The race of your Life! Part One

HEBREWS 12:1-3

¹ Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, ² fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. ³ Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.

In 1968, in the Mexico summer Olympics (way before my time!!!)  I am told that there was a marathon runner from Tanzania. And in that race he stumbled and fell and pulled himself to his feet bleeding, and was able to keep moving forward and two hours after the winner crossed the finish line, this young man did too; John Stevens, stumbled, bleeding across the finish line. The media of course couldn't believe it. They said to him, “why didn't you quit? Why didn't you drop out of the race, you were bleeding, you were in severe pain, why didn't you simply drop out”?  He looked  at them and said, “my country didn't send me 7000 miles to start a race, they sent me 7000 miles to finish it”!

The apostle Paul writes in the book of Hebrews, describing the Christian life as one of a race – not a short sprint but something more resembling a marathon.  And it isn’t a case of being in it to win it, but a case of: I have started and I will finish it!  All who begin and finish the Christian journey are true winners of eternal life.

Now there are some important things to consider when we are in this, the race of your life:

1. We Don’t Run Alone

There are many in the race alongside us, ahead of us and behind us; some beginning their faith journey, some near to completing it and many brushing shoulders with us.

When I was about 10 years old and right on into my early teens, I used to run a lot.  My Granddad ran my first ever mile with me and presented me with a trophy at the completion of it.  I even entered a fun run but after completing it; I knew that I wouldn’t be entering into any Marathons!  But what I remember more than anything is that it always helped me to have someone alongside me.  I enjoyed the run far more if Granddad was there spurring me on…

Now, don’t tell anyone, but I am a bit stubborn – well a lot stubborn at times.  I’ts not always a good trait to have and I know this all too well!  But it can occasionally work for my good, especially when it comes to the area of persevering.  Not giving up on those things in life that really matter.  Perseverance requires effort and a real desire to reach your aim, your goals.  When I entered a fun run, my goal was never to win – I knew I wasn’t that fast.  My aim was to simply make it over the finish line even if I had to crawl on my hands and knees to do so!

Going back to the 1968 games in Mexico for a minute -  John Stephen Akhwari of Tanzania finished his race long after most had completed theirs, showered, packed up and returned to the comfort of the Olympic Village. Bleeding and sore, stumbling in at 74^th place he finished – that is perseverance!  He did not give up.  He came 7000 miles to finish what he had begun.  As the fans were getting ready to leave the stadium in he hobbled, with 400 meters left to circle around the track. And the spectators all rose from their seats, remained fixed to their spots and roared their applause as if he were the winner.  He didn’t have to win, because he knew for whom he was running and that kept him going when all the logic in the world said quit.


We run our race one day at a time and it is God who gives us the strength to complete what we have begun.

2.    We Don’t Need Any Extra Weight

‘Let us throw of everything that hinders’ writes Paul; anything they weighs you down, stops you from running efficiently.   

In ancient Greece long distant runners often ran naked!  (now there is an image we won’t want to hold on to for very long!!)  They literally removed every last item that might somehow slow them down – no extra weight!

Today athletes at the highest level of competition will try to shed every extra ounce.  They go for the lightest of clothing and equipment available in order that they can run their absolute fastest.

The race that we run as Christians  is not a competition.    But we want to run it as best we can. 

We at times carry around with us a lot of baggage that weigh us down; difficulties of the past, fear, guilt, failure...   And we need to learn how to travel lightly, to lay aside the weight of excess baggage, that which makes the journey more difficult to travel.

If you take excess baggage on a plane you will end up paying dearly for it.  It is always best to try and rid ourselves of all that which hinders our progress, that which stops us in our tracks, prevents us from moving forward.

Paul speaks of ridding ourselves of the sin that so easily entangles.  This is the inward hindrance in life.  Not hitting the target set for us by God – not living as he desires us to live our lives. 

To run our best we don’t need any extra weight!


Major Sheila Loman
CO 
Liverpool Birkenhead Corps UKT

The1968 Olympic Marathon Video click below!

.... As he finally crossed the finish line a cheer came from the small crowd. While competing in the marathon in Mexico City, Akhwari fell, badly cutting his knee and dislocating the joint. He continued running, finishing last among the 57 competitors who completed the race (75 had started) when there were only a few thousand people left in the stadium, and the sun had set.

Back to What's Tried and True Part Two

PART TWO

No civilian members, soldier, or officer only!

Paul writes that ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.’ This is what the church therefore has to represent.

Our congregation more so than others must therefore represent this “come as you are” philosophy. We are not in church to show off or to set out our spirituality for public display. We are here to be strengthened (as iron sharpens iron) and built by meeting with God in fellowship with the Christian community. Totally given over with an open mind. Here, if anywhere, we all meet God on an equal footing, member or not; civilian, soldier or officer matters not at all. God is God and we are human.

It is not here, among friends in the congregation that we need to show the position we’ve taken, it is not here in the fellowship that the prophetic voice of a different life, a life that is in active struggle against hunger, poverty, depression, disease, injustice. It's outside the walls we must demonstrate our staunch position.

The uniform is not for the Sunday worship meeting only, it is for the average week day living as well! Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday ...

In addition, we not only have our standard uniform, but several different fashions of uniforms. Full uniform (dress uniform), working uniform (no jacket, no tie, trousers instead of skirts for the ladies), field uniforms (T-shirt or other profile outfit with the SA Shield on it).

My challenge is, therefore, can we be the type of a corps where we never go outside the door without a sword and shield. Both physically and spiritually. We do not go outside the door without having listened to the Word of God (not Logos – the written Truth, but Rhema- the prophetic spoken word) and safe (the shield of faith) in God's fold. Concurrently though, we don’t venture outside the door without being armed with God's mercy, the attitude (mindset)  that today we must actively do something (ie an act of God Rhema) to make Malmo into a better city (and thus the world) and we do not go out without to having the SA shield, clearly visible to show that we are secure not only in God but also in the Salvation Army.

Here in our corps’ fellowship, we are no longer civilian members, soldiers and officers, we are now simply siblings and fellow human beings: We are all one in Christ. Let us be an army of uniformed friends not only here on Sunday but all week long. Make a point to ask: "Do you have the shield on you?" Or "Where is your shield today?"

"We never see the Sallies around any longer" people say, it's no wonder, when we just show ourselves to each other here on Sunday.

It's not just uniforms but what you do when wearing it

The uniform has been defined as a prophetic robe (the prophetic view of ourselves and others that we have made ourselves available in the war). The uniform has also been described as a sacrament (an outward sign of an inner grace). These aspects are vitally important and should not be lost. But they are only meaningful aspects of uniforms (whether it be a parade, work or field uniform) if it is worn outside the corps’ walls. Moreover, it is only meaningful if the uniforms as a external sign is followed by an inner grace.

This means that you live in the abundant grace and mercy that God gives you, and show the same abundant grace and mercy to the people around you, whether soldiers, friends, non-religious, non-believers, Muslims, Buddhists, homosexuals, communists , capitalists, nobility, peasants, homeless, or even your enemies.

It is simply what you do in your uniform that gives it its value and dignity. Wherever you find yourself, and whenever.

Today is the feast, we celebrate our young recruits decision to completely entrust themselves to Christ, fit to fight, to live a life of wholeness and holiness. But I wonder as I stand here, is not every day a cause for celebration? Is it not high time that we who are the Salvation Army take seriously our doctrine on the sacramental life and live out God's unmerited and merciful grace to us in our everyday life and that we do so under the shield of faith?

Lt.Patrik Olterman

Translation: Sven Ljungholm

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

A FORMER'S VOICE GOES SILENT... (co-wrote Darkest England...

Frank Smith: Lost Voice of Mission….


The enigma of Frank Smith has intrigued me for years and it has been good to get an insight to this man through a paper given several years ago to the National Salvation Army Social Services Conference by Norman Murdoch.


If ever there was a lost voice of Mission within TSA it is Frank Smith. The one time Commissioner who led TSA work in the US and Canada (1884-1887) and who was TSA first Social Wing Commissioner 1888-90 resigned and left TSA to become a founder member of the British Labour party. With his ‘desertion’, the cloud under which he left descended further to almost fog any influence he had within the formation of a holistic missiological theology that shaped TSA then, and continues to do so now.


There is very little historical recognition of Frank Smith and his influence, seemingly an awkwardness and embarrassment he simply is not considered. He warrants a minimal attention in Sandall’s historical account of the development of TSA, which is reflected in almost a denial that he shaped the social programme of TSA and that he led the Social Wing. Murdoch (2003) suggests that for some reason Frank Smith remains a peripheral figure and an organisational maverick. Yet for many Salvationists particularly those who worked in city slums he forged a theology of missional engagement that broadened and brought a more holistic understanding of Salvation.


For many Smith was seen as representative of a “new pattern of Salvation Army leadership” who gave welfare work high priority to readdress a growing schism between what was known as the Spiritual Wing and the Social Wing. His socialist way of thinking shaped his theology as he argued that corps should be social centres with Salvationist lay members engaged in social service as well as soul saving. As the first Social Wing Commissioner he is given little credit for the 11 men’s shelters; 10 cheap food depots; 5 workshops; 3 labour bureaus; 7 labour factories; a prison-gate home; a farm colony; 14 rescue homes; 8 Women’s Institutions; 40 slum posts all set up in his 2 year tenure!


His influence over Darkest England and the Way Out is largely played down, as was his influence over William Booth and his ‘change of mind’. The change was dramatic for Booth who had concluded that early charitable mission was unfounded and in fact pauperised those in need, that anything in this vein was not the 'work proper'. The narrowness of definition of salvation summed up with many sound bytes by Catherine who saw soup and soap as secondary.


"Oh! How I see the emptiness and vanity of everything compared with the
salvation of the soul. What does it matter if a man dies in the workhouse? If he
dies on a doorstep covered with wounds, like Lazarus - what does it matter if
his soul; is saved?"


Such strength of thought saw TSA retreat from its early forays into holistic mission, its theology not rigorous enough to underpin and give meaning to its actions. Alongside this, Murdoch (2003) identifies that Booth was aware that TSA was seeing its credibility being lost inner city. It would seem that Smith helped Booth to identify that the driving force for the primacy of individual soul salvation was responsible for dualistic schism that was fragmenting holistic mission.


Post 1890 Booth’s theology became increasingly tired of the dualism seen between the Spiritual and the Social Wing; Smith’s advanced social ideas no doubt would have had an impact as together Smith and Booth explored ‘Wholesale Salvation’ as a means of bringing a balance between individual and social salvation.


'O Wholesale Salvation! doesn't have the same kind of ring, but given the development of Booth's missional theology it makes you wonder when Booth wrote these words:


O boundless salvation! deep ocean of love,
O fullness of mercy, Christ brought from above,
The whole world redeeming, so rich and so free,
Now flowing for all men, now flowing for all men,
Now flowing for all men, come, roll over me!


... 1893, three years after 'Darkest England and the Way Out' and the resignation of Commissioner Frank Smith.


Frank Smith resigned and went into politics. I suspect there are many theories that could be put forward, many of which have pushed Frank Smith's voice into safe obscurity. The impact of his voice can be seen around the world but by and large he represents another lost voice of mission.
Murdoch, N.H .(2003) Frank Smith: Salvationist Socialist. National Salvation Army Social Services Conference.


------


Apparently Frank's Smith's brother ended up with Frank's memoirs etc... but no one seems to have been able to track him down which is a shame. So if anyone had an ancestor called John Smith can they just check their attics for Frank Smith's memoirs!

GORDON COTTERRILL

Baptism's purpose...

I will speak at the Salvation Army today (on Baptism). Those who know that the Salvation Army does not practice the baptism ritual may wonder where I’m headed and might be anxious about some of these introductory words, but I'm not on a collision course with either the Bible or the teachings of my church.

In the church calendar today celebrates the Feast of Epiphany, where the texts of Jesus' baptism is in focus. If baptism is necessary for salvation, it may seem absurd that Jesus had to be baptized. John the Baptist said so and many others have come down on the same side. But perhaps there is a key to understanding this in the book of Hebrews?

If you've followed my blog over the last couple weeks, have you noticed how Jesus for a brief time was made lower than the angels, and that he truly had to be as 'the children of flesh and blood'. This complete identification with humans was further confirmed further through baptism. Baptism signifies the transition. Jesus is ready to complete the mission: to save the world. His baptism was the gate to the road to Calvary.

Therefore Jesus’ baptism was necessary, not for his own salvation, but for that of the whole world. I think he saw it as a foretaste of death and resurrection. His comments to John: "We need to do to fulfill all righteousness" is a confirmation of that.

For me to be righteous before God, I must also die with Christ and rise with him. It is this that is 'baptism', and that ‘baptism’ is necessary for salvation. The rituals can symbolize this in a good way, but if it does not happen on the inner level, they are external actions only in conjunction with religious ceremonies. Piety concerned Jesus. The ‘inner’ characterizes the ‘external’ and not the opposite. Therefore, the Army opted out of the external rituals without thereby saying that it is wrong to exercise and take full advantage of them.

In order to live a sacramental life, it is necessary to be 'baptized'. How it happens is a mystery, and in the expository lesson later today I will testify to the mighty 'experience' I had when I recognized and became aware of what it meant to be dead with Christ and raised with Him in this life

Today's 'manna':

I'm dead and risen with Christ.






MAJOR JOSTEIN NIELSEN
NORWAY

Translated from Norwegian; Sven Ljungholm


Jostein Nielsen

A question that’s been on my mind lately has been this; "What is a Salvation Army Officer?” More specifically, what makes a Salvation Army Officer different from anyone else? Indeed, are they different at all (apart from the obvious red epaulettes)? I've observed an emphasis upon the "call to Officership”, accompanied by an attempt to understand the place of ordination within our movement. All of this has led to, I would suggest, an ever increasing divide between Officers and Soldiers.

The problem here has been identified and analysed masterfully by Major Dr Harold Hill in his book Leadership in the Salvation Army: a Case study in Clericalisation. The problem is whether Officership is seen as a function within our movement or does “Ordination” and “Commissioning” somehow place Officers into a different "class" or even "caste". Historically and theologically we would align ourselves with the first option but more and more, at least in practice I suggest, we have begun to act like the second.

Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than in the way we speak of the "call to Officership". The “call” is treated with deep reverence within The Salvation Army. Indeed the Officer’s Covenant, which all Officers must sign, starts with the words (in capital letters, no less) "CALLED BY GOD". Those who wish to apply for officership need to demonstrate throughout the application process that they have indeed been called and that this calling is evident in their lives. Cadets are also expected that their calling would be affirmed and confirmed throughout their training.

The problem, as I observe it, is that this calling is frequently viewed as an "add on" to Soldiership. In this way Officers become those people who have received “something extra” from God that others have not (in this case a “calling”). An extreme interpretation of this may even suggest that it is a subtle form of Gnosticism.

Some of the symptoms of this problem include the expectation that it is the Officers who are called to be Evangelists, Preachers, Pastors, Administrators, Leaders, Prophets, Worship Leaders and a myriad of other functions since they are the ones that have been "Called by God ". It is entirely unsustainable for them personally or for us as a movement to rely on one small percentage of our movement. As a result of this we have ended up with under-active Soldiers and over-active Officers.

So what's a possible solution?

A colleague of mine, Major Dr Dean Smith, preached recently on the topic "How do I know God's will for my life?” During what was an outstanding sermon he provided what I think is a different way to conceive of the relationship between Soldiership and Officership. He suggested this; 

"We should assume that all Soldiers should be Officers unless they are called to something else."

In this way the calling to officership is viewed as a function of Soldiership not as something added on top of it. Officership, in this understanding of it, is not a status acquired over and above Soldiership, but a specialised form of Soldiership. The “call to Officership” is not an "add-on" for some Christians but a function of the one calling that all Christians share in. This is the calling of Isaiah 43:1 "I have called you by name; you are mine." The calling of some Christians will express itself functionally through Soldiership within The Salvation Army. The calling of some of these Soldiers will also express itself functionally through Officership within The Salvation Army. Indeed some Officers will later function in other specialised ways; teachers, drug and alcohol specialists, business administrators, divisional and territorial leaders. Of course, that does not mean that those who are not Officers are not called at all. Rather, the complete opposite is true. We must assume that all Christians are called but that the calling will functions within different, but no less important, frameworks; be that as school teachers, bakers or candlestick makers... or, indeed, Officers within The Salvation Army.

So, again, we return to the original question "What Is a Salvation Army Officer?" I've come to the conclusion that any answer to this question must be expressed in terms that intrinsically link it to Soldiership. Personally, I'm drawn to the phrase "Strategic Soldiership" for this purpose. This, for me, inseparably links Officership to Soldiership. Officers are, first and foremost, Christians, secondly Soldiers, and thirdly Officers.

If we relate this further to the mission of The Salvation Army we have to be honest and admit that entering into Officership actually requires a candidate to take a step backwards from the mission front. This is not to say that Officers are not involved in the mission, but rather that they have taken on a new strategic role. Importantly, they remain Soldiers themselves but take on the responsibility of leading other Soldiers in the mission. The reality is, though, that Officers are not primarily on the "front line"... Soldiers are. 

This strategic role is very important. This is a very necessary task. We need people to be Officers within The Salvation Army. What we don't need, however, are Officers who “think of themselves more highly than they ought” (Romans 12:3). Officers must not see themselves as somehow better, or more important than Soldiers because they are called and Soldiers are not. Soldiers are at the front line of Salvation Army mission. Officers are called to “Strategic Soldiership”, which necessarily remains one step back from that front line. The front line of Salvation Army mission will take place where soldiers engage in vocations in the world; as butchers, writers, child-care workers, doctors, businesspeople, cleaners, and a hundred other possibilities. This calling is, though, the same calling that all Christians share, including the calling that Officers have received. The calling is to God's mission field - for everyone; Officers, Soldiers, Adherents, and all Christians alike. Officers have a strategic role to play in encouraging, supporting and equipping Soldiers to carry out the mission of The Salvation Army wherever they are.

That is what it means to be a Salvation Army Officer. That is what it means to be a Strategic Soldier.

http://www.setapartinchrist.com/2011/11/who-is-called.html

Officership: A Lifetime Call?

Statistics don’t lie—for an increasing number of people, the years of service as an officer are short

April 15, 2010 by Majors Wendy and Ian Swan

-----------------------------------------

In an age when most people change careers four or five times, can we realistically expect a lifetime commitment to officership? Does God call different people for different periods of time? Is our approach to leadership biblical? Is it practical?

This is the fourth in a series of Point Counterpoint debates in which a variety of Salvationists will explore two sides of an issue that is critical to Army mission.

---

Officership is not a career, but a covenant relationship designed for the long haul. Of course if we want people to sign up, we need to change our approach.

BY MAJOR WENDY SWAN

It may seem a no-brainer for someone in her 27th year of officer service to answer this question. Like others, I enjoyed a successful career in business prior to choosing officership. Since commissioning, have I ever been offered another career? Several times. Recently? Yes. Why then continue to commit to a lifetime of service as an officer?

Let me quickly affirm that much has been gained by the Church from using a business model in terms of management and stewardship of resources. I wonder, however, if we have inadvertently made a mistake in using business language to describe officership—specifically the use of the word “career.” Career speaks of experience and expertise that provide opportunity for power, independence, financial gain and “self.” Officership is not a career. More accurately, officership might be described as a “service path,” originating out of a covenant relationship with God and a vehicle within which to serve The Salvation Army.

The Army’s military terminology and imagery aside, ordination is not a new idea within the Church. It finds its roots in the Mendicant orders of the 13th century where groups of people offered themselves as a model of God active within a community. They took vows of obedience, poverty and chastity so that all of their time and energy could be expended on the religious work of preaching the gospel and serving the poor. Sound familiar?

Seven hundred years later, all Salvationists commit to evangelism, discipleship and service. Officers voluntarily choose additional covenant vows of obedience and simplicity of lifestyle. After more than 20 years in leadership development and training, I have yet to meet anyone who begins officership thinking, “Well, I’ll see how it goes.…” But statistics don’t lie—for an increasing number of people, the years of service as an officer are short.

Based on this reality, I’d like to ask another question: Under what conditions might the Army expect an individual to commit to a lifetime of service? Aside from the theological issue of covenant, I’d like to suggest some pragmatic components that facilitate productive “long-termers.”

Consultative Leadership: While we are making progress in consulting officers on a variety of issues, consultative leadership is more than asking officer personnel for thoughts or opinions regarding issues. These days, people not only want a voice, they want a vote. If people do not believe that their voice is truly heard and valued, they will vote with their feet. The best form of consultative leadership involves what I call “mature conversations,” discussions where deepest need and deepest passion intersect, where both parties recognize capacity and contribution as well as challenges and limitations. People choose to commit to the long term when what they experience in the short term tells them there is a future and they can envision their place in it.

Professional Development: Our Army provides a myriad of opportunities to fulfil one’s calling to serve community. While I’ve served in corps and social services, most of my officership has been in international education and training. We live in a world where accreditation and credentialing increasingly demand a high level of professionalism. While a growing number of people enter officership with extensive skills and education, it is critical that we adopt lifelong learning and equipping of officer personnel for present and future service. While limited financial resources will always be a factor, our strategic-planning lens must be one of “investment” and not “cost” at strategic points in an individual’s service.

Sabbatical Refreshment: I’m not talking about a year lounging on the beaches of Bali (as beautiful as they are!). Studies show that within the ministerial professions, frontline workers experience burnout regardless of how well they have attempted self-care. This is a particular danger for our movement as we expect 24/7 availability as well as multiple appointments from individuals. Are we guilty of abusing God’s grace when we ask people to commit to a lifetime and then fail to provide for the biblical precept of intentional re-creation? Several territories have in recent years implemented a variety of sabbatical forms. This is resulting in longer years of productive and energized service of officers. I’d love to see this become a reality here in Canada and Bermuda.

Consultative leadership, professional development, sabbatical refreshment—that sounds like an Army I’d want to sign up for—long term of course.

Major Wendy Swan is the extended learning program director at William and Catherine Booth College in Winnipeg.

---

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.

BY MAJOR IAN SWAN

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.