Starting this 'blog' thing is very new for me - feels like a cross between writing form letters to a group of people ,with writing a journal and emailing it to all your friends.
I thought I'd pose a question for anyone who's tuning in, which has exercised my
mind for a few months this year. In light of the new National School Chaplaincy Programme...
How ethical is it to be Christian ministry workers/ministers that choose to
receive government funds to assist what is (to us) a ministry?
I've noticed that guidelines for this program speak in terms of "chaplaincy services", and not
in terms of funding a school to ensure that they maintain a chaplain/minister/youth worker.
I don't care particularly about the title, because I've never had a title professionally acknowledged in my workplace (but do have one in the church.) But it seems that it's
a continued "separate church & state" position from the Federals throughout this
whole funding plan; IT AMOUNTS TO:
Religious people may come and work in schools to do a range of school & ministry
functions (as they have for years,) but under this generic 'state' offer they are
engaged by the government to provide a range of care services. One pastor
at my church said that he's against us taking assistance, even if it would expand
our services and impact. His reasoning is revealing: Our work for schools should
be GIVEN by churches & Christians as a GIFT to their local school community.
Well, what do YOU think about that?
Al
A place to find up-to-the-minute updates on pastoral ministry developments, issues & resources - for people involved in Chaplaincy, Youth Work or supporting those who do... in Government high schools.
3 comments:
Hi Al
I think that the issue of funding a ministry is integral with ownership of a ministry. If we share funding for school ministry with the Federal Government then we share ownership of the ministry with the Federal Government. Therefore the implications of joint ownership have to be explored by all who enter into the marriage....TAV
Hi Chaps,
I want to complicate the question further. I work in a private school so I am paid for by the school not by the church. Similar but different. I like TAV's marriage idea and the joint ownership thought. In this way I guess we can applaud the Gov for wanting to enter into partnership in chaplaincy, but we need to tread carefully around the issue of ownership. What is the fine print? Does the end justify the means? What is chaplaincy and how is it different or similar to other ministries?
Many questions not many answers at this point.
Jon
What do ya know? We have a convo going here, don't we? Good to see you here Tav & Jono.
You guys have made a good point - the Fed. Government IS invested in this program, and that's a fact, no matter HOW we organise it. I think that we've got to be EXTRA careful in the NSW State School scene, as well. A "joint ownership" is not established down here (but IS in Queensland state schools.)- the churches look after 'religious teaching' (i.e. SRE) and schools are formally responsible for the other welfare needs of students. The NSCP is vaguely constructed, because in NSW it asks us who get funded, (could be me, if we're successful - we applied this month) to step IN to care-type service provision, while STILL being religious institution people...
Some people are mad about that- even at our middle class school - that they've mixed the 'church' people in with the 'state' services. They want it provided by non-religious people, counselors, or welfare workers. They would be mad! They were never consulted.
I only have one belief as to the "why" the federal Government is owning these services and asking for religious types over any other support staff:
There are vast care needs bubbling up in schools all the time, especially after critical incidents (which keep on coming) - and that stirs up anxiety in parents. Parents vote.
So, this may be cynical of me, but I think offering the Fed funding for chaplaincy services now, and rushing it past critics, is to address these broader anxieties, AND associating the Howard administration with genuinely helping kids - in parents' minds.
They do not own this program - every accountability in its guidelines, shows that NSCP monies have to be justifiably spent and answered for by each local school.
It's 'ghost funding' really, but will get them a lot of praise if good pastoral care outcomes start cropping up.
Should we own our own chaplains? Always - Christian churches provide these people, and will provide them out of their own pockets, long after Funding is stopped. And you never know when that could happen.
You said it Jono - lots of questions raised; but we're getting to some answers at least about who CARES enough to keep us Chaps in state schools.
Post a Comment