Why Not A Starfleet Ships Chaplain As A Main Character?

[LtChange]

Solarbaby wrote:

---

Taken from Wikipedia

I find the idea of a chaplain on a modern day warship ironic. Since most religions at the root of their teachings are peaceful. Its often man's interpretation of the scriptures that leads to war. So why have a person of faith serving on a ship that potentially could bring the deaths of a lot of people? It's definitely not in the ideal of spiritual peace and harmony.

For this reason I think it would be interesting to have a Chaplain who was a non believer in any religion but open minded. Trained to respect and help individuals contemplate their own beliefs. I think a Chaplain with his own strong faith guiding others who worship wormhole aliens and idols etc would have conflicts with his own beliefs too much to be an objective advisor. I think a counsellor is more fitting for this job- assuming they didnt have their own strong faith.

Exactly my point. A huge amount of religious beliefs caused a lot of wars. The idea of an universal chaplain is plain and simple stupid. Just take Earths religious views. How can you "sync" them into a universal chaplain? We are at the counselor idea already. Was Troi a chaplain? Don't think so. As for the chaplain: atheist will not like a chaplain aboard the ship, strict religious beliefs will not accept a universal chaplain ... If Star Trek wants to explore religious views of a character than do so through a character, not a chaplain how counsels everyone aboard. I could buy a character like Guinan who understands you and if you are religious she tries to relate to the character and talk about the topic, but that's about it ... Do not force religion upon Star Trek just because "God bless America and we need that in Star Trek too". We don't.

Knight Templar wrote:

---

As for what Roddenberry wanted? Who cares? He's dead.

Let's say we didn't read that ... If you really consider yourself a Star Trek fan you should be ashamed sir. And if you are not, respect the fans please. No more comment on this topic.

Knight Templar wrote:

---

As for controversy? This when people want an openly gay character on a Trek series?

It's a completely different story. You cannot put on the same page religion with sexual orientation.

As for a quote from Memory Alpha:

Gene Roddenberry himself is said to have rejected the idea of religion lasting into Humanity's future. Ronald D. Moore commented regarding the fate of specific religions in Trek history: "Gene felt very strongly that all of our contemporary Earth religions would be gone by the 23rd century, and while few of us around here actually share that opinion, we feel that we should leave this part of the Trek universe alone." (AOL chat, 1997) "It was a core tenet of Gene's Trek." (AOL chat, 1997)
Brannon Braga said that "In Gene Roddenberry's imagining of the future [...] religion is completely gone. Not a single human being on Earth believes in any of the nonsense that has plagued our civilization for thousands of years. This was an important part of Roddenberry's mythology. He, himself, was a secular humanist and made it well-known to writers of Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation that religion and superstition and mystical thinking were not to be part of his universe. On Roddenberry's future Earth, everyone is an atheist. And that world is the better for it." [X]wbm

Link: http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Human_religion

[Knight Templar]

Gene Roddenberry doesn't own Star Trek. He never owned Star Trek. And he has been dead for more than 20 years.

Several times more Star Trek has been produced without his input as was produced with his input.

And lots of the things he did do were crap anyway.

So again. Who cares what Roddenberry thought?

And religion actually causing wars is way overstated. Lots of the so called "religious wars" were fought for purely secular reasons with religious justifications tacked on later to give the conflict the veneer of moral legitimacy.

[LtChange]

Knight Templar wrote:

---

Gene Roddenberry doesn't own Star Trek. He never owned Star Trek. And he has been dead for more than 20 years.

Several times more Star Trek has been produced without his input as was produced with his input.

And lots of the things he did do were crap anyway.

So again. Who cares what Roddenberry thought?

And religion actually causing wars is way overstated. Lots of the so called "religious wars" were fought for purely secular reasons with religious justifications tacked on later to give the conflict the veneer of moral legitimacy.

Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry was the creative genius behind Star Trek TOS, TNG S1-S2 and the first 4 movies. So again, what you are saying is disrespectful. Without Gene Roddenberry we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Yes, many Star Trek series were created without Gene Roddenberry but most of them respected Genes ideas. So who cares? A true fan!

[DonIago]

I'm starting to like the idea of a gay alien atheist chaplain.

As to the question about Federation members refusing to serve on a ship without one? So what? My understanding is that Federation membership doesn't compel a planet to contribute to Starfleet's ranks... in fact, all indications are that Starfleet generally wants willing and highly competent individuals. AFAIK even during the Dominion War they never instituted a draft.

If the chaplain -did- have a form of spirituality that they ascribed to I can imagine crewmembers being quite put-off by the notion that that individual had the captain's ear in any capacity in which someone of their own spirituality did not.

I've gone to allegedly secular sleepaway camps that nevertheless had "optional" Chapel services and "non-denominational" Grace before meals and such...and I have to say I found it pretty uncomfortable. Even if you accept that they're not attempting to impose their beliefs on anyone, one has to wonder how they would have reacted if asked to make a more demonstrative effort to accommodate other belief systems.

[JoeZhang]

I'm starting to like the idea of a gay alien atheist chaplain.

Maybe make them bisexual as it increases the story possibilities.

[LtChange]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

Maybe make them bisexual as it increases the story possibilities.

A bisexual alien atheist chaplain? I might rethink my position

[Christopher]

This isn't just about Trek or Roddenberry. How many shows are there on network or basic cable TV right now that have members of the clergy as main characters? Very few, I'd imagine. There are some in recurring roles, like Rev. Lovejoy on The Simpsons or the nuns on Pushing Daisies, and there's the occasional character who abandoned a religious career for their current job, like Dr. Chase on House, but active clergy members in starring roles, not so much. Shows that have been centered on clergy, like The Book of Daniel and Soul Man, have tended to be short-lived, unless they weren't primarily featured in their religious roles, as in The Father Dowling Mysteries. There's the occasional Father Mulcahy or Rev Bem or Shepherd Book, the occasional successful sitcom like Amen, but they're not common. You're probably most likely to see a member of a religious order as a main character if he's a Shaolin monk who knows kung fu.

As a rule, TV networks and studios -- and the advertisers who buy airtime on them -- are reluctant to deal much with religion, for fear of sparking controversy. The producers of Deep Space Nine pushed to feature Bajoran religion as a major element of the series, but Paramount resisted, finding even stories about an imaginary, alien religion to be a potential hot potato.

Of course, sometimes you get a show that's more daring, like Moore's Galactica, which dealt heavily with religion and divinity. But Trek tends to be rather more mainstream, a major cash cow for its studio, and that would create a resistance to embracing religious themes that has nothing to do with Roddenberry's beliefs and more to do with advertisers' fear of controversy.

[Bry_Sinclair]

You could add the Vicar of Dibley (1994-2007) to that list

[Christopher]

^Well, clergymembers are far more likely to show up in UK shows than American shows.

[Knight Templar]

LtChange wrote:

---

Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry was the creative genius behind Star Trek TOS, TNG S1-S2 and the first 4 movies. So again, what you are saying is disrespectful. Without Gene Roddenberry we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Yes, many Star Trek series were created without Gene Roddenberry but most of them respected Genes ideas. So who cares? A true fan!

He is dead. Get over it.

And he was far, far, far from a genius. He basically copied a lot from Forbidden Planet IIRC.

And given that Deep Space Nine has often been considered far and away the Trek series in the modern era that discarded Roddenberry's ideas the most yet was arguably the highest quality wise, I would say we can put paid to the idea of GRs ideas being "quality" ones.

[iguana_tonante]

Christopher wrote:

---

You're probably most likely to see a member of a religious order as a main character if he's a Shaolin monk who knows kung fu.

The obvious solution to that is to teach savate as a core subject for Catholic priests.

[Greg Cox]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

Ah I see where you are going with this a gay alien Chaplain -lots of story possibilities there.

Damn. You beat me to the punch. I was going to suggest a gay chaplain.

Then again, Serenity had a chaplain . . . and look what happened to him!

[Greg Cox]

LtChange wrote:

---

Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry was the creative genius behind Star Trek TOS, TNG S1-S2 and the first 4 movies. !

Er, as a matter of record, Roddenberry was only really involved with the first movie.

[T'Girl]

Greg Cox wrote:

---

Er, as a matter of record, Roddenberry was only really involved with the first movie.

And truth be told, Roddenberry hardly created the original series all by himself.

Jimi_James wrote:

---

Here's a question though. Where does this chaplain fall in the chain of command?

If it were a full time assignment and a Starfleet career field, I would imagine it to be a staff position and it's own small department.

How does one person handle the religions of 150 member worlds?

How does one person handle the medical needs of 150 alien species? A chaplain wouldn't have to be an expert in all religions.

LtChange wrote:

---

... also introducing some controversial element in a Star Trek series

Controversial matters are good. But it hard to see how a chaplain would in fact be controversial, Star Trek is usually keyed to an American audience, a deliberately generic Christian chaplain who ministers equally to all beliefs would be offensive how?

Star Trek was never about religion

There are religious characters in all the series, including the animated series.

The federation is built upon diversity

And right there is the prime reason to have a Starfleet chaplain.

strict religious beliefs will not accept a universal chaplain

If the alternative is absolutely nothing? I would say that acceptance would be positive.

Just take Earths religious views. How can you "sync" them into a universal chaplain?

Military chaplains do this every day.

atheist will not like a chaplain aboard the ship

Why not? The Federation is a diverse assemblage, why would a atheist aboard a Starship wish to deign their fellow crewmembers of something they themselves don't want to avail themselves of?

Would that be enough of a reason?

A huge amount of religious beliefs caused a lot of wars.

Historically about seven percent.

[Bry_Sinclair]

Christopher wrote:

---

^Well, clergymembers are far more likely to show up in UK shows than American shows.

That's about the only one I can think of

Greg Cox wrote:

---

Damn. You beat me to the punch. I was going to suggest a gay chaplain.

Or omnisexual? Trek's version of Jack Harkness, just in a dog collar and combadge

Greg Cox wrote:

---

Then again, Serenity had a chaplain . . . and look what happened to him!

True, but before that they gave us a great character.