Religion in schools
Sir: It is little less than fraudulent of Miss Holm (Letters, February 3) to justify the tasteless trendiness ' of New Life on the grounds that the social relevance which it equates with religion is identical with the aims of the biblical writers. If this were granted, her conclusions would not follow. If religion is to be 'acted out' in purely social terms, then the Bible has no more relevance to it than the files of last year's newspapers. No one will appreciate the point quicker than the pupils. And the worthier and brighter minds among them realise that they are being injected with all this social hysteria, not because that is what the Christian tradition demands, but because the purveyors of it are fearful that nothing else will sell. The salt has lost its savour — and you know the rest.
The Bible is an ancient book, and there is little point in trying to pretend otherwise. Our aim in reading it is not to goad us into frenzied, unreflective social activ ism, but to gain a long perspective on the fact of human frailty and human hope. It is sad that the humanist T. H. Huxley, who more than anyone is responsible for the introduction of biblical instruction into the curriculum of state education, should have understood all this so much better than the multitude of ranting Christians to whom he gave such disastrously abused opportunities. We could, of course, gain the same persr ective elsewhere. If things continue as at present, we may have to. But that would be a pity. For, as Huxley also pointed out, the theme has rarely, if at all, been better handled.
The theme is hard to sell, undoubtedly. The age wallows in self-criticism, but refuses to consider any other kind. Certainly it will not hear a word of reproach from anything so utterly discredited as antiquity. But if Miss Holm, and others like her, would sometimes stand against the trend instead of trying to outrun it, how much more interesting they would be. I see she sneers at the attempts made 'in the sixties' to update religious teaching. No doubt in the eighties there will be others to sneer at her — no doubt with quite as good a cause. And the pupils? Are they always to be tossed about with every wind of doctrine? Are they never to be permitted to grow up?
D. B. Taylor 170 Divinity Road, Oxford
Previous page
