Most university chaplains are happy with the support they receive from their own religion or belief organisation, although arrangements of recognition and training seem to make a difference. In particular, those not officially recognised as representing their tradition or organisation are significantly less satisfied with the support they receive from it. It is unclear whether this is a matter of orthodoxy (e.g. some chaplains viewed as heterodox by their own tradition’s standards are denied recognition and support), structures of governance (e.g. some traditions not having systems of support or official recognition within certain regions), or simply communication (e.g. communities and their leaders not knowing that a chaplain has been appointed to represent them). Actual engagement with local organisations appears most effective and enduring when built on well-developed relationships, including inter-faith initiatives for which this is essential. For many chaplains, though, this relationship is primarily one of endorsement and/or informal support; legitimacy of this kind can help build links with local churches, synagogues and mosques, but only when backed up by energy and enthusiasm for building links between campus and community. When this energy and enthusiasm is effectively tapped and mobilised – for example by the Christian organisation Friends International, which supports international students – it appears to provide a service valued equally by both.
At a national level, the support received by university chaplains from the traditions and organisations they represent varies significantly, with the most developed and extensive available via the established Church of England and the least developed evident among the smaller minority faiths. Some of the latter have begun to emulate Christian models of chaplaincy in order to establish appropriately robust support structures for chaplaincy within their own traditions that are recognised within the broader context, reflecting how profoundly university chaplaincy is shaped by the distinctive circumstances of the British setting; University Jewish Chaplaincy is a good example of this. The case of Humanists UK reveals how having a wellresourced national organisation, including legal representation, can reinforce the status of chaplains, especially when equality legislation can be invoked as a means of securing a place at the table. Chaplains appear to be increasingly involved in universities’ compliance with equality legislation. The same goes for the counterterrorism Prevent strategy, and chaplains are called upon to respond to, comply with or carry out ‘preventing violent extremism’ in their universities. Our case studies reveal how, often unlike their funding organisations, some chaplains have been strategic in their engagement with new national policy agendas, meaning that responses at the local level have included creative initiatives that sometimes enhance chaplaincy provision. For example, in one case study, the Prevent strategy had been invoked to secure further funding for Muslim chaplaincy, as part of a broader initiative of building stronger relationships between the university and local Muslim community.
Building Local Connections
“Even though it’s a Christian chaplaincy here, there are good relationships with other religious organisations around the city…which again I think is really important…for the student body because we have Muslim students and Buddhist students, so actually being able make those connections in my view is a really important part of their work. When a Muslim student goes to them they may be able to help them pastorally but actually they really also need to know who to pass them onto in the city or how to help a student from another religion find a group that they can worship with. I view that as a really important part of their role.”
(Pro Vice Chancellor for Student Experience, Cathedrals Group university)
Negotiating with National Legal Frameworks
“I sort of brokered a meeting between the presidents of the faith societies and the two people who are leading the Prevent agenda here, it took a bit of time to persuade them that the most important people for them to talk to were the presidents of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim societies. And as of this year I have, we have, as a matter of course, told all groups who are using this building that if they are having an external speaker, let us know who that is in advance. We didn’t do that until this year, so that’s a change.”
(lead Christian chaplain, traditional elite university)