'God' Banned in Boca

I believe that it is appropriate to say God in certain contexts without offending everyone. There are going to be exceptions to that, but this is about free speech. Your right to not practice religion shouldn't hamper the right for another person to practice. Besides, simply denying people the right to say God in a public place is not going to make Him any less real. That would be like saying, "I don't like bears in the woods. I've never seen one, so I don't believe they exist. So don't ever mention anything about bears in the woods because it hurts my feelings." Sorry, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

Yes it's a far fetched analogy. But for those of us who do believe in God, who believe He is just as real as you and I are, it is difficult to keep from mentioning Him. It would be like having the greatest thing happen to your life and then being told that you have to keep it a secret.

I'm in this hospice's market area and have visited it on behalf of a relative who will soon need its services. It is generally well regarded but this policy seems gratuitous both to believers and non believers when they are most vulnerable. The dying will be left with morphine, comforting themselves with sterile, sanctioned thoughts of peter-pan, Nancy Pelosi, the medicare fairy and mother earth.

As for what is legal, this is a private non-profit hospice. They are free to run their staff meetings as they see fit. It is not a public forum. No one has the right to proselytize for their religion, pump for their political party, or otherwise say things not related to the business purpose of a private staff meeting.

As for what is appropriate, proselytizing is not the purpose of the staff meeting and makes others not sharing Father Signorelli's religion uncomfortable. You would feel the same if a staff member insisted on praying to a religion you didn't believe in.

it's hard to say... i think if i'm at work and in a context like a daily business meeting and someone opens with a prayer i might think it not appropriate, but it also really depends on the delivery and the context very much.

I for one don't have a specific problem if it is very open and inclusive and well meaning, but i could see how it might become problematic. However, if it is you practice to have chaplains on hand I think you have a business where it don't make sense to 'ban' Lord or God, and if workers have an issue i think good managers would address the issue directly instead of the too often used 'blanket rule'.

We've all had a job where someone is doing something wrong and a 'new policy' get's instituted company wide to allow the managers to avoid directly confronting a problem person.

David said:

"...and in a place full of terminally ill people, for God's sake -- is absurd, maybe even Orwellian."

I dont understand. Where are the terminally ill people in the staffroom? This issue was about the staffroom.

Should we then look into the hiring practices of hospice when they hire people who are both on payroll and in hospice care at the same time? If your argument is that they need to counsel their colleagues, its a little more Twilight Zone more than Orwell, no?

Nice logic.

This is happening all over. I write a Chaplain's Column for a paper in which I am not allowed to mention God or religion.

I think God is mostly a fabrication made up by people who didn't want to accept that the world is unfair and that people die for random, often senseless reasons.

Modern humans have been on Earth for probably ten to twelve thousand years, and monotheism is only a relatively recent arrival. Something came before it and something will probably come after it.

I don't force my beliefs on anyone else, nor do I voice them unless someone asks me what I believe. Why can't others do the same?

I find the term "God" highly offensive and the notion that a priest should be allowed access to the dying and their grieving families absolutely unacceptable. I would be deeply angered if somebody, no matter how well meaning, intruded on my grief or personal tragedy with their insane jabbering about the divine, Thetans, spaghetti monsters or whatever other flavour of psychosis they indulge themselves with or use to justify their abuse of small animals and children. No, your religion is not OK, and a large number of people would appreciate it if you kept it to yourself. Paula Alderson is entirely right to expect Mirta Signorelli to practice some restraint and show a little respect for the privacy and personal views of other people. It's just a shame that the religious nut jobs who attempt inflict their odious and irrational worldview on the rest of society cannot be persuaded to excercise a similar restraint.

Where did Mr. Waters get his education? I've heard a lot of "between you and I" from pretentious ignoramuses, but the sentence "Signorelli says the hospice is trying to censor prayers by telling she and other chaplains to "cease and desist from using God in prayers", really takes the cake. Tell he to go back to first grade.

Can I assume that the "Hospice by the Sea" will now refuse to accept (and return), any fees or contributions of currency or coinage on which is inscribed "In God We Trust" ? Has Boca gone fully charitable ?

Or, will they refuse any IRS taxation; or will they continue to "Render unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's ... " ?

There is entirely too much "politics" in both medicine AND religion these days !!

I don't understand why people are upset. Why do you folks have the need to shove your disgusting lifestyle down my throat? Next thing you know you'll be teaching my kids that your lifestyle is "normal".

Wait, am I an atheist upset about religion in the workplace, or a fundamentalist whining about gays? So hard to keep it straight...

I think the core problem here is that the CEO asked a chaplain to speak at staff meetings. What did she expect, quotations from Darwin? "There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one. Amen. Oops! I mean, Shalom ... errr ... Namaste? ... uhhh ... Workers of the world, unite! Thank you."

Just leave the chaplains and the "inspirational" speeches out of staff meetings. I promise that almost no one wants to have to sit through an insipid motiviational talk every week anyway. The main things those talks inspire is the desire to strangle the speaker.

Maybe I'm confused here but the article itself seems to say two opposite things:

1) It starts with: "The hospice CEO says the ban applies only to staff meetings and the chaplain is overreacting."

2) And closes with: "Even if this particular chaplain is trying to evangelize the staff, banning the word 'God' or 'Lord' or even 'Jesus' in the Land of Free Speech and Free Exercise of Religion -- and in a place full of terminally ill people, for God's sake -- is absurd, maybe even Orwellian."

Evangelizing in most workplaces is not allowed. In the case of a hospice, maybe talking about God, as the subject is used in hospice treatment, may be appropriate I don't know, but I don't see anywhere where it says hospice workers are not allowed to mention God to their dying clients. It seems this is an administrative order directed at staff meetings. So either the author is confused or this article is poorly written.

So, I decided to seek out other newspapers for this story. I found a better written story at a paper local to Boca:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/community/news/bocaraton/sfl-flphospice0318pnmar18,0,5601993.story
and it says:
"Hospice CEO Paula Alderson said the ban on religious references applies only to the inspirational messages that chaplains deliver in staff meetings. The hospice remains fully comfortable with ministers, priests and rabbis offering religious counsel to the dying and grieving."

So the directive does not affect the work being done by hospice workers and not even discussions at staff meetings, just inspirational messages delievered at staff meetings.

Its a staff meeting issue about inspirational messages at the staff meeting. Why does this rise to the level of an article in the Post? And why was the Post's article written as though this directive is "Orwellian" when I'm sure evangelizing at Washington Post staff meetings is not allowed?

Maybe the Post's editors should review its writers better. I see many viceral articles written in the blogging sections that seem to try to attract comments instead of presenting truthful articles that may be worthy of comment. And take this as a lesson to seek out other sources for a story that seems "Orwellian".

My money says that it's the whiny reverend that's overreacting. It so often is and her apparently over the top reaction indicates to me that she was probably the source of the problem that the perfectly reasonable policy was trying to address. I've worked with people who feel the need to invoke God and religion in and out of season, and it's distracting, annoying, and, depending on who's doing it, intimidating. A policy categorically banning mentioning GOd during staff meetings becomes necessary when such people are so socially oblivious that they don't notice that they are derailing meetings and making people uncomfortable. My bet is that the hospice talked to the good reverend about this several times before throwing their hands up and instituting the ban.

For the record, unless you work at a religious institution, staff meetings are definitely "out of season" for this behaivor.

More importantly, why is the chaplain's right of free speech as protected by the First Amendment, violated with impunity?

People can talk openly about their feminism, their Gay Day at Disneyland, their drunken revelry during the week but talk about God...

One must surmise that such people must be so weak minded, so spineless, so inept that they feel they must demand the right of free speech for others must be denied. What do you fear?

And food for the Chaplain. I applaud her moral courage in the face of such outrageous behavior.

Please, Krankyman. You have no free speech rights at work. Unless you work for the government, and even then you don't have many.

Thankfully I now have a place to go and not have some mythical figure shoved down my throat. How about the rest of the staff, where was the mass resignation to protest - or are they thankful she's now gone and no longer proselytizing?

As a non believer, I don't understand why they'd need the comfort in the first place. They're going to a "far better place", so why not be excited? At the risk of offending, isn't it rather hypocritical (there's that word again) for a true believer to need comforting? There was a study released yesterday that found those harboring a belief in a god were far more likely to ask that additional measures be taken to prolong their life when terminally ill, needlessly consuming valuable resources and prolonging their own pain. I just don't get it, sorry.

Rev. Mirta Signorelli is a troll, or should that be a trollop?

I'm very disappointed in this article by David Waters. It smacks of poor attention to detail. At least he did include the link to the source. What I found there that was pertinent was as follows:
"Hospice CEO Paula Alderson said the ban on religious references applies only to the inspirational messages that chaplains deliver in staff meetings. The hospice remains fully comfortable with ministers, priests and rabbis offering religious counsel to the dying and grieving."

Rev Signorelli seems incapable of giving a non-denominational invocation or non-denominational inspirational message. Which tells me she's not fully competent as a minister. Frankly, the hospice, and its residents, will be better served with a better qualified minister.

Sorry, one more comment:

According to Wiki (I know, I know), the term Orwellian "connotes an attitude and a policy of control by propaganda, misinformation, denial of truth, and manipulation of the past, including the "unperson"" As far as I'm concerned, that is a great definition of god, at least from what I learned in sunday school.

I wonder what would happen if the staff of these hospices would comfort dying patients by adoring and praying to the giant china teapot circling the Earth, or submit to the pink Unicorn, or fall on their knees for the flying spaghetti monster? I mean fair is fair. If a god or holey lordy is mentioned, it must be equally accepted to pursue other invented entities for comfort.

The Rev Signorelli is leaving her real charge, the patients, because she is inhibited from trying to convert the staff. In part this looks like a really trumped up set of ego, where she is looking for "credit" in converting people to Christ, rather than concentrating on the dead and dying. I presume she is also looking ofr extra credit in converting a Christian from another sect into her own.

Someone that self-centered and sanctimonious appears to be someone they could well do without. It's not all about her, her wants, her desires, and her theology.

Following is a statement from the president/ceo of Hospice by the Sea:

STATEMENT FROM HOSPICE BY THE SEA
Paula J. Alderson, President and CEO
March 18, 2009

It has been brought to our attention that a former colleague, Chaplain Mirta M. Signorelli, MA, circulated a letter stating that Hospice by the Sea asked its chaplains to “cease from using the word ‘God’ in organizational prayers.” Chaplain Signorelli’s letter went on to imply that this request also restricted reference to God when our chaplains are caring for the needs of our patients and their families.

That is not the case.

There is absolutely no change to the way we and our chaplain corps care for our patients; nor has there been any directive, implicit or implied, that restricts chaplains from referring to God.

Here are the facts. Hospice by the Sea has monthly all-staff meetings. For the past few months members of the Spiritual Care staff helped us close the meetings with a few words of inspiration and motivation.

Our workplace, as most, is a diverse collection of people with different backgrounds and beliefs. Out of respect for our employees, who are expected to attend the all-staff meetings, we suggested that the messages be inspirational but not religious. This was not a directive – it was simply a suggestion and only applied to monthly all-staff meetings.

A core component of the care we provide our patients and their families is emotional and spiritual support. The specific nature of that support is directed by the patient and family. Hospice administration places no restrictions on our spiritual care staff when dealing with patients and their families.

Hospice by the Sea has been serving the community since 1979. We are a not-for-profit organization dedicated to providing compassionate care for patients living with life-limiting conditions; as well as providing psychological, social, and spiritual support for their families. This is why hospice exists: To help patients live in comfort and to the fullest for as long as they live.

Following is a statement from the senior chaplain at Hospice by the Sea

STATEMENT FROM FRED MORTENSEN, SENIOR CHAPLAIN
Hospice by the Sea
March 18, 2009

Hospice is a collection of services including medical, nursing, psychological and spiritual. Beyond that it is a life-affirming philosophy that exists on the crossroad of living and dying. It is a rare privilege to us as Spiritual Care Counselors at Hospice by the Sea to be invited into the lives of patients and families as they navigate that crossroad.

The recent attention drawn by Chaplain Mirta Signorelli to the use of specific religious or spiritual language now gives us the opportunity to clarify exactly where we stand. What is the policy surrounding the use of specific religious terms or titles? There is no policy.

Chaplain Signorelli’s statement that Hospice by the Sea has restricted use of the word ‘God’ or any deity is wrong.

The only time the issue has risen among our hospice team has been concerning all-staff meetings that do not in any way include patients or families. Spiritual Care Counselors are provided the opportunity to offer a brief word of encouragement to the staff at these meetings. Our administration reminded us that our staff is a diverse group. We have many traditions, backgrounds and beliefs represented. That is a huge part of our strength in the communities we serve. The suggestion – not a policy, not a directive – was that we remember this as we provide ongoing support to the entire staff. We want to include everyone and exclude no one. The suggestion only referred to our participation in monthly all-staff meetings. In no way was it intended by administration as applying to patient care. The Spiritual Care team, with the exception of Chaplain Signorelli, understood this.

At Hospice by the Sea every single expression of faith, spirituality, culture, and tradition is permitted and encouraged. Any language appropriate to that expression is permitted and encouraged. Any name by which people identify their core beliefs is permitted and encouraged. Whether that expression involves many words and meaningful ritual, or silence and no ritual, it is permitted and encouraged. All these expressions are accepted by the entire Interdisciplinary Team that serves them.

The community should remain confident that the patients and families we serve will continue to be offered Spiritual Care in all its possibilities and expressions as they so desire. We remain proud and committed to serve the mission of Hospice by the Sea.

Wow, a lot of commentors who apparently don't believe in God, but who have a divine ability to see into the inner thoughts and motives of a reverend whom they've never met before. Miraculous.

Notice the article states she wasn't chastised for praying at all, but for refusing to "cease and desist from using God in prayers". Sounds to me like she was invited to the staff meeting and asked to "pray", but then taken to task when she actually had the audacity to include mention of the God she was praying to - which, ostensibly, is the whole point of prayer.

Based on this new information, let's hope Mr. Waters has the courage and character to update his post and retract this statement: "It's not clear who in this case, but my money's on the bureaucracy.".

Just because we cease to mention His name or acknowledge Him does not erase God. He is here, has always been and will always be.

Crack the Old Testament America, find out what happens when a whole nation is stupid enough to forget God.

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb people. We want to forget God so that we get to decide what is right and what is wrong, and what is true and what is not. After all, everything´s relative right??

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb people!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall give praise to God". So then each one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Romans 14:11

This verse is taken out of a context where the author (Paul) is admonishing the Christians in Rome not to judge each other, but it is food for thought for all of our skeptics out there.

And I would venture to say that I would be more worried about being offensive to God, rather Him offending you.

"Just because we cease to mention His name or acknowledge Him does not erase God. He is here, has always been and will always be."

---------------------------------

CochalitoAdoptivo,

That's ridiculous. No gods have ever been proven to exist, ever. You have as much credible evidence for the existence of Zeus or Medusa as you have for the Judeo-Christian God, precisely none. You speak as if your personal belief is fact for all. I can assure you, it most certainly is not.

Mr Waters,

The Chaplain is there is assist and give comfort to dying patients, not to proselytise the staff in any way shape or form. It is completely appropriate for the Chaplain to minister to individual patients and individual staff upon request. It is completely inappropriate for the Chaplain to otherwise proselytise the staff at mandatory meetings where all staff, religious or not, are required to attend. In this case, clearly it is the Chaplian who is overreating.

Is the Post contractually obligated to deliver up one of these stories every week?

Look. This hospital is private. They can make whatever rules they want. It isn't 'free speech' if you are a private employer.

And why did only one chaplain out of seven resign? Are the others really God-haters? Doubtful?

This sounds very much like one chaplain got her knickers in a knot because she was crossing the line - proselytizing in staff meetings, etc.

Contrary to what some want to believe, Christians are not a persecuted group in the US. Far from it.

So stop pretending that you are. It's just pathetic. And quite unChristian.

I agree with Freestinker and AshleyBone--no god or gods have ever been proven to exist--there's no evidence whatsoever, and Waters jumped to conclusions and blamed the wrong side for the controversy.

In this case, the bureaucracy was trying to be inclusive and respectful of everyone's beliefs, but there's always that one religious zealot--Signorelli-- who insists on proselytizing even when asked by her employer to restrain herself.

Waters should acknowledge his leap.

Honestly, some Christians come off sounding like Dennis the Communist Peasant from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail." "Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Come see the violence inherent in the System!"

The woman was misinformed, and decided to start screaming discrimination rather than actually find out what the policy really was. Nothing to see here. Move along.

This has nothing to do with the "proof of God's existence". The policy has nothing to do with this Chaplin's ability to do her job as it relates to the patients that are there. This is nothing more than another opportunity for a religious person objecting to a reasonable and wholly legitimate policy as it applies to staff-only proceedings. The Chaplin is grandstanding, nothing more, and nothing less. This institution is probably better off without her. Good Riddens!

Ok, let's recap.

The Chaplain was asked to give an "inspirational address" to a staff meeting.

Then someone was surprised and offended that the Chaplain mentioned God in that "address".

Score one for the chaplain. Regardless of your own beliefs, when you ask a minister for an "inspirational address", you should expect some mention of God.

But...

Then the Chaplain resigns, complaining that the hospice is preventing her from doing her work.

Unless she was hired to give "inspirational addresses" to the staff, that's just silly, and completely over the top. She's there to give aid and comfort to the patients and their families, upon request.

As for those that would make this argument one of faith vs. atheism, (including, apparently the Chaplain) it is nothing of the sort.

If you don't want a Chaplain, don't ask for one. If one shows up, politely decline.

Yes, the Chaplain will probably pray for you anyway, over in his or her office, or in the chapel. Since you don't believe in prayer, it does you no harm. Get over it.

However, since Chaplain Signorelli cannot seem to get over a silly rule about "inspirational addresses", perhaps a non-sectarian hospice is not the place for her to serve. She doesn't seem level-headed enough for that position.

In a hospice facility setting, faith and religion (or absence thereof) will differ from one patient's room to another. Needs for spiritual consultation will be as varied as the range of people who come to the hospice facility. And, in each individual case, the faith-related concerns will be contained within the patient's room or private bed area or within quiet spaces set aside for talking with family.

Of course the chaplain needs to be able to respond in the language of a faithful, observant member of whatever religions her/his patients embrace. That's the whole point of making pastoral care available in end-of-life facilities.

However, there is no reason whatsoever that a chaplain would need to use religious language in staff meetings, short of mentioning that "Mrs. X has been claiming to see God" when Mrs. X's case is being discussed or that "Mr. Z's agitation seems to be related to his fear of meeting his wife in heaven" when Mr. Z's case is being discussed.

A chaplain's role in hospice is to help patients and their familiy and friends to find comfort within whatever faith tradition (or absence thereof) any of these people practices. Period.

It is not appropriate for a chaplain to practice her/his pastoral duties on the staff and administration unless asked privately for spiritual help by individual members.

Simply stated, morality existed before religions and Gods.

Humans and greater humanity can yearn for a connection to something “greater than self,” which may be termed spirituality. This can be individual and personal. Spirituality need not be defined beyond this yearning. Religion however, is synthetic. Organized religions have become easily corrupted for uses that seem opposite to the idea of an all-loving and caring deity. So “organizers” and propagators of organized religion may become suspect, hence leaving the word "God" out of hospice or other community work while still doing good.

Religious people may take offense to not being allowed to say God or Jesus or Yahweh or whatever, but the objective of humanitarial assistance is not to proselytize your religion, it is to help people. Surely you can speak of a greater nature to the world without mentioning Allah, God, Ra or whatever.

It is past time to get god and religion out of the public sphere. If the intellectually flawed want to practice an inane religion, do so in the privacy of your home or in one of the too many places of worship. The terminally ill do not need god; there is no heaven or hell to go to -- just six feet into the ground. If they wish to pray on their own, so be it. But for some ignorant chaplain to corroborate the lies just isn't necessary. Free speech doesn't mean speech everywhere. Religion is like smoking -- it needs to be severely restricted so as to do no harm.

I like BOB2DAVIS' smoking analogy. The most effective way to gain adherents is to get them young. If you can do that, you'll most likely have them for life.