the Rubicon - BY REQUEST - Subverting the Salvo Empire

“… what you are describing is idolatry.”

T

hey sat there attentive, engaged, and intrigued.  The teacher spent hours unwrapping themes and nuances from a book only four chapters in length.  Many lingered close to the storyteller afterward, insatiable in their appetite to digest the Word.  The speaker – Brian Walsh – skillfully painted a complete picture of the radical call from Paul to the church at Colosse.  This treasonous call to subvert the Roman empire and its marked implications for today inspired, challenged and provoked.  What is the empire, though?  The question hung in the air with a certain tension and silence.  Nobody wanted to immediately out themselves as an imperial conspiracist.  Then slowly and tepidly answers were offered:  the media, America, culture or Wall Street.  Later a young person, with all the sensitivity in the world, gently asked “Is The Salvation Army an empire?”

According to Walsh’s characterization of empire a strong case can be made to categorize The Salvation Army as such.  He simplifies empire into being defined by four characteristics: systematic centralization of power, socioeconomic and military control, powerful myths and imperial images that capture the people’s imaginations.  With varying degrees of efficacy one could ascribe each of these aspects to The Salvation Army.  This creates a space for a fascinating discourse on the Salvo empire.

The systematic centralization of power in The Salvation Army is stark.  It has been since its conception an organization dominated by a distinct hierarchy.  The position of General carries with it enormous potential to dictate the agenda for the denomination universal.  The amount that this holds true of course varies according to the respective managerial excess of each General.  Membership itself has always been hierarchical.  Centralization of power certainly exists in The Salvation Army.

Walsh’s second characteristic is where the parallel falters.  Walsh claims an empire needs socioeconomic and military control.  One can attempt to draw out the abstract military parallel by referring to the obvious affinity to all things military in certain pronounced constituencies in The Salvation Army.  It might even be possible to discuss how economic control – on both a local level (DHQs, THQs) and international level (IHQ, donor territories vs. receiving territories) – perpetuates the Army’s imperial structures.  Nonetheless, it would be an irresponsible representation to indicate that The Salvation Army acts imperially through intentional socioeconomic or military control.

Everyone loves a good story and stories perpetuate empire.  In an empire, myths shape the rhythm of life.  And Salvationist history is filled with these tales.  One need not read Hattersly’s Blood and Fire to know that some of our favourite stories contain in them some inspired stretching of reality.  But we find myths most poignant in our self-understanding of our organization, in the definitions we create of whom and what we are.  The “largest non-governmental direct provider of social services” [ed: this is a tag-line frequently used in public communication by the Army in the Canada and Bermuda territory] line reverberates through our collective consciousness.  At its very best, the claim lacks Christ’s humility.  At its worst it is a gargantuan myth that masks our deficiencies and creates a false sense of accomplishment and comfortability.

And we sometimes take this line even further.  I will never forget the hyperbolic or arrogant (I pray it was the former!) words of a territorial leader echoing in my young head stating “We are The Salvation Army; we are the only church that is doing something.”  Yet, I looked to my heroes of the faith – Dorothy Day, Oscar Romero, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer – and they weren’t Salvationists but were deeply engrossed in the mission of the church universal.  This “largest provider of social services/only church doing something” myth shapes the rhythm of life in The Salvation Army and perpetuates the empire itself.

The final characteristic of empire is imperial images; ubiquitous imagery of the empire permeating culture.  These images mask the reality of empire that lies behind the images themselves.  In The Salvation Army we have undoubtedly perpetuated the empire through imperial images.  The obvious imperial images include the shield, the flag, the uniform, the crest and William Booth.  These images dominate and, sometimes, consume the Army.  Everyday I sport a red imperial logo on the chest of a collared shirt – something similar is normally worn by UPS delivery people and those pumping gas.  Pictures of the founder – and there have been more aesthetically pleasing denominational founders! – are hung in places of honour.  We sing songs about the flag.  We must be the only denomination that heartily enjoys singing about itself in the third person.  All these images mask the reality behind them, the reality of a looming and dangerous Salvo empire.

There is a great sermon illustration that can be used to illuminate fears about The Salvation Army and empire.  An assembly of pastors are sitting around a table discussing overall direction of their denomination.  The leader of the group interjects, “Why all this conversation about the Kingdom?  It sounds like you would be willing to sell out The Salvation Army for the sake of the Kingdom.”  Growing more forceful he pounds the table and states, “That is disloyalty.” “No sir,” this response contains no timidity, “what you are describing is idolatry.”

For God’s sake sometimes we need to subvert the empire.  We need to run from the idolatry of empire.  We need to re-imagine the radical call of Paul to the church at Colosse as a call for The Salvation Army.  A call that is not about abandoning our prophetic place in the church universal, it is not about encouraging disloyalty, and it is not about the pending doom of a denomination. 

What we need to do is to secede from our worst imperial practices and vices.  Where we have established empire we need to put it to death.  We need to remove all that has been deformed by our empire with a call to the resurrection life.  If the story of empire no longer dominates us, then the narrative of Jesus – crucified, buried, risen, ascended and returning – will shape the character of our denominational community.  This will be the alternative to empire.  The problem with empire is idolatry.  The alternative is renewal of the image of God.  The alternative is a community where Christ is all and in all.  And against most of the evidence the church is the flesh and blood embodiment of Christ.  So let us refuse empire, secede from empire, and cease perpetuating and building our own empire.  Let us subvert the Salvo empire wherever necessary for the sake of the Kingdom.  Then we will be just a little closer to image of the invisible God.  Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray.

(Redux request by Frank Dobson)

For further reading see:  Colossians Remixed:  Subverting the Empire by Brian J. Walsh and Sylvia C. Keesmaat.

Writer: Nathanael Homewood is  studying at Yale Divinity School as the
Charles Forman Scholar.  His interests include politics, theology, basketball
and longboarding.  To his mother’s great chagrin he enjoys boxing - her
argument being that finishing his degree should precede getting hit in the head
repeatedly.  He is also passionate about a justice-seeking and missional
Salvation Army.