Directives to military chaplains urge expunging God, religion from Remembrance Day, public ceremonies

[OldSolduer]

It seems religion is not to be tolerated which is ironic coming from people that preach “tolerance “‘
If the shoe fits….

 

[btrudy]

Religion itself is tolerated.

Religion as a function of government is not. Because those two things should not mix.

 

[gryphonv]

Religion itself is tolerated.

Religion as a function of government is not. Because those two things should not mix.

Just curious, would you be ok with Chaplains if they were not wearing cad pat or other uniforms? But they still did exactly the same as they are doing now?

 

[YZT580]

Religion itself is tolerated.

Religion as a function of government is not. Because those two things should not mix.

Perhaps you should step back off your horse and think through the purpose of Remembrance day and other such ceremonies. The ritual, the honour guards, and the salutes are there to first off link us with our history: both recent (Afghanistan) and a little more distant such as Korea and then the distant past going to the Boer War. Whether we agree with the wars and our participation or not, we had ancestors, perhaps sons and daughters, who believed or were committed enough to go and defend what they believed was a series of values. For many, that included their faith. You, by your words, are saying that those values weren't worth defending. Perhaps you should spend some time walking the rows in Ypres, read the names and then stand silently there in the streets whilst the last post is heard. Its hard not to say a prayer. Allowing the chaplain the freedom to speak is not supporting religion in the state it is re-confirming our respect for those whose names are on the stones and the mothers, wives and children who are still weeping. It isn't about what you believe, it is all about what they believed and died for.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie,
In Flanders fields.


Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields

 

[btrudy]

Perhaps you should step back off your horse and think through the purpose of Remembrance day and other such ceremonies. The ritual, the honour guards, and the salutes are there to first off link us with our history: both recent (Afghanistan) and a little more distant such as Korea and then the distant past going to the Boer War. Whether we agree with the wars and our participation or not, we had ancestors, perhaps sons and daughters, who believed or were committed enough to go and defend what they believed was a series of values. For many, that included their faith. You, by your words, are saying that those values weren't worth defending.

Please don't bloody well put words in my mouth. Freedom of religion is absolutely important, and I will absolutely defend anyone's rights to worship as they choose. Their faith is important to them, and their freedom to practice their faith is important to Canada.

But that does not mean that their faith should be influenced by government action. The government should not be in the business of either promoting or suppressing any religion (and to be clear, the promotion of any religion or religion practices is a de facto suppression of all other religious practices, including non-practice) or religious practice.

Just curious, would you be ok with Chaplains if they were not wearing cad pat or other uniforms? But they still did exactly the same as they are doing now?

No, not particularly. Actually, that'd probably be worse, considering that then we wouldn't even have the "Chaplains are an important military tradition" as a veneer of justification.

 

[Remius]

Please don't bloody well put words in my mouth. Freedom of religion is absolutely important, and I will absolutely defend anyone's rights to worship as they choose. Their faith is important to them, and their freedom to practice their faith is important to Canada.

But that does not mean that their faith should be influenced by government action. The government should not be in the business of either promoting or suppressing any religion (and to be clear, the promotion of any religion or religion practices is a de facto suppression of all other religious practices, including non-practice) or religious practice.





No, not particularly. Actually, that'd probably be worse, considering that then we wouldn't even have the "Chaplains are an important military tradition" as a veneer of justification.

I don’t disagree with you about the promotion of religion or whatnot.

That being said there are religious observances and traditions that have morphed into cultural traditions a have little to no religious bearing anymore. Are those things also Verboten in your mind?

 

[lenaitch]

No one in crisis is receiving help via prayers at public ceremonies. Quit straw-manning.

We don't know that. People go to religious ceremonies every week; some to help them manage their life, help them get through a crisis, whatever. Maybe for some, Remembrance Day brings back a flood of memories and perhaps the fellowship (if I am still allowed to use that word) and supporting words help them through.

The discussion over the past few pages has extended to the existence of the Chaplain service itself. If faith people can't 'do faith', even to a minor degree, then why have them around? They provide a service that the employer apparently deems still important.

I suppose in the brave new world we would have to see if a social worker would provide comfort and support to the injured and dying in the field.

Governments support and promote all manner of beliefs and lifestyle choices under the umbrella of being inclusive. If it's wrong to force somebody to attend or be exposed to (not necessarily participate in) an even that has a faith element, then it should be wrong to force somebody to have to attend a presentation or webinar on anything they might not personally agree with.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If religion as a function of government is to be thoroughly eliminated, then there should not be any chaplains at all - replace them with something chaplain-like (ie. everything except the religious training/background). Nor should there be any observances, rituals, symbols, art, etc present in government facilities and at government events except that spontaneously and privately done by individuals acting only for themselves.

I prefer to add things rather than take them away, because the likelihood of ending up with a very sterile and unhappy society is otherwise high. But tit-for-tat is an effective strategy - maybe the only one, for dealing with zealots and activists - so until people stop tearing down my culture, I'm content to tear down theirs.

 

[GR66]

I'm personally non-religious but I believe it would be horribly wrong to eliminate chaplains from the military. We're asking people to potentially make the ultimate sacrifice for our country. Life, death and the afterlife are absolutely fundamental to a person's faith and to ask them to face death without the spiritual support they may need to face that situation would in my opinion be very wrong.

 

[EME101]

The Remembrance Day ceremony closest to my home at my last posting always irritated me. There was little mention of remembrance, other that to talk about the soldiers that sacrificed in God's name, as if the soldiers fought only because God told them to. The ceremony might have well been a Sunday service and not a Remembrance Day ceremony. I'm certainly not against people practicing their religion, but that is not what Remembrance Day is about, and should not be the central focus.

 

[OldSolduer]

I prefer to add things rather than take them away, because the likelihood of ending up with a very sterile and unhappy society is otherwise high.

The Communist and other tyrannical states have tried to eliminate religion and failed miserably.

 

[quadrapiper]

We don't know that. People go to religious ceremonies every week; some to help them manage their life, help them get through a crisis, whatever. Maybe for some, Remembrance Day brings back a flood of memories and perhaps the fellowship (if I am still allowed to use that word) and supporting words help them through.

The discussion over the past few pages has extended to the existence of the Chaplain service itself. If faith people can't 'do faith', even to a minor degree, then why have them around? They provide a service that the employer apparently deems still important.

I suppose in the brave new world we would have to see if a social worker would provide comfort and support to the injured and dying in the field.

Governments support and promote all manner of beliefs and lifestyle choices under the umbrella of being inclusive. If it's wrong to force somebody to attend or be exposed to (not necessarily participate in) an even that has a faith element, then it should be wrong to force somebody to have to attend a presentation or webinar on anything they might not personally agree with.

The best argument for maintaining chaplains-as-religious-officiants (versus chaplains-as-legacy-military-"community counsellors") is as support for deployed members' full spectrum of needs. That probably doesn't justify unit chaplains, so much as a pool of them (service battalion? brigade? division?) available for OUTCAN work.

It also suggests a need to get a very firm handle on which faiths have significant numbers of observant members in uniform, and potentially an effort to recruit chaplains to match: for most of what's been described on this thread, the faith doesn't matter, but reaching outside the Peoples of the Book probably wouldn't hurt (even doing something as basic as having more than Jewish, Christian, and Muslim cap badges wouldn't hurt). Where're the Hindu, Sikh, and Indigenous chaplains?

 

[Good2Golf]

The Communist and other tyrannical states have tried to eliminate religion and failed miserably.

 

[lenaitch]

The Remembrance Day ceremony closest to my home at my last posting always irritated me. There was little mention of remembrance, other that to talk about the soldiers that sacrificed in God's name, as if the soldiers fought only because God told them to. The ceremony might have well been a Sunday service and not a Remembrance Day ceremony. I'm certainly not against people practicing their religion, but that is not what Remembrance Day is about, and should not be the central focus.

That seems quite unusual. I've been to many in many different locations and never found any of them overly 'preachy'.

 

[Happy Guy]

You totally do not understand. It is not possible to separate the chaplain from his religion. That is not a great word a better one is his faith. It is through his faith that he is able to provide comfort, advice when asked, and a shoulder for whenever. Religion is simply the rules etc. governing the services and a formal outline of the things he/she believes. Asking a padre to use banal words and trite statements is to belittle him and mock his faith. If you want a remembrance day service devoid of spiritual content, so be it, ask the CO or the athletic director to conduct it. No argument there. No priest, preacher, rabbi need apply. But don't ask them to be a part of the ceremony and then order him to deny his own calling. It is insulting.

Many of the Padres that I've talked to never pushed religion onto their clients, unless it was for religious services or if the client specifically asked for it. While deployed on ops, many of Padre are used to gauge the morale of the troops and provide feedback to the Command Staff. They are asked to do the extremely difficult and sensitive topics of death services, next of kin notification, provide comfort and solace to grieving soldiers on ops and so forth. As a former Adjt of a major unit, there have been countless times I have consulted the Padres to asked for advice or to have them to a welfare check, talk to a troubled soldier or have them pass bad news. Theirs a difficult burden and I compare it to Sisyphus, who is condemned to roll the boulder up the hill every day, only to have roll down the hill each night. Their job is never ending and thankless.

We have a need for Chaplains.

 

[Quirky]

If the CAF has 10 people apply for something and 4 of them are white then the 4 white applicants should automatically be placed last in the list. Equality 101.

In the CAFs case, they would just remove the 4 white applicants from the list because they take up room for the DEI groups.

 

[RangerRay]

I’m not religious and my shadow only darkens the door of a church for weddings and funerals. Having said that, I did appreciate the “voluntary” Padre’s hours during QL2/3 and at our unit. Religion was not discussed, but there were lots of cookies and coffee, and an encouraging word when I was questioning my life choices at the time.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

This sums up perfectly my position on the role the Chaplaincy plays within the Canadian Armed Forces.

Taken from the CFJSR Adjutant's Handbook to Regimental Officers, commenting on why we stand for Ode to Joy at a Regimental Mess dinner; written by the very eloquent Major Blair Christie MMM, CD, RCCS:

Ode to Joy (exclaim ‘PADRE’). Standing for the Chaplaincy is a contested point. To stand for the Padre does not denote religious affiliations or denominations. It is more than apparent that contemporary society is more secular than ever and some dismiss religion as – in the vein of Marxism – a superstitious ‘Opiate for the Masses’ . Whereas some object to taking their moral code – or commandments – in ‘tablet’ form, others perceive faith as a fundamental component to the human condition. These represent tertiary points for Mess protocol: you stand for the Padre out of respect for what the Padre does. The Chaplain helps hoist the burden of soldiers facing everything damning in life: death and sickness, frail mental health, ill parents, hospitalized children, and the curse of substance addiction. In doing so, the encumbrance of intimate support to a soldier in need is – in large part – relieved from your shoulders. The Padre ensures that no one has to ‘bear the cross’ alone. In standing behind our soldiers during their darkest of times, we in turn stand at a dinner, glasses raised, and give thanks to their presence and support on our behalf

We need chaplains not for what they represent, but what they do. They do more than a Social Worker could, and I can say this both as a man of faith and as someone who has run the gamut from PTSD, Addiction, and suicidal ideation.

A prayer, a moment of reflection, a meditation, whatever it is... is no more an endorsement than it is a human moment shared between one another to remember, acknowledge, and bond amongst other humans.

What is an endorsement is the 76 wreaths laid by "Jim's Hardware" or "Desjardin's Insurance: St. Lawrence Branch" that turn the Acts of Remembrance into a marketing ploy. Perhaps we can put more energy in scrapping that useless exercise than getting petty about who leads a moment of reverence and remembrance?

$0.05 because Harper took my pennies...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

What is an endorsement is the 76 wreaths laid by "Jim's Hardware" or "Desjardin's Insurance: St. Lawrence Branch" that turn the Acts of Remembrance into a marketing ploy. Perhaps we can put more energy in scrapping that useless exercise than getting petty about who leads a moment of reverence and remembrance?

We did that about 15 years ago and knocked over half an hour off the service.

 

[Booter]

We did that about 15 years ago and knocked over half an hour off the service.

This is the nonsense that has taken the services use from me.