Foreword

As we, in the frame of REVACERN project undertook to build relationships among the researchers who are interested in the field of "religions in education," we have to answer some important questions. Question number one: which are the most essential hypotheses in connection with religions in education accepted by the wider scientific public? Social function of religions in education, respectively the religious instruction and denominational schools can be approached from the point of view of particular religious groups. In this case, the question is: what the educational aims of religious groups are. According to the main internal interpretation of purposes, the aims of religious education can be to supply the religious community, to preserve traditions, and to spread religious views and ideology. According to the typical external observant or to the member of any other religious groups in multi-religious society, these aims are not interpretable and not important because they do not share these views and they do not consider them to be serving general interests.

In the last third of the 20th century the archerian paradigm was the most popular scientific interpretation regarding religions in education. According to Archer, the church and the state have been rivals since the very beginning, and in the past two centuries, different interest groups have been competing for the control over the educational system. Regarding the position of religions in education, the streamline of European educational policy-making focused on the right to belief and religion, but the educational policymakers of most EU countries distinguished religious communities from other groups. Their privileged position can be shown by the fact that denominational schools at funding - considering the value-preserving and community-creating roles - did not have to prove that "their activity is of public interest." The last decade has brought changes in educational politics. While the special literature states that the great effect of various new agents of socialization moderate the influence of schools, new demands appeared in connection with schools, and policy makers expect more and more tasks. In the middle of the nineties the issue of the educational system was considered as a national, sometimes local issue in the EU, however, after the millennium, education started to play a key role in strengthening Europe in the global competition, and solving some global troubles. These new challenges seem to be about mediating values, norms and behavior patterns rather than teaching knowledge.

What are these new educational challenges? There is a new phenomenon in educational policy that the social embeddedness of individuals, mental condition, learning and working attitudes are not merely part of private domain. In order to increase the participation in the labor market and help students integrate in society, schools should foster some abilities and competences. They prepare individuals not only for the jobs, but make them capable of handling social relationships, preserving their mental health and developing favorable attitudes towards work.

All modern countries struggle with the declining political activity (fewer young people vote) and low-level civil engagement in youth cohorts and decreased concern with certain collectivist values. This growing democratic deficit is in association with the low level of trust in public institutions and discredit of the calculability of the surrounding society and future. That phenomenon causes skepticism in norms and laws, and at least anomie. According to the current educational politics, schools should build civil engagement, encourage the voluntary activity in local and school communities to raise general trust in society.

The third type of these social demands aim at strengthening social cohesion. For different reasons (through the migration and the unemployment) the proportion of disadvantaged social groups whose culture and religiosity differ from the school cultures and the mainstream cultures, is becoming larger. The well popularized "tolerance" became inappropriate to handle these troubles, for it resulted in indifference in practice. According to new demands, schools should take care of these groups with active solidarity and personal attention, and not only as representatives of out-groups.

These demands expanded the function of schools by developing not only the cultural capital, but the social capital as well. These expectations of schools could enhance and moreover overwrite the traditional function of religions in schools. These expectations of education could enhance and moreover overwrite the traditional function of religions in schools. When we investigate religious education and the church maintained educational institutes and search for the suitable hypotheses, it is worth taking the above mentioned approaches into account. According to some new researches in our region, religious instruction and denominational schools have the opportunity (and sometimes better opportunity than the public ones) to mediate these messages.

Let us have a look at just a few examples. As for the well-being of human resources, religious instruction and denominational schools can be influential in two ways: partly through the ideological, cognitive and affective dimensions of religiosity and partly through the value systems and norms of the school communities. The ideological dimension of religion puts the individual's life into a larger context. It makes the individual responsible for his deeds, and conscious of his way of living. It also leads to a future-oriented attitude, which is compatible with the value system of determining social institutes, e.g., schools. Religious communities can contribute to the prevention of deviant behavior and promotion of good achievement.

[...]