THAT'S THE SPIRIT David Boulton An apparent spate of particularly appalling juvenile crime has produced a good deal of anguished discussion over the past few months on what our schools arc or are not doing to "promote the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils", as required by the 1988 Education Reform Act. But what is this "spiritual development" we talk about so glibly? To Education Secretary John Patten it apparently means bringing back the threat of hell fire, tacked on, as it were, to his new national curriculum. To many church leaders it means specific religious instruction in which "things of the spirit" relate to or are derived from another world and to the traditional supernatural God of our fathers. What does it mean to us?
It is easy to toss around words like "spiritual" and "spirituality", particularly in the context of religion and morality, without troubling overmuch to think through what we mean by these ancient terms. That very present help in time of trouble, the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, defines "spirituality" as "that which has a spiritual character", which doesn't get us far till we find "spiritual" itself defined as "pertaining to, affecting or concerning the spirit or higher moral qualities, esp. as regarded in a religious aspect". "Spirit" has no fewer than 17 definitions, many of them further sub-divided, but they start with a reminder that the word derives from the idea of breath: "the animating or vital principle... the breath of life", and run on to more developed notions such as "the mind or faculties as the seat of action and feeling", and best of all, "the faculties of perception or reflection".
How much of this did the draftsmen of successive Education Acts have in mind when they laid on schools the burden of promoting "spiritual development"? Probably not a lot. They quickly found that religious traditionalists interpreted the words in a specifically religious way, which offended humanists and others who objected to religious indoctrination and offered their own secular definition as an alternative. The result was that the Department of Education adopted two definitions of spirituality, one limiting the word's use to that which "is connected with or derives from a sense of God or of Gods", which kept the churches happy, and another focusing on "inner feelings and beliefs" which read: "The spiritual area is concerned with the awareness a person has of those elements in existence and experience which may be defined in terms of inner feelings and beliefs; they affect the way people see themselves and throw light on the purpose and meaning of life itself".
A recent RE syllabus recognises that "for some people this awareness relates to God, but for others... it can be evidenced by human aspirations such as love, compassion, forgiveness, faith, self-giving, altruism, etc." The Chairman of the National Curriculum Council, David Pascall, has developed this further: "Spirituality... has to do with relationships... with the universal search for individual identity, with our response to the challenging experiences of life, such as death, suffering, beauty and the rare encountering of real goodness. It is to do with the search for meaning in life and values by which to live".
The British Humanist Association - from one of whose briefing documents these quotations are- taken - has been actively campaigning to ensure that "spiritual development" in the schools curricular, or in morning assembly, is not necessarily related to belief in a "real" God, or to notions of a supernatural origin for spiritual awareness and morality - notions which many teachers and pupils alike now find antiquated and bizarre. One result has been The spiritual dimension comes from within, not from beyond... a definition agreed by a Working Group of Christians and Humanists: "Education in spiritual growth is that which promotes apprehension of ultimate reality through fostering higher forms of human consciousness". SoFers might question the concept of "ultimate reality", but as a working definition it is a huge advance on faith-laden or supernaturally validated notions.
The Humanists have worked hard to find definitions acceptable to "theists on the one hand, agnostics and atheists on the other". All can agree, they say, that "the `spiritual' dimension comes from our deepest humanity. It finds expression in aspirations, moral sensibility, creativity, love and friendship, response to natural and human beauty, scientific and artistic endeavour, appreciation and wonder at the natural world, intellectual achievement and physical activity, surmounting suffering and persecution, selfless love, the quest for meaning and value by which to live." To all of which SoF members would surely say a heartfelt "Hear hear!". Individual members of SoF or local groups might wish to make contact with local working parties which are seeking to apply to local schools and education authorities the idea that spirituality, like religion, is a human creation. They could start by contacting John White, Secretary, BHA Education Committee, 14 Lamb's Conduit Passage, London WC1R 4RH.