The 36-Hour Day
with Lylah M. Alphonse
I'm a full-time editor, a part-time writer, and a mom and stepmom to five amazing kids, ages 1 to 14. For me it's not about finding balance, it's about the daily juggle-- my career, my commute, freelance work, homework, housework, married life, social life, and parenting-- and finding the time to get it all done.
To learn more about Lylah, check out her Work It, Mom! profile and read her blog at writeeditrepeat.blogspot.com.
The school year has started in Texas, and this year, public high schools there will be required to teach students about the Bible.
Even though the courses are elective and are supposed to focus on how Christianity in general and the Bible in particular have influenced American history and society, some parents are furious. "I don’t want anybody teaching their religious beliefs to my child unless they want to send their child to my house and let me teach them my religious views," one parent told Texas news station KLTV . "There is no difference."
Which, I’ll admit, was my immediate reaction, too. And then I thought it over.
The decision to have public schools offer courses on the Bible was made back in September 2007, when Texas House Bill 1287 was passed. The bill stipulates that the Bible must be taught in an objective way and "would neither promote nor disparage any religion," but doesn’t provide teachers with a precise curriculum, or any actual training — which is why implementation didn’t take place until this year.
The goal, according to bill, is to "teach students knowledge of biblical content, characters, poetry, and narratives that are prerequisites to understanding contemporary society and culture," as well as familiarize students with the contents, history, literary style, and structure of the Old and New Testaments. Which makes a lot of sense, I think — as long as the Bible can be taught as literature, much in the way students learn about Homer’s The Iliad or Dante’s Inferno .
Think of all of the cultural references in classical literature and pop culture that one simply can’t understand as well without a working knowledge of the Bible: Shakespeare. Milton. The Colbert Report. Books by Madeline L’Engle, like A Wrinkle in Time. The Indiana Jones movies — why watch a movie about the search for the Ark of the Covenant if you have no idea what it is?
The problem, I’d argue, is when instruction steps over the line into indoctrination — and in Texas, a precedent has already been set: A review of Bible courses currently taught in 25 Texas school districts found that most of the courses were "explicitly devotional" and taught by people with no academic training in biblical or religious studies and who were not familiar with the issues of separation of church and state. Some classes, according to an Associated Press report, blatantly encouraged students to convert.
It’s tempting to bring up issues of separation of church and state here, but that protection was actually put in place to keep the government out of religious institutions, not the other way around. But the issue that has most people up in arms is that of faith, and whether it’s possible to teach a holy text without preaching.
I think it is.
My Dad is Catholic, but my brothers and I were raised in my Mom’s faith, which is Zoroastrianism . Even so, one of my favorite books to read at bedtime was a children’s version of the Bible — especially the stories about David and Goliath, Samson and Delilah, Noah and the flood. When I was in college, a friend of mine challenged me to read the Bible cover to cover. He may have been gunning my salvation, but what I got out of it was a better understanding of society in general and how contradictory it can be — learning about his faith didn’t at all change my own.
What do you think? Is it possible to teach the Bible as literature? Or do you have to be — or become — a believer in order to get anything out of the class?
Subscribe to blog via RSS
It is important, as you stated, to have a least a rudimentary understanding of some of the basic happenings in the bible to fully understand a good portion of Western Literature. Whether it needs its own class, completely separated from the rest of the literature curriculum, is definitely debatable. It would make more sense for English teachers to assign appropriate readings from the bible whenever they are reading a piece of literature with biblical analogies, allusions, or metaphors. It is common to have students read related material when studying a piece of literature, so this would seem to be a reasonable practice. Handling the bible in this way would also make it clear that the focus is on the bible as a piece of literature rather than attempting to indoctrinate students.
LMJN | August 31st, 2009 at 8:56 am
I see the pros and the cons here. I was raised Catholic and went to CCD (confraternity of Christian Doctrine to those who might not know the term- a/k/a Sunday school), and so actually read, discussed & analyzed the Bible as doctrine there. When I was a senior in high school (in the early 80s), my public school included a section of the Bible in terms of studying literary conventions (elements of tragedy, archetypes, etc). My teacher, however, was fastidious about not interjecting his religious beliefs into the class. Back then, however, religion was not the hot button it is now - there was little competition as to who - or what - was appropriately “Christian.” Given the climate, I’m not sure I’d want the public schools involved now. I went to high school in New England, where more religions are respected. I live in the South now and there is just much more of “my religion is better than yours” - or - “yours isn’t even a religion” mindsets here. As a result, I’m a little squeamish about the public schools getting involved with the Bible. In theory, I’m all for it…I just don’t think the execution will come off well.
Pat | August 31st, 2009 at 10:16 am
I think it is wonderful for kids of any faith to have the opportunity to study any religion, for the reasons already stated. I am not concerned that it be “mandatory” to offer it, particularly if there are budget issues. HS students can read the Bible / related books and attend church if they want to know more about Christianity. I am more concerned about protecting students’ right to express their faith at school, which has been trampled on (especially with respect to Christians) all too often. (Maybe that is why some of the Texas Christianity classes are partly “devotional” - because the kids long for a chance to express themselves and they feel safe doing it there.) I don’t know how our kids can get an understanding of what the First Amendment means when the schools and the government in general distort it day in and day out.
The AP report on how things were handled in Texas sounds like it was written with a bias. There will always be some teachers - including science and math teachers - who will state their personal views to their students in public schools. In addition, there are plenty of teachers of other subjects who are not “certified” to teach them - particularly where a certification isn’t required or even available - so that concern seems disingenuous. Finally, it should not surprise anyone that the teachers who agree to teach this class happen to love the Christian religion. While it may be true that some of the teachers aren’t doing their job properly, it isn’t fair or helpful to hold an elective HS class to a higher standard than other public HS classes.
I’ve repeatedly read the Koran, Baghavad-Gita, and many other holy books and I haven’t grown three heads yet. High school students are old enough to read and think critically. If they have been taught, for instance, that Jesus was not divine, or that the miracles were just parables, they are not going to change their mind based on a HS class. It will still benefit them to understand references like “walks on water.” I also feel it’s helpful for folks to realize that the Christian religion shares many stories and philosophies with other major world religions. To realize that the “differences” that some discriminate or war over are not actually based on the holy books themselves could actually promote peace, if people weren’t so hell-bent on suppressing this information.
Honestly, for people who don’t want their teens to learn about Christianity from Christians, are they really interested in religious tolerance, or are they actually promoting ignorance, intolerance, and discrimination?
SKL | August 31st, 2009 at 12:39 pm
” Is it possible to teach the Bible as literature?”
IF, and only IF, it is taught as literature and NOT with a theological bent to it.
I took a religion course college MANY moons ago whereby the KJV was used as a history text. IOW, the course was not a theological course, but a history course that used the Bible as one of its texts. The teacher was a lay minister from Emory Univ and he refused to use the 1st part of Genesis because, as he said, it couldn’t be proven historically. Ergo, we went on into the later part of Genesis and then on into the Old Testament. Anything/everything that had been or could be historically proven was used. Actually, there’s a LOT of just plain old history there if you really get down to it. And some of those who proclaimed to have God on their side were down right nasty. Interesting to look at, even draw comparisons to, in today’s world.
So, why not teach the Bible, the Koran, AND the Talmud (?) all together, drawing the comparisons and contrasts between all at the same time. Talk about a teaching moment, as well as an eye-opener for a LOT of kids.
Course, there may be some who are afraid of just that. Afraid of letting others know the truth, and not the “I’m right and everyone else is wrong” attitude.
BTW, I went to public school and we had a local lady from a church come in and teach during a weekly assembly. Course that stopped in/about 67/68. As for these classes being mandatory, No - they have no right to do that UNLESS you’re going to teach it ALL, i.e. Jewish, Islam, Hindu, Tao, Confusious, ets. Like I said, let them compare/contrast…or do you think they (the school system) may be afraid of actually letting them (the kids) know the truth?
Just MHO.
Jane | August 31st, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Well, sure. Of course it’s possible to teach the Bible as literature. I double-majored in English and Religious Studies and took a class offered by the RS department on the Bible as literature. My prof was a Quaker, but I know that only because he mentioned it in another class I took from him.
But not having a curriculum for a class of ANY kind is a bad call…a really bad call.
Just me | August 31st, 2009 at 6:11 pm
as literature, yes. I read some of the bible in high school AP English.
gretchen | September 1st, 2009 at 12:33 pm
As literature and the effects it has had on our society and history only, then yes, I’m ok if Texas schools are required to offer the class as an elective. But to offer the class without a clear curriculum is dumb. How can you even define what the class is if you don’t have a list of what you’re suppose to teach/learn? I do however think it could be a very informative class if taught correctly.
My family is not Christian, or affiliated with any other religion. If my high school student decided to take this class, I would certainly try to keep up with what was being taught and how the teacher taught it. I would talk to my child often about the class to make sure they were comfortable with it, to see if they had any questions they couldn’t ask the teacher, and to verify that they didn’t feel pressured into “coverting”. I think it would be very hard, if the teacher were Christian, to keep their opinions and religion out of the classroom. I’m not saying its impossible, but it would take a very special educator to separate historical facts from what they feel in their hearts. And I don’t know of very many Christians who know the bible well enough to teach it, that don’t have their hearts and minds fully invested in “God’s word”.
Erica | September 1st, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Erica,
I totally agree with what you stated. The class I took was a history/religion course. Now, remember that mine was on the college level, not the HS. But I have to say that the teacher I had, tho a lay Methodist minister, DID manage to keep religious theology out of the course. Ours was strictly a history course. I think if the HS course was approached in the same manner, it could definitely work. After all, the 3 major religions ALL have the same origions. IMHO, if more students had a clear understanding of the common origions(?) and where the deviations came from, the studied could see how each evolved from there,
Again, my class was in a college setting, but we had students in that class from numerous religious faiths, not just Christians. And it was amazaing to have class discussions. The nice thing was, you didn’t have somebody getting up and getting indigant that someone disagreed with them. I think it’d be very interesting to see if that same kind of class could involke the same kind of reactions today, tho in a HS setting.
JD | September 1st, 2009 at 11:48 pm
I only recently learned, from a lawyer, that Separation of Church and State is more specifically to prevent the government from establishing a national religion - a direct backlash to the Church of England that taught that the monarch of England was crowned by God. And in that context, this course requirement absolutely does NOT violate the spirit or the letteer of the law.
That being said, I also believe that it’s entirely possible to teach the Bible from many perspectives, not just one of literature. The Bible shaped the laws of this country. There is a factual history in between the lines of the Bible. It is an influential tome all around and any teacher worth his or her salt could objectively teach on one or many of the areas of influence this book has had in all of our lives (in one way or another).
Public universities seem to be able to offer up Bible studies and theology courses that are secular in nature - objective, non-devotional dissections of this book. Why can’t public schools get it together to do the same?
Phe | September 2nd, 2009 at 11:23 am
If the classes were taught from a purely historical point of view, I would be less edgy about it, although 1) it should still be an elective course, and 2) they may as well just teach that within some literature class.
In all, I see no reason for the Bible to be taught in school. The separation of church and state was a brilliant idea and for many reasons. Kids won’t gain anything from it; if their family is religious, they’ll learn their religion there; if their family is not religious, they have no use for the Bible.
Like another poster said, it’s useful in terms of references made to the Bible (in literature, popular culture, etc.), but beyond that? No. Better to spend that time helping our kids with math and such — you know, the subjects that MATTER and that our kids are falling behind in.
CAH | September 3rd, 2009 at 10:51 am
I too had passages from the Bible in my freshman honors literature book and I don’t remember it being a big issue but there were a few grumblings from both sides: A) it was not being given proper deference and B) it shouldn’t be included at all.
What I actually found was this: 1) it was well incorporated as it was interspersed with other things written in similar times (like the Babylonian “Epic of Gilgamesh”) and provided a richer context. As a kid who grew up in the church it was interesting to read things with a critical eye and actually broadened my views on religion and myths, rather than constricting them. As mentioned before, there is a lot of actual history in there and it can be good to read it with that eye.
What would be interesting would be to have a few “plants” take the courses and reporting back on what is really taught. Then one could decide if they meet the “non-faith based” critiera.
Mich | September 4th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Great idea in theory, but if it can’t be taught by well-trained teachers, as it is in college religion courses, then it should not be taught at all. I disagree that non-religious kids have “no use for” the bible - it is significant, but it apparently is too easy for untrained teachers (especially those who are “unfamiliar with separation of church and state”) to use it inappropriately.
Beth | September 8th, 2009 at 10:37 pm