Right: Ron Williams sits outside the Brisbane court where he challenged a creationist's right to present a lecture arranged by a high school's chaplain.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against federally funded school chaplains in state schools
1. State education within Australia is secular and non-denominational
Australia’s public education system was founded prior to federation on three principles – that it should be universal, free and secular. The last two provisions were intended to ensure the first. It was argued in all the then colonies that if the aim were to have all Australian citizens receive an education that needed to be provided without charge and without the obstacles attendant on conflicting religious beliefs.
In an analysis published on March 20, 2014, by Marion Maddox on the ABC’s Religion and Ethics site, it is explained that by the end of the nineteenth century ‘New South Wales, Western Australia and Tasmania had left room for clergy or their delegates to teach children of their own denominations in public schools during school hours; while Queensland and South Australia followed the Victorian path of keeping religion out of public classtime altogether. All, however, definitively ended "state aid" to denominational schools: if families wanted religious schooling, the mostly devout Christians and Jews in our colonial parliaments decided, then parents would have to arrange it themselves.’
Queensland's former premier (and later chief justice) Charles Lilley summed up the common view. He told the parliament in 1873 that, if Members wanted to fund religious schools, then either the government would have to endorse a single state religion (a course seen as unjust and divisive) or else fairness required that ‘there must be established in every portion of the State endowed schools of every denomination; at the expense of the State, schools must be built, and teachers employed, for each and all of the religions professed in the community.’ Lilley argued that obviously the state could afford such multiple provision, and thus the Queensland parliament legislated, in common with the other Australian states, an end to public funding of religious schools in 1875.
Critics of the National School Chaplaincy Program argue that it fundamentally undermines the long-established principle that state schools should be secular.
2. School chaplains might use their position within schools to promote their religious views to students
It has been claimed that some chaplains may use their positions within schools to promote their own religious beliefs.
An investigation has recently been begun into the conduct of a Brisbane school chaplain who stated on his website, ‘Discipleship … is ultimately a journey deeper into a relationship with Jesus, and to becoming more effective at seeing and establishing the Kingdom of God in our world.
It is my mission to disciple others, including kids and their families in the schools I work in, as well as those around me in church life.’
Though groups like Scripture Union Queensland (SUQld) which supplies chaplains to state schools in Queensland claim to provide psychological, emotional and spiritual guidance, but not religious instruction, the group’s Internet site includes in its mission statement ‘n all that we do, we seek to uphold our core VALUES: respect; stewardship; discovery; that children and young people matter; and that we work together to positively influence children's lives.
These rest upon our FOUNDATION: with Jesus as our example, we seek to model the compassion and teaching woven through the Gospel. We are committed to thoughtful reading of the Bible and prayer.’
Critics of the program argue there is little difference between ‘thoughtful reading of the Bible and prayer’ and religious instruction.’
In a letter published in The Courier Mail on November 7, 2013, V. Millson of Burbank stated, ‘Chaplains are supposedly not allowed to preach to students and yet they are employed by Scripture Union Queensland…. If that is not a conflict of interest then I don't know what is. Public schools should be secular and free from religion.’
3. School chaplains religious beliefs may prevent them giving disinterested support to all students
It has been claimed that the religious beliefs of some school chaplains may prevent them giving disinterested advice to students, especially those students whose life choices the chaplain’s religious convictions leads him or her to reject. Particular concern has been expressed as to the quality of support homosexual students might receive from school chaplains.
Outgoing Labor Senator Louise Pratt has used one of her final parliamentary speeches to call for the abolition of the school chaplaincy program, saying it is harming vulnerable gay and lesbian children.
Senator Pratt said a recent survey had found anti-gay chaplains had driven schoolchildren to self-harm and had told them to ‘pray the gay away’.
Senator Pratt said an online survey by gay rights group All Out, which attracted 2200 responses, had uncovered dozens of firsthand student accounts that describe chaplains as being ‘explicitly anti-gay’. One respondent said their school chaplain had described gays and lesbians as ‘unnatural, indecent and perverse’. Another said a gay friend had overdosed on medical pills after their school chaplain said being gay was a ‘degrading sin’ that sends people to hell.
Senator Pratt further stated, ‘As well as the two stories I have just quoted, students described chaplains helping them to 'pray the gay away' and advising them to sleep with a member of the opposite sex to 'correct' their same-sex attraction. One very serious story involved a student being told by a chaplain that they should leave home because they had homosexual parents .’
4. Trained secular counsellors are likely to be better qualified to offer psychological support to students
Critics of the school chaplaincy program have argued that many of the chaplains are under-qualified to perform counselling and support work and that these tasks would be better performed by fully qualified secular counsellors.
In an opinion piece published by On Line Opinion on July 1, 2014, former Democrat Senator, Brian Greig, stated, ‘To be a school chaplain it is enough simply to hold a Certificate in Pastoral Care or Theology and a diploma in Youth Work....’
Mr Greig went on to explain, ‘It’s true that many chaplains have some qualifications beyond this, such as teaching or family therapy, but it’s not a requirement. They are not psychology graduates, professional psychiatrists or qualified counsellors…’
It was only in September 2011, that it was mandated that new chaplains have a Certificate IV in Youth Work, Pastoral Care or an equivalent qualification. Prior to that, no formal qualifications were required. Critics of the program view this as a bias in favour of getting chaplains into schools, regardless of the relevance or utility of their qualifications and that doing this potentially deprives students of access to better and more appropriately qualified secular counsellors to offer them assistance. The new provision that only chaplains (meaning those with a theological qualification) can be employed under the National School Chaplaincy Program, even when a suitably qualified chaplain cannot be found and a suitably qualified secular counsellor is available is seen as proving the inappropriate priorities of the Program.
5. The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund school chaplains
In June 2014, the High Court has upheld a challenge to the National School Chaplaincy Program, ruling the law used to maintain Commonwealth funding for chaplains is unconstitutional.
Federal funding was intended specifically for schools to hire faith-based chaplains rather than social workers. Under the program, 3700 schools are eligible for up to $72,000 funding to employ chaplains.
In a unanimous decision, six judges on the High Court held that the federal government's agreement to fund the Scripture Union of Queensland to provide chaplaincy services to Queensland schools was unlawful.
The judges ruled that the government could not spend money on specific programs that fall outside the powers given it under the Constitution. This decision means that the federal government can only validly fund programs which are attached to a Commonwealth head of power.
The Commonwealth and the Scripture Union of Queensland had argued that the payments to chaplains fell under the Parliament's constitutional power to make laws for ‘benefits to students’.
But the High Court held that the funding agreement ‘does not provide material aid to provide for the human wants of students’.