Studying religious culture in public school

1. Entity type Lemma
2. Original titleОб изучении религиозной культуры в общеобразовательной школе
3. Language term Russian
4. lemma author Saprykin, Dmitry
5. lemma category Scientific theories and disciplines > Religious studies - Education, Science and Orthodoxy
6. Publication date 2005
7. lemma work Метлик Игорь [Author]. Studying religious culture in public school
8. lemma manifestations Образование и общество
9. Keywords Secular education - religious education
10. Citations
    1. http://www.verav.ru/common/mpublic.php?num=120
11. Lemma body

    1. The article discusses public debate around the issue of teaching religious culture in public schools (particularly, the subject "Basics of Orthodox Culture") and the school cooperation with the Russian Orthodox Church. The author quotes the statements of scientists advocating secular nature of education and opposing religious culture teaching in school on the grounds that it would undermine the scientific basis of education and as a result prevent the "real spiritual revival of society - freedom, democracy, religion freedom." As, for instance, Academician and physicist V.L. Ginzburg believes, "religion should not enter into public life."

       I.V. Metlik analyzes in detail the terminology used by the polemicists, and notices that one must differ "secular" as public, civil, from "secularism" as atheism. The popular interpretation of secular as atheistic entails another substitution: religion study from the atheistic point of view is opposed to "apologetic", i.e. confessional religious education. The author argues that religion should not be opposed to science and atheism, but rather to non-religious theories (philosophies, scientific and philosophical systems) and atheism should be opposed to clericalism. Many non-religious theories and concepts, writes the author, are "as far from rigorous scientific knowledge as religious", though many of these concepts (for example, Freud’s psychological concept of personality, Nietzsche’s philosophical views etc.) are studied in public school in mandatory courses. So, the issue is not in the necessary "scientific character" of education, says Metlik, but in the polemicists’ personal relationship to religion, as the humanitarian part of education includes much of what could not be fit into the framework of rigorous science.

       The author believes the opponents of teaching religious culture in public school are trying in their speeches to impose to the society the humanism ideology, which contradicts to the Russian Constitution. The Russian Constitution prohibits establishment of a state or compulsory religion, as long as a state or compulsory ideology.

       The secular character of education in state and municipal school does not mean, as the author argues, that religion should be studied without participation of religious organizations. Only substitution of the state and local management bodies by religious associations is not permitted, but the interaction between the state and municipal education authorities and religious organizations on matters of mutual interest can never be banned. Religious organizations in this case will act as the guarantees of the religious education content authenticity.