Canon Dr Evonne Paddison CEO of ACCESS ministries
In the last few months the Christian faith, and faith believers in general, have taken a beating in the mainstream press. As a result, believers are questioning not only their ministry involvement, but their freedom to express their faith in public and risk persecution.
The reason? A small group of parents in Victoria is questioning the Act of Education which provides for Special Religious Instruction in public schools. That same group is taking the Education Department to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), claiming that children whose parents opt them out of faith instruction are discriminated against.
In mid-May, HREOC referred the matter to a VCAT hearing.
As the main provider of special religious instruction in Victoria, the role of ACCESS ministries was called into question. There are other faith providers – Jewish, Ba’hai, Christian Orthodox, Muslim.
ACCESS is but one, yet it is our service provision that has come under relentless media scrutiny.
Along the journey, chaplaincy and the role of the church has also been yanked into the media debate. Interestingly, our state and federal political leaders have come out in support of faith instruction, many of them professing their faith publicly for the first time. Our own Prime Minister, an avowed atheist, even referred to the relevance of the King James Bible in one’s life!
What has developed over a few short months is a deliberate attempt by the media to start a faith war – to divide Christians against other Christians; faiths against faiths; congregations against congregations.
It’s sensationalist journalism – find a schism in the foundation, a rat in the ranks, report the division and watch the Letters to the Editor or the news blog implode with atheistic comment.
Emails received at ACCESS have been vicious, filthy, malicious, and racist. Our staff, chaplains and CR educators are under considerable attack and have borne the brunt of this media-created maelstrom of misinformation. At the same time, anecdotal complaints have been made about children in CRE colouring in sheets saying “Jesus Loves Me”.
If we can’t make that claim as a faith educator, what is left?
Any parent may choose to opt their child out of faith education at any time. There is no prejudice. Christianity does not permit prejudice. Our CR educators are community volunteers, many with teaching backgrounds themselves, who have undergone training, a Working With Children Check, and are under the supervision of a Field Supervisor employed by ACCESS. Under Departmental guidelines a classroom teacher is required to remain with the CR class at all times. Not once has ACCESS received a formal complaint from a parent or principal.
With 12 million Christians in Australia, and nearly 65 per cent of parents opting their children into CRE classes, Christians too should have a choice. Detractors claim that CRE should be confined to Sunday. I’ve got news for them – God is with us, always, not just on the day of rest.
The argument has now become one against faith – against the right of individuals to hold a faith and to express a faith, and to share the common values of those faiths with others. Our parents cry out for a provider to take the time to teach their children virtues such as love, mercy, social responsibility, humanity, humility, sharing, grace and forgiveness. They are grateful that we are there and regularly thank us for our presence.
These parents and their children should not be denied access to a faith provision merely because of the stand of a minority.
Migrants flock to our shores to flee oppression and persecution in their country of origin. Many find their way into Christian churches, and we welcome them with open arms. Let us not be the persecuted as well.
It’s time – time for Christians to stand together, united as the body of Christ, to defend our faith, and the values that have shaped this country today. I urge Christians to speak positively of CRE in their schools, to write or email their local MPs, to praise and uphold friends who are CR educators or chaplains. Most importantly, pray.
Canon Dr Evonne Paddison
CEO
ACCESS ministries
Ms Paddison, you are completely wrong. No one is against faith or “against the right of individuals to hold a faith and to express a faith, and to share the common values of those faiths with others.”
The argument is against your aim and that of Access Ministries to contravene the SRI and chaplaincy provision in the Act by using our state schools as mission fields to have our children as you say “…contacted, converted and discipled.”
As for the complaints, I have lodged a formal one with Access. I’m a parent at a state school. I was not vicious, filthy, malicious, or racist in my complaint as you claim. I have yet to be contacted.
Posted by John Bornas | 01. Jun, 2011, 10:25 pmI think the teaching of Jesus have foundationally shaped Western civilisation in a profound and enduring manner. I fully support the rights of children to learn about Jesus.
As someone who was denied CRE in the SA school system, I felt robbed and discriminated against. I doubt whether in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and other majority Muslim nations that they are having a debate about whether Islam should be taught to children. I totally support their right to teach their children about the faith that has influenced and shaped their societies. Equally, since the teachings of Jesus have shaped and influenced Australia, children have the right to learn about that.
This whole anti-SRI campaign is one verging on religious vilification and utterly intolerant. It has been a systematic smearing of a reputable and ethical organisation such as Access Ministries. The truth of the matter is that children are not forced to learn about the Christian faith. Secondly, any religious group can offer classes. Furthermore, it is ‘dog-whistling’ in order to increase intolerance toward those of Christian faith. If such a campaign were run against any other group, faith, or race, it would be rightly condemned.
I urge that this unfair and biased campaign against be stopped. For what opponents of chaplaincy and SRI are failing to see is that many parents and schools want to have these things available for their children. You would seek to deny them of those rights. This is not North Korea of the former Soviet Union. In a liberal democracy you have to live with views and faiths that you may not agree with.
Posted by James | 07. Jun, 2011, 10:06 pmI hardly think Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and other majority Muslim nations are ideal examples to support the argument for religious teachin in school…
Posted by Ash | 09. Jun, 2011, 1:24 pmAsh: “I hardly think Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, and other majority Muslim nations are ideal examples to support the argument for religious teachin in school…”
Ash, they are perfect examples. In fact, James himself explains -
James: “This whole anti-SRI campaign is one verging on religious vilification and utterly intolerant. It has been a systematic smearing of a reputable and ethical organisation such as Access Ministries.” etc.
Just as radical islamists equate the fight against jihadist terror to a war on islam and efforts to eradicate muslims, so to do christians of the Access variety equate even the slightest of criticism to an anti-theist attack on christianity itself that similarly wants to eradicate all christians. This is one of many features that unites these religions at their fundamentalist fringes – persecution, paranoia and martyrdom fantasy. It is both a grand delusion and an effective propaganda tool.
The “bias” being squealed about here is the same as that of a child caught stealing his brother’s cookie – Access Ministries know they have behaved deceptively and fraudulently; they know they have no defense; they know that everyone knows. The only solution, like that of the cookie thief child, is to have a tantrum and howl about being persecuted. This is just more evidence of precisely how deep the rot is set within Access and its apologists.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 10. Jun, 2011, 11:28 amI wholeheartedly concur with John Bornas’s comment.As a mother of 4 and a g/mother of 6,I too am deeply troubled by the chaplaincy program.The ethics program in NSW which will give students who opt out of religious instruction a superb(in my opinion)alternative,is something that should be looked at nationally.School counsellors should be secular appointments as they used to be,full stop.
Posted by S Smith | 09. Jun, 2011, 12:08 pmJohn Bornas | 01. Jun, 2011, 10:25 pm
Hello John.
As a Christian, (that is, someone who has found that their decisions in life are not always the best for themselves or others, and has found that the teachings of Jesus are the very best for us, teaching us that we are so worthy as to be loved unconditionally by an all knowing, all loving God, and to be forgiven by Him when we fail Him and ourselves) I know that all christians are very pleased to have these discussions with anyone who does not know us. Please know that no child is forced to join in any of the classes – parents give permission for the children to join in.
Access Ministries, as far as I am aware, is a christian teaching organisation of no particular christian religion and is approved of by many christian religions. You might say they are specialists in their field, so it makes sense to the Government that Access is best placed for christian teaching in schools. Access Ministries has very strict guidelines to follow and are very strict with their teachers.
As far as I am aware, Access Ministry teachers have 30 minutes once a week for children to hear about what christians believe, not what a child must believe. It is a short time once a week in school to hear the bible stories that show how Jesus, an historic figure, taught people about God’s love for everyone, of God’s requirements for us to not be selfish, but to love one another, and to be respectful, to care for our world, and how to get along with each other. John, what would you like to happen? Would you like the children who attend the Access classes to not attend the classes? I don’t think Access Ministries has any jurisiction over what happens to the children who don’t attend. If a parent of a child who does not attend the class each week, is not happy with what their child does instead, could those parents approach the teacher or the school? Perhaps you could come up with some great and positive ideas with your school. Perhaps looking at the Access Ministries website might be helpful for you. It’s great to hear that you were not one of the unfortunate people who sent such horrible messages to Access Ministries. I have been praying for the people who have sent those horrible messages and I have been praying for the men the ladies the mums or dads or whoever they are at Access Ministries that would have opened those letters – they must have been very horrible experiences that would do no good to anyone especially our children. I also pray that the children of those people are not being exposed to their parents’ ugliness. I also pray that any parents who do not agree with having christian education in their school, to not expose their children to any opinions or discussions that should only be heard by adults. Another note about Christianity – it is the basis of many of Australia’s democratic laws.
Also, not all parents can afford to send their children to a private christian school but they want their children to learn of Christ’s teachings and they are happy to have that reinforced during the week. And these parents are very happy that there is someone like Access to help teach their children the same things they hear at home, things that are unfortunately not heard enough outside the home – today our children are being exposed to a great deal of selfishness – the “Me” society, the “I want it now before I earn it” society. Our children are also being exposed to a part of society that advocates that we should be able to choose our own personal levels of goodness, but it is always proven that we are selfish beings, that we do not understand the true issues of tolerance-gone-mad until we have “tolerated” too far – we do not make our own best judges. As Christians all we can say is thank God for God!
Posted by Eunice Hehir | 02. Mar, 2012, 5:54 amThis is an appallingly dishonest account of the concerns of ordinary citizens in relation to the activities of Access Ministries in Victorian schools.
There is no “attack on faith” or attempt to start a “faith war”. To suggest these things is to totally misrepresent the reasonable concerns of individuals like me.
I agree that children should be educated about religion, but not that they should be “instructed in faith”. They are two very different concepts. There have been numerous examples of activities undertaken by Access volunteers that are clearly NOT educational. There is no formal curriculum, no stated educational goals and learning objectives, no consistent pedagogical approach. If it can’t be called education then it doesn’t belong in our secular, publicly-funded schools.
Values like social responsibility, humanity, humility, and sharing are taught and reinforced in other subjects and contexts. To suggest to children that these values can only be underpinned by “faith” or that only the “faithful” are worthy of love or respect is deceptive and disgraceful.
Posted by Stephen Downes | 01. Jun, 2011, 10:27 pmI am sorry Steven,
But this is incorrect.The Access CRE teachers manuals have ‘scope and sequence’ charts based on current pedagogical and educational aims and objectives. They are educationally sound and do support the VELS.
Jo
Posted by Jo Schroeders | 02. Jun, 2011, 8:47 pmSupport VELS? Oh no they bloody don’t…
Posted by Mike Stuchbery | 07. Jun, 2011, 10:13 pmStephen, thanks for your email. I do realise that you are uninformed in many areas. There is indeed a formal curriculum which all Christian Religious Education teachers MUST adhere to. There are indeed educational goals and learning objectives (Scope and Sequence). Every lesson has its own pedagogy issues – eg honesty is a quality that has to be learned – sharing and generosity are life attitudes that need to be practised – the importance of hoope in the face of difficulty and change. Diana
Posted by Diana Paino | 05. Jun, 2011, 4:35 pmHi Stephen I think if you look at the Access Ministries website you will see the curriculum that is taught.
Yes it is great for children to learn about religions of the world, and governments of the world and history of the world. Please see what I wrote to John – I hope this is helpful.
Values like social responsibility, humanity, humility, and sharing can be taught by in other subjects – what the Access Ministries teachers do is show how Jesus taught and reinforced these subjects.
I don’t know where you got the idea that any christian would say “”that only the “faithful” are worthy of love or respect”"!
That would be at the very least,foolish, and very inaccurate and just as you say, ” deceptive and disgraceful” because we are not always faithful – we are happy to state that we are sinners – God loves us and wants us to be faithful.
Stephen, if you hear such inacuracies again, please, go along to a christian church a minister a priest a pastor – or even better – open up the bible – it is a very fascinating read! Even my non-christian friends read it – they think it’s brilliant! They just haven’t got its’ full message yet!
Posted by Eunice Hehir | 02. Mar, 2012, 6:14 am“What has developed over a few short months is a deliberate attempt by the media to start a faith war – to divide Christians against other Christians; faiths against faiths; congregations against congregations.”
It’s not a faith war. It’s just a request to keep schools secular. If you think it’s a war, then you misunderstand the criticisms greatly.
“Christianity does not permit prejudice. ”
But anyone who criticises you is somehow a proponent of a faith war?
“Not once has ACCESS received a formal complaint from a parent or principal.”
You need to inform your webmaster that your website complaint function does not even appear, let alone work.
“I’ve got news for them – God is with us, always, not just on the day of rest.”
Unless you believe something else.
“The argument has now become one against faith – against the right of individuals to hold a faith and to express a faith, and to share the common values of those faiths with others. ”
No it hasn’t. That’s just the strawman you prefer to fight.
“These parents and their children should not be denied access to a faith provision merely because of the stand of a minority.”
Wow. Seriously? The issue here is that the minority has *less* choice; and governments shouldn’t force a majority viewpoint, it should protect the minority’s rights. This is why the concept of ‘church and state separation’ was invented.
Those who criticise are not against faith or Christianity specifically; we’d just like to see a little more diversity in RE classes or at the far end of the scale a more secular school education all around.
What your comments ignore is that such a thing would actually HELP you and your fellow Christians by ensuring that if the majority of Australians next year decide to convert to Islam… your children won’t be forced to ‘opt out’ of such RE classes. A secular education protects your rights as much as it protects the minority.
Posted by flip | 02. Jun, 2011, 11:38 amEvonne
Have you ever stopped and asked yourself just who gave these opponents the stick they use to hit you with ?
Have you ever considered that if your group delivered a fair reasonable and balanced form of religious education that was inclusive and unbiased that they would have nothing to complain about ?
Instead you and your group delivered a hard line fire and brimstone vision to children, you published cartoons that demonized the teachers you are supposed to work with.
I am all for religious education in schools, I am totally opposed to preaching one narrow form of religion at kids.
It is time you took some responsibility for your actions and acknowledge that the failure of this program in far more down to your actions that those of parents who have been alarmed and disturbed by your ministry to their kids.
Posted by doug Steley | 02. Jun, 2011, 11:58 amA brilliant exercise in missing the point
Posted by Jamie | 02. Jun, 2011, 12:10 pmYes we can stand proud that we haven’t done anything wrong and the majority of familes are happy with SRI. We can’t change the mind of others, and your words are being manipulated and argued against right now. We do need to show our support because that is how a democractic society works.
Posted by Shiona | 02. Jun, 2011, 12:19 pm“the majority of familes are happy with SRI” On what basis do you make that statement? Do you have a published statistical reference? Or are you making a wild assumption in the absence of any documented supporting evidence?
Posted by Justin | 02. Jun, 2011, 8:08 pmJustin, 4 different religions are taught RE in the school where I teach the Christian religion. The parents at the school have a choice and of course are able to choose not to send their children to any of these lessons. I have certainly met parents of children at the school and have found them to be very supportive of the RE programme. When you consider that parents have a choice whether to send their children to RE or not, I wonder at some of the aggressive comments.
Posted by Diana Paino | 05. Jun, 2011, 5:20 pm4 different religions? Rubbish, unless it’s an independent school.
Posted by Mike Stuchbery | 07. Jun, 2011, 10:15 pmWhy would you wonder? I’m astonished at the arrogance of Christian “educators” that the default position should be opt in.
This effectively discriminates against children who opt out, creating an artificial divide that need not exist.
Were you to make it opt in and after hours that should satisfy the needs of parents who wish to participate.
Posted by Mark | 09. Jun, 2011, 5:39 pm“The argument has now become one against faith”
No it hasn’t, you are free to practice whatever faith you want, I’m just not happy about paying for you to teach it to others as a tax payer… I also don’t want you in public schools, stick to your private religious education facilities where parents can opt to send their children if they want….
Posted by Vishal | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:10 pmVishal. It appears as though you don’t understand the system. None of these relious instructors is paid; neither by the tax payer or anyone else. They are volunteers who love God and their neighbour, whoever that may be. There is no discrimination.
Secondly, the children do not have to attend the classes. Their parents may withdraw them at any time.
Posted by Ruth | 02. Jun, 2011, 3:39 pmRuth what you may no understand is this is being funded by the Australian Government. The religous instuctors may not be paid but the company is.
Posted by Emil | 02. Jun, 2011, 3:52 pmGenuinely curious: If I wanted to volunteer to teach a class on how I believe in Mithra, would that be allowed?
Posted by flip | 03. Jun, 2011, 1:22 amRuth also fails to understand that “opt-out” is an old sales trick. You will get many people who are reluctant to take action to opt out because it singles them out, makes them conspicuous. That is why opt in is more democratic.
To show how important opt out is to these folks consider Queensland, where the actual rules for RI are opt in. How many people know that? The school admins often don’t, or if they do they are happy to pretend not to. In many schools the parents find out after the fact that the school has opted their kids in. They are then told they must formally opt out.
In several cases I am aware of parents formally opted out only to have their kids opted back in again the next year. The school admins claimed (barefaced lie) that you had to opt out every year.
Posted by DanDare | 03. Jun, 2011, 9:48 amHi Dandare
As far as I have always experienced, the parents have to give written permission for their children to attend christian classes.
No parent has to opt their child out UNLESS they have firstly sent a written request for they child to attend.
Sometimes a parent may change their mind and withdraw their child.
Protestant christian education in public schools has been around for many many generations back through the history of western civilisation.
Catholic christian education has also been around for many generations and the Catholic community also provide christian education in public schools where there has been a need identified and there are sufficient teachers.
There are now some public schools that have identified a need to have other religions teachers come into the schools for their children. These needs have been identified by the parents and the schools. I think it is great for the christian children to be able to have access to christian learning through the week just as it’s great to have our children reinforce their other subjects on the weekends. I believe we are a christian nation built on christian teachings and we have benifited greatly from being a christian based nation, so much so that many other peoples of other nations and creeds have found us to be such a great safe nation that they have chosen to make Australia their home.
We are now a christian nation with many other nationalities: some who follow the christian religion, some who follow other religions, some who follow no religion at all.
Posted by Eunice Hehir | 02. Mar, 2012, 6:48 amRuth, you obviously don’t get it… What was that $200+ million set aside for chaplains in schools?
Posted by Vishal | 03. Jun, 2011, 2:35 pmYeh Ruth…..
Posted by Stacy | 07. Jun, 2011, 7:44 pm[This has been edited to remove extreme language]. It is time this religion died off and people started living in reality. Keep your fictitious Gods and imaginary saviours in your homes and to yourselves.
Posted by Jim | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:11 pmspot on. thanks.
Posted by BRAD | 02. Jun, 2011, 4:10 pmGood on you Jim. Christians cannot understand atheists, agnostics getting SO annoyed by this relentless preaching, this arrogant righteousness. Believe whatever you want, believe in the tooth fairy if you like, but do not impose your beliefs on others. It is that simple. You (Christians) do not have a monopoly on morality, leave our children alone.
Leave them to be good just because thats a really good way for society to work well, without the ridiculous reward of eternal life.
Posted by DIANE PEARTON | 07. Jun, 2011, 7:01 pmQuote: “ACCESS is but one, yet it is our service provision that has come under relentless media scrutiny.”
Well that’s hardly surprising when a) You provide 98.5% of all “teachers”, b) You are the most vocal about the complaints about SRI/CRE/Chaplains (whether directed at you or not!).
Posted by OzAz | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:12 pmYou Xtians have tortured and murdered all of your opposition for the last 2000 years and the only reason you’re not heating up the braziers now is because we no longer allow you the power. So now you bleat “Discrimination! Persecution!” Go preach your evil doctrine in your churches and Sunday Schools to your declining audiences Just know that all the while we are coming to get your tax breaks and your other privileges. We won’t pay for it, nor will we tolerate any quasi government endorsement of your delusion.
Posted by Paul Hannah | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:23 pmWell said!
Posted by BRAD | 02. Jun, 2011, 4:12 pmPlease don’t criticise the secular press for sensationalist journalism when you indulge in the same thing. This piece is full of rhetoric designed to inflame and overstate the situation.
The role of ACCESS in state schools in Victoria is being questioned by far more than “a small group of parents”.
Members of your own organisation have stated publicly on many occasions that you wish to use your role in state schools to lead children to Christian belief. This is completely outside the role of the Federal Government’s chaplaincy guidelines. Therefore ACCESS is acting illegally.
Please don’t claim prosecution when your faith is not at all under threat in our society. You have freedom of faith and worship. The opposition of people like me is based entirely on your attempts to bring children to Christian faith in a context where such actions have no place, namely, state schools which should be universal, secular and free.
Faith-based schools, churches, and the home are available for parents who wish to inculcate the gospel in their children.
I know you believe that you ought to obey God rather than men, and that the great commission underpins all your actions. However your attempts to turn the chaplaincy program into a missionary activity will not go unopposed.
Posted by Graham Abbott | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:31 pmHear hear!
Posted by flip | 03. Jun, 2011, 1:24 amYes. Well said!
I certainly do not want my tax dollars paying for chaplains to proselytize to our children.
I was shocked and surprised at the nonsense that was being taught to my daughter in CRE in my local public high school. I was expecting a formal curriculum based on an objective account of the history of Christianity and its impact on our culture. Instead, it was pure proselytizing and nonsense like “atheists open their bodies to Satan”.
Chaplains and CRE (as currently taught) should have no place in publicly funded schools in a secular pluralistic society.
Replace the chaplains with qualified counsellors!
Posted by AlanT | 04. Jun, 2011, 7:54 pmNow that’s a bit of spin, really.
You’re not the underdog in any way, shape or form.
Considering there are real underdogs out there, you playing that card is… well, let’s say, seriously uncool?
Posted by Arjen Lentz | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:31 pmYou have completely missed the point of the concerns of parents (of which there are many, not just a minority). No-one is anti-faith or “beating” Christians or Christianity. All they are asking for is that all children be educated ABOUT religion. What it is, what the various religions are and what practitioners of these religions belive. They are asking that one religion is not held above the others as ‘right’ so that all children can learn TOGETHER about religion without some feeling persecuted or excluded.
What could be more fair, loving and tolerant than that?
Posted by Bek | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:40 pmGod may be with you every day of the week, but I refuse to pay for him on my taxpayer dollar. My taxpayer dollars go to provide to provide an equal, secular education to all children, regardless of faith or lack thereof. Faith has no place in a secular classroom.
Parents who “cry out for a provider to take the time to teach their children virtues such as love, mercy, social responsibility, humanity, humility, sharing, grace and forgiveness” can either teach these values themselves (strange concept, I know!), or they can take their children to the church or synagogue or mosque or temple of their choice – on their own time. School is for all children, equally. It is NOT a forum for pushing a single-faith agenda to innocent minds.
Posted by Simon Papson | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:42 pmAt some point all Christians have to realise that despite Jesus’ wonderful message, and it is, but its not an original story. There is no evidence he existed, in a time which has been studied microscopically, he doesnt get a mention as the saviour’, or son of god. Dionysus, Osiris etc Human nature has prevailed because it is what it is. One life, there will be no eternal life that is better than this or why are we not there already? If procreation is our goal, then why doesnt ‘he’ just make more, of everything. We have to leave these beliefs behind & move forward but in the same direction, not pulling in all directions as we are now.
Posted by Patrick Hofman | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:44 pmYou say that there is no evidence that Jesus existed. There are many prophecies that allude to Jesus in the Old Testament (read Isaiah Chapter 53, Micah Ch.5 v.2)as well as the eye witness accounts of the New Testament. Additionally, there are non-Christian and anti-Christian first-century writers that make mention of Jesus, such as: Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Suetonius and Mara Bar-Serapion.
Posted by Jeremy | 14. Jun, 2011, 7:58 pma) “prophecies” are not “evidence”
b) “eye witness accounts of the New Testament” – there are also “eye witness accounts” of UFOs. Nevermind the chinese whispers game of stories told and retold to the point the source is lost
c) Suetonius offers a few lines of a new political rebellion in Palestine, and the rest don’t offer much more detail
d) none of this is relevant – no one is questioning your right to believe. We are however questioning your right to force Access’ skewed, unrepresentative perversion of christianity on innocent children – http://wp.me/p1hBgT-sj
To repeat for the umpteenth time – Access do more harm to the majority of the christian faith itself than to the secularists in their attempts to hijack it.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 16. Jun, 2011, 12:37 pmFaith education is fine, as long as children are given equal time to digest the teachings of all faiths. Giving kids colouring books with ‘Jesus loves me’ in them isn’t religious education. That’s religious instruction, and there’s a difference. If you want to go into schools and say that there are a whole bunch of different religions, and this is what they all teach and this is what their adherents believe, I’m not going to really like that, but I can deal with it.
If you go into schools and tell all the kids that Jesus loves them and they’re all children of God, then you have indoctrination/conversions of children who don’t have the intellectual capacity to make up their own minds.
Just because the different denominations of Christianity are the dominant religions in Australia, doesn’t mean that they should be privileged over others, or even that they’re correct. They should be treated with the same objectivism and skepticism as other faiths.
Posted by Peter | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:44 pm“Christianity does not permit prejudice.” HA! What a ridiculous statement…
“A prejudice is a prejudgment, an assumption made about someone or something before having adequate knowledge to be able to do so with guaranteed accuracy” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice
I’d say that Christians and the religious do that on a daily basis with regards to almost everything and everyone in our society. The whole premise that each religion and its followers are destined to go to heaven and the rest of us aren’t is a prejudice… They prejudge everyone else before knowing anything about them.
You state that 65% of parents are opting their kids into these classes, when did they get asked to opt them in? It’s just assumed, and anyone who doesn’t want their kids in has to specifically opt them out so that’s hardly evidence backing you up. It includes anyone who doesn’t know, doesn’t care, or yes wants their kids to have an education in Christianity whether they’re religious or not.
Get the hell out of our schools and away from our children. [This has been edited to remove extreme language.]
Posted by Pete Darwin | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:50 pmPete Darwin | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:50 pm
Hi Pete
You are right – we christians can be prejudice – but not on a daily basis – I’m sure there’s plenty of us being prejudice to cover every moment of the day! We are sinners! But we know we are sinners and we also know that Christianity does not permit prejudice, that is, God does not permit us to make judgements about anyone or anything before having all the facts. But we do, don’t we – everyone on this earth prejudges before knowing. Making a decision to follow Christ’s teachings and living under God for us means that we are answerable to a higher being – whom we cannot fool nor hide from but whom we can bring our whole life to, when the rest of the world lets us down or has no answers for us or no time for us.
What I am telling you is what christians believe – not what you should believe.
It’s the same in the classroom – this is what christians believe and this is what Christ taught.
I have been giving a great deal of prayer and thought to this issue of teaching christian values in public school.
One overriding thought had been nagging at me – what would happen if we stopped teaching christian values?
Is it possible that we adults might get our precious rights, but denying those children their rights?
Or denying these children their opportunities?
Remember, these are children of parents who have chosen for their children to attend.
Lets look at this from the actual teaching guidelines – teachers don’t work at converting children, only teaching christian values.
What if there is no longer those extra people there for the children – remembering that these christian teachers are there FOR the children, not for us adults who are worried about our rights and our taxes.
Now there has been some comments on these pages arguing that although the teachers are volunteers there is still some sort of payment changing hands. I’ll say a bit more on that later.
Christian education is not about learning facts and figures.
Christian teaching is personal – its about relationship – it’s about self-worth.
If some people think that Christian teaching in public schools is a waste of tax dollars and destroying someones rights, then what is it to take away from our children any, I repeat, any opportunity that tells them they are worthy – more worthy than this world will ever tell them – more worthy than we selfish adults can value them.
What is it to take away opportunities for our children to have access to anyone who shows genuine interest in them?
We wouldn’t want a government teacher taken away from our children that they feel safe with – would we want anyone taken away from our children with whom they feel safe and who reiterate their value?
Sure I’m biased – I’m biased on God’s side.
If you’re anti-christian you’re biased too.
But somehow we have to get biased FOR our children.
You see, I don’t think christian education is the only way we can tell our children that they are valued, but it’s stronger than any way this world can give them.
As adults we have knowledge to make choices.
As children we are building the knowledge.
But please don’t under-estimate our children’s ability to make their own decisions on what they believe. To do that would certainly be arrogant!
I just can’t see that taking away is the answer.
Sure! It is society’s job to make sure we are all doing our job well.
So if christians stuff up they need to be told – you should see how frank and forward we can get with each other when we stuff up – not only does God see everything but he goes and tells someone else – there’s always some christian who finds out! What non-christians might sue each other for, we christians have to take it on the chin from each other!
Now lets look at that cost again – those precious taxes.
Can any of the sceptics tell us how we are going to fund the same level of presence of any other support for our children?
The current volunteers could not be replaced with paid staff – there is not the funding available – it would certainly hit our precious tax dollars – and not many people will make themselves available for about an hour a week’s wages! Then there is the preparation time that any teacher will tell you they do not get paid to do.
By the way, lets get some comments from the parents who give permission for their children to attend christian education classes in public schools or parents from any other religions whose children have their religion in their public school.
Also, what do the other religions representatives think of denying their children access to their religious education in their public schools?
Posted by Eunice Hehir | 02. Mar, 2012, 8:33 am“Our parents cry out for a provider to take the time to teach their children virtues such as love, mercy, social responsibility, humanity, humility, sharing, grace and forgiveness.”
As a parent of four, I can vehemently say that I am appalled that anyone would consider this their duty. My children learn these values from ME. Not from a random person with six hours training.
Posted by Kristine | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:57 pmWell done, Kristine for teaching good values to your children at home. I agree – that’s where it should be taught. I don’t recall any formal values education during my years at school. I understand that values education was introduced into our schools because teachers perceived that many children were not receiving that teaching in their homes and families. ACCESS ministries curriculum strongly supports VELS and is approved by DEECD.
Posted by Esmae | 03. Jun, 2011, 10:42 amI think you have missed the point, Esmae. Even if teachers perceive a lack in values, it’s still not their place to institute them. I don’t care who you are, you don’t take it upon yourself to foist your values onto my children. My values are such that they may very well conflict with your values.
Posted by Kristine | 03. Jun, 2011, 2:53 pm“Christianity does not permit prejudice.” That’s a stretch of any imagination. Christianity has been the corner stone of any prejudice. For example the bible does not condem the practice the use of slavery it actually tells you on how to treat and beat your slave.(Exodus 21:20-21) It is prejudice to women by claiming that you are property. I’m sure you don’t think that if you are a unmarried virgin and a man rapes you, his punishment is to marry you. Or would that be your punishment? (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).
I don’t see you preaching those morals to the children.
Posted by Emil | 02. Jun, 2011, 1:58 pmPrecisely! I’m so sick of hearing the old arguement that we need Christianity to teach our kids good morals. If you read the doctrine of their faith it is horrible. If you look at the actions of their flock, they are horrible. And how can an organisation that specifically requires exemption from the Anti-Discrimination Act in order to operate lay claim to being loving, tolerant, and of high moral fibre?! Keep them out of schools and out of my life.
Posted by Stephen | 02. Jun, 2011, 7:54 pmSuch a reaction. Feeling the heat?
For a democratic society that prides itself on free speech and opinion there certainly seems to be a great deal of closing ranks, fibbing to cover the tracks and hatred towards those who speak out about this appalling situation.
So you have ranks then, so do armies, are you thinking of a crusade in the near future?
Looks like you can be in the club or out but not in with a conscience as that makes you a rat. I guess the whistle blower link on the AM intranet also requires finger prints and a 3d photo just in case retribution is required because the big man upstairs certainly seems to be looking the other way on this issue.
Everyone is so heated up! There must be task force meetings every day to combat the truth of the matter.
First casualty in war? – you guessed it, the truth.
Posted by Roj | 02. Jun, 2011, 2:02 pmWhat is evident from this article is that Evonne is incapable of providing leadership via clear critical thought and correct identification of the issues at hand that a competent CEO of an organisation that holds such responsibility and (tax payer) money should take in their stride.
Evonne seems panicked and floundering, resorting to rhetoric emotional pleas to make her work simple again.
Oh, and buy a dictionary Evonne:
- Indoctrination is not the same as education.
- Persecution is being burnt at the stake for thinking the Earth revolves around the Sun. It is not, being given a special place in the school day or millions of dollars from the government.
Posted by mal | 02. Jun, 2011, 2:05 pmI would like to encourage you Yvonne as CEO of ACCESS Ministries and the work of Christian Religious Education Teachers in Victorian State Schools. They take time out to prepare lessons and volunteer to go into our Public Schools to share the stories of Jesus, backing up the classroom teachers lessons of how we should ‘value one another and look after our world. Other (non-Christian)faith communities listen to the History & stories of Jesus of Nazareth and agree with his teachings. Why are we in Australia so negative to the sharing of the stories?
Posted by Helen | 02. Jun, 2011, 4:07 pmBecause they are stories! Stolen and adapted from stories and faiths that came before them. And they are teaching them to impressionable kids who are not old enough to think critically and see them for the stories they are. Many of these kids will still believe in Santa Claus so please dont suggest that this lot can come into schools, tell them “god is real”, “jesus is real” and not expect to be converting them.
Also the religion kids are being converted to at the tax payers expense is cruel and horrible. The bible (if you have read it) teaches that if a man is caught raping a women then is punishment is to marry her (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). That beating your slave to death should go un-punished so long as the slave lives for a day or two after the beating (Exodus 21:20-21). Oh and of course your not allowed to wear clothes of wool and linen mixed together (Deuteronomy 22:11)… but murder is ok its your property. Yeah, lets get this into primary schools!!!
Posted by Stephen | 02. Jun, 2011, 8:15 pmWhile I agree with Helen that the stories of Jesus may be valuable discussion starters (along with other stories from different religions and cultures), I really must take issue with the claim that SRI is somehow “backing up the classroom teachers (sic) lessons of how we should value one another and look after our world.”
As a primary school teacher who is forced to endure a half hour of SRI each week, I can assure you that the SRI instructors at our school do NOT back up anything else that happens at our school. They represent a stand-alone program. Our school has its own structured program for including all members of our school community and creating cohesive class groups.
Guess what? The SRI instructor has NEVER “backed up” the messages displayed around my classroom about supporting each other in learning and feeling safe, finding our special talents and encouraging others to do their best. Rather, the instructor’s curriculum is turned on and then off within a half hour once a week.
Posted by Mitch Hughes | 02. Jun, 2011, 9:21 pm“Other (non-Christian)faith communities listen to the History & stories of Jesus of Nazareth and agree with his teachings. ”
Does that include Jews?
“Why are we in Australia so negative to the sharing of the stories?”
You either didn’t read the above comments, or didn’t comprehend them. There’s a HUGE difference between listening to a story and being told it’s true.
PS. You can teach values without invoking religion; you can teach values without invoking one particular religion; and why are you so negative about ensuring kids make up their own minds about what they should believe in?
Posted by flip | 03. Jun, 2011, 1:46 amPersonally, as a catholic-now-atheist, I’m just sick of people’s actions not being held accountable because they’re part of a ministry or identify as christian.
Remember, the christian right in this country is a MINORITY. A very vocal one, but a minority nonetheless.
Posted by Bennett | 02. Jun, 2011, 4:45 pmIndividuals raise their voice and their particular bias is obvious; that’s human nature and a freedom we celebrate. Interestingly, the last time I checked the AGE poll on this issue, 78% of voters (out of 80,000!!) were in favour of the continuance of religious education. So do we discriminate against those children (who may well be in the majority) who want to continue these 1/2 hour sessions as provided by the Education Act? For the most part, people of faith do not impose their beliefs on anyone. The “E” in CRE is for education, and this program presents Christian principles and values. The beauty of education is that it’s about choices – the individual freedom to decide what one wants to believe when presented with different ideas.
Posted by Amante Pacis | 02. Jun, 2011, 5:17 pmIn favour of Religious Education or Religious Instruction (Indoctrination)?? Ifyou read most of the comments here people are ok with TEACHERS educating kids about the worlds various religions. They take issue with preachers coming into schools and indoctrinating kids in one faith.
Posted by Stephen | 03. Jun, 2011, 10:41 amIt’s very hard to judge general consensus from a poll like the Age’s, given that the question is put simply, such as “are you in favour of religious education?”
I am in favour of religious EDUCATION, but that is not what we currently have. Education should be taught by qualified teachers and should include facts, especially when being delivered to children who are unable to think critically. That is the difference between ‘Christians believe in Jesus’ and ‘Jesus loves you’.
Secondly, people who want to continue a Christian education are not being discriminated against if these classes become general religious education. They can learn ABOUT their religion and others, and they can continue to learn their own faith where they should: at home, in church and at sunday school.
Posted by Bek | 03. Jun, 2011, 1:21 pmI am in favour of religious education. I am NOT in favour of religious indoctrination.
“The beauty of education is that it’s about choices – the individual freedom to decide what one wants to believe when presented with different ideas.” Yes I fully agree, but that’s not what is going on with Christian “education” classes. Children don’t have a choice. They are taught that Christianity is true and other religions are not true and those who aren’t Christians are damned to hell. Is that a choice?
Lets educate children about Christianity and other religions and leave out the indoctrination.
Posted by AlanT | 05. Jun, 2011, 12:24 pmAmante, I’m going to assume you are ignorant of this, so I will politely suggest that you read this page before attempting to quote statistics from an unscientific poll such as The Age’s
http://greylining.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/access-ministries-found-the-age-poll-bombing-spam/
While I doubt any scientist or statistician would say that either of those polls are remotely scientific or statistically reliable, it could be suggested that the original poll which had 33% in favor and 66% against CRE would be the more reliable of the two due to reduced corruption of participants.
Posted by Stefan | 07. Jun, 2011, 6:00 pmWhy do you think the second poll is corrupt?
Posted by Jeremy | 14. Jun, 2011, 6:25 pmThe answers were provided in great detail. If you don’t want to read them, fair enough. But please don’t waste people’s time by derailing and reverting to the original question, again, as though nothing has been said. Have some respect for the intelligence of others.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 16. Jun, 2011, 1:07 pmThe exceptions I have to religious education is that it is impressed on children who are too young to be able to gauge the value, truth and usefulness of religion.
Any religious education inevitably covers all the good fairy stories; virgin births, converting water into wine, and resurrection from the dead (for which there is not a scrap of evidence) and doesn’t touch on the 60,000 plus women annually who die from poorly carried out abortions in countries where religion has banned abortion. Religion needs to be taught outside the school environment where the curricula focus on facts, not fantasy. It needs to be done after people have attained an age whereby they can rationalise the arguments put to them and decide whether they wish to believe. As people become smarter, they will naturally tend to escape the shackles of religions designed by men to serve our own interests and control others.
Posted by Dark Horse | 02. Jun, 2011, 7:43 pmI agree with that. I do think kids need to be educated about religion because it will show how intolerant and full of nonsense these fairytales are. but it should happen no sooner than highschool.
Posted by Stephen | 03. Jun, 2011, 10:45 am“this media-created maelstrom of misinformation.”
What “misinformation” Evonne? You lied and broke contractual agreements. There is nothing complex about it at all. It’s plain as day.
The rest of this outburst is just plain paranoid and delusional – this obsession with “persecution” conspiracies highlights how very similar fundamentalist islam and christianity really are. Both justify deception for the greater good, and both concoct conspiracies out to destroy them. What neither can work out is that if they behaved as decent people, nobody would worry about them in the slightest. Instead, the make nuisances out of themselves and then cry about being bullied when asked to behave acceptably. This is surreal.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 03. Jun, 2011, 2:16 am“ Christianity does not permit prejudice. ”
How can you possibly make that statement without shame? Christianity condones slavery, holds that all non-Christians will burn in hell, and upholds any and all forms of political oppression ( “ the powers that be are ordained of God ” ). ( Yes, yes, I realise many Christians do not do these things, but they are there nonetheless, if not practised in today’s watered-down forms. )
“ Our parents cry out for a provider to take the time to teach their children virtues such as love, mercy, social responsibility, humanity, humility, sharing, grace and forgiveness. ”
Odd, other people teach those things to their children themselves. Your statement reflects so awfully on the families it is dumbfounding. I doubt I would want to know what your ideas of “ love, mercy, social responsibility, humanity, humility, sharing, grace and forgiveness ”, or ever to be subject to them.
Posted by CJS | 03. Jun, 2011, 2:59 amYour comment CJS shows both prejudice and ignorance. After 30 years in state school teaching and a similar time in Christian ministry I am pleased to be involved in the CRE program. Christianity condemns slavery and oppression and does not claim to be exclusively right. If it was as you claim I would not be part of the program nor would it be accepted and valued as it is in the school community where I now work.
Posted by LLOYD | 03. Jun, 2011, 4:38 pm‘Christianity does not claim to be exclusively right’?
Of course it does, don’t talk susch absolute tosh – what happened to the ‘one true faith’?
Posted by Mark | 09. Jun, 2011, 5:47 pmDear Evonne,
You cannot please everyone. As a nation, there is a division on: what to do with our carbon emissions (& whether in fact climate change is real); who would make the better Prime Minister; whether we should be a republic, etc.
So….despite the 20 or so negative postings on this United Church Magazine website, you need to remember that MANY people do support christian education in schools.
Just to remind everyone….
In the recent Age Newspaper Poll where 79,754 Melbournians voted, on the question: “Teaching the Word
Do you support religion in schools programs?”
YES attracted 78% of the vote
No attracted 22% of the vote
The figures speak for themselves!
Posted by Jo | 03. Jun, 2011, 8:00 amYes Jo. And this figure took a solid 2 weeks of poll bombing by Access Ministries activists to reverse from the original 76% against. Long after the poll had vanished from The Age’s main pages, they were at it stacking the numbers. This is further evidence of the true depths of the dishonesty in play here. It would be fascinating to see the historical graph for the poll over time. http://wp.me/p1hBgT-oA
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 03. Jun, 2011, 12:08 pmAnd looking back, even a week after the poll had disappeared from view, it was still a 50/50 split. Yes Jo – these numbers do speak for themselves. What do they tell you? It must be a miracle how 30,000 “unique” individuals could locate this poll so long after it had disappeared from view and add their objective and disinterested voices to it.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 03. Jun, 2011, 12:35 pmOops. I should have read further down before posting my comment above.
We received an “invitation” to vote 6 days after the article from religious relatives. I should point out these are people I would regard as the sort of Christians (caring, thoughtful, intelligent, tolerant etc) that Access would like people to see themselves as rather than the deceitful manipulators that they are. I have no idea how they got mixed up in this and are likely victims of the manipulation themselves. As far as I know they are coincidentally Uniting Church (again known as having more positive values than many, indeed one of few that would allow negative comments on their blog).
I won’t bother with my proof (comparisons of other polls etc since yours is better anyway) just ask a few similar questions of the initiators of this.
What sort of mentality would
1. Go to the trouble of rigging a meaningless poll in the first place?
2. Think that it would be an acceptable thing to do?
3. Think it would even be seen (unless they drew attention to it)?
4. Think that they wouldn’t then get called for it?
The answer to these questions (and worse) is Access and demonstrates yet again why they should not be allowed near kids. I would not let them teach finger painting let alone values.
Posted by David Stasey | 04. Jun, 2011, 3:34 pmWow. It’s hard to keep up. I’ve just seen your blog entry for today. We didn’t get the ChainMail just an unbiased invitation and link which resulted in a couple of negative votes. Seems if we have to have CRE the Uniting Church directly would be a more honest bet. Even better, ethics classes at Primary level (GRE included in History at Secondary) and make Access staff attend the lessons
Posted by David Stasey | 04. Jun, 2011, 4:06 pmGet a grip Jo. You know as well as anyone else that web polls are nonsense. You obviously did not give a link to that poll because you don’t want people checking it out.
Here is one I found
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/let-us-get-god-out-of-the-classroom-20110403-1ct2t.html
yes 33% no 77%
Even though that one (I couldn’t find the one you are talking about obviously) seems to say most people want RI out of schools I wouldn’t use it as support for my argument. I have read the bit at the bottom that quite correctly says “Disclaimer: These polls are not scientific and reflect the opinion only of visitors who have chosen to participate.”
Posted by DanDare | 03. Jun, 2011, 3:22 pmDan, the poll Jo is referring to is the one I referenced above and can still be found here –
http://www.theage.com.au/polls/victoria/teaching-the-word-20110513-1el3g.html#poll
The Age never closed that poll. On the day it was published with its attached story, it was running at a steady 76% against. Access apologists have been voting in it ever since. It took them a week to reduce it to parity, and through sheer persistence, they have now reduced it even more.
Again, it strange that a poll so long gone from public view is still receiving such a constant stream of positive votes. Statisticians opinions on the feasibility of this not being an example of deliberate manipulation are not what Access would want anyone to hear.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 03. Jun, 2011, 4:28 pmThank you for the link Franc. Yes, the polls are fairly silly since they can be skewed by deliberate effort. There is no guarantee that there is not a bot or two at work as well.
Anyway, that’s all beside the point. Our democracy has safeguards against the tyranny of the majority. Secularism, the right to freedom of religion, are just such safeguards and ACCESS are in breach.
Posted by DanDare | 03. Jun, 2011, 5:36 pmSome aspects of the way that organisation operate remind me of stories I have heard from immigrants from Eastern European countries when they were basically Soviet dictatorships, and the sort of information control one sees in the likes of Scientology, where they have armies of online warriors to demonise any critics. The worst part about it? We (Christians) all get tarred with the same brush – people think we are all manipulative and dishonest when the fact is some of us are victims of this system ourselves. I’m not opposed to a generalised RE but what these guys offer is basically entrance to a cult where only one kind of thinking is permitted. I don’t have to wonder very hard what Jesus would have made of it – he made that clear in his ministry.
Posted by Daniel | 03. Jun, 2011, 10:56 pmDaniel, you have my sympathies. I have raised this point several times elsewhere – the real people being harmed in the long run by the actions of Access, the ACL and other related parties are not the secularists. Those that are being harmed most are the honest, humble christians that account for the majority of the demographic.
A noisy and non-representative minority of zealots has stormed the stage and is claiming to represent the voice of all christians. It is evident from many that protest here and elsewhere that they do not.
For me as a secularist, this is merely a social liberties issue. To you it is far more serious – your very faith is being hijacked by people who, by their actions, have scant regard for the teachings of their own scriptures.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 07. Jun, 2011, 2:16 amFurther Jo, I have just found a spam email from Access Ministries’ Alyson Prescott encouraging people to stack the poll you cite. I quote from the email –
“I’m sure many more than 24% are in favour of CRE (compared with 76% against)!”
All of the detail here – http://wp.me/p1hBgT-sx
Access just keep digging a deeper hole for themselves. They are acting in a very immoral and unethical manner and not very many people are fooled anymore.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 04. Jun, 2011, 1:13 am“Christianity does not permit prejudice” — heh. Tell that to the Cathars, the Jews, the Saracens… in fact, try telling it to Galileo or Copernicus or anyone else who dared disagree with your regime when you had the Big Stick on your side.
Look — nobody minds you people playing in your own sandbox. All we ask is that you don’t shovel the cat-sh_t into our back yard, and then try to make us pay for the costs. The money which has gone to ‘chaplains’ could have gone towards music, or second-language studies, or library resources, or desperately needed teacher’s aides.
Instead it went to a bunch of people whose first priority is not education, but some form of religious dogma. Stop whining, Evonne. You’re not being persecuted. You’re being held accountable. Deal with it.
Posted by Dirk Flinthart | 03. Jun, 2011, 9:00 amIndoctrinating innocent children with the concept of “justifiable genocide” is the most evil thing that can be legally done in Australia.
Posted by Andrew | 03. Jun, 2011, 11:07 amWell, Evonne, you are certainly getting some responses. I support ACCESS ministries CRE program in schools as it helps children understand that genuine love, care and compassion benefits us all. Glad to see it is still strongly supported by many others, too.
Posted by Esmae | 03. Jun, 2011, 11:20 amYes, and I hope you are reading the responses! Here are the main points in a nutshell:
1) Christianity does not have a monopoly on love, care and compassion. These things can be taught in schools without any reference to religion.
2) For children to learn tolerance, acceptance and diversity, they need to learn about all religious and cultural backgrounds that exist in our society.
3) You are not representing these values if you use your religion’s majority status to force all children to learn it. That’s bullying.
Posted by Bek | 03. Jun, 2011, 1:24 pm‘I support ACCESS ministries CRE program in schools as it helps children understand that genuine love, care and compassion benefits us all.’
There is no evidence that ACCESS Ministries does ANY such thing. There is plenty of evidence, however, that ACCESS Ministries are using their access to schools to illegally target children for conversion.
Posted by Dave The Happy Singer | 09. Jun, 2011, 4:50 pmAs we remember that God is in control, this gives us the necessary conviction to carry on. The children in every grade I’ve taught personify, to me, the hunger for knowing Jesus and their acceptance of Him, and it is my fervent belief that our loving God wants these children to embrace Him. Be heartened Evonne and continue stepping forward in faith.
Posted by Trish Broadbear | 03. Jun, 2011, 12:37 pmGod is in control? I think that if I believed that I would keep quiet about it.
Posted by Neil Muirhead | 03. Jun, 2011, 8:26 pmLike they hunger to know Santa or the Easter bunny? It’s amazing how easily an adult can manipulate a child to believe even the most absurd ideas….
Posted by Stephen | 04. Jun, 2011, 12:18 amThat survey that you guys are so enamored of is misleading. It doesn’t mention which religions are to be taught in schools, and how they are to be taught. There’s a difference between telling kids that Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Ba’hai, Buddhists, etc all believe in different things and this is what they are, and ‘Jesus died for you so you can go to heaven and not hell, so be good and don’t question what I say.’
I know which one I’d rather have taught to my kids.
Furthermore, the respondents aren’t exactly the kids being taught are they?
Posted by Peter | 03. Jun, 2011, 12:38 pmStand firm, Evonne. People do not realise that the laws of this country and many others have been founded on Christian principles. The values Australians hold are based on these principles. I wonder how many of the writers of these negative comments have actually seen our teaching books. The school I teach at are pleased to have us there and that our lessons reinforce their values program.
Posted by Nanie | 03. Jun, 2011, 1:07 pmActually, the problem Nanie is that *we have* seen your books. In great detail. We have also observed the furious data purges conducted by Access to remove much of it from their public sites.
The whole problem is that Access have been caught out for what they are. They do not represent mainstream Christianity once you peer behind the mask. They are more in the realm of snake handlers and DIY exorcists than in that of the Christianity most of the ~60% of Australians put on their census forms.
They represent no one other than their own myopic, millenialist perversion of Christianity. The more mainstream Christians that see this, the better.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 03. Jun, 2011, 2:01 pmActually Nanie, viewing these very materials for the first time is what is prompting many parents like me to also start question exactly what Access is doing in our schools when no one is watching. Some of the material is appalling – more appropriate for sunday school than ordinary school kids. This is compounded because Access has been sneakily removing this material from their own website, but enough of it has been saved and reproduced on other sites. It stretches my imagination to far to say this is “education” or teaching. I am withdrawing my children and my support – especially when directly contacting Access weeks ago has had no response.
Posted by Verona | 03. Jun, 2011, 6:16 pmOoh, ooh! (Hand waving in the air) I’ve seen your teaching books!
As a teacher, I’m NOT pleased about splitting my class and sending a group of them to another classroom while the Christian Instruction lesson takes place.
I’m NOT pleased about the way the presence of the ACCESS instructor is my cue to segregate my students into two groups unnecessarily.
I’m NOT pleased about how non-participants are forced to ‘tread water’ with their learning rather than make use of a valuable 30 minutes each week.
I’m NOT pleased that by merely being in the classroom supervising, the students may assume that I share and support the beliefs of the ACCESS instructor.
Does the ACCESS curriculum support our school’s values program? Nup. No links are made between the two. Not from the ACCESS instructor to our program and not from our program to the ACCESS instructor.
The ACCESS curriculum is a completely separate, unlinked program. The idea that ACCESS somehow supports schools’ values programs is a furphy.
Posted by Mitch Hughes | 03. Jun, 2011, 6:20 pmGive up will you , its going to end so why prolong the agony.
Posted by Roger | 05. Jun, 2011, 5:12 pmI have been a Voluntary CRE teacher for 25 years in small rural schools. I have become a friend to both pupils, past pupils and teachers during that time.CRE teaches children about caring for others in their school and class room. About helping their parents, teachers and fellow students. Yes we also tell Bible stories these are told in the context of giving examples of caring, sharing, helping and belonging.
I am also a DIV 1 nurse who in my practical working life cares for our sick, dying and frail aged.Therefore I meet and greet my CRE pupils, their mothers, fathers and grandparents in a capacity outside CRE. I believe actions often speak louder than words.
Ann Kay.
Posted by Ann Kay | 03. Jun, 2011, 7:54 pmI find it sad that the Access Ministries appointed ‘volunteers’ at our school are trying to interfere with *our* religious education of our 7-year-old child. We are Christians, we want to share our faith in the home and lead our children to an understanding of God and His love, and the school programme runs completely contrary to our faith and beliefs. Our child came home crying and saying we would go to hell unless we had “the gifts of the Spirit”. I didn’t even know what this was myself until an Internet search – it’s some loopy Pentecostal idea which has been roundly condemned by mainstream Christians and even senior clergy. Kids at this age can’t cope with hearing one thing at home and church and the opposite at school – if we had sent our child to a school of our denomination (which we can’t do – none exists in our area) we would have unity between them, but in a *state* school, the government is trying to corrupt our children with this nonsense. We’ve tried complaining to the principal, but the principal doesn’t understand the problem. What is the fairness or logic in this?
Posted by Daniel | 03. Jun, 2011, 10:51 pmThe reason why ACCESS ministries has come under “relentless media scrutiny” is because it’s proselytizing to children. See: http://mike-stuchbery.com/2011/05/16/909/
It’s clear from Evonne’s article that she doesn’t believe in secular schooling. Why else make arguments like “Detractors claim that CRE should be confined to Sunday. I’ve got news for them – God is with us, always, not just on the day of rest.”
Policies about taxpayer-funded education should not be decided on the basis of theological arguments. Evonne needs to realize that, in the public’s opinion if not here own, the future of our nation’s children comes before Evonne’s personal religious beliefs.
Posted by Patrick Robotham | 05. Jun, 2011, 4:15 amI am amazed at the number of emotive, angry outbursts of hatred in the comments posted here. My personal experiences of religious education and chaplaincy in schools bear no resemblance to the way they are portrayed by those writers. They seem to imply, deceptively, that Access ministries is an evil organisation with goals of world domination. Nevertheless, there are some comments that seem reasonable in an academic way, but very impractical. For example, if all religions were to be included in a curriculum delivered by fully trained teachers, that would require an much greater level of government funding than is provided at present. Educating students about all world religions would require that each be treated in a superficial way, which is contrary to the more in-depth treatment of subjects proposed by the Australian National Curriculum. It would also require that more time be allocated to religious education, thus reducing the time allocated to other areas of the school curriculum. The other alternative, to remove religious education from schools altogether, does not make sense when we consider the important influence of religion on Australian society. Australian census data, for example, show that the vast majority of Australians associate themselves with a religion, with only a small minority saying they have “no religion”.
Posted by Andrew Hill | 05. Jun, 2011, 11:04 amAndrew, accusing those that criticise you of “hatred” is a pretty hateful thing in itself. It is a wedge card that is played to disrupt and distract people from the actual issues at hand.
There is an extensive list of documented unethical and outright deceptive behavior from Access. You would do far better to counter by providing us of examples where Access *has* acted ethically and in good faith. Is that too hard a task? I suspect it is. It is far easier to play the “hate” card and claim “persecution” instead.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 07. Jun, 2011, 2:32 amCan you give us a statistical breakdown of hatred in these comments? The vast majority of these comments are thoughtful and reasonable in the face of a rather shrill article. I think you’re being a little oversensitive.
If, as you say, teaching about all religions is inevitably superficial then do you also consider the teaching of history, art, music, maths and science to be superficial because the topics are inevitably limited? Design a good comparative religious study course and you will naturally show the kids the important influence of religion on Australian society. Just don’t be inflicting your particular brand in our secular schools. If we want religious indoctrination we’ll send our kids to a religious school or to church, thank you very much. I know you guys like to get our kids while their heads are still soft but please don’t take our opposition as hatred, we’re just protecting our kids.
Posted by Terry | 07. Jun, 2011, 8:31 pm“They seem to imply, deceptively, that Access ministries is an evil organisation”
Let me make it more explicit: Access Ministries is an evil organisation.
“with goals of world domination”
I don’t think Access Ministries have ever said they want to dominate the world, merely that they wish to target school children for indoctrination.
Posted by Dave The Happy Singer | 09. Jun, 2011, 4:29 pmDear me Andrew – if you think these responses are emotive or angry then maybe you need to get out more.
World domination? Nothing of the sort is implied, the issue is that the organisation that is employed to deliver SRI has been exposed as an evangelical rather than educational concern.
And yes, I’d rather see religion removed in its entirety from my kids schools than put up with this band of shysters.
Posted by Mark Ritch | 09. Jun, 2011, 11:22 pmActually, the Australian census shows that the single largest group are those who put down no religion at around 28% followed by catholic at 26% and Anglican at 21%.
Not really a small minority at close to 1 in 3. (ok it’s 5% short of 33% but it will be interesting to look at the next census results)
As for removing religious indoctrination from public schools, that’s a great idea. Let’s replace it with an ethics class taught by the class teacher.
School is meant to be secular in any case and looking at the census data on the spread of religion in the community, having a secular ethics class is the inevitable and only logical choice.
Posted by Shane | 10. Jun, 2011, 1:02 pmNanie – our laws stem from the Constitution of Australia. Since you are fond of the written word, try reading it & point out where it states Christianity is the State religion…
Keep rearranging the deckchairs, Evonne.
Posted by Jay | 06. Jun, 2011, 10:48 amDear Dr Evonne,
I respond to you as a regular church-going individual. I am also a founding member of the Victorian Secular Lobby.
I find it surprising that someone of your apparently extensive qualifications has managed to completely miss the point.
There is no suggestion removing the “freedom to express their faith in public and risk persecution”. There is no suggestion of removing the “… the right of individuals to hold a faith and to express a faith, and to share the common values of those faiths with others.”
I urge you, as an apparently educated individual, to think carefully about what the objections really are. Because only if you understand the criticism of others do you have hope of improving yourself.
People are objecting to Special Religious Instruction. When religion is to be taught in public schools, it should be part of the general social science and civics curriculum.
People are objecting to the public funding of the National Schools Chaplaincy Program. Care should be carried out by qualified individuals without any reference or test to their religion or lack thereof. I refer you to section 116 of the Australian Constitution on this matter.
Posted by Lev Lafayette | 06. Jun, 2011, 1:07 pmFor those who say parents have a choice, consider this. The public school my son goes to, the choice is either to participate in SRI or to do yard duty (cleaning up rubbish in the school grounds) during the time allocated to SRI. Yard duty is also used as a punishment for children who misbehave.
What kind of option is that and what message is that sending to children who opt out?
If there was an alternate ethics class offered by a trained teacher, then you could argue that parents have a choice. At the moment the way things stand there is not much choice and children not in SRI are being discriminated against.
Posted by Shane | 09. Jun, 2011, 11:48 amGood grief. This article is complete fluff
Firstly:
”Our own Prime Minister, an avowed atheist, even referred to the relevance of the King James Bible in one’s life!”
Pardon my cynicism but our PM is not an atheist because Christianity was hidden from her. She makes these comments to appeal to the powerful ACL in an attempt to win marginal seats in places like Mitchum and Queensland.
Secondly
“Detractors claim that CRE should be confined to Sunday. I’ve got news for them – God is with us, always, not just on the day of rest.”
That is a complete misrepresentation of the argument. Christianity is available for anyone to follow at any time in this society. It should not be state sanctioned and funded by a secular government. If one wished to introduce a child to the Christian faith, then take them along to Sunday school.
@NANIE
” laws of this country and many others have been founded on Christian principles.”
Actually, this makes a mockery of the legal system. Teaching a child that Jesus loves him/her, and that they had better love him back and be good, or hell awaits – does not provide any grounding for an understanding of the legal principles of our modern and democratic society.
What principles do you mean anyway?
Posted by Mark M | 09. Jun, 2011, 12:21 pmSecularism in Australia: Christians are not being attacked, just their special expectations.
The issue of secularism does not seem to be very well understood. This is particularly obvious in current discussions about Special Religious Education (SRI), religious chaplains, and religious lobbying of the government. A common misunderstanding is that secularism is the quashing of spiritual and religious beliefs in favour of an atheistic, unsympathetic government; that religious organisations will be shut down and that their ideas will be shunned and no longer welcome in public debate. This hostility towards religion may be true of some individuals, but is not of the guiding principle of secular government. At the heart of it, secularism ensures that the community of believers of any faith and non-believers can be happy in the knowledge that their faith or lack thereof is not disadvantaged or given advantage at the expense of any other. This is achieved by the State not imposing controls on the practice of religious observances, by not choosing a state religion (as there are on the United Kingdom and other European nations), and ensuring the rule of law applies equally across all people without exception. That is what secularism is supposed to ensure: freedom of and from religion; personal choice without that choice putting the individual at a disadvantage. The logical conclusion of this freedom is that people that count themselves as members of a religion or other instituted belief system can not expect the State to enact laws for the advantage of their or any other faith – as I’m sure they would agree with – and to expect fair and equal treatment before the law. It is incumbent on the faithful to understand that freedom of religion also imposes a level of neutrality to their beliefs so that they may enjoy this freedom.
With the level of sectarian depth of feeling and diversity shown recently, no one can deny that the public debate over church/state separation is causing friction. If the Australian government were to go back to a multicultural approach of ceasing; funding religious schools; mandating that SRI be offered via Education Dept policies; providing religious chaplains in public schools: and instead; funding sufficiently trained social workers or counsellors; revoking funding of all religious schools, and; not allowing lobbying from any faith based group, would we not be better off as a civil, modern, pluralistic society?
At the heart of the matter are the laws of Australia that specifically exempt religions from tax and the Australian Constitution that ensures religious freedom. Other than the Preamble that states in part, ‘humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God’(1), only Section 116 mentions religion. This section states that:
The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
Now I’m not a constitutional scholar, but if each portion of this sentence is read individually, it shows that the government of Australia must not favour any religion or prohibit a faith from being expressed, or expect any government employee to have a religion. Basically, it ensures neutrality of government with respect to religious beliefs, therefore, freeing the government to institute laws that are to cover all Australians; do not exclude any from being subject to these laws or providing specific exemptions under the law. I see my point of view as a rational conclusion of Section 116.
So are the following programmes/laws un-constitutional:
• The National School Chaplaincy Programme;
• Funding of faith-based schools;
• Allowing exceptions from the law for specific groups (ie. The Exclusive Brethren);
• Tax Exemption of religious organisations’ non-charitable, faith only activities (churches in general and their associated structures and processes that are only carrying out faith activities such as church services and paying clerics).
With regard to the Australian Taxation Office, it’s web site (2) specifically states that ‘Your organisation will be exempt from income tax … if it is a religious institution’ and describes a religion as ‘belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle, and acceptance of canons of conduct that give effect to that belief, but that do not offend against the ordinary laws’ (assuming ordinary laws as those of the Commonwealth). This grants tax exempt status to organisations such as Scientology. Additionally since the law considers “advancing religion” to be a charitable work, large religious bodies avoid taxes as if they are purely a charity.
So, we have the government of Australia providing tax free status to religions of all types, as long as their practices are not in opposition to the laws of the Commonwealth, freedom of religion guaranteed under the law and the government prohibited from establishing any religion. To my mind this leads to the logical conclusion that being exempt from tax and free to practice, surely says, religion must stay out of government and vice versa. Religion is separated from state.
Why then is it seen as acceptable for religious organisations to demand funding from the government for private schools, religious instruction in schools (SRI/CRE) and school chaplains for public schools? I say that it is not. With the Australian incorporated Catholic Church earning hundreds of millions of dollars per year, and the Anglican Church earning significant sums too, is it not expected (as they are private and tax exempt) that they are expected to fund their own schools with those revenues. Surely that is the purpose of making money, correct, to educate the faithful in their chosen faith?
The DOGS(3) trail of the 1980’s made a very broad judgement based on the use of the word ‘any’ in Section 116. It also seemed to add the word ‘one’ so that the sentence read “The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any one religion”. So the Commonwealth is free to establish laws for all religions, to the exclusion of any. Again I’m not a constitutional scholar, but I agree with the dissenting views of Justice Murphy on this one.
Based on my understanding of secularism as outlined here, all religious people must agree that to live in Australia implies they must agree to accept that all faiths are neutral before the law of the land; notwithstanding the actual beliefs of any historical figures that may have featured in Australia’s past; that their freedom is guaranteed by this neutrality and that they should celebrate their freedom by making it known that they accept them.
(1) For an understanding of the historical background of this statement, see the essay by Chrys Stevenson in The Australian Book of Atheism.
(2) http://www.ato.gov.au/nonprofit/content.aspx?doc=/content/34269.htm&page=10
(3) http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1981/2.html
Posted by Richard | 09. Jun, 2011, 1:15 pmSeems like my essay on Secularism was deemed to — something… Oh well.
I will say that people that are religious must not fear secularism. It’s a method of government, whose opposite is theocracy.
Christians may say that they have a commission from Jesus to spread the word. Well so do the Mormon’s and the Muslims, so isn’t it best to keep it all out of the schools and evangelise out in public where your ideas are seen by adults and older young people in their proper pluralist context??
Posted by RichardJ | 10. Jun, 2011, 3:20 pmThe Humanist Society of Victoria never had and never will have the best interests of Victorian school children at heart.
Posted by RUTH | 14. Jun, 2011, 11:08 amRuth: “The Humanist Society of Victoria never had and never will have the best interests of Victorian school children at heart.”
And precisely how is this relevant to what is being discussed? It shows the true poverty of your position as an Access advocate that you continuously seek to distract and confuse due to your complete inability to defend indefensible behavior.
If you cannot address the issues being raised, silence, and not slander of the opposition, is the honorable option.
Posted by Franc Hoggle | 14. Jun, 2011, 8:02 pm“The Humanist Society of Victoria never had and never will have the best interests of Victorian school children at heart.”
Do you actually have anything useful to say or are you just slandering them just because you don’t like Humanists? Do you actually have any sensible reason to believe what you said?
Posted by AlanT | 14. Jun, 2011, 10:30 pmWhat is the basis of this statement, Ruth?
Here’s what the Humanist Society of Victoria stands for:
Help develop a civil society in which each person may reach her or his potential.
Advocate ethical decision-making and responsibility for one’s actions, based on respect for individual autonomy, peaceful coexistence between peoples of differing ways of life, and maintenance of a sustainable environment.
Support human rights, civil liberties, secular education and a scientific approach to human problems.
How is that not in the best interests of children? Or do you believe that a belief in a particular supernatural being is required to have the “best interests” of children at heart?
Posted by Lev Lafyaette | 18. Jun, 2011, 2:59 pmDear Dr Paddison.
I read in todays age [21 July] that no evidence was found Access Ministries tried to proselyte.That is good news. I am one of many opponents of the style Access ministries teachezs RE. I too had suspected your organization was trying to convert and for that I apologize.
However, this does not get you “off the hook.” I read most letters submitted to The Age regarding the way Access Ministries teach .I have contributed several letters about this subject myself. I strongly suspect the complains have not been an attack of our faith but the Evangelical fundamentalist style of teaching.
Many children have been frightend by what your volunteers said, their theme of hell fire, one RE teachers from you group is suppose to have said that Buddha is Satan’s friend {Quote; Mary Bluett,, Australian Education Union] Letters to the age also have had examples of children coming home in tears because RE volunteer teacher from Access Ministries have told them if your parents dont believe in God they will go to hell.. As a retired deacon, ordained with you on February 7 2004 I beg of you to keep the more extreme fundamentalists out of the class room and insist your teachers portray a God who loves all people and is OK with the diversety in which She/He is believed in. Sigbert Muijsers
Posted by Sigbert Muijsers | 21. Jul, 2011, 3:24 pm