c. 1998 Religion News Service

ARLINGTON, Va. _ Two experts on the controversial relationship between religion and the public schools say it is unconstitutional for educators to exclude religion from the curricula of the nation’s schools.

The two _ Warren Nord, philosophy of religion professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Charles Haynes, senior scholar at the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center in Arlington, Va. _ are looking for something in between the”naked public school”and the”sacred public school.” In a new book,”Taking Religion Seriously Across the Curriculum,”published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, the two outline a way they believe it can be done. They discussed the book and their proposal at a Tuesday (Sept. 15) meeting at the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center.

Haynes and Nord argue it is inherently unfair to exclude religion from curricula.”It’s a violation of the neutrality required by the First Amendment,”said Haynes.

Both the”sacred public school,”where an overt Protestantism dominated, and the”naked public school,”where all discussion of religion was excluded, are”failed models,”he said.

They are proposing an alternative: the”civil public school,”where people of all faiths and those who have none will get fair treatment.

Efforts towards such a model have been supported in recent years by officials of organizations ranging from the Christian Coalition to People for the American Way as well as educational associations and groups representing Christians, Jews and Muslims.

In 1995, 21 religious and educational groups issued a booklet,”Religious Liberty, Public Education and the Future of American Democracy: A Statement of Principles,”which asserted that”public schools may not inculcate nor inhibit religion”but called for study”about”religion”where appropriate.” Outside the areas of history and social studies, religion is rarely mentioned in curricula, Nord said, and, indeed,”is conspicuous by its absence.” He cited economics as an example of an area of the curriculum that barely touches on such religious perspectives as”work as a calling”and various other theories by theologians regarding poverty and justice.

Elliot Mincberg, legal director of People for the American Way, and one of several on a panel discussing the authors’ ideas, said training is needed if schools decide to include more religion in their course offerings.

Mincberg spoke from his experience of working to counter instances such as a case where a school”treated the Resurrection like it was the Gettysburg Address.” Diane Berreth, deputy executive director of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, called the authors’ challenge to educators an”extremely difficult task,”but said,”I do believe that schools are capable of this work.” She said pilot programs would be needed to encourage others to consider their ideas.”Schools are inherently conservative institutions,”she said.”Even private religious schools don’t reflect the worldview of Charles (Haynes) and Warren (Nord).” Nord said despite the challenges, institutions can change. Before World War II, most universities didn’t have religious studies departments and now they are considered”legitimate”in higher education.”The field of religious studies can be developed in public schools,”he said.

An audience member who identified himself as a longtime Lebanese journalist voiced concern that teaching more about religion in the school setting could led to conflict and even bloodshed.

But Haynes said helping explain the world’s diverse religions might prevent violence.”If we don’t do what we’re suggesting, we might argue that what you are pointing to is more likely,”he said.”We are heading down a road in the United States where illiteracy in religion is becoming dangerous.” Nord agreed:”The way to keep people together is to take everybody seriously.” DEA END BANKS