With apologies to H. Kelm and H. Gonzalez

This is my problem, not necessarily yours. But it might be. It's one that I see in a lot of places.

You'll forgive me, I trust, if this goes long or if it ends up confusing. In some ways, it's the culmination of some things I've been mulling over for a while now.

But maybe you don't care.

I frequently don't.

And that's the problem.

When I was in seminary, I took a class entitled "Pastoral Care and Counseling". It was frequently shortened to "Pastoral Care". Me, being a smart-aleck, messed with the names of the courses in conversation, mutating this one to "Pastoral I Don't Care". Sometimes, though, I think we don't care. When I look back on that class, the thing that I recall most of all was that we were essentially amassing three things: tools, information, and techniques. The idea, then, that you would never hear but I think was still felt in the back of people's minds was that once you have amassed these tools, techniques, and information, you will be able to counsel and care pastorally.

Can you honestly say that those three ingredients go into caring? When I have sufficient tools and methods and information, do I then just magically love people more?

Now, of course, this is something of a corruption of the purpose of the class from the very beginning. The class was not designed to teach you how to care. It was assumed that you cared from the very beginning or you wouldn't be there in the first place.

I question that assumption.
I'm living proof that it's flawed.

Now, don't mistake me. I'm not saying that when I went into that class, I didn't care a whit about anybody. That's surely not the case. But how much I cared was somewhat questionable. And, while I'm sure my memory of the seminary course catalog isn't exact, I don't recall any classes designed to remedy this problem.

When I think about my old Pastoral Care class, I think I walked into it with the understanding that I was going to learn how to solve problems, perform ceremonies, and "do ministry" (whatever that means) in particular settings. When I think back to my time as an undergraduate, I remember becoming involved in the Baptist Student Union's Ministry Team. My understanding at that point, and it had been this way previously, was that my goal was to get others to understand God. One of my main focuses in seminary was to do learn to do just that.

These goals, solving problems, performing ceremonies properly, getting others to understand God, "doing ministry", they're all noble goals. But I think I missed something with them. I'm not so sure that these goals can be ends in of themselves, no matter how noble they may be.

Two months ago, I watched "The Fellowship of the Ring" in the theater. Interestingly, I was struck most significantly by what may be the least of the characters in the movie, Sam Gamgee. For those who have read the books (or seen the movies by the time they're all out), there might be some small argument, but in my eyes, Sam did pretty much nothing throughout the adventure. The only exception to this is at Cirith Ungol when he attacks Shelob and rescues Frodo, but for the most part, he accomplished little. Yet I think that I can safely say that were it not for the presence of Samwise Gamgee, Frodo would have perished, Sauron would have retrieved the One Ring, and the Fourth Age would not have been the Age of Men, but the Age of Death. All would have been ruined. Sam prevented this.

But what did he do to accomplish this?
He stood by Frodo. He encouraged him. He believed in him. He put Frodo's goal, perhaps his very life, ahead of his own. He loved Frodo, and that was the very reason for the things that he did at Cirith Ungol.

As I pondered that, I thought, "Every man needs a Sam Gamgee to stand by them." God whispered to me, "You be that Sam Gamgee."

Is this really what God wants of me? I've come to believe in recent years that my goal in life perhaps is, and my giftings and my personality all lead to, teaching. But am I to be Sam before I am to teach? Is this just a temporary thing that God wants of me, or is this for as long as I live? Will I lay down teaching if it means that I cannot "Gamgee" someone?

I don't think I have a choice. If I don't "Gamgee" someone, I think my efforts to teach them will be fraught with frustration and result in futility.

I think about those people that I've tried to "disciple" over the years, those that I've either sought out or those that others have assigned me to. Then I think about the people that I think I really have had an impact on over the years. They're two different groups, and this disappoints me. But when I think about those that I have had the impact on, I realize that I have had that impact on them because I cared about them first. My goal with them was, for the most part, not to teach them, not to impart to them some knowledge or wisdom, not to get them to understand God. They were primarily friends. They were primarily people that I loved. The people that I tried to disciple, loving them was secondary, if even that, to be honest. I was primarily there to help them, teach them, "minister to" them, "disciple" them. And I can almost guarantee that those people were almost completely unimpacted by me. They received nothing from me. And really, I don't think I gave anything to them either.

I have come to realize that my first goal is to love.
And how silly of me for thinking differently! Listen to Jesus: "And he said to them, '"Love the Lord you God in your whole heart and in your whole soul and in your whole understanding"; this is the greatest and first command. And the second is of the same nature, "Love your neighbor as yourself." On these two commands hangs the whole law and the prophets.'" (Matthew 22:37-40) And didn't Paul say to Timothy, "But the conclusion of the instructions is love from pure hearts and good consciences and sincere faith." (I Timothy 1:5) Love is the first command and the last result. Love is "the beginning and the end" (Revelation 22:13) for "God is love." (I John 4:8).

Methods aren't wrong. Nor are information or tools. Teaching, training, discipling, and so forth are also not wrong. But "if I don't have love, I am nothing." (I Corinthians 13:2) More than that, if love is not the primary target, the arch-goal, then I have failed before I have begun.

The command is love. The goal is love. The purpose is love.

The response must be, then, first and foremost, to love.

- Matthew R Green 02/19/02

All scripture quotations are my own translation from the Greek unless otherwise noted.
I wouldn't blame you for checking your own version.

1