.: ARMYBARMY :. resource for training materials, music and shopping

JAC Online

We Don't WANT to be Different (do we?)
by Major Willis Howell

Major Willis Howell is President and Principal of Evangeline Booth College in Atlanta, Georgia. In this article he encourages Salvationists to remain true to who we are and not seek to be like everyone else.

______________________________________________________________________________

Every parent of a teenager has heard words to this effect:

“…but Tommy has one…!

“Karen’s parents let her do it. Why can’t I?”

“Alice and Bill get to go. I’ll be the only one left out!”

“Why can’t I buy it? Everyone else has..!”

After a deep sigh (and briefly wondering if science could develop a way for birth control to somehow be retroactive), the weary parent does their best to explain to the emotionally fraying kid in front of them:

It doesn’t matter what Tommy has.
Karen’s parents aren’t your parents.
Alice and Bill may not be the best role models.
You and your spouse are not responsible for how everyone else spends their money.

Let me tell you from personal experience, the odds of coming through one of these “discussions” with your sanity intact, are right up there with successfully mixing nitro glycerin in your blender. In both cases – trying to “reason” with a hormone-crazed teenager, and do-it-yourself nitro mixing – you’re dealing with highly volatile and unstable components that can explode without warning. In fact, it’s practically one of life’s unwritten truths that any parent/teen set-to that bears even a slight resemblance to what’s described above will be followed by assorted acts of door slamming, sullen expressions, deafening silence, and no end of eye-rolling. And that’s just from the parents!

The message every teen-pressured parent wants to get across, however, is simply this: “Our family isn’t like everyone else’s family. Our standards, our expectations, our values are different. Others can do what they choose, but this is the way we do family.”

God knows what it’s like to be on the receiving end of tantrums. Throughout millennia, His children have thrown all kinds of fits in His direction as they’ve repeatedly rejected His plans and insisted on doing things their way.

For example, do you remember the little falling-out between God and His chosen people in 1 Samuel 8?

It’s probably best to give something of the background that leads up to the event. To do that, though, we have to go all the way back to when God singled out the Jews in the first place, and skim our way forward through some of the events and occurrences that helped to shape their identity as a people.

Now from the very beginning, when He first established His covenant with Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, God clearly intended that His “chosen people” would be special – different. The King James translation even goes so far as to use the word “peculiar” – unlike everyone else. Over time, Abraham’s descendants came to learn that these peculiarities would influence practically every aspect of their lives, including:

their worship of one God (as opposed to the numerous gods other nations worshiped),
their laws,
their diet,
their dress,
their hygiene,
their relationships,
their work habits,
the way they fought wars…

In short, everything about them was to be distinct. Their day-to-day rhythms and routines were to be completely dissimilar to those of the people around them. In fact, God wanted Israel to be so utterly unique that all other nations would figuratively stand around scratching their heads in wonder and amazement at the success of the Jewish people, and come to one unmistakable conclusion: it had to be a God-thing.

For the Jews, this God-planned “differentness” led them into amazing blessing and unimagined hardship. It included centuries of slavery in Egypt, and an astonishingly miraculous release from that slavery. This was quickly followed by forty years of running laps in the wilderness, which finally led them to the successful conquest of the Promised Land. But over all that time, slowly – often painfully – the Jewish people learned how well God cared for, protected, and provided for their needs because of their distinctness. At every point, God was trying to get across the idea that He wanted to leverage their peculiarity in front of the whole world in ways that would lead to their blessing and His glory.

So now we’re at the point of our 1 Samuel episode. It’s now been more than 1,000 years since God and Abraham first kicked this whole thing off, and nearly 300 years after first arriving in the Promised Land. God’s hand picked children are now well-settled into Canaan.

At this time, Israel is still a theocracy. That is, God, by way of various prophets and judges, is calling the shots. It’s the system He put in place and the arrangement the Jews had lived by – and prospered by – since right after their release from Egyptian slavery. Each time they collectively rebelled and bucked against God’s plan brought some level of suffering and consequence. But when His design was willingly and whole-heartedly embraced, it worked amazingly well for them (imagine that)!

During the days of the prophet-judge Samuel, a sort of rumble could be heard. A growing discontent was spreading in the hearts and minds of the Israelites. Little by little, God’s people – the very ones He had chosen to be unique among all other nations – wanted to look and behave more like the nations around them.

Why? Had they observed some more successful “model?” Were the countries around them somehow more prosperous? Were others’ standards of living better? Was there some desired result or outcome other nations were receiving that Israel wasn’t? Sure, there had been some pretty serious problems with Samuel’s sons and all, but was that sufficient reason to throw out the whole system after it had worked for them for so long? I don’t know….

I wonder if it’s possible that over the years they had simply gotten tired of being labeled as “strange,” or “oddball”. Do you think that perhaps some had had all they could stand of explaining to questioners – those from surrounding kingdoms or people they traded with – that their lives and behavior were guided by the terms of a covenant (“You see God spoke to this guy Abraham, like centuries ago, and they agreed on a bunch of stuff… I mean, dude, that’s so irrelevant to our lives now, right?”). Maybe their frustration with having to dress and live a certain way, and hold to certain practices and values had built up to a point that finally took them over the top.

Whatever it was, it all came to a full boil, here in 1 Samuel 8. God’s children collectively stomped their feet, threw their toys, slammed their bedroom doors, and pitched a hot, blue fit. “That’s it – we’re done! Give us the same kind of king every other nation has! We’re tired of being different. We’ve had enough of being ‘unique.’ No more standing out. Just let us blend in and be like everyone else.”

God gave in. He let Israel have exactly what they asked for. They got a king, and looked more like all the other nations around them. But it sure didn’t lead to what anyone would call a “happily-ever-after” kind of ending. You see, their lives – and their nation – were forever changed. Their insistence on swapping out God’s original game plan opened the door to what would eventually lead to a divided kingdom, some truly disastrous kings, and greater distance from God.

Here’s a question… Do you see any parallel at all between this story and our present-day Army? If so, then is there some “moral of the story,” or word of caution that we would do well to pay attention to?

Let’s look a little closer and ask a few more questions…

Do you think there’s a chance that God, as He did with the Jewish people…

…has called out and raised up the Army to be somewhat separate from the rest of the church pack?
…designed our rhythms and routines to be, well, “unconventional” by comparison to other parts of the Church body?
…intended that we would stand out as unique and distinct for His purposes?
…brought us through various specific experiences and circumstances, to intentionally shape our identity?
…wants to leverage our peculiarity in ways intended to honor Him and advance His Kingdom?

If that’s the case, then perhaps He also led our founders and early day leaders to develop and embrace such “peculiar” Army elements as:

our free, non-liturgical worship style,
or the kind of people we intentionally sought out (the marginalized, the cast-off, those who were in some way broken, ignored, despised, or who would fit into no other church system),
or the uncompromising standards we volunteered to live by (a binding covenant that outlined our values and actions, and touches on most every part of our lives )?

In short, is it just possible that the Army was, and still is:

called by God to be noticeably – maybe even radically – different?
designed as a one-of-a-kind shape that fits perfectly into a specific place in the mosaic of God’s overall plan and purpose?
unique to the point that when people examine our “success” as a Movement, they scratch their heads in wonder and amazement and come to the unmistakable conclusion: it’s got to be a God-thing.

Please understand… By suggesting that God has called us to be “different,” I don’t mean to imply that the Army is “elite,” “exclusive,” or “better than” anyone else. I’m just putting forward the idea that perhaps the Army is, in fact, planned by God to be who we are and how we are: a distinctive, uncommon, “horse of another color,” out-of-the-ordinary Movement.

Now if you think this just might be true, then we should be aware of another Samuel-like parallel.

As it was in Samuel’s day, there is a growing rumble of dissatisfaction in some Army circles. A subtle shift seems to be taking place. In a way rather reminiscent of the Israelites’ “give-us-a-king” cry of 1Samuel, some Salvationists want to cast off what makes us distinct in order to adopt more of the style, methods, and “look” of the churches around them.

For some, their concerns center on the uniform and our military trappings. Others focus on brass bands and music styles. Fine. While I have some level of interest in those debates, they are not exactly issues that keep me awake at night. What I do find highly disturbing, however, is the strengthening push – here in the West, anyway – for us to become more of a “middle-class,” suburban church. If some had their way, they would ditch the urban Army model where we intentionally go out searching for and bringing in those who have been written off by other churches. Instead, they would have us settle into well-placed bedroom communities where we could turn our attention on the comfort and care of folks who “look like us.” Tell me…where is it written that we are called to be more concerned about those we’ve already got, than we are those who are still missing and in danger? (For Jesus’ answer to this question, check out Luke 15:3-7)

Of even greater concern, to my thinking, are the increasing demands that we relax our standards on such Army distinctives as holy living and covenant-based behavior. You’re probably aware that there are some in our ranks who think the existing standards of soldiership are too high, and that we’re asking too much of people. (“You see, this binding promise thingy sometimes kinda gets in the way of today’s lifestyle options. It like talks about what I will do and what I won’t do...what’s up with that? I mean, dude, there’s like w-a-y too much hardcore stuff in there. It’s so unlike what other churches have for their membership standards these days. C’mon, let’s get real… If you want people to join, you gotta lower the bar to where people can reach it”).

This is all coming to a head. For whatever the specific mix of reasons, more and more of God’s soldiers are stomping their feet, throwing their toys, slamming their bedroom doors and pitching a fit. They want the Army – their church – to blend in and look like everyone else!

Evidently, this isn’t a new phenomenon. The “let’s-look-more-like-other-churches” folk have been with us from our founding right up through today. Why else would we hear this constant counsel echo over the years?

“I do not want another ecclesiastical corps [that is, corps that look like and act like the bulk of other churches out there – W] cumbering the earth. When The Salvation Army ceases to be a militant body of red-hot men and women whose supreme business is the saving of souls, I hope it will vanish utterly.”

– William Booth

“Beware of imitating the churches.”

– Commissioner Florence Booth

“Today many Officers make no secret of the fact that they measure their privilege by the numerical strength they find on their rolls, and not by the opportunity to establish true religion among those at present unsaved and uninterested. When Officers assess their opportunity in this manner, they show a lack of the aggressive spirit; they show the harking back to “church and chapel” ways which I have already deplored.

“Some Officers allow their influence to be almost entirely confined within the bounds of their corps. Their power is wholly dedicated to maintain existing forces. Do not sink your Salvationism in pastoral duties, fussing the soldiers, visiting sympathizers who are willing to receive you because of the work of your predecessors. Many good people will be glad to keep you at their beck and call doing a little charitable work for them. Officers who are content to do this, neglect aggressive work; brothels and public-houses do not know of their existence; the Devil’s victims, sinking in the mire, hear nothing of that radiant hope in the Lord, hope for the worst, which Officers were raised to carry, like a glowing torch, into the darkest places. Such Officers are helping to snap rather than to add a link to the precious chain of love which binds the heart of the neediest to the Army.

“They are satisfied if the corps has an increased congregation of well-dressed people who like to listen to the Songsters. They are elated because the Army has a good name among the respectable in the town, proud that it has a fine building. If this is included in the printed list of places of worship, which no drunkard, prostitute, or other lost soul ever regards, they think the Army has greatly benefitted.

“My comrades, if one of you is neglecting, and intends to neglect, aggressive warfare against the Devil’s forces and clear witnessing for Christ amongst the ungodly; if one of you feels unable to seek the despairing, the lost, and the callous, who hide themselves in the haunts of sin and will not seek us, I beg that one to resign. Many of the churches will receive you gladly. None who has cast off the bridal garment of Salvationism should remain amongst us.”

– Commissioner Florence Booth

"Some Officers venture altogether too close to the methods of the denominations, and wherever that is done two things inevitably follow –

a smaller number of penitents and a decline in the fighting spirit of the soldiers!"

– General Edward J. Higgins

“We…are not opposed to the church, but we feel we were raised by God to present religion in a different way to the masses outside the church orbit.”

– General Albert Orsborne

“The other churches need us, not to come up with some pale imitation of what they do, but to complement their outreach by doing what only The Salvation Army can.”

– Major Ted Palmer

The point to the whole thing takes us back to both the parent at the beginning of this writing, and God’s choosing of Abraham and his descendants: It doesn’t matter what others do. God has made us who and what we are for His purpose. Sure, there are problems and issues that need addressing. No question. But does the way to accomplish that really call for scrapping the entire organizational and missional identity of our Movement?

See, I believe this is a time for us to run more toward our heritage than away from it. I believe the Army at its results-producing best when we accept, totally embrace, and operate from the full strength of our distinct God-given identity. But when we water down our methods, compromise our standards, or try to pass ourselves off as something we’re not, the Army, those we’re trying to reach, and the Kingdom all suffer.

And to my Salvationist brothers and sisters who may be trying to move the Army in directions of liturgy, greater formality, a more “stained glass” setting, communion, more relaxed standards, or a mega-church mentality, may I lovingly set this idea on the table…? Could it be that the Army just might not be right for you? Please understand I’m not criticizing or condemning! I know full well that we aren’t everyone’s cup of tea. Truth is we’re really more of an “acquired taste.” I’m simply suggesting that perhaps we work together to help find you some church or ministry – complete with the elements, practices, “look,” and “feel” you’re wanting – where you’ll be more comfortable, and not as frustrated.

The Army’s Orders and Regulations – which are published to cover an incredibly wide range of topics – are a far under-used tool when it comes to explaining the standards and expectations of soldiership. But in the most current O&R for Soldiers, the following information is provided in the very first chapter (the emphasis and underlining is mine):

From O&R for SOLDIERS: CHAPTER 1 Some Features of Salvationism

Section 2. The Soldier's Covenant

1. Though the Army's soldiers (members) are drawn from various cultures, traditions and races, as well as from all levels of society, they have all signed their name to the document called 'The Soldier's Covenant' (previously known as the Articles of War). In 1890 it was stated as a regulation that 'every salvation soldier must consider, accept and then sign this document'. This requirement is in force today, as are its reasons, which are reproduced here.

(a) That he may understand beforehand the doctrines, principles and practices to which he will have to conform.

(b) Thinking and praying over this covenant will help him to find out whether he really has the faith and spirit of a salvation soldier or not.

(d) The covenant may prevent many joining who are not in heart and head with us, and who consequently would be likely afterwards to create dissatisfaction and division.

Said another way, every potential soldier owes it to themselves and the Army to know what they’re signing up for; what they’re agreeing to. This point is only made stronger by the fact that we’re asking them sign and enter into a binding covenant with God. So before signing, some questions have to be asked, considered, and settled: “Do I have what it takes? Do I really believe what this says I believe? Am I both able and willing to fulfill what is expected of me? Do I understand, and embrace the Army’s mission and methods?”

If for any reason(s) they find themselves tensing up or pushing back against any of the terms and conditions, they simply shouldn’t sign. Otherwise, they run the risk of create[ing] dissatisfaction and division, mentioned in the O&R above or, worse still, breaking a covenant with God.

Can you imagine what our Army would look like if every Salvationist actively lived out the covenant we’ve signed? Can you picture the unbelievable difference it would make if each of us actually ordered our lives and priorities around the behaviors and passions we’ve put our signatures to? Can your mind grab hold of what God might do with an Army like that?

Understand we still wouldn’t be a perfect Army. And we certainly wouldn’t look like any flavor-of-the-month church model. But I’m convinced that an Army of full strength, covenant-living soldiers like that who completely accept their God-assigned, unique role and specific mission would do nothing less than change the world!

Who’s with me…?