While the Catholic Church has an obligation in human solidarity to support Aboriginal advancement in all fields, the Church believes it has a particular role in what is known as “Aboriginal Disadvantage”.
We need only recall the lapidary words of “Gaudium et Spes”, “the joys and hopes, the grief and anguish of the people of our time, especially of those who are poor and afflicted, are the joys and hopes, the grief and anguish of the followers of Christ as well” (G.S. No.1) Too many Aboriginal people are among the poor and afflicted.
There is no doubt that Australia’s indigenous population is markedly “poor and afflicted, registering abnormally high on nearly all indices of disadvantage, in health, education, rates of imprisonment, premature death and homelessness,” to name a few.
This is not to say that all Aboriginal people fall into this category. Clearly many have achieved recognition in a variety of fields and are offering leadership to overcome the disadvantaged position of their brothers and sisters.
The term “disadvantaged” is a euphemism, but there are few acceptable alternatives. Sutton in his recent book makes the point that the collection of negative social indicators is not simply disadvantage but is better described as “suffering”. A woman murdered in domestic violence is not “disadvantaged” but dead, he says. (The Politics of Suffering, p.76.) He goes on to say that efforts to deal with domestic violence so far have been abysmal.
One could truly say that most if not all attempts to deal with a whole range of negatives have been disastrous. Have the present government policies been able to deal effectively with penury, overcrowding, homelessness, poor education, substance addiction, chronic poor health, sexual abuse, family disintegration, the lack of marriage, the absence of fathers in child rearing, turnstile imprisonment and the lack of core religious and family values? Perhaps they have made them worse.
Many commentators have claimed the policy of self-determination followed for the past thirty or forty years has had the opposite effect of what was intended. It was thought that self-determination would produce a new set of cohesive community values and leadership forms to replace the tribal structures that were lost. It was unrealistic to expect this to happen. What cohesive structure could be formed from remnants of a traditional way of life given the fringe conditions they found themselves in? The policy of self-determination for all its good intentions and lofty ideals might well have resulted in a policy of neglect and abandonment.
My personal experience of gross disadvantage in the City of Perth is revealing. Of the sixteen or so homeless Aboriginal men and women I have been in almost daily contact with over the past ten years, most left school at year 6, only two reached year 8. They then lived very unstable family lives, moving from place to place till they took to the streets. All of them resort to sniffing or other substances. Only one of them has ever been employed and none of them grew up with their natural father. Their lives are punctuated with police arrests, fines, imprisonment and violence. These beautiful people, capable of great charm and gentleness, some highly intelligent, have in their background abundant reasons for taking to the streets.
The key factor in their distress appears to be family instability and some horrifying experiences in childhood. Their invisibility to the world is for them a refuge and protection from further rejection.
There are many things governments can and must do. There are other things they cannot do. It is possible for governments to provide housing and insist on education till the upper secondary levels despite the appalling record.
It is possible, even necessary, for governments to offer training and employment opportunities and insist that money be received through work for those who can work.
The poor attempts to do so till now do not reflect any serious purpose, nor an understanding of how important work is for self-worth and family functioning. It is possible for Governments to provide health clinics, safe houses, foster care and recovery centres, but they cannot strengthen parental relationships to provide for the safe upbringing of children, nor can they provide any motivation for them to do so.
These are spiritual values. They are also the realm of the Church. In this we might discern a proper role for the Church in Aboriginal communities.
The Church cannot neglect welfare provisions. One cannot leave people hungry or thirsty without incurring the wrath of God on the last day. Church support services and social justice advocacy are already well developed in many places.
But welfare and advocacy are not enough. For a Church that preaches love and fidelity, forgiveness and respect, human dignity, the sacredness of life and the care of children, it must draw Aboriginal people into its culture of life. The Church has a commission to make Christ known and loved, to open hearts to receive his transforming grace and to call people into his Kingdom of love, peace and justice.
It is not enough simply to say that the Aborigines are a “spiritual people”. That might be so, but it is no excuse for not sharing the wisdom of Jesus Christ.
To summarise some of these thoughts about the Church’s role in Aboriginal disadvantage; there is much that we are called to do –
a. To critique publicly the failure of policies that are doing more harm than good.
b. To offer within Church structures good education and employment opportunities.
c. To be advocates and friends of those whose rights and dignity are being violated.
d. To offer across Australia a range of positive helping services – safe-houses for children and women, health clinics, food and shelter for the homeless, addiction clinics, emergency relief and financial help. The list is long.
e. In addition, to offer communities of love and friendship by forming prayer groups, mixed if possible, where prayers are said, stories are told, friendships are formed, the words of Jesus are repeated and reconciliation follows.
Now that the “Missions” are gone, we need to look at alternative ways of offering the love of God to suffering people. What we offer is beyond welfare, beyond social justice advocacy. It is a home and a place where the love given and received is tangible and real.
+ Most Rev B J Hickey
Archbishop of Perth
14 December 2009