Things like Bible literacy classes are all whistling past the graveyard. The truth is that American public schools are inherently structured to undermine Christianity. On Monday President Trump tweeted support for state initiatives to require public schools to teach the Bible as world history and literature. Numerous states introducing Bible Literacy classes, giving students the option of studying the Bible. Starting to make a turn back? Great! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2019 USA Today calls current proposals in six states “a wave.” “Some of the lawmakers – and leaders of Christian groups supporting the bills – say they want to restore traditional values in schools and give students a chance to study the religious text deeply,” the paper reports. The project is supported by WallBuilders, the organization run by Glenn Beck buddy David Barton. Last year, the groups supporting the Bible literacy mandate also pushed laws requiring public schools to post the national motto, “In God we trust.” As my colleague David Harsanyi points out, it is impossible to be an educated American without a basic understanding of Christianity and the Bible. This is the world’s top religion and the most influential religion in Western culture and American history, by far. While it’s foolish to think that public schools that cannot get more than one-third of students to read proficiently will be any better at teaching religion, this is all clearly well-intentioned. But it’s all whistling past the graveyard. The truth is that American public schools are currently structured to undermine Christianity. Layering one elective Bible class atop U.S. public schools cannot alter their fundamentally anti-Christian structure, philosophy, and culture. Not Teaching the Bible Teaches Something about the Bible Every single public school teaches about the Bible already. Public schools do so — indeed, are legally and culturally compelled to do so — in completely anti-Christian ways: as either not worthy of mentioning, as one religion among many, or as a personal pursuit that people engage in privately (or, often, some blend of these three). But Christianity claims to be the way to eternal life, not merely one conception of ultimate reality among many equally valid options. It claims to be true, and the only way to eternal life. It is also a holistic religion, meant to affect every single thing believers do. Christianity is not a thing we do briefly on Sundays in private, but a way of life. It ought to affect our speech, our relationships, our behavior — everything. So for public schools to treat the Bible at all, or even to ignore it, is to either directly or indirectly take a stance on Christianity’s religious claims. In our current legal structure, it is impossible for public schools to take those claims seriously. Considering Christianity’s truth claims immediately crosses the establishment of religion line. Therefore any public school treatment of Christianity, including ignoring Christianity, is anti-Christian. It telegraphs to students that whether Christianity is true does not matter. What matters are its tangential effects upon society. While of course Christianity affects society, that’s not its central point. Its point is eternal communion with the creator of the world who sacrificed himself to achieve that communion because humankind chose to break it by doing evil. So to treat its secondary effects as the whole of Christianity is to oppose its central religious claims. Public Schools Are Caught in Anti-Religion Legal Traps This is an inherent relativism that public schools cannot escape because it is impossible to have a monopoly public school system without either syncretism or secularism. In other words, if all people of all faiths must pay for and send their children to one school system, that school system must either a) teach that one specific faith is true b) teach that all faiths are equal and valid or c) teach that no faiths are equal and valid. In other words, schools must be specifically religious, relativist, or anti-religion. There are no other alternatives. Additionally, relativism is anti-religion. It denies every religion’s claims to teach transcendent truths. So schools that are legally required to treat all religions the same are ipso facto anti-religious schools, since all religions claim competing truths about eternal realities. Our current public schools cannot establish a specific and publicly proclaimed religious stance like they used to do when the United States was young and local tax dollars followed children to a wide variety of largely religious schools. The development of constitutional law combined with the foolish decision of dominant Protestants to exclude Catholics from public education funds ended that practice. So today’s religiously neutered public schools tend to blend pantheistic religious relativism and secularism, religious belief systems that directly antagonize Christianity. The problem is that both of these approaches are religious positions masquerading as non-religious positions. Each makes religious claims that directly contradict Christianity’s religious claims. Both say, directly and indirectly, that Christianity is false, that the Bible is not true. Because if it were true, classes must take its religious claims seriously. Instead, they must trivialize them by only studying topics that are tangential to Christianity. The best-case scenario is of a public school teaching religion as anthropology. While that is indeed a highly worthy field of study, its effect when dispensed solo is to distance children from religion. It is also to present a religion predicated on the existence of absolute truth in a context of unknowable truth, or, perhaps worse yet, in a context where what is true is simply not considered important. In other words, to teach Christianity relativistically is to teach anti-Christianity. To do so while purporting to teach Christianity is a neat trick, to be sure, but it only deepens the lies involved. Kids Pick Up What Adults Do, Not Just What They Say Kids definitely pick up on this relegation, at best, of Christianity to just another “subject,” just another item on the curriculum cafeteria line or an item some people indulge in outside of the curriculum cafeteria. The refusal of their parents and culture to take Christianity seriously by enrolling them in schools that reinforce families’ religious commitments, and demanding that their tax dollars not preference anti-religious indoctrination of their children, accounts for a significant portion of American young people’s growing apostasy. There is myriad data on the decline in religious belief among each successive generation of Americans in this century. Here is a representative graph from Pew Research. This is not just an “Oh, they’ll get back to religion when they settle down and have kids, and people are doing that later now” thing. As this Pew graph shows, each successive generation of the past three is less religious than the previous when compared at the same point in their lives. Before you rush to blame it all on young people these days, notice that the importance of religion tanked first among their parents and grandparents. Here’s longer-term data from Gallup. There is also significant anecdotal and sociological data to indicate that public schools are directly responsible for some of this dramatic decline in faith among America’s young. For example, the National Study of Youth and Religion at the University of Notre Dame finds that increased family engagement with religious institutions (including churches, of course, but also schools and social groups), more and closer relationships with religious role models, parental commitment to religious observances, and a reduction in interactions with peers who flout Christian behavior expectations all increased kids’ likelihood of retaining their faith into adulthood. Long-term data from approximately 117,000 children followed by the Nehemiah Institute clearly indicate that public schools secularize children from Christian homes: In other words, religious peers and role models matter. And so does parent commitment, as demonstrated by serious, significant, and sustained actions, not words. Certainly not deluding themselves with the idea that it’s the children’s job to fight our vicious, religion-driven culture war starting at age five. Stop Fighting Last Century’s Culture War<doc-sep>That same survey also provided a fascinating snapshot of Bible courses. They had first appeared in public grade schools in the 1910s in conjunction with a new emphasis in both church and educational circles on religious education. Usually taught from an explicitly Christian perspective, these courses appeared in many districts across the country for the next three decades, though like Bible reading, they were never universal. If Trump’s tweet is intended to claim that Bible courses were once more popular than they are now, he has a point. But if it is intended to suggest that such courses were the norm, it is an exaggeration. In any case, by the late 1950s, only 4.5 percent of the schools surveyed still offered them. Contrary to the myth of the villainous Schempp decision, their popularity had already faded.<doc-sep>Photo illustration: Yahoo News: photos: AP, Shutterstock President Trump signaled his support on Monday for state bills that would allow public schools to teach courses in the Bible, which he once proclaimed was his favorite book. Numerous states introducing Bible Literacy classes, giving students the option of studying the Bible. Starting to make a turn back? Great! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2019 Trump’s tweet came minutes after “Fox & Friends” aired a segment Monday morning on pending legislation in six states — Florida, Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, Virginia and West Virginia — that would allow Bible literacy courses to become a part of a public school education. “Nothing beats the Bible,” Trump famously said on the campaign trail in 2015 — not even “The Art of the Deal.” The Christian activists who crafted the template for inserting the Bible into public school curricula celebrated the president’s endorsement of the idea. “We were excited to see it happen,” Steven Fitschen, president of the National Legal Foundation, told Yahoo News. “The model bill that we were involved with is for the state level, but we were excited to see him use his bully pulpit, so to speak.” Fitschen said the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation — a nonprofit group formed by former Virginia Republican Congressman J. Randy Forbes to promote “restoring Judeo-Christian principles” — hired him to help draft the text of legislation that could withstand First Amendment challenges to teaching the Bible in schools. “We looked at what was already in existence and tried to craft a model bill so we could eliminate any constitutional problems, so there could be a course that taught about Islam or Buddhism or any other religion. Many other schools already have comparative religion courses,” Fitschen said. “The reason we centered in on the Bible, the Old Testament and the New Testament, is the history of the country, how much of our idiom and our political framework, all these things that were biblically derived because of the historical situation with many of the early colonists.” Story continues The American Civil Liberties Union blasted both the attempt to infuse Bible literacy courses in public schools and Trump’s support of it. Its concern is that, notwithstanding Fitschen’s self-proclaimed commitment to religious neutrality, in practice the courses could, at least in some states, amount to a form of Christian evangelism. “Yet again, President Trump is exploiting religious divisions to score political points. Public school Bible courses are rarely taught neutrally and objectively as required by the Constitution,” Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, told Yahoo News in an email. “Instead, these courses usually resemble Sunday school classes that blatantly violate students’ and parents’ First Amendment rights. Religious education is best left to families and faith communities, not public school officials.” Just as the pro-business American Legislative Exchange Council crafts model bills that can be adapted and introduced in states across the country, the Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation’s blueprint for inserting the Bible into public schools follows a similar starter-kit approach. “We don’t get involved with the legislative battles,” Fitschen said. “Instead what we do is we put together model bills that we think would work in any of the 50 states, and it’s up on the foundation website.” While bills following the foundation’s template failed to pass in Alabama, Iowa and West Virginia last year, Kentucky passed its version, House Bill 128, in 2017, over objections from the ACLU, and it was signed into law by Republican Gov. Matt Bevin. Supporters of Bible literacy classes say the text is being taught as a historical and cultural document, but the ACLU contends that including it in the curriculum is a way to promote religion. “In several of these classes, teachers are using the Bible to impart religious life lessons and actively inculcate Christianity,” the ACLU of Kentucky wrote in a letter last year to schools seeking clarity on how the text would be presented to students. Bills written by pro-religious groups that seek to influence the public school curriculum are not uncommon in the U.S. A new Florida measure authored by the Florida Citizens Alliance and sponsored in the state’s Legislature by Republican Rep. Dennis Baxley seeks to require public schools to teach alternatives to climate change and evolution. A September poll from the Public Religion Research Institute found Trump’s approval rating from white evangelicals holding firm at 71 percent, and Monday’s tweet probably won’t change that. A course in Biblical literacy might have helped Trump, who once mistakenly referred to one of the New Testament books as “Two Corinthians” instead of “Second Corinthians” — embarrassingly, at a speech at the evangelical Liberty University. On its website, the National Legal Foundation says its mission is to “prayerfully create and implement innovative strategies that, through decisive action, will cause America’s public policy and legal system to support and facilitate God’s purpose for her.” Both the NLF and the CPCF view their goal of seeing Bible literacy taught in schools in all 50 states as a longterm project. “I expect in some the states where it has failed they’ll try again,” Fitschen said. _____ Read more from Yahoo News:<doc-sep>
On Twitter Monday, President Trump praised the idea of public schools offering Bible literacy classes. But before Christians jump to celebrate Bible literacy in public education, they should pause to consider the complexities and problems involved. Numerous states introducing Bible Literacy classes, giving students the option of studying the Bible. Starting to make a turn back? Great! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2019 Iowa’s bill, House File 2031 , does not require that high school kids must take a Bible class (that’s a relief) but it would simply, according to the Des Moines Register, “direct the state Department of Education to prepare material and teacher training for a high school elective course that focuses on the Hebrew Scriptures and the Bible's New Testament. It would be a social studies class.” Dean Fisher, the state representative who introduced the bill with other Republicans, said, "Basically, I want to give students the opportunity to study the Bible from the perspective of its impact on history and culture." Even though the bill only proposes this as an elective and not a requirement, it’s not the government’s place to do this, for many reasons. While many liberals might argue it’s a violation of the separation of church and state and the much-loved Establishment Clause, I don’t think that’s a strong enough argument. Teaching a class on the Bible is no more the establishment of religion than teaching kids P.E. is raising a generation of Michael Jordans. But it’s still not something the state should be mandating through legislation because the taxpayer-funded public sphere is simply not the right arena. In some cases, states are making this a district-by-district decision rather than a statewide mandate that schools offer these classes. Given the state of our kids’ history and literacy scores, which lag many other advanced countries, students could use the perspective that comes from understanding one of the most foundational works of Western civilization, responsible for spawning several religions. Whether as a cultural or religious work, the Bible is certainly profound and compelling. Drew Zahn, spokesman for the Christian conservative organization The Family Leader, endorses the Iowa legislation for this reason. He said, "Beyond its literary and cultural significance, which is significant, the Bible is also an essential thread of the American consciousness, and without it, American unity is unraveling.” That's true, but the public education system is so flawed, I don't trust the bureaucratic beast to do the Bible justice. When the Bible is taught as purely an academic or historical exercise, things gets tricky: How will the flood be explained? Seven-day creation? Miracles of Jesus like turning water into wine or raising Lazarus from the dead? To Christians, these are explained in a supernatural context. In a public school, it would be hazardous to teach these as supernatural truths. Even as just literature alone, the Bible is an incredible study and unique and beautiful in its own right — but therein lies the rub. The way the humanities and the social sciences are presented in public school is already disappointing. Subjective material can be presented in such a variety of ways. Throw in the restraints of Common Core, the social “values” of public education, and couple it with ignorance and lack of training, and it’s hard to see a positive outcome. If anything, I could see this as yet another avenue of mockery, scorn, and misinterpretation — not a book that would be taught and received well. I’m not alone in this. At The Atlantic, Jonathan Merritt writes: "If conservative Christians don’t trust public schools to teach their children about sex or science, though, why would they want to outsource instruction about sacred scripture to government employees? The type of public-school Bible class that could pass constitutional muster would make heartland evangelicals squirm. Backing 'Bible literacy bills' might be an effective way to appeal to some voters, but if they were put into practice, they’re likely to defeat the very objectives they were meant to advance." If parents would like to see classes taught about the Bible regularly, they would do better to home-school or try private school — hence my columns last week in this space on school choice. Otherwise, let the spiritual teaching in a secular environment spread organically, through students, school boards, or districts — not offered as a cultural elective as a result of state legislation. Nicole Russell (@russell_nm) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog.