Archbishop for U.S. military personnel: Morally acceptable for troops to defy orders
Timothy Broglio, Catholic archbishop responsible for U.S. military personnel, argued that it was morally acceptable for service members to disobey orders that go against their conscience. He expressed concern that troops could end up in a situation that they find morally questionable. However, Broglio acknowledged that doing so would put these service members in a bad situation. He also drew a distinction between “moral objection” vice what is legal regarding which orders could be defied.
From Military Times:
Timothy Broglio — who has served as the archbishop for the military services since 2007 — admitted in a BBC interview on Sunday that he was worried about the troops in his pastoral care “because they could be put in a situation where they’re being ordered to do something which is morally questionable.”
“It would be very difficult for a soldier or a Marine or a sailor to, by himself, to disobey an order … but strictly speaking, he or she would be, within the realm of their own conscience, it would be morally acceptable to disobey that order,” he said.
He went on to note, however, that such an isolated act of conscience would be “perhaps putting that individual in an untenable situation — and that’s my concern.”
Asked about President Donald Trump’s effort to annex Greenland, the autonomous Danish territory, Broglio echoed the condemnation voiced by the upper echelon of the Catholic church over the administration’s foreign policy.
“It does not seem really reasonable that the United States would attack and occupy a friendly nation,” he said. “I think it tarnishes the image of the United States in our world.”
Each service member swears an oath of enlistment to “support” and “defend” the constitution, not the commander in chief. Under U.S. military law, troops are required to disobey orders that are “manifestly” or “patently” unlawful, though such cases are legally complex. Brenner Fissell, vice president of the National Institute of Military Justice and professor of law at Villanova, emphasized the system is legal, not theological.
“The United States law does not track Catholic ethics,” Fissell said in an interview with Military Times. “There is a concept called conscientious objection, which is when you are opposed morally to war, but the United States does not recognize selective conscientious objections which is when you identify specific wars or deployments you don’t want to participate in.”
Additional Reading:
Noury, T. (2026, January 20). Archbishop says it’s ‘morally acceptable’ for troops to defy orders. Military Times. Link.
Category: Donald Trump, Military issues, Society
The Roman Catholic Church has lost even the pretense of moral authority.
Of course, one could argue that they lost that a long time before Martin Luther.
The Roman Catholic Church and the protestant denominations have lost the pretense of moral authority. Martin Luther would see in today’s Protestant churches what he saw in the Catholic churches in his day. Both have become similar to what the Pharisees of Jesus’s time were.
There are Catholic and Protestant congregations who do their best to stay in line with what churches are meant to do, but too many are bowing down before false idols. We went from Jesus refusing to redistribute an inheritance to some church leaders saying, “Share some of your privilege”.
Bishop Talbert Swan is an example of a church leader ministering to false idols:
Yep.
It was “community noted” due to the church in question being a satire Evangelical church that makes fun of grifting pastors.
Eh, still a funny meme.
To be fair, he’s absolutely right…military members may be morally justified in defying orders that offend their sensibilities.
As long as they’re willing to accept the LEGAL consequences of doing so…i.e. court martial, stripping of rank and privileges, dishonorable discharge, prison, perhaps even execution.
Having a subjective moral justification for some action (or lack thereof) has no bearing on the objective legal ramifications of such action.
With that said, I didn’t read the whole article. If he’s claiming that defying orders over a moral objection should be excused and no consequences entail, he’s dead wrong.
Nope, he more or less echoes your position: morally, disobeying what you consider an illegal order but he worries that someone who does so may run afoul of the military system. Like the TEXT of when Kelly et al did it, what he literally states is 100% correct. The rub comes if someone objects/disobeys to an order found to be legal and moral – they are in legal trouble.
One significant downside to such a choice that seems to be overlooked by the archbishop is the undue burden it places on one’s brothers-in-arms.
As we all know, war/soldiering is not an individual event. We train as teams and it takes a great deal of very limited time and effort to build a competent unit. Even losing one person can leave the rest of the team off-balance and, in situations where a crisis of conscience may be to blame, with a severe lack of time to adapt.
This can get good men killed, and should be a big part of the personal calculus when one weighs such moral concerns against their oath.
The “good” Archbishop might want to study a little history, and reexamine how the church manipulated multiple nations to attack / conquer their protestant neighbors… The medieval history of the catholic church is one written in blood… now granted, it has moved away from that to being a milquetoast apologist for a cult masquerading as a religion that still kills any and all that oppose it, but that doesn’t change history…
Yeah, I’m a recovering catholic..
https://youtu.be/1ZzCHKfx6Os
Location, location, location, in this video Dr. Heiser shows that they all got it wrong and Mt Hermon and the base, Grotto of pan was where the Church would be built, the rock was neither Peter or Christ.
Mt. Hermon and that area of Bashan held underworld overtones in ancient times.
The early Church was called “the way” for those who followed the ways of the Lord and then Christians in Antioch in the early 40’s AD, wasn’t till the 4th century you get Catholic Christians, I’ll just be a Christian.
” HEY EVERYBODY…. LET’S PLAY…”U”….”C”….”M”….”J” !!!! ”
(Right Mark Kelly?!?!?)
Easy to talk shit when you don’t have to be the one dealing with consequences.
*To the tune of “YMCA”*
🎶 It aint no fun to get U-C-MJ,
no fun to get U-C-MJ, …🎶
Where was his concern when it was revealed that the church he belongs to was involved in abusing scores of young boys, then tried to ignore and cover it up?
He can shove that moral superiority up his ass.
Your “moral authority” in refusing an order does not trump the UCMJ. So, go ahead. Make your choice. Follow a lawful order, or follow your conscience. Remember, in making your choice, you also choose to accept the consequences. It’s called “free agency”.
Defrock that stupid fuck. That jackass has less moral authority than Dead Ted Kennedy driving his mother’s Oldsmobile.
Hey Archbishop!
.
Hmmm, that’s weird. The site doesn’t want to take images anymore.
..
Well, it took that one! But not the one I wanted.
Try this again:
Hey, Archbishop!
There we go!
So I got a Gutenberg bible at an antique store in Germany. I don’t think it’s worth a lot, though. Some guy name Martin Luther scribbled in all the margins.
LOL! Study those notes. They may be on the test later
Unrelated, but seems we got former military officers who were dismissed by Trump running for Congress. One’s a tranny:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fired-under-trump-former-military-officers-launch-democratic-bids-congress
Welp, that is some brilliant legal advice from a sky-pilot. If followed, it will likely get some snuffy court-martialed for insubordination. Back in my Viet of the Nam times, I had a young soldier reassigned to my company supposedly because he was an insubordinate effup. He got off the Huey when it landed on my firebase and promptly informed me that he was not going to “stay on this muffuckin firebase.” I ordered him otherwise, or I would have him escorted outside the perimeter wire and he could walk back to An Khe, and if the VC didn’t get him, I would give him a pass to stay in the rear. Of course, he did not take me up on my offer. I suppose my orders violated his conscience, cuz the next day he snuck onto another resupply helo back to the division base camp. Needless to say, I preferred court martial charges against him. But he was allowed to stay in the rear with the several dozen of his buddies also awaiting court martial. He likely spent the rest of his tour in the LBJ (Long Binh Jail) and received the Big Chicken Dinner. So, for those want to take the sky pilot’s legal advice, FAFO.
This is the same Catholic Church that tells you to welcome in any immigrant, but Vatican City is behind 30 foot walls that are 10 feet thick. It’s a country all to its self inside Rome. He’s just another useful idiot on The Left trying to confuse young service members and undermine Trump. Where was his conscious when Saint Barry of Kenya droning/bombing all over the world? With all do respect Padre, shut the hell up.
Yeah, the Vatican is full of hypocrites:
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/01/15/vatican-cracks-down-on-illegal-entry-into-its-territory/
Can’t wait to see the first E-nothing dipshit trying to get out of something they don’t like cause, “Muh morul athoritee!” after consultation with the unit barracks lawyer and citing this guy.
Had a female SPC decide she was suddenly a conscience objector in 2001. Said she’d found Jesus and she could no longer carry a weapon. Her roommate busted her out, asked her real loudly just before formation: “Was Jesus at the Sorry Gulch last Thursday when you were dancing on amateur night?” Turned out she was just trying to get out of a Korea assignment. Epic fail.
Epic.
The Padre had best update the old resume, ’cause I don’t think this’ll sit well with SecWar Pete.
Secretary of War has no input on who the Archbishop is for the Archdiocese of The Military Services. The Archbishop is not a member of the military as a chaplain would be; he is the bishop of the diocese to whom all Catholic chaplains belong while they are chaplains. When their service with the Army, Navy, or Air Force ends, they return to their home diocese.
“Off limits” is still a thing.
Neither Executive or Legislative branch have any say in who the Archbishop is nor should they if you believe in separation of church and state.
Broglio never served in the military before he got his current job. When the position was established as an archdiocese vice a vicarate back in the mid 80s, the first Archbishop Joseph T Ryan had been a former Navy Chaplain assigned to the Marine Corps and participated in the Okinawa invasion. If memory serves he was the recipient of a Silver Star.
The Archbishop is right, partially. We all, everyone, Catholic or not, are morally bound to not do that which is immoral.
Firmly held religious belief was the reason cited by many of those who refused the COVID jab. It was the reason that I cited to my own employer for not getting it. Many of those in the military who refused the jab were disobeying an order they believed to be immoral based upon the use of embryonic stems cells used in the development and testing. Were they wrong to refuse?
No individual soldier, sailor, airman or Marine has enough knowledge of any national military action to make an informed decision about the morality of the action, but on a smaller scale, they can make decisions about morality – Shoot unarmed prisoners? Immoral. Rape, pillage, and burn? Immoral. Go to Greenland? Not enough information.
Everyone has to choose to act or not based upon their moral code, but if you don’t have the full picture, you’re on thin ice.
If a person decides to disobey because they believe that is the correct moral course of action, they should also be willing to accept the consequences, even if those consequences are unjust. Only those who use religious belief as an excuse will think they should be absolved of the consequences of their decision.
That’s why Martin Luther King went to jail. He made a choice and knowingly accepted the consequences of that choice. Hopefully we will not be faced with such a choice, but if we are we are supposedly trained by our culture to make the one that is morally correct.
“Shoot unarmed prisoners? Immoral. Rape, pillage, and burn? Immoral. Go to Greenland? Not enough information.“
TopGoz, are you implying service members were ordered to shoot prisoners and rape?
And Greenland? Why would be it be immoral? Our military’s mission is to go and fight wherever our government send them. Don’t like it, stop taking the gruberment’s pay. Don’t like it, remember to vote for the other side next election.
Like GEN George S. Patton said, “I am a Soldier. I fight where I’m told, I win where I fight.”
If Denmark wants to have a little overseas colony, they need to pay for it’s defense, so others cannot come and grab it. They decided to sell the mining rights to China instead of us, which implies they are not afraid of us, and sees America as fools who would protect them no matter if they got in bed with our strategic competitors.
SJ,
No. I implied no such thing, but such orders have been given in the past (see Sherman’s march to the sea, Mai Lai, etc.) and could be again. The trials at Nuremberg made it abundantly clear that “I was just following orders” is no excuse for shooting unarmed prisoners and that the individual is responsible for their own actions. Those actions have consequences. Anyone with convictions will accept the consequences if they really believe their actions were morally correct.
Sherman’s March was in accordance with Law and Customs of war of the time.
Yes, it was. He was actually rather restrained compared to what he could have done. Especially was he self-restrained outside SC.
Oh yes he was.
11B: You are correct; in the interest of brevity I left out a couple things. My thoughts regarding Sherman’s march were directed toward the “bummers” who burned civilian property such as homes that had no apparent military value.
Lars little They/them.
Looks like a shitbag with meth mouth..
After watching his performance at that church, I would say he was on some form of speed. He looks like he could qualify for admission to the Dutch Rudder Club.
Who’s this guy?
Is that the one harassing National Guard dudes in DC a couple of weeks ago?
Same shitbird. He is likely paid to travel to these events and to incite reactions to his verbal attacks.
The Feds need to bust the moneybags paying these dweebs to Insurrect. Roll up the whole rat-line.
He was arrested today and charged with violating the federal FACE Act.
Yup, refusing a lawful order on the basis of “morality” isn’t going to fly well for the objector. The service is not a democracy and unlike burger king, you don’t get it your way.