APPENDIX E
STUDY AND REPORT ON THE MILITARY CHAPLAINCY BY JAMES W. KELLY

[NB: This paper, approved by the Chaplaincy Division of the Home Mission Board in November 1972, was the Board's official response to a resolution proposed earlier that year which would have called for drastic reforms to the Southern Baptist relationship with the military chaplaincy. See the discussion in Chapter 1 for more details.]

....Specific parts of the resolution will be dealt with separately.

A. "That military chaplains no longer be considered commissioned officers of the United States armed services with military rank...."

DISCUSSION— The assignment of rank to chaplains comes from a long history of study and evaluation. At one time, chaplains had no rank and were regarded by the military as accessories with no standing and of questionable value. The chaplains had no power that would provide a basis for action. Rank was given to introduce order and give the chaplains a status and legitimate voice within the military community. Surveys show, undeniably, that a strong majority of chaplains believe rank to be necessary in order for the chaplain to operate effectively on behalf of the men. This does not constitute a barrier but a bridge. The chaplain with rank is a Staff officer—not a Line officer— and does not give orders regarding military duties. Wearing the uniform gives the chaplain a much needed and necessary identification. This lets the men know that he identifies with them, he belongs, and fully shares with them and is not in some unique position outside military discipline.

B. "That the salaries of military chaplains be paid by denominations selecting and sponsoring them, in the spirit of the constitutional separation of church and state."

DISCUSSION— The free exercise clause of the First Amendment to the United States constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF...."

RATIONALE— When the state for its own purposes separates certain of the citizens from their home communities for extended periods of time, it must not deprive them of opportunities for the free exercise of religion. Therefore, when the state assumes so great a role in the lives of those affected, it must at the same time make possible the practice, nurture, and appropriate propagation of religion in a manner as close to normal as it can. To meet these needs, the provisions of the chaplaincy, with support for religious facilities, is the proper responsibility of the government.

The state is not establishing religion but rather making it possible for men to practice their specific religious beliefs.

LOOK AT SOME OF THE NECESSARY SAFEGUARDS IN THE PRESENT SYSTEM:

A chaplain is endorsed by his church and continues under the ecclesiastical discipline of his church at all times. This endorsement may be withdrawn by the church and the chaplain is separated from military service.
A chaplain is required to make quarterly reports to his denomination.
A chaplain is expected by the government as well as his church to conduct his ministry in accord with the dictates of his conscience and the requirements of his church.
A chaplain may voice a complaint if he is being asked to do something contrary to his ordination vows not only through military channels but directly to his denominational endorsing agency.
A chaplain is paid by the state but the state cannot control or slant the ministry that he gives.

LOOK AT WHAT IT WOULD COST TO KEEP ONE CHAPLAIN ON DUTY IN THE MILITARY COMMUNITY SHOULD THE CHURCH DECIDE TO PAY HIS KEEP— .... $47,835.00

....Southern Baptists now have on active duty with Army, Navy and Air Force 559 [sic]. This would mean a total cost of $26,739,765.00 per year to the denomination. Where would the money come from? Would the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines go without religious coverage?

C. "That military chaplains be selected by the denomination as at present...."

DISCUSSION— They are given the status and respect due their responsibilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Alternatives to the present system are not feasible. The present system of a MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND STATE PROVIDES THE NECESSARY ADVANTAGEOUS ACCOMMODATION.
Government pay, military rank or acceptance of military obedience do not seem to constitute a crippling limitation of the freedom of ministry. These very things constitute vehicles for a more widespread outreach with the gospel.
To draw a rigid line between separation of church and state would mean the payment of a price for religious liberty and the spiritual nurture of personnel in the military. Let us give our attention to the question of ultimate allegiance rather than be overly concerned with peripheral matters of pay and rank.
Let us maintain a creative tension between the structures of accommodation and the church's real concern.

RECOMMENDATIONS

That no convention action be taken.
That the Chaplains Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention have a continuing responsibility for
1. Cooperating with the state to the end that the military chaplaincy may be as effective as possible for Christ.
2. Being constantly alert to any tendency on the part of the state to infringe on the freedom of the church to witness in fulness for our Lord.

In keeping with the expression of the resolution—consultations with like agencies through conversation, correspondence and examination of publications on this subject have been made.[1]