Kate Bradford
Difficulties present whenever we try to reconcile evangelical ministry with chaplaincy in public institutions, but acknowledging such difficulties is not the same thing as concluding that these difficulties are insurmountable. Interestingly, concerns are expressed from two opposite angles; not only from an evangelical perspective but also from a secular perspective. From an evangelical perspective, the possibility of genuine Christian ministry is queried because of the boundaries that have been placed around chaplaincy by governmental policies and secular administrations. On the other hand, secular institutions have placed these boundaries around chaplaincy to counter a concern that religious agencies may use chaplaincy as a means of gaining access to these institutions in order to engage in active proselytization.
Chaplaincy literature and scholarship is largely presented from an interfaith perspective with a strong emphasis on psychological and sociological perspectives on spirituality.1 Internationally, evangelical chaplains are not a large group and policies around chaplaincy do not represent any significant input from Christian scholarship from an evangelical perspective.2
Historically, chaplaincy was very much part of evangelical ministry. It thrived under the broad shelter of societal conventions and attitudes that acceded to Christian values expressed in a general dependence on a Judaeo-Christian framework for society. Since the liberalisation both of western society and much of mainline Christianity within these societies, the ‘natural’ place of the Christian message within society was challenged and largely rejected. Through the latter part of the twentieth century, many Christians struggled to find their place within the prevailing secular culture. Consequently, there was an ever present danger of Christians battening down and withdrawing from prevailing secular culture; or conversely losing all distinctiveness by being absorbed by the surrounding culture.
However, the Biblical account contains many examples of ways in which God’s people lived among the nations and engaged with the people around them. These accounts provide clear paradigms for living and ministering as ‘aliens and exiles’.
Chaplaincy provides wonderful opportunities to engage with our culture and with people in need. Additionally, chaplaincy provides a broad framework for Christians in general as they live and work within a secular society.
The entirety of the New Testament is written within the context of Roman rule and the surrounding Greco-Roman culture. The first letter of Peter centres on this theme of living among the ‘pagans’ in an engaging manner. The Old Testament contains five extensive accounts of the people of God living under foreign rule and Israelites working in foreign courts having been appointed to positions in government. These accounts include Joseph, Moses, Daniel, Esther and Nehemiah. Such accounts contain a framework for engagement with governmental agencies rather than withdrawal.
Two governing biblical principles for engagement can be found in Jeremiah 29:5, 7. The first principle encouraged the exiled Israelites to settle and build a life in a foreign land and secondly to seek the peace and prosperity of the city into which they were exiled. The Israelites were encouraged to be involved with the culture. New Testament believers are also to engage with the world around them. They are to love their neighbour as they have first been loved. They follow the God who loved the world so much that he came into the world, his creation, to his people, and this love is expressed compassionately and in a desire to do good to all in word and deed, sharing Jesus’ saving love. Such love and compassion are a response to being formed, reformed and conformed by the Spirit of Christ 3, which is expressed in a heartfelt reverence to Christ as Lord. (1 Pet 3:15) The New Testament urges believers to be in the world but not of the world which follows the examples set by Joseph, Moses, Daniel, Esther and Nehemiah who were immersed in culture and had even undertaken pagan education. The book of Daniel provides some clear guidelines for engaging with the culture around us 4.
Firstly, Daniel and his colleagues received a ‘pagan’ education in Babylonian language, literature and culture. Such an education would have been deeply imbued with astrological and religious beliefs of the culture. By inference, it can be observed that evangelical chaplains also need additional training alongside their theological studies to understand and engage with contemporary culture in order to understand and to discover points of connection. In addition to theology, it is necessary to have a working knowledge of: religious beliefs; culture; psychology; sociology; secularism and generic spirituality.
Secondly, terminology can become a point of conflict – ownership of various words can be challenged. Daniel and his friends lost their Hebrew names and consequently an aspect of their Hebraic heritage was denied. They were allocated Babylonian names connected with the Babylonian religion. Daniel and his colleagues accepted these names. They didn’t quibble over words, or look for points of difference or conflict. Historically, words such as chaplain, chaplaincy, pastoral care, spiritual care, were exclusively Christian words. These same words are now applied generically in secular institutions and some organisations have Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu or even secular chaplains or pastoral care workers. It can be tempting for Christians to feel offended or even betrayed that their words are being used in ways that deny the word’s original intention. Looked at from another way, the shared use of words
provides generous points of contact for a chaplain.
Thirdly, Daniel worked for the government and sought the prosperity of the institutions within which he worked. Daniel’s godly wisdom and guidance were valued and sought by a number of kings and leaders. There is no reason that chaplains should not seek to be actively involved with all sorts of activities and leadership within their institutions and play an active part in multi-disciplinary teams.
However, like Daniel and his friends, the chaplain is unable to become completely part of the system because at points they must differ, most particularly in matters of faith and religion. Eugene Petersen perceptively alluded to this danger when he reminds chaplains not to seek to be a fully integrated professional within the system, and reminds chaplains that they are barely tolerated nuisances by some in the public systems,5 and they can even be objects of derision as has always been the case for those in Christian ministry. The ministry of chaplains should be conducted in a professional manner with integrity. However when chaplaincy seeks to be seen as an official institutional profession (i.e. healthcare discipline), demanding to be taken seriously as part of the institutional structure, then there is a fair chance the content of chaplaincy is also set by the institution. Each chaplain must have a line that they will not cross for in this, their ‘yes’ is as only as good as their ‘no’. Evangelical chaplains respond drawing on a deep well of Christian compassion and biblical wisdom, working through the love of Christ. The chaplain ministers with gentleness and respect, responding to need in prayer with the comfort of Jesus and of the hope found only in his word and sacrifice. (I Pet 3:15, 16). As chaplains encounter people who are struggling with helplessness and hopelessness; deep despair, tragedy and trauma, a spiritual depth is needed. There is much the chaplain can concede but the actual content of a visit arises out of the need of the patient/inmate and the chaplain responds out of the wisdom of their biblical tradition. They can do no less.
Evangelical chaplains, like other chaplains working in multi-faith contexts minister from the depth of their own tradition. Christian chaplains draw on the great wealth of Christian wisdom that has accumulated before them. Stephen Pattison warns against abandoning a 2000 year old tradition for the passing fad of generic spirituality and the eclectic ideas drawn together and labelled spirituality.6
Chaplaincy is a wonderful ministry as we seek to care for, support and love those people who inhabit the margins of our society. Chaplaincy requires a degree of fluidity and flexibility, and desire to connect and be genuinely open with people, yet not to lose the distinctive edge of Christian faith. Unlike parish ministry, chaplains do not control the space or the dominant narrative in the place yet there are wonderful moments where a chaplain can offer to hold open a space for another to explore their own issues around meaning, purpose and deep matters surrounding life and death and eternity.
Evangelical chaplaincy has the potential to provide a template for non-defensive active Christian engagement in many setting, helping Christians to seek peace and prosperity for their own communities and societies.
1 The Journal of Pastoral Care & Counseling, would be a representative publication of the general perspective conveyed in international chaplaincy.
2 Michael Milton, Eugene Petersen, Andrew Purves and Susan Phillips present alternative evangelical narratives that inform and direct evangelical chaplaincy but this perspective is not found readily in mainstream chaplaincy literature.
3 Jeffrey Greenman quoting Richard Foster, ‘Spiritual Formation in Theological Perspective’, Greenman, J. P., & Kalantzis, G. (Eds.). (2010). Life in the Spirit: Spiritual Formation in Theological Perspective. IVP Academic. P.25.
4 The Daniel outline presented is drawn from a series of lectures presented by Vaughan Roberts, in NSW Jan 2013.
5 Eugene Peterson, (1992). Five smooth stones for pastoral work. Gracewing, p.139.
6 Stephen Pattison, ‘Dumbing Down the Spirit’, Orchard, H. C. (2001). Spirituality in health care contexts. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
