Category Archives: Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany

Why it’s so important to have a bereavement chaplain at your side

The subject of clergy involvement in the funeral or memorial service comes up again and again. Most people feel that spiritual or religious content is very important in the funeral or memorial service, and I agree. I can’t even start to count the number of families who start off the conversation with me with something like, “He used to go to church but stopped going” or “She wasn’t a churchgoer but she did believe in God and prayed.” My question, sometimes asked aloud, is “Why is that important?” I ask that question because I do not feel that a person’s spirituality or sense of a transcendent God is determined by how often one sees the inside of a church, or whether the individual wears his or her faith on their sleeve, or quotes chapter and verse with every breath. In fact, I’m sometimes very suspicious of such people and smell hypocrisy in much of that behavior. Your essential and core spirituality is how you live your life, and that’s what I as a professional bereavement chaplain explore in my meetings with the bereaved when planning the funeral or memorial service.

I frequently get involved because the bereaved do not want “clergy” involved because they’ve been wounded by their “clergy” or the faith tradition represented by their clergy. The ineffectualism of mainstream clergy is a whole discussion on its own, however, but let’s just say a few words about it. “Clergy” as used in the non-clergy community means anyone who provides some sort of pastoral service, or anyone who has some sort of leadership role in a religious congregation. “Ordination” is a canonical or legal term that means that the particular person is approved by a particular denomination to provide pastoral care to that specific denomination. Regrettably, adhering to the rules of that denomination may not provide much relief of the suffering experienced by the bereaved; it may have just the opposite effect, leaving them with a sense of emptiness and loneliness, and asking the question, What was that all about?!? But it doesn’t have to be that way and shouldn’t be that way. Spirituality and meaning-making is quite different from religion and religious doctrines and notions of popular piety.

Don’t Let This Happen To You! Get Personal!

In all honesty and fairness, and in my personal experience, clergy is not really what it’s hyped up to be. In fact, clergy tend to deliver the most boring, impersonal, and unsatisfying services imaginable. While there are good reasons for the deficient performance, a lot of the blame should be placed on the funeral home’s hands-off spirituality attitudes, and their failure to provide reliable recommendations to the bereaved. Simply handing the bereaved a clergy list at the arrangements conference is a bit irresponsible. What’s worse still is if a funeral director or funeral home staffer attempts to play chaplain and deliver some insincere “words of comfort” or preside over a prayer vigil. It’s generally like the plumber doing the catering.

Where was I? What’s his name? Where am I?

Even considering the ignorance of many funeral services professionals regarding the psychospirituality of funeralization rites and ritual, calling an individual a clergyperson can be very misleading. First of all, only the mainstream denominations really have an “educated” clergy; that means attending a seminary or seminary college, assuring that the “seminarian” is properly indoctrinated. Most other non-mainstream, storefront or megachurch, clergy may have attended a so-called Bible college or something like that. Basically all that is is a glorified Sunday school for adults. There are many problems associated with both mainstream and non-mainstream clergy. First of all, most are poorly trained in handling existential crises like death and its sequellae grieving, mourning, healing, transformation, and will turn to their denomination’s religious teachings, their doctrines, first, since that’s all they have. Secondly, they don’t have the necessary training or education in death, dying, grief and mourning. Thirdly, they lack interfaith, intercultural training to be able to understand the cultural dynamics that occur in the particular family system. Fourthly, they very rarely take the time to get to know the deceased, much less the key mourners and the family in general. Fifthly, most clergy do not understand the importance of continuing bonds of the living with the dead. In fact, most have a rather antiquated Freudian approach of the need to cut any continuing bond with the dead and replace the bond with something else. That’s a very psychospiritually unhealthy attitude indeed. And last but certainly not least, since I could go on with this list, most clergy have parishes or congregations to run and can’t really provide the kind of service or care required for funeralization and aftercare. The result is what I call the cookie-cutter service with all of its failures and insincerity. The clergyperson, a priest, minister, deacon, or layperson – sometimes, embarrassingly, even the funeral director – steps up at the appointed time, opens a book or recites a formulaic prayer, and it’s all done and over.

Let’s do a prayer now. OK. We’re done.

Sometimes there’s the de rigueur church service that’s all but meaningless to most attendees and represents only an additional expense (can approach more than $600 in some cases). Practically and theologically, the dead are in God’s hands, there’s little the living can do to change things, despite what the minister or priest may preach. Most of these characters are mere sock-puppets anyway, ventriloquist’s dummies.

For all of the reasons given in the above, the best choice for the spiritual or religious care of the bereaved is, believe it or not, the experienced bereavement chaplain. An experienced bereavement chaplain is a specialist in dying, death, psychospiritual care, and aftercare. The experienced bereavement chaplain is not only trained in the disciplines relating to interfaith practices, rite and rituals associated with death, psychology and spirituality of dying, death, and survivors, technology of deathcare, and much, much more that is of essential benefit to the dying and to survivors. No funeral director and no denominational clergy can offer the scope and depth of services that the interfaith bereavement chaplain can offer.

It’s the scope and depth of expertise of the interfaith bereavement chaplain that make him or her the go-to when a family is faced with the dying process, death and deathcare, grief and survivor care. It’s that expertise that makes the interfaith bereavement chaplain an essential member of the care team at all phases of the bereavement process. The professional interfaith bereavement chaplain does what neither the funeral director nor the cookie-cutter clergyperson can do: the chaplain makes death a meaningful and survivable experience.

When a family considers spending $2000 to more than $10000 on a casket alone, or when the family opts for an economical funeral package of say on average $3,000-5,000 does it really make sense to do without an essential service costing a mere $200-300, in most cases less than 5 % of the total cost of the funeral? When survivors consider spending up to $800 on embalming which won’t last more than a couple or days or a maximum of a couple of weeks before decomposition sets in, and embalming is not even required by law in the majority of situations, even when there’s a viewing planned. Why would any family not request the services of a professional interfaith bereavement chaplain with all of the long-term benefits to the survivors socially, psychologically, politically, spiritually that are associated with dignified funeral rites and rituals, and aftercare by a deathcare specialist? You’ll consider several hundreds of dollars for unnecessary embalming, several thousands for a casket, a couple of thousand for a vault, but will go cheapo when it comes to dignified, personalized, meaningful spiritual care? Go figure!

I personally serve the Albany-Rensselaer-Schenectady-Greene counties region in New York state, and have been requested by families in the New York City area for special services, but this blog is read internationally. Given that this blog attracts an international audience, I would like to provide some very general recommendations taken from my local practice, which can be applied to most North American and European regions with little or no adjustment for local conditions. Here is how I practice and what I recommend for families, survivors, and others involved in deathcare:

  • As soon as it becomes obvious that a death is about to occur, whether hours or days, contact a professional interfaith bereavement chaplain. Please note that denominational clergy have their place if the dying person has had a personal relationship with the clergyperson or was active in a faith community. Please note further that hospital chaplains are OK for certain interventions but their competencies are mostly restricted to the hospital setting. Hospice chaplains, too, have their place but are agenda and program driven, and have limited effectiveness outside of the hospice setting.
  • If the person is in the process of dying, you may want to ask for presence or companionship during the dying process. This presence/ companioning can be for those around the dying person as well as for the dying person. If this presence / companioning is to be provided in an institution such as a nursing home, hospital, or hospice, an institutional chaplain may be available, and the interfaith bereavement chaplain will coordinate care visits with the institutional chaplain(s). Nevertheless, when death is imminent, it may be helpful to have your interfaith bereavement chaplain present for the dying person and for the family. Consider the options carefully.
  • Make an appointment to meet with the interfaith bereavement chaplain to discuss your situation. The chaplain will listen attentively and will hear what you need even before you know it. It’s important that you hear what the chaplain has to say, and to share your interpretations with him or her. You should be doing most of the talking during this initial meeting; if the chaplain does most of the talking or interrupts, he or she may not be the ideal choice. Try again. Only after you have explained your situation and the chaplain has had an opportunity to ask some important, brief questions seeking a better understanding, should he or she start making any recommendations.
  • Once the person has died, you may want the chaplain to remain with the body until the funeral home sends a care to take charge of the body. I do this out of respect for the family and to ensure that they know the body will be watched over. This is very important in the initial hours following a death. The bereavement chaplain is also an advocate for the family if the family wants to spend more time with the body.
  • Once you have established a rapport and trust with the chaplain, and if you haven’t already given your funeral director the chaplain’s name, contact details, and the information that you have spoken to the chaplain, you should do that when you make the initial call to the funeral home for removal of the body. Inform your funeral director that you’d like the funeral director to contact the chaplain to discuss the arrangements made and any details if the chaplain is going to do the funeral for you. You may want to ask the chaplain to be present during the arrangements meeting with the funeral director. I find that families are less stressed if I am present.
  • Be sure to discuss aftercare with the chaplain. You should ask about regular contacts with the chaplain for at least the first year after the death. He or she should be available on what are called trigger dates (birthdays, holidays, special dates) when grief may be particularly noticeable, or if you find you need some help in getting through a particular day. The chaplain will likely have discussed grief and grieving with you so that you know what to expect. That discussion is standard practice during my initial meeting with the family.
  • Remember always, that the interfaith bereavement chaplain may be your independent choice or you may receive a recommendation from the funeral home you choose. Do not accept a mere list of clergypersons. You want an interfaith bereavement chaplain. If the funeral home does not have one on call or on staff, maybe it’s time to find another funeral home that can provide a complete range of services.
  • Beware of the funeral home chains and factory funeral homes. Their sole interest is in their bottom line and their shareholders; you are just a consumer to them. You’ll find chain funeral homes and factory funeral homes almost everywhere. I call them Walmart-funerals, because they are there to sell you everything because that’s what they do; they sell funeral goods and services. What you need is deathcare services not a sales pitch and a huge bill.
  • The worst time to do any of the above is when a death occurs. I usually counsel my clients not to make any major decisions for at least 6 months to 1 year after the death but now you have to make some major decisions within hours of the death. It’s an incredibly confusing and draining experience. That’s why I unconditionally recommend that you really should seriously make pre-arrangements so that when a death occurs, you can deal with the grief you will experience, and will have everything else under control. We highly recommend advance directives and pre-arrangements. We also recommend having an interfaith bereavement chaplain present when discussing and finalizing both advance directives and pre-arrangements. You many know what you want but it’s always good to have an impartial presence who can do some impartial thinking.

In upcoming articles I will be discussing the importance of revival of traditional funeral rituals and why they are so important to the living. As a sequel to the discussion about traditional funeral and memorial rituals, I’ll share with you why the family’s participation is so very important, and how we can personalize the rituals and ceremony so that they have lasting psychospiritual benefit for you. I’ll also be writing about continuing our bonds with the dead and why it’s normal and healthy to do that.

But in the meantime, if you have any specific questions or would like more information, please contact me directly at compassionate.care.associates@gmail.com. I’ll be pleased to help in whatever way I can.

Peace and blessings,
Rev. Ch. Harold Vadney

 

 

 

Like a Wounded Beast…

beast

The Bereaved can be Serenely Grateful or Vicious as a Wounded Beast.

The vast majority of bereaved persons and families, whom I have been blessed and privileged to serve over the years, are serenely grateful for the authenticity, openness, genuine compassion, and care that go into the personalized services I create for them. I consider my professional activities to be more of a vocation, a special calling, than simply a way to make money. A living would be impossible given the time and resources that must go into an effective funeral or memorial service.

Now there’s the new fad, so-called board certification; If all else fails, a certificate will fix it!

I am a professional caregiver. As a professional, I figure that a professional chaplain would have at least a bachelor’s degree, preferably a master’s degree, in a subject like psychology, comparative religion, sociology. The coursework alone for a four-year degree today would probably run something like $40-60,000 at an “average” 4-year college. Unless the chaplain has done studies in religion, comparative religion, psychology of religion, or some theology studies, s/he would be well advised to find a program in religious studies, pastoral studies or theology. Ideally, a master’s degree in one of the study tracks mentioned above would be followed by a couple of units of clinical pastoral education (CPE) in a healthcare facility. Even more ideally, a degree in psychology or sociology plus a degree in theology or divinity would be desirable. Then there’s the continuing professional education in the form of courses, seminars, workshops, webinars, and conferences. None of this comes cheaply; it all costs money. (The final tab for my 3-year graduate studies for the M.Div. was $60,000! And I commuted from home!) Of course, American’s can create a demand ex nihilo: now there’s the new fad, so-called board certification. If all else fails, a certificate will fix it! It’s something the agenda-organizations have cooked up that appeal to the ego of some practitioners, and impresses small minds, like those of human resources departments and the like. My opinion is that if you feel you need to have some organization certify your skills, you’re probably not made of the stuff to be an effective chaplain; you’re too full of yourself and lack self-confidence. You simply don’t have the ‘right stuff.’

A chaplain… is obviously not in it for the money.

But I don’t want to distract you from the point of this article: A chaplain, no matter what his or her speciality, is obviously not in it for the money. And if you’re after kudos and compliments, forget it. Administrators couldn’t care less whether you’re there or you’re not, and would rather just refer you to the “volunteers coordinator” of the facility. Your “best” client may drop you like a hot potato if keeping you means standing up for ethics or principle.

Most of the institutions who really should have a professional chaplain on board don’t. I’m talking about healthcare facilities, nursing homes, rehabilitation facilities, first-responders, even government departments; you’ll likely find persons who would benefit from the presence and availability of a professional chaplain in most any organization. This is especially true of the funeral home and the funeral service business.

buy-the-bookThe biggest obstacle that the professional chaplain has to overcome when approaching any organization is, of course, ignorance and indifference. Even those institutions in which one would clearly expect to find a professional chaplain — not one of those pablum-puking, whispering, sad-faced, constantly half-grinning, hovering, sorrowful types –, and I don’t mean a social worker (God save us!) but a trained person who has a clear understanding of suffering and does not conflate compassion, empathy and understanding, one who has not been trained in the discipline of so-called “detached concern.” Any chaplain or wannabe chaplain reading this who is not competent in the subject matter of suffering or who cannot distinguish compassion from empathy from detached concern, STOP READING! this article and find a training course!

Ask if the funeral home is still family owned or run by a group.

If you’re looking for an ego boost, don’t look for it in a healthcare or nursing facility. Funeral homes are not much better. Most funeral directors will probably size you up for what you can afford and sell you a tad more. Beware of the corporate funeral homes, those funeral corporations that buy up once family-owned traditional funeral homes, keep the name but run the show. These corporate operations may include 5 or ten funeral homes in a local area, or may be interstate or even international. If your family’s been using a particular local family-owned funeral home,  my best advice is to ask if it’s still family owned or run by a group. Another unfortunate result of the American denial-of-death culture is the funeral factories, large operations with very low prices and running on volume of bodies they can process in a year. If it’s dignity you’re looking for, avoid these places like the plague.

All you have to do is die and they’ll do the rest.

Most of these operations will pick up, process, package, and plant or burn on a budget basis, all credit cards accepted, they’ll to the paperwork. All you have to do is die and they’ll do the rest. That’s how far much of the American funeral service has declined in the United States; the rest of the industrialized world isn’t far behind, either, though they’ve kept some of their self-respect and tradition for the most part.

We discard our sick, our old, and our dead…

But the American way of death hasn’t happened in a vacuum. Funeralization and memorialization of our dead kin has not descended to the present level of discarding dead human bodies as if they were household or hazardous waste. No, indeed. Our pitiable emphasis on the individual, “me” and to hell with you, our fascination with our toys and our aversion to anything that distracts us from our toys, especially death, our own or anyone else’s, has become our new morality. We discard our sick, our old, and our dead with the ease and care with which we discard an old phone or a melon past its prime. It’s a sad but true fact.

The majority of funeral service consumers are simply so deprived of any notion of reality or of tradition…

Who’s to blame for this deplorable state of affairs? Well, to be honest: You are! This is not an accusation intended to offend or to wound but it is true that the majority of funeral service consumers are simply so deprived of any notion of reality or of tradition, that they’ll do anything just to avoid the unpleasant business of facing reality, death, and making it disappear as quickly and cleanly as possible. If the pleasant things in life are to be done without thought or concern as dictated by the popular slogan, “Just do it!” Most bereaved today have their own slogan, “Just make it go away!”

Enter cremation, direct burial, and direct cremation. No fuss, no messy wakes, no distraction from the things you really want to be doing. After all, why be a human being today when you can have the memorial party tomorrow, or the next day, or whenever. No self-respect. How can we expect respect or reverence for the dead when there’s none for the living?

He discusses every detail with the family members and requests a maximum in family participation…

With that prologue, I’d like to launch into a contribution by a veteran bereavement chaplain, who is rather well known for his “beautiful” personalized services. This chaplain really goes over the top in establishing a relationship with the family of the person who has died, putting together a unique service for every case, carefully selecting music and readings, even designing a program or creating a memory token, such as a lapel ribbon, for the grieving family members. He discusses every detail with the family members and requests a maximum in family participation such as by reading, participation in ritual actions, etc. His credentials are outstanding. His motto is, “It’s not about me; it’s about you, the family.” So, you’d think this guy would be in such demand he’d be worn out. You’d think that the families and funeral homes he serves would swoon with gratitude. Well, think again.

Getting back to the featured topic…

I chose the title of this article for a very specific reason. The chaplain I described above recently did a rather exceptional job for an unusual family. The chaplain bent over backwards and went to almost extreme lengths to create a memorable service. He did even did this at extremely short notice, having just returned from a conference, because a very dear funeral director friend had recommended him so highly, and the family was in a very unusual situation. I’m going to give the lite version below using initials instead of names, in order to protect the innocent as well as the guilty.

I limit my practice to bereavement chaplaincy and came highly recommended to the family by the funeral director of a local funeral home client, with whom I have been working for several years. Because of the circumstances, which I’ll outline briefly below, the funeral director couldn’t give many details since the death had occurred suddenly on a Thursday, and, because of medicolegal/forensic formalities associated with the nature of the death, the funeral director would not be able to hold the arrangements conference with the family until that Saturday, but had already informed the family that I would be calling. This meant that the first opportunity for me to physically meet or talk to the family would be late on Saturday. It was really tight because the actual service was to take place on the Monday afternoon. This was further complicated by the fact that I was at a grief and loss conference in Boston when I received the request, and would be returning only on that Friday. Nevertheless, the situation was manageable, given the circumstances.

All things considered, the earliest I could interview the family would be on Sunday, after the arrangements conference. I called the family late on Saturday but the telephone interview wasn’t going very well so I offered to make a housecall that Sunday afternoon, and I met with the family. The young widow, MW, the deceased’s father GW, his aunt CW, and his uncle SM, as well as his young son were all present at the family conference. I asked permission to record the meeting so that I could capture all details without having to take distracting notes. The family agreed and for more almost two hours I collected memories, anecdotes, shared photos, and was able to form a reasonably accurate composite image of the deceased. I was very satisfied with the rapport established with the family and the outcome of the meeting.

Immediately upon returning to my office I set to work designing the program, selecting readings and music, etc. In the process, I provided the family contact person with ongoing inputs and copies of what was designed or selected. In other words, the family was kept very informed and updated throughout the process and was completely aware of what was going on. I received the family’s approvals for everything.

At the family meeting, the aunt, CM, a retired physician, and apparently the one running things, mentioned that the service was under time constraints because some persons had to “catch international flights”. I suggested 45-55 minutes for the entire memorial service, and CM thought that was reasonable and approved.

On the day of the service, I met with the family just before the service briefly describe what was going to be done, to answer any questions, and to give some short instructions to the family members participating in the service. Everything was on track, and the service itself went flawlessly. Even the music was on cue!

After the service, the father of the deceased, who, throughout the entire process was understandably emotional at the loss of his only son, approached me saying, “That was over the top. I want you to have this.” A bit taken by surprise, I didn’t really know what to think about the father’s words, “over the top”, and initially didn’t notice that the father was holding out his hand to me. The father continued, “That was over the top. It was very beautiful. Please take this.” The father was attempting to hand I something, apparently several bills, but I gently refused saying that I ‘had been paid by the funeral home,” and “that wasn’t necessary.” After several polite refusals, it was apparent the father really wanted to express his appreciation, and so I accepted the gift–and later shared it with the funeral home staff.

While preparing to leave, the uncle SM, approached I and handed me a check. Again I attempted to politely refuse the apparent “gift”, and — now with the funeral director at my side — saying that I had been paid by the funeral director, who nodded in agreement. Nevertheless, the uncle pressed the check into my hand saying, “Take this little extra, you must have spent a bundle on the food yesterday.” (On the way to the family’s home, I had stopped to pick up Danish and bagels as a gift for the family!). Again, I accepted the gift and was astonished at the uncle’s generosity — or so I thought — and again shared the gift with the funeral home staff.

The funeral home staff felt that I had earned the signs of appreciation, given the circumstances and short notice and the work that went into the service, but I felt that the success and the family’s satisfaction was the result of the “team’s” efforts, not just my contributions.

Leaving the funeral home, I was approached by several of the mourners who thanked me and complimented me on the service. The deceased’s best friend approached with hand extended and the words, “That was a brilliant service.”

I was overwhelmed by the response and exhausted by the effort but I was grateful that everything had gone so smoothly, and that the family and the funeral home were both very pleased.

That was the serenely grateful chapter of the story.

What happened next was the wounded beast chapter: The next day, I received a call from the uncle, SM, who started out by saying that the family was having some money problems. SM then launched into a diatribe saying “I can’t believe you accepted my check and cashed it! You took money from GW, too!” SM then accused I of “causing his wife, CW, hurt” and of having “left out important details from the service.” Dumbfounded and aghast, I explained that I had included everything requested by the family in the service and still kept it within the agreed time. I also noted that it was not my practice to accept gifts in addition to the honorarium paid by the funeral home but did so only because both the deceased’s father, GW, and he, SM, had pressed me to accept, and even recalled to SM the details of the moment. The conversation deteriorated into abuse by SM and I gently terminated the conversation, saying I would gladly return the gift made by SM.

Because of the bizarre and extraordinary nature of the call, I immediately called the funeral director to advise him of SM’s call. The funeral director was almost speechless and very, very apologetic. He was very supportive and told me that he had not heard from the family, and thought everything had gone excellently. The funeral director apologized profusely for the experience repeated that he had heard nothing from the family.

A day or two later I contacted the funeral director to follow up on SM’s call, and the funeral director confirmed that he had received a call from SM on the day after I reported the call from SM, and that SM was still rather unhappy.

I noted that the deceased’s next of kin was the father, GW, and the father’s sister, CW, apparently took control of the arrangements to take the burden off of the father. SM was aunt’s husband, an uncle by marriage to the deceased, and really had no standing whatsoever to get involved, since his relationship to the deceased was somewhat remote in kinship and legal terms. I and the funeral director had not heard from the widow, the father or even the aunt! I wondered if SM had gotten into trouble with his wife for being generous, and needed an excuse. Certainly, if he was having financial difficulties and had been honest and said so, the entire incident would have taken a different turn, but was he being dishonest and seeking a scapegoat? Whatever! It didn’t matter at this point.

The funeral director and I agreed that I would write a letter regretting SM’s reaction and offering to discuss the concerns privately. In addition, I requested the funeral director to respond to SM in a letter, and to return SM’s gift to him on my behalf. I expressly asked the funeral director not to mention the incident to the rest of the staff, with whom I had shared the gifts, in order not to embarrass them. For me, at least, it wasn’t a matter of money.

Some time later it was revealed that I had self-disclosed by way of simple conversation during one of the breaks in the family meeting that I, too, was involved in an earlier career in similar fields as the aunt, CM, a physician, and the father, GW, a medical device developer. The uncle, SM, was a non – medical department head in a hospital laboratory; all were retired. One of these had done a sort of background check on me and couldn’t verify my disclosures, scant and vague as they were, not to mention the fact that the events went back more than 25 years! SM even went so far as to impugn my religious affiliations (it was actually at this point the I had heard enough and had respectfully terminated the conversation). Enough was enough. The service was flawless and our conclusion was that SM, or his wife, CW, had reconsidered their “generosity” and needed some way to get their money back. Apparently, the best way to do that was to go after the service and me. So what if the grounds were insubstantial and had nothing to do with the service? They alleged having some “cash difficulties” and reconsidered their generosity. Had they simply said they couldn’t afford the gift and would appreciate it if I had returned it, there would have been no problem whatsoever. I did so even without having been asked.

So why all the pretense? Why, after having been so impressed and happy with the service did this family member make a 180 degree turnaround and attack me 24 hours later? Why was it so important to cook up something just to get $150 back that was initially apparently given in gratitude, despite my several refusals, and even when the funeral director was present and confirmed my affirmation that I had been paid? And Why? when handing I the gift, did SM make the remark about the “food” I had brought. That made the story SM had concocted in the attempt to justify his conduct even more bizarre.

I did not have much to say about this except that I was incredibly hurt by the entire incident. I did what was necessary and more, the family and other mourners were clearly delighted, the family participated, the family had shown their appreciation. So Why? I asked, did they feel they had to go to such lengths concocting such a fiction just to recover their gift. What’s more — and in line with my character — I was more concerned for the impression and effect that SM’s conduct would have on the young widow and her impressions. Overall, I felt that SM’s conduct was spurious and inconsiderate; it was insensitive and devoid of any compassion for the immediate family.

I concluded that this was a manifestation of a grief reaction, and chose to reflect on it, journal it, and let it go. At this time the residual effects are not clear, and time will tell whether SM’s conduct will adversely affect my relationship with this or other client funeral homes. The lessons learned are complex and compound, as will be the ramifications of the incident. What I can say is that neither the funeral director nor I have received a response to our letters. Is that the end of the matter?”

Editor’s Commentary

Those of us in pastoral care, and who invest a big part of ourselves in relieving suffering, can commiserate with this chaplain and with the funeral director as well. We can appreciate the chaplain’s concern not for himself but for the funeral director, who also put his heart and soul into serving this family, and most of all for the young widow and her son, now suddenly without a life-partner and without a father! Fortunate indeed are those of us who have not been made to suffer unjustly like this chaplain. But all things considered, we can reflect on the chaplain’s response to our inquiry:

“It had to happen some day. You can’t serve as many families as I do over time and not expect one to really knock your socks off. You can’t do this work and have your head in the clouds and expect to shine in everyone’s eyes. You have the gentle grateful lambs and you have the wounded beasts who lash out at anyone. That’s grief; that’s how some people are. You have to live in hope, not expectation.”

Bravo, Chaplain!

Internet ambush is not uncommon these days…Enter

cybersniper

Those are heroic words now but what if SM’s conduct adversely affects the chaplain’s relationships with client funeral homes or his reputation overall? What if SM went beyond just calling the chaplain and then calling the funeral director? Internet ambush is not uncommon these days and can have a devastating effect on one’s life’s work. But how would the chaplain know? What would he be able to do?

This incident drives home the unfortunate fact that grief can make beasts of even the most refined people. According to our information, the principal characters in this vignette are all professional, well-educated persons. True, they are retired, but given their backgrounds certainly are not impoverished. On further inquiry we learned that they live in a rather upscale suburban neighborhood, travel frequently to Europe, Turkey, where the young man lived with his wife and son. The deceased and his wife and son were here for a reunion of friends, when he unexpectedly died. The aunt had already allegedly announced we are “spiritual but not religious; we believe in God but not organized religion.” That’s a statement we often hear and it’s not a problem. What was important is that they wanted a spiritual service for the deceased. What we didn’t mention in the narrative above was that the wife is Turkish and culturally Muslim. There were, according to the chaplain, a variety of faith traditions in the assembly, including at lease one Orthodox Jew. According to the chaplain, he attempted to respect all faith traditions present, and even opened the service with a Muslim reading accompanied by traditional Turkish flute music. Noting the presence of the Orthodox Jew in the assembly, the chaplain remarked that he on-the-fly edited out of his prayers and homily any direct reference to Jesus Christ or the Trinity, and substituted “Lord” or “God” to keep it within acceptable parameters and inclusive.

We also agree that SM’s conduct was the ultimate in bad taste and totally insensitive. There were apparently a number of family system background issues that could have incited this unusual and unfortunate behavior, and we should all be on alert for any such red flags during the family meeting. Let’s not forget our training in human development and let’s keep in mind that what happens in childhood may have ramifications in adulthood. The chaplain mentioned SM’s childhood experiences in the RC tradition, and his wife, CW, actually referred to him as a “recovering Catholic.” Was there an element of anticlericalism at work? Let’s also not forget that some of our clients have lived a life in the culture of Cartesian dualities, like this family, and we, as helpers, have to recognize their limitations, while responding with biopsychocultural sensitivity and deep spirituality.

Given the information we have on the family system and the background of this family, we cannot discount the possibility of a fractured assumptive worldview, which may have arisen painfully to the conscious level simply in virtue of the narratives that were shared in the course of the family conference. That fractured assumptive worldview may have been aggravated by the composition of the memorial service and its liturgical elements, as well as by the content of the homily, which revisited some of the narratives of the family conference. The fractured assumptive world view compounded by the tangible and intangible (symbolic) losses may have taken SM over the edge, so to speak.

We are sometimes the authors of our own misfortune. This may be the case with the chaplain. First of all, self-disclosure is appropriate only when and if it is for the good of the client. Unless I missed something in the telling, the chaplain self-disclosed inappropriately. His past career had nothing to do with his role as chaplain to this family. In all fairness, though, and emphasizing that the chaplain’s past careers or history had nothing to do with his role as chaplain, the question does arise as to the truth or the motivation of the family in doing what is tantamount to a background check. That sort of behavior under the circumstances is plainly bizarre and certainly raises questions regarding the family’s priorities. If they were so bereaved under the circumstances and given the time constraints in this case, who on earth would have the time or the energy to do any checking? Why? What would be the motivation? How on earth did the focus move so acutely from the deceased to the chaplain? Such behavior is strange to say the least. But, again, the chaplain should have known better not to have self-disclosed. Period.

The chaplain played by the book in most of the encounter.

play_by_the_rulesAnother point I’d like to make regards the axiom that even otherwise rational people can behave irrationally in an irrational situation. We can all agree that the sudden loss of an only son in the prime of his life is traumatic and tragic in human terms. SM, the deceased’s uncle by marriage to  CM, the deceased’s paternal aunt, were childless and according to information provided by the chaplain, had doted on the deceased. With the death of their nephew, and under such conditions we are clearly dealing with an irrational situation and with a family that may not be playing with a full deck. We are constantly teaching that no big decisions should be made in an acute grief situation. Some people should even avoid making small decisions that may run counter to their day-to-day character. Obviously, the chaplain played by the book in most of the encounter. And it’s not uncommon for a family to offer a “little extra” to the officiant when they feel that the job was well done. Under the circumstances, I can’t fault the chaplain because he did refuse the gifts, until it likely became embarrassing to continue to do so. But it wasn’t out of greed, since he proceeded to share the gift with the other staff! While I am not one prone to making excuses, and the chaplain did handle the situation appropriately, whether he felt that the family was genuinely appreciative [and could afford it], that he had put in such an effort he appreciated the recognition, or he was simply too exhausted to put up a bigger fight all can play into the discussion. The bottom line is this: both the father GW and the uncle, SM, felt that the service was well done, even “over the top,” as the father said. The response of the mourners was also very positive. Accordingly, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the chaplain’s performance or the service was unsatisfactory in any way whatsoever. Given the facts, the comments allegedly made by SM that the service failed in some way is, at best, a ruse.

Bereavement… is irrational and those affected by the death behave irrationally

shizoid1Again, bereavement, especially in an event of untimely death, is irrational and those affected by the death behave irrationally, that’s why our role as level-headed professionals is so important. But if we forget that the bereaved may be irrational in both their thinking and their actions, we are asking for trouble. If we don’t keep in mind that the bereaved can be thinking or acting one way now and do a complete 180 in a New York minute, we are asking for trouble. If we stop expecting the unexpected, we are asking for trouble. Again, the chaplain handled the situation appropriately prima faciae. He could have played tit-for-tat and the situation would have likely become inflammatory, even explosive. Everyone would have suffered. The chaplain responded appropriately. If SM chooses not to acknowledge that or to respond, that’s SM’s choice to burn bridges. If SM hasn’t yet responded it would be unfair to fault him; he may yet respond more sensitively when the time is right.

When a family member attempts to hand me a cash gift after a service…I will usually thank them very graciously for their generosity but decline it.

I personally feel very uncomfortable when a family member attempts to hand me a cash gift after a service. I do realize that they can be very insistent to the point of being embarrassing but I also recognize that it’s their only real way of expressing their gratitude. When it gets to that point I will usually thank them very graciously for their generosity but decline it; instead and in order not to appear arrogant or ungrateful, I tell them that I would really appreciate a card when things simmer down or a letter of appreciation to the funeral home for the service. That usually works, although sometimes the card or the letter never comes. But that’s all right, too. I’ll likely follow up with a card or a letter in a month’s time or at the holidays, anyway.

business-ethics-code-of-conductWe all should adopt a professional code of ethics…and stick to it.

Finally, we all should adopt a professional code of ethics. I use the ADEC code of conduct. As to self-disclosure, I use the APA guidelines. I also recommend that if you are providing services like the chaplain, that you have a personal policy regarding gratuities and either address that during the family conference or ensure that the funeral director mentions that you do not accept gratuities. And if you have a policy, stick to it.

We have to have the awareness and wherewithal to recognize the red flags

No matter how well or how badly the mourners behave, we are not there to judge. If we can’t handle the situation perhaps we shouldn’t be in it. Realistically, we find ourselves in infinitely complex situations, every one of which is unique, and we have to have the skills to cope with each and every one of them if we are to avoid doing ourselves and our clients a disservice. We have to have the awareness and wherewithal to recognize the red flags and to adjust our approach accordingly. We have to be constantly vigilant at all stages of the relationship; we need to identify and respond to very subtle verbal and non-verbal communications. We need to read the symbolic language accurately. My rule of thumb is to hear the question behind every statement and the statement being made with every question. But most of all, be authentic, sincere, gentle, and sensitively compassionate. Whatever you may be or have been in the past, you are in this moment the chaplain. That’s all. So in your chaplaincy be in the moment and make sure it’s all about the family and no one else.

May you all be passed by unnoticed and unwounded by the SM’s of the world; if you happen to cross the path of an SM, follow the example of our chaplain above. Your character will be your best response; SM will likely not be swayed by your wisdom; like a wounded beast he will strike out at the most vulnerable.

Good work, Chaplain, you did well. Learn from the experience and drive on.

Peace and blessings!
Rev. Ch. Harold Vadney
Interfaith Chaplain/Thanatologist

Post scriptum:
The chaplain wrote back to let us know that the funeral director was a true champion in the face of this crisis, and was very supportive of the chaplain. In fact, as a sign of solidarity, the funeral director sent the chaplain this short prayer, which we would like to share with our readers (with the chaplain’s consent):roys-prayer

 

 

 

 

Funeral Homes and Funeral Directors Need to Provide for Spiritual Care

It’s a recognized fact, one that’s been the subject of scientific research and innumerable articles in the professional journals for more than 20 years! That fact is that healthcare and deathcare providers must get with the program and provide holistic services to their clients, and that holistic care must include spiritual care. It’s a recognized fact today that no care, whether of the living or the dead (which is actually care of the living, the survivors), is complete without caring for mind, body and spirit. So why do so many providers chaff at the bit when we offer them the opportunity to provide a complete care package to their consumers?

It’s only natural, almost excusable, that many funeral directors, who have to face death and grieving on a daily basis, become a bit remote from their clients’ experience of the death of a loved one, an unique and transformational experience. That’s why we very strongly recommend spiritual care also for the funeral home staff; they have to reconnect with their human experiences, they have to work through their own experiences of grief, even the grief of others. They, too, are affected, even if they are not consciously aware of it.

Funeral Homes and their Directors Must Get With the Program!

caring for mind body and spirity

Current Awareness and Continuing Education

Current awareness is part of any professional’s ongoing education. That’s why I subscribe to a number of thanatopraxis (the practice of death care; mortuary science and practice) information sources like Connecting Directors, FuneralOne and NFDA, and a number of death, dying, bereavement, grief blog sites such as MaryMac and Everplans; I participate in several continuing education courses and events each year at the NCDE (National Center for Death Education Center) at Mt Ida College and HealthCare Chaplaincy Network and ; I am a member of ADEC (Association for Death Education and Counseling),   and am preparing for fellow certification in death education and counseling, and I share the wealth of knowledge and information I acquire through my blogs, Spirituality, Bereavement & Griefcare, Pastoral Care, and Homiletics and Spiritual Care, where I publish many of my funeral and memorial homilies.

Thanatology Café Events

I’m currently canvassing venues like public libraries, social and benevolent organizations, even churches to host my Thanatology Café events, regular gatherings, where people can hear about and talk about death and death–related subjects, with the collaboration of local funeral homes and funeral directors. This is atwitter grief mourning unique opportunity to learn about death planning, dying, the dying process, death, and after-death care and disposition of the remains. My planned Thanatology Café events will be eye- and mind-opening experiences for everyone involved. Please stay tuned for announcements on my blogs, Facebook and LinkedIn. Find me and my tweets on Twitter at @chaplainharold.

Why all of this in addition to my bereavement chaplaincy practice? Because I, like you, appreciate the fact that death care is really care of the living, and I want to persuade funeral services providers, funeral homes, and funeral directors and their staffs that while they are operating a business, they are practicing an important ministry both the the dead and to the living. It is a tragic and avoidable development in many funeral homes that their goal is to attract as many families as possible in their most difficult moments, to get as many bodies as possible, to move them out the door as fast as possible, to dispose of them as quickly as possible. They manage to do this by appealing to the idolatry of money—we can make grandpa disappear cheaper than the competition. And our death-denying, self-centered culture just eats all of this up. What they don’t understand is the incredible damage they, both the body-disposal services and their customers, are causing to the memory of the deceased, his or her meaning and legacy to the living, to the bereaved in terms of their spirituality and growth, and to the culture and society at large. We need to think outside of the box, people, and return to being human, beings created in the image of the divine. Not just some rubbish that has to be collected and disposed of as neatly and quickly as possible!

griefcareThis past week I spent some time visiting funeral home sites in the Albany, Schenectady, Rensselaer, Greene counties to survey their coverage of spiritual care. As you might guess, the coverage was very poor. While most sites had a Resources page, that page included almost exclusively restaurants and florists, some included hotels and other accommodations. About 5 % even hinted at spirituality or pastoral care services on the site, even fewer referred to spiritual services on the Resources page. This is a serious failure in terms of providing complete service to the bereaved; it’s an ominous development in the death care industry. But it can be fixed.

I have spent years of formal study and have been awarded several degrees, I regularly attend courses and continuing education events to remain on top of the field and as up to date as possible, I subscribe to numerous funeral industry and death, dying, bereavement, grief resources for current awareness, information, and much more. I surf and read funeral home websites to keep abreast of how current they are and what they are doing.

The end result of all of this effort is so that I can provide personalized, specialist interfaith and humanistic chaplaincy services to participating funeral homes and their families in the S.A.R.G. region (Schenectady, Albany, Rensselaer, Green counties in New York state; BTW, did you know Sarg is German for coffin?). I offer those services to funeral homes, hospitals, nursing homes because it’s a recognized essential service to those confronted with spiritual and existential crisis, like the dying and the bereaved.

Part of the problem is with the families themselves

But, regrettably, too many funeral homes, hospitals, nursing homes are either slow learners or just indifferent to the holistic care of their clients. Why is that? We seriously have to ask. Part of the problem is with the families themselves: They simply don’t ask the right question. They should be asking: What can you provide me in terms of spiritual care to get me through this spiritually, emotionally, in terms of how I can use this experience for growth? Yes, that’s quite a mouthful, but that’s why I’m providing the words.

griefcare-finalIn the past, I’ve offered funeral homes or funeral home groups this service through my mailings and many of them have accepted my offerings. But I’d like to invite you to take one further step: I’d like to see you, my readers, do your part to ensure that our funeral homes and funeral directors are aware of the need to provide spiritual care to the bereaved in the context of providing post-mortem services. I’d like you, my readers, including funeral home operators, funeral directors, and families to be the the leaders in listing on your Resources page sources of spiritual care to the bereaved before the death, during the dying process, at the time of death, and during the final rites for the dead. I’d like to encourage families both at the time of making pre-arrangements as well as when making urgent arrangements, to ask about what the funeral home provides in terms of spiritual care and personalized funeral and memorial services.

Spiritual care is an important aspect of care in the funeral arrangement package!

If you’re familiar with the research and publications over the past two decades, you’ll know that spiritual care is an important aspect of care in the funeral professions. So why are funeral homes and funeral directors so slow to react to this reality? The likely answer is this: Because they can! I’d like also to challenge funeral homes and funeral directors to take the necessary steps to explore spiritual care resources and providers in their service areas, and to make those resources available to their families. Listing those resources and services on your funeral home’s Resources page, and noting that your funeral home has an on-call chaplain is a valuable opportunity for your funeral home to confidently inform your families that you offer a complete spectrum of services with a trained, expert, on–call chaplain. Read the trade literature if you have any doubts about this fact.

Rev. Art Lillicropp performs a Blessing of the Hands Ceremony for Kaiser nurses, Thursday, May 9, 2013.

I’m attaching an example of an entry for your Resources page, and hope that you’ll agree to post it on your site. In return, you’ll be providing access to on-call pastoral and spiritual care for your families (arranged through your funeral home), and you’ll be adding an important and much appreciated service to your program.

Of course, I at all times extend the invitation to funeral homes and funeral directors to contact me if they want further information or if they’d like to meet face–to–face to discuss a collaboration, or if they’d like to have a chaplain present at the arrangements conference with the family. They or the family can contact me either by email or by telephone. I am always very happy to meet with the funeral home or with families to discuss how we can best work together to provide the bereaved and their families and friends with this essential service.

Once again, thank you so very much for taking the time to read my material. I hope you find my observations informed and useful. In the meantime, I’ll look forward to hearing from you when you leave a comment on this post.

Chaplain Harold

If you are a funeral home or funeral director and would like to have some sample texts for placement on your website Resources page, please click this link:
Resource Page Texts for Download or Copying.

Where Have All the Mothers Gone?

One of the Take-home Points of Genesis (Both Books of Genesis I & II read together, not separately) is the Distinction of Male and Female, and Their Naturally Different Roles in Creations.

Yes, this is a Pastoral Care blog and I want to make a clear statement at the outset that my vision of pastoral care is holistic and very straight-forward; those who are familiar with my preaching and writing know that I shoot from the hip with a penetrating accuracy. I tend to pick things that are right before our eyes, and illuminate them so you can’t deny them.

We as pastoral and spiritual care providers, clergy, chaplains, pastors, ministers, lay ministers and religious have been called—whether by the Holy Spirit or by another spirit—to serve as exemplary disciples and servant leaders—although, as you will see, some are in the self-service business of leadership, if their ministries can be called “leadership”. We not only teach and preach sacred scriptures but teach and preach morality and ethics, appreciation of tradition, and humility when it comes to questioning the mystery of what makes our faith communities.

Some more or less recent events have drawn attention to the role of women in today’s world, and how they have not managed very well to handle the roles they have precociously demanded, and how they have managed to make a travesty even of their natural prerogatives and functions.

While this blog appeals to and is read by a very broad spectrum of traditions ranging from Orthodox Catholic to Buddhist and Hindu spiritual care providers, and some of our readers will be women who will take extreme offense at what I am about to discuss, while others will strongly agree with my observations, I will ask at the outset that readers, both male and female,  bracket their personal agendas and cast a seeing objective eye on the world around them.

Lets begin with a couple of images:

Yes! You are not seeing things. They are Vaginas carrying signs.

Yes! You are not seeing things. They are Vaginas carrying signs.

Now, think for a moment. Here are a bunch of women dressed up in vagina costumes, parading around in public and representing their most intimate parts. Is there a spiritual statement that can be made on this image?

How about this going down Main St?

How about this going down Main St?

We’d like to think that human procreation is analogous to Divine creativity. Indeed, for thousands of years the woman has been celebrated, even worshipped as the Earth Mother, as the giver of life. So where did this go awry and the outrage of commercialized abortion come on the scene (which implies reasonably, a promiscuity that is unparalled in human history).

Very, very ugly.

Very, very ugly.

Some of us can actually remember when women had some self-respect.

Would I want my mother, sister, daughter includedin this bunch?

Would I want my mother, sister, daughter included in this bunch?

For thousands of years women have had very important roles in community and family, and in ritual cultic life, too. While the notion of women as “priests” has almost universally been the subject of prohibitions—whether for reasons of cultural paradigm, ritual purity, or doctrinal reasons (such as the teaching that women as officiants reminisces of pagan practices)—women are not content with being honored and worshipped as carriers of new life, heads of home and hearth, and maternal figures—in fact, they almost insist on making parodies, if not making complete monsters of themselfs (vide supra).

We tend to agree with one traditional Church spokesperson: Vatican says women priests a ‘crime against faith’. The ordination of women as Roman Catholic priests has been made a “crime against the faith” by the Vatican and subject to discipline by its watchdog. When I am confronted by “disgruntled” women who want to be priests in the RC Church, I remind them that it has been tradition in the RC church that only celibate men be sacramentally ordained; if women can’t accept that, perhaps they’re in the wrong place.

While some may say it’s an overgeneralization, it has been my personal experience that the women who have been ordained in Protestant and Calvinist (note the distinction!) are generally post-menopausal, loaded with baggage, have an extreme feminist agenda (in many cases they have had failed marriages or have been abused as children or adults), are misfits anywhere else. One classic example is the popular Britcom “Vicar of Dibley”, an anglican clergy woman who is lonely, unattractive, judgmental, severely troubled, and sex-starved. Ring a bell ladies?

What you see is not what you get!

What you see is not what you get!

One Presbyterian clergy-woman I trained with came to work with clerical collar and multiple hues of clerical blouse, tight-fitting clamdiggers, and heels or slippers. Another, a Canadian Anglican, came from an alcoholic home, was abandoned by her husband, overweight, smelled like a whorse, tended to get weepy when complaining of her “suffering”, liked to tell male clergy off. What is your spiritual assessment of these pictures? What is the message being sent? Reverence? Humility? Psychopathy? Discordance?

A real mixed bag of tricks!

A real mixed bag of tricks!

In the photo above, center, you see Joy Carrol Walls, the real-life vicar of Dibley. Show me the company you keep….

A woman [?] priest.

A woman [?] priest.

As for women lay religious a.k.a. “nuns”…You know, the powdered and painted women who dedicate themselves to Christ among other pursuits (they used to be called temple prostitutes in the past). No not the ones we remember in the religious habits who stuck to the convents, the hospitals and the schools; they’re now extinct! We’re talking about the ones we write about at Renegade Nun… (it’s a longish article but it makes my point).

The questions we should be asking ourselves as pastoral and spiritual care providers is why this depravity is happening. How has the situation deteriorated to the point where sacred tradition, human dignity, biological prerogatives, even nature has been cast to the winds and gender has become ambiguous and all but disappeared. Why is it that God has to be male or female? Can’t we agree that whatever you call the Divine, it is pure spirit, ethereal, and purest mystery? What have we gained by dragging down our Divine differences that imbue us with dignity, created male and female, and even dragging the Divine down to our decrepit and miserable level?

Where some deranged women’s groups today are complaining of abuse and disparagement based on sexism, we see a myopic one-sidedness. Never before in the history of humankind has the male been made so ridicuolous as he has been made in the American entertainment media, especially American sitcoms. Women have set out on a massive conspiratorial campaign to castrate and enthrall American males to the point of reducing them either to sex toys or absolute morons. And the American male is allowing this to happen. Why is that, I wonder?

Living the Stereotypes We've Created

Living the Stereotypes We’ve Created

Duality, Yin and Yang, male and female are complementary, not antagonists; why can’t we leave it at that. And as PC providers are we providing more artificial and artifactual Political Correctness than spiritual Pastoral Care? Which PC are YOU providing?

Meeting the Monster We've Created Face-to-Face The Editor

Meeting the Monster We’ve Created
Face-to-Face
The Editor

Chaplaincy Sunyata Before Chaplaincy Nirvana

I rather enjoy reading what some of the contemporary pundits of professional chaplaincy have to say about the current status of the professional chaplain and state of affairs IN professional chaplaincy as a healthcare discipline.

George! Do you really mean that?

George! Do you really mean that?

 In a recent posting on a popular forum for professional chaplains, a renowned personality, albeit from the podium of a branded accreditation organization, George Handzo, in a post “Lack of Integration for Chaplaincy is an International Issue” (that links directly  to his Handzo Consulting blog article) preaches some disputable notions about the profession and the burden of responsibility attaching to the community of professional chaplains (“we” per Handzo), and ipso facto to the individual professional chaplain.

In this posting I take issue with three of the venerable George’s distillations of statements made in two published texts cited by him (Wendy Cadge, Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine, University Of Chicago Press (2013) ISBN-13: 978-0226922119 and an article by Ian Macritchie appearing in the Scottish Journal of Healthcare Chaplaincy (not more specifically cited by Hanzo)).

While George Handzo is generally more or less on target in most of what he exposes to the professional community of [healthcare] chaplains, and while one cannot discount his allegiances, especially to the ACPE, he sometimes appears to preaching from his cathedra of laurels than from a more praxis-oriented position of insightful compassion for the frontline, in-the-trenches chaplain.

In general, I found his comments to be facially insensitive, almost indifferent to the actual obstacles facing the institutional chaplain, and he fails to note fairly that those obstacles have little to do with the professional chaplain but with the larger picture of institutional models and cultures, not the least to do with how we educate, train, and form the hierarchs running those institutions. Here my responses:

Handzo Point: “1. The responsibility for the lack of full integration and lack of growth of professional chaplaincy in health care rests mostly if not entirely with us as chaplains.”

This is placing an inordinate and unrealistic burden on the shoulders of professional chaplains and does not take into consideration the real fact that developments in both “professional” (viz. interfaith) as opposed to “denominational” chaplaincy, socio-cultural changes, and models of healthcare in the past half-century. Whereas prior to the most recent five decades chaplaincy was generally the purview of the ordained cleric or, in the hands of “religious,” it is now, like spiritual guidance, up for grabs, if you will, for just about anyone discerning a “calling” to serve the suffering. This, compounded by the problem of over-marketing of certification and the suspicion associated with the process. Some of that suspicion granted is pure envy and professional lassitude but some is factually based.

Yet another problem is posed by the fact that the practically inexhaustable availablity of unqualified volunteers being welcomed by ignorant volunteer coordinators with the blessing of indifferent institutional hierarchy is not even broached, despite the fact that it is an insidious affront to professional chaplaincy and its institutional and public image!

The decline in membership, rather active participation, in mainstream faith traditions, the aging of faith communities, the declining availability of qualified and formed clergy and religious, and the various popular theologies espoused by overzealous agendas have fostered, and nurtured, a climate of “apostolic missionary ministries” and programs, volunteer programs are the most culpable, that welcome the half-baked, baggage-laden, “chaplains” and pastoral care associates responding to nebulous “callings” into nursing homes and hospitals. Why? Not because professional chaplains (those with professional degrees, appropriate life experience, necessary acquired skills, and an understanding of the organization and dynamics of their chosen or preferred work environment) have shirked their duty of “evangelizing” hierarchy in institutions that would benefit from the ministrations of professional chaplains and well-organized pastoral care departments, but because the hierarchy is generally inculturated with the focus on institutional efficacy and efficiency in a fiscal, technical and regulatory sense, rather than in a customer-centered wholistic sense.

While I do not disagree that the chaplain, as a professional minister, bears some responsibility to guide and to educate institutional hierarchy, we are also inculcated with the notion of boundaries and avoidance of making and impression of overstepping, trespassing. We are admonished against proselytizing, evangelizing where inappropriate; so, too, we are admonished against proselytizing the important role of chaplaincy in an institution that feels expanding the gift shop has priority over providing the chaplain with a respectable space. This requires an attitude shift not in hierarchies that are focused on corporate business objectives but in the very early stages of education of the individuals who will later become the board members, the vp’s of quality, customer relations, public relations, etc.

Healthcare delivery models have changed. No longer is there the family physician or event the primary care physician at the bedside. The hospitalist model has taken the lead. In some respects this is good for chaplaincy because the chaplain has a finite number of physicians to deal with and a chief hospitalist to recruit to the cause, with whom to communicate, and from whom to gain access to the inner sanctum. Analogous models can be found in other institutions benefitting from the ministry of spiritual support such as jails, long – term care facilities, colleges, etc. Indeed, no amount of theology or scriptural studies, nor human developmental theory, nor spirituality and prayer discipline is of practical value when attempting to communicate and to work in such an environment.

The bottom line here is to first of all to access the decision-makers of the institution, to speak their languages (sometimes also their institutional dialects), and to make the impression of understanding the culture and the concerns (especially the institutional strategic mission and how chaplaincy plays an integral role in that mission) of hierarchy.

Handzo Point: 2.  To the extent that our status in health care is due to the lack of understanding by others of our capabilities and possible contributions, we need to bear full responsibility for that situation.”

Vide supra (the above is included here in its entirety by reference).

The status of the professional healthcare of the professional chaplain is that of a healthcare provider. Period. Again, I beg to disagree with the venerable George on the point that we (I am assuming George is referring to the community of professional chaplains) “bear the full responsibility for lack of understanding by others of our capabilities and possible contributions.” That statement is not wholly true and if not wholly true, is false.

Neither the individual chaplain nor the various corporate entities that claim to advocate for the individual chaplain can claim to bear full responsibility for the general, regional, and local understandings of attitudes towards the capabilities and contributions of chaplaincy. First of all, the statement is overly broad and overreaching in its scope. Acceptance of chaplaincy in general differs widely from locale to locale, from institution to institution. To homogenize this understanding to positively affect the overall acceptance and admittance of the role, competency and contribution of chaplaincy would be an almost impossible task. It would have to start at a national level, preferably in the form of recommendations, regulations, and legislation. This is, in fact, in the making when one considers more recent HIPA and JCAHO statements and provisions, and while I may rightly be accused of strong criticism of the various chaplain accreditation organizations, I do admit that they may have a role in a sort of lobbying activity to nudge legislators and key bureaucrats and other influential pundits of healthcare.

Again, I must make a point that chaplaincy can be advocated and promoted only early in the formation of the hierarchs or, in the alternative, with an organized authoritative presence in places where the hierarchs convene to discuss their agendas such as at conferences and congresses. If recognized authorities in chaplaincy–not branded accreditation schemes or representatives of such agendized operations–are admitted a place at the head table or on the discussion panel, then we may gain certain ingress to the minds of those hierarchs, and through those sacred spaces, to their institutions as bona fide healthcare providers.

Handzo Point: “3. We have failed to make the case about how we ’help address larger institutional issues’ or how dispensing with chaplaincy would be a ‘great loss to healthcare outcomes.’”

Again, I must take issue with this statement, and again, vide supra.

I take umbrage that venerable George uses the corporate “we,” or in the alternative that the “we” is intended generally to embrace the community of professional chaplains. Here, too, we cannot go where we are barred access or where we are not expressly invited. It’s a long haul to move beyond the first level caregivers (nurses, techs, support staff, even physicians) to get to the boardroom. Nor do most “chaplains” have the credentials with which to impress hierarchs that what the chaplain has to say carries reliable business weight.

Take, for example, the hospital: How many chaplains can say that they have an adequate knowledge of the structure and organization of the hospital? Or of the myriad regulations that affect the hospital? Is the hospital a too  complex example? Take, then, a prison, if you will. What does the generalist chaplain know about prisons? About the regulations affecting prisons and their operation? So, absent specific, specialist training in specific and particular institutions, how does the chaplain addresss “larger institutional issues?” Without such training, knowledge, experience how does the chaplain address “larger institutional issues?” Does the professional chaplain have to have a degree in theology, in pastoral care, in business administration, public administration, and social work to do that? Or, in the alternative, does s / he forge inter –  or multi – disciplinary networks or support resources to do that? Does the professional chaplain need to be the epitome renaissance person or just know how to finagle and kibutz?As to the suggestion that “dispensing with chaplaincy ‘would be a great loss'” I must comment that to experience loss you must first attach value to the thing lost. And so we make full circle.

But what is pristinely clear to me is the fact that, like efficacious chaplaincy itself, the response, if not the answer, lies in an early access to the core decision makers…

The basic question to be answered, far from heaping the burdens of responsibility on the community of professional chaplains, as George Handzo appears to be willing to do, we must ask ourselves: At which point and how do we inculcate the much touted holistic healthcare model (spirit, mind, body) in the hearts and minds of the seculars who call the shots? It’s a very complex question and, since chaplaincy is such a variegated ministry and the cultures in which the ministry is done are so myriad, I personally doubt that there is really one answer. But what is pristinely clear to me is the fact that, like efficacious chaplaincy itself, the response, if not the answer, lies in an early access to the core decision makers, effective formation of the decision makers, comprehensive education, training, and formation of professional chaplains (after an appropriate period of reflection and ongoing discernment), frequent, open, and affordable continuing formation for chaplains, and express support from mainstream denominations of the ministry of chaplaincy based on a spiritual rather than a traditional model.

If I commit the offense of overgeneralization by making the statement that in the past chaplaincy has been its own arch-enemy, I humbly apologize. But chaplaincy must advocate itself as a professional healthcare discipline both internally and ad extra.

If we fail to communicate or document “outcomes” might it not be the shortcoming of the CPE programs themselves and not of the product they churn out as “chaplains”?

Handzo continues his editorializing by noting the problem of outcomes in chaplaincy. According to Handzo, “We often still resist the idea that outcomes are something chaplains should have. We don’t have commonly understood sets of outcomes, we don’t train our students to work toward outcomes, and we often don’t document outcomes so other members of the health care team know what we do.” Again that ubiquitous, corporate “we,” that contributes only to the ambiguity of what Handzo is writing. Who is this “we?” It certainly cannot be the in – the – trenches professional chaplain, or can it, George? It also seems a bit misleading to hear an apostle of the CPE movement, a board member of the consulting firm Healthcare Chaplaincy and a past president of the Association of Professional Chaplains (APC), would make such a statement, especially in view of the reasonable prestige that Rev. Handzo allegedly has in the chaplaincy movement. If “we” have not established “commonly understood sets of outcomes,” and we “don’t train our student to work toward outcomes,” “and we often don’t document outcomes,” that is, we do not communicate to other members of the inter –  or multi – disciplinary team members, whose fault is that? Might it not be the shortcoming of the CPE programs themselves and not of the product they churn out as “chaplains.”

Handzo is describing a lack of community, a lack of consensus, a lack of fraternity among professional chaplains –  – could this be attributable to the plethora of competing “advocacy” or “standards” or “certifying” organizations and competing “outcomes”

Handzo continues, “I am convinced that one of our greatest barriers is our own infighting and the time we waste debating internally whether professional chaplains should have outcomes, demonstrate value, and have measurable outcomes. I find myself increasingly disinterested in engaging those questions.” I am appalled that a leader in the chaplaincy movement and a leader in the CPE movement should be “disinterested” (I am somewhat at a loss what Handzo intends to mean by “disinterested.” Does he mean “indifferent?” “Impartial?” “Dispassionate?”) in engaging such questions! It would seem that Handzo is describing a lack of community, a lack of consensus, a lack of fraternity among professional chaplains –  – could this be attributable to the plethora of competing “advocacy” or “standards” or “certifying” organizations and competing “outcomes.” I’m also having some difficulty with the notion of “outcomes” in spiritual support, and wonder where that one came from. Handzo conspicuously avoids any further elaboration of what are the outcomes to which we should aspire, or how we demonstrate value and to whom. I have not problem demonstrating value to the suffering nor demonstrating value to my contributions to staff education, institutional image, community outreach, service retention, etc. but my point is: How many readers understand these to be values to be demonstrated?

My further point is that Handzo fails to define his terms like “demonstrate value.” Measurable outcomes poses another problem. From the administrative, management point of view I can appreciate the the board or the corporate director for quality might be so limited as to grasp only PowerPoint depictions of measureable outcomes, metrics, etc. If that’s what Handzo is meaning, does that really fall on the lap of the in-the-trenches chaplain? True, the professional chaplain very frequently wears the administrative, managerial hat, too, of director of “pastoral care” (Ugghhhh!) but does the in – the – trenches provider have the time, energy, inclination to start recording “measurable outcomes?” I think not, especially when the professional chaplain, if the institution even has a professional chaplain, has the burden of impossible numbers of patients and the responsibility to triage who gets the visit and who doesn’t. There seems to be a serious disconnect between Handzo’s statement and the real world.

There are many saints that are locked out because of the rigor of artificial and ambiguous certification agendas; likewise, many individuals with more temporal than spiritual / apostolic aspirations gain access to sensitive precincts and cause much damage…

Regrettably, Handzo’s concluding statement: “I continue to rejoice that this is a large and growing group both in the US and abroad that I hope and trust will continue to make a difference in how spirituality is integrated into health care” does not lend much lucidity to what he attempts to share with us. In fact, it reveals a deplorable lack of sensitivity to the complexity of chaplaincy, especially when considering chaplaincy in terms of international models. Which group? The wannabe’s or the professionals? The branded certificated or the natural vocations? The international organizations’ membership censuses or the invisible ministers of spiritual support to the suffering. I’m not quite clear what Rev. Handzo’s point is, really.

There are many saints that are locked out because of the rigor of artificial and ambiguous certification agendas; likewise, many individuals with more temporal than spiritual / apostolic aspirations gain access to sensitive precincts and cause much damage. As impractical, even impossible as it may sound, we must self-police, inter-form, and inform each other as co-disciples, and then corporately police, form, and inform our target institutions. We can do this only if we are humbly authentic and emptied of self-interest and attachments. In other words, we much attain chaplaincy “sunyata” before we can attain chaplaincy “nirvana.”

plant in hand

On the difference or Equivalence of Pastor/Chaplain

Is There a Distinction that Needs to be Drawn Between a Practitioner’s Playing the Role of Pastor or that of Chaplain?

I was a bit bemused by the persistence of the tendency to Bible-thump one’s way through any such discussion

I recently engaged several colleagues on the question of chaplaincy or pastoring. I was a bit bemused by the persistence of the tendency to Bible-thump one’s way through any such discussion, while advocating an interfaith approach as advanced by the adherents of the CPE agenda. I thought I’d share my contribution to the discussion.

listen-with-heartIt is my contention that we should not advance the notion of a “versus” or “as opposed to” when discussing chaplaincy or pastoring. While it is true that some traditions, the Hebrew and Islamic, for example, eschew the notion of “pastor” or “shepherd” for cultural or traditional, even ethical reasons, in the broader sense all chaplains are in fact “pastors,” while all pastors (in the conventional sense) are not necessarily “chaplains” (or critically speaking, even pastors!). In fact, I object in principal to the biased terminology we so frequently use in our vocations, “pastoral care” department, because it tends to be exclusive. I personally prefer spriritual care provider (although in my professional materials I do use pastoral care). Moreover, most people, even those in the vocation, tend to associate pastoral with pastors and thus with some sort of clergy or ordained service provider (usually with no questions asked and we all know about the profanation of ordination); that in itself is a misfortune for all concerned. But the much-touted CPE doesn’t do much to clarify the issues for interns or residents, and we still see chaplains “certified” by the self-proclaimed arbitors of chaplaincy who are just as ignorant after several years of “education” as they were before.

A case in point is taken from the scenario presented by the initiator of the discussion who describes walking into a Jewish patient’s room with a Christian clerical collar, which I characterized as benign “ignorance” but in reality was outright insensitive and would indicate that the “chaplain” in question did not do any initial preparation before launching out on rounds or visitations.clerical collar pc I might fraternally suggest that in future, whether you are a chaplain or a pastoral care associate, to check the chart briefly or dialogue with the nurse assigned to that patient before you visit. The offending chaplain actually says that he was aware that the patient was dying and had no family, so it seems rather odd that the chaplain did not appreciate the patient’s faith tradition and, if it wasn’t in the chart, that he didn’t consult with the immediate caregiver (nurse or LPN).

I also questioned the fact that the visiting chaplain was aware that the man was “Jewish”. Being Jewish immediately identifies one as being associated with a certain cultural, socio-religious tradition, after all, one does not call one’s self “Jewish” except to identify one’s self as a Jew.  So this also raises the question of whether the chaplain in question was indifferent to the possibility that this dying man might have welcomed a visit by a rabbi, or that the chaplain did not make or offer to make a referral. Such sensitivity may have been a great comfort to the man, who might have found great refuge in his tradition and prayers. So I identify a boundary issue in this behavior, too; an issue of knowing one’s limits.

This situation also sends up red flags in that it clearly indicates that the institution did not do a spiritual assessment of this patient, much less a spiritual evaluation or history, which also reveals a glaring ignorance of the now widely inaugurated JCAHO and HIPA scoring categories relating to patient spiritual care.

The scenario I describe above should be instructive to us all and I thank the so-called chaplain for the inadvertent teaching/learning moment he has provided.

Finally, in the dying process I don’t feel there’s a heck of a lot of “pastoring” left to be done, unless it’s for the survivors. In my experience, in end-of-life situations I am more of a presence and spiritual guide/companion. While that may arguably be part of pastoring in a general sense, I feel that the actual mission of pastoring contrasts in praxis with the mission of spiritual accompaniment at end-of-life or in an existential crisis.

plant in handIt’s rather like the difference between evangelization and catechesis, if you have that in your tradition. One takes care of the basics and gets the seed started (evangelization), the other (catechesis) ends in the care and nurturing to harvest time.

Listening to hearAnother colleague mentioned in a rather cliché fashion with which we are all familiar when listening to the CPE crowd, that CPE trains one to listen. I disagree with such responses such as “CPE “teaches” one to listen.” I’m not quite sure how that works but in my divinity training and three years of supervised pastoral formation, and my participation in and disappointment with a rather popular CPE program in a large trauma center in Albany, New York, which fell far short of even my minimum aspirations, I don’t think that people can be “taught to listen” they may listen, but they don’t listen deeply. I know that from experience the deep listening skill comes from deep within one’s self, once one is comfortable with one’s self, and can leave one’s self for the time it takes to absorb and process the patient’s narrative. It’s that kind of listening that might be part of qualifying an aspirant to be spiritual care provider but it certainly isn’t the be all and end all.

The serene face of the large Buddha his long wise curvaceous ears at once loving and open to the woes of the world: Compassionate.

The serene face of the Buddha, his long wise curvaceous ears at once loving and open to the woes of the world: Compassionate.

Deep listening is the act of sinking into a serene quiet place, and awakening a receptive awareness of the other. By entering quiet and becoming aware of the other, we move out of and beyond our ego-driven chaos to become open to the divine messages within us and shared with us by the other. Imagine the irony here is that we so often complain of the pain of not having been heard, but we are so guilty ourselves of being deaf to, not hearing the innate wisdom from within ourselves and shared with us by others. When we learn to accept emptiness, when quiet, we instinctively trust in the guidance of sacred voices far more profoundly than what our bullying brains and the busy buzz of life would have us hear. And we listen, respond with silence.

In fact, having examined quite a number of CPE curricula and having developed continuing quality improvement curricula for the healthcare chaplaincy department, I find that the current CPE programs and their associated certification elements serve only to promote a burocratic and very branded form of “pastoral” care, and that branded product falls short of most suffering persons’ real needs. helpingIt’s the proprietary nature and standardization (viz. uniformization, homogenization) of the learning that deals the death blow to an appreciation (1) of the universal truths and values shared by all human beings, (2) the beauty in the diversity of traditions and how to appreciate and be enriched by a certain mutuality, (3) the possible pitfalls of an interfaith approach to faith traditions that may adhere very loyally to their dogmas. There are other reasons I could enumerate but regrettably (or fortunately for the readers) space is limited.

I think that an overwhelming majority, too, of CPE students come with excess baggage and too little self-death–I’ve observed interns, residents, even certified chaplains who have a great potential to do considerable damage…and do. The situation is not unlike seminary, you can do much to scrutinize, to form, to standardize but Whoa! when you turn them loose on the world, watch out! (A Roman Catholic diocesan priest, who also serves in the chancery tribunal, remarked ironically to me one day, “They’ll ordain anybody these days.” Which is probably true given the shortage of priests today.)

The so-called supervisors of the CPE programs almost invariable have their own biases and agendas, and these tend to impair good formation.
In some, not all instances, too, CPE programs have become “pay-to-work” programs in which minimally screened individuals, wet behind the ears and green, are turned loose on the floors to deal with sophisticated staff and human beings in existential crisis. I don’t feel that’s right. And I have also observed that interns are exposed to the same curriculum content for three or four years, and unless they have the academic predisposition to independently advance their armamentarium of experience through narrative and study, many don’t build their foundations. Some interns do not have theology or pastoral studies to help them through the necessary processing, and almost all have a depraved Western bias to their spirituality that tends to act as a speed bump when offering care to Non-western recipients. These programs tend to be “chaplain mills.” CPE does not fit the bill on its own to form professional, well-rounded spiritual care providers, but does excel in churning out multitudes of volunteers for greedy institutions. That may be one of the reasons it has survived this long.

On another level, some practitioners involved in the discussion advocated that the “Gospel” or, by extension, holy scriptures, has no firm place in chaplaincy. I do differ in that the fundamental ethics of the “Gospel” (not as understood principally by the evangelicals or fundamentalist among us) is a major part of chaplaincy. servant leadershipI cite particularly the beatitudes and the teaching of discipleship and servant leadership (chaplaincy is certainly not limited to the sick and dying but to the suffering generally). While I abhor the notion, and even more so the practice of proselytizing to captive audiences, and would hasten to emphasize that evangelization and catechization is not a fundamental role of the chaplain, ethics, discipleship, and servant leadership all play a special role in the myriad activities of the professional chaplain. (Note also that I do distinguish between the “professional chaplain”, the pastoral/spiritual care associate, and the visitor providing spiritual support.) To advocate that the truths and values espoused by the “Gospel”, the holy scriptures of any faith or spiritual tradition might have no place in chaplaincy is to advocate a position, I believe, of a chaplaincy practice devoid of ethics (and religion) (I do realize that this is a particularly “Christian” approach and my Judaic, Islamic and Buddhist colleagues may not necessarily agree with the religion-ethics statement, but I make the statement here somewhat loosely for convenience sake).

I’m not judging colleagues in chaplaincy or Clinical Pastoral Education too severely at all. In fact, I’m simply sharing my own observations and opinions based on personal experience. I am not a bit surprised when some readers tend to take these observations personally, as if they were meant to make an ad hominem stab at the straw[wo]men of CPE; I usually anticipate that persons in our line of work have a bit more self-awareness not to take every facially severe remark as a lancet thrust to the heart, however.

Rather than play an offended person’s role, perhaps we all would benefit by admitting that we may have learnt something about one’s self as through another’s eyes.

We Respond, We don't React.

We Respond, We don’t React.

Our role is to humbly respond, not to knee-jerk react. After all, to paraphrase the prophet Martin Luther King, Jr.: ‘We are all wrapped in the same cloth…when we directly hurt another we indirectly hurt ourselves.” (I do hope I did that statement justice!). So, when one party to the conversation called such a response arrogant, and a failure to simply accept some responsibility in relationship to colleagues’ responses, I merely responded, “My point indeed. The mouth loves the feel of words.” Instead we minimize, rationalize and justify our behavior, making certain to protect one’s self. This particular correspondent insists that “our patients have thick enough skins to handle a collar.”panda overload My response was tantamount to the fact that I don’t think that we have any right to expect patients to have “thick skins.” Some practitioners in pastoral care seem to admit patients’ strengths but underestimate their sensitivity and vulnerability. Many of the patients I see have lost their thick skins and in fact are pretty bruised in terms of dignity, autonomy, fortitude, patience, etc. I see no reason to add another straw to the pile. And Yes! It’s not about us, it’s about patient-centered, family-focused, inter- and multi-disciplinary care.

bedside prayerWhen we adopt such an approach we appreciate that, whereas many of our colleagues practice their spiritual care ministry in acute care settings or in crisis settings, many colleagues may find themselves–particularly in the scenario of the long-term care setting–in the position of playing both the role of chaplain and pastor to some residents in those longer-term care facilities. Regrettably, many of these residents lived their lives unchurched or churched with infrequent interaction with their faith community; more regrettably, some faith communities have disappeared or simply no longer continue a ministry of visitation of the sick and homebound who were once part of their faith community. It’s in such situations that the chaplain may very well become the pastor, and have to function in both roles. I don’t feel that this should be a major stumbling block nor even a concern to the well-formed spiritual care provider, who is responding to a true call to spiritual care ministry.

We're all wrapped in the same cloth...

We’re all wrapped in the same cloth…

Now God Comes in 29 Different Flavors!

We Are Being Dumbed Down and Turned into A Nation of Zombies.

The Zombies are Eating Our Tax Dollars!

They’re Turning Us Into Zombies
And We’re Eating Each Other!

Technology, the Promoters of the Technology, the Lobbies and Unions Shoving Technology Down Our Throats, the Public Officials Who are Slaves to the Unions and Lobbies, and our Already Zombified Teachers and Administrators are Hell-bent to Zombify our Entire Culture!

Just Shoot Us! Why Doncha!?!

You’re Boring Us To Death!
Just Shoot Us! Why Doncha!?!

I was going to continue the reports on the RC Teen Activity Center and on the Unending Persecution of the RCS CSD BoE President by the Hypocrite Albany DA P.[udenda] David Soares until I Experienced the Most Recent RCS school board public meeting on January 7, 2012. I simply had to comment on it!

PowerPoint Masturbation. I reviewed the RCS Central School District board of education meeting of January 7th, and I was initially amazed that it was so…quiet. Fact is: It was barely attended by the public. Then came the reason: Another one of those idiotic digital slide show presentations where the presenter self-pleasures him or herself by vomiting onto a wall or screen a mass of numbers, charts and graphs that no one but the presenter understands. Only a death squad of mercenaries could kill the audience quicker! Is that the plan? Kill attendance by presenting idiotic garbage? Is that the purpose of the public sessions of the board of education meetings? Well, it does show one thing: If these presenters, who are teachers and administrators in the schools, are that self-absorbed and mentally zombified that they don’t give a damn how intensely boring they are and how disrespectful they are of their audience, what on earth are they doing in the classrooms? Is this an indicator of how they communicate information in the classroom, too? Then, of course, I started to think…

zombies ahead run

Education is all about communication. If teachers and administrators are not capable of communicating appropriately with their audience, what in hell are we spending all this money on paying teachers extreme salaries? If, from what we see and hear in these PowerPoint slide presentations by teachers and administrators is: What in hell are we spending all of the “professional development” money on for teachers? (Please don’t tell me, “It’s in their contract.”) The PowerPoint presentations are much too long, too many slides, too poorly designed, too poorly presented, not presented in a language the audience can fully understand, and present too much information for anyone of normal intelligence to digest! The time, effort, money would be better spent on a simple one-page executive summary, and an essential facts sheet followed with a Q/A session.

Dr Alan McCartney did an excellent job by jumping in and summarizing a very confused and muttered presentation point by clearly distilling the facts: “When she says [the increase in] online testing, the state has essentially told us that Within two years they expect that all state tests will be takend online at the same time by every student in the state.” Bingo. Stop the convoluted explanations and miscommunications, cross-referencing and pointing to other people. You’re supposed to be informing everyone!

But the fact remains: So much money being spent on technology, updates, new computers, etc. doesn’t do very much to improve socialization, reading, writing, development of self. Those are the problems that are being created by over-technologization of our schools and digitizing our learning environments. Out-of-control and excessive dependence on technology is a key factor in zombification.

Big Brother's Zombies

Big Brother’s Zombies

Zombification of America. Imagine all of those futuristic low-budget films where masses of human beings are mindlessly gazing at Fearless Leader, who appears demonically proselytizing on a huge flat-screen. Imagine all of those low-budget walking-dead films depicting zombified undead human beings walking around aimlessly, mindlessly trying to find a brain to eat (apparently they’re brain -starved, the product of our education system). Imagine all of the newsreel, archival, and documentary images of the Nazi era, of Stalin’s Russia, of Revolutionary China and the propaganda machine that deprived whole populations of freedom of thought, speech, movement, and controlled every atom of information served to the public. Have you ever thought about how all of that was accomplished? Have you ever thought about the underlying message these films of protest, of warning are sending?

Are these your kids>

Are these your kids

Isolation of Children. In all of the totalitarian regimes, the family unit was a prime target. First you isolate parents from children, and then you get all the children in one place and brainwash them. Sound familiar? Here, let me help you to understand. In the Nazi, Stalinist, China during the cultural revolution, the family was always made sacrosanct because the propagandists knew at the time that it was central and a core value to the population. But what they then proceded to do is to gradually dissolve the traditional family to form a new-age type of family. Breeders would produce perfect offspring, who would be herded into education camps, and who then would become a generation of perfect zombies, and the cycle would continue. Are you getting it now? Maybe not? Let’s move on, then.

This isolation of children, young people from parents and the traditional family unit then went on to isolate families and children from the ethics and morality sources, the spiritual and faith communities, the churches and congregations. Once the sensitivity to the value of spirituality, faith and religion was erased in the family and in the youth, new gods, idols, could be set up to fill the void created by killing God. Once ethics and morality was taken out of the hands of the faith and spiritual communities, the now ethically and moraly sterile parents and youth could be filled with a popular, government, corporate morality and ethics.

zombie girlNow those newly indoctrinated, brainwashed young adults become teachers. Without the traditional family to instill a sense of culture and identity, and without the faith communities to inspire ethics and morality, the education system, the schools and liberal colleges and universities now disseminate faddish, dumbed-down learning at economically hobbling prices. The basic thought here is: control the spirit and the mind through zombified education, the spirit through corporate ethics and morality, and vertical and horizontal movement by shackling the population with the propaganda that the ultimate goal is a college education even if you end up with a lifetime of debt and no job.

The control logic is ingenious. Don’t you think? No, you don’t think. That’s the fundamental problem!

Undead - The Zombie Teacher

Mr Undead
The Zombie Teacher

Here’s an example: The other day I was having a breakfast meeting with a contributor. The waitress, always ready to add her two cents, starts bitching about what her daughter is [not] learning in middle school. Seems she’s falling behind and the mother hasn’t a clue how to help her. “She just doesn’t get the math they’re teaching! It’s all dashes and dots and numbers. I just don’t get it. I don’t understand what it is!” ISOLATION OF THE PARENT FROM THE CHILD’S EDUCATION! The government sets up systems that eliminate parental participation in their childrens’ education (except to pay dearly for it). If the parent doesn’t get it and can’t help the child, the parent loses esteem in the child’s eyes (“Gee, mom, you’re a dumbass!”), the child feels helpless and vulnerable, has low self-esteem (“I’m stupid.”), the modern morality, ethics, and economics force the single mother to work long hours to support the child (“Gee, mom, you’re never around when I need you!”), the father’s probably a victim of the legal system and in jail for peeing in public or desperation drinking (think alcoholism in soviet Russia), and the child has a no-parent family unit (Our law enforcement dunces and idiot judges at work reinforcing the zombification process!).

eat more brainsEnter the A.S.A.P. programs and the Teen Activity Centers of the world! Parents are already technically isolated from their children and the ethical and moral foundations have been eroded to such an extent that any sense of guilt is radically lessened, so now parents, in the squeeze by the financial environment and the corporate brainwashing that they MUST HAVE, MUST RUSH OUT and GET, MUST GIVE, now make the excuse that to make ends meet, they both, mother and father, must have jobs.

(No one seems to catch on that they’re being satanically manipulated by the corporations, the educators, the service providers. Nope! They’re zombies now, they don’t have to think. No brain left, you see! That’s why the movie zombies have to eat brains…they have to replace their own brain they sacrificed to the government, unions and corporations!). But now we have “After School Activities Programs” and Community Teen Centers, Youth Centers, etc. that gather the young people together, away from home, family, parents, and become the surrogate home, family, parents to the children. All they are are Nazi, Stalinist, revolutionary Chinese youth camps, and they have the same effect: Separate the children from the home, family, parents; gather them into one place; make them feel good and liked there; replace the home, family, parents with a new home, family, and new “parents.” Get it yet? Sure, you rationalize the whole thing and think you “need to work to make ends meet,” that “you need to give the kids the latest brain-dissolving handheld toys,” that you need “to rush out and buy that product,” that everyone in the family “needs their own vehicle” (so that they can rush out and leave the home, family, parents and get to the youth or teen center, indoctrination camp.). No guilt anymore! Everyone has his or her addiction. Everyone’s a zombie.

Nobody needs to care. Everyone needs an assault weapon (to finish off all the other zombies). Do your hear the evil Lord [In]Sidious sniggering in the confusion of your life, now?

FEAR IS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL MOTIVATORS, CONTROLS, WEAPONS!

Zombie Teachers

Zombie Teachers

Zombification of Education. Well, I started out talking about PowerPoint masturbation and presenter self-pleasuring. I raised the question if what we are seeing, the total alienation of the audience by the presenter, total unawareness of the audience, is that what’s happening in the classrooms? I then provided you, dear readers, with a tour of what I see is going on right under unseeing eyes: the zombification of the people. Yes, we are so blind that we sheeple along to the drumbeat of the propagandists, our richly lobby-bribed elected officials, the corporations, and a federal government too big to care and money-making-bailout-sponges the propagandists tell us are too big to fail. But what we are really missing, so tragically missing is the true tragedy right here, in our own communities, right in your own home: the zombification of the family! We used to hear that “education starts in the home, formation in the churches, training in the schools.” Where has all that wisdom gone? We are becoming a nation of digitized, electronic junkies. We are becoming a society of ethically cleansed, amoral, brainless, starving zombies. Why? Because it’s so easy. That’s why.

We like easy. But when you actually think about it it’s catastrophic! Take, for example, electronic communications. Before the birth of the transistor radio way back in the 1960’s, people sat home and listened to the radio together; with the transistor radio, the migration genes were facilitated, and you could listen on your own, while on the move! Then came the computer and e-mail and online searches. No more sitting down and writing a nice card or going to the library, seeing friends, socializing, browsing the stacks. Now you could sit in a dark cubicle or in a corner of your bedroom and get it all! But even then you still had to go out, face the world, shop, negotiate, pay bills.

No more, my little zombies! Just isolate yourself in your dark little corner and Bingo! It’s all done…digitally. Eating out in a restaurant or a diner used to be a social ritual. Forget about that, too! Just look around you: couples sitting at the same table, each one looking blankly down at their lap. It used to be that when you saw something like that you yelled: “Hands on the table!” No more, my little zombies! All the self-pleasuring now is done…digitally!

So the universities came up with another rain-making, revenue generating, cost-saving strategy: online degrees. No more physical interpersonal social learning experiences. Just sit in your dusty, smelly, infested corner and “earn a degree.” It’s that simple, simpletons!

Worse still, our educators and the boards of education are caving to an idiotic decree, now law, that mandates that our schools go digital! Now if this isn’t a conspiracy by the information technology lobbies, the computer and software lobbies, I must have come down with the last shower!

Freud, Piaget, Ainsworth, Watson, Bandura, Kohlberg and others all have theories of human development, of stages of human moral and character evelopment and all of them take into consideration the importance of human physical interaction.

One Instructor, One Lesson for All

One Instructor, One Lesson for All

Almost every magazine and journal has recently published articles on the importance of human contact in healthy human development and the consequences of “isolation.” The studies and research on which these articles are based is done by scholars and academics, scientists. Why is it all lost on our educators? The Answer: Unions and Lobbies! MONEY. And our federal and state education pundits are all in the union and lobby pockets! That’s why the New York State Education Department has told schools to start planning for the flatscreen teacher–all of education will be cleansed of the personal role model in the classroom, the adored teacher (what’s left of any real role models in the classroom). One standardized model will present one standardized presentation over fiberoptic delivery or satellite hookup. All zombies will get one standardized program of instruction. All little zombies will be uniform in their thinking. All parent zombies will be eliminated from the picture (until tax time comes). The entire world will be ZOMBIFIED!

Which Way Is God?!?

Which Way Is God?!?

Nowadays Even God Comes in 29 Different Flavors. Religion and faith, too, has been zombified by the media and by the courts. People are spiritually lost, impoverished. They know there’s something more than the new idols of cars, money, handhelds, digital friends. The human spirit feels drawn to something else! And the free market economy, atheist capitalism is right there to meet the need! My question is Why? if so many people are searching that someone doesn’t get the message that they’re not finding what they need. Just driving around the area we see more different churches than Heinz has soups! What is it that all these churches are attempting to answer but don’t seem to be doing? An interesting fact is that Episcopalians are defecting to Roman Catholicism; Roman Catholics, fundamentalists, Evangelicals, and others are flocking to the Eastern Orthodox Church! The reasons? Here are just a couple:

  • the reductionism, barreness, and minimalism in most faddish, modern faith communities
  • a search for a sense of mystery and majesty in worship
  • a search for a joyful and confident, credible celebration of the liturgy
  • a commitment to the role of tradition as a supplement/complement to the Bible as a source for theology
  • an experience of a well-defined sense of identity in faith tradition rooted in a historical consciousness of the early koinonia / chabad
  • a heritage of spiritual perseverance tested by modern challenges, even persecutions.

The Powers had to Make God Politically Incorrect in our Schools and Public Institutions.

Why? Because a belief in God and freedom to speak about God could possibly remind us that we have the freedom, the chutzpah (Hebrew: audacity) to Argue with God would this would create a dangerous situation in which the citizen could challenge the Powers. Hell, if Abraham and Job could argue with God, why shouldn’t we challenge the Powers?

One possible explanation is that the general zombification we are witnessing is expressing itself in confusion and derailment relating to spirituality and the search for Ultimate Truth, a search for our own identity. The causes of the general zombification include those discussed above. The solutions don’t need to be discovered, they’re already under our noses, we need only to see and acknowledge them.

Believe!Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid!

Believe!
Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid!

The Editor

P.s. If you’ve gotten this far, you deserve a little gift! I’ve found an interesting article, very short, that goes through seven technologies that George Orwell describes in his novel, 1984, and that have become reality in 2013! The man was a seer, a prophet! Read the short article with my best wishes. Click 7 sinister technologies from Orwell 1984.