Café

The Hardest Sermons You’ll Ever Have To Preach
Reviewed by Hans Kristensen
Little Black Books: Science and God
Reviewed by Andrew Laird
Making the Most of the Cross
Reviewed by Lesley Hicks
Higher Ground
Reviewed by Andrew Laird

SCRIPTURE IN SCHOOLS Debating the threat from the “ethics” trial 1

1:00am Monday, 28th June 2010

In NSW the State Government has allowed a trial of a secular ethicscourse in the Scripture timeslot in primary schools. Many
Christians are concerned that less students—maybe many less students—will choose Scripture. But is making a fuss the best response?

Jeremy Halcrow passionately supports the campaign to defend Scripture classes. Too much is at stake to be silent.

If ethics classes compete with Special Religious Education (SRE) next year, as the NSW State Government intends, Scripture enrolments are likely to crash by 60 percent.
Across the ten trial schools, Anglican Scripture lost 47 percent of those enrolled. But the scale of losses was far worse away from inner-city Sydney, with nearly 60 percent of children pulling out of Anglican SRE at Hurstville, Baulkham Hills North and Bungendore.
The reason? In inner-city Sydney anti-religious parents have already opted out of SRE.
Here is the rub. The ethics classes are not merely designed for atheist and other non-religious families, but everyone. The trial even saw kids of church-going Christians recruited. And in some schools, principals and classroom teachers were doing the recruiting! That’s unfair. It’s as if the Anglican Church had written a course marketed as “Morals” and organized class teachers to recruit kids from other faiths.
The biggest danger with the current proposal is that the government will end up becoming the provider of the main competition to Christian Scripture and as a result put its massive resources behind promoting that option.
Despite the threat to SRE, some Christian parents continue to support the ethics proposal. Three main arguments are put forward. Each is misguided:
1. “I want my child to learn critical thinking by doing both the ethics course and SRE”. Ethics and SRE will be in the same timeslot, so you can’t do both. Christian parents have been placed in a lose/lose situation where they have to choose one or the other.
2. “The ethics classes are not anti-Christian.” This isn’t strictly true. The course may not specifically attack Christian doctrines. Nevertheless, there are many ethical models that are not compatible with Christianity. The trial course has a bias towards the secular left. Topics covered include animal rights, but there is no discussion of traditional Judeo-Christian ethics such as respect for parents (and other authorities) and notions of service towards fellow citizens.
3. “We have a secular government and they have a right to exclude religion from the classroom.” This is a fundamental misunderstanding of secular education. We have a multi-faith society with a secular government. This means the government should not favour any one religion or belief system (including atheism) over any other. The state provides education, on behalf of all parents. The government should show equal respect for Christian parents by supporting the equal provision of Christian education in the timetable, along with other parental choices.
The damage caused to SRE by the trial has motivated those passionate about SRE to protest. Anger should be channelled through your local MP at the Education Minister, not local school authorities. The suspension of the SRE policy has left school principals without any guidance. Whether by design or accident, it is the NSW Government that is destroying SRE.
Christians should also show some sympathy to non-religious parents. It is only fair