MINISTRY IN THE PLURALISTIC MILITARY ENVIRONMENT

Editors Note:  Chaplain Giannola's comments on pluralism reflect his thoughts and experiences as an Army Chaplain dealing with many who do not share his Biblical convictions and views.  For those thinking of a ministry in the military as a Chaplain will do well to ponder some of the joys, opportunities and pitfalls he writes on. 

MINISTRY IN THE PLURALISTIC MILITARY ENVIRONMENT

Chaplain (LTC) Jeff Giannola

     I wish to speak on this issue to my Fundamental Christian brethren, because some have difficulty ministering in the military environment, to the extent that they eventually separate from the military, or find themselves undergoing a hardship that perhaps they could have avoided.  I understand that this difficulty is not necessarily due to any shortcoming on the part of the chaplain in the area of spiritual insight or wisdom.  But maybe I can help improve skill in maneuvering among the enemy.  It can be difficult at times for a dedicated Christian to minister in this environment.  There are issues and concerns that we have to deal with.  God does not call everyone into this type of ministry, and for someone to separate because they sincerely believe they are sinning against God, or who feel they are compromising to a level beyond what God would accept, I respect that.  But I wish to present the ministry from a different perspective, perhaps enabling some to consider the military chaplaincy as a true mission field, ripe for the harvest.  It is an open door to accomplish many good works we could not do in the civilian sector.  I will only address the opportunities we have within the Army, as I do not have experience within the other branches of service.  As this is a very sensitive area, I know some will disagree with my position.  All I ask is that the reader think this through carefully.

     First of all, we must define pluralism.  Pluralism means basically that our society, and therefore our military, has a variety of religions represented by the Soldiers.  Soldiers believe in different religions, theologies, and deities; and they have the right to believe that their way is correct and alternate views are wrong.  However, we must work together as a team.  We must treat each other with respect and dignity.  This is an Army value.  A mature attitude within a pluralistic environment means we respect another’s religion, whether we agree with it or not, and whether we like it or not.  We will not insult, tear down, or criticize another’s position.  If asked, or if in a personal conversation, we can share our views and our feelings sincerely; but we must do so with respect and honor.   Pluralism should not force anyone to accept or go along with a belief system that he disagrees with.  Chaplain supervisors and military leaders must be careful when they tell a chaplain how to minister, for then they may be crossing over the chaplain’s own Constitutional rights as a minister.  We can lay down principles, define a boundary within which we minister, but not define ministry specifically.  Each chaplain also has the Constitutional right to minister according to his beliefs, and not be required to go against them.  Some chaplain leaders I believe have gone over the line in directing methods of ministry and restricting chaplains in certain areas. 

     Pluralism is not ecumenicalism.  Some confuse the two, and this is what I believe causes some Fundamentalist chaplains to separate from the military.  They were forced to do what they didn’t believe in the name of pluralism, but their supervisor confused the two terms. Ecumenicalism takes what different religions have in common, rejecting the differences, and the end result is a totally new religion that does not resemble either one.  This is not pluralism, and actually is a form of disrespect; because it is saying that the specific beliefs of the religions represented are not to be supported.  This denies the Constitutional rights of the members of the religions.  Think of it this way: what makes a religion what it is, is not what it has in common with another, but what it has that’s different.  We do this with everything in life.  Scientific classification is noting differences, not similarities, while scientific grouping notes similarities.  Take an elephant and a mouse.  Both are animals and mammals.  Both are vertebrates (have backbones).  Being a mammal, or a vertebrate, does not make a mouse a mouse, or an elephant an elephant.  It’s what they do NOT have in common that specifies what they are.  What they have in common allows us to group them, but not define them.  With religion it’s the same.  What makes Christianity Christian is not what it has in common with Buddhism, but what it does NOT have in common.  To honor Christianity, or Buddhism, or Islam, is to honor what defines them, not just what they have in common.  True pluralism, for example, would allow a Jew, and a Muslim, and a Christian to pray prayers in a group according to their specific religious traditions, without censorship.  True pluralism can say, in effect, “I believe you are going to hell, but I respect your right to believe that way and will support your need to worship that way.”  Our leadership has poor understanding of this, and actually enforces a form of ecumenism, and then censors our religious expression.  I cannot, as a Fundamentalist Christian, support an ecumenical environment, but I can support a pluralistic one.  And the military is not ecumenical, but is pluralistic.   The liberal, anti-fundamental chaplains either willfully, or ignorantly, censor our ministry because they feel we are too “narrow-minded” and we may offend some.  But it is they who dishonor the religions of the Soldiers.  Our commanders usually like and support us; and if they hinder a ministry, it is usually due to ignorance, although in rare instances it has been willful.  Our role as chaplains is to help them understand, and support our subordinate chaplains in this area.

     As chaplains we also must distinguish our position as an officer of the U.S. Government from our status as an individual Christian.  As a Christian, I am not allowed to approve of, or even support, a counterfeit gospel.  Many take II John 10, 11 as a condemnation for supporting a person who would preach a false gospel, lest we be supporting, directly or indirectly, the propagation of that gospel.  I fully agree with that view.  As an individual I must not help another in his religious practice if a false gospel is held.  But some go further and believe supporting one’s Constitutional rights logistically as a governmental representative is also sin.  If anyone cannot serve as a chaplain because of that, I will not criticize that belief.  I respect that position.  However, DoD’s role is to provide religious freedom to all within our services.  As a chaplain, we defend our right to exist in the military by the fact that we provide for the Constitutional right of everyone to exercise their religious needs, and we do it by performing and providing.  The religious freedom offered a non-Christian is the same freedom offered a Christian.  Religious freedom works in our favor also, as it enables non-Christians to consider Christianity from a non-forced position, ensuring true conversions.  A State-enforced Christianity would tend to lead to false conversions, as people accept that position because they have to, not because they really believe it.  As an officer of the U.S. Army, I am to ensure everyone within the Army has the right to the free exercise of their religion.  I do not directly condone, endorse, or help the spread of any false gospel.  I believe, and this is a struggle we must come to terms with, God does not hold me responsible for sinning.  I am not, as an individual Christian, condoning or supporting a religion I believe is false when I am supporting a Constitutional right as an officer of the U.S. government.  That is different.  As such, if asked, I am free to state my views pro or con.  I am also not required to support any religion beyond what they request.  But when an issue is brought to my attention, I must ensure it is taken care of fairly.  I see God doing this also, does He not?  He hates false religions, and will condemn everyone who preaches and lives by them.  Yet, as the Sovereign God, He enables and allows sinners to do what they do. He gives them air to breathe, food and water to consume, and the resources to perform their religions.  Why?  He values freedom of choice.  Just because He provides them the resources and ability does not also mean He condones what they do.   God gives us the freedom and even the ability to sin, but He does not make us sin.  We are responsible for our sins.  Likewise, I better not, as an individual, condone or support a false religion.  But as an arm of the military, I support everyone’s free choice to worship as they see fit.  For chaplains I supervise, I provide for them logistically, and I help them succeed in their careers.  I do not condone their gospel if it is different from my own.  But I help them succeed as a chaplain.  If they do a good job, and respect all religions within their units, and work with other chaplains, I can give them a good rating without sinning against God.  I am not saying they are good Christians, just good chaplains.  For example, I cannot expect a good Jewish chaplain to preach the Christian gospel.  He has a right to be himself and minister to Jewish Soldiers.  Our role as chaplains is to ensure chaplains of all religions minister faithfully according to their religion within their careers.

     The Commander’s position is that he wants a well-oiled fighting machine.  He wants Soldiers who are loyal to the unit and the mission, and who believe in what our Country stands for.  When a Soldier’s religious needs are met, he is more willing to die, go the extra mile, and endure hardship and deprivation to accomplish the mission.  He will love and be loyal to the unit that meets his most important and deepest need.  As chaplains we are combat multipliers, ensuring this need is met to improve the unit’s combat readiness and effectiveness.

     The question then arises as to the how of ministry.  Without specifying what that is specifically, because each chaplain will minister according to his beliefs, there are general principles we must define.

     First of all, a chaplain performs ministry only according to his beliefs.  We cannot be required to preach, teach, or practice anything that we do not believe in.   This is tremendous freedom.  We don’t have to pray an Islamic prayer, or perform a Jewish or Wiccan right for a Soldier who requests one.  We only practice what we believe.  Secondly, we provide for the other religions.  We must provide facilities, monies, supplies, equipment, and even personnel if necessary to assist in religious support.  But this is indirect support, not performance of the ministries themselves.  I believe I can do this and be true to my Christian and my Fundamentalist Protestant tradition, even though some believe they cannot.  This is a mission field; and I am allowed to preach and do what I believe in an environment where I would have no open doors otherwise.  Now it is true that to tactfully have this influence, and not needlessly offend, we should not blatantly make statements that a specific religious group, such as Catholics, or Muslims, or Jehovah Witnesses, and others are going to hell, or are wrong in doctrine.  We must not bad-mouth another religious belief.  But when I teach the Bible, I am allowed to say, “In my tradition I believe praying to Mary is wrong,” or, “Believing Jesus is not Jehovah God is wrong,” or “Such and such a belief will send someone to hell.”  There is no restriction on doctrine/truth that we can preach.  Some say that is compromise.  I do not.  If I can teach what I believe, why should I have to name a religion or denomination and say it’s bad or erroneous in any area?  If I teach the Bible, cannot those who hear make their own judgments?  And if someone asks me, “What do you believe about Mormons, or Hindus, or Wiccans?” I can state what I believe, because I was asked.  I have total freedom.  Also if I am teaching a class specifically on religions from a Christian perspective, then I can state what the Christian view is on these other religions.  As that is specifically in line with the class, it will fly as the audience expects a Christian perspective to be taught.  But in public I would not speak negatively about the other religions.  I find by not talking down about a certain religion, but preaching the true Gospel, others listen to me more and ask questions.  I have more inroads to speak to them and share the truth than I would if I cut their religion down.  They would put up a wall and not listen to me further. 

     I look at ministry in the Army like going to someone’s home to talk to him.  If someone says to me, “I’ll let you into my house to tell me about the Gospel, only don’t talk about baptism or church government, and don’t criticize any religion,” is that unreasonable?  It’s his home.  He has the right to let me in or not.  God gave me a tremendous open door to preach the gospel!  If I should say, “Unless you let me talk about baptism, or whether Hindus are going to Hell, I won’t come in,” is that really sensible?  I think it is foolish.  I just walked away from an amazing opportunity.  The Army says, “Chaplain, in my house you can preach and teach the Bible exactly as you believe.  You can even preach the gospel! Just don’t bad-mouth any religion, and support the free exercise of everyone.  And you can even share your views about other religions when asked.”  What more can I ask for?  I consider those restrictions to be very minor.  I can preach the gospel to those I never could otherwise.  And furthermore, out of uniform, I can preach anyway I choose to anyone, in any church, even stating my views on other religions.  Just not in uniform and not as a chaplain.  To me, that is reasonable and amazing freedom from the government.  I know there are some supervisory chaplains who would attempt to hurt or discipline a chaplain for preaching the basics of the Christian faith, the core beliefs.  Some may require a chaplain to actually participate in an ecumenical service that would involve going against personal beliefs.  But that supervisory chaplain is overstepping his or her bounds.  Each chaplain, when engaging in a joint service, must be allowed to remove himself from anything that would go against his beliefs.  Some supervisors have stated that proselytizing is not accepted in a pluralistic environment.  But that is NOT true!  If proselytizing is a part of our religious beliefs, than denying us that right is a form of denying our own Constitutional right to the free exercise of religion.  We can make converts, but respectfully.  That means the convert must be seeking a relationship with God, and must be coming to us for our sincere advice.  I don’t force it upon one who is not interested.   As I speak of God in general terms outside of a Bible study or Christian service, interested people will ask questions.  I am even allowed to peak their curiosity to ask questions so I can present the gospel, but gently and tactfully.  No one wants to be forced, or to be badgered when they aren’t interested.  Building relationships, creating respect and honor for everyone, opens doors to share God’s truths at appropriate times.  This is being wise as serpents and harmless as doves.

     So in application, let me speak from a Fundamentalist Protestant position on church services and dealing with other chaplains who outrank you.  When I preach a Christian service, which is a Collective Protestant one because I am a Protestant, I stick to the main doctrines of the Christian faith, and on overcoming sin and living right.  We struggle enough with that anyway.  I don’t need to preach on modes of baptism, or whether Christ will come before or after the Tribulation.  I can preach the gospel and all the main doctrines.  Where in the civilian world can you preach to Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, etc?  Why offend one of them by saying they are wrong in their Presbyterian or Methodist beliefs?   We are to help them know the gospel and live for God.  If there is a member of a denomination that preaches a works gospel in my service, I still preach the gospel.  I consider him or her out of step with historic Christianity.  I don’t have to please everyone, just be respectful as I preach and teach.  One way I tactfully get around the accusation of proselytizing when I lead someone to Christ is this:  If they are of a Christian upbringing, I state I am not proselytizing someone to another belief; I am simply helping a Christian get more in touch with his or her belief and relationship with Christ.  If a Catholic accuses me of leading his parishioner to Christ, I say truthfully, “I am not converting a Catholic to Protestantism, I just simply gave the man the gospel.  I did not tell him he had to leave the Catholic faith.”  So I did not proselytize by definition.  Sure, we know Catholics believe a totally different gospel, but historically that developed over time.  So technically they departed from their roots, I did not lie.  If the person leaves the Catholic faith later on, that’s his choice.  I may help him with issues and questions, but I make sure he makes the decision.  If I lead a Mormon or a Jew to Christ, that’s a different matter.  But if they ask me, and I give them the truth, and they want to be saved, then it was their decision.  I did not force them.  So I state I did not convert them, they chose to convert.  It is hard to accuse a chaplain in those cases.  We have that right as chaplains to lead people to Christ.  To be fair, if someone like a Mormon or Buddhist comes to me for salvation, I will share my belief, and let them know it’s not what their church teaches.  That’s only fair and righteous.  They should know that, so they don’t resent me later for tricking or deceiving them.  Many of them have no idea what their religions really teach.  I let them know this is how I believe, and their church may not be happy if he or she accepts Christ this way.  But that’s what Christ wants from us … to count the cost and know what we’re getting into before we take a stand for Him.  I am giving them fair warning.  When they accept Christ, if I am called on the carpet, I can honestly state I gave them fair warning that my gospel was different from theirs, but they wanted to be saved anyway.  No one can get a chaplain in trouble for that.  Wise as serpents, harmless as doves.

     Remember, when out of uniform and when you’re preaching in a local church, you can preach and say whatever you desire, just as if you were not in the military.  But you can add a dimension to your ministry as a chaplain.  You can also preach the gospel within the military setting, with some minor restrictions.  You can do more, not less, as a chaplain.  Since most Soldiers (and many leaders) really do not know what their religion teaches, many will listen to a clear presentation of the Gospel without any complaints.  I have preached sermons to Catholics and others who listened and liked it, and had no idea their denomination taught differently.

     There is the issue of sharing a pulpit with a non-Christian … for example, sharing a service with a Mormon or Church of Christ.  I would not do this either.  It may appear to condone that denomination.  In my career, no supervisory chaplain has forced me to share a pulpit with a Mormon, but no Mormon wanted to.  Mormon chaplains, although considered Protestant by the military, agree they are different and prefer a separate service.  I have heard of some chaplains being ordered to share a pulpit with one, and some Mormons trying to get into the Protestant service, but that is an error of the supervisor.  We are allowed to refuse to share a chapel service with a chaplain who clearly represents a non-Christian group from our perspective.  Related to this, I know many Fundamentalists won’t share a pulpit with a woman chaplain.  I respect that view also.  Many female chaplains would not force you to share a pulpit with them.  If they did, one way to do it is just not co-minister together.  When you do a service, she would not have a part, and vice-versa.  Just because you are using the same facility doesn’t matter.  The facility is the government’s, as well as the service.  You preach the gospel when you have the pulpit.  Remember:  some denominations that are not heretical believe in female pastors.  We may disagree, but they would still be brethren in the Lord.  Each chaplain has to determine what hill they are willing to die on, and what hill they can negotiate in order to serve God while remaining true to their convictions.

     The biggest problematic area that causes issues is working with other chaplains who may not be saved, and who outrank us.  This perhaps is a large area that we must use tact and stealth to remain among the enemy to win souls while not really compromising.  This is not easy, and we will always struggle with this one.  I look at my role in the Army as a Soldier infiltrating enemy lines.  I am to be wise but true.  If I were a fighting Soldier, I would kill only defined targets, or save defined personnel, ignoring the others if possible so as not to jeopardize my mission.  My role in the Army is to minister to Soldiers, not to minister to other chaplains, although that opportunity might arise.  So if I work with a Mormon, Catholic, or Islamic chaplain who outranks me, or who is my supervisor, I could be in trouble if I try to convert him without his permission or invitation.  If I keep quiet in this area, am I a compromiser?  I don’t think so.  I treat them with respect and they do me also.  Maybe we can have a collegial relationship.  Over time, he may begin dialogue with me and I may have the chance to share my beliefs.  Earn trust first!  Chances are since he’s a minister, he most likely will know my theology already.  He can be saved if he wants to be.  It’s not my responsibility as a chaplain to convert him.   It’s my responsibility to minister to and convert Soldiers as God opens doors.  Some would argue that I am to speak to everyone I come in contact with; and if I don’t, their damnation is on my head.  That may be a true calling for some, and I respect those who believe that way.  But in my thinking, if God gives me 1,000 Soldiers to minister to and share the gospel with, and if by sharing the gospel with one chaplain I ruin my opportunity to share it with the 1,000 Soldiers, I did not act wisely.  My target, my mission, is the 1,000 Soldiers.  The chaplain who outranks me is to be respected by me for his position.   I will let a chaplain of equal or greater rank witness to him, since they’re under the authority of others.  If God opens a door, then I can walk through it.  We are not called into the chaplaincy to convert chaplains, or even to provide for their free exercise, unless they’re under us.  I am to do that for all non-chaplains: those that outrank me and those I outrank.  By minding my business and being collegial with all chaplains, I move about among the enemy freely so I may continue to save Soldiers and Leaders.  If I were not in the military, it would be no different.  I would not be witnessing to these chaplains.  I most likely would never even come in contact with them.  Think of this parallel idea.  If you are a missionary in an Islamic country, should you tell the ruler of that nation he’s going to hell if you happen to come across him on the street?  Some of you believe you should, and maybe for you that is God’s will.  Your quick death will glorify God.  We should never deny our faith if asked.  But if not asked, by keeping quiet, some of us may reach thousands more than you ever would.  And there’s always the possibility if this ruler likes us, he may ask us for our beliefs someday.  We will have earned the right to share with him gently and respectfully.  Again, wise as serpents, but harmless as doves.

     Finally, let me address praying in Jesus’ name as that’s a big issue for so many.  A lot depends on our tradition.  Even for Fundamentalists, praying in Jesus’ name may mean different things to different people.

     Let me start by saying that pluralism itself does not prevent a chaplain from putting “in Jesus’ name” at the end of a prayer.  Ecumenicalism does.  Pluralism should allow us to pray as our religion dictates.  But it’s an issue because people make it an issue by complaining to the Command that Chaplains are forcing them to pray a Christian prayer.  This is nonsense.  The Atheist, who already is present, has no choice that a prayer is offered at all.  He simply doesn’t pray.  When a Jewish chaplain prays, everyone prays how they believe even if they’re Christian.  Putting “in Jesus’ name” at the end of a prayer should not really offend anyone.  Some supervisory chaplains have directed me not to pray this way.  They were wrong.  Some commanders asked me not to do so.  Again, they really cannot legally require we not do this, but we need to use common sense again.  Why anger a commander who really wants us to pray and bring God into the meeting, just because he has an issue on the format?  If your tradition really holds that you have to include the phrase, then by all means you can share that with your commander and educate him on your beliefs and tradition.  He most likely will not mind.  I have gotten around this by praying this way, “We ask this in your name, and I personally ask it in the name of my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ,” and have not had a commander complain.  It’s hard to argue that I made everyone pray in Jesus name.  You can’t get more pluralistic than that.  Technically the atheist can still complain, “Don’t say we, I am not praying.”  You can’t please everyone.  I’ve also tried this:  “Those of us who know and love you ask this in the name of our God and Savior.”  Not as direct, but still makes it clear I mean Jesus to all who know I’m a Christian chaplain.  I prayed that prayer in the presence of the commander who asked me not to pray in Jesus’ name.  He did not complain about this prayer.  A Jewish Soldier who knew me looked up and smiled.  He knew I meant those who knew Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

     For me, praying in Jesus name means more than tagging the phrase at the end of a prayer.  I notice in the Bible prayers offered by the apostles do not always end with that phrase.  I also see that Jesus made it clear we must pray in His name for God to hear the prayer.  From my understanding of the Scriptures, praying in Jesus’ name is praying on the authority of the person of Jesus, and basing the prayer not on our righteousness, but His shed blood.  When we pray, we come to God through Christ, and through His shed blood, on His authority and not our own.  If this is true, tacking the phrase at the end, but coming with the wrong mindset, is still not praying in His name.  Likewise, leaving the phrase off is still praying in His name if we come with the right mindset.  In our churches, how many of our members who pray “in Jesus’ name” are really doing it?  How many really understand, and make an effort, to base their approach to God on the merits of Christ alone?  Whenever we pray, we are to have our focus on Christ.  We expect God to hear because of what Christ has done on the cross, not our goodness.  Christians in the audience should pray in Jesus’ name also as they pray along with us.  And I expect non-Christians to not pray in His name.  Leaving the phrase off is not sin to me.  The reason I usually do add the phrase, in church settings or personal ones, is to keep my mind, and the minds of the hearers, on Christ.  Another purpose is testimony.  I am making it clear to others that I am a Christian.  To leave off the phrase because I am embarrassed of it, or afraid to testify for Christ, is a problem to my thinking.  But I can leave it off if ordered to and still pray in His name.  Don’t jeopardize your ministry just because some outranking chaplain wants to have an ego battle with you.  And if it’s a commander, he most likely just doesn’t understand.  Educate him in private later on, and see if he changes his mind.

     I hope this helps my brethren understand that there is truly freedom within the Army to preach the gospel, and all the major doctrines of the Christian faith.  The restrictions are only minor, and actually can help us as Christians to gain credibility with other religions by forcing us to respect them, and introduce our beliefs to them in a reasonable and gentle manner, with intellectual dialogue and discussion.