I. Introduction

What is the status of religion in militaristic iconography and ritual? The American military is religious in nature because it imparts an orienting ethic of collectivism, order, and sacrifice for a higher good. The root meaning of the word religion is to bind; an overarching goal of the military itself is to bind and bring together soldiers in a way to complete the common goal. Collectivism orients the soldier away from individual costs and towards those common goals. But what happens when those collective goals are in opposition to the individual’s personal morals and ethics? Is the use of religion used to justify military acts or attitudes by the individual in order to come to terms with this dichotomy?

This project will examine National Guard website press releases. The National Guard is America’s oldest fighting force, and has been engaged in each of the country’s conflicts. Although the vast majority of soldiers and airmen work a normal job outside the military, and take part in monthly drills, they have been increasingly sent overseas to fight wars. Because of its unique situation whereas its members are taken out of their everyday domestic situation and placed in a war/conflict scenario for months or years and then have to return to a civilian life rather than a military base, the National Guard provides an interesting case in which to study. This study will attempt to argue that the National Guard weakens the line between the populace and the military because of its nature, and occupies a unique place within society that connects to patriotism, the nation, and the ‘salt of the earth.’ There is a sense of a unique community, that although the members work and exist in society alongside everyone else, a militaristic tie binds them together. There is also a ritual of communication that relies on symbols and signs within the military, and as James Carey explains, “The analysis of mass communication will have to examine the several cultural worlds in which people simultaneously exist - the tension, often radical tension, between them, the patterns of mood and motivation distinctive to each, and the interpenetration among them” [1].

This project will examine press releases on the National Guard website within a three month period in the past year. Words such as religion, God, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and worship will be noted in the press releases through coding, examining how religion is used as a ritual and a way of confirming the military/religious dialogue. The goal is to examine these press releases carefully and to look for meaning on how they support (or not support) the use of religion by the military and the American civil religion. This study is interested in the cultural work of religion, or what religion is being used to do.

Historically, this work will trace the uses of religious practices and rituals within the military from the Revolutionary War, forward. Historians such as Jonathan Ebel, Jolyon Mitchell, and Martha Nussbaum will inform this discussion through an examination of the connections between violence, religion, and the military within the American context. Theorists such as Roland Barthes will inform this work. In particular, Barthes’ work in the study of signs and second-order signs or connotations and the rhetoric of the image in his Mythologies will prove enlightening.

One way to understand this aspect of Barthes’ work is through his examination of a front cover from Paris Match, showing a young black soldier in a French uniform saluting. The signifier: a saluting soldier cannot offer us further factual information of the young man’s life. But it has been chosen by the magazine to symbolize more than the young man; the picture, in combination with the signifieds of Frenchness, militarism and relative ethnic difference, gives us a message about France and its citizens. The picture does not explicitly demonstrate ‘that France is a great empire, that all her sons, without any color discrimination, faithfully serve under her flag,’ etc., but the combination of the signifier and signified perpetuates the myth of imperial devotion, success and thus; a property of ‘significance’ for the picture.

“I am at the barber’s, and copy of Paris-Match is offered to me. On the cover, a young Negro in a French uniform is saluting, with his eyes uplifted, probably fixed on a fold of the tricolor. All this is the meaning of the picture. But whether naively or not, I see very well what it signifies to me: that France is a great Empire, that all her sons, without any color discrimination, faithfully serve under the flag, and that there is no better answer to the detractors of an alleged colonialism than the zeal shown by this Negro in serving his so-called oppressors …” [2].

Through an examination of this cover used in Barthes’ book, one can see how the military itself is inherently designed to signify certain things through uniform, symbols such as the flag, and even words used through communication with those serving, as well as those outside of the military community. These signs and signifiers give meaning, and they serve as a way to reinforce a national identity tied to power and organizational government.

Michel Foucault discusses many of these ideas regarding how ritual leads into the regulation of conducts, and how we are all tied to dominant powers. In his book Discipline and Punish, Foucault examines how the body travels through structures to illustrate the power of governments and society. From power over the body in public, to the power over the soul as the body serves society in organizations such as the military [3].

This work will also focus on a primary theme in social science research: the universal and the particular. As Norman Fairclough explains in Analyzing Discourse this issue is how particulars come to be represented as universals - how particular identities, interests, representations come under certain conditions to be claimed as universal. This can be framed within questions of hegemony - of the establishment, maintenance, and contestation of the social dominance of particular social groups: achieving hegemony entails achieving a measure of success in projecting certain particulars as universals [4]. The idea of hegemony comes from Marxism, whereas power depends on upon achieving consent or at least acquiescence and the importance of ideology in sustaining power. The military is by its nature concerned with achieving hegemony through its training, dress, and communication patterns, which can lead to social dominance of groups involved. Through Fairclough’ s textual analysis description, the words used within public relations correspond with the military and outside society, this research will attempt to identify particulars that are being represented as universals that can be defined as hegemonic.

II. Background

It is important to begin by understanding US war history as it pertains to religion. What are the definitions of religion and violence? Within the historical story of John Brown, who believed armed insurrections was the only way to overthrow the institution of slavery, Dr. Jolyon Mitchell raises the question, and provides a warning, about too easily connecting religion with violence saying that scholars must be careful to not oversimplify these connections. Violence (physical, social, and political) is committed and justified either as a response to history, or in order to shape a new one. When discussing religion, there is an easy connection that the public can make with violence when religion ‘goes public’ as it did with the Crusades and the attacks on September 11th. But the public and academia have to be careful, because in many cases modern societies have invented and used the category of ‘religion’ to justify violence, particularly committed by secular states. The tendency may be to focus on fringe elements beyond the US, but an analysis needs to be made on mainstream forms of religion and violence and how they have impacted US society.

While keeping this careful consideration in mind, Martha Nussbaum makes a connection between the use of religion and wartime activities in her book The New Religious Intolerance. By examining extreme and non-extreme acts of intolerance of religion from around the world, Nussbaum argues that much of this is driven by fear, primarily fear of “the other.” In many ways, intolerance permits, and sometimes requires, acting out against the feared object. According to Nussbaum, fear comes from a narcissism sustained by a lack of self-knowledge. Her message is, “…know yourself, so that you can move outside of yourself, serve justice, and promote peace” [5]. She also writes that “…we should be worried about the upsurge in religious fear and animosity in the United States as well as Europe. Fear is accelerating.” [5]. “Fear is a ‘dimming preoccupation’; an intense focus on oneself that drives others into darkness. However valuable and indeed essential it is in a genuinely dangerous world, it is itself one of life’s great dangers” [5]. By theorizing the idea of fear, and how it has contributed to religious intolerance, we as scholars are able to focus that lens on ideas of human dignity and the effects of dehumanizing certain groups of people, as well as seeing the world from the perspective of the minority experience. The politics of fear is nothing new, and was just as prevalent during the McCarthyite era, as well as during the time of major social movements such as the Civil Rights and Feminist movements. Maybe another explanation of Islamophobia and the related politics of fear may lay in anxieties about terrorism inspired by jihadist responses to America’s assault on tribal peoples, in the economic uncertainties of the recession, and in the need for an Islamist bogeyman to replace its disappeared Cold War counterpart. Nevertheless, the rhetoric surrounding fear, patriotism, and religion has reared its head many times throughout US history, and remains a hegemonic force within society.

Ever since its inception, the United States has prided itself on its commitment to religious freedom and pluralism. As Nussbaum explains in her musings on the currents of Islamophobia that have surfaced in the West since the September 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, the US experience of religious diversity is particularly illuminating because ‘so many of the early settlers migrated to the colonies in search of religious liberty and then had to confront the question of pluralism head on’ [5]. America has what may be called religious minimalism. Maximalism, a publicly and visibly prominent style of religiousness in which religion permeates all corners of society and has powerful influence over dress, family structures, leisure time, politics, and economics is discarded by many colonists in America in favor of the more privatized, religious minimalism that owes its creation to the Enlightenment. This term fits into more secular societies and does not necessarily mean less religion, just that religion is used to help with public moments of people’s lives such as births, deaths, and marriages, and politics and economics are kept in the secular sphere. In fact, minimalists tend to view maximalists as either quaint throwbacks or dangerous, reactionary fanatics [6].

The idea of a religious minimalist society plays importantly in how religion is viewed within the military. A key historical scholar that informed this author on ritual, religion, and the military is Jonathan Ebel. In its early days, the use of providence and exceptionalism has been used in America as reasons to enter into various wars and conflicts. The theory of providence, that God has chosen America to play a special role on the global stage, as well as American exceptionalism, in which America sets the tone for the rest of the world, are inherent concepts within the military and its rhetoric even today. Ebel’s article, “Of the Lost and the Fallen: Ritual and the Religious Power of the American Soldier” [7] focuses on the role of religion for soldiers in the 20th century and how various groups of Americans used religious ideas, images, and beliefs to make sense of a war, their involvement in it, and its life-changing and life-ending consequences. In this essay, Ebel addresses the concept of ritual. He engages the ritual culture of the American military, war as an American ritual, and the place of the military and the soldier in American civil religion. In focusing on these intersections, he examines the lives of two 20th-century soldiers, Charles Whittlesey, a veteran of World War I, and Francis Powers, a fighter in the Cold War of the late 1950’s and 60’s. The first committed suicide in 1921, and Powers was convicted of espionage in Moscow in 1960. The fact that Powers did not commit suicide before being captured by the Russians was widely seen as a failure of soldierly commitment, and a rupture of the ritual of war.

The ritual culture of the American military includes the movement and dressing of the body, the expressions of respect to both the country and the higher-ranking service members, as well as the ritual of symbols including the flag and the uniform. Ebel ties this into the American civil religion whereby ideas (liberty), mythic figures (Abraham Lincoln), symbols (flag), events, and maybe most importantly the soldier himself, are used to unify a compelling human narrative of a soldier willing to die for his nation. An intriguing point that Ebel makes is that the American military is religious in nature because it imparts that orienting ethic of collectivism, order, and sacrifice to a higher good.

This collectivism orients the soldier away from individual costs and toward collective goals, which leads to the other compelling intersection within Ebel’s work, war as an American ritual. He contends that it could be the nation’s most important ritual with a classic three-part rite of passage: 1) individuals separating from society to become soldiers 2) soldiers entering the struggle and community 3) soldiers returning for reintegration into society as veterans or fatalities. He also discusses the inherent failures within this rite of passage as social structures change, and the human psyche is unable to cope with the change of ritual (particularly the reintegration passage). Ebel’s goal in this article was to think about the role of ritual in articulating and contesting the nation’s claims to soldier’s bodies. In the two stories he chose, the soldiers resisted with their bodies and thus upended the religious rituals of the military. He ends by saying that we, as a society, forget that soldiers are made, not born.

Some of the signs and symbols of religion have been with the American military since its infancy. The Continental Congress established the chaplaincy in 1775, and chaplains began wearing insignia in 1880. The Latin cross and the shepherd’s crook have been used to designate chaplains on their insignia, and today there are chaplains that represent Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, and Muslim faiths within the military as a whole [8]. Professor Doris Bergen has written that because of the “chaos and terror” encountered during military service, the chaplain becomes “a symbol that somehow, even in the midst of death and fear, there is meaning,” and a symbol of the ability to maintain “courage, hope, and steadfastness in the face of alienation and destruction”[9]. In addition to religious apparel worn based on faith group requirements, the military ID tag, nicknamed “dog tag,” is the one government-issued uniform item that indicates the religion of military personnel. Two tags, each on a separate chain, are worn around the neck under the uniform, and in the case of death one is removed for record keeping and one is left on the body [10]. While the tag helps to identify the body after loss of consciousness or death, and provides some immediate help to medical personnel, it also includes religious affiliation (unless the individual has chosen to have “no religious preference” listed) so that, when possible, a chaplain of that person’s faith group could respond, especially when specific religious rituals or ministrations such as “last rites” are indicated [10]. Religious information also aids in decisions regarding care of the body, including arrangements for burial. The practice of keeping some tag or mark for identification in case of serious injury or death began in the Civil War. In 1906 the Army made the tags official and required and ten years later, July 6, 1916, changed to the two tag requirement [11]. During World War II, a dog tag could indicate only one of three religions through the inclusion of one letter: “P” for Protestant, “C” for Catholic, or “H” for Jewish (from the word “Hebrew,” for “Hebrew faith”), or “NO” or “NONE” (or just no religious designation letter) to indicate no religious preference. By the time of the Vietnam War, IDs spelled out the broad religious choices such as PROTESTANT and CATHOLIC, rather than using initials, and also began to show individual denominations such as “METHODIST” or “BAPTIST.” Today, military personnel can list any religion on their ID tags, and today’s tags spell out religions and belief systems.

Although the regulations for dog tags and chaplains are the same across the American military, there are aspects regarding the history of the National Guard which are unique, as well as its role in the modern military. The National Archives describe its beginnings in the pre-revolutionary Massachusetts colony. On December 13, 1636, the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony had ordered that the colony’s scattered militia companies be organized into North, South, and East Regiments - with a goal of increasing the militia’s accountability to the colonial government, efficacy, and responsiveness in conflicts with indigenous populations. Under this act, white males between the ages of 16 and 60 were obligated to possess arms and take part in the defense of their communities by serving in nightly guard details and participating in weekly drills. As the British colonies developed, colonial militias would develop out of this tradition. The Massachusetts militia began the American Revolutionary War at the Battles of Lexington and Concord and provided the majority of soldiers during the course of the war [12].

The early United States distrusted a standing army, and kept the number of professional soldiers small. But after World War I, the idea of keeping a strong-standing active-duty military gained more popularity. After World War II, and the advent of the military industrial complex, a standing army became the norm, with National Guard units occupying a more traditional state role and staying on call to help with natural disasters or other domestic issues. While serving in Korean and Vietnam wars, National Guard soldiers and airmen did not occupy a large presence. It was not until the Gulf War of 1991 that the use of the National Guard changed rather drastically. Instead of supplementing active duty troops, guard units have taken a leadership role in wartime activities. Whole units have been deployed during that conflict, and increasing in numbers until the present day.

Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, more than 50,000 Guard members were called up by both their States and the Federal government to provide security at home and combat terrorism abroad. The Guard deployed more than 50,000 troops in support of the Gulf States following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Today, tens of thousands of Guard members are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan [13]. In terms of structure, each state has multiple army and air guard units that are led by a state adjutant general. If the National Guard leadership or the President of the United States needs to mobilize these troops for overseas or natural disaster missions outside the state, they must first get permission from the state’s governor (which is almost always given). In 2012 there were 461,796 guard members in the US, the vast majority of which are traditional guardsmen (meaning they only serve part-time while working a civilian job) [12].

III. Method

Data Gathering

A three-month time frame was chosen, from July 1 through September 30th of 2013, to examine press releases published on the National Guard national website. The three month time period was chosen as to not to correspond to a major military build-up. The goal was to avoid possible increased publicity that may surround a major military change. The National Guard has been serving continuously in the wars and incursions in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002, so the time frame chosen for this study will reflect the constant state of affairs since that time.

The website includes press releases written by public information officers and specialists from 2006 until the present. Information presented in press releases reflects all National Guard bases and posts within all US states and territories. The website is operated and designed by the US government, and there are no written policies described as to why or when a press released is removed from the website. The website does offer a way to request information through the Freedom of Information Act.

A basic keyword search will be done the on press releases using words religion, God, Christianity, Judaism, Muslim, Islam, atheist, agnostic, Hindu, Buddhist, spirituality, and worship.

There will also be a comparison done with that of news coverage and press releases from the military surrounding a major news event in September of 2014 that involved the military in religious issues. The event was the refusal of an Air Force Airmen’s refusal to repeat the phrase “So Help Me God” during his oath. The comparison with this coverage to the research found during a more stable period may illuminate some differences in coverage of religious issues.

The main means of analysis and comparison is through military press releases.

Analysis

This study will use critical discourse analysis and textual analysis as a way of examining the text and its meanings. Although critical discourse analysis is sometimes mistaken to represent a ‘method’ of discourse analysis, it is generally agreed upon that any explicit method in discourse studies, the humanities and social sciences may be used in critical discourse analysis research, as long as it is able to adequately and relevantly produce insights into the way discourse reproduces (or resists) social and political inequality, power abuse or domination. That is, critical discourse analysis does not limit its analysis to specific structures of text or talk, but systematically relates these to structures of the sociopolitical context.

Fairclough’s methodology of using textual analysis in reference to hegemony, the universal and the particular will inform this work greatly. Hegemonic representations will be investigated within the text of these press releases. These representations may vary in the extent in which they are asserted or assumed. The use of intertextuality can open up the difference. It is useful to understand which texts and voices are included, which are excluded, and what significant absences are there [3].

Also informing this methodology is Roland Barthes’ work that emphasizes the signs in the text and how they interact with the cultural and personal experiences of the user, as well as the conventions in the texts and how they interact with the conventions experienced and expected by the user. We can find meaning by analyzing the two orders of signification, denotation and connotation. The use of Barthes’ ideas of myth, symbols, metaphor, and metonymy will also inform how readers and participants can find different kinds of meanings from these texts.

IV. Findings/Discussion

The search using the words listed in the methodology section elicited three press releases during the three-month time period. Although initially surprised by the low numbers, considering that these are press releases written for a large audience including military members and non-military members of the public, there may be very valid reasons for not including religious terms in articles that are in essence promoting the National Guard in a positive light. The goal of public relations is to represent an organization and change people’s attitudes and behaviors in order to further an organization’s goals and assumptions. By following Fairclough’s lead in analyzing discourse, assumptions can be regarded as belonging to certain discourses. In a military press release discourse, an assumption can be made that the writing and the tone of the press release will be favorable towards the National Guard and the military as a whole, while attempting to not alienate certain groups and promote a sense of diversity.

The word “God” was found in the first press release analyzed, dated July 11, 2013. The article describes a soldier’s journey from a high school dropout in Alaska to the Military Academy at West Point. To get to that elite school, the article describes how he enlisted in the Alaska Army National Guard and was able to get his high school equivalency at the National Guard Patriot Academy. Within this text the voices heard are those of the soldier himself, the commander of the Alaska Army National Guard, and the National Guard itself through the writing of the press release. Voices not heard include the soldier’s family or those people from his community and upbringing. The text focuses on his leaving and how he got to the point of being accepted by West Point.

With roots in the Alaska Army National Guard, Huff will be able to share what he’s learned here and also expand on that, giving even more to the country with this new venture.

“We will feel bad about losing a great Soldier from our ranks who has the potential and is doing well, but the Alaska Army National Guard is sharing this young man and his potential with the nation through service,” Bridges said (Brigadier General of the

Alaska Army National Guard). “He is succeeding in a great way, which makes us very proud of being his host family unit.”

“For me to even have the opportunity to go to prep school is a blessing in and of itself,” Huff said. “Through all of this, I’ve learned that you really can’t go anywhere unless you have a goal in life.” With a growing list of people Huff attributes to his success, there are two people that stand out - his father, Darrell Huff, and retired Gen. Colin Powell, U.S. Army.

“Apart from God, I couldn’t have made it this far without my dad,” Huff said. “It’s amazing what God has done for me, and my dad always knew i could do better and pushed me”[14].

By beginning with the dialogical quotes, the general states that Alaska is sharing this young man and his potential with the nation through service, it is reaffirming a universal neoliberalist viewpoint of society, in which human value is calculated into terms of what someone can give to the nation for maximum efficiency (in this case military service). it also can be seen as reaffirming hegemony by reinforcing and sustaining relations to power. By “sharing” this young man with the nation, Huff’s acquiescent service to the military supports its power structures. There are assumptions of ideology written within this text as well. A religious ideology that assumes that God was partly responsible for the action, a familial grounding that gives credit to family for helping make this happen, as well as a patriotic ideology that values national military symbols such as Gen. Colin Powell. This also subscribes to Ebel’s work on the American civil religion, in which certain aspects of the military and governmental leaders are viewed in ritualistic and religious lenses.

Barthes’ work in signs and second-order signs can give a framework in which to analyze the photo used alongside the text. The signifier is that of the soldier standing in front of exercise equipment appearing happy and relaxed. The signifieds are those of militarism (Army t-shirt), athleticism, and relative ethnic diversity. The role of diversity is echoed in the photo as well as the text that describes his respect for General Colin Powell. This is a particular representation that both the subject of the piece and the author makes. The combination of the signifier and the signifieds gives us a message about American militarism and the role of the soldier. The picture does not explicitly demonstrate that America has perfect soldiers that are pleased with their situation, and that all members of the service faithfully serve without any color discrimination; but the combination of the signifier with the signifieds perpetuates the myth of patriotism and hard work that leads to success through the framing of the photo in front of exercise equipment, dress, facial expressions, and body language that suggests confidence, ease, and happiness.

The second press release focuses on the work of an Army chaplain in Colorado, and his response to those service members helping with the forest fires in July of 2013. Along with being a chaplain in the Guard, Lt. Justin Cowan also is an assistant principal at one of the local schools. We only hear the voices of Cowan and the National Guard throughout the text. While Cowan discusses those soldiers who are responding to the natural disaster, we never hear from them directly. The text analyzed deals with serving the spiritual needs of the soldiers responding to the fires.

As a chaplain now wearing his Army combat uniform in his community, he’s been going out to checkpoints and talking to Soldiers and Airmen assigned to Colorado National Guard’s Task Force- Security, checking up on their on their morale and the troops while they take care of the community. “Many of these Guard members were manning checkpoints on the Black Forest fire and have returned to duty here, leaving behind jobs and loved ones, and they’re under stresses of their own,” he said. “We try to exercise the right of religion and keep a sense of the sacred wherever we’re stationed.” After receiving a situational brief, Cowan began attending to the spiritual needs of the rest of the Guardsmen assigned across a four-county area in the southwestern Colorado mountains. He conducted chapel services, led prayers, and visited with troops and community members alike.

“The morale is amazing,” Cowan said. “These service members come out and do this job and are so happy to do it. It’s very moving and does my heart good.”

He also attributes his past experience teaching and his current position as assistant principal to making valuable contributions to his ability to be a chaplain, because both involve problem solving. “

In my profession you deal with many issues daily,” he said. “You have to have a vision of your desired outcome in your head” [15].

A very interesting piece of text is, “we try to exercise the right of religion and keep a sense of the sacred whenever we’re stationed.” By saying “we try to exercise the right of religion,” he is speaking to the ability to worship within the military unit, and reiterating the intrinsic ties that exist between the military and religious practices. The mere existence of the chaplain core also emphasizes the continuing connections between soldiers and religion. By “attending to their spirituality” and speaking about the soldiers’ morale, there is an appeal to making sure that soldiers are able to deal with the emotional trauma of their jobs while still keeping focused on the collectivist military goal.

The signifier in the photo which was used alongside the press release is Lt. Cowan kneeling in a praying position while wearing his military uniform. The signifieds include the natural landscape, the mountains in the distance, as well as the smoke rising from the fires on the left. The signifier of the soldier praying tells us something about the faith of this particular service member, but it does not tell us the about the faith of the whole military. By combining the signifier and the signifieds, connections can begin to be made regarding the role of religion within the military, and the ideals of America and patriotism. The photo itself is incredibly symbolic, the blue mountain majesty as the backdrop denoting American exceptionalism (the move west and the dominance of colonialism) with the soldier in uniform praying before the landscape, in essence worshipping America’s ideals: patriotism and service.

The next press release analyzed comes from the Wisconsin National Guard. The focus of the article is the naming of its first Buddhist chaplain. Intertextually, Lt. Christopher Mohr’s voice is heard clearly, as he is the Buddhist chaplain who is the focus of the piece. Other people interviewed for the story include the state command chaplain, the battalion commander, as well as the voice of the National Guard itself. Voices not heard are those soldiers who identify themselves as Buddhist, and perhaps other voices that feel that their spiritual needs are not being addressed, as well as those who do not identify as religious. By reading the article, the assumption is made that all service members in the National Guard need or want a religious representation.

He explained Buddhist teachings such as mindfulness, equanimity, and service to others helped him in his personal life and how he interacts with other people.

”These things have been very useful to me in making sure that I can be a person who is of benefit to others and a person who can work with others to make sure that everybody’s needs, as best I can, be met,” said Mohr.

Chaplain (Col) Douglas Fleischfresser, the state command chaplain, is excited to have another religion. “I think it speaks for where we’re going with diversity and the need to have a diverse viewpoint in spirituality,” Fleischfresser said.

Army chaplains, regardless of the faith they represent, provide spiritual, ethical, and moral guidance to all soldiers in need of assistance. “I think the chaplains are such a critical part of the unit,” said Maj. John Reiter, 32nd BTSB commander. “They are responsible for the (spiritual) care of the soldiers. With the emphasis on resiliency, it’s critical to the health of the battalion” [16].

Throughout this text there is a neoliberalist reading that can be made. With Mohr saying that the Buddhist teachings help him work with others so that needs can be met, as well as the commander emphasizing that spiritual care is essential for the health of the battalion, the message is that of making sure that the soldier’s needs are being met so the mission can be accomplished in the most efficient manner. In fact, in the commander’s quote “With the emphasis on resiliency, it’s critical to the health of the battalion” there is an emphasis not on religion per say, but on helping soldiers bounce back (resiliency) so they can return to work and help complete their militaristic mission and goals. By reinforcing the values of nation, state, and work, while offering avenues to meet a soldier’s needs, the universal values of neoliberalism are represented.

There is also a particular reading of religious inclusion within this text. The command chaplain says that he is excited about the addition of another religion, and that it speaks to diversity and diverse viewpoints in spirituality. While the purpose of this press release it to show the National Guard in the best possible light, a reading can be made that these voices are supporting a platform that encourages the appearance of diversity within all military units. It speaks to goals of allowing all service members to worship as they like, as long as it ultimately serves the goals of the military’s mission. Through this careful reading of the texts, acknowledging those voices within it, there is an emphasis on how religion and spirituality are used by the military to help soldiers come to terms with their jobs and the stress inherent.

As stated in the methodology, all of these press releases were determined during a three-month time period in 2013, during a relatively stable military period. It may be useful to compare those findings to those during a major news event that involved the military and religious issues. In early September of 2014, news stories emerged about an airman in the U.S. Air Force who identified himself as atheist, as refusing to say the words “so help me God” as part of his reenlistment oath at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada. The Air Force used to allow airmen to omit the phrase “so help me God” if they so chose. But an Oct. 30, 2013, an update to Air Force Instruction 36-2606, which spells out the active-duty oath of enlistment, dropped that option. Since that update, airmen have been required to swear an oath to a deity when they enlist or reenlist [17].

Using the same search methodology used for the 2013 press releases during the month of September of 2014, only one press release emerged. It had nothing to do with the initial controversy, but instead was a response and report by the military. It is not a surprise that the military, on their own website, would not release a press release prior to the military making a decision. After all, one of the main goals of public relations is to report favorably on the organization represented. The press release came out on September 17, 2014, and said that the Air Force has instructed force support offices across the service to allow both enlisted members and officers to omit the words “so help me God” from their enlistment oaths if an airman chooses [18]. The Secretary of the Air Force, Deborah Lee James said in the press release, “We take any instance in which Airmen report concerns regarding religious freedom seriously. We are making the appropriate adjustments to ensure our Airmen’s rights are protected” [18].

There is again a reading of religious inclusion within this text that corresponds with the other press releases analyzed. After a very short period of time from when news hit media outlets (the first of September 2014) to the release of this press release (September 17, 2014), the military did an about-face and reversed their regulations to allow airmen to choose whether to omit the phrase “so help me God” from their oaths. This speaks to the goals of the military in allowing all soldiers and airmen to worship (or not worship) as they wish. The lack of press releases discussing the initial controversy also suggests the desire of the military to not be thought of as religiously-based.

V. Conclusion

This research is interested in the cultural work of religion, or what religion is being used to do within the military. There are three major themes which emerged from the findings: the work of religion to support and bring together soldiers in order to complete a common goal, religion as a component of American patriotic symbols and rituals, and the right to worship in a diversity of ways within the military.

The dominant theme exposed within all three press releases involved how religion and spirituality is used to help service members deal with their militaristic job, and make them more efficient in completing the common goal. As stated earlier in this paper, the American military is religious in nature because it imparts an orienting ethic of collectivism, order, and sacrifice for a higher good. There is also a sense of neoliberalism that is infiltrating the military which is articulated by working towards maximum efficiency in job completion by military bodies. Budget concerns within and without the Defense Department have resulted in the growing privatization of the military over the last thirty years. Halliburton and Blackwater, two privately owned companies that sustain military operations overseas and domestically, are the two most well-known and notorious entities. But privatization is impacting every aspect of the military machine, from base operations to healthcare. While counseling and psychological care is available through veteran’s services, the focus has been on maintaining the soldier’s physical and mental well-being before serious problems can begin. This can be looked at as healthy preventative tactics, it can also be viewed through a neoliberalist lens of focusing on private, individual care that helps the military operation keep maximum efficiency without the significant cost of psychological care after the fact. As an example, in the 1990’s the Army reframed its benefits and social services as efforts not to provide “support” and “quality of life”, but endeavors to “promote readiness and self-reliance.” The Army went so far as to change its motto from “The Army Takes Care of Its Own,” to “The Army Takes Care of its Own so that They Can Learn to Take Care of Themselves.” Soldiers and their families faced demands not to “depend” on the military, even when the military deployed personnel for military action [19].

The text analyzed in the press releases emphasizes that religious and spiritual support aids in resiliency, to help soldiers rebound and recover from traumatic work and events. This supports the idea that religion and spirituality is used to help service members come to terms with the stresses inherent with their jobs. It also reflects the Foucaultian idea in which power over the body in public, to the power over the soul, leads to the body serving society in organizations such as the military.

The next theme which came out of this study involves religion as a component of American patriotic symbols and rituals. From the solider in Alaska who invokes God to thank him for his ability to serve his country at West Point, and the photograph used alongside the press release regarding a chaplain’s duties in caring for soldiers fighting forest fires in Colorado, the use of religion as an American patriotic symbol is apparent. Particularly, the photograph which shows a soldier praying in front of an iconic American backdrop, the intrinsic ties between religion and service through patriotism are made.

The right to worship within the military is the final theme which emerged from this research. Within the last press release regarding the addition of a Buddhist chaplain to a National Guard unit, there is clear textual support of the attempt by the military to provide diverse religious and spiritual support. Underlying the text, and through an intertextual reading, the message is that religious and spiritual support is an important part of a soldier’s experience. That this type of support is necessary for their psychological health. There is a correlation between these ideas and Ebel and Nussbaum’s work in the work of the religious ritual within state organizations such as the military.

The military offers a unique sense of community, that although the members work and exist in society alongside everyone else, a militaristic tie binds them together. This type of community provides a rich area of study regarding the cultural work of religion, one of which is just beginning to be examined.