A critique by Rupert Kaye,
ACT Chief Executive
An opportunity squandered
I tuned in to watch this edition of Dispatches
(screened on Channel 4 at 8pm on Monday 6 March 2006) in eager
expectation that Rod Liddle would visit a number of new Christian
schools to find out if, how and why
they are distinctive. After all, there was plenty for him
to have got his teeth into: he could have visited a school
with a redemptive behaviour policy; or a school where every
staff meeting, lesson, test and exam begins with a prayer
asking God to help people to think clearly, discern His will
and give of their best; or a school where children and staff
pray for miraculous healing whenever someone is sick or injured.
Rod Liddle's thesis went something like this: the growing
impact of evangelicalism (my word) / fundamentalism (his word)
on the educational experiences of pupils in UK schools is
a threat to the country's liberal democratic traditions.
This being the case, why did this edition of Dispatches
focus on a handful of peripheral/sensational stories, most
of which were tangential to Mr Liddle's central objection
to a certain kind of Christian schooling?
Mr Liddle could have conducted a survey of a thousand non-Christian
parents to find out why they choose to send their children
to new Christian schools. Is it because the school is Christian?
If so, why is this important to them? Is it because they hope
their child will develop a faith they do not possess for themselves?
Is it because they like the school's distinctive (redemptive)
behaviour policy? Is it because they like the way prayer is
present in every facet of school life? Is it because exam
results are good?
He could have sat in a selection of lessons – from art and
music to maths and geography – taught from the perspective
of a Christian worldview. He could have asked: What does it
mean to teach PE or ICT ‘Christianly'? In so doing, he could
have begun to answer the question: How does a Christian worldview
differ from, say, a secular worldview or an Islamic worldview?
Mr Liddle could have sat in on seminars at the annual Christian
education theory conference; he could have interviewed speakers
and delegates at the annual national Christian teachers' and
headteachers' conferences. And he could have asked Christian
teachers: Did God tell you to become a teacher? How does your
faith impact on your day-to-day work in school? What does
a competent Christian teacher bring into the classroom that
a competent humanist teacher does not?
Somewhat inexplicably, he chose not to interview any of the
key Christian educationalists in the UK. He did not, for example,
interview any of the leading lights in the National Society,
the Catholic Church or Churches Together in England. Nor did
he interview the editors of the Journal of Education and
Christian Belief, or representatives from the Association
of Christian Teachers, The Independent Schools Christian Alliance,
the Christian Schools Trust, or The Stapleford Centre.
In short, Mr Liddle did not speak to the right people he needed
to speak to; he did not ask questions worth asking; and, in
consequence, he did not have much of a story to tell.
Room 101
Sadly, much of the programme seemed to be a kind of Room
101 for Rod Liddle. Clearly, he doesn't have time for
Christians who:
• take umbrage with ‘blasphemous' shows like Jerry
Springer, The Opera
• promote sexual abstinence to teenagers
• believe same-sex relationships and homosexual
sex acts are sinful
• raise their hands and smile during church services
Mr Liddle is a man who, it seems, fails to fathom faith (after
all, the programme seemed to muddle up Elim with Church of
England). He likes mystery, uncertainty and greyness; he abhors
the very notion of black-and-white moral judgements and spiritual
assurance. Hence, he is unable to get his head around the
fact that anyone (especially a headteacher!) living in twenty-first
century England is able to: (a) accept the Bible as a source
of literal truth and moral guidance; and (b) question the
liberal and/or scientific assumptions which underpin so much
of contemporary society.
Poor Mr Liddle! He could hardly believe his ears when he heard
someone telling teenagers that the only way to be 100% sure
of preventing pregnancy and protecting themselves from catching
a sexually transmitted infection is to abstain from sexual
intercourse. So, imagine his surprise – and obvious discomfort
– when an evangelical Christian said that God's pattern for
human sexuality is faithfulness within monogamous marriage
and celibacy for everyone not married. For Mr Liddle, this
stance was clearly a bridge too far. (Perhaps he knows lots
of parents who advocate 'sleeping around' to their teenagers.
Perhaps, he sees promiscuity as one of our country's proud
liberal democratic traditions. Who knows?)
Did he really expect any of the evangelical Christians he
interviewed to openly doubt or contradict the Bible? In his
wildest dreams, did he ever think they would condone same-sex
relationships or homosexual sex acts?
In fairness, Mr Liddle did visit the three state schools run
by the Emmanuel Schools Foundation (endowed by Sir Peter Vardy).
But, even here, the programme relied on flimsy anecdotes about
children disciplined for smoking outside school or not being
allowed to go to the toilet in lesson time to argue (unconvincingly)
that local communities would be better off with a non-Christian
school.
Perhaps a future edition of Dispatches will send
an investigative journalist to a number of new Christian schools
to find out if, how and why they
are distinctive. I hope so. In my opinion, this really is
a story worth telling.
Posted on 7 March 2006
This article is a press release from the Association of Christian Teachers and is used by permission. http://www.christian-teachers.org.uk/
