Chaplain Marshall Scott on extending our ministry

Volunteer Chaplains – Yes or No

At the recent APC Conference, a colleague said with passion, "We shouldn't have volunteer chaplains. We don't have volunteer doctors. We don't have volunteer nurses." This colleague was not the first I have heard make this assertion.

But in fact those professions have developed levels of practice, with varying levels of training, responsibility, and licensure. RN, LPN, Nurse Tech, and Certified Nurse Aid each has its own level of function.

These distinctions grew out of a model of bedside nursing defined by hands-on care. While there are exceptions, much of the hands-on care has been delegated to less-trained but supervised practitioners – including volunteers. Passing ice water, transporting patients, organizing blank forms, distributing literature, delivering meals, feeding patients – these are all functions delegated by nurses and all are done, at least sometimes, by volunteers. Yet they are still considered nursing functions.

Do chaplains have this separation, this designation of levels of function? At first it would not appear so. However, that reflects our failure to recognize ourselves within the context of ministry. The normative context of the believer is the local congregation, and the normative clergy is the clergyperson of the local congregation. Like the registered nurse, there are a variety of educational paths to becoming a clergyperson in a congregation, depending on the specific requirements and culture of each faith community. Still, there is so much in common across those specificities that ecumenical community clergy groups can become important sources of support.

I would suggest that we think of ourselves as are advanced practice ministers. There are others—academics, spiritual directors, monastics—but that is where we are in the context of ministry.

Where does this put us in the context of health care? Our peers in medicine, nursing, and elsewhere have found it necessary and appropriate to develop “extender” roles, some licensed or registered, and some that can be filled with trained, supervised volunteers. We should not be surprised if some expect us doing the same. We would do better to follow the practice of our professional colleagues by ensuring that we take responsibility for training and supervising the volunteers we use to extend our ministries. This would address the expectations of some administrators that “any sincere believer” can appropriately meet patient needs. It would establish that professional chaplains, as advanced practice clergy, are best trained and suited to direct and oversee spiritual care in our institutions. It would allow a more pervasive experience of pastoral concern in many of our institutions, while allowing us perhaps greater opportunities to prioritize, establish boundaries, and care for ourselves.

It would also, to some extent, take us away from the bedside. For many that is already an established fact. Supervising the ministry of others is different from providing ministry ourselves. However, as professionals in health care and as advance practice clergy we are uniquely suited to shape the culture of care in our institutions. We are specially prepared to respond to those situations that are medically, spiritually, and morally most acute. These are functions of our practice that we cannot delegate. Extending ministry as a part of the culture of care through proper use of trained, supervised volunteers is an opportunity to extend spiritual care within our institutions while maintaining those professional pastoral functions for which we are uniquely suited.

Do you have thoughts about advocacy you’d like to share with your colleagues? Send an e-mail to info@PlainViews.org.