Chaplains relate to their universities in a variety of ways, and these are shaped by available resources (time, people and money), the nature of relationships with other staff, the infrastructure of collaboration set in place, and the ethos of the institution. Chaplains engage with academic departments to varying degrees depending largely on individual relationships and common points of intellectual interest, but this is often uneven and unstructured. Chaplains’ involvement in university governance appears to have received renewed momentum on account of recent legislation concerning equality and diversity and counter-terrorism. These oblige universities to attend to human complexities about which chaplains are thought to have expertise or skill, either in religious literacy or pastoral sensitivity. Student services departments offer the most potential for collaboration, given a common focus on student welfare. Chaplaincy appears increasingly to be treated as an overflow service for oversubscribed professional support departments, although the success of this arrangement depends on adequate resourcing, communication and trust between parties. None are guaranteed, and the heavy reliance on volunteer labour presents challenges in striking a balance between retaining the good will of volunteer chaplains and retaining the systems of accountability, safeguarding and quality control that university managers prioritise. Unsurprisingly, then, the university case studies with the most functional and apparently successful patterns of collaboration involved a full-time paid chaplain who was well integrated and respected across their institution.
Managers and chaplains sometimes have different visions for what chaplaincy ought to be about, and these can mask deeper agendas. Nevertheless, most chaplains and managers view their universities as ‘friendly to faith’ and the majority of chaplains are satisfied with the level of support they receive from university management. While some recall past times when there was more hostility or scepticism, the majority appear to function in universities where chaplaincy is recognised as having a legitimate and valuable role to play. How this is expressed practically varies hugely; our comparison of university types confirms that institutional identity and levels of investment (both finance and trust in key individuals) matters a great deal.
Relating to the broader university
“With student services, I think there’s a very, very good relationship. I think the chaplaincy is seen by student services as another place that students can go to. Which is valued by student services, because their resources are always being trimmed. So chaplains can pick up some of the slack on that…Go to chaplaincy, have a cup of tea…They’re nice people. They’ll give you time.”
(Roman Catholic chaplain, Cathedrals Group university)
“…[student support services] don’t really know what we do. But they’re getting better and they’re beginning to realise that actually we offer great listening services and pastoral care and that sort of thing. They’re not allowed to talk about religion really, so they need to be signposting us a bit more. I think the trouble is, also in amongst the academics, [this university] has been avowedly secular really from the word go. The diocese has provided chaplains; the [university] didn’t ask for them.”
(Anglican chaplain, 1960s campus university)