Last Sunday, Catholic priests across the country read an open letter to their parishioners. It condemned the Department of Health and Human Services’ decision to force religious employers to cover the cost of contraception and abortion-inducing drugs in its employees’ health-care coverage. The letter argued that the faithful could not and must not in good conscience comply with the HHS’ “unjust law.”
However, Catholic chaplains in the U.S. Army were “forbidden” from reading this communication.
After Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who is in charge of Catholic military chaplains, sent out the note to be read at Sunday Mass, the Army’s Office of the Chief of Chaplains sent out another communication “forbidding Catholic priests to read the letter, in part because it seemed to encourage civil disobedience, and could be read as seditious against the Commander-in-Chief,” Business Insider‘s Michael Dougherty reports.
It seems that many of them did just that. The military Archdiocese is providing legal support.I sincerely hope a Catholic Chaplin has the guts to disobey this order. Then, if he is disciplined, there will be one h**l of a broo-ha-ha that will blow up in the Army’s face!!!
I wish our Bishops would institute a manditory program of instruction in each Parish to teach our brethren to vote according to Catholic teaching. Then, watch how fast the anti-constitutional scoundrels change their tune!
- Please describe a little of your educational/professional background including your training in dealing with PTSD; please list any specific treatment methods or doctrine which are taught and used currently in the military mental health system. (I will scrub any references to specific locations of training/internship/etc and replace them with fictitious names with an asterisk denoting this and why, and certainly will not say which post you work on)
- Please describe your experience with the military and how it treats PTSD. (simple is fine, no need for technical jargon- I realize this overlaps question #1, answer each as is most sensible to you)
- What has been your experience with the institutional framework for treating PTSD in the military, in regards to how Mental Health involves the Chaplains?
- Have you heard unofficially, or unofficially, any “under the breath” sort of comments which deride the effectiveness or efficacious result of the involvement of the Chaplains in the process of diagnosing and treating PTSD?
- Understanding that spiritual needs are just as important as physical and mental needs: why do you think Army Chaplains have been so ineffective in addressing the issue as it falls within their purview, from the perspective of a mental health provider?
- Have you ever heard or experienced blatant, or tacit, bigotry against the involvement of Chaplains or religious leadership in the treatment of a Soldier, or in general, by the mental health professionals you have worked with? Being candid, what are your biases in regards to the involvement of chaplains?
- What has been the most noticeable failure of the military mental health system in the treatment of PTSD from your experiences working in the system?
- Do you feel that the military mental health community has more leeway in the treatment of a Soldier than a Chaplain? (i.e. Soldier can be forced to see mental health, but chaplains practically have to beg to see a Soldier sometimes). If so, what benefits and downsides have you seen from that?
- If you could do anything to change the way the Chaplains are involved in treatment, what would you change, add, or subtract?
- What is your number one piece of advice for Soldiers and their families once PTSD is suspected or officially diagnosed?
We thank you, sir, for your comments and for your service to God and country!I.A. Gladfelter, LTC, USA (RET)
We also thank you, Sergeant, for your comments and service to God and country!SGT Jon B. Horton, USA, Ret.
All true. However, as a matter of practice, the duties of a priest in the chapliancy are divided according to his two “masters”. His role as a chaplain is directed by the needs of the military; his role as a priest is directed by the Church, through his Bishop. The activities of the priest **during Mass ** (or when fulfilling strictly clerical duties such as hearing confession) should not be under the direction of anyone other than the priest’s ordinary, in this case Archbishop Broglio.Military, chaplains are military commissioned officers just like those in other branches such as the infantry, armor, medical corps, finance corps, whatever. As such, they must give up certain freedoms to preserve the freedoms of us all.
Also, the President of the United States is the Commander In Chief of the U. S. Military. Military officers are by military law required to say nothing detrimental against the President of the United States and his policies and those of others in the Chain of Command, and certain other Federal officials. To do otherwise is an act of disobedience punishable by anything from an Article 15 to a court martial, as a violation of the U. S. Code of Military Justice (UCMJ.) The penalties can run from forfieture of pay through fines to demotions, dismissal from service under other than honorable conditions, may include time under house arrest, in jail, or in prison. It is all a matter of maintaining military discipline, of maintaining obedience throughout the chain of command, which for a military organization is absolutely positively crucial.
The chaplain must comply with the policies of his sponsoring Church, of course, but he must also comply fully with the regulations of his branch of service, the U.C.M.J., and the lawful orders of all those in his chain of command whether or not he likes it. He must also provide spiritual care with all military personnel whether or not they are of his faith. Furthermore, he can not, for reasons of conscience or any other reason for that matter, foment dissent on or off-post against anyone in the Chain of Command - which runs from his immediate superior officer all the way up to the President. If he can not comply for reasons of conscience, he must first comply with whatever orders are given; and only then may he question those orders through military legal channels.
If the Chaplain cannot do that in good conscience, his only option is to resign from military service (or if only contemplating becoming a military Chaplain, do not sign up in the first place.) To become a military chaplain or not (or to remain a chaplain) is a matter of serious discernment.
It is, in my opinion, good to become a military chaplain. Chaplains, especially Catholic chaplains, are badly needed, and worth their weight in platinum! But clergy considering becoming chaplains need to know what they are getting into, and once they are sworn in, they absolutely must abide by all the terms and conditions of military service.
I.A. Gladfelter, LTC, USA (RET)
Excellent points when considering the history of the Chaplain corps:All true. However, as a matter of practice, the duties of a priest in the chapliancy are divided according to his two “masters”. His role as a chaplain is directed by the needs of the military; his role as a priest is directed by the Church, through his Bishop. The activities of the priest **during Mass ** (or when fulfilling strictly clerical duties such as hearing confession) should not be under the direction of anyone other than the priest’s ordinary, in this case Archbishop Broglio.
The problem with this interference is that it opens up the Mass to even more interference. What if the military decided that certain Scripture passages are inflamatory and banned them from being read at Mass? Or it decided that using only wheat hosts was unfair to soldiers and dependants with celiac disease and demanded that rice hosts be used instead? Or decided that priest-chaplains are not to observe the seal of Confession for certain sins?
Q: What insignia has been worn by Army chaplains, and which was the first?
A: Prior to 1880, U.S. Army chaplains did not officially wear their branch insignia nor insignia of rank or grade. During the Civil War, many chaplains considered themselves officers and wore captain’s shoulder straps on their distinctly clerical uniforms.
The first authorized insignia (13 Feb. 1880 - 5 May 1888) was the shepherd’s crook of embroidered frosted silver bullion in center of black velvet shoulder straps as stated in General Order Number 10. This would be appropriate on either the frock coat or undress uniform. In 1898, the crook was replaced with a plain Latin cross of silver on dark-blue shoulder straps. In 1914, chaplains were authorized to wear not only grade insignia, but a complete staff officer’s uniform. General John J. Pershing mandated that chaplains in Europe could only wear the cross on shoulder loops. Most chaplains disagreed, and on 19 March 1926 a board recommended that the insignia of rank be restored to the uniform of the Chaplain. A 1926 Act guaranteed that chaplains were given the rank, pay and allowances of their grades, and they were also to wear their distinctive insignia.
One must question why men who should have a spirit of service to the servants of this nation should feel so compelled to confuse the secular issue with the spiritual. This disparity creates a double-barrier to the spiritual humility of most soldiers. Whats worse is the duality of the situation that Corki touched on, wherein a priest will violate his spiritual duty in the execution of his secular duty. They’ve already been silenced on the issue of homosexuality in light of the repeal of DADT. Now this too? Where DOES it end? Priests giving communion to Satanists because they want to do bad things with it? Priests being forced to perform gay civil-unions? Where? When? How? Who?
I don’t know for sure, but perhaps it was driven more by the military services than the chaplains at that time. The military is by nature highly structured, and seems, arguably, to have problems dealing with people who serve among them but do not wear some form of rankExcellent points when considering the history of the Chaplain corps:
How they assumed themselves officers, and the military played along:
This is an interesting comment. This concern, of avoiding mixing the sacred with the secular, working to keep the two separate, is more generally associated with the Lutherans, coming from their doctrine of the “two kingdoms.”One must question why men who should have a spirit of service to the servants of this nation should feel so compelled to confuse the secular issue with the spiritual.
Obviously there are limits beyond which Catholic chaplains could not serve in the military as they do at present. Precisely where those limits are, keeping things from going so far as to approach those limits, and what to do when those limits are crossed, is a matter for Bishop Broglio of the Military Ordinariate in consultation with and under the guidance of the USCCB and ultimately the Vatican. As Catholics we must trust him and his advisors. It would truly be tragic for our soldiers to have to go into battle without chaplains accompanying them.This disparity creates a double-barrier to the spiritual humility of most soldiers. Whats worse is the duality of the situation that Corki touched on, wherein a priest will violate his spiritual duty in the execution of his secular duty. They’ve already been silenced on the issue of homosexuality in light of the repeal of DADT. Now this too? Where DOES it end? Priests giving communion to Satanists because they want to do bad things with it? Priests being forced to perform gay civil-unions? Where? When? How? Who?
Unimaginable, really!It would truly be tragic for our soldiers to have to go into battle without chaplains accompanying them.
Materially false; the letter is changed and this was only allowed due to the Archbishop of the Military Diocese essentially seeking an indulgence of sorts to read the REDACTED letter. Serving 2 Masters much?Due to demands on chapel times and failure to make prior coordination with their military superiors the RC chaplains could not read the letter out loud during services.
However, individual copies of the letter were handed out at the door as congregants entered.
Now, all that being said, and the legal and constitutional precedent having been set, the question is this: on what grounds did the U.S. Army have the right to forbid those chaplains from reading an open letter from the Archbishop during Sunday Mass?
Update II: The Secretary of the Army has approved the reading of the letter:
Code:Subject: Important Letter Importance: High
Code:Dear Chaplain,
Code:After speaking with the Secretary of the Army it has been agreed that this text should be read at all of the Masses next Sunday and made available to the faithful. If you already read it last Sunday, it is not necessary to repeat the reading.
Code:Thank you and God bless you. Fraternally in Christ, Most Reverend Timothy P. Broglio Archbishop for the Military Services
However, it’s important to note that the language in “this text” has been amended from its original form. The line “We cannot — we will not — comply with this unjust law,” has been removed entirely.
I’m not trying to start a fight with you, jonbhorton. I was mad when I first heard of this. I was told what I wrote in my above post.Materially false; the letter is changed and this was only allowed due to the Archbishop of the Military Diocese essentially seeking an indulgence of sorts to read the REDACTED letter. Serving 2 Masters much?
Update from the article: