BaptistLife.Com Forums.

This article certainly raises some difficult questions. What do you think?

The SBC clearly has bigger problems when their ministers are more concerned about being cornered on homosexuality than actively supporting the military-industrial complex of a secular superpower.

The article linked is by a Presbyterian explaining why Southern Baptist chaplains "cannot serve God and country." I'm unimpressed. Couldn't ABP at least find a Baptist to write on this?

I've talked to a few retired SBC military chaplains who routinely handled some similar situations. They were accustomed to finding another chaplain who could do the service or duty if they received a request they could not fulfill.

Any SBC chaplains who wish to perform same-sex ceremonies or assist in leading a same-gender event can certainly find an endorsement from the homosexual friendly CBF.

Well, William, you beat me to the punch. The article is written from a very biased perspective, and is yet another attempt by ABP to make the SBC look like it is out of step with the culture for its Christian, Biblical stand on homosexuality. They make it sound like Southern Baptist chaplains are the ONLY ones who operate under such rules, and that the practices which Southern Baptists won't participate in are widespread, every day occurrences in the military. Neither of those things is true.

I note that both the NAMB rules and the Covenant and Code of Ethics for Chaplains of the Armed Forces (CCECAF) rules as given in the article seem very myopic (i.e. focussed on a single issue) at least as the article reports it. With SBC’s NAMB it is homosexuality and with the CCECAF it is religious tolerance. Shows a lack of comprehensiveness and over-concern with a religious fad of the moment.

I doubt that the concerns of these rule makers are reflective of the range of concerns of the troops they serve. What about keeping relationships on the front up while on “adventures”, or fear of landmines, or political concerns of the rightness of our "adventures” (like Blake points out), or struggles on recovery from illness/injury or grief for fallen friends. Certainly some guidelines are appropriate in these arenas. Perhaps there are manuals on these other matters, but the rules makers are playing mostly to politics back home instead of providing useful guidance to the chaplains.

I have pastored in 3 communities near military bases and have known several chaplains closely. I agree that both NAMB and the code seem overkill. CBF is not endorsing gay marriage, but it's not writing policies that have no way to be enforced. Will NAMB send folks to a firebase in Helmand Province to verify that no SBC chaplains counseled a same-sex partner there? I think not.

Ed: William, you make a good point in saying "I have never known an SBC chaplain who did not minister to whomever is in need." And I would hope you are correct when you say "NAMB's policy is directed at performance of specific rituals", however I have no idea what you mean by "or that ministry which accepts same sex marriages and relationships."

As for your comment "I'd say that there is a problematic segment of the military chaplaincy."
What large compliment of individuals does not have "a problematic segment"? And from the feedback I have had from our son's one an active army reservist and the other who is an active duty Air Force 1st Sargent, I believe it is indeed being appropriately managed.

Requiring a chaplain to perform a service or to do something that compromises his religious beliefs in order to "serve his country" is a violation of his religious freedom. If the policy were in reverse, and performing same-sex marriages by military chaplains was forbidden, don't you know ABP would be screaming at full volume about that being a violation of religious freedom.

This article was an opinion piece by ABP, not a news piece.

ABP now has an opinion piece by Al Mohler on the same subject.

ABP must be hip to Mohler's hidden pro-gay agenda... I mean, why else would they give him space to type?

ABP has used one of my pieces, conspiracy I suppose.

Yeah, I was just playing to Sandy's attempt to paint ABP as gay-agenda-driven.