Welcome To The Criminalization Of Christianity (U.S Navy Wants Chaplains To Psst On Jesus Alert)

Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 09/15/06 | Janet L. Folger

[goldstategop]

As I sat in the hearing room, I felt a cold chill – like the chilling effect this court-martial will have on our free speech. For this analogy to be accurate, however, I would need to be sitting in a freezer. At issue in the court-martial of Lt. Gordon James Klingenschmitt, chaplain for the United States Navy, is a name and the freedom to speak it. That name is Jesus. And, according to this week's ruling, the freedom to speak it depends on the context.

Before I could go through the metal detectors to get to the courtroom, a Navy official had already taken Jesus' name in vain. No trial for that. No penalty. No problem. But use the name in reverence, in honor or in prayer, and you'll find yourself looking in the face of a court-martial. Welcome to the criminalization of Christianity.

This case is really about Navy Secretary Donald C. Winter, who ordered that every chaplain in the Navy worship his god – the "government god" of "non-sectarian" goodness who has no name and certainly no son by whom someone might be offended. But Chaplain Klingenschmitt told Navy Secretary Nebuchadnezzar, uh, I mean Winter, that he couldn't bow to his government god and had to proclaim the God of the Bible – who has a Son with an illegal name.

So Chaplain Klingenschmitt spoke the Gospel aboard ship, prayed in that illegal name and preached from that "offensive book" – much to the detriment of his career. But it's a good thing he did, particularly for a sailor who heard the message of the Gospel and dedicated his life to Christ – just before being killed in a motorcycle accident. A secular memorial was held, but many sailors approached the chaplain and asked that he hold a Christian memorial service to honor the sailor's faith. So he did. Attendance was voluntary. But the chaplains "above" him didn't like the content of his sermon. Mentioning Jesus in the chapel (you know, that building with the cross on top), they said, is just "too exclusive." Just who was it that hung on that cross depicted on the official Navy chaplain uniform, again? Maybe they can tell people it's really a lower case "t" – standing for "tepid," "totalitarian" or "triangle" until the new shapes can be issued.

In fact, Klingenschmitt was punished in writing for reading an "illegal verse," and Naval Judge Anita Blair upheld the reprimand. What was the illegal verse? [WARNING! If you are a member of the United States Navy, do NOT, I repeat, do NOT read this verse out loud, or face court martial!]

He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. – John 3:36

The judge ruled that the chaplain's freedom wasn't really restricted since he was free to preach a sermon on "other" topics besides Jesus. Like, the measurements of the ark, for instance. Just don't go quoting Bible verses from the New Testament of Jesus Christ and actually mention Jesus Christ.

The chaplain then went on a hunger strike until the Navy said he could pray in uniform again. They said "no speeches" or "opinions," but he was allowed to wear his uniform for "religious observances." That brings us to the event in question – March 30, 2006, where the chaplain engaged in the "religious observance" of prayer. He didn't give a speech. Didn't voice his opinions. In fact, he even turned down questions from reporters because he was wearing his uniform. Quite different from other Navy officers who went on national television and national radio espousing "personal," "partisan" and "political beliefs" while in uniform without any prior permission. The difference? Oh, they were blasting Klingenschmitt, and the Navy agreed with the content of their speech.

Then, Judge Lewis T. Booker, the judge overseeing the court-martial, ruled that the right to "public worship" doesn't include "worshiping in public." Judge Booker said essentially that "public worship" is allowed for one hour on Sunday, and you better use it, because that's the only free exercise of religion you have left, sailor.

And now, five years after we were attacked, our troops are fighting overseas for the freedom of those who pray in the name of Allah at the same time a U.S. chaplain has been court-martialed for praying in the name of Jesus on American soil. Does anyone besides me see something wrong with this? On Monday, Sept. 11, 2006, we gathered to sing "God Bless America," but how likely do you think God will continue to bless us if we are forbidden from using His Son's name?

And where is our beloved commander in chief? The man I worked to elect, who personally told me that the "most important thing" I could do for him was to pray? Cannot our military have that same "most important" right? His number, by the way, is 202-456-1414.

As I was leaving the airport in Norfolk, I saw an advertisement that read: "America will always be the home of the free because it is the land of the brave." When I read it, I cried … because America is no longer the land of the free. Thankfully, there are still are brave Americans like Chaplain Klingenschmitt. If you are among the brave left in the land of the free, I urge you with everything in me to use your freedom while you still can.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is reportedly "still undecided" as to whether the freedom of religion should apply to chaplains. He sits on the conference committee for the Defense appropriations bill, H.R. 5122, and is a critical vote on Section 590 – the amendment that will let the chaplains of all branches of our military pray according to the dictates of their conscience. The toll-free number to reach him is: 1-888-355-3588. Use it to call Sens. John Warner and Carl Levin while you're at it; they're key votes on the committee, as well. The message? Simply: "Let the chaplains pray" – something our Founding Fathers thought was so very important that one of their first acts of the first Congress (after ratifying the First Amendment) was to establish chaplains to do just that.

Of course, you have "the right to remain silent," but if you use that right much longer, those are the words you'll hear before you see the inside of a prison cell. Because if they criminalize Chaplain Klingenschmitt today, tomorrow it's you.

[ZULU]

The cowards and politically correct pandering pimps in certain positions in government are gradually eroding the Judaeo-Christian base of America. The succeeded in Europe already.

The net result is creating a fertile field for conversion by a militant, uncompromising cult of death - Islam.

This is not a new phenomenon. It started long ago when the Supreme Court decided prayer in public schools was uncosntituional - and we sat back and did nothing; when the federal courts decided that it was O.K. to bus little children across a city to achieve "racial balance" - and we sat back and did nothing; when the courts decided that discrimination against one group of people in the U.S. was o.k. to rectify discrimination against another group - and we did nothing.

Government is too important to be left to the undirected control of pandering pimps - which is exactly what is happening now.

In every school in America, the Christian and Jewish majority of students should hold MASS pray-ins, supported by massive displays of their parents outside the schools.

The same thing should happen in the military.

Unless we take strong measures to reverse the creeping the atheization of America, our descendants will grow up in an Islamic theocracy.

The choice is ours.

[Cvengr]

The chaplain has a responsibility to not only his command but also to the higher authority of God to always act in faith through Christ and to never cease praying in all things through Christ.

The command has a responsibility to insure such an office of chaplain is established and maintained.

Since the command removes the believer from the location and accessibility of his regular pastor-teacher, the command therefore assumes responsibility for the spiritual development of their juniors.

Whereas the present courts perceive they are doin right, unless they do right only through faith in Christ, they merely do right in their own eyes for which they will be held accountable by Him.

The consequences of US foreign policy ignoring God and lacking faith in Christ is the very reason for the rise of militant Islam today. Such power was encouraged at the abandonment of the Shah of Iran, when many Masons in government and intelligence believed they were doing a right thing by forming the Green Line between the USSR and the Indian Ocean. Our encouragement of religious military forces as a counterfeit for mercenaries was successful as a good work only good for a short time.

The consequences though, had longer effects. In a nutshell, although God established governance of mankind through the establishment of national governance, for believer and unbeliever alike (and both may live fruitfully through that institution of His grace), when a nation fails to act through faith in Christ, especially if it had been a client nation to God, representing the Gospel to the world by pastors and evangeilism to unbelievers, then that nation will be subjected to His discipline.

Historically, when He disciplines His client nations, the discipline lasts for a seven year period. If that rebllion from Him continues and they fail to return to Him, then the next cycle of discipline is seven times more severe and lasts another 7 years.

In each phase of discipline, He provides a method for the rebellious nation to return to Him. Those who are blind to such grace are likely to suffer alongside those who are rebellious.

It might be further noted, that His discipline and punishment is frequently directed more at believers who fail to remain faithful in Him, than to unbelievers who do not know any better.

A more appropriate action for the command in this situation is to recognize this situation as a testing of the faith of the Chaplain, and the lack of spiritual responsibility of the past commanders, remove those who seek to disallow faith in Christ from office for failure to defend the Constitution of the US, and promote the Chaplain for his perseverence and testing when no worldly benefit appeared to be viable.

This trail might not be testing the Chaplain as much as it might also provide a more significant test of the relationship of senior commanders to God through Christ, and if they fail, the nation might be due for much more severe consequence by His discipline.

Pray through Christ, that our leaders return to Him and remain faithful through Christ, even if but a little bit, so that the nation might be encouraged to continue through His will and not independent of Him.

[buck61]

What the Lt. should have done is to have told the audience he wanted to give a prayer but, he would have to go change clothes and, would be back in an hour or two, every one just Wait for me. I'm sure the audience would have waited an hour or so, sure.

[Cvengr]

I suspect if the command had allowed the Chaplain to act in faith through Christ in all things, there would not have been any conflict, but rather blessings all around.

Those who are in the command and place their faith in their brotherhood over their faith in Christ, still have an opportunity to return to Him, but also manifest their tendancy of a scarred soul to accuse rather than return to Him.

I do not know if this Chaplain disobeyed legitimate authority, however, I have not met a Chaplain who has not been placed in a position of comprimise by his chain of command and by more senior members of the Chaplain Corps throughout their carreer. Most of the more senior Chaplains I've met have succeeded by comprimising their faith in Christ by a number of subtle implications so as not to offend senior members of their line command. I don't believe this was as prolific 40 years ago, but I suspect it is greatly influenced by the faithfulness of senior officers to freemasonry, rationalism, worldliness, and politics than to faithfulness through Christ in any and all things.

Indeed they now appeal to their authority to assert their will, but when that will and act is later judged, will it be found as faithful to Christ as the faith of the Chaplain?

At present IMHO, if the will of the Chaplain were allowed to prevail, both the command and Chaplain Coprs would be better served than the alternative. Worse for the command, if it rules against the Chaplain it has merely promoted a rejection of faith in Christ, rather than returning to Him and good stewardship.

[Non-Sequitur]

So? You will have to explain, in detail, exactly what part of those rules is violated by which actions.

Can't read, huh? What part of 2 and 3 need explanation? Two says, "During or in connection with the furtherance of political activities...when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest could be drawn." Klingenschmitt himself says that it was a political rally. Then there is three, "Except when authorized by competent Service authority, when participating in activities such as public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies or any public demonstration (including those pertaining to civil rights), which may imply Service sanction of the cause for which the demonstration or activity is conducted." Klingenschmitt was ordered not to wear his uniform. He disobeyed that order. He was court-martialed and, in my opinion, got off easy.

[muawiyah]

BS ~ "furtherance of" necessarily implies a level of control that simply does not exist when praying. After all, we have separation of church and state in this country, so "prayer" is totally irrelevant to affairs of state, most particularly politics.

You'll simply have to do much better than that.BTW, at almost any time, day or night, I can go down to the White House and there'll always be two things present ~ guys in military uniform walking about that part of DC, and folks praying.

So far no one has gotten court-martialed for getting too near the prayer givers ~

[muawiyah]

Or, alternatively like the Dubhokhars, he could have stripped naked for prayer.

[verity]

BS article.

[Non-Sequitur]

You'll simply have to do much better than that.BTW, at almost any time, day or night, I can go down to the White House and there'll always be two things present ~ guys in military uniform walking about that part of DC, and folks praying.

Actually no I don't. You've yet to show why he shouldn't have been court martialed for disobeying orders.

And when those guys in military uniform walking around DC take part in political demonstrations then they get cour martialed. Like this Klingenschmitt boob.

[muawiyah]

Actually they don't, particularly not in DC. That's one of the reasons this is such an unusual case.

[Non-Sequitur]

Actually they don't, particularly not in DC. That's one of the reasons this is such an unusual case.

Then why wasn't Klingenschmitt able to use that as a defense? And I should point out that wearing one's uniform while off duty is not really a political statement.

[muawiyah]

Good question. I think the whole thing is related in some way to the movement of Evangelical chaplains into a system that's been more used to Episcopals (2/3, right?) and a handful of Catholic priests.

The command always found the chaplain corps quite compliant ~ of course they didn't have any real Protestants in it either.

No doubt this isn't the end of it, but it's dollars to doughnuts the preacher here and his CO have most likely never attended the other guy's church.

[Non-Sequitur]

Good question. I think the whole thing is related in some way to the movement of Evangelical chaplains into a system that's been more used to Episcopals (2/3, right?) and a handful of Catholic priests.

I have no idea what the denominational makeup of the chaplain corps is, though I would be a bit surprised if it is as heavily Episcopalian as you said. But regardless of faith chaplains are supposed to minister to all servicemen regardless of faith. I doubt Klingenschmitt was able to do that.

The command always found the chaplain corps quite compliant ~ of course they didn't have any real Protestants in it either.

Why is your definition of what is a real Protestant the only valid one?

No doubt this isn't the end of it, but it's dollars to doughnuts the preacher here and his CO have most likely never attended the other guy's church.

Perhaps. I think it will end when Klingenschmitt is finally separated.

[muawiyah]

Inasmuch as this fellow's plight has moved Congress to initiate legislation beneficial to him, I would suggest his CO probably ought to start looking for another job, and the guys on the court martial board might kiss their careers goodbye as well.

Remember, for our officer corps the objective of the promiton system is to surface men of sufficient temperament to be admirals and generals while, at the same time, finding people who can command the respect of their subordinates without resort to judicial methods.

You really aren't doing your career any good if you get caught up in a notorious case.

[Non-Sequitur]

Inasmuch as this fellow's plight has moved Congress to initiate legislation beneficial to him, I would suggest his CO probably ought to start looking for another job, and the guys on the court martial board might kiss their careers goodbye as well.

I would wait until such legislation actually passes before worrying about it.

You really aren't doing your career any good if you get caught up in a notorious case.

You're suggesting that officers should worry about the politics of the matter rather than doing their duty?

[CWOJackson]

LOL! Actually flagrantly disobeying orders is far more detrimental to your career.

[muawiyah]

Yup. Remember the Tailhook fellows? Their sin was to attend the wrong hotel.

[CWOJackson]

Absolutely nothing in common with this case at all.

[muawiyah]

It's the principle of the thing. Down in the junior officer ranks drawing the attention of Congress has traditionally been a career ender unless, of course, you are getting a Congressional Medal of Honor or something.

Being part of a chain of causality that forced Congress to even consider beneficial legislation for somebody else is really not where you want to be.

[CWOJackson]

BS. Your view of the military is extremely dated in inaccurate. The only principle involved is this idiot deliberately decided to disobey orders. In the real world his CO would be held accountable for NOT disciplining him.