The mythologies of RE

Theological enquiry is now a buzzword in the discussions about what we want to achieve in RE. It is focused on Christianity but reflects concern that in teaching about any religion we need to help pupils explore some of the core beliefs. If we want pupils to get beyond externals, they need to examine those beliefs and how they influence the way some people sense of the world.

But …. as well as knowing the beliefs, we also need to consider how religious believers interpret those beliefs. What do believers believe about their beliefs… and of course, they don’t agree!! It is one of the conundrums that makes RE so tricky. Everything is contested and controversial.

Let’s stick with Christianity. I want to take the unusual step of quoting at length from a writer whose work has influenced the way many think about Christianity. He will be familiar to many, and I apologise in advance for the heavily gendered language:

“The whole conception of the world… in the New Testament is mythological: i.e.

– the conception of the world as being structured in three stories, heaven, earth, hell;

– the conception of the intervention of supernatural powers in the course of events;

– and the conception of miracles, especially of the intervention of supernatural powers in the inner life of the soul, the conception that men (sic) can be tempted and corrupted by the devil and possessed by evil spirits.

This conception of the world we call mythological because it is different from the conception… formed and developed by science since its inception in ancient Greece and which is accepted by all modern men… modern science does not believe that the course of nature can be interrupted or, so to speak, perforated by supernatural powers.

The same is true of the modern study of history, which does not take into account any intervention of God or of the devil or of demons in the course of history. Instead, the course of history is considered to be an unbroken whole, complete in itself… Of course, there are still many superstitions among modern men, but they are exceptions or even anomalies. Modern men take it for granted that the course of nature and of history, like their own inner life and their practical life, is nowhere interrupted by the intervention of supernatural powers…

For modern man the mythological conception of the world, the conceptions of eschatology, of redeemer and of redemption , are over and done with. Is it possible to expect that we shall make a sacrifice of understanding, sacrificium intellectus, in order to accept what we cannot sincerely consider true?” Jesus Christ and Mythology (SCM Press 1958)

So no angels, no virgin births, no miracles, no incarnations, no resurrections, no ascensions – those ideas are all part of a mythological world we no longer inhabit and to which we cannot return. We all now inhabit a way of living and being in the world which is radically secular. Being secular is not an intellectual choice we make – it is who we are.

Some might assume that the writer is a non-Christian, maybe an atheist.

But not true of course. He is Rudolf Bultmann, one of the leading 20th century Christian theologians.

His writing raises many crucial questions for RE. We think with a secular mind across the wider curriculum and across most of our life. We cannot leave that mind set outside the RE room. In Bultmann’s terms, we cannot sacrifice our intellect when we reach the RE lesson. This raises big questions about the way the study religions and how we handle theological concepts with pupils. What do we tell them?

First in relation to the study of religion, his point about the study of history also applies to the study of religion. If we are to make sense of human religious life we cannot take into account the intervention of Gods or supernatural powers. We wouldn’t take that intervention into account in the study of any other aspects of human life, so we shouldn’t take it into account when we study religion.

‘God’ is not a legitimate explanatory concept when we try to make sense of religion in RE! Paradoxical to some – but an absolutely crucial principle.

Second, we have to recognise that there are huge differences of viewpoint within Christianity about theological concepts. For example, many Christians will agree with Bultmann that most theological language is part of a mythological conception of the world which is no longer part of our mindset. If pupils are to make sense of theological language, do they need to understand that they ‘thought differently back then’? It’s not that they believed in weird stuff – they just read the world differently.

When we engage pupils with biblical and theological language we are taking then into the world of mythology.

Or are we? Other Christians might not agree.. As teachers all we can do is notice the debates and be curious about them. But it is probably not enough to say ‘some think this/others think this’.

What is clear is that as we press for clarity about the content of the RE curriculum these issues cannot be ducked. Teachers will need a deal of support to help them work through the complexities. All at the very moment when we know we need to make RE more straightforward and accessible to the teacher.