gade, and for the headquarters and sections of Service of Supply) and supervise the chaplains within the commands; established an A.E.F. chaplains' school to orient and train chaplains for duty with their units; visited chaplains in the field; and investigated conditions affecting the moral welfare of the troops. Enjoying the full confidence and support of General Pershing and his staff, Brent and his committee achieved what they set out to accomplish. Even with the backing of the Commander-in-Chief of the A.E.F., however, that might have been impossible had it not been for Brent's modus operandi. His policy was that there would be no official secrets among him, Doherty, and Moody; every problem or letter concerning chaplains was "the property and the responsibility of all." He and his two colleagues respected the convictions of others and ministered to them, irrespective of their religious affiliation. In his final report, Brent wrote that the "most striking thing in connection with our Chaplains' Organization has been the loyalty of the chaplains to one another and to our office." General Pershing must have agreed, for Bishop Brent was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal. Included in the citation were the words: "he . . . established a schematic system of religious effort, enabling all chaplains throughout France to further those excellent results which have marked their duties amongst the troops.'

99 111

The development of the A.E.F. "Chaplains' Organization" demonstrated the potential of a corps of chaplains headed by an able chaplain. Thus, after Brent made his final report, Edmund P. Easterbrook, the senior American chaplain in Europe, used a modified verision of Brent's organizational structure to oversee the chaplains and their activities among the occupation troops. Furthermore, back in the United States, some commanders had appointed senior chaplains on their installations to supervise and coordinate the ministries of other chaplains, camp pastors, and religious workers of the welfare agencies. Nevertheless, it appeared to some chaplains that there would never be an organization in the United States similar to Brent's; the bill drafted by the Judge Advocate General in June 1918 had become bogged down in Congress. Consequently, Chaplain Barton W. Perry, who was invited to address the Executive Committee of the General War-Time Commission in September 1918, took the opportunity to remind the church leaders of the importance of securing the objectives contained in the bill. Chaplain John T. Axton, who frequently traveled from his duty station at the Port of Embarkation at Hoboken, New Jersey, to attend

commission meetings, endorsed Perry's remarks. Both chaplains were obviously hopeful that the commission would continue its campaign to establish a corps of chaplains.112

Whatever the General War-Time Commission did in response to the chaplains' remarks, the War Plans Division of the War Department prepared a study that same month in regard to establishing a "committee of representative clergymen" to "recommended for the action of the War Department such appointments and other matters as would improve the situation with reference to chaplains." The War Plans Division concluded that the committee was not necessary; but the Chief of the Division, Brigadier General Lytle Brown, dissented and recommended a committee of three "for observation and control of all chaplains' work in the Army." 113 In the meantime, Secretary of War Baker was visiting the A.E.F. and met Bishop Brent, who by that time was convinced that it "would be well to systematize all . . . religious efforts in the Army, provided that religion is not militarized." After their meeting, Brent feared that Baker was “unsympathetic with the idea of a Committee of Chaplains in the Office of the Adjutant General." 114

Upon reviewing the study of the War Plans Division and the dissent of Brigadier General Brown, the Chief of the Operations Division of the War Department, Brigadier General Henry Jervey, concurred with Brown and recommended the appointment of Episcopal bishop John N. McCormick, the former Chief of the A.E.F. Red Cross chaplains, to head the proposed committee of three. Two weeks later, on 15 October 1918, Secretary of War Baker directed the appointment of McCormick. The other members of the committee were supposed to be Methodist bishop Willim F. McDowell and a Roman Catholic named by Bishop Patrick J. Hayes. Again, however, Baker had second thoughts and did not make the appointments; apparently he still questioned the necessity of the committee. Moreover, there was some speculation that he was reluctant to appoint another Episcopal bishop to a high level chaplain position."

115

Chaplain Cephas C. Bateman's long-time opposition to a corps of chaplains headed by a chaplain might have contributed to Baker's reluctance to make the appointments. In November 1918 Bateman, the senior chaplain in the Army, recommended to the Adjutant General that "all Army chaplains be placed under the Chief of the Morale Division of the War Department in lieu of having . . . a Chaplain General." Seven

months later, when it appeared that Congress might legislate the authorization of a Chief of Chaplains, he proposed that a board of three chaplains--Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish-be authorized under the immediate supervision of the Chief of the Morale Division. Still apprehensive about any chaplain having supervision over other chaplains in matters of religion, he suggested that the board's responsibilities be limited to "morale matters and welfare work," and to "represent the work of the Army chaplains before church conventions, councils and welfare organizations." His proposals were published in the Army-Navy Journal.118

Although their efforts seemed futile, the proponents of the bill to create a corps of chaplains continued to elicit support, even after the armistice; but one year later, the situation remained the same. Furthermore, during the Congressional hearings in the fall of 1919 regarding the reorganization of the Army, the Chief of Staff, General Peyton C. March, said that chaplains should be given the opportunity for promotion up through the grade of colonel, but that a chaplains' corps should not be established. In January 1920, however, Protestant and Catholic leaders, along with three Army chaplains, appeared before the same Congressional committee and testified that the churches and the chaplains favored the establishment of a chaplains' corps headed by a staff of three persons. Chaplain Axton, who was especially articulate, said that for efficiency's sake, "the selection, the instruction, and the inspection of chaplains should be handled by chaplains." He also claimed that a board of chaplains would enable the churches to appeal to someone with authority "for instructions concerning their chaplains, and for information as to what their status is." His remarks reflected the attitude of a Board of Chaplains that met during November 1919 at Washington, D.C., in the Office of the War Plans Division for the purpose of studying and submitting recommendations on "matters relative to chaplains and moral training in the Army." Bishop Brent, who was unable to testify before the Congressional committee in person, wrote that Axton also reflected his attitude. Finally, what had seemed to be a never-ending exercise in futility brought about the desired result; on 4 June 1920 Congress passed the National Defense Act which authorized the appointment of a chief of chaplains." He was to be appointed for a four year term with the rank, pay, and allowances of a colonel. His main duties were to be the "investigation into the qualifications of candidates for appointment as chaplain, and general coordination and supervision of the work of the chaplains.

118

During the Great War and after, chaplains effectively fulfilled the ministry to which they were called. Of that ministry Chaplain C. Bateman wrote that "no body of men of equal number and of equal rank [gave]. a better account of their stewardship in any army in any war, in any age." Military authorities, including General Pershing and Lieutenant General Hunter Liggett, agreed and commended them as a group. Pershing wrote that from the "base ports to the firing line," they took full advantage of their opportunities to maintain the morale and the high moral standard of the American soldier. He attributed their success to "untiring zeal, marked disregard of danger and deep devotion to duty." Liggett attributed it to "force of character and devoted ministrations to the men with whom [they were] assigned.'

...

"119

Religious leaders and groups also recognized their ministry. In November 1917 the Washington Committee of the Federal Council of Churches decided that “it would be unrighteous to delay longer in making the people of the Christian Churches acquainted with the work of the chaplains," and it initiated "a thorough campaign of publicity." Soon the Council's "Religious Publicity Service" was sending stories about chaplains and the chaplaincy to both the religious and secular press; other articles appeared in the Federal Council Bulletin, the Council's monthly publication with a wide circulation among church leaders at all levels. The National Catholic War Council and the Jewish Welfare Board understook similar measures to recognize the ministry of the chaplains. From the number of applications for the chaplaincy and the contributions for its support that those organizations received, it was evident that their publicity had enhanced the image of the chaplains immeasurably.'

120

Most important, those organizations joined forces and, along with several zealous chaplains, served as a catalyst to institutionalize the chaplaincy as a professional group within the Army. During the war they persuaded the War Department to adopt new policies in regard to the appointing and training of chaplains, and convinced both the President and the Congress to legislate an increase in the number of chaplains. After the war they garnered support from the American public, military authorities, and Congress toward the enactment of a bill that authorized a corps of chaplains headed by a chaplain. Apparently, the War Department gave them a voice in the selection of the first chief. The General Secretary to the Federal Council, Charles S. Macfarland, claimed to be a member of the committee that nominated "John T. Axton to Secretary of War Baker." "Well informed sources" told the Army-Navy Journal

that the leading nominees were Axton and John A. Randolph, that the Secretary of War favored Axton. Whatever the decision-making process, on 15 July 1920 Axton was promoted to the grade of colonel, made Chief of Chaplains, United States Army, and five days later reported to his new office. What numerous chaplains-Orville J. Nave, Aldred A. Pruden, Axton, and others had long hoped and worked for was at least a reality. The chaplaincy was a professional branch of the Army.12

NOTES

121

1 Richard D. Heffner, A Documentary History of the United States, (New York: New American Library, 1952), pp. 247-249.

* Richard Hofstadter, American Political Tradition, (New York: Vintage Books, 1956), p. 272.

3 Heffner, A Documentary History, p. 243.

The Following books contain a detailed discussion of the military buildup and the transformation of the economy from a peacetime to wartime basis. Marvin A. Kriedberg and Merton G. Henry, History of Military Mobilization in the United States Army, 1775–1945, (Washington, D.C.: Department of the Army, 1955), pp. 222, 246; Russel Frank Weigley, History of the United States Army, (New York; Macmillan Co. 1967), pp. 352-358; Edward M. Coffman, The War to End All Wars, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), pp. 19-55.

5

Referring to studies by Ray H. Abrams and John F. Piper, Jr., which together provide a balanced perspective of the churches' attitude toward the war, Robert T. Handy concludes that "Christians were largely united (though with varying degrees of emphasis) in their estimation of the war as an expression of righteous purpose." Robert T. Handy, A Christian America, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), pp. 153–154.

Brent went to the Philippines in 1902, and while there, became acquainted with the representatives of the Anti-Imperialist League, who appealed for his support. He replied: "I have received your appeal to me to support you in a movement which, after more than eleven years of experience in the Philippine Islands, I am convinced is faulty in its conception, unfair in its methods, and disastrous in its consequences." Forbes W. Cameron, The Philippine Islands, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1954), pp. 61-62; Daily Telegraph, London, England, 21 April 1917, pp. 5-6.

7 "Minutes of the Executive Committee of the General War-Time Commission of the Churches, The Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America," 20 March 1918, Archives, National Council of the Churches of Christ in America, New York, New York (hereafter abbreviated NCCCA, NY).

Daniel A. Poling, Huts in Hell, (Boston: Christian Endeavor World, 1918), p. 9.

'The American casualty breakdown, which totaled 300,041, was: battle deaths, 50,510; deaths from other causes, such as diseases and accidents, 55,868; and "wounds not mortal," 193,663. Battle deaths and wounds not mortal include casualties suffered by American forces in Northern Russia to 25 August 1919 and in Siberia to 1 April 1920. Other deaths cover the period of 1 April 1917 to 31 December 1918. Eleven chaplains were killed in action; 12 died of disease. Figures for chaplains who suffered "wounds not mortal" were unavailable. “Selected Manpower Statistics," (Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, 15 April 1973), p. 63; Office of the Chief of Chaplains, Religious Affairs Division, Department of the Army, to Comptroller, Office of the Chief of Chaplains, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., 11 March 1955, identified as a third endorsement to correspondence with office symbol CHL, 8 March 1955, Office of the Chief of Chaplains, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C.

10 W. P. Richardson, "Official Story of Our War with Russia," New York Times Book Review and Magazine, 11 July 1920, pp. 16–17, 24; Betty M. Unterberger, America's Siberian Expedition 1918-1920, (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1956), pp. 230-234; R. Ernest Dupuy, Perish By The Sword, (Harrisburg, Pa.: Military Service Publishing Co., 1939), pp. 287–293; David A. Shannon, Twentieth Century America, (Chicago, Illinois: Rand