Religious education,a matter of understanding? reflections on the final report of the Commission on Religious Education

In this article we offer reflections on the final report of the Commission on Religious Education (CoRE) that was published in England in 2018. We expose and problematise the prominent place of understanding in the report, not only as an educational method, but also the underlying world view of the report itself, a world view which we characterise as ‘hermeneuticism’. We raise educational, theological and political concerns about the particular approach taken in the report. We propose instead that religious education (RE) should be considered first of all in terms of what it means to live with a religious or non-religious orientation, conceived in existential terms rather than in terms of beliefs or practices or objectified world views. Educationally we show that what we term a non-hermeneutic way of viewing our humanity would open different possibilities for RE and its future.     

Religious barriers to world peace

Summary At this stage in history, we are all sophisticated enough to understand and realize that major changes in cultural and religious traditions will not take place with any rapidity. People's traditions become strongly established and precious to them and to their children.The best hope for peace and understanding in our day may lie in the area of truly understanding the differences between religious expressions the world over and then teaching such differences to our children in our religious schools universities, etc., rather than in trying to impose our religious beliefs upon others.It also becomes essential that the leaders of our society be taught these differences so that they, too, can better understand the motivating forces and behavior of other people.Medical schools, schools of diplomacy, business administration schools, etc., would be wise to introduce courses in comparative religion and language differentiation that could help those who will be forging the relationships of tomorrow so as to understand why xx treaty falls through, why one diplomat may feel that he has broken through, whereas on the other side, the feeling is one of total failure or frustration.These problems may not be due in reality to the failure of one person or another, but rather to the ignorance of one facet of mankind toward the beliefs of another facet, and perhaps more important than any other factor in this discussion is the reluctance of one group to attempt to understand another because of the sense of superiority held by one group.Rabbi Abraham O. H. Okamoto D.H.L. Assistant Professor of Religion University of Miami, came to the United States in 1958 to study under an S. H. Scheuer Scholarship at the Hebrew Union College, Jewish Institute of Religion in Cincinnati. He was ordained a Reform rabbi in 1964. His major interest in Hebraic studies is in the field of the ancient versions of the Bible in Aramaic and Syriac.     

(Inadvertently) Instructing Missionaries in (Public University) World Religions Courses: Examining a Pedagogical Dilemma,its Dimensions,and a Course Section Solution

In this article, I explore an ethical and pedagogical dilemma that I encounter each semester in my world religions courses: namely, that a great number of students enroll in the courses as part of their missionary training programs, and come to class understanding successful learning to mean gathering enough information about the world's religious “traditions” so as to effectively seduce people out of them. How should we teach world religions – in public university religious studies courses – with this student constituency? What are/ought to be our student learning goals? What can and should we expect to accomplish? How can we maximize student learning, while also maintaining our disciplinary integrity? In response to these questions, I propose a world religions course module, the goal of which is for students to examine – as objects of inquiry – the lenses through which they understand religion(s). With a recognition of their own lenses, I argue, missionary students become more aware of the biases and presumptions about others that they bring to the table, and they learn to see the ways in which these presumptions inform what they see and know about others, and also what they do not so easily see.     

Self,Sin, and the Sacred: Some Elements of a Select Psychology for the Care of Souls

Many pastors feel that their work in the secular sphere can best be described as an exploration of the meaning of life: as spiritual care. However, the idea that it is possible and easy to find such a thing as “the meaning of life,” as well as the concurrent idea that this meaning will help to make life more agreeable, should not be taken for granted but, rather, should be considered to be open for further exploration. To get a better understanding of the difference between spiritual care and the care of souls, I will discuss three central themes in any pastoral practice: sin, sense, and sorrow, together with three related constructs: soul, self, and the sacred. My exposition will result in a plea for revaluing two traditional but ever relevant modes of religious leadership: the modes of shepherd and teacher, of tutor and theologian, which are performed either in the context of the church or the secular institutional environment.     

Can religious arguments persuade?

In his famous essay “The Ethics of Belief,” William K. Clifford claimed “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” (Clifford’s essay was originally published in Contemporary Review in 1877; it is presently in print in Madigan (1999)). One might claim that a corollary to Clifford’s Law is that it is wrong, always, everywhere, and for anyone, to withhold belief when faced with sufficient evidence. Seeming to operate on this principle, many religious philosophers—from St. Anselm to Alvin Plantinga—have claimed that non-believers are psychologically or cognitively deficient if they refuse to believe in the existence of God, when presented with evidence for His existence in the form of relevant experience or religious arguments that are prima facie unassailable. Similarly, many atheists fail to see how believers can confront the problem of evil and still assert their belief in a benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient Creator. In this paper, I propose to explain why religious arguments so often fail to persuade (I take the term ‘religious argument’ to include arguments whose conclusions are either assertions or denials of religious claims). In doing so, I first offer an account of persuasion and then apply it to religious arguments. I go on to argue that at least some religious arguments commit a form of question-begging, which I call “begging the doxastic question.”~An argument begs the doxastic question, on my account, when a subject would find the argument persuasive only if she antecedently believes the argument’s conclusion. This form of question begging is not, strictly speaking, a case of circularity and thus, is not a fallacy; rather, it would explain why one coming to the argument would fail to be persuaded by it unless he already accepted its conclusion. This has the effect, when applied to religious argumentation, that religious arguments are rarely persuasive, which raises the further question: what good are religious arguments? I end by suggesting some non-persuasive functions of religious argument. Finally, I suggest that a full understanding of religious argumentation should give evidentialists pause, for religious beliefs look less like belief states that are sensitive to evidentiary states and more like framework principles or fundamental commitments.     

A WAY FORWARD FOR SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH ON SCIENCE AND RELIGION: A REVIEW AND A RIFF

John Evans’s new book Morals Not Knowledge pushes scholars to rethink contemporary debates about religion and science by moving past the rhetoric of societal elites to examine the perspectives of everyday Americans, identifying the moral conflicts at the heart of debates. We review Evans’s key contributions while also extending and challenging his arguments, urging consideration of how renewed moral debates might be informed by a broader set of U.S. “publics.” Drawing on empirical research, we highlight four sets of voices that are missing from Evans’s analysis. Specifically, we highlight the voices of racial and ethnic minorities, religious communities (as opposed to individuals), members of minority religious traditions, and everyday religious scientists. Through doing so we offer avenues for future research on these diverse publics that will help facilitate a broader set of better and more informed debates about moral conflict between religious and scientific communities.     

WHY WE NEED RELIGION TO SOLVE THE WORLD FOOD CRISIS

Scholars and practitioners addressing the global food crisis have rarely incorporated perspectives from the world's religious traditions. This lacuna appears in multiple dimensions: until recently, environmentalists have tended to ignore food and agriculture; food justice advocates have focused on food quantities, rather than its method of production; and few scholars of religion have considered agriculture. Faith‐based perspectives typically emphasize the dignity and sanctity of creation and offer holistic frameworks that integrate equity, economic, and environmental concerns, often called the three legs of sustainability. Faith‐based perspectives can provide new paradigms through which to assess food, consumption, and production and the attendant social relations; assess our scientific, economic, and social approaches; and acknowledge the moral and religious dimensions of the world food crisis.     

The Political Activities of Religious Congregations in the United States

In recent decades, much research has focused on how religious congregations affect individuals' political participation. However, only scant attention has been paid to examining the various ways in which religious congregations engage in political activism as formal organizational entities. Using data from the 1998 National Congregations Study (NCS), a survey of a nationally representative sample of 1,236 religious congregations, we begin to fill this gap in our knowledge about religion and politics. We report the rates at which congregations engage in a broad range of political activity, and we examine variations in this activity among major religious traditions. We emphasize two basic findings. First, although in absolute terms congregations' levels of political activism seem rather low, relative to other nonpolitical organizations they engage in politics in substantial numbers. Second, there are qualitative rather than quantitative differences in political activity across religious traditions. Religious traditions specialize in different modes of political participation, a fact that is obscured when attention is focused solely on the political activities of conservative religious groups.     

GREED AS VIOLENCE: Methodological Challenges in Interreligious Dialogue on the Ethics of the Global Financial Crisis

The current financial crisis is one rooted not in recent deregulation but in the breaking of ancient (religious) laws, and this crisis is one of many ethical problems today that have religious roots. The tone of this essay is informed by a document from the World Council of Churches, which affirms “greed as violence” and that Christians do not have all the answers to the problem of greed; therefore, Christians need to seek solutions with other religious communities. Furthermore, religious leaders, theologians, and ethicists, by their very station in life, are not able to effectively listen to the voices of the poor and marginalized people of the world. Self‐critically examining the mainstream traditions within Christianity for its allegiance to empires, the article calls for engaging the alternative, rather than the mainstream traditions within religions whose interpretations of Scripture have provided insights that are at variance with the mainstream. It calls those who engage in this work to be double‐headed: to examine others' beliefs from the perspective of the other—while continuing to be rooted in one's own center—and to recognize that the voices of those in poor or marginalized communities are inaccessible, unless those who are poor themselves become the mediators of dialogue.     

Drawing a line between the religious and the secular: the cases of religious education in Sweden and India

Abstract

Religion as a school subject – Religious Education (RE) – is handled differently in various national contexts. This article discusses two different systems of managing (or avoiding) RE: those used in non-denominational Swedish and Indian schools. The article focuses particularly on what is allowed in the classroom with regards to religion. Both countries are secular, but where is the line drawn between the secular and the religious? Allowing the two contexts to meet reveals the particularities of each. The impact of Protestant Christianity, specifically Lutheranism, is evident in Swedish RE: religion is to be defined through beliefs and words, and religious actions should be excluded from classrooms. The Swedish context highlights ‘knowledge of’ religions, but avoids religious action. In India, there is no explicit RE, but Indian education does include learning from religion as well as ‘doing religion.’ The Indian approach is very inclusive, to the point of emphasising, as teachers put it, a common core of all religions. Both systems of RE offer particular opportunities and face certain difficulties in dealing with the contemporary globalised world.     

What Do the Spiritual and Religious Traditions Offer the Practicing Psychologist?

There has been a remarkable amount of interest in the relationship among spirituality, religion, psychology, and health of late. Contemporary interest in spirituality and religion is hot among not only the general population but among professionals in the mental and physical health disciplines. While most people believe in God and consider themselves to be spiritual, religious, or both, most mental health professionals have little if any training in this area. Psychologists can use spiritual and religious principles and tools to better serve their clients even if they do not share the same religious interests. The purpose of this article is to offer thirteen spiritual and religious tools common among all of the major religious traditions that can be used by contemporary professional psychologists in clinical practice to enhance the already high quality professional services that they provide. Examples of spiritually and religiously integrated treatment along with several ethical precautions are noted as well. This article is based on book project by Plante currently in press.     

Religion,Politics and Ethics: Towards a Global Theory of Social Transformation

In this paper I set out a phenomenology of social transformation, based on an analysis of the distinctively religious form of communication which underlies the trans-generational and trans-cultural transmission of world traditions, taking Confucianism and Christianity as their representatives. A phenomenological analysis of their communicative structure allows the possibility of a better understanding of what can be learnt from them in the context of contemporary debates in both China and the West on the relations between religion, ethics and politics. This analysis suggests that the ethical consistency of belief and act, which is the necessary condition for the engendering of long-term solidarity in religious community, has significant implications for ethics in politics, and especially for the legitimacy of representational leadership as a focal point for change in society. The paper concludes that the historical experience of world religions can offer new insights into the nature of political leadership and representation in today’s globalised world and that the appropriate locus for this inquiry is the present negotiation and re-negotiation of relations between China and the West.     

The Religious Origins and Destinations of Individuals Identifying as a Sexual Minority

Religion has been, and continues to be, a source of external hostility and internal struggle for many sexual minorities. This has potential implications for the observed religious origins and current religious affiliations of individuals identifying as a sexual minority. Regarding origins, self-identified sexual minorities might be less likely than heterosexuals to have come from religious traditions that have tended to be hostile to minority sexualities, as individuals raised within those traditions might be hesitant to identify as a sexual minority even if they have same-sex attractions. Regarding destinations, self-identified sexual minorities might be more likely than heterosexuals to switch away from religious traditions that have tended to be hostile to minority sexualities. We examine these expectations using nationally representative survey data from the 2008 to 2014 General Social Surveys. The analysis shows that sexual minorities do not significantly differ from heterosexuals by the religious traditions in which they were raised. Sexual minorities are, however, more likely than heterosexuals to move away from Christian traditions and towards disaffiliation or reaffiliation with “other” traditions that include Judaism, Buddhism, and liberal nontraditional religions such as Unitarian Universalism. For gay and lesbian individuals, these patterns of disaffiliation and reaffiliation can be attributed to higher on average education and lower likelihood of being married and having children; however, these sociodemographic factors do not explain the disaffiliation and reaffiliation of bisexual individuals. Further research should explore the different religious experiences of sexual minority sub-groups.     

Pogge on Poverty: Contribution or Exploitation?

Thomas Pogge argues that affluent people in the developing world have contribution‐based duties to help protect the poor. And it follows from Pogge's most general thesis that affluent people are contributing to most, if not all, instances of global poverty. In this article I explore two problems with Pogge's general thesis. First, I investigate a typical way in which affluent people would be contributing to global poverty according to Pogge: that affluent countries use their superior bargaining power to get poor countries to accept trading schemes that are unduly favourable to the affluent. I suggest that this type of relation is best understood as exploitation, and that Pogge's general thesis is better understood as a thesis about how affluent people exploit poor people rather than about how they contribute to poverty. Second, I argue that the exploitation does not have the normative content of doing harm. Although exploiting people is often morally wrong, it is not at all clear how demanding exploitation‐based duties are.     

Is Nature Enough? Yes

Abstract. Religious naturalism encompasses thinkers from Baruch Spinoza, George Santayana, John Dewey, Henry Nelson Wieman, and Ralph Burhoe to recent writers. I offer a generic definition of religious naturalism and then outline my own version, the “minimalist vision of transcendence.” Many standard issues in the science‐and‐religion dialogue are seen to fade in significance for religious naturalism. I make suggestions for our understanding of science, including the importance of transcognitive abilities, the need for a revised notion of rationality as an alternative to extreme versions of postmodernism, the value of rational dissensus, and the education of appreciation. Finally, I suggest ways to interpret the religious traditions of the world by religious naturalism.     

IDEAS HAVE REAL‐LIFE CONSEQUENCES

The new editor of Zygon considers the task of “yoking religion and science” not as the combination of two similar entities. Rather, their categorical difference makes reflection on their interplay worthwhile. One thereby confronts the understanding of religion, the multiple facets of religion, the diversity of religious traditions, and disagreements within religious communities. Although concern about secularization might stimulate an apologetic attitude, the author favors a critical and more skeptical attitude, countering superstition and the abuse of people. By being academic rather than apologetic we engage in the best apology for meaningful religion, if any.     

Secularism,Criticism, and Religious Studies Pedagogy

Abstract. Secularization, the idea that religion would gradually diminish over time, was once widely assumed to be true by scholars of religion, but the unexpected resurgence of religious traditions has called it into question. Related debates on the distinction between religion and the secular have destabilized religious studies further. What does the crisis of secularization and secularism mean for the religious studies classroom? This essay proposes a model of religious criticism in the wake of secularism. No longer simply claiming a “view from nowhere,” students and instructors can (by observing standards of evidence, reason, and self‐disclosure) combine criticism with learning. Drawn from aesthetic and ethical traditions of criticism, religious criticism can be practiced by “teaching the conflicts” and through the pedagogical models of Freire and hooks.     

Teaching World Religions without Teaching “World Religions”

Tomoko Masuzawa and a number of other contemporary scholars have recently problematized the categories of “religion” and “world religions” and, in some cases, called for its abandonment altogether as a discipline of scholarly study. In this collaborative essay, we respond to this critique by highlighting three attempts to teach world religions without teaching “world religions.” That is, we attempt to promote student engagement with the empirical study of a plurality of religious traditions without engaging in the rhetoric of pluralism or the reification of the category “religion.” The first two essays focus on topical courses taught at the undergraduate level in self‐consciously Christian settings: the online course “Women and Religion” at Georgian Court University and the service‐learning course “Interreligious Dialogue and Practice” at St. Michael's College, in the University of Toronto. The final essay discusses the integration of texts and traditions from diverse traditions into the graduate theology curriculum more broadly, in this case at Loyola Marymount University. Such confessional settings can, we suggest, offer particularly suitable – if somewhat counter‐intuitive – contexts for bringing the otherwise covert agendas of the world religions discourse to light and subjecting them to a searching inquiry in the religion classroom.     

Metaphor,Religious Language,and Religious Experience

Is it possible to talk about God without either misrepresentation or failing to assert anything of significance? The article begins by reviewing how, in attempting to answer this question, traditional theories of religious language have failed to sidestep both potential pitfalls adequately. After arguing that recently developed theories of metaphor seem better able to shed light on the nature of religious language, it considers the claim that huge areas of our language and, consequently, of our experience are shaped by metaphors. Finally, it considers some of the more significant implications of this claim for our understanding of both religious language and religious experience.