The Need for a Humanist Chaplain

More than 13,000 service members identify themselves as atheists or agnostics, according to a Pentagon survey this year. That's more than the number of Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists in the military combined, yet each of those religions has its own chaplains.
-David Zucchino (Los Angeles Times)  

The Los Angeles Times recently ran a story about a man who is asking to become the Navy's first humanist chaplain. Jason Heap would like to bring comfort and guidance to service members that don't believe in a god. 13,000 members identify as atheist/agnostic and another 276,000 have no religious preference. All of these people, when turning to the Chaplain Corps for moral guidance or a confidential ear to talk to, presently have to talk to a theist. I believe this is a problem.

Mr. Heap says that, "just as a Roman Catholic would prefer to speak with a priest, or a Jewish person with a rabbi ... nontheist people would prefer to have access to someone who understands their basic points of view." This is definitely the case. Non-theists are often poorly served when discussing deep issues such as morality with theists. Many theists, even the best educated of them, are incapable of perceiving a basis for morality that does not rest on a first-cause God (this is a particularly common issue with mono-theists). When a theist chaplain is confronted with a service member's shaken sense of self, I expect it can be difficult to address anything but the most superficial aspects of "spiritual" care. Deeper conversations may misfire since the chaplain and the service member hold radically different worldviews.

I served for six years as an active duty Marine. Full disclosure, I was a Christian at the time. I found the majority of chaplains to be thoughtful and friendly people who were capable of being kind and gracious to service members from all walks of life. There are very few chaplains serving a very large military, so a Catholic chaplain is likely to talk to a Muslim, Baptist, or Buddhist Marine, and the chaplains are trained and ready for such an event. This wouldn't change with the addition of Jason Heap. However, the ability for the Chaplain Corps, as a whole, to properly address the needs of service members grows as chaplains of different faiths share best practices with each other. A non-theist chaplain could only add to that skill set. I understand that the idea of non-spiritual spiritual care will sound odd to many people. However, the Chaplain Corps provides much more than weekend rituals. They perform an important universal service as counselors. In a military that still shuns professional psychiatric care due to stigma, chaplains provide a safe space that our over-stressed service members desperately need. Non-theist soldiers, sailors, and Marines deserve equal respect and care.

I certainly hope that the Navy decides to approve Mr. Heap's application, or that of another qualified non-theist. The military is often progressive on such issues, from a state-sanctioned point of view. Their recent changes concerning homosexual service members, for instance, have amounted to, "that's legal now? Ok. Here are your benefits." On the religious belief front, Thor's Hammer is now allowed on veteran's tombstones. I would hope that the military can honor the beliefs of living service men and women as fully as they honor the dead.

He wants to be the Navy's first humanist chaplain -The Los Angeles Times

 

The Stoic News Cycle

Whenever some disturbing news is reported to you, you ought to have ready at hand the following principle: News, on any subject, never falls within the sphere of the moral purpose.
-Epictetus' Discourses 3.18.1

Urgency fuels so much of modern life. We need to know that, have that, or respond to that now. Alerts vibrate phones 24/7 and it's unlikely any of us make it through the day without someone saying, "did you hear about..." Without the right response to this environment, it's easy to get our blood pressure rising.

Epictetus's quote up top is pretty definitive. News, by its very nature, does not concern our moral purpose. From a stoic point of view that's rather obvious. I still found it striking. I guess the constant bombardment of modern media has left me a bit blind to my habituated response. It's very easy to play along with the narrative of urgency and concern that is spouted every day. To the stoic mind, however, all news is indifferent news.

Epictetus continues, "can anyone bring you word that you have been wrong in an assumption or in a desire? -By no means." No one can see into your inner thoughts. They can't tell you if you're acting through virtue or vice. For us Stoics, virtue is the only good and vice the only evil, so where's that leave news? News is indifferent, firmly in the camp of thing we can not control. 

And Epictetus doesn't pull punches. He goes on to say, "but he can bring you news that someone is dead. Very well, what is that to you? That someone is speaking ill of you. Very well, what is that to you?" His point is that no news, however personal, can dictate your judgments for you. In the case of news like the death of a friend, only you can decide how to respond. In the case of someone else disparaging you, that vicious act is on them. It's their evil, why would it affect you? The stoic viewpoint doesn't extinguish the significance of such events, it simply frees us to respond appropriately to the news.

I've had a lot of time to think about my daughter, who's arriving in a few short weeks. My wife and I have dealt with some rough news from doctors, received more information than was really helpful, and lived with the constant joy that at each check-up the little girl has been doing the best we can hope for. I could easily feel weighed down right now, if I had been constantly inflating the weight of what I know with my images of the worst outcomes. Why would I do that? I can instead find joy in all the moments we've had knowing our daughter even in the womb. I can take information and prepare for the future in a reasonable way. I can love my daughter, knowing that love doesn't require me to protect her from an imagined future. In fact, such an approach deprives my daughter and wife of my presence. I'd be spending my thoughts on a dream life. Neither dreams nor nightmares deserve my investment. Love asks me to be fully present now.

I think there's more here than I can find time to say. I suppose I'll return to it later. In any case, Discourses 3.18 is worth a read. It's definitely modern advice, even if it's from around 60 C.E.