Thread: Eccles: Salvation Army - the 'what do you want to know?' thread Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000709
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
I started this because someone asked me and i couldn't find one that was done previously. Rather than me just publicisise the Army and because this is a discussion forum, maybe I could answer any questions that you have and maybe a debate will arise on each particular subject. As this is ecclesiantics, I guess it will have to major on our chcurch practices rather than our theology, and certainly not stray into charity work.
[ 22. October 2009, 07:34: Message edited by: Think² ]
Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on
:
[Please don't laugh at my questions!]
Does every member hold a rank?
If one of us joined up, what rank would we receive?
Does every member wear a uniform?
How does one get promoted?
What rank must one have to lead a church?
Does anybody go "Ooooh! Their church is headed by a commander. We just have a lieutenant."
Do you have any order of service guidelines at all? Suggestions given by national or international organizations?
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
I've attended (secular) meetings at the Salvation Army Hall on Oxford Street and noticed that the layout of the building is very different to a traditional church. I do vaguely remember reading some of the notices around explaining why there was such a high platform and seats around the base to kneel up to, facing this platform, but can't remember exactly what this signified. Sorry to be vague, but can you explain this further?
Posted by Pointyhat (# 11163) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
[Please don't laugh at my questions!]
Does every member hold a rank?
If one of us joined up, what rank would we receive?
Does every member wear a uniform?
How does one get promoted?
What rank must one have to lead a church?
Does anybody go "Ooooh! Their church is headed by a commander. We just have a lieutenant."
Do you have any order of service guidelines at all? Suggestions given by national or international organizations?
Why would we laugh? There are so many mis-understandings about the Army, yours are no worse than anyone else's!
The answer is thus: the Salvation Army has two types of members - soldiers and officers. Soldiers are members, just like the members of any church, who have committed themselves to worship, service and giving in the local corps. They have signed "The Articles of War" which is a doctrinal statement of beliefs and a list of rules about behaviours eg not to drink alcohol etc. They may or may not wear uniform as they choose. They do not and can not have a rank, except that some of them will become sergeants or sergeant-majors if they accept special responsibilities in the corps.
Officers are full-time, trained and ordained, the same as a vicar or minister. They are promoted from Captain to Major after a set number of years service, then to higher ranks if they are given more responsibility.
It is a general principle that the larger the corps, the more experienced and senior your officer will be.
By the way, I am an ex-Salvationist, having left the Army about 15 years ago, so some of what I say may now be out of date.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
[Please don't laugh at my questions!]
Does every member hold a rank?
If one of us joined up, what rank would we receive?
Does every member wear a uniform?
How does one get promoted?
What rank must one have to lead a church?
Does anybody go "Ooooh! Their church is headed by a commander. We just have a lieutenant."
Do you have any order of service guidelines at all? Suggestions given by national or international organizations?
You can be a 'friend' - a member of the congregation.
You can be an 'adherent' - someone who is happy to accept the officer as his/her minister and be placed on the membership roll. Adherents have to profess salvation.
You can be a 'soldier' which is a covenanted member as previously stated.
If you join up you become a soldier and you can (should IMHO) wear uniform though it's not compulsory unless you are in a band, choir or other active role.
Promotion is role-based. A soldier might become a 'local officer' which is akin to a steward - LOs include treasurer, secretary, bandmaster, Corps Sergeant Major (Chief steward). Other minor 'sergeant' positions include colour sergeant, primary sergeant (for the smallest subnday school kids) and other roles like teachers, etc.
Normally churches are led by commissioned and ordained officers - Lieutenant, Captain, Major and occasionally Lieutenant-Colonel. Some congregations are led by warranted (as opposed to commissioned)'Envoys' who are akin to lay preachers/readers.
Sadly there are still those who see rank as a mark of superiority. It is of course a sign of length of service and experience and respect is accorded but there should be no sense of pride that one church has a Major and the other has a Captain. As in all churches, some younger ministers are far better than the old ones.
We have no orders of service, no liturgy. But we do have our own song book and while we are free to use other sources, in the main we would use this. Music is a tremendous part of our meetings. We would be low evangelical rather than charismatic. A bit like excited Methodists perhaps.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I've attended (secular) meetings at the Salvation Army Hall on Oxford Street and noticed that the layout of the building is very different to a traditional church. I do vaguely remember reading some of the notices around explaining why there was such a high platform and seats around the base to kneel up to, facing this platform, but can't remember exactly what this signified. Sorry to be vague, but can you explain this further?
Yes, there is a 'traditional' Salvation Army style from the nineteenth century when all our purpose-built halls were made to resemble music halls. Huge stages, wrap around balconies, etc.
This is not the style now though our halls are usually plain and minimalist.
The bench that leans up against the platform facing the congregation is our Mercy Seat or Penitent Form. We borrowed this from revivalist Methodism (where our roots lie) and it is the place where people come and kneel, facing the platform, on the occasion of an altar call. It's called the Mercy Seat because in the OT it was the place God's presence was found and God said he would meet the people at the Mercy seat. It was also a place of atonement.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
Hi Pointyhat. Good to meet you. God bless you.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Mudfrog , as I recall an earlier thread, another poster described street marches as being a part of the Army's liturgy. On reflection, that seemed to me correct; it may not be a liturgy of the same kind as eg a multi-con-celebrated Papal High Mass, but nonetheless it is a form of worship following a set pattern capable of regular repetition. so I'd disagree with at least part of your statement: "We have no orders of service, no liturgy".
And welcome aboard Pointyhat .
Posted by Pointyhat (# 11163) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Hi Pointyhat. Good to meet you. God bless you.
Hi, good to meet you too.
Would I be right in thinking that in the years since I left the Army, it has become a bit less "Army-fied" and a bit more "church-fied"? I have noticed that corps sometimes refer to themselves as church centres, with ministers and choirs, rather thn officers and songsters. Is this just to help comprehension, is it modernisation, or is it that the Army is becoming more mainstream?
And what else has changed while my back has been turned?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Mudfrog , as I recall an earlier thread, another poster described street marches as being a part of the Army's liturgy. On reflection, that seemed to me correct; it may not be a liturgy of the same kind as eg a multi-con-celebrated Papal High Mass, but nonetheless it is a form of worship following a set pattern capable of regular repetition. so I'd disagree with at least part of your statement: "We have no orders of service, no liturgy".
And welcome aboard Pointyhat .
Hmmm, I would prefer to say that an Army band marching is more of an act of witness than an act of worship. It is designed - music, flags and uniforms - to raise awareness, draw attention and just 'make a joyful noise'. It's a parade that says 'Look at us! Now listen to what we say!"
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pointyhat:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Hi Pointyhat. Good to meet you. God bless you.
Hi, good to meet you too.
Would I be right in thinking that in the years since I left the Army, it has become a bit less "Army-fied" and a bit more "church-fied"? I have noticed that corps sometimes refer to themselves as church centres, with ministers and choirs, rather thn officers and songsters. Is this just to help comprehension, is it modernisation, or is it that the Army is becoming more mainstream?
And what else has changed while my back has been turned?
Only in the sense of communication. Quite often the 'church' words will be placed in brackets e.g. I am an officer (minister) of the corps (church). It does worry me slightly. It's also a symptom of the rather irrational dislike some people have to the Army identity.
Posted by Pointyhat (# 11163) on
:
The military terminology is not PC, is it? I know people who are uncomfortable with it, and some of it just sounds quaint in this day and age.
I wonder how many Salvationists would still refer to "firing their cartridge" for example?
Posted by Joan_of_Quark (# 9887) on
:
A follow-up about your worship - If you have a song book but no written liturgy, do your services have a typical "shape" - e.g. six songs with a sermon of x length after the third, etc? Is there more than one basic type or can they all be announced as "Service at 10am" "Service at 6pm"?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pointyhat:
The military terminology is not PC, is it? I know people who are uncomfortable with it, and some of it just sounds quaint in this day and age.
I wonder how many Salvationists would still refer to "firing their cartridge" for example?
Ha! Yes we still have cartridge envelopes but no one really talks about firing cartridges any more - it's 'personal giving' or just 'the collection'.
I don't think anyone thinks about PC issues really. It's a non-argument. I think the Bible is quite sufficient in its justification of military metaphor.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Joan_of_Quark:
A follow-up about your worship - If you have a song book but no written liturgy, do your services have a typical "shape" - e.g. six songs with a sermon of x length after the third, etc? Is there more than one basic type or can they all be announced as "Service at 10am" "Service at 6pm"?
There will be songs of praise, testimony, teaching, challenge, etc. The meeting leader will compile an order of service that suits the occason. There will often be a songster song, the band will often play an intrumental piece of music too.
Traditionally the morning meeting is for teaching and encouraging Christian holiness and tends to be more devotional. The evening meeting tends to be more gospel-focused and would traditionally be called a 'salvation' meeting.
Nowadays these distinctions are often blurred.
Prayers are usually extempore and there will be no reciting of the creeds or anything like that.
There will normally be an 'opening prayer', a prayer of commitment following the sermon and a final benediction or the grace.
Sometimes in the morning there might be a children's story.
It's all very free and easy and there will be variations in where and when songs are placed in the running.
In my meetings, the sermon is near the end and will be followed by a chorus or song of response, a prayer and then a final song.
[ 13. August 2009, 17:54: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
Posted by Liverpool fan (# 11424) on
:
A serious question: is is 'publicise the Salvation Army week' or something?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liverpool fan:
A serious question: is is 'publicise the Salvation Army week' or something?
No, I was asked by a host to start the thread.
Posted by Liverpool fan (# 11424) on
:
Oh, right. Wasn't being funny like. Us Quakers had such a week earlier this year.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
There will be songs of praise, testimony, teaching, challenge, etc. The meeting leader will compile an order of service that suits the occason. There will often be a songster song, the band will often play an intrumental piece of music too.
Traditionally the morning meeting is for teaching and encouraging Christian holiness and tends to be more devotional. The evening meeting tends to be more gospel-focused and would traditionally be called a 'salvation' meeting.
Couple of questions, what's 'challenge' in this context ? And is it then standard that you have a morning and evening service of a Sunday - do you have any other days you worship on and do you follow any kind of liturgical calendar ?
Posted by Laurie17 (# 14889) on
:
Very interesting thread. Thanks.
I had some SA experience as a youngster and still have a soft spot. It was never my 'main' church though, by any means. I ahve also had other forms of contact more recently, including professional contacts, and my old friend from school days wh happens to be gay, and of high rank. Also loves his pint, while I am tt !!
My parents used to bring The War Cry back home --
from the pub ! ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
songster song
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
There will be songs of praise, testimony, teaching, challenge, etc. The meeting leader will compile an order of service that suits the occason. There will often be a songster song, the band will often play an intrumental piece of music too.
Traditionally the morning meeting is for teaching and encouraging Christian holiness and tends to be more devotional. The evening meeting tends to be more gospel-focused and would traditionally be called a 'salvation' meeting.
Couple of questions, what's 'challenge' in this context ? And is it then standard that you have a morning and evening service of a Sunday - do you have any other days you worship on and do you follow any kind of liturgical calendar ?
A challenge would be seen in the invitation to accept Christ or the invitation to make a fresh commitment to be holy.
Most places will have morning and evening meetings - and a Sunday school. Some places will have just the morning. One very small congregation near here only has an evening service.
We keep the main feasts and festivals - we don't go a bundle on Lent and Advent though. Good Friday there'll be a meeting - or even 2! We never keep Saints days.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Laurie17:
Very interesting thread. Thanks.
I had some SA experience as a youngster and still have a soft spot. It was never my 'main' church though, by any means. I ahve also had other forms of contact more recently, including professional contacts, and my old friend from school days wh happens to be gay, and of high rank. Also loves his pint, while I am tt !!
My parents used to bring The War Cry back home --
from the pub !
Hmmm, interesting comment.
Your old school friend - the gay drinker of pints: when you say 'of high rank', what exactly do you understand by that? In what context is he highly ranking?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
songster song
Sorry - terminology.
Our choir members are called songsters.
The choir is commonly referred to as The Songsters. They don't lead singing or sing responses or anything like that, but they will contribute one song during the service and occasionally will put on a musical concert of their songs.
Posted by Pre-cambrian (# 2055) on
:
Basically what we'd call an anthem, then, although the actual music may well be different.
Here the SA seems to have a position that I could describe as "semi-establishment", i.e. apart from the Anglicans they are perhaps the denomination most likely to have a formal involvement in civic events. For example, at the borough Remembrance Sunday service at the Fairfield Halls the music is provided by our choir and the SA band. Is that situation common elsewhere?
We (liberal catholic Anglicans) have good relations with the local citadel over the road. (Are they still called citadels?) When they were having some work done several years they joined us for our Sunday Eucharist for a couple of weeks, with the SA major preaching on one of them. They didn't half boost the volume of the congregational singing ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pre-cambrian:
Basically what we'd call an anthem, then, although the actual music may well be different.
Here the SA seems to have a position that I could describe as "semi-establishment", i.e. apart from the Anglicans they are perhaps the denomination most likely to have a formal involvement in civic events. For example, at the borough Remembrance Sunday service at the Fairfield Halls the music is provided by our choir and the SA band. Is that situation common elsewhere?
We (liberal catholic Anglicans) have good relations with the local citadel over the road. (Are they still called citadels?) When they were having some work done several years they joined us for our Sunday Eucharist for a couple of weeks, with the SA major preaching on one of them. They didn't half boost the volume of the congregational singing .
The bands are used a lot in civic type situations. It's because they provide portable music I guess.
Posted by wheelie racer (# 13854) on
:
Another ex- salvationist here ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by wheelie racer:
Another ex- salvationist here
Hi there!
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
You have mentioned the initiation cermeony on the boards - what orm does it take, cos I thought you didn't do baptism ?
Posted by Laurie17 (# 14889) on
:
I too would be interested in the orm it takes. thanks
Posted by Laurie17 (# 14889) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Laurie17:
Very interesting thread. Thanks.
I had some SA experience as a youngster and still have a soft spot.
Hmmm, interesting comment.
Your old school friend - the gay drinker of pints: when you say 'of high rank', what exactly do you understand by that? In what context is he highly ranking?
I meant of high rank in the SA of course ! He has a great ministry (stipendiary) I am shure he drinks his pints in moderation so fret not. I think the tt thing is in obeyance in churhces these days. Most church members like a glass of wine or beer , it seems.
Whereas the Brethren of my childhood were totally tt. Church parties were great fun with children's games' enjoyed by all --the adults were 100% sober and entered into the fun. More fun than drink fuelled occasions so common in and out of church circles these days. Still I mustnt be a miserable s ! Must I !
[ 18. August 2009, 22:50: Message edited by: Laurie17 ]
Posted by Cyprian (# 5638) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
You have mentioned the initiation cermeony on the boards - what orm does it take, cos I thought you didn't do baptism ?
quote:
Originally posted by Laurie17:
I too would be interested in the orm it takes. thanks
Just because it's a four-letter word beginning with 'f', it doesn't mean you have to censor it, you know?
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
I noticed the typo of form sometime after I had posted, and felt it would be an abuse of my hostly powers to edit waaaay after the usual flood control just to make my typing look swanky.
Posted by Pointyhat (# 11163) on
:
By "initiation ceremony" do you mean for infants or adults? You are correct in thinking that the Army does not baptise. However, babies born to Salvation Army families can be dedicated in a ceremony similar to baptism. No water or trinitarian formula of course. It's a ceremony of thanksgiving and a public declaration of intent to raise the child in a Christian home.
Adults who wish to become soldiers go through a "confirmation" ceremony of swearing in, under the flag. Conducted by the corps officer, it includes taking vows to live according to Christian principles and the Army Articles of War, which are publically signed.
And as far as I am aware, the Army has in no way removed the requirement for soldiers to be teetotal. Have I missed something here?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
Below you will find the transcripts of the Salvation Army's full dedication ceremony and also the thamnksgiving ceremony.
THE DEDICATION CEREMONY
1. When the ceremony begins, the child should be held by one of the parents. It is usual for the parents to stand together to the left of the officer conducting the ceremony. The flag may be used for all dedications, and the colour sergeant should stand behind the officer.
2. The cradle roll sergeant and the young people’s sergeant-major, and any other participating local officer, should stand on the other side of the officer from the parents.
3. Other children of the family may stand with their parents, if this is desired. If they do so, the officer should acknowledge their presence and speak to them about their own place in the life of the family.
4. Suitable introductory comments should emphasise the importance placed by The Salvation Army upon Christ-centred family life and the responsibilities of parenthood.
5. A suitable passage of Scripture should be read.
6. The officer shall then say to the parents:
"In the dedication of this child you desire to give him/her fully to God. You wish to thank God for entrusting this precious life into your hands, and you want him/her to be nurtured in all that is pure, lovely and honest. To this end you promise that you will keep from him/her, so far as you are able, everything which is likely to harm him/her in body, mind or spirit.
You also promise that, as he/she grows in wisdom and stature, you will teach him/her the truths of the gospel, encourage him/her to seek Christ as Saviour, and support him/her in the commitment of his/her life to the service of God. You must be
to him/her an example of a true Christian.
If you are willing to make these promises, I will receive the child in the name of God, and on behalf of The Salvation Army."
7. The officer shall take the child and ask the congregation to stand. Where the child is no longer an infant the officer should take him by the hand and lead him to his side. He shall then address the congregation as follows:
"In the name of the Lord and on behalf of the ... Corps of The Salvation Army, I receive this child ... (and here he will give all the names of the child) in recognition of the promises which have been made by his/her parents this day.
8. The officer (or some other person) shall then offer prayer.
9. The officer shall, at this or some other convenient point, address the congregation, reminding them that they are not only witnesses to the ceremony, but also participants in it, and as a such are pledged to support the parents in their spiritual responsibilities.
10. The officer shall then say to the parents:
"In returning ... (first name of the child) into your care, I charge you to care for him/her in the name of the Lord, and to keep the promises that you have made concerning him/her."
11. The officer shall then return the child to the parents and present the certificate of dedication.
12. The parents, before leaving the hall, shall sign the dedication register.
13. If the cradle roll sergeant has not previously enrolled the child, this should be done without further delay and a cradle roll certificate presented.
THE THANKSGIVING AND PRESENTATION CEREMONY
1. This ceremony is not intended for salvationists, but is for use when parents are reluctant to make the promises required by the dedication ceremony. The parents are not asked to make any specific commitment to a Christian upbringing; the ceremony is intended, however, to encourage those spiritual desires, however faint, which have prompted the request for a religious service.
2. The officer should therefore use every opportunity, both in private counselling and during the ceremony, to commend to the parents the benefits of regular worship and training in Christian values.
3. The ceremony should normally take place in the Army hall, but not necessarily in a public meeting. The Army flag may be used at the officer’s discretion.
4. The officer shall say to the parents:
"In presenting this child to God, you wish to give thanks to him for his precious gift. You want him/her to grow up to be healthy, wise and good, and you therefore promise that you will keep from him/her, so far as you are able, everything which is likely to harm him/her in body, mind or soul. If this is your intention, I will receive the child."
5. The officer shall then take the child and pray as follows:
"Dear heavenly Father, we thank you for the precious gift of this child ... (and here he shall give all the names of the child). Take him/her into your care and give to his/her parents wisdom to teach and train him/her in all that is pure, lovely and honest. In accepting this responsibility, may they at all times seek your help and guidance, In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."
6. The officer shall then return the child to the parents, and offer such further words of advice as he considers suitable.
7. Names of children for whom this ceremony is used will be entered in the dedication register, and a thanksgiving and presentation certificate given to the parents. The child’s name should also be entered on the cradle roll and a cradle roll certificate issued.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
Here is the ceremony of enrolment of a soldier in The Salvation Army:
SECTION 1: THE ENROLMENT OF SOLDIERS
1. The public enrolment ceremony of
Salvation Army soldiers is an important occasion both in the life of the prospective soldier and in the life of the corps. The officiating officer should seek to make the ceremony a means of impressing the principles of Christian discipleship and salvationism upon those about to be enrolled and upon Salvationists and others in the meeting.
2. Only those people may be received into soldiership who:
(a) Have professed salvation through faith in
Christ and now acknowledge him as Lord and Saviour.
(b) Have studied the doctrines, principles and
evangelistic witness of the Army as embodied in the Soldier's Covenant and fully explained in Chosen to be a Soldier (Orders and Regulations for Soldiers of The Salvation Army) and The Salvation Army Handbook of Doctrine. Such studies
should be undertaken with the guidance of
the corps officer and the recruiting sergeant
or other person designated.
(c) Have been accepted by the senior pastoral
care council in accordance with Orders and
Regulations for Senior Pastoral Care Councils.
(d) Have signed the Soldier's Covenant.
3. The officer should use the opportunity to challenge the uncommitted with the claims of the gospel and urge salvationists and Christian friends to rededicate themselves to the service of God.
4. At the time of the enrolment, the recruits should be called to the platform and stand under the flag.
5. The recruiting sergeant, or another representative local officer, should also be invited to stand with the recruits. The young people's sergeant-major should participate when junior soldiers are being enrolled as senior soldiers.
6. When all are assembled, an appropriate passage of Scripture should be read by the officiating
officer or some other suitable person.
7. The officer may then lead the recruits in affirming their faith by reading in unison the doctrines accepted by the salvationists. The congregation could also be invited to join in the united reading.
8. An appropriate chorus may be sung, after which the officer shall refer to the articles of war (a soldier's covenant) by saying:
"All who wish to become soldiers of The Salvation
Army are required to sign the Soldier's Covenant.
In so doing, they testify that:
• They worship God as Father, Son and Holy
Spirit.
• They have accepted Jesus Christ as Saviour
and Lord.
• They desire to fulfil their membership of his
Church on earth as a soldier of The Salvation Army.
They affirm their belief in the Bible as the word of God and their acceptance of The Salvation Army’s articles of faith.
They declare that:
• They will be responsive to the Holy Spirit
and seek to grow in grace.
• They will make the values of the Kingdom of
God the standard for their lives, showing Christian integrity in their deeds, maintaining Christian ideals in their relationships, and upholding the sanctity of marriage and family life.
• They will be faithful stewards of all they
have and are.
• They will abstain from the use of all enslaving substances and harmful activities.
• They will be active in God's work both in sharing the gospel and in serving the needy, and will contribute financially to its support.
• They will be true to the principles of The
Salvation Army.
They witness that they freely enter into this
covenant, convinced that the love of Christ requires the devotion of their lives to his service for the salvation of the whole world.
And they declare their determination, by God's
help, to be true soldiers of The Salvation Army.
9. The officer shall then say to the recruits:
"Do you (each) declare, in the presence of God and
this congregation, that you undertake, by the help
of the Holy Spirit, to live and work as a true soldier of Jesus Christ and of The Salvation Army,
according to the witness and promises you make
this day. If so, raise your right hand and say: ‘I
do.’"
They shall each reply: 'I do.'
10. The names of the new soldiers shall be called, and, if desired, they may be invited to sign a presentation copy of the Soldier's Covenant. The officer shall then briefly charge them to keep their promises and, by the grace of God, to be of blessing to the world in which they live. In particular, he should encourage them to
testify openly for Christ, to wear uniform, to give prayer a central place in their home life and, as stewards of their time, abilities and financial resources, to offer these to the Lord, recognising this as the only adequate response to
Christ's sacrifice for them. The officer should conclude by presenting to each soldier the illuminated copy of the Soldier's Covenant, offering the hand of fellowship as he says:
"In the name of the Lord whom we love and serve, I
accept your declarations and receive you as (a) soldier(s) of the ... Corps of The Salvation Army.
11. A dedicatory prayer should be offered.
12. If there is time, each new soldier should
testify; otherwise one or two representatives should do so.
13. The congregation should then be asked to join
the new soldiers in singing a verse promising faithfulness to God.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
It sounds similar to a confirmation.
Slightly different question, cos after all this is Eccles - are there any uniform variations for particular sub-groupings ?
Posted by FreeJack (# 10612) on
:
I don't remember this at my confirmation.
quote:
They will abstain from the use of all enslaving substances and harmful activities.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
I was thinking more in terms of the standing and giving formal assent to a set of principles.
Not a bad promise to make though, is it ?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
It sounds similar to a confirmation.
Slightly different question, cos after all this is Eccles - are there any uniform variations for particular sub-groupings ?
There is a basic standard uniform and it would be the trimmings that would change.
An officer (clergy) have red epaulettes with insignia that goes with whatever rank they hold (1 star for Lieutenant, 2 for captain, crest for Major)
Musicians and singers have blue epaulettes
Other soldiers have black epaulettes.
Overseas in African they wear white or khaki uniforms instead of dark blue serge. In India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, etc, the women wear Salvation Army saris or those trouser suits.
Scotland has its own Salvation Army tartan!! but it's rarely worn.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
I was thinking more in terms of the standing and giving formal assent to a set of principles.
Not a bad promise to make though, is it ?
Interestingly in times of great awakening and renewal the churches have often made teetotalism and other lifestyle commitments a pre-requisite for believers' baptism.
In Russia after the fall of communism, I heard that baptist churches were requiring lifestyle commitments before their baptisms.
In the UK one of the differences between 'Church' and 'Chapel' was that Church people drank and Chapel people didn't.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
I hath googled and found:
I understand that SA uniforms are sometimes known to members colloquially as 'sally suits' - have you come across this ? Also, looking at the prices, I take it you subsidise the uniforms for soldiers with low incomes ?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
I hath googled and found:
I understand that SA uniforms are sometimes known to members colloquially as 'sally suits' - have you come across this ? Also, looking at the prices, I take it you subsidise the uniforms for soldiers with low incomes ?
Never heard it called a sally suit here in UK.
We don't subsidise uniforms for soldiers. Officers get a taxable allowance for uniforms because it's 'workwear' for them.
Posted by Laurie17 (# 14889) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by FreeJack:
I don't remember this at my confirmation.
quote:
They will abstain from the use of all enslaving substances and harmful activities.
Nice parallel with the *Five Precepts* embraced at the beginning of Buddhist Commitment to a life of Mindfulness / meditation -also known as Pancil.
* Also known as the Five Mindfulness Trainings.( by Thich Nhat Hanh)
[ 30. August 2009, 12:59: Message edited by: Laurie17 ]
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
It sounds similar to a confirmation.
I would prefer to see it as our version of adult believers' baptism. We 'dry-clean' in The Salvation Army!
Interesting thought here:
The original meaning of the word 'sacramentum' was an oath made to a commanding officer by a new soldier in the Roman army.
We don't say that the swearing-in of a SA soldier is a sacrament but we would, as I have said, see a parallel with baptism.
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
Do you make use of any sacraments ?
[ 31. August 2009, 10:16: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
Posted by Raspberry Rabbit (# 3080) on
:
1. Has there been any serious discussion within SA circles about the development of a Sacramental theology?
Posted by GreyFace (# 4682) on
:
Do you regard yourselves as a church? Or as a para-church organisation?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Do you make use of any sacraments ?
Trick question really.
I think what you are asking is whether we have the Eucharist and water baptism of any kind. The answer to that is no.
Do we perform actions that convey Christ's presence and can be a means of grace? Then yes, of course. All life and everything the church does in the name of Christ is a means of grace, a sacrament.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Raspberry Rabbit:
1. Has there been any serious discussion within SA circles about the development of a Sacramental theology?
Indeed there has. There have been books written over the years and a little over 10 years ago a Spiritual Life Commission sat and produced a considered document.
Go HERE and scroll down to page 103 to find the statement.
There is also THIS which is our response to "Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry".
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Do you regard yourselves as a church? Or as a para-church organisation?
HERE you will find a brief statement only just published that clarifies what we are in relation to the Universal Church.
Posted by GreyFace (# 4682) on
:
The link's empty.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
The link's empty.
Woops - HERE IT IS
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
As the SA sprang from Methodism, I assumed you'd be Arminian yet there is a Calvinist-sounding statement about 'total depravity'.
Though the creeds are recognised, there is nothing about the ecumenical councils or the Fathers.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
As the SA sprang from Methodism, I assumed you'd be Arminian yet there is a Calvinist-sounding statement about 'total depravity'.
Though the creeds are recognised, there is nothing about the ecumenical councils or the Fathers.
Well, Methodism isn't exactly pure Arminian either.
Wesleyans - for that is what we are - do not subscribe to election or final perseverance, but Wesley and those who follow his teachings, accept fully the docrtine of total depravity. Indeed, the Wesleyan doctrines of prevenient grace, assurance and entire sanctification go with it.
What ecumenical councils would you be referring to, and why should we take note of them in particular? Being Protestant we would probably not spend too much time in the Fathers I'm afraid.
That isn't to say that in study and training for ministry reference will not be made to them.
I can't see that we would be happy to get our doctrines from the Council of Trent, however1
[ 31. August 2009, 18:44: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
Certainly NOT the Council of Trent. I am thinking of the councils up to Ephesus, which all mainline denominations accept.
I am currently reading a book on evangelicals the tradition and will get back to you on this when I have finished it(several funerals to do this week willing).
Many thanks for this thread - I am enjoying it and glad to know about the SA. In all honesty, people like me used to make fun of it but I am now thanking God for such partners in Christ.
Posted by GreyFace (# 4682) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Do you regard yourselves as a church? Or as a para-church organisation?
HERE you will find a brief statement only just published that clarifies what we are in relation to the Universal Church.
Thanks. The short answer is you believe yourselves to be a church, then.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Do you regard yourselves as a church? Or as a para-church organisation?
HERE you will find a brief statement only just published that clarifies what we are in relation to the Universal Church.
Thanks. The short answer is you believe yourselves to be a church, then.
Indeed, it's because we are.
Posted by Yerevan (# 10383) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
I was thinking more in terms of the standing and giving formal assent to a set of principles.
Not a bad promise to make though, is it ?
Interestingly in times of great awakening and renewal the churches have often made teetotalism and other lifestyle commitments a pre-requisite for believers' baptism.
In Russia after the fall of communism, I heard that baptist churches were requiring lifestyle commitments before their baptisms.
In the UK one of the differences between 'Church' and 'Chapel' was that Church people drank and Chapel people didn't.
[tangent]
Its not just a Protestant thing. Irish Catholic children are traditionally invited to take 'the pledge' (a promise to abstain from alcohol for life, or at least until the child turns eighteen) at confirmation. This goes back to an 19th century Irish Catholic temperance movement which borrowed alot of its ideas from non-conformity. Quite a few devout Irish Catholics of the older generation are still total abstainers (they're called 'pioneers' after a Catholic temperance organisation). I remember reading somewhere that Ireland has a higher percentage of teetotallers than almost any other country in Europe, which does rather undermine the stereotype...
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Certainly NOT the Council of Trent. I am thinking of the councils up to Ephesus, which all mainline denominations accept.
I am currently reading a book on evangelicals the tradition and will get back to you on this when I have finished it(several funerals to do this week willing).
Many thanks for this thread - I am enjoying it and glad to know about the SA. In all honesty, people like me used to make fun of it but I am now thanking God for such partners in Christ.
There is no question that the early Reformers believed they were seeking to restore the faith of the early church. The basic thrust of their mission was to point not to themselves as the begetters of a new “protestantism” but to the establishment of a proper catholicism—anti-Roman perhaps but not anti-catholic. The guiding theological precedent was the fifteenth-century martyr Jan Hus, who had declared that the work of the Spirit was realized in the activity of the early church, apostolic and patristic. “We do not intend to explain Scripture otherwise than the Holy Spirit requires and than it is explained by the holy doctors to whom the Spirit gave understanding.”
Christ and his law [of redemption] did not fail for governing the church, seeing devoted priests ministered this law unto the people, who followed the judgment of holy doctors, which judgment they issued by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as is clear from the cases of St. Augustine, St. Jerome, St. Gregory and St. Ambrose, who were given after the apostles’ death to the church to teach her. 13. Jan Hus, The Church by John Hus, trans. David Schaff (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1915), 149.
Johnn Calvin’s training as a humanist made him particularly z.itive to the historical connection between the apostolic and patristic roots of the church and its reform. He was well read in ancient Christian texts and convinced that the Reformation movement was in line with the doctrines of the early church. To Roman cardinal Sadoleto he wrote: You teach that all which has been approved for fifteen hundred years or more, by the uniform consent of the faithful, is, by our headstrong rashness, torn up and destroyed You know . . that our agreement with antiquity is far closer than yours, but that all we have attempted has been to renew that ancient form of the church. 19. John Calvin, Reply to Cardinal Sadoleto, in A Reformation Debate, ed. J. C. Olin (New York: Harper, 1966), 62
The true church that the apostles instituted was commensurate \\ith the ancient form of the church exhibited in the writings of Chrysostom and Basil, among the Greek writers, and Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine among the Latins, which is in stark contrast to “the ruins of that church, as now surviving among yourselves.”2
Likewise, Jakob Andreae and Martin Chemnitz assembled a host of patristic quotations in reference to the doctrine of Christ, lest any Roman critic should allege that the Formula of Concord was not supported, as “the ancient pure church, its fathers and councils, have spoken.” 24. Jakob Andreae and Martin Chemnitz, catalog of Testimonies (1578), trans. T. Manteufel, in Sources and contexts in the Book of concord, ed. R. Kolb and J. A. Nest:r(Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 221.
When the various works of Luther and Melanchthon and other confessional documents were compiled in 1580 as the Book of Concord, its opening essay was a brief commentary on the three ecumenical creeds: the Apostles’, the Nicene, and the Athanasian. It was an intentional move to underscore the deep conviction among evangelical theologians that the Reformation upheld and recovered the chief teachings of the ancient church. 25. R. Koib and I. J. Wengert, eds., The Book of concord: The confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran church (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000), 19.
Art. XX. “This is the sum of doctrine.., nothing which is discrepant with Scripture or with the church catholic or even with the Roman church as far as that church is known - from the writings of the Fathers” (art. 1.22). Augustine and Ambrose, among others, cited as defenders grace and the righteousness of faith against the merit of works.
[ 01. September 2009, 16:37: Message edited by: leo ]
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on
:
That may need its own thread.
Doublethink
Eccles Host
Posted by Bernard Mahler (# 10852) on
:
How much obedience does a Salvation Army soldier have to give to his superior officers compared to that enjoined in ordinary military discipline?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bernard Mahler:
How much obedience does a Salvation Army soldier have to give to his superior officers compared to that enjoined in ordinary military discipline?
What a good question!
No more obedience really than any church member might afford to his minister, priest or elder. The officer have no power to tell people what to do, merely to ensure that the regulations of the Army, willingly accepted by all soldiers and officers, are maintained.
The officer of a corps might direct the programme and call upon people to support the venture, but he has no power to give orders. Soldiers are not employees and cannot be treated as people who simply obey orders.
Posted by GreyFace (# 4682) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Thanks. The short answer is you believe yourselves to be a church, then.
Indeed, it's because we are.
Oh, I have no argument with that at all. I asked the question because I seem to remember once somebody saying that you were originally conceived as a para-church organisation, and that your generally positive view of sacraments (although I'm aware of your position regarding their necessity) was then accommodated by members going to a church.
Was that ever the case? I also recall somebody saying that some of your members have been known to receive sacraments in other churches as an ecumenical act.
A member of my family was apparently baptised as a child by a SA officer. I don't know the circumstances but this person is adamant that this is what happened. Is this legitimate SA practice?
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Yerevan:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
I was thinking more in terms of the standing and giving formal assent to a set of principles.
Not a bad promise to make though, is it ?
Interestingly in times of great awakening and renewal the churches have often made teetotalism and other lifestyle commitments a pre-requisite for believers' baptism.
In Russia after the fall of communism, I heard that baptist churches were requiring lifestyle commitments before their baptisms.
In the UK one of the differences between 'Church' and 'Chapel' was that Church people drank and Chapel people didn't.
[tangent]
Its not just a Protestant thing. Irish Catholic children are traditionally invited to take 'the pledge' (a promise to abstain from alcohol for life, or at least until the child turns eighteen) at confirmation. This goes back to an 19th century Irish Catholic temperance movement which borrowed alot of its ideas from non-conformity. Quite a few devout Irish Catholics of the older generation are still total abstainers (they're called 'pioneers' after a Catholic temperance organisation). I remember reading somewhere that Ireland has a higher percentage of teetotallers than almost any other country in Europe, which does rather undermine the stereotype...
Yes, thanks to
Father Mathew, who I see every time I fancy going to Marks and Sparks!
... although re: stereotypes, I believe that rates of teetotalism also have a lot to do with the numbers of recovering alcoholics!
[/tangent]
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Thanks. The short answer is you believe yourselves to be a church, then.
Indeed, it's because we are.
Oh, I have no argument with that at all. I asked the question because I seem to remember once somebody saying that you were originally conceived as a para-church organisation, and that your generally positive view of sacraments (although I'm aware of your position regarding their necessity) was then accommodated by members going to a church.
Was that ever the case? I also recall somebody saying that some of your members have been known to receive sacraments in other churches as an ecumenical act.
A member of my family was apparently baptised as a child by a SA officer. I don't know the circumstances but this person is adamant that this is what happened. Is this legitimate SA practice?
Broadly speaking when TSA was developing they didn't so much see themselves as a settled church like the Methodist Church or the Anglican Church because they were more revivalist and mission oriented. A huge issue in the cessation of sacraments is that they tended to get in the way of revivalist campaigns. Booth's attitude came to be that they would cease from having sacraments until it could be discussed at a later date. He probably never foresaw the regimentation of The Army that prevented positive discussion for many years. Sadly a lot of people have grown up within TSA believing we are not a church and that's why we don't have sacraments.
Some of them even came to believe we are against sacraments.
By any definition of church (especially the Biblical one) we are a church - though we are glad to be able to use many descriptive titles.
Salvationists are permitted, with the Army's blessing, to partake of sacraments whenever they like as long as the host church agrees.
If an officer baptised a child he would be acting outside his role with no authority whatever to do what he did. It may of course be that the person involved is using the word christening / baptism as the general term for something done to children. we have dedication ceremonies that I have heard even salvationists call a Christening. It's basic ignorance of unthinking members I'm afraid.
Posted by GreyFace (# 4682) on
:
Thanks for all that.
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
By any definition of church (especially the Biblical one) we are a church - though we are glad to be able to use many descriptive titles.
Oh, I don't know. I can think of certain ecclesial groupings that deny the Church of England the name, and I don't think you'd get in either ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
quote:
we have dedication ceremonies that I have heard even salvationists call a Christening. It's basic ignorance of unthinking members I'm afraid.
I'm starting to wonder if that was what happened. I might have to do some more digging - thanks.
Posted by Bernard Mahler (# 10852) on
:
Fifty years ago, when newspapers used to carry church notices under classified advertising, the SA entries used to refer to a morning service called 'knee drill'. I think I can see why 'drill', but 'knee'? Was this, or is it now, under a different name, a service where the congregation actually knelt?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bernard Mahler:
Fifty years ago, when newspapers used to carry church notices under classified advertising, the SA entries used to refer to a morning service called 'knee drill'. I think I can see why 'drill', but 'knee'? Was this, or is it now, under a different name, a service where the congregation actually knelt?
Yes, it was the prayer meeting.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Thanks for all that.
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
By any definition of church (especially the Biblical one) we are a church - though we are glad to be able to use many descriptive titles.
Oh, I don't know. I can think of certain ecclesial groupings that deny the Church of England the name, and I don't think you'd get in either
Indeed, I was told by a Presbyterian minister in Northern Ireland that TSA could not be a church because Calvin said that a church had to have the word, church discipline and the sacrament to be a true church.
I always thought all we needed was the Holy Spirit who made us into children of God, but hey ho.
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
This has been a good thread and I've enjoyed and appreciated the questions.
Does anyone else have any questions?
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0