I don't think any chaplin can minister to all soldiers. For example, many believing Christians could not be ministered to by a chaplin who did not believe that Christ is what He said he was, the only way to the Father. Any attempt to exclude chaplins who preach salvation through Christ is a form of denominational discrimination. Worse, it is an official act of disapproval of a particular religious belief, one held by many (perhaps even a majority) of the service men and women who are away from their home churches to serve and defend our Nation.
If we can not administer a military chaplin program without engaging in censorship of certain religious beliefs from sermons and prayers, then perhaps the entire program should be trashed as a violation of Larson v. Valente.
Rick
Lupu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Lupu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The leading (and quite thorough) opinion on the military chaplaincy
and the Establishment Clause is Katcoff v. Marsh, 755 F. 2d 223
(2nd Cir. 1985). The justification for chaplains is to minister to
religious needs of members of the Armed Forces. Frequently, the
circumstances of soldiers and sailors preclude their ordinary
participation in their own faith community. And Sam Ventola is right
-- chaplains, especially in foreign postings, have to be able to
minister to the religious needs of all soldiers, and they are trained by
the military to do so (typically after being ordained as clergy by their
own faith community). A clergyman or woman who could not
minister to all would not be very useful as a chaplain, and could
quite legitimately be drummed out of the chaplaincy corps.
Chip Lupu
On 12 Jul 2005 at 9:47, Sanford L! evinson wrote:
>
> There is a fascinating article in today's NYTimes on the increasing
> number of Evangelical chaplains in the armed services. Consider oe
> James Klingenschmitt, of the Evangelical Episcopal Church, whose
> retention was recommended against by his commanding officer following,
> among other things, his preaching at a memorial service at sea for a
> Catholic sailor that "emphasized that for those who did not accept
> Jesus, 'God's wrath remains upon him.'" I presume that the this was
> not meant to apply to the Catholic seaman, but it obviously suggested
> to any Jewish or Muslim (or atheist or Buddhist, etc., etc., etc.)
> that they were condemned to God's wrath. In any event, is there a
> serious argument that it is improper to take such speech into account
> in deciding whether to recommend that the contract be renewed. I
> presume, incidentally, that the armed forces would ! not renew the
> contract of a chaplain who sugested that a given war was in fact
> "unjust," If the armed services can constittionally do that
> (presumably on grounds that it is not good for the morale of those in
> the armed services), then why can't it fire chaplains who suggest that
> many members of the armed services are damned to eternal perdition?
>
> sandy
Ira C. ("Chip") Lupu
F. Elwood & Eleanor Davis Professor of Law
The George Washington University Law School
2000 H St., NW
Washington D.C 20052
(202) 994-7053
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Rick Duncan
Welpton Professor of Law
University of Nebraska College of Law
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
Red State Lawblog: www.redstatelaw.blogspot.com
"When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered." --The Prisoner
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
