A confusing story about RS (religious studies in schools) from last week has come to my attention. A group of parents brought a court case against the Department for Education: they complained that its new GCSE syllabus failed to include humanism. They won the case – sort of. The judge said that schools should not be allowed to exclude atheism and humanism, but he also said: ‘It is not of itself unlawful to permit an RS GCSE to be created which is wholly devoted to the study of religion.’ This seems to mean that it’s OK for the actual content of the GCSE syllabus to be devoted to religion, but the manner in which it’s taught must accept that non-religious viewpoints are equally valid.
What a waste of time. Obviously schools will teach religion in a pluralistic way that respects non-religious viewpoints. Because our dominant ideology is non-religious. It’s our first language. The ruling is as dumb as saying that the teaching of French must make clear that English is also a valid language.
The interesting question is whether humanism should be on the GCSE syllabus. Perhaps it should – our dominant ideology, secular humanism, ought to be explicitly examined rather than just taken for granted. If it’s well taught, intelligent pupils will see that it derives from our Christian past.
Comments