Global terms: Religion and Worldviews

The nature of God in Sikhi – Ranvir Singh

The nature of God in Sikhi

While some Sikhs are happy to use the term ‘God’ to refer to the Ultimate, the Base of Being, others are more suspicious for it is difficult for some people to conceive of ‘God’ without thinking of a sort of bearded man in the sky. For Sikhs this is problematic as they believe that the Ultimate is neither male, nor female but also because they believe that the Creator is in the creation and the creation is in the Creator.

The Sikh scripture, the Guru Granth Sahib, begins with the numeral ‘1’. Therefore, it is true to say that Sikhs are monotheistic. However, Sikhs may also be called panentheistic as they believe that the One is present in creation: “One Light fills all creation. That Light is You” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.13).

Sikh are not pantheists, people who believe that God is the world. For Sikhs the Divine is not the universe but is the Life within it, its driving force, like fire inside wood, a “reflection in a mirror or fragrance within a flower” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.684). It is this belief about Divinity that gives rise to the Sikh ethos of the sant-sipahi or saint-soldier.

The saintly element follows from connecting with the Divine within. This Presence is called Naam or name. Naming is integral to a relationship and relationships shape, and are shaped by, our being – our ideas and practices – in the world. The Presence is revealed to us through the Sabd, or word, that inscribes our existence and which therefore constantly reaches out to us as our Inner Tutor or intuition. This Sabd is regarded as the SatGuru or Real Guru, with the interaction between the Guru Granth Sahib or Sikh scripture and Sikhs, a reflection of the dialogue between consciousness and intuition. The action of the Sabd is called gurprasad or grace.

The soldierly element follows from the recognition that there is Divinity and, therefore, dignity in every person. For this reason social action is a corollary of spiritual realisation. Grace reaching to us flows through us as meeta or loving-kindness. “After spending time with saints I lost the sense of ‘us’ and ‘them’. No one automatically is my enemy, nor do I regard others as strangers. I am friendly towards everyone” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.1299). These friendly relations are best expressed in the langar which is a free kitchen where free vegetarian food is available to everyone, whatever their race, gender, faith or class – it represents equality, inclusion and the importance of social service.

Such service can feed into political action. The fifth Guru, Guru Arjun wrote: “From now such is the Will of God: No one shall force another, no one shall take advantage of and use another. Everyone, each individual, has the right to look for and work for happiness and self-fulfilment. Love and persuasion is the only law of social cohesion” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.74). He became the first Sikh martyr in 1606 as the Emperor feared that his words and actions were a threat to the divine right of kings – the belief that God chose rulers and gave them the authority to rule others. A second Guru was martyred, in 1675. The Dasam Granth, a Sikh religious text, says that his sacrifice was for three principles: the right to worship; the right to have your views about the ultimate nature of the world and life respected; the right to pursue happiness and self-fulfilment (Dasam Granth p.54). In 1699, the Khalsa was formed. This remains a self-governing community of equals that anyone is eligible to join providing they agree to abide by its code of conduct, designed to transform a person into a knight.

The battle-drum beats in the sky of the mind; aim is taken, wounds inflicted. The spiritual heroes enter the field of battle; the time for war is here and now! Only
They may be cut, piece by piece, but they never leave the field of battle

(Guru Granth Sahib, p.1105).


The hymn refers to the battle within each person as they struggle with the five thieves that oppress us – pride, greed, lust, anger and undue attachment; and forces of fear, desires and hopes that imprison us in stories of the future and past. These elements may govern and shape our lives. But the stories they tell are part of wider social stories that feed into, and reflect, social realities. Therefore, the struggle for freedom and authenticity has a social as well as spiritual dimension.

The in/out structure of believer/unbeliever; male/female; black/white; high caste/untouchable is replaced by unity through the Presence of the Divine. This oneness of God and oneness of humanity is manifested in the common intellectual human cauldron of the Guru Granth Sahib, featuring 36 non-Sikh authors, symbolised by the sword of discriminating intelligence and will that stirs the pot of the human body. The sword and cauldron together symbolise the amrit ceremony whereby people join the Khalsa. This nexus of spiritual-social is found in the langar where people serve but also eat. Free and abundant food challenge stories of scarcity that justify poverty and restricted access to power in the human species. “The wealth of nature is there to be used. There is enough for all, but it is not shared justly in this world” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.1171). The generosity or grace of God involves other species. “In the deepest rocks there are living beings and even there food is provided for them” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.10).

The implications for ideas of space are clear. Each person’s heart is a sacred space. Moreover, even other planets have sacred spaces as, “The saints of many worlds live there. They celebrate, blooming with the divine” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.8), implying intelligent life and perhaps even more religions. “The concept of time emphasises present/Presence. Seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, and seasons all originate from the 1 Sun”, says Nanak, “in just the same way that different religions originate from the 1 Creator” (Guru Granth Sahib, p.12-13).

God’s truths were established with the “first breath” and persist through time. There was neither a golden age nor will there be one. Suffering exists due to free will and provides the opportunity for relationship between Being and beings. Faced with carnage when Babur invaded India, Guru Nanak wrote: “Nanak sings of the virtues of the King in the city of corpses and gives this lesson: the Creator who allocates unique opportunities sits apart, watching our choices” (Guru Granth Sahib p.723).

Sikhs believe in an afterlife where God acts as Judge. “The rulers are tigers and their officials are dogs. Together they go out to wake up the sleeping people to harass them. Those who should be serving the public wound people with their claws while the dogs lick up the blood that is spilled. But in the Court of God everyone will be judged. Those who have betrayed the trust of the people will be shamed and punished” (Guru Granth Sahib p.1288).

Practical introduction to hermeneutics

Resource of the month: Practical introduction to hermeneutics

February 2022

You might have heard the dreaded ‘H’ word: hermeneutics. What is it? This month we present a practical introduction to hermeneutics in the classroom by adviser Jen Jenkins. In a series of Powerpoints Jen sets out the aim of hermeneutics and the great benefits it can offer for learning. These PPTs would be great for a staff or department meeting, CPD for your local network, or just for your own understanding. Stuffed with clear explanations, practical ideas and resources, find out how hermeneutics can enhance your teaching and develop your pupils’ understanding.

Jen has voiced the PPT slides, click on the grey ‘speaker’ button on each slide to hear her explanations.

RE-searchers Approach

RE-searchers Approach

A team from Exeter University and the Learning Institute has developed a new approach to Religious Education in Primary Schools. It is called ‘the RE-searchers approach’. It encourages pupils to think about the significance and effectiveness of different methodologies and methods of enquiry in Religious Education. To make these accessible to young children, they have personified some of them as cartoon characters. Individually these characters are called Debate-it-all Derek, Ask-it-all Ava, Have-a-go Hugo, and See-the-story Suzie, but collectively they’re known as the ‘RE-searchers’. Each character holds different assumptions about religion(s) and advocates different research methods (e.g. questioning and arguing, interviewing and empathizing, participating and experiencing, and narrating and exploring interpretations). Once acquainted with our characters and their respective characteristics as researchers, pupils can undertake learning activities associated with each of them in pursuit of different understandings of religion(s).

Judaism and G-d – David Hampshire

Judaism and G-d – David Hampshire

The nub of the problem

If you look at books on Judaism you’ll find very little about G-d. This seems to be quite odd from a non-Jewish perspective. Christians have whole books about God: from the nature of the Trinity to the nature of the incarnation and God’s relationship to humanity in Jesus. Not so for Jews. In fact the flourishing of writings about G-d from a Jewish perspective occur in two specific contexts. Firstly, though, why so little about G-d? Judaism tends to focus on the covenants that G-d established with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses. These covenants, especially the covenant at Sinai with the people of Israel, focus on G-d’s promises and Israel’s responsibilities in fulfilling the covenant. Hence, Jews tend to focus on what they should do to fulfil the covenant as opposed to speculating about the nature of G-d.

All Jewish thinking about G-d starts in the Torah, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible. The Torah is more significant than the Prophets or the Writings as a source for Jewish understanding about G-d. Anybody who has read the Hebrew Bible, though, will realise that it does not present a systematic view about the nature of G-d. On the contrary the picture of G-d is quite confusing. This is because the Hebrew Bible was compiled over a period of five hundred years with some traditions going back over a thousand years.

So what can be said about G-d from the Hebrew Bible? Well, there is only one G-d who is the creator of the universe, our world and us. This G-d enters into relationship with human beings and has expectations of us. These are universal expectations, the Noahide Code. G-d also chooses a nation to be a witness to G-d in the world, this is Am Israel (the People Israel) they do this by fulfilling the commandments in the Torah. G-d also appears tender and loving and at the same time jealous and vindictive. Jews lived with this tension until challenged by Greek thinkers and later by Christians and Muslims.

Two contexts for Jewish theology

As stated above there are two contexts in which Jewish thinking about G-d has developed. The first context is when Jews have been challenged to explain their beliefs about G-d to others. The second context is when Jews have faced persecution; often these contexts have coincided. The first real Jewish thinker who tries to make sense of G-d to others, Jews and non-Jews, is Philo of Alexandria (c20 BCE to 40 CE). Philo tries to defend the Jewish Scriptures to the Greek world, the world of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Philo sees G-d as the One who ‘speaks’ and it is through the Word that the world is created. For G-d to speak G-d must have a mind and the world, and us, reflect something of that mind of G-d. Philo sees G-d as transcendent and has having two supreme powers: goodness and authority. As we are made in the image and likeness of G-d we too share these powers.

Other notable Jewish theologians are Maimonides (1135 – 1204 CE) and Nachmanides (1194 – 1270 CE). They became Jewish theologians because they had to defend Judaism in light of their encounter with Christianity and Islam. The most famous philosophical work of Maimonides is the Guide for the Perplexed. The Guide attempts to present Judaism according to a rationalist model and in it Maimonides develops what is sometimes called a negative theology. Such a theology states that G-d is so different from what we are that what we can say about G-d is extremely limited. In fact it is easier to say what G-d isn’t (negative). But Maimonides does say some things about G-d in his Thirteen Principles of Faith in his commentary on the Mishnah Sanhedrin:

  • G-d exists and our existence is dependent on G-d
  • G-d is ONE and is indivisible
  • G-d is pure spirit and has no body
  • G-d is eternal – without beginning or end
  • G-d reveals the Self
  • G-d knows what we think and do
  • G-d judges our actions and will reward and punish them
  • G-d has the power to resurrect the dead

In many Jewish prayer books (Siddurim) these Thirteen Principles are included in full and they have been turned into a hymn often sung on Shabbat (Yigdal).

Perhaps the most infamous Jewish theologian was Baruch Spinoza (1632 – 1677 CE) who tried to re-think Jewish ideas about G-d in terms of the emerging Enlightenment. In the end he was expelled from the Jewish community where he lived because he seemed to suggest that G-d is the world’s soul, making him a pantheist or panentheist. More worryingly he argued that Good and Evil have no real meaning.

Perhaps the greatest and most neglected Jewish theologian was Bahya ben Joseph ibn Pakuda (c1000 CE), his great work The Book of Direction to the Duties of the Heart deserves reading and rereading and gives one of the best systematic presentations of theology in action of any Jewish writer.

The second context for Jewish thinking about G-d is persecution. This might at first appear odd but it makes sense in terms of the Jewish belief that the Jews are G-d’s chosen people. If the Jews are G-d’s chosen people and are faithful to the covenant by keeping the commandments why do they face persecution? The response to this is Jewish mysticism, often referred to as Kabbalah. It is impossible to underestimate the influence of the Kabbalah on Jewish thinking and practice but its most important contribution has been to Jewish thinking about G-d.

The Kabbalah isn’t one single set of ideas or school of thought but it develops in response to the lived experience of Jews. It has its roots in the apocalyptic writings in the Hebrew Bible, such as Daniel – who is not a prophet in the Jewish Biblical tradition. As such the Kabbalah is a dynamic mix of the Biblical and Rabbinic tradition with Neo-Platonism. This works out in a number of ways. Firstly, G-d’s creation is perfect and is possible because G-d contracts (tzimtzum) the Self to enable the universe to exist. A cosmic accident occurs which causes our world to emerge, a world of mixed spirit and matter. G-d gives us the Torah so we can start to piece our world back together. By keeping the commandments we bring G-d into the world and the cosmic accident is repaired. We will know it is repaired when the Messiah comes and the world is perfected. Hence, our actions have cosmic consequences and therefore if we are faithful in keeping the commandments our lives have meaning and purpose, even in persecution. Perhaps the most important Kabbalistic thinker was Isaac Luria (1534 – 1572 CE) and his work has been developed in the Chassidic tradition by Shneur Zalman of Liadi (1745 – 1812) the Baal HaTanya, among others.

One way that this has developed Jewish thinking about G-d results in the reflection on the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. A Kabbalistic teaching is that when the Temple was destroyed the Tiferet (Glory m.) of G-d was separated from the Shekhinah (Presence f.) of G-d. Now the Shekhinah wanders the earth with the lost as one of the lost. The only time this isn’t true is when the candles are lit in the home on a Friday evening and the glory of G-d is apparent to all. In this act of divine copulation souls flood the world and as a result righteous souls are born when a husband and wife are united.

So what does this tell us about G-d? Firstly, G-d is One but contains both male and female aspects. If humans are made in the image and likeness of G-d we are only fully human when we are united as male and female. Secondly, there is virtually nothing about any opposition to G-d. Whilst Satan is mentioned in Jewish sources Satan is not the source of evil. It is G-d who is the origin of all and ‘all’ includes evil. The Kabbalistic tradition refers to this as the Sitra Achra – literally the ‘other side’ of G-d.

Jewish thinking about G-d was further challenged by the Holocaust and provoked much debate about where G-d was in the camps. Writers of note have been Eliezer Berkovitz, Milton Steinberg and Irving Greenberg amongst others.

So what?

If you’ve followed the argument so far you might feel more confused than when you started. This confusion might arise out of thinking that Jews haven’t really done any thinking about G-d since the Bible. In reality Jews have only really had to develop their thinking about G-d when they’ve been challenged by others to do so or by their experience. So what can be said? Here are some pointers:

  1. G-d is not definable, we can use human language but it will always be limited.
  2. The Biblical tradition, supported by the Rabbinic tradition, uses language about G-d which is contradictory because G-d cannot be rationalised by human thought but G-d created all that is whilst remaining uncreated.
  3. G-d is transcendent, totally other, and eternal. Everything that exists exists only to the extent that G-d exists. We are contingent beings and our meaning is dependent on G-d.
  4. G-d is immanent, open to us as One who desires to enter into covenant but that implies responsibility on both parts.
  5. We can’t always make sense of G-d or our world or our experience.

In the end Jews will probably never develop a theology to compare with Christianity or Islam because they are much more concerned on how to live a life in faith with the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, my G-d and the G-d of my fathers.

Note: Many Jews substitute the English word ‘God’ as ‘G-d’ in order to avoid any disrespect. A document containing the holiest Name should not be destroyed, so a potential difficulty can be avoided if the name of God is not used. For other Jews this is not so important, particularly if God’s Hebrew name is not being used.

Parables and Hermeneutics an introduction

Parables and Hermeneutics an introduction

Jesus’ parables reveal the range of different approaches to interpretation, or hermeneutical method. Compare historical and reader response approaches. From an historical perspective we can always try to put the parable in the context, the situation of the time. Some parables open up a narrative world, and invite a response from the reader. Which is correct? Will they lead to a ‘right’ interpretation?

Dodd’s definition of a parable is “At its simplest the parable is a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life, arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to provoke it into active thought.” This is often summarised as a story with a hidden meaning, but actually key active elements here are doubt and active thought. They stimulate engagement. This is a little different from suggesting that there is a single hidden meaning that can be explained easier and definitively. They are metaphors, rather than simply analogies as they are person-centred. They are vivid, drawn from everyday life. So they are about just and unjust managers, they are focussed on agriculture, or some other aspect of culture or working life. Other scholars suggest some parables contain self-evident truths, rather than the uncertain doubts to which Dodd refers.

Anthony Thiselton (Hermeneutics, An introduction, 2009, Eerdmans, Cambridge) thinks both views are a little right, and both are a little wrong. Parables have quite different patterns and are not easily analysed or simplified by these definitions. He argues, “A parable proper catches a listener off guard. It wounds from behind. How did the prophet Nathan approach King David when God told him to expose his adultery with Bathsheba? He could simply have confronted him, but confrontation is seldom wise with Oriental kings, even an Israelite king. He told him a story… The parable draws the listener into a narrative world, and gently the application places him under attack.”

Thiselton considers the different approaches including existential, historical, rhetorical and post-modern.

There are existential readings of parables. For example, in the parable of the labourers in the vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16) every worker receives an agreed upon wage. Some object feeling that justice is more important than grace, and the latecomers should not get as much as those who truly worked all day long. In tragic parables, such as the parable of the foolish maidens, the maidens presumptuously believed their wellbeing was guaranteed, that someone else would look after them and they were deceived because for a long time nothing happened.

The historical approach is concerned to establish whether the parable is authentically Jesus’ words, whether it is based on the life of Jesus or the life of the early Church, whether it relates to general truths or specific situations. Many parables are concerned with the Kingdom, a central element of Jesus teaching. Some parables cannot be understood unless groups such as Pharisees, or tax collectors are understood in their historical setting. It may be argued that if we understand these elements, we are more likely to have a better grasp of the meaning.

A third approach is rhetorical and literary criticism. This focuses on the literary style, rather than historical or theological. Here patterns of language and form are sought out in the text. As dynamic and potent words they invite a reader response. They can lead to a modification of the tradition. In some parables there is a profound reversal, such as the unforgiving servant. And so in reading parables reversals or unexpected turns should be a feature of how they are understood.

More post-modern approaches are drawn from the work of Paul Ricoeur and others. Ricoeur sees the world of the active agent, and the self as a narrative world. Readers therefore are participants, active agents and not simply spectators. Dialogue with the parables and the text is what is necessary.

Do parables have a correct interpretation? For some the answer is a clear ‘yes’, while other approaches suggest this is not the case. Can one interpretative approach be taken over the others? Or from the other approach, is it possible to mix post-modern or reader responses with historical approaches? Consider these questions with the parables you are studying and identify how different interpretations may be drawn from these and other distinctive hermeneutics.

Resources for Primary and Secondary

Resource Spotlight: Resources for Primary and Secondary

July 2024

We have explored innovative new curriculum developments this term, and for July we bring you exciting resources from the University of Exeter. For Primary- the ‘REsearchers’, and for Secondary- ‘Who is Jesus?’ Researchers and teachers from Exeter have developed these groundbreaking resources to exemplify a more contextual, critical engagement with religion and worldviews approach, for all age ranges.

The REsearchers

Designed for Primary- age pupils, this approach allows teachers to explore with children how we find out in RE. You will join the ‘RE-searchers’, characters who love to learn, as you explore methods of knowing in RE in the RE-searchers approach.

Who is Jesus?

This unit of work for Secondary students brings a fascinating analysis of a familiar topic: Jesus. Students will view Jesus from the perspective of a feminist, a Muslim, an artist an others, and reflect on the experience of seeing through multiple perspectives. Find the Who is Jesus? resource on the University on Exeter website.

What are teachers up to?

Read blogs from two leaders in RE, one Secondary and one in the SEN sector. What are their current inspirations, plans and ideas for the future?

Sophie Smith: A Worldviews Journey: Disciplinary Knowledge and the Curriculum

Neil Duncalf: Thoughts on the challenges of leading RE

Nones (non-religious worldviews)

Nones (non-religious worldviews)

5-7 year olds

This may seem like an unfamiliar word, ‘nones’ refers to people who state ‘none’ when asked if they have a religion. How to explore non-religious worldviews with 5-7 year old children? Here we start to think about ways of seeing the world that do not involve belief in a deity.

Although this resource is about non-religious people it was created by Lynn Revell and Kate Christopher as part of their Canterbury Christ Church University grant funded project Teaching Islam as a Worldview. Funding provided by  Culham St Gabriel’s Trust. You can find further resources which were created as part of this project in the RE:ONLINE resource Islam as a Worldview

Follow this link to read more about Kate and Lynn’s research and watch a short video

 

Rethinking the curriculum: Knowledge organisers for teachers

The National Entitlement and the Curriculum

The proposed National Entitlement is not a curriculum however we believe it provides a curriculum framework. We present a knowledge organiser (downloadable below) for teachers as a way of exploring this potential. Knowledge organisers are useful in providing a clear overview of information, which can then be categorised.

The Commission on RE (2018) sets out a new vision for Religion and Worldviews. As part of this vision it sets out a recommendation for a Statement of Entitlement which includes organising principles that may inform thinking behind practical planning and curriculum design for Religion and Worldviews.

You can find the complete report on this link, as well as the Executive Summary and a helpful a video to explain the work of the Commission on RE: https://www.commissiononre.org.uk/final-report-religion-and-worldviews-the-way-forward-a-national-plan-for-re/

Pupils are entitled to be taught, by well-qualified and resourced teachers, knowledge and understanding about:

a. what religion and worldviews are and how they are studied;

b. the impact of religion and worldviews on individuals, communities and societies;

c. the diversity of worldviews in society;

d. the concepts, language and ‘methodologies for knowing’ that help us organise and make sense of our knowledge and understanding of religion and worldviews;

e. the human quest for meaning, so that they are prepared for life in a diverse world and have space to recognise, reflect on and take responsibility for the development of their own personal worldview.

The Commission on RE (2018) report sets out in more details nine bullet points stating what pupils should be taught. These are:

1: About matters of central importance to the worldviews studied, how these can form coherent accounts for adherents, and how these matters are interpreted in different times, cultures and places

2: About key concepts including ‘religion’, ‘secularity’, ‘spirituality’ and ‘worldview’, and that worldviews are complex, diverse and plural

3: In the ways in which patterns of belief, expression and belonging may change across and within worldviews, locally, nationally and globally, both historically and I contemporary times

4: The ways in which worldviews develop in interaction with each other, have some shared beliefs and practices as well as differences, and that people may draw upon more than one tradition

5: The role of religious and non-religious ritual and practices, foundational texts, and of the arts, in both the formation and communication of experience, belief, values, identities and commitments

6: how worldviews may offer responses to fundamental questions of meaning and purpose raised by human experience, and the different roles that worldviews play in providing people with ways of making sense of their lives

7: the different roles played by worldviews in the lives of individuals and societies, including their influences on moral behavior and social norms

8: how worldviews have power and influence in societies and cultures, appealing to various sources of authority, including foundational texts

9: the different ways in which religion and worldviews can be understood, interpreted and studied, including through a wide range of academic disciplines and through direct encounter and discussion with individuals and communities who hold these worldviews.

What could the proposed National Entitlement look like in practice?

The proposed National Entitlement is in many ways an abstract statement. However, it provides some of the thinking that can sit behind a new Religion and Worldviews curriculum.

We suggest that the place to start is actually the final point of the National Entitlement, point (9). This describes the academic disciplines that might frame the more specific learning content. This can be imagined as a lens to look through at the learning content. It is bigger than the learning content and provides a backdrop or framing against which the learning content makes wider sense. The lens might be historical, theological or ethnographic, it might be philosophical, sociological or anthropological, and so on. You might be looking at a specific point of, for example, Islamic history, but will be thinking more widely as a historian and asking the sorts of questions a historian might ask.

Knowledge Organisers based on the proposed Statement of Entitlement

In an attempt to help understand and exemplify the National Entitlement we have created a knowledge organiser presenting Humanism. We have considered what it might mean to explore this worldview based on this new vision of religion and worldviews.  We have also tried to allow this worldview to be explored in itself, without imposing categories that might distort understanding.

The knowledge organisers are NOT a complete curriculum or scheme of work. They present an overview of what content might be covered and questions asked when the proposed National Entitlement guides planning.

The learning content and approaches might be studied over many years, from Primary to Secondary, gradually building up a rich and complex understanding.

We provide notes to unpack some of the learning content, but not a complete guide. This is experimental. Teachers all over the country are engaged in exploring how to implement this new vision.

If this feels very different to your usual planning, it is. The National Entitlement is a game-changer, bringing RE, or religion and worldviews, into the 21st century as a broad-based, critical and reflective subject, driven by disciplinary thinking. While we know there is lots of hard work ahead, we are excited to explore the practical challenges and opportunities these crucial years will bring. We welcome comments and suggestions; we want to hear from you! Get in touch by emailing enquiries@cstg.org.uk

Four learning sessions on Muhammad Ali ( 8-16year olds)

Resource Spotlight: Four learning sessions on Muhammad Ali ( 8-16 year olds)

October 2021

This month we continue our theme of ‘curriculum’ by presenting a set of four learning sessions (suitable for 8-16 year olds) on Muhammad Ali, one of the world’s all-time greatest boxers. Ali was also a conscientious objector, antiracist activist and devoted Muslim. All these aspects of his life are intertwined, as our multiple worldviews are. As well as contribution to teaching resources for Black History Month, these lessons are also an example of what worldviews can look like in the classroom.

Find the resources here

Good Learning in RE

Seven videos of good learning in RE, produced by NATRE. Taken from the DVD Good Learning in Religious Education: Seven Short Films to Make Teachers Think.

The following videos are provided by NATRE, Good Learning in Religious Education: Seven short films to makes teachers think.  The films were sponsored by Culham St Gabriel’s and the Diocese of St Albans and are available to watch on NATRE’s website. There is one sample film below and the rest can be found on the NATRE website or here.

 

Enquiring into Worship with 7-9 Year Olds