What really happens in religious instruction classes?

In the current public discussion of the religious instruction classes in New Zealand public schools I notice many Christians are also opposing the current system. I had thought “Good on them. They are seeing this the same way I am as a matter of fairness, human rights, and opposing indoctrination of children.” And those letter-to-the-editor writers supporting the current scheme all seem to use rather extreme arguments which are not common with reasonable Christians.

However, I came across this video recently which makes me wonder if another motive for Christian concern about religious instruction in our schools is the way the more extreme religious cults can make use of it for evangelism. It’s one thing to know your child is being tutored by a kindly old Anglican woman – but the thought of a strident Exclusive Brethren having access to your children is a worry.

The video is of a talk by Joel Pittman, a former Pentecostal religious instruction teacher in Australia. They call their classes Scripture Classes or Special Religious Instruction (SRI), but essentially they have the same system as ours with the public school theoretically closed and instruction provided from an outside provider.

Religious Education and the Pentecostal Movement – Joel Pittman, Skepticamp Sydney 2011.

Joel describes how evangelicals use SRI for evangelism, how they frighten children into “giving their lives to Christ” and then encourage them to attend youth camps where they can be further indoctrinated.

I am sure many moderate Christian would be concerned if this was happening in New Zealand. And I am not saying it necessarily is. After all, the video describes the Australian situation. But it is obviously possible. Some of the more fundamentalist churches do recognise the possibilities religious instruction offer them in New Zealand. And it’s not as if school boards or the Ministry of Education vets the curriculum used, or the tutors. (After all, the school closes during the religious instruction classes).

The Trust Board of the Churches Education Commission (CEC) (which is one of the main providers in New Zealand) has representatives from many Christian denominations. It also has a rule to “ensure that no more than 40% of the total number of trustees at one time are from any one Member Denomination.” That seems good, but doesn’t necessarily ensure that extremist denominations have no influence. And the fact that some parents report their children being taught creationist stories does suggest they do have some influence.

The current CEC board includes representatives from Methodist, Assembly of God, Anglicans, Open Brethren, Presbyterian and Salvation Army.  And their last financial return shows donations from Anglicans, Associating Churches and Ministries of New Zealand (self-described as “fundamental, evangelistic and Holy Spirit honouring”), Baptist, Christian Brethren, Methodist and New Life churches.

Joel Pittman makes the point that the fundamentalist churches in Australia have the cash and can often override the less financial but more moderate churches with provision of SRI tutors and resources. It would be horrible to think this may also be true in New Zealand. I am sure most Christians would be concerned if this were so.

Perhaps its time for a bit more transparency. Who are the teachers supplied for teaching religious education in our schools? What are their denominations, beliefs and agendas? And how do they really run the classes?

Thanks to Chrys Stevenson at Gladly, the Cross-Eyed Bear: What REALLY happens in your child’s Scripture class – and beyond …

See also
Human values are secular
Mixing values and Jesus in secular education
Their mission – values or advancement of religion?
Mixing values and Jesus in secular education

Similar articles

Their mission – values or advancement of religion?

Colouring in for Jesus at a secular public school

The organisations providing religious instruction in public schools have become quite defensive in their reaction the comments from concerned parents in the media. Simon Greening, current Churches Education Commission Chief Executive claims their purpose is not missionary. They don’t wish to convert children to Christianity, just teach them values. Their aim is to “educate not evangelise.”

Problem is this current story conflicts with their earlier stories, and with the recorded aims of their organisation. Recently one of their newsletters described schools as an “under-utilised mission field”:

“Churches by and large have not woken up to the fact that this is a mission field on our doorstep. The children are right there and we don’t have to supply buildings, seating, lighting or heating, . .”

And they also encouraged Christian followers to join school boards so they could have “more influence” on holding religious study in class.

Tax-free status

Their current claims also look very disingenuous when you peruse their registration as a charity to get tax exemption. (Yes, we are subsidising their activities*). The Churches Education Commission Trust Board describes its charitable purpose, or the main sector under which they registered, as “religious activities” – that is the advancement of religion. Its main activity is providing “religious services / activities,” and its main beneficiaries are “Children / young people.”

They amplify their declared purpose in the rules provided for registration:

“The Commission’s Charitable Purpose is to advance education in New Zealand and to advance the Christian faith in New Zealand. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Commission will seek to achieve its Charitable Purpose by:
(a)     stimulating, servicing, supporting and co-ordinating the efforts of member churches and related organisations engaged in Christian and general education in New Zealand;
(b)      promoting and undertaking Christian religious education programmes in New Zealand;
(c)      by generally providing and assisting with the provision of Christian religious education in New Zealand schools and the wider community;
(d)     developing and supporting chaplaincy in New Zealand schools;
(e)     encouraging people to be involved as informed Christians in education as professionals, as parents, or as other citizens.”

I don’t think there is any doubt about it. Their main purpose is “Christian religious education” and advancement of “the Christian faith in New Zealand.”

They don’t include advancement of human values in any of their documents. Clearly they have just taken opportunist advantage of the inclusion of values in the secular curriculum of New Zealand’s public schools to advance their own religious agenda.

They really are treating these secular public schools as a “mission field.”

Should we be allowing people who are this disrespecting of the truth, and covert with their intentions, teach values to our children?

---

*Actually this organisation also gets other public money. Their last financial returns shows they received four grants totally $12,880 from Internal Affairs Community Organisation Grants Scheme for their work in the Auckland region. They must have been “pulling the wool” to get those grants because they are not meant to fund “Projects seeking to promote commercial, political or religious objectives.”

See also:
Human values are secular
Mixing values and Jesus in secular education

Similar articles

Human values are secular

As is public education in New Zealand – by law.

But some people are unhappy with this fact. They attempt to argue that values need religious belief – that you can’t be good without a god. And they work hard to create the illusion that religious instruction is required to instil values into our children. But if we are to believe today’s NZ Herald story – Schools drop Bible as interest falls – the influence of such attitudes is declining.

This reports that a number of Auckland schools are dropping the “bible in schools” programme run by the Churches Education Commission. And the opt-out, or withdrawal clause, is being used by a growing number of pupils and students – which creates problems for schools of providing supervision for the opt-outs. (The schools are theoretically closed while religious instruction takes place to get around the legal secular requirements).

Some parents are also complaining because schools have not kept them informed of the programme. Sometimes the first hint they get is when their child comes home talking about sin or creationism. One parent, who complained to his school board, managed to get the opt-out permission slip changed (see below). Last year there was no hint the programme was religious – now, at least, the school includes “bible-based” in their description.

The Churches Education Commission are being somewhat deceptive in the promotion of, and description of, their religious instruction programme. They are at least taking advantage of a popular illusion that there is some sort of inevitable link between religion and human values, and that religious organisations should have some sort of privilege in the teaching of values.

But that is a misconception, recognised as such by our educational authorities. After all, our public schools’ curriculum requires the teaching of values – and by law that curriculum must be secular.

And school boards who promote the illusion that the religious instruction programme (when schools by law are closed) is somehow fulfilling a curriculum requirement of teaching values are also being deceptive. It isn’t, and it should not be presented that way. The Churches Education Commission curriculum is aimed at promoting belief in supernatural beings – that is their interest, and they see values as simply a tool for promoting that belief. Have a look at how their own literature describes their teaching aims. For example:

Purpose	Values
For the children to understand that God watches over and cares for His people	Care and compassion; Love
For the children to understand that God made everything in the world and loves us	Inquiry; Responsibility; Creativity
For students to understand that God raised Jesus to life, so people could be friends with Him	Perseverance; Excellence; Love
For students to understand that God does not want us to be greedy	Care and compassion; Integrity; Respect

Clearly they are simply using the human values part of the school curriculum to attach their real purpose – the promotion of supernatural beliefs in young children.

Similar articles

Mixing values and Jesus in secular education

Daniel Dennett calls it the “last big fib.*” The claim that religion and human morality are intimately entwined – that you can’t be good without god. That does seem to be a widely held misconception, or should I say widely promoted.

The New Zealand educational curriculum provides for values education. And in public schools by law the education must be secular. But these  (the teaching of values and secular education) are threatened by the legal provision which allows religious (Christian) groups to come into public schools and provide religious instruction. The “trick” is that schools are legally “closed” during that time – and parents can “opt-out” their children (if they know what is going on).

I think that is bad enough but some groups, and schools, pull another trick. They tie in values and religion so that the intruding religious group provides the curriculum requirement for values education – or justifies their intrusion this way.

On the one hand children are taught a very biased form of values and in practice these groups are more interest in converts and talking about “Jesus” than they are in values). On the other, those children who are opted out miss even that form of values education.

Very unsatisfactory!

A newly formed New Zealand group, the Secular Education Network, is attempting to publicise and change this situation. If the issue interests you or you wish to participate in this work go and have a look at their website at http://reason.org.nz/.

Here’s an excellent, and short, video highlighting the problem in Auckland.

Religious recruiting in our schools.

Similar articles

---

*Have a look at this excellent video of a recent discussion between Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins where Dennett uses this term:

Richard Dawkins & Daniel Dennett. Oxford, 9 May 2012

Art in science

Elusive ... subatomic neutrino tracks showing electrons and muons. Photograph: Dan Mccoy/Rainbow/Science Faction/Corbis

The process of science is very creative in itself. But I think creativity in science  takes on a deeper meaning, and provide a wider communication, when it involves other art forms like writing, music and the graphic arts.

Spare a thought

So I enjoyed this little song by Andrew Pontzen (a theoretical cosmologist – @apontzen) commenting on  the recent news of neutrinos caught travelling faster than light.

It’s called Spare a Thought – and to my limited appreciation of the subject he seems to hint at the underlying physics of the situation.

Thanks to Geek Pop Podcast: The Live Sessions at geek pop.

Some NZ poetry

And I have just found out that SciBlogsNZ has its own resident poet. The chemist Michael Edmonds who writes the blog Molecular Matters.

He has just posted two poems Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing and A New Scientific Revolution. Both are very relevant to the issues we face today.

Evolution and education – advice for teachers

Creationists have far less influence in New Zealand than they do in the US. Still, quite a large proportion of Christians here do not accept evolutionary science. So, I imagine, their wish to undermine the teaching of evolutionary science sometimes becomes an issue, for some teachers.

Here’s a couple of videos prepared by the US National Center for Science Education (NCSE) which does a great job in the US. They are of a talk given by NCSE programs and policy director Steve Newton to an audience of high school teachers from across the US.

Steve covers questions like:

• What challenges do biology teachers face from creationists?
• How do you respond to students asking the “10 questions”?
• What are the different flavors of creationist belief?
• And other issues.

Teaching evolution in a climate of science denial, Part 1.

Part 2: Teaching evolution in a climate of science denial, Part 2.

See also: NCSE YouTube Channel

Similar articles

A victory for secular ethics

I have been following a small controversy which has raged this year in New South Wales. It involves the teaching of ethics in school classes.

Well, a bit more complicated than that (why should anyone oppose the teaching of ethics). This year 10 NSW schools ran a trial project of ethics classes developed by Professor of Philosophy Philip Cam  for the St James Ethics Centre. In the trial schools it was introduced as a voluntary alternative to the religious scripture classes. (These classes are similar to those run in many New Zealand schools where the school is closed for the duration and volunteer religious teachers come in to instruct children, with their parents permission).

Books in prisons

I came across some information on the programme for the LIANZA (Library and Information association of NZ Aotearoa) conference which opens in Christchurch today. The paper by Susan Smith and Judith Wenborn caught my eye. Entitled ‘Take a walk on the wild-side’: library service at the margins: the challenges of prison librarianship it discusses prison library services and how these and other libraries can engage with marginalised users.

This is something I hadn’t thought too much about before. I am well aware of the huge importance of books for children and adults. How they can even play a redemptive role – similar to education. The help people arrive at life purposes and the appreciation of reality and our participation in it.

So it’s obvious, really. The provision of good books in prison libraries should be seen as important to their role in correction.

Send this DVD to our schools

Here’s an idea for Focus on the Family’s next project to encourage discussion of science in New Zealand’s schools. Why not send a copy of the DVD Allan Wilson: Evolutionary to the 400 schools they sent their last project to for inclusion in science classes? Well, I know why not. Their previous project (The Privileged Planet DVD and accompanying workbook) was aimed at promoting creationism, not science (see Culture wars come to New Zealand).

However, Allan Wilson: Evolutionary would not only encourage New Zealand kids to become familiar with and discuss a fascinating area of evolutionary science. It would also encourage national pride because Wilson was a New Zealander (see About Allan Wilson). Who knows – it might even encourage kids to seriously contemplate a future in science. This would do a lot to improve the attitude of, and prospects for, our children – something Focus on the Family claims to be concerned about.

Teaching science in faith schools

It’s easy to think that the current attack on science in the USA is a peculiarly American phenomenon – that it doesn’t, or wouldn’t, occur here in New Zealand. After all, a poll (UMR Research Survey: Morality, Religion and Evolution) last year showed 75% of New Zealanders support evolution.

So one expects that we shouldn’t have the same problem teaching evolution in our schools as occurs in the USA. But what about the faith schools? The data in the UMR research Poll indicates that between 40 and 50% of New Zealand’s Christians actually reject evolutionary science. So how does this influence the teaching of evolution, and science in general, in New Zealand’s faith schools?

This issue has come up in Australia. Maralyn Parker, a journalist for the Sydney Daily Telegraph raises this issue in her blog article Teaching Science at Pacific Hills Christian School. This includes a letter to the NSW Board of Studies expressing concern at the way evolutionary science is taught in at least one Christian school. The letter arose from the depiction of a science lesson at this school in a documentary “In Good Faith” shown on SBS television on Tuesday May 19.

The writer, Chris Bonner, says in part:

‘In the video clip the teacher is referring to a chart “Origins – a spectrum of belief”. This spectrum includes:

Young Earth Creationist

Old earth Creationist

Theistic Evolutionist

Intelligent Design

And Atheistic Evolutionist

In the video clip the science teacher variously refers to evolution as “this view” and that we have “a whole range of positions” on where we come from. The “atheistic evolutionists” exist on the spectrum as just another belief. The teacher throws in Richard Dawkins as one of these types of “believers”.

“But”, the teacher goes on, “there is a whole range of other ways of considering the evidence”, going on to cite the bible, intelligent design and so on.

The teacher then throws to the students the idea that they can decide between these “beliefs”.

We want to “allow you to ask the right questions”, he says, to “allow you to think about what the world is showing you” and (more pointedly) “what God’s revelation through his scripture shows you, so that you can come to some clear understanding about your view”.

The viewer of this clip is left wondering what credence, in the classroom and in formal assessment, would be given to the views of students who do not take “God’s revelation” into account when developing their “clear understanding”.’

This sort of teaching is completely inappropriate for a science class. It presents an incorrect interpretation of evolutionary science and the scientific method in general. I can’t imagine that it conforms to the educational curriculum and it certainly denies students a proper preparation for further science education and a possible science-related career.

I wonder if this sort of teaching is occurring in New Zealand’s faith schools?

email this article to a friend

See also:
I am a Christian who Believes in Theistic Evolution

Similar articles:
God’s not as popular as we thought
Secular twins
Psychological and religious abuse of children
Religious education should include secular humanism
Taxation offense
A respectable man with a dangerous theory
Secular believers
How to lower taxes
What do we teach our children?