Numerous states introducing Bible Literacy classes, giving students the option of studying the Bible. Starting to make a turn back? Great!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 28, 2019
How did I miss this?
First, this is in-line with the President's tweet about the "cost" of immigration in the U.S., or his rage about women 'gagged with duct tape' and smuggled across the border. I don't give his "facts" much credence.
Second, I'm not opposed to this, as long as "Biblical literacy" doesn't mean "indoctrination into specific Christian doctrines. I've found it rather difficult to teach literature to students who've never heard of Noah, Moses, Abraham, or Jonah, students who don't know who Lazarus is ("To say: “I am Lazarus, come from the dead,/Come back to tell you all, I shall tell you all”. It ain't all just to understand Milton, is all I'm sayin'....). I've even taught the Bible as literature, albeit in college courses; and I think it's a worthwhile endeavor, if only because of the importance of Christian scriptures in Western culture.
So if that's what "Biblical literacy" means, I'm all for it. However, I doubt that's what it means. To find out, I turned to Politico (sue me, I'm lazy; besides, you're not paying for this....):
A handful of states are making pushes to introduce elective courses in schools that lawmakers say would teach the Bible in terms of its historical context, and though none have passed, critics have pointed out that such bills could blur the constitutional line separating church and state.As I say, I've taught the Bible as literature in a public college, so there isn't necessarily a 1st Amendment issue here. There could have been, if I'd tried to teach the Bible as sacred text, but I didn't. Teaching the Bible in terms of its own historical context would be quite beyond the capacity of most high school English teachers (no offense), and certainly beyond the carrying capacity of most high school students and their parents (the church/state barrier wouldn't have to come up, or it would as they fought to protect their religious interests from state intrusion). Teaching its literary and historical significance is not a bad idea, but too easily that turns into how Moses taught the U.S. the basis of law (there's a more direct connection to the Iroquois, when it comes to the form of our federal government, and to English common law, when it comes to our laws. Moses is about as important as the Code of Hammurabi, and frankly Noah should be taught alongside The Epic of Gilgamesh, though again, that's probably more suited to a college level course.). Teaching the Bible as a literary object (well, portions of it; the stories like Moses on Sinai, Abraham on Moriah, Jonah and the Whale, would obviate teaching Ecclesiastes or the Prophets or the Letter to the Romans), is not in itself a violation of the 1st Amendment. But not teaching the Bible as sacred text would certainly violate the religious beliefs of many parents, not all of them evangelicals and fundamentalists.
USA Today reported that “Bible literacy” bills of some sort have been introduced in six state legislatures across the country that “would require or encourage public schools to offer elective classes on the Bible’s literary and historical significance.” And one state, Kentucky, recently passed a law creating a framework for such classes.
Back to where we started: is this tweet accurate? Not really; as Politico notes, it follows from a story on Fox & Friends, and what's happening is that such classes are being proposed as electives in some states; but apparently, no such classes have been authorized by law. I'd just speculate that in Texas, second most populous state in the country, there won't be any big push for this. The GOP here realizes they are one election away from being voted out of office (did I mention the long-time incumbent state representative for my district won re-election by only 47 votes against a guy no one had ever heard of, whose campaign consisted primarily of visiting every house in the district? He came to my house twice.). Controversy like this is not something they want to court. And if Texas isn't buying the textbook for this, who's publishing it?
(and there's this):
In case you're wondering about the president's sudden interest in the Bible.— Matthew Gertz (@MattGertz) January 28, 2019
Left, Fox & Friends, 7:53 am
Right, Trump, 8:21 am pic.twitter.com/VynQvYQTJQ
Maps explain many things.
The cynicism of this is nauseating. Obviously Trump neither knows nor values biblical literacy, much less Christian principles; in fact, the spread of either is a danger to his corrupt agenda. But since it speaks to evangelicals’ desire for some non-existent golden age of Christian nationalism - and they’re largely Biblically illiterate themselves - it’s safe for him to back it to stoke their fervor and adulation.
ReplyDeleteTrump is Pharaoh pretending to be Moses.
"Trump is Pharaoh pretending to be Moses."
ReplyDeleteNow I wish I'd said that.
Given your interest in Thomas Merton, you might find some this history on him new. I am intrigued enough to want to get the biography on which this is based. https://aeon.co/essays/can-a-vow-of-silence-last-forever-the-paradox-of-thomas-merton
ReplyDelete