The Salvation Army 2014 USA Salvation Army Conference for Social Work and Emergency Disaster Services 25 to 28 March 2014, Orlando, Florida GLOBAL TRACK SESSION 2A
Can we “save souls” while “serving suffering humanity”? Captain (Dr) Andy Miller III USA Southern Territory Language drives the way we actualize what we discern to be God’s movement in the world. Some are undoubtedly hearing this paper in a language that is not native to them. Conceptualizing the theme for this conference “The Power of One Army … Transforming Our World” means that we not only have to work to understand one language but also to recognize my cultural perspective as a Salvation Army officer in the USA South. This paper seeks to answer the question, “Can we ‘save souls’ while ‘serving suffering humanity?” I will approach this question from a historical and theological perspective with the aim of recovering an ancient biblical practice that can refresh Salvation Army ministry. Despite the barriers of language and different perspectives I want to give an unequivocally clear answer to the given question. My answer to the question above is an exuberant Yes! The answer to this question seems simple, but the fact that it necessitates discussion reveals a tension that exists with Salvation Army theological praxis. Navigating this tension is essential to actualizing God’s kingdom through the ministry of the Army. The Theological Engine of the Salvation War In July 1865 in London’s East End an opportunity came for Rev. William Booth to preach a series of revival meetings, which marks the genesis of what we know today as The Salvation Army. Booth’s heart ached for the people of this area. He illustrated this passion: In every direction were multitudes totally ignorant of gospel, and given up to all kinds of wickedness … A voice seemed to sound in my ears, ‘Why go … anywhere else, to find souls that need the Gospel? Here they are, tens of thousands at your very door. Preach to them, the unsearchable riches of Christ. I will help you — your need shall be supplied.’1
1 William Booth, East London Evangelist, October 1868, 3. Quoted in Pamela J. Walker, Pulling the Devil’s Kingdom Down: The Salvation Army in Victorian Britain (Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 2001), 4142.
The people of their mission field, particularly London’s East End2were ravished by extreme poverty. Due to this, the Salvationist movement was bound to respond to the greater social problems on its battlefield. Reflecting on this historical movement that embraced a holistic 3 theology of ministry, it seems that eschatology, both personal and universal, was the theological engine of The Salvation Army. All the work of the Salvation Army was done in light of the final end (eschaton). To achieve its desired end (i.e. the salvation of souls and the imminence of Christ’s millennial reign) the Salvation Army had to dramatically engage in the culture that surrounded it. They could not possibly work in the midst of a people who were struggling within poverty and social oppression for long with a singular focus on “souls,” without recognizing the necessity that social and physical problems needed salvation as well. The Salvation Army operated more functionally or pragmatically than theoretically. The great goal of the Salvationist's mission is an eschatological aspiration; Booth and the early Army desired, with the help of God, to save the soul of every person in the world. This primary desire to “save souls” is an eschatological concern. Before the Army institutionally organized a global strike against social evils, such ministry was anticipated in the 1880s.4 This movement found its theological climax not in William Booth’s In Darkest England and the Way Out, but in his article “Salvation for Both Worlds.”5 This famous article, published in 1889, is the articulation of a conclusion that Booth had reached, resulting from his recognition of the necessity of holistic ministry. This proclamation was not an overnight decision. It is rather a mature theological expression that understood social and spiritual aspects of the Christian message. This holistic theological development was articulated in 1890 with the establishment of the “Social Wing,” 6 a division of Salvation Army ministry that sought to implement the “scheme” expressed in In Darkest England and the Way
2 See the excellent, and unprecedented, discussion within Salvation Army studies concerning the social condition of the people in London’s East End in Ann M. Woodall, What Price the Poor?: William Booth, Karl Marx and the London Residuum (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005), 61-67. 3 The term “holistic” is used throughout this project to identify an effective balance in mission between personal and corporate, spiritual and physical aspects of ministry. 4 For more on this “prelude” see Jenty Fairbanks, Booth’s Boots: Social Service Beginnings in The Salvation Army (London: The Salvation Army, 1983). 5 William Booth, “Salvation for Both Worlds,” All The World, 6 (January, 1889). 6 See Robert Sandall, The History of The Salvation Army. 7 vols. (London: The Salvation Army, 1947-1966. vols. 1-3 by Sandall, vols. 4-5 by Arch Wiggins, vol. 6 by Fredrick Coutts, vol. 7 by Henry Gariepy), 3:101ff.
Out.7 In Darkest England explicitly supported and institutionally expanded the existing social ministries of The Salvation Army that had been operating since 1884. It is hard to ascertain if the same theological foundation has accompanied the Salvation Army after the death of William Booth. Professor Edward H. McKinley, a perceptive historian of the Salvation Army, suggests this of the rank and file workers of the Salvation Army: [They] were little concerned with theories of social justice, they knew only that their Heavenly Commander had ordered His soldiers to take in strangers, visit the sick and imprisoned, and offer drink to the thirsty and food to the hungry. They also knew that there were souls dying all around and that the first step in saving some of them was to lift them up so they could hear that such a thing as salvation existed.8 What was impressed upon The Salvation Army by William Booth was a holistic theology that was developed by his own eschatological vision and the way he felt God was using his Army in that process. It is unlikely that one would hear a contemporary Salvationist articulate an eschatological theology for holistic ministry in The Salvation Army. What one would likely hear is a consistent approach toward a missional theology that values God’s ability to redeem every part of the world and the soldier’s responsibility in the “great salvation war.” William Booth’s eschatology produced a passionate care for individuals, a dynamic millennial spirit, a missional ecclesiology, a powerful social ethic, and a clear doctrinal basis for these beliefs. The impact of this ecclesiology is felt today in the way The Salvation Army lives out its mission in particular social and spiritual contexts. The driving force of William Booth’s theology — his eschatological vision — is a fitting example and reminder to the Christian church and the contemporary Army of its eschatological task — that is to work with God to redeem the world. It is this theology that has produced practical arms of service throughout the 126 countries the Army serves. It is this biblical and pragmatic theology which encourages soldiers to fight for those who are seemingly lost to society. One of William Booth’s hymns, known in the Salvation Army as the “Founder’s Song,” embodies this eschatological task: “O boundless salvation! deep
7 William Booth In Darkest England and The Way Out (Atlanta: The Salvation Army, 1984). The “scheme” consisted of three proposals. First, the City Colony (102-135) where ragged, poor, hungry men and women from the city could be housed, trained, and helped upwards to honorable and useful lives. The second proposal was the Farm Colony (136-153), a place where those who sought assistance in agricultural work could be provided with appropriate training. The final proposal was the Over-Seas Colony (154-165) that was to be a self-supported group of people working from various countries assisting each other. Other ideas were offered toward social relief (pg. 166-245). Booth concluded by showing how the structure of the Salvation Army is well suited to accomplish this “social scheme” (249-287). 8 Edward H. McKinley, Marching to Glory, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmanns, 1994), 68.
ocean of love,… the whole world redeeming, so rich and so free, Now flowing for all men, come, roll over me!”9
A Refreshing Alternative to “Social Work” Maybe our bifurcating nomenclature of spiritual and social work is the source of the tension revealed in our question. I propose an alternative paradigm to refresh the holistic ministry of The Salvation Army—Christian Hospitality. In Greek, the word for hospitality (philoxenos) is an invented word. It combines the word for brotherly love, phileos (as in Philadelphia), and the word for stranger, xenos. Therefore, hospitality means “Love of stranger.” The practice of hospitality finds its source and highest expression in the nature of the Triune God who continually welcomes humanity into the eternal fellowship of the Godhead. Such welcome is clearly exhibited through Jesus’ sacrificial welcome in His passion. Receiving the welcome that Jesus offers necessitates participation in the fellowship of God’s trinitarian nature. The tradition of hospitality incorporates more than bringing desserts to a potluck and prosaic conversation among friends and family. It is not a spiritual gift for those who like to bake. On the contrary, throughout church history hospitality has been concerned with the interaction between “others” and the practice of welcoming “strangers.” Scripture is filled with the imagery of hospitality. In Romans 12:13, the Apostle Paul gives this two-word command: “practice hospitality.” It is hard to effectively translate the force of this command in its original language. In Greek, it is as if Paul underlined, emboldened, italicized, and enlarged the font saying, “You must practice hospitality.” Or it could be translated, “pursue hospitality,” as one would use pursue to describe a hunt or a vigorous pursuit. The word hospitality has come to be associated with the hospitality industry or conversation over coffee at someone’s house. Until the last three hundred years the word hospitality was specifically understood as a Christian practice. So the root of the word hosp—can be seen in the words hospital, hostel, hospice, etc. The idea was that Christians had a duty to make room for strangers. The significance of naming the tradition is important to William Booth’s connection with the overarching social ethical tradition of Christianity. The language provides the means whereby a Christian can understand his or her social responsibility within the realm of theological, historical, and moral reflection. This understanding is specifically significant for contemporary practitioners of hospitality because hospitality enables their service to move beyond the realm of “duty”, “social services” or "social work". Hospitality then becomes not just something we do, but a way of life for individuals and communities to express welcome as an outgrowth of 9 William Booth, “O Boundless Salvation!” The Song Book of The Salvation Army (London: The Salvation Army International Headquarters, 1987), 82.
their identity as a Christian body. Christian ethicist Christine Pohl shares, “reclaiming hospitality is an attempt to bring back the relational dimension to social service, and to highlight concerns for empowerment and partnership with those who need assistance.” 10 Any Christian movement that takes seriously the exhortation to “welcome one another” (Romans 15:7) can benefit from viewing this welcome through the lens of hospitality. The biblical/theological tradition of hospitality can serve as a refreshing theoretical paradigm for Salvation Army ministries. One can argue that The Salvation Army has had the most consistent Christian social witness in the past 150 years; however, acknowledging, naming, and refocusing this social witness as “hospitality” will connect the Salvation Army’s work with the theological history of the church. Theological reflection has often been a secondary concern for the pragmatic Salvation Army; therefore, it has admittedly lacked an explicit theological foundation for its practices. The theological heritage supplied by the tradition of hospitality can provide a vibrant foundation for the existing social ministries of the Army. In this way hospitality can further connect and unite the progression of William Booth’s theology in a way that does not tend toward bifurcation of the spiritual and social ministries. Everywhere the Army flag flies, a localized presence of the Army’s mission has inherited the fruits of William Booth’s eschatologically focused theology, and if the Army looks at the coming kingdom of God as the template by which the kingdom of God is now a reality, then an eschatological ethic is advantageous for the Army today. 11Dichotomizing this mission into distinct categories of spiritual and social mission often debilitates the Army from recognizing this holistic heritage. “Social Service” as a paradigm has perpetuated this dichotomy. A shift in theoretical paradigms is an answer to this problem. The historical, biblical, theological, and moral tradition of hospitality can serve as an antidote to a sometimesbifurcated Salvation Army. Practical Applications I am suggesting that we fully sanctify all aspects of our ministry by refreshing our approach to “serving suffering humanity” through the lens of hospitality, which empowers our service to suffering humanity to save souls. A community of Salvationist employees, officers, soldiers, and 10 Christine D. Pohl, Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999) 162. 11 The millennialism of Booth has left the Army with a wonderful heritage of the role of personal agency in making the themes of God’s kingdom realized “on earth as it is in heaven.” The Army should be careful not to take this postmillennialism to an extreme form that understands social reasonability as causal in bringing about the millennium and the return of Christ.
the guests we serve can be engaged if we are not separated and we actualize the vision and power of “one army … transforming the world.” Practically we then focus our ministry around our large task of proclaiming the good news of God’s reign and our opportunity to live under it by following Jesus and anticipating the holistic consequences of His kingdom. A few practical conclusions can be drawn from this: 1. Alter our language—‘social services’ misses the mark of the broad dimensions of our hospitable heritage. In my last appointment, the corps changed the name of our shelter manager to Minster of Hospitality. We ceased referring to people in our shelter as clients and began calling them our guests. These changes happened as we considered our hospitable heritage. 2. Resist funding streams that call for separation. 3. Challenge officer appointments titles and administrative structures that systemically limit one’s work to the bifurcated jargon of “social,” “field,” “staff,” or “spiritual.” 4. Engage all groups (soldiers, employees, officers, advisory organizations, and those we serve) with a holistic image that consistently calls us toward an integrated mission. This task seems overwhelming, but so does winning lost souls. The difficulty of this task should not discourage us from undertaking it; it should encourage us to undertake it with the power of the Holy Spirit. A helpful place to start is to bring members of all these various groups together to present a unified vision. 5. Make opportunities for sharing the gospel a common occurrence that goes “hand in hand” with all of our activity. When you open the door for someone to hear the Holy Spirit’s prompting you are practicing hospitality. Commissioner George Scott Railton, one of our early practitioners of hospitality challenged us to let the gospel sound throughout the world: Through the world resounding. Let the gospel sounding. Summon all, at Jesus’ call, His glorious cross surrounding. Sons of God, earth’s trifles leaving. Be not faithless but believing; To your conquering captain cleaving, Forward to the Fight.12
12 George Scott Railton, “Soldier’s Rouse Thee,” The Song Book of The Salvation Army (London: The Salvation Army International Headquarters, 1987), 190.
Salvation Army hospitality is a missional hospitality that is connected to God’s plan to redeem the world. For the Salvationist this plan is understood through the imagery of the battle and it calls soldiers to compassionately move “forward to the fight.”
A response By Major Pam Waugh New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga Territory Captain Miller’s paper asks the question ”Can we save souls while serving suffering humanity?” He gives a definitive answer “Yes”. But there is a tension that exists within Salvation Army theology and practice to the question posed – I would suggest that this tension is good for us! It not only challenges our thinking and practice, but drives our discussions with colleagues, whether they have corps or social service involvement into ensuring the best means possible are engaged in bringing people into a relationship with God, while tackling the issues of social justice and improving the lives of those affected by injustice. I suggest this tension, that Booth described, is evident in the paper we have examined. Historians have written that Booth often wondered whether he had been right to allow the Army to divert its energies from the strictly evangelical responsibilities of the preacher’s vocation. This paper describes the “bifurcation nomenclature of spiritual and social work as the source of the tension”. Is it a tension still present today? In my home Territory, this has been a topic of much discussion. We are now working on closing the gap between corps and social service ministries. From the time of receiving Government funding for social services, it became clear that professionalism drove the outcome of the work, shying Corps people away becoming involved. We have endeavoured to address this with the majority of our Community Ministries Centres being driven from corps leadership and our Addiction Centres focusing on Recovery Churches. Captain Miller talks of hospitality and the call from Scripture to “practice hospitality”. I would like to add to this by suggesting hospitality can be described as “hope”. Our ministries talk of hope but what does that really mean in the context of hospitality. I suggest a model that is simple but creates a clear pathway. Hope requires skill, mastery, attachment and faith. So if a person enters a centre for budgeting services, they learn budget skills, get on top of that (mastery), find a real place of belonging through hospitality (attachment) and wrap around that, discovery of faith. Hospitality is then the expression of belonging and connection, part of what we do, over and above the surface level of a meal together etc. Captain Miller gives five suggestions to help soothe this tension and separation of spiritual and social mission that may be holding us back from our heritage of the evangelical eschatology. I am going to add a sixth for our discussion groups: What if all our Centres (Corps and Social) were renamed “Mission Stations”?
Each Mission Station would have as a Community of Faith would have a Pastoral Care Council who worked closely alongside the social expression of the Station. How would that change the way we think and the emphasis we place on mission versus social work? The vision would be the Body of Christ reaching the community. Catherine Booth said: “If we are to better the future, we must disturb the present”. What do we need to disturb to create future that brings us back to the vision of “saving souls while serving suffering humanity?”
The Salvation Army 2014 USA Salvation Army Conference for Social Work and Emergency Disaster Services 25 to 28 March 2014 GLOBAL TRACK SESSION 2A
“Can we "save souls" while "serving suffering humanity”?” Captain Hary Haran Singapore, Malaysia and Mynamar Introduction Can we "save souls" while "serving suffering humanity"? I believe we serve suffering humanity because we love the souls that Christ has died for – and NOT because of saving sake. Only God can save souls. We are mere instruments. Let us look at Luke 17: 11-19 and the account of Jesus healing ten lepers. Did Jesus heal the 10 lepers because he was evangelizing? Now on his way to Jerusalem, Jesus travelled along the border between Samaria and Galilee. As he was going into a village, ten men who had leprosy met him. They stood at a distance and called out in a loud voice, “Jesus, Master, have pity on us!” When he saw them, he said, “Go, show yourselves to the priests.” And as they went, they were cleansed. One of them, when he saw he was healed, came back, praising God in a loud voice. He threw himself at Jesus’ feet and thanked him—and he was a Samaritan. Jesus asked, “Were not all ten cleansed? Where are the other nine? Has no one returned to give praise to God except this foreigner?” Then he said to him, “Rise and go; your faith has made you well.” This was not evangelism. This was compassion. A soul was saved as a result of compassion. When we serve suffering humanity it must be the result of compassion. Love for people needs to be rooted in the master’s love for humanity. There is danger if we de-link souls from humanity. In this paper I will look at the three key words “Serving Suffering Humanity” from the context of my ministry in Singapore. Suffering humanity – the Singapore context Singapore was estimated to have a GDP per capita of US$56,532 in 2010. 13 Using this measure as a basis, Singapore residents emerge as the richest people in the world. In an island-state of 3.6m population, an estimated 157,00014 (or 1 in 20) of them are millionaires. Today, Singapore is commonly referred to as the Switzerland of the east. Geographically, Singapore is blessed with no natural calamities albeit mild tremors coming from Indonesia. Its common grouch is the annual haze drifting from Sumatra. The ruling party has been governing the country since Independence in 1965. There are no riots in the streets. While homeland security is tight, there had been no incidence of violent terrorism in the island. Crime rates are so low
13 According to a report by Knight Frank and Citi Private Wealth measured by purchasing power parity 14 Source: http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/singapore-ranks-10th-in-the-world-in-number-of-millionaires--report114234326.html
that the police force ran campaigns with the tagline “low crime does not mean no crime”. Lush green landscaping permeates throughout the island. Home ownership is one of the highest in the world. Other measurements on lifestyles point to a growing sophistication. There are more smartphones in Singapore than people and the proportion of these device owners having mobile broadband subscriptions happens to be the highest in the world as well. This begs the question – amidst the growing wealth and affluence, where are “suffering humanity” in Singapore? In truth, Singapore is no paradise and the clues are telling. Despite its status as a rich nation, income equality is the highest compared to OECD countries 15. The income gap is not only wide between the rich and the poor but is puzzlingly wide even between the richer and the rich. Hence, even millionaires in Singapore probably do not perceive themselves much of a big shot amidst their neighbours who own hundreds of millions in assets. Low income earners grapple to make sense of a city bustling with retail outlets displaying items of opulence. Singaporeans are one of the fastest walkers in this planet 16 – a reflection of the pace of life. The fertility rate in Singapore is 1.20 – lower than Japan’s 1.39 and significantly below the self-replacing rate of 2.1. Divorce rates are on the rise. More marriages are now being postponed and there are a growing number of single people. Compelling evidence of Singapore’s woes is found in Gallup research17 which showed Singapore to be the most emotionless and unhappy society in the world. Popular culture in Singapore18 is deeply inspired by cynicism – a reflection of perpetual and consistent unhappiness in the community. While the island is populated with 5.5 million people, only 3.6 million comprise of citizens and permanent residents. A minority portion of the other 1.9 million is made up of professionals and high income earners. The majority includes domestic helpers, construction and manufacturing workers as well as retail service staff. Many of these migrant workers to Singapore are lured by the prospect of good income and would even surrender their entire fortune to pay for passage and work through shrewd and profiteering agents. A spiritual perspective How is it possible that a country deemed to be prosperous (with no risks of violence and crime) would end up being the unhappiest? Being a country with no natural resources, Singapore was early to recognize that manpower was its only resource. Meritocracy was quickly adopted as the key principle and philosophy in the way Singapore organizes itself. Naturally, Singapore is more than eager to benchmark its performance against those of its neighbouring countries across different aspects of development and using all possible indicators. (This is evident given the abundance of statistics comparing Singapore and the rest of the world as quoted in this paper!)
15 Source: http://thehearttruths.com/2013/02/21/singapore-has-the-highest-income-inequality-compared-to-theoecd-countries/ 16 Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/05/02/walking.speeds/index.html 17 Source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/158882/singapore-ranks-least-emotional-country-world.aspx 18 Such as those expressed in local websites www.sgag.sg
The hierarchical nature of Singapore is apparent in every aspects of living. Public housing is segmented by flats with different number of rooms built within each flat. Higher income earners would live in 5room flats. The lowest income earners are 2-room flat renters. For the longest time, schools were publicly ranked based on academic performances and students are streamed early in life based on their English, Mathematics, Sciences and mother tongue language scores. Military service is mandatory in Singapore and in the 2 years of service, soldiers in their late teens are ranked and sorted by different military vocations. Cars are the most expensive in the world and any car purchase is made possible only with a successful bid for a certificate of entitlement (“COE”) which often amounts to tens of thousands of dollars and dictate the size of the car’s engine. Society can judge the net worth of an individual simply based on engine size of a car! Covertly covetous The strongest temptation that befalls a successful and hierarchically structured society is covetousness. The tenth commandment19 states that “You shall not covet your neighbour’s house. You shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.” Ironically, this tenth commandment is probably the least preached about in Singapore. Sadly, Christianity is too often associated with popular prosperity-gospel churches and too often linked to newsworthy financial scandals. In land-scarce, high-people density Singapore, competing against another for a certificate to own a car, to secure a vacancy in a reputable school, to being considered marriageable against other male suitors based on perceived net-worth induces an endless state of coveting. Scripture has long prophesied20 that: “Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.” How does The Salvation Army serve suffering humanity in Singapore? Fifty years ago, Singapore was poor in economic terms and the total population was much smaller. The Salvation Army, led by foreign officers and inspired local ones, was committed to meeting the needs in whatever ways possible. To meet needs, The Salvation Army in Singapore established residential homes for children- in-need and the aged. Its community programmes were targeted to reach out to the lower income groups. Today, Singapore’s population is much more complex and The Salvation Army has earned a respectable history and reputation for its social contributions. Against the backdrop of a sophisticated economy is the support of a structured public service sector. The role of government influences wide areas. For example, each tree in Singapore is tagged with a serial number and is monitored for diseases and its growth is monitored and regulated. It is thus unsurprising that the authorities in Singapore asserts its influence on the social services sector, 19 Exodus 20:17 20 1 Timothy 6:9-10
requiring institutions such as The Salvation Army to become more accountable for the use of public donations. Yet, as a church, The Salvation Army neither grew in strength nor in influence. This has implications to its social programmes. A small soldiery base would imply smaller number of officers recruited. Over time, native Singapore officers aged and retired. Some existing officers resigned and the number of newly commissioned officers was so low that the School For Officers Training (“SFOT”) eventually closed its doors for a number of years. The soldiery too had aged over time and in almost all of the corps today, the youths make up the minority of the corps folk. With a shortage of new officers and a stagnated soldiery base, the running of The Salvation Army social programs is now largely dependent on employees, many of whom are non-salvationists. Thus, the notion of serving suffering humanity is understood and interpreted differently by these employees and not necessarily in the same vein as understood based on the values and context of salvationism. With the growing influence of non-Salvation Army values guiding the social programmes, the dwindling count of Salvation Army officers and the higher accountability imposed by the state, The Salvation Army in Singapore eventually settled on its legacy structures and network of centres with key operational decision-making functions left to the interpretations of non-salvationist professionals and workers. Today, the programmes of The Salvation Army in Singapore address the issues of a small segment of the resident population with several outreach programmes catered to foreign nurses. While the plight of those ministered by The Salvation Army in Singapore seems to suggest a state of suffering given their relatively difficult economic and social circumstances, their plight is not representative of the magnitude of the suffering faced by the community-at-large. As I have explained, Singapore society is pierced with many grief, riddled with anxieties, hardened with cynicisms and confronted with self-seeking peer pressures. The Salvation Army, given its long tradition in addressing the needs of the economic poor, is less adapt to the work of exposing the spiritual bondages of affluence and preaching a gospel that promises spiritual freedom. At the core, the suffering of Singapore is a spiritual. Serving – what it ought to be… Service is core to the heartbeat of The Salvation Army’s movement. While most large, contemporary churches strive to appeal to its congregation in a fashion aligned with consumerism – feel-good experiences, bright lights and sounds, emotional sermons, great music, etc – The Salvation Army has a culture rooted on salvationism; which is an ‘ism’, a way of life, a community culture and value system. Salvationists were taught at the onset that they were saved-to-serve. Serving (not consuming) is how a Salvationist should grow to be like Jesus. This attitude must include our social services. A sense of ownership of the social services ministry ought to exist to those who vowed to defend Salvationism and what The Salvation Army stands for. In short, serving suffering humanity is first a spiritual burden of the soldiers of The Salvation Army. It is possibly the professional burden of employees – but the spiritual ownership has to be with the soldiery.
By soldiery, it should not be limited to soldiers of a particular corps that is tied to specific programs of a social services centre. Rather, the burden should be borne by a general sense of ownership of all social services ministry by all soldiers. Having such a stakeholder model will require respective Salvation Army headquarters to ensure all corps to regularly arrange visits and engagements of corps folks in various social services centres. Serving is a church culture of The Salvation Army movement. Reverend Timothy Keller of Redeemer City church describes 21 a movement as one marked by an attractive, clear, unifying vision for the future. It is held together with a strong set of values or beliefs. The content of the vision must be compelling and clear so that others can grasp it readily. It must not be difficult that only a handful of people can articulate it. Instead, it must be something that all members of the movement can understand and passed virally to others. By contrast, "institutionalized" organizations are held together by rules, regulations, and procedures, not by a shared vision.
A soul loving Army Despite the challenges and difficulties faced by The Salvation Army in Singapore, the question of Jesus to John remains: “Do you love me?” If so, “feed my lambs”. No soldier can claim that he has the power to save souls. Only God saves. We are but the bearer of good news. In this respect, I believe that having souls saved is not in question but to re-orientate soldier’s attitude and understanding in serving suffering humanity. To hold the Word of God by their thoughts, words and deeds, so that people may be drawn to Christ by their exemplary character. Amongst others, they should live out the two greatest commandments of God: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength and with all your mind” and “love your neighbour as yourself.” Deuteronomy 6:4, Luke 10:27 Yes, it is imperative that we love our Almighty God wholeheartedly, unreservedly and completely. Our love for our creator must correspond with God-given task to love souls as indicated by this second commandment. When we realise truly and internalise fully the extent of Christ’s sacrificial and redemptive love for souls, we will be most willing to be effective in serving, for the good of humanity. I strongly conclude that the foregoing are not merely quotations but they are theological truths which are tested and proven again and again. Surely we can read or hear testimonies of amazing conversions of men and women who repented and found new hope and purpose in Christ!
A response by Major Eleanor Haddick Kenya West Territory I concur with Captain Haran in most of his paper in particular when he states that ‘Only God can save souls. We are mere instruments.’ However I do not entirely agree with his explanation of Luke 17:11-19 that Jesus’ motives were the result of compassion and not evangelism. Jesus main aim in coming into 21 Source: http://redeemercitytocity.com/blog/view.jsp?Blog_param=203
the world was to reconcile mankind with their God, and as part of his mission was, “to preach good news to the poor” (Luke 4:18). Is this not evangelism? The basic fundamental mission of the Salvation Army has, and always will be, the saving of souls and that entails serving suffering humanity. Is this not the reason we were raised up and the reason we are effective as an ‘Army of Salvation’? As ‘God’s instruments,’ no matter where in world we are, everything we do is evangelism based, otherwise we just become another NGO and not a faith based Holy Spirit immersed church. Our motive is the winning of souls for the Kingdom, as the captain stated “Service is core to the heartbeat of The Salvation Army’s movement.” we should be all about saving souls whether it’s from the platform or the gutter. William Booth said - nobody gets a blessing if they have cold feet and nobody ever got saved while they had toothache! Compassion for our fellow human beings is a driving force, of course it is, but even the unsaved have compassion. Perhaps it has been our compassion in serving suffering humanity and the need to do something with regards to funding in particular that can lead the Salvation Army away from its mission and be influenced by secular society rather than the Holy Spirit. I concur with the Captain when he states “A sense of ownership of the social services ministry ought to exist”. Too often we are guilty of dividing the Salvation Army in two when they should be interlinked:
1. The church 2. Our social work “Faith and works should travel side by side, step answering to step, like the legs of men walking. First faith, and then works; and then faith again, and then works again--until they can scarcely distinguish which is the one and which is the other but until we manifest God’s love in action, our words are nothing but “sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” (William Booth) As disciples of Jesus Christ and as an Army of Salvation we have been blessed with a social conscience that reflects the spiritual realities of Jesus who was sent to “proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed” (Luke 4:31-44). The simple answer to the question is yes, no matter where in the world the army is called to be, we can “save souls" while "serving suffering humanity”, if we follow God’s guidance through Scripture and the prompting of the Holy Spirit. We need to be careful that we in accepting assistance from the secular world do not compromise ourselves out of the Kingdom. As William Booth stated, “We must wake ourselves up! Or somebody else will take our place, and bear our cross, and thereby rob us of our crown.” and since Scripture states that “the poor we will have with us always,” whether in Kenya, Singapore, or where God has placed us then there will always be a mission for The Salvation Army to "save souls" while "serving suffering humanity until Christ comes or calls.