro tem appointments can happen. Other options can be explored.

Submission and Obedience. If I had a quarter for every time I’ve heard this, I’d be rich: “Man (or The Salvation Army) cannot place me where God cannot use me.” Of course that is true – it just doesn’t always make man’s - or woman’s –placement decision the best decision. God can use us anywhere – but I have to believe that He desires to use us in ways that maximize our gifts and abilities. However, officers serve in a system where we’ve committed to abide by the decisions of our leaders – and the move system is definitely one of those decisions. If our reluctance to move to a particular spot is mostly an issue of preference or bruised ego, we’re out of luck, as we have made a commitment to obedience and don’t really have the choice to refuse to go. However, if there are valid concerns regarding the appointment, we must find ways to articulate them, working with the leadership to determine if any other options are available.

Give it time. With the system as it stands, we still are facing many farewell orders that come as a surprise to the officers. While we have moved towards at least a bit of “consultation,” some have no clue that the phone will ring during the week of moves (another good research project to determine if prior consultation makes the process any easier). It may be that with some time for prayer, reflection, and conversation as noted above, the appointment will become more workable.

Redeeming the struggle. In the book of Ruth, Naomi returns to Bethlehem with a curious statement: “Don’t call me Naomi . . .call me Mara (bitter).” One thought on this narrative is that Naomi discovered she had to name her pain in order for it to be redeemed. While we want to protect the integrity of the Salvation Army as well as our own character, there may be opportunity to be vulnerable with those closest to us as we walk through the difficult days of struggling with the reassignment. We can model a grieving that is consistent with a spirit of holiness. We can walk with our people as they also mourn the loss they feel.

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 been a valued contributor to this blog since its inception.

YOUR VOICE NEEDED...

These past few weeks we have had an average of 60-70 visitors to our blog on a daily basis. Some, as you would guess, found us quite accidentally, and others are regular visitors seeking SA updates and inspiration.

We'd love to hear from you ! Out of the 300 visitors this last week few have taken time to share a comment... it begs the questions;
- is the blog of interest?
- is the format friendly and compelling?
- are the articles relevant and of real interest?

We invite you to share your comments in this thread, and know that your comments are appreciated!

Sven Ljungholm

ps You may share your opinion anonymously - clack on the button on the bottom once having clicked on the comment bar...

At some point, to be a Christian, you've got to transition from "come and see" to "go and die" and that is, you just can't watch other people walk with Jesus; you have to go walk with him. You can't just allow other people to serve you; you need to serve as well. You can't just allow other people to fund ministry, you need to give generously. At some point, the come-and-see season needs to end and the go-and-die season has to begin,...

11 Leadership Lessons from 12 Disciples
So we're going to look at Jesus calling the twelve from a come-and-see experience to a go-and-die life. And so from this, we're going to pull out what I'll call "Eleven Leadership Lessons from Twelve Disciples."

We want to have a church that follows the leadership example of Jesus. How did he pick his men? How did he lead his men? How did he train his men? How did he deploy his men? How did Jesus organize his ministry? Because we want to follow in Jesus' example by Jesus' empowerment through the Holy Spirit, and we want to have a church that is patterned after Jesus' ministry. That's what we're all about. We want to see people meet Jesus. We want to see the church grow. We want to start other campuses. We want to start other churches. We want to continue to mature and grow in every way, but most importantly, we want to do that in a way that honors Jesus, obeys Jesus, imitates Jesus. So we'll pull eleven lessons from him selecting his twelve disciples.

CLICK HERE TO READ FURTHER...

Mark Driscoll

SIX RESOLUTIONS!
By William Booth (age 20)

1. That I will rise every morning sufficiently early to wash, dress, and have a few minutes, not less than five, in private prayer.

2. That I will, as much as possible, avoid all that babbling and idle talk in which I have lately so sinfully indulged.

3. That I will endeavor in my conduct and deportment before the world and my fellow servants especially to conduct myself as a humble, meek and zealous follower of Christ, and by serious conversation and warning endeavor to lead them to think of their immortal souls.

4. That I will read no less than four chapters in God’s Word every day.

5. That I will strive to live closer to God, and to seek after holiness of heart and leave providential events with God.

6. That I will read over this every day or at least twice a week.

“God help me, enable me to cultivate a spirit of self-denial and to yield myself a prisoner of love to the redeemer of the world.”

Wiiliam Booth Left the Work (part three)

Conference

William Booth’s departure from the new Connexion met with conflicting responses among his fellows. One minister, who had been converted in William’s revival services, invited the evangelist to conduct services in Hayle, Cornwall, which later widened into a larger campaign. Before long, however, Methodist chapels were closed against him and he discovered that his resignation had stirred ill-will toward him.

Such mixed responses often greet officers who step out of officership. Some meet with Christian understanding and support from peers and superiors. One divisional commander, upon realising that an officer’s resignation was unavoidable, sincerely offered to help load crates and boxes when moving day arrived.

Too many, however, cannot witness to such experience. Many have echoed the sorrow if one officer-couple who, from the day of their resignation, received no card, call or other contact from any of their comrades for over a year. Another couple remarked, ‘It’s as if we fell off the face of the earth.’

We are frequently so disturbed by the loss of an officer that we find it difficult to comply with Orders and Regulations, which state that, ‘Comrades who withdraw from officership should be treated justly and kindly.’ Earlier editions dealt more specifically with comrades who have resigned honourably, adding that officers should ‘Go out of their way to show [the ex-officer] kindness, obtain for him the sympathy of comrades, and prevent him being, in any sense, regarded with suspicion.’ Even an officer who resigns amid shameful or worrying circumstances should be treated kindly and justly, for ‘you who are spiritual should restore him gently.’

It is difficult to know what to say or how to act toward recently-resigned comrades. When we react unkindly (or not at all) to an ex-officer, however, we not only disobey O&R, but we also increase whatever tension or difficulties may have led to resignation. More importantly, we also oppose the command of Scripture to ‘love one another’, to ‘carry each other’s burdens, and in this way…fulfil the law of Christ’.

The 1862 conference of the New Connexion voted to accept William Booth’s resignation, ‘and thus,’ writes Harold Begbie, ‘any hope he may have nourished of a return to the church of his adoption was effectually knocked on the head.’ It’s impossible to say what action, if any, on the organisation’s part might have led Booth to return, but it appears that little or no effort was made to bring that about.

Similarly, the manner in which we sometimes handle the resignation of our comrade-officers effectually locks the door of re-entry behind them. Due to some circumstances beyond our control (and others within our control), resignation is often so traumatic, seeming to leave the officer ‘without a friend and without a farthing’, that any possibility of return is quashed. Very often, in making it overwhelmingly difficult for an officer to leave, we make it insurmountably difficult for him to return.

Comrade

When all attempts to retain our officers and encourage them to persevere prove fruitless, we can derive no benefit from withholding help or ‘teaching a lesson’ to the resigning officer. We must not only try to make the transition as painless as possible for the Army, but it will be to our benefit in the long run to be a helpful and supportive as possible to our comrade, like the divisional commander who was willing to carry boxes for his officer-friend.

Neither should we (consciously or not) impose exile upon our friends and family who step out of officership. Staying in touch with former officers will not only encourage them and exhibit a Christlike spirit of interest and concern in us, but it may prove a boon to the Army as well. Some who have undertaken to contact former officers have been surprised that many ex-officers might have considered taking an appointment-even after years- if only someone had shown interest.

Too often the back door of officership swings only one way; perhaps, to borrow an American president’s phrase, ‘a kinder, gentler’ approach would keep the door open for those who still have gifts and talents and energy to offer to the Army.

William and Catherine Booth’s departure from the Methodist New Connexion was significant, not only in paving the way for The Salvation Army, but also in the lessons to be gained from their experience. If we heed those lessons, we will more often obey our orders to treat comrades who withdraw from officership ‘kindly and justly’. In this way we will fulfill the law of Christ.

(Part three)

Bob Hostetler; THE OFFICER1991

William Booth Left the Work (part two)

Co-dependency

According to Lieut-Colonel Damon Rader, the assistant field secretary for pastoral care in the USA Eastern Territory, we must pay attention to the need for balance and wholeness among our personnel in order to prevent resignations. ‘We don’t have enough people holding our trampoline,’ he says, pointing to inadequate personal support. Equipping our officers to cope with stress, marital difficulties, co-dependency and similar struggles will not be accomplished with an annual spiritual retreat. The demands are great and our response must meet the demands.

Also because we are no longer the upstart child of a whirlwind evangelist but an organisation like the New Connexion, there will be times when our officers will find themselves up against a bureaucracy that cannot see things from their perspective. There will likewise be times when officers react foolishly or hastily with threats or ultimatums. At such times, mutual flexibility and respect is crucial. Most importantly, officers must learn to communicate - particularly face-to-face or over the phone- and superiors must be careful to listen before the situation reaches a crisis.

The witness of history is that William and Catherine Booth ‘left the work’ of the New Connexion for the right reasons. After prayerful consideration and every attempt to ‘follow peace’, they left the New Connexion in the belief that they were obeying God. ‘I don’t believe in any religion,’ wrote Catherine, ‘apart from doing the will of God.’

For many years Order and Regulations for Officers stated that,

Although the inclination to resign is usually a temptation of the devil, it is possible that an officer can come into such a condition of heart and mind, or of health, or into such circumstances that would make resignation not only allowable but commendable.

Contemplating

The current edition of O & R admits ‘such circumstances as would make resignation correct.’ Some leaders, however, have come to express the feeling that under no circumstances can an officer resign honourably, let alone by God’s leading. One highly respected officer, at a gathering of cadets, said he could not envision an instance when an officer could resign according to the will of God. We point proudly to ex-officers who belong to the past, like George Bennard and Gipsy Smith, but seem far less patient with our contemporaries who were once officers.

Don’t misunderstand. It is important, when an officer is contemplating resignation, to attempt to prevent it by correcting the causes or working through acceptable alternatives. It is important, too, to guard the Army’s interests. An equal priority, however, for ‘shepherd of God’s flock’, must be the condition of that officer’s soul: is he spiritually sound? Is she acting in obedience to God according to the light she possesses? Are they seeking to please God in this decision? According to the Army historians, the answers to those questions in the case of William and Catherine Booth were all ‘yes’.

Covenant

If the Founders’ experience is any indication, it is possible for someone who previously has been committed to service in one organisation to be called of God to a new field of service. When one admits that point, it is no longer necessary to view every officer resignation as a spiritual catastrophe. Lieut-Colonel Rader, who has become one of the Army’s experts on personnel problems and solutions, admits, ‘Life does get our of balance for officers, that’s true, but not every crisis is a spiritual problem.’

Provided that it is possible to resign honourably, it is possible also to fulfill all the particulars of an officer’s covenant and yet follow God as a non-officer. ‘To love and serve [Christ] supremely all my days; to live to win souls and make their salvation the first purpose of my life; to maintain the doctrines and principles of The Salvation Army, and, by God’s grace, to prove myself a worthy officer’ is a solemn covenant that resignation does not negate. One may prove a worthy officer, as were Sidney Cox and Eric Ball, for example, even if one later feels God’s leading elsewhere,

We may find it necessary, therefore, though we may disagree with or mourn the officer’s decision (and after all attempts at preventing resignation have failed), to trust the judgment of the officer and the wisdom of God. The Founder himself, having resigned from the New Connexion, wrote: ‘Knowing that the future will most convincingly and emphatically either vindicate or condemn my present action, I am content to await its verdict.’ (part two)

Bob Hostetler; THE OFFICER 1991

William Booth Left the Work

The young man and his wife disagreed with the organisation. When their appointment was announced, they decided to leave the work they had chosen seven years earlier and in which they had ministered effectively. The two felt strongly God’s call to evangelistic work; the leaders of the organisation saw things differently.

So William Booth left the work. ‘It was a heartbreaking business,’ William admitted:

"Here was a great crowd of people all over the land who loved me and my dear wife. I felt a deep regard for them, and to leave them was a sorrow beyond description. But I felt I must follow what appeared to be the beckoning finger of my Lord. So, with my wife and four little children, I left my quarters and went out into the world once more, trusting God, literally not knowing who would give me a shilling, or what to do or where to go."

Of course, when Booth left the ministry of the Methodist New Connexion, many of his superiors were convinced he was making a tragic mistake. Some even visited the couple in their lodgings to persuade them to reconsider their decision. Others felt that Booth’s resignation was simple disobedience.

Ironically such a scenario could easily be applied to our day, simply by substituting the name of a Salvation Army officer for that of William Booth in the account above.

Connexion

It is, of course, a startling realisation. William Booth left the work- not the Army of course, but to his superiors and fellow ministers in the Methodist New Connexion, the step he took that day in 1861 was regarded in much the same way that officers in Booth’s Army today regard a colleague who resigns his commission.
‘Oh,’ someone protests, ‘it is not at all the same thing. The founders were following God’s call, his leading.’
‘Yes,’ another might add, ‘and they were embarking on a venture of faith.’
‘And they were up against a rigid bureaucracy that wouldn’t allow Booth to fully exercise his call to evangelism.’

It may be true that William and Catherine’s experience is exceptional and that no inferences can be drawn or applications made from their case. On the other hand, it may be helpful to recall that, as a Methodist minister, the Founder made some difficult choices early in his career, and it may be possible to apply those recollections to some of our own attitudes and conduct toward comrade officers who ‘leave the work’.

Though it can be seen in retrospect that ‘God meant it for good’ , the loss of William Booth to the Methodist ministry might have been prevented. Booth had addressed a reasoned letter to the President of the New Connexion, detailing his call to evangelistic work. Though it took two months for a reply to come (and even then it was noncommittal at best), William was permitted to read his lengthy letter at the annual conference which would decide his fate. Unfortunately for the New Connexion the conference issued a hasty decree, and the matter was settled: William and Catherine left. Similarly, though it sounds like stating the obvious, many officer resignations occur because they are not prevented. (part one)
Bob Hostetler THE OFFICER1991