Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth hosted a Christian prayer service at the Pentagon on Wednesday morning, an event he indicated would become a monthly occurrence. The service, held in the Pentagon auditorium and broadcast live on the department’s internal TV network, has drawn varied reactions, sparking both praise for its promotion of faith and criticism regarding the separation of church and state.
In his opening remarks, Secretary Hegseth expressed his conviction, stating, “This is precisely where I need to be, exactly where we need to be as a nation at this moment, in prayer, on bended knee, recognizing the providence of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.” He characterized the event as voluntary and encouraged attendees to inform their colleagues about it. Acting Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson affirmed the voluntary nature of the service, describing it as “an opportunity for Believers to appeal to Heaven on behalf of our great nation and its warfighters,” rooted in a tradition of “beseeching the Almighty” since the nation’s founding as “One Nation under God.”
However, current and former defense officials, along with legal experts, raised concerns about the event’s nature. Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Rachel VanLandingham, a national security law expert, described the use of the Department of Defense seal on event brochures as indicative of government sponsorship, suggesting it could be a “clear violation” of the First Amendment’s prohibition on government endorsing a religion. A former Pentagon lawyer echoed this, calling the service “incredibly problematic” and asserting that “having a broadcast event is obviously an endorsement.” Critics highlighted that unlike routine, non-denominational services held in Pentagon chapels, this event was held in the auditorium, broadcast live, hosted by the secretary, and heavily advertised, potentially exerting undue pressure on service members and civilian employees in a hierarchical organization. The New York Times framed the event as part of an “increasing infusion of overt Christian evangelization in official government events during Mr. Trump’s second term,” while a Pentagon press secretary did not immediately clarify whether future monthly services would include non-Protestant pastors, Catholic priests, rabbis, or imams.
Conversely, supporters of the event defended Secretary Hegseth’s actions. First Liberty Institute, a religious liberty firm, issued a statement asserting that Hegseth’s “exercise of his religious faith is protected,” drawing parallels to their defense of Navy SEALs who faced challenges for their faith-based objections to COVID requirements. Erin Smith, Associate Counsel at First Liberty Institute, commended Hegseth for “standing up for the Constitution and against censorship.” Joe Rigney, a fellow of theology at New Saint Andrews College, commented on social media, expressing his admiration for the service, stating his belief that “the Lord Jesus heard and will answer these prayers.” Rigney also expressed satisfaction that The New York Times “freaked out about it.”
The service featured Brooks Potteiger, the pastor of Hegseth’s Tennessee church, Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship, whom Hegseth introduced as a longtime mentor. Potteiger’s words included a prayer for President Donald Trump, whom he described as “sovereignly appointed,” thanking God for using him “to bring stability and moral clarity to our land.” He also prayed for Trump’s continued protection, blessing, wisdom, and for God to “surround him with faithful counselors who fear your name and love your precepts.” Potteiger infused his sermon with Pentagon-specific references, asserting God’s sovereignty “over Tomahawk and Minuteman missiles, including strategy meetings and war room debriefings.” Hegseth himself frequently speaks about his faith, once stating, “Without my Lord and savior Jesus Christ, I don’t have a shot.”
Hegseth’s public stance on faith and military matters has been a subject of discussion. During his Senate confirmation hearing in January, Hegseth appeared to soften his previously strong stance against women serving in combat roles. He told the Senate panel that he would support women in such roles “so long as they meet the same standards as men,” calling for a review to ensure standards were not eroded for quotas. This position marked a shift from past statements, such as a November podcast where he declared, “I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal, has made fighting more complicated,” and a statement in his book that “We need moms. But not in the military, especially in combat units.” While military officials affirmed that gender-neutral, merit-based standards are already in place, this apparent change drew a specific reaction from some.
Luke Saint, president of Future of Christendom, commenting on The Lancaster Patriot Podcast, stated that while Christians should stand for their beliefs, the political system often leads to compromise. He specifically noted that “no women in combat” was a significant talking point for Christian nationalists supporting Hegseth, and then asserted that Hegseth folded “like a [house] of cards” on the issue during his hearing. Saint suggested that if Hegseth had stood firm on his previous statements, even at the cost of his position, many Christian nationalists might have been among the first to criticize him, indicating a perceived lack of support within the Christian community for those who appeal to God’s Law in public life. Hegseth’s church, Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship, is part of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, whose governing documents state that church leadership roles are reserved for men, homosexuality is unbiblical, and women should not participate in combat.
While critical of what he saw as a compromise on the issue of women in combat during Hegseth’s confirmation hearing, Saint expressed support for the act of public Christian prayer within government. He told The Lancaster Patriot Podcast that the opposition to Hegseth’s prayer service, particularly when based on constitutional arguments, presents an example of how man-made statutes can be used against what he considers righteous acts. Saint contended, “This is what happens when we believe we’re smarter than God. Despite any good intentions, man-made laws inevitably end up prosecuting righteous deeds and righteous people. Because our framers chose not to explicitly mention Christ or establish the Christian religion by name, only by inference, we are now, 250 years later, suffering the consequences as people use that very document against public Christian prayer.” Saint’s commentary underscores his view that the framers’ omission of an explicit recognition of Christ has led to a situation where the foundational document is now used to oppose public expressions of the Christian faith.
The prayer service comes amidst broader efforts by the Trump administration to emphasize connections between government and evangelical Christianity. President Trump has previously dismissed concerns about violating the First Amendment’s prohibition on establishing a state religion, and on his 2024 campaign, pledged to champion conservative Christianity across American life and government, notably signing an executive order banning “anti-Christian bias” in the federal government.
