Dec 26 2007
The facts about religion and chaplains in the military…
[These are my thoughts and not those of Campus Crusade or my parents]
Here are the facts about religion and chaplains in the military:
1. In the military, there are Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Islamic etc chaplains.
2. Each chaplain is free to share his faith beliefs all he wants within the military guidelines given him. They are not muzzled.
3. Each chaplain is responsible for providing for the spiritual needs of all the soldiers under him or her. Therefore they provide and announce:
- On Sundays, on many bases, there are different services available for Roman Catholic and Islamic and for any chaplain who chose to provide his.
- Buses pick up some to go off post to Synagogues, Mormon temples, Greek Orthodox etc.
- Even Wiccans can meet as a group as long as the meeting is open to anyone.
- No one is compelled to attend any meeting but can attend any if they choose.
4. Any chaplain can use volunteers to teach classes on Sunday morning as long as that volunteer teaches under his or her supervision.
- Chaplains can recruit their volunteers from the community.
5. All belief groups want to share their beliefs to the world. In the America, they are free to do this as long as they do it by the rules.
For some reason those who are not followers of Jesus have problems with Christian groups ministering to the military. Here is what I want to know:
- I want to know if there are Pagan, Wiccan, Buddhists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jewish and other groups who send missionaries to the military who raise their own financial support?
- Are their atheist groups who raise their own financial support to assist the military in their emotional and educational needs?
- Show me where the Military Ministry of Campus Crusade has violated the Constitution? The Separation of Church and State was to protect the Church from the State not the other way around.
- What harm is being done to our military?
- Do those who have a beef really care about the military personnel or are they trying to make a political statement?
These are questions I want answered. I’m tired of being called a “right-winged bigot” and a “fundamentalist” and every form of profanity in the book. Personally I’m ready for the US to leave Iraq but I support or military and our leaders. I’m a follower of Jesus who wants to fulfill the calling God has given me. I follow the laws and I’m tolerant of other’s beliefs. It’s time the “other” beliefs showed a little tolerance of Christ followers too.
What do you think?
6 responses so far
I think the watchdog group’s problem relates to the stated purpose of campus crusade:
http://www.ccci.org/about-us/ministry-profile/index.aspx “Helping to fulfill the Great Commission in the power of the Holy Spirit by winning people to faith in Jesus Christ, building them in their faith and sending them to win and build others; and helping the Body of Christ do evangelism and discipleship”
The sole purpose of Campus Crusade is to make converts that make more converts. I think the watchdog group figures that Crusade gets too much free reign, endorsement, and access to people in basic training and cadets at the Air Force Academy.
I also think that the watchdog group does not appear to have a problem with the MOS of chaplain. Perhaps they view a chaplain as a resource person for folks who are already people of faith in the military? I suspect they don’t see the role of chaplain as being evangelistic at all.
In short, I think the watchdog folks think this: any religious group should not have unfettered access to people in basic training with the official endorsement of the US Army. Their nightmare is a US Army where evangelical Christianity is the “approved” faith, even though there will be enough other chaplains available for the “less than highly approved” faiths.
The point that Kevin seems to be making is that all religious groups have equal access to folks in Basic Training, they can make converts to their heart’s content. If Campus Crusade is the only group using that access, how is it their fault? Their nightmare is: this is one more example of the persecution of evangelicals by the “secular humanists”.
It’s an interesting discussion that probably should be litigated. Is basic training the equivalent of a public school? Is basic traininig so stressful to the individual that it makes them open to becoming evangelicals because that’s what is expected in the army (kind of like the understanding that the military is populated by republicans)? If a religious group can raise it’s own financial support, should it have total access to recruits during basic training? Does freedom of religion mean that the Crusade is unable to freely practice without making converts? Kind of a knotty problem going on here.
It reminds me of when King Harod ordered the murder of all the Jewish male babies in an effort to get rid of Jesus. I think Christianity poses more threat than any other religion, otherwise why would some want to get rid of it? It didn’t work when Harod tried either.
God promises His word would not return void. Men may try, but our God reigns and Christ is alive.
Kevin,
I’ve read several articles about this situation online. Though, I’ve yet to see specific allegations against your parents ministry. The MRFF’s real beef is with the United States Military and the Secretary of Defense not with Christian organizations. So it seems that your parents ministry is being dragged into something where they don’t belong. That’s unfortunate.
All that said, I think everyone should first read Jeremy Hall’s original complaint filed against Gates and the Military. Efforts aimed at Kevin’s parents ministry is unnecessary and doesn’t help their lawsuit. If what Hall alleges is true in the complaint below - he should be able to prove that his religious freedom was indeed violated by military officers.
I don’t think there are new questions that the Courts need to answer. Instead, prior principles/precedents can be applied. And it seems that if any Christian organization is allowed access to the cadets - then Hall should have the right to hold meetings for Free Thinkers just as Campus Crusade holds Bible studies. The military seems to be at fault for creating a hostile environment towards those who do not proclaim Jesus Christ as their Lord. All that said, atheists and free thinkers must understand that religious freedom protects my right as a Christian to share my faith in the public square. Likewise, atheists have the right to share their beliefs/philosophy of life/etc. with theists. I also think that Christian organizations ministering to the military should abandon all militaresque language in their speech and marketing. For instance one manual for a military ministry allegedly states that the organization’s responsibility include “working with Chaplains and Military personnel to bring lost soldiers closer to Christ, build them in their faith and send them out into the world as government paid missionaries.” Phrases like “government paid missionaries” are not helpful. I can read that sentence to mean that the organization wants to fulfill the Great Commission. But many others read such phrases to imply that military ministries have a theocratic-dominionist agenda and wish to use the government to evangelize the masses with coercive tactics. In a military environment, the language may be cute and acceptable to most but its not helpful.
Anyways, the complaint is worth reading. If there is an updated complaint that anyone knows of - I’d like to read that too.
The Complaint
OLM,
Very good insight regarding the concerns of each side.
BDW,
Good observations, and thanks for posting the link - I found it helpful to see the nature of the complaint first hand. If the facts are not disputed, I think Hall has a good case against Gates and Welborn.
I spent ten years in the United States Air Force, active duty. Never ONCE did I see a military chaplain COERCE or “force” someone to “believe” or even entertain the thought of “religious belief.”
What I did see:
Wonderful men (and women) who were not afraid to preach the Gospel of Christ in power and proclamation, genuinely anointed and inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Wonderful men and women who were not afraid or ashamed of the testimony of Christ–but who were not abrasive or abusive with the “testimonies.”
I’m not sure Hall has a good case…and I trust Secretary Gates.
Why the mention of Jehovah’s Witnesses? They shun the military and anything to do with it.