In a denomination that stands against war except as a last measure, isn't it a bit strange for some United Methodists to call their teen outreach program the UM Army?
I'm told it's mostly an East Texas thang, and I do recall writing about this back in Longview.
But no matter what they call it, the kids do good work.
Should we look for another name and not refer to the fight (sorry, but don't know what else to call it without confusing readers about what I mean) as spiritual warfare? The analogy in the NT is putting on the spiritual armor of God. The results of losing such battles can be just as deadly - spiritually and physically. Sorry, but I had to use the word dead; don't know what else to call it. Maybe another word for dead would be mortally challenged?:)
Posted by: Marc | June 14, 2008 at 10:46 PM
I'm always wary of military metaphors and Christian service. Thanks for bringing it to our concern.
From what little I can glean, I think the problem is there is no reason for the UM ARMY to be called an army other than it is a convenient acronym (United Methodist Action Reach-out Mission by Youth).
I mentioned this post to a friend and they said "well, what about the Salvation Army?" Which is a good point, except they are called the Salvation Army because they are organized like an army: with ranks and places of service! Interesting!
Finally, this reminds me of General Conference when the Bishops pledged to not use language of "defeat" and "prevail" regarding legislation to keep from using military language. It was ridiculed a bit, but overall I think the little ways we separate military language from our speaking, the more disconcerting the language will become.
Posted by: Jeremy! | June 15, 2008 at 12:44 PM