1. MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE POSTED TO EACH  SECTION.

2. RESPOND TO MY POSTS.

NOTE; I HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO ALL YOUR POSTS DUE TO 2 THINGS, I WANTED TO LOOK AT YOUR RESPONSES TO EACH OTHER AND ONLY SPEAK WHEN IT WAS NECESSARY.  I REALIZED THAT BY DOING THAT YOU WERE NOT GETTING ANY FEEDBACK FROM ME   NNOT SURE THAT IT WORKED AS WELL AS I HOPED.  I APOLOGIZE. YOUR WORK WAS EXCELLANT.  THESE ASSIGNMENTS TOOK ALOT OF THOUGHT AND UNDERSTANDNG.  GOOD JOB.

IF YOU ARE NOT FINISHED YOU WILL HAVE UNTIL THE 15 TH OF FEBRUARY TO CATCH UP.

Pastoral Confidentiality

Pastoral confidentiality enjoys a long tradition in the Church. The Manual of the Church of the Nazarene states:

 It shall be the duty of every minister of the Church of the Nazarene to hold in trust and confidence any communication of a confidential nature given to him or her by a counselee of the congregation while he or she is acting in his or her professional character as a licensed or ordained minister of the Church of the Nazarene. The public dissemination of such communication without the express written consent of the declarant is expressly condemned. Any Nazarene minister who violates the above  regulation subjects himself or herself to

[disciplinary sanctions].

It is important that confidentiality is described as a duty. Often missed is the further qualification that this communication must be “of a confidential nature.” This means not all communication with a minister is necessarily confidential. For example, many things a pastor will hear are not priestly in nature, but administrative. Another point of this policy is that a minister must not discuss the information in a public setting. If a minister does this, he or she has compromised the priestly office. Confidentiality is essential to the pastoral ministry as a priestly function of the Church.

 Pastoral confidentiality originated in 1215 at the Fourth Lateran Council [Canon XXI]:

“Let the priest be discreet and cautious, so that he may pour wine and oil into the wounds of the injured person like a skilled physician, diligently inquiring into the circumstances both of the sinner and of the sin, so that he may wisely understand what advice he should give and what remedy he should apply, trying different tests to heal the patient. Let him guard with greatest care against exposing the sinner even slightly by word or sign or in any other way. But if he should need wiser advice, let him ask for it cautiously, without any mention of the person, for if anyone dares reveal a sin uncovered to him in the place of confession, we decree that he not only by deposed from the office of priest but also be dispatched to a monastery of strict discipline to so penance for the rest of his life.

The purpose of confidentiality is for the priest to be in a position to render service to the hurts, spiritual and emotional, of the Church. The integrity to hold in confidence information shared in a counseling setting speaks to the character of the minister. Other helping professions require confidentiality, but the context of pastoral confidentiality arises in the delicate issues related to the priestly work of the minister. Pastoral care would have little meaning apart from the trust guaranteed by the integrity of the pastor. From a deontological point of view confidentiality becomes an unconditional duty. Teleological consideration teaches that the consequence of pastoral confidentiality is dependent upon character and its consequence is  character. Either way the importance of confidentiality is essential to the practice of ministry.

  State laws vary, so ministers need to know what the guidelines are in their state.

 Confidentiality is not without practical and ethical problems.

First, it can be ambiguous ethically. For example, what should be held in confidence? If a person tells you something that, if kept in confidence, will injure another person or even the person talking, then confidence must be questioned. Sometimes confidence is extended too far for it to be useful. The abuse of a child would be an example of this. If it is an administrative concern, confidence does not apply.

Second, sometimes confidence only pretends to protect the counselee when in fact it protects the counselor. When keeping the information does not affect the counselee and only protects the counselor legally, then its moral standing is questionable. Anytime that confidence is mostly about the counselor, its moral status should be questioned.

Third, too often confidentiality lacks accountability. It can be a veil for the pastor who cannot seek consultation and therefore cannot render the service needed. Confidence can be a place for the counselor to hide from himself or herself.

Fourth, confidentiality tends to expand beyond appropriate borders, perhaps to the point where any positive result is impossible.

Fifth, confidentiality can hide the real issue, which can be about power. If a person knows your secrets he or she may exert some power over you. This can lead to a temptation to exert that power in dangerous ways. The moral issues at stake radiate around the appropriateness of privacy both for the counselor and for the counselee.

Integrity solves the problems. The character of the pastor is the one thing that is always brought to the circumstance. All of the issues above can be dealt with if integrity characterizes the work of the pastor.

If confidentiality is to have true integrity, the following should characterize it:

• Confidentiality should be explicitly requested and granted.
• Before one grants a confidence it should cause one to ponder why such intimacy is required and what purpose confidence will serve in this context.

 One should consider very carefully the long-term effect of a confidence and determine whose need it serves.

• One should consider the way the offer of confidence changes the relationship.
• One should limit the range of the offer of confidence with increasing discipline.

The duty of ministerial confidence needs to be placed within the context of the church. In fact, confidence is incomprehensible apart from the constituency it intends to serve. The Church is not just a collection of individuals. Rather the Church is a community of persons who are formed by the Holy Spirit into a new reality, a body. While confidence is morally required in many circumstances, it can contribute to problems in other situations. For example, holding a confidence regarding one member of a family may compromise the safety of the entire family.

If the self is not atomistic, then confidentiality becomes a virtue as it seeks the health of the entire community where the interests of the person are best secured.

This means counseling with integrity requires that the pastor do more than hold secrets. It requires that the pastor establish a covenant with the counselee in order to offer perspective and direction in Christian integrity. Too often confidentiality becomes a lazy holding of a secret. Integrity requires the pastor to examine his or her motives and seek the positive good of the counselee, and that is not always to hold a secret.

There are too many situations regarding confidentiality for all of them to be worked out here. The point is to understand that a character shaped by the truth will often be in situations where discernment will be required. Integrity is therefore a character trait necessary for those who seek to offer counsel.

Theologically speaking, integrity is spelled holiness. The teaching of the Wesleyan-Holiness tradition holds up the whole life or the life of integrity as a possibility by the co-operant grace of God. While moral reflection tends to make character an achievement of reason, the holiness tradition understands that apart from God no integrity would be possible. The manifestation of integrity in the life of holiness is conviction. Persistence is the major component of a life defined By conviction. There may be a good deal that comes and goes, but a life of integrity manifests itself with the kind of tenacity that will not cave in to the demands of the situation.

Therefore, convictions will not be given up easily, and when they are, a different kind of person emerges. Integrity is who we are when no one is looking. Therefore, by coming to understand one’s convictions it is possible to begin the process of self-understanding. Convictions fall into three general categories: moral, doctrinal, and philosophical. Moral convictions concern how life is lived. Doctrinal convictions reflect one’s theological understanding. Philosophical convictions define worldview.

Convictions operate at three levels: cognitive, affective, and volitional. Understanding the connection between holiness theology and convictions will make more evident what guides our love and identifies us as moral agents. Holiness as a moral conviction allows freedom in the face of pluralism.

 Let’s look at a proposed list of moral, doctrinal, and philosophical convictions.

Moral Convictions

• The moral life arises out of the gospel.
• The moral life is sustained in a community of noncoercive discourse.
• There ought to be a qualitative difference in the Christian life.
• Life is foundationally sacred.
• It is important to define the levels of covenantal responsibility.
• Understanding the meaning of stewardship and living in light of that reality is foundational to living out the Christian life.
• Moral convictions engender human freedom.

Doctrinal Convictions

• God continually and graciously seeks to make Himself known-Father, Son, and Spirit-as He enjoys His creation and is enjoyed by His creation.
• Humankind, while existing in a condition of co- determination, is finally defined by grace- empowered freedom.
• Human character is formed in worship.
• Jesus the Christ has entered history without privilege and has subverted the power of evil.
• The Spirit calls the community of faith into being through the preaching of Scripture.
• The Church exists to be the community of incarnation and a community of noncoercive discourse, which provides a structure of grace.
• The gracious offer of a transformed life, both as gift and grace-empowered response.
• The presence of the Rule of God is both reality and promise.

Philosophical Convictions

• All things are related-relational ontology.
• The community with which we identify shapes us.
• We exist as a prayer in the presence of God.
• Most of life is in between.

These convictions only represent the process where integrity of action, belief, and thought emerge. The point is that integrity requires the hard work of understanding the convictions that shape and guide life.

Some practical convictions regarding integrity would include:

• I will always endeavor to be honest in my communication.
• I will honor my family as a matter of first importance.
• I will consider the way in which I use money as a way of testifying to my faith.
• I will never allow myself to be in a situation of sexual temptation.
• I will endeavor to grow in understanding by reading and formal education.
• I will never handle money as a pastor in my church.

The Bible speaks clearly to the importance of integrity in the ministry. Paul writes to the troubled church at Corinth concerning his ministry. He says, “In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel” (1 Cor :14). He goes on in the next verse and makes it clear that he bases this judgment on nonselfish criteria, for he does not claim this right for himself. In verse 16 Paul writes, “If I proclaim the gospel, this gives me no ground for boasting, for an obligation is laid on me, and woe to me if I do not proclaim the gospel!” In other words, Paul preaches out of sense of integrity; he can do nothing else. He does not preach to be paid, even though he deserves to be paid. Paul preaches out of sense of duty to the gospel entrusted to him.

 Paul gets very specific in his letters to Timothy regarding the importance of integrity. Here Paul talks about the qualifications for being a bishop or a deacon. Regarding a bishop he says the following:

• Above reproach
• Married only once
• Temperate
• Sensible
• Respectable
• Hospitable
• Apt teacher
• Not a drunkard
• Not violent, but gentle
• Not quarrelsome
• Not a lover of money
• Must manage household well
• Must keep children submissive
• Not a recent convert
• Must be well thought of by outsiders

Such is the life to which those who desire to preach must aspire.

 Paul characterizes a deacon in the following way:

• Must be serious
• Not double-tongued
• Not indulging in much wine
• Not greedy for money
• Hold fast to the mystery of faith with a clear conscience
• Let them be tested
• Married only once
• Manage children and household well

The meaning of integrity becomes very important in the case of the bishop and deacon. At least part of the reason for this connects to what they represent. The pattern of integrity expected of a person in ministry follows very closely the pattern of ministry. A person in ministry is to do what is good-hold fast to the mystery of faith, be temperate, serious, etc.-and they are to avoid doing harm-not violent, not a lover of money, not double-tongued.

Some of what this means relates to the difference between ministry as a profession and ministry as a vocation. While ministry is a profession with rules and responsibilities to go along with it, the meaning goes much deeper to a vocation. A profession claims status, but a vocation seeks to answer a call responsibly. A profession is about a career, and vocation concerns ministry.

A person who follows God in any job or work is fulfilling a vocation. All Christians have a primary responsibility to praise God in all they do. Therefore, a school bus driver can be fulfilling a vocation as he or she drives. Although the primary reference is to pastoral ministry as a vocation, it is not the only way to understand ministry.

All talk about integrity must confront the human tendency to locate too much worth in appearance. The senses are very powerful mechanisms in human life. Aristotle locates three levels of life: enjoyment, statesman, and wisdom.

Children most naturally prefer ice cream over vegetable soup, but too much ice cream makes life less enjoyable. When Aristotle defines action as the desire for happiness, he means at the basic level we want to do that which contributes to happiness. Human beings act in order to be happy. The most basic level of happiness is enjoyment. Therefore, our first actions are determined by what makes us happy.

Yet, a life of mere experience or mere enjoyment is a limited life because nothing lasts very long. Such a life can be frustrating. Plato’s Republic reflects on freedom in a democracy as that which is determined by desire. Such a society eats to the point of gluttony only to diet. One day is fine beverages and the next it is water. Desire and enjoyment are not finally capable of guiding life.

The life of the statesman widens one’s perspective to others, but even here life cannot be complete. Integrity comes with wisdom because such a life is capable of finding the eternal in the midst of the particular. The basic problem with integrity is that much of life is concerned with appearances. When life is lived this way, the search for meaning is reduced to grasping at shadows.

Human life most naturally reaches for what the senses reveal. This kind of life can be dangerous because what we see, feel, taste, hear, and smell may not be what is important. This fundamental problem is quite apparent in modern philosophy. Descartes, the father of modern philosophy, separates the body from the mind; thus he sees them as connecting only on occasion. The problem is that he places the essence of humankind in thought. While this does not have to result in viewing what the body does as unimportant, it often does.

 Morality is about linking thought with action and embodiment. The mind has a great possibility of convincing the body it is fine to proceed. Modern philosophy presents a powerful case to human beings for saying something like, “At least I intended to do the right thing!” Intention can become the pathway to a life that lacks integrity. When will and action are separated too far, then it can become highly problematic.

David Hume, an 18th-century philosopher, thought of virtue as artificial. For him this meant virtues were proposed for mostly selfish reasons. Thomas Hobbes would mostly agree with this. Yet, if virtues are only animated by human intentionality, they can change when moods, cultures, and conditions change. Such a circumstance diminishes the importance of talk about integrity.

Jean Paul Sartre, a 20th-century philosopher who consistently pointed to the dark side of life, often pointed to the lack of integrity in everyday life. One of the terms he used to express this was “bad faith.” Sartre understood bad faith to be our tendency to lie or allowed ourselves to be lied to while we try to convince ourselves. So a person with an ugly sweater, knowing it is ugly, attempts to convince himself or herself it is pretty by asking you whether it is ugly or pretty. When you say it is pretty, even though the person knows it is ugly, he or she continues to wear it. This is bad faith and it is the exact opposite of integrity.

Martin Heidegger, another 20th-century philosopher, diagnoses the fundamental problem of modernity as the loss of Being among the things of life. For Heidegger authenticity emerges when we understand the stakes of life, that is, “being-towards-death.” A life of integrity is one that faces its own death. Translating this into a Christian understanding, the only way to live an authentic life is to see everything in light of its end, eternity.

Another dimension of the problem with integrity relates to perfectionism. The Wesleyan-Holiness trajectory often runs scared at the accusation of works righteousness. It appears that any emphasis upon integrity can either be reduced to intentions or become perfectionism. Both courses are problematic. The linking of the inner and the outer already discussed in a previous lesson goes to the heart of what integrity means.

Jesus directly addresses this issue by saying, “Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven” (Mt 6:1). Jesus goes on to illustrate what this means. Hypocrites have no integrity because they do not really fool themselves and they rarely fool those around them. Perfectionism leads either to extreme frustration in life or false claims about oneself.

How do you define integrity?

The simple definition for integrity is wholeness. The entire movement of Scripture and the Christian tradition is to argue for the importance of integrity. Psalm 7:8, says, “The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to my integrity that is in me.” This psalm of David asks for God’s intervention in the midst of a crisis on the basis of integrity. Here the integrity is to be located in David.

Psalm 51 comes from another chapter in the life of David. This is a time when David had failed miserably by his involvement with Bathsheba and his complicity in the death of her husband. This psalm affirms the need for restoration. David gives us a clue to the meaning of integrity by referring to a broken spirit and a contrite heart.

1 Kings 9:4-5 reflects on the meaning of integrity in the following way: “As for you, if you will walk before me, as David your father walked, with integrity of heart and uprightness, doing according to all that I have commanded you, and keeping my statutes and my ordinances, then I will establish your royal throne over Israel forever, as I promised your father David, saying, ‘There shall not fail you a successor on the throne of Israel.’” It should be noted that even though David failed God with Bathsheba, he is called a person of integrity.

Therefore, integrity does not include perfection, but it does require honesty. When David fails he admits it and pleads with God for mercy. Talk about integrity cannot be allowed to become a legalism. Job 2:9-10 says, “Then his wife said to him, ‘Do you still persist in your integrity? Curse God, and die.’ But he said to her,‘You speak as any foolish woman would speak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?’ In all this Job did not sin with his lips.” From this we learn that integrity cannot be merely a reflection of circumstances.

Integrity means to be real, authentic, and whole. A person of integrity is capable of being the same whether in the presence of others or alone.  Plato’s Republic includes a story titled “The Ring of Gyges.” The story is intended to argue against what Socrates and Plato suggest is the true nature of justice. The story is about a man who finds a ring that  if turned around makes a person invisible. The point of the story is that when the just man is invisible he behaves exactly like the unjust man. Therefore, justice is only done in order to appear just and not because a person is just. There is no such thing as justice, only that which gets us what we want. “The Ring of Gyges” argues that being real, authentic, or whole is nothing but an act and as such there is no such thing as integrity.

Yet, Socrates and Plato argue that justice is about a rightly ordered soul, one where the reason rules both spirit and desire. Therefore, it is possible to live with justice and integrity. The Christian faith argues along a similar path as that of Plato and Socrates; the difference is that integrity begins in faith, not in reason.

Pastor Stan Hill is the senior pastor of a thriving suburban church. About two years prior he called Morris Brown to be his youth pastor. Since Morris’s wife is a Christian counselor, she was employed part time to lighten the load of the pastor. The first year and half was a joyous time of ministry for Pastor Hill and Morris Brown, along with Morris’s wife. But about six months ago trouble began to emerge, first in small ways and then in more evident ways.

The problem began when it was discovered that Morris Brown’s son, who is 14, had gotten involved with a girl in the youth group, who is 17. The girl, Jane, was now pregnant. Morris feels his son was seduced by the older girl, and he wants the church to censure her and her family. The church is quickly choosing sides on this matter. Pastor Hill feels that while this is a difficult moment in the life of the church and the life of Brown’s family, it is also a time for ministry to both Jane and Brown’s son.

Much of the problem is that Morris’s wife has been in a counseling relationship with Jane and some of her friends for two years. As the counselor, she knows certain things about Jane and some of her friends. One day when Susan-a friend of Jane’s-came for counseling, Morris’s wife verbally attacked her and threatened to divulge certain confidential information to her parents because Susan had not sided with the Browns.

While Pastor Hill is sympathetic to the pain Mrs. Brown feels, he is concerned she is allowing her personal pain to compromise her professional responsibility. On top of this Morris Brown has long wanted to become a senior pastor himself, but Mrs. Brown was too attached to the Church and would not consider leaving. So Morris allowed this situation to unravel in order toconvince his wife that it is time to leave the Church.

He asks Pastor Hill for a week off so he can interview and preach a trial sermon in a small church. During that next week Morris decides to take the church and resigns to the board, saying he does not know what he is going to do, but the time has come to leave. All of this leaves Pastor Hill looking like an uncaring pastor and the church looking unconcerned for the future of the Brown family.

This is a difficult situation that bears directly upon the issue of integrity and confidentiality.

The most obvious moral concern is the threat to break confidentiality on the part of Mrs. Brown. She entered into a confidential counseling relationship with a friend of Jane’s. Now that her Counselee is not willing to join in criticism of Jane, she feels justified in threatening her. This behavior is unprofessional and immoral. This is especially the case since Mrs Brown is dealing with teens.

Morris is also acting with questionable integrity in allowing this crisis to anger his wife to the point that she is willing to leave the church. It is also improper to allow the church, who loves him, to believe he is just resigning when in fact he is planning to go to a nearby church as senior pastor.

The real challenge in this situation is how to call the Browns to moral and professional integrity. There are people being hurt in the situation through the lack of a commitment to integrity and confidentiality.

HAVE HAD MAJOR COMPUTER PROBLEMS ALL WEEK.  HOPE TO HAVE FIXED BY TUESDAY.  HARDDRIVE ERRORS.

HI

I JUST DOWNLOADED BIBLE EXPLORER FROM http://www.bible-explorer.com/?g=free

I ALSO DOWNLOADED THEIR FREE BOOKS THERE WERE ALMOST 200 OF THEM.  NO NEED TO TYPE BIBLER VEERSES ANY LONGER JUST COPY AND PASTE THEM.

1. READ AND RESPOND TO EACH POST AND TO EACH OTHER.

2. GO BACK THROUGH EACH POST AND REPLY TO MY POST TO YOUR POST.