The Bible in the Public Schools: Reopening the Discussion

One of the now classic "American" discussions concerns the role of the bible in the public schools. One particularly erudite presenter proposed an historical “typology” that organized and presented the relationship between religion and the public schools in the 20th century into three categories: (1) The Sacred Schools; (2) The Naked Schools; (3) The Civic Schools. The “Sacred Schools” typology describes the pre-WWII situation, in which religion (and particularly the Christian religion) was openly taught as the normative religious expression. The “Naked Schools” typology refers to the strong societal reaction against such blatantly confessional (sometimes called “devotional”) methods of teaching, and is descriptive of a school system that purposefully excludes the teaching of religion. The “Civic Schools” typology describes an educational environment in which people learn “about” religion as an object of inquiry, rather than as a confessional document to which one is encouraged to adhere. Although few people with whom I am associated would advocate for a return to the "Sacred Schools" model, some may be more willing to pursue questions concerning a "Civic Schools" model of engagement with the bible. Put prepositionally, Civic Schools do not teach ACCORDING TO the bible (i.e., devotionally), but they do learn FROM the bible as a cultural object that is worthy of inquiry. Helpful instruction about the bible, however, must be critically informed, and must be primarily approached from scientific methods such as sociology, history, literary criticism and linguistic analysis. I am currently wondering if seminaries (admittedly a confessional organization) or colleges with a religion department can play some role in equipping secondary school educators in this task.

The Old Testament and Popular Media

While in Boston this year, at the Society of Biblical Literature conference, I attended a session titled, "Bible and America Popular Culture Section;" and, though not specifically dedicated to matters of pedagogy, I found it to be (perhaps) the most useful, in terms of my own situation as a teacher in a college classroom. The presenter, Karl Jacobson (Prof. of Religion - Augsburg College) made a presentation titled "Through the Pistol Smoke: Psalm 23 in Contemporary Film and Song." The presentation essentially examined the manifold ways in which Psalm 23 has seeped into the American popular consciousness, and, as a result, makes its way(fragmentarily in most cases) onto platinum selling albums of silver screen movies. After returning from the conference, I just happened to give two lectures on the Psalms, and decided to integrate music/video into the lecture. I chose a Psalm that I knew was both beautiful and horrible (Ps 145), and a music group with a history of doing Psalms well (Shane and Shane). Psalm 145 is beautiful in its praise of God, and horrible in its desire for the "gracious" and "merciful" God to bring about destruction on the Psalms's enemies ("all the wicked he will destroy" (v 20). Interestingly, though, the particular artists (Shane and Shane), who often draw from the Psalter, conveniently excise v 20 from their version. This opened wide the class time to a discussion about the role of hatred in the Psalms, and in the place of worship.

Teaching the Bible Dialogically - Reflections on "Teaching Reflectively in Theological Contexts," ed. Mary Hess and Stephen Brookfield

Anyone even remotely familiar with pedagogical "jargon" of the last few decades is quite familiar with the dreaded designation "sage on the stage!" This "teacher-centered" (another pejorative term) approach is slowly giving way to approaches that are, to use the vernacular, "dialogical" and conversationally oriented. Many of these issues are addressed in a recent book by Mary Hess and Stephen Brookfield, both of whom are professional educators. As a beginning teacher, I have found their reflections on this matter to be sagely and timely!

I come to their book with several questions:

1. How large of a role does "dialogue" play in an introductory class, when classes are relatively large (40+) and the curriculum demands that a certain amount of content needs to be presented?
2. I teach students who, due to their deeply religious upbringing, often value the notion of certitude over ambiguity and paradox. How can one begin to deal with "truth" on the level of conversation and dialogue when, for many of my students, truth is not a matter to be discussed, but rather asserted and defended?