Subject: Re: Use of 'Lord's Prayer' in secular settings
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 02:16:02 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Reply-To:  
Organization: iiNet Limited
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion,aus.religion
  (Allistar Melville)
wrote:
>In my opinion they shouldn't be forced to do either, religion should
>be kept out of public school. Fullstop.

It is perfectly OK for you to have this opinion, and to express it and
use your voice and vote to forward it.

But - if a school or community decides that a majority of them do want
to have somesort of religious activity would you oppse that as well? 

What I am getting at is this - is what you are expressing (opposition
to religious expression and teaching in public schools) your
preference, or is it what you want to impose on everyone?

In Australia public prayer in the context of the whole school
community happens rarely, if at all in public schools. Exceptions
_might_ be in the case of Christmas and Easter assemblies, and
memorial services for members of the school community who have died.

If the school administration, the parent body and the wider school
community all support it, there is the option of local churches
providing religious instruction - but students and parents can opt out
of this if they wish. I think these things are good, but I do not
think they go far enough. 

To fully undertstand modern Western society, it's institutions,
history, ethics, etc., a knowledge of Christianity and the psychology
and philosophy of religion is essential. It is a real shame that
public schools deny their students this knowledge. I think the study
of religion should be taught in every school - as an objective study,
'warts and all', in much the same way that history, economics and
politics are taught. In case there is any doubt, I think that the
atheistic objections to religion should be taught as well as the
theistic arguments in favour.

So I guess I disagree with you, Allister. I think that religious
activity should be allowed in public schools on a voluntary basis and
when it can help the school community (eg funerals), and I also think
that the subject of religion should be a part of any comprehensive
school curriculum.

cheers

N+
Nigel B. Mitchell
 

-----------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Use of 'Lord's Prayer' in secular settings
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 04:48:23 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Reply-To:  
Organization: iiNet Limited
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion,aus.religion
 (Allistar Melville) wrote:
>I have little problems with religion being part of the curriculum as
>long as: (as mentioned above)
> 1) ALL reliugions are given equal time

ALL religions?

I would suggest that the emphasis on each religion be in proportion to
the nominal allegiance to that religion in the school community. In
Australia we have census figures which indicate this, and a possibly
more acurate measure might be to give school families the option of
indicating their religious affiliation at enrolment.

> 2) The religious beliefs are not presented as fact.

I know of several very good religion education curricula designed for
Australian schools in which the various aspects of Religion are
covered, eg "Who is God?", Death, rites of passage, morality, etc.,
and units compare and contrast various religious and non-religious
ways of explaining, celebrating and living their ideas in these areas.

The curricula I have seen give examples from Christianity and at least
one other religion in each area. I think this is an appropriate
balance in Australian society where somewhere between 60-80% of the
population claim affiliation to a Christian church.

Students are not told encouraged to compare "right" and "wrong",
but rather they are equipped to describe and analyse the content and
consequences of the various religious beliefs. 

I know of Christian schools, including the one my daughter attends, in
which such studies take place _as well_ as deliberately doctrinal
Christian teaching and worship. The students emerge from this highly
critical and articulate in matters of religion. Some do become
Christians, many do not - but they all make informed decisions, and
are equipped to analyse and reconsider their decisions (in either
direction) later in life. 

cheers

N+
Nigel B. Mitchell
 

-----------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Use of 'Lord's Prayer' in secular settings
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 07:31:50 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Reply-To: 
Organization: iiNet Limited
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion,aus.religion 
Nigel:
>|> I would suggest that the emphasis on each religion be in proportion to
>|> the nominal allegiance to that religion in the school community.

Julian:
>No each religion must be given equal time i.e. there has to be just one
>child of a particular religion for it to be taught, and Christian religion
>will be lumped as one.

Where I have experienced what we are talking about, that is actually
what happens. I have taught Religious education in state schools, and
also in church schools. I know that in my classes anyway, children who
belonged to other religions than Christianity were given the
opportunity and encouragement to share insights from their religious
heritage in class - eg bringing matzoh bread at passover and talking
about how their family keeps the feast, discusing how their family was
keeping Ramadan, etc. This applies to different Christian traditions
as well, eg Orthodox Easter traditions.

If you and I are ever on a school board together, we will argue out
the case of whether all religions should be given 'equal time', or
whether the curriculum should represent proportionally the diversity
of the community. 

If there was one Muslim child and twenty Christian children, I would
not see that as a reason to give them equal time. On the other hand,
if there were no Muslim children I would not consider that a reason to
ignore Islam. 

>|> The curricula I have seen give examples from Christianity and at least
>|> one other religion in each area. I think this is an appropriate
>|> balance in Australian society where somewhere between 60-80% of the
>|> population claim affiliation to a Christian church.

>This would give them an unbalanced view.

I would have thought that a "balanced view" would be one that
accurately reflected the wider society.

>|> I know of Christian schools, including the one my daughter attends, in
>|> which such studies take place _as well_ as deliberately doctrinal
>|> Christian teaching and worship. The students emerge from this highly
>|> critical and articulate in matters of religion. Some do become
>|> Christians, many do not - but they all make informed decisions, and
>|> are equipped to analyse and reconsider their decisions (in either
>|> direction) later in life. 

>So the Ark story is analysed and shown to be impossible?

As an historical event, Yes, of course.

But it would also be studied as a powerful story in which Jewish and
Christian people find a metaphor for the judgement and mercy of God.

The story of Noah's Ark is not one I would use with a junior class,
except maybe purely in storytelling mode. With a senior (Secondary)
class I would use it to discuss the nature of Justice, and Judgement,
and Sin, and Death. No doubt many students would say that it shows God
to be unjust, which is probably what you (Julian) would say, and I
would have to agree that on the face of it that is so. This can be the
jumping off place for a very interesting discussion which can cover
the nature of scripture (ie is it a historical story), as well as the
other topics I listed above.

cheers

N+
Nigel B. Mitchell
 

-----------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Use of 'Lord's Prayer' in secular settings
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 07:45:00 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Reply-To: 
Organization: iiNet Limited
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion,aus.religion

Nigel:
>|> I also do not know of a single group that would teach schoolkids that
>|> atheists "are going to burn in hell" which would be allowed to
teach
>|> in a state school. I did say that the school community and the school
>|> administration had to give their approval.

Juian:
>You must not get about much, are seriously trying to tell me that your
>church doesn't mention hell until you are grown up?

My church doesn't talk about Hell much at all. Why should we?
You accuse me of not getting out much. I suspect that I spend more
time in Churches than you do. Let me assure you that telling people
that atheists "are going to burn in hell" is not a major theme in the
preaching of any mainstream churches and few marginal ones - and even
less so in their teaching of the faith to young people. 

If you want to set yourself up as a piercing critic of Christianity,
Julian, I suggest that you check the validity of what you are saying
against something more reliable than usenet. Even here, unless you
have very selective vision or subscribe to Andy's "a good Christian is
a malevolent christian" philosophy, you would have to admit that only
a very small proportion of people who call themselves Christians talk
about "atheists will all burn in hell" and such nonsense.

>|> I have described some curricula in my post to Allister. I can provide
>|> more information if you like. Most states in Australia have a course
>|> called "beliefs and values" or similar available for secondary
>|> students, and it is a real pity that only a small number of schools
>|> take up this option.

>If this what to be a choice course i.e. choose one of the following courses...
>then fine the Christians can go to religious classes while the rest can 
>do sport, art classes, home-economics, etc. But mind only in the latter
>years of secondary school, definately not primary.

The courses in religion studies (also known as comarative religion)
are usually only available as options in senior secondary. They are
not exclusively for Christians, and it is not only Christians who
attend such classes. You might make less false statements and
assumptions about Christianity if you had attended such a course. The
course would probably not have convinced you of the truth of
Christianity - it would not have been aiming to do that. But it would
have given you a better understanding of the breadth and meaning of
Christian teaching and traditions.

Interestingly, the "religious" classes, commonly known as Religious
education, seem to be almost entirely restricted to primary schools.

I suspect that you will disapprove, Julian, but that is what the
schools and communities want. As I said, such classes cannot take
place unless the school administration and school community (ie parent
and teacher body) supports it, and the wider Church community provides
the teachers. There is always the right of parents of students to opt
out of such classes.

>|> >Currently it is biased towards Christianity and that isn't even taught,
>|> >i.e. Greek "Myths", Maori "Myths and Legends". Can
you seriously tell me
>|> >that the topic will be called "Christian myths and legends"? 
>|> 
>|> I don't see why not.
>|> Part of any good course in basic religion education would involve
>|> debunking the popular notion that "myths" and "legends"
are untrue. 
>|> Those words describe types of literature and story.
>|> 
>|> eg - is the Anzac legend true?

>O.k. do a survey at your church "How many would support the teaching of
>"Christian myths and legends".

I am sure that a course in "Myths and legends of world religions"
would be widely supported, and would benefit all who elected to take
it.

cheers

N+
Nigel B. Mitchell