Wight, Roger D. (1983, Fall). The chaplain's allegiance to the military: a response. Military Chaplains' Review, 12(4), 48-50.
***
We choose to become soldiers and put on the green suit. (p. 48)That was true for the chaplains, including the ones in the Vienna mission's H.R. department, but the Vienna mission staff also chose of their own free will to join the mission. So we voluntarily agreed to be under the mission's authority, right?
Well, to a point. I always expected missions to be reasonable and I understood missions theory and a good chunk of the issues of ministry in Eastern Europe. And there were things I expressed my desire for up front, that right away was contested. So they breached confidence, and my rights weren't observed that were provided in the staff handbook anyway, so the thing was that they just had a blanket right to do whatever they wanted and I had no rights at all. Is that the organization I joined? Do you think I would have joined if I had known that the mission was like that? Are you crazy? No way! But that's basically the way they were and how they acted with me in moving me all over the place from position to position.
Yeah, okay, I came there of my own free will, but I had no idea what the mission was like. At least in the Army there are rules; in the Vienna mission there weren't any rules and there was no grievance procedure - I mean anything that wasn't a joke, anything that would have been at all neutral or where my voice would have been heard.
***
If we cannot well and faithfully discharge the duties of our office because of a conflict arising from our denomination's stance, then we will most likely have to choose to leave military service. An example of this might be a stance which a denomination would take on nuclear arms. Personal convictions involving nuclear arms could invovle conflict which would not allow allegiance to the military. Separation is again indication. (p. 49)The things that I had conflicts with the mission on generally are things that they might not have not even have wanted to admit that even go on there at the mission, such as the deception and the like. So technically I wasn't disagreeing with them on anything. That is if we were going to make a show as if this issue is something that we don't value, that how can it be something worth making a stink over and making my life infinitely miserable over, right? So it's not like I'm disagreeing over nuclear arms, which everyone knows the U.S. military has and where they stand concerning. Rather, I'm being a pain in an area where the mission sort of keeps under wraps.
So that's the thing. I didn't disagree with the mission on any of the major issues, such as the theological doctrines or the basic strategies, except once I learned about how their so paranoid to the nth degree that they almost forgot God in the process. So that's what happened, except that my dad work might be involved as well, interfering in my time there.
***
We have seen that effective ministry within the military requires our allegiance to the military. (p. 50)I still find this hard to accept. Even taking into account that the military is a total institution, you can compare it to prison ministry then - should ministers in prisons have some kind of allegiance like that to prisons. Or hospitals? Or, I don't know, how about slums?
And you still have to deal with the unequally yoked issue. I'm just still not convinced.
***
Well, I guess that's all. I just went through a few short articles in this file that I decided not to comment on. Then I just decided to just stop at this and I'll just start a new one next time.
