the Rubicon - BY REQUEST- Is The Salvation Army Pentecostal?

H

ere is a description of an early Salvation Army meeting recorded in General Bramwell Booth’s autobiography Echoes and Memories:

‘At night Corbridge led the hallelujah meeting till 10 o’clock. Then we commenced an All-Night of Prayer. Two hundred and fifty people were present till 1am; two hundred or so after. A tremendous time. From the very first, Jehovah was passing by, searching, softening and subduing every heart. The power of the Holy Ghost fell on Robinson and prostrated him. He nearly fainted twice. The brother of the Blandys entered into full liberty and then he shouted, wept, clapped his hands, danced, amid a scene of the most glorious and heavenly enthusiasm. Others meanwhile were lying prostrate on the floor, some of them groaning for perfect deliverance ….’

This happened in 1878 - 22 years before the official start of the Pentecostal movement. Was The Salvation Army Pentecostal, or did it at least begin that way?

Here is another classic, this time from Samuel Logan Brengle:

‘But we cannot have what Peter obtained on the day of Pentecost’ wrote someone to me recently. However, Peter himself, in that great sermon which he preached that day, declared that we can, for he says: ‘ Ye shall receive the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you’ - Jews, to whom I am talking - ‘and to your children,’ and not to you only, but ‘to all that are afar off’ - nineteen hundred years from now - ‘even as many as the Lord our God shall call,’ or convert (Acts 2:38, 39).’

In recent days, some people have challenged The Salvation Army by referring back to its early days and suggesting that it has moved away from its Pentecostal roots. Are they right? Was Brengle really a Salvationist Pentecostal?

Let me suggest that Pentecostalism isn’t determined by the way people act under the influence of the Holy Spirit. At the heart of Pentecostalism is a theology and interpretation of Scripture that then manifests itself in various forms of behaviour.

When we look at these theological and interpretive issues, we discover differences between The Salvation Army and the Pentecostal Movement.

Let me make it clear right at the start of this talk that this is not a Pentecostal bashing exercise. Quite the opposite – although we in The Salvation Army do not embrace some of their theological positions or many of their practices, we do admire their passion for the Lord and the spreading of the gospel. They have in fact been a ‘wake up call’ for the whole church (including the Army) challenging us regarding our own dependence on God and effectiveness in our ministry. We must both honour and respect our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Pentecostalism
The modern Pentecostal Movement has a specific point in time when it commenced.

‘It all began at 7pm on 31st December 1900. 40 students at a bible college in Topeka Kansas, had come to the conclusion that the biblical evidence of baptism in the Spirit was speaking in tongues, and they were now praying for the experience. When the principal of the college … was persuaded to lay hands on one of the students, a ‘glory fell upon her, a halo seemed to surround her head and face’ and she began to speak in tongues.’

This began a movement which has changed the face of the church through the 20th century and into the 21st century. Although its development has tended to ebb and flow, over the past 30 years there seems to have been a consistent growth in this movement.

Peter C. Wagner has described the major stages of this renewal as three ‘waves’.

1. The first wave - The rise of Pentecostalism is that described by John Larsson (above). It really emerged from the 19th century holiness movement in North America and for much of the first half of the 20th century was on the fringe of the church and seen as a deviation from mainstream Christianity – “too much experience, and too little in theology”.
2. The second wave was the charismatic renewal of the 1960’s and 1970’s - described by some a neo-Pentecostalism. This time it was based in a mainstream church - the Episcopal (Anglican) Church at Van Nuys, a suburb of Los Angeles. Far from being on the fringe, this ‘charismatic’ renewal took place in a well-established church with a long tradition of conservative worship and orthodox theology.
3. The third wave - the renewal movement in the 1980’s and 1990’s was associated with people like John Wimber, Peter C. Wagner, Jack Deere and others. Again they were ministering and teaching in mainstream denominations. It spawned the Church Growth movement and had a focus at Fuller Seminary in Pasadena.

In each of these waves, the principle characteristics were: speaking in tongues (glossolalia), an interest in healing, ecstatic worship, interest in prophecy (particularly in the third wave) and spiritual warfare (also the third wave). Also common to all of the waves is the experience described as ‘baptism of the Spirit’ and it is this description of the action of the Holy Spirit that provides the common link throughout the history of the movement.

‘The distinctive teaching of Pentecostalism is the emphasis on the second crisis experience subsequent to conversion which is called the baptism of the Spirit. This experience is seen as giving power for witness and releasing gifts of the Spirit within the personality and increasing the fruit of the spirit. Speaking in tongues is considered by most Pentecostals to be the necessary sign that the blessing has been received.’

The fourth wave?
In 1999 the writer R.T. Kendal in a book called The Anointing speculates about a fourth wave of Pentecostal renewal. He sees a coming together of the conservative evangelical and charismatic groups that will have an influence which will cross denominational boundaries.

Although this ‘wave’ has not yet fully formed, there are things happening that seem to be indicating that Kendall might be right. The characteristics of the ‘fourth wave’ he has observed are:

• A particular pattern of worship – 20-40 minutes of chorus singing; then prayer (often in small groups; or everyone speaking out loud); then a 35-45 minute sermon, followed by ‘ministry’ (often laying on of hands).
• Some slaying in the spirit
• Some speaking in tongues (although not overt or public)
• Fervent ‘supernatural’ believing prayer
• An expectation of signs and wonders

Is this ‘fourth wave’ already happening? In our own Territory, we seem to be seeing some of these characteristics. Some corps and even some larger events (such as Unlimited) express a strong dependence on the outpouring of the Holy Spirit with an emphasis that is more along the lines of the Pentecostal tradition than the Holiness tradition from which The Salvation Army comes. But this is not limited to Australia. Major Ian Barr of the UK territory says this:

‘… it is difficult to gauge the accuracy of Kendal’s thesis, but there is no shortage of evidence even in the Army. The UK Territory’s annual Roots convention, started in the early 1990’s by a group of officers and soldiers with charismatic leanings, has grown to accommodate a diverse range of Salvationists. It bears all the hallmarks of the fourth wave - a coming together of charismatic and evangelical conservative Christians for worship and study with a strongly prophetic and missiological agenda.’

Whether it is a ‘fourth wave’ or simply an awakening of the Spirit, we should rejoice in the new enthusiasm for the mission and a new passion for the things of God that is being displayed in our present generation.

The big question is however – can we embrace this awakening without embracing Pentecostal theology? There is a difference in our theologies. How do we respond to the Holy Spirit without getting caught up in the trappings of another denomination?

Holy Spirit dependent without being Pentecostal (Acts 2)

The Salvation Army is not a Pentecostal movement (in spite of the influences). Our interpretation of Act 2 leads us to a different understanding of ‘baptism of the Spirit’, and thus sets us aside from our Pentecostal friends.

Let me take a moment to look at Acts 2 and then highlight two theological differences between The Salvation Army and Pentecostalism.

Acts 2 and 3 (selected verses)

2/1 ‘When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

14 Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say…”

40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptised, and about three thousand were added to their number that day. 42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

3/1 One day Peter and John were going up to the temple at the time of prayer–at three in the afternoon. 2 Now a man crippled from birth was being carried to the temple gate called Beautiful, where he was put every day to beg from those going into the temple courts. 3 When he saw Peter and John about to enter, he asked them for money. 4 Peter looked straight at him, as did John. Then Peter said, “Look at us!” 5 So the man gave them his attention, expecting to get something from them.

6 Then Peter said, “Silver or gold I do not have, but what I have I give you. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.” 7 Taking him by the right hand, he helped him up, and instantly the man’s feet and ankles became strong. 8 He jumped to his feet and began to walk. Then he went with them into the temple courts, walking and jumping, and praising God. 9 When all the people saw him walking and praising God, 10 they recognized him as the same man who used to sit begging at the temple gate called Beautiful, and they were filled with wonder and amazement at what had happened to him.

12 When Peter saw this, he said to them: “Men of Israel, why does this surprise you? Why do you stare at us as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk? 13 The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed ….”’

The first difference – Understanding Acts 2.

What is Acts 2 all about? Is it about the Holy Spirit (and the signs and wonders associated with him), or is it about what the Holy Spirit did? Pentecostals celebrate the first – the coming of the Holy Spirit, and their worship re-enact the signs and wonders of Pentecost (talking in tongues, exuberant behaviour etc.)

The Salvation Army (along with mainstream non-Pentecostal churches) celebrates what the Holy Spirit did … and that is the creation of the church. Described theologically as ‘Christ’s last act of creation on earth’, it was on the day of Pentecost that the church was born. Because of this belief The Salvation Army celebrates the purposes of the church that the Holy Spirit created.

What are these purposes? Acts chapters 2 and 3 tell us …

The first activity the church under the direction of the Holy Spirit was to preach the gospel … verse 14 onwards records the first sermon of the church by Peter. It was a mission sermon (kerygma). It had a challenge with an appeal and 3000 people were saved

The second activity of the church was to gather the new believers together for teaching, friendship and the building of a community. They did ‘fellowship’.

Then in chapter 3 we see a third purpose: a suffering man was given physical help. In this case he was healed. We saw this happen often with Jesus himself, but here we see that it is also to be part of the church … involvement with society at the most basic level.

Proclaiming the gospel (saving souls); sharing and teaching in fellowship (growing saints) and caring for the sick (serving suffering humanity).

It is interesting to note in Chapter 3 that immediately after the healing of the lame man, Peter goes back to the first thing the church did. He again uses this opportunity to preach. The mission of the church to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ is always part of the narrative of Acts.

Some may argue that this is a primitive ecclesiology and that history has advanced the idea of ‘church’ well beyond these three basic functions. Is the church of Australia today as dynamic as the Acts church? I am suggesting that the church of today (including The Salvation Army) could do well to re-visit its New Testament roots, certainly in regard to understanding its reliance on the Holy Spirit.

The second difference - understanding ‘baptism of the Spirit’.

The Salvation Army used the term ‘baptism of the Spirit’ for many years, as did the Wesleyans and many of the Holiness movements of the 19th century. The intention of this phrase ‘baptism of the Spirit’ was to describe the cleansing that comes to the person who is being fully sanctified – made holy.

In early Salvation Army teaching the baptism of the Spirit was associated with ‘second blessing’ theology – that Christians were saved, and then in a subsequent experience (baptism of the Spirit) were cleansed of their sin and fully sanctified. Although The Salvation Army has now moved away from the ‘second blessing’ teaching, it still declares that when a person is saved, they are cleansed of their sin through the baptism of the Spirit. We can be saved and sanctified – and it is all the work of the Holy Spirit. It won’t happen without him. For The Salvation Army, and for the whole holiness movement, the focus the baptism of the Spirit was on ‘power’ (exousia) for ‘moral authority’ and evidenced though the life of love and purity.

When the Pentecostals came onto the scene, they too began to use this term ‘baptism of the Spirit’. But theirs’ was a different meaning. For them, the focus was on the ‘power’ (dynamis) for the purpose of supernatural giftedness and evidenced in the signs and wonders.

For Pentecostals the baptism is a ‘doing’ thing. For Salvationists, it is a ‘being’ experience. Salvation Story is helpful here.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a way some have used to describe the holiness experience. Baptism is a symbol of dying to ourselves and emerging as new persons in Christ. It was used in the Early Church as the receiving of the Holy Spirit at regeneration which was the requirement for membership in the body of Christ: ‘We were all baptised by one Spirit into one body’ (I Corinthians 12:13). The ‘baptism of the Holy Spirit’ may therefore be considered as distinct from being ‘filled with the Holy Spirit’. Baptism happens once at the beginning of Christian experience, while infilling happens repeatedly throughout the Christian life.

The impact of the Pentecostals was such that because of confusion over the meaning of ‘baptism of the Spirit’, The Salvation Army (and the holiness movement generally) moved away from this terminology in the early 20th Century.

The problem of experience
It is at this point that we come face to face with the one of the most problematic aspects of the Holy Spirit - experience, and the problem of experiential theology.

Let me divert briefly.

• Biblical Theology is the development of theology based purely on what the bible says (eg. Creation). This theology forms the foundations of the doctrines of the church.
• Systematic Theology collates and organises the Biblical concepts and moulds them into rational ideas, especially the theology that is not clearly spelt out in scripture (for example the Trinity).
• Experiential Theology is theology that expresses itself in the human’s response to God. It adds the ‘flavour’ and colour, but is affected by interpretation, bias, pre-conceived ideas, and individual experience (for example, slaying in the Spirit and the ‘second blessing’).

Whenever we discuss the Holy Spirit, we become affected by ‘experiential theology’. It is how people experience God and because we are all different, the experience will be different for each one of us. This is why there are so many diverse opinions regarding the work of the Holy Spirit. If we are going to avoid error, then we must always return to scripture.

It is the question of ‘experience’ that presents the most contentious issues related to Pentecostalism. The ‘doctrines’ of the General Council of the Assemblies of God (USA) states “We believe … the initial physical evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is ‘speaking in tongues’ as experienced on the Day of Pentecost and referenced through Acts and the Epistles”. To speaking in tongues we also add ‘slaying in the Spirit’, ‘prophecy’ and ‘healing’. It is these things that cause most of the arguments.

Each of these expressions falls into the category of ‘experiential theology’ and must be tested against ‘biblical theology’.

Speaking in tongues – from the Greek word glossolalia meaning ‘unknown tongue’ The interpretation of this word in scripture is hotly debated. Dr Roger Green, head of NT studies Asbury College, argues that this term always means a language that is known, but unknown to the speaker. Acts 2 for example indicates that all those from foreign countries could understand what the disciples were saying even though the disciples had not learned their language. Other scholars on the other hand, argue for a spiritual language that is only known to God. Whatever position is taken, it is still qualified by Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians that discourages this language being used in public (1 Cor. 14:19 and 28) and is one of the lesser gifts. (1 Cor 12:28-31). There is no suggestion in scripture that this is a gift given as one of the evidences of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Slaying in the Spirit – there is no equivalent experience described in scripture.

Prophecy – in scripture it is primarily the proclamation of the word of God. Very little is involved in telling the future or forecasting events. Almost none of it is prophecy over individuals.

Healing – is evidenced in scripture and although there are some accounts of the apostles’ healing people following the resurrection of Jesus, they are few, and usually in the context of a larger evangelical purpose. What is never present in scripture is the idea that the ‘faith’ usurps the sovereignty of God. Healing cannot be demanded and is not equated with salvation. Fullness of life (John 10:10) is not a physical reference, but a spiritual one.

The Salvation Army celebrates the purpose of the church, which was created in Acts 2. The re-enactment of Pentecost through the signs and wonders is therefore not our tradition and in our opinion cannot be fully substantiated by scripture.

This does not diminish the experiences that some people have. Many have been blessed through the ecstatic experience of signs and wonders. But it is largely ‘experiential theology’ and therefore not the basis of doctrine or biblical interpretation.

Experience and Scripture
This does not mean that experience is not indicated in scripture, in fact, quite the opposite. In the 1930’s, the theologian Rudolph Otto explained the two particular types of experience that can be identified in Scripture and was evident in the life of the Church.

The first of these experiences he describes as the ‘Numinous’ - an intense experience and near physical encounter with God that is characterised by fear, fascination and mystery in the almost tangible presence of the divine.

Biblical examples of intense experience are found in the story of the transfiguration of Jesus in which Peter speaks for James and John in Mark 9:6 and says ‘Rabbi it is good for us to be here’. They were really so frightened that he didn’t know what to say. The Old Testament story of Moses at the burning bush is another example of this intense type of experience. These occurrences are very rare, yet nonetheless real to the participants, and throughout the centuries a relatively small number of Christians have given testimony to such near-physical encounters with God.

The second type of experience Otto describes as ‘ecstatic’ – a joyful experience, a sense of release from one’s normal inhibitions, often evidenced by speaking in tongues, and other ecstatic manifestations. Acts 2:2-4 is such an example.

It is this second type of experience that has become more commonly expressed in the modern church and has been fundamental to the various manifestations of Pentecostalism and charismatic renewal in the twentieth century. There is no question that ‘experience’ is part of the biblical tradition and therefore to be expected as part of the church tradition.

Experiencing the Holy Spirit without being Pentecostal
However, a person or a church doesn’t have to be Pentecostal to acknowledge or experience God through his Holy Spirit. They are Biblical experiences, not ‘Pentecostal’ experiences.

The Swiss theologian Emil Brunner makes the point:

‘… we ought to face the New Testament witness with sufficient candour to admit that in this ‘pneuma’ (Holy Spirit) which the Ecclesia was conscious of possessing, there lie forces of an extra-rational kind mostly lacking among us Christians today.’

Experiencing the Holy Spirit should be a part of who we are as the ‘ecclesia’, the church. But I suspect that Brunner’s suggestion that the modern church is ‘lacking’ in its acceptance of the supernatural is partially right. The rationalism of Modernity has created many Christian cynics who are skeptical to anything supernatural. Maybe scientific rationalism has had a ‘dampening’ effect on the church, and The Salvation Army.

I believe that God has used the Pentecostal movement to challenge The Salvation Army to a new awareness of our need to be Holy Spirit dependent. Even though The Salvation Army has constantly acknowledged the importance of the Holy Spirit, it has not always acted that way. We are not Pentecostal, but the Pentecostals can teach us to be more expectant of the supernatural workings of the Holy Spirit.

I personally believe that God has brought into existence The Salvation Army and given us our emphasis for a specific reason… the world needs a church of holy people who are mostly on their knees before God in humility and brokenness. God has called us to a broken world. How better to reach a broken world than through the awareness of our own brokenness, and the reliance of his perfect grace and love. Our baptism of the Spirit is ‘power’ (exousia) for the life of love and purity.

There is no question that early Salvation Army teaching advocated an experiential type of Baptism of the Spirit. Certainly, early leaders encouraged Salvationists to fervently pray for the blessing.

The emphasis however, was not the ‘signs and wonders’ or the experiential nature of the ‘blessing’. The result was always for the experience of holiness – that state of ‘perfect love’, ‘full salvation’, entire sanctification. It was always for ‘what it meant’, not for ‘what was to be ‘experienced’.

The historical records show little evidence of people speaking in tongues; there were accounts of people falling down and lying one the floor in an trance – but this appears to have been spontaneous, and not encouraged by a mediator ‘slaying’ in the Spirit. There are certainly accounts of laughing, joyous behaviour, but the focus was always on the life change that followed – the life of holiness that was a foundational doctrine of our early Salvation Army.

Conclusion
General Clarence Wiseman wrote:

‘The New Testament does not teach that Christians need a new baptism in the Spirit, for they already possess the Holy Spirit, otherwise they would not be Christians. What is required is an awakening to the necessity for an utter and complete surrender to the Spirit.’

The Salvation Army is not Pentecostal. But it is ‘charismatic’ because it is absolutely dependent on the Holy Spirit and the gifts he gives to enable us to be his servants in the world.

Our challenge is to pray more expectantly for the beautiful Spirit of Jesus to transform the whole world and to use The Salvation Army as one of his tools in this mission.

Note: The original version of this article contains numerous endnotes. Unfortunately such notations are not supported in the software used to create theRubicon. If you wish to see the original piece you can download a pdf by clicking here.

 
 
Writer: Following seven years as a high school teacher Lieutenant Colonel Philip Cairns was commissioned as a Salvation Army officer in 1982. His ministry has included twelve years as a corps officer (pastor), appointmnetsat the training college and in the pastoral care department. He has also been involved in corps (church) programme work at both the divisional and territorial levels. He was previously the training principal and the principal of Booth College,and has recently taken up his current appointment as Secretary for Personnel,  Australia Eastern Territory. Philip is married to Jan and has three children and six beautiful grandchildren.

the Rubicon - BY REQUEST - Rooted in Mission not Maintenance Part#3

 Rob Perry says The world needs the Church to roll up its sleeves and re-enter abandoned communities - Part #3

3) Religious Phase – Towards Mission

Kierkegaard’s third sphere is the religious sphere. This existential realm goes beyond the ethical. This stage is only discovered by faith. Kierkegaard examines the religious phase in his book Fear and Trembling. In this study, Kierkegaard looks at Abraham’s (near) sacrifice of Isaac. He examines the motivation and the horror behind this humbling and confusing story. It is here that we enter the realm of faith. Kierkegaard said:

“But what did Abraham do?… He mounted the ass, he rode slowly down the path. All along he had faith, he believed that God would not demand Isaac of him, while still he was willing to offer him if that was indeed what was demanded. He believed on the strength of the absurd, for there could be no question of human calculation, and it was indeed absurd that God who demanded this of him should in the next instant withdraw the demand. He climbed the mountain, even in that moment when the knife gleamed he believed – that God would not demand Isaac. Certainly he was surprised by the outcome, but by means of a double movement he had come back to his original position and therefore received Isaac more joyfully than the first time.”

Nothing but faith could have sustained Abraham through this trial. The trial itself seemed ludicrous and paradoxical. Abraham was required to suspend the ethical and proceed on belief in God only. He did not believe that God would violate the ethical, but he carried on in faith that God would rectify the paradoxical command with morality. Faith sustained him, and God delivered Isaac. Abraham lived in the strength of the absurd.

The third sphere of our lives as Christians is when we surrender fully, and in faith allow ourselves to be led by God wherever and however he wills

For our purposes in examining mission, I would say that the third sphere of our lives as Christians is when we surrender fully, and in faith allow ourselves to be led by God wherever and however he wills. We are no long confined to our own wisdom. Instead we are called and commissioned to go wherever, and do whatever God commands.

God commanded Jeremiah: “Do not say, ‘I am only a child.’ You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you. Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you.” This encapsulates the essence of mission. Although we feel inadequate, we go wherever God commands and do whatever he commands. Faith replaces fear, for God will protect and deliver us. If God calls us to a personal Jubilee, instructing us to give up our possessions, we need not be afraid, he will rescue us. If God calls us to leave our homes and move into the poorest area of our city, we need not be afraid, he will rescue us.

To go into the unknown involves an intense trust in God. It truly does require a “leap of faith.” The rich irony is in the fact that on the other side of the leap of faith, we find a fulfillment and joy that is indescribable to those who have not yet leapt. Frederick Buechner said that a person’s place “is where your deep gladness and the world’s deep hunger meet.” I, and countless others, can only testify that this is true.

Some years ago I led a team that took a group of community children from Toronto to a camp during the spring break. For seven days, 60 loud and hyperactive six- to 12-year-old residents of the urban jungle descended upon the wilderness campground. Due to some miscalculation and a lack of volunteers, the staff was drastically outnumbered and the children smelled blood. I lost my voice on the first day, and by the third, we were all exhausted and beginning to be afraid of total collapse. Kids were fighting and threatening each other, some were continually trying to run away, while others would barricade themselves in the cabin to avoid going to programs. Between replacing broken property and cleaning lice out of hair and clothes, I found a new depth to my prayer life, as I pleaded God not to allow any kids (or staff) to get damaged by the end of the week.

In the midst of the turmoil, God’s Spirit descended upon camp. As day seven approached, we had a night in which we gave the kids an opportunity to accept Jesus as Saviour. Slowly one by one, kids came forward to the Mercy Seat – girls mostly. The boys were still feeling out the situation, sitting at the back, acting cool. That is until Jamal made his move. Now Jamal was never the most popular kid. He was a bit chubby and he was awkward in basketball. He always tried just that little bit too hard. He was too influenced by other kids, and would follow whoever happened to be around. But here he was, the first boy standing. Jamal stood up at the back and made the trembling journey to the front of the room where he knelt and prayed with a leader. Who should follow but his whole crew. The five or six other boys with whom Jamal had spent the week filed in line behind him and almost inexplicably found themselves kneeling at the front of the room as well. It was a beautiful moment.

But that’s not even the best part. Later that night in our cabin I recounted the day’s events with the boys. “I am really proud of you guys,” I said. “Today you made some very important decisions.” Just then another leader came in, and I told the guys to share with her the good news from the day. All at once they started to share the story of decision day. Andrew, an especially enthusiastic young man, spoke up and said, “Yeah it was great! I got up first and went to the front, and then all the others followed…” It was at that point Jamal sat up stiffly in his bunk, and indignantly interjected, “F___ off! I accepted Jesus first!”

As long as I live I will never forget those six words!

When I was in the southern part of Russia, I visited some refugee camps that tented hundreds of families who had fled from the Chechen war. In a couple short weeks I had become attached to a wonderful group of children who lived there.

I happened to be visiting during their annual festival, a competition in which children from different refugee camps presented songs, artwork and dance. In the days preceding the festival, I sat in on the kids’ rehearsals as they tried their best to put together what would be the best possible presentation for the day. For hour upon hour I sat and listened as they practised. To this day, these are only the Russian phrases I have memorized: “Hello” “How are you?” and “It’s cool that you got on TV” – the repetitious line from the chorus of the pop song the kids sang in their presentation.

When the day finally came for the competition, I sat beaming with paternal pride (as if I had anything whatsoever to do with their presentation). The kids sang, danced, displayed their artwork and generally had a great time. A group from another camp got up and put on a stunning display of their national dance. It was a close race, but when all was said and done, there was something far more important going on than song and dance. For those few days, in that refuge far away from demolished homes, bombs and gunfire, hundreds of children displaced by war came together. And for a short time they were centre-stage; the kids were the singers, the dancers, the artists and the musicians. They were the stars and they shined!

In two weeks that seemed like two years, I got to know a small group of kids who had lived through horrors I cannot imagine. I got to see them at their very best. And, in case you are wondering, yes, they won! But truly, that’s not important. What matters is that in those moments those children felt like the most important people on earth, not forgotten victims of an often-ignored war.

After my two weeks were finished, as I was preparing to get in a taxi and leave, Khavazh, one of the boys who I had spent the most time with came to me, and through a translator asked me a question… another phrase I will never forget: he simply said, “When are you coming back?” Of course I had no answer for him. The kids in my community were waiting for me. But at that moment, how I wished I could stay. And in that moment, as it has so many times before and since, the Scripture resonated in my heart, “The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few.” If only my fellow Christians knew the riches they were missing. If only the Church could understand the depth of joy and meaning found on the other side of mission. John Ortberg wrote:

“Jesus took a little child in his arms and said, in effect, ‘Here’s your ministry. Give yourselves to those who can bring you no status or clout. Just help people. You need this little child. You need to help this little child, not just for her sake, but more for your sake. For if you don’t, your whole life will be thrown away on an idiotic contest to see who is the greatest. But if you serve her – often and well and cheerfully and out of the limelight – then the day may come when you do it without thinking, ‘What a wonderful thing I’ve done.’ Then you will begin to serve naturally, effortlessly, for the joy of it. Then you will begin to understand how life in the kingdom works.’”

It is through mission that we express perfect love for Jesus Christ. This outpouring of love is costly. It involves a terrifying leap of faith to go wherever God sends you. But the good news is that after that initial leap, the adventure is only beginning. To maintain a mission focus is not easy, but to do so is to be significant. Mission is the key to the meaningful life we have all been called to.

Conclusions
Kierkegaard’s three spheres are mere guidelines. No one person or congregation fits perfectly into any sphere; I am sure that we can identify personal areas of selfish motivation as in the aesthetic sphere, rigid adherence to the rule of the law, as in the ethical sphere, and moments of unselfish obedience and faith, as in the religious sphere. However, if we are Christians, we are called to mission. There is no escaping this reality.

Todd Gitlin, an old time 1960s protestor, posits three complementary motivations for anyone who wants to wade into political activism. Adventure, duty and love. I believe he has hit on something that goes beyond politics, and takes us into the realm of mission. The fact is that God understands people, and when we make ourselves available to him, he meets us where we are.

If our main motivation is fun and adventure, we could become downhearted, wallow in our selfish nature, and do nothing. Or, like Samson, God could use our flamboyant nature and our desire for fun and new experiences as our motivation to go places no one else would ever dream of going. Shock rocker Marilyn Manson once bemoaned the fact that there were no new adventures out there. He said, “What other violence can you show? What other drug can you do? What other thing can you get pierced? It’s all been done.” There are no new adventures out there. We keep attempting to create the fastest roller coasters, the highest bungee jumps and the wildest parties. The one true adventure that is left is simply to fearfully and courageously follow wherever God leads – to the darkest places on earth, or to people in our own apartment building. God, as Redeemer, seeks to redeem our natures, not destroy them.

What about duty? I believe there are two ways to look at the word duty. We can look at it as a strict adherence to a set of rules, which is very limiting. Our other option is to confront our responsibility to the world. Mother Teresa once said that, “If there are poor in the world, it is because you and I don’t give enough.” This is a stinging indictment from a woman who lived her life among the poorest of the poor. However, we must take our duty to love and care for others seriously. This is not legalism, but responsibility. We are comfortable and well fed while elsewhere people are dying of starvation. Yes, we have a duty. We have a God-given duty to care for others.

Adventure, duty and love, but the greatest of these is love.

Love is God’s defining characteristic and our highest aim. At the end of the day, we may live among the poor, give up our possessions, preach the Word and feed the hungry, but if we don’t have love, we are nothing. Eternally, our lives count for nothing. Maintenance takes root when love becomes distorted, and love for self replaces love for God. Mission is the pure expression of our love for Jesus Christ and for others.

Someone wrote: “Pity sighs, and says, ‘how awful.’ Compassion weeps, and says, ‘I’ll help.’” The world needs people who will help. Much more than that, the world needs the Church to roll up its sleeves, re-enter abandoned communities and help. Because, like Jesus, we weep when we gaze upon fallen Jerusalem. We weep when we see empty monuments where life-giving inner-city churches once were. We weep because all around the world mothers are weeping for lost children. We weep because every day people die without a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. We must weep. And from that place of brokenness, with our hearts firmly set on God, it is time for us to take that courageous leap of faith and to respond to God’s call to go wherever he tells us to go and do whatever he tells us to do.

Writer: Rob Perry works with children and youth at 614 Regent Park, Toronto, Canada.

Photo: John McAlister

the Rubicon - BY REQUEST - Rooted in Mission not Maintenance Part#2

Rob Perry says The world needs the Church to roll up its sleeves and re-enter abandoned communities - Part #2 

2) The Ethical Stage – Maintaining Legalism
Those… who are tied to blind dogma, perfunctory ritual, and institutional self-preservation, those who see God as guardian of the status quo (no matter how oppressive it may be), have so institutionalized God in their thinking and feeling that they are unable to see Him at work outside their narrow – and usually self-serving – perceptions. – Phil Needham from Community in Mission – A Salvationist Ecclesiology (36)

During the roughly four centuries between the Old and New Testaments, pagan cultures influencing Jewish life became a significant problem. In response to the corrupting pressure of Greek and Roman culture, new politico-religious factions began to appear within Judaism. Over time, the most influential of these sub-sects became the Pharisees. Initially, the Pharisees were pious Jews who chose to turn their backs on a world that was increasingly contrary to the laws of God, and to separate themselves from corrupting influences.

They started well. The Pharisees were a lay-holiness movement dedicated to protecting Judaism from outside influences and creating righteous followers of God, commendable goals. However, their good intentions were not enough. By the time of Christ, the Pharisees had generated 613 different laws pertaining to the minutia of Jewish life. Maintaining strict rules of conduct had become the reason for their religion. The end result of the Pharisee’s movement was a rigid adherence to the letter of the Mosaic Law; to the point where today to call someone a Pharisee is synonymous with charging him or her with legalism.

Kierkegaard’s second “existential sphere” is the ethical stage. Our churches are jam-packed with people who subsist in the ethical sphere. The ethical stage is the moral stage, the dutiful life. The ethicists are convinced that obedience to duty, structure, and rules will bring happiness.

The search for greater meaning begins when an individual despairs at the limited nature of temporary pleasure

There is something to be said for the ethical stage. The search for greater meaning begins when an individual despairs at the limited nature of temporary pleasure. A person comes face to face with the reality of his own sinfulness and need for God.

Leviticus 25:18 says, “Follow my decrees and be careful to obey my laws, and you will live safely in the land.” It was this type of directive that consumed the Pharisees, and is the same kind of directive that consumes many churches. It has become many believers’ goal to live in perfect obedience to the law. While this is a commendable and biblical aim, it is the motivation behind the goal that we must examine.

Why do some “follow (God’s) decrees?” So they will “live safely in the land.” It is an insular, self-protective desire that drives them, and it inhibits mission. The irony is that the context of this command is the Year of Jubilee, an excellent Old Testament concept that is ripe with implications of social justice and self-sacrifice. It was during the Year of Jubilee that people were commanded to lend freely to those in need, to free their servants and slaves, and cancel debts. God did promise that he would protect and look after his people. In essence God says, “Sacrifice. Give to the poor. Free your servants. And, once you have given more than you dreamt you could, do not worry, then I will take care of you.”

Moving Beyond the Ethical Sphere
Some want to live within the sound of church and chapel bell. I want to run a rescue shop within a yard of hell. – C.T. Studd

The author Elie Wiesel, a Jew who lived through WWII concentration camps, once reflected on one of the great evils in the world: He said, “The opposite of love is not hate – it’s indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness – it’s indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy – it’s indifference. And the opposite of life is not death – it’s indifference.” In Jesus’ day, the Pharisees had become absorbed by the rule of the law, which became a hindrance to them living God’s will. We must not become indifferent. If we are apathetic and indifferent, we are useless to God.

The old maxim is true; sometimes we can be so godly minded that we are of no earthly good. We become so focused on having sanctified souls and spotless congregations, that our churches are frightening to anyone who does not follow our strict codes of conduct. When a genuine “sinner” enters our sacred doors, everyone is uncomfortable. The church members are uncomfortable, because suddenly an outsider is among them who does not fit into their rigid norms. She may look different, smell badly, or have poorly behaved children. The visitor also feels uncomfortable. The moment she enters the church she sees a congregation of people who look the same, dress the same, have reserved pews and condescending stares. She knows this is not a place of refuge for her. John White wrote:

“Meanwhile our churches, like secular associations, are concerned with fund-raising, beautiful buildings, large numbers, comforting sermons from highly qualified preachers, while they display indifference to the poor, the insane, and the lonely. Jesus himself would find no place in our all-too-respectable churches, for he did not come to help the righteous but to bring sinners to repentance. Our churches are not equipped to do that sort of thing.”

Jesus himself would find no place in our all-too-respectable churches, for he did not come to help the righteous but to bring sinners to repentance

Jesus was the embodiment of what it means to live beyond the ethical sphere. Did he obey the law? Yes. He fulfilled it by living beyond legalism, traditionalism and ritualism, choosing to dwell in the dirt, grime and hilarity that is found in relationship with people who were lonely, despised, liars, fornicators, cheaters, alcoholics, failures and losers. This is the believer’s mission, to carry on this great work of Christ! The mission will be accomplished only through relationship. The method is simple. Love your neighbour; get to know the people near your home or church, be their friend, pray for them and love them.

Just before his ascension Jesus commanded his followers to, “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” As in the Year of Jubilee, when God’s people step out in faith, his promise is that “surely [God is] with you always, to the very end of the age.” Jesus’ command to his disciples is to “go.” It is not a command to necessarily pack up everything and go to a far off land, as it is a reminder that wherever you are, it is your duty as a disciple to make other disciples. It is for us to live the Christian life, not just to visit it. We are to proclaim Jesus and make disciples in his name. Wherever our homes and churches are, that is where we fulfill mission.

A poster in my office has a quote from an anonymous missionary, “I have but one candle to burn, and would rather burn it out where people are dying in darkness than in a land which is flooded with lights.” Jesus preached the kingdom of God, a place where the King reigns. It is the place where tears are replaced with laughing, darkness with light, sickness with healing, loneliness with community and death with life. Where Jesus is, his Kingdom is. Where his people are, there also is his kingdom. If we believe the Holy Spirit is alive in us, and that with his power we can live out the ‘God with us’ vision of Jesus Christ today, we must ask, where would Jesus live now?

Conquering Legalism in the Church
True disciples focus is beyond themselves and their own personal piety. They seek holiness with a burning passion, so that they may shine an even brighter light in the dark places where they bring the Kingdom. The key to overcoming legalism is to roll up our sleeves and get dirty. Relationships are dirty. To live incarnationally is messy and sometimes difficult. However, when we are in our glass palaces miles away from the realities of life, indifference is too easy an option and adherence to legalistic ritual too readily replaces sacrificial mission.

Relationships are dirty. To live incarnationally is messy and sometimes difficult

In order to help congregations move beyond the ethical sphere, a few things must happen. We must protect our churches from becoming ignorant of the outside world. Here, discipleship is key. The sad reality is that many people in our congregations are not passionate about mission because they have not been properly discipled. I will never forget the day when one of the key elders at the church I grew up in stood in front of the entire congregation and made an off-hand comment that John 3:16 was the only verse in the Bible he had memorized. This is unacceptable. We must ensure that our congregation understands the Bible. This includes mission.

Prayer is essential. It ignites and maintains the believers’ missional focus. At our church, we leave our building and pray in our neighbourhood at least once a week. This allows us to keep the reality of our community constantly before us. Being in the neighbourhood helps us to pray effectively about the specific needs of our community. Also, praying in the community is a prophetic statement. It tells our community that God’s people are present and that someone is “standing in the gap” on their behalf.

We also do our best as a church to ensure that our mission focus is international, not just local. For example, we have united prayer for issues such as the persecuted church, child soldiers or the AIDS epidemic in Africa. I remember hearing people from the streets of Toronto, many of whom have been affected by AIDS, praying for the victims of the African AIDS epidemic.

During appeal times in church we have opportunity to sign petitions regarding international social justice issues. We give opportunity for people in our congregation to write letters overseas. Despite the fact that our church is comprised largely of people from one of the poorest neighbourhoods in Canada, we focus for weeks on the annual offering for our denomination’s overseas mission work.

It takes hard work and creativity to maintain a mission focus for a church body. However, if the vision is not clear, and the focus is not continually targeted towards mission, it will wind up in the minutia of legalistic irrelevance.

Writer: Rob Perry works with children and youth at 614 Regent Park, Toronto, Canada.

the Rubicon - BY REQUEST - Rooted in Mission not Maintenance Part#1

The world needs the Church to roll up its sleeves and re-enter abandoned communities by Rob Perry

It is called “The Church,” which is what it once was. It still looks like a church, a brown brick building, with a church steeple, even a cross on top, but people don’t worship there. Around a decade ago the small congregation moved out, and the building was sold. Now it’s a trendy downtown club, home to a variety of local jazz and classical performers. Its name is a sad testament to what once was.

Two blocks away, at the top of another brick building with a steeple, is a large sign. Spanning the width of the church, written in chipped blue paint, it reads “Salvation Army Citadel.” This church moved in around 1904, and moved out in the 1980s. It’s an apartment building. The sign remains as a faded reminder of the past.

Less than a block up the road are two impressive works of architecture that stand almost side-by-side. These church buildings exist as a remembrance of what were, a century earlier, two of the most influential denominations in the east part of downtown. In fact, people still do worship at both. In the past number of decades as other Christian denominations were on their way out, these massive church buildings acted as anchors. Even though they have little or nothing to do with their environment, they remain; large buildings, tiny congregations, locked doors. Monuments.

The saddest part of the situation is that, as when they were first constructed, these buildings stand in some of the neediest areas of their city. Gangs, crack prostitutes, poor families and homeless addicts pass by their doors every day, and sleep in their stairwells every night. Social problems still remain. In fact, they have increased, but God’s people have left.

The prophet Ezekiel says, “I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it, but I found none. So I will pour out my wrath on them and consume them with my fiery anger, bringing down on their own heads all they have done, declares the Sovereign LORD” (Ezekiel 22:30-31). In a very real sense, it is the Church’s responsibility to “stand in the gap” on behalf of our communities. But, unfortunately, for neighbourhoods across North America, the on-site intercessors are gone. One morning, the community woke up, and its prophets, evangelists and priests had disappeared. In a twinkling of an eye, the neighbourhood was abandoned. There was no one to stand in the gap anymore, because the intercessors had moved to the suburbs.

It is the Church’s responsibility to “stand in the gap” on behalf of our communities

You can almost read the congregations’ stories in the bricks on the church walls. Around 80 or 100 years ago, new churches formed mostly around immigrant populations that inhabited the community. The churches were the most important landmarks in the neighbourhood. Everyone was affiliated with one or the other, whether they attended on Sundays or not. The children attended the Sunday Schools. When they became teenagers, many stopped going, only to find themselves back in times of crisis or when they were a little older, sending their own children to Sunday school. In communities filled with poverty and crisis, the churches were the safe places, the houses of refuge, the sanctuaries.

In many cases, small congregations inhabited these buildings, meeting faithfully week after week, year after year. But generations passed, children grew up and had children; they got better jobs, and moved into “nicer” areas of town. Their children in turn grew, got degrees and careers, and with them, families, larger incomes, bigger houses and fancier cars. With every succeeding generation, love for the community diminished. Churches lost their mission focus, and as their children became adults, the thought of remaining in the neighbourhood as a witness of hope, was not a consideration. The church was no longer their sanctuary. Those who still attended commuted. Gradually, the churches stopped owning responsibility for their communities and began focusing on insular details such as sermons, traditions, rivalries and maintaining programs that had been running since the church’s inception. At some point, the desire to maintain defeated the impulse for mission. Inevitably, eventually the church itself “graduated” to the suburbs, where its members lived. All that was left in the urban centre was a monument; a reminder of what was once the gathering place for a community.

That is the past; the question for the present is how the Church can regain its lost sense of mission? After decades, and even centuries of maintenance focus at the expense of our communities, how do we turn our hearts and minds towards mission again?

One of the most succinct descriptions of mission in the Bible is found in Jeremiah 1:17: “But the LORD said… ‘You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you… ’” It is a very simple, yet profound command, with massive implications: Wherever God sends us, we go; whatever he tells us to say or do, we do. Mission encapsulates not only the far corners of the earth, but also our own cities and communities.

Upon receiving God’s call, Jeremiah’s natural inclination was to look inwards: He said, “Ah Sovereign LORD, I do not know how to speak; I am only a child.” Astounded by the awesome task set before him, Jeremiah was forced to face his own inadequacies. Today, in order for the Church of Christ to regain a vision for mission, we need to examine ourselves as Jeremiah did.

In order for the Church of Christ to regain a vision for mission, we need to examine ourselves as Jeremiah did

There are many motivations for mission, with love being the highest. What is mission after all, if not love for God expressed through service to the poor (see Matthew 25:31-46)? Let us examine a few things that keep us as people and congregations from attaining a missional existence. From there we will look at how to overcome these barriers, to move beyond maintenance, and achieve authentic mission.

Soren Kierkegaard specified three stages of human existence; reflecting a person’s attitude and motivation towards themselves and the world around them. The three spheres include the aesthetic sphere, the ethical sphere and the religious sphere: selfish motivation for pleasures, a strict adherence to rules and duty, and a higher calling towards God, respectively. Any group of Christians has believers who fit into one of these three stages (not everyone experiences each stage; neither is any stage exclusive of the others).

1) The Aesthetic Stage – Maintaining the Trivial
I say that I know life has gotten so boring so quickly in so many ways – and that neither of us planned for this to happen. I never thought that we would end up in the suburbs with lawnmowers and swing sets. I never thought that I’d be a lifer at some useless company. But then wasn’t this the way of the world? The way of adulthood, of maturity, of bringing up children? – Douglas Coupland from Life After God

What are we living for? What is most important to us? What drives us? According to Kierkegaard, the aesthetic sphere is the pursuit of pleasure. During this stage, self is the focus. Hedonism, materialism and other pursuits to do with personal gratification characterize this sphere. I believe that there are many people in our churches who have not graduated from this stage of development. When a believer sits in church week only for “personal blessing,” or when service to God is focused more on what “I get out of it” than on personal submission to the will of God, or when self-gratification is the benchmark of a religious experience, it is a safe bet that the believer is still living in the aesthetic sphere.

When we choose to avoid mission, our focus shifts elsewhere. And, when the most important thing in life is taken away, only trivialities remain. In the movie The Untouchables, the main character, Eliot Ness, faces the disparity between the urgent and the trivial. Eliot Ness is the leader of a group of incorruptible crime-fighters during the time of American prohibition. These “untouchables” had one goal: to bring Al Capone to justice. Towards the end of the movie we see Ness come face to face with life’s priorities. One of Ness’ men has just been murdered. The remaining three ‘untouchables’ are in hiding, hopelessly trying to figure out a new plan of action. Their case against Capone is in shambles, their comrade is dead and they are physically and emotionally drained. Just then Ness’s wife phones. There is silence in the room until his short conversation is over. After getting off the telephone, Ness turns to one of his partners and says, “She’s sitting in some room surrounded by people she doesn’t know going over kitchen colour charts or something.” And then he says with bewilderment: “Some part of the world still cares what colour the kitchen is.” To Ness, the colour of his kitchen walls was irrelevant.

Is it wrong to paint the kitchen? Of course not. However, when your life is mission focused, you gain a different perspective. Viewed in the light of a world filled with loneliness, disease and violence, does the colour of our kitchens really matter? What about the colour of the kitchen cupboards at church, or the carpet in the sanctuary, or the type of clothes the choir wears? Certainly these things need to be taken care of, but how many hours have we spent in committee meetings looking at colour charts while the battle rages outside our doors?

The Cure for Personal Aestheticism
The Jewish mystic Abraham Heschel once said, “We should not spend our life hunting for trivial satisfaction while God is waiting.” God is waiting. But where is he waiting? He waits for us to turn to him in prayer. He waits for us to seek him and fulfill the most important command, to “Love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and all our minds. This is the first and greatest commandment.” However, we must not forget the second commandment, for “the second is like (the first); love your neighbour as yourself” (Matthew 22:37-39). And so, who are our neighbours? Christoph Blumhardt writes:

“Do we want to follow Jesus on this way? Then we must accept him in this company. Then the call comes to us to set to work wholeheartedly, for here is Jesus. He himself, speaking about the time of his absence, does not say, “I was rich and you respected me.” He says, “I was poor, I was hungry, I was thirsty, I was imprisoned, and you came to me, to the poor Saviour. You came to me, who sat as a guest at the table of the lowest men. There you came to me.” Here must be your whole heart; here you must do the deeds of faith; for it is from here that the power comes which will overthrow the world, the wretched, unhappy world.”

Every person is Christ for me and since there is only one Jesus, the person I am meeting is the only person in the world at that moment

Mother Teresa said, “I believe in person-to-person contact. Every person is Christ for me and since there is only one Jesus, the person I am meeting is the only person in the world at that moment.” When we enter into relationship with the outcast and unwanted in our society, this is reality. We are in the presence of the divine. We must not lessen this by demystifying it. It is mysterious, and strangely humbling. To love Jesus by serving others is the essence of mission. And, when we replace mission with trivialities, it is we who miss out.

Battling Corporate Aestheticism
Joy and perfect communion with God can only be found in mission. When we are serving sacrificially and completely, we become partners with Christ in his redemptive work. When we exist in the aesthetic sphere of Christian life, it is easy to fool ourselves into thinking that we are fulfilling our destinies as followers of Christ, when we are only living to indulge our comfort zones and fulfill our selfish desires.

How much time have we spent debating what kind of music is to be played during worship? There are passionate Christians who will fight to defend their style of music. However, if we desire to recapture mission, we must enter into the “worship debate” only by examining our position through the lens of mission. Through a missional lens, the worship question is pragmatic: what kind of music will most effectively speak to the hearts of my church’s surrounding community?

We had to address this question when beginning a new church in urban, multi-cultural Toronto. In the neighbourhood surrounding the church, you will hear as many as 100 languages spoken. The residents of our community come from nearly every culture and tradition in the world. So, what music is right for this church?

On Sunday, we may sing songs in French, Mandarin, Spanish, Zulu and Russian. We use a “worship band” style including keyboards, guitars, bass, drums, and vocals – because it is the nearest we have to what most neighbourhood people listen to on the radio. As a mission-focused church, the principle here is that every congregational decision must be mission focused.

This principal carries over to other areas of church. For instance, our church meets on Sunday at 4:30 pm. Why? Because people in our neighbourhood like to sleep in on Sundays. Decisions are based on the needs of the community, not the desires of the believer.

Mission involves sacrifice and a focus on others. It means being not only comfortable, but joyful when people who look differently enter our churches

I am sure we know people in our congregation who may be mired in the aesthetic stage. Unfortunately, sometimes these people are pastors, or hold places of authority. However, until such people are ready to move on in maturity, mission is too high a calling. Mission involves sacrifice and a focus on others. It means being not only comfortable, but joyful when people who look differently enter our churches. Mission necessitates a passion and love for God’s fallen creation, and a willingness to do whatever it takes to be a transformative influence in the world. However, as long as we are content to live a self-absorbed hedonistic religion, our goal will be to ultimately maintain a church that makes us happy and comfortable.

Top photo: Timothy Samoff, Bottom photo: John McAlister

Writer: Rob Perry works with children and youth at 614 Regent Park, Toronto, Canada.

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.

Changing church culture 1

 by Eleanor Burne-Jones

I live in an area where many congregations are aging and churches are approaching closure.  Many are struggling, and even if they are just about able to manage financially, their members are getting older and  the programme is slowly diminishing.  They are unable to offer the kind of resources that draw or hold new and younger people, such as different kinds of worship services, Alpha courses, Bible studies at different levels, small groups, and a high-challenge high-support environment for discipleship with integrated mission training.  Often there are people in the congregations who have struggled to encourage renewal over decades. Often, successive waves of innovative newcomers have been driven out by the group’s change-resistance.  Often they have had leaders who have been trying over years to turn the congregations around, and who have been driven to despair by the situation.

Can anything impact church culture and enable the kinds of changes that are needed for renewal?   I believe so. I think many of our professional church leaders (of all denominations) are ‘corks that need to be popped’, discipling, developing and deploying every believer. This means thinking primarily in terms of sending out rather than gathering in, and focussing on making disciples who will make disciples, rather than focussing on controlling, managing, and all-too-often warehousing, believers. It’s a paradigm shift in overall church thinking, away from shepherd-sheep as the primary model of church.

When I moved to Cornwall as a lay person, and a sister at the time in an Anglican Franciscan Third Order, (and also a Salvationist), I realised quickly there was no local network for people who were called to pioneering ministries of different kinds.  There was a leaders network, but it was for clergy so far as I understand, and I wasn’t in any formal role in the church so was not involved. Neither were any of my friends who were lay people and out setting up new initiatives. So we set up the Cornwall Fresh Expressions Network, invited everyone interested, and got on with encouraging each other and creating a learning community. It has grown and continues to grow steadily, now including everyone from senior ministers to new believers including teens who share their dreams for the future of the church. We are ecumenical, we have about equal numbers of women and men, lay and ordained, people working alone and those able to gather a team.

Every stereotype of church planters and pioneers I had has been challenged by the people in the network. The point is that this group works not just for us to give each other encouragement in a difficult mission context, and in a context which has not helped lay people get out and serve God with affirmation and support, but we work together as a vital learning community, listening to God, Scripture and one another, even from our very different theological perspectives.

So the first thing I’d suggest, whether you are a soldier or in validated church leadership, is join, or create, a network. It really is as simple as that.  Do whatever it takes to find others with a similar calling and energy, lay on food, provide worship, pray for each other, provide pastoral care for exhausted, frustrated and despairing planters and church leaders, and keep building warm relationships with the churches in your area. I’ve seen trust slowly grow, barriers come down, and entrenched attitudes begin to change.  Find training resources and before you know it the group will be generating its own training materials and giving them away.

The next challenge, whether you want to encourage a fading congregation into renewal, or need to embed a change-prepared culture into a new church plant, is explore and understand renewal. Look at the process, look at the kind of leadership it takes, and work out what incremental steps might look like in reality. They will be as unique as each situation, but there are common themes.  Keep coming back to the question, ‘What would it take?’ to sort out the next step.  The Holy Spirit brings the renewal, not the leader or participants. But God does not force us, and in different ways we can surely derail what would otherwise be God’s life-giving movements amongst and through us. The ‘What would it take?’ question often brings us to face hard changes.  We can pray for renewal, we can pray for revival, but as the old truth says, it needs to start with us. We often need to know what to repent of, what needs to change, what our part in opening the door to the Holy Spirit needs to be. 

On reflecting on what we need to understand about ourselves as groups, here’s a useful definition of [church] culture by David Brubaker, who draws also on the work of others:

‘Culture is composed of the tacit assumptions about rules, rituals, roles, and relationships, which are expressed in values and symbols.  The equipper functions as cultivator of culture, fostering the awareness of the system’s history and depths‘¹.

For example, if one of the unwritten rules is ‘we don’t tolerate disagreements around here’, and in fact that means that conflict is suppressed, and issues are never dealt with, you have unearthed a reason a church may be stuck in impasse rather than renewed and growing.  If clergy and laity are locked in their relationship into a shepherd and sheep model, you may have unearthed a reason why lay people are not developed and sent out in mission, and a whole mindset may need to change for your church to experience renewal.

Dr Jeffrey Pugh, a senior minister in Australia, did his doctoral research², including theological reflection, on the role of leaders in congregations that experienced renewal.  In my own words, here is the summary of what he found, as I understand it.  Present in churches that turned around were: An emotionally mature, well differentiated³ leader, who leads from an ethical heart. He or she creates a sense of safety in the group, of all, the leader’s friends and enemies, being safely held in his/her warm, positive regard⁴. This leader transitions the culture of a congregation (if necessary) from a culture of control to a culture of competence⁵. This leader enables a congregation to journey through the chaos and pain of change by listening to the congregation and discerning with them those vital things that need be kept in order for the congregation to retain a sense of safety, self-identity, and their connection between past, present and future⁶.

Much of the above ties in very naturally with preaching and teaching, and lends itself to being broken down into elements, and explored in your learning community, as you listen to one another’s thoughts and experiences and reflect on your own developing leadership. Questions to ask might again be: What would it take? How do I need to change? It might be, ‘How can I articulate in a life-giving way in the group I’m part of but don’t lead, what might help us all move forward?’ It might be about how we need to change our thinking as individuals and how we respond to what God is saying to us in our reflection together.

The second most important resource for changing church culture, and here we are once again asking about incremental steps the congregation can take together, is conflict literacy training. The group can take this journey together to prepare themselves to handle disagreements, even strong differences and painful issues, in a way that demonstrates faith that God can bring good out of even the most difficult experiences we face in the church. (More on this to come in part 2.)

This process of reflection is for all of us.  Our mission contexts are constantly changing around us.  I believe renewal is possible even in the declined churches I see around me in rural UK, because nothing is impossible for God. I believe he works within our humanity, within ‘the way we work in groups’, within our God-created natures, even in our limitations, and relational holiness can be beautifully expressed as we work together on the nuts and bolts of our congregational renewal, in conflict transformation, and trust-building in our communities.  One of the most beautiful cultural renewals possible in the church is that of listening, sensitive and thoughtful encouragement. We can immediately practice this with those around us. If it isn’t happening vertically where you are within the church, then encourage it, and help it to happen horizontally across networks and groups you facilitate.

 Writer: Eleanor Burne-Jones grew up in The Salvation Army, but gradually left the Army and the church by her mid twenties. She spent more than fifteen years in the Jewish faith, before returning to Christ and The Salvation Army in 2003/4.  She was noviced as a Franciscan at the same time she was enrolled a soldier, and had nearly three years of Franciscan spiritual formation in the Third Order Soc. St Francis before asking to live out her vocation within The Salvation Army. In 2007 she set up Kres Jesu Krist, (Cornwall Church Health) with an ecumenical lay team. They offer training and spiritual accompaniment, and facilitate the Cornwall Fresh Expressions Network for people in pioneering ministries and church planting across the county. She is studying theology, and is a soldier at Penzance Corps, UK and has her own blog.

 Resources (UK): Fresh Expressions DVDs and website. http://www.freshexpressions.org.uk/index.asp?id=1

References

1. David Brubaker, adapted from Paul Stevens and Phil Collins, Alban Institute 1993.
2. Dr  Jeffrey Pugh, PhD thesis, Fantasyland Faith, the redemptive role of ethical leaders within neurotic church systems. 2007 Available from Amazon, pub on demand, and http://www.flipkart.com/fantasyland-faith-redemptive-role-ethical/3836428962-ijz3fnw23d which includes an abstract.
3. The term is as used in Bown Family Systems theory. A useful resource is Roberta M Gilbert, ‘Extraordinary Relationships’ 1992, Wiley and Sons, Canada.
4. JP refers to ‘adequate holding environment’, a concept used in psychodynamics. JP compares a number of lenses through which to understand renewal in congregations, and the psychodynamic is one of them.
5. Terms as used in organisational culture theory.
6. Transitional Objects, as the term is used in the field of psychodynamics.

Curse of the third generation

Has today’s Army lost the plot asks Bruce Redman?

In Australia we have a dynasty of media moguls called the Packers. Sir Frank Packer set up the empire, his son Kerry picked it up and took it all to a new level through to his dying day (he died in 2005 having amassed a personal fortune of $7 billion) and then along came son Jamie. After a number of failed personal business ventures this last week he sold out a significant chunk of the family media conglomerate. It’s a common story and in business it is often referred to as “the curse of the third generation”. It’s a concept that I first became aware of when Prince Charles addressed The Salvation Army International Congress in London in 1978.

The Prince identified a dangerous moment in any movement or business, when the founding visionary dies. “English business, “ said Charles, “is a history of three generations – the founding father, hauling himself upwards; the son who goes to grammar school and becomes a businessman and the grandson who goes to Eton and becomes a poet. The grandson is the ruin of it all.”

› Continue reading

Head or heart

David Witthoff on the battleground of mind and soul

Where are past and current trends in The Salvation Army leading us? I’ve found that the more I read history, the more I understand the Army. Understanding history makes me think “Oh, that’s why we’re like this!” or “That’s why we do that!”

History does not repeat itself though. People are never the same. Situations are never the same. Culture is never the same. However, certain trends in history can inform our thoughts on the future. Let’s talk about history for bit. This article has been strongly influence and inspired by my reading of Mark Noll’s book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind, which I highly recommend.

› 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