Uniform standards
by Rob Reardon
I love The Salvation Army uniform. I don’t care if people presume that I’m an airline pilot when 
walking through an airport, or if I’m mistaken for a bellhop at a hotel. Plain and simple, the uniform is an outward sign to society that I’m SAVED by the blood of Jesus Christ and I’m available to whomever is in need physically, emotionally or spiritually. Along the same line of thought, wearing the uniform is a privilege. Not a privilege similar to “club” membership or preferential treatment, but a privilege to be used by God to minister to all of humanity.
When I wear my uniform, I’m making a statement that carries with it simultaneous messages of integrity, commitment and accessibility. If any of those areas are lacking, then the uniform simply becomes a costume of sorts. The wearer is playing “dress-up” and is not standing beside the message conveyed by the garment. 2 Timothy is clear in 2:3-5:
“Join with me in suffering, like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs; rather, they try to please their commanding officer. Similarly, anyone who competes as an athlete does not receive the victor’s crown except by competing according to the rules.”
The Salvation Army has, for its own good and the good of others, certain rules and expectations for those wearing the uniform. If those rules aren’t lived and followed, then it’s simple - take the uniform off.
A friend of mine once said, “If I worked at Wendy’s, I wouldn’t sell you Taco Bell!” The same is true as soldiers of The Salvation Army. If you call yourself a Salvationist and you wear the uniform, don’t try to sell me anything else! Don’t push any other doctrine or theology or belief or standard. If the soldier wearing the uniform isn’t following the rules of not only The Salvation Army but what the Bible clearly sets out as godly living, then step aside until you’re ready to do so!
Now there will be those who will say that rules are to be lived by, yes, but grace ought to reign supreme. I agree, but not to the detriment of the Christian witness and integrity of Biblical standards. Just before that passage above from 2 Timothy 2, we read that we are to “be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 2:1).
Grace is free-flowing, but it also has its expectations, doesn’t it? This is covered in Romans 6:1-2: “What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?” Grace doesn’t give us license to live lives peppered with sin, but it provides the means to overcome sin and live lives of holiness and integrity.
This is what the uniform represents. It is not just another Sunday suit. It is not a “costume” by which we dress-up when necessary to feed the poor. It is a cloak of holiness and a means by which we can communicate to this dying world that there is hope in Christ. Wear it well!
Writer: Capt. Rob Reardon is an officer of the USA Western Territory currently serving at the USA National Headquarters in the Business Department. While youth ministry and discipleship are his passion, he is willingly taking a sojourn into the dark recesses of business administration. On good days he can be found cultivating relationships over a good cup of java. On bad days he fights the urge to tumble into a deep depression due to the performance (or lack thereof) of his favorite sports teams. Every day he is in his element loving and enjoying God, his family and the life he has been blessed with.
23 Comments to Uniform standards
Leave a comment
Categories
- 1000 Post Celebration
- Areopagus
- Belief
- Blogroll
- COMING SOON
- Concise Oxford
- Creation
- Creative Arts
- Double~take
- Easter
- Ecclesia
- Education
- Ephemera
- FAD
- Featured
- From Russia with Blogs
- Gen whY?
- History
- JustThinking
- Lives lived
- Match factory
- Match Factory Events
- Ordination
- Personae
- Politics
- Power
- Ragamuffin
- Ramblings
- Redux - The Best of
- Resources
- Resurrected writers
- Reviews
- Rubicon Books
- Rubiconography
- Shades of grey
- Shades of grey
- Supper Club
- theRubi-Blog
- Think
- Thinkaloud
- Thought
- Uncategorized
- Urbanities
- Vox populi
Sound and Fury
- Slaves 5 Margaret Okubo, David, Johnny Gainey
- What The Hell? (Part One: Bell's Hell) 12 Jim, Jim, Robert deidrick
- Politics #1 : Political parties - An Erroneous Assumption 4 Rochelle Stockman, Terry Camsey, Phil
- Murungu or Mwanangu 5 George, givesak, Andrea614Regent
- Heaven without hell 24 Mary Davis, Cadet Nathan Swartz, Andrew Bale
Hi Rob
I’m generally hesitant to enter a debate about uniform, and the wearing of it. It feels like far too much energy has already been spent in this area, so I’ll just offer a couple of links to previous rambles I’ve had about it.
The writing isn’t ask strong as yours, Rob…it’s a few scribbled thoughts…but it may give you an idea of my perspective.
One is very recent, and another less so:
http://johnnylaird.blogspot.com/2009/05/culture.html
http://johnnylaird.blogspot.com/2008/06/punk-monk.html
The only point I would throw in on top of that is that if I am wearing a uniform to identify me as a Salvationist, I think it’s important that it’s immediately recognizable as such, so I’d prefer not be confused with another uniform wearing guy.
J
Captain Reardon,
Thank you for your blog on the uniform. I agree 100 percent with your interpretation. Keep up the good work.
I would agree with you to a point.
I believe that while wearing uniform, there must be room for theological debate regarding what is sin, what is holy living, what is biblical interpretation etc., (some of which we have seen on this forum). Uniform wearing says we belong to The Salvation Army, and all that it stands for. Can’t that equally stand for a people who are diverse in their understanding of scripture, theology, doctrine etc., who engage in critical discussion of the same, but are united in the outward expression of their salvation?
I would say the moment we start saying things like ‘this is what we believe and what we stand for - end of discussion. If you don’t like it, don’t wear the uniform’ (sort of statements) (yout comment “A friend of mine once said, “If I worked at Wendy’s, I wouldn’t sell you Taco Bell!” The same is true as soldiers of The Salvation Army. If you call yourself a Salvationist and you wear the uniform, don’t try to sell me anything else! Don’t push any other doctrine or theology or belief or standard. If the soldier wearing the uniform isn’t following the rules of not only The Salvation Army but what the Bible clearly sets out as godly living, then step aside until you’re ready to do so!”), then our theology is dead. Our salvation is dead and innefective, and we have no salvation, we have no hope of eternal life. We become just another club, or pagan religion worshiping man made doctrine and a man made God.
Isn’t God far greater than that? Is it possible for any of us to understand God to the point that we can say ‘This is what we believe - end of subject…..’ Isn’t that a form of idolatary? Doesn’t that put us above God? One might argue that we have the revealed Word of God in scripture, so we can understand. But I would make the same point. Because it does talk about the infinite, supreme God, can any of us claim to fully understand it? We can only understand it according to the light we have within us individually. So there MUST be diversity in theology and doctrine etc.
Yes, I do have very strong views on the subject. I do like the uniform, and If I were still serving, I would actually be pushing for the older style uniform (the one with proper epoulettes etc.) to be worn as the everyday uniform, and only have the t-shirt for when we are doing work in the garbage dump or likely to get EXTREMELY dirty. Our point of difference I think is what we believe it stands for.
Yours in Christ,
Graeme.
This is a good post, Rob. Thanks for your thoughts.
I’m glad you’ve interpreted the uniform in terms of what it means (or should mean) to people outside the Army. It’s a good theory, but in practice it seems to be a way to enforce our hierarchy and laws.
In our territory it’s fairly standard for Pastoral Care Councils (the old Census Boards) to take a soldier out of uniform for a while for whatever transgression they may have committed. It seems to be less common to remove them from soldiership. I guess the paperwork’s just too much. Discipleship and holiness don’t seem to come into it—uniform wearing is, for many, a way of saying you’re in good standing with the Army.
Uniform is also used to enforce the hierarchical structures of the Army. I’m heading off to an officers’ councils this afternoon. We are privileged to have our Zonal Secretaries as leaders. DHQ has been very busy making sure that all officers are aware that they are to wear full Navy uniforms today. This is a private event—the only time ‘outsiders’ will see us is when we move from the car park to the hall. The only reason we are expected to wear this version of our uniform is deference to a particular rank within our organisation. It has nothing to do with ‘communicat[ing] to this dying world that there is hope in Christ.’
If you want me to wear a Navy jacket, it seems you have to be either a Commissioner or dead. But that’s probably my own issue…!
The uniform is an evangelistic opportunity. My own Corps officer knows of Salvationists who have been in airports in full uniform being asked to pray with non-salvationists. Also, the uniform is very respected outside the Army.
Cameron - your experience is not isolated. It’s more of an epidemic than you know. At my current appointment, all of the American TCs are here as well as the Zonal Commissioner - and guess what? We have to be nice and neat in our blues!
Quite a while ago, when I was a CO we were asked to host a retired General on a Sunday. I was shocked when the meeting was over and we were heading off to lunch that the DCs and the General all changed out of uniform so as to not attract attention. My wife and I, young and naive as we were fully expected to go to lunch in uniform and as such were not prepared. Probably the only time I’ve been chastised for wearing my uniform…
I believe that the main issues with relevance of the uniform can be traced back to a time when the uniform became a “membership jacket” of sorts; when people were rushed into uniform to play in the band, for instance. I don’t think it’s too late to bring back its relevance by highlighting its usefulness for evangelism and discipleship.
The uniform can do a lot of good in society if worn by responsible soldiers.
Alternatively, there can be enormous damage done by irresponsible people wearing the uniform.
My experience is that there are quite a few people rushed into uniform to make the numbers look good for an officer.
Some are given a uniform because they want to play in the band or they are willing to collect money. Holiness in some cases has nothing to with it.
Also, new people coming into a corps filled with uniforms can feel seperate or disenfranshised.
Perhaps the only people who should wear the uniform are officers. Jesus said to let our light shine before others. People can do that and be a witness of Christ without a uniform.
Jeff G
When I did my first soldiership and adherence class last year as an officer, I didn’t put much of an emphais at all on the uniform. I believe the only thing I said about it was “That in some settings, it would be useful for both our Christian witness and for practical reasons, to be identified as soldiers in the Army, and as such, the wearing of a uniform would be appropriate.”
And that was all that was said. The rest of the classes focused on salvationism as a lifesytle; a calling; a mission. To my surprise on enrolment day, all ten of my recuits were in full uniform, totally of their own accord and of their own choosing.
If we sell soldiership in The Salvation Army as club membership, the wearing of the uniform will become a chore for our members, something done out of a sense of obligation. If we teach soldiership as one’s missional calling, the uniform will be seen in an altogether different light.
Rob J.
I must say I dislike these uniform debates because they smack of conformism and almost idolatry at times. I think I remember an article that the wearing of the uniform was like a sacrament!
Friends, the uniform only identifies us, and where I live, it doesn’t do a good job of it. There are not enough uniformed salvationists here in the Vancouver area to actually make the uniform well known. So we’re often confused with other uniform wearing types.
Being from Toronto I found it highly amusing one day when we first came to Vancouver (1994). We were driving home and were pulled over by the police during a drinking/driving check and were in our uniform. In Toronto, the police would see our uniform and wave us on. Not so here. The police officer shined the light at us and saw the uniform and asked us if we had been drinking. My husband and I just looked at each other and smiled. “We’re Salvation Army officers…” we said. Guess what, the police officer just repeated his question, “Have you had any alcohol to drink tonight?”
The sad thing is that even when people know the uniform means Salvation Army, they think that we’re just social workers. So I have to disagree with you, Rob, that our uniform has any spiritual significance to anyone other than ourselves. I don’t mind wearing one, but I only view it in a practical way - it has no spiritual significance to me at all. Perhaps that might offend others, but it is what it is.
I don’t disagree with wearing a uniform that is practical and clearly identifies our organization. Our new casual uniform does that and thank goodness it includes pants for women! Where I draw the line is in making it into something it was never intended to be. And… when it ceases to have the effect we would like it to have or gets in the way of communicating the Gospel, may we have to courage to make a positive change and not hang on to it for traditions sake.
Kathie C.
I don’t know about you all but wearing uniform always seems to be an internal problem within the Army. New Soldiers I’ve experienced never have a problem with wearing uniform, the public don’t appear to have a problem with the uniform either.
The last Red Shield appeal it was noticed in my corps that people in uniform attracted people to them. The people wearing these high visibility jackets with a large red shield on them, people just walked passed them.
General Eva Burrows retired, in the television series “Marching as to War” mentioned that she attended a meeting of religious leaders. One of the leaders came up to her and said “thank you Salvation Army”. She wondered what she was being thanked for, the leader then said “thank you for your uniform, there are to many anonymous christians”.
For me I believe we need to talk it up more, lets decide if we are salvationists or SALVATIONISTS.
Roy S.
I had to smile about Kathy’s comments about pants being available for women with the casual uniform. My wife shares the exact same opinion along with many other female officers.
When you look at pictures of female RCMP recruits from the 1970’s they were all in skirts. Today of course that would be considered sexist and female Mounties wear the exact same uniform (formal and work attire) as their male colleagues. Perhaps it is time for the Army to consider doing the same?
K. MacLeod
Amen on the skirt issue!
PLEASE bring in pants for women…I hate skirts…I hate high heels and I hate pantyhose! I find every excuse to wear anything but formal uniform whenever I can because I can’t wear pants with my tunic!
I don’t mind wearing the uniform (of any level of formality) other than the skirt issue and although I agree with several concerns regarding its effectiveness and our use when in private functions, I still have very little problem wearing it…just the skirt.
It is especially difficult when you have to run around after small children (my own and other people’s when I am on for Children’s Church or nursery) and when I go to the mercy seat for myself or to pray with others. It is no longer 1950…let’s be reasonable!
Kathleen I.
Isn’t the uniform an outward expression of an inward faith? Aren’t the sacrements the same thing?
Jeff G.
Great comment Kathie C. Also great comment Kathleen!!
Jeff
For me anything with a crest, a red shield, or the words “The Salvation Army” on it is uniform.
Let’s make sure we don’t have uniform, a clothing representation and identification, turn into uniformity, mindlessy wearing the same thing as if we were stormtroopers.
Does “uniform” have to include epauletes, a tie or pin, a tunic, etc.?
Mark B.
The problem with ‘uniform’ is that it has no real biblical or theological basis. It is a completely secular concept. There is no biblical value of uniformity - only unity and diversity!
Therefore uniform only has validity as a discussion around methods or visible forms. To suggest that there is any kind of sacramental undertone (or overtone), is to sacralise something of our own human choosing and work, that is not a divine revelation!
I think it is therefore high time that Salvationists let go of any sacral misunderstanding, and simply use ‘uniform’ as a helpful tool when and where it proves so, and abandon it, when and where it is unhelpful. That means allowing it to become a voluntary thing, unconnected to rules and regulations, and the manipulation of Army leaders who use it for purposes other than what it was designed for.
Thankfully plenty of congregations are moving in that direction, and as my mum used to say, ‘more power to their elbow’!
David W.
The uniform, (as other Salvationists would attest) tells the public that we are Christians. It is a visable sign of our inward faith. Just as the sacraments are visable signs of an inward faith, so then is the uniform. To say that the uniform is not sacrimental is splitting hairs. For those who just wear the uniform and are not genuine in their faith, then I agree, it is just playing dress up. People can also participate in the sacriments and also not be genuine in their faith. For them it is just acting.But for those who are genuine in their inward faith, then what they do “sacramentely” has validity.
Going up to the Mercy seat or altar is also an outward expression of an inward faith.
My confusion is, just as the Salvation Army won’t allow baptism or the Lord’s supper because it could just end up an outward expression and cause division, can’t the same be said of the uniform and the other many ceremonial acts the Salvation has?
My understanding of the sacraments is that if our faith is genuine, then the external forms, (uniform, baptism, Lord’s supper, dedication under the flag, Mercy seat etc) convey and correspond to the heavenly things they contain.
No one should dissallow any sacraments on the premise that they could just be outward observances and nothing more.
If some people are not genuine in their inner faith then that’s their problem, but others should not be dissallowed to participate who’s faith may be the real thing.
Sacraments are signs to which God’s word is attached.
The outward signs (uniform included) are affirmations that God is the creator. They convey redemptive grace and signify that God is at home in His creation.
Just my thoughts.
Jeff G.
I had an interesting experience in a coffee shop one morning - when someone asked me what security company I worked for.
It was a cold slap up the side of the head to the fact that I, like many others, had become sloppy and wasn’t wearing my cap. Without it, you’re nothing more than a security guard! It is the one place on the uniform where the name and, the concept of “SALVATION” is displayed prominently (by prominently, I mean in your face).
I’ve since corrected that problem and now I find a number of opportunities to engage people in a discussion about Salvation. My favourite quote, when someone asks me what the name means is…”for there is salvation in no other name, for there is no other name given under heaven whereby we must be saved, but the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Herbert P.
I live in Australia and have seen woman soldiers and officers wearing trousers and no one blinks an eyelid.
Here in Australia the Salvation Army uniform is almost universally recognised as being the Salvation Army and it actually does not look that bad.
The shirts also clearly display “the Salvation Army” on them on one side.
Sarah R.
Great discussion going on here. I really like the Wendy’s / Taco Bell analogy. I even posted it on my facebook with a link to the article!
I often talk to people about what I call ‘The uniform spectrum’, often to the chagrine of listeners who sometimes say “You and your spectrum, bah”.
The spectrum, as I see it, allows for a broad range of uniforms, for many occasions. From shorts, flip-flops (Im always hesitant to use the word thongs with international readers) and a Red Shield or Crest emblazoned T-Shirt, to full navy lapel or even (dun dun dah) high neck!
We talk about relevence, but are we so arrogant to say that ONE particular uniform will be relevent in all situations?! A couple of examples.
Some of my mates go to university, or work in a job in which casual attire is acceptable. In those situations a full uniform wouldnt be particularly relevant, but TSA polo shirts or T-shirts would be an acceptable outward sign of their faith in Christ and their Soldiership in TSA. I sometimes wear a TSA shirt put out by my Territory’s youth team (MORE) and get a few questions about it, and this allows opportunity to evangelise, chat about my faith and recruit for Christ! Thats at the ‘casual’ end of the spectrum.
At Red Shield time, many local business people volunteer their time for TSA, when attending planning meetings, would it be appropriate to wear a T-Shirt? NO WAY! Most of the men and women there would be in suits / business attire, if the Officer or Soldier attending were to rock up wearing jeans and a shirt, not only would it be unprofessional, but perhaps the business people would see it as either the person not caring, or just generally being a bit hopeless. So, full navy lapel should be worn. Thats the ‘formal’ end of the spectrum.
As you could imagine, there are thousands of different situations and many different combos that Soldiers and Officers could use. What I really dislike hearing is uniform bashing, or non-uniform bashing, really, we are all individuals, and as long as its not completely innapproriate or bringing TSA into dis-repute, I don’t see why we can’t use a ’spectrum’ type model. Perhaps O&R could have an updated ‘appropriate uniform by situation’ section?
Anyway, just thought I’d share that. I’m 23, but personally I’d probably wear full navy lapel 24/7 if given the chance, but, hey, I’m an individual, and that’s how I roll.
Tim G.
This might be just a UK thing but what seems to have gone unsaid is that the vast majority of ‘uniformed’ salvationist only wear any form of SA uniform on a Sunday for the few hours that they go to Church. Salvation Army uniform has become “Sunday Best”.
What a witness to all those other Salvationist and Christians! It could be a fair assumption to make that most salvationist drive to Church (happy to be told I’m wrong) so very few people see us out in uniform. So what is the point of Uniform for most Salvationist if this is what it has become?
The uniform debate has become a distraction from the real issue of what identifies us as Christians and Salvationist. A uniform give identity and is easy to quantify. It’s also too easy to hide behind and create a duplicitous life. Christian when it’s on, somebody else when it isn’t.
I am a uniformed Salvationist, I work for the Army, but recently I’ve been asked why I wear uniform by young people who are struggling with it. I’m finding it harder and harder to be able to answer the question. I believe it has a purpose I’m just not sure if what we have done is create an irretrieavable situation.
A Whitehouse
I thought the following quotation which I cam across, might be an interesting insertion into this ongoing discussion about uniform. The writer is the British theologian Luke Bretherton:
“In the Salvation Army there is, at present, an ardent but to an outsider baffling debate about whether wearing uniforms is a requirement for full membership of the Salvation Army. This debate is a good illustration of what happens when renewal movements abandon the given practices and theological coordinates of the Christian tradition – in the case of the Salvation Army it is the abandonment of the sacraments of baptism and Eucharist. The result is that they end up sacralising the non-essential. This can be seen again and again in modern holiness and revival movements”.
I think he has a point, don’t you?
I have enjoyed reading ALL the commentary about uniforms and I thank ALL who have contributed.
The one part of all these replies I have enjoyed the most is the comment made about being an unashamed and not “anonymous” christian.
I, being a former serviceman in the U.S. Navy, was expected to wear a uniform for two reasons.
1) To show the opposition that we are the opposition, eg: Waging war (War against despair, poverty and the wages of sin)and we are at war.
2) To be a witness for Christ Jesus; by showing an outward reflection of His indwelling Spirit.
3) We are ambassadors for the LORD our God!
Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. Matthew 5:15 (NIV) 1984