Religious Education in schools defined by secular pressure groups

The research, funded by the British Academy, was published in the journal History of Education. It outlines how premeditated attempts to marginalise Christianity from the life and curriculum of state-maintained schools were made by the National Secular Society and the British Humanist Association during the 1960s and 1970s. It also shows how many Christians and religious educators of the time actively cooperated with Humanist groups and invited discussions with Secularists.

The Secularist and Humanist movements gained popularity in the 1960s. They focussed much of their attention on attempts to abolish or reform the requirement that all state-school pupils should participate in a daily act of worship and receive regular Religious Education, which was outlined in the 1944 Education Act. Whilst not sufficiently persuasive to change the law, the Secularist and Humanist movements helped change the aim of Religious Education from Christian instruction seeking to make church members. This was during a period of rapid social and cultural change, including decreasing rates of Christian practice, mass immigration and permissive changes to legislation. These changes created a climate where many who belonged to the churches thought Religious Education, and perhaps even Christianity itself, were in need of defence.

In this context, the researchers found that Christians and Humanists entered into discussions about how Religious Education could be developed in such a way that it was suitable for pupils and teachers regardless of their religious or secular beliefs. As a consequence pupils began to be taught more widely about religions, such as Hinduism and Islam. More controversially, Religious Education syllabuses also began to include non-religious philosophies such as Humanism and Communism. Moral education was also increasingly delivered separately from Christian teaching and worship.

Whilst the churches may have been fearful of any changes to the legislation on Religious Education, the research suggests that Christians and religious educators were not press-ganged into co-operation with non-religious groups. Rather, many of them deliberately liaised with non-religious groups, in particular Humanists.

University of Exeter Education expert and lead author of the paper, Dr Rob Freathy, was as much surprised by the extent of the collaboration between Christians and Humanists as he was by the vigour of Secularist and Humanist lobbying. He said: “Our research does not simply portray an ideological war between competing groups struggling to control children’s minds, although there was conflict between many factions at particular times. Instead, we’ve unearthed a much more complicated story characterised as much by compromise and conciliation as it is by contestation and conflict.

“Many Christians and Humanists worked together both informally and through official processes to develop multi-faith forms of Religious Education which would be suitable for all pupils and teachers regardless of their religious or secular backgrounds. Through such collaborative efforts Humanists had a direct influence on the development of the form of Religious Education we see in schools today.”