Different Strands of Theological DNA in Chaplaincy

Kate Bradford

Chaplaincy is a ministry that has its raison d'etre in personal encounters. To this end, there is a strong focus on the practical nature of this ministry, thus, a particular focus on operational or practical theology. But to assume in any way, that an operational theology is somehow neutral simply arising out of particular situations; or uninhibited by the weight of formal theology, or does not precipitate from a structural theology, is a mistake. Operational theology, as any theology, is neither neutral or value free. Operational theology either aligns with some theological positions or reacts to others.

Operational theological practices and world views function as visible and invisible theologies. These views arise out of a particular theological context influences by attitudes to Scripture, history and tradition. Operational theology does not exist is a simple form, it is precipitated from both theology and psycho-sociological attitudes. Orthopraxis is underpinned by orthotheologia and orthocardia: actions and attitudes are underpinned by a set of beliefs and emotional commitment to those beliefs.

Chaplaincy training focuses on informing a participants’ operational theology. Any trainee undergoing chaplaincy training has a reasonable right to understand the implications of the theological presuppositions underlying the practical training. This is necessary because there is a troubling assumption that chaplains can undergo a chaplaincy training course involving a high level of: personal disclosure; vulnerability; examination and then modification of pastoral practice through the verbatim method; but not be theologically changed. The training has the express purpose of altering a participant’s operational theology; however operational theology has levers that move a participant’s structural theology. In fact I would argue that often the unstated intent of chaplaincy training is to change the trainee’s structural theology.

Theological assumptions are freighted in within the operational theology; each operation theology represents theological proposition, containing strands of theological DNA. As the participant submits to the program their theology is cracked open. Just as patients are vulnerable and suggestible, chaplaincy trainee participants are also vulnerable and exposed, and the process has unsheathed their theological DNA. During this time of exposure, new strands of theological DNA can be spliced in modifying the theological positions held. This is not necessarily a bad thing as this is one way a Christian grows and changes. But, there is a need for this process to be consciously acknowledged both by trainer and course participant, and the need of separating out the explorations of theological challenges in a less vulnerable environment.

Because of the theological nature of chaplaincy course content, and the potential vulnerability of trainees two opposite problems arise: a trainee may become sensitive to the fact that their theology is being challenged and emotionally pull back from the course and learn very little, or the contrary, complete submersion in the course results in later discovery that they have a number of new unexamined theological beliefs that they did not have before the course, along with new competing loyalties but no avenues to discuss or resolve the discrepancies.

For evangelical chaplaincy trainees, whose identity is in Christ, and seeking to sensitively share the love and hope of Christ through thought, word and deed, a particular training environment is needed. Chaplaincy is a highly specific Christian ministry that requires a theologically safe environment for trainees to participate. Chaplaincy training is vastly different to a doing a Clinical Supervision course or Mental Health First Aid course. Chaplaincy is not a tequnique – chaplaincy is a Christian ministry. I wish to suggest the following safeguards for training in this Christian ministry: 1) Chaplaincy trainers have high levels of training and practice in both theology and chaplaincy; 2) the trainer’s personal theological perspective is clearly articulated and open to examination; 3) the theological positional of authors of course material is acknowledged; 4) opportunities to discuss the theology of an idea, or course of action, in addition to the more subjective theological reflections; 5) the trainer is able to direct trainees to theological resources that help guide the trainees through, formation of new practical theologies, and structural theological changes. In many situations the changes may actually involve loosening unhelpful adhesions between theology and practice, distinguishing between the content of the gospel and gospel practice, respecting boundaries, acknowledging limits and accepting finitude; rather than actually altering structural beliefs.

Such training guidelines would provide a higher degree of transparency, and greater safety for the participant as they enter the immersion process of being a chaplaincy trainee, the end point should precipitate in greater transparency, safety, comfort and hope for the suffer the chaplain seeks to help. Chaplaincy remains a ministry that has its raison d'etre in personal encounters.

CPE Needs a Refocus

David Pettett

The Clinical Pastoral Education movement has taken great insights from psychology and is faithfully teaching how these can be used in a pastoral context. The person not trained with these insights is likely to say what can be the most inappropriate things to the hurting person. The desire to justify God or just to bring words of comfort can lead to well meaning people doing the opposite of what they want to do and actually bring more pain. CPE use of psychological insights can help the carer be more appropriate in their caring. But a problem has developed. The movement has lost its roots in biblical Christianity.

CPE teaches a right emphasis that the Chaplain needs to be sensitive to where the person they are ministering to is at. This is normally a hard place, a prison cell, a hospital bed. This is not the place to proselytise and it is not the place to teach, rebuke, exhort. It is the place to listen and to empower. And yet the CPE movement has missed the point that the Christian Chaplain brings with them the greatest empowerment this world has ever known. They bring the message of Christ who alone can save. In fact the way the movement has developed, “Christian Chaplain” is an oxymoron. The CPE movement has succumbed to a Universalist theology. It teaches that the role of the Chaplain is to help the person in need find meaning in their own hard place. This “meaning” is whatever the person wants it to be. So the Chaplain is not to speak of Christ for this will distract the person in need from finding their own meaning. Rather than helping people find God, this approach shapes God to fit wherever we want him. It invents a god to mean whatever we want it to mean.

This emphasis evacuates Chaplaincy from all meaning. Pastoral care arises out of the compassion of Christ. This is his compassion shown to the world ultimately in his atoning death and resurrection. This compassion brings reconciliation between God and man. True Chaplaincy brings this compassion into the hard place. Using the insights of psychology the Chaplain will sensitively bring this compassion in such a way that the person in need will hear it and understand that it is only Christ who can bring meaning to their suffering. The Chaplain who does not do this is failing as a Chaplain, for the only true Chaplaincy is Christian Chaplaincy that speaks of the reconciling work of God in Christ.

The CPE movement has failed because it stops at psychological insights. It does not go on to do the hard work of working out how to bring the reconciliation of Christ to a suffering person who may never have given Christ much thought. While it might allow talk of God, spirituality or prayer, it refuses to allow the possibility of speaking of Christ, who is the human race’s only comfort.

How then does the Christian Chaplain bring the emphasis of the unique reconciling work of Christ into the pastoral encounter in a way that will empower the person being ministered to?

The Chaplain first needs some basic theological insights. These are what God has revealed in His word:
1. The nature of man: Created in the image of God. Fallen. Redeemed in the life, death, resurrection, ascension and second coming of the Lord Jesus.
2. The nature of God: Three persons, one God: Father, Son (fully God and fully Man) and Holy Spirit.
3. Christian Eschatology: expectations for life – despite suffering in this world God is in charge and will bring all things together in Christ putting an end to pain and suffering, bringing a new heaven and a new earth. Persevere, there is reward.

These points of theology give the Chaplain a starting point and a clear understanding of what is going on in the human condition.

The value of a human life is that people are created in the image of God. A person is not valuable because they have done good things or that they are a good person. Human value is not even in that a person is loved by God, as valuable as that love is. The suffering person does not necessarily see, and rarely feels, the love of God in their suffering. The unique Judaeo Christian understanding that humanity is created in the image of God is the one thing that declares the value of each human being. (This is another reason why the CPE movement has failed. By welcoming people of other Faiths, which do not share this understanding of humanity, into its colleges, the movement has lost the very reason as to why it is important to bring the compassion of Christ to people. They are worth it because they are image bearers of the Creator.) The person in need is helped to see that even though they may not feel loved by God, though they may even question the very love of God itself, they are created in the image of God and therefore have deep value.

If a person recognises they’re valued because they are created in the image of the Creator, they may well then ask the question as to why an image bearer should then be suffering. The Christian Chaplain’s insight that suffering has entered the world because of humanity’s fallen state, because of man’s rejection of the rule of God, will show the dichotomy humanity lives with: bearing God’s image but out of fellowship with God. Only the Christian Chaplain can bring the reconciling work of Christ to bring any sense of hope to the suffering person.

Without this biblical perspective on life God becomes who you want him to be or he is shaped into something he is not. And that is no help to anyone.

My argument is that a biblical understanding of the human condition, of who God is and of where the world is heading is the necessary basis for bringing real compassion and empowerment to suffering people in a hard places. Pastoral ministry that relies only on psychological insights into the human condition and does not bring a biblical understanding is not pastoral ministry as Jesus brought it to those he encountered in their suffering and it is not the legacy Jesus left us.

It is time for the CPE movement to refocus and do the hard work of teaching pastors how to bring the compassion of Christ into a hurting world in a way that respects the dignity of the human person created in the image of God.

Christology and Theology of Chaplaincy

Kate Bradford

Christology is the way of speaking about Jesus. This can be explicit or implicit, low or high Christology. As a broad Christian discipline, Christology seeks to explain the relationship between theology and anthropology.

At a particular level it explores the relationship between the human and divine natures of the historical person Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, or the Anointed One. To hold a high Christology is to focus particularly on the divine attributes of the Christ, to hold a low Christology is to focus on the human attributes, or cheap benefits of Jesus’ ministry. Christology can be expressed in terms that differ depending on the perspective of the commentator; as such a view can be either from above or below.

In addition to various points of view a Christology focusing objective and subjective frames may be employed. However, Christology whether high or low, is always discussed to some extent from ‘below’ or within the subjective frame as it is a view from a human perspective. Humanly speaking no exhaustive Christology can be formulated, but rather tends towards a position based on ‘evidence’ concerning the Divine, contained within the texts of scripture as recorded in the Old Testament (OT)and New Testament (NT) of the Bible.

It is important to note that there are a number of Christological positions formulated that do not rely upon the Bible as an authoritative source. There are other redactions of the Biblical material with other disciplines. Examples of these would be found in feminist or liberation or post-modern Christologies or even much more broadly there are Islamic, Buddhist or atheist Christologies. The point here is that every human holds a Christology of some sort.

The implications of these various Christologies for the Theology of Chaplaincy are foundational. Behind all chaplaincy work every chaplain operates from either an implicit or explicit Christology. Whatever Christological position a chaplain holds this position will set the chaplain’s deep agenda.

At a cosmic level Christology explores the relationship between God the Father and his role in creation and then entering the created order. (John 1,Col 1, Heb 1, Phil 2) At a local level Christology focuses on Jesus’ earthly ministry (Synoptic Gospels), the nature of his ongoing relationship to humanity and the particular intimacy that he shares with his followers.

Christology has two concerns; who is Jesus Christ in himself, and flowing from this, what is Jesus Christ for us? However to press these category differences too far is to begin to artificially differentiate between his nature and mission.

For Christian chaplains there are huge implications that flow from our understanding of Christology and our internalized positions. Jesus tells his followers that they are salt and light; yet immediately tied to this is the possibility that salt can be bad or lose its saltiness and likewise light can be poor or even hidden. From this we can derive a view that it is possible for Christians to hold poor, bad, dull, misguided or undeveloped Christologies that will negatively affect the ministry/witness of the Christian. It is quite possible, for these underlying beliefs often remain unarticulated or even unacknowledged but never-the-less powerful and formative.

What a chaplain believes about Jesus in himself and his function will direct the focus and emphasis of their chaplaincy work. The theories of functional Christology are tied to views of the atonement. These views seek to explain how it is possible that imperfect, incomplete human beings can relate to a perfect and complete God, and how this is made possible by the God-man Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

Of course there is a second conversation to be had after this conversation. The second necessary conversation is: how is the Chaplain to be in the world. Most chaplaincy thought and theory is around the second conversation while ignoring the implications, importance and dependence on the first conversation.

Looking both ways, before crossing!

Kate Bradford

With similarities to crossing roads, any discussion concerning evangelical chaplaincy must look both ways – that is towards each of opposite ends of a continuum. The continuum is Pastoral Theology with theological/biblical foundations and traditions at one end and the particular practical issues with which the discipline of pastoral care engages at the other end.  Each direction presents immediate frames of reference, which need to be consulted on their own terms before any integration is possible.

For a chaplain, to neglect to look in one or other direction will lead inevitably to an imbalance in ministry. Either, relying too heavily on theoretical theology and/or parish based ministry models; or conversely drawing too heavily on practical considerations that are deeply engaged with social and psychological theory but conceivably lack a biblical basis. The continuum of chaplaincy ministry moves between the aims of communicating theological truths at one end and compassionate care at the other end.

To have as a stated aim to communicate theological truths is a contextually appropriate aim to have within a theological college or a parish ministry settings . In these contexts the message and the space are both ‘owned’ by the minister: examples of ministries of this kind are teaching, preaching and event evangelism. Students and congregation members have ‘freely’ placed themselves under the authority of these ministries which in turn provide boundaries and set limits around this ministry. Chapel services and other formal services such as funeral, baptism and marriage services also follow this model. Most chaplaincy ministry, however, does not happen in the context of formal church services. Chaplaincy happens when the chaplain is a guest in somebody else’s space. As a guest the chaplain owns neither, the message, nor the space yet they extend hospitality.

This ‘guest’ status can present a tension for the chaplain as they struggle to find balance. Out of deference to the other’s space, and suffering, the chaplain may listen empathically yet feel quite disempowered, wondering where faith fits into their ministry. Timothy Morgan, writing in Christianity Today, captures the chaplain’s tension of living in two spaces, quoting Jan McCormack who created Denver Seminary’s program for professional-level training for chaplains:

Understanding the differences between a church-based pastorate and a work-based chaplaincy can be difficult. "Chaplaincy is really doing [ministry] work in somebody else's workplace.  In … chaplaincy, you are at their job site." McCormack said creative tension is key to understanding the chaplain's role. "The tension that you [the chaplain] have to be able to live with well and with integrity is to represent to that institution and to that individual your own faith background, without any apology or compromise.
"Most of us want to remove tension, not live in tension," she said. "But to be a successful chaplain, you have to live in that in-between space. It's difficult, but an incredible opportunity.”[1]

The challenge for a chaplain is ministering in the in-between space, in that they visit and offer hospitality. A space is offered and opened and invited the other into to explore deep spiritual issues without the message being controlled.  Rather than directing the conversation the evangelical chaplain responds to questions that draw on the wisdom of their own Biblical tradition. An integrated Pastoral Theology allows care and a pastoral encounter to happen far from a formal religious meeting or space, by looking both ways, balancing both theology and pastoral practice.

---

[1] The Chaplain’s Tension, Timothy C. Morgan http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/august/16.7.html accessed 24/3/2012

Promoting Chaplaincy

Lindsay Johnstone, Chaplain at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney

How do we encourage people, especially in churches and Christian organisations, to support chaplaincy? How do we make chaplaincy intelligible from a Biblical perspective? How can we do so in a manner likely to evoke inner impetus rather than action locked into a sense of obligation?

This paper is primarily concerned with the context of a Christian audience. However, if promoting the work for the sake of a government grant or for business sponsorship, or support from a community club, we shall want to make sure that pragmatic considerations do not (accidentally) neutralise the Scriptures. Quoting the Bible, however briefly, with integrity and in context adorns the Gospel of Christ.

When the work is being promoted in an overtly Christian assembly or group, then we shall not want to leave the hearer believing that our “good works” are autonomous from or supplementary to the Gospel message.

Because church services and related meetings operate with the expectation that the people attending include both Christians who are needing to be taught or reinforced in the outworking of Christian beliefs and also people not yet converted, we shall want folk to hear Christian care taught in such a way that it supports a Biblical understanding both of how we enter the Kingdom of God, and also how works of Christian care relate to eternity and spiritual salvation. We also want to lower the risks of wrongly arousing guilt on the one-hand or of reinforcing smugness and self-righteousness on the other when motivating and encouraging support for our ministries.

With regard to Ephesians 2: 8-10, we know that the good works God has prepared beforehand to be done by people saved through faith are themselves manifestation of the faith which is “not of works”. They are not done legalistically, so, therefore, they have the character of faith (being itself given to us by God). We want to promote understanding that there is no modular split between the eternal and the temporal.  Separation of Christian performance from the Gospel runs the risk of a new “evangelical law” producing guilt complex or self-righteousness when specific practical actions are being promoted. Because of our carnal nature, it is surprisingly easy for this to happen, but we thank the Lord for his forgiveness and mercy!

How to motivate through the Gospel focus

When motivating Christians to do anything, including supporting chaplaincy and pastoral care, it could be useful to reflect on and apply the model adopted by Tim Keller, Senior Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York when he is preaching generally -

(a) In every text of the Scripture there is somehow a moral principle. It may grow out of because of what it shows us about the character of God or Christ, or out of either the good or bad example of characters in the text, or because of explicit commands, promises, and warnings. This moral principle must be distilled clearly. b) But then a crisis is created in the hearers as the preacher shows that his moral principle creates insurmountable problems. The sermon shows how this practical and moral obligation is impossible to meet. The hearers are led to a seemingly dead end. c) Then a hidden door opens and light comes in. The sermon moves both into worship and into Christ-application when it shows how only Jesus Christ has fulfilled this. If the text is a narrative, you can show how Christ is the ultimate example of a particular character. If the text is didactic, you can show how Christ is the ultimate embodiment of the principle. d) Finally, we show how our inability to live as we ought stems from our rejection of Christ as the Way, Truth, and Life (or whatever the theme is). The sermon points out how to repent and rejoice in Christ in such a way that we can live as we ought.[i]

All motivation of Christians and exhortation to do any good work will stay close to the Gospel if these four truths are always kept in mind.

1                     There are things we are supposed to do.

2                     Of ourselves we are unable to do them, or especially in the manner God intends.

3                     Christ has done them and succeeded.

4                     As we reaffirm our relationship and destiny in connection with Christ, and in the power of the Holy Spirit, we are enabled to do what God wants us to do.

Pastoral care and chaplaincy, along with practical and prayerful support for this ministry, can, in this way,  be presented as increasingly facilitating within the present age foretastes of the joy of the age-to-come.

---

Christ-Centered, Gospel-Motivated Sermons

kellerquotes.com/christ-centered-gospel-motivated-sermons/

Keller Quotes – The words of Dr. Timothy Keller 30 Apr 2012

Chaplaincy ― A House Built on Sand or Rock?

Kate Bradford

Several years ago our house underwent and extension. One day, during the work, I looked down on the new foundations from a deck above. The foundations were set down into the ground, with heavy duty plastic providing a damp course, long steel reinforcing bars wired together to form piers that in turn supported long hollow reinforced beams resting across the space. Over the reinforced bars were laid large sheets of welding mesh.  It seemed obvious though, that no matter, however important foundation might be, no-one can inhabit foundations. Foundations simply provide the base on which the dwelling is built.

The building work came to a halt as we waited for the council engineer to arrive and certify the integrity of the foundations; this was a necessary process before the entire sub-structure was entombed in concrete.

As boring as foundations might seem certification of them is vital, all the more so, because once the concrete is poured and the dwelling built, it becomes very difficult to check the integrity of the sub-floor.

Likewise any view of Christianity, that comprises only foundations, and returns again and again to re-lay foundations (HEB 5:12, 13), is a difficult faith to inhabit, it can be uncomfortable, rigid, conforming to rules, cold and draft-filled, and exposed to and unable to withstand the elements. A faith such as this misses the point that foundations exist to be built upon. The ministry of Chaplaincy like many ministries happens within the dwelling, that space built upon the foundations.

Christianity in essence is a hospitable faith, a dwelling into which we can run; a safe refuge.  A place into which we invite others; a shelter from the storm. At its core chaplaincy is the exercise of hospitality, an invitation into this space. Hospitality forms the basis of the day to day work of chaplaincy; a broad description of the theology employed at this level is practical theology.   

When Jesus spoke of a building a house he did not question the need for a house, but rather he asked what was under the house, sand or rock. (MATT 7:24,25; LUKE  6: 46,49) Once the house is built and the sub-floor concealed from view, it can be difficult to know the quality of the foundations until the integrity on the base is tested in some way. In Jesus’ parable this testing came by way of rain, floods and wind.  

As chaplains it is reasonable to question the foundations of our practical theology and ask on what does it rest: sand, waiting to be washed or blown away or deep bedrock gripping tightly to the base? The foundations Jesus referred to in his parable were hearing his words and doing his will. Evangelical chaplaincy ministry takes Jesus’ foundation seriously when constructing a practical theology, as these practices should be founded the Word of Scripture (1 COR 3:11). This Word has been studied and imbibed, and while we do not inhabit our creedal statements, our systematic theology, Biblical theology or narrative theology, they together form and articulate our faith, and provide boundaries with-in which we faithfully practice our Chaplaincy.

Chaplaincy ― A Word in Season

Kate Bradford

Words

Christian Chaplains are followers of the incarnate Word, the One who shares their humanity. Chaplaincy, as a Christian ministry is never separated from the incarnated Christ or his inspiring Word.   The chaplain enters the suffering of another: being, listening, hearing the pain ― yet without the spoken word it is possible that the chaplain has entered a conspiracy of silence. Chaplaincy is an offer to care in thought, word and deed.

Only when the chaplain’s offer is accepted does the chaplain have the privilege of sharing someone else’s journey; and it is true that there are no answers without first hearing the question. And even hearing the question does not guarantee that there will be answers, but to believe that there is no answer – nothing that could ever satisfy – is a betrayal of the trust that has been placed in the chaplain.

Ecclesiastes 3 tells us there is a time for silence; however this silence is paired with a time to speak.  Silence and speech are not simply quantitative, either absent or present, but rather they are qualitative ― nuanced with awkwardness or companionship and infused with coolness or warmth. There are biblical passages that warn against the excessive use of words and it is true that the wrong thing should not be said, but Scripture contains no injunction against speech containing kind, gentle and gracious words that bring comfort and healing.

Perhaps the right kind of speech does not always come easily or naturally but this is not the same thing to say that the right words cannot be learned.

We speak to care for another; not to simply disseminate information or display our knowledge, neither to dominate nor command the conversation. At this point theological training is inverted. Unlike the critico-analytical method where a case is stated and then argued for, when the chaplain responds to another person’s words, there is a scarcity of words – words – skilfully placed into the conversation just at the right time.

These pared back words are placed with the same careful timing of an orchestral triangle-player, who following the score, plays the single note with precision at just the right time. The triangle player does not fumble; he or she plays decisively with the all the skill of a percussionist and has engaged critically with the theory of music long before this moment.

In the same way for the chaplain critical-analysis has been used to engage with the biblical text forming the background to a chaplaincy encounter. The structured thought behind the scene allows a seemingly incidental conversation to have structure with the aim of opening out a space to allow someone explore their own spiritual world and elucidating truth.

Conversations

Pastoral conversation may endeavour to be diffuse; work in a mist; deal with paradox; to illuminate; to elucidate; working deftly with words so that they are felt physically in the body and in the tap into a spiritual (poetic, or perhaps parabolic) dimension. The selection of language is not arbitrary, but serves to point to a reality beyond that that can be seen or felt; ideas and thought are juxtaposed against each other to pries open another layer of reality. We use language to open this space to allow more time to explore or ponder matters of faith. As we work in this area our words are operating as retractors that are keeping open a space between the physical world and world of spiritual ideas or concepts.

We begin with the person’s present reality: in the real not the ideal[1], being careful not to fuel unlikely expectation. Like a surgeon presented with a tray of instruments, the chaplain carefully selects the one or two words that will gently cut through to a spiritual space at just the right angle.

We stay with them in the present watching their cognitive and emotional responses. We seek to slow the process down with the aim of opening up a vertical space[2]; using oblique language rather than opaque. We attempt to slow things down and help people feel. We do not want to cut to the chase or cut to the quick. We use language to cushion, not shock. This is a very different method to that of the evangelist who aims to cut to the heart of the matter wishing to startle and disorientate the listener, confronting them with a new idea.  

The conversation moves forward only one step at a time accommodating chaos, fragmentation and discontinuity that the sufferer feels; moving forward only as much as necessary, each new word or concept takes energy to comprehend. This can create a dissonance between feelings and cognition.

By contrast to some forms of proclamation, hospital chaplaincy attempts not demolish props of various beliefs or meanings before first seeing the patient safely resting on another. Removing hope, even a false hope without replacing it with anything else may drop someone into an abyss.  Deconstruction has with it the responsibility of not leaving an ‘empty house’ but to be actively involved with reconstruction. Images of support and reconstruction are found in the One who has suffered and understands suffering, the One who is willing to walk with people through the valley of the shadow of death, the One who offers his yoke, the One who lays down his life in order that another may take theirs up.

Christian Chaplaincy offers the possibility of extending an offer to an invitation into the future. He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away. Rev 21:4

---

[1] Working with ‘the real not the ideal’ was an idea that I first heard in a lecture in Sydney by Dr Susan S. Phillips, American Sociologist and Christian Spiritual Director.

[2] Eugene Peterson introduces the vertical space, in his article ‘Teach us to Care and not to Care’, in  The Crisis of Care: Affirming and Restoring Caring Practices in the Helping Professions.  Susan S. Phillips, and Patricia Benner, eds. 1st ed. Georgetown University Press, 1995.

Clinical Supervision and Theology of Chaplaincy

Kate Bradford

In what way is Chaplaincy different for Clinical Supervision?

I have been participating in a workplace course, Clinical Supervision Training; the use of the term Clinical in this context relates to the discipline of Clinical Psychology rather than the medical/clinical work environment. The purpose of this course is to equip hospital staff members (nursing, allied health and others) with skills to clinically supervise and support other staff members in the hospital work environment.

Clinical supervision in this particular course encompasses skills to: empathically support; encourage reflection; help clarify; in order to aid the development of coping skills and build confidence in the other. The key skills focused on are active listening and reflective questioning. A method of Socratic questioning is used in the training. By drawing on Socrates’ belief that: people already have the truth within them and the questioner acts as a mid-wife helping to draw the answers out of people – they in effect discover what they already know.[1]

The clinical skills imparted during the course are both practical and insightful. But as a result of my participation I wish to ask; does Chaplaincy offer anything different from Clinical Supervision? And if so; in what way is Chaplaincy a distinct discipline? If it is not, then consequently, chaplaincy is essentially a form of Clinical Supervision dependant on a clinical psychology framework. Therefore if this is the case, then would it not be better to leave our work to those specifically trained in clinical psychology or counselling?

As Christian Chaplains our ministry is distinct from Clinical supervision is several ways. 1) Christian chaplains help prayerfully, to create a space where a patient may explore spiritual issues around meaning, purpose, hope and love. By listening and asking perceptive questions we help the patient discover what they know: how they think and feel about an issue or event. We are physically, emotionally and spiritually present with the person as they explore their issues. The chaplain is below, seeing events from the patient’s viewpoint; they are compassionately beside them and in their present.  2) As the chaplain spends time with the patient they help the patient to discover not only what they know but additionally help the patient discover the limits or edges of their knowledge. A Biblical perspective would critique the Socratic questioning at this point, as Socratic questioning cannot open up what someone truly does not know, or does even not know that they don’t know. The chaplain, beginning with the patient’s perspective, has a role to guide the patient beyond to deeper truths that lie outside themselves.

The chaplain must remain continually mindful that Socrates can only lead them so far and they must never place their ultimate confidence in him and his method. Socrates could observe true things about humanity; but not about humanity’s relationship with God, for this the Christian must follow the way of Jesus and his wisdom on these matters.

Soren Kierkegaard, a follower of Jesus’ way, addressed this issue in Philosophical Fragments, a book written pseudonymously by Johannes Climacus, who asks ‘How far does Truth admit of being learned?’[2]^,[i] Climacus observed that "one cannot seek for what he knows, and it seems equally impossible for him to seek for what he does not know. For what a man knows he cannot seek, since he knows it; and what he does not know he cannot seek, since he does not even know for what to seek."[3] Climacus underlines that with the Socratic Method "the Truth is not introduced into the individual from without, but was within him all the time"[4] that “all learning and inquiry is... a kind of remembering" and that "one who is ignorant needs only a reminder to help him come to himself in the consciousness of what he knows".[5] Such a view is at odds with the Biblical view: that are generally revealed truths that we may identify for ourselves however there are a greater set of divine/eternal truths that remain hidden until revealed. This Truth is external, residing in the triune God. The value and limits of the inward journey are that they may ultimately reveal the need for the outward journey.   

As chaplains we question, because if we do not hear the question how is it possible to know the answer, but if we have no answers beyond those things that patient can discover within themselves: how can we be ministers of the Gospel? Climacus describes a moment of departure from what is already know as of being of  "decisive significance,"[6] Thus, for the patient the moment of departure in time is more than just a realization of what one already has. It is the realisation of what one wholly lacks. The patient may not even possess the truth unknowingly or unwittingly. Prior to the moment of departure the patient does not know or possess the truth, and does not even know that they do not know the truth.

The chaplain is working with two patient’s horizons of significance.[7] One horizon is the immediate circumstance in which the patient finds themselves and as such has some self-knowledge and access to an understanding of these circumstances.  A second horizon of significance is the eternal horizon; access to this horizon is not inside but rather, outside the patient.  In the Christian worldview truth is revealed; truth is most clearly seen in the person of Jesus Christ who said, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life’ (John 14:1,6) and truth is comprehended through the revealed text of the Bible. The chaplain helps create an environment and conditions necessary for hearing this Truth. The chaplain reflectively introduces ideas or concepts from Biblical truth that connects with the patients and their situation and helps lead them to a new place.

Socratic questioning is an invaluable tool for the chaplain but not as an end in its own right. Jesus and the Apostle Paul were both masters of Socratic questions – not with the intent to reveal the truth within – but rather to illuminate contradictions in thought and to expose the limits of human reasoning. It is possible to assume that Jesus and Paul may have been drawing on contemporary Greek culture that surrounded their first century world, but we can be certain that they drew on their own Jewish culture’s reliance on the power of reflective questioning to show human limits, this is most clearly seen in the book of Job.

Chaplaincy as a discipline differs from Clinical Supervision. Clinical Supervision is concerned with changing perceptions and alleviating anxiety in the immediate context. Chaplaincy is concerned with engaging both the temporal and eternal horizons of significance. The chaplain listens attentively, and questions reflectively, in order to help guide the patient to what can be known about the current circumstances and to help the patient sense the limits of what cannot be known internally about eternity. This is a process that involves both illumination and revelation.

[1] Julius Tomin, ‘Socratic Midwifery’, The Classical Quarterly New Series, Vol. 37, No. 1 (1987), pp. 97-102
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/639347

[2] Soren Kierkegaard, ‘Philosophical Fragments’, A Kierkegaard Anthology Robert Bretall, (ed) Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1946, 154.

[3] Fragments, 155.

[4] Fragments, 155.

[5] Fragments, 155.

[6] Fragments, 157.

[7] Horizon of Significance refers to Charles Taylor's claim that authentic identities ought to be constructed dialogically against 'horizons of significance’ The Ethics of Authenticity, 1991.

---

[i] An essay on Kierkegaard’s discussion between Socrates and Climacus: "Greek and Christian Models of the Truth." <http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=22042>. Accessed 20/April/2012

---

Can an Anglican prison chaplain pastorally care for a follower of witchcraft?

Reflections by Walter Pospelyj, Anglican Chaplain to the Parklea Correctional Centre.

Whilst we may be an ‘Anglican’ chaplain or a ‘Presbyterian’ chaplain, and have a direct responsibility to pastorally care for and minister to those of our own denomination, in accordance with our specific denominational practices and traditions.  There is an expectation that we will be available for the religious and spiritual needs of those from other faiths.

After 12 years of ministering in correctional centres, the day that I had anticipated for many years finally eventuated.  On March 7, 2012, in response to a referral request from an inmate to see a chaplain, I spoke with a 50 year old man who claimed to be a follower of witchcraft.  He spoke with a great deal of knowledge and confidence in relation to his faith and appeared to be well versed.  He went on to claim that he has traced his family tree back many hundreds of years, and over those generations “the craft” had been passed down from generation to generation and practiced by each successive generation.

The reason for this referral was primarily to obtain “religious material” – various books and a set of tarot cards - and secondly, to receive “religious visits” from “his people”.

I spoke with this inmate for over an hour.  It was an interesting and passionate conversation and we covered a number of “religious” and other random topics.  I listened and asked many questions, and listened some more for a good portion of the conversation.  There were many opportunities to interact with what he was saying, but as the conversation progressed and developed, there appeared to be a willingness to hear my input.

There were a couple of things that troubled me.  This inmate has done considerable gaol time and has experienced a variety of negative reactions from various chaplains around the state when he revealed his witchcraft background.  Some chaplains refused to speak to him, some banned him from the chapel and one even ran away from him on hearing his background and affiliation.  Virtually all of the chaplains refused to assist him or provide him with any pastoral care.  What would compel someone to run away or refuse to engage this inmate in conversation.  Is it fear?  Is it a lack of confidence in their faith?  I have no idea.  But as I look at the scriptures I see Jesus engaging with those who are possessed with evil spirits, those who are shunned by society and those who have differing religious views.

He asked if I had a problem with organising some books, and tarot cards for him.  Herein lies my dilemma.  How do I respond to that question?

I told him that personally I have an issue with books on witchcraft, and personally disagree with its teachings, practices and beliefs.  My theological position puts me at odds with the teachings, practices and beliefs of witchcraft.  But then it does with most other religions as well.  I went on to say that I sit under the authority and teaching of the Bible, and that is why I have an issue with it.

Secondly, I told him that systemically, if his religion is a bone fide religion, accepted by Corrective Services NSW, and that if this “religion” is listed as his religion on his file, then I don’t think I am justified in withholding the delivery of service[1] to him.  If assistance is given to Muslim and Mormon inmates, then a follower of witchcraft is no different.

He appeared to be happy with this response.

In our conversation, he went to say that he hadn’t read the bible and didn’t know much about it.  The rapport that I had established at this point allowed me to speak about what the Bible says, and he appeared to listen and receive it.

I walked away from that conversation, thankful, prayerful, encouraged, perplexed and disappointed.  It was a great opportunity to truly engage with someone who is non Christian in their thinking and I was thankful for that.  I was encouraged in being able to share some of the truths of the scriptures with him, as well as being able to develop a positive rapport with him.  I was disappointed in the response from some of the other chaplains that he had experienced over the years.  And finally as I reflected on my time spent with this inmate, a number of questions and issues were raised.

¢  Can a chaplain in a correctional centre, or hospital, or in any other workplace choose to refuse the delivery of service to an inmate, patient or employee, when requested?”. 

¢  Can we refuse to pastorally care for people just because we have differing religious or theological positions?

¢  Did I honour God in my dealings with this guy, or did I go soft?

¢  Does scripture have anything to add to this scenario?

Let me outline some answers I have so far formulated to some of those questions.

From my understanding, as a prison chaplain, I am responsible to my head of church[2] for matters of faith and practice, and I am responsible to the correctional centre for matters of security.  Having said that, there are also other departmental obligations as a full time chaplain in a correctional centre.  As an Anglican chaplain, I am primarily responsible to minister to members of my own faith, as well as attend to the needs of other inmates as they arise.  That  means that I do facilitate the needs of inmates from other faiths.  Some examples of that include;

·           I will arrange a religious visit by a pastor or minister, at the request of the inmate, from the church / religious organisation that he was associated with prior to coming into custody.

·           I will contact a religious organisation / church to obtain and provide written material for an inmate.

·           I will make the chapel available to other faiths / religious organizations for them to use, such as Friday Muslim prayers or Buddhist meditations.

There are currently 43 different options[3] for “Religion” that an inmate can declare himself to be an adherent of when entering into the custody of the Department of Corrective Services.  These include the mainstream catholic and various protestant denominations, Agnostic and Atheist, a range of non Christian religions, such as Muslim, Buddhist, Mormon, Baha’i, Ananda Marga, Pegus, Ratona Taoism and Satanist. 

From that list of religious options, 42 will generally not attract the attention or concern of chaplains or staff within the centre.  However, if an inmate declares to be a ‘Satanist’, or an adherent of witchcraft or any other overtly satanically associated religion, then this will generally draw a different response.

The interpretation of “other faiths” appears to be a nebulous concept.  Amongst most chaplains, there appears to be a general willingness to accept and include followers of Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism and virtually all other faiths, as recipients of pastoral care and ministry.  However, faiths that are not accepted are those such as wicca, witchcraft and the other overtly satanically associated religions. 

It begs the question – “On what basis do you include one and exclude the other?” But then is this a valid question?  Can you include most and exclude a few?  I don’t believe we can exclude a follower of witchcraft, or of any other cult or religion in today’s multi-faith, freedom of religion, pluralistic society.

There are basically two spiritual pools we swim in. Christianity is unique in what it teaches and differs from all the other religions. It holds to the authority of scripture, and proclaims Jesus as the Son of God, fully God – fully man, born of a virgin, who physically died on the Cross at Calvary and physically rose three days later.  In his death, he took the punishment for the sin of mankind, with the result being reconciliation between God and mankind for those who place their faith and trust in His death on the cross.  Jesus himself said, “I am the way, and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the father except through me.[4]”

The other pool contains all those who hold a different position from Christianity due to the fact that they believe and proclaim something different from what scripture teaches.  Christianity may be closely aligned by some with other faiths.  In the case of Islam, there is the claim that Christianity and Islam serve the same God.  This is an assertion that I totally reject, and it is the differences that will eternally keep us separate.  Islam refuses to accept that Jesus died on the cross, but was rather substituted, as well as refusing to accept Jesus as God, within the Trinity, or as the Son of God.

Having said that, it is the Christian call to love that should keep us seeking to establish relationships with people.  It is love that keeps bringing us to the table to dialogue with people and at times robustly discuss matters of faith, regardless of religious persuasions.

Whilst Paul was waiting for the brothers in Athens, we read in Acts 17:16-17 “that his spirit was provoked within him as he saw that the city was full of idols.  ¹⁷ So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons, and in the marketplace every day with those who happened to be there.”

At verse 22-23, Paul addresses the Areopagus and says, “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are religious.  ²³ For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown God.’  What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you”.  Paul then goes on to speak about what God is like and continues on to share the gospel with them.  At the end of the passage we read that some mocked him, some were prepared to listen to him again and some were converted.

My saviour has conquered death and has defeated Satan.  As I hold fast to that truth, it gives me great strength and courage to discuss and reason with people who hold differing religious views from my own – whether they be witchcraft, Islam or Cao Dai.  I don’t agree with the teaching of Islam or of witchcraft, but just as Paul did when the opportunity arose, and with the Spirit’s leading, I will seek to engage members of our communities in dialogue.  I have the freedom of, not from, religion, and therefore as an Evangelical Christian, if people are interested, I am free to engage with them and speak about my Saviour and the great hope that I have because of Him – 1 Peter 3:15-16[5], “¹⁵ but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defence to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you;¹⁶ yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behaviour I Christ may be put to shame.”

As a chaplain, there is an understanding I will facilitate other religious practices, without prejudice.  Therefore, with gentleness and respect, I can pastorally care for him and provide him with the material he needs to practice his religion.

---

[1] “Delivery of service” is a term used to refer to the services from different disciplines within the correctional centre, i.e., psychology, welfare, education and chaplaincy.  Each of these discipline delivers a service of some description to inmates.

[2] For me that is the Anglican Archbishop of the Diocese of Sydney, Peter Jensen.

[3] There are also 5 other options including; Unknown, Refused to provide information, None, No Religion, No Preferred Religion,

[4] John 14:6

[5] CEV