CAP Chaplains -- problems?

[RiverAux]

Evidently the military has been having issues with their Chaplains trying to recruit new members for their own religion lately.  I haven't heard of any such problems with CAP Chaplains.  Frankly, I don't know exactly what the rules are for how "sectarian" military or CAP Chaplains are supposed to be in terms of regular religious services or prayers that they offer in public. 

Has this been an issue elsewhere in CAP?

[Eclipse]

Without being able to get into detail yes.

I don't know if its so much direct recruiting, as the problem I have had is
evangelism versus ecumenicalism.

[Chaplaindon]

RiverAux (et al),

This is part of a manufactured issue ... one created to advance a political agenda. The ostensible issue (you allude to) is that Christian chaplains are being prohibited by the DoD and/or the military from praying "in the Name of Jesus Christ," out of some misguided attempt at political correctness.

Such is simply not the case at all.

The actual truth of the matter has two (2) foci:

1.  Chaplains (both US military, and CAP -- who are also "endorsed military chaplains" albeit serving CAP) have and continue to have the right and freedom to pray as their conscience, faith, and endorsing religion directs DURING religious services. There are no constraints on practices or liturgies during worship services.

But there in lies a "bone of contention" with some. Although Chaplains (of all faiths, not just Christian) may pray (etc.) with impunity during worship, they are constrained by DoD policy, USAF regulation and instruction and CAPR's to be inclusive and nonsectarian while praying in secular (non-worship service) settings.

Thus, while saying a prayer at a WG deployment event (e.g. before leaving for Iraq, let's say) the WG Chaplain (an O-6), a Buddhist in this hypothetical example, is required to say a general prayer --not one that favors one faith tradition over another. A Muslim WG/HC would be similarly constrained from pronouncing the primacy of the Prophet during his prayer. Likewise would a Christian HC be prohibited from praying --in THAT secular setting-- in the Name of Jesus.

In such a setting the chaplain is praying on behalf of all faith traditions --not just hers/his-- and even praying for those who have no faith tradition (there are atheists in foxholes, contrary to the common wisdom).

So in a worship setting a Buddhist Chaplain, or a Muslim Chaplain, or a Roman Catholic Chaplain (and so forth) may be a sectarian and unrestrained in her/his prayers as their conscience and ecclesiastical endorser will allow. Likewise in a SECULAR (non-worship) setting, all must be similarly NON-sectarian and inclusive -- per Regulation(s).

Sadly, there are those --who for what (I think) are political motives INCONSISTENT with the real role of the ministry and/or chaplaincy-- have distorted the reality to suggest that in all settings Christian Chaplains (and ONLY CHRISTIAN CHAPLAINS) are being forbidden to preach in Jesus' Name. This distortion/lie is getting around too. In my civilian parish I have received several impassioned phone calls from "concerned citizens" asking me to "get involved" politically to free our Christian Chaplains. I have kindly, but explicitly, given them the facts.

I am pleased that Chaplains (of all faiths) are similarly constrained from sectarian prayers during secular events. I would be uncomfortable (at the least) if a Muslim Chaplain pronounced that Muhammad was greater or better than Christ during a pre-SAREX-briefing prayer. I would expect a Muslim cadet/SM to be similarly upset if, in the same setting, I prayed ONLY in Jesus' Name.

It's a good rule.

2.  Recently, I saw a morning news show where a USN Chaplain (a Lt., I think) was decrying his pending dismissal from the Navy for "praying in the Name of Jesus." What a terrible miscarriage of justice, right? Not at all, ---as the story developed upon further questioning-- he was being dismissed for disobeying his commanding officer who ordered him NOT to wear his USN uniform to a protest and prayer in front of the White House.  He wasn't being disciplined for praying, he was being disciplined for disobeying an order and wearing his uniform when he shouldn't have.

Unfortunately, I suspect that the distortion of facts and the sensational claims being made --for POLITICAL GAIN (IMHO)-- has and will continue to scare off some potential chaplains from military or CAP service. Ultimately, this agenda-making will harm the women and men in uniform (military and CAP) who benefit from the service of the chaplaincy.

I hope a good dose of fact and not rumor, distortion, and falsehoods will stem the tide.  People need to "play politics" with potholes and solid waste management and not the emotional and spiritual needs of our military and CAP personnel.

To that end, if you hear someone crisis-mongering this issue "Praying in the Name of Jesus," set them straight. Together we can stem the tide of this nonsense.

[DogCollar]

Chaplain Don is correct.  Both the endorsement process and the appointment process are clear that Chaplains in public/secular settings are to perform their duties in a respectful, hospitable manner and NOT to use the language of a "specific" faith.  In worship, that is billed as Christian worship, for Christians, obviously, Jesus name may be used. 

I would invite anyone that has issues to read the Covenant and Code of Ethics for CAP Chaplains that can be found at the CAP website in the Regulations area.  It is a fine document.

[DNall]

The problem he mentions is not about the rules or chaplains grumbling about following them. There have been a few scandals lately, the Academy being one that was all over the news, in which people were pressured into religious activity, including being blocked from positions & other penalties for not doing so. Even SOS says you can't have a firm basis in core values without a religious background, and calls on our chaplains to proselytize in order to create that common moral basis.

I think a lot of CAP chaplains are lackadaisical with the rules, just like CAP members are compared to the way it works in the real military.

[Chaplaindon]

Dennis,

I would caution against using the word "proselytize." It's a "landmine."

In the US military and in CAP, proselytizing (active and overt indoctrination and recruitment of followers) is ONLY acceptable in strictly religious settings (cf: worship services, Sunday Schools, confirmation classes, Bar Mitvah prep, and so forth).There must not be ANY ambiguity on that point.

Chaplains are explcitly forbidden to engage in sectarian proselytizing while acting within secular roles.

First and foremost, EVERY chaplain in the military and CAP is a chaplain for ALL personnel who fall within their span of responsibility without any regard to the beliefs of each individual.  They are to provide pastoral care for ALL --not just those of their faith tradition or even their own Country (in wartime, chaplains are to minsiter to all sides).

Although I am a devout Christian, it would be a blatant violation of CAPR's and AFR's/AFI's for me to take advantage of --let's say-- my assignment as an Encampment Chaplain to try to convert a Muslim cadet to the Christian faith OUTSIDE of a voluntary worship service.

That hypothetical Muslim cadet would, of course, be welcome to attend our Christian worship service of her/his free will.

Likewise, it would be against the rules (and discriminatory) if --at the same hypothetical Encampment-- a Jewish cadet was told that she/he may not take the time out of their Friday evening activities to celebrate Sabbath telling her, "You can worship on Sunday with everybody else." Or a Jewish Chaplain to refuse to allow Christian worship during a SAREX because he already worshiped on the Sabbath.

On the other hand, once a member voluntarily enters a worship service that I (or another chaplain of whatever faith tradition, Christian or otherwise) lead, however, I/they can be as convicting or proselytizing as /they feel I/they must be.

While, as you say, SOS suggests --as normative-- the need for a "religious background" it cannot prescribe one faith/religious tradition as superior to another lest it violate the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.

Chaplains (and commanders) cannot get "lackadasical" or uninformed about religious accomodation in CAP. They must be engaged lest a USAFA-like scandal --wrought by a well-meaning but misled commandant (and challenged, thankfully by a courageous and stalwart chaplain, no less)-- recurr this time in CAP.

[DogCollar]

Well, I can only speak for myself here in CAP, but proselytizing in hopes of finding "common moral" ground is not only impossible it is HIGHLY unethical!.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that we should rename "Moral Leadership" training to Ethical Leadership training.  Yes, there is a major difference between morality and ethics.

Chaplains who insist that their "Religious Freedom" is being compromised by the ethical standards established by the militaries own chaplains corp, are using that argument as a straw man to make a wider political statement.  That statement is that American Values are threatened by a perceived lack of morality, too which the prescribe unethical behavior as the antedote.

Sorry to get on my soap box, but obviously this touches a nerve.

[Eclipse]

But there in lies a "bone of contention" with some. Although Chaplains (of all faiths, not just Christian) may pray (etc.) with impunity during worship, they are constrained by DoD policy, USAF regulation and instruction and CAPR's to be inclusive and nonsectarian while praying in secular (non-worship service) settings.

This is the specific issue I have had to personally deal with.

A chaplain, who knowingly had an audience of other faiths, refused to make his invocations non-denominational and then started trying to play the "religious restraint card".

After a heated discussion, we simply wnet without an invocation.  I left the event with VERY heated threats from him about all the complaints he was going to file.

This was after I had taken great pains to provide time for him to provide services as he saw fit the night before.

[DogCollar]

But there in lies a "bone of contention" with some. Although Chaplains (of all faiths, not just Christian) may pray (etc.) with impunity during worship, they are constrained by DoD policy, USAF regulation and instruction and CAPR's to be inclusive and nonsectarian while praying in secular (non-worship service) settings.

This is the specific issue I have had to personally deal with.

A chaplain, who knowingly had an audience of other faiths, refused to make his invocations non-denominational and then started trying to play the "religious restraint card".

After a heated discussion, we simply wnet without an invocation.  I left the event with VERY heated threats from him about all the complaints he was going to file.

This was after I had taken great pains to provide time for him to provide services as he saw fit the night before.

Thank you for not giving into the threats from this chaplain.  I would expect that you would be backed up by both your wing chaplain and national chaplain as well.

[Chaplaindon]

If your chaplain so-refused in a secular CAP setting (OUTSIDE of a designated worship service/devotional or other singularly religious event) then the CC should relieve her/him from their position.

The situation is not unlike --loose anaology warning-- a pilot who adamantly refuses to adhere to CAPR 60-1 ("I'm gonna fly aerobatics in the squadron 172 and nobody's gonna stop me") claiming a non-exisitent "pilot restraint" card.

No one is restraining any clergyperson (or pilot) from exercising her/his freedoms (this being at least a semi-free Country) in general. We are as CAP and (in the case of endoprsed CAP chaplains who fall under USAF/HC regs too) as CAP/USAF clergypersons and/or pilots --who wish to wear the uniform and "fly" our airplanes, etc.-- must adhere to the CAPR's.

If they wish to challenge, grandstand or take an ethical stand against those rules (e.g. the Navy Chaplain I mentioned in an earlier posting) they should take it through channels or protest OUT of CAP uniform/activities.

To do otherwise is disrespectful, disobedient and teaches our cadets and SM to be likewise.

[DNall]

I would caution against using the word "proselytize." It's a "landmine."

I understand that. I believe everyone understands the rules & nature of the chaplain service both in & out of sectarian services. The issue that has come up primarily on the military side is not limited to chaplains exclusively but has involved some, and very much is proselytizing & outright discrimination.

The cases in which chaplains have been directly responsible is small, but they also have a primary responsibility in preventing similiar activity by memebrs in their care. That's been more of an issue on the CAP side where our general membership doesn't always behave itself or even understand the standards to which they are required to live.

[DNall]

Well, I can only speak for myself here in CAP, but proselytizing in hopes of finding "common moral" ground is not only impossible it is HIGHLY unethical!.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that we should rename "Moral Leadership" training to Ethical Leadership training.  Yes, there is a major difference between morality and ethics.

Understand, and ML sessions are supposed to teach both ethics for leadership, AND a common moral ground - that's what core values are. In other words, I think it should have elements of moral instruction & of ethics. Indeed ethics cannot exist w/o a moral foundation. When talking about 12-18yo kids, you're building foundations, not capping the roof.

The portions of SOS I referred to (I just did this last week), specifically state that it's a problem getting people to live by core vallues because they don't have a shared religious upbringing - share judeo-christian values - as was the case in the past & that chaplains should work actively to remind those of us that do, and indoctrinate those that don't, and goes on to quote a couple bible versus while making the point. I crtainly wasn't offended, I thought it was right on, but it was right up on that line of pushing christianity, and advocating doing so as necessary to the AF mission. Obviously people hearing that can get over-zealous & go to far.

[Chaplaindon]

Dennis,

Well put. And relative to your statement that chaplains, "... have a primary responsibility in preventing similiar activity by memebrs in their care," I would suggest that (as a former squadron commander myself) commanders avail themselves of the expertise of their unit chaplain (or if their unit lacks an HC, then a local HC or one at another eschelon) on issues of religious accomodation so as to avoid minefields.

This is an area that a chaplain can be invaluable well beyond a monthly ML session.

This is an excellent reason to recruit/retain chaplain(s) into a local unit. Sadly, I have heard  members and commanders suggest that a unit is better of with a MLO in lieu of a chaplain.

A chaplain can be an enormous asset to a commander.

[DNall]

The issue I'm primarily referring to in CAP, is lots of home-school cadets being recruited & you know some of those parents can be a bit extreme. If you get enough of them around then they become the majority opinion locally & start pushing other people around. I've seen a similar thing happen with a series of Jewish families pushing people out. I've seen all kinds of stupid crap between immature kids & adults that can't keep their eye on the ball. Chaplains should be there stomping on that even before the CC has a chance. They are critical, especially in our org, and we need about 4 times as many as we got, but it's real hard to find good ones that can live within those lines & take care of their people first & foremost. It's a big adjustment from civilian ministry.

[Chaplaindon]

Dennis,

I would disagree with your assessment that, "ML sessions are supposed to teach both ethics for leadership, AND a common moral ground - that's what core values are" on several fronts.

One is simple semantics/linquistics. Ethics and Morals actual/literally mean the same thing-truly. It's just that "morals" comes from the Latin noun mores and "ethics" comes from an earlier Classical Greek noun ethos coined by Aristotle. One is Latin, one is Greek. They SHOULD mean the same thing.

Core values MAY be one way of making a moral/ethical decision but they needen't be the only one. Classical ethics speaks of three (3) distinct ethical/moral standpoints: rules (deontological), goals (teleological) and virtues/values (aretological). Leadership requires situational application of all three standpoints usually in a blended form.

All three standpoints can be corrupted. Rules-based ethics can result in a Nuremburg defense, "I was just following orders." Goals-based can result in a Machiavellian "ends justify the means" posture. And virtues requires some inate or provided basis which can be good or bad. Take for example indoctrination that says that suicide/homicide bombings are good. The resulting virtues-based decision would be corrupted.

Real harm can (and I think is done -- in places around the world) by indoctrinating people so as to corrupt ones value-base

In MLs I usually challenge the Cadets to make a decision about an issue/topic and then tell me from what stance they made it. Usually the virtues/values stance --with a situational test often being, "what kind of a person/citizen/CAP member/etc. would I be if I did this versus that?"--- the one that brings about the best answers.

That having been said, Judeo-Christian ethics and that of the Bible are not without pitfalls as well (e.g. slavery, polygamy, etc.) and don't take into account the virtues incumbent in non-Judeo-Christian faith traditions. Why even atheists can be honest, loving, decent, virtuos people.

Lastly ML's don't so much "teach ethics" as they permit cadets to WRESTLE, EXPERIENCE, and EXPERIMENT with ethics/morals (and various situations) and see what a difference even a subtle difference in stance or standpoint can make in a leadership decision. Through this experiement --not unlike leadershp laboratory-- the cadets, hopefully, learn to make better decisions not just in CAP but in life.

When done right, MLs are kind of like the moral/ethical equivilent of Project-X.

There are so important that I really disagree with the MLO program. ML's are not the place for para-professionals. The ML leaders need to have academic training in ethics as most chaplains who completed divinity school have.

[CAPOfficer]

The European Edition of the Stars & Stripes (2 March 07), has an article on this very subject.  On page four, a Navy Chaplain (Lt), with 16 years service was court-martailed and discharged from the service for invoking the name of Jesus in his services.  However, there are some other factors which weighted in on the discharge as well.  You can find the article at http://estripes.osd.mil/index.php?archive=202703761764088209645088238789 .

[DNall]

This could be a fun discussion.... I'm aware of the root & background of both words. The common modern meaning is that morals are the values & beliefs that determine right & wrong, while ethics are impassionate rules for behavior which may be based on morals, but need not be. Semantics though, as you say.

Understand the three points you mention, though I believe that's Aristotle again & I wouldn't actualize it that way, or as re-defined by Aquinas. I believe the way I would define it is in parallel to a Maslow style hierarchy. That on the bottom there is a foundation of virtue; based on your upbringing, religion, & strongest held beliefs; that this is where you get the right vs wrong instinct from & is most determinative of your actions. Up a layer is perceived morals, your goals if you will, the place where you think you are but aren't & wish you were but know you aren't, but the standard by which you try to judge others & hold yourself. There's ethics above that, which are rules not created by you & least determinative of your behavior. That includes both formal rules as well as cultural & societal norming & peer pressure, all of which can be good or bad.

The art applied in moral leadership sessions, in my opinion, is to guide participants to build that foundation of virtue, then to instruct in ethics drawn from core values to qualities & responsibilities of military leadership (NCOs in particular) so as to cause the individuals to actualize those external ethics to an increasingly organically integrated point up until they believe them to be basic controlling virtues for everything they say & do - just like one's faith in God should be.

The ML session you describe sounds a lot like sheltered little children being let out to exercises the moral muscle in a controlled environment where they can't hurt themselves & can be positively reinforced. That's fine for 5yos, it's naive in my opinion for the kids we work with. These kids are drinking, maybe using drugs, probably having sex, and we're usually dealing with the best of society. I prefer to treat them like adults & press my sessions toward indoctrination - yes real harm can absolutely be done by indoctrinating people to corrupt values, while real value is done indoctrinating them to equally strong belief in positive virtues. I believe they have plenty of time in the real world to practice, what I do is gain receptiveness from them that allows me to shape their personalities & future lives by controlling the foundation upon which they make all decisions. For sure that gets scary if you put a bad person in that spot, just as all good things can be turned to evil. I don't play games with these kids though. I need real measurable progress toward short-term goals, I need immediate behavior modification, I need independently functioning competent professional disciplined leaders, & I need to use that long-view technique to achieve these goals.

I'll be honest, I much prefer a chaplain in that role, I have enough power to shape their lives as a CP officer. I mean on the one hand it feels good when you turn one around & see them successful, and then there's others that go & join the military you're pretty sure from your influence & get themselves killed & you take responsibility for that too. I really would prefer to share that responsibility on another person & still have them driving topics toward my instructional objectives.

[Chaplaindon]

Thanks for the S&S link,

The article makes it clear that "He was court-martialed for disobeying orders" and that the praying "in the Name of Jesus" at "public military events" and that he wore his USN uniform to a political protest in front of the White House ... all significant no-no's.

It is sad that he lost his career and his "million-dollar pension" and that his family was evicted from military housing. Such can be the consequences of one's actions.

In the end, however sad it is that he lost his career (etc.) he wasn't discharged for praying in the Name of Jesus "in his services" as CAPOfficer, perhaps inadvertently wrote. 

[Chaplaindon]

The ML session you describe sounds a lot like sheltered little children being let out to exercises the moral muscle in a controlled environment where they can't hurt themselves & can be positively reinforced. That's fine for 5yos, it's naive in my opinion for the kids we work with. These kids are drinking, maybe using drugs, probably having sex, and we're usually dealing with the best of society. I prefer to treat them like adults & press my sessions toward indoctrination - yes real harm can absolutely be done by indoctrinating people to corrupt values, while real value is done indoctrinating them to equally strong belief in positive virtues. I believe they have plenty of time in the real world to practice, what I do is gain receptiveness from them that allows me to shape their personalities & future lives by controlling the foundation upon which they make all decisions. For sure that gets scary if you put a bad person in that spot, just as all good things can be turned to evil. I don't play games with these kids though. I need real measurable progress toward short-term goals, I need immediate behavior modification, I need independently functioning competent professional disciplined leaders, & I need to use that long-view technique to achieve these goals.

Guess it's a good thing you're not a chaplain. 

[DNall]

Guess it's a good thing you're not a chaplain. 

You know I do conduct ML sessions... in a socratic method with the objectives I sated right from military sources that are directly applicable. You'll also find I have a better record in terms of results per capita or year than anyone you're likely to meet. I got kids at West Point, AFAcad, & the Naval Acad right now (the latest of 16 in 13 years - counting my time off from CAP), that would follow me to hell without even being asked, and they'll be happy to tell you stories about kids we worked with that would be dead or in prison if we hadn't intervened, but who are now trusted combat leaders, & business executives. My results don't lie, and those people young & old will tell you I'm a humble but confident person that discourages personal followership.

I would tell you in general that what I'm doing in those sessions is most related to leadership values & ethics sections taught in every military leadership course, and not so much related to chaplain duties. We have chosen to use chaplains there because we don't have a lot else for them to do, and they are good at certain aspects of it, which you seem to have a firm grasp on, but there are other elments that require additional work to accomplish what the military is doing with those sessions & to carry that beyond instruction to the daily mentoring process.

I would further stress that you MUST treat them like adults ALWAYS. They are not children, even if we do keep lowering the age, and if you treat them like children they will act like it & they will be offended & act out because of that treatment. You've heard the advice that you should dress for the job you want, not the job you have; well you should treat cadets like adult airmen cause that's what they want & are learning to be. They will then respond & strive to meet that challenge, which they are mostly capable of.

If indoctrination is the word you're worried about, it's not bad either. It's causing a person to belive according to an institutional philosophy. That's what you are supposed to be doing.

[RiverAux]

Well, I opened the thread by saying that I wasn't aware of any problems.  After ChaplainDons great explanation, I guess I am aware of one -- a prominent chaplain in our Wing invoking Jesus during prayers at SAREXs, meetings, etc. 

[Chaplaindon]

"We have chosen to use chaplains there because we don't have a lot else for them to do, and they are good at certain aspects of it" -- how nice of you (et al) ... I don't know what I would do without your charity.

As to your larger thought about how to do ML, I will graciously conceed the point to your overwhelming resume and expertise (16 in 13 years, I am awe-struck).

Doubtless you are right, I mean, you MUST be --RIGHT?

And, what a shame it is that more of CAP --nationally-- doesn't (like your would-be-adult cadets), "... follow [you] to hell without even being asked." Can I carry a handbasket?

[DNall]

That was a little snide there for a chaplain. Of the people you've directly commanded for more than a few days, have you averaged more than one service academy graduate per year for every year since you first joined CAP? That one impresses people, but it's the on I think I had the least to do with. They did all the work, I was just privileged to be able to work with each of them. I'm a lot more proud of the kids we took from juvenile probation & turned around to be successful & productive citizens. I'm not wanting to brag here, I'm just making a point that I have a proven record of success with this method, that's not surprising since most of it is ripped off from various part of the military. 

On the other hand you're a chaplain so I guess you have the rules emblazoned on a tablet of stone & they can't be questioned (just returning some of that snideness, that's a joke, laugh). Fact is moral leadership is an interdisciplinary program that takes elements from within a chaplain's specialty & elements from military programs, and combines them into a hands on discussion that is not condescending to cadets at the most important time of anything else we do in the program to treat them like adults.

[Chaplaindon]

XI  "Thou shall not be snide."

Hmmm ... must have missed that one. Maybe it's in the subtlety of Hebrew to English transliteration?

Oh well, "take two tablets and call me in the morning."

[DNall]

  Listen, no disrespect intended. It's obviously an interdisciplinary thing that has a few right answers, and several wrong ones. I think it's useful to learn from what other people do & why they do it, and especially useful when they know what they're talking about rather than just stubled on something that works & can't explain why.

[Chappie]

Well, I opened the thread by saying that I wasn't aware of any problems.  After ChaplainDons great explanation, I guess I am aware of one -- a prominent chaplain in our Wing invoking Jesus during prayers at SAREXs, meetings, etc. 

The guidelines that I follow are very simple....for an event (Wing/Group/Squadron/SARX/etc.) and have a great cross-section of members, the invocation/benediction concludes with a simple "Amen".  For a protestant worship service, I will conclude my prayers according to my faith tradition.  As a CAP Chaplain, I am to be a Chaplain to all members of CAP...the cross symbolizes the affiliation with a major faith group.   While I can freely share my faith with those who ask, I am not free to try and impose my faith on others.  It irritates me to hear that there have been occasions when Chaplains or MLOs have used the ML sessions as a platform to espouse their personal religious beliefs.

[CAPOfficer]

Thanks for the S&S link,

The article makes it clear that "He was court-martialed for disobeying orders" and that the praying "in the Name of Jesus" at "public military events" and that he wore his USN uniform to a political protest in front of the White House ... all significant no-no's.

It is sad that he lost his career and his "million-dollar pension" and that his family was evicted from military housing. Such can be the consequences of one's actions.

In the end, however sad it is that he lost his career (etc.) he wasn't discharged for praying in the Name of Jesus "in his services" as CAPOfficer, perhaps inadvertently wrote. 

Correct, he wasn't discharged for the prayer alone; however, the initial reprimand he received for praying in the Name of Jesus was the catalyst for his follow-up actions.  His protest (in uniform) outside the White House seeking public support for change (to be allowed to pray in the Name of Jesus), was the final action which caused his discharge.  His disobedience to orders is also directly related to his initial actions.

Buy you're correct again, my intention wasn't to imply that he was discharged only on the basis of his praying in the Name of Jesus; for that I apologize.

[Chaplaindon]

No apology needed.

Thanks for the S&S link.

[Eclipse]

Chaplain Don,

Did you attend the Chaplain's conference last year?

Scuttle has it that one of the first things said by the director of the program was that this would be a fully ecumenical conference, and one of the first sessions was specifically about this topic.

The result was a heated discussion and at least one Chanplain walking out on the conference.

/rumor

[Chaplaindon]

Eclipse,

I wasn't there. Can't speak to the truthfulness of that rumor.

One generic comment, however, walking out may not be the wrong step to take if a clergyperson cannot --in good conscience, or within the polity/doctrine of her/his faith tradition-- minister in a fully PLURALISTIC setting. It's really not an issue of ecumenicism [which implies manifold Christian faiths working together] it is far more widespread than that.

As Chappie reiterated, a Chaplain (CAP or military) is called to minister to ALL regardless of faith or faith tradition. For example, a Muslim Chaplain must be ready, willing, and able to inclusively and positively minister to a Christian member (or serviceperson) just as he would care for them in his own mosque. They do not have to preach, believe, or witness the theology incumbent in another faith tradition ... but they do have to care for and minister to the member regardless.

If a clergyperson isn't willing to embrace and practice such a unique ministry, she/he should step aside --albeit walking out in anger isn't a good witness (IMHO) of any faith tradition. As I said earlier, the same principle applies to pilots who refuse to comply with CAPR 60-1 ... they probably shouldn't be piloting aircraft in CAP either.

Chaplaincy is a uniquely challenging vocation.

[Major Lord]

One is simple semantics/linquistics. Ethics and Morals actual/literally mean the same thing-truly. It's just that "morals" comes from the Latin noun mores and "ethics" comes from an earlier Classical Greek noun ethos coined by Aristotle. One is Latin, one is Greek. They SHOULD mean the same thing.

This is a classical example of "universalist" thinking. Morals relate to matters of good and evil, ethics on the other hand, relate to purely secular matters of right and wrong. Those who would have us adopt a belief system devoid of a belief in absolute good and evil will frequently try to mix, and therefore minimize, the value of both terms. They most assuredly do not mean the same thing.

Capt. Lord

Tags - MIKE

[Chaplaindon]

"Morals relate to matters of good and evil, ethics on the other hand, relate to purely secular matters of right and wrong. Those who would have us adopt a belief system devoid of a belief in absolute good and evil will frequently try to mix, and therefore minimize, the value of both terms. They most assuredly do not mean the same thing."

CaptLord,

Your statement is an example of why --IMHO-- "Ethics for Command" led within the SM community was ever so useful previosuly (1990's) in CAP. As a then-squadron CC, I made sure we had it.

Although, in your mind --and perhaps others-- there is a differentiation in meaning between ethics and morals, one was never intended. The words literally have the same root and inherent meaning.

Whether it is "'universalist' thinking" (heaven forbid, oh my) or not, ethics/morals ultimately speak to decision-making --and decision-making that CAN be bereft of any "belief in absolute good and evil." Now, I believe that such bereft ethics are too-often prone (if not doomed) to tragic failure and untwoward outcomes, however, decision made that way remain technically, at least, "ethical" one's.

Likewise moral/ethical decisions can be secularly-based ("what's in it for me/family/country/etc.?")or faith-based ("what would God have me do?"; "WWJD?"). Sadly, too, sometimes the faith-based ones have been hideously --even absolutely-- WRONG/EVIL (e.g. the Crusades). Why even African slavery was supported in many circles, even in the USA, by religious leaders on the basis of Scriptures.

18th & 19th Century "Christian" ethics/morals permitted/encouraged the ownership and exploitation of fellow human beings: an undoubted/undeniable moral/ethical WRONG.

It is my hope that OUR present-day decision-making, whether in the mundane ("paper or plastic?" at the supermarket) to the overwhelmingly substantial ("should we make war on ___?"), be thoughtfully/deliberately guided by issues of right and wrong. I believe in absolute rights and wrongs and likewise good and evil.

Unfortunately, we --meaning the global community of humankind, and/or the pluralistic community within CAP-- do not all share the same background, education, and faith traditions. As a result our internal mechanism for decision-making (our "moral/ethical compass," if you will) for deciding right/wrong or wrong/evil may give differing direction.

Additionally, even within Christian (or perhaps, more broadly Judeo-Christian) ethics, the compass can give varied readings. I can recall seeing the bumpersticker-espoused Christian ethical question about war, "Who would Jesus Bomb?" And, it is a fact that nowhere in the Canon of Scriptures is Jesus of Nazareth quoted as encouraging war, retaliation, or revenge. It isn't even implied.

Thus, there will be times, when a broader --perhaps more universal-- moral/ethical compass may be needed to guide decision-making in our lives and global 21st Century community.

At the same time, however, ethical decison-making can be tough EVEN with the context of a single faith and cultural/ethnic tradition. That's why, for example, there are a variety of views about the ongoing war-- even within the same country and among people of the same faith tradition and even denomination.

Capt., to recap, then, morals/ethics are about making good decisions ... HOPEFULLY, maybe even NORMATIVELY, however not ABSOLUTELY, within a context of an understanding of absolute good and evil. It does not REQUIRE faith in one belief system or another NECESSARILY, although IMHO such a belief system makes for much better decisions overall. However, atheists can make good decisions too.

Like it or not, the intended --historical-- meaning of ethics and morals is identical.

IMHO, more CAP personnel need to be taught ethics/morals formally.

[ZigZag911]

Perhaps it is time to bring back the "Ethics for Command" program.

In fact, maybe it should be woven into the required CAP courses (Level 1, SLS, CLC, UCC, RSC, NSC).

[Major Lord]

Actually, I can think of several occasions in which Jesus called for "retaliation". In one instance, he trashed the moneychangers for defiling the temple, in another, he cursed a tree for not bearing fruit ( a fig-but who really likes them anyway) and when he suggested that drowning those who would hurt his little ones by tying a millstone to them and throwing them into the lake would be a prudent preemptive action)

Words have meaning, and to say that morals and ethics are the same is not correct. ( Do I need to bring in a Jesuit here to explain the difference?)
Slavery as you suggest, would be an act that any person who has formed a sound conscience would know is both ethically and morally wrong. I have heard similar arguments from moral relativists that "allah" is the same is "God". Note that the Democrats of the day, the moral relativists and secular humanists were the suporters of slavery, but that deists and Christians finally had the practice abolished through the auspices of Abe Lincoln...

As far as your reference to the Crusades goes, I think you will find on closer study that the Crusades were a response to the stated muslim goal of world domination. The siege of Constantinople is still alive in the memory of Islam, a poitical belief system bent in fact on world domination and enslavement or annihilation of of non-believers.

Believe me, I am not arguing for CAP chaplains to take on a a more aggresive role in promoting Christianity, but I do expect a CAP chaplain to know that the western schools of Judeo-Christian beliefs are the best moral ( and ethical) road map ever created. We wear the uniform of a country that recognizes that all of our unalienable rights are granted to us by our Creator. We don't need a belief that is "Broader or more Universal" than the Judeo-Christian-American way of life. This has been tried in a variety of environments, who have tried to substitute communism, socialism, facism, and secular humanism for reason, morality and faith.  Its a non-starter.

Capt. Lord

[Chappie]

Perhaps it is time to bring back the "Ethics for Command" program.

In fact, maybe it should be woven into the required CAP courses (Level 1, SLS, CLC, UCC, RSC, NSC).

My understanding of why the "Ethics for Command" program disappeared:  When Gen. Fogleman introduced the Core Values to the USAF, it was the understanding that Squadron Commanders would implement training.  CAP followed that thinking and EFC was disbanded. 

In light of that, EFC was no longer published and conducted for Senior Members/Officers.   CAP has published it own Core Values pamphlet and there are couple of references to it in training (SLS, Level 1). 

A couple of years ago, in response to a need for something along the lines of ML for Senior Members suggested at the CAWG Commander's Call, Col. Virginia Nelson tasked the Wing Chaplain, Ch (LtC) Paul Ward, to come up with a Core Values Course for Senior Members which would be made available for all squadrons in the CAWG.  He received approval from Rob Smith and Chaplain (Col.) Charles Sharp to adapt and adopt material from previous CAP publications. 

The end result of his work can be found on the Best Practices page: http://level2.cap.gov/index.cfm?nodeID=5963.

[Chaplaindon]

So CaptLord,

If you " ... can think of several occasions in which Jesus called for 'retaliation;'" then who would Jesus bomb?

And, just for the record ... in Arabic speaking Christian congregations (and there are many), they actually do call God "Allah." It is the Arabic noun for God.

Then again, maybe they're all moral relativists (or Democrats) too ...

Also what's wrong with the more Eastern (as in Orthodox -- you remember, Constantinople? ... hey, and St. Paul was Eastern/Middle-Eastern too ... ) and Middle Eastern "schools of Judeo-Christian beliefs" are they excluded --by your thesis-- from offering (too) "best moral (and ethical) road map ever created"?

Lastly, if as you explicated, you " ... expect a CAP chaplain to know that the western schools of Judeo-Christian beliefs are the best moral ( and ethical) road map ever created. We wear the uniform of a country that recognizes that all of our unalienable rights are granted to us by our Creator. We don't need a belief that is "Broader or more Universal" than the Judeo-Christian-American way of life"  can a non-Christian, non-Jewish chaplain, let's say a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Hindu, can they be CAP chaplains and lead MLs too are need they be excluded from service in the "uniform of [our] country" because they embrace a "broader or more universal belief" system than you are willing to accept?

If so, then maybe you should have a chat with your Jesuit friend instead of me.

[MIKE]

At this pont it would seem that Chaplaindon and CaptLord should take it to PM.

[Chaplaindon]

Works for me ...

[Psicorp]

Well, I can only speak for myself here in CAP, but proselytizing in hopes of finding "common moral" ground is not only impossible it is HIGHLY unethical!.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that we should rename "Moral Leadership" training to Ethical Leadership training.  Yes, there is a major difference between morality and ethics.

Chaplains who insist that their "Religious Freedom" is being compromised by the ethical standards established by the militaries own chaplains corp, are using that argument as a straw man to make a wider political statement.  That statement is that American Values are threatened by a perceived lack of morality, too which the prescribe unethical behavior as the antedote.

Sorry to get on my soap box, but obviously this touches a nerve.

Thank you, Sir.  Back when my original squadron didn't have a Chaplain or MLO, I used to bring in guest religious leaders to conduct Moral Leadership classes for the cadets.  I found willing faith leaders from around the religious spectrum and tried to ensure that no one faith was emphasized more than any other. 

You are absolutely correct, sir, calling it Ethical Leadership Training is calling it exactly what it is.

Politics seem to ruin everything it touches.

[flyerthom]

Words have meaning, and to say that morals and ethics are the same is not correct. ( Do I need to bring in a Jesuit here to explain the difference

Capt. Lord

Please nooooooo! After four years of them I am still carry the scars. On the flip side, the Jesuits were the first I heard to advocate a more universal world view. And I quite remember the controversy over Liberation Theology and the Pope having to restrain Latin American Jesuits for their strong support of leftist revolutions such as the Sandinistas The joys of a Jesuit education in the early 80's.

[fyrfitrmedic]

Words have meaning, and to say that morals and ethics are the same is not correct. ( Do I need to bring in a Jesuit here to explain the difference

Capt. Lord

Please nooooooo! After four years of them I am still carry the scars. On the flip side, the Jesuits were the first I heard to advocate a more universal world view. And I quite remember the controversy over Liberation Theology and the Pope having to restrain Latin American Jesuits for their strong support of leftist revolutions such as the Sandinistas The joys of a Jesuit education in the early 80's.

The Jesuits taught me how to think. I haven't felt safe since.

-- Detective Frank Pembleton

[jacklumanog]

RiverAux (et al),

This is part of a manufactured issue ... one created to advance a political agenda. The ostensible issue (you allude to) is that Christian chaplains are being prohibited by the DoD and/or the military from praying "in the Name of Jesus Christ," out of some misguided attempt at political correctness.

Such is simply not the case at all.

The actual truth of the matter has two (2) foci:

1.  Chaplains (both US military, and CAP -- who are also "endorsed military chaplains" albeit serving CAP) have and continue to have the right and freedom to pray as their conscience, faith, and endorsing religion directs DURING religious services. There are no constraints on practices or liturgies during worship services.

But there in lies a "bone of contention" with some. Although Chaplains (of all faiths, not just Christian) may pray (etc.) with impunity during worship, they are constrained by DoD policy, USAF regulation and instruction and CAPR's to be inclusive and nonsectarian while praying in secular (non-worship service) settings.

Thus, while saying a prayer at a WG deployment event (e.g. before leaving for Iraq, let's say) the WG Chaplain (an O-6), a Buddhist in this hypothetical example, is required to say a general prayer --not one that favors one faith tradition over another. A Muslim WG/HC would be similarly constrained from pronouncing the primacy of the Prophet during his prayer. Likewise would a Christian HC be prohibited from praying --in THAT secular setting-- in the Name of Jesus.

In such a setting the chaplain is praying on behalf of all faith traditions --not just hers/his-- and even praying for those who have no faith tradition (there are atheists in foxholes, contrary to the common wisdom).

So in a worship setting a Buddhist Chaplain, or a Muslim Chaplain, or a Roman Catholic Chaplain (and so forth) may be a sectarian and unrestrained in her/his prayers as their conscience and ecclesiastical endorser will allow. Likewise in a SECULAR (non-worship) setting, all must be similarly NON-sectarian and inclusive -- per Regulation(s).

Sadly, there are those --who for what (I think) are political motives INCONSISTENT with the real role of the ministry and/or chaplaincy-- have distorted the reality to suggest that in all settings Christian Chaplains (and ONLY CHRISTIAN CHAPLAINS) are being forbidden to preach in Jesus' Name. This distortion/lie is getting around too. In my civilian parish I have received several impassioned phone calls from "concerned citizens" asking me to "get involved" politically to free our Christian Chaplains. I have kindly, but explicitly, given them the facts.

I am pleased that Chaplains (of all faiths) are similarly constrained from sectarian prayers during secular events. I would be uncomfortable (at the least) if a Muslim Chaplain pronounced that Muhammad was greater or better than Christ during a pre-SAREX-briefing prayer. I would expect a Muslim cadet/SM to be similarly upset if, in the same setting, I prayed ONLY in Jesus' Name.

It's a good rule.

2.  Recently, I saw a morning news show where a USN Chaplain (a Lt., I think) was decrying his pending dismissal from the Navy for "praying in the Name of Jesus." What a terrible miscarriage of justice, right? Not at all, ---as the story developed upon further questioning-- he was being dismissed for disobeying his commanding officer who ordered him NOT to wear his USN uniform to a protest and prayer in front of the White House.  He wasn't being disciplined for praying, he was being disciplined for disobeying an order and wearing his uniform when he shouldn't have.

Unfortunately, I suspect that the distortion of facts and the sensational claims being made --for POLITICAL GAIN (IMHO)-- has and will continue to scare off some potential chaplains from military or CAP service. Ultimately, this agenda-making will harm the women and men in uniform (military and CAP) who benefit from the service of the chaplaincy.

I hope a good dose of fact and not rumor, distortion, and falsehoods will stem the tide.  People need to "play politics" with potholes and solid waste management and not the emotional and spiritual needs of our military and CAP personnel.

To that end, if you hear someone crisis-mongering this issue "Praying in the Name of Jesus," set them straight. Together we can stem the tide of this nonsense.

I'm a bit late to the party here but very few people seem to have gotten this story correct.  It makes for a sensational headline but Chaplain Don hit it on the head.  Thank you for spreading the word.

[alexalvarez]

Yes, being a CAP Chaplain is challenging.

Blessings on all of you.

[aveighter]

Capt Lord is on the right track.  This entire discussion is a reflection of the general deterioration of the social fabric of western civilization with the almost manic need of some to mix everything into one giant morass of moral equivalence where the lines separating good and evil, right and wrong fade away into the constantly shifting shades of gray.  Despite several thousand years of recorded human history,  a thousand plus of western european history and a couple centuries or so of American history to the contrary, we are to accept the idea that there is no "better or worse" but merely different "faith traditions" which we must allow for and swallow without question and nary the hint of a raised eyebrow.

I want to take a poll here.  Now that there is a strong push to add and legitimize Wiccan Priests (witches)in the military,  how many of you Christian Pastors or Jewish Rabbis would be willing to have one of these fellows minister to you or provide you with spiritual services in time of need?  Just wondering.  Please raise your hands.  Is there room for one  more under the big moral tent?

[Chappie]

<snip>
I want to take a poll here.  Now that there is a strong push to add and legitimize Wiccan Priests (witches)in the military,  how many of you Christian Pastors or Jewish Rabbis would be willing to have one of these fellows minister to you or provide you with spiritual services in time of need?  Just wondering.  Please raise your hands.  Is there room for one  more under the big moral tent?

Aveighter ---  first of all, as a Chaplain I have a mandated duty and responsibility to defend the 1st amendment rights of all members (freedom of religion).  Speaking as an Christian Chaplain who has served on  Encampment staff over the years, it is the practice to conduct a Protestant and Catholic service at Encampment (since we have chaplains of those religious persuasions).  For those of the Jewish, Islamic and Buddist faith group -- cadets and senior members who wish to attend a service are transported to the place where their faith group meets.   If there are Wiccans, who request services....there would be an attempt to locate something in the local area for them.    As a defender of a member's first amendment right, if a Wiccan were to become a Chaplain in the military or CAP so that Wiccan members have there religious needs met, then so be it. 

Second of all, to answer your question -- I would not have a Wiccan provide ministry or service to me.  There would not be the need to request one.  As a Protestant Chaplain (in CAP and previously in Law Enforcement who has responded to several different scenarios, it has been my practice to ascertain if the parties involved have a local pastor, rabbi, priest, or religious leader they would like to have contacted.   

[aveighter]

I appreciate you answering.  Your response is very interesting.  Out of curiosity, and I ask this sincerely, is there a point on this continuum of equivalency at which you would say "no mas" as far as your ability to maintain participation?

[Chaplaindon]

avieghter,

Take a deep breath ...

This is not about moral equivalence. It is not about political correctness (either conservative or liberal). It is not about what I like or dislike.

This is about following long-standing regulations about religious accommodation.

The policy is nothing new. What has brought it to light of late is foolish agenda-mongering. First it was the leadership at the USAF Academy deliberately pushing conservative Christian theology (and the politics that comes with it) upon cadets without regard to the wishes (or religious affiliations and/or beliefs) of the cadets. The policy less-then-subtlely coerced cadets to follow their leadership's religious beliefs, believing it would hurt their careers at the Academy to do otherwise. That was wrong and brought to an end by a courageous chaplain at the expense of her own USAF career.

The second is seen in chaplains saying they are being forced out for "praying in the Name of Jesus" when in fact the are being forced out for violating direct and legitimate orders not to engage in political activism in uniform.

No clergyperson of any religion, faith tradition or denomination is forced to become a chaplain. It is "challenging" as Ch. Alvarez stated. It isn't for everyone.

For those who do elect to become chaplains, they are expected to follow regulations. I find it personally ironic to hear the members complain that their chaplains are refusing to violate their regulations and covenants (both CAP and USAF) when many of the same complainers would excoriate any other member (probably a chaplain too) for a 1 angstrom error in alignment of an item of uniform.

Violations of the provisions of CAPMANUAL 39-1 are seen as causing harm to CAP's relationship to the USAF. CAPM 39-1 is sacrosanct.

At the same time --it might appear to the casual observer, I pray not-- that Chaplains are been encouraged or ridiculed --at aveighter's and other's behest-- into knowingly (and willingly) violating CAPREGULATION 265-2 (E) (25FEB1995) because it is unpopular with some or seen by some as inconsistent with moral, religious, or political stances they espouse. Take a moment and read Section C of that regulation. It is the Code of Ethics and is taken directly from the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces (NCMAF) published in 1994.

If a clergyperson desires to be a CAP (or other military) chaplains she/he MUST adhere to this Code of Ethics it is REGULATION. If that same clergyperson finds that they cannot adhere to the ethical standards imposed on chaplains, then she/he have an obligation to step aside.

Just over a year ago, the USAF made this point explictly. Lt. Gen. Roger Brady, Air Force deputy chief of staff for personnel issued guidelines and a press release staing that, "The guidelines address prayer at military events [outside of worship], but in no way restrict private prayer or chaplains' activities in religious settings." General Brady added, "We respect the rights of chaplains to adhere to the tenets of their individual faiths, and they will not be required to participate in religious activities, including public prayer, inconsistent with their faiths."

Thus if you cannot adhere to the regulations --even in the USAF-- you may step aside, decline to participate per your conscience. You are not permitted to just go off and do as you please as a chaplain.

The matter is simply one of adhering to regulation. And if you think that a uniform violation could hamper CAP relations with the USAF, imagine what could happen if a chaplain --wearing the USAF chaplain's badge, no less (not a CAP look-a-like)-- unilaterally disregarded the chaplain service regulations in favor of a personal doctrinal/political crusade.

I am a comitted/believer Christian and called to that ministry. However, I feel God has called me to a broader more challenging ministry too: that of military/CAP chaplain. However, this issue isn't about what I or any other chaplain personally believes theologically/doctrinally/politically ... it's about following the rules every CAP/USAF chaplain agreed to when she/he joined the chaplain service.

If that's a "problem" (hence the original rationale for this thread) it doesn't reside with the chaplains but rather with those who'd ask the chaplains to violate rules on their behalf and denounce those who won't.

[Chappie]

I appreciate you answering.  Your response is very interesting.  Out of curiosity, and I ask this sincerely, is there a point on this continuum of equivalency at which you would say "no mas" as far as your ability to maintain participation?

No.  I share the same viewpoint as ChaplainDon has responded to you.  When I joined CAP as a Chaplain, I read the requirements and regulations before signing on the dotted line.  As Chaplain Alvarez has stated, it is challenging.  And as Chaplaindon stated, it isn't for everyone.

[Al Sayre]

As a Commander and lay person, here is how I see the Chaplain's role (in order of priority): 

To provide a steady and calming presence within the Command that any member regardless of rank or faith can talk to. 

To be an advocate for those members who are afraid or unable to speak to the command staff about an issue that is troubling them.

To provide counsel to the commander regarding the morale and well being of the members of his command, and provide a moral rudder for the squadron through their actions.

To keep the commander informed and within the regulations regarding the requirements for religious services etc., and provide those services when needed.

To provide counseling regarding matters of faith to those members who request such counseling.

I believe that these are within the capacity of a Chaplain of any faith, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Wiccan, Buddhist, etc.   YMMV

[Chaplaindon]

Lt Sayre,

Thanks for your comments. As a former unit commander myself, I would recommend you read CAPP 265-4 (E) (15APR1994). It is the Civil Air Patrol Chaplain Service Handbook and can be found on line at http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_082503085403.pdf.

Although this CAPP is ostensibly a handbook for chaplains, its contents would be useful as an orientation to the chaplain service for a unit commander as well. It is a very thoughtful and well-written introduction to the roles and responsibilities of a CAP chaplain and how she/he is to integrate and function within a unit.

Section 2-5 of CAPP 295-4 specifically address the issues of religious pluralism that seem to have become something of a lightning-rod on this Blog and CAP and the military. Reading this section might help clarify the chaplain's role a bit more.

It is noteworthy too, that this Pamphlet is nearly 13 years old. As I have written, religious accommodation and a pluralistic ministry for military chaplains is nothing new.

[aveighter]

Thank you all for your responses, they have been eye opening.

Just over a year ago, the USAF made this point explicitly. Lt. Gen. Roger Brady, Air Force deputy chief of staff for personnel issued guidelines and a press release stating that, "The guidelines address prayer at military events [outside of worship], but in no way restrict private prayer or chaplains&#146; activities in religious settings.&#148; General Brady added, &#147;We respect the rights of chaplains to adhere to the tenets of their individual faiths, and they will not be required to participate in religious activities, including public prayer, inconsistent with their faiths.&#148;

Don, your reply was especially noteworthy (not sure what breathing has to do with the topic).  My question was simply "is there a point that you would be unable to participate based on your set of religious beliefs".  This would be consistent with the regulation as the General stated it.  I am left to conclude from your inclusion of the quote from General Brady that your answer is no as you would seem to make no quality distinction between the theological basis, from which moral concepts stem, of Judeo-Christianity, Islam, Buddism or witchcraft or whatever follows next.

CAPP 265-4  Section 2-5 states the chaplains objective is to be a representative of God.  This is monotheism at its finest and of more than passing importance to a Jew or Christian.  Are you comfortable with the idea of participating in an arena where the concept of a monotheistic Almighty is just another choice given equal standing with polytheism, earth goddesses, water sprites so on and so forth?  Do you think your local Mullah is good to go with that?  Where is the point, in your opinion, (you too Chappie) at which pluralism ends and heresy begins?  Or is there such a point?

Now Don, don't get caught up in vitriolic respirations.  I'm simply asking if in this quest for regulatory purity can you be comfortable in a regime of regulated theological/moral equivalence or not.  A simple yes or no is fine.

[Chaplaindon]

I am still not sure I understand the question. If you are asking me if I would particpate in a "worship service" involving "polytheism, earth goddesses, water sprites so on and so forth ..." the answer is "no."

But that's not the issue. The issue is whether I try to be a caring, concerned chaplain for everyone whether they believe in or worship the Trinity or a shrubbery. As a CAP/military chaplain, I am called to accommodate their religion (within reason) but not necessarily embrace it myself. 

Likewise I am NOT to FORCE my Christian faith on someone else IN CAP outside of a worship/devotional setting. If a member voluntarily attends a worship service or a devotional that I lead, I CAN proclaim a sectarian message as specifically as I please. I cannot do so in a secular setting or in-general to members.

You also ask, "Do you think your local Mullah is good to go with that?" That's another odd question. Are you asking about a Muslim clergyman (or a Muslim CAP chaplain) because they are called an Imam ... not a Mullah? My answer is, ask him.

I am not a Muslim, however, I know of actual incidents where Christian and/or Jewish CAP chaplains at CAP encampments have had Muslim cadets under their pastoral care. The chaplains did not take a crash course in Arabic or Koran and imitate an Imam. Rather, they accommodated the religious needs of these Muslim members. They located and set aside a place for the members to say their daily prayers. They took a compass and used it to mark East on the wall and then advised their cadet and SM officers and NCOs to excuse them for their 5-time-a-day prayers. That is religious accommodation. That is loving and caring work of a chaplain.

I would expect that my "local" Muslim CAP chaplain IAW CAPRs and AFRs to do likewise if the situation was reversed.

Additionally, I have particpated in interfaith worship at CAP encampments. As a Christian clergyperson, I particpated in a Jewish Sabbath service and was honored to have been asked. Likewise, I have had a Rabbi assist me in a Christian worship service. If I am ever confronted with an invitation to worship with a polytheistic, earth goddesses, water sprite -- I'll let you know my decision then.

However, I would be expected to be a caring, loving, chaplain --practicing a ministry of presence-- at a CAP event attended by a polytheistic, earth goddesses, water sprite who happens to be a CAP member at that event. And I would see redress through the event commander if I witnessed or was made aware of that person facing ridicule or scorn or her/his faith. That would be unjust and unacceptable.

Pluralism is the realization of the fact that there are multiple faiths/religions/beliefs. Heresy is a qualitative determination that one or more faith/belief/doctrine/teaching is contrary to a given SINGLE faith/religion. 

To accept the fact that there is diversity in faith and beliefs is NOT the same as saying that for oneself all are equally good means of finding spiritual or religious fulfillment. And what's one groups heresy (say female clergypersons to some Christian sects) is a normative practice to another.

Here's a thought --see if this endears CAP to the USAF-- have all chaplains in CAP condemn as heretics all persons who do not accept her/his specific belief system.  It would be nonsense.

But if you feel strongly enough about the matter: go to seminary, get ordained, approved and endorsed as a chaplain and buck the system YOURSELF and quit encouraging real chaplains to do your dirty work.

[aveighter]

After digging through the 70% of your response that had nothing to do with my inquiry I'll take your answer as yes.

Thank you.

[Chappie]

After digging through the 70% of your response that had nothing to do with my inquiry I'll take your answer as yes.

Thank you.

I have no problem with the response given by Chaplaindon.  While there are other faith groups that exist within the Chaplain service and the CAP membership that are not part of my belief system, I am not forced to embrace their beliefs as my own.  However as a Chaplain, I am obligated to make sure that the needs of the membership are met.  I personally don't have to become one of them to make that happen...but I can attempt to arrange for services to be be provided.  At Encampments I have transported cadets and senior members to a local synagogue, a local Islamic prayer room, and a local Buddist temple.  Transporting members to a place of worship...or arranging for them to be able to practice their religious beliefs is a far cry from heresy.   Heresy is a word found within religious circles...but you will not find that term in the regulations governing the Chaplain service.  Since the regulations do not require me to embrace and proclaim the beliefs of faith groups that I am not a part of as my own, I do not have a problem with pluralism.  But if the regulations required me to become a member of one of the other faith groups and/or participate as one of them....that would be over the line.

If I as a Protestant Chaplain determine and presses the point that the chaplaincy has no place for the Buddist, Hindu, Jewish, Islamic, or Wiccan....then what would happen if someone would also say that there is no place for the Protestant Chaplain.  As a defender of the other's First Amendment rights, I can and will not exclude their right to practice their belief.  As a Protestant Chaplain, I can and will not attempt to proselytize.

[Chaplaindon]

Despite all of the talk of political correctness and the so forth, I would like to recommend to everyone an excellent film/video concerning the interfaith nature of the military chaplaincy. The film is entitled The Four Chaplains: Sacrifice at Sea and was released in 2004 (and shown on the Hallmark Channel on cable).

The film recounts the real-life events and resultant heroism of four (4) US Army chaplains --newbies to the chaplaincy all-- who met and became friends at Chaplain School at the Harvard University Divinity School during WWII.

This was a time (as the film points out quite well) of great religious mistrust and even some Nevertheless, these 4 clergymen: a Roman Catholic priest, a Dutch Reformed pastor, a Methodist pastor, and a Jewish Rabbi met, became fast friends and then an invincible team that displayed immense heroism one night in 1943 upon the frigid waters of the north Atlantic after their troop ship (the U.S.A.T. Dorchester) was torpedoed by a U-Boat.

Subsequent to the events of the Dorchester and the loss of the 4 chaplains (who gave up their places in the too-few lifeboats as well as their gloves, life vests (etc.) to save the soldiers), the US Post Office issued a stamp in their honor which says simply "INTERFAITH IN ACTION."

Additionally, in 1960 a special Medal of Honor was cast and awarded posthumously to the Four Chaplains for their exemplary heroism and loving service before self.

INTERFAITH IN ACTION.

That is the spirit of the Chaplaincy, or SHOULD be, even to this day. We are clergypersons of many faiths --even some we (as individuals) cannot accept as valid for us-- working together to serve the spiritual, emotional and moral needs of ALL the service/CAP members we are called to serve. It is --or SHOULD BE-- interfaith in action. In fact, the film quotes an interview with one of the surviving soldiers who admitted that --to this day-- he's not a believer. The chaplains sacrificed themselves to save him (and many others) regardless.

I heartily recommend this film to you. It might be a wonderful "squadron movie night" presentation. The DVD constains two versions, in fact, one that lasts 54 minutes (the one shown on TV) and would be ideal for a Squadron Meeting (or maybe an SLS/CLC) and a longer 1.5 hours (appx) version. It has been shown at the SWR CSSC in 2005.

The film is distributed by Faith & Values Media. You can read more at www.thefourchaplains.com.

[Chappie]

Despite all of the talk of political correctness and the so forth, I would like to recommend to everyone an excellent film/video concerning the interfaith nature of the military chaplaincy. The film is entitled The Four Chaplains: Sacrifice at Sea and was released in 2004 (and shown on the Hallmark Channel on cable).

The film recounts the real-life events and resultant heroism of four (4) US Army chaplains --newbies to the chaplaincy all-- who met and became friends at Chaplain School at the Harvard University Divinity School during WWII.

This was a time (as the film points out quite well) of great religious mistrust and even some Nevertheless, these 4 clergymen: a Roman Catholic priest, a Dutch Reformed pastor, a Methodist pastor, and a Jewish Rabbi met, became fast friends and then an invincible team that displayed immense heroism one night in 1943 upon the frigid waters of the north Atlantic after their troop ship (the U.S.A.T. Dorchester) was torpedoed by a U-Boat.

Subsequent to the events of the Dorchester and the loss of the 4 chaplains (who gave up their places in the too-few lifeboats as well as their gloves, life vests (etc.) to save the soldiers), the US Post Office issued a stamp in their honor which says simply "INTERFAITH IN ACTION."

Additionally, in 1960 a special Medal of Honor was cast and awarded posthumously to the Four Chaplains for their exemplary heroism and loving service before self.

INTERFAITH IN ACTION.

That is the spirit of the Chaplaincy, or SHOULD be, even to this day. We are clergypersons of many faiths --even some we (as individuals) cannot accept as valid for us-- working together to serve the spiritual, emotional and moral needs of ALL the service/CAP members we are called to serve. It is --or SHOULD BE-- interfaith in action. In fact, the film quotes an interview with one of the surviving soldiers who admitted that --to this day-- he's not a believer. The chaplains sacrificed themselves to save him (and many others) regardless.

I heartily recommend this film to you. It might be a wonderful "squadron movie night" presentation. The DVD constains two versions, in fact, one that lasts 54 minutes (the one shown on TV) and would be ideal for a Squadron Meeting (or maybe an SLS/CLC) and a longer 1.5 hours (appx) version. It has been shown at the SWR CSSC in 2005.

The film is distributed by Faith & Values Media. You can read more at www.thefourchaplains.com.

I have prepared and used this account in a PPT presentation on a number of occasions.