Available via license: CC BY 3.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Catholic Education Journal of Catholic Education
Volume 22
Issue 3
Special Issue: The Challenges and
Opportunities of Including the LGBTQ
Community in Catholic Education
Article 3
2019
Homophobia in Catholic schools: An exploration of teachers’ Homophobia in Catholic schools: An exploration of teachers’
rights and experiences in Canada and Australia rights and experiences in Canada and Australia
Tonya D. Callaghan
University of Calgary
Lisa van Leent
Queensland University of Technology
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/ce
Part of the International and Comparative Education Commons, and the Other Education Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Callaghan, T. D., & van Leent, L. (2019). Homophobia in Catholic schools: An exploration of teachers’ rights
and experiences in Canada and Australia.
Journal of Catholic Education, 22
(3). http://dx.doi.org/
10.15365/joce.2203032019
This Article is brought to you for free with open access by the School of Education at Digital Commons at Loyola
Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for publication in Journal of Catholic Education
by the journal's editorial board and has been published on the web by an authorized administrator of Digital
Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information about Digital Commons,
please contact digitalcommons@lmu.edu. To contact the editorial board of Journal of Catholic Education, please
email JCE@nd.edu.
36 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
Journal of Catholic Education, Vol. 22, No.3, December 2019, pp. 36-57. is article is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 International License.
https://doi.org/10.15365/joce.2203032019
Homophobia in Catholic schools: An Exploration of Teachers’
Rights and Experiences in Canada and Australia
Tonya D. Callaghan
University of Calgary
Lisa van Leent
Queensland University of Technology
Little is known about the experiences of non-heterosexual educators in Catholic
schools. is international analysis reveals previously unreported data from Aus-
tralian and Canadian qualitative studies that examine the experiences of lesbian,
gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) teachers, and LGBTI Allies
from Australia and Canada who are currently teaching or have taught in Catholic
schools. Bringing their work together for the rst time, the two lead researchers
compare their investigations and reveal disheartening similarities with religiously
inspired homophobia despite diering legal and policy contexts of the two countries.
ese two studies demonstrate that LGBTI teachers, and LGBTI Allies, rely on
their personal beliefs and local school community culture and policies to understand
their equality rights and this has signicant implications for the eld of education.
Keywords
Non-heterosexual teachers, Catholic schools, homophobia, equality, inter-
national comparative study, Canada, Australia
Since the American Gay Liberation Movement of the 1960s, a new cli-
mate of tolerance has developed in the Western world, including the two
Commonwealth countries of this study: Canada and Australia. is is
evidenced by notable advances in same-sex legal rights. Nevertheless, previ-
ous research has shown that these legal advances are typically not respected in
Catholic schools causing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LG-
BTI) teachers to be at risk for homophobic discrimination (Callaghan, 2007b;
2018). Caught between the religious edicts of the Vatican and the secular laws
of the state, Catholic schools in Canada and Australia respond to non-het-
erosexual teachers in contradictory and inconsistent ways, including ring or
37
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
more subtle forms of exclusion. is lack of consistency and recurring intoler-
ance towards gender and sexual minority groups could be due to the central
contradiction within Catholic doctrine itself, the church’s decree that “it’s ok to
be gay, just don’t act on it,” which is untenable for many lay Catholics.
As members of LGBTI communities (one in Brisbane, Queensland, Aus-
talia and the other in Calgary, Alberta, Canada) we the authors ask, how is it
acceptable to be gay if one is not to act on it? roughout our research into
gender and sexual diversity in schooling, we have uncovered that Catholic
schools can be especially dicult places for LGBTI people to teach and we
thought it would be worthwhile to examine our studies together to discover
why that might be.
In addition to advances in same-sex legal rights in both Canada and Aus-
tralia, this exploratory study is most suited to the two countries because they
share a framework of common values and goals that include the promotion of
democracy, education, human rights, good governance, and individual liberty.
ey also share many recognizable traditions and customs as well as similar
legal and political systems. In both countries, Catholic schools receive up to
70% of their funding from public sources (McKinney, 2008). is exploratory
international study reveals new evidence about homophobic and transphobic
incidents in Catholic schools, and explores the challenges of achieving the
promise of equal opportunity for all.
Literature Review
Catholic Doctrine and Decrees
e Catholic teachings can be found in the Catechism of the Catholic
Church (“Catechism”) (Catholic Church, 1992), a book about the beliefs of
faithful Catholics. is book refers only to “homosexual persons” and not
bisexual, transgender, or intersex people. is is not only because such sexual
and gender identities were not commonly known at the time that the Cat-
echism was rst undertaken in the mid-1980s and subsequently published in
1992, but also because Church leaders are wary that such identity markers
would be too arming of non-heterosexual sexual activity.
In Canada, provincial assemblies of Catholic bishops have written pasto-
ral guidelines intended for Catholic schools that discourage the use of iden-
tity markers such as “gay” or “lesbian.” A pastoral guideline is essentially an
educational policy and curriculum document written and designed by local
bishops to direct Catholic schools on issues of morality (Callaghan, 2007b).
38 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
For example, Alberta bishops’ 2001 pastoral guideline, A Resource for an Inclu-
sive Community, states,
to refer to a person as ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ in our culture is not only to use
politically charged language but to succumb to a reductionist way of
speaking about someone else. Such labeling is not only inaccurate but
tends to re-enforce and, in some cases, legitimate an arrested psycho-
sexual development. (as cited in CCSSA, 2007, section 3)
Similarly, the Ontario bishops’ Pastoral Guidelines to Assist Students of
Same-Sex Orientation, caution that “attaching a label” such as homosexual,
lesbian, or gay is “problematic” because it “implies that they are their orienta-
tion. . . . e orientation or act is homosexual or heterosexual but the person
is not” (OCCB, 2004, p. 26).
For these reasons and more, the Catechism of the Catholic Church refers
to “homosexual persons” and not LGBTI individuals. Even the use of the
“homosexual persons” label is itself contradictory given the bishops’ conten-
tion that the sexual act—not the person—is homosexual. But, contradictions
abound in Catholic documents about homosexuality (Callaghan, 2007a).
Deeply discrepant, the catechism related to the sexual expression of LGBTI
people can be distilled to the colloquial Christian expression: “Love the sin-
ner, hate the sin.” is irreconcilable concept underlies curricular and policy
decisions regarding the topic of gender and sexual diversity and the existence
of gender and sexual minorities in Catholic schools.
e catechism about homosexuality can be traced to a denitive letter
from the Vatican written by Prefect Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (who later
went on to become Pope Benedict XVI) and Archbishop Alberto Bovone.
Entitled Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of
Homosexual Persons, some lay LGBTI Catholics simply refer to it as the
Halloween Letter because it contains some frightening ideas, and because the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith released it in October. In the
Halloween Letter, Ratzinger and Bovone (1986) attempt to distinguish be-
tween identifying as homosexual and engaging in homosexual acts:
Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not
a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic
moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective
disorder. (item 3)
39
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
is language informed the Catechism’s lessons on homosexuality, which
can be found in Nos. 2357-59 – a section on chastity within a discussion about
the sixth commandment “you shall not commit adultery.” According to the
Catechism, homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to
natural law” (Catholic Church, 1992, No. 2357); therefore, the homosexual
orientation is presented as “objectively disordered” (No. 2358).
Catholic education leaders tend to enforce infractions outlined in the
Catechism related to “homosexual persons” more than other elements of the
doctrine pertaining to sexuality. For example, in Canada, teachers working
for publicly-funded Catholic schools must sign an employment contract
containing a Catholicity clause requiring them to uphold all elements of
Catholic doctrine 24 hours a day, seven days a week, but the LGBTI teachers
have been the ones most held to account. Specically, lesbian and gay teach-
ers in Canadian Catholic schools have been summarily dismissed for legally
marrying their same-sex partners, or for wanting to raise children with their
same-sex partners (Callaghan, 2018). Conversely, although the Catechism of
the Catholic Church also forbids cohabitation outside of marriage, the use of
contraception, and divorce, it appears that a high percentage of heterosexual
teachers are keeping their jobs even though they live with partners outside of
the bonds of marriage, or, if and when they do get married, they choose not
to have children, plan to have small families of only two or three children, or
decide to get divorced.
Religious Freedoms in Australia
In Australia, the experiences of LGBTI teachers in Catholic schools
are largely unknown. However, Grey, Harris, and Jones (2016) suggest that
the rights of teachers in the Australian state of Victoria who work in state
schools are protected by progressive anti-discrimination legislation, but those
who work in independent and religious schools “are not subject to state legis-
lation in the area of LGBTI teachers’ rights” (p. 290). ey go on to state that
although there is little evidence of LGBTI teachers being dismissed
from employment in Australian Catholic schools, research by Ferfolja
(2005) reveals that the threat of dismissal has been used to both silence
and harass LGBTI teachers working in the Australian Catholic educa-
tion system. (p. 290)
With a dearth of research in this eld, we hope to add to their work, but
also to suggest that more studies must be undertaken into the plight of LG-
BTI people in Catholic schools.
40 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
Fundamental international human rights principles stipulate that there
should be no hierarchy of rights, but currently in Australia, respect for reli-
gious freedom seems to be aorded more weight than respect for the equal-
ity rights of LGBTI people. is is especially evident in the arena of public
schooling. Following the Australian same-sex marriage plebiscite of 2017, the
prime minister at the time called for a review of religious freedom (Austra-
lian Government, 2018), which sparked debate about teachers’ rights and the
rights of religious schools to discriminate in hiring and ring sta. Currently,
Australian governments are debating the legal rights of religious institutions,
including Catholic schools, to discriminate against LGBTI teachers.
Legislative Boundaries and Exemptions
In Australia, and similarly in Canada, each state and territory (jurisdic-
tion) has diering legislative detail. In the state of Queensland, where the
Australian study was undertaken, teachers working in Catholic schools are
bound by a “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislative context. Teachers cannot be dis-
missed based on their sexual orientation or gender identity according to the
Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld). However, the Act goes on to dene the
following:
It is not unlawful for an employer to discriminate…against a person
if…it is a genuine occupational requirement of the employer that the
person, in the course of, or in connection with, the person’s work, act in
a way consistent with the employer’s religious beliefs. (p. 28)
is means that teachers can be dismissed if their actions do not align
with the religious beliefs of the school. erefore, if the Catholic institution
upholds marriage as solely between a man and a woman, then those who act
in ways that are not consistent with these beliefs could be lawfully discrimi-
nated against based on their actions.
One might argue that religious freedoms of such organisations should
entitle them to employ people who will act in accordance with the tenets of
the faith and the ideologies inherent in the establishment. However, in Aus-
tralia, and similarly to Canada, Catholic schools are government funded. We,
therefore, oer a counter argument that publicly funded institutions should
be answerable to the laws of the land. Further, Australia, unlike its western
democratic counterparts, does not have an overarching charter which estab-
lishes human rights and freedoms for all to uphold.
41
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
In Canada, Catholic schools have a long and somewhat complicated his-
tory, originating with Britain’s victory over France for the colonies of North
America in the early 1700s. e two main faith groups at the time were
Catholics and Protestants. As a concession to the faith group in a minority
position in any given community, a separate school system was established to
ensure that Catholic families could send their children to Catholic schools
if living in a predominantly Protestant area and vice versa. Separate schools
currently have constitutional status in the provinces of Alberta, Saskatch-
ewan, and Ontario. Separate schools are operated by civil authorities and are
accountable to provincial governments rather than church authorities. Reli-
gious bodies do not have a constitutional or legal interest in separate schools
and, as such, Canadian Catholic separate schools are not private or parochial
schools that are common in other countries.
Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) ensures
the right of denominational schools and separate schools to exist in Canada
out of respect for special rights conferred to Roman Catholics and Protes-
tants by the colonizers of Canada, which was necessary in order to join the
British North American colonies together as a federal union under the new
confederation of Canada. e denominational right of Canadian Catholic
schools to exist should not be interpreted to mean that they are absolved
from respecting other rights and freedoms outlined in the Charter—speci-
cally Section 15, the equality rights provision.
e religious freedom that is guaranteed by Section 2 of the Charter also
should not be interpreted as the freedom to deny basic human rights to spe-
cic groups in the name of that very religious freedom. Respect for Section
29 and Section 2 of the Charter is often the crux of the argument advanced by
Canadian Catholic schools seeking to be exempt from respecting all forms of
equality outlined in Section 15 due to their perceived conicts with religious
beliefs. is anomaly begs the question: Shouldn’t educational institutions in
receipt of public funding respect the equality rights that are guaranteed in the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? A solution to this problem may lie
in Section 1 of the Charter, which is a limiting clause that has the capacity to
legally restrict Charter rights and freedoms if the expression of one right calls
for the suppression of other rights.
e Original Studies
e original Canadian study (Callaghan, 2018) employed a multi-method
qualitative research framework involving three key components: (a) semi-
42 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
structured interviews with 20 participants; (b) media accounts that illustrate
the Catholic schools’ homophobic environment; and (c) two key Catholic
policy and curriculum documents from the Canadian provinces of Alberta
and Ontario. In order to help explain the phenomenon of religiously-inspired
homophobia in Canadian Catholic schools, Callaghan theorized the teachers’
experiences using the following critical theories: Gramsci’s (1971) notion of
hegemony, Althusser’s (1970/2008) concept of the Ideological State Appara-
tus, and Foucault’s (1975/1995) theory of disciplinary surveillance.
e original Australian study (van Leent, 2015; van Leent 2017) sought to
understand primary school teachers’ everyday experiences related to sexual-
ity and contextualised the investigation into the socially constructed nature
of teacher knowledge about sexualities. Phenomenography (Marton, 1986)
was the research design and methodological approach used for the Austra-
lian study. Nineteen teacher participants were interviewed using relatively
unstructured, open-ended questioning; a suitable approach given the aim
of revealing teachers’ conceptions. Heteronormativity (Warner, 1981) was a
foundational thoery in understanding concepts such as heterosexism, and
various forms of homophobia, which were underpinned by social construc-
tionist theories in pedagogy, sexuality theories, and evolving understandings
of sexuality.
e Current Study
Although the two independent studies employed specic theoretical
approaches and research designs, they nevertheless align ontologically and
epistemologically. Both uncover the experiences of teachers vis-à-vis LGBTI
issues and topics, and both studies show that new knowledge is constructed
by individuals’ experiences in the world. e intention of these studies and
the analysis is not to provide replicable or comprehensive representations of
teachers’ experiences. e aim of this research is to reveal these teachers’ expe-
riences only. eoretically, individuals’ experiences are valued and respected as
new knowledge, which is constructed by them and their experiences.
Method
e idea for this exploratory analysis was initially conceived of when
author Lisa van Leent’s university, Queensland University of Technol-
ogy, invited author Tonya Callaghan to give a guest lecture on her research
into religiously-inspired homophobia and transphobia in Catholic schools
in Canada. As van Leent listened to Callaghan’s presentation, she started
43
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
to notice many similarities with a sub-set of her recently-completed study
pertaining to the three teachers who had experience with Australian Catholic
schools. roughout the duration of the research visit, we had opportunities
to discuss our respective studies and determined that it would be worthwhile
to bring our studies together in an analysis because the plight of sexual and
gender minority groups in Catholic schools is a neglected research topic due
to a conservative deference to the fundamental freedom of religion. It is also
due to a corresponding prevailing societal belief that religiously inspired dis-
criminatory practices occurring in publicly funded schools are a normal part
of religious freedom that should continue unchallenged.
Our study aims to shed light on the prevelance and seriousness of the
problems facing LGBTI teachers in Catholic schools in dierent parts of the
planet. We thought if we could show the similarities of the LGBTI teachers’
experiences in Catholic schools in such far away corners of the world, then
we might be able to convince other gender and sexuality scholars to include
Catholic schools in their studies. Our goal is anti-oppressive in that we
hope to provide sucient evidence that the problem exists in order to start
developing solutions. Ultimately, we aim to uncover eective ways to resist
homophobia and transphobia in Catholic schools, thereby hopefully empow-
ering silenced and shamed sexual and gender minority groups within those
schools.
We started our analysis with an exegesis of one another’s studies. at is,
we conducted a close reading and re-reading of one another’s published and
unpublished studies for the purpose of ensuring some equivalence in our
data and that they are indeed comparable between the dierent contexts. We
carefully dened the boundaries of our cases to include only those data that
pertained to teachers in Catholic school contexts (these were primarily LG-
BTI teachers, but also one ally and one non-ally teacher). Upon completing
our exegesis and dening the boundaries of our cases, we determined that our
comparative analysis has three common, functionally eqivalent dimensions:
(a) the experiences of LGBTI and other teachers, (b) in Catholic schools,
and (c) in two commonwealth nations that share many similarities in terms
of history and governance.
We then subjected our data sets from Australia and Canada, which were
gathered within the timeframes of 2010-2014, to a content analysis; identify-
ing any discussion of teachers’ experiences in Catholic education contexts in
relation to their experiences of situations in which diverse sexualities inter-
sected with notions of Catholicism. e total number of participants was 10
44 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
(n=10). After applying the content analysis to the full data set to identify the
relevant transcripts, we conducted a thematic analysis. A thematic analysis
was used to develop the description and summary of the comparison of the
teachers’ experiences in this paper (Clarke & Braun, 2018). e analysis was
informed by the nature of the context in which the data was specically
sought, the similarities of our critical social justice theoretical frameworks,
and relevant scholarship in the eld of gender and sexuality studies in the
discipline of education.
Findings from the Canadian Subset
is discussion is limited to the Canadian teachers’ stories, the main
facts of which are summarized and analyzed using various critical theories.
All of the teacher participants identify as LGBTI, except for one female
teacher participant who identies as a “straight ally.” Of the six teacher
participants,whose stories are shared here using pseudonyms, four are no
longer teaching with their original Catholic school board: three were red for
behaving in ways Catholic school administrators deemed to be contrary to
Catholic doctrine vis-à-vis gender and sexual minority groups, and one was
harassed about her suspected lesbianism to the point that she chose to quit
the profession after she nished out her temporary contract.
Job was red from his Catholic district in rural Alberta in 2008 because
he was transitioning from female to male. Naarai was red from her Catholic
district in rural Alberta in 2009 because she was attempting to conceive a
child with her female partner. Anna was red from her Catholic district in
southern Alberta in 2004 for taking on the role of “straight ally” to the LG-
BTI students in her Catholic school and providing a “positive space” for them
to meet in her classroom at lunchtime. Naomi was harassed because of her
suspected lesbianism by conservative residents in her northern Ontario town,
and by certain colleagues at the elementary school where she had accepted
a temporary teaching position. e harassment was so severe that she barely
completed the school year in 2005.
e two other teacher participants, who were not red or forced out
of their jobs, are both cisgender gay males, one a principal and the other a
teacher, who have been teaching with their respective Catholic school dis-
tricts since the mid 1990s. ey both are only able stay employed as educators
by remaining closeted at work and by pretending to be bachelors unlucky
in love, despite the fact that both men have long-term male partners with
whom they have been living for decades. Mark is a principal at a Catholic
45
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
elementary school in Alberta who has developed excellent coping skills in
avoiding personal questions that might reveal his sexuality and marital status.
Luke is a high school English teacher in Ontario who is fearful that the
Catholicity clause in his employment contract might be used to re him if it
becomes known that he has been living with his male partner in a common-
law arrangement for decades. Like Mark, Luke has developed coping skills
to avoid the religiously inspired homophobia that pervades his school atmo-
sphere. Unlike Mark, Luke nds covert ways to express his sense of human
rights activism in his Catholic school.
Findings from the Australian Subset
Primary school teachers (n=19) were the focus of the Australian study and
were employed in a variety of contexts; there were a total of three teachers in
Catholic schools. For the purposes of this article, only data from the par-
ticipants who had experiences working in Catholic schools in Queensland,
Australia has been included. e following excerpts are from three primary
school teachers who shared their experiences in Queensland. ey reveal
important new knowledge about this little-known phenomenon of religiously
inspired homophobia in Catholic schools.
e rst participant had a student who died by suicide, which the teacher
believed was because the student had diculty negotiating being gay in a
Catholic environment. e teacher did not identify as LGBTI or as an ally,
but she described her motivation as being supportive and responsive to stu-
dents who raise challenges to the Catholic Church on its values and beliefs
in relation to diverse genders and sexualities. She goes on to describe the risk
she knows she is taking every time this occurs:
I also have to be very cautious and careful because if I’m seen not to be
supportive of the Catholic Church I’m compromising my position...It
means you have to be very, very careful because if I put a foot wrong, I
can actually be sacked on the spot because Catholic schools are exempt
from discrimination based on religious beliefs and practices.
is particular participant was aware that by addressing concepts of di-
verse sexualities she could lose her professional appointment, but because of
her personal experiences and desire to support students, the participant took
the calculated risk.
46 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
Even when faced with an organisational culture that does not necessar-
ily support the inclusion of diverse sexualities, this participant nevertheless
found a way to embrace the concept to support students’ individual personal
development regarding sexuality. e following excerpt is quite lengthy but in
order to gain an understanding of the complexity of the teacher’s experience
the context has been included.
I have kids challenge it [diverse sexualities] continuously and say they
don’t believe what the Church is about and all the rest of it. Fortunately,
I’ve been teaching religious ed. in Catholic schools a long time so I’ve
had a lot of chance to sort of think through the approach and I always
take it very cautiously and carefully and say to the kids: e new tes-
tament doesn’t emphasise anything about homosexuality; Jesus never
passed any comment about sexual sin, sexual identity, homosexuality
sexual identity—nothing, there is nothing. So therefore, my beliefs are
that Jesus is really on about the individual and looking after the indi-
vidual. e rest is church culture, it’s church history over a period of
time and that is always evolving you just have to be patient... what I
always teach is that the church teaches about free will and conscience
and that that is how all decisions have to be made. I always emphasise if
you have an informed conscience, and you’ve spent time understanding
who you are as a person and understanding what your sexual identity is
about, then that is, in fact, informing your conscience. e church actu-
ally says once formed, you have to follow it, and that’s how I get around
it. So, even though the Church has this culture and beliefs around di-
verse sexualities, you’re choosing a particular section out of that culture
that really supports them to be individual and... yeah that’s what I tend
to do. And I think that’s where a lot of informed religious education
teachers in Catholic schools will go—they will go that way. ey will
talk about informed conscience and moral decision making rather than
going the hard line about what the church says about homosexuality.
is excerpt indicates that teachers can and will include content in their
teaching that is informed by their personal beliefs and not necessarily part
of the curriculum or institutional culture. Culturally, the Catholic schools to
which these teachers are referring, promote a heteronormative climate which
indicates a “silent” condemnation. Although particular Catholic ocials ar-
ticulate a clear stance on condemning sexual diversity in the broader commu-
47
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
nity, Catholic schools in Queensland did not, at the time of data collection,
have clear policy on homophobic bullying or teacher expectations regarding
how teachers should respond to diverse sexualities.
Another participant described their experiences as follows:
So, I myself am gay but I’m not allowed to be gay, which I think in itself
is a hindrance because I just think of how many—if you were allowed
to be open in the education department (whether it be state school or
a Catholic organization)—it would actually make it normal. Because,
at the moment, it’s hidden but all the kids know ’cause an ex-student
told them so they all keep insinuating: ‘Oh, well, [participant name] is
a lesbian,’ but I’m not allowed to acknowledge that and go: ‘Well, yeah,
I am.’ And I think that’s what they’re waiting for; they’re waiting for
clarication. ‘Well she is,’ and you know just get on with it and we’ll all
become normal.
is teacher seems unaware of the dierent protections aorded to teach-
ers in state schools versus religious schools. She states, “I’m not allowed to be
gay” and she remains “silent” being fully aware that her position is compro-
mised as a “gay” teacher in a Catholic school. e teacher also reveals a desire
for the normalization of being gay.
e third participant did not identify as LGBTI or as an ally, but grapples
with the idea that LGBTI themes and issues are “out of bounds” as a teacher
in a Catholic school. Although the teacher was unaware of the specicities
of the Anti Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld), she was well aware of Catholic
ideologies in relation to diverse sexualities:
I didn’t want to shun it ‘cause it’s a Catholic school but some of them
were like, [gasp]: ‘What? You can’t say that!’ And I thought, ‘Well, we’re
not gonna skirt around it.’ But I’m not going to go into it because it’s
not really my place in a Catholic school setting... But then I thought,
you are tempted to, like, go into it, but then you think, ‘Am I gonna get
myself into strife?’ and especially because it’s so spur of the moment ...
And (laugh) I didn’t want to be the one to tell them on that particular
day and get myself into trouble.
is teacher was grappling with her pedagogical response due to her
personal beliefs; that teachers should be able to have open discussion in the
48 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
classroom about LGBTI themes and issues and her understanding of the
school culture and broader ideologies held by the Catholic institution in
which she worked.
Discussion: Exploring Teachers’ Experiences across Canada and Australia
e teachers in this exploratory study reveal their experiences of grap-
pling with personal beliefs and institutional culture from working in Catholic
schools in both Canada and Australia. ree themes emerge from the data:
rights, risks, and resistance. ese are explicated in the following sections.
Rights
e legislative and legal platforms in both countries dier and it is logical
to conclude that the teachers would subsequently have dierent understand-
ings about their rights in the context of LGBTI rights. However, our study
reveals that all of our teacher participants were critically aware that their
right to employment in their respective Catholic school systems was contin-
gent upon their ability to uphold the Catholicity clause in their employment
contracts. Many worked in fear. is workplace fear and anxiety had signi-
cant impact on their ability to: remain employed, express themselves freely
(without serious personal consequences), and exercise their autonomous ca-
pacity to challenge the system. For example, some of the teachers in the study
have the legal right to challenge being red, but did not because of personal
expense, both emotional and nancial. One way to better understand how
heterosexism, homophobia, and transphobia operate in Catholic schools is to
draw upon various critical theories.
Gramsci theorized that consent is as vital as coercion if ideological he-
gemony is going to function. e two teachers in the Canadian context and
the one teacher in the Australian context who continued to work in Catholic
schools closeted or hid their gay identity in order to keep their jobs. ey
strategically acted out their consent to their own domination by pretending
to live within the connes of Catholicity as normalised heterosexuality. ey
experienced a form of doctrinal disciplining in the tremendous amount of
emotional and psychological energy they felt obligated to expend in order to
avoid having their homosexuality become known by pretending to be het-
erosexual and single. is dissimulation robbed these teachers of one of the
privileges taken for granted by most heterosexual peoples in contemporary
Western society—sharing information about the source of their romantic
love and happiness with others. Gramsci’s writings on hegemony do not
49
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
necessarily assume individuals undergo complete psychological acceptance of
dominant ideologies. Given that the teachers chose to participate in a study
about homophobia and transphobia, they clearly had not consented entirely
to Catholic heterosexist and genderist domination. Gramsci’s theories ac-
count for the ideological domination of Catholic doctrine about non-het-
erosexuality in Catholic schools, but they also allow for acts of resistance to
Church-sanctioned discrimination.
Resistance
Teachers in both Canadian and Australian contexts grappled with their
personal beliefs about LGBTI rights in the context of Catholic education.
Some of the teachers in both contexts felt a sense of responsibility for student
well-being and social justice activism which demonstrated capacity to resist
and challenge dominant Catholic discourse. ey understood that there are
contradictions in their workplace and they struggled to reconcile issues such
as the disparity with which particular doctrine about homosexuality is en-
forced while other doctrine pertaining to sexuality is often overlooked, such
as beliefs about contraception, divorce, and adultery. e teachers grappled
with other contradictions in relation to students and their right to explore
these contradictions through resistance. For example, discussing issues such
as “moral decision-making” and “informed conscience” and what these mean
for individuals within a Catholic context.
Canadian participants, Luke and Mark, were not totally dominated by the
doctrinal disciplining of their Catholic schools in that they both had long-
term partners with whom they lived, despite the fact that this is decidedly
against Catholic doctrine. e Australian teacher who deliberately chose to
support students in questioning Catholic culture was not completely domi-
nated by doctrinal disciplining either. rough the power of personal will,
these teachers managed to not fully internalize the disciplining gaze of Fou-
cault’s (1975/1995) Panopticon (described in detail below). Unlike Althusser,
Foucault does not overlook the possibility of resistance; he also theorizes
the productive force of power, which can explain how the heteronormativ-
ity of the Catholic school unexpectedly invited new acts of resistance despite
signicant risks.
Risks
e teachers in Canada who continued to work in Catholic schools were
critically aware of their rights, but chose to remain largely silent. e one
teacher in Australia who continued to work in a Catholic school also re-
50 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
mained silent, but was not aware of the legislative protections aorded to
teachers who work in state government schools. All the teachers were criti-
cally aware of the potential consequences of being an LGBTI teacher and
or discussing LGBTI rights, issues and or topics. Regardless of geography,
legislative context, or Catholic school system, the teachers had diering
understandings of their rights, but all were critically aware of the risks of not
following the status quo.
Like Gramsci, Althusser posited that repression on its own cannot re-
produce the existing social relations of production in any given culture and
that ideology plays a vital role in the reproduction of the status quo. Accord-
ing to Althusser’s Ideological State Apparatus, the “State” that is operating
in Catholic schools, in relation to sexual minority groups, is the Vatican and
the dominant ideology being circulated is Catholic doctrine. As Althusser
(1970/2008, p. 19) explains:
e Ideological State Apparatuses function massively and predomi-
nantly by ideology [italics in the original], but they also function second-
arily by repression. . . . us Schools and Churches use suitable methods
of punishment, expulsion, selection, etc., to “discipline” not only their
shepherds, but also their ocks.
e Catholic Church’s position on sexual diversity is circulated in Catho-
lic schools primarily by ideology (i.e. via curriculum taught through a Catho-
lic lter) but also secondarily by repressive policy (informed by Catholic doc-
trine) that directs Canadian Catholic school administrators to re LGBTI
teachers for behaving in ways deemed contrary to Catholicity. In Althusser’s
framework, resistance to ideological domination appears futile.
Mark and Luke were not only subject to the wiles of Althusser’s Ideologi-
cal State Apparatus the Catholic Church, but they also experienced a kind of
Foucaultian disciplinary surveillance known as the Panopticon. In his book,
Discipline and Punish (1975/1995), Foucault drew upon the work of 18th century
British utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) who described the
Panopticon as an architectural device that can be used in institutions such as
prisons to observe all the prisoners without the observer being seen. Prison-
ers never know if they are being observed or not, and therefore must act as
though they are always being observed. e power of the Panopticon is its
ability to cause those being observed to discipline themselves and to “induce
[within them] a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the
51
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
automatic functioning of power” (Foucault, 1975/1995, p. 201). e Panopti-
con reveals how the repressive force of Catholic doctrine causes teachers in
Catholic schools to conform to the disciplinary regime required of them.
As Callaghan (2018) points out, the fact that a teacher is forced to remain
silent sends a very clear message of oppression and marginalization of diverse
gender identities and sexualities to the students and others in the school. e
implications for teacher and student health and wellbeing are profound. e
teachers in the Australian context were very aware of the unwritten expecta-
tions of their Catholic employers. From the ally working within the system
to support individuals, to the gay teacher who just wants “it” to be normal,
to the ally who is grappling with their personal beliefs, these teachers know
the possibilities of being dismissed or getting “into strife.” Allen, Rasmus-
sen, Quinlivan, Aspin, Sanjakdar and Bromdal (2014), discuss the concepts
of “risky” and “controversial” in the context of intersections between culture,
religion and sexuality. ese teachers are critically aware of the risky business
of discussing, including, or embodying LGBTI identities.
Although the teachers in this comparative study experience varying de-
grees of fear of punishment and actual punishment (such as fear of “getting
into trouble,” silencing, harassment, ring), regardless of location, they are
all critically aware of the risks that come with feeling the fear and still resist-
ing the heteronormative repression. For example, Canadian teacher Luke
and a teacher from the Australian context both nd ways to challenge their
heteronormative discourse that circulates in their Catholic school systems in
order to support LGBTI individuals in their midst, but both are very aware
of the associated risks. e Australian teacher participant points out: “I can
be sacked on the spot” for showing support for gender and sexual diversity
in an Australian Catholic school. All the teachers in the study share experi-
ences that reveal they are critically aware of the risks of being red or oth-
erwise “getting into trouble.” ey have all experienced silencing, exclusion,
and a fear for their professional status. ey are all aware of the professional
risks involved in working in Catholic education contexts, as they all grapple
with their personal beliefs, the challenge of being themselves and expressing
themselves, and sharing their interpretation of Catholic values in the class-
room.
is analysis of the Canadian and Australian teachers’ experiences
through the lens of critical theories reveals that the Vatican is able to as-
sert a dominant and hegemonic power within Catholic schools. In terms of
disciplining the sexual conduct of LGBTI educators, the Vatican’s power
52 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
prevails over other governments such as Canadian provincial ministries of
education and the Australian Department of Education and Training in the
publicly funded institution of the Australian and Canadian Catholic school.
e Vatican’s power is “panoptic” (Foucault, 1975/1995, p. 201) and operates
by means of discipline, surveillance and self-regulation. Teacher resistance is
muted. is is largely due to the fact that the majority of the LGBTI teacher
participants were swiftly red for behaving in ways that contravened Catho-
licity and so had no opportunity to resist the systemic homophobia and
transphobia of their Catholic schools. All of the LGBTI teacher participants
experienced some form of heterosexism in their Catholic schools and none
described a Catholic school environment that was accepting and welcom-
ing of gender and sexual diversity. Although the Vatican’s power is clearly
a dominant force, it is not entirely successful in achieving total domina-
tion over gender and sexual minority groups in Catholic schools, and this is
evident in the small acts of resistance that some of the LGBTI teachers were
able to accomplish.
Overall, this study reveals that teachers who identify as LGBTI are
signicantly disadvantaged because of the fact that their human rights are
impinged upon by Catholic education leaders and they fear for their employ-
ment security. Moreover, teachers who do not identify as LGBTI, including
those who do and do not consider themselves allies of LGBTI people and
concerns, are sharing similar experiences of fear of discrimination for simply
addressing LGBTI themes and issues in the classroom. Such teachers’ funda-
mental freedoms of thought, belief, conscience, and expression are seriously
curtailed. Allies to the LGBTI equity agenda and those who understand that
LGBTI identities and non-heterosexual and non-binary relationships form
part of the lived reality of students, teachers, and others involved in education
are also at risk of discrimination. Conservative forces in Australia are actively
silencing attempts to address LGBTI themes, issues, rights and inclusion in
Australian schools and this chilling eect is occurring beyond the familiar
lines of identity politics. at is, overt discrimination and fear of oppressive
reprisals control not only those educators who identify as LGBTI, or are
perceived as such, but also those who are or would be allies to social justice
eorts in schools.
Limitations and Implications
e empirical results we have reported in this exploratory study should
be considered in light of some limitations and implications. e study reveals
ndings about the experiences of LGBTI teachers associated with Catholic
53
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
schools of two Canadian provinces and one Australian state. We recognize
that the experiences of LGBTI teachers in schools is often dependant upon
the leadership of those schools and this can vary considerably due to many
factors. Nevertheless, the similarities among our ndings show a transfer-
ability of participant experiences. As qualitative researchers, we do not claim
that these ndings are generalizable to all Catholic schools around the world.
Scholars who research qustions of gender and sexuality in public school-
ing should not neglect to include Catholic schools in their studies out of a
deference for religious freedom and a tendency to leave Catholic schools to
their own devices. Future studies into the experiences of LGBTI teachers in
Catholic schools should look to uncover instances of surviving, thriving, and
resilience.
In Australia, the religious freedoms and rights debate, which began fol-
lowing the same-sex plebiscite in [2017], was largely silenced in recent politi-
cal campaigning; rather, the primary election issue in relation to education
focused on school funding: private versus public. e conservative political
party, which supported increases in private school funding and subjected
Australians to the brutal same-sex marriage plebiscite and ensuing public
debate, have been reinstated. e debate on school funding and religious
freedoms, including funding for religious schools, will no doubt continue in
the coming months as the government moves on key policies in relation to
education.
In Canada, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains the
important equality rights provision (Section 15), but, as our study has shown,
this has not protected LGBTI teachers in Canadian Catholic schools from
being harassed and dismissed. eir experiences are quite similar to LG-
BTI teachers in Australian Catholic schools who do not enjoy such federal
protections and given the recent election outcome are unlikely to change.
In light of the progress in LGBTI student rights in Canada, especially in
relation to provincial legislation that ensures students—including those in
Catholic schools—should be allowed to establish Gay/Straight Alliances and
use the words “gay” or “queer” in the name of their GSAs (Callaghan, 2014),
one might expect that respect for LGBTI teachers’ equality rights will follow.
As we have seen, legislation, law, and progressive educational policies are very
important for safeguarding LGBTI teachers’ equality rights, but there should
not be loopholes for Catholic schools to simply sidestep these essential rights
(in the case of Canada) or be exempt from human rights and federal anti-
discrimination laws (in the case of Australia).
54 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
LGBTI teachers’ rights in Australia are currently, as of 2019, in the hands
of a conservative government that must be persuaded to act on the recom-
mendations of the religious freedoms review, which they have ignored since
the recommendations were released over the last year. Regardless of the
outcome of the state of policital aairs in Australia, the Canadian experi-
ences shows us that the risk is always there for Catholic schools to disrespect
equality rights pertaining to LGBTI teachers and to le for exemptions to
anti-discrimination laws. In both countries, LGBTI teachers feel the power
of the Catholic Church doctrine regardless of the legislative context. e role
of religion in the state is not new to scholars (Butler, Habermas, Taylor &
West, 2011) and, as our study reveals, is an ongoing topic for discussion and
debate; the future of religion and individual rights are imperative for both
Australian and Canadian societies.
Conclusion
e experiences of teachers within the Australian Catholic school en-
vironment described in this article highlight that it is not only LGBTI
teachers who are lawfully discriminated against, but any teacher who acts by
discussing or supporting LGBTI themes, issues, rights and inclusion. e
Catholic ideology is supported by an essentialist view point in which het-
erosexuality is deemed to be the only “normal” and “natural” expression of
sexuality. In Catholic schools, this kind of heteronormativity (Warner, 1991)
is perpetuated and reinforced by “overt and covert practices of invisibility and
silencing” (Ferfolja, 2007, p. 150). None of the teachers referred to any Catho-
lic policy or doctorine specically, but they were all aware of the potential
ramications of identifying as LGBTI, an ally, or by “acting” in ways that
contradict the perceived values of the Catholic institution.
In Queensland it is dicult to imagine how teachers in Catholic educa-
tion reconcile their work on sexualities in the current legislative context;
especially when this is compounded by the inuences of religious freedom
reviews, marriage equality debates, and Bill of Rights discussions. Similarly
to the Canadian context, and as Callaghan (2018) has argued, publicly funded
institutions such as Catholic schools in Australia should be accountable to
human rights legislation. ese examples of some teachers’ conceptions reveal
the realities of teachers’ work in Catholic contexts: many experience a real
fear of being red; many have a hyper awareness of the privileging of hetero-
sexuality; and most are devastatingly aware of the potential consequences of
the impacts of invisibility and silencing for students.
55
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
Although Canada and Australia have dierent laws and protections
regarding LGBTI teachers’ rights, this comparative study shows that LGBTI
teachers have similar experiences in Catholic schools in such far away corners
of the world. Clearly, through the dissemination of punitive doctrine on the
topic of “homosexuality,” the Vatican is able to exert powerful control over
the lives of LGBTI teachers in Catholic schools. e Catholic church is not
the only authority governing Catholic schools, however. ese schools can re-
ceive up to 70% of their operating costs from public monies collected through
taxes and are legally accountable to elected trustees. is means that Catholic
schools belong to public citizens, not Church ocials, and should therefore
adhere to human rights legislation that governs the state.
Catholic teachers, sta, parents, and others who do not agree with re-
pressive Catholic school policies regarding sexual and gender minorities are
increasingly stepping forward to express their opposition to heterosexist
discrimination in Catholic schools. e outlook has been grim for LGBTI
teachers in Catholic schools for many years, but the more people discuss their
plight the more we may ignite a spark that encourages world-wide opposi-
tion to homophobic and transphobic oppression in Catholic schools.
References
Allen, L., Rasmussen, M. L., Quinlivan, K., Aspin, C., Sanjakdar, F., & Bromdal, A. (2014).
Who’s afraid of sex at school? e politics of researching culture, religion and sexuality
at school. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 37(1), 31-43. https://
doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2012.754006
Althusser, L. (2008). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses (notes toward an investigation).
London: Verso. (Original work published in 1970)
Anti-Discrimination Act [1991, Parliament of Queensland, Australia]. Retrieved from
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/2017-06-05/act-1991-085
Australian Government. (2018). Religious freedom review. Retrieved from https://www.pmc.
gov.au/domestic-policy/religious-freedom-review
Butler, J., Habermas, J., Taylor, C., & West, C. (2011). e power of religion in the public sphere.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Callaghan, T. D. (2007a). Contra/Diction: How Catholic doublespeak in Canadian Catholic
secondary schools furthers homophobia. Canadian Online Journal of Queer Studies in
Education, 3(1). Retrieved from https://journals.scholarsportal.info/browse/17107598/
v03i0001
Callaghan, T. D. (2007b). at’s so gay: Homophobia in Canadian Catholic schools. Saarbrücken,
Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
56 Journal of Catholic Education / December 2019
Callaghan, T. D. (2014). Law and disorder: Ontario Catholic bishops’ opposition to gay-
straight alliances.Paideusis: Journal of the Canadian Philosophy of Education Society, 22(1),
28-37. Retrieved from http://journals.sfu.ca/paideusis/index.php/paideusis/article/
view/405/211
Callaghan, T. D. (2018). Homophobia in the hallways: Heterosexism and transphobia in Canadian
Catholic schools. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (1982). Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, RSC
1985, app. II, no.44. Retrieved from http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/index.html
Catholic Church. (1992). Catechism of the Catholic Church. Retrieved from http://www.vatican.
va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2018). Using thematic analysis in counselling and psychotherapy
research: A critical reection. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 18(2), 107–110.
https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12165
Council of Catholic School Superintendents of Alberta [CCSSA]. (2007, March). Toward an
inclusive community [workshop]. Calgary, AB: Author.
Ferfolja, T. (2005). Institutional silence: Experiences of Australian lesbian teachers working
in Catholic high schools. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Issues in Education, 2(3), 51-66.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J367v02n03_05
Ferfolja, T. (2007). Schooling cultures: Institutionalizing heteronormativity and
heterosexism. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(2), 147-162. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13603110500296596
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: e birth of the prison (A. M. Sheridan Smith,
Trans.). New York: Vintage Books. (Original work published 1975)
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. New York: International.
Gray, E., Harris, A., & Jones, T. (2016). Australian LGBTQ teachers, exclusionary
spaces and points of interruption. Sexualities, 19(3), 286-303. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1363460715583602
Karp, P. (2018, June 6). Most Australians oppose religious schools’ right to re sta based
on sexuality. e Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/
may/14/most-australians-oppose-religious-schools-right-to-re-sta-based-on-
sexuality
Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography-Describing conceptions of the world around us.
Instructional Science, 10, 177-200. Retrieved from http://www.ped.gu.se/biorn/phgraph/
misc/constr/phegraph.html
McKinney, S. J. (Ed.). (2008). Faith schools in the twenty-rst century. Edinburgh: Dunedin
Academic Press.
Ontario Conference of Catholic Bishops. (2004). Pastoral guidelines to assist students
of same-sex orientation. Retrieved from https://www.hcdsb.org/Board/Equity/
Documents/Pastoral%20Guidelines%20to%20Assist%20Students%20of%20Same-
Sex%20Orientation.pdf
Ratzinger, J., & Bovone, A. (1986, October 1). Letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the
pastoral care of homosexual persons [the Halloween letter]. Retrieved from http://www.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_
homosexual-persons_en.html
57
Homophobia in Catholic Schools
van Leent, L. (2017). Supporting school teachers: Primary teachers’ conceptions of their
responses to diverse sexualities. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 17(4),
440-453. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2017.1303369
van Leent, L., & Ryan, M. (2015). e changing experiences of primary teachers: Responding
to scenarios involving diverse sexualities. International Journal of Inclusive Education,
20(7), 711-725. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2015.1111443
Warner, M. (1991). Introduction: Fear of a queer planet. Social Text (29), 3-17. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/466295
Dr. Tonya Callaghan is an Associate Professor with the University of Calgary
Werklund School of Education. Her second book, Homophobia in the Hallways:
Heterosexism and Transphobia in Canadian Catholic Schools was published in
2018 with the University of Toronto Press. Her research explores Catholic resistance
to anti-homophobia/transphobia education in both curriculum and educational
policy.
Dr. Lisa van Leent is a senior lecturer within the Faculty of Education, Queensland
University of Technology. Her research interests concern teacher support in rela-
tionships and sexuality education, particularly in regards to diverse sexualities,
and the improvement in support for LGBTIQ+ students in schools.
