Greetings and best wishes for the New Year to the readers of this blog.  After a fairly long break during the holiday season, I would like to start the year with a topic that seemed to pick up steam at the end of 2021: criticism of the Salvation Army’s effort to fight racism.

The Mission Statement of the Salvation Army is posted on the organization’s website.  It states the following:

“The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian Church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.”

The Salvation Army considers itself an integral part of the Christian church, and its well-known charitable work is merely an expression of its commitment to Christian beliefs.  As of last November, according to Newsweek, the organization was reporting that it had “gifted more than $200 million in direct financial assistance to help people stay in their homes in 2021.” Since the beginning of the pandemic, it had “provided more than $225 million in meals, $81 million in utility assistance and $111 million in rent and mortgage assistance.”

The same month, it was also reported that “Americans gave more charitable donations to the United Way Worldwide and the Salvation Army in 2020 than to any other nonprofit focusing on direct aid, as reported by the Associated Press. Specifically, the SA raised $1.8 billion in 2020, an increase of 31 percent from the previous year.”

During its Red Kettle campaign, which occurs in the holiday season, and which historically brings in about 33% of the donations it receives, the Salvation Army saw a substantial shortage in both volunteers and donations.  Conservative media have reported that the shortage is a direct result of the Salvation Army’s fight against racism, initiated last April with the introduction of a guide titled Let’s Talk About Racism.  According to an article in the Washington Examiner, the guide ”discouraged ‘colorblindness’ and called on white people to ‘evaluate racist attitudes and practices.’” Accusations also include the claim that the Salvation Army is asking white people to apologize for “whiteness.”

The above accusations probably sound familiar to those who have been paying attention to the current debate on Critical Race Theory.  The article in Newsweek cited above directly links the Salvation Army to Critical Race Theory with the following introduction of the issue:

“As The Salvation Army launches its Red Kettle Campaign this holiday season, some of its long-time donors are withdrawing their support from the 156-year old charitable organization citing its newly embraced “woke” ideology as the reason.

Of great concern to loyal supporters and faithful Salvationists is the initiative dubbed ‘Let’s Talk About Racism.’ In a nutshell, its curriculum outlines the Christian church’s alleged racial collusion and provides action steps to analyze and combat racism through an “anti-racist” lens while incorporating Critical Race Theory.

Definitions of institutional and systemic racism are included while real or perceived differences in life outcomes (“inequities”) are attributable not to individual effort and other circumstances, but to discrimination. Sections address topics including police brutality, health care and Black unemployment linking such topics to ‘racial inequity.’”

Systemic racism.  Inequities.  This all sounds familiar.  As suggested by the above statement, there is also strong disappointment being voiced by conservative supporters of the Salvation Army who feel that the organization is moving away from its Christian calling to embrace wokeness, a major reason why they are withdrawing their support.

In my article “Is Critical Race Theory Really Opposed to Biblical Teaching?” I examined and refuted the arguments presented by those who claim that CRT is against the Bible.  Here, I intend to examine the document Let’s Talk About Racism to see if it conforms to Christian teaching.

In its defense, the Salvation Army says Let’s Talk About Racism is meant to encourage internal discussions about racism and is not part of a compulsory program.  It states that “The Salvation Army denounces racism in all forms.”  But it acknowledges that “race and racism have created detrimental divisions and harm throughout the earth, even in our Christian schools of thought and methodology, and have led to slavery, caste systems, war, genocide, and unequitable systems and statuses.”

There should be nothing controversial about these statements, especially to a Christian.  The goal of the new initiative is then stated as follows:

“This resource is designed to foster conversations about racism and race so that we can join together to fight the evil of racism and create a more just and equitable society. Take this opportunity to listen and learn from each other as you open your hearts to what God is speaking to you.”

Since the Salvation Army considers itself a Christian outreach organization, the Christian motivation behind the effort is further introduced:

“A major component of The Salvation Army’s international mission statement is ‘… to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in his name without discrimination.’ However, we cannot truly serve our brothers and sisters if we allow discrimination and racism to happen around them or even within The Salvation Army. Our International Position Statement reads, ‘The Salvation Army acknowledges with regret, that Salvationists have sometimes shared in the sins of racism and conformed to economic, organizational and social pressures that perpetuate racism.’, and challenges us to fight against racism. As Salvationists and Christians, we are called to stand against any form of sin or oppression, and racism is no different.”

As far as I can tell, these words may be the reason for the anger expressed by white conservatives against the document.  Fundamentally, it’s about what it means to be a Christian.  Those who are angry claim that the Salvation Army has been, so far, doing admirable benevolence work without being involved in politics.  They view efforts to promote diversity and inclusion as political matters that are of no concern to a Christian.  An invitation to participate in the fight for social justice is, to them, a distraction from the real work of the church, which belongs in the spiritual domain.  And very importantly, they see such an invitation as an insult against whiteness: somebody is accusing white people of being evil because of their skin color.  Some of them feel that they are just nice people who are trying to do the right thing, but are now being accused of collaborating with evil forces.

Those who feel that they are doing enough and should not be asked to participate in matters that are of no concern to them are certainly free to feel that way.  That is a valid human perspective, but that is not what the church of Christ is about.  In the Old Testament, the prophets constantly denounced the rich and powerful who perpetuated a system that oppressed the poor, the widows and the orphans.  In the New Testament, Jesus took the prophets’ efforts to a new level by announcing the era of the kingdom of God, and by making it the most urgent pursuit for his disciples: “But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matthew 6:33)

Old Testament pictures of the kingdom of God are visions of a restored earth where God’s rule is in effect, leading to justice for all (the Old Testament has very little to say about the afterlife).  And Jesus makes it clear that he is talking about God’s rule on earth when he says “Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”  It is on earth that he wants the desire to please God to drive human behavior.  Therefore, the notion that the church should limit itself to spiritual matters, and avoid advocacy for social justice, is fraudulent and has nothing to do with New Testament Christianity.

It is rather sad to see conservative commentators accusing the Salvation Army of betraying its Christian calling, when the opposite is true: The Salvation Army is trying to be true to its Christian calling.  And when it comes to matters of racism, it is in agreement with Christian leaders such as Jim Wallis, who wrote the book America’s Original Sin: Racism, White Privilege and the Bridge to a New America.  Wallis is a white man who does not hate his kind but has been trying his best to promote New Testament Christianity.

It is important to understand that traditional churches have not necessarily promoted New Testament Christianity.  They inherited a distorted form of Christianity that has led to much evil in the world because its leaders wanted to maintain their advantages in the world.  They therefore paid no mind to Jesus’ declarations which elevate the poor and peacemakers in the kingdom of God.  They preferred the notion that the poor are lazy and liked the idea of being able to use legalized violence to protect their privileges.  The ability to distort the teaching of Christ can be seen, for example, in the way “Christian” slave-masters interpreted Jesus’ Golden Rule: They claimed the rule simply meant that masters should treat slaves the way they would want to be treated if they too were slaves.  Of course, it’s easier to believe such nonsense if the church teaches that a person’s status on earth does not matter because only the afterlife matters.  Ironically, this thinking simply justifies the status quo: the slave must accept his condition and the master is vindicated.  The master-slave relationship is not questioned, but some masters get credit for being “good masters” and slaves get credit for being obedient.

But Jesus clearly disagrees and advocates for a way of life with a completely reversed value system, in which being a master is not valued and should not be pursued in the first place:

“Jesus called them together and said, ‘You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.’” (Matthew 20:25-28)

Jesus wants his disciples to practice kingdom of God ethics and be examples for others to follow.  He promotes love of neighbor and illustrates it with the parable of the Good Samaritan who goes out of his way to help a stranger in distress (Luke 10:25-37).  In the parable, the Levite and the priest, who represent the religious orthodoxy of his time, refuse to get involved.  It is the despised Samaritan who, out of compassion for his fellow human being, gets involved and acts in accordance with God’s will.  Isn’t that what the Salvation Army is trying to do?

The guide presents important information to educate Salvationists on the lingering realities associated with a history of racism.  Those realities include disadvantages experienced by victims of racism on matters of home ownership, health, incarceration, education, and on such matters, the Salvation Army is in agreement with Critical Race Theory.  Indeed, these are just observable realities.

But the guide also presents historical information about the role played by Christian churches in encouraging the evil of racism, beginning with the infamous Doctrine of Discovery, issued by the Catholic Church at the end of the 15^th Century, when the European nations set out to colonize foreign lands, taking for themselves territories occupied by native populations of those lands.  The doctrine essentially allowed the colonizers to grab, by force, any territory not occupied by white people, and treat the indigenous populations as subhuman creatures that needed to be saved through servitude.  And the colonists were happy to make full use of this divine authorization to do evil. These are just facts of history.  A true Christian would learn from them and commit himself to the building of a better future for all people.  But critics of the Salvation Army see this, not as a war against evil, but as an attack against whiteness.  Therefore, they withdraw their support.

The guide also discusses the historical role played by American leaders and churches to maintain the institution of slavery.  A celebrated Methodist leader such as George Whitfield argued for the reintroduction of slavery in Georgia.  Southern Baptists split from northern Baptists over slavery matters, and four slave owners founded the Southern Baptist Convention which opposed any attempt to eliminate slavery.  Southern Presbyterians split from the larger body over matters of race relations.  Methodists in the Southern States formed their own separate body so that their clergymen could own slaves.  And of course, there is no reason to believe that court decisions such as the Dred Scott ruling (1857), against the emancipation of black slaves, did not reflect the will of many of the good Christian people of America.

When critics of the Salvation Army declare that the organization is abandoning its Christian values, which Christian values are they referring to?  With all due respect, it seems to me that those who see attempts to embrace race reconciliation as attacks against whiteness must ask themselves which side they would have been on during those debates about slavery.  Are they saying that today, in America, any trace of the above history of racism has been permanently erased and anyone who mentions it is against Christianity?

In the guide, the Salvation Army describes itself as “mostly progressive early on in race relations.”  But it recognizes that “While many Salvationists have acted firmly and courageously against racism, The Salvation Army acknowledges with regret, that Salvationists have sometimes shared in the sins of racism and conformed to economic, organizational and social pressures that perpetuate racism.”  Therefore, its recent effort to promote diversity and inclusion merely reaffirms the approach to Christianity it adopted from the beginning.  That approach is expressed in the following statement:

“We affirm that racial and multicultural integration of believers is desirable and feasible within a local body of Christ because the gospel transcends human culture. Faith in Christ Jesus is what makes each of you equal with each other, whether you are a Jew or a Greek, a slave or a free person, a man or a woman.”

If Christians, in all honesty, see a playing field that has been set up to deny opportunities to some, they cannot, in all honesty, promote color-blindness.  That would merely be a disguised defense of the status quo.  Did the prophets in the Bible accept the status quo?  Didn’t they ask the kings to promote justice?

“Hear the word of the Lord to you, king of Judah, you who sit on David’s throne—you, your officials and your people who come through these gates. This is what the Lord says: Do what is just and right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place.” (Jeremiah 22:2-3)

“How long will you defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?
Defend the weak and the fatherless;
uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.” (Psalm 82:2-4)

I admit that I can write such things because I have a mind of my own and am not subjected to anybody’s agenda.  It turns out that the Salvation Army, sadly, had to withdraw its guide (temporarily, I hope) for further review, recognizing that some of the wording may have inadvertently offended some people, even though the substance of the guide remains consistent with its mission.  That is understandable since it must rely heavily on voluntary donations to do its work.  But isn’t that how the advance of Jesus’ kingdom of God gets derailed by pseudo-Christian considerations?