This is a tangent I thought of while reading the Christmas in the Schools thread.
Many schools have chiors or other groups that either play or sing music that is of religious descent. How do you feel that this does or doesn’t violate the first amendment?
Music in the schools is taught/performed for a variety of reasons, most of which have to do with teaching technical proficiency or with introducing students to the vast variety of music extant.
This being the case, I personally don’t feel that “religious music” in the school violates the establishment clause. The purpose of teaching and performing this music is not to proselytize, any more than is teaching “History of World Religions.” Both are provided for the enrichment of the students’ education. Would you have all the references to God, Jesus and the Church stricken from Shakespeare’s plays when studied in public schools?
If it really bothers anyone, then I suppose a variety of music from a variety of religions could be presented at concert time. But to not perform a beautiful piece of music because it was written for a religious text is, IMO, narrow-minded and exclusionary.
By the same token, and using similar arguments, secular music ought to be screened just as carefully. Some of the texts and contexts, be they from operas or folk music, can be downright earthy.
The Dave-Guy
“since my daughter’s only half-Jewish, can she go in up to her knees?” J.H. Marx
Since most artistic endeavors of the Reanissance were church sponsored, many of the works of this incredibly creative period in European history have religious themes. It is tough, but possible, to put together an instrumental band or choral music program that totally ignores these works.
For the most part, however, these classes are electives. Alternate sources of music instruction exist in most communities, although they may be expensive. Most of these classes do require practice time outside of school.
Basic ground rules:
-
Avoid the most blatantly religious works. Ave Maria is a beautiful piece of music. It is clearly only appropriate for Christians, and even many Christians who feel the Catholics honor Mary excessively would find this song objectionable. OTOH, songs from “Fiddler on the Roof”, which uses a religious theme as a symbol of a man’s struggles to define right & wrong could be reasonably incorporated into a program, or the whole play could be presented by the drama & vocal music departments.
-
Until music classes are elective, religious songs should be avoided.
-
No student should be required to participate any any song they find objectionable. Their grade should not be affected by such a decision. It is reasonable to ask them to remain on stage, however, so as to avoid causing unnecessary disruption.
-
Beacause of #3, these songs should not be selected for interscholastic competitions. They are fine for school assemblies & after school recitals for parents.
-
Students & parents with concerns should address these with their program director at the time of enrollment, and not wait until just before a major concert before making demands and ultimatums. Compromises take time to reach.
Here’s a federal publication that summarizes current laws: http://www.fac.org/publicat/parents/parents.htm
Sue from El Paso
Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.
A thoughtful and well-researched reply, Sue. I’m a little puzzled by #2, however. Music classes and band/orchestra/chorus in my high school were electives. Unless my school was an exception, or you’re referring to compulsory classes in elementary or junior high school. But many of their concerts make more use of contemporary “pop” music, since the kiddies are more familiar with them and can learn them by rote.
My opinion is anyone’s education, be it general knowledge or music and the arts, is incomplete if it doesn’t include the religious aspects. Since you prefaced your list with an acknowledgement of the numerous works of beauty commissioned by the Church through the millenia, I assume you agree.
The Dave-Guy
“since my daughter’s only half-Jewish, can she go in up to her knees?” J.H. Marx
Dave, you’re right. #2 was a little vague.
What I meant was that for 2nd graders, everyone does music together. It is not an elective for them. For 8th graders, however, music typically is an elecctive. They must choose to be in band and/or chorus. The “until” simply meant that sacred music should generally not be included until children reach the grade level at which music becomes a choice.
Also the above “rules” are MY interpretation of what I read in various guidelines I researched, and in no way are law.
Sue from El Paso
Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.
I’m all for the keeping religious dogma and theological teachings out of the schools and firmly with parents and preachers, but music education in our schools should not be separated into the religious and the secular. A student would receive a very incomplete education if all religious pieces were excluded. You can only play POP goes the weasel so many times, you know. Music is about inspiration and religion has always been inspirational.
Your #1 & #2 are counterproductive. When we teach music, we should not exclude the most beutiful pieces simply because they deal with subject matter we find too “religious”.
I would object to an entire curriculum focusing on religious works (unless it’s a college-level elective, of course), but to prohibit the joys of music to our children because we’re afraid it’ll brainwash them is foolish (I’m not calling you a fool, just making a point).
#3 can not be allowed either. Teachers have a hard enough job to have to worry about junior’s conscientious objection to singing “God Bless America” with the rest of the class.
I fail to see why, in #4, it’s OK for school assemblies but not for interscholastic events.
#5 I agree with completely. Any objections to the curriculum (not just the music program) should be brought up at the very beginning of the school year (and often, these programs are known years in advance). The time to challenge the grand finale of the winter play is not on Dec 1 when you hear little joey belting out, “Silent Night” in his room in practice for next week’s production.
None of this is intended as a personal attack, Major, just my opinions - in fact I’m glad you’re taking an interest in our schools.
Imagine if we segregated art history as well! How very preposterous!
Hell is Other People.
Having a pretty good voice, I sang in school choirs throughout Jr. High, High School, and college. I never much cared for those texts with a religious meaning, but then again I didn’t care for the text to “My True Love Hath My Heart, and I Have His” either, because it was obviously supposed to be sung from the standpoint of a girl (ick! cooties!).
I will say this, though: If not for the religious songs I had to sing, I would never have acquired the skill to recite the Latin “Gloria” in under a minute. 
The truth, as always, is more complicated than that.
Sue, your point is well-put, well-taken, and I agree with you. Although it seems a little obvious that second graders would not really be attempting too many religious oriented songs. Their speed is more the “Frosty the Snowman” variety, rather than selections from Handel’s “Messiah.” Although I guess some of the little nippers could manage “Silent Night” or something. But since most of the songs at that age are learned by rote, the more popular, secular songs would be the more obvious choices.
The Dave-Guy
“since my daughter’s only half-Jewish, can she go in up to her knees?” J.H. Marx
At my high school the chorus director has talked to the kids at the beginning of the year and essentially given them the choice of whether or not religious music will be sung. Without fail religious music has been OKed by the students mostly for the reason that most well-written, emotional music was written for church choirs because they were the only real large singing groups at the time.
Sake -
My point #1 is almost certainly more stringent than current law requires. It is my opinion that churches do offer opportunities to perform these works, and that that is the appropriate place for them. If a student selected such a work as a solo piece, and the piano accompanist were amenable, that’s one thing. But for a choir director to select such a work seems inappropriate to me. I have no problem with a student vote, as long as minority views were given due respect.
#2 With elementary school kids, the line between required & optional is pretty hard to draw. Kids that age aren’t comfortable telling adults they’re uncomfortable doing something everyone else is doing. That is my main reason for not using religious music at that level.
#3 I can’t understand why a few students remaining silently in place for songs they don’t want to sing is disruptive, or requires any extra effort on the part of the teacher.
#4 The reason for not including such music in pieces prepared for competition is that the affected kids, the other kids or even the band director may feel that kids who opt out are not contributing to a group effort (which directly impacts the band director’s future). This kind of pressure/coercion is wrong IMO. Playing for parents is something different entirely. Much less pressure, and more songs, so that sitting out for one is less noticeable.
#5 - Glad we agree on something - Seriously, I don’t really think we’re all that far apart on the others.
Sue from El Paso
Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.
DAVEW0071 wrote:
I take it you’ve never attended a Messiah sing-along. The average adult’s speed is more the “Frosty the Snowman” variety, too.
The truth, as always, is more complicated than that.
Ha! Recently I heard a group of adults attempting to sing good 'ol “Frosty The Snowman” and it went exactly like this:
Major, you’re right, our views are not that far apart. Call me old fashioned (no, don’t on second thought), but I think elementary schools should be run like dictatorships NOT democracies. At those young ages (6-12), children need to learn to follow directions and respect authority, and the number one priority should be to learn. If you create the precedence in music class for little Shelly’s non-participation in the class recital on religious grounds, then little Fontleroy will refuse to participate in science class because his parents are creationists, and tiny Mortimer will sit geopraphy class out because his momma is certain the world is flat.
Parents must work with the school board to set a curriculum and then the students must follow it.
Hell is Other People.
Sake -
Actually all of the examples you cite are situations in which the preferred method of handling disagreements between parents & schools is to allow the student to be excused from the class. This is not just my opinion, but is the intent & philosophy embodied in the government pamphlet I cited earlier in this thread (at least as I understand it). While that doesn’t make it unequivocably right, it does make it the intent of the President & Department of Education, and almost as enforceable as enacted laws. Certainly a school board not in compliance with these guidelines facing a suit over such issues would do well to settle.
You can call me old-fashioned, too. I do understand where you’re coming from - I myself went to Catholic school through 7th grade. Self-esteem, personal expression, & creativity weren’t seen as quite so desireable then as they seem to be now. I know that we both want to do what’s right for all of the kids, but we disagree on how to do so. I’m glad we can do so amicably.
Sue from El Paso
Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.
Addendum: Oops - I read your last example too fast. Mortimer would only be excused from Geography if his Mom was convinced the earth was flat based on RELIGIOUS convictions.
::eyes rolling::
THAT makes more sense, thanks for clearing that up - I was going to compose a very confused response to your post.
Now that I have nothing to disagree with I’ll just sit here and smile :).
Hell is Other People.