SBC Military Chaplains

[Dave Roberts]

My heart goes out to the chaplains who are caught in this Catch 22.

[Sandy]

There are a lot of Southern Baptist chaplains in the military, and few places where they would encounter the things that NAMB wants them to avoid. I doubt that this is going to create much of a problem. It would be up to the ranking chaplain to determine what a specific chaplain would or would not have to do, and many of them are either Southern Baptist, or from a denomination that shares the SBC's Biblical perspective on homosexuality. And I think that most of those in authority, whether they agree with the SBC position or not, would be inclined to make the necessary arrangements to avoid putting the chaplains in a catch 22.

[Dave Roberts]

Most of my experiences with chaplains has been that they are much less denominational in their concerns than they are simply concerned for the people with whom they work. I hope there will be few conflicts. NAMB just seems to have overstressed the obvious.

[Big Daddy Weaver]

I would think that the NAMB "guideline" prohibiting a chaplain from conducting a service with a chaplain/contractor/volunteer who is gay OR affirms same-sex relationships could be problematic. I'm sure there are instances in which a Protestant chaplain would need to work in some capacity with another Protestant chaplain, possibly a mainline Protestant with a differing view on homosexuality.

Of course, it's worth remembering that the government (not churches) pays for the salary of chaplains.

[Sandy]

I think it would be a rare occasion in the military chaplaincy to encounter a situation in which a chaplain would be required to work with another chaplain who came from a welcoming and affirming denomination or one that was favorable to same-sex relationships. First of all, I doubt that there would be very many situations in which the subject would be involved in some kind of service, and second, looking at the numbers of chaplains that are Southern Baptist, or come from a denomination that would share similar perspectives on same-sex marriage or on homosexuality in general, I doubt that arrangements couldn't be made to avoid that having to happen. There are few chaplains in the military from the few denominations that approve of same-sex marriage, or which are "welcoming and affirming." And the percentage of chaplains who would be in the commanding offices who are Southern Baptists, or who are from other denominations who share similar views, is at least as high as the rest of the chaplaincy. I don't think it would be a problem for assignments to be made which keep chaplains of any denominational background from having to violate their convictions.

I'll have to double check to make certain, but I believe that Southern Baptist chaplains are paid by NAMB. I lived adjacent to Ft. Huachuca, Arizona for years, and we frequently had a chaplain whose local church membership was at my home church, and they were under NAMB appointment, with a home missionary designation, and are part of that pay structure.

[Haruo]

[Sandy]

http://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/fait ... bc538.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/12/natio ... nted=print

Not sure I would agree that the military is only 3% Southern Baptist and Evangelical, given their numbers among the Protestant Christian community at large. The article cites "self-identification" as the source, but they represent a much higher percentage of Protestant Christians than that.

[Dave Roberts]

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: I would like to see the form on which Military personnel self identify as to religious preference. Decades, really more than a half century ago (1953), our official choices where Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Other, or None, with no place to define other. The choice was stamped on your dog tags, with a single letter C,P,J,O,N. Later, but still in the fifties, Baptist claiming not to be Protestant, lobbied for and did gain a spot on the list,identified with a B. I have an idea that the figures here come form some independent survey.

[Sandy]

I don't think that entering military chaplaincy means that you surrender your religious freedom. Most chaplains that I've met and known, especially those who are Southern Baptist, have a very clear understanding of their role and have a high level of respect for differences in Christian traditions. But I think you can do that, and not be put in a position to compromise your convictions. If the article in the Post-Dispatch is accurate, the number of chaplains serving from the few denominations which endorse same-sex marriages, and which are welcoming and affirming on the issue of homosexuality is extremely small, as would be the number of military personnel asking for such services from their chaplains.

It becomes a controversy, as it most usually does, because the small minority of pro-gay activists can't tolerate people who don't see things their way, and so they make an issue out of it, either to force their will, or to create such a stir that the ability of those who hold a different view to minister in the situation is impaired, or eliminated.

[Sandy]

[Haruo]

[johnfariss]

[Dave Roberts]

No endorsing body pays military chaplains. They are on the military payroll.

[Ed Pettibone]

[Haruo]

[Ed Pettibone]

[Haruo]

When our pastor, Dr. Judy Gay, started back to seminary after retiring from a long career in special education and educational administration, it was with the intention of working in chaplaincy. She was not initially comfortable with the pastorate for women, although she had felt a calling to preach since childhood. I know she worked for awhile as a chaplain ("spiritual care provider", the term is there) at Harborview Hospital: . But I don't know whether, how much, or by whom she was paid during that part of her professional life.

[Jerry_B]

Why chaplains at all? Seems to me that the goal of the military and the goal of most religions are antithetical to one another.

[Haruo]

[Jerry_B]

Well, specifically I guess, the killing of people.

[Haruo]

Yeah, if that is the goal then you're probably right. But my understanding is that the military views killing people not as the goal but as a means to the establishment and maintenance of peace, and since they are all (with a tip of the hat to William) Marxists anyway, to whom ends justify means, they kill people merely as a stepping stone to a better life for all who are left.

[Ed Pettibone]

[Jerry_B]

So what is the goal then if not killing people?

[Ed Pettibone]