The Problem with the Salvation Army

If you hang around the right corners of the internet, you've undoubtedly encountered at least an article or two on why participating in donation drives with the Salvation Army, either by ringing the bells for them or by donating to a bell ringer, can be deeply problematic, mostly driven by the simple fact of the disrespect of the Salvation Army towards the LGBTQIA+ community.

In reaction to this, the Salvation Army at the National level and numerous smaller regional levels have responded, not by recanting their theology condemning lifestyles outside of the monogamous, married, cishet norms, but by attempting to assure all that their theology ALSO respects the image of God and so they should welcome all to their shelters.

Defenders of the SA often point to those statements, shrug, and say; "Just because they disagree with a lifestyle doesn't mean they won't help." And for some members of the SA church, that might be true. But there is a problem... Churches are ultimately a collection of individuals, and in emergency situations, the flaws of an individual will often UNSTOPPABLY take precedence over any kind of national, umbrella policy.

If you have been badly wounded, and an EMT arrives to give aid, if they choose not to due to a "disagreement" with your lifestyle, there is no appeal. Sure, another source of help MIGHT arrive, but in an emergency, you are often completely at their mercy. That's why proposed laws in favor of the "religious rights" of emergency care providers are so deeply dangerous: in a critical moment, there is no time to argue about lifestyle or constitutional rights. You need help now, and if they refuse to provide it, you are out of luck.

For all of their National and or regional posturing on people from all walks of life being deserving of help, the fact of the matter is that the Salvation Army's theological stance towards the LGBTQIA+ community compromises their capacity to give Christ-like emergency aid on a FUNDAMENTAL level. For every caregiver who understands that their own, personal beliefs on appropriate relationships should not interfere with offering the love of God to another, as repeatedly commanded in the scriptures, those who do not understand that are still placed in a position where they will turn away someone in need, and in that moment, the money the organization has been given has been misused. These aren't isolated incidents, but instead inevitable consequences of the theology behind the Salvation Army.

Even with all of the good that they do (and they do a LOT of good for a lot of people) such a fundamental flaw should be a dealbreaker. Your money is better spent going elsewhere than their kennels, your time is better spent doing things other than ringing their bells, because despite their PROBABLY good intentions, the fact is that until they finally reevaluate who they are on a fundamental, theological level, their ability to provide aid to those in need will be tainted in a way that shouldn't be ignored in the name of the Christmas feel-goods.

When participating in any charity work, especially in areas concerning emergency care, it is vitally important to understand the underlying ideologies at work. With religious organizations, that means knowing their theology. And if their theology condemns the lifestyles of a group most likely to find themselves in need of emergency shelter, food, or other care, then they are a bad choice to provide said care.

You wouldn't put someone who vocally despises animals in charge of a pet shelter. How much more careful should we be when it comes to the care of those who bear the very image of God?