CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

There is a real need today for every denomination to restudy its position on the military chaplaincy and to determine its position on the chaplaincy of the future. Obviously, for one person to do this for all Protestant denominations, or even for several denominations that have similar basic doctrines on the related issues, would be too ambitious an undertaking. Yet every church can do this for itself. And, in addition, some ecumenical committee approach could be made.

Because of the nature of Baptist church organization, no one person can speak for any group of Baptists, and the present writer does not presume to do so. What is undertaken in the present study is to stimulate thinking and inquiry into this subject and to offer a contribution to what might hopefully become a denominational-wide study and possible position. Such a position might be seriously considered by the Chaplaincy Division of the Home Mission Board, and/or by the Home Mission Board or Southern Baptist Convention itself upon approval of the messengers to the annual convention.

It is almost certain that the issue will not die or "go away" and that sooner or later it must be faced. The tensions inherent in the military chaplaincy demand that the churches deal with them. Charles F. Wills, Secretary of the Department of Chaplaincy Services of the American Baptist Home Mission Societies, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, wrote in a letter to the writer, August 30, 1972:

I am committed to the chaplaincy as a vital ministry but I am sure that the Churches must review and re-think their participation in it. The chaplaincy works in an area of delicate tension between church and state—it could be destroyed if it is not alert and relevant.

Baptists have a long tradition for separation of church and state. In the military chaplaincy there is a union rather than a separation of church and state. The state employs and pays the salary of an ordained minister of the gospel who is a chaplain for the express purpose of preaching the gospel and leading religious services and practicing the Christian ministry. In other areas, such as using federal funds for Christian education, Baptists have refused for doctrinal reasons to permit Christian professors to be paid by the government to teach religion in church schools. These and other related areas will be explored in this study. Issues will be sharpened, reactions will be analyzed, and trends will be sought. A consistent, logical, appropriate, and contemporary Baptist position will be sought. The right way is not easy to find.

Not all agree with the interpretations or conclusions. The chairman of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs in Washington, D.C., feels that the committee has not given specific attention to the church and state issues involved in the military chaplaincy and that it must do so in the immediate future. This study is an honest attempt of one man to give such attention within his own mind and conscience. A central issue of this study candidly faces the question of whether the present form of ministry to persons in the armed forces is adequate to the church's purpose and consistent with Baptist foundations and traditions. Baptists are responsible to develop and reshape their military chaplaincy ministry in the light of their own basic beliefs and practices and in the direction of their historic concepts of religious liberty.

The procedures to be followed will be as follows:

(1) Studying the background material to learn the Baptist doctrinal teachings on religious liberty and church-state relations and historical factors associated with the Southern Baptist position on church-state relations and the military chaplaincy; studying where Baptists are today in this area, and how they arrived at this point, and searching for and analyzing trends in order to plan better for the future;

(2) Obtaining input from the Southern Baptist Chaplains Commission, the U.S. Army Chaplain School, the U.S, Army Chaplains Board, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs in Washington, D.C., the Southern Baptist Christian Life Commission, J.M. Dawson Studies in Church and State (Baylor University, Waco, Texas), and other organizations, agencies, and sources;

(3) Obtaining input by letters and interviews from military and civilian sources, denominational leaders and agencies, and from others knowledgeable about the field;

(4) Preparation of the basic 1,000 word position statement on the future of the chaplaincy as set forth in the abstract and purpose of this study;

(5) Distributing copies of the proposed position statement along with the supporting document (Chapter VII of the dissertation) to the Southern Baptist Convention Chaplains Commission, the U.S. Army Chaplain Board, the U.S. Army Chaplain School and other organizations, agencies, and persons, for their review and comment;

(6) Considering comments received from sources indicated in procedure #5 above, with final discussion, revision, and completion of dissertation/project.

The study is organized into three principal parts. Part I is oriented primarily toward the past. First there is a search for biblical foundations for the distinctive Baptist doctrines on church and state relations, religious liberty and other issues related to the military chaplaincy. The early Anabaptist beginnings are briefly treated in relation to these issues. The early Baptists of England, Holland, and America are considered in more detail, with a view to determining their attitudes toward the issues that have a bearing on the subject and purpose of the study. The Baptists in the Colonial and Revolutionary Periods and in the first half of the nineteenth century are studied in more detail in order to find the roots of the Southern Baptist traditions and heritage in the church-state relations and the military chaplaincy. Similarly, the Southern Baptist Convention since its founding in 1845 is surveyed as thoroughly as possible within the scope of such a study as this, with primary consideration given to the following periods: The War Between the States, 1865-1914, World War I, Between the two World Wars, World War II, and the period from World War II to 1973.

Part II of the study addresses the subject of the present stance of the denomination. Various ethical considerations are selected for special inquiry: the military chaplaincy and war and peace, church and state, political responsibility, conscientious objection, and freedom and authority.

Part III of the study looks ahead to identify some of the areas of tension and conflict and trends, to analyze the trends, face responsibilities, and to seek a new and more consistent position regarding the military chaplaincy. It searches for a contemporary theological and ethical position which is consistent with traditional Baptist doctrinal beliefs. The dissertation concludes with some recommendations which grew out of the study, including a proposed 1,000 word position statement for Southern Baptists to consider on the military chaplaincy of the future.

What Is the Problem?

Southern Baptists, along with other Baptist bodies, have generally accepted the military chaplaincy as an appropriate vehicle of Christian ministry without serious questions concerning church-state cooperation. Most Baptists have not given thought to whether or not there is a problem with the Baptist doctrine of separation of church and state. Yet, when some of the questions are brought out into the open a thoughtful and informed Baptist can immediately see that there is a problem. Here are a few pertinent questions raised by James M. Sapp in a 1968 meeting of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs.

1. Is the military chaplaincy system a genuine case of accommodation to the religious groups of the nation or does it provide the individual "military man" a real opportunity for religious experience?
2. Does the present system of apportioning chaplains on the nominal troop adherence to the particular religious groups, coupled with a well functioning procurement and training schedule and satisfactory tenure, promotion and retirement incentives equate to meeting the religious needs of military personnel?
3. Does government have a mandate to assure the "free exercise of religion" for a soldier stationed in a battle zone situated a remote distance from a church or synagogue of his faith?
4. Is there danger of a military church emerging as a result of highly organized techniques and curriculum?
5. Is there an improper interrelation and cooperation between church and state in certain government actions in providing military chaplains?
6. Is there an improper interrelation and cooperation between church and state in certain church actions in providing military chaplains?

The traditional Baptist teaching on the separation of church and state is that the state should have no ecclesiastical function, and the church should have no civic function. The problem, then, is that certain government actions seem to be in the area of ecclesiastical functions, and certain church actions seem to be in the area of civic functions. Thus the problem is posed as a violation of the principle of the "separation of church and state," in that the chaplaincy is an integral part of the military establishment and is a governmentally subsidized establishment of religion.

Another aspect of the problem is related to the issue of the morality of war itself and the church's possible compromise of its ethical witness for peace and its implied sanction of war. This opens up an entirely different, yet related, group of problems and questions which must be dealt with:

1. What does the New Testament teach about a just and lasting peace?
2. What is the duty of Christians to seek peace with all men?
3. Does the Bible teach that war is ever justified? If so, what kind of war?
4. What should be the Christian citizen's attitude toward a defensive war?
5. What is a responsible Christian position on the authority and responsibility of the state in international relations to enforce order and justice?
6. Does the Sixth Commandment forbid defensive warfare? What would be the ultimate result of extreme pacifism in a world society where many men and nations follow the war spirit? What would be the result of militarism in a thermonuclear age? What would be the result of a continued arms race or of unilateral disarmament?
7. Are the church and the chaplain guilty by association with the government in militaristic actions in certain circumstances?

The above questions involve the larger area of the Christian and the social order. Some of these issues will have to be dealt with in this study, though in a limited way. The subjects of Christian citizenship, conscience, and the Christian and society have a bearing on the study and must be considered as they relate to the military chaplaincy.

Definition of Certain Key Terms

Separation of church and state. A condition or relationship in which the nature and functions of church are quite distinct from those of the state, in that the state is a temporal organization with civic functions without ecclesiastical functions, and the church is a voluntary and spiritual organization with ecclesiastical functions without civic functions. It forbids the making of any law or any governmental action that involves the interlocking of the official functions of the state with the official or institutional functions of any church. There should be no church-controlled state or state-controlled church.

Religious liberty. A term denoting the unfettered right of every man to believe what he wishes, to change his faith, to express it in worship and practice, and to teach and persuade others as his conscience dictates. It means no preference is to be shown for any one faith and equality is to be guaranteed for all before the law. The state has no right or competency to interfere with the religious opinions or persuasions of men. Man is free not to worship if he so chooses. Religious liberty is more than religious toleration. There should be no coercion at all in religious and ecclesiastical matters. Every church and every individual should be completely free in all matters of conscience, policy, practice, religious observance, and expression; no church or person should be more free or less free than any other church or individual.

Military chaplaincy. The institution by which the United States Government commissions and utilizes clergymen for religious ministry in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and National Guard. The chaplain is trained, ordained, and endorsed by his denomination, and he conducts public worship and administers religious rites, ceremonies and ordinances, and provides pastoral care and counseling, religious education and instruction. The military establishment maintains administrative supervision, command authority and control over the chaplain's career, assignment, promotion, military education, and program of activities, to include control of resources.

Church. A broad, general use of the term may include:

The forces of organized religion led by the Christian groups, but including also the Jews and other bodies of worshipers of God. The church so understood is the collective body of believers in God whose interests are primarily spiritual and ethical.

The term may also be used specifically of the Christian Church in a universal sense, or of a denominational body of Christian believers, or of a local church congregation, or of a local place of worship. Baptists generally use the term as a local congregation of baptized believers voluntarily associated together. In various ways the state may have relations with the church in each of these uses of the word.

State. Webster's New International Dictionary definition: "A political body, or body politic; any body of people occupying a definite territory and politically organized under one government, esp. one that is a sovereign, or not subject to external control." It may refer to a smaller political subunit such as a municipality, or city, country, or one of the fifty states in the United States, or the federal government. The state is the organization of the people for maintaining order and promoting the common welfare under a duly adopted constitution.

Toleration. A term which generally carries with it the idea that the person, opinion, or institution tolerated is a departure from what is normally right and is not considered entirely satisfactory from the standpoint of the powers that be. It is the "allowance of that which is not wholly approved." Murray's English Dictionary defines it in connection with religion, as "allowance (with or without limitations) by the ruling power, of the exercise of religion otherwise than in the form officially established or recognized."

The Functions of the Military Chaplaincy

A military chaplain is a minister, clergyman, or pastor to persons in the military forces. His functions are essentially the same as those of his civilian counterparts. He preaches the word of God and administers the ordinances, sacraments, or rites of his church or denomination according to the practices of his church or denomination. He counsels, teaches, advises, administers, supervises, and leads various religious activities and programs. As the parish of the civilian minister is his whole community, so the parish of the military chaplain is his whole military unit, organization, or installation. He is a clergyman in uniform, and his mission is to bring men to God and God to men. He represents spiritual and eternal values in the institutional military framework. The legitimate functions of the chaplain are not at issue in this study. Certainly there is a need for such a ministry. But the conditions of this particular form of ministry, its unique nature in the military framework of command and control, its restrictions and administration, and its system of intermingling functions of church and state, are to be scrutinized from various perspectives.