Fighting on enemy territory
Yesterday I posted a quote from General George Carpenter that said, "Defensive warfare has less to recommend it to the Salvation Army than anyone. We were raised up to fight on enemy territory. Our organization is built upon the commando system, mobile, quick in action, suitable for small groups without dependence upon elaborate equipment."
Graeme Smith, in his comment on the quote quite rightly saw it as supporting the use of small groups in mission. As someone who loves the cell model or ward system as a strategy for reaching and nurturing people in the faith I am delighted to find backing for it from the archives of Army history.
But actually it wasn't that aspect of the quote that really grabbed my attention but the call for Salvationists to invade the devils kingdom rather than simply try and ward off his attacks.
Interestingly, during the same research into Army history during WW2 I also came across Albert Orsborn's assessment of the SA in Great Britain during the war years.
" In the Salvation Army, I speak only for the British Isles we fought a long rearguard action against the devil. There was no question of revival or advance. We were concerned to try to hold our forces together, despite disintegrating influences of war and immediate post-war years.
Our musical sections had been decimated. Even our women soldiers who are so faithful in all forms of voluntary service, were taken up with war-time activities in national undertakings. Interest among the public in spiritual things was at its lowest for many years. Many of our younger officers, starting their vocation between the wars, laboured in vain to win converts. Not for them the crowded halls, the lively street meetings, the stimulating opposition, the crowded Mercy Seat of our earlier days. They were cast in the role of God's unheeded witnesses that he might be justified when a backslidden generation came to judgement."
Perhaps if we had heeded the rest of Carpenter's advice below we might not still be obsessed with survival than taking new territory for the kingdom.
"We must have fire in our hearts to drive us out, to sing, to speak, to pray with a zeal that commands attention and a love that cannot fail!"
What will it be in 2007? Fighting on enemy territory or just a rearguard action?
God bless
Carol
Yesterday I posted a quote from General George Carpenter that said, "Defensive warfare has less to recommend it to the Salvation Army than anyone. We were raised up to fight on enemy territory. Our organization is built upon the commando system, mobile, quick in action, suitable for small groups without dependence upon elaborate equipment."
Graeme Smith, in his comment on the quote quite rightly saw it as supporting the use of small groups in mission. As someone who loves the cell model or ward system as a strategy for reaching and nurturing people in the faith I am delighted to find backing for it from the archives of Army history.
But actually it wasn't that aspect of the quote that really grabbed my attention but the call for Salvationists to invade the devils kingdom rather than simply try and ward off his attacks.
Interestingly, during the same research into Army history during WW2 I also came across Albert Orsborn's assessment of the SA in Great Britain during the war years.
" In the Salvation Army, I speak only for the British Isles we fought a long rearguard action against the devil. There was no question of revival or advance. We were concerned to try to hold our forces together, despite disintegrating influences of war and immediate post-war years.
Our musical sections had been decimated. Even our women soldiers who are so faithful in all forms of voluntary service, were taken up with war-time activities in national undertakings. Interest among the public in spiritual things was at its lowest for many years. Many of our younger officers, starting their vocation between the wars, laboured in vain to win converts. Not for them the crowded halls, the lively street meetings, the stimulating opposition, the crowded Mercy Seat of our earlier days. They were cast in the role of God's unheeded witnesses that he might be justified when a backslidden generation came to judgement."
Perhaps if we had heeded the rest of Carpenter's advice below we might not still be obsessed with survival than taking new territory for the kingdom.
"We must have fire in our hearts to drive us out, to sing, to speak, to pray with a zeal that commands attention and a love that cannot fail!"
What will it be in 2007? Fighting on enemy territory or just a rearguard action?
God bless
Carol
posted by Rehoboth at
7:37 AM
6 Comments:
And 60 or so years later, the struggle to get soldiers back on the streets, back into enemies territory is extremely difficult. We are in great danger too of reinforcing the officer-soldier divide if we do it all for them too...interestingly, if given the challenge, people do respond albeit cautiously.
A great example for us was someone who volunteered recently to do a stand with the War Cry who hadn't done it since she was 15! And...she enjoyed it!
We all long for the Army to be re-mobilised...Lord make it a reality!
blessings
Andrew
By
Captain Andrew Clark, at 8:33 AM
Hi
I pinched your quote off Graeme for my blog as well, but I took it that small groups -provided they are missional and with their focus on getting every member fully active, was by definition moving into advance rather than remaining on defence. And in all honesty I see them as far easier to mobilise than a larger group with an established and more introspective culture in place.
With respect to Andrew, what I keep hearing is the opposite side of the problem- soldiers frustrated because the officers won't draw them into outreach work or the missional endeavours of the corps. This was one of my first encounters with salvationists after I came back, and then after training in spiritual direction virtually every salvationist I spent time in accompaniment with came with exactly the same complaint.
There you have a dilemma. You can take the submit to authority route and assuming someone doesn't have it in them yet to go out and pioneer, sit there passively waiting for a CO who will draw them into involvement or nurture leadership in them - or perhaps reveal what you are doing wrong so at least you have some direction to moev in. You can get assertive, or you can just leave. You can train and work independently while remaining in the corps - which was my approach for the first two or three years. Or you can go out and pioneer and assertively remain within the Salvationist framework and vows even though you are not connected formally beyond being on the roll somewhere.
There are no easy solutions.
There's a kind of manifesto for Godly rebellion in, I think, Alan Hirsch's book, The Forgotten Ways, but if I can find it I will put it up on my blog.
I realise the officers must also see many passive soldiers, and each has a story about their spiritual journey which may reveal the reasons for their passivity. They are also worth listening to. Sometimes a way out is quite simple, in others it is deep rooted, and will be a long journey.
It's a dilemma which ever way it cuts - that's been my experience as a soldier on the receiving end and as someone who has listened to officers reflecting.
By
Eleanor Burne-Jones, at 10:34 AM
Incidentally, of those I've accompanied, one has left TSA, one became a respected preacher outside TSA and was finally integrated into lay work in TSA, and another is really still puzzled over what to do after a long, long time of ministry outside TSA that was unconnected to and ignored by the corps. She seems to be getting some involvement now, but it has taken literally years. And she had asked at intervals what she was doing wrong that she was not involved and had not been given any indication. Just 'we'll get back to you'. (When it happened to me I waited a while, prayed in some frustration and then went out and invented my own solution. :0) )
By
Eleanor Burne-Jones, at 10:39 AM
I put Alan Hirsch quote over on eveningbeaches and commented.
The Forgotten Ways, p.23 ' However, it seems that over time the increasingly impersonal structures of the institution assume roles, responsibilities, and authority that legitimately belong to the whole people of God in their local and grassroots expressions. It is at this point that things tend to go awry.'
By
Eleanor Burne-Jones, at 11:03 AM
The quote as a whole reminds me of two things I've read in recent months. Both were talking about the problems of churches that have either built a fortress or pitched their tents. Both things suggested that being outside the 4 walls of the church reaching people instead of concentrating on an attractional model is what is truly important.
The question we should ask is when we started expecting people to come inside instead of being out there?
By
Graeme Smith, at 6:27 AM
Another factor is that nothing stays static. If we don't advance we retreat and the enemy invades the church.
But it doesn't have to be that way. We have learned many lessons in our years of planting and I know that we are going to find it odd to have a hall and a congregation already in place. However God has been really challenging me about not settling down and I know that he wants me to push even further beyond my comfort zones in our new appointment in Pill.
Forward ever forward!
God bless
Carol
By
Rehoboth, at 10:57 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home