By Rollin Grams, Bible and Mission.
Introduction
After decades of the exclusion of religion—Christianity in particular—from the classroom in American education, the Oklahoma State Superintendent called for schools to incorporate the Bible and the Ten Commandments in their curricula.[1] This return to an earlier approach in education in America follows an increasing concern that children should be taught values—Christian values in particular. Christian religion is privileged in the curriculum. Can such a ruling stand opposition from those denouncing Christianity in the culture on the grounds that the government shall not establish any religion? One might think that the argument stands on stronger grounds in England, where there is an established religion, the Church of England. However, the English are in general even more secular than the Americans, and the Church of England is uncertain of its faith at best and undermining its historic teaching on key theological and moral subjects at worst. Just what is religious education, and should it be taught in schools? If it is taught in private schools, should it be government regulated? The government’s interest in regulating homeschooling may in part stem from an interest in regulating religious teaching and forcing a state-sanctioned ideology and ethic.[2]
In this essay, I will begin by describing the argument for government involvement in moral formation and education in Aristotle. I will then turn to consider the Bloom Report in the United Kingdom. While Aristotle is concerned with a particular moral formation endorsed by the state, the Bloom report advocates that the state should teach about religion for multicultural, peaceful coexistence without endorsing any particular religion. My argument is that both proposals overreach the purpose of the state, and Bloom’s suggestion is particularly lacking in suggesting that the end-goal of religious education is toleration or coexistence while what it actually accomplishes is a minimizing and undermining of religious beliefs in a secular state.
Aristotle
In Aristotle’s view, the household is a microcosm of the state (cf. Nichomachean Ethics 1160b). However, he rejects the priority of the household. Instead, the bonds forming the state exist prior to the household as well as to the individual. Also, they are natural and positive.