Prof David Horrell writes...

Most HE institutions admitting students to degrees in theology and religious studies do not require RS A-level, so are not presuming certain areas of knowledge in advance – unlike many other degree subjects. The syllabuses are so varied that this would be difficult in any case. But there is a strong case for doing all we can to ensure that students come to degrees in TRS with appropriate skills and expectations as far as possible. In that regard, certain features of the new proposals seem to me very positive.

The proposal to include significant elements of “textual studies” seems to me – though challenging – a good way to try to get students to grapple with the important issues about the interpretation and influence of sacred texts. That would certainly be a good (“hermeneutical”) skill to bring to a University degree in TRS (often lacking at present). But it will need good resources and careful “marketing” to make it attractive to school students – if it looks like “Bible study” (or other equivalents) it will only attract a certain group of the committed. The same goes for systematic studies of religious beliefs and practices.

The dominance of philosophy and ethics in the current system means that many students (mistakenly) have the impression they are studying “Philosophy and Ethics” as subjects in their own right, and thus consider, say, Philosophy at University, when the A-level they are actually doing is RS, and the specific kind of philosophy they are interested in is philosophy of religion. This is in part a reflection of the difficulty of “selling” study of “religion” to school students, which is itself unfortunate and needs addressing: it should be perfectly possible to make it attractive, interesting and relevant to study religion and its forms, expressions, influences, in the world today; and in the present time the importance of nuanced and informed understanding of religions should be pretty clear.

Of course, this needs to be divorced from any idea that RS or RE is about encouraging “religiosity” or “spirituality”, which, I suspect emerges partly because of the blurred line between studying religion and encouraging a religious ethos or faith, which is explicit in schools with a Church foundation (many primary schools in England, and some secondaries). One promising approach is the emphasis on “religious literacy”, that is, making the case that to function competently and sensitively in contemporary society one needs some kind of nuanced understanding of religion(s), not least in order to negotiate critically the media portrayals that shape our perceptions. That also implies that understanding of more than one religious tradition is important, not least in the context of contemporary Britain.

Although both A-level and degree level specifications allow a focus on only one religion, I do wonder whether some understanding of the diverse matrix of contemporary religions and their interactions with so-called “secular” societies ought to be part of any advanced course of study – though I write this as a New Testament scholar who has focused mostly on Christian (and Jewish) traditions.

David Horrell

Professor of New Testament Studies

Director, Centre for Biblical Studies

University of Exeter