Introduction
Chaplaincy and missions occur in religious, demographic/cultural, and political contexts. Therefore, changes in these contexts can significantly influence the essence and object of both chaplaincy and missions. However, the traditional mission work approaches face greater disruptions than chaplaincy.
The rationale is that chaplaincy does not seek to convert people to a different religion. On the contrary, missions traditionally involved the introduction of new religions into communities. The current demographic and cultural changes demonstrate a shift from universality to pluralism. Such a paradigm shift also explains why modern secular societies emphasize tolerance.
If missionaries accept that tolerance is necessary, their objectives of changing religions will become obsolete. Some scholars observe that pluralism has led to a shift in the practice of chaplaincy from a ‘religious service’ to an ‘existential care’ model. Chaplaincy appears to have accepted the change and embraced the fact that people are inherently different. However, spirituality is an aspect that unites all individuals regardless of their religion. With such developments, the main question is what pluralism, cultural diversity, and tolerance mean for chaplaincy and missions.
Thesis
Chaplaincy and missions inherently differ in their purposes and approaches. The contemporary world presents distinct challenges for each, necessitating an examination of what the future holds for chaplaincy and missions. However, it can be concluded that pluralism and cultural diversity are increasingly critical to modern society. Therefore, this research adopts the thesis that emerging pluralism and growing sentiments toward tolerance are changing how chaplaincy and missions are conducted, including a shift from a focus on religion to an emphasis on existence.
Understanding Chaplaincy
The first and most important question is: what is a chaplain, and what does chaplaincy entail? Responses to this question vary significantly, often depending on context. The most basic definition of chaplaincy is a practice of care that recognizes and articulates the sacred by individuals nominated to handle this task in secular situations. As a result, chaplaincy is a practical discipline that entails applying knowledge, reasoning, and skilled actions to specific circumstances. Therefore, chaplaincy is not about preaching a religion; its primary focus is providing support and care to people in need.
Current literature aims to provide an understanding of the term and its application. However, theory and practice seem to differ, as churches and other religious organizations often select chaplains, making it difficult to separate the role of religion from that of chaplaincy. In many contexts, chaplaincy focuses on providing spiritual and existential care to individuals institutionalized in hospitals, prisons, the military, and care organizations. As such, chaplaincy does not consider the individuals’ religion when providing spiritual support.
An interesting aspect of chaplaincy praxis is that many chaplains fail to distinguish between religion and spiritual care. Such an issue can stem from the fact that religious denominations select chaplains who, perhaps instinctively, incorporate their religious beliefs into their spiritual care.
In Western countries, the primary concern is often the overrepresentation of specific Christian denominations. However, the growing demographic diversity in such countries increasingly necessitates the inclusion of other religions. A case of the Northern states highlights that the growing number of Muslims in the region calls for more Muslim chaplains to help fill the gap.
The growing secularization necessitates that chaplaincy activities cater to the needs of all individuals. However, contemporary chaplaincy practice does not adequately equip chaplains with the skills necessary to handle diverse religious beliefs. On the contrary, different religions are often called upon to produce chaplains who can effectively minister to their followers. As a result, Muslim and Buddhist chaplains are emerging worldwide, especially in Western countries where religious diversity is growing.
Therefore, chaplaincy may not be aimed at preaching religion with the hope of conversion. Even so, current literature suggests that it is impossible to separate chaplaincy from religion entirely. A possible explanation for this observation is that both spirituality and religion have a conceptual and historical overlap.
Additionally, an individual’s spirituality may be shaped by religious teachings, in which case matching chaplains to the religious beliefs of chaplaincy recipients seems prudent. Buddhist chaplaincy helps illustrate this point by highlighting chaplains’ work. In essence, Buddhist chaplains provide guidance on meditation and preparation for the dying process. They also engage in death rituals and funeral ceremonies aligned with Buddhist teachings.
Similarly, Muslim chaplains have often been sought by institutions to help meet the religious needs of individuals, especially in correctional facilities. In this case, it can be argued that the theory and practice of chaplaincy differ, as individuals often fail to recognize that chaplaincy focuses on existential care rather than a religious service.
Biblical Missiology
Biblical missiology can be summarized in a single sentence that explains how the Bible perceives missions. This sentence is, “The whole Bible, both Old and New Testament, is a missionary book, the revelation of God’s purpose and action in mission in human history”. Therefore, abiding by Biblical teachings means accepting that one is on a mission sent by God.
Defining the term ‘mission’ is essential in this regard, as its usage may vary across contexts. From a Biblical perspective, ‘mission’ means “the act of being sent with a commission to carry out the will of a superior”. Numerous individual and historical accounts demonstrate that Christian missionaries have traditionally served as agents commissioned to spread the gospel.
Additionally, many missionaries claim that they serve where God has called them. Biblical missiology requires Christians to accept such calls and serve God’s purpose. The mission of God means pursuing the purpose for which one is called. In this case, missionaries serve various purposes, including assisting people in times of war and disaster and simply preaching the gospel in non-Christian societies.
The mission of God, or “Missio Dei,” refers to God’s great mission to restore humanity to Himself. His efforts in this regard have included sending Jesus and calling His people to participate in the mission. Missio Dei can be illustrated through the concept of the ‘image of God’ as illustrated in the Bible.
The book of Genesis expresses that humankind is made in God’s image. The implications of this expression are twofold:
- humankind has the capacity to fellowship with God, and
- people can represent their Creator.
The first implication of the idea of God’s image is often regarded as the foundation of Jesus’ Great Commission in the New Testament, as illustrated in Matthew. In essence, God has made all humans in His image, which allows Jesus to include people from all nations when making disciples. Missio Dei focuses on the redemption of all human beings from the Fall discussed in Genesis 3. In this case, Christians called to serve in the mission focus on aiding redemption efforts by helping non-believers come to faith.
Biblical missiology reflects a shift from the particular to the universal. In other words, missiology affirms that all creation was made by God, implying that all people are meant to worship only one God. In this case, the biblical God is the Supreme Creator, as He is the one who created all things. Even though He identifies Himself as the God of Israel or Ibrahim, the intention behind this identification is to encompass all people and be the Lord of all things. The idea of universality is interesting in a contemporary, secular, and multicultural society.
The main question that might arise is the extent to which universality applies and the conflicts it raises. The rationale is that universality means disregarding all other religious beliefs and upholding only what the Bible teaches. Arguably, the concept of universality is the primary reason why missions often fail. For instance, missions in the Kimberley region have failed to dislodge Aboriginal beliefs and practices or instill a distinctly Christian view of morality and humanity. In essence, pluralism enables individuals to preserve their cultural identities, including their religious beliefs and systems.
The concept of universality differentiates missions from chaplaincy in two fundamental ways. First, chaplaincy involves individuals nominated to that position by the institutions in which they work. In other cases, chaplains are appointed by religious organizations and dispatched to various institutions. On the contrary, missionaries do not require appointment to positions, as most of them believe they have received a calling from God to become missionaries.
For instance, individuals feel a personal calling and decide to move to places where they can help people access, understand, and embrace the gospel. In many cases, such callings lead people to move to places where Christianity has not yet reached or where communities are predominantly non-Christian. Missions become a form of apostolic endeavor and a challenge that people willingly adopt.
Second, chaplains focus on the particular, while missions are universalist. In other words, chaplaincy provides existential care to individuals regardless of their religious affiliation. In many cases, appealing to individuals’ needs is considered the ideal approach.
Missions are universalist in that they believe in one universal law embedded in the Bible. The law expresses one God, the supreme Creator, who expects all individuals to be bound by His rule. As a result, the needs of the individuals are grossly disregarded as missionaries pursue religious conversion. Therefore, missions comprise a religious service and an effort to spread the gospel.
The need to differentiate between the two stems from their distinct relationships with religion. Such a relationship dictates the approaches and methods used by missionaries and chaplains. The differentiation also enables the assessment of how both concepts apply to a secular and pluralistic world. The expectation is that one of them will become increasingly irrelevant or raise critical problems as societies become more diverse.
Chaplaincy and Missions in a Pluralist World
Pluralism in a Religious Context
Pluralism is not a new concept, but the growing interest in the term means that more people are increasingly acknowledging social differences and moving away from the pursuit of assimilation. The broad sense of pluralism is the coexistence of two or more states, principles, groups, or sources of authority. Therefore, a pluralist society can be described as one that comprises more than two social and demographic characteristics.
In the West, pluralism often manifests as cultural diversity, encompassing aspects such as race, nationality, and even religion. For instance, Muslim and Buddhist populations are rapidly growing in such countries as the United States. The challenge posed by such pluralism is that not all religions embrace the idea of God as the Creator of all things. In other words, one cannot preach the same religion to Muslims, Judaists, Buddhists, and Christians. Therefore, upholding the universality of Biblical missiology may force Christians in the West to reject the pluralism of their own societies. Rejecting pluralism may pose greater challenges for religion in the future, as individuals in the contemporary world fight for the right to practice their religions.
Pluralism in the religious context often has a meaning that goes beyond differences in belief systems. In essence, religious pluralism holds that there is virtue in all religions and that they are all good and have equal value. As a result, religious pluralism does not consider the particularity of religion; rather, it is interested in ideas that do not favor any religion over others. In other words, religious pluralism denies the finality of any religion.
All religions are expected to coexist in mutual acceptance and respect. Indeed, such is the principle of tolerance, where individuals are encouraged to embrace their differences and accept the ‘other.’ However, religious pluralism is more than tolerance, as it acknowledges that there are multiple paths to God. In simpler terms, Christians would be expected to accept that Islam, Buddhism, and other religions are valid and that such religions would reciprocate the sentiment.
How Chaplaincy Adapts to Pluralism
The definition and practice of chaplaincy reveal that religion is not the central focus. In other words, chaplains are expected to offer existential or spiritual care to individuals regardless of their religious affiliation. By focusing on the individual, chaplains help individuals cope with difficult situations. In this case, such individuals may be from the same or different religions as the chaplain.
The separation of chaplaincy from religion means that the practice can remain relevant even as society’s demographics change. The rationale is that as long as people believe in spirituality, spiritual and pastoral care will always be needed. As previously stated, pluralism does not necessarily involve a disregard for religion. On the contrary, pluralism allows different religions to coexist and respect one another. As a chaplain, pluralism requires adjusting the services to meet the needs of the individuals or institutions in which they work.
The current literature indicates that chaplaincy in a pluralist world adapts in one of two ways: tailoring services to individuals’ needs and recruiting from diverse demographics, particularly by including chaplains from different religions. In many Western countries, chaplaincy has traditionally been the domain of church clergy. As a result, chaplaincy could not be separated from the church.
However, growing pluralism has led many practitioners to ask how they can offer pluralistic services. The answer to this question is not yet fully explored. However, an emerging paradigm shift involved changes in chaplaincy personnel to help churches and institutions deploy chaplains equipped to handle diverse needs.
In most cases, the changes involve re-training current chaplains in pluralism or changing chaplaincy training to incorporate pluralism. A notable observation is that pluralism is politically influenced, at least in Western countries. Therefore, a pluralist chaplaincy is both a necessity and a compliance issue. The politics of inclusiveness dictate that chaplaincy services must not discriminate against anyone.
The most apparent way chaplaincy adapts to pluralism is through the recruitment and deployment of chaplains. For instance, Buddhist organizations in Europe are receiving overwhelming requests for assistance from individuals in challenging situations. Besides dispatching Buddhist religious personnel to institutions for spiritual care, individuals from this religion are also being trained as physicians, therapists, and counselors. The result is the emergence and growth of Buddhist chaplaincy in the West.
Similarly, Islamic chaplaincy is also on the rise in the West, which is the result of the growing Muslim population. Islamic pastoral care has a long history in the religion since Islam provides a religious imperative for people to care for those facing social, spiritual, physical, and psychological distress. Therefore, chaplaincy is already geared up for a pluralist society.
Missions Admitting Other Religions
There is no easy answer to this question. Indeed, the question arouses critical thought and debate surrounding the essence of Missio Dei and religiosity. However, it is easy to acknowledge that accepting pluralism diminishes the role of missions. Similarly, persisting with missions means rejecting pluralism and holding on to universality. Each option has profound implications for Christianity and its pursuit of Biblical missiology.
Adopting a radical pluralism means tolerating only the local religious narratives and rejecting attempts to universalize them. In other words, radical pluralism accepts individual and distinct religions and refrains from efforts to unify them. As a result, the meaning and purpose of Missio Dei may evolve, and missions may need to adjust their purpose and approaches accordingly. In this case, missions cannot be designed to change people’s religions. If a Christian accepts Islam as a valid religion, the missionary will not venture into an Islamic society seeking to convert Muslims to Christianity.
An alternative course of action is to reject religious pluralism and pursue the traditional mission objective of converting people to Christianity. However, such a path leads to a different form of radicalism involving persecution and religious extremism. In essence, the church performs better in societies that embrace religious freedom. In countries where the church has faced a political disadvantage and faces severe persecution, missions become riskier and, in many cases, impossible. In many countries with Radical Islam, the church faces the destruction of its property and the killing of its members.
Similarly, growing islamophobia in some Western countries results in Mosques and Muslims facing a similar challenge. Missions become a matter of competition with other religions, which leads to the emergence of religious extremists willing to use violence. However, the biggest challenge facing the missions in a pluralistic society is the political governance of pluralism. In a country that embraces freedom of worship or religion, no religious denomination reserves the right to interfere with another. Therefore, missions cannot continue to ignore religious pluralism in the contemporary world.
Personal Plan for Missional Praxis
Chaplaincy and missions will remain a critical aspect of religion even as pluralism grows. As a Christian, I believe that mission is an integral part of one’s existence. However, one has to identify a unique sense of God’s calling to become a missionary. In my view, missionaries have a different role to play in the modern world.
Most importantly, the growing secularization is a trend that must be reversed. Nations must accept religion if Missio Dei has to retain its essence and purpose. Considering the rising religious clashes and growing extremism, I believe seeking religious conversions is no longer a priority.
The rationale is that it does not appear wise and prudent to travel to far-off lands to convert people to a religion that is increasingly losing its footing at home. No missionary will gain adequate credibility if they come from a secular society. Therefore, the first step is to restore religiosity at home before embarking on a distant mission.
Therefore, my plan for missional praxis is to address and reverse secularization. Such an objective cannot be achieved through chaplaincy. In any case, the use of chaplains for spiritual care in many institutions is perceived to be a sign of secularization. However, the Christian mission seeks to ensure that individuals embrace the universality of creation and the supreme law of God.
Secularization is a different problem from pluralism, in that pluralism accepts different religions. Secularization often entails the degradation and diminishing role of religion in society. Arguably, the greatest threat to Missio Dei is the rise of populations that oppose religiosity.
Restoring religiosity should be the first step towards Missio Dei. The second step would be for people to choose their own religion, assuming that other religions will adopt similar missions to attract followers. However, such missions cannot succeed unless people embrace religion. In this case, I believe my unique calling is to encourage more people to adopt a particular religion. Despite emerging challenges posed by pluralism, secularization appears to be the most urgent threat to the Missio Dei.
Conclusion
Pluralism is an emerging trend in modern societies as cultural and demographic diversity continues to grow. From a religious perspective, pluralism entails new requirements, as people are expected to accept their differences and coexist cordially. In this regard, it has been observed that chaplaincy has already adapted and continues to make changes in response to pluralism. Most notably, new chaplains are trained in pluralism, and institutions are increasingly recruiting from diverse religious backgrounds to fill gaps in religious representation. However, this observation is supported by the fact that chaplaincy is not a religious service.
On the contrary, missions are expected to make a difficult choice between rejecting and embracing universality. Missions are religious services and are inextricably linked to the church. Despite missions being individual callings, their primary motive is the Missio Dei, meaning the pursuit of biblical missiology. In a pluralistic society, pluralism is politically governed, which diminishes the role of missions. In other words, no single religion reserves the right to undermine another. Rejecting pluralism may also facilitate religious extremism with serious consequences. However, missions should find a new objective since secularization arguably threatens Missio Dei more than pluralism.
Bibliography
Asadu, George, Benjamin Diara, and Nicholas Asogwa. “Religious Pluralism and its Implications for Church Development.” HTS Theological Studies 76, no. 3 (2020): 1-9.
Bauckham, Richard. Bible and Mission: Christian Witness in a Postmodern World. Carlisle: Paternoster, 2003.
Cobb, Mark, Chris Swift, and Andrew Todd. “Introduction to Chaplaincy Studies.” In A Handbook of Chaplaincy Studies: Understanding Spiritual Care in Public Places, edited by Andrew Todd, Christopher Swift and Mark Cobb, 1-12. New York: Routledge, 2016.
Danbolt, Lars, and Hans Stiffoff-Hansen. “Health care chaplaincy in the Nordic countries. Transformations and perspectives.” In Clinique du Sens, edited by Ansen Zeder, Brandt Elisabeth and Besson, Jacques Pierre-Yves, 35-46. Paris: Editions des Archives Contemporaines, 2020.
Glasser, Arthur, Charles Engen, Dean Gilliland, and Shawn Redford. Announcing the Kingdom: The Story of God’s Mission in the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Publishing Group, 2003.
Grung, Anne, and Beret Braten. “Chaplaincy and religious plurality in the Norwegian context.” Journal for Practical Theology 36, no. 2 (2019): 71-80.
Joannes, David. The Mind of a Missionary: What Global Kingdom Workers Tell Us About Thriving on Mission Today. Prescott: Within Reach Global Inc., 2018.
Johnson, Alan. Apostolic Function In 21st Century Missions. Pasadena: William Carey Publishing, 2009.
Kaiser, Walter. Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations. Grand Rapids: Baker Publishing Group, 2000.
Kolig, Erich. “Mission Not Accomplished: Christianity in the Kimberleys.” Australian Association for the Study of Religions Book Series, 2022: 376-390.
Long, Ibrahim, and Bilal Ansari. “Islamic Pastoral Care and the Development of Muslim Chaplaincy.” Journal of Muslim Mental Health 12, no. 1 (2018): 109-121.
Perez, Sergio, and Daniela Rohde. “The Relationship Between Religious/Spiritual Beliefs and Subjective Well-Being: A Case-Based Comparative Cross-National Study.” Journal of Religion and Health 61 (2022): 4585-4605.
Roloff, Corola. “Buddhist Chaplaincy and Care Practices.” In Complexities of Spiritual Care in Plural Societies: Education, Praxis and Concepts, edited by Anne Grung, 59-98. Boston: De Gruyter, 2022.
Stifoss-Hanssen, Hans, Lars Danbolt, and Hilde Frokedal. “Chaplaincy in Northern Europe: An Overview from Norway.” Journal of practical theology 36, no. 2 (2019): 60-70.
Wright, Christopher. The Mission of God’s People: A Biblical Theology of the Church’s Mission (Biblical Theology for Life). Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010.
York, John. Missions in the Age of the Spirit. Springfield: Logion, 2000.