The Next General

Geoff Ryan provides a job description for the “top job”

O rganizationally The Salvation Army is closer to the Roman Catholic church than most other Protestant denominations, the majority of which are governed according to a congregational model while we are structurally a hierarchy. We are a particular expression of the church militant and our ecclesiastical head is our only elected position. The Army’s High Council is analogous to the Catholic College of Cardinals which convenes when electing a new Pope.

The strange land of the 21^st century - to which many feel the church has been exiled - is one of complex challenges which differ significantly from those of the twentieth century. Any General of The Salvation Army will need to be able to first recognize and then, vigorously address these challenges. This essay identifies four major challenges. Two of them are ‘internal’, that is - specific to The Salvation Army. The other two are ‘external, and more general in nature.

In spite of the rather inclusive promise held out by the “leadership industry” that has taken root throughout the evangelical church in recent years and, while acknowledging that certain leadership skills can be nurtured, I believe that leaders are born more than they are made. The Salvation Army as it exists today is a vast global organization with thousands of senior executives (Divisional and Territorial leaders) and tens of thousands of line managers (active officers). We are an internationally recognized NGO with a presence in 109 countries of the world. It is an unstable and dangerous world which, in the coming years, will produce more Bosnia’s, Rwandas, Sierra Leone’s and Afghanistans. It is a world that is highly complex and nuanced and so in need of canny and worldly, statesmen/women to guide movements such as ours.

Historically, the Army culture promotes performers: composers/musicians, preachers/Bible teachers and from time to time, public relations/editorial people. With reference to our choice of General, we have primarily looked for personality, profile within the movement and Christian character. Yet, personal holiness may not necessarily be the only, or even the defining, characteristic of a great leader. It was Teresa of Avila who advised that it avails little to have a holy man in a position that requires good judgement and leadership if he has neither. The history of the Church shows that there were many who were holy but ineffective, and sometimes the contrary is also true as well.

The Generals who are to lead The Salvation Army forward in the 21^st century have to be more than simply good preachers or Bible students. They will need to possess skills and abilities needed by the world we minister in and not simply those valued by the Army’s particular subculture. They will need to be generalists, with the charisma needed to attract and deploy (and not be threatened by) the numerous specialists needed to get the job done. They will need to be persons of courage, decisiveness and possessing a measure of the iconoclast.

Internal Challenges

Structural reform

The Salvation Army is in need of organizational restructuring and ultimately this can only be comprehensively carried out from the top. The centralized command-and-control bureaucracy that has developed over the years is increasingly unworkable and simply not elastic enough to be effective in a world in which the information revolution has flattened lines of authority and post-modernity has irrevocably altered the way upcoming generations respond to authority and leadership and view their own autonomy and independence. Our whole organizational culture needs to shift, but this can start with structural reform.

Our Headquarters at all levels - International, Territorial and Divisional - need to re-imagine themselves into resourcing hubs and not first-and-foremost command centers. They need to understand that The Salvation Army is primarily an idea and not an institution. They need to understand that to lead in the 21^st century means to understand the subtle but vital difference between power (as conferred by an institutional structure) and influence (as granted to a leader by those who choose to listen to him/her and to follow him/her). This is all dependent, however, on local units being self-sustaining, innovative and not in need of the micro-managing that many DHQs and THQs are forced to undertake at present.

As strange as this may sound, the structure of al-Qaeda is instructive. Al-Qaeda functions as a pre-modern group whose methodology appears at times to be quite post-modern and who seem equipped to deal with the post-modern context better than many of us moderns (and sometimes with far more impact). Like The Salvation Army, al-Qaeda is an idea. Bin Laden and others provide the inspiration for the troops. They embody the idea, cast the vision and set the mission. They resource the cells - autonomous units operating subversively and deep within a generally hostile environment. They are connected like nodes to the centre (the vision) while retaining a large degree of independence and decision-making ability. They are in relationship with the centre and this provides accountability - not to a structure or institution - but to the vision. In reality, they constitute a network of local missions with an intense global focus. In no way am I suggesting that al-Qaeda is a positive or worthy idea, but simply that structurally and organizationally there are parallels here to be drawn.

Hand in glove with any restructuring is the need for leadership to “please stay still”, to quote an Australian officer friend of mine. The Army is doing better of late in allowing corps officers to remain in their appointments longer. But this paradigm shift is needed even more at the Territorial, Divisional and International levels. Leaders can no longer expect to achieve anything significant or be taken seriously or quite frankly, even listened to and obeyed, if they are remain unaccountable to those they lead. And this accountability means sticking around long enough to follow through on any vision they set, any strategy they devise and all promises they make. If leaders are not required to face the consequences of the policy decisions they initiate, then neither should the officers they presume to lead. Pope John Paul II had a tremendous impact on his church and the world - but he had 26 years to do it.

Theological Clarity

There is a need for theological clarity in The Salvation Army. Depending on your viewpoint, the Army is either in its adolescence and so cannot make it’s mind up who it wants to be when it grows up; or alternatively the Army is approaching a mid-life crisis and cannot decide who it really, secretly, thought it wanted to be all along. Either way, we seem continue in this interminable identity crises about who we should be. But, it all starts with what we truly believe.

Most of the arguments we engage in with each other are about ecclesiology, but such arguments are useless. The Australian theologian Michael Frost has said that Christology precedes Missiology, which precedes Ecclesiology (XME). Who we think Jesus is, will drive what we think he has called us to do and therefore how we do it. The “identity” issue needs to be solved before the “function” is clarified.

At this point in our history, the Army has opened itself to a vast array of theological influences. What was once a monolith in the Army: one order of service, one style of worship, one set of core beliefs, one mission - has now become a veritable smorgasbord of at time complementary, at times contradictory, ideas and theologies and “stories”. These range from a revisionist history of the Army that credits our emerging years with a late 20^th century/early 21st century Pentecostalism and prosperity-gospel; to the dualistic expressions of syncretistic spiritualism endemic in much of the Army in the Southern World; to the highly rationalistic, liberalism of parts of the Western Army; to the peculiarly American conservatism of the ‘Holiness Movement’ that owes little to true Wesleyan and much to mid-nineteenth century revivalists such as Charles Finney. I could go on.

Yet we do have our story. It is deeply rooted in our Wesleyan Heritage and tradition. It is not the same story as other denominations and movements. We need not be ashamed or embarrassed, nor do we need to become proud and arrogant. We just need to grow up and accept who we are. Someone needs to stand up and articulate clearly and intelligently who we are and what we believe. This someone needs to embody and explain the idea that is The Salvation Army. The only person who could do that is the General, but it will not happen with the way the position is presently structured, unless the new General changes things.

As with leadership at Divisional, Territorial and International levels, any General exists in that tension between the need to function as an executive and the call to shepherd the flock. We explain to outsiders that our Divisional Commanders are analogous to Bishops. However, as soon as an officer attains any degree of even middle-management leadership, they are divorced from their pastoral function and structurally disconnected from local community. The Catholic Archbishop of Toronto, for example, will be found in the pulpit of Toronto’s Cathedral every Easter and Christmas, whatever other administrative responsibilities he has. Bill Hybels, Rick Warren, Charles Swindoll - local church leaders all. When they err, it is on the side of pastor. Cannot all our DCs, TCs, IHQ Commissioners and the General, also be given pastoral responsibilities in a local corps and in this way remain permanently linked to those they would lead? This may  work out as primarily as a symbolic gesture, but symbols are important and the office and person of our General is nothing, if not a symbol.

It was as a shepherd that Pope John Paul II became the main theological driving force in Catholicism over the last quarter century and the most influential religious figure in the world. He issued his encyclicals, defining with crystal clear intent the theological identity and hence the missiological function, of his church. Because he remained at his post long enough, he was able to get to know his leaders and could therefore appoint to pivotal positions, those he trusted to share his vision. It has been said the power of the General’s office is the power of appointment. However, in a three or four year tenure, how is it possible for any General to get to know his/her international leadership sufficiently? Sadly, too often, the role of General is perceived as little more than ‘international cheerleader’.

The Salvation Army needs a theology adequate to face the challenges of the 21^st century. The office of the General, if it can be re-imagined and redefined, is the only one that can give it to us with consistency, clarity and authority.

External Challenges

Islam

In the closing years of the twentieth century all the theologians who mattered were saying that the issue for the church in the coming millenium was Islam. This was before 9/11, which simply proved that they knew what they were talking about. So what does The Salvation Army have to say to Islam? Theologically, I believe that with our holistic understanding of full salvation and our redemptive theology, we are positioned better than many expressions of the church to engage Islam with credibility. Structurally, however, we have to admit that as a quasi-military Christian organization, this is going to be difficult. If we choose to adopt an adversarial stance against the “threat of Islam”, as many of our evangelical brothers and sisters have, then business as usual will suffice. If we wish to be a little more realistic and effective and, frankly Christ-like, then we need to re-examine our presentation of ourselves.

In his book, The Next Christendom, author Philip Jenkins maintains that conflict in the twentieth century was defined by ideology, but in the 21^st century “the prime animating and destructive force in human affairs” will be religion. And the touch point will be where Christianity and Islam intersect - a battle for the hearts and minds and souls of millions of Africans, Asians, Europeans and North Americans.

To date the Salvation Army has largely ignored Islam, refusing to engage thoughtfully and strategically and really only addressing Islam reactively, when it has moved into “neighbourhoods” in which we already have a presence. We can no longer afford such naivety.

Globalism

There now exists “a new and aggressive secularization, borne into the heart of modern societies by the dynamics of globalization”, contends R. Scott Appleby, a history professor at the University of Notre Dame. “In traditional as well as developed societies, increasing materialism opens the way to a form of secularism that is indifferent or hostile to religious faith.” It is the notion that the human experience can be understood through criteria that give no reference to our transcendent origins and orientation. It is characterized by the reduction of human beings to objects whether through abortion, euthanasia, genocide and war or the social inequalities of the last century. All this we have carried over to the brave new world of the 21^st century. “A robust new form of globalism now dominates economic, political and cultural interaction among peoples. The commodification of social relations that turns individuals into cogs in the wheels of industry and politics now shapes virtually all forms of human interaction - even religion”, contends Appleby.

The next General will inherit a Salvation Army that in the West is awash in materialism and the attendant “commodification” of faith. We are an organization deeply compromised by the power structures of the day - political and particularly, economic. Walter Brueggemann states that: “consumer culture is organized against history…there is a depreciation of memory and a ridicule of hope, which means everything must be held in the now, either an urgent now or an eternal now. Any community that is rooted in energizing memories and summoned by radical hopes is a curiosity and a threat… When we suffer from amnesia, every form of serious authority for faith is in question, and we live unauthorized lives of faith and practice unauthorized ministries.” The Salvation Army is definitely a curiosity in the 21^st century, but are we a threat? Have the accommodations we have made over the years with these systems led us to live unauthorized lives of faith and to practice unauthorized ministries? Has the Army forgotten who we were called to be and for whom we were called into existence for? Have we completely lost the ability and freedom to speak and act prophetically on behalf of those excluded by the aggressively secular globalism of the 21^st century?

CONCLUSION

So here are the challenges before any General, as I see them anyway. It is quite a handful. So, what sort of person is needed?

Well, a General with a razor-sharp intellect formed by disciplined reading and study of philosophy, theology, politics, economics, and science; a natural leader who understands how to motivate and inspire people; a visionary who can think strategically and who understands organizational theory and the zeitgeist of post-modernity; a person rooted in the experience and understanding of the Wesleyan tradition - who knows exactly who they are and what our story is; a thinker with a deep knowledge and, if possible, personal experience of the languages, cultures, religious laws and customs of Islam; a tough-minded but tender-hearted follower of Jesus with a burning concern for the excluded and marginalized of the world, who would be a shepherd of those sheep who have no shepherd.

So  … who wants the job?

Writer: Major Geoff Ryan was co-founder and publisher of theRubicon for three years. He is co-ordinator of the 614 Network and organizes the bi-annual Urban Forum. His interests include writing, politics, coffee and his children. Geoff and his wife Sandra minister in Regent Park, a social housing project in downtown Toronto, Canada.

 

The Next General is featured in Geoff Ryan’s book  “10 on the Army” and was previously published in “Horizons” magazine (Canada)

 

11 Comments to The Next General

1. ‘Who wants the job’ may be the wrong question, but I’m not sure what the right one is. ‘Who will go?’ One additional concern on the way the position has been currently understood is the incredible demand that the expectation of extensive travel places upon the General (and spouse). All too often (as we often do with a TC or DC), we want her/him to meet our expectations without thinking through how the gifts of the General can best be used in the larger picture. Thought-provoking, Geoff - I don’t quite get the confrontational part. Opinionated, maybe, but strong convictions open the door to needed conversation.
JoAnn on September 8th, 2009

2. I don’t hold TSA is at heart an ‘idea’, that’s something man made. I hold it is a charism, a grace, and that is something the Holy Spirit has helped emerge within the wider church, a grace hammered out into reality, to the best of our ability, wherever we live it out.
Eleanor Burne-Jones on September 9th, 2009

3. Really excellent piece, Geoff…and right on the button in so many places.

   Thanks for this

   J
Johnny Laird on September 9th, 2009

4. Hmm, much to ponder. Your points re the qualities of the incoming General would also have to be understood (and condoned) by those entrusted with the responsibility of electing him/her at the next High Council.
   The re-imagining of TSA at present is coming at grass roots level rather than from the ‘top’. This of course allows for the (potentially diluting) ’smorgasbord’ of expressions of TSA that we see.
   Very thought provoking - thanks for publishing this
Richard Borrett on September 9th, 2009

5. Hi Geoff,

   What you say is right on the mark. But not just for General, but for leadership in general within The ‘Army. The problem is, those who posess the gifts/qualitities/etc. you talk about, are often suppressed to the point that they find no alternative but to leave The ‘Army.

   I fear it may be many generations before what you say in your essay will become a reality. Of course by then, the world will have changed again and possibly new kinds of leadership will be needed.

   Also to pick up on your point on theological clarity…. This (as I’m sure you’re aware) has the potential to cleave off a great swath of people from The ‘Army. Yes, we have been trying to walk a ‘middle ground’ for too long, and so pleasing almost noone. If we come down heavy in favour of liberal theology, all those who have a conservative theological view will undoubtedly leave, and we will find ourselves unable to reach those in society who see everything as black and white etc. If we come down heavy in favour of Conservative theology, the reverse will happen - those who are liberal will be forced out, and we will be unable to reach those in society who are more liberal thinking. The dynamics of human society/nature suggests it is impossible for one group to reach all people. We need to choose what we want to be, and who we want to reach, concentrate on that, and create a new space for a new organisation to rise up. I would like to see The ‘Army become more liberal and let a new organisation take care of the conservatives - reason being, liberal theological movements tend to have limited success (if any) if they start as a new movement, but tend to be very successfull if an existing movement with history becomes liberal. They need to be born through maturity and go through the ‘growing pains’ of an existing movement. Whereas conservative movements will take root and flourish regardless.

   Just a few thoughts.

   Yours in Christ,
   Graeme.
Graeme Randall on September 9th, 2009

6. I am one who is now “out of the loop” and a former officer of 25 years. I would like to share a few brief comments and tally that to my limited experience and isolated opinion.
   I agree that the new General has a great challenge ahead. With much prayer , consultation and shared thinking the next general must make some serious decisions and use the stroke of the pen. New policy and changes are needed. From revamping the ranking system to the training college classes and training methods concerning leadership and Salvation Army principles and doctrine , change is desperately needed. An important focus from the general on down to THQ/DHQ should be the proper and most effective use of officers in their respective appointments. Currently there is a huge variance in this area and it should be stopped or ineffectiveness will idle and stifle the movement. Gifts and talents of people should be respected , used and honored as much as possible. Many officers are neglected and stifled because of poor leadership which tends to bring much frustration , apathy and in the end resignation. Just check out the FSAF and you will see what I mean.

   As far as the next General being more pastoral and having a focus on spiritual matters as well as administrative , oh yes ! When a leader is focusing on these areas many great things happen all the way down the line. People will feel respected not neglected and an awakening just may happen.

   In this world we can see Islam on the move. The next General needs much wisdom in dealing with this religion since it brings challenges, opportunities and dangers. As I read scripture and see the direction that the world is headed The Salvation Army needs to be alert and sensitive as how to minister and yet remain faithful to the Lord and it’s reason for existence.

   Finally liberalism. This word means different things to various people. It can be a positive, good thing. But if being liberal means anything goes as long as I do not hurt anyone else that is garbage. I know there are various levels of liberalism. The Salvation Army under the leadership of the next General needs to be liberal with love and care and sharing wisdom and “pastoral counsel”.

   Thank you for your article,Geoff.

   Bob
Bob Deidrick on September 15th, 2009

7. I know that the Army is not perfect but you have a few things wrong about most officers and the Army in communities.

   Most corps officers remain as corps officers. I was one for 23 of my 25 years.

   Most do not go to headquarters nor do they want to. Ministry is at the front lines. If an officer cannot handle corps ministry that is too bad. That is where most are needed and those that are in corps ministry dwell in the communities where they are assigned with rare exception.

   Many communities where I was assigned at, the Army was there for well over 100 years and will continue to be there for a long time.

   Bob
Robert Deidrick on October 1st, 2009

8. Great article Geoff! I appreciate the wisdom and evidence you share.

   Bob, what does “FSAF” mean? I would check it out if I knew what it was…
Eric Himes on October 8th, 2009

9. I just have one comment. Why is the picture at the beginning of the article wearing a man’s hat and not a woman’s?

   - Megan Smith
Megan S on October 8th, 2009

10. Eric,

    FSAOFstands for Former Salvation Army Officers Fellowship.

    I was part of the group until a couple people were very critical and nasty to others. I had enough of that as an active officer for 25 years.

    It is a site that has various articles and comments. You can go to one part of the site but not the other section that is for former officers only.

    Bob
Bob Deidrick on October 8th, 2009

11. Great article Geoff.

    I see one problem with the actual implementation. It has to do with the heirarchy. You say it has to be done from the “Top”. The “top” or General is elected by his peers who have worked themselves through the beaucracy by “not rocking the boat”. By them “not rocking the boat” shows the type of leader they are and therefore will not “rock the boat” when they are in a position to make the necessary changes to lead the Army in the 21st century.

    Derek
Derek on October 12th, 2009

Leave a comment