Ostensibly exploring the practice of law before the internet. Heck, before good highways for that matter.
Tuesday, July 14, 2026
Churches of the West: LDS church would get sacred site, Martin’s Cove, under proposed BLM land trade now gaining steam
Tuesday, June 9, 2026
Lex Anteinternet: Sunday Morning Scene. Religion in the military. A resolution?
Lex Anteinternet: Sunday Morning Scene. Religion in the military.: The Department of Defense scaled back its list of recognized religions. There were 211, now there are 31. Here is the full list: Agnostic...
And a happy ending, or at least an ending, occurred to this story when the Pentagon redid its classifications to read as follows:
It's actually not a bad reclassification, although a person does hae to wonder why, in order to make a non Christian religion happy, the Christian identification was taken away from actual Christian religions.
One of the major newspapers ran statistics for the various religions in terms of the what percentage of the military is comprised of them. While there are Mormons in the military, the percentage is infanticidally small. As noted earlier, however, there would be units in the military that would be heavily made up of Mormons, principally Guard and Reserve units in Utah. Their spiritual needs would be different than those of Christian religions, however, which would gain importance in a large scale war.
According to exit polls form the last general election, 64% of Mormons voted for Trump in the last election. 20% voted for Harris. 56% of Catholics did, with 41% voting for Harris. Catholics are a much larger demographic than Mormons and Trump has interestingly shown little concern about enormously offending them. 68% of Southern Baptists, the largest Protestant religion in the country, went for Trump. Southern Baptist, I suspect, are probably the largest Christian denomination to be upset by the reclassification, if they are.
I don't know that I have a strong opinion on the list being reworked to address Mormon concerns, but I would note a couple of oddities about it. One is that that the U.S. Government didn't define them as Christian, although they seem happy with the result. The second is that what Trump may say aside, he doesn't love Mormons anymore than he loves anyone else.
Monday, June 8, 2026
Lex Anteinternet: Sunday Morning Scene. Religion in the military. The back currents of religion in the Trump administration and the New Apostolic Reformation.
Lex Anteinternet: Sunday Morning Scene. Religion in the military.: The Department of Defense scaled back its list of recognized religions. There were 211, now there are 31. Here is the full list: Agnostic...
Under new military guidance from Pete Hegseth, the LDS Church is officially classified as a non-Christian religion. My fellow Saints, you can love these Christian nationalists all you want, but they will not love you back.
I’m a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints My church membership is inextricably intertwined with my Christianity, as it is for 17 million other Latter-day Saints Regardless of what the Pentagon thinks
I just got off the phone with President Trump We discussed the Pentagon’s “Christian list” I won’t speak for him, but I’m thrilled about where this is heading We’re most fortunate that President Trump (1) loves Latter-day Saints, and (2) is our commander in chief Stay tuned
Sunday, June 7, 2026
Sunday Morning Scene. Religion in the military.
The Department of Defense scaled back its list of recognized religions. There were 211, now there are 31. Here is the full list:
Agnostic (AN)
Baha'i faith (BH)
Buddhism (BU)
Christian - Assemblies of God (AG)
Christian - Baptist (BA)
Christian - Brethren (BR)
Christian - Catholic (CA)
Christian - Church of Christ (CC)
Christian - Church of God (CG)
Christian - Church of the Nazarene (CN)
Christian - Episcopal/Anglican (EA)
Christian - Evangelical (EV)
Christian - Jehovah's Witnesses (JW)
Christian - Lutheran (LU)
Christian - Methodist (ME)
Christian - Non Denominational (ND)
Christian - Orthodox (OX)
Christian - Other (CO)
Christian - Pentecostal (PE)
Christian - Presbyterian (PR)
Christian - Quaker (QU)
Christian - Reformed (RE)
Christian - Scientist (SC)
Christian - Seventh Day Adventist (SA)
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (CJ)
Hindu (HI)
Islam (Muslim) (IS)
Judaism (Jewish) (JU)
No Religion (NR)
Other Religions (OR)
Sikh (SI)
One of the things that I find discouraging to do is to give any credit to Hegseth's Department of Defense, but every now and then he's right. Frankly, his view that too much social experimentation, or "woke" policies as the far right would have it, had been going on inside the military was correct. Transgenderism and the the like had no place in the military.
And frankly the huge number of religions that the DoD recognized was a problem.
One thing I'd thought that Hegseth would do, and which I wish he would do, is to remove women from combat roles. To some degree it looks like he's creeping up on that, but if that's the case, he ought to realize that after January 2027 he's going to be much less capable of doing anything.
The problem Hegseth interjects, however, is that like the Trumpian far right in general is that he combines some concerns over legitimate problems, including legitimate social problems, with wackiness, which makes it really hard to give him credit on anything. In terms of religions, Hegseth is festooned with Crusader related tattoos which would be an insult to Crusaders, given his own beliefs, and fits into the theologically unsupportable hardcore millenialist Calvinist camp.
Anyhow, this probably made sense, in the abstract.
And this is a far more complicated story than people might imagine.
The U.S. Army has had chaplains since July 29, 1775, sort of, as there were religious that served on a regimental level at that time. Religious diversity existed in the colonies that early, but nowhere near to the extent it does not. An official Army chaplain did not exist until Reverend John Hurt of Virginia (who had served as Chaplain of the 6th Virginia Regiment during the American Revolution) was appointed to the position of Chaplain of the Continental Army on 4 March 1791, which even for the Revolution is sort of late in the day.
It wasn't until the Mexican War that there were Catholic Chaplains in the Army, the influx of German and Irish immigrants, and the bigoted attitudes of the Southern officer class making it a necessity. The Mexican War remains the most unpopular war that Americans ever fought, something even some professional soldiers acknowledged, and the desertion rate in general was huge. The desertion rate of Catholic Irish and German troops was particularly problematic. So, during that war, Catholic Chaplains came into the service in response to the government recognizing the problem. It's sometimes noted that the Mexican War served as a training ground for the Civil War, and in that context it certainly did, as huge numbers of Catholic troops served in the Civil War, with most of them serving the Union. Some senior officers by that time, such as Sheridan and McClellan, were Catholic.
The service did not start issuing "dog tags" until 1906, and that was due to the concern of Army Chaplain Charles C. Pierce, who who was in charge of the Army Morgue and Office of Identification in the Philippines. To put this in context 40% of the Union dead from the Civil War remained unidentified after the war. Their bodies were never identified. The early dog tags did not identify religion, but late Great War ones did, with that being indicated by a single initial, P, C, or H, for Protestant, Catholic, and Hebrew, the latter being the term used to identify Jewish soldiers. After the war, with a return to a small military, the practice was discontinued, but it was revived in 1941.
By the Vietnam War the practice had changed to allow troops to choose what would be stamped on their dog tags. This is the type we had in the 1980s, and in my case it was stamped "Catholic". Apparently this is the system that's still used.
Of course dog tags are one thing and ministering to troops another. I honestly have no idea how the protestant chaplains minister to protestant troops There are so many varieties of Protestantism it must be difficult. The task faced by Catholic, Jewish and Muslim must accordingly be easier in that regard.
Anyhow, with the current diversity of the US, this must be a huge task. Cutting the categories down to sizes makes sense, but its also guaranteed to upset people.
One group it's upset is the Latter Day Saints, as they aren't listed as Christians, which they aren't. Jehovah's Witnesses, however, are listed as Christians on this list, and they are not either. Both religions recognize that Christ existed, but their theologies are radically different from Christians. Mormon theology is really had to nail down, and it moves, but generally the LDS do not believe Jesus is the co-eternal God of the Holy Trinity, but rather view Him as an exalted, separate being who is the literal spirit brother of all humanity and Satan. Jehovah Witnesses believe that Jesus is the most exalted of God's created beings. Neither religion, therefore, hold what Christians do, as defined by the Nicene Creed:
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
In other words, they don't believe in one eternal God with three personalities, which have always existed.
At least traditionally they haven't believed that. As noted, Mormon theology moves and frankly isn't well defined.
Nonetheless, this has upset the LDS, which regards itself as Christian. It may regard itself as such, and surely does given its name, but it isn't.
That it upsets them and is a big deal to them makes sense, however, as its a direct rejection of their religious claims. So in essence the Pentagon has made a statement rejecting their theology, and it pretty much had to, which shows the danger of recognizing even 31 faiths. But you also have to recognize some distinctions as well. Protestants and Catholics are different. The LDS is extremely different.
A peculiarity of this we'd note is that this would only matter in practical terms if you have troops fitting these categories. Jehovah's Witnesses are precluded from serving under their religion, so not only is the identification of them as Christians incorrect, but even having that category for the service may be fairly pointless.
There are about 36,000 Mormons in the military, which is surprisingly slightly lower than the number of Orthodox, which is about 39,000. There are only 15,000 active duty members of the service who are Jewish.
So, I guess, is there a point to this discussion?
I suppose, with part of it just being to note what the overall story is. The US is very diverse and that reflects in the military, but not to the extent that a person might think. 20% of servicemembers are Catholic which mirrors our percentage of the American population. In Korea, to attend Easter Mass, a colleague of mine and I went to an on base chapel, but the Priest was Australian and not in the Army. Probably a fairly typical scenario. In contrast, my father was pretty good friends with a Catholic Chaplain in the Air Force when he was stationed overseas.
70% of servicemembers overall are Protestant, but of course, as noted Protestantism is very diverse. That makes the 20% of the service that's Catholic a pretty big block.
The other part of this story is, I guess, that you are going to upset people with a list like this. The service can't possibly list every single Protestant faith and Protestants themselves notoriously disregard their own denominations. Catholics, Orthodox, Jews, and Muslims, don't. That's a real reason some discretion is needed. A Catholic needing last rights needs it from a Catholic or Orthodox Priest, who are the only ones who can deliver that. The LDS are their own thing as well, and frankly, except they obviously feel uncomfortable that, they ought to accept it.
But is there more to this?
(To Be Continued).