What is not understood about the wall of separation?

[lilithu]

I have a US chaplin's guidebook around here somewhere, and it does discuss wiccan traditions.

Having a cursory familiarity with another religious tradition is not enough to be able to provide pastoral care within their framework.

The bigger question is "does the fact that the chaplin is prodistent represent a government endorsement of prodistentism, or Christianity, over other religions?". I'd tend to say "no".

It depends. If *all* of the chaplins are Protestant, then I'd say that is a govt endorsement of Protestantism, regardless of whether all the chaplins try to address other religions. That said, your point is taken that this is the bigger question. And I know that not all military chaplins are Protestant. I know the military has rabbis and imams. And even UUs. Not sure about others.

I think the reformations of the 1950s (adding "god" to the bulk of the money and the pledge) were similarly intermingling promotion.

Actually, I don't have a problem with "In God We Trust" being on money inherently. It's a passive thing. (I assume you know that "God" is written on many of our govt bldgs, including the Supreme Court?) I do have a problem with a pledge since that requires actively pledging "under God." And I have a problem with them being added in the 50's when they weren't there before. We are a freaky country.

 

[YamiB.]

Actually, I don't have a problem with "In God We Trust" being on money inherently. It's a passive thing. (I assume you know that "God" is written on many of our govt bldgs, including the Supreme Court?) I do have a problem with a pledge since that requires actively pledging "under God." And I have a problem with them being added in the 50's when they weren't there before. We are a freaky country.

Well, we did plenty of crazy things when we were trying to fight those Godless commies. I really do prefer [SIZE=-1]E Pluribus Unum to In God We Trust.
[/SIZE]

 

[JerryL]

Having a cursory familiarity with another religious tradition is not enough to be able to provide pastoral care within their framework.

With the alternative being not having any religious support, I would call a chaplin a movement in the right direction.

Of course, chaplins have other duties to: such as making sure proper rights are performed in regards to teh dead, and that legetimate religious expression within the military is defended.

You are opposing chaplins as though there was a better option.

It depends. If *all* of the chaplins are Protestant, then I'd say that is a govt endorsement of Protestantism, regardless of whether all the chaplins try to address other religions. That said, your point is taken that this is the bigger question. And I know that not all military chaplins are Protestant. I know the military has rabbis and imams. And even UUs. Not sure about others.

I don't believe there is any restriction on what religions can become chaplins (if there is, that would be an issue in itself); though the millitary is, of course, limited to who actually signs up (I suppose there are not a lot of Quaker chaplins, but then again, there should not be a lot of Quakers to minister to either).

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

So the chaplain is paid by the state to be there just for the purpose of presenting Christianity?

The funny thing about this case, when it comes to Catholicism and other religions, is that, take for instance, for mass and confession services, a Catholic priest was allowed to come into NCF to perform them. It's not like the Chaplain was sitting in on Sweat Lodge, Equinox, or Ramadon services either. The only thing I ever witnessed him getting involved in was his own Church services.

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[lilithu]

You are opposing chaplins as though there was a better option.

No, no, I am not opposing chaplains. Sorry to give you that impression. If anyone needs spiritual guidance it's people in the military. (And no, I don't mean they're bad; I mean they're the ones who are routinely put in situations that would cause personal and spiritual angst.)

My comments come not from any misgivings about chaplains but because I know how hard it is to "translate" between one religious worldview and another. We deal with this in UU all the time. Just because you learn a few words and phrases of another tradition does not mean that you understand it.

I was just pointing out that the situation is not ideal. And the only solution that I see is to get a greater diversity of chaplains in the military. As you said, this depends on who signs-up.

As an asside, Davidium, who is a UU who posts on RF now and then (tho usually only in the UU forums) is currently studying to become a military chaplain.

 

[lilithu]

The funny thing about this case, when it comes to Catholicism and other religions, is that, take for instance, for mass and confession services, a Catholic priest was allowed to come into NCF to perform them. It's not like the Chaplain was sitting in on Sweat Lodge, Equinox, or Ramadon services either. The only thing I ever witnessed him getting involved in was his own Church services.

That doesn't mean govt is favoring Catholicism. Catholicism is hierarchical. A Catholic priest is required to perform the rites of mass and confession. If he were not allowed to come in it would violate the free exercise of the Catholics who are there. The other tradtions that you mentioned do not require a religious authority to be present in order for its practitioners to practice.

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

That doesn't mean govt is favoring Catholicism. Catholicism is hierarchical. A Catholic priest is required to perform the rites of mass and confession. If he were not allowed to come in it would violate the free exercise of the Catholics who are there. The other tradtions that you mentioned do not require a religious authority to be present in order for its practitioners to practice.

I wasn't trying to state that NCF was favoring Catholicism in this case. The point I was trying to get at was that the Chaplain facilitated only his own Church services. to state otherwise would be using the word "facilitate" in a rediculously loose sense of the word. The truth is that NCF was the only one facilitating in these cases, not the Chaplain.

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[doppelganger]

The issue of public funding of evangelical work in prisons is back in the news today with a article in the New York Times:

But the only way an inmate could qualify for this kinder mutation of prison life was to enter an intensely religious rehabilitation program and satisfy the evangelical Christians running it that he was making acceptable spiritual progress. The program — which grew from a project started in 1997 at a Texas prison with the support of George W. Bush, who was governor at the time — says on its Web site that it seeks “to ‘cure’ prisoners by identifying sin as the root of their problems” and showing inmates “how God can heal them permanently, if they turn from their sinful past.”
One Roman Catholic inmate, Michael A. Bauer, left the program after a year, mostly because he felt the program staff and volunteers were hostile toward his faith.
“My No. 1 reason for leaving the program was that I personally felt spiritually crushed,” he testified at a court hearing last year. “I just didn’t feel good about where I was and what was going on.”
For Robert W. Pratt, chief judge of the federal courts in the Southern District of Iowa, this all added up to an unconstitutional use of taxpayer money for religious indoctrination, as he ruled in June in a lawsuit challenging the arrangement.
The Iowa prison program is not unique. Since 2000, courts have cited more than a dozen programs for having unconstitutionally used taxpayer money to pay for religious activities or evangelism aimed at prisoners, recovering addicts, job seekers, teenagers and children.