The Married Man’s Rant

Counterpoint to the married women’s ghetto rant

In the most recent list of appointment changes in the Australia Eastern Territory, we broke new ground. For the first time ever, a married woman officer was appointed as Divisional Commander. Hallelujah! At last we are appointing people to these leadership positions based on their abilities, giftedness and appropriateness.

I welcome this change.

I am filled with a great sense of hope for other married women of great potential who would also be suitable for similar leadership roles in the future. The door has been opened on some great possibilities. I am particularly looking forward to the day when my own wife, who is a capable officer in her own right, may be given the opportunity to be appointed as Divisional Commander, Territorial Commander or, dare I say it, even General. May I go on record now as stating that if such a scenario were to occur then I would do my best in the role of International President of Women’s Ministries… (now let me remove my tongue from my cheek before I continue).

But hang on just a moment. Let’s go back a month or so ago when the much anticipated list of appointments was released. Where the spouse of the newly appointed Divisional Commander would normally be, by default one suspects, given the role of Divisional President of Women’s Ministries, sadly “Mr D.C.” was appointed to another role.

Why?

If we have established an entire structure of default appointments which, in the past, were given to the wife of the Territorial or Divisional Commander, why all of a sudden do we display this inconsistency when the wife is the one who is D.C.?

“It’s obvious,” you may say. “He’s a male.”

Excuse me? Surely there’s another reason. Why are married men excluded from this ministry opportunity? If we espouse a theology of the “priesthood of all believers,” why then this obvious discrepancy?

May I remind us all of some of the prophetic words (albeit a little politically incorrect these days) of William Booth: “Some of my best men are women.” Perhaps we need to realise that some of our best women are in fact men.

Why couldn’t a married male provide great leadership in the area of Women’s Ministries? Is that so far removed from the realm of reality that it’s not even considered? Can we seriously go forward as a movement without taking these questions into serious consideration?

Well, here’s a better option. Get rid of Women’s Ministries!

I believe we need an entire restructure of our leadership within The Salvation Army. We need to completely eliminate, from the top down, the entire “Women’s Ministries” category of appointments and replace them with appointments that are needed. “Family Ministries” may be a place to start.

If we want equality between the sexes in ministry in The Salvation Army, let’s do it properly. Let’s give everyone, male and female, married and single, the opportunity to minister in their area of giftedness, skill and knowledge. Surely that’s the way God created us to minister. Or am I just a little too optimistic?

I’ve had enough of saying one thing whilst ignoring the fact that our entire structure says something completely different.

But that’s just my rant.

Writer: Adam Couchman has been an officer for five years and is currently appointed as Training Officer at the School for Officer Training and Assistant Director to the School for Christian Studies at Booth College in the Australia Eastern Territory. Together with his wife Megan, Adam has two daughters: Brielle and Annabelle.  Adam enjoys music, and studying theology and has just commenced a Masters degree in Theology.

4 Comments to The Married Man’s Rant

1. I am not sure this is actually a counterpoint to Danielle’s article. It is more or less an argument for the same “tear down” of the ghetto only from a male perspective. In any case, I think it is important for men who are feminists to stand up for, stand by, and stand with their wives.

   (Before anyone freaks out, by feminist I mean one who upholds the value, honor, worth, ability, and importance of women as equal members of society. I think we should all be feminists under this definition.)
Juan on December 3rd, 2008

2. Great post. It does make a great counterpoint to Danielle’s post a few days ago.

   A few years ago the Australian Southern Territory did try to change the ‘Women’s Ministries’ department into ‘Adult and Family Ministries.’ As I remember the stationery was printed, the logos designed and the job titles changed. I think there was even talk of creating a ‘Men’s Ministries’ department within it. However, IHQ decided otherwise and everything changed back.

   I never found out the reason, or at least one that made any sense. Perhaps somebody here could enlighten me?

   My suspicion was that the ghetto (to use Danielle’s wonderful phrase) had been bulldozed leaving its inhabitants with nowhere to go, so IHQ stepped in. I used to be so cynical…
Cameron Horsburgh on December 3rd, 2008

3. Actually, we have a couple of male officers in EET who do lead Home League. (Including married men). The women love them and they do a super job.

   I’m not sure what to think of these Population Ministries - sometimes it feels like false categories are created. And there are folks who fit into none of those categories. And corps who are expected to run programs that are less suited to their needs than something inter-generational, a reading club, etc., etc. that doesn’t fit in the old programmatic schemes.

   Obviously, there are great things about certain programs but there is often an accompanying rigidity that seems most unhelpful.
Maureen Diffley on December 3rd, 2008

4. Just a minor theological point. ‘The priesthood of all believers’ has nothing to do with who can or cannot be granted a certain role in ordained or lay ministry. It is about the gift of having access to the Father.
Craig Gaudion on December 3rd, 2008

Leave a comment