{"id":2980,"date":"2010-04-16T00:30:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-16T08:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/?p=2980"},"modified":"2015-06-27T19:16:14","modified_gmt":"2015-06-27T22:16:14","slug":"military-religion-question-answered-beliefs-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2010\/04\/16\/military-religion-question-answered-beliefs-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Military Religion Question Answered: Beliefs, Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

The last Military Religion Question of the Day<\/a> asked if a military Chaplain’s article about God’s provision was correctly characterized by a critic:<\/p>\n

The\u2026Chaplain writes about why women were created (as an afterthought to keep men from being lonely), marriage as a Christian institution, and segues to a blatant Jesus salvation pitch.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The critic did not directly accuse the Chaplain of wrongdoing.\u00a0 Instead, he appears to be holding the Chaplain’s beliefs up for ridicule.\u00a0 Is the mockery justified?<\/p>\n

The critic’s interpretation of the Chaplain’s description of “why women were created” is fairly mistaken, making it hardly worth the effort to rebut.\u00a0 In short, all three Abrahamic religions refer to the same religious text statement about “The reason God gives for creating woman\u2026”\u00a0\u00a0In a manner of speaking, then, he is denigrating not only Christianity, but also Islam and Judaism.<\/p>\n

The critic also misrepresents the Chaplain’s statement on marriage.\u00a0 The Chaplain said it was a divine<\/em> institution, not a Christian one:<\/p>\n

Marriage was given to us by God as one way to meet these needs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Finally: the critic says the Chaplain “segues to a blatant Jesus salvation pitch.”\u00a0 Did he?<\/p>\n

In short, yes.\u00a0 Chaplain Etheridge’s “pitch” is about as close as you can come to saying “come to Jesus” without actually doing it.<\/p>\n

But\u2026what of it?<\/p>\n

Chaplain Etheridge is a Christian Chaplain, so it is not unforeseeable he believes what he wrote, nor is it unreasonable to conclude he has made similar statements before.\u00a0 Why, then,\u00a0is his statement of those beliefs held up for ridicule?<\/p>\n

Again, the critic doesn’t actually say the Chaplain did anything wrong, and it would be foolish to begin rebutting hypotheticals.\u00a0 Suffice it to say Chaplains are–shockingly enough–both allowed and expected to espouse the views of their religion, whatever it may be.\u00a0 There may be times when an “inclusive” perspective is appropriate, but there is no policy, regulation, or guidance saying public statements by Chaplains are one of those times.<\/p>\n

How does this Military Religion Question compare to the nearly simultaneous criticism of Chaplain Hornok<\/a>?\u00a0 In discussing the accusation against Chaplain Hornok, the analysis rebutted the critic\u2019s accusation\u00a0Chaplain Hornok had “proselytized.”\u00a0 In that regard, it ignored the question of whether or not Chaplain Hornok was allowed<\/em> to “proselytize” or otherwise make more explicit statements or invitations about his faith.<\/p>\n

Without question, Chaplain Etheridge more explicitly espoused the core tenets of his faith than did Chaplain Hornok.\u00a0 But the critic doesn’t say there was anything wrong<\/em> with that, nor do the publicly available facts support any such accusations.<\/p>\n

The Situation Exposed<\/strong><\/p>\n

Like the previous example, this criticism also came from Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation\u2026but not that<\/em> Weinstein.\u00a0 This Facebook post was attributed to Casey<\/em> Weinstein, son of MRFF creator Michael Weinstein.\u00a0 (The MRFF appears to be a family affair, with Casey’s wife Amanda also writing on behalf of the MRFF,\u00a0Michael Weinstein’s wife Bonnie fulfilling the role of “Development Director,” and Weinstein’s college student daughter Amber listed as an “admin” for the MRFF Facebook page.\u00a0 Only one Weinstein remains publicly unaffiliated with the MRFF’s efforts.)<\/p>\n

Just as with public commentaries by Commanders and Chiefs, Chaplains–who work for the Commander–may write articles from and about their personal views and perspectives.\u00a0 Public articles by military Chaplains can address the specific tenets of their faith, as one Chaplain did when he attempted to address the Christian quandary over “celebrating” Halloween<\/a> or as another did when he tried to explain the reconciliation between Christianity and military service<\/a>.\u00a0 They can also present explanations of religious events, and there is no requirement they contain qualifiers or caveats to prevent offense to those who may not agree with the faith system or holiday–whether\u00a0Christian,\u00a0Jewish (pdf)<\/a>,\u00a0or Islamic (pdf)<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation prides itself on highlighting instances in which religion (ie, Christianity) “pervades” military publications.\u00a0 (In fact, researcher Chris Rodda recently wrote a short blog composed almost entirely of\u00a0Christian quotes also from The Quantico Times<\/em>, as was the quote in this situation; again, she never actually said anything was wrong<\/em> with those statements.)\u00a0 The MRFF has taken to finding and highlighting the “Chaplain’s Corner” sections of base\/post papers (at least, those written by Christians)–of which there are probably thousands published and freely available–in order to “prove” Christians are attempting to surreptitiously convert the US military into some kind of religious warfare machine.\u00a0 That’s not at all the right way to view these articles on faith.<\/p>\n

Instead of denigrating someone’s faith, a true religious freedom organization would laud the grand American liberties permitting a military officer to espouse his religious views, whether they be Christian, Jewish, Islamic, or something else.\u00a0 Demanding courts martial or implying Constitutional violations by Chaplains has a chilling effect on religious freedom, it does not support it.\u00a0 Freedom is not protected by the restriction<\/em> of opposing ideas, but by the encouragement<\/em> of them.\u00a0 As Thomas Jefferson said:<\/p>\n

Truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them\u2026 (Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom<\/em>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Weinstein (that is, the elder) has explicitly stated his opposition to (or “war with”) a distinct religious faith group.\u00a0 Rather than opposing them with ideology, he has attempted to enlist the power of the state to restrict the actions of specific faith adherents.\u00a0 In these latest examples, he–and his son–have complained about Christian Chaplains espousing their religious views, despite the fact the Constitution protects the Chaplains’ religious freedom and no military or government necessity restricts them–and despite the fact Chaplains of other religions also publicly speak out<\/a> on their faiths.<\/p>\n

A\u00a0true religious freedom organization would defend<\/em> the adherents of a faith practicing and expressing their beliefs.\u00a0 But then, Michael Weinstein’s “religious freedom foundation” is anything but.<\/p>\n

(As the MRFF’s highlights of these “Chaplain’s Corners” vary little from its standard disdain for the public expression of the Christian faith, future MRFF criticisms of such publications will not be discussed, absent unique circumstances.)<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The last Military Religion Question of the Day asked if a military Chaplain’s article about God’s provision was correctly characterized by a critic: The\u2026Chaplain writes about why women were created (as an afterthought to keep men from being lonely), marriage as a Christian institution, and segues to a blatant Jesus salvation pitch. The critic did not directly accuse the Chaplain […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[23,366,175,4,82,70,19,44,39,85,2,5218,7,17,10],"class_list":["post-2980","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-military-regulations","tag-bible","tag-casey-weinstein","tag-chris-rodda","tag-churchandstate","tag-constitution","tag-evangelism","tag-government","tag-islam","tag-jewish","tag-mikey-weinstein","tag-military","tag-military-religious-freedom-foundation","tag-mrff","tag-religious-expression","tag-religion"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2980","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2980"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2980\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2980"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2980"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2980"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}