Correct me if I’m wrong here, because often I am. And I do not want to rely on hearsay or useless erroneous conjecture. But as I’ve been reading various publications and blogs of officers and leaders, I hit on a disturbing notion in regards to how Generals of The Salvation Army are elected. Am I incorrect in assuming that a large portion of the election process is weighed within economic and statistical measures? By that I mean do we put that much emphasis on those leaders who are perceived to have grown their territories in leaps and bounds? If this is the case, and I hope they are not, is this biblical?
Secondly, does this then preclude potential candidates who clearly have the intellect and godly principles from being elected based on the territories in which they are currently serving?
Hopes: The fastest growing regions of The Salvation Army are also within the poorest regions of this world…would the High Council consider a Commissioner from one of these regions as a viable candidate? My hope and dream is that we begin to see the progressive movement within the Army to consider the leadership of the entire world regardless of its economic or statistical support.
What I know: Not much. That much is true. But what I do know is that This Army has been historically revolutionary in this movement! We allow women to preach, Hallelujah! Regardless of gender, Salvationists have more equality than a lot of churches around the world! We are a holiness movement, and thus we must continue to rely on His promptings and proddings within our Army for ‘greater things’. The mission is not over yet! And we continue to need leaders to rise who will not insulate the Army and play it safe but those who are willing move it forward!