STUDIES OF RELIGION HSC COURSEFOUNDATION STUDY 1: ABORIGINAL BELIEF SYSTEMS AND SPIRITUALITY

MISSIONS AND MISSIONARY ACTIVITY

IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS

Assimilation A nineteenth-century idea that Aboriginal people should be improved by being civilised and Christianised. From the 1930s, assimilation was government policy and in the 1950s legislation was introduced to enforce it. The ultimate aim of this legislation was the eventual destruction of Aboriginal society through the dispersal of individuals and the breaking-up of Aboriginal communities.

Evangelisation The process through which the Church co-operates with God’s act of self-communication, calling humanity to conversion and to faith in Christ.

Mission An Aboriginal settlement, which may or may not once have been a religious institution. A person is described as living off a mission, rather than in or at.

Missionary activity Activity aimed at evangelising people – winning souls for Christ.

Self-determination Controlling all aspects of one’s own life. Since 1972, Aboriginal self-determination has been government policy.

Historical Context of Missionary Activity

Theories attempting to explain the hierarchy of human beings (with whites at the top, peoples of colour in the middle, and blacks at the bottom) were very popular in Europe, and when imported to Australia were firmly embraced by Euro-Australian colonists – who actually believed that the Aborigines were inferior, that they were a dying race.

Colonisation was the establishment, often by violent physical force and military power, of British colonies on the Australian continent. Colonisation removed Aborigines from their own traditional lands; it destroyed their sacred sites and essential resources; it disrupted their systems of hunting and gathering; it killed the means for their sustenance. Also it introduced foreign diseases such as tuberculosis, measles and whooping cough; it brought foreign vices such as alcohol; and, it made Aborigines dependent upon white rations and handouts of sugar, flour, tea and blankets.

Colonisation institutionalised the systematic exploitation of Aboriginal people; in white, colonial Australia, segregation walked hand in hand with slavery. Aborigines were forced to become labourers – young Aboriginal girls were made to serve as domestics and often forced to double up as sexual partners,

51

In this lesson you will – Learn about the effect of missions and missionary activity on Aboriginal belief

systems from the original contact period through to more recent times. Learn to identify the impact of European colonisation on Aboriginal belief

systems and society.

and young Aboriginal boys were made to work as stockmen or drovers. Aborigines were relegated to gathering and sleeping in fringe camps: the outskirts of white towns, farms, and other settlements.

The churches, instead of condemning this shameful state of affairs, made it worse. Nineteenth century Christianity claimed to have a unique relationship with the one true God, such that it alone offered salvation to all of humanity. They viewed Christian values as being supreme. Christian missionaries, therefore, were determined to change not only the religion of the Aborigines in its narrow sense, but also other aspects of their culture which the missionaries found unacceptable to their culture value system.

Read the report by Dr Ullathorne, who was the head of the Catholic Church in Australia at the time. Highlight those parts which indicate that the Church intended to change the religion and the culture of the Aborigines.

Missions and Reserves

With European settlement of the Australian continent came the imposition of European culture, complete with its acquisitive values, Christian religious teachings and ethics. Under the auspices of Governor Macquarie and the commitment of the Reverend Samuel Marsden, actions were taken to establish centres where Aboriginal people could be shown the way of white civilisation and Christian values. From the 1820s, governments and churches began establishing reserves and mission stations by the second half of the nineteenth century, many of the Aborigines in the eastern colonies had been rounded up and were kept on missions or reserves, the former controlled by the church, and the latter by the government.

The mission stations were ideal for the missionaries’ purpose: to evangelise, to civilise and to protect the indigenous people from the negative influences of White society. History shows that the efforts of these early missionaries were in many cases, and perhaps in general, unsuccessful and possibly even counter-productive. The reason is that they failed to appreciate the historical context of their work – the devastating and irreversible impact White settlement had on indigenous people by undermining the basis for their original culture, spirituality and well-being, that is, their relationship to the land.

52

Missionary Activity

Different denominations began working with Aboriginal people over a wide range of states and territories – Methodists in Queensland and the Northern Territory, Catholics in Western Australia, and Anglicans in all these areas. The Anglican and Protestant missions, which had the official support of the colonial administrators, claimed the more accessible and hospitable lands in New South Wales and Victoria.

The missionaries were dedicated and self-sacrificing workers. Many lived on the fringes of country towns, in hot, dusty conditions, with nothing but crude huts for shelter. Some of them were from the major bush ministry organisations, such as the Australian Inland Mission. However, the work they did with Aboriginal people was very different to the work they did with white settlers. Missionaries always treated white settlers with respect, as equals. On the other hand, they often treated Aboriginal people with paternalism, as though they were children.

Most missionaries believed that Aboriginal culture was inferior to European culture. They still believed that these people had to give up their nomadic lifestyle and take up permanent homes and jobs to become truly Christian. Typical missions forced Aborigines into a strictly regimented, dehumanised lifestyle, without any democratic rights. The missions also broke up Aboriginal families. In order to civilise Aboriginal children, they were often separated from their parents, at times forcibly and permanently. Children of these stolen generations were brought up in white families or white institutions, where they were trained to take jobs as servants or labourers. Of course, the churches today have renounced this cruel practice, but less than a century ago, many Christians believed that it was a kind way of adjusting Aboriginal children into white society.

There was very little in Aboriginal life that did not offend the missionaries. They objected to Aboriginal child rearing practices, to women fighting, to Aboriginal nakedness, to Aboriginal standards of cleanliness, and to Aboriginal mortuary practices. They believed that un-reclaimed Aborigines were dangerous savages bordering on the bestial amongst whom one was not surprised to find cannibalism. One missionary described the unconverted Aborigines as moral lepers, and another believed them to be the lowest of the low. Thus, at all times missionaries stood ready to attack the central features of Aboriginal society; its economy, its pattern of social behaviour, and most of all, its religious values. Without exception, they tried to convince the adults that their way of life and beliefs were sinful even when they were tolerated. All missionaries tried to convert Aborigines to Christianity but, without exception, diverted most of their resources to converting the young.

Yet, even with so much abuse, a growing number of missionaries took a more enlightened view of indigenous Australians. They realised that they were not dealing with wild savages; Aboriginal culture was thousands of years old, with highly developed religious ceremonies and moral codes. These missionaries were impressed by the spiritual desires of Aboriginal people, that they, like European Christians, were reaching out to God. A few missionaries allowed Aboriginal people to adopt Christianity without having to give up their traditional hunting and food gathering practices. Some missionaries also used Pacific Islanders as part of their team. Pacific Islanders, themselves indigenous people, were in a better position to understand the needs of Aboriginal people and to communicate them to the white missionaries.

Tolerant missionaries encountered a great deal of hostility from other white people – including fellow missionaries, local farmers and townspeople, government officials and journalists. One Catholic missionary, Rosendo Salvado, was criticised by a Perth newspaper for not properly civilising Aboriginal people on his mission. Also in Perth, John Gribble, an Anglican missionary, was banned from preaching because he dared speak out against white settlers who were abusing Aboriginal people around his mission. Yet the missionaries continued to stick up for the right of Aborigines and protect them from physical attack.

Protection and Segregation

In 1838, a new policy of protection was introduced by the British Parliament and applied to Australia’s Aborigines. This official policy remained in place for almost the next hundred years and largely depended on Christian missions to carry out its work. It went hand in hand with the missionary initiatives of all the

53

Christian churches which commenced in earnest from 1850 onwards and which sought to rescue the indigenous people from their mistreatment by Europeans. From the perspective of the missionaries, the official policy of protection on the one hand easily took on the form of isolation of Aborigines from White communities, thus sanctioning the taking of large tracts of land for pastoral purposes, but one the other hand, offered a solution to the dangerous spread of European diseases, especially venereal diseases, among Aborigines. By the mid-nineteenth century, missionary presence all but covered the continent.

Some maintain that the protection/segregation practice was a deliberate government policy aiming at setting Aborigines physically apart from white settlers. Aborigines were ripped from their traditional lands, their sacred sites, their families and their food and water sources, and forcibly herded into holding camps, in order to keep them away from the sight of the white colonists.

Segregation/protection dispossessed Aborigines; people were forcibly removed to missions (run by the churches) and reserves (run by the governments). Authorities treated Aborigines as if they were children. They changed people’s names; decided if, who, and when they could marry; totally controlled their employment and wages (they determined whether or not Aboriginal people were to be paid, and if so how much, and put their wages into bank account controlled by white administrators). Most often Aborigines never saw their money at all. By law, Aborigines were not permitted even to leave missions and reserves, and if caught attempting this, they would be severely punished.

Segregation/protection was a deliberate attempt to destroy Aboriginal people’s spirituality and their religious links to the land. It broke up and destroyed their kinship system. It destroyed their traditional gender roles. Aborigines were not allowed to speak their languages or to pass them on to their children. Segregation/protection prohibited them from practising traditional religion, so a great deal of their language, culture and ceremonies went underground.

As global opinion and pressure about the rights of indigenous people changed, and in an effort to keep up an appearance in the eyes of the world – and especially in the eyes of Britain – Australia embarked upon a campaign of protection of the natives. British policy established the so-called protectorate system in Australia which – though intended for good – became a mechanism to control the Aboriginal pest and keep Aborigines physically removed from their own land. The laws gave so-called protectors and assistant protectors vast powers over the lives of Aboriginal people. Private citizens, government employees, humanitarians, clergy, missionaries and policemen were chose for these positions.

Thus, segregation/protection was simply an exercise in semantics: Aborigines continued to suffer injustice – in many cases at the hands of their protectors. It must be admitted that certain protectors did do some good; nevertheless, overwhelming evidence makes it clear that the protectorate system was an abysmal failure.

Assimilation Policies

In 1901 the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act came into force. The Aborigines were never asked about their opinions on the matter, were never included in the vote and, indeed, were not included in the nation itself. Section 127 of the Australian Constitution excluded ‘Aboriginal natives’ from being counted in any population figures. Aboriginal people had been part of the land for time immemorial, yet were specifically and explicitly excluded from the text of the federation document. Indeed, it can be stated that federation was the institutionalisation of Australian racism.

The high ideals of egalitarianism had clashed with the harsh realities of so-called frontier-life. The Aborigines were not dying out, as had been predicted, and the economic burden of protection was ever-increasing. The Australian government and the churches began to look for scapegoats. Neither could seem to solve the native problem, and racism led white Australian to project the root causes outside the white power structure: they blamed the Aborigines themselves.

After federation the Australian government completely reversed its position on Aborigines again, and moved from segregation/protection to developing national practices and policies of assimilation.

54

Assimilation policies changed the way many reserves and missions operated. There was a shift in focus of the work of many missions which had initially been established to protect the Aborigines, to institutions that facilitated the assimilation of mixed-race children into White society. There was increased pressure to separate Aborigines into categories – mixed Aboriginal blood and full blood. The resolution of the 1937 Conference of Commonwealth and State Aboriginal Authorities could be summarised as –

That the destiny of the natives of Aboriginal origin but not the full blood lies in their ultimate absorption by the people of the Commonwealth, and all efforts should be directed to that end.

That efforts by all State authorities should be directed towards the education of children of mixed Aboriginal blood at White standards, and their subsequent employment under the same conditions as Whites with a view to their taking their place in the White community on an equal footing with the Whites.

Assimilation was formally adopted as a state and federal policy in 1951. This policy meant –

That all Aborigines and part-Aborigines are expected eventually to attain the same manner of living as other Australians and to live as members of a single Australian community, enjoying the same rights and privileges, accepting the same responsibilities, observing the same customs and influenced by the same beliefs and hopes as other Australians.

Many children were removed from the families so that they could be more easily assimilated, and from the late 1950s families were encouraged, sometimes forcefully, to leave the reserves and try to make it in the White community with increasing frequency. Those who left the reserves were not permitted to visit family members still on the reserve.

From the legislators’ point of view, the rationale of separation was to help Aboriginal children assimilate into White society, and Christian faith was seen as facilitating the process of cultural transformation. From the missionaries’ viewpoint, the means and ends were the opposite: cultural transformation was seen as facilitating and complementing the goal of religious conversion. Hence separation from traditional cultural influences was necessary in order to provide greater opportunities for the missionaries to replace non-Christian values with Christian ones.

55

In reality, assimilation did not recognise Aborigines as Australia’s indigenous people bearing inherent rights; it created more racism against Aboriginal people. Developed and supported strongly by the churches, the policy of assimilation worked – theoretically – towards the goal of one nation, whereby all nationalities and races in Australia would see themselves as one people. Assimilation was supposed to establish true justice for all people of the country. In reality, however, assimilation practices and policies showed a clear intent to eliminate the Aborigines as an independent race and culture without any possibility of the Aborigines being allowed to develop as a community within Australia.

To some people the words may have sounded like justice, but to many Aborigines they sounded like cultural genocide all over again. If the Aboriginal race could not be destroyed, or separated, then they might just be absorbed. Assimilation, then, became the driving socio-political force in Australia, and has held the sway right throughout much of this century. Some believe that assimilation still strongly influences white attitudes towards Aborigines today.

Self-Determination

The 1960s brought further changes to how governments and missionaries operated with regard to Aboriginal people. Gradually, there was a move from assimilation to self-determination. In the case of the churches, two events were responsible for this change – the rapid decolonisation of former colonies in Africa and the Second Vatican Council. Decolonisation changed the way churches worked in the former colonies, now that those who were the objects of their missionary activity were their leaders, and Vatican II presented a new vision of what the Catholic Church’s mission was all about. Now the Church was to enter into the lives of people, to listen to them, and to engage in a dialogue with culture.

There was an increasing appreciation by missionaries of the necessary distinction between Christian faith and Western culture. The shifting emphasis was from working for Aboriginal peoples to one of working together with communities.

No longer do the churches run communities. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have set up their own councils and invite different religious people to help them in their work – supporting them in their work, supporting them with expertise and further training. Gradually, as more and more indigenous people become competent and confident in leading their communities, the non-indigenous churches are learning to stand alongside them, in solidarity and in partnership, for mutual benefit.

In 1973, Australian states agreed to transfer their policy-making and co-ordinating functions in Aboriginal affairs to the Commonwealth. This led to the development of several government agencies for Aboriginal self-determination, including the National Aboriginal Council, the Aboriginal Development Commission, various ministries, departments and state offices of Aboriginal affairs, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, and the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation. These have, in turn, developed government programs for Aborigines, including the Training for Aboriginals Program, the Aboriginal Enterprise Incentive Scheme, and the Community Development and Employment Program.

One controversial view is that self-determination is dictated to Aboriginal people by Australian government policy and practice. Commonwealth government co-ordination of Aboriginal affairs began an era of Commonwealth economic and administrative control of Aboriginal interests via grants and other direct and indirect financial manipulation of Aboriginal communities across the country. A basic flaw of contemporary Australian government and social understandings of Aboriginal self-determination is that – even after the death of the terra nullius myth – these do not admit a true and full Aboriginal sovereignty – in law, politics, society, economics, culture and religion.

56

Evaluation of Christian Missions

Christian missions have come under severe criticism for their role in the destruction of Aboriginal culture, their control of Aboriginal lives, their separation of children from their families and for the lack of respect for Aboriginal values and beliefs. The missionaries often reflected the prevailing views of the time and implemented the policies advocated by academics and politicians. At other times some missionaries and their supporters stood out against the prevailing views. Just as Aborigines have suffered the effects of stereotyping, so missionaries have been stereotyped and the diversity of missionary approaches and individual contributions have been overlooked.

In some missions deliberate attempts were made to suppress traditional ceremonies and the use of Aboriginal languages. These were regarded as pagan and a barrier to entry into the civilised Christian world. However, on other missions there were policies of non-interference with traditional practices and the use of languages was encouraged. In some remote areas, the protection afforded by missions enabled people to retain cultural practices and knowledge and these have remained strong. They are under threat now, not because of mission influence but from the pressures of modernisation, the influence of media, such as television, the effects of alcohol and other substance abuse and increasing mobility.

Missions played a major role in the education of Aboriginal children. In the early period they conducted schools in regions in which other children had little opportunity for schooling. Most of the early political Aboriginal leaders had their education in mission schools.

Health was another area in which missions provided most of the care and services. While some missionaries participated in the removal of children from their families others stood against this policy and resisted government pressures to send away children of mixed descent.

Perhaps the greatest secular achievement of missions has been that they enabled the survival of Aboriginal groups which were under dire threat.

The response by Aborigines to the message brought by the missionaries was varied. Just as many in the early period adopted the clothing and social habits of the missionaries, they adopted the religious practices that were introduced to them. However, there was little scope for developing indigenous ways of worship. Other Aborigines rejected the Christian message because of the control and abuses that sometimes accompanied it, or as they discerned a gap between the Christian profession of many whites and their treatment of the Aborigines.

However, there is no doubt that coming under the influence of White missionaries who imparted a new kind of spiritual understanding to indigenous people had both positive and negative effects. For many, it meant the undermining of traditional spirituality and cultural traditions. For others, probably fewer in number, it allowed them to move more easily between two cultures, to perceive points of commonality as well as points of difference, and to see possibilities for co-existence and mutual gain.

57

Choose one of the following issues – Missions, reserves and missionary activity. Protection/segregation. The Stolen Generations. Assimilation. Self-determination.

Draw a cut out symbols to show what the issue is about. The symbols should show the positive aspects of the issue as well as the negative. Use colour to indicate what you think about the issue. Present your symbols to the class.

The missionary institutions have been very significant as places of both repression and cultural survival. Within the missions, people were offered refuge from violence of the frontier; often, however, the price of safety was cultural oppression, especially of aspects of culture such as language and ceremony. Missions often provided the place where members of indigenous people congregated, thus unintentionally preserving cultural and community identity against the assimilation intentions of the majority society.

Missionaries were frequently outspoken in their defence of indigenous people, not only to save the lives of the people, but also to argue for the recognition of Aborigines as fully human. On the other hand, even if not saying outright that traditional Aboriginal life was abominable, missionaries were at least vigorously seeking to change the way indigenous people expressed their spiritual relationship through the land in story and ceremony.

The National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families received submissions from many of the churches and church groups that had actively been involved in missionary activity among the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, as well as from people who had been under their care. Mostly the churches accepted that they share some responsibility for forcible removals because of their involvement in providing accommodation, education and work placements for children. The Aboriginal Legal Service of Western Australia advised the Inquiry that 85 per cent of the people it interviewed who had been forcibly removed as children had spent at least part of their childhood in the care of a mission. Nationally the proportion is probably somewhat lower.

One unforeseen outcome of the National Inquiry was raised by the Kimberley Land Council: “Perhaps the saddest legacy of mission experience is that in many outback communities today, there is deep division between those who wish to defend the Church to which they belong, and those who wish to blame it for all the suffering they have experienced.” The legacy of separation goes beyond breaking up families, and extends to the breaking up of communities and a spirit of solidarity as well.

Another comment that must be made about the impact of missionary activity is that many missionaries have gained from the contact. In place of paternalistic condescension, there has grown an appreciation of the deeply spiritual foundations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural traditions. There has been a gradual recognition that indigenous people could make a positive contribution to Australian national identity and values, rather than simply assimilate into the ready-made, religiously packaged culture of materialism that seem to prevail in Australia.

58

Evaluate the impact of missionary activity on Aborigines, using a Minus Three to Positive Three contnuum.

Summary of Themes

59

60

References

Bartlett, T. (2000). HSC foundation study 1: Aboriginal belief systems and spirituality.

Board of Studies. (1999). Stage 6 syllabus: studies of religion. Sydney: Board of Studies New South Wales.

Edwards, W. (2000). Aboriginal religion, [CD-ROM]. Redfish Bluefish [2001, November 3].

Loos, N. (1988). Concern and contempt: church and missionary attitudes towards aborigines in North Queensland in the nineteenth century. In T. Swain & D. B. Rose (Eds.), Aboriginal Australians and Christian missions (pp. 100-120). Bedford Park: Australian Association for the Study of Religions.

Lovat, T., & McGrath, J. (Eds.). (1999). New studies in religion. Katoomba: Social Science Press.

McClish, B. (1999). The Australian church story. Melbourne: HarperCollinsReligions.

Morrissey, J., Mudge, P., Taylor, A., Bailey, G., Gregor, H., McGillion, C., O'Reilly, P., Magee, P., & Mills, L. (2001). Living religion (2nd ed.). Sydney: Longman.

Pattel-Gray, A. (2000). Aboriginal spirituality. In D. Parnham (Ed.), Exploring religion (2nd ed., pp. 177-202). South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

© Emmaus Publications (2002). Every effort has been made to trace and acknowledge all materials used. This material may be photocopied for educational use only.

61