Originally posted by Doc H.: The USAF view, was, at least, that you were an officer first and whatever your AFSC (Air Force Specialty Code) was second. I went to the same Air War College that Wing Commanders attended, and any number of medical officers, including me, carried G-Series orders and command authority during at least one assignment. Many flight surgeons are command pilots. In spite of the Geneva Convention, three Army dental officers were awarded the MOH for combat operations, among 76 other medical personnel overall historically, from all services. My final assignment was in the Pentagon immediately post-9/11 on the Air Force CAT (Crisis Action Team), alongside warfighters from all services, ANG and Reservists, planning combat ops. Chaplains carry a different load, and I can understand, but for any medic who thought they were a medic first, my favorite COS Gen John Jumper introduced me to my Pentagon assignment with "The mission of the Air Force is to fly, fight and win. And don't you ever forget it." A blank uniform would have been...something the General would not have understood.
The Army definitely thinks differently! As a long time Army medical officer, the position of the Army has been in a group of personnel the “ special staff” officers like medical and chaplain do not lead formations outside their specialty- if for example as I did many times, a medical officer or chaplain regardless of rank accompanied a combat patrol, the highest ranking combat arms soldier was in charge. In a lot of cases that meant myself as a major for the purposes of that mission was subordinate to even an infantry E-7, if they were leading the patrol. Medical officers of course can be in a leadership position ( I was OIC of a medical section manning an aid station in Afghanistan) over medical assets. But the idea the highest ranking person is always in charge is definitely not how things work on the Army side
Posts: 3836 | Location: Finally free in AZ! | Registered: February 14, 2003
Thanks for the comments thus far. This it something else I’m curious about:
quote:
he said he wanted to restore chaplains’ focus on ministry and argued that the role had shifted toward counseling and support functions in recent years.
How does “ministry” differ from something like counseling? I believe I can think of some ways because I believe I know what counseling involves, but how would you describe ministry?
And not only that, but “in recent years”? When I was a military brat in the early 1960s I often heard the expression, “Don’t like it? Talk to the chaplain.” A few years later in Basic, it was a chaplain who tried to explain to us recruits why the tradition of saluting was important. (A rather unusual, but clever explanation that I remember to this day.) That wasn’t about them handing out the Eucharist on Sundays.
I can tell at sight a Chassepot rifle from a javelin.
Posts: 49844 | Location: 10,160 Feet Above Sea Level in Commirado | Registered: April 04, 2002
In the Navy at least, Chaps are overburdened with mental health visits. They are the first line due to long wait times for appointment with overburdened clinical psychologists and psychiatrists. Chaps winds up being a nurse who talks to you and diagnoses you or refers you instead of a chaplain.
Counseling is great when it’s marriage counseling, or personal counseling. But most often it’s psychiatric counseling chaplains are doing. At least in the Navy.
Eight years to retirement! Just waiting!
Posts: 7964 | Location: Wisconsin | Registered: August 10, 2009
Retired USAF LtCol (O-5), and it bothers me not in the least. I’m sure the younger Chaplains will render a salute as required, but if they’re older looking pop one. If they don’t out rank you, so what. They have a tough job.
NRA Life Member
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are." Teddy Roosevelt
Posts: 2330 | Location: Newnan, GA USA | Registered: January 24, 2006
Thread drift: I wasn't sure about this "rank", so I asked Google. The reply gave me the correct reference to *M*A*S*H*, but the AI answer also gave this misinformation: "In the Navy, a Lieutenant Commander is above a Captain."
Unless things have changed since I was active duty Navy, Lieutenant Commander is O-4; Captain is O-6.
הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים
Posts: 33707 | Location: Central Florida, Orlando area | Registered: January 03, 2010
captain I am glad you said it because every time I read it I started to post. lol
In the Navy (and honestly the AF too I’m sure) dr’s aren’t in charge of anything that is a warfare designated unit. Commanding a “team” is one thing, commanding an actual combat unit is a whole other animal.
If you don’t have a warfare specialty you aren’t commanding a combat unit whether it’s an airplane, ship, sub whatever.This message has been edited. Last edited by: pedropcola,
Posts: 8479 | Location: Florida | Registered: June 18, 2005
As a young sailor on a heavy cruiser and having to do side boy duty I had to along with other side boy 's had to go to the dock in japan to retrieve out drunk Chaplin ,he did it all the time with others.full navy captain. Had we lowly seaman would get captain mass for that shi* Finally some standards for officers.
Posts: 22445 | Location: Georgia | Registered: February 19, 2007
So, as my completely non-military, but Christian take on it….
I think there maybe need to be two different things.
I can, definitely, see men called to minister to soldiers in times of conflict, but I think it would be very challenging to be one in furtherance of a combat goal.
No Christian can ever want to destroy the enemy. We may have to kill, and we are permitted to do so, in dire necessity - but it is always, at least slightly, a failure that we had to kill instead of helping them find Christ.
I think to have been a chaplain during the Obama admin, especially for SF etc must have been quite challenging.
Posts: 6900 | Location: Republic of Ice Cream, Low Country, SC. | Registered: May 24, 2007
Many historians would agree with this: “The First World War was a tragic and unnecessary conflict.” — John Keegan, The First World War (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1999)
But just as Iran has been waging war, overtly and covertly, against the US since 1979, the Germans conducted hostile military actions against the US prior to our entry into World War I. That included massive sabotage efforts and even biological warfare in the form of introducing anthrax and glanders into the country. When someone attacks you, it’s appropriate to attack them back. Unnecessary or not, if anything once the war was being fought our entry would have been justified well before Wilson evidently decided that enough was enough.
I can tell at sight a Chassepot rifle from a javelin.
Posts: 49844 | Location: 10,160 Feet Above Sea Level in Commirado | Registered: April 04, 2002
Originally posted by Aglifter: So, as my completely non-military, but Christian take on it….
I think there maybe need to be two different things.
I can, definitely, see men called to minister to soldiers in times of conflict, but I think it would be very challenging to be one in furtherance of a combat goal.
No Christian can ever want to destroy the enemy. We may have to kill, and we are permitted to do so, in dire necessity - but it is always, at least slightly, a failure that we had to kill instead of helping them find Christ.
I think to have been a chaplain during the Obama admin, especially for SF etc must have been quite challenging.
I don't think you quite understand what a military Chaplain is or does then.
Not sure about the other services, but US Army Chaplains do not carry weapons.
Posts: 37102 | Location: Pennsylvania | Registered: November 12, 2007