{"id":33340,"date":"2015-08-18T00:30:39","date_gmt":"2015-08-18T03:30:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/?p=33340"},"modified":"2016-11-24T22:49:12","modified_gmt":"2016-11-25T01:49:12","slug":"retired-general-tells-military-chaplains-to-be-inclusive-or-get-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christianfighterpilot.com\/blog\/2015\/08\/18\/retired-general-tells-military-chaplains-to-be-inclusive-or-get-out\/","title":{"rendered":"Retired General tells Military Chaplains to be Inclusive or “Get Out”"},"content":{"rendered":"

David Wells, pastor of Pleasant View Baptist Church in McQuady, Kentucky, was recently barred<\/a> from ministering to residents of a juvenile detention facility because he refused to sign a policy that said he could not refer to homosexuality as sinful. The Liberty Counsel is now assisting Wells as he sues for reinstatement<\/a>:<\/p>\n

“They have not accommodated him and they’re clearly trying to restrict a particular viewpoint,” said Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Staver also said he\u00a0 <\/p>\n

believes the attack on the ministry is the first of many to come in the U.S. after the Supreme Court ruled that state bans against same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Advocates for homosexuality have repeatedly claimed the ability of homosexuals to exercise their “rights” would have no impact on the religious liberties of chaplains, pastors, or others. Numerous public examples, however, seem to show\u00a0the government\u00a0either requiring people to violate their religious beliefs (to stay in business, for example), or banning certain religious persons outright if they refuse to elevate homosexuality over their religious beliefs. This conflict has already come to the US military, where Chaplain Wes Modder<\/a> faces a discharge board for stating his religious beliefs on sexuality — which he made in response to questions directed to him.<\/p>\n

A retired General recently took this a step further, telling chaplains in his former command they could either “make room at the table or get out.” In an official Army article oddly titled “Chaplains Valued For Their Service As Moral Compass<\/a>,” retired LtGen Jim Pillsbury appeared to direct chaplains to subvert that very moral compass [emphasis added]:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The retired three-star general went on to describe the sanctuary at his church where his pastor has two chairs and one table near the pulpit. The two chairs represent opposites<\/strong> — black and white, Republican and democrat, boy and girl, peacemaker and warrior, straight and gay — and the table represents inclusiveness<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

“Do you have room in your heart for those who are different from what your beliefs are? I firmly believe the intention of our Lord is for us to read the Bible and interpret the Bible based on our relationship with the Lord. The word is not black and white. That is why Jesus told parables,” Pillsbury said.<\/p>\n

“You can make room at the table or you can get out<\/strong>. I know all of you have wrestled with that.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Keep in mind Gen Pillsbury was previously the Deputy Commander of the very command in which these chaplains now serve. He’s not speaking to these chaplains as a religious leader; he’s speaking, according to the article, “from an Army leader’s point of view.”<\/p>\n

Yet his view does not appear to be consistent with US law or the US military’s official<\/em> policy.<\/p>\n

How would then-commanding Gen Pillsbury have responded if he was required to review a complaint against a chaplain who said homosexuality was a sin? How would he have responded if a chaplain’s endorsing agency didn’t allow a chaplain to “make room at the table”?<\/p>\n

It’s not entirely clear, actually, nor is it clear Gen Pillsbury even correctly understood his pastor’s chair\/table example. For that matter, its not entirely clear that Gen Pillsbury’s comments are being correctly understood by those now lauding them.<\/p>\n

Chaplains do<\/em> need to have “room in their heart” for those whose beliefs are not the same as theirs, because they will serve troops of all faiths. That’s a fair, if somewhat inartful, statement.<\/p>\n

When a General tells chaplains they’re required<\/em> to “have a chair at the table,” and that the table is acceptance<\/em> of that person’s truth claims, as Gen Pillsbury appeared to say, that’s a bridge too far. Every chaplain would likely have “room at the table” for anyone who wanted to sit and talk. Chaplains are counselors and servants by nature, and they would likely want nothing more than to listen to and share with another, regardless of their beliefs. (That may even be the sense of\u00a0“openness” intended by the pulpit example Gen Pillsbury related.)\u00a0 But it is another matter to be told they have to accept, agree with, or affirm those other beliefs — or that they’re not allowed to speak their own religious tenets about them if they disagree.<\/p>\n

Despite Gen Pillsbury’s personal opinions, his personal faith (including his declaration “the word is not black and white”), and the way his pastor leads his church (which Gen Pillsbury may even be misunderstanding), official military policy says chaplains don’t<\/em> have to censor or change their religious beliefs in the face of the changing social norm on sexuality. They’re not<\/em>\u00a0required to have a “chair at the table” that accepts the truth claims of others with different beliefs.<\/p>\n

If that is the meaning of what Gen Pillsbury said, he’s wrong.<\/p>\n

Gen Pillsbury is retired, but he obviously still maintains some official influence, as he was invited to speak to these chaplains. The “unofficial” influence a retired General can have is also not insignificant.<\/p>\n

It shouldn’t be terribly surprising that General Pillsbury’s statement is being interpreted as “accept homosexuality or get out,” as Mikey Weinstein read it<\/a>, given social changes and the military’s attempt to match or lead them.<\/p>\n

Still, there were loud scoffs when faith adherents and religious liberty advocates cautioned that the rising tide of “sexual freedom” risked infringing on religious freedom.<\/p>\n

‘It will never happen,’ they said.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

ADVERTISEMENT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\n