Thanks. We might (ironically given the nature of this thread) at least mark the occasion with prayers in our Sunday chapel service. We were founded on 10 Feb 1941 and were an ATC sqn until the formation of the CCF.
1 Like
Just reading through ACP23 the guide to chaplains which I never have bothered with before.
Para 1.18 ……It is the responsibility of the Squadron Commanding Officer to encourage cadets to pursue the religious faith to which they belong and to further this purpose, the CO is secure the services and the appointment of a suitable chaplain.
Para 3.2 The Air Cadet Council has given authority for the appointment of ministers of other faiths as chaplains. This will ensure that the chaplaincy can provide support to all cadets.
I think you would be within your right as CO to secure a humanist celebrant as chaplain if the majority of your Sqn was secular/humanist. It states region chaplains can advise 
As per the regulations
Again, seems like policy is due a major overhaul considering the code of conduct prohibits us doing religion and politics with cadets (for good reason).
The RN is very much behind. I believe their policies remain that OCs have a moral duty to make their people observe Christian service and set an example in that regard themselves…
It’s surprising how many of these policies refer to Sqn COs rather than OCs. Sloppy.
1 Like
Ironically I find ACP23 one of the better written documents!
I’ve just gone to look at the code of conduct in the regulations to see its actual wording and I can’t find anything that states we are prohibited.
Happy to be corrected (please do - we can only change when we know what it already says) but I can only find the phrases “respectful of others religion”. I’m sure it’s in there but I can’t cite it - it’s not in the code of conduct or ACP1
How I interpret this is that we should not dissuade or discourage someone from following the religious faith that they belong. We are supportive of that faith even if it contradicts with our own.
So we support & encourage cadets to follow their faith be it Christian, Jewish, Islam, humanist, Hindu et all provided it is respectful & lawful.
2 Likes
ACP23 seems to be “RAFAC for dummies” & has got quite a good governance structure diagram!
So in summary inclusivity should provide the means that everyone be able to comfortably participate no matter their faith, / non faith, gender, monachist / non monarchish etc as long as it is respectful & lawful. Religion (possible because it is percievable the biggest blocker of change) seems to be taking the biggest beating in this discussion, but to get inclusivity right there is a need to fairly address the whole spectrum of blockers.
1 Like
I’m not sure where non-monarchist comes from, given the nature of the oath / promise. Are republicans to be exempted from saluting, as it’s in respect of the sovereign’s commission?
Seems reasonable.
People provided a safe and respectful space to be who they are, while ensuring anything they do maintains that safe and welcoming space for everyone else.
Things to object to: stuff that makes it difficult for others to feel welcome or engage with the subject matter (personal beliefs creeping in and taking over)
Things to defend against: People being maltreated because of who they are or what they believe
2 Likes
I’d say this tells me to proactively nurture the religious (but not non-religious) beliefs of my cadets, despite it having nothing to do with our organisational aims.
Classic overreach.
This goes beyond any generalised support of cadets exploring who they are, their place in the world, and perhaps any difficult discussions about philosophy which I imagine any good youth leader would want to support.
This is a “make sure they’re thinking about god regularly” instruction.
Again, that’s what their church / synagogue / temple etc is for.
I find it interesting that I interpret it as “support cadets exploring the secular & other faiths” and yourself interpret this as only support the religious & not the secular.
Either way it is only over reach if it is specifically stated that we are prohibited from discussing or promoting religion or politics - something you will need to evidence if you wish to change policy.
That’s because you’re being general with the interpretation.
I don’t think I’d be objecting if it said “support your cadets to develop their beliefs and sense of self through discussion and development.”
Language matters, and the inclusion of “religious faith” but nothing else clearly sets it apart.
1 Like
Well this completely contradicts ACP 20, as quoted above:
Classic RAFAC policy contradiction!
The only thing I can think of that is close is ACP 20 tells us not to “Promote their own religious, political ideals or beliefs to anyone while on RAFAC duty.” But that wouldn’t disallow discussions around politics and religion, but you’d have to be incredibly careful/sensitive.
4 Likes
@OC.1324 You’re about to have your mind blown. Check out ACP 9. There’s some absolutely ridiculous stuff in there.
A whole page trying to defend why “to do my duty to God” is in there.
There are loads of ideas for padres hour. Many include reading the bible, or bible verses as references.
How on earth is this compatible with "you must not Promote their own religious, political ideals or beliefs to anyone while on RAFAC duty.”?
1 Like
It’s compatible as it’s with the formal Sqn role & using the formal ACPs - it’s not the individual delivering’s interpretation or allegory of the bible as part of “padre hour” it’s the RAFAC as a whole & the organisations religious beliefs
These are not new documents & as part of commissioning/going into uniform you would be expected to know which ACP is which even you hadn’t read the context .
ACP 9 & ACP23 are not new so their existence & content shouldn’t be a surprise.
Having said that our padre always ignores the Christian & biblical bits & just focuses on the good citizenship & ethics.
2 Likes
Which, imo, is 100% how it is supposed to be. But this policy seems to indicate otherwise.
You have a valid point, I was thinking of those non uk nationalities that may not be part of commonwealth, i get it is a peripheral example but wanted to understand if inclusivity was reaching out to all areas of differences, and not getting biased purely against religion, think generally there isnt an issue with recognising monarch (at least monarch is tangable and not an idealology) maybe some salute out of courtesy as opposed to loyalty.
1 Like
And therefore, why give chaplains special positions?
Ethics and citizenship are no more difficult to learn about than any of the other things we learn for the organisation.
And if I’m (rightly) barred from talking about my own beliefs and politics, there should be no room for other individuals to have a free pass.
The organisation has no place providing a special platform for anyone’s personal beliefs.
1 Like
This isn’t a religious organisation.
Just because past policy holders have shoehorned the Christian religion into all sorts of nooks and crannies to ensure our future salvation does not make this a religious organisation.