Please tell me this is not true!

Published On: May 31, 2015|Categories: MRFF's Inbox|Comments Off on Please tell me this is not true!|

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.
“The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) is threatening Christians with courts martial.
General Craig Olson spoke at a National Day of Prayer event thanking God and talking about the power of prayer.
Now this radical anti-Christian group is demanding that he face a court martial and be “aggressively and visibly brought to justice for his unforgivable crimes and transgressions.”
Even worse, this group – which calls Christians in the military “monsters who terrorize” – has consulted with the Pentagon on religion in the military.”
Does this sound like “Military Religious Freedom” to you?  Please tell me this is not true.  If it is, you would be nothing but a bunch of hypocrites posing as people who care.  Please enlighten me!
 
Thank you
(name withheld)
 
I have family members defending and serving our country – risking their lives so that we can have freedom.  Please make sure you support them even if they are Christians okay.
Hi (name withheld) –
Thanks for taking the time to write to the MRFF.  I’m a volunteer who supports the organization in a variety of ways, one of which is assisting with email correspondence.  I am also a lifelong, committed, and active Christian, a USAF Academy graduate (’85), and a veteran USAF officer.
You mention at the end of your note that you have family members in service to our country.  First, I’d like to extend my appreciation for their service and sacrifice, and I will pray for their safety.  MRFF is comprised of many current and former military members, so we certainly understand and share your desire that all military members are supported.  And despite a good bit of the narrative that appears in many conservative media outlets about MRFF, we are neither anti-Christian specifically, nor anti-religion generally. Rather, we are pro-Constitution, and if you are open to hearing my perspective about our mission and about the Maj Gen Olson situation, I’d welcome the opportunity to share it with you.
The mission of the MRFF is to ensure that all members of the United States Armed Forces fully receive the Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom to which they and all Americans are entitled by virtue of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.  That means just what it says — all members of the military, of every manner of religious belief (including non-belief), and including those who are Christian like you and me.
In order for that to happen (that is, to ensure equal religious protections and rights for all military members) there are a few other things that must happen. Key among them is that military organizations and military leaders cannot allow any one religious belief (including non-belief) to be given prominence, preference, or allowed to appear to have official sanction over all other beliefs.  Consider that our military is a reflection of the broader American society. While Christianity is without a doubt the most prominent religious belief, it is far from the only one (and for that matter, even with Christianity there is a good bit of disagreement as to who qualifies as the “right kind” of Christian — but more on that in a moment).
Most of all, I hope you agree with me that every military member has a right to serve in an environment that does not cause them to question or worry that their particular religious belief makes their participation less valuable to the military, or even worse cause them to think that their religious belief could adversely influence their professional goals.
Within the USAF, the military branch with which I am most familiar, there are specific rules which are intended to promote an environment of religious neutrality.  The main rules are found in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 1-1.  This instruction has the following to say about the rights of every USAF member:
“2.11. Free Exercise of Religion and Religious Accommodation — Every Airman is free to practice the religion of their choice or subscribe to no religious belief at all. You should confidently practice your own beliefs while respecting others whose viewpoints differ from your own. Every Airman also has the right to individual expressions of sincerely held beliefs, to include conscience, moral principles or religious beliefs, unless those expressions would have an adverse impact on military readiness, unit cohesion, good order, discipline, health and safety, or mission accomplishment.”
Seems pretty straightforward, yes?  And perhaps you read it and think, ‘Then what was wrong with what Maj Gen Olson did?’  To understand that, we need to look further at what AFI 1-1 says about the obligations of USAF leaders:
“2.12. Balance of Free Exercise of Religion and Establishment Clause — Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for their own free exercise of religion, including individual expressions of religious beliefs, and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief.”
This obligation of all USAF leaders, and especially those at the most senior levels such as Maj Gen Olson, has been completely ignored in virtually all of the objections that I’ve read among the conservative media sources that are speaking on this issue.  The most common misconception that has been argued is along these lines – ‘Maj Gen Olson has the same rights to express his religious beliefs as every American.’   In a word? Untrue.
You may be surprised to know that MRFF absolutely supports the rights of Maj Gen Olson to hold whatever religious beliefs he desires to hold, and to express those beliefs in an appropriate time, place, and manner.  But that didn’t happen with his appearance at the NDP Task Force event.
Just what is the NDP Task Force?  If you believe what you read at conservative media sources, it is some sort of officially-sanctioned manifestation of the National Day of Prayer.  But that is not actually what it is, and the difference is important.
The NDP Task Force is a private, sectarian religious group that promotes a very specific religious doctrine. It is not, as you might think, open to participation by all Americans of sincere beliefs who wish to share the sentiments of a National Day of Prayer.  In fact, to be even a volunteer for the NDP Task Force, applicants must agree to a very specific statement of Christian belief that excludes even many professed Christians (notably those of the most ancient, liturgical traditions).  Further, in recent years the annual NDP Task Force event has come under criticism for being overtly partisan from a political perspective.  Still, I support (as does everyone at MRFF) the rights of the private citizens associated with the NDP Task Force to their Constitutionally protected freedom of religion.
But Maj Gen Olson does not share all of those same rights, as we’ve already discussed here.  The manner in which he chose to participate in the NDP Task Force event ignored the clear direction of AFI 1-1 and allowed his participation to take on the hue of an official endorsement:
— He appeared in full uniform
— He did not indicate in any way that he was speaking as an individual, and not as a USAF leader
— Most troubling, he called for specifically sectarian prayers that the Defense Dept and all troops should “depend on Christ”
For those reasons, I believe that MRFF’s objections are understandable and justified, and I hope you find this additional information helpful.
Thanks again for writing.
Peace,
Mike Challman
Christian, USAF veteran, MRFF supporter
Dear (name withheld),

No, it isn’t true, any more than Mikey working for the White House or the Pentagon.

 

We are not a “radical anti-Christian group” as the media and others deliberately portray us; they know the truth about us but that wouldn’t make you angry.

 

Mikey – who is Jewish – is the face founder and President of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) and prays 3 times a day to the same Father we do. There is also the Board, Advisory Board, volunteers and supporters that total 230 and 87% of them are Christians. A full 96% of our 41,600+ soldier clients are Christians – Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodist, Lutherans, Baptists, Evangelicals, etc. We fight for Christians more than any others.

 

MRFF does not act on its own but at the request of soldiers’ complaints of the blatant disregard and trampling of the Constitution and the Military Code of Justice; blurring the lines between the separation of church and state. Every complaint is vetted by Mikey who was a JAG lawyer at the Air Force Academy for 10 years; worked in the West Wing under Ronald Reagan; and held positions in private practice.

 

You are not privy to the emails we get from mainline Christians who are being harassed, persecuted, denied advancements and sometimes forced out of the military on trumped up charges. We have to keep their names anonymous because their very careers depend on it.

 

US Army chaplain MAJ James Linzey, who, in a 1999 video, described mainstream Protestant churches as “demonic, dastardly creatures from the pit of hell “that should be “stomped out.”(see above)

 

This is the thinking in our military all the way up the chain of command towards mainline Christians. They are told they are “not the right kind of Christian” and not “Christian enough” and are going to spend eternity in the “lake of fire.” They must denounce their own Christian denomination and become “born-again” with a spiritual birthday within the Evangelical Fundamental Dominion theology (not all Evangelicals are Dominionist) and cleanse the earth of those of other faiths and those of no faith – by way of our military who are “Warriors for Christ” and “government paid missionaries” – so that Jesus can come back and rule for 1,000 years.https://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/2012/06/shocking-video-mrff-reveals-u-s-military-being-used-as-government-paid-missionaries/

 

The leadership of the Air Force and its academy are the most egregious in forcing this faith on their subordinates that on September 1, 2011 then Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz had to issue a Memorandum on which the subject was Maintaining Government Neutrality Regarding Religion to rein them in. The leadership of the Air Force thumbed their nose at him and continued to aggressively proselytize the Cadets and those that refused were singled out as unfit to “serve the Lord.”

 

“. . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”   (Article VI, Section III)

 

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment (Establishment Clause) of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise (Free Exercise Clause) thereof . . . “(1st Amendment)

 

The Establishment Clause comes before the Free Exercise Clause for a reason; the Free Exercise Clause is subservient to the Establishment Clause – not the other way around as some Christians would like it to be.

 

We are not trying to take Jesus out of the military, but Major General Olson cannot be given an exception to the rules because of his rank or his religion.

 

Let me explain:

 

The National Day of Prayer Task Force is not the National Day of Prayer signed into law by President Truman in 1952.

 

The National Day of Prayer is celebrated by Americans of many religions as a day of prayer and fasting. The President issues an official National Day of Prayer proclamation each year as well – by law signed by President Truman.

 

The National Day of Prayer Task Force is strictly a conservative evangelical Christian organization called the “National Prayer Committee” that was formed to coordinate and implement a fixed annual day of prayer (held on the same day as the original National Day of Prayer) for the purpose of organizing only Evangelical Christian prayer events with local, state, and federal government entities.

 

The National Day of Prayer is sanctioned by the government where the National Day of Prayer Task Force is not.

 

The Pentagon treats mainline Christians and other religions differently. I do not know where they prayed this year, but last year “the Protestants, except for those Episcopalian types, get the nice big event in the auditorium complete with world-class musical entertainment on the actual May 1 date of the National Day of Prayer. The Catholics get to have their event on the right day, but in the Pentagon’s chapel. Muslims have to wait a day for their event. Then there’s another Protestant gospel service thrown in the middle of all this. The Episcopalians, who are apparently not the same as Protestants have to wait until May 7. And, last but not least, there are the Hindus and Jews, who get to observe the May 1 National Day of Prayer on May 8.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-rodda/pentagon-to-join-in-one-v_b_5208018.html

 

Is this consistent with the original National Day of Prayer? No, it demeans soldiers of other faiths that they are not welcome during the one day each year set aside to pray for our country.

 

The wording and meaning of the original First Amendment was several times upheld by the Supreme Court as an accurate description of the Establishment Clause:

Jefferson’s concept of “separation of church and state” first became a part of Establishment Clause jurisprudence in Reynolds v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1878). In that case, the court examined the history of religious liberty in the US, determining that while the constitution guarantees religious freedom, “The word ‘religion’ is not defined in the Constitution. We must go elsewhere, therefore, to ascertain its meaning and nowhere more appropriately, we think, than to the history of the times in the midst of which the provision was adopted.” The court found that the leaders in advocating and formulating the constitutional guarantee of religious liberty were James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. Quoting the “separation” paragraph from Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists, the court concluded that, “coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured.

 

The Supreme Court heard the Lemon v. Kurtzman case in 1971 and ruled in favor of the Establishment Clause. Subsequent to this decision, the Supreme Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether government action comports with the Establishment Clause, known as the “Lemon Test.”

 

  1. Any law or policy must have been adopted with a neutral or non-religious purpose.
  2. The principle or primary effect of any law or policy must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion.
  3. The statute or policy must not result in an “excessive entanglement” of government with religion.

 

If any government entity’s actions fit into one of these three, then it is a violation of the Establishment Clause.

 

Parker v. Levy:

“This Court has long recognized that the military is, by necessity, a specialized society separate from civilian society… While the members of the military are not excluded from the protection granted by the First Amendment, the different character of the military community and of the military mission requires a different application of those protections. … The fundamental necessity for obedience, and the consequent necessity for imposition of discipline, may render permissible within the military that which would be constitutionally impermissible outside it… Speech [to include religious speech] that is protected in the civil population may nonetheless undermine the effectiveness of response to command.  If it does, it is constitutionally unprotected.” (Emphasis added) Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733, 1974

 

Our military is secular and by giving his speech on Christianity in uniform – which gives the impression to the world that we have a Christian military – demeans the morale of those of other faiths. His speech is constitutionally unprotected.

 

The Air Force has strict regulations on religious neutrality:

 

Air Force Instruction 1-1, Section 2.12:

 

2.12. Balance of Free Exercise of Religion and Establishment Clause. Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for their own free exercise of religion, including individual expressions of religious beliefs, and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. They must ensure their words and actions cannot reasonably be construed to be officially endorsing or disapproving of, or extending preferential treatment for any faith, belief, or absence of belief.

 

The violation of this – by speaking in uniform at a civilian event- is a potential felony under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

 

Because Major General Craig S. Olson showed up in uniform to give his speech, he is also providing an unlawful endorsement and selective benefit to a non-Federal entity

(the NDPTF, which is a private organization), in violation of both the Joint Ethics Regulation (DoD 5500.7-R) prohibition on endorsement of non-Federal entities and DoD Instruction 5410.19, which prohibits the providing of a selective benefit or preferential treatment to any private organization.

Joint Ethics Regulation (DoD 5500.7-R)

DoD Instruction 5410.19

 

Major General Olson knows these rules but chose to ignore them with the backing of the Air Force.

 

He ended his speech with: Pray for them when they have to go back that they can bear through that by depending on Christ.

 

Our military is secular and our wars are not Christian Holy Wars. He gave the appearance to the world that he was speaking on behalf of our military.

 

We have many clients who are Christians who are serving in our military and we are not trying to take Christianity out of it but force it to obey the Constitution, Supreme Court rulings, Air Force instructions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as to the time, place and manner in which one may give his testimony.

 

I hope this clears up any misconceptions you had due to the media omitting all of the pertinent laws that Major general Olson broke.

 

Pastor Joan

MRFF Advisory Board Member

Recent Posts

Share This Story