Fedor Kozyrev
Centre for Religious Pedagogy

Since a federal law on education was passed in 1992, its restrictive statements on the inadmissibility of the activities of religious organizations in state schools have been interpreted by educational agencies as a prohibition on the teaching of religion. As recently as a year ago, educators were indicating that teaching of religious subjects in state schools in Russia was in violation of the Russian Constitution. Yet, this position has been changing rapidly. On 24 April 2001, a round-table meeting titled "Religious Education in Russia: Problems and Prospects" was held at the parliament of the Russian Federation. The final document produced from this meeting was considered a breakthrough where the importance of spiritual education in schools was concerned. Participants agreed that spiritual upbringing and religious education in Russia's schools should be given a priority status among other educational issues. They agreed, in principle, that the secular character of Russia's state (municipal) school system should not exclude education based on a religious outlook, including the teaching of various historical-religious systems of knowledge.

It has become increasingly clear to many in Russian society that the failure to build a socialist system in Russia was not due to some ideological or economic miscalculation, but rather to the failures caused by an irreligious ideology. Based on this change of thinking, it now seems possible that the basics of the traditional creeds and values of our country (in some form) may soon be included in the programs adopted by general education schools. In many respects, our future depends on our success in combining the idea of a pluralistic democratic state, as formulated in the Constitution, with the spiritual ideals and traditional religious values forming the basis of the great union of various cultures, peoples, and creeds which is Russia. Perhaps, then, this is an opportune time for the majority Russian Orthodox Church,1 jointly with other religious denominations and creeds, to become an independent fullfledged partner in education and the spiritual consolidation of our society.

The Historical Roots:

Russia is entering a new historical epoch which is different from both the Soviet period and the long history of Czarist Russia. Russia has lived through a long reign of state-supported atheism and the effects of this history on society's attitudes toward religion cannot be underestimated. Besides the fact that the number of religious believers has sharply decreased, the recent generations have not had the same feelings of kinship with their parish. When the Russian Orthodox Church stops becoming the necessary and organic element of a way of life, it tends to lose the widespread support of the people. Additionally, as a consequence of Russia's Communist history, citizens are wary of any penetration of the Church into public life. This is especially true as it relates to religious education in schools. Parents are often afraid that some kind of new ideological control may enter schools under the guise of religious education and children may once again be told what is permitted and what is not. This kind of distrust naturally leads to resistance among professional pedagogues against the inclusion of religious education in Russia's school programs.

Also, there have never been theological departments in Russian universities -- as there are in Western Europe. With European education forced on Russia by Peter the Great, seminary theology and academic science found themselves on different levels of public life. This development resulted, to a considerable extent, in the isolation of clergy from public life and the polarization of spiritual and secular principles in Russian culture. Today, despite a great number of intellectuals joining the clergy, this separation is still in place in both public and clerical consciousness. In the meantime, a traditional Orthodox way of life is often perceived as a necessary attribute of religiosity, maybe even as a criteria for being a believer. This attitude, however, deepens secular society's distrust of the Russian Orthodox Church while intensifying its rejection of the world, which is a strong element in Eastern Christianity.

Hazards of Indoctrination:

While it is still too early to estimate the future extent and form of religious education in Russia's schools, there is some danger that ideology will enter schools under the guise of religious and spiritual education. The likelihood of such a scenario is confirmed by the increasingly close co-operation between the Ministry of Education and the Moscow Patriarchy. For example, there is a new concept of moral upbringing and spiritual education which has been developed, on the order of the Ministry of Education, by the Orthodox Church-sponsored Pokrov Institute. The official position of the Russian Orthodox Church concerning religious education is reflected in its recently adopted social doctrine (Item 14.3) which reads, "From the Orthodox viewpoint, it is desirable that the whole system of education be built on religious grounds and be based on Christian values".

While expressing its respect for secular schools and its preparedness to build a relationship with such schools on the basis of respect for the freedom of man, the Church believes that "the forcing upon students of anti-religious and anti-Christian views and the affirmation of the monopoly of the materialistic view of the world is inadmissible". However, this well-substantiated position does not provide any answers as to whether or not the Church finds the forcing upon students of Christian ideas and views admissible.

A report prepared for pedagogical readings in St. Petersburg in November 2000 by the Pokrov Institute would imply that this is the aim of Russian pedagogy. In this report, an attempt was made to substantiate, on the basis of domestic pedagogical tradition, the moral admissibility and social usefulness of involving students in religious education regardless of their free will. The aim, noted the report, was to promote the spiritual consolidation of Russia and the instilling of patriotism in her students. The authors of the report seemed to omit, however, the issue of how this proposed indoctrination was compatible with the principles of the freedom of conscience, tolerance, and pluralism. According to this new concept, the basic principle and objective of moral upbringing and spiritual education is the attaining of the likeness of Christ. Unfortunately, there was little in the report addressing how traditional Christian values might be conveyed to atheists, Muslims, and Jews. Perhaps our society has not yet matured enough to understand that the setting of such pedagogical objectives, while living in a multi-denominational and multi-religious democratic state, leads to the creation of a number of additional problems. Also, it may not be clearly realised that the tactless enforcing of a system of religious values on people may result in the profanation and depreciation of the values one is trying to transmit. This approach may also result in the turning of religious education into the means of indoctrinating students and forcing upon them a rigidly regulated system of an outward semblance of values rather than becoming the means for students to develop their own abilities and to broaden their outlook.

A critical revision is also needed of both the methods and overall principles of pre- Revolutionary religious education. Despite the fact that religious education has been in the hands of the Russian Orthodox Church for centuries, there has been a universal explosion of ungodliness, the desecration of churches, and ill feeling towards the Church. Today, neither the leaders of the Church, nor religious pedagogues, display the will to analyse old mistakes and bring the principles of spiritual education in harmony with the realities of contemporary pluralistic society. At the same time, our society has received too serious a lesson of scepticism and nihilism, and has been too much inoculated with European enlightenment, to accept bold religious indoctrination. That's why many parents, even Orthodox believers, are not likely to allow their children to be indoctrinated in school in the spirit of Orthodox patriotism in the way similar to the recent indoctrination in Marxism-Leninism. At the slightest political fluctuations, or the appearance of the negative results of Orthodox indoctrination, we might find ourselves in the same sad condition. That is, in a society characterised by a totally irreligious system of school education.

A New Way:

Many people in our country find the current irreligious condition normal. Yet the number is growing of those who realise that the deliberate impoverishing of the spiritual world of a child, which inevitably results from the lack of familiarisation with religion, can never be the means of protecting the child's freedom of conscience because it means the violation of another fundamental right of a child to receive education. It will be a great loss for Russia's children if either the path of indoctrination or an irreligious school education is pursued. In the former case, while trying to preserve the national identity and the consolidation of our society, we potentially lose democratic principles and freedoms. In the latter case, while trying to preserve freedoms, we lose all connection with our national spiritual tradition and, along with it, the ability to understand the spiritual identities, cultures, and historic legacies of other peoples. Such are the extremes. I believe that the best path lies somewhere in the middle.

In whatever way the organization of religious education in Russian schools is developed, its future depends on whether it will become truly professional or subservient to some political cause. These realities are already understood by many teachers, priests, and religious believers of various denominations and creeds. A movement of pedagogues and believers whose motto is "Spirituality without Indoctrination" has already appeared in St. Petersburg. This initiative brings together teachers of humanities and methodologists from the city's leading universities and high schools together with priests, etc. Their tasks include exchanging professional experiences, enhancing the qualifications of teachers, and fostering joint efforts in methodological research as it relates to religious pedagogy. Additionally, their work includes promoting and introducing various programs of religious education in schools that may maximise student's knowledge of the world of religion and their national spiritual tradition without infringing on their fundamental rights and freedoms.

The participants of the movement believe that the alternative to indoctrination is not the absence of religious education in schools, but, rather, the consistent and wellconsidered introduction of it. They also clearly understand that an attempt to pass religious education in school into the hands of the Russian Orthodox Church will not cause any reconciliation. In fact, it may have the opposite effect of aggravating the differences between secular and spiritual systems of education which have historically formed in our country and this is already happening in some places. This situation is likely to remain until the Church begins to realize that there is a difference between educational and missionary purposes.

A Unique Russian Pedagogy:

Russia needs to develop its own domestic school of religious pedagogy, which, while coordinating its activities with clergy, should remain consistently secular. On the one hand, we must use the experience of religious education accumulated by secular schools in democratic countries. On the other hand, we must rely on our country's own pedagogical and spiritual resources, i.e. correlating foreign experiences with the historical, cultural and religious peculiarities of Russia and attaining cooperation between traditional denominations and creeds.

The mechanical following of Western pedagogical models and approaches would only be likely to aggravate the situation now existing in our national spiritual life. In Great Britain, for example, young school students attending the same class are taught six different religions. This system works in Britain because those children naturally belong to different, and rarely interacting, subcultures. British teachers believe that, for a little child to be able to love his or her strange next-door neighbour, the understanding, even minimal, of that neighbour's religion is essential. In Russia, this approach is not yet appropriate. So, while creating our own system of religious education, we must pursue other more urgent issues, such as the reconciliation of generations and learning to overcome the rupture in our national spiritual tradition by helping the young to understand where their forefathers were right and where they were wrong.

We have fallen much behind Western countries where secular religious pedagogy is concerned. Yet this temporary backwardness is no reason for us to forsake our own beliefs and the search for our own way. It is important that we choose a model of religious education that can be adjusted to the religious and legal situations now existing in our country while still meeting the needs of our society. Since much of Russia remains Orthodox Christian, and because Christian Orthodoxy is Russia's ethnological core, this fact must be reflected in the programs of religious education. Religious education may never be quite abstract, i.e. separated from historically formed features of certain traditions. And there is no need to try and achieve the "equality" of religions. Of course, no child should be deprived of a chance to get acquainted with religious traditions other than his or her own and should never receive a distorted or partial view of those other traditions. We must also make sure that students belonging to religious minorities can receive religious education based on their own traditions. Taking Russia's historic experience into account, school programs should also pay attention to atheistic views. There is nothing wrong with having our children receive impartial knowledge of the ideas of irreligious Humanism and Communism.

Indeed, the future of religious education in Russia will largely depend, not just on how school programmes are composed, although that is important, but also on what ideas and values this education will be built on. The most important objective of a scientifically developed system of religious pedagogy must be the formulation of the main ideas, purposes, and principles of such education. We must determine our position, declare our priorities, and decide what values we will rely upon when building a new civic society. These priorities should include the creative development of each person to his or her fullest potential, the reinforcement of our national and religious self-identification, and an ability to remain true to our traditions. The question we must ask (and answer) is whether the exploitation of religious feelings toward political and social ends is permissible and, if yes, to what extent? This exercise includes a clear evaluation of the phenomenon of indoctrination. If, while answering the above questions, the public and professional pedagogues become divided and unable to find common ground, then, in accordance with the essence of pluralism, several pedagogical schools and trends must be developed. In such matters, there is no place for forcible unification.

END NOTES
1 Approximately 60-65% of those in Russia identify themselves as Orthodox Christians ( Pravoslavnaya Missiya Segodnya, St.Petersburg, 1999). Some foreign sources estimate the number of Orthodox Christians in Russia to be somewhat lower at 45% (according to The Eastern Christian Churches by Ronald G. Roberson of Chicago University). We can, in any case, say with some assurance that about half of the population of Russia identifies with the Russian Orthodox Church.

Back to Religious Education - Table of Contents