Operational, Social, and Religious Influences Upon the Army Chaplain Field Manual, 1926-1952

The early formulation of the Army Chaplain Field Manual reveals the Army Chaplaincy struggling with individuals using the Army Chaplain Field Manual to further their social and religious beliefs upon other chaplains. The research is to determine what were the influences and who were the chaplains that promulgated their own agenda at the expense of the free exercise of religious beliefs by other chaplains. The research begins with chaplains who privately published ＂Manuals＂ and ＂Duties＂ of chaplains. These writings contributed to the first edition of the chaplain manual in 1926. The draft 1926 manual is also compared with the first edition to reveal issues the Army Adjutant General wanted changed in the manual. A developmental and comparative analyses will be conducted upon the following editions 1937, 1941, 1944, 1947 and 1952. The results of the research reveal that the early chaplaincy struggled with their non-combatant status. Second, social issues such as recreation and the playing of ＂moving pictures＂ on the Sabbath was respected by the military but progressives within the chaplaincy forced their agenda upon the majority of chaplains in the military.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.