ii.Engaging the ‘hidden christians’

In their analysis of contemporary student Christianity, Guest et al (2013) have discerned a significant number of students who, while self-identifying as Christian, are unlikely to interact with university chaplaincies. Not only are there ‘emerging nominals’ and ‘lapsed engagers’ (see Types of student Christian) who while attending church at home do not do as at university. There are also the ‘unchurched Christians’ ( see Types of student Christian), attending nowhere yet containing a significant minority who pray privately and volunteer publically, so demonstrating “resilient patterns of personal spirituality” (p.207).

Guest et al are uncompromisingly clear on the challenge these non-participating Christian students pose for university chaplains. Somewhat pointedly, though not without justification, they conclude:

“[Chaplaincies] have not yet worked out how to recover engagement with the vast majority of Christian students who are at present disconnected from their provision, let alone the growing number of undergraduates with no particular faith identity or interest in spirituality and religion.” (Gent et al, 2013, pp.161f)

Yet if Guest et al are clear on scope of the difficulty facing chaplaincy provision, they also provide a revealing insight into the intrinsic nature of the difficulty of creating opportunities for meaningful encounter with the ‘hidden Christians’.

“The hidden Christian majority appear disinclined to bring any attention to their personal faith and spiritual practices [which are often considered and reflective], and they are highly averse to evangelizing.” (p.209)

In other words, ‘hidden Christians’ will neither actively advertise their presence, nor respond to invitations that would mean transgressing the private boundaries of their faith expression into some form of public space. What is to be done? It is not clear that any overt strategy will meet with success. Rather three thoughts come to mind.

• Knowing of the existence of ‘hidden Christians ‘affords the opportunity to ensure that their presence, at least, is sensitively acknowledged in forms of publicity produced by the chaplaincy. Recognition might be a first step to the possibility of relationship.
• Their hidden, and it seems deliberately hidden, presence serves to underline the importance of those forms of engagement with the student body when we primarily relate in ways other than as chaplain. For example, one of the privileges of teaching is that it enables one to form relationships of trust with those who would never otherwise seek us out. A parallel situation might just as easily emerge through support for sporting and cultural activities, or via other forms of working with the natural grain of one’s interests. My own experience is that, especially for example in the accelerated setting of a residential field trip, such modes of encounter do allow one to converse with members of this concealed body. The inevitable downside is, however, that this is only ever going to be on a comparatively small scale with articular, concentrated portions of the student body.
• Though it can never become a willed strategy, another setting in which ‘hidden Christians’’ reveal something of themselves is in response to chaplaincy’s intervention in a crisis situation. Thus, for example, the task of working with the friends of a student who has died to construct a suitable memorial service can elicit the ‘confession’ of latent faith.

Guest et al did not, of course, consider forms of Christian expression amongst staff. But one might easily imagine that an entirely comparable situation pertains here, though perhaps distinguished by two advantages that strengthen the possibility of engagement over their student counterparts. First, one might expect staff to demonstrate a generally greater level of confidence leading to an increased willingness to speak of matters both significant and personal. Secondly, and speaking for myself, it is often much easier for chaplains to be organic members of the social spaces in habited by staff, and it is precisely this kind of presence which affords the potential for genuine relationship.

Even if options for encounter exist with the ‘hidden Christians’ it is still not entirely clear what it is chaplaincy might be seeking to achieve. Is it our task to help the ‘hidden’ Christian to become a more overt and visible participants? Are we to affirm what already is and celebrate its presence? In discerning one’s goals here on must be very careful not to attempt to co-op the ‘hidden’ simply into becoming more conspicuous supporters of our own agenda. Opening up the possibility of a deeper encounter with Christ and the Spirit may not necessarily result in a response we would wish or recognise. There is an appropriate humility to be learnt here which has nothing to do with complacency or cowardice.