As Sherlock Holmes famously observed, sometimes the most important fact to note is not that the dog barked, but that the dog didn't bark. Certainly the silence that followed the announcement that in Victorian State schools optional classes in religious education would be replaced by classes on relationships for all students was notable.
Apart from the providers of religious education, almost no one commented. Church based schools and peak bodies were silent. Others criticised the decision to teach relationships on the grounds that such teaching was not the business of schools but should be left to families.
The silence on the issue reflects long-standing and well-rehearsed differences of educational philosophy between state schools and faith-based schools. But it also concealed the effects of broader cultural changes that will pose questions to schools of both kinds. The old dogs may have fallen silent, but the braying of new hounds is borne on the wind.
Religious, and particularly Catholic schools, have put a strong weight on tradition, both as offering authoritative content and as a process by which faith and an ethical way of life are transmitted. They are handed down from generation to generation through a network of relationships, symbols and processes that make up a school. The beliefs and values embodied in the whole of the school are described and explored in religion classes. This understanding can be traced back to medieval monastic schools where the curriculum was part of the daily life of the monastery.
State schools in Australia were distinctive because they did not presuppose a shared faith. As a result they could not appeal to a shared faith tradition. But initially an informal religious and ethical tradition was embodied in the practices and relationships of schools. It reflected a generally accepted form of theism and commonly accepted ethical code. So despite the claims made in polemic, the schools were not Godless in any strong sense. But they could not offer any formal space to reflect on religious questions.
That settlement is now being tested both in Catholic and state schools by rapid cultural change. In particular, people now commonly dismiss tradition as an authoritative source of values and beliefs. They see values as the responsibility of autonomous individuals to choose.
From this perspective discussion of ethics and faith is a private matter, best hosted in families. Public schools are seen as public institutions, and should focus on passing on the knowledge and skills that will benefit the individual and society. Of course, because the judgment of what will benefit the individual and society must also be left to individual choice, there is no way for it to be discussed in schools. As a result the criterion is often assumed to be the economic benefit gained by the individual or by society. Little space is left for the broader tradition on which the schools could once draw.
This emphasis on individual autonomy also puts religious schools under pressure. They must work within the prevailing culture, and as fewer families, students or teachers have any firm church allegiance or religious understanding, it becomes harder for the school to embody the tradition in the relationships, symbols and practices of the school. The idea of a tradition that might have authority in the choices we make will seem to many to be incredible.
Where this erosion of the place of tradition is not resisted, the operative goals of schools then become the academic and economic advancement of individuals. Religious classes and rituals become a decoration, a rhetorical branding.
As a result of these pressures on both state and faith-based schools, we might expect that the difference between those faith-based schools in which their inherited tradition shapes the life of the school and those in which adherence to the tradition is largely rhetorical and not operative will be more marked.
We might also expect that faith-based schools that take tradition seriously and embody it in the life of the school will become more popular. They will appeal to a minority of parents, who want a school with strong ethical and faith tradition for their children, even if they do not themselves share the tradition.
Compared to the enormity of this cultural shift and the challenge it poses to schools of all sorts to commend a humane ethic, the presence or absence of religion classes in state schools is unimportant. This dog's bark was too faint to be heard.
Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street.