The image at the head of this blog, entitled “the death struggle”, was painted by Edvard Munch. The struggle depicted is not primarily that of the person dying, who cannot be seen, but is found in the faces of those expressing their grief. In some measure, in their bereavement, they are beginning to grapple with an altered reality. Very often the faces and experiences of both the unwell, and those who care about them, are remote in the work of theology. In health care chaplaincy in particular, the vast majority of theological reflection and writing is done by the professionals, not by the people undergoing the experiences of illness. This is why a recent article by Professor Graeme Smith is interesting. It draws on evidence from research into the experiences of seafarers who have received ministry from chaplains. Entitled “A theology of chaplaincy from below”, it explores the sailors’ narratives to make the argument that the recipients of chaplains’ care are people who produce of a theology of their own.

It is true that there is a very limited range of material which elicits and explores the experiences of people who receive chaplaincy care. Even when it does happen, it is often filtered through the voice of the chaplain, describing the chaplain’s perception of how people have responded to what has been offered. Equally, a large proportion of what is gleaned is framed as “customer satisfaction” rather than theological insight. The reasons for this are clear, as the secular employers of many chaplains are much more comfortable with these kinds of metrics than with data from a field of study and information with which they may be unfamiliar: theology. Graeme Smith is also right in identifying a suspicion of theology and religion, which may make the use of material framed in this discipline a matter of contestation and doubt.

Smith also analyses of the chaplains’ responses to questions about their theology and purpose. Here he finds that their theology of chaplaincy is both brief and vague. The chaplains would speak about a “ministry of presence” and might expand that to include reference to “incarnational theology”. While I am familiar with this style of response from chaplains I think it would be accurate to note that health care chaplains might also add theodicy and ethics. Similarly, in recent years, some military chaplains would be able and willing to articulate their theology in relation to the growing field of “moral injury”. Perhaps one of the systemic issues Smith identifies in his work has developed as a result of greater inter-faith working. While this is excellent and valuable it may have inclined teams to focus on their areas of common concern and diminished some of the deeper exploration of theology within a particular faith.

While the notion of “being there” in chaplaincy has been a widely accepted trope for professional spiritual care, the COVID-19 pandemic placed that concept under considerable pressure. Being there added to the risk factors of caring institutions. One more body out and about on the wards, or in care homes, added to the risk of the virus being brought into the setting. Was being there essential? As it emerged over time, there were marked differences between chaplains ministering at a distance and those still able to be a physical presence in the hospital or care home. While it might be possible to interpret the incarnation as the needless burdening of Mary and Joseph, with pain and cost to come, God-at-a-distance and God-among-us represent theologies that are worlds apart. Good things did happen at a distance, but it appears that the presence of the chaplain in places of acute loss and suffering had an altogether different quality and consequence.

“It must be very difficult for chaplains who are not able to go into their home and schemes, because I’ve experienced that for retirement living, really not the same. It’s really not the same. Chaplaincy is hands on, face to face and I’m very conscious at least I’ve been able to do, and that must be frustrating for others who have not been able to”.

Swift, C. (2020). Being There, Virtually Being There, Being Absent: Chaplaincy in Social Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Health & Social Care Chaplaincy, 8(2).

Without doubt chaplains could do more to articulate and develop the theologies of their ministry. Megan Smith sees this as essential in order for chaplains to sustain their identity and not get wholly absorbed into the institutional paradigms of the places in which they serve. Further, she argues that a simplistic interpretation of incarnation as “being Christ to others” often fails to take full account of all the dimensions inherent in the incarnation. For example, the Word made flesh has a prophetic, critical and challenging edge, which may not be understood or expressed in the ministry of chaplains. At the same time, there can be a misperception that the chaplain comes to bring theology into the institutional setting, while not taking proper account of the possibility that theology is already there – waiting to be encountered.

In my role as a chaplain I have never doubted the importance of theology in what I do, or for the context of a large and complex institution. Theology asks unusual questions and stimulates debates which often lie silent within the discourses of the spiritual. Accessing the theology of the recipients of care is not always easy, but I agree that it is necessary. This is not only for the benefit of chaplains and those to whom they offer care. I have long said that the place where theology is written is very significant. Theology written in intensive care; during a pandemic; in A&E; or from a prison cell, speaks from a place where the tidiness and safety of doctrinal certainty often buckles under the messy complexity of living. The work of Jens Zimmermann on incarnational humanism might offer one route to finding a fuller account of the incarnation as a basis for a theology developed by everyone caught up in a community defined by common characteristics. This might be NHS patients; military personnel; or a community of seafarers. It is significant that Zimmermann finds in Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the prisoner-theologian, the epitome of this approach to theology, where the Christ comes to fulfil our humanity:

“because Christ died for our true humanity, the Christian works for the common good in society as best as possible under any given circumstances”.

Zimmermann, J. (2016). Bonhoeffer’s incarnational humanism. Theologica Wratislaviensia, (11 Dietrich Bonhoeffer na 500 lat Reformacji), 73-86.