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.

Lip-serving suffering humanity?

They’d been living on the streets for about 18 months, after hitching into the city from the bush. The life they’d left “back home” was dysfunctional, violent and disapproving of the young couple.

During the daylight hours they’d split up, strategically raiding the bins for a feed or a makeshift blanket and pillow. At night they’d bed down in the back stairwell of a church; they figured they’d be safe there.

A couple of the teenagers from the church had befriended them, surreptitiously slipping them the odd biscuit or cup of coffee on a weeknight or Sunday. But the caretaking team and the minister had other ideas; they felt the presence of this couple was threatening and unhealthy.  Their bedding was regularly binned. The place where they slept was washed out with a fire hose in the afternoon to make it uninhabitable. After several altercations with the church people and a number of visits by the police, the couple eventually moved on.

This is a true and distressing story of un-Christlike behaviour by a church. What’s even sadder is that the church in this story is a Salvation Army corps.

Emblazoned on one of the splendid banners in their hall is the stated aim to “Serve Suffering Humanity”. These words are regularly given lip service, along with “Grow Saints” and “Save Souls”. Prayers are regularly proclaimed for the Lord to “guide troubled souls to our door,” and it’s also the stated purpose for the regular outreach activities. Sadly, there are Salvationists in that particular fellowship, and throughout the Army world, who are yet to see the people literally at our doorsteps as an answer to our prayers.

I’m reminded of the lyrics of the late Christian songwriter and prophet, Keith Green, who sang:

He brings people to your door,
And you turn them away,
As you smile and say,
God bless you, be at peace;
And all heaven just weeps
‘Cause Jesus came to your door
You’ve left him out on the streets…

Keith Green wrote “Asleep in the Light” after being inspired by reading the Army Founder’s manifesto In darkest England and the way out. William Booth’s vision for reaching the lost was a genuine effort to live out Christ’s story of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31-46). When did Salvationists decide that looking after people like that young, homeless couple wasn’t part of our core (or corps) business?

Serving suffering humanity can’t be done just by writing a cheque or by remote control from your comfortable lounge room. Things are going to get grubby and that’s why we as an army are known to roll up our sleeves and “muck in” (as the English say).  It’s always been a distinctive feature of our Army. More and more, our previously safe and sanitised suburban corps are being called upon to engage with the lost, the last and the least on a daily basis, just as Salvationists did at the beginning of our movement.

Are we ready to handle this onslaught? Are we ready to share this pain? Do we have programs and personnel ready to meet the individual needs of the people who live near our corps? Or are we too tied up in providing a solid, middle class place for our “own people” that we have lost the distinct purpose for which the Salvation Army was raised up?

Thankfully, there are many corps that now have “mission” as the centrepiece for every activity that they engage in. I believe that those corps prosper because they are being true to God’s purpose for the Salvation Army. Mission requires flexible and passionate people who are not content to just sit in the pews, sing a song or tootle through a mouthpiece. Our whole life is about loving Jesus, being guided by the Holy Spirit and living a life of sacrifice, quite often out of our comfort zones.

Keith Green again…

To obey is better than sacrifice,

I want more than Sundays and Wednesday nights.  (ex I Samuel 15:22)

Let’s do more than just give lip service to suffering humanity.

On Calling

David Witthoff says desire and character define calling

It’s come to my attention that the current way that we in the Army think about calling may not be entirely helpful. It may be rather misleading. The idea of calling touches on the presuppositions that people have about how active God is in the world. Is He actively changing and doing things, directing people’s actions, choices and influencing them one way or another, or is He laid back after giving us His Word, expecting us to look there for answers. On this topic scripture gives no clear answer, and so our understanding should not be either/or, but both. God expects us to look to scripture for our direction in life as He orchestrates the events and happenings of the world. But where there are two extremes that need balance, we usually find people who fall to one side or the other. That is what brought about my concern.

› Continue reading

Squeezing the drops

Rob Jeffery labours in the vineyard

The parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16 is perhaps one of the least understood parables found in the New Testament canon.  While other parables, such as The Yeast and The Mustard Seed, are admittedly more cryptic in their telling, the Labourers in the Vineyard is often misunderstood to the point that Christian readers assume a meaning that the Gospel writer (or at least the Matthean community) did not intend for it.

Although there is no widespread exegetical consensus on this particular parable, by way of a concise scriptural analysis, it is perhaps possible to discern the Gospel writer’s true meaning of Jesus’ parable and to show how Jesus’ use of parabolic and metaphorical language connected with his first-century audience.  In order for this to happen, however, Christian readers must be willing to lay aside the parable’s traditional meaning and interpretation that has so often been preached from Christian pulpits.
› Continue reading

The Devil made me do it…

… or did he?

The modern world has been unsure what to do with the biblical texts around the world of the demonic, and has often swung between total unbelief and a kind of unhealthy over belief. This Areopagus episode - recorded November 1, 2008 - takes us straight to the heart of this territory, to see if there isn’t maybe a sane and reasoned middle way.

In a measured yet engaged presentation Dr. Pierre Gilbert, of Canadian Mennonite University, takes us over some of the key points from his recent book: Demons, Lies & Shadows. A Plea for a Return to Text and Reason published by Kindred Press.

The presentation and questions that followed were recorded at ideaExchange, a monthly church-sponsored public lecture series held in a bookstore in Winnipeg, Canada.

There are three ways to hear this talk and the lively discussion time that followed (runs 1:02:22):

• click on the arrow below
• use the podcast widget in the right sidebar
• click here to download the episode from iTunes

Thoughts from a troubled pacifist

You’d think, to hear some people talk,
That lads go West with sobs and curses,
And sullen faces white as chalk,
Hankering for wreaths and tombs and hearses.
But they’ve been taught the way to do it
Like Christian soldiers; not with haste
And shuddering groans; but passing through it
With due regard for decent taste.

How to Die by Siegfried Sassoon

by Geoff Ryan

Last week a story appeared in one of our national papers about renewed fighting in the Democratic Republic of Congo, a conflict that has claimed an estimated five million lives in the past five years. Specifically profiled was rebel leader General Laurent Nkunda, a “tall, urbane and charming” warlord who in the photo that accompanied the article, looks more like the former university student he is, than the “Butcher of Kisangani”, as he is also referred to. Nkunda is also a “self-described devout Pentecostal Christian”. The incongruity of this particular piece of information, tucked amid a fairly detailed description of some of Nkunda’s murderous military exploits, startled me.  How can someone be “a devout Pentecostal Christian” and also a warlord of the ilk described in this article? How can such a person be a Christian of any stripe, for that matter?

› Continue reading

What do we believe?

Grant Sandercock-Brown on belief, the role of officers and…

I’ve attended many a Bible study in my time. You know the ones, filled with open ended (and possibly unanswerable) questions like “How do you think Sisera felt about women with tent pegs?” or “How should Achan have responded just before his stoning to death?” I’ve been a critic of these studies on many occasions. Mainly because they often consist of people coming together to air their ignorance and leaving with it still intact.

Of course, I’ve learned that the process is more important than any learning outcome — that praying together and sharing in each other lives matters a great deal. That’s the only reason I still attend. But I must confess an element of intellectual snobbery in such groups. For instance, when a fellow Bible studier realises that Arminianism has nothing to do with ethnic heritage and asks “What’s that?” I think, “My fellow Rubiconers would have known.”

› Continue reading

A Lover in the Salvo Ruins

Do not abandon the ruins urges Nathanael Homewood

“You should go to another denomination.”

The accusation stood out prominently on my Facebook page amongst the normal minutia of pokes, LOL’s and profile pictures.  They were serious and thought-provoking words.  Words that pierced.  I could not just dispense with them.

It was not the first time I was told I didn’t fit in.  Nor was it the first time someone implicitly, or explicitly, questioned my denominational devotedness.  I responded to the charge with some long-forgotten sterile phrase portraying heroic martyrdom and claiming loyalty to the Salvation Army.  The reality, though, was being exposed in my immaturity and loveless loyalty toward the Salvation Army.  I was struggling — grasping desperately at unfulfilling answers — as I attempted to illuminate why I love the Salvation Army.

› Continue reading

Corporate washing

Clint Ku says: daily we do something that promotes slavery

Sometimes it’s so easy to admire the surface of something and forget the substance. To skip over the important details and to think, “Yeah it looks good, so it must be okay.” Matthew 10:16 says, “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.” There are, indeed, a lot of wolves out there.

Something has come to me recently: Rainforest Alliance and Fairtrade. Just to start off, from what I know of both these labels, they started for different things and for different purposes, and this article is not attacking either of these labels. But it occurs to me that some corporations may be treating us as fools. Let me just say this - just because a store has the word Fairtrade plastered all over their stalls doesn’t mean that the coffee that you buy from them is actually Fairtrade. The stuff behind the counter is just as likely not to be Fairtrade. Similarly, just because a corporation has Rainforest Alliance on their labels does not mean that the majority of its products are indeed good for the environment.

› Continue reading

Encountering Jesus

Part 4 | Glimpses of characterization in the gospel of John

The blind leading the blind. If only that were the case…
by Bruce Power

The final episode to be considered in this brief series is Jesus’ encounter with a man blind from birth (John 9). In the thinking of the day such physical disabilities were the result of one of two things, the sin of the person, or the sin of the parents. When Jesus and his disciples see this man, and learn of his circumstances, the disciples pose the question of fault. Whose responsibility is it?

Now we might wonder how a person could sin in vetro, but this was a theological concern of enough significance that the topic was debated by religious specialists. Where would Jesus come down on the issue? After all, it had to be one or the other.

› Continue reading