Thanks to Greg for drawing my attention to this article in today's SMH.
snotty article about Scripture lessons
Now I'm after help from all of you out there (yeah, both of you!) because I don't know the legal position of Scripture classes. So please put me right.
I thought that it was mandated by the government for all schools to provide scripture, but that they only had to do it if there were churches etc. who were willing to do it.
Therefore there seems to be a double-edged sword here. True, if Muslims, Hindus, Humanists, Atheists want to provide Scripture I can't see why they would be prevented from doing so. However, doesn't the article give the game away that many schools do not provide scripture at all ... and therefore if churches were to approach them offering their services the Principals would be technically disobeying the law.
Help me out here. What am I missing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Yep, under the current law in NSW they gots to let you do it. If as a Baptist minister you come in and say 'Let me see all the Baptist kids at this school for a weekly lesson', then they are obliged to say 'yes'.
If the principal is not onside, they can make life somewhat difficult in the way they timetable events and the way they timetable your class, but the policy is clear.
Hi john,
another problem is that the author of the article conflates two separate pieces of legislation. The first is the legislation allowing the teaching of scripture in schools, under this, as explained by Gordon, schools are obliged to let us teach scripture.
Secondly, there is legislation the Howard goverenment put through in their last term in office which allows for chaplaincy in schools, including funding. The $156M mentioned at the start of the article is with respect to this legislation. The government was going to provide funding for schools that elected to have a chaplain.
With respect to the second legislation, i can't remember the details, but my gut feeling is that schools would volunatarily opt into the scheme should they so desire. Hence her plea for schools to remain "secular" (meaning she wants them to be secularist).
My memory of the issues involved for christians in particular was that in other states where scripture faces limitations, chaplaincy could be a good thing. However, for Christians in NSW it wasn't necessarily good as we are already permitted to teach scripture and submitting to the chaplaincy legislation could place limitations on what was taught. However, it was a while back and i am happy to be corrected.
So i think what has happened in the article (to try and answer your quesiton) is that as she has taken aim at the recent chaplaincy legislation (which i believe to be volunarily entered into by schools), she has tried to argue that religion shouldn't be in schools whatsoever, which (for at least NSW) contradicts the older legislation.
Hope that helps
IN a way, it relates to your previous post
Andrew
John,
I don’t have anything to add to what Gordon and Andrew have said re the legal position (thanks, guys), but would like to reiterate what I said in my original letter to you about the SMH article, because I believe that SRE is an extremely important issue which needs to be treated with great intelligence and wisdom, and I would like there to be more clarity on how we should approach it with unbelievers:
My own view of the matter is, I think, quite pragmatic. On the one hand, I see the opportunity to tell schoolchildren about Jesus as a tremendous blessing, and one that we should fight tooth and nail to retain. However, I also think it is something of an anachronism - a relic of the '70s and earlier: an era when a clear majority of Australians were at least nominally Christian, before the onset of rampant secularism (and maybe some other "isms" which are frequently either inimical to Christian belief, or unhelpful). In a way, in fact, I think a lot of the views espoused in the article make perfect sense, given that this is (like it or not) a secular society, with a fairly small percentage of professing Christians. In fact, if someone challenged me on this point, I'm not sure I would know how to respond. I would in all seriousness like to hear some ideas on how we can present Christian religious instruction in schools as something desirable in Australian society in the early 21st century.
Be that as it may, I believe strongly that we must try to retain it: once gone, the opportunity will be lost forever. It is so important, in fact, that it might be worthwhile considering making a few concessions to our opponents. For instance, I think it is perfectly understandable that parents of children who are not permitted to attend scripture would like them to be doing something constructive instead. Also, I think we must insist loudly that no one involved in any form of Christian instruction in schools must ever do anything even remotely dishonest. If we can keep the more vociferous opponents reasonably satisfied, we might be able to keep scripture in our schools a while longer.
I know this is all rather negative, but I think we need to be realistic - and keep praying for revival!!
I welcome any comments or suggestions…
Greg
Post a Comment