I heard from friends that there is an association for the Christian army officers in the SAF. Is that true?
Is there an official website?
yeah, there is one... i can try to get more info for u if u're interested... ?
It is a very bad idea for the SAF to allow such organizations, even informal ones that exist outside its command structure/ hierarchy.
We now have a Christian Army Officers Association. Next the Muslim officers will also want an officers association of their own, followed by Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists.... etc.
Each of these sub cliques will further its own agenda and this will be highly divisive, especially in times of war.
All SAF officers should regard themselves as officers of the Singapore Armed Forces, not Christian officers of the Singapore Armed Forces, or Muslim officers of the Singapore Armed Forces etc.
If these officers are compelled to join a religious society, they are free to join a Christian (or Muslim, or Hindu, or Buddhist etc.) Association, but not a Christian Army Officers Association.
Divisive? Whats so divisive about an association? Every officer regards himself as an officer of the SAF, not of a Christian Army Officers Association.
Some people are just so narrow minded about religion that it just becomes an annoyance. Why can't a group of officers with something in common form an association? It would be unconstitutional to limit them.
On the other hand we also never heard of Hindu officers club or Islamic brotherhood of SAF officers
Well, if they are interested to form such an association, why not? I think it would be an excellent idea to have an association to help look meld the interests of religion and the military.
You are right about that but will it sound good to the ears? I think those officers can have their association as civilians.
Given the sensitive race and religion issues that may well be the crux of any conflict in South East Asia, such a group would be extremely unwise, to say the least. Even in a more homogeneous (religiously speaking, at least) military like the US Army, the issue of religion, and evangelical Christianity in particular, is a perpetual bugbear, with non-Christians being ostracised. In Singapore, the situation would be even worse. For reasons such as these, there should never be any official recognition or support for such an organisation.
Still, what people do in their private time is their own business, within limits. Such an organisation, privately founded and privately run, would be hard to argue against unless there could be demonstrable proof that it was detrimental to the interests of the military. I hope the leaders of this organisation are aware of the dangers that the organisation poses to the stability of the military and society as a whole, and always tread tactfully. In my personal experience, anybody who tries to promote a religion will definitely step on other peoples toes. Given the big hoo-hah about Christian nurses trying to convert patients one or two years back, any attempt to bring the works of these organisation into military life would be heavily frowned upon, as it would undermine the ideals of our military, and our society as a whole.
Shotgun: Would you have the same reaction if you heard that there was a Muslim Army Officers Association? Obviously not right? For this very reason I don't think that a Christian Army Officers Association is a good idea, but as has been mentioned, if these officers are discreet about it and form an association in their private time, so be it.
I disagree strongly with your statement about 'melding the interests of religion and the military'. In a multi-religious society like ours, there is no way that religion can be brought into the military, regardless of the numerous historical and present day precedents, which, I might mention, happen in more religiously homogeneous populations. The stance of the SAF therefore is that religion is your own private business, and, given the circumstances we are in, this is the best stance to take in my opinion.
Originally posted by Shotgun:Divisive? Whats so divisive about an association? Every officer regards himself as an officer of the SAF, not of a Christian Army Officers Association.
Some people are just so narrow minded about religion that it just becomes an annoyance. Why can't a group of officers with something in common form an association? It would be unconstitutional to limit them.
If every officer regards himself as an officer of the SAF and not of a Christian SAF Army Officer, why form the Christian Officers Association? Those officers are free to join a Church of other CHristian organizations as civilians.
I am not narrow minded about religion. Every Singaporean citizen (be they officers or not) are entitled to practice their religion in their own personal capacity. But the SAF is an extension of our secular government, so it should strictly be irreligious.... lest we start to have a group of civil servants forming a Christian Civil Servants Association, followed by another group forming the Muslim Civil Servants Association... ad infinitum. Do you really want to live in a country like that?
It would only be unconstitutional to limit a person's practicing his choice of religion in his personal capacity. Religion is a personal thing. By all means, practice your religions, but not at the expense of national unity.
Before we go on with this debate, I might as well post the link up. It's not limited to officers, but is open to Christians in all arms of the SAF.
http://www.mcf.org.sg/home.html
Read the mission statement and vision first before posting anything else. It's really senseless when you base all your comments on things we haven't really confirmed yet.
well i'm catholic, and an aspiring officer...i don't see what's the issue at all. its all done in good faith, it doesn't compromise with the SAF core values, and so their aim is for the well being of fellow christians and the nation at a whole.
Originally posted by cookiecookie:I heard from friends that there is an association for the Christian army officers in the SAF. Is that true?
Is there an official website?
if there is one, i certainly have not heard of it.
and if there is one, my sense is that the saf does not officially sanction it.
there's one. but im not sure whether it's the one TS is talking about. cuz in my buddy's OA account, he always receives daily email from a certain WO and the email's content is about those teachings bla bla and accompanied with stories.
though im a taoist and i detest those who keep trying to convert me, i still read those mails and find some stories nice and interesting.
Originally posted by edwin3060:Given the sensitive race and religion issues that may well be the crux of any conflict in South East Asia, such a group would be extremely unwise, to say the least. Even in a more homogeneous (religiously speaking, at least) military like the US Army, the issue of religion, and evangelical Christianity in particular, is a perpetual bugbear, with non-Christians being ostracised. In Singapore, the situation would be even worse. For reasons such as these, there should never be any official recognition or support for such an organisation.
Still, what people do in their private time is their own business, within limits. Such an organisation, privately founded and privately run, would be hard to argue against unless there could be demonstrable proof that it was detrimental to the interests of the military. I hope the leaders of this organisation are aware of the dangers that the organisation poses to the stability of the military and society as a whole, and always tread tactfully. In my personal experience, anybody who tries to promote a religion will definitely step on other peoples toes. Given the big hoo-hah about Christian nurses trying to convert patients one or two years back, any attempt to bring the works of these organisation into military life would be heavily frowned upon, as it would undermine the ideals of our military, and our society as a whole.
Shotgun: Would you have the same reaction if you heard that there was a Muslim Army Officers Association? Obviously not right? For this very reason I don't think that a Christian Army Officers Association is a good idea, but as has been mentioned, if these officers are discreet about it and form an association in their private time, so be it.
I disagree strongly with your statement about 'melding the interests of religion and the military'. In a multi-religious society like ours, there is no way that religion can be brought into the military, regardless of the numerous historical and present day precedents, which, I might mention, happen in more religiously homogeneous populations. The stance of the SAF therefore is that religion is your own private business, and, given the circumstances we are in, this is the best stance to take in my opinion.
I would fully support a "SAF Muslim/Christian/Buddhist Officer's Association." I believe in the freedom to form associations.
Perhaps melding was not the best of words. If we look at the various religions and their take on violence and bloodshed, we realize that it puts a religion and the military at odds. If such associations under careful supervision is able to deconflict the interests of religion and the military, I do not see why they should not be encouraged.
There are needs that the religious servicemen that cannot be met by the SAF as a neutral organization. Such associations can be a "gap" filler in officially addressing a soldier's religious needs.
I find it hard to see how various religious associations formed to address the needs of servicemen will cause "national" disunity. ( we are not even discussing this on a national level. ) If this country is able to have churches, mosques, temples operating side by side in a neighbourhood, have its people attending it live in harmony and mindful of sensitivities, it will also be able to implement "religious associations" within a SMALLER organizational structure such as the SAF. A military organization with even stricter guidelines should have even lesser problems.
With regards to evangelical Christians servicemen, as long as they are sensitive, non-intrusive with their evangelism they should be able to stay out of trouble. Besides, if they do step over the board, complaints can always belodged for necessary disciplinary actions to be taken. That is one thing that doesn't happen outside the military. =D
not so important stuff i believe, priority is MSK's head
Originally posted by Unknown_X:there's one. but im not sure whether it's the one TS is talking about. cuz in my buddy's OA account, he always receives daily email from a certain WO and the email's content is about those teachings bla bla and accompanied with stories.
though im a taoist and i detest those who keep trying to convert me, i still read those mails and find some stories nice and interesting.
ok. but i believe it is an informal, unofficial association rather than an SAF recognised body... i may be wrong though.
they organise crusade against JI and mas selamat
Dude, you've gotta step forward into the 21st century. The crusades are over!
Originally posted by Shotgun:
I would fully support a "SAF Muslim/Christian/Buddhist Officer's Association." I believe in the freedom to form associations.
Perhaps melding was not the best of words. If we look at the various religions and their take on violence and bloodshed, we realize that it puts a religion and the military at odds. If such associations under careful supervision is able to deconflict the interests of religion and the military, I do not see why they should not be encouraged.
There are needs that the religious servicemen that cannot be met by the SAF as a neutral organization. Such associations can be a "gap" filler in officially addressing a soldier's religious needs.
And what are these needs of religious servicemen that SAF as a neutral organization cannot fufill?
Given that religious servicemen are not forbid from praying or spreading the words and not discriminated on...and so on and so for.
Originally posted by Shotgun:
I find it hard to see how various religious associations formed to address the needs of servicemen will cause "national" disunity. ( we are not even discussing this on a national level. ) If this country is able to have churches, mosques, temples operating side by side in a neighbourhood, have its people attending it live in harmony and mindful of sensitivities, it will also be able to implement "religious associations" within a SMALLER organizational structure such as the SAF. A military organization with even stricter guidelines should have even lesser problems.
So you will find it okay if atheist or agnostic servicemen form a SAF Atheism Association or Agnostism Association and encourage others to join them/convert them?
Originally posted by Shotgun:
With regards to evangelical Christians servicemen, as long as they are sensitive, non-intrusive with their evangelism they should be able to stay out of trouble. Besides, if they do step over the board, complaints can always belodged for necessary disciplinary actions to be taken. That is one thing that doesn't happen outside the military. =D
Please enlighten me on what can the SAF do to these people who step over the line?
Originally posted by Shotgun:I would fully support a "SAF Muslim/Christian/Buddhist Officer's Association." I believe in the freedom to form associations.
Perhaps melding was not the best of words. If we look at the various religions and their take on violence and bloodshed, we realize that it puts a religion and the military at odds. If such associations under careful supervision is able to deconflict the interests of religion and the military, I do not see why they should not be encouraged.
There are needs that the religious servicemen that cannot be met by the SAF as a neutral organization. Such associations can be a "gap" filler in officially addressing a soldier's religious needs.
I find it hard to see how various religious associations formed to address the needs of servicemen will cause "national" disunity. ( we are not even discussing this on a national level. ) If this country is able to have churches, mosques, temples operating side by side in a neighbourhood, have its people attending it live in harmony and mindful of sensitivities, it will also be able to implement "religious associations" within a SMALLER organizational structure such as the SAF. A military organization with even stricter guidelines should have even lesser problems.
With regards to evangelical Christians servicemen, as long as they are sensitive, non-intrusive with their evangelism they should be able to stay out of trouble. Besides, if they do step over the board, complaints can always belodged for necessary disciplinary actions to be taken. That is one thing that doesn't happen outside the military. =D
Agreed that the SAF cannot meet the religious needs of servicemembers, thus all these organisations are acceptable given that it is on private time and discreet. The incident raised by Unknown_X would be pushing the limits already because it is using SAF resources to distribute Christian material. My whole discomfort with the issue is from the fact that because religious restrictions are not always clearly defined by the SAF that evangelical groups of any denomination would try to 'play the system' as has already happened. Also, religion and race are closely interlinked in our part of the world, and anything that disturbs the status quo needs to be closely watched-- as I said before, if there were any hint of discrimination in the SAF based on religion, the whole house of cards may just come down.
Finally, as you said yourself, some tenets of religion are not compatible with the military, or indeed, society as a whole-- our modern society functions because we sidestep,ignore or re-interprete those tenets. In fact I am sure that all those who have done BMT within the past few years would have done a questionaire that asks you whether you would place loyalty to your religion above loyalty to your country.
From the website of the MCF:
"In the following 2 years, attempts were made to register the group with the Registry of Societies but these efforts failed. We then faced the prospect of being disbanded.
Upon knowing our situation, the Fellowship of Evangelical Students (FES) formed the Armed Forces Committee (AFC) on 8 July 1972, and we became affiliated to FES as the AFC."
The fact that this MCF is not allowed to be an official society, but must go through loopholes and establish itself as adjunct of a previously approved society, shows that the official stance would still be to disallow such societies.
Also, one of the links of the MCF is to the OCF, which is an organisation for American Christian officers. In the first place, such a link to another military would be inadvisable due to security issues. Also, the OCF is the very organisation that has lead to such reports of discrimination against non-Christians in the US Army and Marines.
For these reasons I would be disinclined to think that the MCF is a good idea.
Race and religion are sensitive issues especially in war...
I wouldn't see why having the MCF would be a problem. It is a fellowship, meaning that its role is not just to evangelise (which must be done with tact), but for the spiritual well-being of Christians in the SAF. They will support one another spiritually.
When they tried to register in 1970, they were not accepted. Note that that year was in wake of racial riots across the whole decade. Perhaps the gov. were weary of such groups which might pose threat to stability?
Even so, it is still a touchy issue, so no surprise there will be opposition.
If correctly applied, Christian teachings and concepts should not discriminate.
Hope this helps.
Sorry, my edit function doesn't work so sorry for the double post but,
I believe that evangelism should be kept to a personal level. It is not a good idea to mate God with the military as an organisation, but it is perfectly okay to mate God with military personnel.
Evangelism can take many forms. A lot
of it is one-to-one which can turn off some people, but that's where evangelists have to be tact. Maybe the organisation should set up some guidelines on evangelism in SAF? (When, where, appropriety of occasion?)
However, such groups should not use SAF resource to spread their word. (I have some MCF tracts. By right, they aren't affliated with SAF and printing is done through FES)
As long as SAF does not endorse it, there won't be much of a problem as it does not support any such group.
I am a Christian posting this up, so if there is any problem with my statement, pls let me know. I'm trying to keep my postings as sensitive to others as possible so if you feel offended by my posting, again let me know.
Originally posted by wuming78:ok. but i believe it is an informal, unofficial association rather than an SAF recognised body... i may be wrong though.
i dont think it's recognised. just a way for those who believe in their faith strongly to share what they feel i suppose.
edwin3060, yup it's using the saf resources to distirbute christian/catholic resources but they do not force u to read it or anything. in fact, u must have th lobang to get people to add u into the mailing list.
Originally posted by lam_sheng_hong:I wouldn't see why having the MCF would be a problem. It is a fellowship, meaning that its role is not just to evangelise (which must be done with tact), but for the spiritual well-being of Christians in the SAF. They will support one another spiritually.
When they tried to register in 1970, they were not accepted. Note that that year was in wake of racial riots across the whole decade. Perhaps the gov. were weary of such groups which might pose threat to stability?
Even so, it is still a touchy issue, so no surprise there will be opposition.
Yes indeed. This issue has already caused a difference of opinion in this small community of SG forumners. If such military religious organizations are allowed to prevail there is no telling what kind of divide and damage it can cause.
On a separate note I wish to highlight another point; it does not matter whether organizations like MCF is for fellowship of evangelical purposes. Its very existence (especially if endorsed or recognized by the SAF itself) will compromise the cohesiveness of SAF as a fighting organization.
Let me draw an analogy from the accounting profession. We all know that reporting accountants must be independent and objective in their conduct. Hence, the code of ethical conduct for many professional accounting bodies will require its members to “…be, and be seen to be, free of any interest which is incompatible with objectivity and independence.” (Acid test: Would you believe a reporting accountant if he certifies that the Renci hospital is free of any financial and accounting irregularities, if the said accountant is also a student of Ven. Shi Ming Yi?) Likewise, the existence of military-religious organizations (regardless of their mandate) can be seen as compromising the secularity of the SAF, and by extension, our secular government.
Our government is indeed wise to refuse to recognize and register MCF as a society. I agree with you that there won't be much of a problem as long as SAF does not endorse it. However, I am concerned that the MCF is using SAF resources to further its own agenda. As explained above, this may be perceived as SAF giving tacit support to the MCF.
Can you please give more details on how SAF resources is misused as such?