A letter I wrote........

[ynneb]

Here is a letter I wrote, your comments welcomed.....

Dear Sir / Madam,

There is something that has concerned me for a while. Firstly I would like to say I am very sorry to rehash an old debate that has troubled the Salvation Army for some time. Also please bear with me while I give some background to my thoughts. Even while you read this, I ask you do not dismiss this letter before at least finishing what I need to say.



I have been a Christian for 20 years. It was through the Pentecostal movement that first helped me to accept Jesus as my savior. Prior to this I was raised in a practicing Catholic family. Currently I am a member of the Box Hill Salvation Army (Non soldier, and also non adherent) I have been regularly attending the Salvation Army for approximately 5 years. First and foremost I am a Christian, and would not categorize myself as any particular brand of Christian group. That been said, I like what the Salvation Army stands for, in terms of their name, an Army dedicated to the Salvation of people. Army, acknowledging there is a fight involved in bringing people to Jesus.



I have seen and participated in many aspects of Christian activity. From the formal structured Catholic types of meetings to the unstructured Spirit led meetings in the Pentecostal church. In looking back at all these experiences and in my relationship with God, I have strongly come to the conclusion that God is looking for a people who worship Him in freedom of spirit, and in new fresh ways. I believe that He hates ritualistic mantra type worship.

Essentially He wants our hearts to rejoice in Him and not just repeat prewritten words on a Sunday and then call that Church.

I know that you would agree with me on this.



I am sorry to take so long to raise my issue, I really need you to understand where I am coming from.



Recently I was asked to lead a home group through the Box Hill Salvos. We worked through a book and a set of videos titled “The purpose Driven life” written by a pastor by the name of Rick Warren. We all enjoyed the book and the time together. It was a great time of spiritual refreshing and conformation of our beliefs etc. At the time I did not realize there were 4 retired officers who were also in the group. Had I known I may have felt a little intimidated in taking the group. I am glad I only found out after a couple of weeks into the study.



There was one week in the group where we touched on the issue of baptism. (Here is where I start, please at least hear me out) The subject was raised, and the mood in the room changed dramatically for a short moment.

One of the Majors was starting to launch off into a spiel about how the Salvation Army didn’t believe in baptism.

I quickly said that we wouldn’t get into a debate and moved on. While I had already been baptized in water when I first became a born again Christian, the issue didn’t really worry me.



I have read the history as to why and how this doctrine came about. William Booth didn’t want people to trust in the act itself, and said that you are baptized in your heart when you become a Christian. I agree with this.

What I am concerned about, is that I have noticed that many Salvationists ( Not all) have substituted this with trusts in other things instead. Its like they are now trusting in their membership to the Salvation Army and the doctrines of the Salvation Army, above the bible itself. I could see on that night that people were exulting what the Salvation Army had to say on the subject, and were not even prepared to consider what the bible said. Remembering I agree with the reasons why William Booth introduced this doctrine, but these soldiers would not even entertain the thought of possibly looking at scriptures. It was like it was taboo to even examine the Word of God on this subject.



I have also read that the Salvation Army does not dismiss those who do believe in the physical act of water baptism. This is good. But it seems like an us and them spiritual pride has evolved of the many years of the Army’s history. I really wonder if William Booth is looking down from heaven, thinking that he had made a mistake. In an attempt to stop people trusting in physical acts as salvation, over the years the doctrine eroded into something where people are trusting in the doctrine instead, as a substitute for the very thing William Booth wanted to eliminate.



I have noticed in the Box Hill church that there have been many who have gone out and been water baptised.

Its never made public within the church itself. The whole idea of the physical act of water baptism is to make public what has happened in your heart. Instead it has become almost like a dirty little secret that some go away and do in small little private groups. I really feel sad about this.



Although my readings of the bible make me believe that we should make a public display of the inner Godly working, I have no doubt in a persons salvation if they have not done the physical act.



It concerns me when on occasion I have spoken to some Salvationists, that they have a deep unrest, unease, doubt,

about if they really should be water baptized. This is bad fruit. I believe the official church stance should change.

People should be encouraged from the platform to be baptized, but those who do not want to, that’s fine too.



In reading Back what I have written I hope I have explained myself well. Writing has never been my strong point.



I would be interested in your thoughts about what I have written.



Thanks for taking the time to consider my letter.



Kind regards



Ben frawley

 

[Andy Broadley]

There is something that has concerned me for a while. Firstly I would like to say I am very sorry to rehash an old debate that has troubled the Salvation Army for some time. Also please bear with me while I give some background to my thoughts. Even while you read this, I ask you do not dismiss this letter before at least finishing what I need to say.

We won't dismiss it at all. We'll try and answer you as best we can. Or at least I will. Others will be able to do so much better.

I have been a Christian for 20 years. It was through the Pentecostal movement that first helped me to accept Jesus as my savior. Prior to this I was raised in a practicing Catholic family. Currently I am a member of the Box Hill Salvation Army (Non soldier, and also non adherent) I have been regularly attending the Salvation Army for approximately 5 years. First and foremost I am a Christian, and would not categorize myself as any particular brand of Christian group. That been said, I like what the Salvation Army stands for, in terms of their name, an Army dedicated to the Salvation of people. Army, acknowledging there is a fight involved in bringing people to Jesus.

Halelujah!

I have seen and participated in many aspects of Christian activity. From the formal structured Catholic types of meetings to the unstructured Spirit led meetings in the Pentecostal church. In looking back at all these experiences and in my relationship with God, I have strongly come to the conclusion that God is looking for a people who worship Him in freedom of spirit, and in new fresh ways. I believe that He hates ritualistic mantra type worship.

I believe God does not want EMPTY ritualistic mantra type worship. genuine worship of that kind is very meaningful, and I believe, welcomed by God. I have a great many good friends in the Catholic church who would feel quite hurt to think you considered their style of worship hateful to God.

Essentially He wants our hearts to rejoice in Him and not just repeat prewritten words on a Sunday and then call that Church.

I know that you would agree with me on this.

Our Father, who art in heaven.
Hallowed be Thy name.
Thy Kingdom come,
Thy will be done.....

Again Ben, it's not the words, but the heart of the person saying them that counts.

Next time you have someone saying a 'spontaneous' 15 minute prayer in an Army meeting, count how many times they use the word 'just'

Recently I was asked to lead a home group through the Box Hill Salvos. We worked through a book and a set of videos titled “The purpose Driven life” written by a pastor by the name of Rick Warren. We all enjoyed the book and the time together. It was a great time of spiritual refreshing and conformation of our beliefs etc. At the time I did not realize there were 4 retired officers who were also in the group. Had I known I may have felt a little intimidated in taking the group. I am glad I only found out after a couple of weeks into the study.

Sounds great, and i do know what you mean. I would have felt the same way too.

There was one week in the group where we touched on the issue of baptism. (Here is where I start, please at least hear me out) The subject was raised, and the mood in the room changed dramatically for a short moment.

One of the Majors was starting to launch off into a spiel about how the Salvation Army didn’t believe in baptism.

I quickly said that we wouldn’t get into a debate and moved on. While I had already been baptized in water when I first became a born again Christian, the issue didn’t really worry me.

Well handled. But was it a spiel or an explanation?

I have read the history as to why and how this doctrine came about. William Booth didn’t want people to trust in the act itself, and said that you are baptized in your heart when you become a Christian. I agree with this.

Me too

What I am concerned about, is that I have noticed that many Salvationists ( Not all) have substituted this with trusts in other things instead. Its like they are now trusting in their membership to the Salvation Army and the doctrines of the Salvation Army, above the bible itself. I could see on that night that people were exulting what the Salvation Army had to say on the subject, and were not even prepared to consider what the bible said. Remembering I agree with the reasons why William Booth introduced this doctrine, but these soldiers would not even entertain the thought of possibly looking at scriptures. It was like it was taboo to even examine the Word of God on this subject.

I think that by far and away the vast majority of Salvationists would never class Army doctrine above Scripture, althgough i agree that there are some.
Sadly there are some peop[le who are Salvationists first and Christians second, but I also believe that you will find exactly the same in every donomination.

I have also read that the Salvation Army does not dismiss those who do believe in the physical act of water baptism. This is good. But it seems like an us and them spiritual pride has evolved of the many years of the Army’s history. I really wonder if William Booth is looking down from heaven, thinking that he had made a mistake. In an attempt to stop people trusting in physical acts as salvation, over the years the doctrine eroded into something where people are trusting in the doctrine instead, as a substitute for the very thing William Booth wanted to eliminate.

The Army certainly would not reject anyone (Salvationist or otherwise) who chose water baptism, any more than it wold dismiss me if I joined my catholic friends and prayed the Rosary, or took Communion with my Anglican friends.

I think it is unfair to sugest that Salvationists have simply substituted doctrine for any of these things.

That they do not constitute main stream discussion within the Army, is simply a result of their not being part of Army worship.

And I don't think that General Booth is thinking he made a mistake. I'm sure there are many things about the modern Army that cause him great frustration, but not this.

I have noticed in the Box Hill church that there have been many who have gone out and been water baptised.

True for most Corps

Although my readings of the bible make me believe that we should make a public display of the inner Godly working, I have no doubt in a persons salvation if they have not done the physical act.

Isn't the uniform a public display? I would class it as such.

It concerns me when on occasion I have spoken to some Salvationists, that they have a deep unrest, unease, doubt,

about if they really should be water baptized. This is bad fruit. I believe the official church stance should change.

People should be encouraged from the platform to be baptized, but those who do not want to, that’s fine too.

It's a matter of personal choice. Army doctrine states that it is not a requirement, but does not prevent it.
Bad fruit? I don't think so for a moment, and there is no need to change the Army's stance on it. It works fine already.

In reading Back what I have written I hope I have explained myself well. Writing has never been my strong point.

Looked pretty good to me Ben

I would be interested in your thoughts about what I have written.



Thanks for taking the time to consider my letter.



Kind regards



Ben frawley

Thanks Ben. A pleasure to discuss this with you. I hope my comments have helped. </EM>