Even before America became an independent nation, chaplains were valued members of our troops.  The first military chaplains were there when Gen. George Washington led the Continental Army, and tens of thousands of chaplains have followed in their example since. 

Some chaplains have made the ultimate sacrifice, putting their lives on the line for their fellow man.  One particularly famous story involved the 1943 sinking of the U.S.A.T. Dorchester, when four military chaplains – a Methodist minister, Jewish rabbi, Dutch Reformed minister, and Catholic priest – gave their life vests to others, linked arms together, and said prayers as the ship went down.  Congress created a new Chaplain’s Medal for Heroism to honor them posthumously. 

This history reminds us of how revered the Chaplain Corps is to our nation and to our troops.  These religious leaders live out the sacred duty of their motto, “For God and country.”

Atheist Application Could Invite Other Non-Religious Applications

You can imagine, then, my disappointment to learn that an application for an atheist chaplain could soon be approved by the Navy.  The Navy Chaplain advisory board has moved the application forward in the process, leaving the possibility of an imminent final approval.  Such a decision would be completely out of step with the Chaplain Corps’s religious mission.  An atheist or “secular humanist” has adopted a worldview defined by the absence of a belief in God. Such a worldview contradicts the purpose of the Chaplain Corps and the service of those in it. 

In addition, the Navy’s appointment of an atheist chaplain would counter Department of Defense guidelines.  The guidelines state that those in a religious ministry profession are “endorsed to represent a religious organization and to conduct its religious observances or ceremonies.”

Beyond the mismatch of atheism and the Chaplain Corps in principle, an atheist chaplain could also fundamentally alter the role of the Corps in practice.  Other “chaplains” with non-religious or philosophical worldviews could petition the military to be included.  These inclusions would erode the specifically religious bedrock that has grounded the Chaplain Corps for 243 years.

22 Senate Republicans Join Wicker’s Letter to Navy Leadership

My request for the Navy to reject the application of a “secular-humanist” chaplain is in no way an attempt to curb the constitutional rights of any service members.  The Navy has the authority to create separate programs for non-religious expression.  My effort stems from the need to protect the Chaplain Corps from politically correct inclusions that would erode its very identity.

I am joined in this effort by 22 of my Republican colleagues in the U.S. Senate.  These Senators have signed my letter to Navy leadership opposing the atheist chaplain under consideration.  Like me, they recognize the value that the Chaplain Corps brings to our military and our nation. 

The future of the Chaplain Corps and its integrity as a religious organization should not be put at risk by a shortsighted decision from the Navy regarding the application of an atheist chaplain.  Our military chaplains, representing a variety of faiths, are a reminder that those who serve in our armed forces need not check their religious freedoms when they put on their uniform.

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., today called on the Navy to deny an application for a “secular humanist” to serve in the Chaplain Corps. Twenty-two Senators joined Wicker in sending a letter to Navy Secretary Richard Spencer and Adm. John Richardson saying, “the Chaplain Corps serves religious needs, not philosophical preferences.”

“Our military chaplains serve under the motto ‘for God and country,’” Wicker said. “It is troubling that the Navy could allow a self-avowed atheist to serve in the Chaplain Corps. I am hopeful that the Navy leadership will reject this application and preserve the distinct religious role that our chaplains carry out.”

Below is the full text of the letter:

The Chaplain Corps is an institution older than our nation, first created in 1775 by General George Washington to serve the religious needs of his troops.  Today, the Chaplain Corps faithfully serves all members of our armed forces without regard to religious preference or belief.  Therefore, we are concerned that the Navy may expand the Chaplain Corps beyond its clear purpose of protecting and facilitating the constitutional right of service members to the free exercise of religion.  It is our understanding that the Navy Chaplain Appointment and Retention Eligibility Advisory Group (CARE AG) has recommended accepting an applicant to serve in the Corps as a secular-humanist Chaplain. 

The Navy’s approval would constitute a grave mistake.  Approving a secular-humanist Chaplain is inconsistent with the Constitution and the Department of Defense’s (DOD) own guidelines.  As part of DOD, the Navy has a constitutional obligation under the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment to ensure that service members have access to services that meet their religious needs.  The Chaplain Corps exists to fulfill this duty. The Supreme Court has ruled that non-religious beliefs may not rely on the Religion Clauses for protection.  Furthermore, DOD’s guidelines reinforce the uniquely religious purpose of the Chaplain Corps.

The Navy has sufficient authority to create programs for humanist or atheist service members.  The Chaplain Corp is not the appropriate place.  The Chaplain Corps serves religious needs, not philosophical preferences.  Approving a secular-humanist Chaplain would open the door to other applicants representing other philosophical worldviews.  Over time, this situation would erode the distinct religious function of the Chaplain Corps. 

We hope that you will act to preserve the integrity of the Chaplain Corps and its long-standing constitutional role.  The Navy should reject the application for a secular-humanist Chaplain.

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., issued the following statement on the death of Rev. Billy Graham:

“Rev. Graham lived a remarkable life in service to God and his fellow man. His ministry was instrumental in spreading the Gospel to the far corners of the world. As the refrain from one of my favorite hymns reminds me, ‘When we all get to heaven what a day of rejoicing that will be, when we all see Jesus we’ll sing and shout the victory.’ Today Billy Graham is singing and shouting.”

Following this year’s March for Life, Mississippians gathered in the U.S. Senate for a hot chocolate reception hosted by my D.C. office.  They had just walked up Constitution Avenue to the steps of the Supreme Court, braving the January cold in a powerful display of solidarity against the devastating decision delivered by Roe v. Wade more than 40 years ago.

I join these Mississippians and countless others around the country in supporting the overturn of Roe v. Wade.  I firmly believe that life begins at conception and that innocent unborn children should not be excluded from the inalienable protections enshrined in our nation’s founding documents.  Indeed, the unborn are the most defenseless among us.

A Shocking Fact About the U.S. and Late-Term Abortions

Sadly, the United States is one of only a few places in the world where abortion can be performed after 20 weeks, more than halfway through a pregnancy.  Only seven countries – Canada, China, the Netherlands, North Korea, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam – have earned this distinction.  The claim, first reported by the Charlotte Lozier Institute in 2014, seemed so outrageous that The Washington Post wrote about it in its Fact Checker column.  The newspaper awarded the claim its special Geppetto Checkmark for being true.

Surveys have shown that a majority of Americans support ending late-term abortions.  I am hopeful that the Senate will pass an important piece of legislation that could – at the very least – remove the United States from the company of North Korea and China when it comes to abortion.  Unborn children can feel pain at 20 weeks.  The “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which I have cosponsored, would make it illegal to perform an abortion when an unborn child has reached 20 weeks or older, except in cases of rape, incest against a minor, or when the mother’s life is threatened. 

Fight for Life Marches On

Protecting the sanctity of life has always been part of my work on behalf of Mississippians, both in the state legislature and in Washington.  This Congress, I have introduced legislation to prevent taxpayer dollars from ever going toward abortions, cosponsored legislation defending the right to life at conception, and repeatedly supported efforts to defund Planned Parenthood.  I am encouraged by President Trump’s commitment to protecting the unborn, demonstrated by his executive action last year to reinstate the Mexico City Policy.  This policy bans the use of taxpayer dollars for international groups that perform or support abortions.

Just a few days ago, we recognized National Religious Freedom Day, celebrating our nation’s founding constitutional protections regarding the free practice of religion.  For many, the right to life stems from deeply held moral and religious beliefs. As citizens, we can speak out on the issues we believe in without fear of persecution.  I am thankful so many Americans have chosen to exercise this freedom on behalf of the unborn since the March for Life began 45 years ago.  These moments are a shining display of our liberty and a reminder to guard it.