Posted on Feb 25, 2014
Do you address a Chaplain as "Sir", respective rank, or by "Chaplain (last name)"?
59.8K
133
74
12
12
0
A few people in my unit have been chastised for calling our Chaplain as "sir", instead of "Chaplain". They were told that as per the regulation (they don't say which one) a Chaplain is only to be addressed as "Chaplain". <BR><BR>I have looked through AR 600-25 and there is nothing in that regulation, except that you call an officer by either his/her rank and last name, or "Sir". I can't even find where it says that you are allowed to address him/her as "Chaplain". I know that it is done, but I can't find where it is okay by regulation. <BR><BR>Could someone please help me out with this? <BR><BR>Thank you in advance!
Chaplain
Customs and Courtesies
AR 600-25
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 54
1
1
0
Most chaplains I have met, introduce themselves as "Chaplain" regardless of their rank, so I tend to refer to them as Chaplain with a yes/no Sir/Ma'am as appropriate. IMHO, based on those I have interacted with, most present their role as a Chaplain/advisor first when addressing soldier issues before they use their rank. The rank is there and appropriately noted but Perhaps they use the rank in a less forward mode to offer SMs a greater sense of ease.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
If we were to take the "CHIEF" question regarding address or the female warrant officer one, then we have a similar piece. I have and will always call a Chaplain, "CHAPLAIN" unless I do not see the "cross" above their US Army first. I have called one "Sir" or Ma'am" when not clearly identifying them as a Chaplain first.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I say Chaplain or sir. I have even called Catholic Chaplains "Father". I have not had any complaints.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I saw variations on the theme of "regulations say" more times than I can remember while I was in- the vast majority of the time they had confused "regulations" with "some dude told me." In this case it seems like one of those things where they are technically correct, but, as the SFC said, reading a bit too far into it. The actual text :
All chaplains are addressed as "Chaplain," regardless of military grade or professional title. When a chaplain is addressed in writing, grade is indicated in parentheses; for example, Chaplain (Major) John F. Doe.
Link for future reference: http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r600_20.pdf
Link for future reference: http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r600_20.pdf
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I've used both. As an officer respect for the rank is first and foremost. During Desert Storm, our Chaplain was so involved with everyone that he was most affectionately addressed as Chaplain. In conversations with him, I would respond to his questions or comments with Sir.
Thanks for posting this question - brings back some warm memories!!!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SPC Dash Guerzon
I usually just went with "Chaplain , it was easier than saying "Sir" when other officers might have been around.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
An officer is an Officer so yes, you address them by Sir/Ma'am or by the rank.
(1)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
CWO2 Shannon Reck, maybe that is the case in the Navy, but in the Army, Chaplains are treated like any other commissioned officer. They can be called Sir/Ma'am, Chaplain or by their rank. All are appropriate in the Army.
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
@MAJ Carl Ballinger, let me clarify: for customs and courtesies, Chaplains are treated just like other officers. I understand as a special branch, they do not have the same command authority as a line officer......but then again, as AMEDD officer, neither do I. Yet I'm still addressed as Sir or LTC and not as "Nurse"
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
Um...No. You call them chaplain. Just like you address the docs as "doctor" not "major".
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
I told my soldiers that each person can only address me as “sir” once per day. They will need to use their quota wisely.
Just call me chap.
Just call me chap.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
My grandfather was an Army Chaplain who rose to the rank of "full bird" Colonel. As far as I know, he was known as: "Chaplain" "Sir" "Colonel" or "Reverend." I don't think he was too formal on it, but he was proud of his rank. Had he not been forced to retire at (then) 55, he would have been eligible for Brigadier General.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google