Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Reclassifying Faith?: Inside the Department of War’s Revision to Its List of Religions

News

Reclassifying Faith?: Inside the Department of War’s Revision to Its List of Religions
man holding his hands on open book
Photo by Patrick Fore on Unsplash

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

How Are Religions Recognized in the U.S. Military?


Introduced in World War 1, dog tags, or metal identification tags worn by U.S. service members, are one of the primary ways the U.S. military recognizes religions. Besides including a service member’s name, Department of War (DOW) identification number, and blood type, dog tags can include a service member’s religious preference. Since 2017, service members have chosen from a list of 211 recognized religions, also known as the “Faith and Belief Codes,” for their dog tag engravings. Outside of dog tags, the U.S. military has also shared service members’ religious preferences with the Army Chaplains Corp. First established under President George Washington, three chaplain corps (Army Chaplain Corps, the Air Force Chaplain Corps, and the Navy Chaplain Corps) host commissioned officers who provide religious support to service members and their families. As of today, more than 3,000 chaplains serve in the Chaplains Corp. Among them, approximately 110 religious faith groups are represented.

Why Did the U.S. Military Reduce Its List of Recognized Religions?

In a memo first released to news outlets on June 4, 2026, the DOW announced a reduction to the list of recognized religions by the U.S. military. A notable decrease from the 211 previously recognized religions, the new list, renamed “Religious Affiliation Codes,” contains just 31 religions. Intended to “streamline the DOW’s collection of religious preferences selection for Service members,” the move follows other previously announced changes by the Department, including chaplains being instructed to wear their religious insignia in place of their rank insignia, or symbols worn on military uniforms indicting a service member’s duties, pay grade, or rank. The new list of recognized religions is expected to take effect in July.

Who Supports the New List?

Supporters of DOW’s new, reduced list of recognized religions include Under Secretary of War for Personnel and Readiness Anthony J. Tata, who suggested the new list would “enhance the delivery of targeted religious support from the Chaplaincy.” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell praised the DOW’s new list, calling it “long overdue” and beneficial to chaplains, who can now quickly respond to the spiritual needs of their units. Secretary of War’s Pete Hegseth, who hinted at reducing the list in late March, voiced his support for the new list and labeled the old list of over 200 religions “impractical and unusable.” Some veterans also supported the new list, with Retired Major General Randell E. Kitchens, who formerly served as the Air Force’s Chief of Chaplains, noting that the list "appears to represent major faith groups.”

Who Opposes the New List?

Critics of the DOW’s new, reduced list of recognized religions include lawmakers, religious organizations, and veterans. The Unitarian Universalist Association expressed concerns that, with Unitarian Universalism removed from the list, service members identifying with the religion could now face challenges accessing spiritual care. Meanwhile, co-founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, Mikey Weinstein, argued that the change violated the U.S. Constitution's “separation of church and state.” Lawmakers like Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Senator John Curtis (R-UT) also questioned the new list, specifically the DOW’s decision to not label the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a Christian denomination. Veterans protested the new list too, with a former U.S. Army Chaplain calling the new list “an excuse for the failure to provide the free exercise of religion for all people.”

What Will Happen to Chaplains and Service Members With Unrecognized Religions?

Although the DOW eventually responded to criticism of the new list by removing the labeling that stated whether a religion was a Christian denomination, 31 religions still remain on the list. That said, military experts like Retired General Steven Schaick worry chaplains of unrecognized religions could lose their ecclesiastical endorsement, an official certification from one’s religious denomination to serve as a chaplain. An ecclesiastical endorsement is required by all branches of the military. And while the memo stated service members could still put unrecognized religions on their dog tags, and many of the unrecognized religions remain on the Department of Veteran Affair’s (VA) list of approved emblems for headstones, some former military members predict that the changed policy will make some service members feel unrecognized, putting their well-being at risk.

Reclassifying Faith?: Inside the Department of War’s Revision to Its List of Religions was first published on The Alliance for Citizen Engagement and was republished with permission.

Stephanie Peterson is a senior at Purdue University Northwest.


Read More

United States Capitol building and blurred American flag against blue sky

America’s aging Congress has no maximum age limit. Could a constitutional amendment create age limits for lawmakers and better represent younger voters?

TGI /Tetra Images

Congress Has an Age Floor and No Ceiling. That's Backwards for Gen Z.

Senator Dianne Feinstein's visible decline in her final years in office. Senator Lindsey Graham's sudden death. Senator Mitch McConnell's own recent hospitalization, and his halting explanation of it afterward. Three senators, three separate incidents, no obvious connection between them, except that the saga of these three senators is really one story about the problem of not knowing when to step down. That framing asks the right question of individual leaders. But it assumes the problem is a matter of personal judgment, each senator, in his or her own time, finding the wisdom to recognize the moment has passed. I think that gets the American version of this problem backwards. Congress's age problem is not a string of individual judgment calls. It is a structural feature of the Constitution itself, and it is quietly reshaping who gets represented in American government.

The Constitution sets a floor for federal office and no ceiling. A representative must be at least twenty-five. A senator must be at least thirty. A president must be at least thirty-five. Nothing in the document says how old is too old. Combine that asymmetry with the enormous advantages of incumbency, better name recognition, fundraising networks, committee seniority, and the result is predictable: a Congress that can start young but can never age out. It can only age up. The 119th Congress is now the third oldest in American history, with an average member age of nearly fifty-nine and a Senate averaging in the mid-sixties. This is not a temporary blip. It is the natural output of a system with a gate on one end and no gate on the other.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first
a large white building with a flag on top of it

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the third and final installment of our series on “Article the first.” Previous parts examined the history of the single inverted word that turned an intended floor into a ceiling and its impact on the amendment’s failed ratification. This concluding part outlines the path forward for enlarging the House today.

Part 3 — The Path Forward

Keep ReadingShow less
The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

Painting from 1856 by Junius Brutus Stearns of George Washington at the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the second of a three-part series on the First Amendment proposed by Congress in 1789—often called “Article the first”—which was never ratified. Part 1 explained how a single inverted word in the text created a mathematical absurdity that has been misread for 237 years. This second part explores the untold history of how that defect affected the original ratification process in state legislatures.

Part 2 — The Untold History

Keep ReadingShow less
Bill of Rights
Happy 230th birthday, Bill of Rights
leezsnow/Getty Images

The Enduring Illusion of Article the first

This is the first of three parts exploring “Article the First,” the forgotten proposal in the original Bill of Rights. For 237 years, a single, inverted word has created a “semantic illusion,” leading historians and policymakers to misread the founders' intended guarantee of a growing House as a ceiling. This series uncovers the error, tracks its consequences, and explores why reclaiming the founders’ original vision is the path to meaningful representation reform.

Part 1 — The Inverted Word

Keep ReadingShow less