For the past several years, two U.S. Army posts in Virginia, Fort Eustis and Fort Lee, have been putting on a series of what are called Commanding General's Spiritual Fitness Concerts. As I've written in a number of other posts, "spiritual fitness" is just the military's new term for promoting religion, particularly evangelical Christianity. And this concert series is no different.
On May 13, 2010, about eighty soldiers, stationed at Fort Eustis while attending a training course, were punished for opting out of attending one of these Christian concerts. The headliner at this concert was a Christian rock band called BarlowGirl, a band that describes itself as taking "an aggressive, almost warrior-like stance when it comes to spreading the gospel and serving God."
Any doubt that this was an evangelical Christian event was cleared up by the Army post's newspaper, the Fort Eustis Wheel, which ran an article after the concert that began:
Following the Apostle Paul's message to the Ephesians in the Bible, Christian rock music's edgy, all-girl band BarlowGirl brought the armor of God to the warriors and families of Fort Eustis during another installment of the Commanding General's Spiritual Fitness Concert Series May 13 at Jacobs Theater.
The father of the three Barlow sisters who make up the band was also quoted in the article, saying, "We really believe that to be a Christian in today's world, you have to be a warrior, and we feel very blessed and privileged that God has given us the tool to deliver His message and arm His army."
A few days later, some of the soldiers punished for choosing not to attend this concert contacted the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF). The following is from the account sent by one of those soldiers to MRFF, detailing what transpired that night.
The week prior to the event the [unit name and NCO's name withheld] informed us of a Christian rock event that was about to take place on Thursday the 13th.
"On Thursday 13th at 1730 we were informed that instead of being dismissed for the day, the entire company (about 250 soldiers) would march as a whole to the event. Not only that, but to make sure that everyone is present we were prohibited from going back to the barracks (to eliminate the off chance that some might "hide" in their rooms and not come back down).
We were marched as a whole to chow and were instructed to reform outside the dining facility. A number of soldiers were disappointed and restless. Several of us were of different faith or belief. A couple were particularly offended (being of Muslim faith) and started considering to disobey the order.
From the dining facility we were marched back to the company area. There was a rumor circulating that we may be given a choice later on to fall out or attend. Though it was only a rumor it was also a small hope enough to allow us to follow along a little longer before choosing to become disobedient. We were marched back to the company area. To our dismay there was still no sign of us having a choice.
We started marching to the theater. At that point two Muslim soldiers fell out of formation on their own. Student leadership tried to convince them to fall back in and that a choice will be presented to us once we reach the theater.
At the theater we were instructed to split in two groups; those that want to attend versus those that don't. At that point what crossed my mind is the fact that being given an option so late in the game implies that the leadership is attempting to make a point about its intention. The "body language" was suggesting that "we marched you here as a group to give you a clue that we really want you to attend (we tilt the table and expect you to roll in our direction), now we give you the choice to either satisfy us or disappoint us." A number of soldiers seemed to notice these clues and sullenly volunteered for the concert in fear of possible consequences.
Those of us that chose not to attend (about 80, or a little less that half) were marched back to the company area. At that point the NCO issued us a punishment. We were to be on lock-down in the company (not released from duty), could not go anywhere on post (no PX, no library, etc). We were to go to strictly to the barracks and contact maintenance. If we were caught sitting in our rooms, in our beds, or having/handling electronics (cell phones, laptops, games) and doing anything other than maintenance, we would further have our weekend passes revoked and continue barracks maintenance for the entirety of the weekend. At that point the implied message was clear in my mind "we gave you a choice to either satisfy us or disappoint us. Since you chose to disappoint us you will now have your freedoms suspended and contact chores while the rest of your buddies are enjoying a concert."
At that evening, nine of us chose to pursue an EO complaint. I was surprised to find out that a couple of the most offended soldiers were actually Christian themselves (Catholic). One of them was grown as a child in Cuba and this incident enraged him particularly as it brought memories of oppression.
The account of another soldier who did not attend the concert, which relates the same sequence of events and punishment that occurred, also adds that some of the soldiers who did decide to attend only did so due to pressure from their superiors and fear of repercussions.
At the theater is the first time our options were presented to us. And they were presented to us in a way that seemed harmless, we could either go to the show, or go to the barracks. But at that point, I felt pressured. As a person, I know that I can't be pressured into anything, I'm much stronger than that. But I also know that a lot of people aren't that strong, and that pressure was present. I could hear people saying, "I don't know about going back to the barracks, that sounds suspicious, I'm going to go ahead and go to the show" and many things that sounded a lot like that. Now, like I said, I don't get pressured into things, but I also don't think that anybody should have to feel that kind of pressure. Making somebody feel that pressure is a violation of human rights, we are allowed to think what we want about religion and not have to feel pressured into doing things, and at that moment there was definitely pressure to go to that concert simply because people don't want to have their free time taken away.
The Commanding General's Spiritual Fitness Concert Series was the brainchild of Maj. Gen. James E. Chambers, who, according to an article on the Army.mil website, "was reborn as a Christian" at the age of sixteen. According to the article, Chambers held the first concert at Fort Lee within a month of becoming the commanding general of the Combined Arms Support Command and Fort Lee in June 2008. But he had already started the series at Fort Eustis, as the previous commanding general there. The concerts have continued at Fort Eustis under the new commanding general, as well as spreading to Fort Lee under Maj. Gen. Chambers. The concerts are also promoted to the airmen on Langley Air Force Base, which is now part of Joint Base Langley-Eustis.
In the Army.mil article, Maj. Gen. Chambers was quoted as saying, "The idea is not to be a proponent for any one religion. It's to have a mix of different performers with different religious backgrounds." But there has been no "mix of different performers with different religious backgrounds" at these concerts. Every one of them has had evangelical Christian performers, who typically not only perform their music but give their Christian testimony and read from the Bible in between songs.
Another problem with these concerts, besides the issues like soldiers being punished for choosing not to attend them, is that they are run by the commanders, and not the chaplains' offices. It is absolutely permissible for a chaplain's office to put on a Christian concert. It is not permissible for the command to put on a Christian concert, or any other religious event. Having a religious concert series that is actually called and promoted as a Commanding General's Concert Series is completely over the top.
And then there's the cost. These concerts aren't just small events with local Christian bands. We're talking about the top, nationally-known, award-winning Christian artists, with headline acts costing anywhere from $30,000 to $100,000, and even many of the opening acts being in the $10,000 range.
The cost of these concerts led MRFF's research department to start looking at some of the DoD contracts for other "spiritual fitness" events and programs, and what we found was astounding. One contract, for example, awarded to an outside consulting firm to provide "spiritual fitness" services, was for $3.5 million.
MRFF was already aware that exorbitant amounts of DoD funding were going to the hiring of civilian religious employees by military installations, the expenses of religious (almost exclusively evangelical Christian) programs, and extravagant religious facilities, but the extent of this spending goes far beyond what we had initially thought it amounted to. Therefore, MRFF has decided to launch an investigation into exactly how much the military is spending on promoting religion.
Do the recently announced plans of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to trim defense spending include any trimming of the military's outrageous spending on the promoting of religion and evangelizing of our troops? This alone could save the DoD untold millions every year, and go a long way towards upholding our Constitution at the same time.
Chris Rodda: Mandatory U.S. Army Survey Says Non-Believers Unfit to Serve
There can be no excuses for this type of command influence and it clearly needs to stop. The author need not indicate which section of the UCMJ was voilated, that would be difficult for the JAG office to do at this point.
Knowing something like this is wrong only takes a minor understanding of the military and human nature. Something clearly missed by this CG. All too often power is misused as influence and in this case the power was used to influence soldiers against thier will in matters of religion. This is not an option for command to undertake. Misuse of O&M funds is nothing new for CG's, but something that congress is slowly getting a handle on.
I hope those involved are duly punished for their actions, but specifically those at the top, not the NCO's following the commanders guidance.
Now tell me how a country that does not understand the separation of church and state is neither free nor anything other than a theocracy? Are you speaking of a Shari'a Theocracy or a Pentateuch Theocracy? Those are the only ones I know about. How does this concert where soldiers were given a choice, and those that decided to not attend were given a "time out", create an unbalance in your theological world and make you appalled?
As, a Christian and a former soldier, I never, have never, will never approve of forcing religion on people especially in the military. I have many words for the "evangelical" community which I will keep silent on for now.
However, just for clarification, the way Barlow Girl is branded here is completely false.
I'm a hard core Rock N Roller who doesn't often fall for the soft pop act, and have difficulties swallowing "Christian" culture. But I have had the pleasure of meeting these girls and there is no way they are anything like the light you shed on them. They are beautiful intellegent peace loving accepting individuals who have struggled through and survived real life problems and are not interested in sugar coating anything. I'd be willing to bet they are going to be very upset to hear about soldiers being forced to "worship."
They are also amazing musicians, and so, with the exception of participating in what is a paid gig, I can tell you right now it was a bald face error in journalistic practices to even include them as part of this.
This is a vulgar display of lacking research skills. As a avid reader of the Post, I am flat out appalled.
Nobody is blaming BarlowGirl for this. They were just doing their thing and had no idea what was going on with the soldiers who chose not to attend their show. One of them even tweeted that she thought what happened to these soldiers was "horrible." What happened wasn't their fault. They just happened to be the band doing the show that the incident happened at.
The placement of this quote (and the one from their father) makes the entire BarlowGirl team appear to share the same "agenda" as Chambers (and the entire installation it seems.) I happen to know this is not the case, but people who don't know may think otherwise.
I myself identify with taking a "warrior-like" stance, yet do not believe in throwing down a hammer to an "uncivilized, heathen world" as some religious right have done. Instead we do it with community, love, and actual service. To people like me, everyone is the same, Christian or not. There are some of us in the Christian community who do this "warring" without violence (and what happened on that military installation, in my opinion, was absolute violence.)
Simply put, I feel this quote from the BarlowGirl web-site was taken out of context because there is a huge "majority" group in this country giving the rest of us a bad name. They were not listed simply as the headliner, they were portrayed as one and the same.
I know for a fact that BarlowGirl does not have the same agenda as Ft. Lee or Chambers or anyone else in the military or anywhere else in this nation where division and arrogance are.
If anything it's a vulgar display of personal bias, which is just the main tool for the survival of the fittest in the US political landscape.
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/index.php/archives/541-jason-leopold
But I'm sure you have all the facts because you were there and that the soldiers who reported the incident themselves were just a bunch of liars.
I read the entire blog and not only am I calling the soldier in question a malcontent I'm calling him a liar. After 20 years in the Navy and having thousands of lies told to me by very smart and clever sailors I can smell one a thousand miles away. (JROTC..still laughing at that one). Does that help?
So if "locked down" is the normal routine for a Thursday night, it may seem like punishment, but it is not punishment. (All initial training probably feels like punishment to some of these people.)
If my guess is correct, the story should have been written by an objective reporter as "On May 13, 2010, about two hundred soldiers, stationed at Fort Eustis while attending a training course, were offered the option of attending one of these Christian concerts. The eighty soldiers who did not wish to attend returned to their normal Thursday training routine in their barracks.
Not as interesting a story is it?
But anyway, that is irrelevant to the larger problem. No military commander should be involved in any kind of proselytizing to soldiers. That is inexcusable coming from someone whose supposed goal is to protect this country. Using his position of authority to promote this concert constitutes a breach of church/state separation, and he's gone much further than that.
Comprehensive Soldier Fitness and its subordinate Master Resiliency Training are a program are designed in conjunction with UPenn. What you have here is the intersection of two unrelated things. Initial Entry Training soldiers are ALWAYS on lockdown (conditions described are not punishment, just their general living conditions) and the NCOs (various ranking sergeants who's actions are not Army Policy) are held to extremely high accountability standards. As someone who is Cadre trained (trains IET soldiers) and a Chaplain (familiar with Spiritual Fitness as part of CSF/MRT) I can assure you this was NCOs attempt at managing conflicting orders: 1) keep trainees accounted for and under their training conditions and 2) allow soldiers to participate in an event Spiritual Fitness (CSF/MRT) event. The problem here is NOT the Concert or the CSF Program, it is the unrealistic standard of accountability and lockdown that IET soldiers face every day. The NCOs know this too, they didn't take them to the concert to force Christianity on them, they took them to the concert because they wanted a break from their rigorous overseeing and wanted to give the soldier trainees a break from it as well. I can tell you more about Spiritual Fitness/ CSF and MRT (which is a multi-faith and non-faith approach to soldier support, Spiritual is one of 5 dimensions), but this is long enough already.
"On May 13, 2010, about 250 soldiers, stationed at Fort Eustis while attending a training course, were offered the option of attending one of these Christian concerts. The eighty soldiers who did not wish to attend returned to their normal Thursday training routine in their barracks"?
This doesn't surprise me. MANY Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are very offended by Johnny-come-lately evangelicals claiming exclusive use of the word "Christian" with what is actually a very recent, idiosyncratic, and non-traditional theology. And it wouldn't surprise me if the concert was anti-Catholic as hell. MANY fundamentalists are.