# 11 Should the French curriculum include the study of religion? ©

It's been a while since I last wrote anything. Here, I mean. Because I write prolifically. Incomprehensible gibberish most of the time. Except for the occasional golden nugget here and there.

ANYWAY.

Believe it or not, being a student, I have been busy. With work.

I KNOW, RIGHT? Student + work = huh ?

But that is not the issue at hand. Far from it.

I have written a paper in French on the question of religious education in the French school curriculum. You may be aware (or not) that secularism is actually a pretty big deal in France.

And now Ladies and Gentlemen, for your enjoyment, a translation of my paper into English (the original French version will be published in the next post):

Should the French curriculum include the study of religion?

"How can we understand the attacks of 9/11 without a knowledge of wahhabism, of the various Islamic denominations, and of monotheist avatars?,” asks Professor Régis Debray of the Université de Lyon III in his 2002 report to the French Ministry of Education on religious education in secular schools (Rapport sur « L’Enseignement du fait religieux dans l’Ecole laïque », February 2002). Indeed, religion, whether we like it or not, is all around us and is used to justify the ends and means of many actions. So should fait religieux therefore be taught in French secular schools?

There are many arguments in favour of the integration of religious education in the French school curriculum. Firstly, as Debray points out (Publications : Actes des séminaires et universités d’été - Le « fait religieux » : définitions et problèmes », November 2002), religion is omnipresent and supports our understanding of civilization, the foundations of human history, as well as our political motives. Religion therefore cannot be evaded, because to evade it would be to embrace ignorance and live in denial.

Secondly, recent years have seen the amplification of the debate on religion between two main groups: those who are religious and those who are sceptical. The polemic is illustrated by Dan Cray’s article

God vs. Science

(Time Magazine, November 2006). In his article, Cray reminds us of the intensification of the case for Creationism and the case for Darwinism in the debate, and that religious legitimacy is now increasingly questionable in the face of technological and scientific advancements. Just as the case for the vindication of Science grows, there has recently been an escalation in religious practice, notably of Islam in France (Frédéric Chambon, Le repli communautaire des quartiers, vingt ans après la mobilisation pour l'intégration, February 2003).

University is also the stage of a rise in theological disputations, namely between Christian Unions and Atheist-Agnostic societies in the UK. The significance of the debate underlines the hold of religion on our society. Thus the teaching of theology in secular schools is becoming necessary. Admittedly, in order to shape an opinion or a belief, shouldn’t one question and inspect every possible aspect? Before claiming to be a Christian, shouldn’t one have read the Bible, allegedly the Word of God, in its entirety at least once? Before claiming to be atheist or agnostic, shouldn’t one cogitate about theology or at least reflect on the origins and the existence of the universe? Unless we want to advocate indifference vis-à-vis the Big Question, an objective study of religion is essential at school.

On the other hand, there are those who stand against religious education in French secular schools. Firstly, some claim that a secular education aims at a complete lack of religion in schools, and that religious education, albeit purely anthropological, historical and sociological, does not have a place there. As a matter of fact, these people add that religious education should only be found at Sunday school, at the synagogue or at the mosque. Furthermore, they affirm that religious education would shake the foundations of pluralism and secularism of the French Republic. But surely, teaching the history of mankind and its various faiths and civilisations would only uphold the notion of pluralism? Moreover, isn’t secularism a movement toward the acceptance and tolerance of all faiths, ethnic groups and all beliefs?

Secondly, the case against religious education maintains that such an academic subject would influence and alter pupils’ faiths (or lack thereof). Additionally, some declare that a completely objective approach to various beliefs could offend some religious pupils as it would devalue their god(s). Yet, if these individuals claim to be true believers, shouldn’t they be untroubled in the face of anthropological, sociological and scientific explanations of their faiths? Others throw in that they could end up atheist or agnostic at the end of the day, which, of course, would be horrendously apocalyptic. That is always a possibility, but isn’t it a ‘risk’ to be taken in a world in constant evolution, where different ideologies and beliefs abound, so much so that we could each change our mind at any moment?

And so the debate on religious education in French state schools rages on, and is disputed by two main teams. There are those who are against: they insist that religion does not have a place at school but solely in other institutions (although it is difficult to find academies which take an objective approach in teaching all faiths to primary and secondary school pupils… and I'm not entirely convinced that a twelve year-old pupil would venture into a mosque of their own accord to hear about the sociological significance of Hallah).

Then there are those who are in favour of religious education: religion has been an integral part of our society for millennia; far from ignoring its study and the debates over it, we must welcome them. Besides, in order to adopt a solid opinion, one must be informed and éclairé, as Debray says (Publications : Actes des séminaires et universités d’été - Le « fait religieux » : définitions et problèmes », November 2002). The polemics are developing, and so are the conflicts caused in the name of deities. With a view to understand and live in this world, we must first understand religion and Science, and reject ignorance. So why should religion be considered a taboo? That is the question that Richard Dawkins, the world-famous evolutionary biologist and proponent of logic and reason, asks in his controversial book The God Delusion (Bantam Press, 2006). Most people will be quick to answer that it is because we must avoid altercations. But let’s face it, these people haven’t really thought about it. Because the answer is simple: humans are scared of a truth that is different from their own.

Copyright © Caffeine Bubbles, 10 March 2010, Warwickshire, UK