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
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 Next »
Goddammit. GodDAMMIT. One of the last good charities.
MadisonConservative on December 5, 2008 at 4:51 PM
Actually-it is a cult. Just a particularly nice one with great image-handlers.
kybowexar on December 5, 2008 at 4:52 PM
they give blank receipts when you donate stuff; so they can be as cultish as they like IMHO :P
lorien1973 on December 5, 2008 at 4:53 PM
This is unheard of.
Esthier on December 5, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Ummm… this is news? Not just that, they suck at raising money. They should get a job, do something useful for society and donate what they make. The inefficiency of their methodology drives me nuts every time I see it.
ErikTheRed on December 5, 2008 at 4:54 PM
I was never even aware they were this much of a religious organization. (I knew they were “religious” in the sense the YMCA is… but not like this)
Skywise on December 5, 2008 at 4:55 PM
Wait. I’m confused. This isn’t THE Salvation Army, this is some other group that happens to have a similar name?
Darnit AP! Stop posting confusing joke stories! I can’t think straight at the end of my workday!
wearyman on December 5, 2008 at 4:55 PM
I thought Obama was going to change things!
So,this sounds like more of a Dictatorship!
Question:
What if Salvation Officer has a mistress,then
what is the standard operating procedure!A hem.
canopfor on December 5, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Oh, Lord. The Salvation Army is an excellent charity. I don’t know how anyone can say they suck at fund raising when they took in 2 billion in 2007. No one holds a gun to their heads. There is no right to be in the SA. It’s their rules, either abide by them or get out.
Blake on December 5, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Forget that. If I stood on the corner, shaking a collection plate and asking for donations for my denomination, you’d laugh at me. But somehow the SA gets a pass. Then again, freedom of religion means freedom of religion, not freedom of religion in whatever way you think is appropriate. It’s none of my (or your) business.
Darin on December 5, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Who do they think they are…Jehovah’s Witnesses or Mormon’s?
right2bright on December 5, 2008 at 5:02 PM
They’ve been doing this for years. They’re a religious organization, and can develop whatever rules they want for their own ministers.
They do have to be aware of backlash like this, however. He seems to be handling it nicely, stating his disagreement but urging people to continue giving for the charitable purposes.
He also states he’s thinking of starting an independent church. Makes me wonder if there’s more to the story.
cs89 on December 5, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Husband and wives work together as missionaries. They live in the community and receive very little pay for what they do. They do excellent work for those that desperately need it. See, HA readers — it’s not always about you.
Blake on December 5, 2008 at 5:04 PM
what would mr hopenchange have to say about this?
gatorboy on December 5, 2008 at 5:09 PM
It’s a foolish rule, but I think it’s a bit self-serving for a guy to raise an objection to the rule for the first time when the rule is applied to him. So, I don’t have a lot of sympathy.
As for Salvation Army, I have great respect for them as a charitable organization. They are highly efficient with their money (in terms of % of donations that goes to service) and raise their money by honest means. I really hate charities like United Way that raise money by getting businesses to force their employees to donate, and then give the money to liberal causes with few strings attached.
Outlander on December 5, 2008 at 5:10 PM
The Salvation Army has a pretty strict Wesleyan Holiness background. I can understand they may have been… concerned… if his fiancee was staying in the guest room of a house they were helping pay for.
Hopefully, this will work out well for everyone involved. Sounds like he feels called to transition out of the SA anyway, and the SA doesn’t want to keep an officer who knowingly violates their policies.
cs89 on December 5, 2008 at 5:11 PM
Weird.
CP on December 5, 2008 at 5:12 PM
He could have left quietly with his head held high, married, and gone on with his life and ministry. But, noooooo, he had to go all b!tcha$$ to the press and make his private life available for public consumption. Kind of exhibitionist, IMO.
/
Christien on December 5, 2008 at 5:14 PM
I’ve tried for at least two minutes, but I just can’t seem to care about this situation at all. It must be a void in my personality, I guess.
Wino on December 5, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Perhaps I’m missing something, but I don’t see why I, as a member of the general public, would care about this one way or the another. Is there some reason this should be of interest to us?
paul006 on December 5, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Wow, in other breaking news, Roman Catholic priests can’t marry anyone at all.
Americans don’t like soccer.
The sun is still scheduled to rise in the East tomorrow.
Techie on December 5, 2008 at 5:17 PM
My wife and I worked with a family of Salvationers in the mid nineties. Nice people, but VERY strange. They took the S.A. extremely seriously and I remember commenting to my wife that it seemed kinda cultish. I also remember that their house was furnished pretty much by stuff people donated. They sorta got pick of the litter, so to speak.
robblefarian on December 5, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Why? Because you disagree? Husband and wife live together in the community and both are expected to minister and run the charity. In their opinion, this requires two officers–not one officer and someone who can’t perform the duties they are expected to do as missionaries.
Blake on December 5, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Who cares about who they have to marry, what kind of firearms and ordnance are they issued? Do they have the freedom to choose their own weapons?
My collie says:
Don’t carry guns? What kind of an army is that? No wait. Don’t tell me. Let me guess. It’s a British invention, isn’t it?
CyberCipher on December 5, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Must be a very slow news day for this to find its way in. I’m still going to put money in when they ring the bell and do not care who they marry.
jeanie on December 5, 2008 at 5:20 PM
I share the question.
Spirit of 1776 on December 5, 2008 at 5:21 PM
C.U.L.T. But it’s their choice to either live by the rules or leave. Unless the Salvation Army has a commando hit-team that targets apostates, I say let them have their rules and see if they can continue by them.
scharfy on December 5, 2008 at 5:22 PM
Slow news day indeed.
I don’t care. If they fire the officer, fine. If the couple marries, Mazel Tov. I don’t care about the rules of the Sally Ann and I don’t care if they are a cult.
at least they are a cult that collects money for good causes and not one the murders people in Mumbai or blows up Jews in Israel. You know THAT cult.
mjk on December 5, 2008 at 5:23 PM
So, he wants people to ask SA to reverse the ruling, not for him, but for future officers. Uh huh. How about we contact SA, support their current ruling, and ask that they change the rule effective immediately after he leaves. That way, he gets to play martyr, and future officers benefit, too!
Christien on December 5, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Yep. It’s sort of like how I view some of the sex deviants around here. All about look-at-me-and-what-I-do.
platypus on December 5, 2008 at 5:26 PM
What community? Don’t Salvation Army people live in regular neighborhoods like the rest of us? Missionaries? I’m obviously out of the loop, but I wouldn’t mind an explanation of why the spouse has to be SA anything.
fireweednectar on December 5, 2008 at 5:26 PM
Why on earth are people calling them a cult? They are a bonafide religion, I thought that was well known. This is no different than a Catholic priest being let go because he got married.
The SA is a pretty good group, and they do a lot of good. I certainly approve of them more than I do many other religions, such as the cult of Obama. They only pretty much do charity. It’s not a bad way to go. Not sure why this is a big story either.
Vanceone on December 5, 2008 at 5:27 PM
I’m outraged! OUTRAGED! OK not really.
ronsfi on December 5, 2008 at 5:27 PM
Count me in with these guys. None of my business.
RushBaby on December 5, 2008 at 5:29 PM
The fact that he’s remarrying so soon after his wife’s death probably didn’t go over too well, either.
Allah’s cad-o-meter is apparently on the fritz.
Infidoll on December 5, 2008 at 5:30 PM
The logic is that you won’t catch crap from a wife when you have to uproot her every few years to move to a new place, if she’s already signed on to be an officer (who expects to be reassigned periodically) herself.
This was the rule when he signed up. He knew it. Either his fiancee becomes an officer or he has to stop being one. Deal with it.
The Monster on December 5, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Uuuuuhhh … Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Over.
They actually take that whole “Army” part seriously? No – seriously, seriously?
That is simultaneously really, really creepy and really, really funny.
I had no idea.
Next time I see a guy with a little red bucket, I’m going to ask for his rank. Perhaps if he gives me an attitude, I’ll tell him to quit eyeballing me or I’ll have to skull#@#$ him. Er, something.
Hoooah!
Professor Blather on December 5, 2008 at 5:37 PM
That’s it. All the gently used Oshkosh children’s clothing goes to SA this year.
/
Christien on December 5, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Salvation Army really does do the job no one else wants to do.
I get that the army rank/title thing comes off a little…counter culture. If they changed the names to variations of “pastor” no one would bat an eye.
Furthermore, I would not have been able to serve as an “appointed missionary” with the agency we served under had my wife not also been approved. And I would expect a missions board to apply the same standard to a missionary on their staff who wanted to get hitched: if the spouse couldn’t be accepted as an appointee (for whatever reason), then the employment relationship would have to end. That’s what ministry is like.
This whole thing hinges on the semantics of the “officer” title.
TexasDan on December 5, 2008 at 5:43 PM
It has marks of a loose “cult” but, then again, I’ve known folks who have come to a real saving faith in Christ from their meetings, regardless of where they now go to church. They aren’t dangerous. People know what they are getting into.
Me thinks this is a smear.
Mommypundit on December 5, 2008 at 5:49 PM
Actually, I shouldn’t say that ANY cult isn’t dangerous. Bad doctrine is bad news. But, I need to research this.
Mommypundit on December 5, 2008 at 5:52 PM
The SA has been doing the “military” thing for well over a hundred years now. I’m actually surprised that people are surprised by it.
Techie on December 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM
They get the best bang for the buck when it comes to their good works. I would rather give to them then the Red Cross or United Way if given the opportunity. If this rule were a “surprise” I might be more interested but I am a little over the rules for thee but not for me the country seems to be going through. I am not quite sure what this fifteen minutes of fame will get this gentleman but I hope he is happy in the end.
Cindy Munford on December 5, 2008 at 6:00 PM
BTW, the first hit that comes up on a Goggle search on “the founding of the salvation arm” can be found here.
My collie says:
AllahPundit, please don’t ban collie for mentioning the C word.
CyberCipher on December 5, 2008 at 6:06 PM
Boo hoo. He knew the rules and now because they inconvenience him he wants them changed?
No one is forced to become a member/officer of the SA. There is no Constitutional right to have it acommodate yur personal situation. People really need to stop whining.
katiejane on December 5, 2008 at 6:11 PM
EH? No more change from me at every store front.
allrsn on December 5, 2008 at 6:12 PM
The guy at the bucket, unless he volunteered, is being paid a nice hourly sum to stand there. And is not necessarily a “Salvationist.”
Joan of Argghh on December 5, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Liberals have the same rule, for marriage, teaching, acting, comedy, music, reporting, etc.
bagoh20 on December 5, 2008 at 6:21 PM
A lot of the bell ringers are volunteers. My aunt (maiden school teacher) is from Suffren, N.Y. where a training facility is located. She volunteered from time to time and was not required to join the S.A.
Cindy Munford on December 5, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Seriously? I assumed he was a Private First Class or something. I was planning to call the next one I see a “maggot” and make him do pushups.
You’re ruining my fun.
Professor Blather on December 5, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Yeah, I don’t really see the outrage here…
Why can’t an organization have the rules it wants and enforce them? People tend to react to this stuff backwards. There are no rules prohibiting who this guy can marry – he can marry whomever he choses.
However if he wants to be part of this organization, shouldn’t he also have to abide by it’s rules?
And if he doesn’t have to abide by the rules, then why have ANY rules, anywhere for anything?
catmman on December 5, 2008 at 6:29 PM
I guess after this Christmas I’ll be calling Goodwill instead.
multiuseless on December 5, 2008 at 6:36 PM
I read an article about them in the early 90s in the LAT. Though they get housing, I don’t remember if it was subsidized or free. Nevertheless, a husband and wife combined salary was only about $13k. They are definitely not into it for the money. Again, anyone who works with the urban poor or the court system depends on the charity and programs the SA provides.
Blake on December 5, 2008 at 6:49 PM
This really is shocking and sad. I hope there is some real public outrage over this.
My local Salvation Army had already lost me — they have a volunteer that pulls donated items and sells them on ebay for personal profit. Seriously! I reported her when it became known, but nothing ever came of it … which is why I don’t give to them any longer.
I donate to UMCOR.
eucher on December 5, 2008 at 6:54 PM
What he said!
A volunteer organization gets to pick its own rules.
If you don’t like the rules, then don’t join the organization.
Religious_Zealot on December 5, 2008 at 6:54 PM
Great, great organization (and I’m not saying that just because I’m Methodist!)
100% of every donation goes directly to where you send it.
That’s because all of the overhead is paid for through local church apportionments.
Religious_Zealot on December 5, 2008 at 6:55 PM
In a higher since, once a person has received the “Calling” it is of little difference where they should spend their ministry; they need to live a life of integrity and staying true to the highest sense of their calling. Unfortunately, some have fallen from these high principles, and, we get stories about Elmer Gantry and Jim Baker, which turn many from the faith, where they “throw the baby out with the bathwater.” The S.A. has done a great amount of good, especially to people that most of us wouldn’t invite into our homes for dinner, the people that some consider the dregs of our society that others have given up on. So, if they want to stand outside the stores and ring their bells or have rules that some of us have trouble with, well, so be it; I try to look at the good they have done. If Mr. Harsh wants to go out and start his own church, Far Out! When you look at life and see all the hurting people there should be no sense of competition, since there are enough to go around to be ministered to. As far as being bothered by those groups that go out and proselytize, I have learned to be cordial and let them know that I am fulfilled through my own spiritual studies and thank them for going out to minister to the poor in spirit. They are usually happy with that and depart in peace and don’t usually come back. Cheers…
DL13 on December 5, 2008 at 7:00 PM
What is with everyone saying they didn’t know the Salvation Army was a “religious” organization? What do you think “salvation” means? They have always helped people with clothes, food and sharing the Gospel to lead people to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.
Now, we are talking about an “officer” here. Not a bell-ringer. An officer has heavier responsibilities than other workers. He is the head minister. The Salvation Army is a church.
But the real question is, does your own church have the right to set rules and regulations? Can I come to your church this Sunday riding my Harley up the aisle? Or do you have the right to set a rule against that?
Bob Feeblethorp on December 5, 2008 at 7:01 PM
Well for heaven’s sake, he lost his wife to a heart attack … I don’t know why, but this does bother me. Even the military can’t tell you who you can and cannot marry (barring, you know, same sex or family members) — what “organization” can or should be able to? It seems medieval and intrusive to me.
Anyway, here’s what their site says:
eucher on December 5, 2008 at 7:05 PM
Most people that have had extensive dealings with couples that are committed to different faiths knows why rules like this are in place.
It has nothing to do with pure blood lines as there aren’t restrictions on who can become an officer.
It has to do with focus and committment. What is the likelihood of a non-officer wife getting tired of regular relocations which are dictated by a religion she doesn’t believe in? Will he be able to remain as committed to what he’s teaching where it conflicts with her beliefs? Most mixed faith couples aren’t really big on telling the kids, “Well, Mommy’s great and all, but, on that belief she’s totally wrong!” They usually end up watering down and generalizing their beliefs to allow for all beliefs to be equal.
Where one or both partners do remain committed to disparate religions, it can cause friction in the relationship. I know an LDS woman married to an evangelical man. He’s fine with her attending church as long as no one from her church ever comes over, none of her church materials are ever in the house and she never mentions anything regarding her faith to their children. It’s certainly caused issues in their marriage (especially since he didn’t make this clear prior to saying “I do.”).
The SA’s rule seems more like a blanket rule to make sure that people that commit to being an officer will not be distracted and will have the important support of their spouse.
A cult says, “We won’t allow you to marry that person because you’re one of us.”
A private group says, “Our membership rules say you can’t marry outside the group. We wish you the best though!”
He knew the rules and was fine with them until his desires came into conflict with them. It’s quite silly. If people within the SA want to debate this, more power to them, but I don’t see why he wants people outside the organization to help him put pressure on them.
JadeNYU on December 5, 2008 at 7:06 PM
I had no idea the Salvation Army was a cult. I knew it was a religious charity, but not a cult. How disappointing…
FloatingRock on December 5, 2008 at 7:09 PM
The organization is not telling him who he can or can’t marry.
They’re telling him what their rules are for being a member.
If he can’t/won’t abide by their rules, then he can’t be a member.
But he can still marry whoever he wants.
Religious_Zealot on December 5, 2008 at 7:11 PM
That’s what you get for hanging around a freak show. It’s his problem and now wants to make it mine? No thanks.
Hog Wild on December 5, 2008 at 7:16 PM
I have Very Limited Sympathy for dissident members of a religious group or any other voluntary association who go out and lobby the general public when they are expelled for disobeying the rules of their organization. Count me as another of the “why is this any of my business?” party.
Confutus on December 5, 2008 at 7:17 PM
The other day we were talking about selling out your morals for money.
I noticed at the end of Jack Black’s Prop 8 bit, the “Republicans” came around because there was money to be made off gay marriage.
Regardless of its cult status, the SA walked away from millions in money from NYC because the city wanted to force it to hire gays. At least their principles are not for sale.
Kafir on December 5, 2008 at 7:21 PM
I wonder if this is yet a further example of what was started with the Boy Scout case when we came within on SCOTUS vote of telling private groups who they could or couldn’t hire and what their rules could be.
I’ve never understood people voluntarily joining a group and then complaining about their rules.
Religious_Zealot on December 5, 2008 at 7:30 PM
It’s not a damn cult. And it was highly irresponsible for Allahpundit to call it a cult. I hope you’re proud of yourself, you jerk.
Are convents cults? Hey, they can’t marry, must be celibate, and are required to dedicate themselves to education, medicine, the poor, and God. They get kicked out if they violate the rules. I don’t see Allahpundit and his ilk calling them a cult.
Blake on December 5, 2008 at 7:53 PM
The guy knew the rules when he joined, he knew the rules the whole time he served married to his first wife. There’s no evidence that he ever thought that they were unfair before. If he did, he shouldn’t have joined.
He knew the rule before he even started dating the woman, he knew that he would have to chose between her and the Salvation Army one day, he made his decision. He needs to quit whining and live with the consequence.
29Victor on December 5, 2008 at 7:55 PM
There are very good reasons for the Officer to Officer rules. I worked for them for 12 years and this is one charity that really does good things. Leave them alone.
abbendigo on December 5, 2008 at 8:31 PM
Ironically, I laughed at Allahpundit’s cult comment (and he did say “practically,” for the record) …
… but the last several responses on this thread have me wondering if he has a point. Reading the article on the Salvation Army did, in fact, make it sound a bit cult-like … and the response of some commenters here has been, well, exactly what you’d expect if you criticized Scientology. Or the Moonies. Or, uh, any cult.
Not saying its a cult. But you people sure aren’t making it look LESS like one.
Please don’t put a hex on me or invoke the wrath of Xenu. Thanks.
Professor Blather on December 5, 2008 at 8:38 PM
Hey, look on the bright side. They don’t do honor killings.
Fletch54 on December 5, 2008 at 8:57 PM
Will there be a musical about the outrage?
batterup on December 5, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Salvation ARmy is not a cult! It is a legitimate church and it does fantastic works-not like the Red Cross that has been pretty shady the last few years.
Bullhead on December 5, 2008 at 9:06 PM
I agree with you Blake, it’s not a cult. It’s a religion with its own rules and set of beliefs. In this country everyone is free to worship as they believe. At least their rules and beliefs don’t include world domination, beheading infidels, stoning women who’ve been raped…,, well you get the picture.
4shoes on December 5, 2008 at 9:29 PM
When they marry are they required to only do it missionary style?
How do they get paid? By a percentage of the gross?
right2bright on December 5, 2008 at 9:49 PM
They return about 85 cents on each dollar, meaning they operate on about a 15% overhead. Pretty good, not great, but pretty good.
Catholic relief is about 97 cents, so Salvation Army is probably the low end of the high profile organizations, and very low on the Christian organizations.
right2bright on December 5, 2008 at 10:03 PM
It’s not a cult.
One of the basic indicators of a cult is how difficult it is to leave it.
One doesn’t usually get ‘kicked out’ of a cult – they get ‘reprogrammed.’
Religious_Zealot on December 5, 2008 at 10:34 PM
I read an article in the Sunday paper about them years ago. They do expect people to be seriously dedicated to their work. No one holds a gun to their heads and forces them to join.
“Cult”? WTF? As already said, it’s no more a cult than any other mainstream religion. Or staying employed at the NY Times if you make it known you’ve changed your registration from Democratic to Republican.
In other news, dog bites man, sun rises in east.
JimC on December 5, 2008 at 10:36 PM
What the hell is the point of this post?
And what exactly are we suppose to email them?
Dear Salvation Army,
I am not now and have never been a member of your church or organization, with no interest in changing that. Why you should pay one bit of attention to what I think about you choose to do as a community I don’t know but I would like to go on here and complain and berate you anyway. By the way I think your group is practically a cult and should change to what everybody else thinks.
Signed,
Somebody you have never heard of who doesn’t really care and you won’t hear from again until there’s a news story about how you are doing something I don’t like.
Rocks on December 5, 2008 at 10:37 PM
Lots of religions have a tradition of husband and wife pastor teams.
The idea is that a pastor should be married to a woman who can be equally yoked with him in the ministry. The Salvation Army has decided that if both of them are ministers they can work and support each other better in their respective calling.
Now I think this is going pretty overboard, but expecting a pastor to be married to someone of the same sect is not unreasonable at all.
If a wife is not of the same faith, she can hardly be expected to support the pastor in his duties can she?
How many Southern Baptist pastors have a wife who attends church somewhere else?
My own faith does not have any such limitations, but I can understand why the Salvation Army might institute such policies, and therefor I’m not going to make any charged accusations of cultism, and neither should anyone else.
Sackett on December 5, 2008 at 10:53 PM
I can’t believe no one is commenting on this:
His wife dies less than six months ago, & he’s already engaged? Foolish.
eea on December 6, 2008 at 12:19 AM
BIG NEWS FLASH
Helping people and marrying like-minded christians isn’t a bad thing.
Bob Feeblethorp on December 6, 2008 at 2:12 AM
They are too Harsh on Harsh.
Elizabetty on December 6, 2008 at 2:47 AM
That would be awesome!
Tzetzes on December 6, 2008 at 3:01 AM
I worked for SA as an employee. The structure of the organization is all-encompassing. They are self-insured and basically provide for every single need of the officer and their family: home, cars, utilities, travel, vacation, medical, groceries… everything.
When an officer marries outside of the Army, it plays huge financial havoc with the structure of care. The officers I worked with were both third-generation Salvationists and the cutest young couple– and very fun and non-stuffy. It’s all they’ve ever known. They traveled all over the country playing their instruments for different events and their actual SA duties were pretty light, since ours was a very small unit.
The SA office usually serves as a touchpoint for other Social Services money provided by grants or the government or community groups. SA money does not usually pay for absolutely all the services they provide. Or at least it didn’t where I worked. Another big program for the SA is probationary oversight programs. They can do it at a much more reasonable rate than other private providers and push pretty hard to own those programs.
Officers must move to a new location every two years. This is a safety precaution to keep any undue influence or monetary temptations at bay. It keeps them focused on the mission, and not so much on “kingdom building”.
Shelters, food, and life programs overseen by good Christian “soldiers” have a much more successful impact than disinterest wage slaves. It’s hard work, but they are sold out to it.
It’s going to take a tremendous re-structuring and accounting to accommodate a “half” couple lifestyle. It’s a lot to ask of the organization. The SA will bend over backwards to help one of their officers adjust back into the secular world.
Joan of Argghh on December 6, 2008 at 7:08 AM
What is WRONG with you people?
The Salvation Army is a church. “Officers” are the ministers in the denomination. Other denominations set standards for their ministers, why won’t you let the Army set their standards?
What a pack of flaming hypocrites!!
pelajus on December 6, 2008 at 7:18 AM
“We’re building a religion.”
Coronagold on December 6, 2008 at 8:57 AM
Apparently lib-speak has migrated here. Any charitable organization that actually expects its members to follow the rules should be dismissed as a cult regardless of whatever good works they do? So we should ignore the charity of the SA and stop contributing because ONE of their members wants to have things his own way? It is more important that this guy feels good about his choices?
How dare the RC Church require priests to be unmarried? How dare Orthodox Jews not allow members to eat pork chops?
katiejane on December 6, 2008 at 9:21 AM
For no apparent reason, Allahpundit feels threatened by the Salvation Army.
Blake on December 6, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Ya learn something new every day.
percysunshine on December 6, 2008 at 10:37 AM
No, not hypocrites. The SA asks us for donations every Christmas — I see the bell ringers everywhere I go, and, up to now, have donated a dollar or three every time I see one.
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).
Call it projection or whatever, but I can’t in good conscience put any further dollars in the kettle while Captain Johnny Harsh is drummed out. It’s like those Catholics who decided to leave the faith over pedophile priests — I can honestly understand their feelings, even as their departure hurts. But I’m far more forgiving to the transgressions of my Church than I am of another with which I have only a small emotional or faith connection.
The Salvation Army has every right to set the standards for its ministers, and I have every right to not support those standards with my contributions, and there is not an ounce of hypocrisy in the mix.
You are, of course, free to contribute, and I’ll understand that too — after all, we do live in America.
unclesmrgol on December 6, 2008 at 11:22 AM
A cult is a tiny, strange religion.
A religion is a large, well known cult.
Pelayo on December 6, 2008 at 11:48 AM
The SA is going beyond the Bible here. And the Bible cautions us not to go beyond what is written. Time for review.
paul1149 on December 6, 2008 at 2:54 PM
I don’t care what anyone says. I give to Salvation Army every year and have for 40 years and I will continue to do so. Of all the charities out there, this one has done more good for more people I know than any other.
Glynn on December 6, 2008 at 7:22 PM
I absolutely agree with you. If one were to take the time and really look at the work this fine organization does, some here might be ashamed of some of things that are being said.
Glynn on December 6, 2008 at 7:24 PM
All I know is that, having lived through Hurricane Ivan then Dennis the next year, when I finally got internet and found Bingley (in NJ) had posted info for Red Cross donations, I asked him to change it to the Salvation Army. Having seen them in work in NC after Bertha and Fran in ’96, then here in Pensacola after Ivan, et al, all I can say is that they are magnificent. MAGNIFICENT. And I would urge any person any day to support them.
And if dems da rules, DEMS da RULES. A lance corporal can’t marry a major in the Marine Corps, right? A Catholic priest can’t be married…unless he was previously an Episcopal priest, which is PATENTLY unfair to the single guys. But, dems da “rules”. And beating up on a fantastic group of selfless folks busting their asses EVERY single day in this country for a “rule”?
Please.
tree hugging sister on December 6, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Re: Joan of Arrgh’s comment, here’s the list of some other “Holiness” movement churches:
They have Methodist roots.
And, unlike the Red Cross, you know exactly where your money goes, should you donate for a specific natural disaster.
tree hugging sister on December 6, 2008 at 7:59 PM
Is your religion atheism or agnosticism?
eea on December 6, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Your comments were very helpful. Thank you!
eea on December 6, 2008 at 10:59 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »