An opportunity for clarity

On June 5, Pentagon officials announced a reorganization of the religious affiliation codes used by the military, reducing the number of officially recognized religious groups from over 200 to 31. In doing so, they set off a surprising controversy that highlights unavoidable questions of religious pluralism.

First, some background. In 2017, the Department of Defense expanded the number of “faith and belief codes” to over 200. The stated purpose of the expansion was to “accurately track more faith and belief systems, providing more accurate demographic data for religious groups,” to enable “better planning for religious support to the force,” and to provide “a better assessment of the capabilities and requirements of each Military Service's Chaplain Corps.” The 2017 expansion included distinct codes for a great variety of kinds of religious groups, from religions to denominations to individual churches. Here is a sampling of the 2017 list: Presbyterian Church in America, Roman Catholic Church, Islam, Buddhism, Sikh, Christian Missionary Alliance, Central Bible Church, Druid, Rosicrucianism, Troth, Heathen, Church of the Spiral Tree, Atheist, Agnostic, Shaman, Schwenkfelder Churches, Ohio Yearly Meeting of Friends, Kansas Yearly Meeting of Friends, as well as dozens of Baptist denominations.

In March of this year, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced that the military would be “streamlining the number of faith code affiliations” because the previous system was “impractical and unusable.” In early June, the Pentagon made good on the announcement, drawing criticism from progressives and atheists, who saw it as a Christian nationalist attempt to marginalize religious minorities in the military.

But the reorganization also drew criticism from Republican politicians for a different reason. When the reduction was announced, the list distinguished between Christian and non-Christian religions, with several denominations of Christians listed (such as Baptist, Presbyterian, Quaker, Non-denominational, and so on). But the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was not tagged as a Christian denomination, but instead presented as a different religion altogether, alongside Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism.

This drew substantial criticism from Mormon leaders, most notably Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, who demanded that the Pentagon rectify the list by classifying Mormonism as a Christian denomination. In a short video, Lee called the classification “repugnant to any sense of decency and our common heritage and our common belief that our government needs to not weigh in on doctrinal disputes between various religious denominations.” He concluded the video with a dramatic appeal, saying, “Secretary Hegseth, tear down that wall!” After a weekend of controversy, the Pentagon issued a clarification, noting that the new simplified codes had mistakenly included “redundant and unnecessary labeling,” and agreeing with Sen. Lee that “the Pentagon’s job is not to adjudicate theological debates.” Lee applauded the clarification but continued to make the case that Mormons are in fact Christians, making the classic Mormon appeal to read the Book of Mormon and pray and ask God if it is true (which Mormons claim He answers by giving a “burning in the bosom” as a sign confirming Mormon’s authenticity).

The controversy, however brief, highlighted three issues of abiding relevance for Christians in America. First, it afforded an opportunity for Christians to clarify that, however nice and pleasant Mormons may be, they are not orthodox Christians. Not even close. Mormonism was founded as a self-conscious repudiation of the universal Christian church, which Joseph Smith regarded as apostate (and it is highly ironic that a religion that began with such a repudiation is now desperate to be considered simply another Christian denomination).
More than that, Mormonism rejects the foundational Christian doctrine of the Trinity, as expressed in the ecumenical creeds of Nicaea and Chalcedon. It also supplements the Bible with the Book of Mormon, which effectively modifies and trumps the Old and New Testaments (in the same way that the Quran trumps the Scriptures for Muslims). In fact, the similarities between Mormonism and Islam have often been humorously noted: a self-proclaimed prophet receives new revelation from an angel; this new revelation “corrects” orthodox Christian doctrine, denies the Trinity, and teaches a form of salvation by works. And of course, in their original forms, both religions forthrightly endorse polygamy.

Thus, in a time in which many are prone to speak of generic “faith” or “faith in God,” it is important for Christians to be clear that the faith that counts is faith in the God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God who became man for us men and our salvation. Whatever co-belligerency in political and moral matters that we have with Mormons (or Muslims), we must continue to insist that they are Christian heresies, not adherents of the faith once for all delivered to the saints.

Second, the controversy demonstrates that it’s impossible for the state to avoid making religious judgments. The simple attempt to classify religions (or denominations) involves distinguishing one religious group from another, based on doctrines and practices. The Pentagon’s decision to remove the Christian label from their classification system didn’t keep them from making a judgment about religions, nor did it avoid privileging certain religious groups over others. These are inescapable questions.

Finally, the controversy highlights that the modern attempt at a purely secular civic order is an inconsistent fiction. Principled pluralism is simply public polytheism. What’s more, given the Christian history of America, it’s the kind of pluralism that is susceptible to disproportionate influence (and even manipulation) from religious minorities, from Mormons to Muslims, from Wiccan chaplains in the military to Baphomet statues at city hall. America’s original Protestant establishment, however informal, self-consciously promoted Christianity as the true religion, and thus was able to tolerate the presence of minority faiths without catering to their religious demands or pretending that all religions were the same.

The corruption of that principle of toleration into the modern myth of neutrality is simply a recipe for the privatization of Christian faith and the Balkanization of our public life. The claims of Christianity are unavoidably public, and all people (and all institutions) are duty bound to acknowledge and promote them.