Faith and Development

How does faith influence our work? This is a question we are often asked, and it’s a good one. On one level there is a simple answer: we support projects in countries and communities where The Salvation Army is already based, so that they are an integrated part of that mission in those places to share Jesus’ love with people through healthy relationships and practical help. However, for many reading this, you’ll be aware that there are big challenges when programmes described as ‘charity’ are done through a ‘church’ structure; and the approach can create some complex issues internationally.

To help gain a deeper understanding of this, I spoke with Stanford Muzavazi, who over the last 15 years has worked in various roles and now is based at The Salvation Army’s International Headquarters. Stanford has a fascinating insight into how The Salvation Army’s faith-based approach is worked out across the world.

Ben: Some might see The Salvation Army more as a ‘church’ while others see it as a ‘charity’. What does that look like for The Salvation Army in different country contexts?

Stanford: I think it’s amazing to observe – but before I explain how I’ve seen it, I’m not bothered when people outside The Salvation Army see us in one way or the other. I think my worry comes when people within the movement, employees or soldiers, see us either as one or the other. I think that’s when a bit of a disaster comes. Where I grew up, the context was more on the evangelistic side; you go and do open-air ministry, get people saved and then march back to the corps.

Then they get into the recruitment class and become part of the corps. I did not feel the sense of anything beyond that. Then I moved to [another territory] and it was a different context. In this context The Salvation Army was only introduced in one way; it’s there to help the physical needs of people. So at first I was very surprised to see people knocking on the door of the corps officers’ home asking for food and clothing, and then just going on their way.

I think the message of what it means to be a soldier and to fight when it comes to justice, for restoration communities, is sometimes dropped, and this is what worries me more than anything when it comes to our identity.

Ben: The UKI Territory funds projects in other territories which are then implemented through their own personnel, infrastructure and processes. How do you see that approach working in practice, and what are the strengths and challenges of working in this way?

Stanford: Firstly, there’s nothing wrong with [international] funding. But I think there needs to be a process of how we incorporate it into the elements of what we are already doing.

I have seen scenarios where large funds are just coming in with no connection to the corps. What that does is that those corps become part of the beneficiaries and they cease being active soldiers. They see the need in themselves more than the need to serve the community. Our soldiers need to understand that development funding is supporting the journey that they are already in, where everyone has an important part to play. I have also seen situations where a project officer walks into a province and decides what the problem is, speaks to a donor, and between the two of them they ‘resolve’ it. And everyone, including soldiers, are seen as beneficiaries. Disempowered. Although the problem was being solved, the community had no participation in the process. So, for example, every time the bore well broke down they would wait for The Salvation Army to come and fix it.

Ben: The so-called ‘international development’ part of The Salvation Army, with several territories involved with international funding, has itself been on a journey – from small one-off projects, now to large development offices accessing government grants. Do you see that as a risk undermining some of the things that you’re talking about in terms of ownership at the corps level?

Stanford: Yes, it is a risk, but there’s a solution. But before I respond to that, let me underline that there are massive economic and social challenges that require huge investment. I don’t think we should feel bad about access to huge funds. It is required. There are children who have to walk 20kms to school, there are people drinking water from a polluted river, there are people without shelter or medical care. So as an organisation I don’t think we should be worried that we have grown in that way and we’re beginning to enter into those spaces. It is relevant.

But what we may be missing is that our project officers and development personnel in the territories then begin to focus only on these big projects. But in my experience, I realised that whether I have a project or not, I’m still a development officer. My responsibility is to build capacity in local corps; for them to identify issues through continuous relationships, where they are in constant discussions with an understanding that we are all here to save souls, and to encourage those who accept Christ to grow their relationship with Christ. And our responsibility does not stop there, whether people accept Christ or not. We still have a responsibility to fight for justice for and with them.

If we are building this capacity at local levels, it means that we are always ‘outside’ of our buildings, so our soldiers and corps personnel are able to engage in honest ways, in in-depth ways, that determine when we need additional resources. It builds a platform for these larger funding processes to build on. So for me, the missing piece is when we forget about developing this capacity at local level. So when there is, say, $500,000 that becomes available, the discussion is not about where can we spend this money, but rather about where can this fit into existing conversations in the territory which is already identifying issues.

Ben: In terms of international development, if there was one thing that we should either stop doing or start doing, what would that be?

Stanford: I think one thing we need to do more of is taking the time to understand our local contexts before making decisions on behalf of other people. We need to take time to learn from each other, take time to understand the contexts in which we work and don’t make our visits only about work. This takes time, but we need to be in a place where we are partnering together on the same level with no one dominating the decisions being made.

It was a great conversation with Stanford – you can listen to the full version on our Develop podcast episode ‘Faith and Development’. Clearly the community-based work we support can be a huge benefit to the families and individuals involved. But the approach we choose to take – ensuring we have the time to listen and truly understand each other, and hear God’s voice and direction – is the underlying principle which is fundamental to all we do.