Measuring
the Complex
Nature of Correctional Chaplaincy
By Dr. M. G. Maness
1. “Encounters” Are Not Trackable Home
2. “Religious Program” More an “Encounter” than
a “Program”
3. Integrating--the Ministry of Balancing
Trusts
4. Measuring the Complex Nature of Chaplaincy
1.
“Encounters” Are Not Trackable
As I walked to lunch, I drew close to a young
man leaning up against the wall of the education building.
“Who are you!” he sarcastically exclaimed.
My attention drawn, I replied, “Excuse me?”
“Who are you!” he said with anger in his
voice.
“I am Chaplain Maness,” I said after a brief
pause. “What is your name?”
He told me.
Then he said that he thought I was a lawyer or something. (During my first several years I always wore
a tie--quite a rarity in prison by any regular staff.) This would have been a more unnerving
encounter had this man been any larger;
he was quite small.
Nevertheless, we talked for a while about his anger over this place--the
penitentiary--and his desire to get transferred to another unit. I have not seen him again.
This is one example of ministry to human
needs behind the razor wired fences of Texas’ prisons. A defusing took place of a good deal of
built-up anger and the place of faith in anger and authority. Only God truly knows the full implications
of that single encounter or the true and full value of the presence of a
“Chaplain” and how that presence alone opened the door to an encounter with a
young man’s deeply felt emotions.
Perhaps any “staff” person could have defused
the anger.
Yet the very mention of “Chaplain” communicated
volumes in and of itself. Here was a
person whose “job” was concern, who somehow had concern for affairs of the
heart, who was approachable. Here stood
an institutional staff person who was “for” human growth and “for” spiritual
guidance. Most clearly most of the
time, the title “chaplain” communicated that there stood a person with concern
for the soul. In fact, the “title”
alone was defusing in spite of any ability of the Chaplain.
This kind of impact is not trackable. Even the though there was a substantial
contribution, measuring and tracking that contribution is impossible. You can loosely track the “number” of
encounters, but the depth, extent and multiple and even exponential ripples of
such an encounter are not subject to measure.
2.
“Religious Program” More an “Encounter”
than a “Program”
1. “Encounters” Are Not
Trackable Top
2. “Religious Program” More an
“Encounter” than a “Program”
3. Integrating--the Ministry of
Balancing Trusts
4. Measuring the Complex Nature
of Chaplaincy
An individual inmate program is never simply
a “religious program” for inmates: it is
more an event or encounter among many to inmates “within” and “with respect” to
the total institutional environment.
That is the nature of every religious program, for all of the major
religions have as a basic element a philosophy that permeates all of life. No “program” or “study” or “worship” or whatever
is ever
meant to be simply an event designed to affect one aspect of the person. Rather, every religious “event” in every
religion is meant to
be pervasive and touch every aspect of the person’s life.
Indeed, the term “prison religious program”
is a misnomer, just the most accessible word to describe a “religious event” in
a secular environment. In reality,
every “religious program” is in fact meant to be a permeating and
permanent piece of relating. See as
references the Holy Books and ten billion commentaries on those Holy Books from
each religion. If one wants to be truly
thorough, go back into the past several thousand years.
Chaplaincy is a specialized “religious
ministry” that has roots in the history of humanity.
At the heart of all “religious” ministry,
there is also the attempt to touch all of the vital concerns of life: life, meaning, destiny, death and the
definitions of hope and humanity itself.
Indefinable. Untrackable. Nevertheless, there is a direct corollary
between the integrity and effectiveness of a ministry and the openness of the
administration to that ministry. That
is Integrating--the Ministry of Balancing Trusts.
3. Integrating--the Ministry of Balancing Trusts
1. “Encounters” Are Not
Trackable Top
2. “Religious Program” More an
“Encounter” than a “Program”
3. Integrating--the Ministry of
Balancing Trusts
4. Measuring the Complex Nature
of Chaplaincy
Networking is essentially nurturing a number
of dynamic connections. Administrating
is essentially the maintenance of the paperwork trail that tracks that dynamic
network. The bringing of the two
together is Integrating--the Ministry of “Balancing Trusts,” a near invisible
avenue of ministry. The Chaplain works
in the center of the dividing wall between security staff and the inmates—integrating
a ministry of “balancing trusts” in all of the relations in an institution.
Crises are the most common situations for the
development of both staff and inmate relationships--especially with
inmates. The crises are manifold: death, dear John letter, custody dispute or
the removal of a child or the death or kidnapping or rape of a child; inmate assault upon another inmate; assault upon staff. Crises are complex enough, but the Chaplains
also have to factor into the resolutions, the stages of life and the vital
concerns of life.
The vital concerns of life impact these
crises and lead men and women to examine their roots in faith and life. For better or worse: there is no choice here. Chaplains are the facilitators, hopefully,
for the better when they can.
Nevertheless, all of the religions of the world have a special focus
upon the vital concerns of life. When
this growth does occur -- and it does occur -- there is an exponential
multiplication of growth.
Relationships are not stagnant. Every school of psychology and every major
religion and all of life itself instruct us on this. Relationships are active and dynamic, always affecting more
people than the primary parties involved.
A man or woman encountering growth and gaining a measure of stability
will transmute or translate “something” of that growth, something of that
stability into his or her other relationships in the local prison unit and
eventually to his or her home. All
persons are involved in the symbiosis of a closed system: inmates, staff, volunteers and the families
of all of these. The dynamic nature of
relationships is complicated further by the faith elements of each individual
adherent. Who is not an adherent to
some faith group? Even an atheist is
such by “faith.”
Call “Integrating--the Ministry of Balancing
Trusts” a simple call to good relations.
A method of being kind. A method
of “winning friends and influencing people.”
Call the “Ministry of Balancing Trusts” a modus operandi of “doing unto
others as you would have them do to you.”
Though impossible to fully explain, Networking and Administrating
precede and provide a basis for Integrating--the Ministry of Balancing
Trusts. Some might even see such as an
over-complicated way of simply stating how one is submissive to the
authoritarian and hierarchical structure of prison. Sometimes it is that simple for the simple-minded Chaplain or
naive administrator who is not cognizant of the immensity of the agency’s
mission statements.
The good conscience of every Correctional
Chaplain will bear witness that they are always on the cutting edge of
“wanting” to do more with what they have.
That is the drive of most every correctional Chaplain. “Integrating--the Balancing of Trusts” is
one of highest levels of discretion squarely on the shoulders of the
institutional staff Chaplain.
So then, from mechanisms of organization to
the manifold crises of individuals, complexity of Chaplaincy increases. Then again the complexity increases and
trackability decreases to near impossibility when one factors in the stages of
life and concerns for vital issues of life.
And the above impossibility of trackability and complexity increases
when one attempts to factor into the above the
exponential nature of growth from one encounter to another.
4. Measuring the Complex Nature of Chaplaincy
1. “Encounters” Are Not
Trackable Top
2. “Religious Program” More an
“Encounter” than a “Program”
3. Integrating--the Ministry of
Balancing Trusts
4. Measuring the Complex Nature
of Chaplaincy
These three -- Networking, Administrating
& Integrating -- are exceeding complex in themselves. So complex, one will have trouble finding
much literature about them specific to Correctional Chaplaincy. Yet one does not have to look far for
“pertinent” literature. For each of the
three are veritable professions in themselves.
TDCJ has entire positions devoted to networking and administrating. Politics and the very offices of national
and state senators and representatives know this very well. There are enormous energies and skills at
work to network, administrate and integrate in the offices of a successful
politician: they do not call it
“political science” in vain. Political
science and chaplaincy have so very many similarities.
Unlike the political sciences, the
professions of engineers, lawyers, actuaries and computer programmers are
complex in a different way, in a more focused way. These are so very “trackable”:
a bridge, a legal brief, an insurance analysis and even a computer
program are “finite” items. Certainly,
a great deal of complexity went into their creations, but more often than not,
the product is finished. And the issues
of networking, administrating and integrating that support the “finite”
creations were accomplished by others in support. These professions are also more “tractable” in the sense that the
teaching of skills has so many more benchmarks--clear benchmarks and
tests of competence.
The “MBA” has become the classic credential
for senior executives the world over.
How many books exist on “business administration.” Certainly, most of this has to dovetail with
the “CPA” in the management of money and the Human Resources executives in the
management of people. Yet when the
tally has been reached and the manual written, the job is done for the day. These are finite positions that are very
trackable. “Because” the primary
functions “are” trackable with tangible figures, that makes those
professions “less” complicated than the concerns of Chaplaincy that are near
impossible to track.
Many elements in Chaplaincy are trackable,
like attendance and phone calls. The
simple stuff. Yet the heart of ministry
is in the substance of the teaching, the quality of relating and the essence of
the encounters themselves. These things
are not very trackable or tractable.
Outside of the obvious “degrees” by the many seminaries in the many
religious faiths, the issue of tractability also entails the “unique person”
themselves. Thus, the heart of ministry
-- the balancing of trusts -- is indeed a cultivation of precious hearts that makes
the measuring of the full impact of the Chaplaincy Services the most
complicated of all.
As the most complicated of all, that makes
“Chaplaincy Profession” most deserving of ALL of the professions for
“Professional Equity.” See more at
www.preciousheart.net.
1. “Encounters” Are Not Trackable Top Home
2. “Religious Program” More an “Encounter” than
a “Program”
3. Integrating--the Ministry of Balancing
Trusts
4. Measuring the Complex Nature of Chaplaincy