Broader Horizons?

As part of my Period of Discernment with the Uniting Church in Australia, I have been talking to my mentor about chaplaincy. I have been having this discussion with him partly because the POD is about exploring the individual's call to ministry, and what form of ministry that call may take. Ordained ministry as a congregational minister is not the only form of ministry within the church; the UCA, like most other churches, has both ordained and lay ministries to which people may be called. The purpose of the POD is to help them discern in which one of these ministries they are being called to serve.

Within the UCA, there are two forms of ordained ministry. One is the Ministry of the Word (congregational ministry) while the other is the Ministry of the Diaconate. The Diaconate is a ministry that is focused on pastoral care, and can operate both within the congregational setting and within the wider community and institutions. Some Deacons act as pastoral assistants to congregational ministers; others work within institutions such as hospitals; some functions as chaplains; and others perform a combination of these tasks. It is an incredibly rich and varied ministry.

Personally, I feel called to the Ministry of the Word; that is, to being a congregational minister. However, I am also interested in chaplaincy, and with the possibility of combining chaplaincy with congregational ministry. And chaplaincy is an interesting role, because it can be performed by both ordained and lay people; it is a role in which the ordained and lay ministries cross-over. And that is the other reason why I have been discussing chaplaincy with my mentor: because I wanted to obtain some insight into chaplaincy and how it operates from the perspective of an ordained minister; but also because I have in mind a particular form of ministry to which I feel called and for which I feel there is a very great need.

As readers of this blog will know, in a former life, I worked for a white-collar trade union; indeed, my involvement in unionism in various capacities goes back the better part of two decades. During this period, I made a number of observations:

• Working for a trade union means dealing with human suffering. This seems a somewhat melodramatic statement until you realise why trade unions exist: because the employment relationship all too often involves exploitation and/or victimisation of employees by employers. Not always, and as I mentioned in an earlier post, one of the arts of trade unionism is knowing when your own members are at fault or not telling you the truth. But the bottom line is that no-one calls a union to tell them that everything is fine, that they are being treated properly and paid correctly. On the contrary, people call the union because they are in distress: they are about to be sacked, or are being bullied, or discriminated against, or victimised in some way, or exploited. Which means people who call the union are, at best, concerned, and frequently highly stressed. Which means being a union official is a stressful occupation.
• The union movement operates in a uniquely democratic/political environment. The leadership of unions are not appointed, like chief executives or board members. On the contrary, every three or four years, they have to face the membership, conduct an election campaign, and risk being challenged for office, in order to retain their jobs. In some unions, this electoral process extends down to the staff as well. Thus, there is a certain degree of understandable angst among elected officials about their job security and whether or not they will be challenged at the next election. Which makes the internal environment of the union intensely political, a factor which gives rise to stress and tension.
• Being a union official is an intensely thankless task. On the one hand, union officials must deal with the frequently unrealistic expectations of their members; the "wave a wand and make it alright" attitude among rank-and-file union members is widely prevalent. Over and against this is the fact that union members pay their dues to receive the benefits of membership, including competent industrial advice and advocacy. On the other hand, union officials rarely receive any acknowledgement for their efforts; you can put months or even years of your life into a member's case, only to have them walk away at the end without a word of thanks. By the same token, some members for whom you feel didn't get a good result are intensely grateful just to have someone on their side, someone to speak on their behalf. So the thanks, while few and far between, also occurs in the most unexpected places.
• Union officials suffer from being members of a "closed community". That is to say, many union officials feel unable to talk to their families and friends about what happens to them within their work as a union official because people outside the movement just don't "get it"; they don't understand the "context" in which stress and tension arise as a result of working for a union, and thus are unable to effectively act as "sounding-boards" or avenues of de-briefing. Exacerbating this tendency is the fact that the political environment within a union makes many officials hesitant to talk to their colleagues out of fear (whether justified or not) of any potential consequences for doing so. Thus, many officials simply try to "cope" without having anyone with whom they can "let off steam"or turn to in times of crisis.
• Working for a union frequently "burns out" people - for the reasons stated above, but also because union officials struggling to cope with crises or stress tend to "self-medicate"; that is, they turn to alcohol, for example, for stress relief. Which isn't to say that there is an "alcohol problem" within the union movement, or that unions are populated by sad, hopeless drunks. Rather, that in the absence of other support mechanisms, the "quick and easy" fix of alternatives such as alcohol can be a trap into which some fall, and which in the long run contributes to their sense of distress and isolation.

It is for this and other reasons that I feel there is a real and urgent need for a chaplaincy mission to the union movement. Moreover, I feel that my past experience as a union official equips me to deal with some of the cultural aspects of the union movement which may be problematic for others.

My mentor generously provided me with the details of a UCA minister who is also an emergency services chaplain;and he graciously agreed to meet me. We had a most interesting and enlightening discussion; and although I was a little disturbed to realise that, in so far as chaplaincy is concerned, matters within the church appear a little haphazard and ad hoc, nonetheless, I was able to clarify my thinking in this area. And the result is that I feel even more strongly compelled than before that I should make it part of my response to God's call to engage in some form of chaplaincy to the union movement. Moreover, I don't think that I need necessarily wait until the POD is completed, and the church indicates whether or not I am accepted as a ministry candidate. I think I need to take the initiative; I will discuss this with my mentor and reflect further.

But I feel very excited by the possibilities and the prospect for broadening horizons.

Talk to you soon,

BB

Quote for the Day: For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven. (Ecclesiastes 3:1 - NRSV)