www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Navy Chaplain Faces Court Martial For Praying

Got this piece from the NBC-affiliate TV Station in Los Angeles. Deacon Robert

Navy Chaplain May Face Court-Martial For Praying
Clergyman Prayed In Uniform Outside White House

POSTED: 4:39 am PDT May 4, 2006


NORFOLK, Va. -- A chaplain stationed at Naval Station Norfolk said he could face court-martial for praying in uniform outside the White House.

Lt. Gordon Klingenschmitt said he prayed at a March 30 protest opposing Department of Defense rules forbidding military chaplains from invoking the name of Jesus Christ.

He's accused of violating an order not to appear in uniform at news conferences in support of personal or religious issues.

The issue seems to hinge on whether his praying at the event was permissible participation at a bona fide religious service. Klingenschmitt is rejecting non-judicial punishment in favor of trial by court-martial.


In addition, he's filing a complaint against the Navy claiming the threat of punishment against him amounts to religious harassment and he's appealing to the White House to end what he claims are the military's attempts to take reprisals against a whistle-blower.

Perhaps we should send letters to the White House in support of this good chaplain. May God grant him many years. This country has become something I'm liking less and less.

CDL

The acceptance by clergy of civil or military posts of a high rank is most usually a mistake which goes against the wise canon which specifically prohibits such.

There will always be exceptions such as Archbishop Makarios' acceptance of the post of Prime Minister in Cyprus or Bishop Theofan Noli's acceptance of the same in Albania. Each answered the call of a national, really international, crisis for a wise man of readily apparant integrity to assume leadership of the state.

But the aboveposted story is a good example of why the canon was passed and why it stands.

The officer in question is simply not free to preach the gospel. What would they have him say at the Pascha, "He is Risen!" ??????

For example, in Greece the chaplains are state funded (as are US Military chaplains), and as are all paid clergy there, but they do not wear the uniform and have no rank. The responsibility for what they say or do goes back to their bishop, not the Secretary of Defense.

Perhaps someday, to accomodate the atheists, they will even feel the need to remove these words from the Naval Memorial in downtown Washington:

"O Eternal Father, strong to save,
Whose arm dost bind the restless wave,
Who bidst the mighty ocean deep,
Its own appointed limits keep,
O hear us when we cry to thee,
For those in peril on the sea."

In the Risen Christ,
Andrew

Unfortunately for this Chaplain when he agreed to join the military and serve as a Chaplain and the accompanying rank he agreed to follow the rules of the U.S. Navy and to be subject to its jurisdiction.

It is a little understood truth that when one joins the armed forces one agrees to forfeit some individual rights and liberties.

If this chaplain agreed to these conditions, accepted an officers rank and then disobeyed direct orders he is and should be held accountable for his actions.

Should he be in a position where he feels that he cannot faithful exercise his duties as a priest because of a conflict with his position and his orders then he should have resigned his commission.

I'm not saying that the Depart of the Navy is in the right on what they have demanded/expected of him. But the sad fact of the matter is that all military chaplains agree to follow and be subject to the UCMJ and the orders of their superior officers.

They even swear an oath to do so.

If that oath is a contradiction to one's faith then perhaps they shouldn't swear it to begin with, but having done so they are under both an oath and a contractual obligation to follow through.

So while I sympathise with this chaplain I think he'll find himself in a very bad position when this goes to a court martial.

Just my .02

Carole

I sympathize with this man, though I agree that he might be in trouble for violating such laws. It's sad however to see such forced atheization of society and its institutions. It's like that disgusting story of Christmas losing its christian identity! Can you believe that?

May �SomeOne� bless America :rolleyes:

I agree. while there is too much interference with religious freedom, particularly in the case of chaplains not permitted to use the Name of Christ (I guess in prayer), possibly to not only make the atheists among us happy, but our Muslim "allies" as well, there is still the point that a chaplain is an officer in the armed forces, and is subject to regulations, and to UCMJ (Universal Code of Military Justice), as is any other officer or enlisted person. I do hope the best for this fine man who is serving our country, but it doesn't look all that good.oh, at one time, I was in ROTC at UT Chattanooga, and had sought to become an officer, but it wasn't in the Plan. but I have many friends who are both officers and enlisted, and I worry for them. I also worry for the son of a couple who have been very kind to me over the years. the son, who is in his forties, has been called up in his Naval Reserve unit (he is an officer), and is headed for Iraq. here in Chattanooga, it is Armed Forces Day, and the annual paprade to honor our women and men will begin in about twenty minutes.
Much Love,
Jonn

Carole,

I wholeheartedly agree with you. He agreed to accept existing and future Naval regulations. So perhaps when he was commissioned he was allowed to use the words "Jesus Christ," but now he is not. The correct choice is to express one's displeasure and to resign.

I imagine that he feels much as I did in circumstances that had some parallels to his: "How can they do this to my Navy? Does no one fear God?"

It is one thing to swallow hard and accept regulations that should be unacceptable to one as a Christian. This only compromises one's own integrity.

It is quite another thing when one is a clergyman and one accepts the same. In this case, one compromises one's own integrity and the Church's integrity.

Again, the canon forbids clergy from accepting high civil or military posts. He himself and his bishop put him in this predicament.

Christ is Risen,
Andrew

I agree with you fully Andrew. I have long had problems with the idea of the clergy being comissioned officers in the military. I've known more than one enlisted person who hesitated to address personal issues or spiritual issues with their chaplain because he wore officer's ensignia.

I have a friend whose husband is an Air Force pilot who hesitated to address issues with his priest/chaplain because the good Father outranked him.

I think it creates untold problems when clergy are comissioned officers bound to follow secular rules and laws that may often conflict with their higher calling.

It is a difficult sitaution for this priest (and for all military chaplains) and I will pray for him (and all). But I don't expect a favourable outcome when this goes to trial by military court.

So sad.

Carole

I agree with you too Andrew but there is a bit more to this than that.

I think this Navy Chaplain might be trying to spin this.

The article is titled, "Navy Chaplain May Face Court-Martial For Praying Clergyman Prayed In Uniform Outside White House" and the Chaplain says that he is being charged because "opposing Department of Defense rules forbidding military chaplains from invoking the name of Jesus Christ."

Yet the whole issue is his violation of the orders to not appear in uniform at news conferences in support of personal or religious issues. That order has nothing to do with Christ nor is it religious harassment in any way. He could have shown up in civilian cloths and there would be no issue.


David, Byzantine Catholic and Carmelite pre-novice

If I were under a Court Martial I'd also be spinning a bit and probably learning the jig and dance as well.

On the one hand, he obviously has violated the military dicipline that he agreed to follow. On the other hand, his situation parallels that of the early Christians in the Roman Army.

These had agreed, upon joining the Army, to sacrifice to the Gods. In many cases, they subsequently accepted Christ. When asked to offer incense to the other gods, they refused, betraying their earlier oath but keeping their latest one. Correctly, they accepted the punishment for this, even unto death.

For this reason, the scripture (James) says 'swear not, neither by heaven above nor by earth below. But let your yea be yea and your nay be nay.' In other words, try not to commit to a whole system of affirmations with one pledge, but rather, take up and answer each challenge as it comes to you.

In Christ,
Andrew

Spin won't help much though. Usually you spin to help to get the jury pool on your side. In a Court Martial the jury is your fellow officers.

Not really the same. He was told not to wear his uniform not to pray to Allah.

The way for this to be the same is that if the Christians in the Roman Army were told not to wear their uniform when they go to worship.


David, Byzantine Catholic and Carmelite pre-novice

Its true that there is more and more restriction on religious expression in the military but as someone pointed out the only real issue here is the chaplain being part of a demonstration wearing the uniform. This has always been a rule. There are no such restrictions placed on chaplains for their ministry and conducting services in chapels. In fact the Armed Forces Hymnal is still around and even has the Divine Liturgy. Even a military person in uniform who is not a chaplain may not participate in public demonstrations. Art, CW3, retired

The issue of protesting is uniform is a no-brainer. He's wrong by any measure.

Having said that, I reiterate my original point that to attempt to speak on behalf of the Church while in uniform is also wrong, or at a minimum, highly problemmatic. As we all agree, because of one's oath to the military, one is not fully free to speak and live out the gospel. Thus, clergy should keep to the canon and refuse high military and civil positions.

The parallel that I'm referring to with the Roman soldiers is the regulation (of which I had not previously heard) mentioned in Dn Jessup's post that Chaplains make no direct reference to Jesus Christ. That is for Christians, the equivalent of burning incense to other Gods. Our Lord has a name and we, especially our clergy, must not be ashamed to use it.

With love in Jesus Christ,
Andrew

A distinction must be made on what chaplains can and cannot do.

Using the Divine name in religious services in the capacity of a minister endorsed by a faith/denomination is not the same as the chaplain using the Divine name at a change of command, redeployment ceremony, etc.

I might add a lot of chaplains do break this rule but I have not seen any resistance to this by the formation of Soldiers.

Regards,

Cyril, Army Officer

I see this has carried over from the military chaplain thread.

Does anyone have access to a copy of the instruction that this Chaplain has issue with?

I have found an interesting article on the issues of miltiary chaplains.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/09/04/MNGU1EG0E31.DTL

ICXC
NIKA