How we understand chaplaincy

Paidiske said:

Thanks, that makes sense. I haven't had much chance to get a Lutheran point of view on this before!

Click to expand...

You are very welcome. Just keep in mind that not all Lutherans are the same either.

rters

Paidiske said:

Spin off from another thread, but one I thought might be of interest to the group here.

How do you understand chaplaincy? Do you think it is different if undertaken by a lay or an ordained person? Or in different contexts (eg. school, prison, hospital, military, etc)? Is this something your tradition embraces or struggles with?

I have my own ideas, but I'd rather make room for others to start with.

Click to expand...

If you are talking about the "Chaplaincy that most all hospitals, and institutions accept and require which is under the CPE program I have a real personal view of it. While in Seminary for the Master of Divinity in Pastoral Care, I was required to take one semester or one quarter unit.

Here is what I saw and learned. My supervisor came to class drunk several times. We sang songs as a group holding hands to music that was not religious. I was told to be a listener, not to interject Christ into my conversation, unless the patient brought it up. Pray only if asked to by the patient. In my group we had about t men and the supervisor was a younger liberated liberal female about 28 to 32 years of age. The group consisted of me a Baptist pastor / Student, three Catholic males in seminary, a man about 40 in the UCC church wanting to be a chaplain, and married catholic deacon wanting to take the course.

We all assigned two areas of the Hospital. I was assigned the Labor / delivery area, and the ER. Each of us were required to spend one night a week, a with a bed was supplied, but we were on call all night long.

I found the Supervisor to be extremely pro gay, and "sexually liberated" in all ways. (her words not mine). In class when she said something that was contrary to Scripture, I would ask her how that fit in being a chaplain? I found her to be the worst example of what I considered a Christian Chaplin should be. I saw the program to which I was assigned to be anything but Christian. I experienced by others in the CPE program a social gospel program, based on listening and not interjecting any faith, except what ever the patient had. The men in my group were mixed, some went out with the Supervisor and partied. Some just kept quiet just to pass the course. I at temped to report the Supervisor to the director. He was involved with my Supervisor. After completing the course my Supervisor failed me. I took my case before the National CPE board and I was given full credit for my course. I have no idea what happened to the Director or the Supervisor.

My opinion of the CPE program as I witnessed it was anything but Christian. I was offered a position with a small stipend and after completing it then a paid position might be offered. I said no thank you.

Just to make everyone aware of the fact all Chaplains for the different services are required to take a number of quarters of CPE (Clinical Pastoral Education) to become a Chaplain.

I have seen Chaplains at the VA hospital that were excellent, examples of what a Chaplain should be.

Paidiske said:

Okay... sorry, I realise this is a bit off topic, but I'm curious...

So if, at a later service, you need to say all of the consecratory prayers again, and that is the only context for which you will reserve the sacrament... why reserve it at all? Is it purely if there is too much to easily consume after the first service?

Click to expand...

Note that "all of the consecratory prayers" would not be a huge burden, because in the liturgy of the LCMS, WELS and most of the traditional German Lutheran churches, this consists primarily of the Institution Narrative, and is much simpler than even the BCP. I believe the LCMS decided not to use the Lutheran Book of Worship but to issue their own recension of it largely because the ELCA churches, coming from a somewhat more high church Scandinavian tradition, inserted prayers that could be read as Eucharistic Prayers, or Canons of the Mass, basically, Anaphorae, which Luther was opposed to (but there was also a much larger rupture between the ELCA and the LCMS brewing over the ordination of women and other issues, and I would say that these days the LCMS actually tends to be a bit more High Church than the ELCA; the worship services of the ELCA, UMC and PCUSA have been allowed to become undifferentiated, watered down versions of the 1979 BCP; but the LCMS, being congregational, has a few congregations where a praise and worship band approach has taken over).

Paidiske said:

It sounds complicated! But thank you for explaining. Lutheranism is so small here that I have no experience of Lutheran worship at all.

Click to expand...

The ones in Australia (http://www.lca.org.au/) are in full fellowship with Lutheran Church Canada (my synod). In Canada and for the most part, in the US the further west one goes, the more apt you are to find contemporary worship; the further east, the more liturgical.

At the very least, Communion for the sick and shut-ins would consist of the invocation; confession and absolution; usually Scripture readings and a meditation on those; Confession of faith (either Apostles or Nicene Creed) Prayers general and specific; Service of the Sacrament (which would include the Lords Prayer), the Verba, distribution, dismissal (Based on the song of Simeon); the benediction.

If the situation is dire, it is up to the Pastor's discretion, but at the very least, it would be the verba, distribution, dismissal and the prayer of commendation for the dying.

Chaplains are in a certain area of clerical existence that is a bit misunderstood from mainstream clergy. For starters the only way they can survive is if they can speak with a certain level of, for lack of a better word, ecumenism, that is required more so of chaplains than the usual parish priest. An ship of 5000 people of just as many religious traditions is different to minister to than a parish of the same number where everyone is a member of the same sect.

Part of the "problem" of chaplains, at least in the American military, has been that certain Evangelically minded individuals have tried a little too hard to convert people who just needed someone unaffiliated with command leadership to hear them vent and help deal with life. Life is hard. Military life is harder and as helpful as one's immediate chain of command may or may not be, there are some things about, say, one's first deployment than only a chaplain can answer. All ecclesiastical differences aside, no chaplain is allowed, by law, to push conversion to their own sect unless asked by the service member on how to do so. Chaplains are also supposed to maintain confidentiality on a similar level of Confession when it comes to conversations with people unless that person is threatening to do harm to themselves and/or others. I have met some great chaplains whom I wish I could emulate. I only met one whom I'd be hesitant to help rescue from a burning building (no one's perfect okay?)

I remember a couple chaplains whom I'd met said that they preferred the chaplaincy over parish life because it allowed them to deal with people's pastoral issues and worry less about the administrative end of things. One said that he loved it because it helped him avoid the clergy gossip. Really, the main difference between chaplains and a parish priest is the audience and for some, like military chaplains, a heightened sense of mobility.

Paul Yohannan said:

Note that in the Orthodox church, the administration of the Eucharist to the laity in the divine liturgy, assisting the priest, and to the ill persons at home, is a specific ministry of Deacons, and Deacons are allowed to touch the altar and handle the sacred vessels as needed. They simply cannot consecrate the Eucharist.

Click to expand...

It isn't uncommon, in the Arabic traditions, for the deacon to regularly help distribute Communion. Greek and Slavic traditions don't seem to do it as much unless there's a large crowd and not a lot of priests. I'm not sure about the Romanian or Georgian traditions.

E.C. said:

Chaplains are in a certain area of clerical existence that is a bit misunderstood from mainstream clergy. For starters the only way they can survive is if they can speak with a certain level of, for lack of a better word, ecumenism, that is required more so of chaplains than the usual parish priest. An ship of 5000 people of just as many religious traditions is different to minister to than a parish of the same number where everyone is a member of the same sect.

Part of the "problem" of chaplains, at least in the American military, has been that certain Evangelically minded individuals have tried a little too hard to convert people who just needed someone unaffiliated with command leadership to hear them vent and help deal with life. Life is hard. Military life is harder and as helpful as one's immediate chain of command may or may not be, there are some things about, say, one's first deployment than only a chaplain can answer. All ecclesiastical differences aside, no chaplain is allowed, by law, to push conversion to their own sect unless asked by the service member on how to do so. Chaplains are also supposed to maintain confidentiality on a similar level of Confession when it comes to conversations with people unless that person is threatening to do harm to themselves and/or others. I have met some great chaplains whom I wish I could emulate. I only met one whom I'd be hesitant to help rescue from a burning building (no one's perfect okay?)

I remember a couple chaplains whom I'd met said that they preferred the chaplaincy over parish life because it allowed them to deal with people's pastoral issues and worry less about the administrative end of things. One said that he loved it because it helped him avoid the clergy gossip.



It isn't uncommon, in the Arabic traditions, for the deacon to regularly help distribute Communion. Greek and Slavic traditions don't seem to do it as much unless there's a large crowd and not a lot of priests. I'm not sure about the Romanian or Georgian traditions.

Click to expand...

So true about ministering to others. In our military, the same rules apply; however our Chaplains are allowed to retain our practice of "closed Communion"; communing only those in fellowship with our Synod. Pastoral discretion may be applied in circumstances of emergency; but that would be entirely up to the Chaplain.

MarkRohfrietsch said:

So true about ministering to others. In our military, the same rules apply; however our Chaplains are allowed to retain our practice of "closed Communion"; communing only those in fellowship with our Synod. Pastoral discretion may be applied in circumstances of emergency; but that would be entirely up to the Chaplain.

Click to expand...

Same here on the Closed Communion.

To me it seems that the classic model of the Parish Priest, the Parish Church, the village and the fields around made a lot of sense. However life is different now. We don't all find our meaning purpose and being in a narrow geographic space. We travel for just about everything. The chaplain has the role of being the focus person within whatever the defining characteristic of a centre of community is, Hospital, Prison, Police Force, Fire Brigade, University, School. Within the Christian context they are a focus person, bringing (or perhaps more correctly revealing and helping people see) God in that situation, maybe sacramental, maybe pastoral, maybe listening, speaking and praying. This has become a little more confusing now as we become increasingly more secular and have chaplains who are sometimes specifically secular, who would see their role simply as pastoral and listening.

As our society changes and people find more and more meaning and community in their work, learning and everyday life, and less in the confines of where they lay their head down at night, the more significant the role of chaplains is likely to be.