The Politicisation and Securitisation of Religious Education? A Rejoinder

Abstract

ABSTRACTI consider Liam Gearon’s critique of what he calls the politicisation and securitisation of religious education, focusing on his criticisms of a European research project, the Religion in Education: a Contribution to Dialogue or a Factor of Conflict in Transforming Societies of European Countries? (REDCo) project funded by the European Commission Framework 6 Programme, and a European policy discussion document, the Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions in Public Schools, published by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). I criticise Gearon’s representation of both projects, offering alternative accounts and relating my comments to Gearon’s essentialist view of religious education. I give a critique of Gearon’s view that initiation into ‘the religious life’ is the only legitimate form of religious education. I conclude that, although educators should always be wary of being manipulated by politicians and others, support for research and/or development concerning studies of religions (or of religions and non-religious worldviews) is a legitimate concern for bodies such as the European Commission, and the OSCE/ODIHR, provided that participants are enabled to work freely and openly in the pursuit of scholarly enquiry and liberal educational goals.