Religion in the Canadian Forces & in Canadian Society

[stealthylizard]

Ugh, I hated mandatory church parades when I was in cadets.  It wasn't that long ago either, back in the early 90's.  We were required to have parental permission to skip them.  As much as I hated going to church, it kept us away from barrack duties while the non-religious types got down to cleaning for CO's inspection.

 

[armyvern]

Each individual needs to take care of their own religious beliefs; they shouldn't require the government to hold their hand on this matter. A member of the CF shouldn't be increasing the administrative burden by demanding that the military provide them with the religious content in their life - more self-reliance is needed, not less.

The whole problem with your argument here is that neither should any CF member be denied religious or spiritual content while deployed, training etc etc simply because they are a member of the CF.

We are a reflection of Canadian society. How better to reflect that tolerant Candian society than by allowing spiritual and religious needs, in all their many shapes and forms, to be practised by each and every individual soldier as one sees fit, as is occurring right now as we speak? I'm certainly not out there holding their hand, and neither are you. Is it putting you out any? No, I'd say it's not.  Tolerance works both ways...the right to practice and the right not to, a fact you seem to be forgetting.

Man, I've tried to stay out of this thread, being that I am not a religious person at all but, sadly, your belief that individuals are being administrative burdens because they are afforded the opportunity to practise their own spirituality or religious beliefs while serving, just as any other Canadian is afforded the right to, is right the fuck out of it; and that's my .02 cents worth.

 

[cameron]

Iterator you don't get it, it IS the religious content of those ceremonies that make them such a source of strength and comfort.

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

The ecumenical nature of the ceremonies, the ramp ceremonies, the blessing of the colours, the Remembrance itself, is designed to serve a purpose.  That purpose is to honour both those who serve, and those who have fallen, to provide comfort and support.  There are those that say these ceremonies serve no military purpose, that, like the parades, the colours, the ceremonials, they are relics of a past that should be tossed aside with the bayonette and horse cavalry.  The army that does so, that tosses aside everthing not imediately required for maintainace of its kit, and killing human beings, will have created a force that simultaneously has mastered the arts of killing, and forgotten for what it stands.  The Soviets sent such a force to Afghanistan, and when the boys came marching home, the only ones laughing were the Russian mobs, who found ample employment for hurting young men who knew they had blood on their hands, and no idea either why, or why they should stop.
We are not simply executioners.  We are soldiers.  Brothers and sisters in arms who stand beneath our colours, bit(h and complain as we spit and polish for the parades that make us proud even as we complain.  We remember the sacrifice of our forebearers at Ypres, the Somme, Dieppe, Normandy, Korea, Yugoslavia, and now Afghanistan.  We stand together in these "empty ceremonials" civilians so quickly dismiss, as we stand together in the sorts of endless, griniding, soul destroying stresses that are operational deployments, that are wars in all but name; we stand because we remember why.  Padres are not the most important trade in the CF, but they have an institutional knowledge of how to handle the spiritual needs of soldiers that no civilian can bring.  I would rather talk to a CF Chaplain of another faith who understands OUR world, than my own priest who has no idea what we have seen and have to remember. 

 

[cameron]

Again +1 mainerjohnthomas.  Like I said before the CF can be an efficient fighting force without ceremonies (religious or otherwise), but there is a difference between being an efficient fighting force and an excellent one.  What some people forget is that one of the things (apart from excellent training of course) that makes militaries like the British, Canadian, Australian and New Zealanders so formidable despite their size, are their traditions, many of which either have a religious component or were influenced by religious ideals.  These traditions, some of which are centuries old, give members of the profession of arms a reason to take pride in their craft, other than just killing because one is good at it.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Like I said before the CF can be an efficient fighting force without ceremonies (religious or otherwise), but there is a difference between being an efficient fighting force and an excellent one.

I fail to see your theory, in your past posts, on how removing cerimonial duites will make us more efficient.

Do you mean the time wasted on them can be put to beter use?

Please elaborate so I can better understand, as I do not want to post something incorrect.

dileas

tess

 

[Emenince Grise]

We stand together in these "empty ceremonials" civilians so quickly dismiss, as we stand together in the sorts of endless, griniding, soul destroying stresses that are operational deployments, that are wars in all but name; we stand because we remember why.

As a civilian, but one who has presided at the civilian counterpart of those "empty ceremonials" (such as Remembrance Day),  I find there is far more interest now and appreciation for the ceremonials than there were 25 years ago when I began ministry. It has reached the point in the congregation I serve that I dare not be away on the Sunday prior to Remembrance Day. It's that important.  And every time I mention those who have died in our congregational prayers, as well as those who serve, it has always been positively received. People want to name the sacrifice and remember. 

   Padres are not the most important trade in the CF, but they have an institutional knowledge of how to handle the spiritual needs of soldiers that no civilian can bring.  I would rather talk to a CF Chaplain of another faith who understands OUR world, than my own priest who has no idea what we have seen and have to remember. 

Well said.

 

[warrickdll]

So, what you are saying (for example) is that a dying soldier, who happens to be a Roman Catholic, would be denied last rites in a field hospital, because you would dispense with the Chaplaincy and all of its trappings and rituals.
...

Yes. Clearly we don't have a Chaplain trailing behind each RC incase they die. So whatever the peculiarities of any of the multitude of religions are, they can occur after repatriation.

You are making an argument for the individuation of religious belief. That is certainly one perspective, however it is not how Canadian society sees religious faith. Nor it is how the military (as I understand it) sees religious faith.

I believe that most Canadians think that the government should stay out of religion. Individualization of religion is the correct way to deal with religion in a free society.

...
Canada has historically seen religion and its associated activities as being "value added" to the benefit of society as a whole. That is why, for example, churches can apply for a 50% rebate on GST and why churches are able to issue a tax credit for contributions. It has never been seen as a "service industry", either by society or itself.
...

Well that hold over should be ended.

I'm not saying that individuals are not receiving anything from their religions, but I am saying that is for them to pay for it, and not for it to be subsidized by the government.

...
We have never subscribed to the doctrine of the separation of church and state in Canada. While there is no "established church" in Canada (that being abolished in the 1850's) one would he hard-pressed to find an aspect of Canadian social policy, for example, from Medicare to the Canada Pension Plan, that was not deeply and profoundly influenced by the religious beliefs of those who initiated those policies. Perhaps a little deeper study of Canadian history is in order.
...

It is a myth that the modernization of society is a result of religion. What has happened is that religions have been modernized to try and remain relevant to the changes of society.

...
Finally, it is the mandate of the padre and the Chaplain General's office to be concerned both for the welfare of the members but also for their families. I understand that is a unique mandate among all the service branches. That the CF has incorporated that mandate into itself is both progressive and profoundly helpful to the members, I believe. But perhaps I'm biased.
... 

I am not questioning any padre's accomplishments; I believe that the non-religious duties of padre's should be reassigned and that we should return the responsibility to the individual to take care of their own religious beliefs. 

The whole problem with your argument here is that neither should any CF member be denied religious or spiritual content while deployed, training etc etc simply because they are a member of the CF.
...

You would not be denied anything; there are still phones and the internet.

Think of the argument this way: Should you be denied being a parent because the CF requires you to be somewhere other than at home?

You joined the military, and although the CF may try to accommodate your personal needs, it is also up to each member to attend to their own personal lives. You must be prepared to spend extended times away from your family, your social clubs, and your padre.

Iterator you don't get it, it IS the religious content of those ceremonies that make them such a source of strength and comfort.

Again, it is the other way round. As an example, people have always honoured their dead, but whether or not a specific religion, sect, or any religion at all, is used has never been constant.

...
There are those that say these ceremonies serve no military purpose, that, like the parades, the colours, the ceremonials, they are relics of a past that should be tossed aside with the bayonette and horse cavalry.
... 

No. The ceremonies remain, only the overt religious content is removed.

 

[Emenince Grise]

Yes. Clearly we don't have a Chaplain trailing behind each RC incase they die. So whatever the peculiarities of any of the multitude of religions are, they can occur after repatriation.

In the case of the Roman Catholic faith, that is simply not possible. And as the Roman Catholic Church is the largest single individual religious grouping in Canada, having a chaplain close at hand is an appropriate accommodation.

I believe that most Canadians think that the government should stay out of religion. Individualization of religion is the correct way to deal with religion in a free society.

Would you be surprised that Canadians think otherwise? See any of the works of Prof. Reg Bibby of the University of Lethbridge for more. BTW, religious practice, by definition, is not an individual practice but a communal practice. Viz. the minyan in Judaism, the words of Jesus to Christians to gather together for worship and Friday worship in the Islamic faith.

Well that hold over should be ended.

Why? it is a foundation of Candian society.

I'm not saying that individuals are not receiving anything from their religions, but I am saying that is for them to pay for it, and not for it to be subsidized by the government.

So why should the majority be tyrannized by the minority?

It is a myth that the modernization of society is a result of religion. What has happened is that religions have been modernized to try and remain relevant to the changes of society.

Given that more humans have been killed by noted secularist progressives like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Saddam Hussen et al, your argument rings hollow.

I am not questioning any padre's accomplishments; I believe that the non-religious duties of padre's should be reassigned and that we should return the responsibility to the individual to take care of their own religious beliefs. 

I see a massive increase in the number of shrinks attached to the CF Medical Branch... 

You would not be denied anything; there are still phones and the internet.

And that completely misunderstands human nature. People seek face-to-face contact. The phone and internet are poor substitutes. 

Think of the argument this way: Should you be denied being a parent because the CF requires you to be somewhere other than at home?

You joined the military, and although the CF may try to accommodate your personal needs, it is also up to each member to attend to their own personal lives. You must be prepared to spend extended times away from your family, your social clubs, and your padre.

That has not been the experience of the CF over the last century. Your mileage may vary.

Again, it is the other way round. As an example, people have always honoured their dead, but whether or not a specific religion, sect, or any religion at all, is used has never been constant.

No. The ceremonies remain, only the overt religious content is removed.

The difference, as has been explained to me, is between black and white and Technicolour. Take the religious aspect out of those events and they become really drab.

 

[warrickdll]

In the case of the Roman Catholic faith, that is simply not possible. And as the Roman Catholic Church is the largest single individual religious grouping in Canada, having a chaplain close at hand is an appropriate accommodation.
...

I cannot speak to the specifics of the RC religion, but I presume they have some way of dealing with people who have died without a priest being present.

Chasing the eccentricities of religions is a fool's game. You end up in a state where the religion with the most ridiculous rules has the most rights.

The number of adherents does not make a religion any more or less valid than another.

... Why? it is a foundation of Candian society. ...

Colonization has ended; we no longer need to subsidize religion.

... So why should the majority be tyrannized by the minority? ...

Tyrannized? I'm just saying you should pay for your own religion.

... Given that more humans have been killed by noted secularist progressives like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Saddam Hussen et al, your argument rings hollow. ...

You started off so well, and then you became tyrannized, and now this. Again, the sky is not falling

... And that completely misunderstands human nature. People seek face-to-face contact. The phone and internet are poor substitutes. ... 

And yet we manage with our families. Face-to-face can be done on leave (if not online).

... Take the religious aspect out of those events and they become really drab. ...

Only a lack of imagination would make that true.

 

[deedster]

The difference, as has been explained to me, is between black and white and Technicolour. Take the religious aspect out of those events and they become really drab.

Well said Your Eminence!

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Forgive me if I take the lazy way out and respond to four replies with one post.  First to Geo, I haven't changed my views, perhaps I just expressed myself poorly in my first post, but misunderstandings do occur in life so no sweat.  To mainerjohnthomas and Bruce Monkhouse +1.  Its ironic that a 'heathen' like myself would get so passionate about religion.  Many 'christians' disapprove of people like me who drink Guinness, smoke Dominican cigars and would think nothing of telling someone to f@#* off if they really step on my toes.  However, while I might not live what many consider to be a christian lifestyle, I have a strong belief in God and feel that religion should play an important role in our society.  mainerjohnthomas puts it so well, when someone gives their life for their country, for a cause, for their comrades-in-arms, the least that can be done for them is to send them to their maker in a reverent manner that honours their noble deeds.

I support Bruce's views about the willingness of some of us to discard something that is such an important part of our moral and social fibre.  I personally feel that the man who believes in nothing has already lost everything.  In response to Iterator, while i'm sure the CF would continue to operate efficiently even if subjected to a complete separation of church and state, why get rid of something that has been such a source of strength and comfort as well as maintaining morale for both individuals and units, especially at a time like now when Canada's military is being tested in a way its never been since Korea?

Cameron...you will be pleased to know that Jesus had absolutely no words of reproof for people who drank alcohol (he performed his first miracle at Cana of Galilee and made a lot of wine to keep the party going), there was absolutely no warnings about smoking and he told the odd Pharisee to f... off....in rather more effective terms... as they definately ticked him off. He took a whip and cleared the temple of those whom he thought were desecrating the place. None of those things have anything to do with moral/ or spiritual  behaviour at all in fact. In Old Testament terms one prophet says that we are required to love justice, show mercy and to walk humbly (with our God). Jesus said to love God and neighbor as oneself....sounds like stuff that you're doing....or have I missed my mark?

 

[armyvern]

You would not be denied anything; there are still phones and the internet.

Think of the argument this way: Should you be denied being a parent because the CF requires you to be somewhere other than at home?

You joined the military, and although the CF may try to accommodate your personal needs, it is also up to each member to attend to their own personal lives. You must be prepared to spend extended times away from your family, your social clubs, and your padre.

Again, it is the other way round. As an example, people have always honoured their dead, but whether or not a specific religion, sect, or any religion at all, is used has never been constant.

Get a grip on yourself because you are now pushing your own viewpoint of the "non-requirement" for religion onto others. And you profess yourself to be tolerant? Tolerance is the acceptance of the spirituality or religiosity in any way shape or form, or lack of it, of your fellow man, and of their freedom to practice it or not. Yes, keep the government out of my religious affairs, but don't do it by having the government deny the right to practice it to others (ie CF members who choose to do so) on my behalf for that is intolerant.

I (although not I personally as I am not a religious person) would not be denied anything because I have access to a phone and the internet? Wrong. All citizens of this country have the ability and the right to practice their religion in a Holy place of their own choosing. I really hope that you are not suggesting that the CF deny their members this opportunity to do the same thing or to consult with a "spiritual advisor" (either on a religious basis or not) when deployed etc. Consult a padre or a spiritual advisor via telephone or the internet?? Absolutely not on.

Spare me your petty arguements for arguements sake regarding me joining the military buddy. You know not who to whom you speak. I keep my family quite separate from my career thank you very much. I know all about being away from my family for extended periods of time and for you to suggest otherwise, or to suggest that those who wish to practice their own individual spirituality or religion in their own way are burdening the system and haven't separated their personal lives from their duty to Country is, again, right the fuck out of it.

You and I have the right not to practise any religion if we so choose, but others have the right to practise in their own individual way if they so choose. The CF, and the CF padres, are doing an excellent job of allowing just that to happen.  Get over it.

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Get a grip on yourself because you are now pushing your own viewpoint of the "non-requirement" for religion onto others. And you profess yourself to be tolerant? Tolerance is the acceptance of the spirituality or religiosity in any way shape or form, or lack of it, of your fellow man, and of their freedom to practice it or not. Yes, keep the government out of my religious affairs, but don't do it by having the government deny the right to practice it to others (ie CF members who choose to do so) on my behalf for that is intolerant.

I (although not I personally as I am not a religious person) would not be denied anything because I have access to a phone and the internet? Wrong. All citizens of this country have the ability and the right to practice their religion in a Holy place of their own choosing. I really hope that you are not suggesting that the CF deny their members this opportunity to do the same thing or to consult with a "spiritual advisor" (either on a religious basis or not) when deployed etc. Consult a padre or a spiritual advisor via telephone or the internet?? Absolutely not on.

Spare me your petty arguements for arguements sake regarding me joining the military buddy. You know not who to whom you speak. I keep my family quite separate from my career thank you very much. I know all about being away from my family for extended periods of time and for you to suggest otherwise, or to suggest that those who wish to practice their own individual spirituality or religion in their own way are burdening the system and haven't separated their personal lives from their duty to Country is, again, right the frig out of it.

You and I have the right not to practise any religion if we so choose, but others have the right to practise in their own individual way if they so choose. The CF, and the CF padres, are doing an excellent job of allowing just that to happen.  Get over it.

+1 Vern....I couldn't have said it better....which is why you said it! ha ha
Our Padres in theatre are very busy with people who are asking questions and seeking solace in spirituality. Impossible to do via the internet or phone...no one forces them to go talk with a Padre but a lot of folks are glad that the listening ears and caring people are real and present for them.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Only a lack of imagination would make that true.

No lack of imagination around here:


In an unspecified future.
Location; the CDS’s office.


Staff Officer No. 1:   “Sir, there’s a problem with the troops.”

CDS: “Well, nothing’s too good for the troops.  We must fix this. What is the problem?”

S.O. No. 1:   “”Well sir, as you can see on this slide, 16% of the general population claims themselves to follow no religion.  We have been receiving complaints from this sector in the service that they are offended by the perception of religious trappings in military ceremonies.  They demand equality sir.”

CDS:  “My God …. no, strike that …. my goodness, we can’t have offended troops, the national press will vilify me … and the Minister.  We still haven’t recovered from making all the IMPs vegan to satisfy the 8% who demand no meat products.”

So. No. 1: “Yes sir, what is your intent?”

CDS: “My intent is to strike down the offending activities.  Henceforth, there is to be no religious activities, or allowances of vestigial trappings.  Sanitize the ceremonials.  And get me the Chaplain General.”

Chaplain General: “Reporting as ordered sir, would you like me to start the meeting with a  short prayer.”

CDS:  “Not bloody likely.  You’re fired, clear your desk and your entire Corps from the department by sundown.”

C.G.: “Damn me sir, what about the churches!”

CDS:  “There’ll be no more of that, or churches either.  All churches in the CF will be handed off to CFPSA.  Once their flat roofs are installed, base clubs can use them once the remaining religious artefacts have been disposed of.

C.G.:  “Aye aye sir, I’ll see you in hell.”

CDS:  ‘No you won’t, we don’t believe in that claptrap around here anymore.”

S.O. No. 2:   “Sir, the CFCWO is here to see you.”

CDS:  “Good morning ‘RSM’, what have you got for me this morning.”

CFCWO:  “Bloody hell General, I wish you’d call me Chief, I’ll never get used to that “RSM” business.”

CDS:  “Enough of that or I’ll make it official.  What do you have, I’m busy converting the force to hereticism, or atheism, or something, …. haven’t had the full brief yet.  All I know is that we need to reissue 65000 sets of dogtags with “NRE.”

CFCWO:  “I wanted to go over the Remembrance Day ceremony.  Once we’ve taken out the Padres, and the prayers, and any mention of crosses – that killed the McCrae poem – we’re down to the Last Post, a moment’s silence, and Reveille.  Should be done in under five minutes.”

CDS: “Splendid, more time for moosemilk ….. uh, we still have that, don’t we, Chief?”

CFCWO: “Yes sir, we haven’t been able to find any religion that mixed milk, ice cream and rum, so it can stay until we do.”

CDS:  “Well, thank God …. no, strike that.”


November 12
CDS’ Office

S.O. No. 2:  “Sir, your papers …. you’d better check the national rags first.”

CDS:  “What now?  My head hurts from the moosemilk yesterday, I hardly remember that whirlwind service.  Uh, do we still call it a service?”

S.O. No. 2:   “No sir, it’s officially the Annual Act of Memoriam now, the Politically Correct Names Committee issued that a few days ago, the CANFORGEN officially striking down all religious practices is on your desk for signature today, we couldn’t sort out the wording in time for Remembrance Day.  Rather difficult to outline something replacing those archaic rites without mentioning the background activities at all.”

CDS:  “So be it.  let’s see what the newshounds have been digging up for this week.  My God ….. no, strike that …. what the hell …. damn, strike that too …. and that dammit ….”

S.O. No. 2: “Ah, yes sir, there seems to be some consternation about the stripping of religion from the Service.  The press seems to think that over 80% of service members have, or had, declared religions and are now being persecuted for it.”

S.O. No. 2: “Oh, and you’re being called the ‘Godless General’, the briefing note is on your desk under the new CANFORGEN.

CDS:  “What briefing note?”

S.O. No. 2:   “The one that describes the unrest among some of the troops over the disbanding of the Padre Corps, stripping of the churches and banning of religious practices.”

CDS: “They can’t expect me to allow that back.  We can’t let just a few complainers force us to change, and I won’t be swayed by a little furor in the press.”

S.O. No. 2:   “Aye, sir.”

S.O. No. 3 (entering office):  “Sir, better turn to NewsTrash.com, the top story is about your campaign of religious persecution.”

CDS:  “What the hell … no, strike that …. a-a-a—achoo”

S.O. No. 3:   “God Bless You sir”

CDS:  “Charge that man …. damn him …… oh Christ …. damn me.  Where’s that order, and bring me the damn shredder.”

 

[Emenince Grise]

Cameron...you will be pleased to know that Jesus had absolutely no words of reproof for people who drank alcohol (he performed his first miracle at Can of Galilee and made a lot of wine to keep the party going), there was absolutely no warnings about smoking and he told the odd Pharisee to f... off....in rather more effective terms... as they definately ticked him off. He took a whip and cleared the temple of those whom he thought were desecrating the place. None of those things have anything to do with moral/ or spiritual  behaviour at all in fact. In Old Testament terms one prophet says that we are required to love justice, show mercy and to walk humbly (with our God). Jesus said to love God and neighbor as oneself....sounds like stuff that you're doing....or have I missed my mark?

Sounds really good to me. 

 

[Emenince Grise]

Get a grip on yourself because you are now pushing your own viewpoint of the "non-requirement" for religion onto others. And you profess yourself to be tolerant? Tolerance is the acceptance of the spirituality or religiosity in any way shape or form, or lack of it, of your fellow man, and of their freedom to practice it or not. Yes, keep the government out of my religious affairs, but don't do it by having the government deny the right to practice it to others (ie CF members who choose to do so) on my behalf for that is intolerant.

I (although not I personally as I am not a religious person) would not be denied anything because I have access to a phone and the internet? Wrong. All citizens of this country have the ability and the right to practice their religion in a Holy place of their own choosing. I really hope that you are not suggesting that the CF deny their members this opportunity to do the same thing or to consult with a "spiritual advisor" (either on a religious basis or not) when deployed etc. Consult a padre or a spiritual advisor via telephone or the internet?? Absolutely not on.

Spare me your petty arguements for arguements sake regarding me joining the military buddy. You know not who to whom you speak. I keep my family quite separate from my career thank you very much. I know all about being away from my family for extended periods of time and for you to suggest otherwise, or to suggest that those who wish to practice their own individual spirituality or religion in their own way are burdening the system and haven't separated their personal lives from their duty to Country is, again, right the frig out of it.

You and I have the right not to practise any religion if we so choose, but others have the right to practise in their own individual way if they so choose. The CF, and the CF padres, are doing an excellent job of allowing just that to happen.  Get over it.

And I hear the choir chanting "Amen..."  ;D

 

[Emenince Grise]

No lack of imagination around here:


In an unspecified future.
Location; the CDS’s office.

That's good. That's VERY good!  ;D

 

[warrickdll]

Get a grip on yourself because you are now pushing your own viewpoint of the "non-requirement" for religion onto others. ...

No. I'm stating that the religious content of CF ceremonies are a liability and also that the government and the CF should get out of the business of subsidizing religions.

...
Spare me your petty arguements for arguements sake regarding me joining the military buddy. You know not who to whom you speak. ...

The argument is a simple one to follow, you (not the literal you) have rights, but you (not the literal you) must accept certain limitations on your (not the literal your) ability to access these rights due to your (not the literal your) service in the CF.

... ...

Imagination noted. Now if you could apply that energy to removing the religious content in military ceremonies (a recognized fault), then the problem would be solved. Sure, a vocal minority will complain, but sometimes you have to stand up to that when you're doing the right thing.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Imagination noted. Now if you could apply that energy to removing the religious content in military ceremonies (a recognized fault), then the problem would be solved. Sure, a vocal minority will complain, but sometimes you have to stand up to that when you're doing the right thing.

Do you even hear what you are saying?

Perhaps the "vocal minority" that needs to be stood up to are those who would strip the majority of their right to religious content that does not detract from operational effectiveness - which you have not demonstrated the current level of religious content in the CF does.