Winnifred Fallers Sullivan

This book does not live up to its title. It is the review of a case in Florida, centered around the Florida version of the Religious Freedom Act. The case in interesting and thought provoking, and if one is already well versed in the intricacies of religious freedom and expression and first amendment rights, one can easily come to a wealth of conclusions that relate to this case, but the author dances around her conclusion without actually stating what the real problems are with religious freedom. She hints at it, and teases, but never really makes a strong case for why there should not be special exemptions for religious beliefs. And this is not being said by one who needs convincing, and can't be convinced. Overall, an interesting work about an interesting case that was improperly handled, in my opinion, by both sides, but not compelling evidence one way or the other, since the judge was probably right that it didn't present a religious burden, but most people, including myself, will sympathize with the religious plaintiffs. If you want substantive discussion of the impossibility of religious freedom, though, I would look elsewhere.… (mais)

I began reading this book with enthusiasm, and it does contain many interesting and worthwhile sections. It begins with an overview of current US law and religion. It then moves on to:
Spiritual governance
Chaplaincy
Credentialing
The Constitution
Defining a "ministry of presence"
and an afterword

"I'm not really here to keep you from freaking out. I'm here to be with you while you freak out." Would that Sullivan have left it at that! It is a good definition of both chaplaincy and ministry of presence.

Then Sullivan began quoting Wendy Cadge, who wrote [Paging God: Religion in the Halls of Medicine], a book on hospital chaplains that was based on quite a bit of research and read like an undergraduate term paper.

Sullivan was very clear in defining the military's "spiritual fitness" program. She then outlined how the courts have distinguished between "spiritual" and "religious." Because the material was fresh to me, I found this section of the book interesting, even though, as with Cage, I felt I was reading a term paper.

Throughout the book Sullivan refers, on the one hand, to the fact that chaplains come from all religions, and on the other to the inherent Christian-ness of the vocations. She frequently refers to its incarnational aspects, and then defines incarnation as Christian.

Many times she ends a discussion of Protestant/Catholic differences/similarities with a sentence such as "The definitional ambiguity of the expression 'ministry of presence' helps to enable that convergence [between Catholics and Protestants] while also opening to a more general spiritual presence embracing religious practices beyond Christianity (kindle location 3348).

Assuming an "Afterword" is not a conclusion is not incorrect for this book, since Sullivan uses this spaces to further comment on her findings. But a book dealing with three separate aspects of a topic begs for a conclusion! After a couple of paragraphs and a long block quote on Minamalist Art (which was certainly a surprise), this is the final sentence in the main book (before the "Afterword"):
"At its best, a ministry of presence might seem to be understood to be a similar expression of the irresolvability of nature and culture [as 'empty presence' defines Minimalism in art].

As a reader, I am left wondering if Sullivan believes in a ministry of presence, or, for that matter, understands it.

Does she believe that chaplains can bring value in charged circumstances?

Does she believe, truly, that non- Christians can provide a ministry of presence to others of their religion, or to anyone at all?

I am glad to have read some of the issues Sullivan raises re: separation of religion and state, and some of the sources that she quotes, but I hope someone else takes up a pen to add to the field of chaplaincy literature.o… (mais)