Chaplaincy: secular and global ministry?

I was recently asked how I thought about chaplaincy as a Christian minister given the secular context, multifaith nature and impacts of globalisation. This was my response. Perhaps I should remind readers that I'm in Britain working as a chaplain in a university and we work within a framework of human rights legislation particularly equality and diversity.

It’s not quite right to say that chaplaincy is a statutory requirement for equality –although it seems that most HEIs interpret it in a way that chaplaincy seems to be a main way to try to address the appearance of religion (including non-belief) as a protected characteristic.

I’m also keen to question the terms ‘secular’ and ‘secularisation’. It is often seen as a bad thing but we should recall that some of the impetus for it grows out of the European religious wars following the Reformation –it became evident that moving religion (indeed, in the fullness of time any strong ideology) away from absolute power moved it away from the apparently strong temptations to murder opponents. One of the things about the Baptist and many other non-conformists is that, as people who were mostly persecuted, they have a strong ethos of separation of religion and state and of religious tolerance –it is interesting to note that the oft-persecuted Shi’ite Muslims tend in the same direction. 

In addition to this practical response to abuse of power by religious agents (and later by agents of ‘secular’ ideologies) there are theological reasons for supporting secularism at least of a certain kind. I’d note here the distinction between hard and soft secularism and I’d making a theological case for the latter. Hard secularism is a way to characterise anti-religious ideology –the immediate aftermath of the French revolution is an extreme example: the replacement of a religious ideology of governance by anti-religious. Hard secularism can be more tolerant than that: modern France and Turkey operate hard secular regimes (in theory) by excluding all religious expression from the public sphere (government, education, publicly owned space etc –hence debates about hijab-wearing or crosses on classroom walls).

Soft secularism (in theory the state of India) recognises that people come into the public sphere with religious identities and commitments and rather than excluding them, seeks to be impartial about their claims (perhaps the USA is this too) and to make sure that they don’t become co-ercive.

I think that latter approach can be defended theologically. The idea of doing as you’d be done by in Jesus’ teaching seems to indicate that if we would like the right to practice our faith, we advocate for all to have that right –even those who are our ‘enemies’. If we want to be able to commend our faith to others, we must allow them the same privilege. Furthermore, as I read the teaching of Christ and of Paul I find a scepticism about religion particularly where it becomes a legalistic thing (and state religion has to be legalistic –by definition). I’m also interested to note that in the first chapters of Genesis the duty of humanity is to tend creation and there is no temple. The impetus towards religiosity flows from the conversation with the serpent and its aftermath. So I’m in favour of trying to help the churches to think about secular life as the arena of Christian mission and effort: our tending of creation and society is our religion. Chaplaincy might be a way to help promote this insight among the churches.

This impacts on chaplaincy in several ways in my view. One is to alert us to our own faith’s impetus towards treating others hospitably, with dignity and to do so particularly when they are in some way our ‘enemy’ (that is, they oppose us or what we stand for). This does not mean downplaying our distinctive message and its challenge to consider Christ as the one to be followed, it means doing that in a way that is appropriate and respects the humanity and dignity of others.

At its best an organisation’s policies and systems are ways to make sure that people are dealt with even-handedly, with justice and dignity. So in broad terms, as chaplains it is appropriate that we abide by an organisation’s ethos etc when we work with it. It is also appropriate that where it becomes clear that polices and systems are prejudicial, harmful or unjust, we should find ways to challenge that. Ways that will be effective. Sometimes that means, as in all small-p political matters, being prepared to be patient and pragmatic, finding allies and seeking to build momentum for change and finding right timings. All the while trying to find the best ways to support those who are badly done-by and to advocate for them in the best ways we have at that time. This is a dimension of the prophetic side of chaplaincy. I think that the personal spiritual challenge for chaplains is to love the institutions and their people appropriately –that is without it becoming a wilful blindness to faults and especially faults that can be rectified. I think also it means being realistic too about human nature which is also capable of subverting the best schemes. So sometimes the prophetic dimension of chaplaincy could involve being, in effect, a whistle-blower or supporting those who are speaking out about misuses of power and privilege. We should also be wary of our own tendencies to subvert the good and cultivate a certain lightness to our perceptions and agenda and practice self-examination.

From where I am at the moment, globalisation appears to mean a series of mechanisms for allowing capital to maximise its returns while creating a race to the bottom for labour. Universities have been subjected to this regime. I’m convinced, theologically, that human systems and organisations are purposed by God to serve human welfare (which also entails the welfare of the ecosystem) and so I’m not happy about the way that a particular set of views about marketisation and metrics have come to dominate the running of Higher Education because I think that in the longer term they tend to have negative impacts on important things like human welfare and quality of education. So I tend as a chaplain to try to encourage questioning of systems that ensue from that kind of globalisation agenda. (That's not to say that some aspects of HE didn't need some shaking up -there are positives things about improving teaching and research and putting the student experience much more at the heart of thinking -however, I dissent about the means currently employed ostensibly to achieve these ends).

I also try to encourage human-welfare-centred interpretations of legislation and policy. For example in our HEI, I support vocally and in meetings, interpretations of the Prevent duties that focus on safety of students rather than more authoritarian and politically paranoid interpretations. I also try to encourage thinking based in properly thought through evidence rather than prejudice and ill-founded fears.

University as corporation

In my university, Northumbria, the VC (who also bears, significantly, the title Chief Executive) has just completed a round of staff briefings to present 'Vision 2025'. I was intrigued to not that he and the governors have clearly been considering things in the kind of way that this article
Focusing a Corporate Lens on Global Universities - Planet Academe - The Chronicle of Higher Education envisages:

when universities overcome their natural resistance to comparing themselves to multinational corporations, they can think in new and useful ways. And learning to think differently is, after all, what universities are all about.

In particular these things from the article resonate:

Universities need to make it someone’s job to manage international partnerships, to sustain relationships, to make sure the institution and its partners are getting what they want from relationships

I think that 'we' can tick that box: over the last couple of years or so there have been appointments in this area in its various dimensions. Or at least so it seems to me.
And how about this? 

Universities, like companies, may need to make the transformation from being a national brand to being a global one.

This was, essentially, one of the big themes in the VC's briefing. Except that, perhaps, the leap is even bigger: from a regional to a global 'brand'. The demographics are a clear indicator of what needs to happen: today's 1-5 year olds will only number about 3.5 million in 2025, which is not a lot to share between 140 or so institutions as they exist today in GB. But look at the comparable figures for China, India, Indonesia and you'll see which are the big markets to reach for. Go figure...
And I think I discern the basis in the way that I hear university managers talking for this being taken seriously, especially as the university already has very good employability ratings and a big focus on professional education.

An organization, whether it is a company or a university, can identify two arrows. One is what people are looking for in jobs, and the other is what the institution has to offer. An organization that can find the intersection of those arrows can build powerful, long-term success.

And I suspect that the recent de-merging of Careers from Student Support and Wellbeing in the University -and it seems to be a very good careers service- may be about freeing them up to help in this process, but I may be over-interpretnig. If so, then it certainly won't harm the Uni to be doing this in the light of this remark.


Of course, the wider issue is how far we 'like' the idea of university as corporation, but it does seem that survival and thriving have a financial dimension and this does indicate that attention to matters that enable thriving in financial terms. The problems with the model are not at that level, but whether the mentality associated with the business model is compatible with or noxious to the main 'missions' of a university. I think that this is analogous to individual human beings experiencing some tension between various aims in life. We sometimes express this in phrases such as 'Am I eating to live or living to eat?" or 'Are we working to live or living to work?'. For a university, I suspect,  this may be something like 'Are we making money to learn and teach or are we teaching and learning to make money?' And, as with human individuals, it is easy to slip from the healthy  '-ing to live' to the soul-destroying 'living to -', so it may be be universities, I would suggest.


With human individuals we know or suspect that they/we have veered into the unhealthy relationship with work or money when relationships are damaged, physical health is compromised and mood falls into depression and irritability which may also show up in poor decision-making.


I would suggest that similarly with universities. Relationships with partners, employees, government and the environment are damaged (and this may involve fraudulent and abusive patterns of behaviour); organisational dysfunction becomes prevalent; employee satisfaction falls and morale plummets. Now those things need to be read off in terms of people being part of the enterprise of HE because they believe in something of the 'mission' of a university (and, theologically, I'd say that has something to do with the providential purposes 'under God' which is strongly related, I would suggest, to the vocation of an HEI) and that would have a relation to the issue of morale.


Hmmm. It'd be great if there were comments on what other uni's are doing, but I' don't know how many of my readers are likely to be in a position to do so...

Robin Hood tax: what the Republicans tried to censor....

I'm tempted to say that if the USAmerican Republican in the 90's engineered effectively to censor the idea, then it's an idea worth knowing about. Of course it's now being taken seriously.
What’s not to like? | Inside Story: "Republican senators in the United States had started misrepresenting Tobin’s proposal as a “UN tax.” This was nonsense, of course: taxes can only be collected by governments. Yet that fact didn’t prevent the Republican-controlled Senate from including in the bill authorising payment of US dues to the United Nations a clause prohibiting payment if Tobin’s idea was even discussed in the UN."
The article this quote's from gives some helpful details and summaries of research related to the tax. Here's the summarising final paragraph.

American Nobel economics laureate Paul Krugman argues that a financial transaction tax “would be a trivial expense for people engaged in foreign trade or long term investment; but it would be a major disincentive for people trying to make a fast buck (or euro, or yen) by outguessing the markets over the course of a few days or weeks.” “What’s not to like?” he asks. Critics claim that it would be avoided, but the centralisation of such transactions makes them relatively easy to monitor – if there is a will to do so. The tax is one way of shrinking bloated financial sectors and of raising revenue from those who have benefited most from the explosive growth in the volume of international financial transactions. •

Development traps

This looks like an important book and here's a helpful summary of what it says. Shapevine Missional Training And Learning Resources: "at the bottom the villains have the guns and the money and they usually prevail. With hard work, thrift, and intelligence a society can climb out of poverty unless it gets trapped. The four big traps are 1) conflict, 2) natural resources, 3) being landlocked (with bad neighbors), and 4) bad governance."

TRADE -film about people trafficking

I haven't spotted when this might be released in the UK, but it looks worth keeping an eye out for.
TRADE

Children exploited in Olympics goods factories

I suspect that this could become the symbolic heart of campaigning for workers' rights in the 'outsource destinations' of our global economy. "Research inside China found widespread abuse of workers producing licensed goods carrying the logo of the 2008 Beijing games. Mr Barber said: 'Children and adult workers are being grossly exploited so that unscrupulous employers can make more profit. Their actions tarnish the Olympic ideal, and we don't want more of the same when the Olympics come to London. The IOC must add respect for workers' rights to the Olympic charter."
More info as I find it.
Children exploited in Olympics goods factories, says TUC | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited:

White House promises to replace Wolfowitz quickly

"The White House said yesterday that it would work quickly to name a replacement for Paul Wolfowitz, who stepped down as president of the World Bank after a bitter and protracted dispute dividing European governments and America."
But it shouldn't be up to the USA; there should be a global democratic process. The principle of 'no taxation without representation' applies here. Okay not 'taxation' in this case but 'financial regulation'. Join the UN campaign for a democratic UN.

Democratization at global level neededCampaign for U.N. Parliamentary Assembly launched | Campaign for a UN Parliament

"Boutros-Ghali argues. 'We need to promote the democratization of globalization, before globalization destroys the foundations of national and international democracy.' According to Boutros-Ghali, the establishment of a Parliamentary Assembly at the United Nations 'has become an indispensable step to achieve democratic control of globalization.'"
Remember, we already have global institutions like the World Bank and the WTC making decisions that affect the lives of billions, but they are not democratically accountable, least of all to those who are worst affected by their decisions. This is a campaign to bring about the democratisation of global institutions.
Boutros-Ghali: Democratization at global level needed
Campaign for U.N. Parliamentary Assembly launched | Campaign for a UN Parliament:

Globalisation facing a revolt of the middle classes?

Hmm, makes you think, eh?

"think of the programmers and accountants who got themselves educated and trained as they were told to do, and now find their skills don't make them any more employable than assembly-line operatives.
Blinder reckons 30 to 40 million American jobs - between a quarter and a fifth of the total - are potentially offshorable. Not all will go, but the threat will send a shiver down the spine of Middle America and, Blinder predicts, transform its attitudes to social safety nets.
Combine that with the rise of the super-rich. This is another effect of globalisation: capital can ignore international barriers and drive down taxation by setting one country against another. Under new Labour, Britain has become a tax haven for the very wealthy and, as we are slowly realising, the distorting effect on the London-area housing market is profound. A generation of middle-class youth is moving into its thirties without the smallest prospect of owning a home"

New Statesman - Revolt of the middle classes: