Religion in public education

The debate concerning the role of religion in the public classroom is, in essence, a debate about rights, human rights. The difficulty in developing a common standard or approach is that we are not able, as a society, to decide what is absolute.

This lack of agreement, in turn, triggers debate about what is meant by human freedom and justice. At stake is the three fold question; what demands can people make on others or their society; what demands can groups make on society; and what demands can society make on groups.

Another problem is to agree on a universal doctrine on what it means to be human. While we assert that human rights are legitimate for all, we assume that the very notion of "humanity" is understood. And further, that it finds its definition in some common body of thought. The very use of the term, "human rights," operates from the assumption that there is a universal, moral order under which all humanity lives.

"Human" assumes that we know what it means. Within the Canadian experience, we have come to understand the foundation of our humanity out of our common religious notion of the source of creation. Human kind, is not the result of happen-chance but of purpose. It is this common view of humanity which resists racism. Racism is correctly viewed as being wrong, not just because it is a nasty idea but rather it violates the very assumptions of what we know it means to be human.

"Rights" like the word "human" suggests there are inalienable liberties which are the inherited privileges of each person. Intrinsic to this assumption is that there exists some sort of universal body of truth from which this comes.

"Persons demand beliefs; societies need convictions; and civilizations require a basic social ethical vision by which to guide behaviour. A creed is an indispensable part of human existence. Just as surely each creed is sustained and implemented accordingly as it is lived out by groups of people who take it as a basis for structuring their life together: Not all doctrines or creed make a social difference. People have believed all sorts of things about rights and humanity, but these beliefs have been socially and historically important only when they have become the basis for social bonding and action, forming a sustained movement and affecting surrounding social institutions." (Creeds, Society, and Human Rights. M. Stackhouse, W. B. Eerdmans, 1984. p.4)

Canadians have experienced that "bonding" by the common religious ethos of the Judeo-Christian community. The history of the Canadian public school system documents the essential contribution this religious expression made to our development.

There are two matters to consider. First to disengage from those roots will bring about cultural dislocation. And to refuse to allow these roots to be adequately described is, in fact, a denial of them. To reduce them to a multi-faith religious course is to deny history and the contribution which this body of thought brought to the developing of this nation.

Secondly it will bring about the losing of the primary source of a Canadian understanding of what it means to be human. With all respect to Eastern religions and Marxist-Leninism materialism, our understanding of humanity has distinct origins. Notwithstanding that the current wave of secularity, to push religious thought into a corner and to ban the teaching of the Judeo-Christian thought, is to imply that it no longer is the source of thought for the majority of Canadians. And that would be untrue.

Our argument is that while it may appear to be "equal" to eliminate all forms of religion and therefore be seen to be fair, students are fed false information on our roots, the source of understanding what is meant to be human and how the structures of Canada have evolved.

Education is more than facts on what to think but it instructs us how to think. While it is clear that students are not to be indoctrinated, to pretend that a major component of our history is irrelevant or is a primary source of Canadian cultural, be it good or bad, is to be blinded.

The broader issue is that because human rights involves an idea of life and a membership around that idea, we are in fact dealing with ideas of ultimacy. And that is religious.

In Canada, the notion of ultimacy has a very clear source. The danger is that when a society denies that source, it may not be long before the ideas are also denied. And that is when life becomes dehumanized and chaos ensues. It is ultimately religion that takes hold of transcendent ideas and transforms them into social life.