Excerpt
At
that
the
chaplain
felt
braver.
"So,
tell
me
Doctor,
how
are
things
with
you
and
God?"
The
psychiatrist
was
sort
of
stunned
at
the
question,
but
then
relaxed,
and
thoughtfully
replied,
"I
will
tell
you
this:
I've
seen
a
lot
of
simple
operations
get
a
little
fouled
up
over
the
years.
My
operation
will
be
open
heart
surgery.
I
know
full
well
that
if
something
were
to
go
wrong
.
.
.
well,
I
guess
I'm
saying
.
.
.
I'm
not
sure
about
God."
"Go
on,"
the
young
chaplain
whispered.
"Well,
what
does
that
Bible
say
about
what
happens
when
you
die?"
(1)
II. MODERN
PROBLEMS
IN
PASTORAL
CARE
OF
THE
SICK
AND
DYING
Whether
the
minister
of
the
gospel
is
a
solo
pastor
with
an
older
congregation
or
the
senior
pastor
of
a
mega
church,
or
even
a
professor
of
a
college
or
seminary
who
may
also
serve
on
the
staff
of
a
suburban
congregation,
all
ministers
usually
wind
their
way
into
hospital
parking
lots,
climb
stairs,
and
maneuver
endless
corridors
to
enter
the
rooms
of
people
in
hospital
beds.
Some
the
minister
will
know
quite
well.
Others
will
be
friends
or
relatives
of
the
congregation,
and
the
minister
will
have
never
met
them.
Few
clergy
would
dispute
the
proposition
that
hospital
visitation
is
a
necessary
part
of
the
minister's
work.
The
biblical
references
on
the
matter
are
so
many
and
so
clear
that
pastoral
visitation
of
the
sick
and
dying
is
an
expected
work
of
the
minister
of
the
gospel
in
carrying
out
a
biblically
faithful
pastorate.
"Now
Naaman,
commander
of
the
army
of
the
king
of
Syria,
was
a
great
and
honorable
man
in
the
eyes
of
his
master,
because
by
him
the
LORD
had
given
victory
to
Syria.
He
was
also
a
mighty
man
of
valor,
but
a
leper.
Now
bands
from
Aram
had
gone
out
and
had
taken
captive
a
young
girl
from
Israel,
and
she
served
Naaman's
wife.
She
said
to
her
mistress,
"If
only
my
master
would
see
the
prophet
who
is
in
Samaria!
He
would
cure
him
of
his
leprosy""(2
Kings
5:1
3).
"I
was
naked
and
you
clothed
Me;
I
was
sick
and
you
visited
Me;
I
was
in
prison
and
you
came
to
Me"
(Matthew
25:36).
"I
was
a
stranger
and
you
did
not
take
Me
in,
naked
and
you
did
not
clothe
Me,
sick
and
in
prison
and
you
did
not
visit
Me"
(Matthew
25:43).
"Is
anyone
among
you
sick?
Let
him
call
for
the
elders
of
the
church,
and
let
them
pray
over
him,
anointing
him
with
oil
in
the
name
of
the
Lord"
(James
5:14).
(2)
However,
a
real
question
might
be:
"What
is
the
role
of
the
minister
of
the
gospel
on
hospital
visitations?"
Or,
in
keeping
with
the
theme
of
a
recent
Annual
Meeting
of
our
society,
"What
are
Evangelicalism's
'boundaries'
in
the
work
of
pastoral
care
of
the
sick
and
dying?"
(3)
We
might
even
borrow
the
sarcastic
patient's
question
as
an
authentic
and
pressing
question
to
every
minister
of
the
gospel
prying
open
a
hospital
room
door:
"So,
what
are
you
doing
here?"
On
this
vital
matter
of
ministry
the
visitation
of
the
sick
The
Book
of
Church
Order
of
the
Presbyterian
Church
in
America
instructs
its
officers
and
members
that:
"It
is
the
privilege
and
duty
of
the
pastor
to
visit
the
sick
and
to
minister
to
their
physical,
mental,
and
spiritual
welfare.
In
view
of
the
varying
circumstances
of
the
sick,
the
minister
should
use
discretion
in
the
performance
of
this
duty."
(4)
Patrick
Fairbairn,
the
Scottish
prince
of
pastoral
theology,
and
a
representative
of
the
traditional
evangelical
approach
to
visitation
of
the
sick,
wrote:
The
ministration
of
counsel
and
comfort
to
the
"diseased,
the
dying,
or
the
bereaved"
is
undoubtedly
a
most
important
branch
of
pastoral
duty.
It
is
such,
indeed,
that
the
neglect
or
slovenly
discharge
of
it
will
go
far
to
neutralize
the
effect
of
all
other
services.
For
the
pastor
who
makes
himself
strange
in
the
households
of
his
flock,
while
they
are
involved
in
sorrow
or
stricken
with
disease
and
death,
will
invariably
be
regarded
as
devoid
of
the
tenderness
and
consideration
which
are
the
most
appropriate
characteristics
of
his
calling.
(5)
C. W.
Brister
in
his
outstanding
work
Pastoral
Care
in
the
Church
addressed
the
nature
of
the
experience
of
the
hospitalized
person:
Accidents,
hospitalized
illnesses,
and
surgical
procedures
disrupt
life's
serenity
and
threaten
the
security
of
persons
and
their
families.
Hospitalization
creates
a
crisis
as
the
ill
or
injured
person
experiences
his
own
finitude,
suffers
pain,
and
copes
with
alien
forces
and
persons.
(6)
I
would
suggest
that
there
is
always
the
potential
for
another
sort
of
crisis:
a
crisis
of
role
and
identity
of
the
minister
of
the
gospel
on
the
care
giving
team
to
the
sick
and
dying.
So
this
paper
seeks
to
address
the
issue
of
the
role
of
ministers
of
the
gospel
in
hospital
visitation.
In
particular,
I
want
to
suggest
that
liberalizing
tendencies
in
modern
pastoral
care,
as
well
as
ordinary
but
errant
pastoral
identities,
require
professors
of
practical
or
pastoral
or
applied
theology
to
recognize
the
persistent
possibility
of
crisis
in
this
important
aspect
of
the
pastor's
work
and
to
be
intentional
in
re
orientating
future
pastors
toward
a
biblically
faithful,
vocationally
satisfying,
and
historically
evangelical
approach
to
the
visitation
of
the
sick
and
dying.
An
important
caveat
to
be
made
at
this
point
is
that
this
paper
is
primarily
concerned
with
raising
and
addressing
concerns
about
the
visitation
of
the
sick
by
generalists,
generally
speaking,
parish
ministers,
not
specialists
such
as
hospital
or
military
chaplains.
(Although
what
I
propose
in
this
paper
would,
I
think,
be
of
some
value
to
them
as
well.)
(8)
1. Liberalizing
tendencies.
"So
what
are
you
doing
here?"
should
provoke
a
prompt
and
decisive
answer.
There
have
been
a
variety
of
helpful
theologians
and
pastors
and
writers
who
have
helped
form
our
response.
(8) Most
of
the
great
patristic
figures
have
answered
this
central
question
about
the
role
of
the
minister
in
caring
for
the
sick.
Among
them,
we
would
name
Tertullian,
Origen,
Chrysostom,
Cyril
of
Jerusalem,
and
the
great
Augustine.
Classical
Roman
Catholic
voices
such
as
Ambrose,
Gregory,
and
Thomas
Aquinas
have
answered
the
question.
Classical
Protestant
voices
such
as
Luther,
Calvin,
Bucer,
Herbert,
Gouge,
Bunyan,
Owen,
Baxter,
and
Wesley
have
weighed
in.
Modern
voices
like
Kierkegaard,
Niebuhr,
Earth,
Bonhoeffer,
Geoffrey
Nuttal,
and
Thomas
Oden
have
added
their
comments.
We
shall
consider
some
of
them
momentarily.
But,
amazingly,
in
the
presence
of
so
many
of
those
voices
saying
remarkably
similar
things
about
the
work
of
pastoral
visitation
of
the
sick,
there
have
been
answers
that
could
only
be
described
as
novel.
These
voices
might
be
characterized
as
liberalizing
tendencies
in
the
work
of
pastoral
visitation.
These
voices
have
tended
to
pare
the
theological
edge
off
of
a
distinctively
evangelical
or
perhaps
we
should
say,
"classical"
response,
in
favor
of
a
new
voice.
This
new
voice
carries
with
it
the
familiarly
unbiblical
echoes
of
the
modern
psychological
movement.
Among
these
new
voices
Thomas
Oden
lists
the
following:
"Stolze
(1940),
Waterhouse
(1940),
Goulooze
(1950),
Bergsten
(1951),
Johnson
(1953),
and
Hiltner
(1959)."
(9)
The
force
of
their
teaching,
while
offering
much
that
would
surely
be
welcomed
as
helpful
by
evangelical
pastors,
was
to
supplant
the
sufficiency
of
Scripture
with
an
unhealthy
and
unwise
dependence
on
the
teachings
of
modern
psychology.
Frederic
Greeves,
author
of
Theology
and
the
Cure
of
Souls
and
an
eminent
British
pastoral
theologian,
visited
the
United
States
in
the
late
1950s
and
remarked
(and
I
quote
from
C.
W.
Brister)
"that
ministers
are
primarily
consulted
as
psychologists
rather
than
as
pastors."
(10)
Indeed,
Seward
Hiltner,
who
may
be
called
the
father
of
the
modern
pastoral
care
movement
in
seminary
education,
relied
heavily
on
the
behavioral
science
work
of
Karl
Menninger
and,
indeed,
was
a
professor
at
the
Menninger
Institute
in
Topeka,
Kansas,
in
1957.
He
was
also
the
chief
spokesman
for
a
distinctively
Rogerian
form
of
pastoral
care.
Carroll
Wise,
another
prominent
member
of
this
school,
taught
that
"[w]e
ministers
do
not
solve
anybody's
problems.
.
.
.
We
are
simply
a
means
by
which
a
person
is
enabled
to
work
out
his
own
destiny."
(11)
I
will
not
go
into
his
thoughts
on
preaching,
but
his
statement
that
"exhortation
.
.
.
may
do
a
lot
of
harm
.
.
."
(12)
fairly
represents
his
assessment
of
the
older
Biblical
approaches
to
pastoral
care
and,
particularly,
the
role
of
the
minister
in
visiting
the
sick
and
dying.
After
Hiltner,
the
name
of
Dr.
Howard
Clinebell,
who
labored
as
Professor
of
Pastoral
Psychology
and
Counseling
at
the
School
of
Theology
at
Claremont,
Claremont,
California,
must
surely
rank
as
the
key
teacher
of
these
innovative
ideas
about
the
ordinary
work
of
the
pastor
in
the
cure
of
souls.
There
was
nothing
ordinary
and
certainly
little
that
was
biblical
in
this
man's
work.
Clinebell,
in
his
Basic
Types
of
Pastoral
Care
and
Counseling
(in
the
1990
eighth
printing
of
the
1966
original),
which
emerged
as
a
primary
textbook
in
pastoral
counseling
in
many
mainline
seminaries,
proposed
that
a
key
goal
of
a
pastoral
counselor
was
to
help
parishioners
to
"develop
and
cherish
a
nurturing
interaction
with
our
great
mother
Mother
Nature."
(13)
Drawing
from
feminist
theology,
Clinebell
encouraged
an
"androgynous
wholeness"
to
the
self
as
a
goal
of
pastoral
counselors.
(14)
Clinebell
is
helpful
to
the
evangelical
only
in
this:
he
records
the
history
of
what
he
calls
the
"contemporary
flowering
of
this
ancient
ministry
.
.
."
[of
cure
of
souls]
by
listing
the
chief
pioneers.
(15)
He
includes
"Richard
Cabot,
Anton
Boisen,
Philip
Guiles,
[and]
Russell
Dicks
.
.
."
(16)
I
say
this
is
helpful
to
evangelicals,
because
in
listing
the
names
he
exposes
the
progenitors
of
the
false
doctrines.
Other
than
this,
his
textbook,
which
is
grounded
in
psychology,
feminist
theology,
and
liberation
theology,
with
limited
references
to
Scripture
and
the
casuistic
practices
of
most
of
Christian
history,
the
book
has
no
value
for
the
work
of
an
evangelical
minister.
Yet,
many
evangelicals
in
mainline
denominations
were
educated
in
it.
All
of
this
is
to
say
that
there
was
enormous
synergy
between
psychologists,
philosophers,
and
psychiatrists
and
the
modern
pastoral
care
movement
and
thus
potential
enormous
influence
on
those
trained
in
it.
Again,
Thomas
Oden,
a
theologian
who
at
one
time
claimed
the
theology
of
Niebuhr
and
Tillich
which
undergirded
the
movement,
but
who
later
rejected
it
in
favor
of
traditional
evangelicalism,
lists
the
following
as
major
influencers
on
the
modern
pastoral
care
movement:
"James
(1897),
Freud
(d.
1939),
Jung
(1959ff),
C.
R.
Rogers
(1951,
1961),
[and]
.
.
.
Menninger
(1972)."
(17)
Paul
Vitz
includes
theorists
and
therapists
such
as
Maslow,
Skinner,
Masters,
and
Johnson,
Sanford,
and
Kohlberg.
While
these
thinkers
have
shaped
and
influenced
the
pastoral
care
movement
and
consequently
the
seminary
students
who
were
trained
under
their
adherents,
I
would
add
that
the
popular
works
of
people
like
Wayne
Dyer
and
Rollo
May
have
no
doubt
had
an
impact
as
well
on
the
approach
of
pastors
to
the
work
of
cure
of
souls.
There
have
been
popular
and
scholarly
works
outlining
a
traditional
evangelical
criticism
of
this
movement
(see
especially
the
works
of
Paul
Vitz,
Jay
Adams,
and
the
Bobgans).
(18)
It
is
not
my
interest
in
this
paper
to
pursue
this
criticism
further.
However,
I
raise
the
issue
because
the
psychological
therapeutic
movement
in
the
modern
pastoral
care
school
has,
if
it
has
been
integrated
as
a
normative
approach
to
pastoral
care,
been
a
chief
contributor
to
an
errant
answer
to
our
pressing
question.
The
answer
to
the
question,
"So
what
are
you
doing
here
in
my
hospital
room,
pastor?"
may
be
answered
this
way
by
practitioners
of
the
modern
pastoral
care
movement,
"I
am
here
just
to
listen."
Or,
if
he
is
willing
to
stretch
the
Rogerian
model
a
bit:
"I
am
here
to
help
you
get
in
touch
with
yourself
before
this
operation."
At
the
very
minimum,
this
is
a
departure
from
the
normative
answers
provided
by
curators
of
souls
prior
to
the
modern
pastoral
care
movement.
I
shall
have
something
to
say
about
those
older
practitioners
in
a
moment,
but
I
want
to
address
another
problematic
approach
to
the
question.
2.
Ordinary
but
dangerous
assumed
identities
The
work
of
the
Christian
pastor,
a
word
whose
etymology
suggests
its
proper
association,
is
grounded
in
faithful
biblical
instruction,
including
faithful
metaphors.
When
those
metaphors
are
mortgaged
for
handy
or
high
impact
or
what
we
understand
to
be
relevant,
but
biblically
groundless
metaphors,
the
effect
is
not
only
to
confuse
or
abandon
the
biblical
identity
of
pastor,
but
also
to
compromise
if
not
sacrifice
divinely
attached
blessings.
The
identity
powerfully
and,
yes,
practically,
relates
to
the
blessings.
In
the
pastoral
care
of
the
sick
and
dying,
nothing
could
be
truer.
As
a
pastor,
mentor
of
other
pastors,
and
military
chaplain,
I
want
to
suggest
some
of
the
wrong
identities
assumed
by
mistaken
pastors.
I,
too,
have
made
these
errors,
yet
while
they
are
understandable,
they
will,
if
left
uncorrected
in
one's
ministry,
fail
to
produce
the
cure.
Here
are
some
of
the
default
settings
that
some
ministers
might
have
in
their
minds
concerning
hospital
visitation.
(19)
a.
Therapist
I
begin
with
the
false
identity
of
therapist.
Given
what
we
have
seen
is
the
ground
of
the
modern
pastoral
care
movement,
it
is
little
wonder
that
pastors
might
be
tempted
to
assume
the
role
of
therapist
as
they
go
into
the
hospital
room.
Ralph
Turnbull
wrote
encouragingly:
"Some
pastors
fear
that
greater
emphasis
on
psychology
will
lead
to
confusion
by
eliminating
theology
as
the
basis
for
the
pastoral
ministry.
The
pastor
must
always
remember
that
the
nature
of
his
work
as
comforter
is
defined
by
the
basic
concepts
of
the
Christian
gospel
rather
than
by
modern
psychology."
(20)
The
modern
pastoral
care
movement
is
born,
not
of
divine
revelation,
but
out
of
at
minimum
a
syncretism
of
received
traditions
in
the
Church
with
what
Scripture
refers
to
as
the
"wisdom
of
this
world"
(1
Cor
1:20;
2:6;
3:19).
(21)
At
its
worst,
in
the
case
of
Clinebell.
It
is
a
wholesale
replacement
of
infallible
biblical
injunctions,
principles,
and
traditions
with
broken,
sensual,
and
even
idolatrous
worldviews.
It
is
easy
to
see
that
when
the
role
of
the
minister
of
the
gospel
becomes
that
of
therapist,
he
is
then
competing,
if
you
will,
with
other
care
giving
professionals.
His
"ministry,"
if
that
is
an
appropriate
term,
has
been
rerouted
from
prophet
priest
pastor,
ambassador
of
Jesus
Christ,
to
dispenser
of
psychological
techniques
whose
traditions
are
shallow
in
terms
of
history
and
public
recognition.
I
listened
to
the
testimony
of
one
parishioner:
a
seventy
five
year
old
Presbyterian
man
from
a
conservative
denomination,
a
deacon,
and
a
life
long
follower
of
Christ.
(22)
The
incident
happened
in
1996
in
a
the
cardiac
ward
of
a
large
and
well
respected
hospital
in
a
Midwestern
city.
The
patient
said
the
hospital
chaplain
came
into
the
room,
did
not
offer
to
pray
or
to
read
Scripture,
but
proceeded
along
this
line:
Chaplain:
"So
how
do
you
feel
about
being
here?"
Patient:
"I
am
ready
to
go
home,
I
guess.
But,
I
know
my
old
ticker
needs
a
little
repair,
so
I'm
just
trusting
in
the
Lord."
Chaplain:
"So,
you're
feeling
isolated."
Patient:
"Actually,
my
wife
comes
and
goes.
I
think
I'm
fine."
Chaplain:
"How
do
you
feel
about
being
out
of
control
at
this
time
in
your
life?"
You
can
see
what
was
happening.
The
chaplain,
using
Rogerian
therapeutic
techniques,
engaged
the
patient,
with
the
apparent
hopes
of
guiding
the
patient
to
get
in
touch
with
his
feelings.
Now,
there
is
something
commendable
in
all
of
this
as
it
touches
upon
empathy
and
an
incarnational
approach
to
the
visitation.
However,
particularly
in
the
case
of
a
believer,
this
approach
is
entirely
insufficient
and
unsatisfactory
to
the
patient.
They
expect
an
ambassador
of
Jesus
Christ,
not
a
therapist.
They
crave,
as
he
related
to
me,
a
minister
of
the
gospel
to
speak
the
comfortable
words
of
Scripture,
to
inquire
as
to
the
work
of
the
Spirit
in
his
soul,
and
to
perhaps
lead
him
in
prayer.
b. Medical
expert
Another
assumed
false
identity
for
the
pastor
is
the
medical
expert.
John
Wesley,
of
course,
along
with
many
of
the
Methodist
preachers,
was
instructed
in
and
practiced
a
sort
of
lay
medicine
in
his
day.
Doctor
Martin
Lloyd
Jones
was
a
trained
surgeon
from
St.
Bartholomew's
in
London
before
surrendering
to
a
call
to
preach.
But,
apart
from
these
unusual
instances,
one
historical
and
probably
unlikely
to
be
necessary
again
and
the
other
a
unique
vocational
path,
the
rest
of
us
should
stay
clear
of
offering
medical
advice
in
hospitals.
In
Excerpt out of 15 pages
- Quote paper
- Michael Milton (Author), 2003, "So, What are You Doing Here?" The Role of the Minister of the Gospel in Hospital Visitation or a Theological Cure for the Crisis in Evangelical Pastoral Care, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/387358
Similar texts
Publish now - it's free
Comments