Religious Observances in Schools
The July 2004 edition of Care’s Education Update notes that “Scottish schools have for more than 100 years been obliged by statute to incorporate into their work an act of ‘religious observance’. The current guidance . . . requires that religious observance be within a broadly Christian framework”. Some time ago an item in Notes and Comments drew attention to the First Minister’s resolve to promote consideration of multi-faith assemblies in schools “to reflect Scotland’s multi-cultural society” and because chaos in the classroom is caused by teenagers disgruntled at having to sing hymns first thing in the morning! Mr McConnell regarded the “Time for Reflection” of the Scottish Parliament, which has speakers from various religions, as a potential model for schools. Despite the requirement for “religious observance of a broadly Christian character”, later guidelines advise that the aim of religious observance is “to promote the spiritual development of all members of the school community” – spiritual being used in the modern sense.
The article in Care’s Education Update reports that “the Scottish Executive is currently considering a report . . . proposing to alter the position and turn traditional religious observance into something resembling multi-faith, or a values-based, reflection. The argument is that, as we are now a multi-cultural society, predominantly Christian worship is no longer appropriate. This despite the finding of the 2001 National Census that 68% of Scots consider themselves to be Christians in a general sense, and only 15% say they have no religious faith. Of the other faiths, Islam is the most numerous at 2% of the population.”
The growth of ethnic minorities is being made an excuse for departures in many areas of society from practices which are claimed to be Christian. The BBC’s consultative document, Building Public Value, claims that “the UK is becoming a mature multi-cultural nation. Between 1991 and 2001 the ethnic population of the UK grew by 54% compared with 4% for the total UK population; ethnic minorities now represent just under 8% of the overall population and are projected to grow as rapidly over the next decade, particularly in urban areas”. Accordingly, “as the country changes, the BBC will seek to build a deeper understanding of multi-faith Britain. Christian celebration will continue to represent a significant part of the BBC’s commitment. At the same time the BBC will reflect the growth of other faiths, including Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, Judaism and Buddhism. . . . The BBC will also reflect the fast-developing interest in broader spiritual pursuits beyond organised religion.”
We should be thankful for those schools where staff or visitors still conduct religious observances in a recognisably Christian manner. Sadly it would appear that such “Christian” observances as take place in many schools are far from being conformed to the Bible in content or form. However, it is a further step in the spiritual degeneracy of our nation that serious consideration is being given to removing even a professedly-Christian structure from religious observance in schools. Apart from the spiritual issues involved, we believe such proposals to be illegal in a nation committed, as we constitutionally are, to the Reformed Christian Faith. The introduction of multi-faith acts of “worship” will impose an intolerable burden upon conscientious Christian staff and parents and pupils. The odd-ones-out will be those who adhere to the truth of God and to the Christian convictions which made our nation and its educational system what they were.
In Religious Education also there are significant problems. In England, as Care’s Education Update points out, “whereas the great majority of RE specialists 30 years ago were Christians, now there are far more from other religions or no religion”. Most teachers not specialising in RE are further disqualified by lack of interest, commitment or training – and there is a professedly “even-handed” approach to religions which discourages the teaching of Biblical truth from commitment or conviction. A teacher is quoted as commenting that “religious study is in danger of treating religiousness as a kind of strangeness to be understood, tolerated, classified or dissected, rather than as a source of personal challenge”.
The basic problem is that our legislators and educationalists have abandoned the idea that Britain is a Christian nation and that Christianity is the one true religion. They have accepted the position that no religion is superior to another or has an exclusive claim to truthfulness. This rot began in the churches, when true Christianity was abandoned and replaced with something which, being untrue, has no claim on conscience. Had the churches and the nation adhered to a truly Biblical Christianity, we would not be facing our current problems in school or society.
HMC
Abortion
The publication of 3-D pictures of unborn babies has given fresh impetus to calls for revision of UK legislation on abortion. These pictures show a 28-week child rubbing its eye, an 18-week child opening its eye and even a 12-week foetus making “walking” movements. In any case, there has been widespread concern about the present normal legal limit of 24 weeks for abortions, because some premature infants born earlier have survived. Even Lord Steel, who was responsible for promoting the Abortion Act in Parliament, supports a review. Such a review would be welcomed, as would any resulting tightening of the law.
However, what is needed is to realise that unborn infants are not fundamentally different from those that already enjoy the protection of the law by virtue of having been born. We recognise that abortion may be necessary if there is threat to the mother’s life, but to destroy an unborn child in other circumstances is a clear breach of the Sixth Commandment.
It is a further scandal that babies born alive after failed abortions have been left to die. It was reported to the July meeting of the British Medical Association that 1% of abortions in the UK result in live births. One such infant survived for three days before succumbing to neglect. Thankfully the Association called for such infants to receive the same care as others born prematurely, and no doubt some already receive that care. But it is a sad comment on contemporary attitudes to life that such care is not automatic.
Considerable propaganda is being put out in support of abortion, much of it under the trite slogan: a mother’s right to choose, which ignores completely the total lack of choice on the part of the millions of unborn children who have lost their lives in the womb since the Abortion Act was first passed. A co-author of a report from a University of Southampton research centre has called for abortion to be “de-stigmatised”. But what she should be calling attention to is the sin of abortion; it is no trivial matter.
“Religious Hatred”
Home Secretary David Blunkett has announced legislation to outlaw incitement to religious hatred in England and Wales. One’s reaction to the proposed law will depend, to some extent, on how exactly the law is to be framed and how it may be interpreted in the future. We certainly would not wish to incite anyone to hatred of any other human being.
One matter of concern arises from Mr Blunkett’s statement that the law would apply “equally to far-right evangelical Christians as to extremists in the Islamic faith”. One can only ask, Who exactly are the “evangelical Christians” he has in mind, and what does he really know about their beliefs? If it is the minuscule number of anti-abortion activists who have committed or threatened murder in the USA, there is, as far as we know, no one of in that category in Britain. But it is statements such as this that give rise to concern that there will yet be attempts to limit one’s right to speak against false religion and sin – in spite of the Home Secretary’s assurance that it will still be possible, under the proposed legislation, for adherents of one religion to criticise another.
Alarm Over Use of Television
According to mediawatch-UK, the Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, has suggested that children in our schools would benefit from lessons on watching television. She claimed that these are as needful in the United Kingdom as maths and science lessons. These comments may be considered in the light of a programme presented by Professor Robert Winston which stated that the average 3-year-old child in the UK is glued to the television for nearly 5 hours every day, and that almost half of all 3-year-olds have a television in their bedrooms. This programme admits that “most scientists now think that TV can encourage violent tendencies”.
A separate review by mediawatch-uk of 86 films, broadcast between July and December 2003 on the five terrestrial channels, found that the names Jesus and Christ were used as expletives no fewer than 328 times. Together with even higher figures for profane language, this presents a most disturbing trend. In another welcome move, Charles Clarke, the Education Secretary, has strongly challenged the view that violence on television has no effect on children and has demanded that broadcasters investigate whether there is a link between television violence and bullying. It seems that those in positions of responsibility are at last becoming uneasy about the use our nation makes of television and the harmful effects television produces. It is not before time.
One of the most dangerous tendencies of television is to relax, gradually and imperceptibly, viewers’ attitudes to sinful activity. When adultery or violence or blasphemy is presented as entertainment, the inevitable consequence is that the conscience of the viewer will be deadened to these things. The morality of the nation now seems to be prescribed by film and television stars. Before long, evil is considered good, and good is despised. It is obvious to most reasonable people that this will be the effect on young, developing minds, if they are exposed to a lot of television. The damage that television, and the almost-universal abuse of it, has done to the moral fibre of our nation is becoming more and more evident. It is high time the Government intervened to curb the vile and degrading language and activity portrayed on television. It is doubtful that the initiative suggested would prove successful in stopping the advance of widespread immorality.
It seems almost impossible to justify a Christian watching more than a very limited amount of what pours out of television channels. And those who do so are in grave danger of hardening their consciences and of being drawn little by little into that conformity to the world which Scripture describes as enmity towards God. Some of us feel that, until great improvements are made, it is wiser for Christians, and especially those with children, not to use this medium at all.
DC