Logo image
Back
Jungle confessional: Chaplains and atrocity allegations in Vietnam
Conference presentation

Jungle confessional: Chaplains and atrocity allegations in Vietnam

Christopher J Levesque
Annual Meeting of the Society for Military History, 84th (Jacksonville, FL, 03/30/2017–04/02/2017)
03/31/2017

Metrics

228 Record Views

Abstract

Soldiers who witnessed atrocities in Vietnam faced the questions of who to report them to, what the consequences for their actions would be, and whether anyone would believe them. Even before the Army changed the Universal Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) after the My Lai Massacre became a public scandal to allow soldiers to report atrocities that they witnessed to chaplains or the Inspector General, they often turned to the chaplains for advice. The most famous example of this was Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson, known for his role in stopping the My Lai Massacre, reported the murders there both through his chain of command and to Chaplain Carl Creswell as his legal and moral duty. Thompson’s decision to seek spiritual advice was common among soldiers who made the difficult decision to report war crimes. Other soldiers turned to chaplains when it became clear that their immediate superiors would not investigate rapes or other abuses. Sometimes soldiers only wanted reassurance that there was nothing wrong with them, but others used chaplains for their ability to report atrocities through their own chains of command, or to other authorities. Chaplains could have a positive or negative effect on soldiers’ decisions to report atrocities based on their views on how to balance their “prophetic” role as a keeper of morality with their need to provide a “ministry of presence.”  This could occur when soldiers requested to speak to a chaplain after witnessing or taking part in an incident, or when investigators asked chaplains to counsel soldiers under investigation. Why and how soldiers relied on the guidance provided by military chaplains in Vietnam is a complex issue that illuminates both the influence of religious belief on soldiers’ decisions, but also the role of chaplains in combat units. Chaplains in Vietnam were alternately accused by defense attorneys of preying on soldier’s beliefs so they would cooperate with authorities, or accused by embittered veterans of supporting the meat grinder of the war. The reactions of chaplains when soldiers reported atrocities to them also influenced how those soldiers perceived their presence on the battlefield, sometimes quite negatively, even when those chaplains eventually reported their allegations to higher authorities.

Details

Logo image