Email
+
|
Email sent 22/3/10
Mr Ron Williams
c/- Howitz
and Bilinsky
Re: Donaghey K.,
'Dad in Ungodly stance', Sunday Mail, 21/3/10
I noted reference
in the above article to your proposed High
Court Challenge to prevent the Commonwealth Government supporting 'a
pro-Christian culture in state schools' through funding of chaplains. As I
understand it, your challenge is based on Section 116 of the Australian
constitution which requires that:
"The Commonwealth shall not make any law
for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or
for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test
shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under
the Commonwealth."
I should like to
submit for your consideration that the complex issues involved in this can't
be resolved sensibly through a High Court challenge, because changes within
society over the past century have rendered this section of the constitution
out of date. For example:
-
the words used
in Section 116 no longer have quite the same implications that they did in
1901 (eg the only alternative 'religions' then considered would have been
different Christian denominations); and
-
the issues
involved in the relationship between church and state are complex, and no
longer the same as in 1901 (eg while there are huge advantages in a
separation of church and state, the practices of non-Western societies
suggest that this is only achievable in a
Judeo-Christian environment; declining Christian adherence now puts
Australia at risk of losing those advantages; a close relationship with the
state reduces churches' ability to operate independently; schools are
pressed to provide 'values' education - and this is only feasible in the
context of a broad world view (ie a religion); many world views are claimed
to be 'secular' while actually being alternative 'religions'; and those who
oppose 'Christian' teachings may not recognise the real current
alternatives).
The best way to
allow Australia's political leaders to eliminate funding for (mainly Christian)
chaplains in state schools (and to restore the separation of church and state
generally) would be to strengthen the capacity of churches to
achieve similar outcomes independently. The above argument is presented in
more detail on my web-site.
Regards
John Craig
|
Detailed Comments |
Detailed Comments on Ron Williams'
Proposed High Court Challenge
Complexities Not Recognised in the
Constitution
The complex issues involved in Commonwealth
funding for (often Christian) chaplains in state schools can't be
resolved sensibly through a High Court challenge, because changes within
society over the past century have rendered this section of the
constitution out of date
Firstly,
time has altered the meaning of the words contained in Section 116.
For example, the primary intent of Section 116 of the constitution in 1901 would
have been to prevent any particular (Christian) denomination from gaining
ascendancy - as no other religion would have been seriously considered to be
in contention. Likewise, the High Court Challenge
web-site suggests that the National School Chaplaincy Program has promoted
a 'non-secular pro-Christian culture in state schools'. However it is
understood that, the original meaning of 'secular' was 'of no particular
denomination' - rather than 'of no particular religion' (or even more
narrowly 'of no religion').
Secondly,
the relationship between church and state involves complex issues, and in some
respects these are now fundamentally different to the situation in 1901 when
Australia's constitution was adopted. For example:
-
while
there is great benefit in the separation of church and
state, this separation seems only achievable within the Judeo-Christian
tradition (eg see
Cultural Foundations of Western
Dominance, 2001). This drew attention to: (a) the practical
advantages that both individuals and governments gain when states are not
embroiled in trying to determine the nature of, and enforce, morality in
individual behaviour; and (b) the apparent necessity, noting the
often-less-liberal practices
in non-Western societies, for the morality of
behaviour to be predominantly guided by individual consciences responsible to God if the
liberty (which creates those practical advantages) is to be tolerated by a
society's elites. Other observations about the benefits of separating
church and state are in:
-
Restoring 'Faith in Politics' (2006) - which disputed the current
Prime Minister's argument that churches should take a strong role in
politics;
-
Continuing the Separation of Church and State (2006) and
Church's Mission (2009) - which suggested why simple / unchanging
religious principles in themselves were an inadequate guide to public
policies, as the latter almost invariably dealt with quite complex social and
economic systems;
-
Keeping Religion out of Australian
Politics (2009) - which concerned: (a) criticism of a political
leader for suggesting that Australia's Christian heritage remained
important; and (b) the emergence of political parties seeking to enforce
the separation of church and state - whose efforts would be likely to
increase (rather than reduce) the role of religion in Australia's
political system;
-
declining Christian adherence in Australia now puts at risk: the individual
liberty; the separation of church and state; and the practical (social /
economic / political) advantages derived from these (see
Moral Foundations of Individual Liberty). The latter highlights the
challenges to the 'Christ-ian' philosophical and theological foundations of
Western societies, and the increasing pressure on political elites to pose
as moral authorities (because the community's behavioural standards have
declined). The (at times) 'high priestly' response by political leaders puts both individual liberty and
the separation of church and state at risk;
-
close
links between church and state reduce churches' ability to properly carry
out their independent role (ie bringing individuals into a
relationship with God). In Australia extensive government funding for church
social service organisations seems to have diverted some churches' attention from their original goals towards more 'political' activities (ie church
leaders' often now prefer lobbying governments and addressing political
causes, rather than engagement with
individuals). For this reason, it seems likely that Commonwealth funding of
chaplains in state schools could also be counter-productive from a Christian
viewpoint in the longer term;
-
there has
been increasing pressure for state schools to teach 'values' to their
students (see
The
Importance of Values Taught in State Schools, 2004) However it
is arguably impossible to define 'values' meaningfully except in the context
of a broad world-view (ie a religion, see
Symons E
'State schools need religion to instill values', The Australian,
25/10/04);
-
many world views that are
presented as 'secular' are in reality alternative 'religions',
and thus as such should not be advocated by any government that did not wish to
prefer a particular religion. For example, a non-theistic interpretation of
evolution is widely advocated as appropriate for teaching in science
classes, even though: (a) such an interpretation is strongly associated with
a particular religious position (ie atheism); and (b) the scientific
validity of that conclusion is anything but assured (see
Celebrating a New Evangelical
'Religion': Atheism, 2010). Likewise symbols with
strong religious implications that seem incompatible with Australia's
traditions were presented as the 'spirit' of Sydney's 2010 New Year's Eve
celebrations apparently because organisers were unaware of their religious
significance (see
Sydney's 2010 New Year's Eve
Celebrations: Awakening Which 'Spirit'? , 2010). Likewise:
-
it seems that
those who vigorously opposed 'Christian' traditions often don't have
any serious understanding of the real current alternatives (see
Philosophy and Religion: The Case for
a Bigger Picture View, 2010)
Towards a
Solution
Restoring the ability of Australia's churches to operate independently
in providing guidance to young people seems essential to restoring the separation of church and state (see
Strengthening the capacity of apolitical churches to operate independently).
Australia's legal
and governance system was founded on the basis of, and requires, a social
environment in which people have an understanding of life and of ethical behaviour
that does not depend on
external controls over individuals by human authorities. Only if such an
environment is re-created, is it likely that government financial support for (usually Christian)
chaplains in state schools would no longer appear necessary to politicians,
concerned citizens and school principals.
How this might be
achieved (ie by seriously questioning the intellectual obstacles to Christ-ian
adherence that have emerged over the past century) is suggested in
Philosophy and Religion: The Case for a
Bigger Picture View (2010).
The latter refers particularly to increasing community understanding of
defects in both the modern / positivist view that 'science has all the answers' and
the post-modern view that 'no answers are better than any others'.
These questions can not be resolved either politically, or through the
courts.
|