Advertisement

Theological Underpinnings of Australian Catholic RE: A Public Theology Proposal

  • Terence LovatEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter will begin with an appraisal of Religious Education (RE) as it has functioned in Australian religious and public school settings over the past century and a half, with especial reference to the Catholic setting. Such appraisal will be shown to reveal a paucity of theological underpinning and directionality in RE, rendering it weakened against other school subjects by means of a gap in its disciplinary underpinnings. This chapter will move to propose a public theology perspective as one highly suitable to redressing this weakness and providing RE with the theological infrastructure necessary to its role as agency of both informing and enfaithing. This chapter will justify this move against a range of prominent scholarship in theology, including that of Newman and Aquinas, and will utilize a key feature of Habermasian epistemology that fits well with the intentions of both public theology and an informing and enfaithing RE.

References

  1. Abbott, W. (1966). The documents of Vatican II. New York: The America Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, N. (2006). Habermas and theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Ghazali, A. (1999). Abu al-Ghazali’s path to sufism (R. McCarthy, Trans.). Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae.Google Scholar
  4. Al-Farabi, A. (1968). Ihsa’al-‘ulum (Enumeration of the sciences) (U. Amin (Ed.), Trans.). Cairo: Librairie Anglo-Egyptienne.Google Scholar
  5. Aquinas, T. (1948). Summa theologica (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). New York: Benziger Bros.Google Scholar
  6. Aristotle, (1985). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  7. Bingaman, B. (2015). All things new: The Trinitarian nature of the human calling in maximus the confessor and Jurgen Moltmann [Foreword by J. Moltmann]. Cambridge: James Clarke and Co.Google Scholar
  8. Browning, D., & Schussler Fiorenza, E. (Eds.). (1992). Habermas, modernity and public theology. New York: Crossroads.Google Scholar
  9. Douglas, B., & Lovat, T. (2010). Theology in Australian higher education: The ‘Newcastle Model’ brings theology home to the academy. Higher Education Research and Development, 29(1), 75–87.Google Scholar
  10. Goldman, R. (1965). Readiness for religion. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  11. Graham, E. (2013). Between a rock and a hard place: Public theology in a post-secular age. London: SCM Press.Google Scholar
  12. Groome, T. (1980). Christian religious education: Sharing our story and vision. San Francisco: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  13. Grundy, S. (1982). Three modes of action research. Curriculum Perspectives, 2(3), 23–34.Google Scholar
  14. Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests (J. Shapiro, Trans.). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  15. Habermas, J. (1974). Theory and practice (J. Viertal, Trans.). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  16. Habermas, J. (1985). The philosophical discourse of modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  17. Habermas, J. (2002). Religion and rationality: Essays on reason, God and modernity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Habermas, J. (2006). Religion in the public sphere. European Journal of Philosophy, 14, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Habermas, J. (2008). Notes on a post-secular society. New Perspective Quarterly, 25(4), 17–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Husserl, E. (1958). The idea of phenomenology (W. Alston & G. Nakhnikian, Trans.). The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  21. Lovat, T. (1995). Teaching and learning religion: A phenomenological approach. Sydney: Social Science Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lovat, T. (2009). What is this thing called religious education? (3rd ed.). Sydney: David Barlow Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Lovat, T. (2012). Interfaith education and phenomenological method. In T. van der Zee & T. Lovat (Eds.), New perspectives on religious and spiritual education (pp. 87–100). Munster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  24. Lovat, T. (2013). Jurgen Habermas: Education’s reluctant hero. In M. Murphy (Ed.), Social theory and educational research: Understanding Foucault, Habermas, Derrida and Bourdieu (pp. 69–83). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Lovat, T. (2018). Spirituality in Australian education: A legacy of confusion, omission and obstruction. In M. de Souza & L. Halafoff (Eds.), Re-enchanting education and spiritual wellbeing. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Moltmann, J. (2016). The future of public theology. Address at World Council of Churches Forum, Geneva. Available at http://www.pubtheo.com/page.asp?pid=2061.
  27. Moore, B., & Habel, N. (1982). When religion goes to school: Typology of religion for the classroom. Adelaide: Texts in Humanities.Google Scholar
  28. Newman, J. H. (1927). The idea of a university defined and illustrated. Chicago: Loyola University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Newman, J. H. (1979). An essay in aid of a grammar of assent. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  30. Newman, J. H. (2013). Catena aurea: Commentary on the four gospels (by T. Aquinas). London: Baronius Press.Google Scholar
  31. NSW. (1980). Religion in education in NSW government schools. Sydney: NSW Department of Education.Google Scholar
  32. NSW. (1991). Studies of religion. Sydney: NSW Board of Studies.Google Scholar
  33. Paeth, S. (2005). Jurgen Moltmann’s public theology. Journal of Political Theology, 6(2), 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smart, N. (1968). Secular education and the logic of religion. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  35. Smart, N. (1974). The science of religion and the sociology of knowledge. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Stackhouse, M. (2004). Civil religion, political theology and public theology: What’s the difference? Journal of Political Theology, 5(3), 275–293.Google Scholar
  37. Stenhouse, L. (1967). Culture and education. London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  38. Van Manen, M. (1982). Phenomenological pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 12, 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Van Manen, M. (1991). The tact of teaching: The meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of NewcastleNewcastleAustralia
  2. 2.University of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations