• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

An unwritten rule for most lower deck messes, the door was always open for the Padre, no need to request permission to enter, though most did so anyway. The Padres rarely invoked rank, preferring to address sailors one-on-one. I have not observed a Social Worker extended similar courtesies.
 
Given the overall shortage of social workers and mental health resources in society as a whole, it’s naive to think that the solution is just to hire more social workers. More than half are leaving the profession in this country, and most can’t handle the case loads they have.
Specific to this point: wouldn't be terribly surprised if CAF pay, benefits, and working conditions for social workers are superior in all regards to the vast majority of their civilian peers.
 
Specific to this point: wouldn't be terribly surprised if CAF pay, benefits, and working conditions for social workers are superior in all regards to the vast majority of their civilian peers.
And to add, if it’s like many professions there are those that specialize in different types of social work. That would be wholly unsuitable for the requirements of CAF members which shrinks your pool even more.

When I was in recruiting social workers needed a masters, a background in clinical work and be accredited in their province. They had to meet universality of service as well. They were basically unicorns.
 
bull. Tradition is the foundation upon which your future is built
We cherry pick the hell out of which traditions matter to each of us:

"After Parliament passed the Canadian Human Rights Act in 1977 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted in 1982, the RCN changed its policies to enable women to serve at sea in replenishment ships, which although not warships, serve in combat zones. Although all military occupations were opened to women in 1989 following the order to remove the legal barriers to their employment,12 women were still restricted from serving aboard submarines until 2001."

Fighting against women serving in most roles in the RCN would be fighting for institutional tradition. Times change, old traditions die and new ones are born. I'm sure there were dinosaurs at the time fighting against the change to tradition (this is where you start drawing parallels). Those arguments are lost to history. Not all traditions should change, but we have to be open minded to change and not dismiss change based on tradition alone. The foundation of women in the CAF was built on defying tradition.
 
Like the saying goes,

"Years of tradition unimpeded by progress."
 
We cherry pick the hell out of which traditions matter to each of us:

"After Parliament passed the Canadian Human Rights Act in 1977 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was adopted in 1982, the RCN changed its policies to enable women to serve at sea in replenishment ships, which although not warships, serve in combat zones. Although all military occupations were opened to women in 1989 following the order to remove the legal barriers to their employment,12 women were still restricted from serving aboard submarines until 2001."

Fighting against women serving in most roles in the RCN would be fighting for institutional tradition. Times change, old traditions die and new ones are born. I'm sure there were dinosaurs at the time fighting against the change to tradition (this is where you start drawing parallels). Those arguments are lost to history. Not all traditions should change, but we have to be open minded to change and not dismiss change based on tradition alone. The foundation of women in the CAF was built on defying tradition.
Women in the navy could be said to be a return to tradition. There were women on board Nelson's navy. There were women during the British civil war that defended their homes against the Roundheads. Joan of Arc wasn't the first lady to don a suit of armour. We build upon tradition. In so doing we may supersede it with a new one but we are replacing and not abandoning. Tradition provides the foundation, even in war. Sun Wu is still quoted: his concepts provide the traditions behind much of our planning. Traditions provide a link with the past: important when you are trying to imbue the concept of loyalty into recruits. The US marines we don't leave anyone behind is a tradition that instills a feeling of comfort during trying times. I am not saying some traditions have outlived their usefulness but examine each one carefully before you discard it and don't be bullied into it simply to satisfy the latest fad. Chaplains, for the most part, live their faith. They don't need a pulpit. They are also a respected member of the regiment. I would think that every serving soldier should be insulted that some two bit politico was trying to stop them from providing the words that they feel would most comfort those present.
 
IMO I think the Padre is a necessary and essential part of any unit. Social workers are just that - social workers. Padres bring much more to the table.
I am not religious but I do recognize the need for an individual like a Padre - someone outside the CoC that a soldier can bring their problems to.
 
IMO I think the Padre is a necessary and essential part of any unit. Social workers are just that - social workers. Padres bring much more to the table.
I am not religious but I do recognize the need for an individual like a Padre - someone outside the CoC that a soldier can bring their problems to.
I really wish people would bloody well stop pretending like we can't take that part of a Chaplain Officer's role and responsibilities and give it to someone else.

The Padres do that because that's their job. That's why we keep them around. Even if we eliminate Chaplains as a trade, that job can be taken on by another group.
 
Because that's the current structure of how we employ social workers.

Which wouldn't be how they'd all be employed if we engaged in a "replace padres with social workers" program.

The God squad indeed only spends a very small portion of their time on the God part, and that's the only part that couldn't be replicated by a non-religious replacement. A friendly face over coffee can currently be a padre, but it can also be a social worker. And there'll be some added benefit that the social worker won't have baggage associated with their religious affiliation that may cause some folks with religious based trauma to want to avoid them.

Why should it be "either-or"? We also don't employ social workers the same way that a great deal of that profession are employed civvy side. Depending on jurisdiction, the qualification to register as and call oneself a "social worker" can be as minimal as a two year college diploma, whereas Social Work Officers need a minimum of a Masters with training and two years experience in "clinical counselling". And, as far as I am aware, all (or most) military chaplains receive additional training in "clinical pastoral counselling", so they are not exactly without skills when assisting soldiers with problems outside the spiritual realm. The same may not necessarily be true with social workers whose client presents with a spiritual dilemma. Just because religiosity has waned over the last few generations, doesn't mean that soldiers/sailors/the other ones (maybe even a minority of) have no need of clergy, maybe the need is even more so when deployed.

There have been a few other threads over the years about the requirement for clergy in uniform. They usually remind me of the dedication of one particular padre of my acquaintance. I never had much interaction with chaplains during my career or even prior to or after; being an Nfld Irish Catholic it is safe to assume that I'm atheist agnostic have no use for religion at all.

But I have recognized the service that chaplains can provide to serving members, often done in an informal manner and not in structured counselling as would be expected of a clinical social worker. We had a chaplain with us when we deployed to Rwanda in 1994 on OP PASSAGE. He was the individual that most stood out to my mind. No, he didn't save my soul or gather me into the arms of the Lord (he wasn't a miracle worker), we didn't even talk or interact personally that much. There didn't seem to be that much call for the primary duties of his profession; a photo I took of him saying mass showed about six or seven gathered around him, which seemed about his average customers. But I did notice him going about in his quiet manner talking to soldiers. I know from feedback from some of my guys that he helped them.

However, my admiration for him was mostly for his assumption of what was probably the least desirable duty, burying the dead. Early in the mission, the assumption was that patients who died in our facility would be turned over to family or the local authorities for disposal of their remains. It soon became evident that families were often nonexistent or unable to do so and the "local authorities" didn't care. Initially, with the exception of the reburial of the mass grave, the burial of the dead was usually done by pers not engaged in clinical duties. I remember one of the first children to die in our hospital, it was a tiny little thing; we wrapped it in a sheet and put it in a ration box as a makeshift coffin. With another officer, we carried it over to the graveyard site (there had been a couple of previous burials there); the two of us dug the grave and the chaplain who joined us assisted with the digging. He said his prayers and we went back to our usual duties. The digging of graves (and maintenance of the graveyard) was later done by locals hired for the task who worked under the direction of the chaplain, who participated in the internment of every one who died while in our care.

I can't see a social worker assuming the same role.
 
I really wish people would bloody well stop pretending like we can't take that part of a Chaplain Officer's role and responsibilities and give it to someone else.

The Padres do that because that's their job. That's why we keep them around. Even if we eliminate Chaplains as a trade, that job can be taken on by another group.
Which trade essentially doesn’t have a rigid trade structure and would be able to take on that role?

It works for padres because they are impartial to the whole CoC system. I know if I were to talk to a padre they A) actually give a crap about my interests and B) aren’t beholden to the same duties and responsibilities of other officers.

That isn’t the only reason we keep them around, like I said, funerals, contacting the families of the fallen, spiritual connection for the troops. These are all roles that you can’t easily give to any other trade.

Lets also not pretend padres are uneducated in terms of providing council, as some posts here have claimed (as opposed to social workers who somehow are more educated). Padres are educated by some of the longest standing educational institutions in the world. You don’t just wake up one day and declare yourself a Imam, Rabbi, or Priest.

Its like one arty storesman said to me as a sup tech once. ‘What stops me from doing your job?’. My response was fairly simple, ‘about the same amount of training preventing me from doing yours.’

We all have roles to play. There isn’t a single trade in the CAF today which can easily be replaced.
 
Women in the navy could be said to be a return to tradition. There were women on board Nelson's navy. There were women during the British civil war that defended their homes against the Roundheads. Joan of Arc wasn't the first lady to don a suit of armour. We build upon tradition. In so doing we may supersede it with a new one but we are replacing and not abandoning. Tradition provides the foundation, even in war. Sun Wu is still quoted: his concepts provide the traditions behind much of our planning. Traditions provide a link with the past: important when you are trying to imbue the concept of loyalty into recruits. The US marines we don't leave anyone behind is a tradition that instills a feeling of comfort during trying times. I am not saying some traditions have outlived their usefulness but examine each one carefully before you discard it and don't be bullied into it simply to satisfy the latest fad. Chaplains, for the most part, live their faith. They don't need a pulpit. They are also a respected member of the regiment. I would think that every serving soldier should be insulted that some two bit politico was trying to stop them from providing the words that they feel would most comfort those present.

What you're describing isn't a return to tradition, but cherry picking historical examples that were not the norm to fit a narrative (and none relating to the CAF).

"I am not saying some traditions have outlived their usefulness but examine each one carefully before you discard it and don't be bullied into it simply to satisfy the latest fad."

Exactly what I said:

"Not all traditions should change, but we have to be open minded to change and not dismiss change based on tradition alone."


"I would think that every serving soldier should be insulted that some two bit politico was trying to stop them from providing the words that they feel would most comfort those present."

You would like to think that, but the reality is 70% of young Canadian soldiers aren't religious and probably don't care (provided a link to the stats previously if you want to look at them).

"Traditions provide a link with the past: important when you are trying to imbue the concept of loyalty into recruits."

Again, not all traditions. Drinking heavily and preventing women from working most jobs does not imbue a sense of loyalty.
 
Last edited:
I really wish people would bloody well stop pretending like we can't take that part of a Chaplain Officer's role and responsibilities and give it to someone else.

The Padres do that because that's their job. That's why we keep them around. Even if we eliminate Chaplains as a trade, that job can be taken on by another group.
And I really wish people would bloody well stop pretending like we can take that part of a chaplain officer’s role and responsibilities and give it to someone else.

It’s a case of « if the system isn’t broken, don’t try to fix it ».

All I see is a disaster in the making. We have precedence, current situation and a lack of trust that backs that assertion up.

Who do you give that job to? What group? I’ve (and a few others) already posted a few facts as to why I don’t think social workers can or would be able to do it.
 
Back
Top