At very short notice we arranged a special meeting on Thursday 28th May to consider the Government's new proposed guidance on Religious Education in England.

Our Secretary Josh Kutchinsky reflects on the event.

I thought the  meeting was excellent. In no small measure due to a really professional job done by our Chair, Alan Palmer. The contributions from members, (Alan Henness, Peter Knight and Dave Miller) who represented the views of others who couldn't be there but who sent messages was also excellent and helped set the tone for the event.

I read out messages received from John Keast, Chair of the Writing Group for the Guidance and Denise Chaplin, Chair of the National Association of SACREs (Standing Advisory Councils on Religious Education)

I was more anxious than I think I had realised as to whether we would have enough people turn up and a sufficient diversity of opinion to make the meeting interesting. I think we had over 50 people at the meeting. It's for others to say whether they enjoyed it, but I know that Mark Chater, who is in charge of the Government consultation and who  was in 'consultation/listening mode', was impressed. The Education officer (Secondary) from the Roman Catholic  Diocese of Westminster, Peter Ward, (a member of the steering group for the Guidance) was surprised by some of the testimony regarding the discrimination that humanists were facing in different parts of the country. He also made some interesting comments, towards the end of the meeting, intended, I felt, to enlighten humanists as to  what he perceived as our prejudices; as to the  state of affairs in respect of faith schools indoctrinating their pupils (they don't, he said) and the part played by creationism in Catholic Schools, which he said was almost non-existent and he claimed that the theory of evolution is, and has been, accepted by Catholics for a very long time. [Note: A discussion about Religious schools, private and state funded, could make for another valuable  CLHG meeting at some future time. ]

It was interesting that towards the end of the discussion people were talking about there being a London versus Shire Counties divide with London's religious and belief diversity resulting in greater inclusion, however one of the examples of discrimination came from a London Borough!

I was surprised to hear a somewhat passionate contribution from Mariano a Buddhist (am I revealing a prejudice here?), which was basically that Humanists on SACREs must behave themselves and not join with the intention of insulting or decrying the beliefs of others - I wonder whether he was talking from personal experience? I felt that some humanists (and maybe others) were  unhappy with what he said and maybe more with the manner in which he expressed himself, but the meeting remained polite. Of course the point is that  SACREs/Local Authorities don't have to accept any particular individual as a member but any rejection should not be on the grounds of a lack of religious belief.

Early on when I feared that we would have nobody who would provide reasons for the  anti-humanist viewpoint, which occurs in some SACREs, I mentioned what I had encountered from a very genuine and committed Christian on my SACRE (no longer a member)  who simply said that he believed that Religious Education should be about religion and inculcate religious values and that, whilst thanking me for my hard work, he honestly felt that I should not be on a SACRE and that Humanism should not be part of the syllabus. No one took the bait and supported this view, in fact it was made clear by I think, Roger Butler, a schools Inspector, teacher and  RE Consultant that teaching RE in this way would in fact be  contrary to the law.  

Father Fergus Capie, an Anglican and the Director of the London Inter Faith Centre, told me afterwards that he thought the meeting had been interesting and worthwhile. He also had himself contributed some very thoughtful (and thought-provoking) comments regarding where we need to go with progressing dialogue between people holding all manner of beliefs.

I was really pleased that Basma Elshayyal,  a Muslim representative from Brent SACRE, and a Head of RE, who has taught in community and faith schools,  came and felt sufficiently comfortable   to contribute  some interesting and emotionally charged opinions  extolling  the value of  inclusive RE (which includes Humanism).

Some humanist members of London SACREs , and others from outside London who are trying to participate in their local SACREs,  made significant contributions and I think went away having heard some interesting comments.

Expert and measured opinion, from BHA Education Officers past and present (Marilyn Mason and Andrew Copson), was to the point and very clearly expressed. This, in my opinion,  is not always easy., particularly if you have invested a great deal of time and energy to fight discrimination against humanists and the non-religious.

It was quite a lot of work for the organisers of this meeting but in my opinion Central London Humanists provided a valuable forum for the discussion of this issue, which of course could only scrape the surface in one short meeting, but I can't imagine how it could have been bettered.