Trying to understand

Published On: August 4, 2013|Categories: MRFF's Inbox|2 Comments|

Accessibility Notice

This post was created on the previous version of the MRFF website, and may not be fully accessible to users of assistive technology. If you need help accessing this content, please reach out via email.

Good morning

I am a military chaplain with a background of medical chaplaincy. I am supportive of religious freedoms. I do support the atheist/humanist role as chaplain though we may disagree with why (I do view a atheist as having faith – perhaps in science or in mankind but something bigger then themselves and certainly have their views on how we got here, our purpose in being here, and what happens when we die – something similar with all faith whether rooted in Bible, Koran, or science). But certainly in CPE, a GOOD chaplain should be able to sit down with ANY faith and encourage their faith journey even if it is not shared by the chaplain. Though the chaplain will still have the ability to refer if unable to help (examples Buddhist funeral, Muslim wedding etc).

I also think that the other recent news article with the atheist couple who wanted to get married in a chapel and were ok with the permanent Christian fixtures should have been allowed to marry there as it is government property.

However I do not understand what your response is with the “Atheist in Foxholes” article. From reading the article, I see that he has made reference to a historic saying, does not state that there aren’t atheist in foxholes nor did he even state that faith was in religion or not for everyone. It seemed to simply encourage us from a historic perspective that in trying times to look at our lives and see if we have something to count on and to define faith for ourselves.

One hospital chaplain I knew at a staff meeting spoke on faith and he made a point of even stating that for those with no belief in God, still have a belief or faith in mankind. That is core of the atheist doctrine lately as they have been very good at helping others.

Please help me understand your view of why this particular article is troubling to you. As I stated I usually side with your views because of 1st Amendment freedoms, but I am unable to see your perspective on this particular article.

Thanks for your help.

(name withheld)


Good afternoon,

It seems that the primary concern you have is our (as well as the USAF’s) disapproval of the message delivered by CH Reyes. To get there though, it’s first necessary to understand the divergent perspectives on the essay in question. As you explained, you believe that every person has faith. That is essentially the same message that CH Reyes shared, and that is false. What’s happening here is a projection of ideology which leads to a failure of fundamental respect. Faith is the belief in something that a person has no way of knowing to be true. As a non-religious person myself, I do not have faith. I understand that the principles of science work because they have been tested innumerable times and yielded positive results. That is not faith, but observation. I do not have “faith in mankind,” and there is no atheist doctrine which establishes that. I have empathy for others (as do nearly all humans) which drives me to charitable works when the opportunity is available. I do not have faith that after I die I will cease to exist, I understand that to be the case because consciousness is the result of biochemistry and electrical activity in the brain which ends shortly after basic bodily functions cease. This is not faith, this is understanding. To tell the non-religious that they have faith is an insult to who we are. It is tantamount to me telling you that you do not, and cannot truly believe in God. Imagine if your superior officer published an essay lauding the work of Sam Harris in which he explained all religions to be the simple result of geography, cult-inspired delusion and evolutionary biology. To do so would violate your chosen identity with false attribution. If I did so from a position of lawful authority over you, it would be criminal.

The most frustrating bit of CH Reyes’ essay was his regurgitation of the phrase “no atheists in foxholes” in a positive light. It was not a neutral historical recount. His message was clear that all people had faith in something and that the chaplain who coined the phrase was a hero, not just for his actions of self-sacrifice, but for his insidious observation that atheists are weak willed and psychologically frail in combat. Imagine if CH Reyes had written a presentation on the heroism of the author of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Would that be palatable? While they cannot be compared by degree, both doctrines carry the same message. It is the use of misinformation and propaganda to inspire long-lasting discrimination. The issue of bigotry towards the non-religious, and privileging or reward for the religious, is a culturally endemic problem. Allowing chaplains to continue to promote lies about the non-religious, even if those lies are the genuine, heartfelt convictions of the chaplain in question, will only keep this problem alive and well long into the future.

If you have any more questions I would be glad to answer them for you.

Cheers,

Blake A. Page
Military Religious Freedom Foundation
Special Assistant to the President
Director of West Point Affairs

Share This Story

2 Comments

  1. Gunther August 23, 2013 at 9:57 pm

    Have faith doesn’t protect your from enemy fire nor friendly fire. It also doesn’t always help repair your body from bullet wounds and sharpnel nor doesn’t help you heal from the mental destruction of your mind cause by war. By the way, many people who been in battle stated that when they saw their buddies getting hit, they either cry out for their mother or for a medic/corpmen not God. I can’t recall any battle where wounded men saw God coming down to heal their wounds, and give them a new arm, leg, eyes, fingers, etc. when they lost their in battle

  2. Gunther August 23, 2013 at 10:08 pm

    Many of these Christian soldiers seem to have no faith in God because many stated that they put their faith in having their fellow soldiers in helping them to stay alive on the battlefied plus having an M-60, 50 caliber machine gun, or any other weapon to keep them alive. In the movie The Longest Day, General Gavin talk to his men about having God on their side but also stated that this (an M1 rifle) will also help them and then Gavin pull back the bolt of the M1 rfile.

    Seems like to me, that a lot of Christian soldiers have little or no faith in God to protect them; otherwise, they would not need all that military hardware to defeat the enemy. All they have to do is get down on their knees and pray.

Leave A Comment