Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel
28 October 2005
To: Ch MGEN Charles C. Baldwin, Air Force Chief of Chaplains
Subject: Air Force Interim Guidelines on the Free Exercise of Religion
Thank you for the invitation and opportunity to comment and raise concerns and questions on the “Interim Guidelines”. We greatly appreciate your leadership in this most important issue.
The attached document represents the concerns and positions of the five member denominations of the Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains (PRJC) and its Air Force chaplains. Our response is in two parts. Part one is the response of our Commission that includes a historical precedent and principle, theological principles, conclusions, and, finally three recommendations. Part two includes specific responses to the Air Force Free Exercise document both by our Commission and our Air Force chaplains.
The position of the PRJC Commission is:
· These “Interim Guidelines” could seriously restrict, even suppress, the historic freedom of speech.
· This freedom is inseparable from our constitutionally protected liberty to exercise freedom of religion within the military services.
We covenant to pray for you and your staff as you work within the Air Force on this critical issue.
Sincerely,
David P. Peterson
Executive Director
1 Attachment: PRJC Response to the Air Force Interim Guidelines
cc: National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces
Armed Forces Chaplain Board
PREFACE:
The Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel (PRJC) endorses chaplains for the Presbyterian Church in America, Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America, Korean American Presbyterian Church and Korean Presbyterian Church in America. The following statements in our document and the later comments in red italics throughout the Air Force document, represent the responses, questions and concerns of the PRJC and their endorsed Air Force Chaplains to the Air Force Interim Guidelines on the Free Exercise of Religion.
I. INTRODUCTION:
In response to certain accusations of alleged abuse(s) of religious freedom at the USAF Academy, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force has issued “Interim Guidelines” which, in the opinion of the signers of this document, have the potential effect of seriously restricting, or even suppressing altogether, the historic freedom of speech which is inseparable from an authentic exercise of our constitutionally protected liberty to exercise freedom of religion within our military services.
II. HISTORICAL PRECEDENT AND PRINCIPLE:
From the establishment of chaplain ministries in the United States armed forces over two hundred years ago, it has been both the established understanding and practice of religious denominations that have agreed to “loan” the pastoral services of ordained ministers, priests and rabbis to the military to ENDORSE these ordained men for such service in a specific branch of our country’s military services. From that beginning it has been the historic understanding that such endorsement was a mutually acknowledged authority belonging solely to those endorsing religious bodies. In other words, it is a recognized ecclesiastical authority of the churches to determine both the sufficiency of demonstrated professional (theological) competence of a candidate and his pastoral integrity, given the rigors and hazards of military life, remote from ordinary ecclesiastical oversight. Historically it has been the prerogative of the military to determine suitability of attitude and physical ability to endure the expected service hardships and to function competently within the military culture, but never to dictate to a chaplain, the THEOLOGICAL CONTENT of his beliefs, or to constrain his conscience in the PASTORAL APPLICATION of those beliefs. The same restrictions on the prerogatives of military indoctrination of other service personnel apply, even at the lowest entry level of enlisted recruits. No superior has the right to impose restriction on a service member’s beliefs or his expression of beliefs, unless it can be categorically demonstrated that such expression undermines operational effectives or is in some other objectively demonstrable way prejudicial to good order and discipline.
III. THEOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES:
In Presbyterian and Reformed faith groups, it is regarded as eminently biblical for ordained ministers/priests to be responsibly and intimately involved in both doctrinal instruction and applicatory exhortation of military personnel, as part of their ordinary training and preparation for combat. That involvement begins with the propositional truth that neither the existence of military entities as such, nor service within their ranks, is intrinsically evil, but actually ordained and approved by God Himself (Deuteronomy 20:1-4; Romans 13:1-7; Ephesians 6:10-17) .
Since honorable military service is biblical and, by good and necessary inference, commended by God Himself, (Matthew 8:5-3; 26:53-54; Luke 3:14; Acts 10:1 ff; II Timothy 2:3-4; Revelation 19:11-16), it has been the historic practice and policy of such churches that endorse pastors for ministry within the military, to ordain them as evangelists, with all the obligations and authority which that biblical designation implies. Therefore, it is deeply troubling that the Air Force has withdrawn the Covenant and Code of Ethics for their chaplains because it mentioned proselytizing and evangelizing.
By way of example of the obligations taken by our chaplains, four of the vows to which assent is required for ordination as an evangelist in our member denominations, read as follows:
(1) Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice?
(2) Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of this
Church, as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures? (3) Do you promise to be zealous and faithful in maintaining the truths of the gospel and
the purity, the peace, and the unity of the church, whatever persecution or opposition may arise unto you on that account?
(4) Are you now willing to undertake the work of an evangelist, and do you promise to be faithful in the discharge of all the duties of this ministry as God may give you strength?
Of the vows intrinsic to the ordination of Ruling Elders and Deacons (some of which are members of the Air Force, both officer and enlisted), in our member denominations, four of the vows read as follows:
(1) Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice?
(2) Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of this Church, as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures?
(3) Do you promise to seek the purity, the peace, and the unity of the church?
(4) Do you accept the office of Ruling Elder (or Deacon) in this congregation and promise, in reliance on the grace of God, faithfully to perform all the duties thereof?”
Of pre-eminent importance is their obligation to be faithful to Scripture in upholding, and teaching, the Sovereignty of God in all the issues and areas of life. Consequently, it is an invasive violation of their conscience, their ordination vows and the constitutions of their endorsing bodies if some segment of the military services (such as a chaplain corps), or some senior military individual seeks to constrain or prohibit service personnel from the free expression of biblical truth or its evangelical application.
A long-standing expression of the unofficial tendency among some leaders within the military services to seek to regulate unwelcome religious expression has been to informally constrain and illegitimately pressure evangelical chaplains who are seeking to express biblical truths in a manner faithful to their endorsing denominations. Prominent among the many efforts to restrict religious expression, one of the commonest has been perpetrated by (mostly) senior chaplains who have sought to suppress the use of the name of “Jesus” or “Jesus Christ” in prayers at public events, evidently fearful of offending non-Christians. Yet that effort places any chaplain or committed lay person (especially if ordained as a Ruling Elder or Deacon) of historic Presbyterian persuasion who succumbs to that pressure, at risk of violating the constitution of the church that ordained him and the constitution he vowed at his ordination to uphold. A service member caught in this situation is under great pressure to violate his own conscience.
Those who bring such pressure to bear on theologically minded chaplains may be unaware of the confessional foundation underlying such a conviction as offering prayer in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. In Chapter 21 of the Westminster Confession of Faith, entitled, “Of Religious Worship and the Sabbath Day”, the second and third paragraphs state,
“2. Religious worship is to be given to God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and to Him alone; not to angels, saints of any other creature: and, since the fall, not without a Mediator; nor in the mention of any other but of Christ alone.” John 14:6; 1Timothy 2:5; Ephesians 2:18; Colossians 3:17.
“3. Prayer, with thanksgiving, being one special part of religious worship, is by God required of all men: and, that it may be accepted, it is to be made in the name of the Son, by the help of His Spirit…” John 14:13-14; 1 Peter 2:5.
The First Amendment to our constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” In the opinion of the members of Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel, the Interim Guidelines, as presently written, achieve a significant restriction on the “free exercise” wherever and whenever one or more of a variety of individuals in the Air Force expresses embarrassment, offense or anger because of a particular expression of religious faith. They also seem to step over the line in trying to establish a civil religion. The Interim Guidelines, if promulgated and enforced with any zeal, have the potential to place a significant number of service personnel under a restriction on their freedom of religious speech to which they cannot, in conscience, agree or accede. We also see these interim guidelines encroaching upon and marginalizing our chaplains and their ministries within the Air Force.
Further, the guidelines are so broad in establishing those restrictive powers and defining the violations and violators to which they supposedly may be applied that the potential for abuse on the part of those who are hostile to expressions of evangelical Christianity appears to be substantial. Does the Air Force, in truth, want to place itself in the position of being subject to lawsuits for religious persecution and discrimination on the basis of religion?
IV. CONCLUSIONS:
Several serious defects in the proposed Interim Guidelines appear to have been written to be deferential to political correctness. We hope, however, that the likelihood for great harm was unrecognized. In either case, the Guidelines carry great potential for unanticipated and subsequently unwelcome consequences which may well bring great long term harm to the United States Air Force.
Not the least of such costly but unanticipated consequences could be the growing disinclination to even consider entering the Air Force on the part of some of the most qualified candidates for enlistment or commissioning, if indeed the USAF gains a reputation for itself of religious persecution and the suppression of freedom of speech in religious matters.
Sadly, it is often forgotten that when regulations of one sort or another are needlessly multiplied and become draconian in their application and enforcement, one unavoidable consequence is to encourage those so governed to develop subversive ways to avoid compliance with those restrictions which they consider to be oppressive and simply unacceptable. The Interim Guidelines potentially tempt personnel to embrace a spirit of rebellion and secretive resistance to the whole military authority structure, producing a culture that would be corrosive of unit loyalty and esprit de corps.
Insofar as the proposed Guidelines would apply to Air Force chaplains, a long term effect will likely be the incremental transformation of the Chaplain Corps from a good example of corporate moral strength, theological discernment, ethical leadership and prophetic rebuke to a corps of anemic social workers and psychological counselors with a politically correct veneer of religious busy-ness and exuding timidity could only try to please everybody and offend nobody.
The likely failure to achieve the degree of demonstrable compliance required in the Guidelines will be a temptation to the Air Force leadership to develop a new in-house bureaucracy to effect conformity and enforce compliance, yet another drain on the already overextended manpower and funding resources of the U.S. military.
V. RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That we request that the Secretary and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the Air Force Chief of Chaplains and other involved leadership personnel earnestly reconsider any immediate or short term implementation of the Interim Guidelines and extend the 1 November 2005 deadline for submission of feedback and/or questions. There is no operational necessity to force anything other than a prayerful, thoughtful response. (Proverbs 11:14; 15:22; 24:6)
2. That we request the Air Force Chief of Chaplains to solicit recommendations for a more informal, proactive, and less severe set of constraints and requirements to address the perceived or real abuses of religious expression through the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces (NCMAF). The Air Force would be well served by allowing at least three months for carefully considered recommendations from a wide range of perspectives.
3. That in recommending reconsideration of both content and implementation of the Interim Guidelines and in soliciting sentence-by-sentence feedback, we elect to pray that the Lord will be pleased to grant that this guideline adoption effort will encourage the free exercise of religious faith. To this end, such a work must not be done in haste, lest it be long repented of in leisure!
Respectfully submitted,
The Presbyterian and Reformed Joint Commission on Chaplains and Military Personnel
Message from Chaplain Baldwin's Office: Respecting the Beliefs of All Airmen
1. PURPOSE: RECENTLY, THE ACTING SECAF AND CSAF EXPRESSED THEIR VIEWS ON FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION IN THE MILITARY CONTEXT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THEY APPROVED AND HAVE DIRECTED THE FOLLOWING INTERIM GUIDELINES BE FOLLOWED BY ALL AIR FORCE MEMBERS AND CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES. THIS MESSAGE CONTAINS THOSE GUIDELINES, TO BE PROMULGATED BY COMMANDERS AND CIVILIAN LEADERS, AND TASKS THE AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND TO SUBMIT A PLAN FOR INCORPORATING GUIDELINES IN ALL VENUES OF FORMAL TRAINING AND EDUCATION FOR OFFICERS, ENLISTED AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL WHERE OUR CORE VALUES AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS ARE ADDRESSED. IT ALSO TASKS THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY TO SUBMIT A LONG RANGE PLAN FOR INCORPORATING THIS GUIDANCE IN THEIR TRAINING PROGRAM.
2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES:
A. WE ARE SWORN TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. IN TAKING THIS OATH WE PLEDGE OUR PERSONAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTION S PROTECTIONS FOR FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION AND PROHIBITIONS AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION.
B. WE WILL ACCOMMODATE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION AND OTHER PERSONAL BELIEFS, AS WELL AS FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, EXCEPT AS MUST BE LIMITED BY MILITARY NECESSITY. WE WILL NOT OFFICIALLY ENDORSE OR ESTABLISH RELIGION EITHER ONE SPECIFIC RELIGION, OR THE IDEA OF RELIGION OVER NON-RELIGION.
Comment: It is impossible for a Chaplain endorsed by a particular faith group or the USAF Chaplaincy not to endorse religion over non-religion. That is our calling. We cannot deny who we are: Chaplains endorsed by their particular faith groups to minister to all within the Air Force. The “WE” of this paragraph also represents chaplains and they cannot support this statement! Intentionally, they promote the idea of religion over non-religion both in public and private settings. It is impossible not to offend the non-religious. If that were done, God and faith would be completely erased from public speech or conversation.
C. OUR CORE VALUES SUPPORT AND ARE CONSISTENT WITH OUR CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS. OUR INTEGRITY DEMANDS THAT WE RESPECT OTHERS AND THAT WE LIVE UP TO OUR OATHS. SERVICE BEFORE SELF DEMANDS RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION, OUR AIR FORCE AND EACH OTHER, AND AN UNDERSTANDING THAT IN THE MILITARY OUR SERVICE BEGINS WITH A COMMITMENT TO OUR RESPONSIBILITIES, NOT ONLY OUR RIGHTS. COMMITMENT TO A CLIMATE IN WHICH INDIVIDUALS OF DIVERSE BELIEFS FORM AN EFFECTIVE TEAM IS ESSENTIAL TO ACHIEVING EXCELLENCE.
In considering when military necessity may lead to some constraint on individual rights in this context, we consider The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Title 42, United States Code, Section 2000bb-1, which provides, in part: Government may substantially burden a person s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
Comment: This is without clarity as to how the government/Air Force may restrict the free exercise of religion if it has a compelling interest to do so. What is the definition of a compelling interest? Who determines that compelling interest? The JAG? Good order and discipline? Keeping the Air Force out of the press? ie…happenings at the Air Force Academy? This is dangerous ground we are breaking.
D. CHAPLAIN SERVICE PROGRAMS ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COMMANDERS. CHAPLAINS FUNCTION AS STAFF OFFICERS WHEN ADVISING COMMANDERS IN REGARD TO THE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION, AND THEY IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS OF RELIGIOUS SUPPORT AND PASTORAL CARE TO HELP COMMANDERS CARE FOR THE WELFARE OF ALL THEIR PEOPLE.
Comment: To many active duty chaplains, the extended role of the JAG has pushed aside the staff officer function that the chaplain has had when it comes to advising commanders on the Free Exercise of Religion. From this document, the reverse seems to be happening: to advise the commander on “Freedom From Religion”. A question we would ask is…did the Air Force ask for advise from Air Force Chaplains in writing this interim guidance or was this a product in most of its parts from the Air Force JAG? If so, you have set aside your own guidance and denied chaplains their important role in this matter and their free exercise of religion.
E. SUPERVISORS, COMMANDERS, AND LEADERS AT EVERY LEVEL, BEAR A SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THEIR WORDS AND ACTIONS CANNOT REASONABLY BE CONSTRUED AS EITHER OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE DECISIONS OF INDIVIDUALS TO HOLD PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OR TO HOLD NO RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.
Comment: This interim guidance seems to discourage supervisors, commanders and leaders at every level to express themselves within the “freedom of religion expression” clause, even though they do it in a professional and sensitive way. It places the burden on the speaker of religious speech. One cannot determine before hand nor control how his/her speech is to be perceived. It seems that we are running scared of that which we cannot control. Does this prohibit those in uniform from leadership positions within chapel programs and ministry? Examples would be: teaching Sunday school, Bible study groups, Men of the Chapel, Women of the Chapel, reading scripture in a worship service, and even attending a chapel or church service. What about speaking engagements at a National Prayer Breakfast/Luncheon? A no offense environment is impossible and not guaranteed by the Constitution.
F. ABUSE OR DISRESPECT OF OUR WINGMEN OUR FELLOW AIR FORCE PEOPLE INCLUDING DISRESPECT BASED ON RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OR THE ABSENCE OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, IS UNACCEPTABLE.
Comment: Who defines “abuse and disrespect”? For many religious people, the swearing by religious Deity in public settings is an abuse and disrespect of their religious beliefs. Nothing in this document addresses that. Can the Christian preaching/teaching of the gospel of Christ in a chapel setting, be it study or worship, be construed as abuse and disrespect? The example of preaching at the Air Force Academy brings an answer of yes! That is scary.
G. WE WILL RECOGNIZE AND VALUE THE MANY HERITAGES, CULTURES, AND BELIEFS REPRESENTED AMONG US, AND BUILD A TEAM BY STRESSING OUR COMMON AIR FORCE HERITAGE: THE OATHS WE TOOK; THE CORE VALUES THAT WE EMBRACE; AND, THE MISSION THAT WE UNDERTAKE TO PROTECT OUR NATION.
H. AT A TIME WHEN MANY NATIONS ARE TORN APART BY RELIGIOUS STRIFE, WE MUST UNDERSTAND THAT OUR ABILITY TO STAND TOGETHER AS AMERICANS AND AS AIRMEN THOSE WHO REPRESENT MANY RELIGIONS, SHOULDER-TO-SHOULDER WITH THOSE WHO CLAIM NO RELIGION IS PART OF OUR HERITAGE, AND OUR STRENGTH.
Comment: This document attests to the fact that the Air Force does not like certain religious heritages and expressions and is seeking to silence them. Namely, Evangelical Christians have been singled out at the Air Force Academy. You are denying your own core values and are seeking to build a civil religion based on secular principles within the Air Force that you can completely control.
3. GUIDELINES. THESE GUIDELINES ADDRESS SOME KEY AREAS: RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION; PUBLIC PRAYER OUTSIDE OF VOLUNTARY WORSHIP SETTINGS; INDIVIDUAL SHARING OF RELIGIOUS FAITH IN THE MILITARY CONTEXT; THE CHAPLAIN SERVICE; EMAIL AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS; AND, GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE. THEY DO NOT PROVIDE ALL THE ANSWERS. RESOLUTION OF PARTICULAR ISSUES WILL BE FACT-SPECIFIC, REQUIRE COMMON SENSE, AND WILL OFTEN BENEFIT FROM THE ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL, THE CHAPLAINCY, AND THE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY OFFICE.
A. RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION.
(1) IT IS AIR FORCE POLICY THAT REQUESTS FOR ACCOMMODATION SHOULD BE APPROVED EXCEPT WHEN PRECLUDED BY MILITARY NECESSITY. THEY SHOULD NORMALLY BE APPROVED UNLESS APPROVAL WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON MILITARY READINESS, UNIT COHESION, STANDARDS, OR DISCIPLINE. WHEN REQUESTS ARE PRECLUDED BY MILITARY NECESSITY, COMMANDERS AND SUPERVISORS SHOULD SEEK REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES. COMMANDERS AND SUPERVISORS AT ALL LEVELS SHOULD ENSURE THAT REQUESTS FOR RELIGIOUS ACCOMODATION ARE DEALT WITH AS FAIRLY AS PRACTICABLE THROUGHOUT THEIR ORGANIZATIONS.
(2) BASIC GUIDANCE FOR RELIGIOUS ACCOMODATION IN MANY AREAS, INCLUDING WORSHIP SERVICES, HOLY DAYS, SABBATH OBSERVANCES, DIETARY REQUIREMENTS, MEDICAL ISSUES, AND APPAREL, IS INCLUDED IN DOD DIRECTIVE 1300.17. THIS GUIDANCE IS IMPLEMENTED THROUGH AF INSTRUCTIONS, INCLUDING AFI 36-2706, CHAPTER 8; AFI 36-2903, TABLES 2.6 AND 2.9; AND AFJI 48-110, PARA 13. COMMANDERS AND SUPERVISORS SHOULD BECOME THOROUGHLY FAMILIAR WITH THESE POLICIES, AND INCLUDE THEM IN STAFF AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRAINING.
(3) COMMANDERS CANNOT ANTICIPATE EVERY REQUEST FOR ACCOMMODATION, BUT, WHERE PRACTICABLE, AVOIDING SCHEDULING CONFLICTS WITH MAJOR RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE DAYS CAN BUILD UNIT CONFIDENCE IN LEADERSHIP AND ENHANCE UNIT EFFECTIVENESS.
(4) ABOVE ALL, COMMANDERS MUST ENSURE THAT THEY CREATE A CLIMATE WHERE INDIVIDUALS BELIEVE THAT REQUESTS FOR ACCOMMODATION ARE WELCOMED AND WILL BE FAIRLY CONSIDERED.
B. PUBLIC PRAYER OUTSIDE OF VOLUNTARY WORSHIP SETTINGS.
(1) PUBLIC PRAYER SHOULD NOT USUALLY BE INCLUDED IN OFFICIAL SETTINGS SUCH AS STAFF MEETINGS, OFFICE MEETINGS, CLASSES, OR OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED ACTIVITIES SUCH AS SPORTS EVENTS OR PRACTICE SESSIONS.
Comment: The question is: WHY NOT? The Air Force, though a young military service, has a heritage and history of this type of public prayer that cannot be denied. It is part of Air Force history! The Army and Navy have had this as part of their heritage and history since they began. WHY does the Air Force want to put a sudden stop to this? The answer: political correctness pressure. Why can’t commanders ask for wisdom and blessing in a chaplain prayer? Congress begins each day with prayer with the leadership of their chaplains.
(2) COMMON SENSE--AND MUTUAL RESPECT--SHOULD ALWAYS BE APPLIED AND EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES MAY DRIVE EXCEPTIONS.
Comment: Common sense would tell anyone that if a commander wants to open a staff meeting with a chaplain prayer then he/she should be allowed that respect. Why should extraordinary circumstances drive exceptions? It sounds as if you only want a chaplain to have public prayer when things are not going well. Who decides the exceptions? The JAG?
(3) CONSISTENT WITH LONG-STANDING MILITARY TRADITION, A BRIEF NON-SECTARIAN PRAYER MAY BE INCLUDED IN NON-ROUTINE MILITARY CEREMONIES OR EVENTS OF SPECIAL IMPORTANCE, SUCH AS A CHANGE-OF-COMMAND, PROMOTION CEREMONIES OR SIGNIFICANT CELEBRATIONS, WHERE THE PURPOSE OF THE PRAYER IS TO ADD A HEIGHTENED SENSE OF SERIOUSNESS OR SOLEMNITY, NOT TO ADVANCE SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. MILITARY CHAPLAINS ARE TRAINED TO DEAL WITH SUCH EVENTS.
Comment: What is a “non-sectarian” prayer and who decides the content? The Air Force has just stepped into the establishment of religion at this point. Chaplains are not and never should be trained in the theology of prayer by the Air Force! That is the sole prerogative of their faith group/denomination who endorses them for the chaplaincy. What is this “long-standing military tradition of a brief non-sectarian prayer”? Retired Air Force chaplains know nothing about this long-standing tradition. This must have been a “stealth” tradition. In fact, it has never and does not now exist, only in the imagination of some people. There have been many books of prayers prayed by Air Force and other military chaplains but they have not been called non-sectarian. Does this mean that the chaplain who prays is not to invoke the name of God? Or is this a veiled attempt to say that a chaplain may not pray in the name of Jesus? If so, this goes completely against the free exercise of religion. In a pluralistic setting like the Air Force, free exercise of religion means that in a public setting, a Jewish chaplain prays as a Jewish chaplain, a Muslim chaplain prays as a Muslim chaplain and a Christian chaplain prays as a Christian chaplain. In doing so they have respect for each other and those at the public event have respect for each of them and the religious tradition they represent. They DO NOT PRAY A NON-SECTARIAN PRAYER! We deplore the notion that prayer is to be used to lend seriousness or solemnity to a particular occasion. We also deplore the notion that the chaplain needs to be given guidance by the Air Force as to how he/she should pray and the contents of that prayer. Does the Air Force give guidance to the JAG and Medical Corps in how they practice their professions? They are fully qualified as are chaplains. These public prayers, in the conviction that God is real, listening and worthy of our praise, are in a shared concern for all Air Force personnel in that public gathering.
(4) IN ADDITION, A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOR PERSONAL REFLECTION DOES NOT REQUIRE THE SAME CONSIDERATIONS AS PUBLIC PRAYER AND MAY BE APPROPRIATE IN OFFICIAL SETTINGS.
C. INDIVIDUAL SHARING OF RELIGIOUS FAITH.
(1) IN OFFICIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, PARTICULARLY SITUATIONS WHERE SUPERIOR/SUBORDINATE RELATIONSHIPS ARE INVOLVED, INDIVIDUALS NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE POTENTIAL THAT PERSONAL EXPRESSIONS MAY APPEAR TO BE OFFICIAL EXPRESSIONS. THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE WHEN SUBORDINATES ARE PRESENT AS PART OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS.
Comment: What about participation and leadership in chapel programs and ministries by military members? That has been part of the Air Force heritage and history. Many of them have been effective speakers at National Prayer Breakfasts/Luncheons and the like.
(2) THE MORE SENIOR THE INDIVIDUAL, THE MORE LIKELY THAT PERSONAL EXPRESSIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED TO BE OFFICIAL STATEMENTS. THE MORE SENIOR THE LEADER, THE MORE RESPONSIBILITY HE OR SHE HAS TO SEND THE MESSAGE THAT WE ARE A TEAM BASED ON TRUST, RESPECT, AND A COMMON MISSION TO DEFEND OUR NATION AND THAT WHAT IS EXPECTED OF ALL OUR PERSONNEL IS TO LIVE UP TO OUR OATHS, EMBRACE OUR SHARED AIR FORCE CORE VALUES, AND DO OUR DUTY.
For example, there may be extraordinary circumstances where the potential benefits for the welfare of the command outweigh the potential of causing discomfort. These circumstances might include mass casualties, preparation for imminent combat, and natural disasters.
(3) NOTHING IN THIS GUIDANCE SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD TO LIMIT VOLUNTARY, PEER TO PEER DISCUSSIONS.
D. THE CHAPLAIN SERVICE.
(1) AIR FORCE COMMANDERS HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT THE PEOPLE UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO OBTAIN SPIRITUAL CARE. CHAPLAINS ASSIST COMMANDERS IN MEETING THIS RESPONSIBILITY.
(2) CHAPLAINS ARE COMMISSIONED TO PROVIDE MINISTRY TO THOSE OF THEIR OWN FAITHS, TO FACILITATE MINISTRY TO THOSE OF OTHER FAITHS, AND TO PROVIDE CARE FOR ALL SERVICE MEMBERS, INCLUDING THOSE WHO CLAIM NO RELIGIOUS FAITH. IN THESE VARIOUS ROLES, THEY SHOULD RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS TO THEIR OWN RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO HOLD NO BELIEFS. THEY MUST BE AS SENSITIVE TO THOSE WHO DO NOT WELCOME OFFERINGS OF FAITH, AS THEY ARE GENEROUS IN SHARING THEIR FAITH WITH THOSE WHO DO. IN ADDITION, THEY MUST REMAIN SENSITIVE TO THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SUPERIOR RANK, AND THEY SHOULD RESPECT PROFESSIONAL SETTINGS WHERE MANDATORY PARTICIPATION MAY MAKE EXPRESSIONS OF RELIGIOUS FAITH INAPPROPRIATE.
Comment: If a chaplain has been asked to participate in an official function, is that chaplain not being asked because they are a chaplain and represent religious faith? By the crescent, tablets or cross on his/her uniform, the chaplain is always expressing religious faith, and those symbols are always an offence to someone. Will those symbols of religious expression also be removed because they offend someone? If that be so, then the chaplain is left to the role of a morale officer. Our President and Commander in Chief makes public expressions of religious faith by saying “God bless America” or “God bless you”. According to these interim guidelines, our Commander in Chief is not in compliance. What a shame!
(3) CHAPLAIN SERVICE GUIDANCE INCLUDES AFPD 52-1 AND AFI 52-101.
E. EMAIL AND SIMILAR COMMUNICATIONS.
(1) GENERAL RULES FOR USE OF GOVERNMENT COMPUTERS APPLY TO RELIGIOUS MATTERS AS THEY DO FOR OTHER MATTERS IAW AFI 33-119, AFI 33-129, AND 33-112.
Comment: Does this mean that chapels and chaplains cannot advertise their programs and events through official email channels? If so, it is another example of denying free exercise of religion. This channel of communication has been available for chaplains to write short devotional thoughts and send them to only those who request. Will this also be denied? If so, it is another example of the free exercise of religion being denied.
(2) INDIVIDUALS WILL TAKE THESE GUIDELINES INTO ACCOUNT IN THEIR OFFICIAL COMMUNICATIONS. AS IN OTHER AREAS OF EXPRESSION, IT IS IMPORTANT TO AVOID THE REASONABLE PERCEPTION THAT ANY OFFICIAL E-MAIL OR COMPUTER POSTING IMPLIES THAT THE AIR FORCE SUPPORTS ANY ONE RELIGION OVER OTHER RELIGIONS, OR THE IDEA OF RELIGION OVER THE CHOICE OF NO RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION.
F. GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE.
NOTHING IN THESE GUIDELINES RELIEVES COMMANDERS OF THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE IN THEIR COMMANDS.
Comment: Sometimes a subordinate who is troubled will come to a superior and ask how he/she handles life’s complications. This situation is much different than a superior going to a subordinate. Will this also be denied because of political correctness? If so, it will threaten the moral foundation, character modeling and mentoring that has been so important to the Air Force.
4. FOR AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND: REQUEST AETC DEVELOP TRAINING MODULES FOR ALL ACCESSION AND TRAINING VENUES--OFFICER, ENLISTED AND CIVILIAN--WHERE AIR FORCE CULTURE AND CORE VALUES ARE ADDRESSED. AETC SHOULD INCLUDE THIS REQUIREMENT IN THEIR FY08 POM. PROVIDE A PLAN, WITH TIMELINE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION, TO AF/DP NOT LATER THAN 1 NOVEMBER 2005. IN DEVELOPING THIS TRAINING, CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO FEEDBACK RECEIVED REGARDING THESE INTERIM GUIDELINES. UPON APPROVAL, THIS TRAINING WILL REPLACE THESE INTERIM GUIDELINES.
5. FOR THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY: USAFA WILL INCORPORATE THIS GUIDANCE IN THE TRAINING MODULES ON RELIGIOUS RESPECT--RESPECTING SPIRITUAL VALUES OF ALL PEOPLE (RSVP)--CURRENTLY IN DEVELOPMENT. PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF RSVP, WITH TIMELINES, TO AF/DP NOT LATER THAN 1 NOVEMBER.
Comment: Why single out the Air Force Academy to have specific training in the area of religion and spiritual matters while not having the same training for the entire Air Force? Feed back by some cadets, faculty, staff and other Air Force personnel assigned to the Academy indicate that this training has been an attack on their own personal religious faith. They have been offended. What is their recourse?
6. APPLICATION OF THESE GUIDELINES WILL REQUIRE MUCH THOUGHT AND JUDGMENT BY COMMANDERS AND SUPERVISORS. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE ANSWERS TO EVERY SITUATION. WE WELCOME MAJCOM FEEDBACK AS YOUR COMMANDERS GAIN EXPERIENCE IN IMPLEMENTING THIS GUIDANCE.