Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Salvation Army to fire officer because his fiancee isn’t also a Salvation Army officer

posted at 4:50 pm on December 5, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Note well: It’s not that he’s required to marry a Salvationist. He’s required to marry another Salvationist officer.

Good lord, it’s practically a cult.

“I knew the rule and that this was coming and that I would be let go,” he said Wednesday. “But for the Salvation Army to let me go because I will marry outside of the (Salvation) Army, I think is wrong. I pray that people will write letters and call the Salvation Army to change this ruling. It wouldn’t be for my benefit, but for future officers.”…

Harsh said his fiancée has filled a void not only for himself, but also for his daughters following the death of his wife, who died June 28 at St. Luke’s Medical Center in Milwaukee due to complications associated with a heart attack…

Helen Lord Burr, a member of the Oshkosh Salvation Army Advisory Board, said the Salvation Army has specific rules and they’re the same all over the world

Although joyous that he helped build the Salvation Army in Oshkosh, including bringing back Sunday worship services, Harsh said there were challenging times. In addition to losing his wife, Harsh had brain surgery three times while in Oshkosh.

The rules are the same all over the world? From the Salvation Army’s FAQ:

Originally Salvation Army officers (full-time ordained ministers) were required to marry other officers if they wished to remain in the ministry. But this is now changing, and it will be more possible in the future to find an officer who is married to a non-officer. However, Salvation Army officers still usually marry other officers by choice. This creates a special partnership in ministry, and in local centres in particular this joint ministry can make the work more effective.

Wikipedia also claims that the rule’s been “relaxed in recent years,” although whether that means allowing officers to marry non-Salvationists or merely Salvationists who aren’t officers isn’t clear. In any event, the Brits dropped this nonsense almost a decade ago. The logic of religious celibacy is that it frees the mind from earthly temptations the better to focus on God (theoretically), but what’s the logic of this? It smacks of keeping the bloodlines pure.

Since he’s asking for public intervention, I’m going to do something I normally don’t do and point you to the Oshkosh SA’s e-mail interface. Please be polite.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

The logic of religious celibacy is that it frees the mind from earthly temptations the better to focus on God (theoretically), but what’s the logic of this? It smacks of keeping the bloodlines pure.

Allah,

This is none of our business. I wouldn’t dream of writing to the leaders of a church in order to comment on how they run their organization.

Membership in this organization is voluntary. Salvation Army officers are leaders in the organization who are ministers. It’s perfectly appropriate for the SA to establish codes of conduct for their leaders. The fellow in question knew the rules and the consequences. He made his choice.

Frankly, I’ve been saddened at the challenges the Salvation Army has faced in recent years at Christmastime. I love the bell ringers and was sad when Target Stores banned them. Let’s leave this group alone.

Y-not on December 6, 2008 at 11:34 PM

Weird. I had no idea the “salvation army” was so formal. I always took the title loosely but apparently they’re a much more ridged organization that I would have ever dreamed.

Frankly, this turns me off on a lot of levels. One, I don’t know who they are obviously. Two, rules about who you can and can’t marry as it regards service is an infringement that I can’t support.

To me these were always just the guys ringing bells in front of malls and other stores.

Sigh… I just don’t see myself putting any more money in that bucket.

Karmashock on December 7, 2008 at 8:35 AM

I’m not a member of their “church” — I’m a Catholic. My priests (at least in the Latin rite) don’t marry, but, if they did, I would expect that they should be free to marry people who are not Catholics, as I was free to do (and did).

unclesmrgol on December 6, 2008 at 11:22 AM

Well, duh. A member of the SA is free to marry anyone who they want. However, they are not free to continue to serve as a minister. Just like in the Catholic church a priest can marry who they want but can not continue to be a priest.

So, yeah, you are a hypocrite.

Blake on December 7, 2008 at 9:01 AM

Frankly, I’ve been saddened at the challenges the Salvation Army has faced in recent years at Christmastime. I love the bell ringers and was sad when Target Stores banned them. Let’s leave this group alone.

Y-not on December 6, 2008 at 11:34 PM

I agree completely.

Weird. I had no idea the “salvation army” was so formal. I always took the title loosely but apparently they’re a much more ridged organization that I would have ever dreamed.

Frankly, this turns me off on a lot of levels. One, I don’t know who they are obviously. Two, rules about who you can and can’t marry as it regards service is an infringement that I can’t support.

To me these were always just the guys ringing bells in front of malls and other stores.

Sigh… I just don’t see myself putting any more money in that bucket.

Karmashock on December 7, 2008 at 8:35 AM

First of all, most of the “guys” ringing those bells are not members of the Salvation Army. I have rang those bells. So have all my family. My granddaughter, who is in ROTC, and her entire squad, rang those bells. First you say you don’t know who they are and then that this perceived “infringement” is something you can’t support. Did you read this thread at all. Good grief. Allah, I am really disappointed in your attitude about the Salvation Army. You are way off base with this one.

Glynn on December 7, 2008 at 9:37 AM

Oh, and one other thing, Allah. I won’t be writing to the Salvation Army unless it is to thank then profusely for all the good they do pretty much selflessly in this world. That is a pretty rare thing these days. I think they are awesome.

Glynn on December 7, 2008 at 9:39 AM

Goddammit. GodDAMMIT. One of the last good charities.

MadisonConservative on December 5, 2008 at 4:51 PM

And they are still one of the last good charities.

Glynn on December 7, 2008 at 10:20 AM

Private organization.

hillbillyjim on December 7, 2008 at 11:10 AM

I tried posting this yesterday, but the posts never “took.”

People who assert that the Salvation Army is a poorly run charity — or who naively think that they raise all of their funds through the red kettle drive — have not done their homework (and know very little about non-profit fundraising).

The Salvation Army is considered to be a very well-run charity… and has been for some time. The kettle drive is probably the most visible face of the Salvation Army’s fundraising, but they raise money from corporate donations and major gifts from individuals as well. The purpose of the kettle drive is marketing as much as anything.

Although Charity Navigator does not rate the Salvation Army (as a religious group, the SA is not required to file 990s from which Charity Navigator estimates costs to raise a dollar, etc), the Better Business Bureau found that the Salvation Army meets all 20 standards for accountability that it uses to evaluate charities. According to the most recent Annual Report that includes combined financial information for the Territorial Headquarters in the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, fund raising costs were 9% of related contributions.

And, back in ‘87 when Paul Newman was evaluating charities worthy of his support, the Salvation Army was one of only a handful of social service organizations whose cost to raise a dollar performed better than Newman’s stringent standard of $0.15 (it was $0.14):

I don’t work for the Salvation Army, but I have worked in non-profit fundraising for several years. From what I could glean, based on a very quick internet search (conducted with an open mind), the Salvation Army is a well-run charity. I wonder if the folks on this thread who were so quick to criticize the Salvation Army are motivated by something other than the group’s quality as a charitable organization, or perhaps they are just too lazy to do some research before accusing this excellent group of being a shoddy organization.

Y-not on December 7, 2008 at 4:18 PM

I think I will leave the Salvation Army alone, thank you! They are a private organization who can get along quite nicely without our silly advise! They also do a lot of great work for very poor people. There are many other targets of opportunity…or could it be that they are a Christian organization and that is the reason to target them?

sabbott on December 8, 2008 at 6:37 AM

Many, many years ago I was a social worker. When I had people in need that government couldn’t wouldn’t help, the Salvation Army ALWAYS came through. What a fabulous organization.

In this particular case, I say it’s a religious decision and none of my business.

huckleberryfriend on December 8, 2008 at 9:51 AM

I’m with Y-not. It’s none of our business. It’s the Salvation Army’s rules and they aren’t breaking any laws.

splash883 on December 8, 2008 at 11:14 AM

Comment pages: 1 2


You must be logged in to post a comment.