Think

Proof! | Envisioning the Future

We must regain trust says Joe Noland

This is my semi-follow-up take on the The Shrinking Pool post, as promised. Recently I heard an officer say, “I accepted the call to officership at face value.” Years of experience and an educated intuition tell me that hers is the exception rather than the rule today. And there is plenty of evidence to suggest that members of this “emerging generation” are not joiners, nor are they as brand loyal as in my generation. A Google search on the subject brought up over 12,000 hits on the subject. A page on the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention website features a young Southern Baptist pastor with the following observation:

“Yet Harris, a young Southern Baptist pastor, believes Southern Baptists will play a diminished role in gospel work in the next quarter century unless Southern Baptist leaders begin envisioning the future through the eyes of an emerging generation less brand loyal than previous generations.”

Substitute Salvation Army, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran or any other mainline denomination into that paragraph and you get the same result. Oh, I know there are exceptions and we thank God for them, but the hard facts are out there, impossible to ignore, and they are very scary.

Can you explain otherwise why our candidate rolls are diminishing so rapidly in the Western world? As an old has-been Candidates Secretary, I instinctively begin to evaluate the reasons why - can’t help myself. In fact, I ask every young Salvationist employee I meet the same question, “Why are you not an officer?” and no matter how they verbalize it, it comes out the same: “It’s a matter of trust! The brand and reality are not jiving together. My trust isn’t strong enough to commit for a lifetime. Prove it to me. I can’t accept the brand at face value!” I’m retired, so why do I bother going around asking these kinds of questions? It’s because I care deeply, that’s why… and besides, it’s part of my DNA.

Just last week, I asked three highly skilled, very talented, high-profile and extremely dedicated Savationist employees, who love the Army culture dearly, why they are not officers (you would recognize their names). This week, I spoke with yet another. Their answers were variations on the same theme: “Freedom, trust and treatment.” I’ll let you fill in the blanks, because they are being filled in anyway by this generation whether we like it or not and/or whether we want to admit it or not.

This is exactly why I supported John Gowan’s short-term ministry alternative, the “Lieutenant” program, even with its several flaws. Something is better than nothing! And the majority of polled respondents agreed. It provided an innovative alternative for those not ready to make a lifetime commitment, thus leaving the door open down the line. We saw this work to perfection while in Melbourne, Australia recently when fifteen exceptional Lieutenants were commissioned as Captains. And their tenure as Lieutenants counted for something.

Swish! By the strike of pen, it’s gone. This is not a criticism of the decision made, but rather a plea for an ongoing alternative ministry path, one that counts. Who cares what it’s called? (Well, not quite. Ask them what they think of the term “Envoy”.) Keep the Lieutenant rank a substantive one and call the other whatever (almost), but keep it viable. That’s my plea along with the plea of all who responded to the original questionnaire, including those gathered at the International Leader’s Conference in Atlanta, 2000! God knows we need this alternative path in order to reach the cultural mind-set of this age group. It’s also a plea for “… leaders to begin envisioning the future through the eyes of an emerging generation.”

Unfortunately, we must regain their trust, which is closely aligned to control and treatment. And this takes time, along with proof as…”in the pudding.”

Writer: Commissioner Joe Noland’s ministry can be summed up in three words: chaos, creativity and controversy - three elements implicit in any successful innovative endeavor. Cecil B. DeMille, renowned producer of Biblical epics, once wrote, “Creativity is a drug I cannot live without.” Joe’s mantra reads, “Creativity is my drug of choice.”  Access Joe Noland’s complete bio, among other things, by clicking into his website.

Related posts:

Friday, May 22nd, 2009 Think

16 Comments to Proof! | Envisioning the Future

  1. Good on you Joe! You are such an inspiration mate.

    You said that you are not prepared to criticise the elimination of the Lieutenancy program but I am more than happy to go on record as being extremely critical of that decision. We were two weeks from acceptance when the program was pulled unceremoniously from under my wife and I and no, we are not in any way enamoured by the term ENVOY.

    So we’ll keep on doing our thing as faithful “soldiers” and we will do so loudly and proudly. We are too old for Training College but we faithfully do our own theological studies as we continue to do our inner-city mission work.

    I feel really sorry for my officer friends because the effective ones seem to be so in spite of the system rather than because of the system. I think the hierachical nature of officership can allow bullies to wield power that is not their right to have and there are too many duds who are promoted according to the “Peter Principle” where people rise to their own level of incompetence.

    People are appointed to positions that they have no skill-set for and we wonder why things fall apart. Some officers are so obsessed with their own little world that the cry of “OTHERS” goes unheard.

    Don’t get me started on the super-ambitious “children of the regiment” who are happy to tell you that they have a divine right to leadership because of what Dad, Mum or the Grandparents did. What rot!

    The system is well and truly broken and can only be fixed if we humble ourselves (yes, all of us) before God and start being Christ-like in our dealings with each other.

    We also need alternative paths to ministry and service that are forward looking not navel gazing. Just sitting around, wringing our hands, pontificating about the good old days won’t cut it anymore. And anyway, I’m not so sure they were such great days - I remember the sinfulness was endemic in the ranks and it could be argued that this along with our internal distractions are the main reason we are not prospering now.

    Keep the dialogue happening folks. It brings the truth to light so we can deal with it and move forward.

    2. Bruce Redman on May 22nd, 2009

  2. Bruce you are right that this perspective is valid not just for this generation but for those of us further along the path.

    More than some officers being bullies, resting on the laurels of their ancestors’ accomplishments, or rising to the level of their incompetence (the last is NOT their fault…it’s been pretty roundly stated on this blog in many posts that officers have go where they’re sent or get out).

    The loss of lieutancy as an option is just one more way that soldiership is not given the supports necessary for effective ministry. Systematic and systemic supports are not available. soldiers have to cobble them together as they can.

    Bruce, I am so glad that you and your wife can keep steadfast in ministry.

    Andrea

    3. Andrea614Regent on May 22nd, 2009

  3. To this new generation, staying in one vocation for a lifetime is as strange as using a cassette tape.

    It is a fact that employers once looked for consistency in a person’s application; having many different jobs and employers was the sign of irresponsibility and disloyalty.

    Today, that trend has ended. Many employers want to know how much experience a person has had in many different fields and companies. Flexibility is the new reliability. Even leadership gurus teach the premise that a person’s major goal should be to “work yourself out of a job, give it away, and move on to something new”.

    As long as we measure loyalty by the same principles that once were highly valued by all society, but have drastically changed, we will not be able to attract this and future generations.

    What do they see? They see officers being treated like pawns on someone else’s chess board, being pushed around to meet someone’s agendas and fulfill someone else’s dreams, while they themselves seem to be making all the sacrifices, including the ability to be who God has created them to be and to use the gifts God has given them specifically. Employees of The Army, on the other hand, especially those who are soldiers and loyal to the corps, are given great respect, flexibility, and even a little creative freedom.

    Two examples:

    One officer with whom I am very familiar, was moved from place to place, tossed around like a ragdoll, given terribly stressful appointments, and spoken to like he had no reason to be respected. He resigned, got a divorce, and then The Army employed him in a very powerful position in a division with great financial support, gave him a huge salary and he is now treated like royalty. This person is still in that position and is loving life.

    Another was an employee with whom I worked very closely. He was offered officership by The Army, and could not attend training because of his age. He and his wife were highly regarded as employees, treated as if The Army could not do without them, and then they became officers. Once they were commissioned, they were placed in appointments where they served as assistants; they were given menial roles, and treated like has-beens.

    Is this how The Army expects to attract candidates?

    There is also the serious problem of nepotism. It is so obvious that a “name” gives a person a certain amount of respect, and the privilege of working within their strengths that is not afforded to the “new-bloods.” I believe this is an attempt to hold on to the values of Grandma and Grandpa. And, for many, it seems to be working. Unfortunately, it only works for them. Others are not attracted to the status-quo mongers that too often are placed in roles of influence and authority. And many officers who are not a part of the generational-club are heading for greener pastures.

    4. Johnny Gainey on May 22nd, 2009

  4. Thank you, commissioner. Spot-on as always.

    As for a name, for what it’s worth, in this country (New Zealand)when the latest rejigging of Lieutenancy took place and suggestions were called for, I suggested “Warrant Officer” - that was what the Auxiliary Captain rank was originally proposed to be called back in the late 1950s. But I suppose that doesn’t make sense for the majority of countries whose military terminology has not been derived from a British system. Anyway, the proposal was not accepted, and something like “Non-Officer Full-Time Something-or-other” was adopted instead (sorry, it was unmemorable, and holders of the non-rank tend to be called “Leader” instead. That would go down well in Germany I guess?)

    But more seriously, I still think that if we’re going to have ranks at all - and I suppose a military system must - let anyone in full-time, paid, leadership, regardless of whether short-term or life-long or any other consideration, be regarded simply as an officer, captain if you will. Away with first-class and second-class ranks, which are offensive.

    If anyone cares for an extended rationale for this position, please refer to my “Leadership in the Salvation Army: a case-study in clericalisation” (Paternoster, 2006), if you will excuse the promotional aside.

    Harold Hill

    5. Harold Hill on May 22nd, 2009

  5. This week there has been yet another report on child abuse in a church setting. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8065797.stm Against this backdrop a Franciscan (Anglican) friend told us how, if he walks around his parish in a habit, he gets verbal abuse not only to the effect that religion is evil and ‘the cause of all the wars in the world’, but also that church people are abusers. We have so many dechurched people in our population they can be counted in surveys and represented as the frighteningly generous wedge of a pie chart. It is hardly surprising there are trust issues inside the church as well as outside it. A Jesuit edited blog commented ‘ Why did so many Catholic institutions fail so appallingly? A hundred reasons can be suggested, but three come to mind: undue respect for authority (which was self-justifying and rarely self-critical); religious authoritarianism (government of communities by self-perpetuating cliques, who rarely saw the need for fresh thinking); and a rancid clericalism (product of a religious culture that increasingly turned in on itself).’ It isn’t just the Catholic church which has an impaired reputation at the moment, it has affected the whole church in the West, with the divisions in the Anglican church appearing relentlessly in the press, to the extent that the only thing the public hear about Anglicans is to do with fights and arguments over the gay issue.

    We need to come to understand together how to rebuild trust within our own communities. We need to understand how integrity, and congruence between what we say and what we do, are fundamental to creating an environment of trust. We need to learn how to move from looking at people as resources that The Salvation Army can use to asking one another naturally ‘How can we help you serve God better?’
    It’s frightening, we are used to speaking a language that associated sacrificial service to God with sacrificial obedience to the church. But as Christendom fades, the incongruence between the charism of TSA and officers being primarily occupied with deploying buildings and managing ’sheep’ becomes more and more obvious. Progress in understanding together how to build trust and how to embed this deep into our culture depends on our ability to talk about the difficult issues together. It requires the church to learn a new kind of humility. This journey to openness is also a journey toward rebuilding that trust. Paradoxically, the good news here in the UK, at least in parts of it, is that the situation of church aging/decline is so severe there is no longer any real choice but to handle the necessary changes if we are to have a future here. Looking around, I can see the realisation sinking in, and some couragous and painful steps being taken toward a new church culture.

    6. Eleanor Burne-Jones on May 24th, 2009

  6. Wow, Eleanor. Your thoughts (and quotes) resonate so deeply with me. I have thought many times about being an officer. Some who would steer me that way have tried to coerce me into thinking that because I don’t want to be obedient to the Army, I must have a problem with authority and even that I don’t want to submit to God.

    Rubbish.

    I’m glad the Army is declining in size and that it is being forced to look at these real problems within the organization. That question of

    “How can we help you serve God better?”

    is so refreshing. I have never heard it from the lips of an officer. Imagine what God could do if indeed we stopped looking at people as resources to further the Army’s mission, but started looking at how we could use the Army’s resources to help people achieve all that God has planned for them! It’s what we do for people in the Adult Rehabilitation Centers - why can’t that model work for everyone else???

    7. Jeremiah on May 25th, 2009

  7. I find it’s not as simple, sadly, as saying to myself oh well I don’t have to offer to serve within TSA then. What the situation demands of me, and I can only speak here from my personal journey, is that I respond to the institutional church with as much grace as I would wish them to show me. It calls out from me also a need to respond creatively, hopefully, and modelling the kind of generosity of spirit I would like to experience myself at the hands of the formal church. There’s surely nothing intrinsically wrong with the church supporting people financially in order to build the kingdom of God. Alone, I can’t come up with ‘an answer’. I am confident that in listening to God together, soldiers and officers can discern ways of facilitating each others service that are life-giving and practical.

    8. Eleanor Burne-Jones on May 25th, 2009

  8. Good stuff all! Thanks for a continuing constructive dialogue on this important subject. Let’s keep it ongoing. Who knows what doors (and minds) might be opened.

    9. Joe Noland on May 26th, 2009

  9. Thank you Joe for a well written and well thought out piece. It’s funny that often the disease has spread so far before we actually realize we’re sick. Ignoring the warning signs, we push on ahead doing what we’ve always done and then before you know it, it’s almost too late.

    Is it too late for the Army to change so that this trend reverses?

    I found some info on officership on an Army website from Austrailia:

    “First and foremost, The Salvation Army gives the leadership of the movement to its Officers. Officers are commissioned to be leaders. Leadership is given to people who have no contractual tie to The Salvation Army, who have no legally binding relationship to The Salvation Army at all, and whose first allegiance is given to God.”

    Yes, the reality is we have no legally binding relationship with the very organization who provides for us. They are also not legally bound to do anything for us at all. However, even though our first allegiance is supposed to be given to God, The Salvation Army and God have become intertwined within the organization.

    We attended a Human Rights workshop given by the Army’s lawyers about how we need to legally treat employees. What was scary was that when I asked if this applied to officers as well… the answer was no.

    Does anyone else this this is a problem? When officers are bullied or mistreated and end up on the casualty list, they have no recourse.

    That has to change.

    Is it too late?

    That depends.

    I’m working on my next article as a follow up to the first Shrinking Pool. I have followed up on some of the comments that were made and it has led me to some interesting research. I hope this discussion carries on so long and so wide that someone hears and takes action.

    Blessings… Kathie

    10. Kathie Chiu on May 27th, 2009

  10. Kathie,

    I have had the same response regarding ‘legal’ treatment of Officers.

    I discovered when I left Officership, that the problem is (at least in Australia) that Officers and clergy of any denomination, are not legally considered employed by any definition of the law. Therefore, any legal consideration does not apply to them, except basic human rights - which is codeified in international law. The problem I found when I left Officership was no-one would give me a job as I had been ‘unemployed’ for 8 years with no viable excuse - therefore, I was lazy and unmotivated and not a desirable employee.

    We need to change the status of clergy and the law.

    Just a thought.

    Yours in Christ,
    Graeme.

    11. Graeme Randall on May 28th, 2009

  11. “Why are you not an officer?”

    My short answer to the question posed to me by a certain retired officer… (grin)… was “I’m not called to officership.”

    This answer would not suffice… so I had to own up to the reality of it:

    “I don’t trust leadership will allow me to serve the calling that I DO HAVE… specifically a specialist.”

    …

    By the time I tried to go to sleep that night… I knew for sure… my issue with our “shrinking pool” … our “emerging generational leader’s issues”… etc… was we are sooooo bound to our past… to a model of organizing our resources (the time we invest, the talent / people we invest, the treasures we invest) that thinks and acts with paradigms from 20-100 years ago!

    One of my favorite thinkers, historians, writers, cultural encouragers… Leonard Sweet… has an amazing image statement… he describes it here:

    —–
    There is a new theory among physicists about how the swing works. Previous theories revolved around the principle of “parametric instability,” which pivoted the action of swinging at the middle of the arc, and the rocking forward into a higher center of gravity. Physicist William Case, while watching how children actually swing, has now posited a new principle which physicists call “driven harmonic oscillator.” The key to the swing is not in the middle of the arc, but at each end of the arc, where and when the swingers at the same time lean back and throw their feet forward.
    That’s my image statement. As a historian of Christianity, I want the church to lean back–not just back to the 50s, but all the way back through 2000 years of history, all the way back until we’re, in the words of that Sunday School song, “Leaning, Leaning, Leaning on the Everlasting Arms.” But at the same time and I do mean simultaneously, we must use that energy and power that comes from “learning to lean” to kick forward into the future and Carpe Manana.
    —–

    Ancient-Future… what an amazing idea!

    I must admit… I’ve been processing this (along with soooooo many other formational thoughts) for years now.

    I firmly consider myself a prodigal son… both in the literal sense of the biblical story… and in the Salvationist sense that I’ve spent a collective third of my life in “other” community churches outside of TSA.

    I believe that God provides a heritage for a reason.

    I believe that it is critical that we:

    • UNDERSTAND where those that have forged ahead in ministry before us have gone

    • LISTEN to the testimonies and passions of those that have fought on the front lines all these years

    • FOLLOW the core work that has firmly established TSA as one of the most respected organizations in the word… and…

    … yet…

    I believe that it is EQUALLY as critical that we:

    • UNDERSTAND that as humans we are bound to a half dimension of time… meaning you and I can only MOVE FORWARD in time… this leads to:

    • LISTEN to the testimonies and passions of those who God has been speaking to regarding stepping up to today and tomorrows leadership (notice I didn’t say officership here)…

    • FOLLOW the core work… and at the same time… as in the swing illustration above… PUSH FORWARD WITH ALL OF OUR MIGHT forward… to where we ARE GOING!!

    The harvest call continues each moment that we live… will we SPEND it looking back to where we’ve come from at the cost of where we are going?

    … or… might we answer this harvest call… drawing on the wisdom of the ages… and INVEST in where we are going?

    There is NO question that God continues to raise up people that have an understanding of the times we live in… that have a passion for the people of the culture they are called to love and invest in… that desire to follow God’s calling for their lives.

    If there is no question of this… then really… what is the question at hand?

    I’d love to hear more towards this end… wouldn’t you?

    imMEDIAtely yours,

    Errin Hogan

    12. Errin Hogan on June 11th, 2009

  12. I noticed that I missed one thought above…

    Specialist

    In my answer to the question “why are you not an officer?” … I realized the issue was of trust of leadership… mainly due to the evidence at hand that shows most officers are treated as “generalists”… which I don’t believe God designed most people to be.

    Throughout recorded history … AND Christ’s own teachings via parables… we’re taught that while humanity is called to live in corporate fashion.

    Christ speaks to the idea of “body living”… to His people living as a church body… a living organism. Each person has a unique role to fulfill within this body.

    YES… TSA as an organism in its current state DOES require a lot of “generalist” infrastructure to maintain itself.

    I’d go on record (in fact, I am doing this via the WayBackMachine’s recording of all of our thoughts here!!) as stating that we should also be investing in specialists.

    As we’ve participated in a rich history of military and war time style metaphors and structures… lets look closer at these models in the days ahead.

    Our enemy has NOT stopped the attack on humanity. Our enemy should NOT be found within our ranks (each other as often is played out in TSA commands across the globe)… no… our enemy seeks to attack those all around us… within the cultures you and I invest our lives in.

    Generalists… Specialists… in essence… we’re really discussing HOW we invest our forces here.

    HOW will we move forward… no matter what titles we give to the enlisted… no matter what our volunteer army calls themselves because they don’t trust the current “leadership” infrastructure enough to participate from the inside… HOW will we move forward?

    13. Errin Hogan on June 11th, 2009

  13. I love those thoughts. They well bring to mind the delicious combination of panic and exhilaration I remember at the highest point I could get to on the big swing in the garden in my childhood. If anyone has a specialist ministry and has the opportunity, I’d recommend they develop it as far as practical constraints allow. One look around the fringes of the fading denominations here shows up how badly a range of different kinds of ministry are needed in the new expressions of church developing to match our rapidly changing missional context.

    It’s worth looking at what Alan Hirsch has written about what he terms apostolic genius in the church, and how he understands an apostolic environment. I recommend the Handbook to ‘The Forgotten Ways’ as reading. In using the term ‘communitas’ he has identified something often missing in a church environment. Here is his definition: ‘Adopted from the work of anthropologist, Victor Turner, ‘communitas, one of the key elements of missional DNA, describe the dynamics of the Christian community inspired to overcome their instincts to ‘huddle and cuddle’, and to instead form themselves around a common mission that calls them onto a dangerous journey to unknown places, a mission that calls the church to shake off its collective securities and to plunge into the world of action. There they will experience disorientation and marginalisation but also encounter God and one another in a new way. Communitas is always linked therefore with the experience of liminality. It involves adventure and movement, and it describes that unique experience of togetherness that really happens only among a group of people inspired by the vision of a better world actually attempting to do something about it.’

    Alan Hirsch explains (paraphrased) ‘Apostolic Genius’ as that unique energy and force that imbues phenomenal Jesus movements in history. It comes about through the dynamic interplay of missional-incarnational impulse, apostolic environment, disciple-making, organic systems and communitas, in a context of adaptive challenge acting as a catalyst. Both those definitions can be found in the glossary at the end of ‘The Forgotten Ways Handbook’ by Alan Hirsch with Darryn Altclass, pub Brazos, US 2009.

    Freedom, trust and treatment are big issues in trying to create this kind of environment and work in (or somehow connected with) a big institutional church - if officers have problems, try being a soldier. I have meetings with church planting mentors and colleagues where every sentence I say seems to have to end with ‘but I can’t do that as a lay person, so others will have to use that approach’. I think I’m now one of the recognised experts on working alone, without funding, without being able to coordinate easily ecumenically, unable to convene a good committee, walking on eggshells every time I assemble a team in case I upset one of the local clergy, etc. But if you look closely at the concepts Alan describes, the conditions for Apostolic Genius are environments that by the grace of God any church planter can potentially create, for example amongst tribes who are not likely to be able to connect with existing congregations. We can choose to plant within the charism that inspires and fires us, we can and should disciple others from the heart of who we are as Salvationists. I argue we should go for the panicky and exhilarating moments that come with pushing the swing of following Jesus to its limits, and plant, or develop specialist ministries, or whatever God leads. (I’m very tired while writing this, so please excuse the ramblings!)

    14. Eleanor Burne-Jones on June 11th, 2009

  14. The ranking system that the Army has at this time is stale and antiquated. I think that the years to make specific ranks should be changed. At commissioning a rank of Lieutenant for three years and then promoted to Captain.

    The rank of Captain would continue up to fifteen years of service and then the rank of Major would apply. At twenty-five years of service a rank of Senior Major would be attained as well as long-service recognition. At thirty-five years of service the rank of Lt. Colonel should be applied. Divisional Commanders and certain THQ officers would have the rank of Colonel. As far as short-term tenure and non-Training College rank, perhaps Second Lieutenant or Envoy. Currently some Corps appointments have employees with no rank or Envoys and Sergeants. All appointments with rare exception should have a rank and title. Years of service should be the determining factor of rank with the exception of Divisional Commanders and THQ offcers with specific responsibilities. A mininmum of twenty years of service should be applied to the rank of Colonel.

    Historically Corps Officers have been neglected in recognition and rank. Corps Officership should be a highly esteemed placement and honored accordingly with a change of rank as already described.

    It is time to face the facts. It’a simple matter of a meeting of leadership and consent and the stroke of the pen and it could be done.

    15. Robert Deidrick on August 3rd, 2009

  15. It seems that you all are so free to speak openly with some of the things that are said on this “think-tank”.

    So many officers I know were really taken to task for saying these kind of things on the xanga network a few years ago.

    I feel I can’t be free to say some of the things I read here because there still is this kind of atmosphere. I sort of spoke about similar subject on Commissioner Joe’s “Sigh” blog, if that is the correct lingo.

    The leadership always makes you feel that you are the only one who thinks this way or no one else experiences the kind of situations you do. If they can keep you ignorant and isolated, then they continue to have power to wield you as they wish.

    16. Female Officer (USA) on August 9th, 2009

  16. To Female Officer (USA)

    You are not the only one frustrated. You are not the only one fearful of retaliation. For me, I fear no one. I am a former officer. I still respect leadership but I have every right to disagree. Who knows, maybe I am correct. Maybe it is only opinion. As a leader “Corps Officer”, I sometimes had folk disagree with me. I respected that and attempted to see their point. We still need to show respect and yet agree to disagree on some issues. Do not forget to take these issues before the Lord.

    17. Robert Deidrick on August 10th, 2009

Leave a comment

Categories


Sound and Fury