Collective Worship in a Church of England (C.E.) Voluntary Controlled (V.C.) Primary School. Is it theologically possible and morally desirable?

What follows is the text of a seminar I led for an MA module.

I have always enjoyed leading collective worship in schools. I like singing and story telling. The children, by and large, have enthusiastically participated in both story telling and song singing. As a curate in Birmingham, with many children from non Christian backgrounds attending assemblies, I was taught to be careful, always reminding the children when appropriate, that this is what Christians believe, and was not necessarily what they had to believe.

After Birmingham came schools in rural Shropshire and Herefordshire. With the same philosophy in mind I led Collective Worship, never assuming the Christianity of the children present, until challenged by an inspector about the way I led Collective Worship. Whilst acknowledging the fact that the children were obviously enjoying Collective Worship and gladly participating in it, he nevertheless questioned whether this was worship. ‘Could it be better described as the imparting of information with some entertainment and singing?’

This of course begs questions, ‘What is worship?’ and ‘Are those without choice able to offer it? And ‘Should they be required to do so?’ Hence my questions:

Before moving on I would like to say just a few words about context. When I submitted my proposal, one of the questions that arose from the email conversation with my tutors was.

‘The context of assembles being in a faith school means that parents have chosen to place their children in a faith school and we wonder if this is important?’

May I respond in two ways.

Firstly, in my thinking I had not considered the school to be a faith school in the current usage of this term. This is because parents in our village do not choose the school because it is a 'faith school', they choose it because it is the school in the village. Neither does the school select on the basis of denomination or any religious affiliation. The head recently told me.

‘We are a community school, we put our arms around everyone.’ This from a school that just last week achieved an Outstanding from its statutory church inspection.

It is the community school that historically was provided by the church, as a service to the community.

Let's call it a church provided community school.

Secondly, I am not sure how the answers would be changed by context, faith school or non faith school.

If the love offered to my spouse, in my arranged marriage, is not freely offered and therefore turns out not to be love. No amount of my parents choosing my spouse for me would make my ‘going through the motions’ love.

So if worship that is not freely offered turns out not to be worship, then no other external considerations, i.e. parental choice or faith school context will make it worship.

Similarly if an action in and of it self turns out to be morally undesirable, then nothing, not the law, parental choice, faith school context, nothing can make it morally desirable. So if compulsory worship turns out to be a violation of a child’s Freedom of Conscience, and that is held by society and church to be wrong, then nothing not the law, parental choice, faith school context, nothing can make it morally desirable.

So what does the law say?

...each pupil in attendance at a community, foundation or voluntary school shall on each school day take part in an act of collective worship.

The whole act is interpreted by a much longer document Circular 1/94.

It states that the aims of Collective Worship are:

…to provide the opportunity for pupils to worship God, to consider spiritual and moral issues and to explore their own beliefs; to encourage participation and response, whether through active involvement in the presentation of worship or through listening to and joining in the worship offered; and to develop community spirit, promote a common ethos and shared values, and reinforce positive values.

It goes onto state that worship:

…must in some sense reflect something special or separate from ordinary school activities and it should be concerned with reverence or veneration paid to a divine being or power. However, worship in schools will necessarily be of a different character from worship amongst a group with beliefs in common. The legislation reflects this difference in referring to 'collective worship' rather than 'corporate worship'.

It says further that:

In the light of the Christian traditions of Great Britain collective worship organised by a county or equivalent grant-maintained school is to be 'wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character'. The Act then further defines collective worship of a 'broadly Christian character' as being worship which reflects the broad traditions of Christian belief.

The Churches represented in the Churches’ Joint Education Policy Committee take the following position:

“We strongly support the continuation of Collective Worship in all schools, recognising the major contribution it makes to the spiritual and moral development of pupils, which is a prime goal of education. It is believed by other faith groups to be of benefit even though its emphasis is mainly Christian. We look for Government support for an improvement in the quality of acts of collective worship and for ensuring that all pupils are able, with their parents’ consent, to attend meaningful acts of worship at school.”

The churches argue that Collective Worship has both Educational and Spiritual benefits.

It provides a means of developing an appreciation that goes beyond the material world, fostering a concern for others and providing a forum for exploring shared values.

Our society has other voices, The National Secular Society unsurprisingly takes a different view. Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society, has said:

“The churches are putting incredible pressure on the Government and on Ofsted to enforce this iniquitous law. Large-scale surveys show that 60 per cent of school children define themselves as atheist or agnostic, so why are they being forced against their conscience to worship a God they don’t believe in? It is an abuse of their human rights – they are not permitted to exercise their freedom of conscience.

This is straightforward indoctrination. The churches can’t get children into their services so they bring the church to school, and force the children, a captive audience, to observe by law. We encourage parents to consider whether they want their children to undergo this manipulation. They have the right to withdraw their children from it, and many are exercising that right”

The British Humanist Association:

"Would like to see changes in legislation to give schools much more flexibility about how they conduct assemblies, the immediate withdrawal of Circular 1/94 (which insists on a narrow interpretation of the legal requirement for "broadly Christian" worship) in favour of new guidance from the DCSF recommending inclusive assemblies, suitable for all. This should be followed by repeal of the legislation requiring acts of worship in schools. Schools should, however, provide time and space for optional worship for those who want it."

Earlier we looked at the words of Keith Porteous Wood from the NSS

‘Why are they (the children) being forced against their conscience to worship a God they don’t believe in? It is an abuse of their human rights – they are not permitted to exercise their freedom of conscience.’

It seems to me that the whole question turns not on faith school stroke non faith school, but on the issue of Freedom of Conscience.

What does Freedom of Conscience mean? How should it be applied to the individual. To what extent do children have the right to exercise Freedom Conscience?

Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Furthermore Article 18 declares.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The UNHCR Declaration of the Rights of the Child principle 3 declares.

The child shall enjoy special protection, and shall be given opportunities and facilities, by law and by other means, to enable him to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually and socially in a healthy and normal manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity. In the enactment of laws for this purpose, the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration.

Notice the words I have italicized and underlined. ‘in conditions of freedom and dignity’

So here are two well known secular declarations on Human rights that seem to be saying that the freedom of conscience even of the child is something to be upheld by law.

So what does the Christian Tradition have to say about Freedom of Conscience.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that;

God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. "God willed that man should be 'left in the hand of his own counsel,' so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him."

“Man is rational and therefore like God; he is created with free will and is master over his acts.”

“Every human person, created in the image of God, has the natural right to be recognized as a free and responsible being. All owe to each other this duty of respect. the right to the exercise of freedom, especially in moral and religious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human person.”

Martin Luther is reported to have said.

"Unless I am convinced by proofs from Scriptures or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I can and will not retract, for it is neither safe nor wise to do anything against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen."

Now compare this with this question from early Christian history. Why were Christians persecuted by the Roman Empire, an empire which is well known for its religious toleration?

‘The Christians “atheism” was the basic cause of their maltreatment. Some intellectual pagans decried the forms of contemporary cult, but almost all concurred with them when necessary; the Christians refused to concur and their lack of respect was intolerable….

Nobody minded too much what the Christians did or did not believe. As a governor told Bishop Dionysius, there would be no objection if the bishop would only worship the pagan gods as well as his own.’ 1

Christians were brought to the attention of the Roman authorities because they refused to offer sacrifices to the imperial Cults. The Romans were, in the main completely perplexed by this conscientious objection to sacrifice. The fact of Christian martyrdom at this time and throughout Christian History demonstrates in my view the importance that Christianity has always given to Freedom of Conscience.

I would like now to turn my attention to the nature of worship. When it comes to worship, I feel a bit like Augustine trying to describe time. When I use the word I know what I mean. When someone asks me to define it, that is when I am in difficulty.

‘Worship is a religious phenomenon , a reaching out through the fear that always accompanies the sacred to the mysterium conceived as tremendum but also as fascinans, because behind it and in it there is an intuition of the Transcendent.’ 2

Put another way ‘Worship is a religious phenomenon, a reaching out through the fearful and fascinating mystery of the sacred, because behind it and in it there is an intuition of the Transcendent.’

Worship then, might be described as a human response to that which is wholly other. The question that arises for me is whether such a response is voluntary of involuntary.

One particular saying of Jesus springs to mind.

“A time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” 3

I have a subsequent question for myself. Is there a difference between compulsion and coercion?

The difference perhaps is that a compulsion to act can arise from within a person, whereas coercion is something that can only originate outside a person.

I might say that am compelled from within to respond to God in worship.

Another word often associated with worship is devotion, which I equate to an active love. Again I can be compelled from within to respond to God with loving devotion.

Loving devotion is not possible where coercion is involved. For if the love is real, why the coercion?

So let me offer some tentative conclusions.

I do believe that the question of God and therefore the question of worship do have a place within the educational context. Accompanying those questions is that of ‘Freedom of Conscience’. Only when that question is properly addressed can the possibility of true worship be entertained.

To quote Jesus again;

“A time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” 4

In terms of practice, I would begin by exploring with the children the issue of Freedom of Conscience. If children are to develop a ‘Good Conscience’ they need to be given some freedom to develop and use it. It seems me to that ‘Collective Worship’ provides an opportunity for this to happen.

The BHA expressly argues that ‘Schools should, however, provide time and space for optional worship for those who want it.’

The question of God, and whether and how we should worship God can and perhaps should be part RE. It might turn out that in a particular class that a minority of children do not believe in God. This question could be asked of the majority;

‘Should those who do not believe have to attend worship?’

Similarly if the believers happen to be in the minority, the majority could be asked;

‘Should the believers be given the option to worship? What are you the non believers going to do instead.?’

One final question might be asked

‘How do we come together as a school to think about and affirm our shared values?’

I began with questions, and I have ended not with answers, but further questions.

1 Lane-Fox, R., Pagans and Christians p.425.

2Jones, C., et al eds The Study of Liturgy, p.7.

3 NIV John 4. 23f

4 NIV John 4. 23f