The Military Change of Stole Ceremony

In 2007 I was a brand new lieutenant colonel reporting to my first general staff assignment. When I arrived, I discovered that a “change of stole” ceremony had been scheduled for me. I am not a fan of these events and I briefly resisted. Ultimately, I gave in and participated without further objection. "Go along and get along," as they say. I regret that. I wish I had explained my position more clearly. 

What are change of stole ceremonies, and why do I object to them? 

Whose Need does it Serve?

The change of stole ceremony marks the passing of responsibility from one command chaplain to another, usually in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5) or colonel (O-6). The commander lifts a stole decorated with organizational markings from the neck of the outgoing command chaplain and places it on the neck of the incoming command chaplain. There are speeches and ceremonial trappings to the event. All together, the ceremony mimics the passing of the colors at military change of command, and that is not an accident.

Selection for battalion command in the Army is highly competitive. Only the highest performers can hope to achieve this goal in their careers. Changes of command at this level are major events in the life of a military organization. They normally feature marching bands, the firing of canons, and large numbers of troops in formation. Change of command ceremonies are wonderful spectacles that promote Army pride, unit cohesion, and esprit de corps. They also provide honorees with massive loads of psychological validation. The band is playing for you. The troops are marching for you.

Both battalion commanders and division chaplains serve in the grade of O-5. Selection as a division chaplain is also also highly competitive, and that's the organizational domain where change of stole ceremonies appear to have originated. It didn’t take long for non-divisional commands to get in on the action, as well.

Chaplains, by law, will never be placed in command of military formations and thus never experience the ceremonial affirmation of a change of command. Other officers can potentially be chosen to command at some level of organization within the Army. Change of stole ceremonies provide senior chaplains with ceremonial validation which they would otherwise never experience.

Whose need is the ceremony meeting? No other staff section marks the passing of responsibility with a ceremony. None. The change of stole ceremony primarily exists to meet the ego needs of senior chaplains. But that’s not the main reason I object. 

The Source of Spiritual Authority

The government cannot invest me with spiritual authority. My church, acting through my bishop, has already done that, and one symbol of that ecclesiastical authority is the stole. When my bishop placed a stole over my neck at my ordination, he said, “Take authority as an elder in the Church to preach the word of God and to administer the Holy Sacraments.” The stole I wear is not a decoration, but a symbol of ecclesiastical authority and responsibility bestowed by my church.

Religious Appropriation

A stole is a liturgical vestment. For Christians within the Great Tradition, stoles do not represent a particular organization or institution. They do not represent appointment to particular congregation or membership in a particular denomination. They are a visible sign of being set apart for the ministry of word and sacrament within the whole body of Christ's one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Whether a congregation uses vestments during Christian worship or not is adiaphora, but where they are used, historic practice and Christian theology govern their use.

Do other religions even use stoles in their sacred practices? I don't think so. The Army has appropriated a religious symbol from one segment of its Christian population, stripped it of its historic meaning, and employed it for a semi-secular purpose. I think I know why.

Fewer and fewer Army chaplains come from traditions that invest the newly ordained with a stole, or in which clergy routinely vest for sacred worship. The originators of the stole ceremony could infuse the stole with new meaning because they did not have a strong connection to its existing meaning.

Chaplains are religious leaders, but the chaplaincy itself is not a religious institution with its own rites and ceremonies. The government has no power to invest anyone with spiritual authority. By appropriating an existing religious symbol, the government risks the appearance of an establishment of religion. At the very least, it has corrupted the meaning of the symbol it appropriated.

If military units want to mark the change of chaplain responsibility with a ceremony, there are plenty of ways to do that without misappropriating an existing religious symbol.

The Scarf Precedent

Perhaps the originators of this "tradition" settled on the stole because Army regulations at the time permitted the wear of a black chaplain's "scarf" while in uniform and conducting religious services. The scarves were issued as part of the religiously distinctive "chaplain's kit" that each chaplain received upon graduation from the Chaplain Officer Basic Course. The scarves bore religious symbols, Christian or Jewish, as appropriate for the chaplains who received them. The scarves might resemble stoles, but it appears that the regulation intentionally steered away from the word "stole" in describing them. Actually, the scarf more closely resembles an Anglican tippet and functions more like one, too.

Of What Use?

I understand the purpose of the faith-specific chaplain scarf. Apart from its use in the change of stole ceremony itself, what is the purpose of the organizational stole? The one placed on my neck in 2007 spent the next two years folded away in a drawer. I never used it at any organizational event.

Whose Likeness and Inscription?


In addition to authorizing ecclesiastical vestments, regulations now also permit "ceremonial stoles" for use during military ceremonies, which I think is a mistake. During the early years of Afghanistan and Iraq, the Army Chief of Chaplains issued stoles emblazoned with only the national coat of arms for all chaplains to wear with their dress uniforms. He wanted there to be a dignified, uniform look for chaplains participating in ramp ceremonies and other memorials for the fallen. I understand the sentiment, but I never wore that stole.

Some may look on the ceremonial stole as a "non-specific religious vestment," a generic religious symbol, but no such thing exists. If a ceremonial stole is a religious vestment, it points to a specific faith commitment grounded in a specific faith community. A religious vestment adorned only with national or organizational symbols flirts with idolatry. If a ceremonial stole is not a religious vestment, then why is it needed at all? If chaplains are functioning solely in their military capacity, they already have an appropriate vestment for that. It's called a uniform.

Popular posts from this blog

If My People

Performative civil religion was on full display this week during the America Reads the Bible series of public Bible readings. The performance is supposed to commemorate the 250th anniversary of America’s Declaration of Independence. During the event, a series of politicians, MAGA supporters, and other ostensibly notable figures will read aloud the entire Protestant Bible in piecemeal fashion. The readers are using the King James Easy Read Bible, one of many obscure revisions of the KJV. The live readings take place at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. Tickets are $50. You can also register to watch a live stream. I cannot understood why anyone thinks merely reading the words of the Bible aloud will mean anything to God, have a positive effect on the nation, or draw anyone to Jesus. On Tuesday, President Trump read from Second Chronicle. The organizer's website features a recording of the president's reading on the home page of it's website and declares, As...
Read more

The Problem with Religious Affiliation Codes

Religious preference codes only exist to give commanders and chaplains a big, one-over-the-world view of the religious needs of the unit as a whole. They reside in the big Army database of personnel records as useful data points for generalized planning. They are not terribly useful for individual religious support where people don't always fit their labels. There, chaplains need to get to know their soldiers personally.  Soldiers entering the Army are overwhelmed by an avalanche of administrative requirements. It’s a normal human response to proceed through that process without much thought.  I found that Soldiers had often chosen their religious preference codes hastily, and the religion coded in the personnel database did not accurately reflect their religious identities.  The previous list of religious codes was long (5 single spaced pages) and not logically organized. It was a jumble of institutional identities and religious categories, most of which were going to be...
Read more

Is the President Saving Religion?

The president spoke to the National Prayer Breakfast on February 6, 2026. The event is sponsored by a Christian organization, but its official website says that it is open to people of all faiths. It is supposed to bring national leaders of faith together regardless of political affiliation.  As a Christian pastor, I would like to respectfully offer some reflections on the president’s 77 minute speech. This essay is long because the speech was long. What’s In the Speech What was the tone of the speech? Uplifting? Inspiring? Unifying? Spiritual? I would characterize it as political. It’s tone matched the tone of all his speeches, if you know what I mean. Most of it echoed themes and talking points common to every speech he makes. Little of it had any bearing on on the purpose of the assembly, and I can’t begin to address those parts of the speech. Simply put, I found much of it objectionable.  But what about the rest, the parts that talked about religion? In over 12...
Read more