MRFF Calls for Inquiry of the Chaplain Endorsing Agency CFGC
Jun 26 2009
Please Note: The commentary in this article is not meant to imply an official MOAA position on the MRFF letter. From time to time, we will address topics that are outside of our official scope to help provide factual information as best we can.
Background on Chaplain Endorsing Agencies, CFCG, and MRFF
For those not familiar with the process of becoming a military chaplain, here is some background information. The Armed Forces Chaplain Board makes recommendations via certified ‘Endorsing Agencies’ to the Secretary of Defense on a variety of chaplain issues. There are currently nine administrating endorsing agencies and approximately another 187 endorsing agencies. The full list of agencies can be found here. The purpose of the AFCB is listed on their website here as:
- Protection of free exercise of religion according to Amendment I to the Constitution of the United States.
- Procurement, professional standards, requirements, training, and assignment of military chaplains
- All religious support providers.
- Procurement and utilization of supplies, equipment, and facilities for religious use.
- Promotion of dialog with civilian organizations regarding religious issues.
- Promotion of joint military endeavors for the delivery of ministry by the Military Services throughout the Department of Defense whenever practicable.
One of these administrating endorsing agencies, the Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches (CFGC) has come under fire for alleged violations of multiple regulations governing the endorsing agencies. CFGC gained their authorization for ecclesiastic endorsement in 1984 and has since made a big impact on the Chaplains Corps. According to their website, they are “presently endorsing 270+ Military Chaplains/Chaplain Candidates and 180+ Civilian Chaplains/Seminarians” and represents over 7.5 million “Full Gospel” believers. CFGC’s founder and President is E.H. (Jim) Ammerman, who served for 23 years as an Army chaplain and retired in 1977. In addition to their own endorsing agency, Mr. Ammerman serves as the endorsing executive for 12 other endorsing agencies, all of which are offshoots or associates of CFGC.
On June 24th, 2009, the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) sent a comprehensive package of complaints regarding CFGC’s past and present actions to the Secretary of Defense, President Obama and a number of other high ranking government officials. The letter, which can be found in full here, laid out a series of accusations against CFGC and Colonel Ammerman and called for the revocation of their status as an endorsing agency, as well as an investigation into the CFGC endorsed chaplains currently in the military. MRFF was founded in 2006 by Michael L. ‘Mikey’ Weinstein, “to directly battle the evangelical, fundamentalist religious right”. Mr. Weinstein was driven to form the non-profit watchdog group based on his experience in the military, starting with harassment at the Air Force Academy (five other members of his family have attended AFA as well). Mr. Weinstein served for ten years in the Air Force as a Judge Advocate General and went on to serve as counsel to President Reagan and presidential candidate H. Ross Perot. MRFF claims to have fielded calls from over 13,000 active duty personnel (96% of whom are Christian) asking for advice or reporting harassment.
In this article, we will examine the four main accusations made by MRFF against CFGC and try to determine their validity. Although the complaint letter contained supporting documentation, the evaluations have been done independent of any MRFF documentation or sources to provide the most objective viewpoint possible.
Evaluation of Specific Claims in the MRFF Complaint
#1 – CFGC’s Denigration of Other Religious Entities
From the letter:
Th e Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches (CFGC), headed by retired Army Col. E.H. Jim Ammerman, which, according to its website, currently has over 270 chaplains and chaplain candidates in all branches of the military, habitually denigrates all religions and religious denominations except Charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity. Th is denigration, which includes virulently anti-semitic and Islamophobic statements, as well as the deprecation of Catholicism and mainstream Protestantism, occurs in the CFGC’s chaplain newsletters, as well as in the speeches, media appearances, and videos of both Mr. Ammerman and a currently serving CFGC chaplain, Army Maj. James F. Linzey.
Evaluation – True. On multiple occasions, Mr. Ammerman has made disparaging remarks about fellow Christians, Muslims, Jews and other faiths. The following is a list of some examples:
- Regarding Mainstream Protestants (from Newsweek) – “In a 2008 sermon, Ammerman described a CFGC chaplain at Fort Riley, Kans., who demanded the 42 chaplains below him “speak up for Jesus” or leave his outfit”
- Regarding Jews (from Ammerman’s Prophecy Club video): “Why, you know, father Abraham started out at fifty and got way down. He might have gotten down to three, but he didn’t go that far. You know, that’s where jewing down came from. He’s the father of the Jews, and he jewed God down. Well, I wish I had some of that ability. I seem to have to always pay full price.”
- Regarding Wiccans (from The Washington Post): Wiccans “run around naked in the woods” and “draw blood with a dagger” in their ceremonies. “You can’t do that in the military. It’s against good order and discipline.”
- Regarding Muslims (from CFCG’s September 2006 newsletter): “Therefore after much study and deliberation, perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both ‘good’ Muslims and good Americans.”
#2 – CFGC Ties to Extremist Groups and Statements Against the Government
From the letter:
Both Mr. Ammerman and Maj. Linzey have made numerous statements against the government of the United States and certain government officials and departments, promoted civilian militia movements, and disseminated many conspiracy theories in an attempt to foment disloyalty to the government of the the United States among both civilians and military personnel. Th is type of activity has previously led to an investigation of Ammerman and CFGC, called for by Air Force Lt. Gen. Normand Lezy in 1997. DoD Directive Number 1325.6, “Guidelines for Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces,” cited in Lt. Gen. Lezy’s 1997 memorandum, states that “Military personnel must reject participation in organizations that espouse supremacist causes.” The Prophecy Club, an organization for which both Mr. Ammerman and Maj. Linzey have made videos, unquestionably espouses a supremacist cause. In addition, various statements made by both Mr. Ammerman and Maj. Linzey in their Prophecy Club videos, as well as in other forums, such as radio appearances and speeches, incontrovertibly violate one or more of the following statutory provisions found in Enclosure E1.2 of DoD Directive Number 1325.6.
Evaluation – True. Not only have Mr. Ammerman and Major Linzey created videos for The Prophecy Club, which can be found here and here, they have also used their DoD certified newsletter to suggest the killing of Democratic candidates in the 2008 election.
The Newsweek article referenced above also contains the following:
Ammerman and chaplain Linzey have espoused conspiracy theories about “Satanic forces” at work in the U.S. government facilitating a military takeover by foreign troops; Ammerman even appears in a video favored by militia groups titled The Imminent Military Takeover of the USA. In 2008, Ammerman implied that four presidential candidates should be “arrested, quickly tried and hanged” for not voting to designate English America’s official language, and speculated that Barack Obama would be assassinated as a secret Muslim.
In April of 2005, Major Linzey was conducting a radio interview and advocated civilians taking up arms:
Linzey : I want Americans, I want everybody listening, to go out and buy 5 weapons and 5,000 bullets – for your own protection, for self defense. Because I believe that foreign soldiers will come to our houses, to rape our wives and teenage daughters and kill the men right in front of them – and then the women will bear children of an ethnic stock different from what they are, and that’s how you alter the course of any society; you change the ethnic stock. Egypt today is not the same ethnic stock it was during the Moses days.”
Huffington Post blogger Bruce Wilson describes another incident from the 2008 campaign season:
Last August 9, 2008 during a sermon at the Sioux Falls, South Dakota Cornerstone Church Jim Ammerman declared that Barack Obama was secretly a Muslim and predicted that if the Illinois Senator won the election, “we won’t have a president very long” because Muslims would try to murder the new president — for betraying Allah. If candidate Obama chose Hillary Clinton as his vice presidential running mate and won the election, pastor Ammerman continued, Bill Clinton would arrange for Obama to be killed because “[Bill] wants back in the White House.”
#3 – CFGC is Not Eligible to be an Endorsing Agency
From the letter:
According to the de nition of a “Religious Organization” found in DoD Directive Number 1304.19, “Guidance for the Appointment of Chaplains for the Military Departments,” CFGC is not eligible to be authorized as an ecclesiastical endorser. CFGC is not an “entity that is organized and functions primarily to perform religious ministries to a non-military lay constituency.” CFGC, which is operated out of a house located in a residential neighborhood of Dallas, Texas zoned for single family homes, did not have a “non-military lay constituency” at the time of its founding, but was founded for the sole purpose of endorsing chaplains, and this continues to be its primary purpose to this day.
Evaluation – Undetermined. Beyond MRFF sources, we could not verify the authenticity of this claim. CFGC’s ‘About Us’ page does not go in to much of the history of the church before they received their authorization as an endorsing agency. However, we lean towards accepting this assertion due to Mr. Ammerman’s bio page, which makes no mention of serving non-military constituents prior to their authorization.
#4 – CFGC Violates CENTCOM’s General Order 1-A
From the letter:
In a clear and blatant violation of CENTCOM’s General Order 1-A, which absolutely prohibits the proselytizing of any religion, faith or practice in Iraq and/or Afghanistan, a network of forty CFGC chaplains has engaged in the organized distribution in Iraq of Arabic language Bibles and other Arabic language fundamentalist Christian evangelizing materials to the Iraqi people. The violation of this explicitly prohibited activity by these forty CFGC chaplains was initiated, encouraged, and aided by Mr. Ammerman.
Evaluation – True. Back to the Newsweek article for this one:
The Bible initiative was handled by former Army chaplain Jim Ammerman, the 83-year-old founder of the Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches (CFGC), an organization in charge of endorsing 270 chaplains and chaplain candidates for the armed services. Ammerman worked with an evangelical group based in Arkansas, the International Missions Network Center, to distribute the Bibles through the efforts of his 40 active-duty chaplains in Iraq. A 2003 newsletter for the group said of the effort, “The goal is to establish a wedge for the kingdom of God in the Middle East, directly affecting the Islamic world.”
J. E. Wadkins, vice president of student life at Ecclesia College who oversees the International Missions Network Center, says they have worked with Ammerman for 20 years and reached out to him as part of their “Bibles for the Nations” mission. He estimates that in the end, between 100,000 and 500,000 Arabic Bibles were distributed in under one year, beginning not long after Saddam Hussein’s ouster. “It was a really early effort there,” says Wadkins, “when things first opened up.”
Mr. Ammerman is reportedly fond of quoting the biblical passage in the book of Luke, chapter 19, verse 27: But on the day when Lot went out of Sodom, fire came down from heaven and destruction came on them all as a way of highlighting the struggle he sees in the current wars to his chaplains.
Overall Evaluation
While the behavior and intent of Mr. Ammerman and CFGC are certainly worthy of a deep look by the Department of Defense in relation to their endorsing agency status, MRFF have gone too far in calling for the aggressive investigation and court martial of any CFGC endorsed chaplains that may have been participating in the violations. It is obvious from the research performed here that CFGC does have a deeply entrenched presence in the military, and calling for such a wide inquisition will only fan a great deal of anger. But if our Chaplain Corps is being infiltrated by evangelical fundamentalists bent on converting not only Muslims but also American troops, it does represent a real threat to their security in Afghanistan and Iraq. If what the Harper’s Magazine story of soldiers’ actions in 2004 is anything but an isolated incident, it will be very hard to win over any hearts or minds.
You may have heard Mikey Weinstein’s name before. He has been featured in many news articles over the past four years, and in many forwarded emails. The most recent one, regarding the bible burning incident in Afghanistan, was written by Gordon Klingenschmitt. In April and again in May, Klingerschmidt issued calls to God via imprecatory prayers to smite Mr. Weinstein’s family, wipe his seed from the earth and, in somewhat of a paradox, curse his family for the next ten generations. I mention this because Klingenschmitt was discharged from the military after 17 years after he demanded a court martial when he was questioned about praying in front of the White House in uniform. Gordon Klingenschmitt was a chaplain, and he was endorsed by CFGC.
As strong and courageous as our men and women in uniform overseas are, the majority of our fighting force is enlisted and under the age of 25. In a foreign land, under extreme duress, they are more vulnerable than the normal person to persuasion. Our chaplains are there to provide comfort and spiritual guidance, not to point anyone towards a particular faith. If we cannot maintain a wall between religion and the military, we run the risk of inadvertently forming our own jihad style force. Jim Ammerman passing on a strong belief in end times prophecy, which traditionally requires a great deal of global destruction before the rapture can occur, to a vulnerable generation of servicemen, is inconceivable. But the statistics regarding how many people in uniform have contacted MRFF seem to point towards a select group of chaplains pushing this scenario, and risking turning our efforts in the Middle East into a true crusade.
UPDATE – Battle of the Bilge interviewed Mikey Weinstein for a profile feature, which can be found here.
Remember that comments are moderated to avoid the scourge of spam, not for content. We do not edit your words and it should only be a short time before your comment appears.
I wish MOAA would steer clear of religious squabbles like this. It is clear that both organizations (the endorsing agent and its accuser) have their own agendas, and it is not the place of MOAA to wade into the middle of it. I’m not sure that DoD should play “cop” in this matter, either. Trying to regulate religious views would be an exercise in futility, would end up angering many both in and out of the military, and the US Government should not be involved.
Obviously the Evangelicals (and I use the term grudgingly since I am a graduate of the Wisconsin EVANGELICAL Lutheran Seminary) have no understanding of the separation of Church and State. That separation was not only established by our founding fathers, but by the Lord Himself when he said, “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s!
In my Naval career as a Chaplain the “evangelicals” caused more problems by improperly imposing their “Christian” views in every venue possible. They did more to cause an anit-Christian attitude among the troops than if they had remained invisible. I know, I have seen it time and time again.
If they don’t want to abide by the rules of good order and discipline then don’t enter the military environment. They are the closest thing to a cult I have ever seen. They are intolerable of any other views than their own. They fail to understand that if you deny anybody their American guaranteed rights, then your rights might very well be the next to go. Remember Nazi Germany. By the time the Jews said ENOUGH!, it was too late.
Anyway, that is my opinion andit is based on my personal experience interacting with the evangelicals throughout my career. Respectfully subitted, Stan M. Aufderheide, CDR, CHC, USN, (Ret.)
Religion has not changed, it is the government that has changed. George Washington would be kicked out of the Army today for his beliefs and prayers.
Any chaplain who would stand up and read the Preamble to any state constitution would probably be sued.
The Barstoolers are fine, Christianity is not?
God help us!
I believe CFGC is an extremist religious hate group where racists and criminals are hiding as so-called Christians.
If it is not DoD’s job to play cop in these serious issues, we are in deeper trouble than I thought. Of course DoD should look into this. The published public statements by Chaplain Ammerman and his associates are troubling and should disqualify them from having an influence on chaplain selection. Listen to Chaplain Aufderheide (above), people!
It is definitely within the purview of MOAA to address any threat to the US and particularly to the US Military. Any attempt for chaplains to disenfanchise people based on religious beliefs which do not violate the law, is definitely a threat to both. It is also repugnant to any “real” officer in the US military to have chaplains prostelizing anyone or endorsing discrimination against any group based on their religious beliefs. The job of the chaplain is to minister to our military personnel in the context of that military person’s personal religious beliefs. Chaplains are in the military to fill the chosen spiritual needs of the troops, not to serve the the sect, synod, or religion of the chaplain.
Based on the MOAA analysis and my personal observation of current military intolerance of various relgious beliefs, I believe that CFGC should be decertified. Additionally, a rational but more aggressive investigation of complaints past, present and future of this sort is needed. Automatically investigating (a la the Tailhook investigation) all of the CFGC chapains based on being CFGC certified is just as repugnant as the behavior of Colonel Ammerman.
This dynamic has happened before. In the 1970s the Marine Corps discovered that both white supremicist and black radical groups had staked out their own ‘turf’ at Camp Pendleton. The Corps’ response was to discharge them as soon as discovered. This included some officers who were found to be members of the KKK. Chaplian Aufderheide (above) is quite correct. Any group that places its own agenda above good order & discipline needs to be purged from the military — at once. As a reminder to all officers, one of our responsibilities is to try to return our young enlistees to their families/home towns as better, more mature people after four years under our leadership. Not with a new set of beliefs obtained under high-pressure conditions. In my day, I always encouraged my troops to see the chaplian of their religious background (i.e. the chaplian their parents would want them to see). I felt this was my responsibiolity as an officer. My personal religious beliefs had no influence on this responsibility.
I find the position that has been taken in some replies that it is none of DOD’s business to be strange. Who do they think is paying those chaplains? I think it is DOD!
As for the position that the problem is too large to address via investigation and disciplinary action. The fact that it may be so large is exactly why it must be investigated and dealt with. If that angers some rogue chaplains, so be it!
I concur with both Chaplain Aufderheide and Col. Moran. To think that Ammerman was endorsing Chaplains into the military with attidues similar to his is frieghtening and a danger to the good order of the military. I don’t see how the Chief of Chaplains cannot withdraw certification from Ammerman’s organization. We’ve seen two instances in the past month where individuals with similar beliefs to Ammerman have killed people with whom they disagreed.
I wonder where the Secret Service is concerning the overt threats made on President Obama by a supposedly Christian pastor.
Stunning comments; Weinstein is an atheist who is against all chaplains in the military. Since the Clinton administration, there has been a dramatic increase in social engineering, political correctness, racial, gender and ethnicity preferences and quotas, and now a threat to overturn the absurd “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell” policy that never should have been permitted but there is no criticism of these policies by MOAA. DOD has moved way to the Left in many of its views even and especially under President Bush which in turn has inflamed the likes of CFGC. The economic policies of the current administration since January 2009 no doubt dismay many Americans and frighten millions as our nation rapidly is embracing the Social Democrat policies of Western European nations in decline. But most frightening of all is when chaplains who believe in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the right to own and bear arms are shouted down by those who would prefer to live in a police state of which more than a few military officers of liberal persuasion apparently prefer as long as it is a liberal police state. Rather than investigate CFGC, turn the light on the Wahabi funded organizations which sponsor ALL MUSLIM CHAPLAINS IN THE MILITARY. But that will never happen and MOAA continues to show through its magazine that its staff is firmly in the camp of the Democrat Party.
The articles only identify, by name three people who have been disruptive. Those individuals need to be dealt with through appropriate chanels. I think this is an issue that the military chaplaincy should attend to simply because it is their jobs that will ultimately be on the line. I would think that the three Chiefs of Chaplains with their staff could deal with those chaplains that are on active duty (to include seminarians). The Armed Forces Chaplalincy Board needs to deal with these issues from their perspective and if this included withdrawing authority of Ammerman, then so be it. I would think it appropriate for this activity to be done with the full knowledge of the Department of Defense, but not run by the Department of Defense. These are my thoughts entirely and are respectfully submitted. Chaplalin (MAJ) Roy W Ludlow, USA Retired.
The “Evangelical” community in uniform has been a problem for a long time. I welcome a thorough investigation and timely removal of the problem personnel.
As a Technical Instructor at Lowery AFB, CO in the late 60′s, I recall a sermon given by a Catholic Chaplin to a congregation primarily made up of young recent enlistees going through Tech School. In this sermon he pointed out that the ground troops that worked on the aircraft that killed people were just as guilty of murder as the pilots of those aircraft. My response to the Chaplin was as outraged as a Sergeant could get away with toward a Captain. His response to me was: “If you want to express another opinion, you take the pulpit.” I agreed to do that, but, oddly enough, he never could find the right time to allow me to do it.
After my commissioning as a mental health officer, I witnessed many incidents where Evangelical personnel, Chaplains and lay members of their congregations, created significant mental health problems for young troops. At one point, during our medical management of a young Airman who had tried to commit suicide while at an Evangelical “recruiting dinner” because he believed that, because he could not understand what people who were “Speaking in Tongues” were saying, he was therefore unacceptable to God and should be destroyed, I was forced, after observing his reaction to some of his visitors, to write an order prohibiting the Chaplin who sponsored the dinner, and the rest of the people at that dinner, including one of our med techs, from having any contact with the troop until we could air evacuate him back to the states. The Chaplin hit the roof. Fortunately the Hospital Commander backed me up.
It has long been my observation that many Chaplains see their primary job as recruiting souls, not serving the members they already have. Given the vulnerable states many of our young people are in in their early years of military service, a Chaplin hunting for souls in the military is the equivalent of a hunter hunting for game in a zoo.
And, yes, I do believe it is relevant to cover this in the MOAA. It may be that it is only those of us who are retired who can speak without fear of retribution.
What actions have the Service Chiefs and their Chiefs of Chaplains taken to eliminate this misconduct?
If the Chief of Chaplains in any branch has evidence, then let it be presented, otherwise most of comments above are just that. Opinions are like you know what; everyone has one. No, any particular Chaplain of any faith group is not suppose to be more concerned with gaining converts than with ministring to those who are in need, no matter their religious persuasion, but what do you think happens when a G.I. comes to a Chaplain if that G.I. does not have a faith group? You already know the answer. If the Chief of Chaplains of the branches need someting to be concerned about it is the growing pressure for a Chaplain to whom a “sin” has been confessed, if it is something like child abuse or who knows what else swinging from trees, if it is a hot potato issue the Chaplain, many of whom make solemn vows, are now expected to report what they know or suspect to the JAG offices or risk becomming an accessory to the crime. I am sure however, if the Chiefs of Chaplains in each branch were allowed to run their own Chaplain’s Corps versus bowing to the current politicial mandates the services would have better Chaplains.
I totally concur with the opinions of Chaplain Aufderheide and others. I retired in 1980 so am ignorant of this subject. However, I must state my utter surprise that normal military chain of command actions apparantly have not/are not being taken to correct this obviously illegal conduct on the spot in proper disciplinary fashion. If General Order 1-A (and I’m sure several other “orders”/regulations) have been/are being violated, officers “on-site” are derelict in performance of their duty. I can understand the need for overall (DoD)attention due to the scale of this attack on our sensibilities, but what has happened to individual responsibility – or has our “spoiled child” society too deeply permeated our armed forces officer corps? “Don’t criticize!” Don’t stick my neck out!”! My ignorant opinion: this should have never gotten to first base! The solution is mandatory from both ends. Officers of all ranks and positions, educate yourselves and do your duty; DoD, stop being a political object and do your duty! Thank You, MOAA, for being our “watchdog”.
Why do we pay chaplains from appropriated funds, which come from taxes? If we pay chaplains from appropriated funds, why do we also require ecclesiastical endorsement? These two ideas seem to me to be in conflict.
My opinion of a Christian is that his beliefs concerning the place of Christ in our lives should take precedence over the needs of the military if there is a conflict. The same would go for a Jewish chaplain or a Muslim chaplain of whatever one may think of as a “belief” worthy of calling someone a chaplain.
If all that chaplains are supposed to do is sort of console soldiers for being away from home in a very undesirable situation, why not train soldiers specifically for that purpose, or maybe recruit social workers, psychiatrists etc? If there is supposed to be a separation of Church and State, which I really fail to see in the Constitution, but so be it, then why pay representatives of the Church (Chaplains) and then attempt to control what they do?
I once had a desire to be a chaplain. I thought it was a worthy cause. I still do, but wonder how a conscientious person can stand the strain of a calling from God (as I believed and believe it should be) coupled with the politics of the military.
Gerald G. Fuller
Major USAF, Retired.
Chaplain Ammerman and his associates are the “Ugly American” personified! The perception of their activities by the Iraquis is very likely seen as “doctrine” being imposed by the evil Christian invader!
And the indoctrination of our troops with this skewed vision of a loving and forgiving God when they are the most vulnerable and in need of Him is unforgivable.
They should not be part of the military chaplaincy. I certainly hope the DOD can do something about it.
I just do not understand why evangelism is a problem for people. What religion or Christian denomination is out there to destroy the armed services? Frankly, it wouldn’t bother me a bit to see Jewish evangelicals, Budhist evangelicals or any other religion out there advertising their beliefs and inviting people to evaluate for their own lives. Christian evangelicals preach redemption and the fruit of the spirit (Galatians 5:22.) Against these things there is no law. And, personally, I would rather see all our servicemen subscribe to a faith above themselves. All would benefit.
What is a problem is when individuals use the pulpit to breed hatred and avarice instead of hope, peace and spiritual renewal. We have regulations and laws to control this illegal activity, and those laws should be enforced. The chaplaincy plays an enormous part in the lives of our combat servicemen and we need to support it fully.
From the Article
“As strong and courageous as our men and women in uniform overseas are, the majority of our fighting force is enlisted and under the age of 25. In a foreign land, under extreme duress, they are more vulnerable than the normal person to persuasion. Our chaplains are there to provide comfort and spiritual guidance, not to point anyone towards a particular faith.”
The last sentence is paradoxical. How does a chaplain provide “spiritual guidance” without a spiritual reference point? How does a chaplain provide “comfort” unless he points the “vulnerable” young enlisted to the God who provides all comfort?
Someone needs to speak out who has known Jim Ammerman for over forty years. There are a number of spiritual and political issues over which we strongly disagree. However, I cannot put this man on a cross because of what he sincerely believes. It would appear that this matter needs investigation by the Chiefs of the three branches of our Armed Forces. We need to settle any problems within the system and in keeping with our spiritual hearts and minds. If all religious Faiths and Denominations would fill their chaplain quotas with qualified men and women, it would greatly benefit all members of our Armed Forces and their families. While Chaplains do serve under both their Faith and The Military, they are staff officers and come under commmand authority. This authority is accepted when a person becomes a military chaplain or chaplain candidate. Only those who are willing to minister to all of God’s children should be commissioned. There are probably many chaplains who serve under Ammerman’s endorsing agency who are honorable men and women, and a few who need to be sent back to civilian life. This is not a new struggle and it has been fought over a number of times. If we lose our military chaplains the real losers will not be the un-employed clergy, but the men and women of our Armed Forces and their families. Only trained military chaplains can serve on the front lines. Surely this issue can be sloved as it ought to be, within the system. And may God by various names and concepts bless all of those in our Chaplain Family. and those they serve.
Thank you, Colonel Morris, that was extremely well said.
I can only say that as a former AF chaplain, I know that certain events have in fact been carried out against evangelical chaplains (myself included) by other chaplains (usually not evangelical, though not always), base commanders, the chief of chaplains, and others. When a chaplain believes himself or herself to be attacked for beliefs held (such as providing a low-keyed, short and discreet altar call for which he recieved no complaints in the past), and utilizes the congressional investigation for being denied the right to conduct any religious activities whatsoever, the powers that be will have that chaplain investigated, sent to a psych ward, and then begin the process of ruining that chaplain in every way possible to include even his or her family. As I said before, I know this to be a fact. Whether anyone reading this believes it is up to you. You are entitled to be wrong, if that is your desire.
Based on your own (MOAA) evaluation, the CFGC should be disqualified from any and all dealing with the US Military. As for the DoD looking into the matter, it is highly doubtful they will-because if they do, it automatically signals there could be some truth to the matter (accusations).
We are after all talking about past and present Military officers (and I’m sure NCO too) being accused of evangelizing the younger Military troops, to the point that MRFF has received ~13,000 complaints. I trust Mikey’s integrity as a retired Military officer that the numbers are a true accounting. I’m certainly not putting this entire issue on the CFGC, but I’m sure that based on a preponderance of “evaluations” so far, it is likely they had a small part to play…or maybe larger then I know.
Col Morris may have some valid points, but our troops are not serving Jim Ammerman political views. As a Military we must put our personal and political beliefs aside and do our jobs to the full extent of our capabilities. This means leaving personal belief’s in a deity at the door.
The problem here is that the establishment IS NOT doing what Col Morris says they should be doing and the underlings are just rolling over and not saying anything out of fear of [career] survival. You cannot expect Colonels to “police” Colonels…its just not done…well 99.9% of the time anyway.
A final comment for Christopher Thompson…Mikey Weinstein is no Atheist…but so what if he could be. Atheists are treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force them to practice what they do. We are free to believe what we wish, but NO ONE is allowed to force us what to believe and this is happening is the US Military…I’m a witness!!
I think this is a very good use of the MOAA web site and encourage the continued discussion of such issues. We need to make sure that the military mission is not subverted by those operating outside the established rules and regulations.
In my Naval career as a Chaplain I experienced bigoted assault from theological fundamentalists, theological liberals, atheists, and agnostics. I have had the misfortune of serving under a few of the worst examples of leadership, ethics, and morals. However, I was mostly blessed to serve under the most exemplary men and women this country has ever experienced. The last time I checked we called that life! So let us dispose of the witch hunt!
Mr. Aufdrheide is correct. It is an issue of good order and discipline. The last time I checked it was the responsibility of Commanders and Commanding officers to enforce good order and discipline through the avenues provided in the UCMJ. If the UCMJ has been violated it is incumbent upon the Commander to take action. There is an avenue in place if the Commander is incapable of taking corrective action. It is called relief for cause.
The majority of religious issues prevalent in the military, in my opinion, stem from the Line failing to fulfill their duty. We all swore to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic as well as obey all lawful orders. Line, do your job.
Having served 28 years in the Army as an evangelical chaplain, I had great freedom to preach the gospel, and did so before troops at all levels. But I did this without disparaging other religious groups. Chaplains should have just as much freedom to voice their convictions as any servicemember should have to not attend chaplain services. Attendance should be strictly voluntary. However, when a chaplain (or any other officer) publicly ridicules another religious group, he has crossed the line of religious freedom and should be corrected or removed from the military. There is a real tension for the conscientious evangelical chaplain who desires to remain subordinate to his command structure but at the same time is compelled to fulfill the Great Commission of his Commander-in-Chief, Jesus Christ, who said, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” A chaplain is not a mere social worker; he is a preacher with a message of hope. That message can be offensive, but it should never deliberately attack other faith groups. If anyone is on a crusade it is Weinstein, who virtually discriminates against all military chaplains. I have seen his kind before. And long after he departs, the message of hope that the chaplain brings the troops will continue.
CH (LTC RET) Gerald Priest…you said you preached the gospel without disparaging other religious groups but here you disparage a man of great religious conviction that is only trying to help his fellow service men from being religiously proselytized by the Military’s senior membership.
You need to read this: http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/about2.html
Mikey is not a crusade, he is not on a mission, he is not against Military Chaplains. Mikey only wants YOU, to unequivocally ensure, that NO serviceman is forced to church, or to pray or any practice any other form of supplication if he or she desires not to. Mikey wants YOU, to unequivocally ensure, that NO serviceman is forced to clean the toilet or mop the floor because he or she refuses to go to church, or to pray or any practice any other form of supplication because YOU CAN’T FORCE US TO DO WHAT YOU DO!!!
There’s not just one Mikey Weinstein now CH Priest…there’s at least 13,000 (and growing) and we are not going to “depart” this time.
REF: Clark Paton’s 1 Jul comment: EVERYONE has an agenda. Such is the nature of politics, and, as a result, our government of the people, who must sort out such conflicts among its constituents, especially when they involve conflicting values and the use of the taxpayer dollar. The government–including DoD–is not trying to regulate religious views, but rather needs to be the arbiter in such matters WITHIN THE MILITARY. And we, as current or former servicemembers, have all taken an oath to protect out country against ALL enemies, both foreign AND DOMESTIC. If there’s some losoe cannon out there saying a sitting President should have been executed and other inflammatory remarks documented on tape, and that person is actively influencing not only servicemembers but chaplains who are supposed to be role models for the troops, then the government has no choice but to look into this.
REF: Gene McVay’s 1 Jul comment: “George Washington would be kicked out of the Army today for his beliefs and prayers.” Washington was an Episcopal by membership and a deist by belief. When was the last time you heard of either being discharged?
REF: Christopher Thompson’s 1 Jul comment: about Mikey Weinstein being an athiest: Mikey Weinstein is no athiest, unless an atheist is defined as one whose religious belief is different than yours. He is a Jew. He got involved when he discovered the anti-semitic treatment his son and other Jewish cadets were getting at the Air Force Academy from evangelical cadets and faculty in authority over them there. I suggest all read that story if you have not yet already done so.
REF: CW4 Glen Nardin, USA’s 1 Jul comment, “I just do not understand why evangelism is a problem for people.” It’s not a problem until you start using tax dollars, and especially when your audience is captive.
REF: Gerald G. Fuller’s 1 July comment: “My opinion of a Christian is that his beliefs concerning the place of Christ in our lives should take precedence over the needs of the military if there is a conflict.” Indeed, that is why there are such avenues as conscientious objector status, many of whom are or were Christians when faced with that dilemma. No one is questioning a chaplain’s or any individual’s right over what should take precedence in his or her life. But if a chaplain oversteps the bounds of what he or she has freely agreed to in the job description, then a decision has to be made as to which master will be served.
Finally, I salute MOAA for a forum such as this. As long as it’s kept open and it’s presentation is objective, what can strengthen the democracy we’ve all fought for or are continuing to fight for, more than an honest and open exchange of ideas amongst peers?
Captain Love:
You said: Our chaplains are there to provide comfort and spiritual guidance, not to point anyone towards a particular faith.”
The last sentence is paradoxical. How does a chaplain provide “spiritual guidance” without a spiritual reference point? How does a chaplain provide “comfort” unless he points the “vulnerable” young enlisted to the God who provides all comfort?”
Let me explain the historic nature of the Chaplain Corps and what is currently going on.
When I entered the Navy Chaplain Corps in the mid 1970s, our motto was “cooperation without compromise”. Our ministry was to provide pastoral care to the troops in our care. A person who came to us for help was entitled to receive that help from HIS OR HER perspective, not ours. If we could not minister to that person, we needed to find someone who could. The Chaplain had an obligation to respect the religious views of every troop. Our job was to be available, but not to encroach our views on theirs. And yes, you can offer help to sailors and others under those conditions. It might not be what we consider “spiritual”; it might be philosophical, or it might be whatever they found central in their lives. And it can include the values we find in faith. But it must not be coercive. It must not denigrate his/her own faith or choice.
What is going on today in our military, is that some religions are favored over others. The “rights” of Chaplains to “witness” or senior officers to “express their beliefs” in uniform and in a duty status are given priority. As a CG Captain, how much power do you have over a seaman in such a discussion? Do you think an E2 could ever tell you to “go jump, sir”? Of course not.
We have troops in the military from many of our churches who are being told by these “Chaplains” that the religious faith of these troops is false, that Roman Catholics are not Christians, that mainline Churches are the work of Satan, etc. This does not provide “comfort” to the troop. On the countrary, it sows discord, and diminishes unit cohesion.
Every shift change in many commands now includes Chaplains praying for the command, often in explicitly Christian terms. How does the young Jewish department head who has to attend feel? Why should everything be “religiousized” unless it is because these Chaplains feel the important thing is to evangelize the troops? That’s not what they are there for.
Troops have the right to believe as they will…or in nothing at all. The only concern we have is that they do their jobs well. Otherwise, we are little different than the Soviet Union was when they had “political officers” in every command. We just call them “Chaplains”…but the function is the same–to ensure “right belief” in the personnel.
There are many wise posts above, including by retired Chaplains who understand the issue.
I would ask that you reread Christopher Thompson’s post, above. He is speaking much like evangelical Chaplains serving in the field right now. What if you were a young Muslim troop, or a Jew? Or an athiest, or a Roman Catholic, or a Lutheran? Drawing lines, determining who is “right” and prescribing that everyone else is an enemy is exactly what these chaplains are doing. They are not pastoral caregivers, they are “evangelists” who will turn the entire military into a Christian organization if they can. But religion is not issued with a uniform upon enlistment.
We take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We take no religious oath to ANY religion. That’s a great part of what has made our military the envy of the world, that men and women of every race and creed can serve together, carrying out their orders reliably and without bias. At this moment we are trying to convince the Iraqis that the way forward is for Sunni, Shi’a and Kurds to work together peacefully as a national, not a sectarian Army. At the same time, we are creating a sectarian military in the US. It must stop.
Pr Chris
As an “evangelical” who served honorably on active duty for 30 years and enjoyed working alongside those from different theological backgrounds, I did not know that I was a problem as some have said. I am saddened to see the broad attacks and generalizations above, even from my fellow chaplains. I learned so much from my Lutheran, Methodist, Catholic,Jewish, Muslim and other theologically different chaplains and Servicemembers. I became a better chaplain because of interaction with them. Seems like now there is a whole lot of talking and attacking going on and not much listening, compassion or respect. May God forgive us for our arrogance.
Some chaplains don’t get it and some non-chaplains don’t get it. Having served about half my 27 years on active duty as a chaplain with Marines and half with Navy (not including 8 years enlsted reserves), I saw enough of the good and enough of the bad to understand frustrations and anguish expressed in above comments. As an evangelical, I took gas from a very few liberal chaplains and a very few evangelical chaplains who thought I was not evangelical enough. However–military personnel and their families were all served well 90% of the time by the whole theological spectrum of chaplains who understood their mission and their limitations accepted when taking the commissioning oath. There are not only jerks in the various chaplaincies; there are also jerks masquerading as leaders–but like chaplains, the rest of the 90% do a heads-and-shoulders job of sacrificially serving their people and their country. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater!
Religion has enough opposition without internal strife causing more opportunity to doubt! In a shrinking world, thinking people understand that the global community, regardless of differences, is inter-related and interdependent on one another. and needs to work together for the good of all in facing common problems. That does not imply universalism and uniformity, for thinking people can also agree to disagree and still respect each other; yes, even value one another for our differences and be enriched by what we can learn from one another. Extreme separatists who are insecure and threatened by change and globalization often resort to generating an enemy and lashing out in a presumed need to defend their traditions and past. The same observation holds for the religious world as it does for the political. Some of the worse zealots are those who delude themselves into thinking they are the judge of the earth and oppose anyone who differs with them; all in the name of God, of course (they need some kind of justification for their bias and inhumanity).
Religion has proved a mixed bag of bane and blessings as it attempts to give some meaning to existence. Some religious expressions have proved exclusive rather than inclusive. Others seem to produce more guilt than inspire blessing. When change threatens treasured traditions, insecure zealots and uncertain fundamentalists inflame hate and violence rather than examine the issues. Brotherly love and acceptance is equated with heretical apostasy. Abusive religion resorts to using fear and force in attempts to coerce adherence by controlling, dominating and manipulating the human spirit. Historically, the world has seen too many examples of such misuse of the spiritual. True religion enables, empowers and frees men and women to be all that they understand the divine will to be for their lives. It motivates faith and love by respecting the freewill of choice in the pursuit of truth (John 8:32).
Though the Christian Scriptures define truth as the Law (Psalms 119:142), the Word (John 17:17) and Jesus (John 14:6, Jesus did not answer Pontius Pilate’s question, “What is truth?” (John 18:38). He left Pilate to determine the answer to that question for himself. Seems like a good example to me, so long as your definition of truth and freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins!
As an active duty Army chaplain from a fairly conservative faith, I freely chose to minister in a religiously pluralistic environmnet. I understood the necessity to serve people of all faiths or no faith, and not impose my own beliefs on others unless I was asked to explain my particular views. Plenty of opportunities were afforded me to organize, lead and conduct religious activities, programs and services in accorance with my own faith heritage. Those were advertised as such and attendance was purely voluntary. Chaplains serve others, not themselves; they minister for the spiritual well-being of all those in their circle of influence rather than wear the uniform to assert their perceived personal agenda and rights. If a chaplain cannot accept that norm, then they should find a civilian expression of ministry in which they are content.
Thank you for your comment, sir. That was informative and well said.
Say, hasn’t CFGC violated DoD instructions by questioning the integrity of DoD and our top elected officials — and ultimately jeopardized the integrity and stability of national security?
Per DoDI 1304.28, an endorsing body MUST:
6.7.3.4. Be able to meet all other appointment eligibility criteria of the
Military Department to which the applicant is applying.
6.8. Any individual or religious organization shall be removed from or rejected for
participation in the DoD Chaplain program if:
6.8.1. The individual is under indictment or has been convicted of a terrorism-related
offense, or other offense threatening national or economic security.
6.8.2. The religious organization appears on the annual State Department list of
Foreign Terror Organizations.