The Day the Associate Divisional Commander Was Promoted to Glory

Many will remember joann's visit to hc last october- here's an article she wrote yesterday.

SUNDAY, APRIL 10, 2011

It began as an ordinary day, as so many days of consequence tend to do. It was a Friday. The trains were delayed heading into New York City. There was enough hot water for showers for everyone. The writer’s conference was concluding its workshops.

Then came the whispers. “Did you hear? The Associate Divisional Commander has been Promoted to Glory.” As a corps officer in the hinterlands of Ohio I seldom get the scoop on any breaking news in the Salvation Army, but my presence at the territorial headquarters conference center put me in the loop for this report. “She’s dead – there won’t be any more associate positions within the SA command structure. They – whoever ‘they’ is/are – have killed her off.” (Note that I don’t need to use language that’s gender-inclusive here because the associate has been female – and note too that I’ve taken poetic license with these quotes).

The decision had actually been made prior to April 8, 2011, but on this day the changes of appointment were released for divisional leaders in the East. In each appointment, the female spouses were named to the position of Divisional Director of Women’s Ministries – no associate divisional commander designation anymore.

So what? We no longer have Brigadiers, as the last few retired officers with that rank are going to Glory as well, and that change wasn’t earth-shaking. In fact, I’m kind of glad it’s gone since I’d probably be a Brigadier by now. And I nearly turned cartwheels when the bonnet was given a respectful burial – that historically cherished headgear was downright uncomfortable. I’m all for change, so why am I sorrowful and angry about this change of designation?

Here’s why. The associate divisional commander designation was an attempt on the part of Salvation Army leadership to assign couples to divisional leadership in a way that could replicate the model of the division of labor available to corps officers. When assigned as the DC/ADC, it was possible for the couple to divide their responsibilities in a way that honored their separate giftings and abilities. The title ADC implied and honored a shared leadership and a positional recognition of the experience and abilities of the female spouse. I can’t say that the Divisional Director of Women’s Ministries makes that same assumption. (See Captain Lisa VanCleef’s recent “Partners – or not?” in The Officer (November/December 2010) for further discussion of this concept).

Of course, even without specific titles and appointments, God’s work can be done. But within our culture, titles are important, and they are also important to staff, advisory boards and others that we work with. They speak to our structure, theology, history and practice. Titles do matter. As one Facebook comment noted, “If we exercise an authority without the position, we are in danger of our leadership ability being misunderstood, just because we are not designated for that task. People need clear position – [attempting to provide leadership without the position] is just as dangerous as being in a position without the needed qualifications to fill the task.”

Here are a few theological questions. Is this change a movement towards a complementarian view of men and women based purely on gender? Are we moving away from an egalitarian view of men and women and their work for the Kingdom? Are we, in this decision, reverting to a view of headship that would be more compatible with our Southern Baptist brothers rather than the teachings and modeling of Catherine and William Booth? Are we suggesting that a woman’s role really is only to minister to other women, that a woman’s voice isn’t appropriate for teaching or leading men? Are we moving closer to that?

Then there’s history. Within current Salvation Army circles, there is a definite cognitive dissonance that forms for women in ministry (especially married women), for while women are theoretically given equal opportunity by policy, practice proves a contradiction, as Eason points out historically. Even though given equal opportunity by the written regulations of the organization, women were considerably less likely to be in leadership, and women often took a lesser role upon marriage (Eason, 2003). Upon appointment of their husbands to leadership roles, women officers historically were called “to a less conspicuous part of His great vineyard,” and urged to “not judge as to the relative importance of the work we do for Him, whether this or that” (Higgins 1931, 266-267). That argument is not acceptable to many Salvationist women in today’s world.

There is a tension between the written policies that indicate that women have all of the rights and privileges of men within the organization, and the actual practices that do not support that policy (Satterlee 2005), as is the case in some other denominations as well (Lehman 2001, 8, Chaves 1997, 1). This tension includes the stained-glass ceiling for career advancement, the lack of financial compensation for the married woman officer, and role expectations that often are framed along gender lines as noted in the DDWM designation. Increasingly, these policies and practices create a cognitive dissonance that becomes especially problematic for married women officers, particularly those at midlife whose energies no longer have to be divided between home, children and ministry – pretty much where those being appointed to divisional leadership find themselves.

Some Salvationists, both men and women, don’t feel that change is necessary or even appropriate in this area and don’t understand why this is of concern to many officers. Why? Status quo, dynamics within the marriage, male hubris, female self-image struggles, a desire for an easier life, the role of the self-fulfilling prophecy (organizational expectations), patriarchal patterns – some or all play a role in opinions around this subject. We may not be at the point yet where critical mass has formed on the side of change, and so we must continue to be open for dialogue on this vital subject, providing theological support as well as outlining the pragmatic implications of our failure to achieve the goal of having appointments and responsibilities commensurate with the women’s gifts, abilities and experience.

Is the ADC title/role the best solution? Perhaps not, as some suggest. But a return to what some recognize as the Army’s women officer ghetto is far from a viable solution for 2011.

Many have a two-fold fear at this point. The first is that the Salvation Army will have difficulty in attracting capable married women who see the limitations that will be theirs in ministry. They either will not enter the training school or they will leave within the first ten years of officership. The second is that those women of my generation – in our 40’s, 50’s and 60’s will ‘defect in place,’ remaining in the Army but identifying patriarchy and its impact while taking responsibility for our own spiritual lives, remaining on their own terms – perhaps less wholeheartedly committed to the organization. Winter, Lummis and Stokes believed that the women who are “defecting in place” may do so because:
They continue to have the need for continuity, for community and connection, the desire to remain a part of a tradition in which one has one’s roots is significant for many women. So they choose to remain in a way that will not violate their integrity. At the same time, deep within is the hope that the values they profess will one day be accepted and the institution will change. (Winter, Lummis and Stokes 1995, 197)

It used to be about what I wanted for me, but that’s not the point anymore – it’s too late. But I want my younger Salvationist sisters to have the opportunity to blossom into leaders for the future – whether they are married or not. And I thought that the ADC designation was a start.

I have a dear friend named Zoe (life). There is a sense of a prayerful, prophetic mantle upon Zoe. She wants to be a preacher when she grows up – or maybe a hairdresser. At age 9 she recently mused: “I feel like I’m standing in front of a door but I don’t know how to get the door open.” My dream is that when Zoe and her sisters are old enough to approach the door God leads them to (officer, preacher, hairdresser, listener), they will be “loosed” to fully offer all of their gifts, abilities and experiences in the cause of Christ. I want a Salvation Army door to be ready for Zoe where her gifts, abilities and experiences will be as generously received and honored as they are generously given.

As Commissioner Kay Rader wrote for Christians for Biblical Equality, “The task is too great for only half the force. We need the full force to win the world for God.” While the title given to women officers in one territory may seem like a small issue, this has larger consequence. At its foundation, this is not a women’s issue – this is a Kingdom issue, potentially with profound implications for the future of the Salvation Army.

So what do we do when someone has died? We grieve – denial, anger, bargaining, depression and (perhaps) acceptance. We sit. We bring casseroles. We wonder if there was anything we could have done to have kept them alive. And, if we’re like Mary, we tell Jesus about our sorrow. Lazarus, come forth!

Major JoAnn Shade

USA Eastern Territory