Conclusion
A chaplain is the Army’s agent for ensuring the soldier’s free exercise of religion, and as such bears
a heavy responsibility. Chaplains must diligently defend their soldiers and advocate on their behalf with
those who seek to restrict their Constitutional
rights. This paper
has
established the potential conflict
with the Army chaplaincy
stated mission to ensure the free exercise
of
religion when
the chaplain practices
Christian fundamentalism.
But are
the beliefs held
by
a fundamentalist
clergyperson totally
incompatible with service as an Army chaplain?
After reviewing the
research and anecdotes provided
in the paper, I conclude
that in some, but
not all cases, fundamentalist views are
incompatible with service.
A
fundamentalist
Christian holds very strong beliefs, but like every other American
retains the right to the free exercise
of
those beliefs. However,
certain tenets of fundamentalism, when taken to extreme, are incompatible with other soldiers‟ rights to free exercise, and
therefore
inappropriate for chaplains. It is not the beliefs themselves which
are incompatible with chaplain service, but the practice. If by attitude
and
action a chaplain does not
respect
the rights of others, denigrates those
who
believe differently,
and refuses to work collegially
with peers, that chaplain
is not capable of
performing the
inherently governmental functions of the chaplaincy, that of
ensuring free exercise rights. In fact,
that chaplain threatens the free exercise of soldiers by
his or her very presence. On the
other hand, when a chaplain
respects the rights of
others, even when their beliefs are very different,
that chaplain will
protect them and their right to free
exercise.
Ultimately, the challenge will remain for all chaplains:
to live and work
in an
institution in which they are required to act within
the
bounds of their endorsed faith
group while simultaneously supporting the free exercise
rights of others. For all
chaplains, this means maintaining a strong sense of ethics
regarding the conduct of
evangelism and
the assistance provided for all soldiers. More
specifically, for
chaplains holding fundamentalist beliefs, it
means
understanding that the
soldier,
not the chaplain, decides when the
interaction between the two
should
be
inherently religious in nature. If
the chaplain can
accept this, he or
she will serve the soldiers
well.
Endnotes
1
U.S. Department of the Army, Religious Support, Army Field
Manual 1-05 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Army, April 2003), iii.
2
The focus of this paper is on the Army chaplaincy, because the regulations, standards and
anecdotes from that community are most readily available to
the
author. However, the
recommendations will
be extrapolated to the Department of Defense level, since that is where policy for the chaplaincies of all
services is established.
3 Gerrie ter Haar, “Religious Fundamentalism and Social Change: a
comparative Inquiry” in
The
Freedom to Do God’s Will: Religious Fundamentalism and Social Change, eds. Gerrie ter Haar and James J. Busuttil
(London: Routledge, 2003), 2.
4
R. A. Torrey and others, eds., The Fundamentals: a Testimony to the Truth, vol. I, reprinted from 1917 ed. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1980),
5.
5 Franklin Johnson, “Fallacies of the Higher Criticism,” in The Fundamentals: a Testimony
to the Truth, vol. I, eds. A. C. Dixon
and others, reprinted from 1917 ed. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1980), 55.
6
James Orr,
“The Holy Scriptures and Modern Negations,” in The Fundamentals: a
Testimony to the Truth, vol. I, eds. A. C. Dixon and
others, reprinted from 1917 ed. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1980), 94.
7 Robert
E.
Speer, “Foreign Missions or World-Wide
Evangelism,” in The Fundamentals: a
Testimony to the Truth, vol. III, eds. A. C. Dixon and
others, reprinted from 1917 ed. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1980), 231.
8
Heinz Streib, “The Question of Salvation and Faith-based
Radicalism,” in Faith-based
Radicalism: Christianity, Islam and
Judaism Between
Constructive Activism and Destructive
Fanaticism, eds. Christiane Timmerman, Dirk Hutsebaut, Sara Mels, Walter Nonneman
and Walter van Herck (Brussels: P.I.E. Peter Lang, 2007), 151.
9 Nancy T. Ammerman, “North American Protestant Fundamentalism,” in Fundamentalisms
Observed, eds. Martin
E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby (Chicago: The
University
of Chicago
Press, 1991), 54.
10
Noah Adams, “Timeline: Remembering the Scopes Monkey Trial,” All Things Considered,
July
5, 2005, linked from NPR
Home
Page, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId
=4723956 (accessed February
27, 2011).
11 Ammerman, “North American Protestant Fundamentalism,” 28.
12 Ibid., 55.
No comments:
Post a Comment