May 7, 2017 - Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection by Charles Darwin (1859, cited in ...... of the Committee on Public Retrenchment" (Ruggles- ...
HEAVENLY CONFINEMENT? THE ROLE AND PERCEPTION OF CHRISTIAN PRISON CHAPLAINS IN NORTH-EAST ENGLAND'S PRISONS
DAVID SCOTT
As long as substantial segments of the population are denied adequate opportunities for a livelihood, any scheme for punishing must be morally flawed (Von Hirsch, 1976:149).
i
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Phil Scraton, my dissertation tutor, for his guidance, support and friendship. Professor Scraton's encouragement and critical comments have considerably enhanced this study. Thanks are also due to Scott Gibbons who provided indispensable help in locating material on prison chaplaincy, 'surfing' the Internet on my behalf. Thanks to all the prison chaplains for their time, especially the Anglican chaplains at Durham Prison and Frankland Prison. This research would not have been possible without their cooperation and their honesty. May I express my gratitude to all the prisoners who gave their testimonies and to the prison staff for their time and help. Many thanks to Pip Edgar Partnership for typing this manuscript while to Michelle Newnham I will simply say thank you for much support. Despite the help of all those named above I take full responsibility for any inaccuracies that lie within.
iii
ABSTRACT The role and perception of the contemporary prison chaplain is shrouded in mystery. While recognised as playing an important part in the development of the penitentiary and enshrined in law as one of the three officers of the prison (with the governor and medical officer), the chaplain has not been the subject of a sociological investigation for over 70 years. This study includes the testimonies of twelve prison chaplains serving in six prisons in the North East of England in 1996. Additionally, these opinions have been combined with those of a number of prisoners and prison staff from these penal establishments and the Assistant Chaplain General so that a comprehensive analysis of the chaplain's position in the prison can be attained.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements
iii
Abstract
iv
INTRODUCTION
1
1.
CHURCH, STATE AND PUNISHMENT
5
2.
THE HISTORY OF THE PRISON CHAPLAIN
26
3.
"PRIESTS, PASTORS AND PROPHETS", THE PRISON CHAPLAINCY TODAY
46
GOD'S MESSENGERS BEHIND BARS: THE ROLE AND PERCEPTION OF THE PRISON CHAPLAIN IN NORTH EAST ENGLAND
58
PRISON CHAPLAINS
4.
5.
:
ABOLITIONIST OR REFORMER?
79
APPENDIX ONE APPENDIX TWO APPENDIX THREE APPENDIX FOUR
: : : :
86 102 104 109
APPENDIX FIVE
:
Methodology Reception Interview Research Prison Research Observations Comparison of Chaplains' Duties (1857-1996) Don’t Forget Your Toothbrush, Life in a Prison Cell
BIBLIOGRAPHY
113 115
v
vi
INTRODUCTION
1
The purpose of this investigation is to analyse the contribution of the contemporary prison chaplain to the prison community. In Britain today the ultimate sanction of the state is imprisonment, yet life inside the prison is cloaked in mystery. The penalties imposed on illegal wrongdoers by the governing authorities should be the concern of everyone in society. Yet members of the public and academics alike have only limited access to these punitive institutions. Therefore it is difficult to ascertain an accurate picture of the prison unless employed or confined within its walls. The paucity of research outlining the role of the chaplain prevents the articulation of possible advantages or disadvantages of this function. Thus the chaplain remains part of the mystery of prison. While historians such as Ignatieff (1978, 1981) highlight the significant contribution of the chaplain to the development of the penitentiary, there is no historical analysis of the "decline of the chaplain within the penal system" (Ignatieff, 1981:78). Despite some excellent critical texts focusing on imprisonment (Sykes, 1958; Sim, 1990; Scraton, Sim and Skidmore, 1991; Thomas, 1972 and Carlen, 1994), many contemporary authors such as Morris and Morris (1963) blatantly ignore
the chaplain. Hall Williams (1975) identified this flaw in present day literature arguing "it is possible that sufficient thought has not been given to the role of the chaplain in a modern prison system" (Ibid: 131). The aim of this study is to provide a small, yet significant, insight into the function of the chaplain. This knowledge may bring a greater understanding of prison life and subsequently the opportunity for more informed critical studies on the workings of the prison. Recently, however, the prison chaplain has been in the public spotlight. The Observer (16th July 1995) claimed that at Lewes Prison "314 prisoners have declared themselves Christians in the past year". These conversions appear to have had a massive impact on prison life. A governor at Lewes (cited in The Observer, 16th July 1995) stated "it has quietened prison life down …. you notice a difference in people". Apichella (1996), an American journalist, likewise argues that chaplains have considerable influence over prisoners, claiming "God is recycling thousands of lives in the prisons" with "record-breaking conversions between 1991 and 1995" (Ibid: 11). Apichella (1996) highlights the rise of what he calls a "prison pentecost" in Britain's prisons in the 1990s, drawing such a conclusion from visits to prisons such as HMP Exeter, HMP Dartmoor, HMP Durham, HMP Wakefield and HMP Manchester [Strangeways]. Apichella (1996:25) cites Exeter Prison as a
classic example of this pentecostal rebirth, where in less than one year 200 prisoners made "commitments to Christ". This incredible proportion of Christian prisoners certainly justifies Hall Williams (1975) assertion that academics may have underestimated the potential influence 2
of the prison chaplain. The prison chaplains have also recently featured on Songs of Praise (BBC Television, 4th February 1996). This specifically Christian programme, with an estimated weekly audience of over 6 million, dedicated a show to Christians working or serving sentences in Wormwood Scrubs. However, perhaps of greatest significance is that the position of chaplain provides tangible evidence of the close relationship between church and state. It is not surprising then that both recognise the important role performed by Christianity and the chaplain in prison. Ann Widdecombe (cited in H.M. Prison Service, February 1996), Prison Minister, stated that the work of the prison chaplain is “vital”, believing that “many prisoners have found a new way of life through the discovery of faith”. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Carey (1993), holds strong views on Britain's penal policy. The Archbishop, a former part-time chaplain at Durham Prison, knows "how isolating, how inhuman (and) how demoralising such institutions can be" (Ibid: 59). Interestingly at the Lincoln Prison Conference in 1995, Dr Carey (cited on Six O'clock News, BBC Television, 8th April 1995) urged for the use of non-custodial sentences and a reduction in the number of people sentenced to prison. Whilst Paul Cavadino (cited in ITN Teletext News. 8th April 1995) believed Dr Carey had given a "powerful indictment of the overuse of prison", the government response to Dr Carey's comments was less receptive, stating: Prison plays its part alongside community based sentences in the Government's comprehensive justice policy ... [the Home Office] welcomed Dr Carey's contribution to the law and order debate ... but prison deters the criminals and protects the public. (HM Government, cited in BBC, Teletext News, 8th April 1995). Though effectively marginalised in official circles such a limited critique of the penal system by the Established Church does not go far enough. If the Christian doctrine is based on principles of love, compassion, care, forgiveness, reconciliation and restitution, how can it ever support an institution based on deprivation and the deliberate infliction of pain? To answer this question it is necessary to examine the bonds between church, state and punishment. In Chapter One the apparent mutual dependency between the Established Church and state is investigated. The legal ties between church and state; the Gramscian conception of hegemony; the theological justifications of the close bond between church and state and both 3
secular and Christian theories of punishment are analysed. Chapter Two examines the history of the prison chaplain covering the period from their humble beginning, ministering to the condemned, up to the controversial ordination of women chaplains in 1992. Chapter Three outlines the contemporary chaplain's prison ministry in greater detail, documenting the chaplain's prophetic role as reformer. Chapter Four draws upon the themes covered in the earlier chapters but this time in the words of prison chaplains, prison staff and prisoners in six penal establishments in the North East of England. Chapter Five is an analysis of these reflections combined with some possible justifications for the chaplains to alter their current role as prison reformer to that of abolitionist.
4
CHAPTER ONE
CHURCH, STATE AND PUNISHMENT
5
The state cherishes and protects religion ... the main source of the state's welfare, the great stay and security of all its use as a wiselydevised engine of social happiness. (Whitehead, 1823, cited in Norman, 1976:45-6) We believe that the state is not merely the creation of some social contract, but is ordained by God for certain purposes and derives its authority from Him. (Lord Eustace Percy, cited Ibid:302-3) ... perfect Being and Creator who has reserved to Himself alone the right to be legislator and judge at the same time, for only He can be both without adverse consequence... men might punish when God forgives and forgive when God punishes. (Beccaria, 1764, translated by Young, 1986:17) The theoretical foundations underpinning the role of the contemporary prison chaplain must be divided into the separate, yet interconnected themes of church, state and punishment. This distinction is necessary when considering the unique position of the chaplain within the prison. The chaplain is a representative of a specific religion who ministers to the prison community. This study examines Christian prison chaplains predominantly from the Church of England denomination. Whilst remaining a member of the church the chaplain is also an employee of the Prison Service, which administers punishment on behalf of the state. The Church of England chaplain, therefore, representing both church and state, is tangible evidence of their continuing cooperation in punishing alleged miscreants. The rationale underpinning the alliance between church and state raises questions central to the nature and function of both institutions. Throughout the centuries church and state have offered, almost without interruption, unequivocal patronage for their relative positions in society. This reciprocal relationship remains intact with their barriers on moral, spiritual and political grounds proving, over time, to be negotiable. Most important for this analysis is the coincidence of interests between church and state regarding the state's discharge of punishment. From the church's perspective all three elements are interconnected and necessary for the fulfillment of God's will on earth. As such, an analysis obviously raises numerous questions concerning various theoretical disciplines; it is essential that they are investigated individually. Thus it is possible to assess the position of the church in connection with both state and punishment, facilitating an understanding of the role of the prison chaplain. 6
The Gramscian Theory of the State An understanding of the significant role that religions and, in particular, Christianity have played and continue to play in society requires a thorough analysis of the underlying tenets of the liberal-democratic state and the ways in which these principles have influenced its relationship with the church. Certainly the bond between church and state and their interconnected legacy provides an indispensable insight into the reasoning of the church itself. This increases in importance when considering that the constitution of the contemporary state and the place of religion within it has been the subject of an intense and wide-ranging legal and philosophical discussion. Consequently, a spectrum of opinions has developed which relates to the state's nature and function, characterised by two diametrically opposed explanations. At one extreme, pluralists propose that the state is simply an impartial, unbiased and fairly neutral facilitator, striving for the common good. By contrast, Marxist instrumentalists, such as Quinney (1974, cited in Hall and Scraton, 1981:474), argue that the political struggle is determined primarily by economic factors. Thus the state is an instrument which has been "created by the class that has the power to enforce its will on the rest of society" for the furtherance of capitalist exploitation (Ibid). In short, Marxist instrumentalists assert that in a stratified society one group of people dominate all other groups as a ruling class controlling both political and economic mechanisms. The capitalist class, or bourgeoisie, own the means of production and are able, either directly or indirectly, to manipulate the political and legal elements of society. This class rule ultimately perpetuates inequality and maintains the oppression and exploitation of the wage labourer or proletariat (Hall and Scraton, 1981). Ultimately, although both the polemics are misleading, they should not be
dismissed out of hand. Their sheer diversity illuminates the intricacy and complexity of the chameleon-like modern state. For whereas the pluralist thesis ignores the role of the state in the ruling classes' continued domination over the masses, the instrumentalists "glaringly fail" (Ibid) to resolve the contradiction of an overwhelmingly biased state convincingly projecting itself as being even-handed and just. Significant critical insights into the nature of the state are to be found in the work of neo-Marxist theorists such as Antonio Gramsci (1971), Louis Althusser (1977) and Nicos Poulantzas (1978). Althusser (1977b:136-7) perceived the state as an oppressive organism comprising many facets, which could be sub-divided into two main categories, one coercive and the other ideological. 7
Althusser maintained that the Repressive State Apparatus (RSA), constituting the government, administration and criminal justice system are complemented in their control function by the Ideological State Apparatus (ISA) of religion, education, family, media and popular culture. The RSA and ISA components of the state dovetail accordingly and importantly the church performs a prominent ideological role in legitimating the state, thus protecting the existing order. Althusser (1977b: 143) however qualifies this assertion, arguing that although the church was the dominant ISA in pre-capitalist society, its influence has now declined so significantly that it has been replaced by education as the most persuasive indoctrinator. Notwithstanding, Althusser fails to develop sufficiently the importance of the ideological elements, with the thrust of his thesis focusing on the repressive aspects of the state as the mainstay for its survival. Alternatively, Poulantzas (1978) offers a different explanation regarding the characteristics of the state. For Poulantzas (1978:225,115): (t)he state can in no way be reduced to a mere apparatus or instrument of force in the hands of the dominant class ... (rather) institutions of the state don't have any power ... they can only be related to the social class which holds power. In the work of Poulantzas then, the state in itself is impotent, only acquiring mastery through connections with the ruling class. Thus, whereas Althusser viewed the church as an autonomous, though integral, element of the state authenticating its right to rule, Poulantzas perceived the church as being dependent upon "relations" with the elite for its influence.
Poulantzas
(1978:226) however, over-concentrates on the state's "monopoly or organised physical repression" as the most essential factor in the continued subjugation of the oppressed. Therefore, despite the more sophisticated analysis of both Althusser and Poulantzas, their work fails to carry the same authority as that of their predecessor Gramsci (1971). Antonio Gramsci (1971:247), reworking Marx's theory of the state as a coercive tool of the élites, argues that the coercive elements of the state are not necessarily pre-eminent instruments of the Ruling Class. Rather, the state must "be conceived as an educator". Additionally, he develops the ideological concept of "hegemony", which emphasises the importance of the moral, intellectual and cultural factors as well as the economic and political aspects of the modern state. This combination earns the respect of the subordinate class, whilst leaving the supremacy of the élites intact. While hegemony secures popular consent, it is not invulnerable and therefore must 8
be strengthened, if necessary, by force. This notion of “hegemony protected by the armour of coercion” (Ibid:263) places enforcement as a secondary component, for "(f)aith in the legitimacy of rule converts the force of coercion into authority and consent" (Habey, 1981, cited in Hall, 1982:13). Therefore, it is only when the legitimation of the state and the existing order come under threat, such as during economic recession that force must be applied. Scraton and Thomas (1985:263) describe this form of rule as "authoritarian populism". By concentrating on ideological and
cultural mechanisms first and coercion second, Gramsci convincingly explains how a state can appear to be just while maintaining and reproducing economic exploitation. Thus, if the Gramscian analysis of the state is accepted as correct then where does this leave the position of the church? It would appear that the Christian Churches and all other religions (for example Islam, Hinduism and Judaism) have an important role to play in the construction and maintenance of hegemony. This raises questions about how religion and the Christian Churches can be utilised for the support of the state and why, given the nature of the state as reinforcer of class divisions, the church authorities agree to fulfill this role. The ‘Engine of Social Happiness' It has been asserted that the teachings of the Christian Church and other religions can alter a believer’s perception of the state and subsequent conduct towards it. Numerous sociological studies exist although their main aim has not been to examine the validity of any particular religious claim.1 Instead the discipline is primarily concerned with understanding the role that religious beliefs play in changing people's behaviour. First however, it is necessary to clarify the nature of religion as it is understood by sociologists. Bocock (1985:210) comprehensively defines religion as, "those social actions and cultural beliefs which are concerned with the sacred". In a poetic declaration of begrudging respect for religion, Karl Marx (1955:11) provides a greater insight into its power and ability to anaesthetise the downtrodden describing it as, "the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people." Although Marx (1955) did not write extensively about religion and what he did write relied heavily on The Essence of Christianity by Ludwig Feuerbach (1841, cited in Kee, 1986:62). The main thrust of his argument was that "man makes religion, religion 1
See Hamilton (1995) for a detailed discussion of Marx, Durkheim and Weber on religion. 9
does not make man" (Marx, 1955:11). Marx maintained that religion must be abolished before the downtrodden would be able to end their oppression. The justification for this position is rooted in the almost universal religious promise of a better future in this or the next life. For example, Christians believe that Jesus Christ conquered death through the resurrection and thus for Christians, the guarantee of eternal life may diminish the pains of oppression. To further illustrate its power, Badham (1989b:29) cites the message of 2 Corinthians 4:17, arguing that the good news of the gospels is that God's eternal love "far outweighed" any suffering in this life. Thus, the inequalities and pains of the present pale into insignificance when compared to the potential rewards bestowed by a benevolent God. From this perspective Hamilton (1995:82) asserts that these beliefs provide no "real solution" to injustice. Moreover, by accepting the intolerable, they actually prevent a "real solution" to the problem. E. P. Thompson (1963:178,172) condemns such a religious illusion of contentment as the "chiliasm of the defeated and the hopeless". Though Thompson was referring to the "psychic exploitation" of the Methodist movement upon the working class in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, his argument can be transferred to various other religious doctrines and movements. A fundamental feature then is the notion that adherents of a religion may more easily consent to hardship, such as economic exploitation or imprisonment, because they believe their future happiness has been secured by faith. Therefore, if the Gramscian thesis that the state perpetuates the subjugation of the lower classes is accepted, then any belief system belittling the pains of the present would be a desirable attribute to uphold. The church, by promoting instructions which devalue the immediate future, inevitably supports the existing social order. There is a second reason for the state to establish a close relationship with the church. Even without the spiritual element outlined above, historically the Established Church has also performed a crucial role in identifying the boundaries of the sovereign nation. 'Civil Religion' (Bocock, 1985:225) does not incorporate the beliefs of the Christian Church but rather its religious symbolism and its close identification with a nation's past. By involving church rituals in national events, such as the controversial service after the Falklands/Malvinas conflict in 1982, the state combines with the church in an invocation of national identity. The church, therefore, can be represented both as part of the worldwide Christian community and also as a
10
division of the secular state.2 ‘Unholy Alliance’ – Church and State Christianity has been established in Britain since the fourth century and the ongoing relationship between church and state has mainly been one of unqualified mutual support. Before investigating this relationship however, it is necessary to distinguish between the terms 'Christianity' and 'the Christian Church', as they cannot always be assumed to follow exactly the same doctrine. Christians believe that the Bible is inspired by God and that by adhering to its teachings they are conforming to God's will. Similarly the church, as the collective body of believers, formulates policies on the basis of its theological understanding of the Bible. Nevertheless, in practice these principles have not necessarily been the determining factors in the church's dealings with the state. Troeltsch (1911:57) in his authoritative study on churches and sects, defines the church as being an "overwhelmingly conservative" organism that impregnates the state and ruling classes; accepting the secular order and becoming an integral part of it. This provides the church with greater prestige in society although ultimately it becomes dependent on the state for its survival, suppressing any critical stance against the authorities or the social structure. By comparison, Troeltsch (1911:57) maintains that sects are comprised of people from the lower classes and although they do not have the same influence as the Established Church, neither do they possess the same insecurities or dependence on the state and could therefore more freely oppose the existing order. The Established Church, then automatically bonded through personal connections to the existing order, is compromised in both its impartiality and its ability to adhere to biblical principles opposing the ruling élite's dominant position in society. The affinity however between the modern church and state is also rooted in sixteenth century statutory ties and the constitutional debates in the court of King Henry VIII (1509 - 1547) which led to the establishment of the Church of England. From its beginnings the notions underpinning the creation of the new church were those of nationalism rather than differences in doctrine. The new church was intended to convey allegiance and power from the Pope to the monarch. This increased the legitimacy of a sovereign, now not only head of the earthly state but also of the people's spiritual welfare. It should be 2
For further details on "Civil Religion" see Bocock (1985). 11
recalled that both the German and Swiss reformers were opposed to the secularisation of the Roman Catholic Church and pleaded for the restoration of the church to her former purity (Biggs, 1965). King Henry, by contrast, was relatively unconcerned by the worldly outlook of the church and, although influenced by the Lutheran critique, desired the church in Britain to remain fundamentally unchanged but with the monarch replacing the papacy as its head (Ibid: 156). Therefore, whilst the reasoning behind Henry Tudor's desire to break with the Roman Catholic Church may at times have been thinly disguised as being similar to those of the Protestant Reformation, his intentions actually had little in common with the theological propositions of either Martin Luther or Jean Calvin. The provisions of the Submission of the Clergy Act (1533) were the first moves toward the creation of a distinctly English Church. This undermined the autonomy of the church, restricting its powers to legislate by canon and making its own measures subordinate to those of parliament. The unprecedented and crucially more important Act of Supremacy (1534) closely followed, severing all links with Rome and declaring Henry Tudor as "Supreme Head of Church". King Henry's virtually lethal weakening of the old church's powerbase was completed in 1536 when much of its wealth was confiscated with the dissolution of the monasteries. Yet despite these erosions into the church's power and independence there was little alteration to its doctrine with the pamphlet Institution of a Christian Man (1537, cited in Delderfield, 1990: 65) stressing that the convictions of the "new church" conformed to the Papal orthodoxy. Although the legislation of Henry Tudor was repealed and the Pope's supremacy reinstated during the five year reign of Catholic Queen Mary (1553-1558), its essence was preserved in the statutory
legacy of Queen Elizabeth I (1558 - 1603) whose reforms remain virtually unaltered. Elizabeth, who was guided by the theology of Calvin and believed that church and state must work together "harmoniously" (Biggs, 1963:140) to perform God's will, successfully established a distinct Church of England through the Act of Supremacy (1558) and Act of Uniformity (1558) with the monarch becoming its "Supreme Governor". The new church, "characterized by uniformity, continuity and nationality" (Ibid: 161-2) was "inseparable" from the state. They were "two aspects of one whole" (Ibid: 162) for "the establishment was not just a useful expedient, it was an essential expression of the unity of the secular and spiritual realms". Despite such close legal ties the church became a silent partner with the state independently retaining its statutory powers. The Church of England, named after and legally bound to the 12
nation, was transformed from an autonomous institution into the spiritual department of the state. In return, various legislation culminating in the Act of Uniformity (1662), which excluded nonconformists from positions of social and political power, practically guaranteed the Established Church a spiritual monopoly.
Despite this legislation the church never totally
succeeded in becoming the spiritual representative of the entire nation. Even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, when widespread Christian belief could be taken for granted, the Established Church was continually plagued by non-attendance and dissent, neither of which were ever to be eradicated. The Act of Toleration (1689) permitted worship outside the Church of England, although its membership did become a qualification for entering the realms of political power. Before 1760 most men and women adhered to the Established Church. By 1850, however, Anglicanism was only one of a number of denominations, challenged most notably by its own Methodist splinter group and a now resurgent Roman Catholicism (Gibson, 1994). Anglicanism was also opposed by Protestant non-conformists such as the Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers and Unitarians. Despite such contestation throughout the eighteenth and early nineteenth century church and state provided mutual legitimation,3 with the state protecting the church's benevolent role as source of welfare and public morality (Norman, 1976). The church, accepting the Pauline teaching of civil obedience, bestowed divinity upon the institution of property and upheld God's hierarchy in society. The state also played its part. Indeed Gibson (1994:5-6) argues that both Whigs and Tories were obliged to support the church whilst the bishops played an important role in the House of Lords. Yet although there was also a political dimension in the church's relationship with the state, its role in government should not be overstated. The church had never been envisaged as an equal partner and never possessed the autonomy to encroach on parliamentary business. The fragility of the powerbase of the Established Church became increasingly obvious as time progressed. This was most clearly demonstrated by the consecutive reforms of 1829 and 1832 which severely diminished the influence of the Anglican Church by allowing Catholics and nonconformists to enter parliament. Perhaps most significantly of all though, during this period the Established Church was the chief provider of education in society. Drawing our attention back to the insights of the Marxist inspired theorists Louis Althusser and Antonio Gramsci, the 3
See also theological considerations of the Pauline doctrine below. 13
Established Church thus performed a central role in the maintenance of ruling class hegemony and was undoubtedly an important ally of the state. More important than the rising plurality of Christian doctrine in the early nineteenth century, however, was the growing challenge of atheism a few decades later. The publication of On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection by Charles Darwin (1859, cited in Kee, 1990:103), combined with the overall development of the natural and social sciences, acted as a catalyst for the dramatic decline in religious belief throughout Europe. The new science provided a credible challenge to the reality of Biblical explanations and the effects of these alternative, non-religious accounts gradually began to manifest themselves in the decrease in attendance affecting all Christian denominations in Britain. Rose, Kamin and Lewontin in their book Not in Our Genes (1984, cited in Sim, 1990:53) point out that: Darwinism wrestled God's final hold on human affairs from His power hands and relegated the deity to, at best, some dim primordial principle whose will no longer determined human action ... [As a result] the dominant class dethroned God and replaced Him with science. Akin to a rebalancing of measuring scales, as scientific explanations of the natural and social world became more influential during the nineteenth century, the importance of Anglicanism was likewise diminished. Yet perhaps the most surprising consequence of this decline of the Established Church and the challenges of an increasingly secular society was that the state continued to provide support for so long. Accordingly, if one of the main purposes of the Anglican Church was to offer legitimation to the British State, what should it do when the church itself faced a crisis of legitimation? The answer was to loosen ties. The first moves towards distancing the church from the state came with the Enabling Act (1919) which established the Church Assembly and made provisions for the church to have partial legislative independence from the state; the first time it had had such autonomy since 1603. The subordination of
the church to parliament was virtually removed by the opening of the General Synod in November 1970, which allows the clergy to discuss and prescribe measures, only requiring a rubber stamp of approval from the House of Commons. However, old loyalties die hard. In the words of Archbishop William Temple (1941, cited in Norman, 1976:11), "it is not legal bonds that make the church to closely follow the state; it is personal ties and economic interests". Yet, whereas the legal position of the church has remained virtually unaltered, its benevolent role as 14
provider of welfare and in particular education came under threat. For Davis (1994:3), "(t)he history of the West is that of a progressive differentiation between church and state, between religion and society", and change in the delivery of education is the prime example. The 1944 Education Act transferred responsibility for teaching from the church to the state, subsequently closing the majority of church-run schools. Of the nine thousand Church of England schools remaining in 1944, only some two thousand were to survive after the Second World War (Hastings1986:179). The claim that the Church of England is a representative of the community has become an even more precarious proposition in twentieth century. This is especially evident in the post-war period where Britain has developed as an increasingly multi-faith society, including large religious populations including Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. For example, in the 1990s Britain had large populations of non-Christians: approximately 300,000 Jews, 400,000 Hindus and 400,000 Sikhs (Bruce, 1995:74,83,87); 40% of South Asians in Britain are likely to be Muslims (Nielsen, 1989:225), whilst Buddhism is the fastest growing religion in Britain today (Green, 1989:217). In fact, only approximately 14% (6.7 million) of the population "belong" to the Christian Churches, and "although not regarded with any great hostility, our churches are unpopular" (Bruce, 1995:35,125).
Thus Anglicanism, with a congregation comprising
approximately 2% of the population and with more adherents overseas than in Britain itself, carries little weight, preaching today to only a very small minority.4 This of course does not tell us about the class background of the Anglican congregations, especially the number belonging to the ruling elite.
Indeed Anglicanism continues to bear direct influence on the state; most
symbolically, for example, prayers begin each day's sittings in both Houses of Parliament. Thus the Established Church has continued to benefit from the protection of the state, possibly as a reward for its past loyalty, whilst the political views of the clergy, whether in support of the state or not, continue to arouse at least the interests of the media. Whilst the historical legal, political and personal ties of the church and state provide a partial explanation of their close relationship, their connection also has a theological dimension. Therefore, given the nature of the modern state, the inequality that it perpetuates and the basic Christian values and principles which seem to oppose such activity, how can the church justify 4
Hornsby Smith (1989:85) states that in the early 1980s, the Roman Catholic Church estimated that its membership was around 5.1 million in Britain. Lamont (1989:179) claims that there are 65 million Anglicans worldwide. 15
such unqualified support and why does it continue to do so? The Pauline Theology of The State and Punishment Central to the church's perceptions of the state are the extensive writings of the Apostle Paul. Some theologians, such as McKenzie (1965) and Cullmann (1956), argue that the church has interpreted Paul's teachings on the state to mean that the state's true function is to be God's instrument of retribution. The Pauline doctrine of the state, most clearly articulated in the book of Romans, inextricably links obedience to the law with the will of God: For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (New International Version (NIV) Romans, 2.13) The necessity of submitting to the law is explained later in Romans, for the state is ordained by God with the purpose of enforcing His will. Therefore, to disregard the state is also to disregard God: Everyone must submit to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves. (NIV, Romans, 13.1-2.) Accordingly, Christians must obey the governing authority for it has been made and used by God. For Cullmann (1956:18) the state is only a "temporary institution ... willed by God" and can only exist "as long as this age continues". Consequently, "man" (sic) does not need to challenge the state, as God, maker and destroyer of everything, will replace appropriately the current state with another "agent of his judgement" (McKenzie, 1965:14). St Paul further reveals that the state's purpose is to allow God to exact vengeance on those who do wrong. Therefore, the state is portrayed as being capable of making judgements about the culpability of an individual, also distinguishing 'good' from 'bad': For rulers hold no terror to those who do right, but for those who do wrong ... He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer (NIV, Romans, 13.3-6). Thus, the sentences of the court could also be identified as a direct punishment from God. Should 16
this be so Cullmann (1956:18) warns that Christians must avoid the state in resolving disputes as this would initiate both God's judgement and His earthly agents. Cullmann (1956:19) also points out that however corrupt the governing authority may be no action should be taken against the state that may threaten its existence. McKenzie (1965) goes further, contending that the existence of the state is in itself a form of punishment, performing God's retribution on men and women for their sin. For McKenzie (1965:13) then, "Man suffers the State because he is under judgement, and the State is part of the curse which lies upon him for his sins". The Church of England Board of Social Responsibility (BSR) Report Prisons and Prisoners in England Today (1978) selectively updates and expands on these arguments. While accepting the link between the state and punishment, the BSR (1978:32) proposes that the terms 'vengeance' and 'wrath of God' are in fact expressions of a "belief in a moral order" which requires laws for its protection. The BSR (1978:33-4) contends that, although there is a tension between sanctioning the punitive authority of the state and the Christian commitment to "love one another", the state maintains dignity, order and stability, which are necessary conditions for human relationships to prosper, and ultimately allows freedom to be possible: ... (O)ur view endorses the legitimacy of action taken by the state to punish offenders against its laws ... (and that) punishment is inescapably retributive: it exacts what is owed by the individual offence (Ibid:34,35). The underlying theme of this theological interpretation of the Pauline thesis is clear: the state is God's agent to punish those who sin. However, the validity of this view has been questioned. McKenzie (1965:7) warns of placing too much emphasis on Paul's understanding of the state, for it has "no parallel with the modern world", although this clarification does not detract from the overall theological perspective. The most radical challenge to this interpretation of the Pauline doctrine can be found in the work of Liberation Theologians. Liberation Theology originated in and takes its inspiration from the writings of Catholic South American theologian Gustavo Gutierrez in the late 1960s, most notably in his book A Theology of Liberation (1969, cited in Fierro, 1977:324). Liberation theology is similar to other radical interpretations of the scripture including ‘Revolution Theology’, its Protestant European counterpart (Fierro, 1977). Liberation theology understands God to be the deliverer of His people from oppression and in Marx and the Bible Jose Miranda 17
(1977) exemplifies this through his investigation of the similarities between the theories of Marx and the teachings of the Christian scriptures.5 Miranda's reading of Paul is diametric to those of McKenzie, Cullmann and the Church of England. Rather than enshrining the law he argues Paul is actually calling for its abolition. Miranda (1977:152) maintains that the "revolutionary and absolutely central message" of the Pauline thesis is that justice cannot be achieved through the law. In fact Paul wanted a world free from laws as their ultimate injustice was proved by the crucifixion of Christ. In Paul's Epistle to the Galatians he writes "if justice comes by means of law, then Christ died in vain" (NIV, Galatians, 2.2). Instead Paul reveals that justice is derived in faith and love. Miranda's (1977:215) crucial insight into the essence of the Pauline thesis provides a new conceptualisation of the intended relationship between church and state: Faith does not deceive because the new human civilisation will have as its foundation the justice of God, not the justice of men, which is the justice of law (Ibid). Therefore, unlike McKenzie and Cullmann who treat law, justice and the will of God as the same, Miranda implies that man (sic), law and injustice are connected. Further, justice cannot be found by submitting to the state because the law itself is made by man. Justice can be found in faith and love alone. In a similar vein Howard Zehr (1984:10,11) points out that the key to Old Testament justice, especially in Leviticus, Exodus and Deuteronomy, was the concept of Shalom, "making things right", achieved through restitution, forgiveness and reconciliation. This involved building relationships between the persons who have wronged and those who have been wronged, as opposed to seeking punishment for their wrongdoings. Miranda (1977:296) supports this standpoint, emphasising that nothing less than "authentic love" among men and the total emancipation of the world's poor and oppressed can be seen as justice in Biblical terms. According to Miranda (1977:61), justice, faith and love are inseparable and essential for obedience to God. Preferably, therefore, Christians should challenge a corrupted governing authority, rather than supporting it, liberating those it exploits: Completely opposite to the defence of the status quo, the realisation of justice not only subverts it, it also demands that we abolish the state and the law. (Ibid:30) 5
Marx and The Bible has been criticised by other theologians, with Fierro (1977:374) arguing that Miranda's reading of Marx is "scarcely recognizable”. 18
These two theological interpretations of Paul's thesis, then, could hardly be more different. The first portrays the state as God's agent of retribution, punishing man (sic) for his sins. Alternatively, the second views the state as illegitimate, with God desiring its abolition. The Established Church, however, has followed the interpretation of the state as an agent of retribution. Thus, from a theological standpoint, the Church of England is committed to supporting the state for, not only is it made by God but, it is regarded as performing punishment on His behalf. Such a link between punishment and the state provides an explanation of the church's often controversial support for the state, but fails to offer any insight into the way that the punishment should be discharged. For this it is necessary to investigate both the secular and the Christian explanations for the foundations of punishment and imprisonment to determine if the church has a distinct justification for the right to punish. Theories of Punishment The debates justifying punishment and explaining why it is an integral part of life are diverse and complicated. While there is not space to develop fully these arguments, it is necessary to distinguish between the terms 'state punishment' and 'punishment in general'. Punishment in general must be regarded as "an expression of the social disapproval engendered by breach of a rule" (Harding & Ireland, 1989:103), while state punishment, punishment performed by the state, means "the identification by the state of consequences normally considered unpleasant, on a person, in response to his having been convicted of a crime" (Von Hirsch, 1976:35). This clarification is essential to an examination of the state's role in performing punishment, the focus of this book, rather than an overall discernment of the rationale of punishment in society. The modern day understanding of these concepts of punishment has been developed from the philosophy of the Enlightenment, which dictated that deviance could be controlled by balancing the relationship between pain and pleasure, most notably by emphasising the pains of state punishment. The most well known advocate of this utilitarian position, Cesare Beccaria (1764 translated by Young, 1986:23), maintained that "(t)he purpose of punishment, then, is nothing other than to dissuade the criminal from doing fresh harm to his compatriots and to keep other people from doing the same". Yet whilst some penologists, such as the conservative-realist thinker James Q. Wilson (1975:118-121) agree with Beccaria's assertions, maintaining that offenders are "reasonably rational" people who are governed by "rewards and penalties of every sort", many contemporary secular studies on punishment and its association with the state have 19
challenged the validity of these assumptions. The legitimacy of retributive, deterrent and rehabilitative theories as a means of vindicating punishments have been thoroughly scrutinized and have proved to be highly contested (Hudson, 1996). Scandinavian abolitionist Thomas Mathiesen's (1990) definitive study, Prison on Trial, provides one of the strongest critiques of punishment and imprisonment, comprehensively dismissing "social defence" and "retribution" theories.
Mathiesen (1990) examines the
justifications for punishment and imprisonment, finding them inadequate in all accounts, maintaining that not only does imprisonment fail to prevent crime and rehabilitate the offender, "most likely we can say that it in fact dehabilitates" (Ibid:47).6 In a further important study on punishment Phillip Bean brilliantly sums up the contradictions and differences between the different philosophical justifications: Supporters of retribution accuse the utilitarians of opportunism and the reformists of vicious paternalism. The utilitarians accuse the retributionists of vindictiveness and the reformists of failing to justify punishment by an insistence on treatment. The reformists see the retributionists as cruel, and utilitarians as inadequate when they attempt to control action. However, it is not Bean's (1981) discussion on the merits and detriments of each philosophical justification which provides his most significant contribution to this particular debate, but his separation of forgiveness from these propositions. Bean (1981:99) argues that the opposite of forgiveness is resentment and ill will, not punishment. This for Bean (1981) allows forgiveness to be invoked independently, still tolerating the coexistence of punishment. For Bean (1981), forgiveness, a cornerstone of the Christian doctrine, has no significant impact on undermining the philosophical justifications of punishment. This claim though has faced considerable objection from penal abolitionists who see punishment [which they define as the deliberate infliction of pain] as directly contradicting key secular and religious human values and principles, with mercy and forgiveness being just two of these. Punishment is an evil that cannot be purified of ‘ill-will’ or scientifically separated from notions of ‘resentment’. For abolitionists then there can be no convenient re-definition of the deliberate pain infliction that can neutralize Christian, or secular, principles of forgiveness.
6
Given the failure to find a philosophical justification for punishment, it is important to consider the reasons why punishment prevails and the role that the state plays in this process. 20
For the Established Church, punishment is regarded as having two essential factors: the "practical" and the "moral" (BSR 1978:24). The "practical" element of state punishment is to achieve an objective, such as the reduction of ‘crime’. The "moral" element assumes that society is based upon a moral order. Drawing some parallels with the insights of the great French sociologist Emile Durkheim, deviance is conceived as immoral and illegal and so punishment is required to perform a rehabilitative function to alter the "moral status of the offender" (Ibid:25). This position has many pitfalls, most notably the proposition that the offending behaviour is automatically wrong. In addition, it has been demonstrated that the state is founded upon a class struggle, not a moral order (Gramsci, 1971). Following this class analysis the Marxist theorist Evgeny Pashukanis (1978, cited in Hudson, 1996:113) maintains that punishment is a "strategic measure undertaken by the state" which protects the interests of the ruling élites whilst for penal abolitionist Barbara Hudson (1996:151) "punishment needs to be justified in general and in every particular instance, partly because it is imposed differentially on the least powerful groups in society".
Echoing the Dutch penal abolitionist Willem de Haan, Hudson (1996: 151) thus
challenges the "taken for grantedness" of punishment and argues that "we should always punish with
a bad conscience".7 The Monastic Order, Repentance and the Prison The ultimate legal sanction of the British state is imprisonment and its similarities with the monastic past of the Christian Church are striking.
The monastic order was first developed in
Egypt in the fourth century whilst the first monasteries in Europe were founded in Ireland in the fifth century (Biggs, 1965:110-2). The Benedictine Order, which has proved to be the most influential in the Monastic tradition, was established in 529 A.D. The monastery and monastic tradition should not be regarded as a movement instigated by the church, but rather by individuals disillusioned with the Catholic Church and society as a whole. This draws our attention to the interpretation of Christian doctrine in the development of monasticism.
Biggs
(1965:109) tells us that renunciation is a central component of Christianity and for this reason punishment has never been regarded by Christians as being the realm of the state alone. Christians believe that all people are sinners, but that they can be saved from eternal damnation and punishment by Christ, who died on the cross for their sins. The idea of a universality of sin and that every sin is equal has obvious consequences for a theology of punishment, as sins such 7
Hudson (1996:147) also highlights the importance of working towards a "woman-wise" penology. 21
as pride and adultery are not punished by imprisonment. Ward (1971, cited in Atherton, 1987:95) supports this view of humanity arguing that, "(t)he view that man is a sinner is the only hopeful view of him ... the belief that human responsibility as a reality is part of the gospel". The question becomes then of how a responsible Christian can purge themselves of all forms of sin and become pure in the eyes of God? Workman (cited Ibid) argues that, "(w)hen the age of persecution was past ... the bloody struggle of the martyr gave way to the self-immolation of the ascetic". This new, intensely personal, punishment was to be the monastery, regarded by those who lived in them as superior to the corruptible Catholic Church. The self-discipline of the celibate monks was severe and their daily life was characterised by repetitive work, fasts, absences of sleep and repentance of their sins. The purpose of this voluntary daily sacrifice was to overcome the weakness of the flesh and thus live an unblemished earthly and spiritual life. The Benedictine order aimed to form a "school of divine servitude" (Ibid: 113), with the intention of purifying the self, "not with others" (Knowles, cited Ibid). Spiritual welfare was therefore dependent upon the central Christian concept of repentance, which according to McHugh (1978, cited in James, 1990:34): must be a free act of will, otherwise, it would not be the result of sorrow or remorse, but of fear and self interest... Punishment was something which followed repentance as penance, a sign of purification and resolve not to sin again. This crucial distinction then that repentance must come before punishment and not as a result of it, places the church in an interesting position when analysing its attitude towards the prison. These two principles of genuine repentance and renunciation are distinct to the monastic order. Prison is a different kettle of fish altogether. Gresham Sykes (1958:64) describes a prisoner's life as characterised by loss of liberty, deprivation of goods and services, involuntary celibacy, feelings of insecurity, fear and deprivation of autonomy. These state imposed deprivations are a long way from self imposed sacrifices to achieve purification in the eyes of God. Therefore, despite prison's apparent similarities with the monastery the two can never be compared, as prison society will always comprise of captives and state inflicted pain. While the Established Church may be forced to support the state in discharging punishment, it seems to have some autonomy in indicating which punishment is the most appropriate. The BSR Report (1978:37) points out that in the Old Testament "imprisonment represented an irregular 22
and sinful state of affairs", which provides Christian reformers with Biblical opposition to the current penal system. The Jubilee Trust (1996:79) highlights ten elements of the Biblical perspective of punishment: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
Punishment should not be arbitrary. Punishment should reflect the crime committed. Deterrence plays an important role in biblical justice. Rehabilitation plays an important role in biblical justice. Punishment should include elements of retribution and deterrence. Restitution for damage is the key to understanding the appropriate response to criminality. The Bible does not specify what punishment should be imposed. Imprisonment is not the best form of punishment. The needs of the victim are important. Offenders should be treated with dignity and respect.
These issues obviously raise questions concerning the legitimacy of the current prison system from a Biblical perspective. Whilst there is some support for the notion of punishment, notably as deterrence, retribution and rehabilitation, there is clear emphasis on preserving human dignity, respect and placing limitations on the use of incarceration. The above ten elements of this particular Biblical perspective echo therefore the words of Bishop Augustine Harris (cited in Atherton, 1987:52): "God doesn't like prisons, God doesn't like penal systems". The question for Christians becomes therefore one of prison reform or prison [penal] abolition. Church, State and Punishment The themes outlined above, documenting the relationship between church, state and punishment, present an intricate profile of the motives which shape the Established Church's stance towards the prison system. When combined they demonstrate why both the church and state continue to provide mutual support and show the effect of this on the church's view of state punishment, as well as on that of the Church of England prison chaplain. Certainly, the theology adopted by the Established Church plays the most crucial part in this relationship. The interpretation of the Pauline doctrine as a command for civil obedience and the ordination of the state as God's agent of retribution, not only gives legitimation to the state as a genuine enforcer of physical repression, but also prevents any opposition to the state. This theological doctrine of the church denies the right of the Christian to challenge a corrupted governing authority, as this would be incompatible with the will of God. Christians are taught to believe that, as God established everything including the state, it will be used for His purpose, no 23
matter how dishonest the state may be. The propagation of this doctrine is ideal for the capitalist state. For Gramsci (1971) the state contains the class struggle through hegemony. The state, primarily an educator but shielded by force when the ideological legitimation is eroded, can rely on this theological standpoint for protection. By providing the majority of these ideological elements, at least until the midtwentieth century, the church supplied another barrier between the élites and those they exploited. Common-sense questions why the state should use force if the ideology of the church will lead to the conformity of the oppressed without it. The importance of religion in this process, however, is dependent on its prominence in society. Even though the Christian religion may currently be in decline its churches have a monopoly on morality. By supporting the state, then, the Christian churches indirectly infer a moral right on the governing authority. Certainly the teachings of religion can be manipulated in several ways. The dominance of the state is supported by the general teachings of the Christian religion and also by other religions such as Islam and Judaism. The belief in the promise of eternal life can lead to the acceptance of the unacceptable on earth, for any suffering will be rewarded in the next life. From a different perspective, the institution of the church can also benefit the state. The state can cloak itself in the legitimation of the church through 'civil religion', using the symbolism of Britain's Christian past to invoke a sense of national identity, a form of unity breaking through the class barriers. The Established Church, along with other denominations and religions, educate the people to accept as legitimate the present governing authorities and consequently uphold the processes of economic exploitation. That the church has continued to support the notion of 'God's Hierarchy' in society is not surprising when considering the close bonds between the church and the ruling élite. Both legal and personal ties between church and state have remained close, even though the Anglican Church currently has fewer than one million members and society has become multifaith and atheistical. Yet again this has been to the benefit of the state. The Established church, dependent on the élite of society, is in a weaker position to challenge the state, as its dissolution would also place the church's future in jeopardy. Possibly the closest link between church and state is the idea that the purpose of the state is to carry out punishment on God's behalf. Such a proposition bodes well for any governing authority and this, perhaps more than any other factor, explains why the church has remained supportive of 24
the state. The Established Church's8 perspective of punishment would appear to be similar to those of secular academics, with punishment and imprisonment being regarded as performing a role in protecting society. Punishment is also seen as having a potential redeeming function through rehabilitation. A significantly different picture emerges, however, when examining the monastic traditions of the church where repentance, punishment and forgiveness are linked. Whereas forgiveness is achieved through repentance, here punishment is perceived as a sign of determination not to sin again. Thus, crucially, punishment is not viewed as a method of achieving repentance. No solace then can be found for Christians who wish to legitimate incarceration through its superficial similarities with monasticism. The foundations of the Established Church's alliance with the state and its methods of punishment are based on a particular interpretation of Paul's Epistle to Rome. Even though Liberation Theologians, such as Miranda (1977), maintain that the Pauline doctrine is in fact calling for the abolition of law and the state, rather than for Christians and their church to endorse it, this contrasts with the disposition of the Established Church. Liberation theology maintains that disputes should be resolved through reconciliation and restitution with the church opposing the subjugation of the poor rather than supporting a governing body which facilitates it. This political criticism strikes at the heart of the church's relationship with the state and, if such a standpoint was adopted by the Established Church, it would mean a complete overhaul of its links with the state. Certainly, any meaningful Christian analysis of the legitimacy of the state and its punishments, such as imprisonment, must be rooted in this critical theological position. It would be incorrect, however, to assume that even those Christians who believe that it is wrong to challenge the state automatically support all forms of state punishment. No matter how closely bonded church, state and punishment may be, this in itself cannot be used as an excuse for ignoring or neglecting the inadequacies and brutalities of prison life.9 This suggests that the role of the prison chaplain may be one of conflicting moral and political loyalties.
8
9
This is in relation to the propositions in the Church of England Board of Social Responsibility Report (1978). There are numerous texts documenting the pains of imprisonment. See Gresham Sykes (1958) Society of Captives and Phil Scraton, Joe Sim and Paula Skidmore (1991) Prisons Under Protest. 25
CHAPTER TWO
THE HISTORY OF THE PRISON CHAPLAIN
26
Could it be that one of the oddest mistakes in history was the decision to erect monastery-like institutions, and cloister within them tens of thousands of human beings, who have neither the calling, nor the inclination, nor in most cases the natural or spiritual resources to derive any real benefits from a monastic way of life without option? (Atherton, 1987:38). Christianity ... seeks to create, not habits, but principles; working from within, and from without, it begets a new nature (Clay, 1861:397). The prison chaplains are entirely useless. They are in a class of well-meaning, but foolish, indeed silly men. They are of no help to any prisoner. (Oscar Wilde, cited in Abbott, 1968:27). The chaplain's contribution to the history of the prison is probably one of the most important yet underrated of all the members of the prison staff. There is still no chronicle of the perceived rise or fall in the fortunes of the chaplain in British prisons and so it is difficult to pinpoint exactly why and when the chaplain, who at one stage was possibly the most powerful individual in the whole institution, merited this loss of academic interest. What is certain is that the chaplain has been a legal requirement in the prison for over 220 years. Consequently, these religious ministers have played, and may still play, an important part in not only the development of the institution itself, but also in the lives of numerous prisoners who have suffered or rejoiced at their hands. Questionably, without the development of religious punishment the modern prison may never have originated. Even with only the most cursory glance at the designs of the monastery and the prison, it becomes impossible not to notice the close resemblance between the two institutions. The similarities go beyond a shared cellular architecture, however, with the intentions of both being to bring about the repentance of an alleged sinner, albeit by very different means. Thorsten Selin (1927, cited in James, 1990:31) wrote: ... the real sources of our entire penitentiary system for the correction of delinquents ... must be looked for in the church and particularly in those bodies which regard silence, isolation and selfinflicted mental and physical pain as the true road to salvation. This being said, seventeenth century Benedictine Monk, Dom Jean Mabillon, was well aware of the problems of the monastic prison and solitude as a form of punishment:
27
May no man say that it is good for them to be left alone in order to get time to think about their conscience and seriously reflect upon the sad state into which they have precipitated themselves (cited Ibid:35). As we explored in the previous chapter, there are considerable difficulties in ‘transplanting’ the self imposed discipline derived from the monastic order aspiring to overcome weakness and ‘purify the flesh’ into a secularised and state imposed form of repentance. Nevertheless the eighteenth century prison reformers, while still maintaining the same aims as their monastic predecessors, regarded the prison as a means of achieving reformation against the will of its "reluctant monks" (Atherton, 1987:24). This comparison clearly shows that Christian doctrine was one of the greatest influences upon the thinking of those who conceived the prison. The affinity between them is certainly no coincidence, as even the name that the reformers gave their 'new invention', the 'penitentiary', is derived from the Christian concept of penitence meaning "regret for wrongdoing or sinning" (Stout and Clear, 1992:8). Therefore, it is little wonder that the Christian religion and the prison chaplain were prominent contributors to this new method of controlling deviant behaviour. Historical Studies of the Prison To determine the significance of the historic legacy of the prison chaplain, it is firstly necessary to identify the diverse explanations of the origin of the contemporary penal system. Much has been written on the history of the prison and Stan Cohen (1985) maintains that the majority of these studies fall into the categories of Administrative / Traditional History, Traditional Marxist History or Revisionist History. The Traditional History10 is a "quintessentially optimistic perspective" (Cohen and Scull, 1983:2), which viewed the introduction of the prison as a progression in the administration of punishment and the sensibilities of the nation. This perspective regards the prison as a humane and legitimate form of punishment and is epitomized in the writings of Sidney and Beatrice Webb (1922). Although the Webbs provide a clear description of the penal system, their analysis in general lacks any critical insights into the nature of the prison. Importantly though for this study, one of their few criticisms is directed against the chaplains and their discharge of duty concerning the education of prisoners (Webb and Webb, 1922:158).
10
Traditional History is often known as 'Whig History'. 28
Despite such weaknesses, the Traditional Histories of the prison remained the dominant perspective until the 1970s with only Punishment and Social Structure by Georg Rusche and Otto Kirchheimer (1939, cited in Howe, 1994:5) providing dissent. This pioneering study originally written by Georg Rusche, a Traditional Marxist, was altered by Otto Kirchheimer for publication in 1939. Focusing on social structure and materialist context rather than the internal dynamics of penal institutions, Rusche and Kirchheimer emphasised the interconnections between the needs of the capitalist labour market and the function of imprisonment as a means of containing and disciplining unproductive workers. The thesis was discarded by most historians until 1968, when it was republished to great acclaim, with perhaps the high water-tide of their influence coming with its reworking by the Italian Marxists Dario Melossi and Massimo Pavarini (1981).11 Though in The Prison and the Factory Melossi and Pavarini (1981) focused on the material rather than the ideological or institutional dimensions of the prison, notably its connections with the newly industrialized societies, the role of the prison chaplain does not go entirely unnoticed. For example, Melossi and Pavarini (1981:159) cite the Board of Inspectors at Iowa Penitentiary (1859) who, whilst acknowledging the power of the chaplain over the prisoner, emphasise the importance of penal discipline rather than ideological indoctrination through religion: "only relax the reigns of discipline ... and a chaplain's labours would be of no more use here than with the drunken mob". Revisionist Historians, in particular David Rothman (1971) and Michael Ignatieff (1978), broke with both the Whig and Marxist traditions. For Stan Cohen (1985), Rothman understands the prison as a model of functional order and equilibrium whilst Ignatieff approached the penitentiary within the context of an emerging class hierarchy. Cohen (1985:15) argues that the revisionists were united in viewing "archaeology ... (as) an opportunity for contemporary critique" and in the belief that the emergence of the prison is linked to similar institutions, such as the hospital or school of the same period. Rothman (1971, 1981), author of the first revisionist narrative, investigated the origins of the asylum in Jacksonian America. Interestingly, Rothman (1971:6,53) stressed the importance of the church and the prevailing Calvinist doctrine in the development of penal sanctions. Rothman (1971:84) cites the Reverend James B. Finley, chaplain at Ohio Prison, as an example of the positive views of the Christian community towards the penitentiary. Rev Finley argued in favour of the prison, believing that "could we all be put in prison ... the world would ultimately be the better for it". Rothman (1971:51,53) points out that 11
Melossi and Pavarini (1981) originally published their thesis in Italy in 1977. 29
sin and criminality were linked by the clergy, whilst the Calvinist doctrine "stressed the natural depravity of man and the powers of the devil". Similarly Ignatieff (1978:57) highlights the significant role played by Christian reformers, such as John Howard, Sarah Martin and the prison chaplain, in creating and sustaining the prison as the "technology of salvation". Rather controversially, Cohen (1985) also located Michel Foucault within the revisionist paradigm. Foucault (1977:31) attempted to write a "history of the present" and located the prison within a new form of power relations linked to a "whole series of carcarel mechanisms" (Ibid:308). Rather than regarding the prison as a victory for humanitarianism over barbarity, or as the misguided interventions of reformers, Foucault perceived it as a new reconceptualisation of the previous systems of power.12 For, "the reform movement was not prepared outside of the legal machines and against all of its representatives; it was prepared for the most part from within" (Ibid:81). Foucault argued therefore that rather than the prison being seen as an imposed reform by those from outside of the ruling elite, the penitentiary must be viewed as simply a change in the mechanisms of maintaining the power structures that still existed during the era of the "Bloody Code". Ultimately Foucault (1977) focused on the institution rather than the wider structural context, and specifically the organisation and deployment of penal power within the prison itself.
His concentration on the internal dynamics of penal custody is therefore
particularly relevant to an understanding of the role of the prison chaplain. Whatever the contrasting explanations of the aims of those who established the penitentiary, however, the theorists discussed above are united on one issue: that to some extent the Christian religion and the prison chaplain were crucial in the development of prison.13 Chaplains Before The Penitentiary In 1553 the first 'House of Correction' was opened in London. This House of Correction was originally a Royal Palace, near a spring called Bridgets Well (Bride-Well), and many subsequent 12
13
Foucault is criticised by Cohen (1985:29) for basing his analysis on the visions of reformers, and in particular, Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon design, rather than the actual implementation of their proposals (Bentham's designs were rejected). The revisionist perspective has come under close scrutiny, most notably by Ignatieff (1981:78) who, in a famous recantation of his earlier work, wrote that he was now "a former, though unrepentant member of the revisionist school", arguing that he had fallen into the trap of "over schematizing a complex story". Further criticism is that it concentrates solely on the European and Western dimensions of punishment, and is "profoundly masculinist" by omitting the experiences of women (Howe, 1994). See also McConville (1981) who provides a comprehensive outline of the prison's history and the role of the prison chaplain between 1750-1877. 30
Houses Of Correction were referred to as ‘Bridewells’ (Clay, 1861:20). By 1576 there was a ‘Bridewell’ in every English County (Harvey, 1941:11), although unlike its successor the penitentiary, this elementary form of imprisonment only utilised the prison's capacity as a method of containment. The Bridewell was one of a number of prototypes14 which developed in Britain, Europe and North America over the next three hundred years. The Amsterdam RaspHuis, established in 1596, and the erection of a Monastic Prison at San Michele, Rome in 1703 by Pope Clement IX (Webb and Webb, 1922:116), merely provided a disturbing vision of future developments in state punishment. Ignatieff (1978:28) points out that before 1775 imprisonment was subordinate to a number of punishments, most notably transportation and hanging. The Act for the Punishment of Rogues and Vagabonds and Sturdy Beggars (1597, cited in James, 1990:3) provided the legislative authority for public hangings until their demise in 1868 (the death penalty continued behind prison walls until 1964). In the eighteenth century England was still gripped by the terror of the "Bloody Code", an "ideological system" combining "majesty, justice and mercy" (Hay, 1975:26). The code comprised over two hundred separate acts which commanded the death penalty. Yet despite this "fat and swelling sheaf of laws" (Ibid: 18) protecting the propertied Englishman and the large number of convictions under the Capital Statutes, only a small number of felons were actually executed. V.A.C. Gatrell (1994:547) claims that the code could only remain effective if 90% of the condemned were pardoned. To accomplish this petitioning of the King for mercy became an integral part of this lottery for justice. Douglas Hay (1975:48) argues that those who helped the condemned achieve a reprieve, such as local gentry or even the prison chaplain, also "shared the glory" or disappointment of the Monarch's decision.15 Prison chaplaincy, although still in an embryonic stage, provided a prominent role in dealing with those awaiting execution. The chaplain not only helped prepare petitions for mercy to the King, but also ministered to those who wanted to hear, for the "mercy of God" (Oliver, 1972:20). Paul Rock (1977) claims that at this time the majority of the population were illiterate. Therefore, many of the condemned may have needed help in the drafting of letters, either to a local gentleman who may take pity on her/his cause or directly to the King. The chaplain may well have been the person who performed this act. However, for some this was not their only 14
15
See Webb and Webb (1922) for clear description of the differing types of prison in Britain in the eighteenth century. Gatrell (1994:559-65) brilliantly details the mockery of this system of mercy from the King. 31
contribution. The chaplains at Newgate and Tyburn prisons, unable to contain their opposition to the death penalty, attempted to undermine this most bloody code in the critical pamphlets Tyburn Calendar, or The Malefactors' Bloody Register (1700, cited Ibid: 19) and its successor The Newgate Calendar (1771, cited Ibid). Although both publications remained anonymous, Karman (1962, cited Ibid) suggests "the overwhelming moral tone of every narrative, the intimate knowledge of the last words and reactions of the condemned, and particularly their repentance (or lack of it) point to the probability of the Chaplain's authorship". In the prisons, however, which were run as businesses, religion had had little or no impact. Ned Ward (cited in McConville, 1981:52) visited a Bridewell in 1700 and although there were no legal obligations for a Bridewell to have a minister of religion, Ward perhaps infers that there should be in this most "unChristian confinement". Certainly Ward was disgusted by what he saw. Ward maintained that "such severe, nay barbarous usage is a shame to our laws, unhappiness to our Nation and a scandal to Christianity". Indeed there was little profit in catering for the prisoners' spiritual needs, while those clergy who showed an interest in their captive parishioners were often unwelcome, viewed as "interfering" by the jailers (James, 1990:60). Another reason why the clergy may not have been welcome in the prison was due to their overall unpopularity. According to Hay (1975:29), the clergy were "lazy, absentee and dominated by material ambition". One who did intervene was Methodist John Wesley (Harvey, 1941:17). Wesley preached monthly to prisoners at Oxford Castle, while his brother Charles regularly visited Newgate, even composing hymns for the condemned. However, it was the work of Christian reformer John Howard that left the most lasting impression. Indeed John Wesley admired Howard immensely. He wrote: I had the pleasure of a conversation with Mr Howard. I think him one of the greatest men in Europe. Nothing but the mighty power of God can enable him to go through his difficult and dangerous employment. But what can hurt us if God is on our side (cited in McConville, 1981:79). Howard's appointment as High Sheriff of Bedfordshire in 1773 and his subsequent exhaustive study of jails in England, culminating in the publication of The State of the Prisons (1777, cited in Ignatieff, 1978:52), ultimately changed the purpose of the prison and the chaplain's role within it. In 1773 Parliament authorised the appointment and payment of chaplains to prisons. The Act on Appointment of Chaplains required that:
32
... he shall read morning and evening prayers each Sunday, Good Friday and Christmas ... preach two sermons each Sunday ... all offenders shall attend. Further, the chaplain was also to visit: .. any of the offenders, either sick or in health that may desire or stand in need of his spiritual advice and attendance (cited in James, 1990:62). Yet though Howard "had the pleasure to find a chaplain appointed in most county jails" (Howard, 1777, cited in James, 1990:62), few inspired him. Southwood (1958:69) quotes what John Howard expected from the prison chaplain who: (w)ill not content himself with officiating in public, will converse with prisoners; admonish the profligate, exhort the thoughtless; comfort the sick; and make known to the condemned that mercy which is revealed in gospels. What Howard found was not to his liking. James (1990:62), for example, states that: (t)here were indeed some bad chaplains. The chaplain of Newgate Prison, for example, testified to a Parliamentary Committee that he did not visit the prisoners in private and did not visit the sick, but did bury the dead. Ignatieff (1978:41) claims that when Howard visited Newgate in 1775 he discovered that the chaplain could not demand compulsory chapel attendance, an option overturned by the provisions of the Penitentiary Act (1779, cited Ibid:52). The 1779 Act, drafted by William Blackstone and John Howard and induced by a crisis in transportation to North America, called for a radically new prison based on religious instruction and solitary confinement. The legislation, however, was never enacted as the crisis was eased by the opening of new territories for convicts in Australia and the launching of the "Hulk Ships". Clay (1861:59) cites the death of William Blackstone in February 1780 as a further major reason why the legislation failed. Clay (1861:63) continued, asserting that after the death of John Howard in 1791, people seemed to drop their fascination for progressive penal reforms: in other words, as Clay puts it, "the public interest in prisons, which had always been feeble, waned after his death" (Ibid). The Hulks Act (1776) provided for ships to hold those prisoners waiting for transportation. In 33
1779 a committee recommended that each ship be appointed a chaplain, although "in these 'floating Hells' religious ministrations were of course baron" (Clay, 1861:80). Abbott (1968:22) maintains that while some Hulk chaplains spent twelve hours a day performing their duties, others, such as the chaplain of the "Gannymede" and the "Leven" did very little. This chaplain only conducted weekly services on the Gannymede and never actually went on board the Leven. Abbott (1968:22) states that: (a)nother chaplain ... refused to bury prisoners who had died of cholera until there was several bodies - he remained on ship and officers took the bodies ashore; the chaplain dropped a handkerchief when he reached the words of commitment and the officers, almost a mile away, lowered the body. Yet though public interest may have significantly declined, the philanthropic and evangelical movements continued to gain pace. Dedicated Christians, such as Sarah Martin at Yarmouth Gaol and Elizabeth Fry at Newgate, continued to minister to prisoners, while reformers such as Jonas Hanway, G.O. Paul, Thomas Butterworth Bayley and Jeremy Bentham16 tirelessly promoted the penitentiary. With the influence of European prisons and, in 1790, the opening of the innovative Walnut Street Prison, Philadelphia, evangelical clamour for the penitentiary increased. Echoing Foucault (1977), we can see that within a relatively short period punishment changed from being "extensive, indirect and ceremonial" to "intensive, direct and banal" (Spitzer, 1979:315): changing from the deliberate infliction of pain directed at harming the body to penal interventions directed at transforming the soul. The Penitentiary and the Chaplain. 1816 - 1922 The "General Penitentiary" opened in 1816 and was designed with the sole intention of inducing the reformation of convicts. This "monument of ugliness" (Webb and Webb, 1922:51), which had its name changed to Millbank Prison in 1843, placed the chaplain and religious discipline at its core. In the 1830s Reverend Daniel Nihil was appointed Chaplain-Governor. Reverend Daniel Nihil (1837, cited in McConville, 1981:166) stated that: (t)he reformation of persons who have engaged in criminal acts and habits is the most difficult work in the world. God alone, who rules the heart, can accomplish it.
16
Bentham was not a practising Christian. He advocated the Panopticon. For details see Foucault (1977) and Semple (1993). 34
Clay (1861:77) however, argued that this "unwise project was of course a failure": Terrors of the law were abundantly preached in the chapel, tracts were diligently circulated in the wards, and the turnkeys transformed into Scripture-readers and sent on pastoral visits from cell to cell. Of course all the rediest rogues played the game, ... while a few of the weaker sort went mad under the combined influences of solitude, malaria and Calvinism (Ibid). Despite the disastrous failings of the Millbank experiment, the penitential regime was given a second chance in 1842 with the opening of Pentonville. The chapel was "the brain" of the new "penitentiary machine" (Ignatieff, 1978:5), and was based on "solitude, hard labour and religious indoctrination" (Ignatieff, 1981:80). It became the 'model' prison in England. Pentonville was to prove so popular that by 1848 the government began to replace transportation with convict prisons (Ignatieff, 1978:200). Ignatieff (1978:197) argues that the cellular system of Pentonville gave the chaplain "extraordinary powers over the psyche of the offenders". Reverend John Clay, the "patron saint of the prison chaplains" (James, 1990:62), asserted that: a few months in the solitary cell renders a prisoner strangely impressionable. The chaplain can then make the brawny navy cry like a child; he can work on his feelings in almost any way he pleases; he can, so to speak, photograph his thoughts, wishes and opinions on his patient's mind and fill his mouth with his own phrases and language (cited op cit: 197-198). John Clay, Chaplain at Preston Gaol from 1821-1858, had a very high profile role as a conscientious chaplain and prison reformer. Woodley (1991:35) maintains that Clay played an important part in the ending of the Hulks as a form of imprisonment. Woodley (1991:35) points out that John Clay's Annual Report of 1825 was read out to a grand jury by the Chairman of the Quarter Sessions that same year and was subsequently reprinted in the local newspapers. Clay also seemed to be successful in motivating the prisoners, claiming that prisoners wanting to be in the chapel "sometimes exceeded 340" (cited in Clay, 1861:288) and that when: (t)he prisoners assemble for daily and Sabbath Worship (they do so) under circumstances which make them regard the Holy service as the greatest solace and advantage of their condition (John Clay, 1847, cited in Clay, 1861:278). This being said, not all of John Clay's work bore fruit. Clay (1862:392) argues that many who claimed to be converts were not. These prisoners were either: 35
1. 2. 3. 4.
Hypocrites. The well meaning, weak willed victims of temptation. The physiological penitent who wept and prayed out of nervous depression. The "Converts" not from sin to righteousness, but from temporal to Eternal selfishness.
Further, the Reverend Thomas Carter (cited in Shimmin, 1857:40), chaplain at Walton Gaol, Liverpool, gives a description of one of his parishioners stating: _______, a young man, 21 years of age, been brought up in Liverpool as a whitesmith and locksmith. Does not know the meaning of Redeemer, but believes in God. Has heard of Jesus Christ, but does not know who He is. Cannot say any prayers, because he never "laned any". Hobhouse and Brockway (1922:187) give details of the chaplain's duties in 1922. The duties of the chaplain include ... the conduct of chapel services, interviews with all prisoners on reception and discharge, cell visits, supervision of secular instruction, guidance of lady visitors, arrangements of lectures, missions and musical services, Bible and religious classes, and a share of the Prisoners' Aid Society work. Beyond this the chaplain has further allotted to him the charge of reading prayers daily to any sick who may be in hospital, the admonishing of those under punishment, and the general supervision of library arrangements; while on occasion of an execution, he has to attend the condemned man and officiate at the tragic ceremony itself. Last but not least, he has to satisfy the demands of the central authority in the way of completing all kinds of forms and returns. The chaplain, in addition to these many other spiritual and secular duties, was also head of education in the prisons. The "Read-read-reading Gaol" (Clay, 1861:194) chaplain had lessons: morning, noon and night; and what made matters worse, the Bible was the chief lesson-book. It was committed to memory wholesale; several chapters, two or three gospels, nay almost the whole New Testament, were sometimes learnt ... by eminently studious felons (Ibid: 195). However, the Reading Chaplain had a different philosophy for writing and arithmetic as: much discretion ought to be used in communicating this extent of 36
secular knowledge to criminals... Such instruction might prove injurious to the culprit himself and to society... It is only therefore when the feelings and conduct of an offender give the hope of his reformation, that instruction beyond that of teaching to read, be imparted (cited in Webb and Webb, 1922:158). The Reading Prison chaplain was not alone in holding this opinion. The chaplain at Swaffham House of Correction (cited in Webb and Webb, 1922:157) stated it would be "very disadvantageous and productive of evil, if the prisoners were taught to write". Why it was such an "evil" to teach the prisoner this knowledge, however, is not explained. The chaplain's feeble attempts to justify denying the prisoner a complete education was compounded by the "absurd collection" (Ibid) of books in the prison library, such as the one at Maidstone Gaol. Webb and Webb (1922:158) quote the findings of a Parliamentary Committee in 1837 on the books in Maidstone Gaol library: 13 volumes of Tracts, 2 volumes of cheap repository Tracts, 2 volumes of Bishop Wilsons Sermons, Bishop Home on the Psalms, Laws' Serious Call, Josephus on the Jewish Wars, Burnet on the Psalms, Bishop Watsons' Apology, Bishop Porteous Evidences, Jones on the Trinity, Bishop Halls' Comfort to the Afflicted; and we also read some of Leslies' Short Method with Deists; and the same authors Short and Ready Method with Jews. This rather unusual selection of books in the library would have done little to encourage the prisoners to read. In 1911 a Departmental Report (cited in Abbott, 1968:25-6) on the libraries stated: (w)e attach the greatest importance to the chaplain's systematic guidance of the prisoners in his charge in the matter of reading. The mass of the prisoners cannot know, and no catalogue can inform them, what is the nature of a book's content. We strongly recommend that all chaplains should do what we believe the majority do now, and make it their regular practice when visiting prisoners privately in their cells to enquire into and interest themselves in their reading and recommend the books which from their knowledge of the individual, they believe to be the most conducive to his improvement as well as to his recreation. Webb and Webb (1922:158) contend that education meant to the chaplains: little more than the reduction of the prisoner to a state of abject submission supposed to be produced by compelling them to 37
contemplate pictures of Eternal suffering to which they were destined. Yet the chaplain was still regarded as the most appropriate person to be in charge of the library, and continued to be so until the 1960s. Despite their idiosyncrasies, the Anglican Chaplain therefore remained an integral part of the prison regime throughout the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth century. The Prison Act (1865) stipulated that every prison must "appoint a chaplain being a clergyman of the Established Church" (cited in Hobhouse and Brockway, 1922:185). The Prison Act (1877) consolidated the role of the chaplain and brought all prisons under the control of the Home Secretary, while the Prison Rules (1877) named the chaplain, medical officer and governor as the "superior officers of the prison" (Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:12). However, the Roman Catholic and Non-Conformist ministers were not so readily accepted by their Anglican colleagues or the prison authorities. At Monmouth Gaol in 1825 a NonConformist minister, who spoke fluent Welsh, was denied access to a condemned man unable to speak English by the Anglican chaplain while MPs, such as Mr Whalley and Mr Newdegate, opposed the appointment of Roman Catholic prison chaplains in the House of Commons (Webb and Webb, 1922:101,209-10). At Walton Gaol, Shimmin (1857:46) points out that although Roman Catholics could be excused from Anglican services and have a Roman Catholic chaplain visit them, on "the Sunday we were there, out of the one thousand or so prisoners, only 14 males and 2 or 3 females ... missed service". The introduction of the Prison Ministers Act (1863), authorising the appointment of Roman Catholic and Non-Conformist chaplains was "controversial" (McConville, 1981:448)17 and did little to alleviate the problems facing non-Anglican chaplains. A Select Committee (1870:iii), looking at the workings of the "Prison and Prison Ministers Acts" in relation to chaplains not belonging to the Established Church found that there had been "great inequality in the working of the system". Though Roman Catholic Priests could be appointed and paid at the Convict prisons since March 1864 overall numbers were small and so the committee recommended that more Roman Catholic chaplains should be appointed by the prison authorities and be "classed as one of the officers of the prison". Hobhouse and Brockway (1922:197) maintain that the situation 17
The Prison Ministers Act provided for Non-Anglican ministers to local prisons (McConville, 1981:448). 38
had not greatly improved by the 1920s. They state that both Non-Conformists and Roman Catholics still struggled with "resources and access", concluding that "there is nothing like religious equality in prison". However, despite the differences between the denominations, Clerkenwell Prison chaplain, John William Horsley (Wheeler and Horsley, 1886) proved that the chaplain was still the conscience of the institution, remonstrating in his journal "(w)hy should it be so much easier for a man (sic) to enter a prison as a criminal than as a philanthropist or a citizen interested in seeing for himself whether things are as they should be?" (entry dated 1885, Ibid). Horsley claimed that in the year 1876-7 he wrote 961 letters, mainly to clergy, on behalf of prisoners and argued that this service was of considerable help to his parishioners on their release. One articulate man who he had helped in this way wrote to Horsley (entry dated 1883, Ibid) stating: I often wonder if prison chaplains attach sufficient importance to their mission as the civilizing influence on the place. Palpable fruit in the way of criminals reclaimed and actually restored to the service of good may very seldom crown your labours, but I can imagine that a body of criminals deprived of the (chaplains') humanizing influence ... would very soon degenerate into a class of men very much more depraved than present. Horsley (entry dated 1883, Ibid) wrote that this letter was "certainly different to the prevailing idea that governors and doctors are necessities and valuable, but chaplains merely concessions to popular prejudice and external ignorance". Whilst not questioning the authenticity of the letter to Horsley, it must be noted that the above evidence is taken from a copy in Horsley's own hand from the Clerkenwell Chaplains Journal where Horsley was writing a rough copy of a letter to be sent to prison authorities. Still, the point remains, that contrary to the apparent lack of awareness and narrow-mindedness against their role and perception, Horsley (entry dated 1881, Ibid) believed that the chaplain was an extremely useful and experienced member of the prison staff, for "the chaplain, in the course of his duties, spends more of his time, and more time at a stretch, in the cells than any other prison officer". The first Chaplain Inspector/Visitor stated that, "in one prison ... upwards of 30,000 visits were paid by the chaplain staff to those under their care" (Merrick, 1898:122). Simpson (1912:44), 39
coincidentally the second Chaplain Inspector, believed that the chaplains were well respected in their duties, claiming "everywhere I have found the demeanour of the prisoners orderly and attentive". Yet in the main, chaplains such as Clay or Horsley were in the minority as "the vast majority of chaplains carried out their duties loyally and unremarkably" (McConville, 1981:449). McConville (1981:450) continues, arguing that "confined to the business of their own prisons, the chaplains could occasionally comment upon, but in the end, only accede to policy decisions taken elsewhere". In 1878, Du Cane (cited Ibid:446) stated: (a)s the prisoners are a very mixed class, our desire is to get chaplains who do not have any extra-ordinary views of any kind, such as might cause bad feeling in the prison. Most chaplains adhered to Regulation 57 of the Prison Rule (cited in Hobhouse and Brockway, 1922:185), which stipulated that: the chaplain shall conform to the rules and regulations of the prison, and shall not interfere with the working of them as regards the safe custody, discipline and labour of the prisoners, but shall support the governor ... The Departmental Committee on Prisons (1896:33), possibly aiming to bring some accountability to the prison chaplaincy, recommended the "appointment of Chaplain Inspector" or "Visiting Chaplain" as he became known until 1903. The Departmental Committee (1896) laid down the criteria of the Chaplain Inspector/Visitor.
The Chaplain Inspector was to help the Prison
Commissioners: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
In appointment of both full-time and part-time chaplains. To visit prisons and observe religious services. Check prison libraries See to workings of the Aid Societies. To preach occasionally in prisons.
G.P. Merrick, former chaplain of Holloway prison, was appointed and first reported to the Prison Commissioners in 1898, while in 1902 Merrick was given the additional responsibility of reporting on the "Operation of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies" (Merrick, 1902 b). In 1908 C. B. Simpson became the new Chaplain Inspector and, although the post continued after his retirement in 1915, the chaplain's reports were omitted from the Commissioners Report in 1916 in "accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Public Retrenchment" (Ruggles40
Brise, Dryhurst, Smalley and Briscoe, 1916:21). Despite this slight to the status of the chaplaincy, religion and the chaplains retained a high profile, both as a member of the prison staff and as the subject of those investigating the institution. Prisons Today by Hobhouse and Brockway (1922) constituted one of the most comprehensive studies on prison life ever undertaken, dedicating considerable discussion to the chaplain. Hobhouse and Brockway (1922) were both conscientious objectors to the "Great War", 1914-1918/9 and served some time in prison. One reason why they may have taken so much time and space considering the role and perception of the prison chaplain is that they were helped by the high profile chaplain of Wakefield and Wandsworth prisons, William Douglas Morisson, to complete their study.18 Hobhouse and Brockway (1922), in a scathing attack on the prison system, also found numerous faults with the ministering of religion in prison. Hobhouse and Brockway (1922:188) remonstrated that on average the chaplain visited each prisoner only "four minutes ... once every two months". Webb and Webb (1922:210) argue similarly that: (b)etween 1879 and 1894, the visit of Anglican Chaplains to each prison cell may have become somewhat more frequent than one or two a year which had in some large prisons been the average.
Interestingly, Hobhouse and Brockway (1922:196) found that 75% of prisoners were Anglican with hardly any atheists in the prison. The high number of Anglican prisoners can be partially explained by the lack of Roman Catholic chaplains, for in 1922 there were still only four of them working full-time. Overall though, the impact of the chaplain, whatever the denomination, in promoting change in the lives of the prisoners seemed limited with one ex-prisoner commenting that: (p)rison religion, for instance, is chiefly hypocrisy in order to curry favour with the chaplain and get privileges from him. The men who take the sacrament in chapel are often the meanest beasts in prison (Ibid: 193). This view was also shared by warders who perceived the chapel services as having very little value, except as "breaks in the monotonous solitude" and the "relief afforded by singing" (Ibid: 18
For details on W. D. Morisson see Woodley (1993). 41
191). Hobhouse and Brockway (1922:189) had little regard for the chapels themselves, finding "real beauty" in only one or two prisons with the majority being "hideously ugly". Hobhouse and Brockway (1922) maintained that: ... under the present system the chaplains are far too much under the control of the Commissioners, far too deeply involved in officialism; that as a rule, a great too many duties to perform, too many prisoners to visit, too many forms to fill in, too much routine and secular work; and lastly that their Christian work is hampered almost fatally by the repressive and thoroughly unchristian character of the system in which ... they are involved (Ibid). Hobhouse and Brockway (1922:189-90) concluded that: (o)ur evidence points, however, on the whole, to the conclusion that the devotional life in chapel suffers almost as severely as the personal interviews from the fact that those who conduct the services are recognised as part of the prison regime, and therefore are incapable of yielding the intended fruits of love, joy and peace. Despite the critical nature of their report, however, Hobhouse and Brockway (1922) at least complemented the chaplain in deeming the work of the ministers of religion as worthy of study. The Decline of the Prison Chaplain. 1920s - 1990s Prisons Today (1922) was to be the first and last in-depth sociological study of the chaplain in Britain and, although numerous studies by chaplains and representatives of the Church of England followed, none were as comprehensive.19
Certainly, as the twentieth century
progressed, the perception of the chaplain as a central figure in the prison system and religion as a tool of reformation, began to diminish. H. J. Woods (1926:289), in a highly critical assessment of the prison chaplain, believed that religion in the prison was "tolerated rather than desired, impeded rather than helped ...": To the prisoner religion ... is just part of the business of serving a sentence, one of the many extra-ordinary things that comprise the prison system. It is not a light in the darkness but just part of the gloom ... in some mysterious way it is mixed up with his punishment.20 19
20
See for example Atherton (1987), Church of England Board of Social Responsibility Repot (1978), James (1990) and Austin (ed) (1989). For details from serving chaplains see New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review (edited by A. R. Duce). For Historical context see Abbott (1968) and Priestley (1989). H. J. Woods (1926:289) remonstrated that an unofficial visitor could "develop Christian religion in 42
Despite this pessimistic view the chaplains' position remained secure. The 1952 Prison Act (cited in Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:13) required every prison to have "a governor, a chaplain and a medical officer". In 1957 the Church Assembly ordered a Commission to "enquire into the church's ministration and the use of opportunities for evangelism in Her Majesty's Prisons" (cited in Atherton, 1976:18). The Church Assembly Report The Church and The Prisoner (1960, cited Ibid) recommended, among other things, that there should be a bishop "with a special concern for the church's work in prisons".21 However, this symbolic gesture did not alter the hierarchy of the Prison Service chaplaincy. In 1957 a 'Principle Roman Catholic Chaplain' was appointed for the first time, at last giving recognition to a considerable number of those chaplains not belonging to the Established Church, although this post did not become full time until 1973 (Atherton, 1987: 138-9). In 1962 the Anglican Chaplain Inspector had his title changed to 'Chaplain General of Prisons' and in 1963 an Anglican Deputy Chaplain General was appointed. The Methodist chaplains were given a Superintendent Methodist Chaplain and there were three Assistant Chaplain Generals and two Senior Roman Catholic chaplains. However, this reorganisation did little to prepare the chaplains for the "traumatic era" (Atherton, 1987:35) of the 1960s. The introduction to the prison of a host of welfare "specialists" (Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:13), such as education officers, psychologists, social workers and probation officers in 1966, dramatically altered the role of the chaplain. This was combined with the ending of compulsory attendance at chapel for both adult and young prisoners, although as Morris and Morris (1963:39) state "church attendance is no longer compulsory, but once a man has opted to attend, he must continue to do so regularly and is not allowed to stay away when he chooses".22
21
22
the Prisons where the chaplains fail", an argument supported by Harvey (1941:39), who believed that "the chaplain's services ought to be supplemented and enlarged by the appointment of a number of voluntary assistants". Whilst there had been prison visitors going back to the time of Sarah Martin and Elizabeth Fry it was not until 1944 that the "National Association of Prison Visitors" was established (see Lochhead, 1980). However, there still continue to be other visitors, both Christian and nonChristian, to the prison. In March 1979, "Prison Fellowship" was officially launched in Britain. It was originally formed in the U.S.A. in the early 1970s and is intended to give Christian support to the chaplain (see Alison, 1980 and Jubilee Trust, 1996 for further details on Prison Fellowship). Atherton (1976:18) points out that the Church Assembly Report also recommended that there should be established "a small Advisory Council which should be a Council of the Church Assembly". The Prison Chaplaincies Council was replaced by a Sub- Committee of the General Synod Board of Social Responsibility in 1976. In May 1969 Geoffrey Clarkson edited the first Chaplains Newsletter. In 1971 Richard Atherton, the then editor, changed its name to New Life. This was later changed to Justice Reflections. 43
If the large amount of space in Prisons Today was an indicator of how much academic interest there was in the prison chaplain in the 1920s, then conversely the virtual omission of religion in the sociological study of Pentonville by Morris and Morris (1963) must gauge the extent to which this appreciation had declined. Although Morris and Morris (1963:298) intermittently mentioned the chaplain and religion, they regarded them as unworthy of a detailed study as they believed that their contribution to the prison community was only "small". Morris and Morris (1963:64) found that only 47% of the prison population were Church of England, compared to 75% in the study of Hobhouse and Brockway (1922). They also found that 14% of the prison population had no religion. However, "those who claimed to have no religion at all, although often regarded as such on reception, generally found themselves dubbed 'Church of England'". Also, the Christian domination of the chaplaincy became increasingly threatened with large numbers of Buddhists, Muslims and Hindus among the prison community by the late 1960s.23 This is a possible explanation for the development of a new spirit of cooperation between the Methodist, Roman Catholic and Anglican chaplains, which has continued until the present day despite the theological obstacles of the ordination of women Anglican prison chaplains in the 1990s. Each penal establishment has at least one chaplain of each of the three denominations and many other part-time chaplains from other religions. In the majority of cases the Anglican chaplain is full-time and the Methodist and Roman Catholic chaplains are part-time. In 1988 there were 87 full-time and 47 part-time Anglican chaplains (Chester et al., 1988). From Obscurity and Back Again: The Rise and Fall of the Prison Chaplain? Inevitably, the prison chaplain's role over the last three centuries has been one of change. The humble origins of the chaplain as an often unwelcome and unpaid member of the local gaols, as chaplain to the hulks, or even minister to the condemned, gave little indication of the important duties that were to come. Within thirty years of the first official appointment to the gaols the chaplain became vital to the repentance-making machine of the penitentiary. The chaplains of Millbank and Pentonville, for a short period at least, held significant power over prisoners. In a regime based on solitary confinement they were in a position to manipulate the psyche of the offenders who were compelled to attend the daily services by the chaplain. 23
There had been Jewish chaplains dating back to the nineteenth century. 44
More positively, as head of education, the chaplain was the pioneer of welfare in the penitentiary and was a confidante and possibly friend for some prisoners. Not all chaplains, however, used their powers responsibly and, rather than using education as a positive tool to help the prisoners, used it to persuade and threaten them into repentance. Certainly, denying the right to learn to write and use arithmetic had no logical justifications. Oliver (1972:21) paraphrases the work of Selin, arguing that the prison chaplains today have: .. somehow lost their historical position of being the originators and the catalytic agents for prison reform. The functions formerly performed by the prison chaplains apparently have been taken over by social workers and other professionally trained personnel. In the twentieth century the status and role of the chaplain has come under increasing scrutiny, with many professional secular welfare staff gradually replacing the chaplain's duties. Although the Prison Acts have continued to regard the chaplain as an essential member of staff, chaplains have become increasingly isolated in a hostile environment.
45
CHAPTER THREE
"PRIESTS, PASTORS AND PROPHETS" THE PRISON CHAPLAINCY TODAY
46
(A)s long as prisons remain in existence; as long as it is expected that prisoners, like other human beings, have a spiritual dimension to their natures and spiritual needs which must be met ... there can be no radical alternatives to the prison chaplain (Atherton, 1972:2). Prisons are not likely to stimulate faith. I found very little love in them (Lord Soper, 1989, cited in Chester et al, 1989:52). The chaplain can be a unique asset in the prison. Internally, a good chaplain is detached yet he (sic) can be confidante of every person in the prison (Michael Alison, MP, 1989, cited Ibid). In an environment in which prison staff and prisoners are dominated by discipline and security chaplains are the only people to have some immunity from these rigorous constraints. Only partially freed from the constant surveillance, which plagues both captor and captive, the chaplains' liberty to roam in a community in which such freedom is so highly esteemed gives them an unusual and unique role in the prison. However, it is not only the differences in their duties which distinguish the chaplains from other prison staff. They should also bring a different perspective to prison life in general, particularly for the 56,000 currently imprisoned in 1996. The prison chaplain is minister to everybody and everything within the prison walls. Pound, Atherton and Dariew (1989:54) state that whilst chaplains exercise their ministry primarily to prisoners they are also responsible for the spiritual welfare of prison staff. Christian chaplains are also expected to minister to members of other faiths and their ecumenical partners in the prison. Finally, the chaplain should exercise a ministry to churches in the community, providing a realistic account of prison life. By fulfilling these roles the chaplain becomes "prophet, priest and pastor" to the prison (Lloyd-Rees, 1971:9). The Church in Prison Currently appointed in every penal establishment in England and Wales are ministers representing the Anglican, Methodist and Roman Catholic denominations of the Christian religion.24
Although the majority of these ministers are part-time, in 1988 there were 80
Anglican and 15 Roman Catholic full-time prison chaplains (Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:16). The chaplains are appointed by the relevant denominational authority at the Prison
24
There are also numerous chaplains from non-Christian religions working part-time in many prisons. See main text below. 47
Service Chaplaincy Headquarters.25 Every chaplain is expected to have a "calling to prison ministry" (Acorn, 1990:97), as well as having personal qualities, such as "sincerity", "sensitivity" and "spirituality" (Atherton, 1987:81-3). Additionally, the chaplain must possess the "ability to relate to the prisoners in a non-judgemental manner" (Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:24).26 The chaplain should accept the legitimate role played by other denominations in the Christian ministration to prisoners. Macquiban (1995:10) argues that terms such as Roman Catholic, Anglican or Methodist are "largely meaningless to most inmates [read prisoners]" for, in prison, "ecumenism is not an optional extra, it is essential". The chaplain is employed and paid by the state, a civil servant who is being obliged to sign the Official Secrets Act and thus expected to demonstrate "unswerving obedience" (Dixon, 1995:25) to the Prison Service. However, unlike any other employee in the Prison Service, the chaplain is also an ordained member of the church, accountable to and licensed by the diocesan bishop. The chaplain is thus both the servant of God and the state and this is occasionally problematic. The chaplains, "messengers, watchmen (sic) and stewards of the Lord" (chaplains' oath, cited Ibid) may have to choose which of their masters they are to follow. Such a conflict of loyalties seems unavoidable, having a profound effect on the application of chaplaincy duties. These duties include those which "must" be done, those which "should" be done and those which "could" be done (Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:39-58). Mandatory tasks include reception interviews, divine worship and being the "bearer of sad news to prisoners" (Ibid:43). Further, full-time chaplains are required to keep a journal, provide assessment of lifers and write a report if a prisoner commits suicide. The chaplain "could" also write parole reports on a prisoner and thus may be an important figure in determining prisoners' main priorities: the return of their freedom. In 1971 the then Chaplain General, Rev Leslie Lloyd-Rees, provided a "definitive statement" of the three functions of the prison chaplain (Lloyd-Rees, 1971:9): those of "prophet, priest and pastor" (Ibid). Prison chaplains are to be prophets by bringing "theological insight" into the 25
26
This is referring to the Anglican Chaplain General, the Principal Roman Catholic Chaplain and the Superintendent Methodist Chaplain. For further details on chaplaincy hierarchy see Chapter Two, Atherton (1987) and Prison Service Chaplaincy (1988). The Church of England chaplain must be a member of the church before s/he can become a prison chaplain on a part-time basis. However, Macquiban (1995:2) states that at least for Methodist chaplains, many ministers come to prison chaplaincy work out of duty rather than choice, as nobody else wants to perform this role. 48
everyday management of the prison and into the development of penal policy. They are also priests because they link man with "God's scheme of redemption" and pastors, as the chaplain, are in prison to see "man (sic) not as prisoners or problems, or threats or even patients or clients, but as people, unique and distinct persons" (Ibid). This definition by Lloyd-Rees (1971) did little to clarify the practical application of these theological directives and subsequently there have been various commentaries on what role the chaplain actually performs. Garland (1990) asserts that the tasks of contemporary chaplains are "indistinguishable" (Ibid:204) from those of social workers, while Eimer (1989: 231) claims that the chaplain plays a "key role" as a psychologist. Eimer (1989:241) further maintains that religion "helps clients meet certain treatment objectives". Taft (1978:55) argues that in America chaplains have either focused attention on evangelising or "schooled themselves in psychology" and that every "chaplain should be fully trained in psychology" (Ibid: 60). Hall Williams (1975) argues that the chaplain's role should be seen as part of the overall "training and treatment" experience of the prison regime and that "for a few", the chaplain is a ready counsellor and confidante" (Ibid: 131). Acorn (1990:98) similarly believes that the chaplain is in prison for "training and counselling". The role as evangelist is less clear. Certainly, contemporary prison chaplains, unlike their predecessors, are not in prison primarily to encourage religious conversion. Neither is such a transformation deemed as essential for rehabilitation and reform. The chaplain's presence is to guarantee the rights of those who wish to exercise their religious beliefs, although the balance between guaranteeing and encouraging religious practices depends on the perception of the chaplain within the prison community. The Iowa Supreme Court (cited in American Journal of Correction, 1977:26) maintained that the prison chaplain's role was "not to spread or encourage religion ... (but) to accord the prisoners their guaranteed right to exercise it". Hilbert (1993:49) argues similarly that: (s)piritual care in prison should therefore be seen as a form of respect and guarantee of a prisoner's freedom of conscience and religion. It should never be understood as the continuation of state punishment directed towards a prisoner's inner-self. A Prophet to the Penal System Lloyd-Rees's (1971) proposition that the chaplain should be a prophet to the penal system, ministering to both staff and prisoners, as well as influencing future policy, is now the dominant philosophy of the Prison Service Chaplaincy. Stokes (1988:3-4) contends that the chaplain does 49
not: belong to "them" or "us" but to both and neither. (H)is [sic] place is on the fence in between. That is a painful place to sit; he will get sniped at from both sides... Only there can he maintain his independent witness and exercise a ministry of reconciliation. Williams (1994:49), in a similar vein to both Stokes (1988) and Lloyd-Rees (1971), argues that the "chaplain has to be the truth teller of the entire institution". An Anonymous Prison Governor (1972:5-6) believed that: the chaplain is ... a [wo]man of God ... [s/he] will see the prisoner, the prison officer, the prison system, the Home Office, government, society and all, in their true and only proper context. Atherton (1987:69-71) claims that the purpose of the chaplain is to help the prisoner "achieve reconciliation with oneself" or, in the words of Macquiban (1995:5), to restore a "sense of dignity, worth, hope and acceptance". Further, the chaplain should also attempt to reconcile the prisoner "with others" (op-cit), such as family, friends or even prison officers and through repentance, a "reconciliation with God" (Ibid).27 Duncombe (1992:195) argues that the: major spiritual illness of most inmates [read prisoners], especially repeaters, is shame and not guilt. At the deepest level they believe that they are "no good", not because they have done something bad (guilt) but because they are bad (shame). Whilst his definition of ‘shame’ should perhaps be contested, Duncombe (1992:198) continues "I am convinced that ... chaplain corps must be residential, made up primarily (if not completely) of inmates [read prisoners]". Therefore the prison would be like a ‘Bible College’, and the prisoners would be expected to minister to each other. Jardine (1978:105) similarly highlights the significant role that prisoners could play in supporting the role of the chaplain, pointing out that the "person who has most influence over the prisoner is her/his fellow prisoners". Jardine (1978:95) however, states that the "vast majority" of prisoners are "not deeply religious" and so the "screw in a Roman collar" (Atherton, 1987:80) may face "hostility" (Macquiban, 1995:9) 27
See also Prison Service Chaplaincy (1988:42) for details of the chaplain's wish to achieve reconciliation. 50
from the captive parishioners. Many prisoners regard the chaplain as a "key-carrying member of the establishment" (Ibid) and although "keys also open doors" (Ibid:2), they are more readily associated with the locking of cells and the denial of the prisoners' freedom. The Chaplain's Handbook (Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988) points out that "wearing his (sic) keys unobtrusively, is more important than the fact he holds them" (Ibid:28). The moral and practical dilemmas confronting the prison chaplain in their daily interactions with prisoners then are substantial. Indeed, Duncombe (1992:194) highlights some of the other problems of prison ministry. i) ii) iii) iv) v) vi) vii) viii)
Problem of shame, Problem of self deception, Lack of vision, Lack of realistic life plans. Shaky religious foundations. Scarcity of pastoral presence, Lack of prophetic voice, Few opportunities for meaningful human service.
Some of these difficulties are perhaps insurmountable in the prison context. Certainly, the prison is a "predominantly secular and godless community" (Clark, 1995:81), although chaplain Frank James (cited in Home Office, 1996:10) claims that: many inmates [read prisoners] who have no religion will still look on the chaplain as the best person to go and talk to when they have a personal problem. It can be important for a chaplain to be just a social worker. Taft (1978:55) argues that no more than 15% of prisoners attend religious programmes, whilst only 5% actually hold religious beliefs,28 although Hall Williams (1975:131) claims that for these prisoners such faith can be "a considerable source of support and comfort". Jardine (1978:127) however argues that "(t)he Christian in jail is always in a sticky position because (s)he comes under suspicion not only from many of (her) his fellow prisoners, but also from staff". Also the very nature of the chaplains' duties and the responsibility of chaplains to break bad news to prisoners, may favourably impact the prisoners' perception of them.
28
Taft (1978) was referring in particular to the number of American prisoners who were involved in religious programmes. 51
Yet, even among the prisoners who are committed Christians, Wyre (1992:73-7) maintains that people who sexually offend present the chaplain with "special problems". Some sexual offenders believe that a religious conversion, combined with an active prayer life and reading the Bible, will be "sufficient to suppress deviant sexual thoughts and behaviour". Such offenders subsequently refuse to have treatment despite the necessity to "alter victim creating thoughts" (Wyre, 1992:77) still being required. The point is not that chaplains should wash their hands of the person who has sexually offended, for Wire (1992:77) continues that: (t)raining in all areas of sexual deviance is necessary for all chaplains who deal with sex offenders. They are in a position to help the offender put religious belief into perspective and recognise the necessity of altering victim creating thoughts, feelings and behaviours. Macquiban (1995:4) argues that respect for chaplains "cannot be assumed by virtue of office" as some prison officers view chaplains as an "irrelevance in a place of confinement" (Ibid:9). Jardine (1978:118) similarly claims that: it is fair to say that many members of staff are probably sceptical about how much good the chaplain does ... [S]taff ... feel like ... the chaplain cuts no ice with the men and some prisoners only use him [sic] when they can get something out of him. Those members of staff who feel that the chaplain's role is an important one are probably people who have strong religious convictions themselves. The Prison Service Chaplaincy (1988:27) points out how the credibility within the Prison Service can be lost: If a chaplain, through carelessness or ill-will, endangers security, then [s]he is not only risking [her] his own position, but also letting down [her] his colleagues, possibly endangering the public and almost certainly bringing ministers of religion into disrepute. The chaplains are the only people in the prison who can go "where they will, when they will" (Home Office, 1996:15), and this 'free role' is at best misunderstood and at worst resented by many members of staff. Murphy (1956: 71) maintains that some prison officers believe that the chaplains spend most of their time "performing activities that are not of a religious nature", while Abbott (1968) argues that chaplains should be limited to religious or spiritual matters. Abbott (1968:29) asserts that the chaplain is not a "case-worker professionally today" and thus should 52
relinquish responsibility for all secular duties, concluding "how far he [sic] needs a greater freedom from his prescribed [religious] role can be questioned" (Ibid:31). Abbott (1968:31) also challenged the value of the chaplain's current "hierarchal position", the status of the chaplain certainly being of some concern to chaplains and prison officers. However, the Church Assembly report (1960, cited Ibid:30) stated that the chaplain: will not be worried overmuch by his [sic] status or the degree of official recognition afforded him so long as he can have reasonable opportunity of being in personal contact with his men. The unique role of the chaplain was upheld, however, by a recent Home Secretary (cited in Prison Service Chaplaincy, 1988:6), who stipulated that the chaplain "remains responsible to the governor for his (sic) role in relation to the establishment as a whole". The chaplain also has the: inalienable right of access to the governor whenever he [sic] judges that there is anything concerning the spiritual health of the establishment which needs to be brought to his [sic] attention. (Home Secretary, cited Ibid:4) Marchant (1989), Prison Governor of H.M.P. Pentonville, maintains that the importance of the chaplain "can hardly be exaggerated" (Ibid:6). Marchant (1989:5) continues believing that a "good governor will find help, support and indeed inspiration" from the chaplain, who is a "voice of sanity amid the mechanics of security and control". Therefore, despite hostility from the lower grades of officer, it would appear that governors appreciate the prison chaplain. This connection with upholding penal order raises questions concerning the manner and extent to which the prison chaplain remains a central cog in the penal machine, albeit now much diminished from the high water mark of the mid nineteenth century. Defender of the Faith and Human Rights? Whether the role of the prison chaplain should be one of prison reformer is by no means clear. Hansen (1985:5) points out that in North America a "growing number of chaplains nationwide" demand alternatives to imprisonment. Hansen (1985) argues that chaplains are calling for 80% of prisoners to be released whilst Mary Essex (cited Ibid) maintains that "there is no such thing as a Christian prison system". Taft (1978:58-9) cites a Protestant chaplain from Ristad, U.S.A., who believed that "(p)risons simply don't work. I want to demythologise them and show them for what they are: cold, boring and destructive places". 53
Prisoners are saturated in time
consciousness and feel the physical and emotional loss created by imprisonment intensely. The structured pains of imprisonment destroy hope and inevitably human life and remain highly morally contentious institutions (de Haan, 1990). There are similar views held in Britain, although this abolitionist perspective is not universal. Hoyles (1971:62), a former British prison chaplain, believed that the "strong (prison) wall is a barrier" for, just like the "Wall of Jericho, it must be broken down". Hoyles (1971) maintains that the chaplain could play an important role in the abolition of the prison, for "as long as Christ is alive in prison there is hope that it will gradually crumble" (Ibid). Certainly, whilst the chaplain is the undisputed "conscience" (Home Office, 1996:15) of the Prison Service, Williams (1994) argues that: (t)he chaplain is there because he [sic] accepts the Tightness of the job being done ... there may well be room for conscientious disagreement between Christians about the role of coercion ... but I assume that, if you are there at all, it is because you have, with whatever reservations, agreed that there is a legitimate task to be done (Ibid:51). Stokes (1988) also offers words of caution to those chaplains dissatisfied with the prison: When chaplains challenge the system ... they have to be careful as to when and how they do it. Too frequent carping about petty matters will bring a reputation as a small-minded bore with too much time on his (sic) hands (Ibid:4). Duce (1985:13), however, considers that the chaplain can be crucial in protecting the human rights of the prisoners, as they are "front line observation troops in this defensive battle". Duce (1985:12) argues that the chaplain can "open channels of communication in a field that can be divided between staff and inmates [read prisoners]". Hilpert (1993:50-1) argues that the chaplain can be the
defender of human rights in three important ways. First, the chaplain must "respect the prisoner's personality" and try to convince the prisoner that the "social self-image" of "self-hate" (Ibid:50) is wrong. In this sense the recognition of the shared humanity of those incarcerated is of central importance.
The chaplain can play a key role trying to combat the stigmatising and
dehumanising consequences of imprisonment. Second, the chaplain must be a "social bridge" with the "normal world" (Ibid).
Hilpert (1993:50) maintains that the chaplain's visit is
"considered to be more normal contact than with prison staff, visits from lawyers, doctors or social workers". The chaplain can also be a contact with the prisoner's relatives and friends outside prison and the prisoner's local clergy. Smith (1989:23), a clergyman in London, visits 54
parishioners in prison, bringing news of "family, friends and community and sometimes I am asked to pass on a message to those at home". Third, the prison chaplain must "personify the lawyer of the prisoner in public" (Ibid:51). Hilpert (1993) states that: (p)risoners in society belong to the weakest element because they rarely have opportunities to talk about their experience and interests in public ... (P)rison chaplains should exercise influence to provide clarification, professionalism, objectivity and reflection (Ibid:51). Similarly, Oliver (1972) argues that prison chaplains should: minister outside the walls to the organised religious groups with which they are affiliated ... Those outside of the actual walls of the prison need the prison chaplains' ministry as much, if indeed not more, than those inside the walls (Ibid:22). Byron Eshelman (1968, cited in Oliver, 1972) argues that: being a prison chaplain ... is something of an offbeat form of ministry not widely acclaimed in organised religion ... The organised church has a minimal interest in the prison chaplaincy and usually considers the chaplain as an outsider. Clearly, the prison chaplain is in a unique position to safeguard the prisoners' human rights, being ideally placed to give an informed account of life inside the carceral community. Non-Christian Ministry to Prisoners This study is primarily concerned with the role and perception of the Christian prison chaplain, particularly those ministers belonging to the Church of England. However, there are a large number of prisoners and chaplains who are non-Christians. In 1989 there were 1,819 Muslims, 469 Sikhs, 194 Hindus and 140 Buddhists imprisoned in England and Wales (Poulter, 1990:139). Under the provisions of the Prison Act (1952) and the Prison Rules (1964), any prison with large numbers of non-Christian prisoners must appoint a minister of that faith. Poulter (1990:140) states that in 1989, approximately 90 Muslim Imans had been appointed. A "Race Relations Policy Statement" issued by the Prison Service in 1986 (cited in Poulter, 1990:139) declared that: (m)embers of minority religion groups have the same rights to practice their faith as those of the majority faith. Wherever feasible in prison circumstances, arrangements are made to give them the 55
same practical opportunity to do so.29 All non-Christian prison chaplains are appointed on a part-time basis, with normally the Church of England minister in charge of resources for the whole chaplaincy team. Many Church of England chaplains are knowledgeable of other religions. The Prison Service Chaplaincy (1993) Directory and Guide on Religious Practice in H.M.P. Prison Service for example has full details on Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Bahai and Janism. Although there is some friction between the Christian and non-Christian ministers there is generally a spirit of cooperation. Padayachi (1995:78) highlights the ease with which both the chaplaincy and prison authorities allowed the building of a Buddha Rupa at HMP Risely in 1994.30 Non-Christian chaplains are few in number but many provide a valuable service to their parishioners. In some cases the groups of prisoners in non-Christian meetings may be the same size, or even larger than their Christian counterparts. The differences between the Christian and non-Christian prison chaplains are deeper than those concerning the propagation of their religious beliefs. Due to their part-time status, Sikh, Buddhist, Jewish and Muslim chaplains are not identified with the establishment. This, together with the particular religions' cultural identity, contributes to the proportionally greater success of non-Christian chaplains' ministrations. The Role and Perception of the Chaplain Prison chaplains are confronted with a number of challenges concerning both the fulfilment and application of their duties. The chaplain's role is unique and cannot be compared to that of prison officers. It "cannot be trimmed neatly to shape and pushed into a convenient corner of the [prison] structure" (Stokes, 1988:4). Difficult decisions concerning conflict of loyalties between church and state, combined with contrasting perspectives over the chaplain's role as 'prophetic' prisoner reformer, ultimately determine a chaplain’s priorities. Many chaplains face hostility from their parishioners. Yet, chaplains can have a substantial impact on a small number of prison officers and prisoners, despite the obstacles that may be placed in their way by those resentful of their ministry. Significantly, prison chaplains can perform a clear and indispensible role in the safeguarding prisoner human rights. However, 29 30
For details on race relations in prisons today see Genders and Player (1989). The prison authority also helped fund the building of the Buddha Rupa. The Buddhist chaplaincy organisation is called the Angulimala. 56
despite the essential nature of many of their duties, the accurate portrayal of prison life in public perhaps overshadows any other role the chaplains can perform.
57
CHAPTER FOUR
GOD’S MESSENGERS BEHIND BARS: THE ROLE AND PERCEPTION OF THE PRISON CHAPLAIN IN NORTH EAST ENGLAND
58
The research was conducted between the 12th March and 17th June 1996 at six penal institutions: Frankland Prison, Durham (a dispersal prison for Category A male prisoners); Durham Prison (a local prison for male prisoners, incorporating 'H Wing' for Category A women prisoners); Acklington Prison, Northumberland (Category C male prisoners); Castington Young Offender Institution (YOI), Northumberland and Deerbolt Young Offender Institution (YOI), County Durham (both for young male prisoners); Askham Grange Open Prison, Yorkshire (for Category D women prisoners). Twelve Christian prison chaplains currently employed at one or more of these establishments were interviewed and their evidence comprises most of this chapter. All of the chaplains, prisoners and prison officers questioned participated in semi-structured
interviews, unless otherwise stated. Ten ministers represent the Anglican denomination, of which, seven are full-time and three are part-time. The other ministers, from the Methodist and Roman Catholic denominations, each are part-time. The Roman Catholic Chaplain, Father Peter Chappel, works part-time at Frankland Prison, Durham Prison and Low Newton Remand Centre. Some of the other part-time chaplains interviewed also work at other penal institutions in the North East of England. Further, the Assistant Chaplain General, John Hargreaves, who has operational responsibility for all chaplains in the North of England, was interviewed at the Chaplaincy Headquarters in Stafford. Prison staff and prisoners were interviewed or completed questionnaires from the above penal establishments, as were Christian volunteers and members of Prison Fellowship. Their opinions are integrated with those of the chaplains in this chapter.31 The Role of the Prison Chaplain All chaplains interviewed considered that their primary duty in prison was to preach the gospel to prisoners and staff, demonstrating that God "loves everybody". The chaplains perceived their presence as fulfilling a dual role, representing not only God in prison, but also their respective church. These were not their only functions however. John Ernest Buglass (Methodist minister of Acklington Prison) stated that the chaplain was there "to help the prisoner cope with life", while Peter Chappel (Roman Catholic chaplain to both Frankland Prison and Durham Prison) aimed to "bring God into a pagan society, bringing principles, values and standards of Christianity". Canon Truman (Anglican chaplain of Acklington Prison) suggested that this could be achieved 31
For further details of questions to chaplains, prison officers, prisoners and volunteers see Methodology Appendix (1-3). 59
by "being a friend to those who need a friend and to do this from a fairly powerless position" because in prison "you only have the authority which the person you are talking to gives you" (Stan Bindoff, Anglican chaplain at Frankland Prison). Stan Bindoff, whose opinions reflected many of his colleagues, asserted that: first and foremost we are people of God. I think that means that we celebrate all the sacraments to proclaim the holy God and to evangelise the best we can. But then I think the role is extended. It is my responsibility to make sure every denomination and faith is represented ... The chaplain must also raise the humanity of the institution, by trying to humanise what is a dehumanising place and getting alongside people and attempting to encourage a different view of things. Stan Bindoff added “I am seen as the chaplain, and although I never sign up to that , I usually put down that I am the Church of England Chaplain, I am here full-time, and so administration tends to come to me anyway.” Ron Attley (Anglican chaplain of Deerbolt Young Offender Institution) succinctly argued that the chaplain's duty must be to "cloak prisoners in prayer and service". The way to achieve this must be determined however, in the words of Ian Galletley (Anglican substitute chaplain at Durham Prison), by whether the ministers decide "to spend a small amount of time with a great many people, or spend a lot of time with a few people". The execution of chaplains' duties can also "to large extent depend on the personality and outlook of the chaplain" (Canon Truman), while Canon Truman stated "I would not like to produce a blueprint of the role of the chaplain". But what are the perfect characteristics of a chaplain? Roger Clegg (Anglican chaplain of Askham Grange Prison) asserted that the "ideal" chaplain should be "approachable and empathetic", while Fiona Eltringham (Anglican chaplain of Castington Young Offender Institution) believed "you must be caring, involved with people and be prepared to listen: you must have big ears and a small mouth". In a similar vein Steve Mann (Anglican substitute chaplain at Durham Prison) believed that the ideal chaplain "is a good listener, motivated by compassion and concern, and a thinker who knows and understands one's own faith". Most of the chaplains interviewed believed that being cheerful and having a sense of humour were essential attributes, as a "smile and a joke can break down barriers and get you out of difficult situations" (Ian Galletley). Ann Tarper (Deputy Anglican chaplain at Durham Prison) stated that in the daily running of the establishment the chaplain was there to "meet, talk to, counsel and listen to both prisoners and staff". Similarly, Ian Galletley emphasised the importance of listening and showing a genuine 60
interest in the prisoners' lives, arguing that "prison officers don't often ask prisoners what they think because it is largely a kind of 'Rambo' world where people find it difficult to admit that they have feelings". Consequently, "many chaplains know many prisoners better than prison officers, but then they have a different job to do" (Ibid). Ian Galletley maintained "closed environments tend to have very fixed roles within them and anyone who has a different role faces particular stresses and certain irritations, which are built into that exceptional role automatically". Fiona Eltringham believed that it was important to: be involved in as much of the prison life as you can be by living alongside the prisoners and staff. Whilst there are specifically Christian aspects to the job, chaplains are part of the system, and so I am involved in various committees ... Sometimes it can be frustrating. The regime is limiting, and sometimes you cannot see prisoners when you want. Mike Dixon (Anglican chaplain of Durham Prison), known affectionately as 'Mick the Vic', believed the chaplain and religion played a crucial role in prison life. Mike Dixon highlighted the Sunday Service particularly, arguing that "everyone in the chapel is on an equal basis, whether prisoners, ministers or visitors, which doesn't happen elsewhere in the prison". In an increasingly multi-faith and atheistical society, however, it is inevitable that this will be reflected in the prison community. Yet, John Hargreaves argued that the prison chaplaincy is a "Christian chaplaincy, I think that is the first thing that you have to grasp". The Assistant Chaplain General continued, "some people would like to see it an all faith chaplaincy, but it is not, although it is an ecumenical chaplaincy". Peter Chappel believed that "we need to be a united church to have our voice heard in prison", while Stan Bindoff had "more problems with Christian sects such as Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses than with Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists". Canon Truman believed that "as chaplain I have to defend all faiths and I have learnt a lot from my Buddhist, Muslim and Jewish colleagues and I value their friendship". However, Ron Attley argued that "we talk about team work in the chaplaincy among the Christian denominations, but I don't think it works as well as we would like to think it does". Fiona Eltringham believed that "some chaplains are not happy about women priests" and this could be a barrier to ecumenism. Fiona Eltringham claimed that there were positive and negative elements to being a woman chaplain. Although it "might make it easier, as most of the lads are more courteous to a woman ... it is a very harsh and a very male dominated society and that can feel very isolating and lonely at times" (Ibid). 61
It is difficult to assess if chaplains gain job satisfaction from their ministry. Stan Bindoff pointed out that "so much of our work is unproductive, viewed negatively and it is constantly an uphill struggle", while Fiona Eltringham argued that "sometimes you think it is all a waste of time (but) ... you can be the one stable element in the prisoners' lives". Stan Bindoff wished "people would take more notice of what we had to say". He continues: most of the week I am alone doing things which are misunderstood or misinterpreted. I often feel a sense of hopelessness in the prison ... The loneliness and isolation is one of the most difficult things to cope with. Peter Chappel however reflected that overall being a chaplain can be very rewarding as "to help someone with depression or the loss of a loved one, or having a grown man cry on your shoulder, which he probably couldn't do with anybody else in the prison, shows that you are meant to be here for that person at this time". The chaplain's status in the Prison Service was "quite poor on the whole" (Steve Mann). According to Steve Mann: the No 1 Governor and senior management usually relate well to the chaplain, although among the staff generally there is not such status. I think it is because there is not a clear understanding of what chaplains are about. Because they don't understand where we fit in the hierarchy of functions they can't ascribe status. Sharon Jones (Anglican chaplain at Acklington Prison) asserted that "one of the biggest problems is defining the lines of authority, and where we stand in relation to the establishment". Another predicament confronting all chaplains, especially those who had served for a number of years, was "institutionalisation" (Mike Dixon): The chaplain can become identified totally with the institution and never question it. Not responding to prisoner needs. Always taking the institution's point of view and not admitting that innocent people are in prison, and by becoming defensive about the system instead of critical. (Ibid) Roger Clegg (part-time chaplain at Askham Grange) pointed out some of the difficulties that face a chaplain in an open prison:
62
It isn't easy. We don't have a captive audience, so it's not a matter of unlocking cells. We rely very much on chance encounters. Because they are not in cells here and are doing useful things, it's not so easy to get hold of them in the daytime. In the evenings, apart from Wednesday, the chaplains tend not to be here. The Chaplains' Relationship with Other Staff A major cause of concern for chaplains was hostility from other members of staff. Ian Galletley stated "I am sure you have been told already that prison ministry would be fine if it wasn't for the prison officers". Peter Chappel argued that he would like to "be recognised as part of the team by everybody and not just as a do-gooder or plonker, as is the attitude by some in here". Stan Bindoff asserted: we are often seen as bumbling amateurs who are jolly nice people but don't have much to offer. We have the right to go anywhere at any time or see anybody we wish to see at any time. It would be lovely to be able to operate like that but it is difficult to do because we meet so often with barriers because staff don't accord to us the position we actually have. Education, probation, psychology and chaplaincy are the four areas that are seen as the "do-gooders", which officers and governors often want to suppress because we can be a thorn in the flesh. Mike Dixon similarly argued, "you have to form networks of like minded people, you have to look for allies. Our natural allies are education and probation. You can't do things on your own. You also have to have links with the church". Mike Dixon continued that "all the things that we have stood for are being questioned, and security, security and security is the only thing". Perhaps one explanation for this is that the chaplains are "seen as a security threat" (Ibid). Ian Galletley also wanted: to see more respect for God's messengers, there are a minority of officers in particular who think that we are a waste of space, and a few who are rude and make life difficult. The difficulties are rarely with the prisoners, but between officers and other chaplains because of how things are done. Governors tend to look at the chaplain in terms of cost and what good you do in keeping the prisoners happy and quiet. They realise that chaplains are quite good counsellors and we do often have a good relationship with difficult prisoners as they see us as different from the screws ... So in many respects we keep the lid on the prison... Many officers regard us as amiable irrelevances, and some of them think we are naive idiots who believe everything that prisoners tell us, but they are the ones who don't know anything about what we actually do 63
because they never sit in any of our conversations. One thing which has always struck me is that the male officers who are easily embarrassed, a lot of the most 'Rambo', weight lifting types have conformist attitudes. They find the fact that we are prepared to sit in a cell and pray with someone rather disturbing because they couldn't do it. Generally, I feel we get on better, and are held in higher regard by officers with more intelligence, who can see, whether they have faith or not, it is a basic human right to be able to talk to people in confidence. Ian Galletley believed that the chaplains should not however be naïve: The chaplain has to be realistic. You have to be tough in the sense of not being an easy touch. You've got to know the world. You have to understand the men, who can be very difficult and cynical, and what their life is like outside ... You must not let yourself be bullied in here, but if you do make a mistake, it is very important to apologise for it. Nobody apologises in prison. Peter Chappel made a similar point when he argued: there is a lot of negativity, this place is not Christian. I feel it when I am snubbed and when officers deliberately ignore me. They will do anything not to talk to you, such as look the other way or look at the floor ... Although not accepted on the whole, when we are needed we are there and are used. Similarly, Canon Truman thought "one of the worst problems is the attitude of some of the members of staff, who are sometimes very difficult, rude and insensitive". This has far reaching consequences as "these attitudes of the officers are taken out on the lads who come to chapel" (Ibid). The credibility of the chaplains among their colleagues seemed to vary. Stan Bindoff highlighted the crucial distinction between the chaplain's relationship with the staff and the chaplain's credibility: A lot of staff will stand around and have a talk or joke with me, but that doesn't mean I have credibility. I am accepted as a person in the prison, but whether I am accepted as a professional is another thing. People think "Stan is a nice chap, but doesn't have a clue about life". I think staff see chaplains and their work as largely irrelevant, preaching medieval mumbo jumbo.
64
Peter Chappel believed that such criticism was unfounded as "we have time for people, and we have experience of life and dealing with people in varied situations", claiming that "disruptive prisoners will talk to us who won't talk to the officers". Mike Dixon maintained that "credibility with the staff has got to be won these days ... the problem is challenging ... they don't like to be challenged of course". The relationship and credibility between chaplains and staff was further complicated as "staff are always individuals, there is no such thing as 'chaplains' or 'staff, we all have a different approach" (Ibid). Ron Attley asserted that the chaplain was only called "when people don't know what to do with someone, such as in a bereavement". For Stan Bindoff credibility "depends on what we are doing": I was in the hospital yesterday talking to a prisoner with only weeks to live and I know that earned some credibility from the staff I was working with because of the time I spent and what I said to him. Everybody thought I was going to say "let's pray", and that will come, but we talked about hard things like "you are alive until you die". Ian Galletley claimed that some staff "act like children, being naughty in front of the vicar", believing that: most officers only have two ways of assessing your credibility. One is what they make of the way you are around the place and how you deal with them personally, and the other is what prisoners say about you. The best way to gain credibility with staff is to offer some counselling to officers who are facing problems. If you can help them come to terms with the death of a child or the end of a marriage, then you gain it there. Problems between staff and the chaplains are not however universal.
Although in HMP
Frankland, HMP Durham and HMP Acklington, most chaplains faced hostility from some prison officers, the chaplains from Castington Y.O.I., Askham Grange Open Prison and Deerbolt Y.O.I., appeared to have good relationships with staff. A similar comparison could also be made between the male and female chaplains. Ann Tarper argued that she was "accepted by each member of the staff simply as a colleague, my relationship with the staff is good and I find that encouraging". Ron Attley believed "I am generally well received", while Fiona Eltringham likewise argued that "the Governor is very supportive ... there are certainly no no-go areas for the chaplaincy": I think I have a good bantering relationship with most staff. I get 65
quite a lot of teasing and that is usually a good sign that you get on with people. The chaplain needs to be seen as someone who is part of the place, not an optional extra thrown in. It is important to make time for staff as well as prisoners. Most of the chaplains held weekly or monthly meetings for the staff and most were poorly attended. Fiona Eltringham stated "I run a staff Eucharist once a month ... there were two of us at the last meeting". Maintaining a focus on the positive, Roger Clegg stipulated that: all the staff are very friendly to me and I have only found them helpful. That has been my experience. I try to know their names and encourage them to call me by my name. I try to have meals with the staff as often as I can ... a number of them do come and chat to me about their problems. Ann Tarper argued that "you have to keep a balance between being friendly with the prisoners and friendly with the staff" as you "have to make sure you are not seen to be taking sides". Steve Mann likewise stated "some chaplains are perceived as friends of prisoners, but not of staff. Other chaplains are perceived as being friends of staff and not prisoners. Both of these are a failure." Ron Attley argued that "recently I have had more pastoral chatting with the staff because morale is low", while John Hargreaves claimed "chaplains are almost universally on the staff care team, and in many establishments they are chairman". This view was supported by Canon Truman who stated that chaplains had a crucial role to play in helping staff: We have a privilege of confidentiality. We are the only officers in the prison who don't have to report conversations with a prisoner or member of staff. Whoever comes to us knows that what they discuss will never be disclosed to another person. A lot of members of staff are stressed due to budget cuts and are quite prepared to see a chaplain where they are not prepared to talk to anyone else. (Ibid) This was not their only difference with other prison officers. Stan Bindoff believed that: we are here to offer people hope. We have a unique responsibility to do this. If you asked most staff who they dealt with in the prison they would say prisoners. I would hope the chaplain would say people ... Prisons are here to constrain people, chaplains are here to set them free. We want to help people live in the constraints of prison. Mike Dixon pointed out that "other staff have a disciplinary role". The prison officer's main 66
duties were concerned primarily with security and they must "see that the prisoners are fed, watered and exercised ... we are independent of that" (Ibid). John Hargreaves stated that the chaplain walks: a tightrope as a chaplain between staff and prisoners. If you are too much on one side or the other, you find yourself in trouble and marginalised ... It is important that chaplains call prisoners by their names and not their prisoner number. The chaplain must remind people that they are human beings sharing a common humanity. To appreciate fully the perception of the chaplain it was also necessary to analyse the views of prison officers. John (a Health Care Officer from Durham Prison) stated that "on the whole the chaplains do a good job, although some are better than others": They quite often dilute situations although a lot of the old hat staff tend not to give them much credit ... Many staff have not got time for chaplains. We have to be security conscious twenty four hours a day ... they do a worthwhile job ... (and) it would be a sad day if they withdrew from prison. (Ibid) Monica Brown (an officer at Durham Prison Hospital) believed "they serve a good function, especially when breaking bad news" although "we stumble across the chaplain in the hospital, they should give us warning of when they are coming". Margaret Anderson (administrative assistant to the chaplains at Frankland Prison) believed that "as people they are OK, they are very friendly": I think the chaplaincy get ignored in the prison to a certain extent. The staff in general don't really know what the chaplain does. Many view them as a hindrance or a nuisance or even as a bit of a joke, although there are a lot of situations believe me, where the minister can calm people down ... I think they are seen as a nuisance quite honestly. David (a prison officer from Frankland Prison) stated that the "chapel is just another place to meet which could be turned into a nice big tea room for the officers", rating the chaplain's contribution "on about par with the library" (Ibid). T. G. Bowden (a Health Care Officer at HMP Frankland) believed: the chaplaincy are a good resource but staff don't have time to talk. Chaplains are people who mainly talk to inmates (read prisoners), especially during the day when we are busy, they have time to 67
listen. I like the chaplain, but some don't, maybe it's a personality clash. R. Shepherd (a Buddhist prison officer at HMP Frankland) argued for a "religious coordinator who is not a minister of a particular religion": Stan (Bindoff) will go out of his way to help staff, he will even go to their home. They play an important role but that depends on the individual chaplain. A lot of them would not want to be disturbed at midnight to go and tell a prisoner somebody has died. (Ibid) The Chaplain and the Prisoner Stan Bindoff believed that chaplains "don't have much credibility with prisoners". He believed that there is very little interest in religion in dispersal prisons, stating "chaplains only impact on the lives of prisoners in dealing with marriage or in dealing with death". Stan Bindoff continued: They probably assume that we have "sold" out because we're employed by the state. I find it very hurtful when people accuse me of hypocrisy, as I know I am not a hypocrite. I try to tell them that keys open doors as well as lock them. Stan Bindoff went on to say "many are a joy to be with and over the years there are many prisoners who I view as friends", while Ian Galletley asserted: the majority of prisoners are pleased to see you although if they are in a large group on the wing they will often try to tease and taunt and mock you to see what you are made of, but very few deny your right to be there and many of them enjoy the therapy of sharing a trouble. Ann Tarper believed that "prisoners are grateful for someone who is not there to do nasty things to them ... we don't have a disciplinary role". Peter Chappel highlighted some of the problems facing chaplains: There is a lot of ignorance, apathy and antagonism towards us, but many people would treat ministers outside the same as God is not part of their lives anyway. After prisoners have talked to us on the wing there is an interrogation by others, such as "what did he want?" or "what did you tell him?", even though it may be confidential to that man ... Prisoners also associate bad news with the chaplain as we have to inform prisoners of a death. (Ibid)
68
The amount of genuine interest in religion among prisoners seemed slight when examining the number of prisoners who attend the chapel services. At Frankland Prison the chapel service attendances for non-vulnerable prisoners were normally in single figures. However, at other institutions, such as Deerbolt Y.O.I, and Castington Y.O.I., attendances were quite high, although the motivation behind the prisoner's decision to attend the chapel service may have more to do with seeing their friends or as an opportunity just to get out of their 'pad' for a while rather than with spiritual matters. Ann Tarper did not think this "such a bad thing" as "at least it proves that they consider chapel a preferable option to being in their cells". Mike Dixon claimed that those prisoners who were interested in religion normally turn their backs on Christianity, preferring "bizarre things like the occult", though "coming to prison is a bit like a bereavement and people normally think about faith when they are bereaved. It makes them think where am I at, where have I come from and where am I going to" (Ibid). Steve Mann argued: it is important that prisoners don't think that the chaplain is a messenger boy here just to make their lives easier. We are here to help those who are genuine and we have to use our experience to differentiate where help is necessary, but not taking on board responsibilities which belong to the prisoner. Steve Mann believed that only a "very small number indeed" of prisoners actually have "real faith".
Surprisingly, this may not be such a bad thing as "there are very serious risks in
evangelising": The whole dimension of the psychology of the individual and the power that a chaplain has in terms of the way people think present very serious dangers for chaplains, who can over influence prisoners, vulnerable into ways of believing. You can almost guarantee that if I was talking to a distressed prisoner and worded what I am saying in such a way as to imply that he needs to agree with what I believe about God for his life to improve, then he will agree with me and I will have a convert. But this gives the impression that this is going to solve all of their problems, and then they will discover this is not the case, and because the prisoner's faith was based upon that, it will collapse. The prisoner will be worse off and I will not have helped that person. You do hear claims of hundreds of prisoners becoming Christians and it causes me concern. The faith the prisoners gained in prison has done them no good outside back in their old life. They are worse off because of it. They have tried God and it has failed. I do not think we are about the business of building more failure into people's lives. This is what we have the power to do if we are not careful. (Ibid) 69
Mike Dixon also highlighted the "vulnerability" of prisoners, for there was "the temptation for the chaplain to hit people with God when they are down, and the other temptation is to confuse bringing prisoners to chapel with bringing prisoners to God". For Roger Clegg the impact of the chaplain in open prison was largely negligible "for most of the people who come through the doors, we have largely no effect". Stan Bindoff argued that prisoners sometimes used the chaplain to pass on information to the authorities. "Sometimes we are told things that need to go elsewhere. Sometimes prisoners tell us things knowing that it has to go elsewhere and that is why they have told us" (Ibid). Peter Chappel stated: ... if a prisoner asks if they can speak to you confidentially, we say yes on the condition it doesn't concern your own safety, the safety of somebody else or the prison itself. John (a Health Care Officer at Durham Prison) supported this, stating that chaplains: on the whole get on well with inmates [read prisoners], providing that is what the inmates [read prisoners] want. They have the sense not to encroach on the inmates' [read prisoners’] space. The majority will confide in the chaplain, they need to talk to a neutral. The chaplain is no threat to them and they use the chaplain as a middle person. Steve Mann reiterated this perception, maintaining that "the chaplain is the only person who will shake the hand of the prisoner, whoever it is, or whatever they have done". When discussing ‘Christian prisoners’, Peter Chappel made the important point that: you are dealing with men with a very low faith level ... (however) it is not easy being a Christian. It is normally easier to do wrong than to do right. Fiona Eltringham also highlighted some of the difficulties facing Christian prisoners: To be able to survive you have to present a hard man image, and even though some of the lads are prepared to say they go to chapel, and would be quite prepared to say publicly that they pray and read the Bible, they still have to be able to live on the wing. For youngsters in particular it is not easy to be different. 70
Virtually all 36 prisoners interviewed claimed they had some belief in God and spent considerable time with the chaplain and this must be taken into consideration when analysing their comments. Francis Hammond (Chapel Orderly at Durham Prison) highlighted a crucial distinction in the perception of the chaplain by prisoners: If I had a genuine problem, like if my mam died, I'd like him to come and check on me to see if I'm alright until I'm over that period and back to normal. If you've got a problem, then the chaplain is an indispensable person, but if you haven't got a problem, the chaplain is classed as a member of staff because they have a set of keys. (Ibid)32 Hosni (a Muslim prisoner at Frankland) attended the chaplain's mid-week groups, stating that the chapel "is a nice place to come, we get plenty coffee, plenty tea". Charlie went to Frankland Chapel three times a week and explained that there were a number of reasons why he did this: ... I might feel like an easy afternoon, or I might feel like a compelling debate. I might feel like dodging work to get to the gym ... so it can be for both religious reasons and leisure. My personality relates to the chaplain. They are approachable, the chaplains listen, unlike the screws. (Ibid) Albert similarly attended Frankland Chapel three times a week. "It gets us off the wing, the coffee in the chapel is better than on the wing ... we have a laugh". Jimmy believed the Frankland chaplain was good at "talking to you, helping you with faith, cheering you up and also gives you belief in yourself.” Graham (a Christian prisoner in Frankland) believed: ... some laugh and some sneer, a lot of people come to get out of workshops. Some people don't want to embrace it because they are afraid, so they hit out at it. It is easier not to be a Christian in prison. Andy (also a prisoner in Frankland) stated "I used to be a violent person but now I keep myself to myself": I keep control of my anger ... I came to chapel and it changed my life ... it's now the new me. If I have a problem I go to see the chaplain ... He can pray, or I can pray myself in the pad ... (Ibid) 32
All quotations and comments from prisoners are highlighted in bold in this chapter to emphasise the differences in consent between prison and staff respondents in the study. 71
Mo Langti (a disabled prisoner) mainly confined to Frankland Prison Hospital stated, under the watchful eye and ear of a prison officer, "there is not much a chaplain can do although it is nice to know that they are there, you see the chapel is one part of prison which doesn't seem like prison". 'Lightning' (a prisoner at Frankland) had only encouragement for the chaplaincy until he realised that the researcher was not a chaplain. Lightning stated "there are things I can tell the chaplain I can't even tell my mam and dad": I like a little tiff, I like to deny God's existence, but I'm only looking for Him to show me that He is there. It's a little game I play. (Ibid) However, Lightning later claimed "when I was a Rastafarian they didn't talk to me ... I'm not saying they are racist, it may be just be me ... (but) chaplains only talk to Christians". Phil (a Christian prisoner at Acklington) believed the chaplains were: a lot better than prison officers. They want power, and are very macho. There are a few good officers around but they don't trust prisoners. Chaplains treat us like individuals ... Phil continued that "in large groups prisoners are quite hostile" and there "could be more presence on the wing, the only time the chaplain is on the wing is for bad news". Sean (the Orderly of Acklington prison) claimed that: ... chaplains are better than staff, some of the staff aren't keen to help anybody. Staff also tend to go behind the chaplain's back and make things awkward for the chaplain. (Ibid) Noleen (Durham Prison Questionnaire), from Durham Prison 'H Wing', maintained that "at the end of the day the chaplains work for the prison so their first loyalty is to the prison and not the prisoners". Sue May (Durham Prison Questionnaire), also in the 'H Wing' at Durham Prison, stated that: Mick the Vic is very easy to talk to. I would always feel if it was necessary, I could speak to him about any matter. He helps whenever I need advice or assistance. If you ask him to speak to anyone needing advice, he will do so. However, Shiyanbola (Durham Prison Questionnaire) asserted that "towards me, the chaplain's behaviour is worse" than other prison staff. Shiyanbola goes to the "service on every Sunday, 72
but he doesn't know anything about me". David (Durham Prison Questionnaire), a male prisoner in Durham Prison, believed that the "chaplain's attitude seems better than the prison staff, but there are really good prison staff'. Paul Thompson (Durham Prison Questionnaire) stated that the chaplain "is a very nice person, comical, funny and easy to get on with", while Sean (Durham Prison Questionnaire) maintained that "he is a very caring person and I think that some of the prisoners should take him more seriously". Kurt, (a male prisoner at Durham Prison) argued that "staff think chaplains are black and white penguins, they think they are interfering". In the Young Offender Institutions the chaplains' perception amongst those prisoners questioned was also favourable, such as Simon (a prisoner at Deerbolt) who stated that: my gran died recently and they wouldn't let me go to the funeral, so I went to the chapel on the same day. The chaplain's worth it just because of his help then. (Ibid) Ben (Questionnaire, Castington Y.O.I.), a prisoner at Castington, wrote "Fiona is a nice person to know and does a lot to help people out and organise visitors and groups", while Keeran (Questionnaire, Castington Y.O.I.) believed "she is nice and understanding and she treats you for the person you are". Thomas (Questionnaire, Castington Y.O.I.) simply wrote "I think she is the best". Chaplain and Volunteers One of the other main groups of people dealt with by chaplains are Christian and non-Christian volunteers. All the chaplains questioned were pleased to have visitors as they "can have more effect than the chaplaincy team" (Canon Truman). They bring the outside world into the prison and "are appreciated by the lads" (Peter Chappel). However, Stan Bindoff argued that one of the "frustrations about this, is the type of Christian we get, as they come inside and believe that chaplains simply aren't Christians". Stan Bindoff stated that "in one of my previous prisons I actually had to sack someone because they were undermining everything the chaplain was trying to do". Likewise, Mike Dixon asserted: we have to be careful with Christian volunteers. Some want to bring God into prison and convert everybody, and so we say God is already here.
73
Steve Mann stated that "a lot of Christian outside groups come to prison services thinking they are coming to convert the prisoners ... it is up to the chaplain to moderate that influence". Lillian (a representative of Prison Fellowship in Frankland Prison) believed that "Mike Dixon (a former Chaplain at Frankland) is a nice chap but he isn't a Christian, it's so nice to have a chaplain at Frankland who is a Christian". However, this observation probably had more to do with this person's perception of the chaplain's role in prison than the beliefs of the particular chaplain. Monique Smith (Field Director of Prison Fellowship) stated that chaplains are "absolutely vital as they are the only people prisoners can go to and be honest". Rose (a Christian Volunteer in Frankland Prison) felt "privileged" to work in the prison with the chaplain. Rose believed that the chaplain performed "an important ministry as these people who have a great need in their life and have a lot of time to reflect". Sister Mary (a Catechist at Durham Prison) believed that chaplains "have a very difficult job because the prison authorities don't take them seriously. The Durham chaplain doesn't stand on his dignity. He'll take flak. He meets them where they are at and he treats them like people of worth" (Ibid). The Chaplain and Outside Links Steve Mann believed that the chaplain "has a unique opportunity of informing people of what happens in prison and challenging perceptions", although the "general mood in church is to think that everybody has an easy life and deserves to be there ... until it happens to them". Steve Mann believed that "church people can be very narrow minded and unaware of many realities of life. The chaplain is in a unique position to challenge that." Peter Chappel argued that many members of the public were "set in their ways" and when explaining the harsh realities of prison life "you often see them shaking their heads negatively". Mike Dixon outlined the reaction to giving a talk to a group outside of prison: It's quite a lively debate. I normally say prisoners are not working and it is a waste of time sending people to prison because people normally grow out of criminality as it's a young man's game. Everyone else wants to send people to prison. Canon Truman stated that "I think one of the saddest things is the lack of interest by the churches outside in the work of the chaplains and the punitive attitudes of some of its clergy and congregation". Similarly, Fiona Eltringham argued that "people need to know that there are prisons because most of us want to forget them". John Hargreaves stated: 74
I think the chaplaincy has a responsibility to keep the church in contact with the kind of people who come to prison. It is very heavily under used by the church as a whole. You hear clergy say that some people are un-churched, but you will probably find that they have had a lot of contact with the church when they've been in prison.33 Overall, chaplains rarely remained in contact with ex-prisoners as the prisoners regarded the chaplain as part of their prison life. Peter Chappel explained why chaplains rarely hear from exprisoners: I occasionally get a letter, but when people have done their time and walk out of the gate, it is all behind them. They need people in prison, but when they go they are out of this world and back into their own with their family Mike Dixon aptly stated that the "most contact we have with ex-prisoners is when they come back in again", and even those ex-prisoners who found faith in prison may return to their former parish. Canon Truman stated "we know human nature is not perfect and there are many Christians who sin" and some of these sins may be against the law. Mike Dixon asserts "I suppose the question is, can you be a Christian burglar, and I suppose you can", believing, "we are all sinners, some are illegal". The Purpose and Legitimacy of Prison Ann Tarper believed that there were four reasons why people were sent to prison: Firstly, society needs to be protected from some people. Secondly, society demands people are punished. Thirdly, putting people in prison can give some people the opportunity or motivation or necessity of re-thinking their lives and what they are doing, and how they relate to other people. Fourthly I think some prisoners realise they have done wrong do need to feel that they have paid a debt to society by being punished. Ron Attley argued that prisons really "keep these lads off the streets and stop them causing havoc ... (prisons) punish and exclude, but rarely rehabilitate”. Peter Chappel argued that "until you've experienced loss of freedom you don't know what it means", maintaining "the dehumanising of coming to prison is never forgotten". Mike Dixon thought "people underestimate the pain of 33
The Durham Prison chaplain had contact with the Meadowell Estate local vicar and community leaders as a number of prisoners were from this area of Newcastle. 75
imprisonment". Ron Attley continued, "I don't disapprove of that, but I just wish we would all come clean about it and say what we are doing".
Mike Dixon asserted that "prisons are
fundamentally un-Christian": I think the whole idea of forgiveness is central to the theology of punishment. Forgiveness involves being aware of what you have done; being sorry for what you have done; intending not to do it again, and also doing something in reparation of what they have done. Then forgiveness comes. Many people think forgiveness is a soft option, but it's not. The pain of realising what you have done is the biggest punishment. (Ibid) Mike Dixon argued: we have a lynch mob mentality led by the media and fuelled by a government looking for votes. Part of our job is to fight against that tide ... Punishment has to be linked to the community from where the offender came. The offender will be made to feel shame for the damage they have done and therefore won't do it again ... Prison probably makes reconciliation more difficult. For reconciliation to take place there has to be dialogue. If the prisoner is locked away, the dialogue is broken for there is no longer communication between the offender and the community from which they have come. When Steve Mann was asked what he viewed to be the purpose of prison he replied: God knows, I don't. I haven't the faintest idea. It seems to me that the prison is a total failure. Frankly I think prisons are keeping people out of sight and out of mind. Prisons are such a terrible waste. Probably a minority of people need to be locked up, for the general safety of the rest of society, for their families and maybe even themselves. There are some lads in here that I've spoken with whose sole intention is to go out and re-offend. They don't care about coming to prison because their mates are here. The two things they miss in prison are alcohol and sex, if it's with a woman. Plenty of sex with men, plenty of drugs. The prisoners have no intention of changing. Why? Because in reality there is no other way to live. The chaplains were also asked questions concerning eternal punishment. All of the chaplains believed that it was wrong to use the notion of eternal damnation as a means of securing the repentance of their parishioners. Mike Dixon stated:
76
I don't believe in eternal punishment. I don't believe that people should be frightened into the Kingdom of God. My main preaching on the Christian faith is how we live our lives here and now. Abolitionism and the Chaplain The majority of chaplains interviewed believed that they had a role as a reformer and that the current system was not ideal, although most hesitated at the thought of abolishing prisons. Ian Galletley was "not in favour of political priests … I am old-fashioned enough to favour a division between religion and politics". Mike Dixon believed that "there are plenty of chaplains who don't believe that the prison system works" but that "we are here because that is where the people are". Stan Bindoff stated "there are a lot of areas in the prison that aren't good", arguing that the chaplains have to be "bloody nuisances, bringing a Christian perspective into jail". However Stan Bindoff asserted that "I wouldn't work in prisons if I thought there wasn't a place for them": I am uneasy with the government policy of building new prisons. Maybe part of the reforms would be to knock down a few prisons or at least to design creative regimes within the prison, or develop new punishments in the community. I don't think you could ever abolish prisons entirely because there is a need to remove some people from society for the good of society. (Ibid) Peter Chappel stated that "some people need to be in prison, but I think for people who have committed petty crimes, prison is not the answer". Steve Mann maintained that it was right for chaplains to work in the prison system as it gives them "the opportunity to do the positive things we do". If the chaplains were not part of the prison service "we might not be able to function at all, and that would be a great loss ... it is right for the chaplain to work for reform or abolition where appropriate" (Ibid). Ann Tarper stated that "I would certainly like to see as many people as possible kept out of jail" and although Fiona Eltringham "can't see a way of not having prisons at all ... too many people are in prison for too long". Ron Attley held similar views: You look at a lot of prisons and you see in them a lot of violent people who need to be locked up, and I think that is fair enough, we should do that, but rather than opening more prisons we should be reducing them in number. Sharon Jones thought: there has to be found a different way. I do not think locking men up for great lengths of time serves any useful service for them. I think 77
the issues of why they are here in the first place need addressing, and they are not being addressed. Ron Attley believed that in Deerbolt Y.O.I, there were: ... a few lads who to me should be in a mental hospital and being cared for and getting appropriate treatment. We are not doing them any favours by keeping them here. On the other hand, we also have young boys in here from 15 years old, who are not really geared up to cope with it at all. Canon Truman took a different perspective stating: to reform means taking apart and rebuilding, which I think is a little unrealistic. The standpoint I'd like to take is one of evolution, allowing the good things to grow and getting rid of the bad. The chaplain's job is to encourage and to criticise so that we can allow the prison service to evolve and become more humane and efficient. Canon Truman continued: wherever possible people should be punished by loss of facilities or by being made to do things in restitution or working towards rehabilitation. I think this is better done in the community. Once you have taken a person out of society, you then have to put them back in, and all of the problems that entails. John Hargreaves highlighted the position of the chaplaincy hierarchy by arguing: we'd all like to be worked out of a job, but we must support the system in a sense that we support the rightness of the method of punishment. Whether it is rightly applied to everyone who is in prison is another matter. However, when you are working in a system you cannot work against it, and it would be wrong to do so.
78
CHAPTER FIVE
PRISON CHAPLAIN: ABOLITIONIST OR REFORMER?
79
Before outlining the conclusions to this study it is necessary to recognise the parameters of the research. The project concentrated on the reflections of Anglican chaplains and consequently the analysis primarily reproduces the views and experiences of chaplains of the Established Church. This is not, however, to deny the legitimate role performed by prison ministers belonging to other Christian denominations or chaplains representing non-Christian religions. Further, the views of those prison staff and prisoners who detailed their perception of the chaplain cannot necessarily be deemed as typical of the prisons investigated or of those in the penal system in general. The overwhelming majority of prisoners questioned either stated their belief in God, or spent time with the chaplain or in the chapel 'by choice', if such a concept exists in prison. It is therefore likely that the prisoners surveyed hold a more favourable view of the chaplain than those prisoners who have little or no contact.34 It is impossible to generalise about the relationship between the chaplain and prison officers. It is clear from the interviews with prison chaplains and prison officers that in some prisons chaplains face considerable hostility from some of their work colleagues. Overall, there is a lack of understanding of the role of the chaplain by prison staff and, possibly because of this, at least a significant minority of officers view chaplains negatively. This is manifested in the officers' behaviour towards chaplains such as ignoring them or regarding their presence as irrelevant. This perception of the chaplain, as a 'do-gooder', who has no valuable professional contribution to the prison community, was found to be most prevalent at HMP Frankland, HMP Durham and Acklington Prison; the three prison regimes that carried the highest security of the adult prisons investigated. In these establishments, even where male chaplains had good personal relationships with staff, this did not translate to acceptance or credibility. The female chaplains in these prisons did not believe that they had problems with other members of staff, although the prison officers questioned were not gender specific in their criticisms or praise of the chaplaincy. Interestingly, the chaplains at Deerbolt YOI, Castington YOI and HMP Askham Grange, with lower security categories, claimed to have good relationships with their fellow officers. Unfortunately this cannot be verified as staff from these institutions were not interviewed. Yet, the chaplain's privilege of confidentiality within prison regimes is unique. Combined with the appeal of a spiritual solution, such privacy in a world of constant surveillance means that in times of crisis some prison officers abandon their prejudices and turn to the chaplain for help. 34
See Methodology for further details on research methods used in study. 80
This implies that the perception of the chaplain is not fixed or definite and can either improve or decline, depending on personal dealings and relationships with other members of staff. What is certain is that 'respect' for the chaplaincy is earned rather than ascribed. The role that the chaplain performs is ultimately the reason for their enforced isolation from other members of staff. The conflicting interests of the chaplains' masters, church and state separates them from their secular colleagues. The chaplains must ensure that their functions are legitimate in the eyes of both the state and their church, which cannot necessarily be done without challenging colleagues or the operation of the prison regime. The dehumanisation which characterises the penal system35 contrasts sharply with the chaplain's mission to bring love and compassion to all confined behind the prison walls. The research suggests that chaplains have little impact on the lives of the majority of prisoners. On the wing, chaplains are unpopular. Peer pressure, the lack of privacy and the 'macho' culture of prison, combined with the association of bad news with the chaplain, prevent many prisoners being openly friendly. Yet, chaplains claim when they have a one-to-one private discussion with prisoners, whether Christians or non-Christians, their captive parishioners usually are friendly. Which of these two scenarios most accurately reflects the true perception of the chaplains and their credibility among prisoners is not clear. The chaplains and the majority of prisoners questioned claimed that at least a minority hold the chaplain in high regard. In the prison, with the often false relationships between prisoners and the confrontational stance between prisoner and staff, the chaplain is often the prisoner's only 'friend' and confidante. Although, in quantifiable terms the presence of the chaplain is virtually negligible, for some prisoners their faith, and contact with a chaplain may significantly improve their quality of life. On the surface, the reformative impact of the chaplain appears to be insignificant. Yet, the notion that a person's belief in a religion which promises future rewards for the suffering of the present, may have an impact on the lives of prisoners. The Church of England's theological interpretation of the Pauline thesis of civil obedience can be analysed in context of the prison regime. If prison is regarded as an unacceptable and inappropriate form of punishment, it is possible that the presence and teachings of the chaplain may prevent a significant challenge. Chaplains and officers claimed that chaplains often communicated better with difficult prisoners than other 35
For examples of the horrors of prison life see Prisons Under Protest by Scraton, Sim and Skidmore (1991). See also British Prisons by Fitzgerald and Sim (1982) for critique of legitimacy of the prison. 81
members of staff, possibly diffusing volatile situations. Prisoners gave accounts of how they had changed because of their belief in God. In earlier chapters it was suggested that the church and religions play an important part in the maintenance of hegemony. The teachings of religion may make the unacceptable, acceptable. In this context, the chaplain's presence can act as an 'opiate' to disillusioned prisoners, thus suppressing opposition to the penal system. The analysis thus far presents the chaplain as being in a non-influential role as it relates to the majority of staff and prisoners. Yet, a zealous chaplain, eager for converts, could manipulate individual prisoners, thus ultimately ministering to a wider audience.
The chaplains were
however aware of the dangers of over-influencing their captive parishioners and the possible negative consequences of a religious conversion for prisoners while in prison and after release. The research also suggests that the chaplains had to contend with clergy and Christians in the community who hold punitive views. Some of the chaplains faced hostility when challenging these perceptions of the prison. Most chaplains interviewed regarded the penal establishments as a form of exclusion rather than a means for facilitating the reform or rehabilitation of an offender. Without doubt, prison is the personification of short-term sentencing policies. Prison does little to compensate the victim and fails to address the offender's behaviour or provide a remedy for the irrational nature of much ‘criminality’ and other problematic conduct. Yet ultimately, it has long-term implications for the lives of those it contains. The Assistant Chaplain General clearly argued that the chaplain must support the prison as a legitimate form of punishment. This endorsement of state punishment highlights the Established Church's theological standpoint that the state performs punishment on God's behalf. This understanding of the scriptures requires the roles of church, state and punishment to be interlocked for 'God's will' to be carried out on earth. The mutual support between church and state throughout the centuries has conferred legitimacy upon both institutions. The chaplain's presence in prison reaffirms the Christian Church's acceptance of the state's monopoly of physical repression. However, the radical critique of liberation theologians challenges the assumption that the state is 'God's agent' of retribution. Liberation theologians call for the abolition of laws made by 'man' (sic), arguing that justice cannot be achieved this way. Therefore, as the prison is made by 'man' (sic) and upholds 'man-made' (sic) laws, then likewise, the prison should also be abolished. While all chaplains proclaimed a prophetic role in the prison, defending and advocating humanitarian 82
reforms, only a minority considered that this role should entail demand for prison abolition. The chaplain's role previously has been described as promoting reconciliation with the prisoner's self, with others and with God. However, the chaplains interviewed highlighted the inappropriate nature of the prison as a means for reconciliation, proposing that prison was neither helpful for the prisoner nor the victim. They considered that prison prevented reconciliation rather than facilitating it. It has also been asserted that some offenders want to be imprisoned in order to repay a debt to society. This justification does not provide a legitimate basis for imprisonment as neither the state, nor broader society, forgives prisoners. While this perspective may enable offenders to take responsibility for their actions, other forms of punishment, providing opportunities for reconciliation and avoiding the stigmatisation of imprisonment, could be more preferable and morally justifiable options. Whatever the justifications or not of evangelism in society, any proposition that religious conversion is a legitimate justification for imprisonment requires critical scrutiny. The inherent vulnerability of the prisoners and the subsequent power of the chaplains to manipulate their captive parishioners, combined with the brutalisation of prison regimes, points towards the unacceptability of prison as a 'Bible College'. It is debatable whether 'repentance to God' under such deprived and persuasive conditions is desirable. Prison thus has dubious legitimate status as a means of reforming offenders through Christianity. Whatever the similarities between the cellular structure of the monastery and the prison in the former institution, repentance is an act of free will; this is not and never can be the case in the prison. Religion can have no legitimate role in prison other than guaranteeing the rights of the prisoners to practice their faith. Prison chaplains have a historic and prophetic role as prison reformers. However, reform has a nasty side-effect of protecting, supporting and providing even greater legitimation for the prison. The chaplain who disagrees with the prison system ultimately can only provide justice for wrongdoers and those who have been wronged by opposing the penal establishment instead of attempting to modify it.36 While humanitarian reforms may improve the conditions of those currently incarcerated, they do not contest the appropriateness of the prison as a form of
36
See Mathiesen (1974) The Politics of Abolition for detailed discussion on the necessity for "unfinished" proposals on prison reform, and the susceptibility of prison reform to strengthen these illegitimate institutions rather than significantly improving the lives of those contained within them. See also Carlen and Tchaikovsky (1996) for details of "utopian realism" and prison reform. 83
punishment. But why should Anglican and other Christian chaplains wish to challenge the prison? The Christian theology of punishment, which is accepted by the Established Church, is clear: Christians should support the State's right to punish, but are free to challenge the methods used in its discharge. Certainly, a number of the chaplains interviewed questioned the legitimacy of the prison and one chaplain described it as 'unChristian'. Alternatively, responses to wrongdoing may better serve both offender and victim if based on notions of restitution, reconciliation and 'shalom'. Means of redress could be located in the community rather than behind the walls of a prison. The chaplain is ideally positioned to inform the debate on abolitionism, especially to the Christian community outside of prison. Undoubtedly, the chaplain has played an important role in the history of the penal system and this study suggests that the chaplain may have an important part to play in its future. The decision whether to support the continuation of prison as the ultimate sanction of the state, or as a crucial ally to reformers calling for its abolition, could be decisive. What is beyond question is that the chaplain can no longer be ignored by academics either sociologists of historians.37 The chaplains are not simply surrogate social workers or psychologists.38
The contemporary
chaplain’s role is distinctive and cannot be compared to any other member of staff in the ‘community of cells’. Chaplains perform an independent function, ministering to often ungrateful parishioners and possibly provide a social bridge between prisoners and staff.39
The potential, however, for
improvements in the discharge of state interventions in response to personal harms, troubles and 37
38
39
It is necessary that a historical analysis of the chaplain is written so that appropriate assessment of the chaplains’ contributions to the prison over the last 220 years can be attained. See also Ignatieff (1978, 1981). See Garland (1990), who believes that the chaplain's role is similar to that of a social worker. This study of the perception of the prison chaplain only incorporated the views of a small number of prisoners and prison staff. It is essential for further understanding of the perception of the chaplain that more detailed research is undertaken on the opinions of both staff and prisoners. It is also necessary to investigate further the differences in the role between the ecumenical partners in the Christian ministry; the differences between full and part time chaplains; and, possible of even greater importance, the role and perception of non-Christian ministers of religion. These three areas are not adequately covered in this study. 84
problems are immense.
A massive reduction in the number of prisons and their possible
replacement by community based alternatives would require a drastic appraisal of the chaplain's role. The chaplains could become representatives of their respective Christian denominations or religions in the wider community, performing a pastoral role dealing with offenders and victims of crime. The Christian principals of restitution and reconciliation may be better observed in the community, where the needs of all members of society could be assessed. Certainly, teaching offenders, victims of crime and the Christian community the biblical lessons of love, forgiveness, compassion and acceptance may facilitate a greater understanding of the needs of offenders and their criminalised behaviour. This potential role for the Christian prison chaplain in the community could be more productive than the current attempts to express God's love in an environment based on depriving prisoners of their freedom.
85
APPENDIX ONE
METHODOLOGY
86
The details of the research conducted and research methods utilised in this study are divided into three sections. 1.
Outline of the six penal establishments involved and the chaplain's, prisoners, prison officers and Christian volunteers interviewed. There are also details of the research carried out at the Chaplaincy Headquarters, Stafford and the Prison Fellowship Roadshow, Durham, plus information on prison observations.
2.
Duplications of the semi-structured interviews and questionnaires used in the study.
3.
The justifications for the research methods used and problems encountered during the investigation.
Section One: The Research Methods The investigation into the role and perception of the contemporary prison chaplain was researched at six penal establishments in the North East of England. 1.
Frankland Prison Type of Prison Average Number of Prisoners Location Days Visited prison
: : : :
Chaplains interviewed
:
Research Methods
:
Number of Prison Staff Interviewed Number of Prisoners Interviewed Number of Prisoners Completed Questionnaires Number of Christian Volunteers Interviewed
: : :
Dispersal Prison 383 male, Category A prisoners Durham 12th March, 29th April, 30th April, 2nd May, 3rd May and 5th May 1996 Stan Bindoff, Anglican Chaplain, (2nd May, 1996); Peter Chappel, Roman Catholic Chaplain (2nd May, 3rd May, 1996) Semi-structured interviews. Structured interviews. Structured/semi-structured interviews. Observation/participant observation. 4 members of staff 10 prisoners interviewed -
:
4 Christian volunteers
87
2.
3.
Durham Prison Type of Prison Average Number of Prisoners
: :
Location Days Visited prison
: :
Chaplains interviewed
:
Research Methods
:
Number of Prison Staff Interviewed Number of Prisoners Interviewed Number of Prisoners Completed Questionnaires Number of Christian Volunteers Interviewed
: : : :
Local Prison 500 male, Category B prisoners. ‘H’ Wing, 48 Category A female prisoners. Durham 2nd April, 22nd April, 25th April, 28th April and 6th May 1996 Mike Dixon, Anglican Chaplain, (25th April, 1996); Ian Galletley, substitute Anglican Chaplain (28th April, 1996); Ann Tarper, Deputy Anglican Chaplain (6th May, 1996). Additional help from Janice Hodgson, assistant to the Roman Catholic Chaplain and Louise Kinsey, Salvation Army). Semi-structured interviews. Structured interviews. Structured/semi-structured interviews. Questionnaire. Observation/participant observation. 2 members of staff 2 prisoners interviewed 4 male prisoners 6 female prisoners 1 Christian volunteer
Acklington Prison Type of Prison Average Number of Prisoners Location Days Visited prison Chaplains interviewed
: : : : :
Research Methods
:
Number of Prison Staff Interviewed Number of Prisoners Interviewed Number of Prisoners Completed Questionnaires Number of Christian Volunteers Interviewed
: : :
Training Prison 574 male, Category C prisoners. Northumberland 18th April, 16th May 1996. Canon Truman, Anglican Chaplain, (16th May, 1996); Sharon Jones, Anglican Chaplain (16th May, 1996); John Ernst Buglass, Methodist Chaplain (16th May 1996). Semi-structured interviews. Structured/semi-structured interviews. 2 prisoners interviewed -
:
-
88
4.
5.
Askham Grange Type of Prison Average Number of Prisoners Location Days Visited prison Chaplains interviewed
: : : : :
Research Methods Number of Prison Staff Interviewed Number of Prisoners Interviewed Number of Prisoners Completed Questionnaires Number of Christian Volunteers Interviewed
: : : :
Prison 100 Category D female prisoners. North Yorkshire 14th May 1996. Roger Clegg Anglican Chaplain (14th May 1996) Semi-structured interviews. -
:
-
Castington Young Offender Institution (Y.O.I.) Type of Prison Average Number of Prisoners
: :
Location Days Visited prison Chaplains interviewed
: : :
Research Methods Number of Prison Staff Interviewed Number of Prisoners Interviewed Number of Prisoners Completed Questionnaires Number of Christian Volunteers Interviewed
: : : :
Y.O.I. 280 Category C male prisoners aged between 17-21. Northumberland 27th March, 9th May 1996. Fiona Eltringham, Anglican Chaplain (9th May 1996). Semi-structured interview questionnaire 11 male prisoners
:
2 Christian volunteers
89
6.
Deerbolt Y.O.I. Type of Prison Average Number of Prisoners Location Days Visited prison Chaplains interviewed
: : : : :
Research Methods
:
Number of Prison Staff Interviewed Number of Prisoners Interviewed Number of Prisoners Completed Questionnaires Number of Christian Volunteers Interviewed
: : :
Y.O.I. 366 male prisoners from 15 years old. County Durham 7th May, 17th June, 1996. Ron Attley, Anglican Chaplain (17th June 1996). Semi-structured interviews Structured/semi-structured interviews 1 prisoner -
:
-
In addition to the six penal establishments outlined above, research was conducted at two other locations. a)
Chaplaincy Headquarters, Stafford. Assistant Chaplain General, John Hargreaves, interviewed using Semi-structured interview on 14th July, 1996.
b)
Prison Fellowship Roadshow, Durham. Interviewed 3 members of Prison Fellowship using Semi-structured interviews on 30th April, 1996.
Observations Another research method used in this study, but only at Durham and Frankland Prisons, was Observation. The results of both direct and participant observations are documented in Appendix Two and Appendix Three. In Durham prison the researcher observed a number of chaplains conducting reception interviews. The researcher was present at nine reception interviews and documented the chaplain's questions and the responses of the prisoners to them (for further details see Appendix Two. The researcher also observed the Anglican Chaplains' Sunday Services at Frankland Prison (5th May, 1996) and Durham Prison (28th April, 1996). At Frankland Prison the researcher participated (I joined in with singing hymns) in the services for Rule 43 prisoners and ordinary prisoners. At Durham Prison the researcher attended the Anglican Service for female prisoners in the Chapel on 'FT Wing, and the service for male Rule 43 prisoners and ordinary prisoners. The researcher also 'shadowed' the Anglican Chaplain, Stan Bindoff, at Frankland Prison and a number of chaplains at Durham Prison (for further details see Appendix Three).
90
Section Two: Chaplaincy Research PRISON CHAPLAIN SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW
PART ONE
THE CHAPLAIN
PART TWO
RELATIONSHIP WITH STAFF/ PRISONERS
PART THREE
LEGITIMACY OF PRISON/ PUNISHMENT
PART FOUR
CHAPLAIN AND OUTSIDE LINKS
PART FIVE
CHAPLAIN AS REFORMER/ ABOLITION
PART SIX
CHAPLAINS ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
91
PRISON CHAPLAINCY RESEARCH SEMI - STRUCTURED INTERVIEW NAME OF PRISON NAME OF CHAPLAIN DATE
…………………………………………….. ……………………………………………... …………………..
TOPIC
TIME
PART ONE TESTIMONY TRAINING ACCOUNTABILITY AIMS/ROLE OF CHAPLAIN IDEAL ROLE/CHARACTERISTICS JOB SATISFACTION PROBLEMS/VULNERABILITY/ISOLATION ECUMENICAL APPROACH AND OTHER RELIGIONS STATUS PART TWO RELATIONSHIP / CREDIBILITY WITH STAFF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CHAPLAIN / STAFF RELATIONSHIP / CREDIBILITY WITH PRISONERS OFFICIAL OR FRIEND PRISONERS INTEREST IN RELIGION IMPACT OF CHAPLAIN ON PRISONERS LIFE PART THREE THEOLOGY OF PUNISHMENT AND PURPOSE OF PRISON REFORM? REHABILITATE? DETER? RETRIBUTION? 92
PUNISHMENT - REPENTANCE - FORGIVENESS FORGIVENESS/RESTITUTION/RECONCILIATION REPENTANCE AND CONTINUATION OF PUNISHMENT / PRISON THE AFTER LIFE - ETERNAL PUNISHMENT / SALVATION RECIDIVIST CHRISTIANS IN PRISON AND SOCIETY NON CRIMINAL SINS PART FOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRISTIAN VOLUNTEERS PRISON AS A BIBLE COLLEGE CONTACTS WITH EX PRISONERS RELIGION AND CRIME PREVENTION CHAPLAIN AND OUTSIDE LINKS PART FIVE DOES CHAPLAIN SUPPORT PRISON SYSTEM ABOLITION AND CHAPLAIN PART SIX CHAPLAINS OWN / ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
93
QUESTIONNAIRE ON CHAPLAIN NAME OF PRISON FIRST NAME AGE …………………
……………………………………………. ……………………………………………. MALE / FEMALE
1 PART A Please tick/circle Yes or No 1.
Do you go to chapel on Sunday's or regularly meet with the Minister of your faith?
YES
NO
2.
Do you believe in God?
YES
NO
3.
Do you Pray or read religious books such as the Bible?
YES
NO
4.
Did you have Faith before you came to Prison?
YES
NO
5.
Have you found Faith in Prison?
YES
NO
PART B Please circle/tick the relevant answer 6.
Would you prefer to watch / attend A Chapel Service An Educational Talk
Eastenders
7.
Compared to other Prison Staff do you think the Chaplain is More Helpful Less Helpful About the Same
8.
If there was NOT a Chaplain would Prison be a Better Place Worse Place
About the Same
PART C Please write in the space provided 9. How often do you speak to a Chaplain? Would you prefer to see more or less of the Minister of your Faith?
94
10.
What do you think of the Chaplain?
11.
Can you talk too and / or trust the Chaplain to help you in both spiritual / religious and practical ways?
12.
In your opinion is the Chaplains behaviour / attitude towards you different (better / worse) than other prison staff?
13.
Has the Minister of your Faith / Religion made a significant impact (good or bad) on your life in prison?
14.
Could the Chaplain do more to help you?
15.
Is there any other comments you would like to make about your Chaplain / Minister of your Faith?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CO-OPERATION
95
PRISON CHAPLAINCY RESEARCH PRISON STAFF INTERVIEWS NAME OF PRISON FIRST NAME ROLE / JOB IN PRISON DATE
……………………………….. ……………………………….. ……………………………….. ………………………………..
TOPIC
TIME
PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE OF CHAPLAIN / CHAPLAINCY OVERALL PERSPECTIVE OF CHAPLAINCY WITH STAFF PERSONAL CONTACT WITH CHAPLAINCY PERCEIVED ROLE OF CHAPLAIN IN PRISON CHAPLAINS RELATIONSHIP WITH PRISONERS DOES PRISON NEED A CHAPLAIN COULD CHAPLAIN DO MORE TO HELP STAFF / PRISONERS OTHER COMMENTS ON CHAPLAINCY
96
PRISON CHAPLAINCY RESEARCH PRISON VOLUNTEERS INTERVIEWS NAME OF PRISON FIRST NAME ROLE / JOB IN PRISON DATE
……………………………….. ……………………………….. ……………………………….. ………………………………..
TOPIC
TIME
RELATIONSHIP WITH CHAPLAIN PERCEPTION OF CHAPLAINCY / CHAPLAINS ROLE VOLUNTEERS ROLE IN PRISON ROLE OF RELIGION IN PRISON PERCEPTION OF PRISONERS OTHER COMMENTS ON CHAPLAINCY
97
Section Three: Justification and Problems with Methods Utilised Thus, as sections one and two outline, a number of research methods were used in this study. A.
Semi-Structured Interviews for chaplains at all six penal establishments and Assistant Chaplain General.
B.
1. 2.
C.
Semi-Structured Interviews for prison staff at Durham and Frankland.
D
Semi-Structured Interview for Christian volunteers at Castington, Durham, Frankland and Prison Fellowship Roadshow.
E.
Observations/shadowing of chaplains at Durham and Frankland.
A.
PRISON CHAPLAINS All of the chaplains interviewed undertook semi-structured interviews. This research method was chosen as it gave the opportunity for the chaplains to give as much detail of their role and perception in the prison community as they felt appropriate. The limited data on the chaplains made quantifiable research techniques difficult. The researcher was unable to ascertain from the literature research exactly what issues the chaplains felt were most important. Therefore a wide ranging number of questions/areas were given to the chaplain. A semi-structured interview was chosen rather than an unstructured interview, because of the limited space in the dissertation for their comments to enable a comparison between the views of the chaplains could be attained. The researcher deemed the five areas of: Testimonies; relationship/credibility with staff and prisoners; the purpose of prison; outside links and the chaplain as penal reformer/abolitionist, to be the most significant for this study. However, the chaplains were also given the opportunity to cover any other areas that they felt were relevant. The interviews lasted between 45 minutes to 2 1/2 hours, with the majority of interviews lasting approximately 1 hour 20 minutes.
Questionnaires for prisoners at Durham and Castington Structured/Semi-Structured Interviews based on prisoner questionnaire at Deerbolt, Durham, Acklington and Frankland.
However on the negative side, this research method made it impossible to generalise on the opinions of the chaplains interviewed. Possibly quantitative research methods in addition to the semi-structured interview may have given a clearer account of where the chaplains' opinions lay on issues such as abolitionism. B.
PRISONERS 1.
Questionnaires The questionnaires were given out to 30 prisoners in Durham and 10 were returned. 11 questionnaires were handed out to prisoners at Castington, all of which were returned. Due to either time constraints, lack of opportunity to meet prisoners or opposition from Prison Authorities/chaplains, no other questionnaires were handed out or completed. At Durham Prison 20 questionnaires were given to male prisoners and 10 to 98
female prisoners. All questionnaires were completed by prisoners between 28th April - 6th May, when collected from the chaplains' office. At Castington 11 questionnaires were given to prisoners after the chaplains mid-week meeting and completed that evening (9th May, 1996). This research method was chosen because of the limitations for the researcher in the prison and because it gave an opportunity to acquire the views of prisoners unable to spend time talking to the researcher. However, this method of gaining the perceptions of prisoners may not be reliable or representative of the overall views of prisoners.
2.
i)
All of the prisoners completing the questionnaires had considerable contact with the chaplain or belief in God.
ii)
At Castington, the chaplain was in or near the room where the prisoners completed their questionnaires. At Durham the questionnaires were given back to the chaplains. These factors may have influenced a more positive perception of the chaplain and some prisoners may have feared recriminations if negative views were expressed.
iii)
Some of the prisoners, especially at Castington, had difficulty understanding the questionnaire and some prisons had difficulty with reading and writing. It was not the intention of the questionnaire to embarrass the prisoners who were unable to complete it.
iv)
The position of the research was ambiguous and many prisoners believed the researcher was either a trainee chaplain or in some way connected to the Anglican Church. Certainly, by accompanying the chaplain, the researcher was probably associated with the chaplain and possibly the Establishment. Some prisoners may have perceived that the researcher wanted only positive feedback and duly obliged (prisoners were asked to give honest opinions, whether good or bad, although the researcher could have distanced the relationship with the chaplains and thus appeared to come from a more neutral perspective).
v)
The prisoners may have felt that they would receive a reward from the researcher/chaplain if they gave positive feedback.
Structured/Semi-Structured Interviews The questionnaires were used as a basis for an interview with 1 prisoner at Deerbolt, 2 prisoners at Acklington, 2 prisoners at Durham and 10 prisoners at Frankland. All of the prisoners interviewed were male. The interviews varied between Structured/Semi-structured methods, depending on the answers given by prisoners and their willingness to talk on other issues regarding either the chaplain or experiences of prison life. This method of research was used whenever possible. The prisoners were able to express themselves verbally, which they might not have been able to do in writing. More detailed answers were given by the prisoners and it also gave the prisoner some opportunity to raise issues which they felt were appropriate. 99
The disadvantages of this method of research are very similar to those outlined above. i)
Prisoners had belief in God and/or spent time with the chaplain.
ii)
Prisoners viewed researcher as friend of the chaplain.
iii)
Prisoners may have felt obliged to give positive feedback.
iv)
Prisoners may have felt that they would receive a reward if they gave positive feedback.
However, two incidents at Frankland Prison merit further elaboration. Lightning, a prisoner at Frankland, gave a very detailed and positive account of the chaplain in the first half of the interview. However, he had been under the mis-apprehension that the researcher was a trainee prison chaplain. When it was made clear that the researcher was a Criminologist, Lightning's account of the prison chaplain significantly altered. He detailed some of the problems he'd had with the chaplains, claiming he had been discriminated against on racial grounds. Mo Langti, a disabled prisoner, confined mainly to Frankland prison hospital, was chosen by a Prison Officer as an 'ideal' interviewee. While Mo Langti was being interviewed the prison officer asked Mo if he had any positive comments to make on the prison chaplain. The prison officer stood near the prisoner throughout the interview. Mo Langti appeared very self-conscious and unwilling to talk in detail (see Chapter Four for details of prisoner comments). Therefore the perception of the researcher and the intervention of prison officers could influence the accounts given by the prisoners. C.
PRISON STAFF Four Prison staff were interviewed at Frankland Prison and 2 members of staff at Durham Prison. All interviews were semi-structured. Staff were unwilling to talk about the chaplains and a number of officers declined to be interviewed at both Durham and Frankland.
D.
CHRISTIAN VOLUNTEERS Two Christian volunteers were interviewed at Castington, 1 Christian volunteer in Durham and 4 Christian volunteers in Frankland, 3 members of Prison Fellowship were also interviewed for the study.
E.
PRISON CHAPLAIN OBSERVATIONS The chaplains at Durham and Frankland agreed to allow the researcher to 'shadow' them for a whole day. At Frankland the chaplain was observed on 29th April, 1996. A number of chaplains in Durham Prison allowed the researcher to accompany them on 22nd April, 1996. At Durham Prison a number of chaplains allowed the researcher to 'sit in' on nine reception interviews. This allowed an observation of the chaplains' questions to prisoners and responses. The researcher also was present at the Anglican Sunday 100
Services at both Frankland and Durham. The research method provided in insight into the perception of chaplains on the wing as they visited various prisoners; the attitudes of staff and prisoners in the services; and the overall attitude of the staff. However, the researcher was 'not invisible' and may have had an impact on the behaviour of the chaplains, prisoners and staff.
101
APPENDIX TWO
RECEPTION INTERVIEW RESEARCH
102
The observations of the reception interviews were conducted at Durham Prison. On the 22nd April, 1996, the researcher observed three reception interviews of prisoners by Salvation Army Chaplain Louis Kinsey. On the 25th April, 1996, the researcher observed 6 reception interviews by Anglican substitute Chaplain Ian Galletley. The discussions between the chaplain and the prisoners must be treated as confidential. Therefore, only a generalised description of the reception interviews can be given. The approach by both chaplains to the reception interviews was similar and so this account incorporates the questions of both chaplains without identifying their source unless stipulated. The reception interview can take place in either the prisoner's cell or 'pad', or in interview rooms on the wing. The chaplain firstly asked the prisoners their name, address and their offence. The chaplains then asked questions concerning the prisoner's family and their life history. There was very little emphasis on religion. Rather the chaplains gave advice on practical issues. Louis Kinsey (observation, 22nd April, 1996) stated, "we are not here to convert you but to help you ... keep your head down and stay out of trouble". The length of time each interview took and questions on a prisoners religious belief depended upon the response to earlier questions. The average length of time for each reception interview was 10 minutes, although some interviews lasted only 5 minutes and one continued for more than 15 minutes. The approach of the prisoners to the chaplain varied greatly, some prisoners welcomed the chaplains, while others regarded them as a joke. Overall, the reception interview was probably not considered important by the prisoners. However in one interview, which was observed, the chaplain was greatly welcomed. The prisoner had been in prison for nearly a week and was scared to leave his cell. The chaplain was the first person he had spoken to in three days. The interview lasted a lot longer than normal (approx. 16 minutes, the researcher felt uncomfortable writing in the prisoner’s cell in case the prisoner believed the researcher was making notes of his conversation). The prisoner did most of the talking and was very depressed. The chaplain arranged to visit the prisoner again the next day to see if he could help him Overall, none of the nine reception interviews observed were the same, contrasting most dramatically in the attitudes of the prisoners. Although the chaplains controlled the conversation and asked the questions, prisoners did have the "choice" as to how much they would tell the chaplain and if they would have contact with the chaplain again.
103
APPENDIX THREE
PRISON RESEARCH OBSERVATIONS
104
The researcher observed other aspects of the chaplain's role and perception in both Frankland and Durham prisons. In both penal institutions the researcher 'shadowed' the chaplains for a day and observed the Sunday Services. 1.
Frankland Prison a)
The Anglican Chaplain, Stan Bindoff, was observed on the 29th April, 1996 for whole of working day. Time Activity 9.30 a.m. - 9.35 a.m. 9.35 a.m. - 10.30 a.m. 10.45 a.m. - 12.15 p.m. 12.30 p.m. - 12.45 p.m. 12.45 p.m. - 1.00 p.m. 1.00 p.m. - 2.00 p.m. 2.00 p.m. - 2.05 p.m. 2.05 p.m. - 3.00 p.m. 3.00 p.m. - 3.10 p.m. 3.10 p.m. - 4.00 p.m. 4.00 p.m. - 4.05 p.m. 4.30 p.m. - 5.15. p.m. 5.15 p.m. - 5.30 p.m.
Arrival Administration Hospital Visit (visits terminally ill prisoner) Lunch Administration Vulnerable Prisoners (Rule 43) Chaplain's group preparation Vulnerable Prisoners and Christian volunteers arrive. (28 prisoners, 6 volunteers and researcher) Video Presentation ("Cross and the Switchblade") Chaplain discusses how video relates to wider Christian principles and relevance of prison life Tea/Coffee - Discussion with Chaplain Vulnerable prisoners leave Chapel Unexpected visit of Deputy Governor (interested in research being undertaken) Administration/leave Prison
b)
Observations of life for the chaplains in Frankland Prison cannot be speculated upon, as only a limited amount of time was spent in the prison dealing with the chaplains and other members of staff, prisoners and volunteers. However the Anglican Chaplain seemed frustrated by the length of time it took for even basic tasks to be completed. The Anglican Chaplain had to deal with an enormous amount of administrative matters and spent relatively little time dealing with religious or spiritual aspects of prison life. The Anglican Chaplain was the only the chaplain in the Institution most days of the week and had little support from other members of staff.
c)
The researcher observed the Anglican Chaplain's Sunday Services on 5th May, 1996. i)
Vulnerable Prisoners Service (9.30 a.m. Service) At the Eucharist there were three prison visitors, 12 prisoners (Rule 43) and the researcher. The Service started 15 minutes late as it had taken longer than expected to move the prisoners from the wing to the Chapel. The prison staff provided no explanation for the delay.
ii)
Other Prisoners (10.30 a.m. Service) Because of the delay in earlier Service, this Eucharist started nearly 20 105
minutes late. One prisoner attended the Service. The content of the Service was the same as in the earlier Eucharist. 2.
Durham Prison a)
The observations of the chaplains working day at Durham involved three chaplains; Louis Kinsey (Salvation Army Chaplain), Peter Chappel (Roman Catholic Chaplain) and Mike Dixon (Anglican Chaplain). The observations of the chaplains at Durham were undertaken on the 22nd April, 1996 and the evening group of the Anglican Chaplain on that day is also documented. Time
Activity
8.30 a.m. - 8.45 a.m. 8.45 a.m. - 9.00 a.m.
Arrival Administration/Tea/Discussion about who will do Reception Interviews Morning Prayers and Bible readings (Anglican Chaplain, Roman Catholic Chaplain, Salvation Army Chaplain, Prison Trustee and researcher) Administration Reception Interviews (with Louis Kinsey, see previous Appendix for details) Hospital Visit (with Roman Catholic Chaplain, Peter Chappel) Visit to Meadowell Estate, Newcastle (with Mike Dixon).
9.00 a.m. - 9.20 a.m. 9.20 a.m. - 9.40 a.m. 9.40 a.m. - 10.35 a.m. 10.35 a.m. - 11.00 a.m. 11.00 a.m. - 1.45 p.m.
The Meadowell Vicar visits parishioners in Durham Prison and has had contact with Chaplains since 1991. The Anglican Chaplain visits Meadowell once or twice a month to keep contacts between community and prisoners. Meadowell Group Meeting (Mike Dixon, Charles Hope (local Vicar), Carol Bell (Community worker), Prison Officer and researcher). Meeting discussed next visit to Durham Prison to see Meadowell prisoners.
106
Time
Activity Lunch break.
1.45 p.m. - 3.30 p.m.
3.30 p.m. - 4.45 p.m. 5.00 p.m. 5.00 p.m. - 5.30 p.m. 5.30 p.m. - 7.45 p.m. 8.00 p.m.
H Wing Chaplains Group (Louis Kinsey) (6 women prisoners, researcher and M.A. counselling student). Prisoners watched two videos (Testimony by Bobby Ball) and discussed relevance to prison life. Administration End of normal working day Tea Chaplains Evening Group (5 prisoners, Chaplain, pianist, three Durham University students and researcher). Singing and discussion. Finish
b)
Observations of life for the chaplains in Durham are only limited. The difference between the regimes at Durham and Frankland are immense; there seemed a greater co-operation between some members of staff and the chaplains and also more enthusiasm among prisoners on religion. There was a very positive ecumenical approach by the chaplains with many chaplains from different Christian denominations working together closely.
c)
The researcher observed the Anglican Chaplain's Sunday Service on 28th April, 1996. Despite the differences in the audiences the contents of all three services were virtually identical. i)
'H' Wing Chapel Service (9.15 a.m. Service) 8 women prisoners attended the Service with Anglican Chaplains Mike Dixon and Steve Mann leading worship. The researcher was also present and a trainee Anglican Minister at a local Theological College. All of the prisoners (except one) took Communion and all seemed genuinely interested in the chaplain's sermon. Despite the absence of the organist, there was enthusiastic singing of hymns.
ii)
Ordinary Prisoners (10.30 a.m. Service) 15 prisoners attended with researcher and trainee Minister; a Prison Officer was also present. Two chaplains led worship (as above). The prisoners did not seem particularly interested in the Service. There was hardly any attempt to sing the hymns. However, because there was no organist, the prisoners may have felt shy and self-conscious.
iii)
Vulnerable Prisoners (Afternoon Service) 20 prisoners attended Service, with researcher also present. Mike Dixon and Steve Mann led Worship. With no musical accompaniment, there was only small participation in the singing of hymns. 107
These observations outline the differences between the role of the chaplain in a dispersal prison and a local prison. It would appear that the chaplains in the local prison have greater freedom in their role and may have greater opportunities to deal with the spiritual side of prison life. Only 13 prisoners attended the Anglican Chaplains two Services at Frankland on the day visited, while 43 prisoners attended the three Anglican Services at Durham. It is interesting to note that Vulnerable Prisoners (Rule 43 in adult prisons and Rule 46 in Y.O.I.) appear to have more interest in the Christian religion than other prisoners. A greater proportion of vulnerable prisoners attended Chapel Services in all of the prisons visited. However, the observations and interviews of the prisoners and chaplains did not examine the differences in religious belief between Vulnerable Prisoners and other prisoners. This differentiation may require more research (see Wyre (1992) for further details).
108
APPENDIX FOUR
COMPARISON OF CHAPLAINS' DUTIES (1857-1996)
109
It has been argued by historians and sociologists (such as Ignatieff (1978, 1981) and Garland (1990)) that the Chaplains influence and position in the prison has declined in the last 150 years. Outlined below are the duties of the Prison Chaplain at Walton Jail, Liverpool in 1857. These duties are then compared to those of the Chaplain in the Chaplaincy Handbook (1988), which outlines the role of the contemporary Prison Chaplain. The similarity of duties and their categorisation by Shimmin (1857) highlights the continuity between the role of the Chaplains today and that of their predecessors. 1.
Hugh Shimmin (1857, pp39-40) Amongst the appointed public duties of the Chaplain of our Borough Gaol are that he shall on every Sunday, Christmas Day and Good Friday and on public fasts and thanksgiving days, perform the appointed morning and evening services of the Church of England and preach a sermon. He has also to read prayers, to be selected by him from the Liturgy, together with a portion of scripture, in the Chapel. As far as practicable he is expected to see every prisoner in private in order to direct his advice and instruction according to the peculiar character and state of mind of those upon he has to act. He has also frequently to see the sick and attend, at all reasonable times, any prisoner who may require his spiritual advice and assistance; to pay special attention to juvenile offenders and daily visit prisoners in solitary or close confinement for prison offences. If he observes that the mind of any prisoner is likely to be injuriously affected by the discipline or treatment, he reports the fact to the Governor, the Surgeon and one or more of the visiting Justices. He directs the distribution of books to prisoners and sees that there is proper supply of reading lessons, slates, copy books and other material for instruction. The following may be taken as an epitome of the rules relating to the Chaplains duties:Positive and Daily 1. Prayers. 2.
Visit prisoners in solitary or under confinement.
Positive but not Daily 1. Assemble prisoners in class for general religious instruction. 2. Visit the sick. 3. Visit every room and cell. 4. Pay special attention to juveniles. 5. Frequently visit schools and examine progress. Conditional if Practical 1. See every prisoner in private. 2. See and admonish every prisoner on admission and discharge.
110
General 1. Divine Service on Sunday. 2. Administer Sacrament four times a year. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Pay attention to the state of mind of prisoners, and report, (as directed) if he observes the mind of any affected. Keep a character book. Keep a journal. Superintend distribution of books. Provide proper material for instruction. Direct time of teacher.
Optional 1. May inspect prisoners letters. 2. May accept assistance from without in visiting prisoners. There are three school masters and school mistresses in the gaol, who act, as stated under the orders of the Chaplain, and they are, in fact, more like scripture readers or home missionaries than secular instructors. 2.
Prison Service Chaplaincy (1988) (The following statements are only segments form the Chaplaincy Handbook (1988, pp37-58). For more detailed outline of duties of contemporary Chaplain see Prison Service Chaplaincy (1988)) Chaplains duties are pigeon-holed into "musts", "shoulds" and "coulds". Musts (for both full and part-time Chaplains) 1. Reception Interviews A full time Chaplain will, of course, be ready to interview all newcomers within 24 hours of their arrival. 2. Divine Worship 3. Cell Visiting 4. The Ministry of Reconciliation 5. The Sacrament of Marriage 6. Bearer of Sad News When information is received in prison of the serious illness or death of the close relative of any inmate (read prisoner), the Chaplain is normally expected to break the bad news. 7. 8.
Religious Instructions (Young Prisoners) Suicide and Sudden Deaths Standing Order 153 states When a prisoner commits suicide the Governor will …. furnish Headquarters with special reports by himself, the Chaplain and the Medical Officer.
111
9.
Burials
"Musts" (for Full-Time Chaplain) and "You really Should" (for Part-Time Chaplains 1. Documentation It is specially in regard to "Lifers" that documentation takes on its full pastoral significance. When a man (sic) is given a life sentence there are a series of assessments made of him (sic) throughout his (sic) days in prison in an attempt to discover when, or indeed whether, he (sic) may be safely released. One of those who is required to make a contribution to those assessments is the appropriate Chaplain. 2. Discharges According to prison rule (number 11) (the Chaplain) should see every prisoner of his (sic) denomination individually not only "soon after the prisoners reception into prison" but also "shortly before his (sic) discharge". 3. Meetings 4. Chaplains Journal 5. Induction (guidance to new Chaplains) Shoulds (for both part-time and full-time Chaplains) 1. Ordering Standard religious books 2. Religious Education Grant 3. Chapel Equipment and Supplies 4. Pastoral Visits of Past Clergy 5. Change of Religious Registration "It Would be Great if you Could" (both full and part-time Chaplains) 1. Letters and Visits (outside) 2. Pastoral Visits 3. Parole Reports 4. Study groups 5. Voluntary Assistants 6. Organist 7. Missions
112
APPENDIX FIVE
DON'T FORGET YOUR TOOTHBRUSH, LIFE IN A PRISON CELL
113
Atherton (1987) provides an excellent description of what possessions a prisoner has in her/his cell. Shared with possibly two other people, the cell is the prisoners "bedroom, sitting room, dining-room and during the hours of the night, toilet also" (Ibid). The cell itself is approximately 11 feet long, 7 feet wide and 9 feet high. Its furniture consists of a bed, a chair, a table, an open cabinet, cutlery, a bowl and soap dish, a shaving brush, a razor, a toothbrush and toothpaste, a hairbrush or comb, a mug, a board for photographs of family and friends, though more often covered with pin-ups, a 60 watt bulb and a chamber pot. (Ibid:46)
114
BIBLIOGRAPHY
115
Abbott, W J (1968) 'The Prison Chaplain' Prison Service Journal, VII(27), pp. 21-31. Acorn, L R (1990) 'The challenges of ministering to a captive congregation' Corrections Today, 52(7), pp. 97-107. Alison, S M (1980) 'The Prison Christian Fellowship'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1980) New Life: The Prison Chaplaincy Review, August 1980, pp. 64-67. Allard, P (1990) 'The Community of Prison Chaplains'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1990) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 7, pp. 57-67. Althusser, L (1977a) For Marx translated by Brewster, B, NLB. Althusser, L (1977b) Lenin and Philosophy and other essays translated by Brewster, B, NLB. American Journal of Correction (1977) NEWS: 'State can pay prison chaplains' American Journal of Correction, 39(5), Sept-Oct 1977, p. 26. Anonymous (A Prison Governor) (1972) 'The idea of a chaplain ... a governor's view'. In: Atherton, R (ed) Chaplains Newsletter, June 1972, pp. 5-7. Apichella, M (1996) Prison Pentecost: Has Revival Come to Our Prisons? Kingsway Publications. Ashcroft, J, Bockmell, M & Townsend, C (1993) 'A Christian Vision of Justice'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1993) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 9, pp. 18-31. Atherton, R (1972) 'Editorial'. In: Atherton, R (ed) Chaplains Newsletter, June 1972, pp. l-2. Atherton, R (1976) New Life: The Prison Chaplaincy Review, June 1976. Atherton, R (1987) Summons to Serve: The Christian call to prison ministry, Geoffrey Chapman. Austin, J (ed) (1989) Ministry to Prisoners in London: A report by the diocese of London and Southwark prisons and penal concerns group, London Diocesan Board for Social Responsibility. Badham, P (1989a) 'Introduction'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. VII-XIV. Badham, P (1989b) 'Some secular trends in the Church of England today'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 23-34. Barker, E (1989) 'Tolerant Discrimination: Church, State and the new religions'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 185-208. Baxendale, A (1981) 'Prison Education'. In: Ferguson, J (ed) (1981) Christianity, Society and Education, SPCK, pp. l46-166.
116
Bean, P (1981) Punishment: A philosophical and criminological inquiry, Martin Robertson. Beattie, J M (1986) Crime and the Courts in England, 1660-1800, Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press. Beccaria, C (1764) On Crimes and Punishments, translated by Young, D (1986), Hackett Publishing Company. Biggs, W W (1965) An Introduction to the History of the Christian Church, Edward Arnold (publishers) Ltd. Blackburn, K C (1969) 'The Specialist - Conformity or Estrangement'. In: Clarkson, G (ed) (1969) Chaplains Newsletter, 1, May 1969, pp. 2-3. Bocock, R & Thompson, K (1985) 'Introduction'. In: Bocock, R & Thompson, K (eds) (1985) Religion and Ideology, Manchester University Press in association with the Open University Press, pp. l-8. Bocock, R (1985) 'Religion in Modern Britain'. In: Bocock, R & Thompson, K (eds) (1985) Religion and Ideology, Manchester University Press in association with the Open University Press, pp. 207-233. British Broadcasting Corporation (1996) Songs of Praise, BBC Television Broadcast 4th February 1996. Brown, R (1978) 'The Idea of Imprisonment'. In: Times Literary Supplement, June 16th 1978, p. 658. Bruce, S (1995) Religion in Modern Britain, Oxford University Press. Carey, G (1993) 'Commissioning Service for the Chaplain General'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1993) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 10, pp. 58-61. Carlen, P (1983) 'On Rights and Powers: some notes on penal politics'. In: Garland, D & Young, P (eds) (1983) The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Heinemann Education Books Ltd., pp. 203-216. Carlen, P (1994) 'Why Study Women's Imprisonment? Or Anyone Else's?' British Journal of Criminology, 34, Special Issue, pp. 131-140. Carlen, P & Tchaikovsky, C (1996) ‘Women’s imprisonment in England at the end of the twentieth century: legitimacy, realities and utopias’. In: Mathews, R & Francis, P (eds) (1996)Prisons 2000: An international perspective on the current state and future of imprisonment, Macmillan Press, pp. 201-218. Caradino, M & Dignan, J (1992) The Penal system: An Introduction, Sage Publications. Chester, Bishop of, Alison, M & Lord Soper (1988) 'Prison Chaplaincy in Parliamentary Debates'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1988) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 6, pp. 48-53. 117
Church of England Board of Social Responsibility Report (1978) Prisons and Prisoners in England Today, Church Information Office. Clark, A (1995) 'A New Chaplain's Sense of Purpose'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12, pp. 80-82. Clark, H (1993) The Church Under Thatcher, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. Clay, W C (1861) The Prison Chaplain: A Memoir of The Rev John Clay, Macmillan. Cohen, S (1983) 'Social Control Talk: Telling stories about correctional change. In: Garland, D & Young, P (eds)(1983) The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Heinemann Education Books Ltd., pp. l0l-129. Cohen, S (1985) Visions of Social Control: Crime Punishment and Classification, Polity Press. Cohen, S & Taylor, L (1977) 'Talking About Prison Blues'. In: Bell, C & Newby, H (eds) (1981) Doing Sociological Research, The Free Press, Macmillan Publishing Company, pp. 67-86. Cohen, S & Taylor, L (1979) Prison Secrets, Radical Alternatives to Prison/Liberty. Cohen, S & Scull, A (1983) 'Social Control in History and Sociology'. In: Cohen, S & Scull, A (eds) (1983) Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essays, Basil Blackwell, pp. l-6. Cohn-Sherbok, D (1989) 'Judaism in Modern Britain: A New Orientation'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 209224. Cole, W O (1989) 'Sikhs in Britain'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 259-276. Comerford, P (1989) 'Theological Reflections on a Chaplains Task'. In: Austin, J (ed) (1989) Ministry to Prisoners in London: A report by the diocese of London and Southwark prisons and penal concerns group, London Diocesan Board for Social Responsibility, pp. 21-22. Cooper, J (1969) 'The Whole Man?'. In: Clarkson, G (ed) (1969) Chaplains Newsletter, l, May 1969, pp. 5-6. Coyle, A (1995) 'The Prisons We Deserve - Custody, Care and Justice'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12, pp. 13-19. Cullmann, O (1956) 'The State in the New Testament'. In: Hall, B D (ed) (1970) Church and State in the Middle Ages, John Wiley & Sons Inc., pp. l5-19. Davis, C (1994) Religion and the Making of Society: Essays in Social Theory, Cambridge University Press. DeLacy, M (1986) Prison Reform in Lancashire 1700-1850: A study of local administration, Manchester University Press. 118
Delderfield, E R (1990) Kings and Queens of England and Great Britain, David & Charles. Denton, P (1969) 'A new look at religion in an open borstal'. In: Clarkson, G (ed) (1969) Chaplains Newsletter, 2, Dec 1969, pp. 6-7. Departmental Committee on Prisons, (1896) Observations of the Prison Commissioners on the Recommendations of the Departmental Committee on Prisons, Appointed by the Secretary of State on 6th June. 1984, HMSO. Dixon, M (1995) 'Who Stands Fast?'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12, pp. 24-26. Dodsworth, B (1989) 'The Prison Chaplaincy: An Historical Note'. In: Austin, J (ed) (1989) Ministry to Prisoners in London: A report by the diocese of London and Southwark prisons and penal concerns group, London Diocesan Board for Social Responsibility, pp. 31 -32. Donald, J & Hall, S (eds) (1986) Politics and Ideology, Open University Press. Duce, A R (1977) Human Rights in Prison, (unpublished paper). Duce, A R (1985) 'Human Rights - their challenge for the theological thinking of prison chaplains', The First International Consultation of Prison Chaplain. The Ecumenical Institute 21st Aug 1985 (unpublished paper). Duce, A R (1988) 'International Directory of Prison Chaplains'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1988) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 5, pp. 53-56. Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12. Duncombe, D C (1992) 'The Task of Prison Chaplaincy: An Inmate's View'. In: The Journal of Pastoral Care, 46(2), Summer 1992, pp. 193-209. Dunleavy, P & Leary, B (1987) Theories of the State: Politics of Liberal Democracy. Macmillan. Dunstan, G (1980) 'The Prison Chaplain - A Representative Man'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1980) New Life: The Prison Chaplaincy Review, Aug 1980, pp. 48-58. Eimer, K W (1989) 'The Assessment and Treatment of the Religiously Concerned Psychiatric Patient' The Journal of Pastoral Care, XLIII(3), Fall (1989), pp. 231-241. Emsley, C (1987) Crime and Society in England 1750-1900, Longman. Fierro, A (1977) The Militant Gospel, SCM Press. Fitzgerald, M & Sim, J (1982) British Prisons, 2nd edn, Basil Blackwell. Fitzgerald, M & Marshall, P (1996) 'Ethnic Minorities in British Prisons: Some Research Implications'. In: Mathews, R & Francis, P (eds) (1996) Prisons 2000: An International 119
Perspective on the Current State and Future of Imprisonment, Macmillan Press, pp. 139162. Forgacs, D (ed) (1988) A Gramsci Reader: Selected Writings 1916-35, Lawrence & Wishart. Forsythe, W J (1987) The Reform of Prisoners: 1830-1900, Croom Helm. Forsythe, W J (1991) Penal Discipline, Reformatory Projects and The English Prison Commission 1895-1939, University of Exeter Press. Foucault, M (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Penguin. Frost, B (1988) 'Forgiveness and Politics = Myth or Reality'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1988) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 5, pp. 16-21. Garland, D (1983) 'Durkheim's Theory of Punishment: A Critique'. In: Garland, D & Young, P (eds) (1983) The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Ltd. Heinemann Education Books, pp. 37-61. Garland, D (1985) Punishment and Welfare: A History of Penal Strategies, Gower Publishing Company. Garland, D (1990) Punishment and Modern Society: A Study of Social Theory, Oxford University Press. Garland, D & Young, P (1983) 'Towards a Social Analysis of Penality'. In: Garland D Young P (eds) (1983) The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Heinemann Education Books Ltd., pp. l-36. Gatrell, V A C (1994) The Hanging Tree: Execution and the English People 1770-1868, Oxford University Press. Gay, J D (1983) Chaplaincy in Church Colleges: A Study of the Role of the Chaplain in Thirteen Anglican Colleges of Higher Education, A Culham Occasional Paper, Culham College Institute/Culham Educational Foundation. Genders, E & Player, E (1989) Race Relations in Prisons, Clarendon Press. Gibson, W (1994) Church, State and Society. 1760-1850, St. Martin's Press. Gilbert, A D (1976) Religion and Society in Industrial England: Church. Chapel and Social Change. 1740-1914, Longman. Graham, W R & Carlson, B A (1988) 'The American Protestant Correctional Chaplains Association Inc.', The Journal of Pastoral Care, XLII(3), Fall, pp. 220-227. Gramsci, A (1971) Selections Prom the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (edited and translated by Quintin Hoare & Geoffrey Nowell Smith) Lawrence & Wishart. 120
Green, D (1989) 'Buddhism in Britain: Skilful Means or Selling Out'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 277-292. de Haan, W (1990) The Politics of Redress: Crime, Punishment and Penal Abolition, Unwin Hyman. de Haan, W (1991) 'Abolitionism and Crime Control: A Contradiction in Terms'. In: Stenson, K & Cowell, D (eds) (1991) The Politics of Crime Control, Sage Publications. Hall, S (1982) Culture and the State, Open University Press. Hall, S, Critcher, C, Jefferson, T, Clark, J & Roberts, B (1978) Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State and Law and Order, Macmillan Press Ltd. Hall, S & Scraton, P (1981) 'Law, Class and Control'. In: Fitzgerald, M, McLennan, G & Pauson, J (ed) (1981) Crime and Society: Readings in History and Theory, Routledge & Kegan Paul in association with Open University Press, pp. 460-497. Hall Williams, J E (1975) Changing Prisons, Peter Owen. Hamilton, M B (1995) The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives, Routledge. Harmon, P (1992) Church, State, Morality and Law, Gill & Macmillan. Hansen, S (1985) 'Prison Chaplains Call for Fewer Jails, More Justice: D.C. Chaplains urge attack on roots of crime plus jail reform', National Catholic Reporter, 21, Mar 1985, p. 5. Harding, C, Hines, B, Ireland, R & Rawlings, P (1985) Imprisonment in England and Wales: A Concise History, Croom Helm. Harding, C & Ireland, R W (1989) Punishment: Rhetoric, Rule and Practice, Routledge. Hardy, R (1991) 'The Influence of Religion in Prisons'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1991) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 8, pp. 20-24. Hart, H L A (1968) Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the Philosophy of Law, Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press. Harvey, T E (1941) The Christian Church and the Prisoner in English Experience, The Epworth Press. Hastings, A (1980) 'A Theology of Law and Order'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1980) New Life: The Prison Chaplaincy Review, Aug 1980, pp. 28-32. Hastings, A (1986) A History of English Christianity. 1920-1985, William Collins Sons & Co Ltd. Hawkins, K (1975) Alternatives to Imprisonment'. In: McConville, S (ed) (1975) The Use of 121
Imprisonment: Essays in the Changing State of English Penal Policy, Routledge & Kegan Paul, pp. 67-87. Hay, D (1975) ‘Property Authority and the Criminal Law'. In: Hay, D, Lanebaugh, P, Rule, J G, Thompson, E P & Winslow, C (1975) Albions Fatal Tree: Crime and Society in Eighteenth Century England, Peregrine Books, Penguin Books, pp. 17-64. Her Majesty's Prison Service (1996) Prison Service News, 14(141) Feb 1996, H M Prison Service. Hill, B D (1970) Church and State in the Middle Ages, John Wiley & Sons Inc. Hilpert, K (1993) 'Spiritual Care in Prison and Human Rights'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12, pp. 40-51. Hobhouse, S & Brockway, A F (1922) English Prisons Today: Being the Report of the Prison System Enquiry Committee, Longmans, Green & Co. Home Office (1996) Inside Faith: The Prison Service Chaplaincy, Central Office of Information, HMSO. Howe, A (1994) Punishment and Critique: Towards a Feminist Analysis of Penality, Routledge. Hoyles, A (1971) Christ Alive in Prison, Lutterworth Press. Hudson, B (1987) 'Justice' Through Punishment: A Critique of the 'Justice' Model of Corrections, Macmillan Education Ltd. Hudson, B A (1993) Penal Policy and Social Justice, Macmillan Press Ltd. Hudson, B A (1996) Understanding Justice: An Introduction to Ideas, Perspectives and Controversies in Modern Penal Theory, Open University Press. Hunt, D (1974) The Political Ideas of Marx and Engels: Volume 1, Marxism and Totalitarian Democracy, 1818-1850, Macmillan Press Ltd. Ignatieff, M (1978) A Just Measure of Pain: The Penitentiary in the Industrial Revolution, 17501850, Columbia University Press. Ignatieff, M (1981) 'State, Civil Society and Total Institutions: A Critique of Recent Social Histories of Punishment'. In: Cohen, S & Scull, A (ed) (1983) Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essays, Basil Blackwell, pp. 75-105. Ignatieff, M (1990) 'Imprisonment and the Need for Justice'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1990) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 7, pp. 41-46. James, J T L (1990) A Living Tradition: Penitentiary Chaplaincy, Chaplaincy Division, Correction Service of Canada.
122
Jardine, D (1978) In Jail with Jesus, Christian Journals Limited. Joll, J (1979) Gramsci, 2nd edn., Fontana/Collins. Jordan, B (1985) The State, Authority and Autonomy, Basil Blackwell Ltd. Jubilee Trust (1996) Foundations: The Biblical Foundation of Prison Ministry, Jubilee Trust. Kee, A (1986) Domination or Liberation: The Place of Religion in Social Conflict, SCM Press Ltd. Kee, A (1990) Marx and the Failure of Liberation Theology, Trinity Press International. Knott, K (1989) 'Hindu Communities in Britain'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 243-258. Lamont, S (1989) Church and State: Uneasy Alliances, The Bodley Head. Lea, J & Young, J (1984) What Is To Be Done About Law And Order? Penguin Books in association with the Socialist Society. Leech, M (1995) The Prisoners' Handbook 1995, Oxford University Press. Lloyd-Rees, L (1971) 'The Role of the Chaplain'. In: Atherton, R (ed) (1971) Chaplains Newsletter, July 1971, p. 9. Lochhead, S (1980) 'Prison Visiting'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1980) New Life: The Prison Chaplaincy Review, Aug 1980, pp. 83-90. Lyons, D C (1988) 'Spreading The Gospel Behind Bars: ATTICA and San Quentin Ministers Offer Hope and Salvation as Alternatives to Punishment', Ebony, 43(9) July 1988, pp. 7074. Macquiban, T (1995) 'Prison Chaplains - Their Theology of Ministry and Mission'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12, pp. 113. Maguire, J F (Chairman) (1870) Report From the Select Committee on Prison and Prison Ministers Acts, Together with the Proceedings of the Committee: Minutes of Evidence and Appendix, HMSO/House of Commons. Marchant, B (1989) 'A Governor's View'. In: Austin, J (ed) (1989) Ministry to Prisoners in London: A Report by the Diocese of London and Southwark Prisons and Penal Concerns Group, London Diocesan Board of Social Responsibility, pp. 5-6. Martin, R (1969) 'Sociology and Theology: Alienation and Original Sin'. In: Gill, R (ed) (1987) Theology and Sociology: A Reader, Geoffrey Chapman, Cassell Publishers Ltd., pp. l0l117.
123
Marx, K & Engels, F (1955) 'On Religion'. In: Bocock, R & Thompson, K (eds) (1985) Religion and Ideology, Manchester University Press in association with the Open University, pp. 1120. Mathiesen, T (1974) The Politics of Abolition, Martin Robertson. Mathiesen, T (1990) Prison on Trial: A Critical Assessment, Sage Publications. McConville, S (1981) A History of English Prison Administration Volume One: 1750-1877, Routledge & Kegan Paul. McConville, S & Hall, Williams J E (1985) Crime and Punishment: A Radical Rethink, Tawney Publications. McGowen, R (1983) 'The Image of Justice and Reform of the Criminal Law in Early Nineteenth Century England', Buffalo Law Review, 32, pp. 89-125. McGowen, R (1986) 'A Powerful Sympathy: Terror, the Prison and Humanitarian Reform in Early Nineteenth Century Britain' Journal of British Studies, 25, July (1986) pp. 312-334. McKenzie, J (1965) 'The Christian and the State'. In: Hill, B D (1970) Church and State in the Middle Ages, John Wiley & Sons Inc. pp. 6-15 Melossi, D & Pavarini, M (1981) The Prison and the Factory: Origins of the Penitentiary System, Macmillan Press Ltd. Merrick, G P (1898) 'Report by the Visiting Chaplain of Prisons' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prison 1897-98, HMSO, pp. 122-24. Merrick, G P (1899) 'Report by the Visiting chaplain' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1898-99, HMSO, pp. 3133. Merrick, G P (1900) 'Report by the Visiting Chaplain' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1899-1900, HMSO, pp. 44-46. Merrick, G P (1902a) 'Report by the visiting Chaplain' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1901-1902, HMSO, pp. 45-49. Merrick, G P (1902b) 'Report by the Visiting chaplain on the Operation of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1901-1902, HMSO, pp. 61-63. Merrick, G P (1903a) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1902-1903, HMSO, pp. 48-51. 124
Merrick, G P (1903b) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector on the Operation of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prison and the Directors of Convict Prisons 1902-1903, HMSO, pp. 64-66. Merrick, G P (1903c) 'Copy of Report by the Prison Chaplain Inspector (Mr Merrick) dated 31st January 1903' paper 4a [in HM Prison Department (1911)] Various Memoranda on Prison Matters, 1911, HMSO, pp. l-14. Merrick, G P (1904a) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector' in Prison Commissioners', Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1903-1904, HMSO, pp. 45-49. Merrick, G P (1904b) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector on the Operation of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies' in Prison Commissioners', Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1903-1904, HMSO, pp. 63-66. Merrick, G P (1907a) ‘Report by the Chaplain Inspectors' in Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1906-1907, HMSO, pp. 48-52. Merrick, G P (1907b) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector on the Operation of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies' in Prison Commissioners', Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1906-1907, HMSO, pp. 55-57. Miranda, J P (1977) Marx and the Bible: A Critique of the Philosophy of Oppression, SCM Press Ltd. Morris, T & Morris, P (1963) Pentonville: A Sociological Study of an English Prison, Routledge & Kegan Paul. Moule, C (1992) 'Retribution On Restoration'. In: Duce A R (ed) (1993) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 9, pp. l4-18. Murphy, G L (1956) The Social Role of the Prison Chaplain, PhD Thesis, Pittsburg University, Pennsylvania. National Council on Crime and Delinquency (1993) 'Does Involvement in Religion Help Prisoners Adjust to Prisons?'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1993) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 10, pp. 69-75. New International Version (NIV) (1973) Holy Bible, Hodder & Stoughton. Neilsen, J S (1989) 'Islamic Communities in Britain'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press. pp. 225-242. Norman, E R (1976) Church and Society in England 1770-1970: A Historical Study, Oxford University Press.
125
Oliver, J W (1972) 'To Whom Should the Prison Minister?' Federal Probation, 36(1), Mar 1972, pp. 19-22. Padayachi, K (1995) 'Nissoko - Risley's Own Ryo-Aryi Rock Garden'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1995) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 12, pp. 78-79. Parsons, G (1989) 'The Rise of Religious Pluralism in the Church of England'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. l22. Pattison, E M (1972) 'Systems of Pastoral Care'. In: Gill, R (ed) (1987) Theology and Sociology: A Reader, Geoffrey Chapman, Cassell Publishers Ltd., pp. 358-372. Paul, L (1973) A Church by Daylight: A Reappraisement of the Church of England and its Future, Geoffrey Chapman. Pederson, D (1979) How to Establish a Jail and Prison Ministry: A Basic Training Guide, Thomas Nelson Publishers. Philips, D (1983) 'A Just Measure of Crime, Authority, Hunters and Blue Locusts' A 'Revisionists' Social History of Crime and the Law in Britain, 1780-1850'. In: Cohen, S & Scull, A (ed) (1983) Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essays, Basil Blackwell, pp. 50-74. Playfair, G (1971) The Punitive Obsession: An Unvarnished History of the English Prison System, Victor Gollancz Ltd. Potter, H (1989) 'Is God a Hanging Judge?'. In: Duce A R (ed) (1989) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 6, pp. 20-29. Poulantzas, N (1978) Political Power and Social Class, NLB and Sheed & Ward/Verso. Poulter, S (1990) Asian Traditions and English Law: A Handbook, The Runnymede Trust with Trentham Books. Pound, K (1989) ‘The Chaplain in the Prisons: Summary'. In: Austin, J (ed)(1989) Ministry to Prisoners in London: A Report by The Diocese of London and Southwark Prisons and Penal Concerns Group, London Diocesan Board for Social Responsibility, pp. 19-20. Pound, K, Atherton, R & Dariew, W (1989) 'Six Faces of a Future Chaplaincy'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1989) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 6, pp. 53-56. Priestley, P (1985) Victorian Prison Lives: English Prison Biography, Methuen, 1830-1914. Priestley, P (1989) Jail Journeys: The English Prison Experience 1918-1990, Routledge. Prison Officers Association (1996) Gatelodge: The Official Journal of the Prison Officers Association, Prison Officers Association, 85(2), April 1996. 126
Prison Service Chaplaincy (1983) A Policy Proposal Regarding Chaplaincy and Accountability: The Place in Management. Home Office. Prison Service Chaplaincy (1988) The Prison Service Chaplaincy Handbook. HMSO. Prison Service Chaplaincy (1993) Directory and Guide on Religious Practices in HM Prison Service, Home Office/HMSO. Rock, P (1977) 'Law, Order and Power in Late Seventeenth and Early Eighteenth Century England'. In: Cohen, S & Scull, A (ed) (1983) Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essay, Basil Blackwell, pp. 191-221. Rothman, D J (1971) The Discovery of the Asylum: Social Order and Disorder in the New Republic, Little, Brown & Company Ltd. Rothman, D J (1981) 'Social Control: The Uses and Abuses of the Concept in the History of Incarceration'. In: Cohen, S & Scull, A (ed) (1983) Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essays, Basil Blackwell, pp. l06-117. Ruggles-Brise, E (1897) 'Prison Bill, 1897' Paper 1 in Various Memoranda on Prison Matters, HMSO, pp. l-39. Ruggles-Brise, E, Dryhurst, F J, Smalley, H & Briscoe, E W (1916) 'Report of the Commissioners and the Directors of Convict Prisons for the Year 1915-1916'. In: Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons for the Year 1915-1916, HMSO, pp. 322. Runcie, R (1989) 'Prison: Reform, Renewal and Rehabilitation Some Personal Reflections'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1990) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 7, pp. l-15. Russell, D (1985) ‘Changing face of the Chaplaincy'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1985) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 3, pp. 57-61. Scarnati, R, Madry, M A, Wise, A, Moore, H D, Schmieder, M C & Stephens, M L (1991) 'Religious Beliefs and Practices Among Most Dangerous Psychiatric Inmates' Forensic Reports, 4(l), Jan-Mar 1991, pp. l-16. Schillebeeckx, E (1980) 'Sociology, Theology and Ministry'. In: Gill R (ed) (1987) Theology and Sociology: A Reader, Geoffrey Chapman, Cassell Publishers Ltd., pp. 398-409. Scraton, P & Thomas, D (eds) (1985) The State Versus The People, Basil Blackwell. Scraton, P, Sim, J & Skidmore, P (1991) Prisons Under Protest, Open University Press. Scroggs, R (1980) 'The Sociological Interpretation of the New Testament: The Present State of Research'. In: Gill R (ed) (1987) Theology and Sociology: A Reader, Geoffrey Chapman, Cassell Publishers Ltd., pp. 254-275. Semple, J (1993) Benthams Prison: A Study of the Panopticon Penitentiary, Clarendon Press, 127
Oxford University Press. Sheppard, D (1983) Bias to the Poor, Hodder and Stoughton. Shimmin, H (1857) 'Policing and Prisons in Mid-nineteenth Century Liverpool'. In: 'Liverpool Life' (1857) Liverpool Mercury, Edge Hill History Department, pp. l-56. Sim, J (1990) Medical Power in Prisons: The Prison Medical Service in England 1774-1989, Open University Press. Sim, J, Scraton, P & Gordon, P (1987) 'Crime, the State and Critical Analysis'. In: Scraton, P (ed) (1987) Law. Order and the Authoritarian State: Readings in Critical Criminology, Open University Press, pp. l-70. Simpson, C B (1908a) 'Report by the Chaplain inspector'. In: Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1907-1908, HMSO, pp. 37-8. Simpson, C B (1908b) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector on the Operation of Discharged Prisoners Aid Societies'. In: Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1907-1908, HMSO, pp. 46-47. Simpson, C B (1912) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector'. In: Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1911-1912, HMSO, pp. 44-45. Simpson, C B (1915) 'Report by the Chaplain Inspector'. In: Prison Commissioners' Report of the Commissioners of Prisons and the Directors of Convict Prisons, 1914-1915, HMSO, pp. 34-36. Smart, N (1989) 'Church, Party and State'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 381-395. Smith, R (1989) 'Prisons and the Parish'. In: Austin, J (ed) (1989) Ministry to Prisoners in London: A Report by the Diocese of London and Southwark Prisons and Penal Concerns Group, London Diocese Board for Social Responsibility, pp. 23-24. Southwood, M (1958) John Howard: Prison Reformer, Independent Press Ltd. Sparks, R F (1971) Local Prisons: The Crisis in the English Penal System, Heinemann. Spitzer, S (1979) 'The Rationalization of Crime Control in Capitalist Society'. In: Cohen, S & Scull, A (eds) (1983) Social Control and the State: Historical and Comparative Essays, Basil Blackwell, pp. 312-333. Stanley, S & Baginsky, M (1984) Alternatives to Prison: An Examination of Non-Custodial Sentencing of Offenders, Peter Owen. Stokes, R (1988) 'The Changing Chaplaincy - Some Reflections'. In: Duce, A R (eds) (1988) New 128
Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 5, pp. l-5. Stolz, B A (1978) 'Chaplaincy. Prisons as Political Institutions: What are the Implications for Prison Ministry'. In: American Correctional Association 108th Annual Conference of Correction. Stout, B & Clear, T (1992) 'Federal Prison Chaplains: Satisfied in Ministry But Often Undervalued'. In: Federal Prisons Journal, Winter, 2(4), pp. 8-10. Sykes, G M (1958) Society of Captives: A Study of a Maximum Security Prison, Princeton University Press. Taft, P B (1978) 'Whatever Happened to that Old-Time Prison Chaplain?' Corrections Magazine, 4(4), Dec 1978, pp. 54-61. Tarlton, P (1989) 'Human Growth in Prison'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1989) in New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 6, pp. 57-60. Taylor, I, Walton, P & Young, J (1973) The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance, Routledge. Thomas, J E (1972) The English Prison Officer Since 1850: A Study in Conflict, Routledge & Kegan Paul. Thompson, D M (1989) 'The Free Churches in Modern Britain'. In: Badham, P (ed) (1989) Religion, State and Society in Modern Britain, The Edwin Mellen Press, pp. 99-118. Thompson, E P (1963) 'The Transforming Power of the Cross'. In: Bocock, R & Thompson, K (eds) (1985) Religion and Ideology, Manchester University Press in association with the Open University, pp. l51-183. Tilford, N A (1988) 'Team Ministry in a Prison'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1988) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 5, pp. 57-60. Tobias, J J (1967) Crime and Industrial Society in the Nineteenth Century, B T Batsford Ltd. Troeltsch, E (1911) 'Churches and Sects'. In: Gill R (ed) (1987) Theology and Sociology: A Reader, Geoffrey Chapman, Cassell Publishers Ltd., pp. 56-68. True, M (1975) 'Locking Out The Prison Chaplain'. In: Commonweal, 102, June 1975, pp. 166167. Tumin, S (1996) 'The State of the Prisons'. In: Matthews, R & Francis, P (eds) (1996) Prison 2000: An International Perspective on the Current State and Future of Imprisonment, Macmillan Press, pp. 11-20. Turner, B S (1983) 'Social Cement'. In: Bocock, R & Thomson, K (eds) (1985) Religion and Ideology, Manchester University Press in association with the Open University, pp. 234244. 129
Ustorf, W (1995) 'Not through the sound of thunder. The quest for God in the backyard of history'. In: Young, F (ed) (1995) Dare We Speak of God in Public? The Edward Cadbury Lectures 1993-94, Mowbray, pp. l00-114. Von Hirsch, A (1976) Doing Justice: The Choice of Punishment. (Report of the Committee for the Study of Incarceration), Northeastern University Press. Webb, S & Webb, B (1922) English Prisons Under Local Government, Longman Green & Company. Wheeler, I B & Horsley, J W (1886) House of Detention Chaplains Reports 1874-1886, Clerkenwell Prison Chaplain Journal (unpublished and unpaginated). Williams, R (1985) 'Penance in the Penitentiary'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1985) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 7, pp. 25-34. Williams, R (1994) 'Ministry in Prison - Theological Reflections'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1994) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 11, pp. 43-54. Wilson, J Q (1975) Thinking About Crime, Vintage Books. Woodley, D (1990) 'Aspirations of John Howard'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1990) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 7, pp. 46-50. Woodley, D (1991) 'John Clay - Chaplain, Preston Gaol, 1823-58'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1991) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 8, pp. 32-37. Woodley, D (1993) 'William Douglas Morrison'. In: Neale, K (ed) (1993) Prison Service People: Volume One, H M Prison Service College, pp. 17-26. Woods, H J (1926) 'Religion in the City of Cells'. In: Congregational Quarterly, IV(3), July 1926, pp. 289-299. Wright, M (1982) Making Good: Prisons, Punishment and Beyond, Burnet Books Ltd. Wright, M (1988) 'From Retribution to Restoration'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1988) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 5, pp. 42-49. Wyre, R (1992) 'The Problem of Religious Conversion in the Life of Sex Offenders'. In: Duce, A R (ed) (1992) New Life: The Prison Service Chaplaincy Review, 9, pp. 73-77. Young, P (1983) 'Sociology, The State and Penal Relations'. In: Garland, D & Young, P (eds) (1983) The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penality and Social Analysis, Heinemann Education Books Ltd., pp. 84-100. Zehr, H (1984) 'Retributive Justice, Restorative Justice'. In: MCC United States Office of Criminal Justice. 130
