^{note 183 page 1} See, for example, The School Bible.

^{note 183 page 2} e.g. the story of Noah tends to end at the leaving of the Ark; the rest is not considered suitable for the lower Primary school, the stage at which the story often appears. If the whole story cannot be used then, should it not be left as a whole till a later stage?

^{note 184 page 1} Predestination is a difficult doctrine, but a large part of the difficulty found here and in the Pauline teaching on grace by an A level sixth form, stemmed from moralistic ‘be good and God will love you’ school worship.

^{note 184 page 2} ‘The God of sugar’—a student comment.

^{note 185 page 1} There is however an increasing tendency to teach the historical background of biblical history and not merely tell the story.

^{note 185 page 2} ‘Too much too soon’—see the criticisms of R. Goldman, Religious Education from Childhood to Adolescence, Readiness for Religion.

^{note 185 page 3} On this tendency see Barr, J., Old and Mew in Interpretation, p. 72.Google Scholar

^{note 185 page 4} J. Barr, op. cit., p. 66f. The whole of chapter 3 is relevant for the points raised here and in the preceding note.

^{note 185 page 5} So almost the whole of a large group of students saw the death of Jesus ‘religiously’ and totally failed to see it against the politics of the time.

^{note 185 page 6} An older generation began with interpretation (in the catechism) and only heard biblical history within that framework. This has gone and may not have been replaced by any interpretative teaching.

^{note 186 page 1} e.g. R. Goldman, Readiness for Religion, Sheep and Shepherds. Few twentieth century British children have a vivid life-interest in this. They may never have seen a sheep let alone a shepherd. Similarly, ‘what is the Bible?’ is a methodological tool rather than a life-theme; ‘symbols’ may be judged to be the same.

^{note 186 page 2} ‘If each of the catecheses forming this work genuinely relies on an experience of the child, the entire catechism, for its part, is based on a predetermined doctrinal structure’ (Racine, L., ‘The Child's Psychological Experience and his Evangelization’, Lumen Vitae, 1967, No. 3, p. 479).Google Scholar

^{note 186 page 3} Racine, op. cit., p. 481.

^{note 187 page 1} e.g. in studying ‘bread’ the story of Ruth (if used) is merely illustrative of another method of harvesting.

^{note 187 page 2} The underlying argument may be of this kind:

‘Why listen to Eph. 2 on race?’—‘Because Paul said it.’

‘Why listen to Paul?’—‘Because he is a great servant of Christ.’

‘Why listen to Christ?’—‘Because He is Son of God’—but that is a judgment of faith.

Or ‘Why listen to Eph. 2 on race?‘—’Because in Christ all men are reconciled.’ But they are not; not if that means the Church or our world—so—why listen?

Or ‘listen because all men are reconciled in Christ’—‘Who is Christ?’—and the judgment of faith is required again.

See the response given to ‘I am the way, the truth and the life’ in Marvin, E., Odds Against, p. 30.Google Scholar

^{note 187 page 3} ‘But Miss, how can you rise when you're dead ? I can't' raises the real questions of Christology—who is this Jesus of whom it is said that He rose? But it cannot get a full or even a very helpful answer at age 7, when it was asked.

^{note 187 page 4} A very vague term.

^{note 188 page 1} See e.g. the writings of Camus. (The desire to protect the children, of course, operates here.)

^{note 188 page 2} See H. Cox, The Secular City, which seldom criticises the twentieth century western city-culture in any depth.

^{note 188 page 3} What does Kurios Iesous mean in this existentialist context?

^{note 188 page 4} There may be an overemphasis on selfhood in this theology—if Christ sets me free to be truly myself, then what are other people? Helps to my self-expression? If they are people in their own right, they may prevent or limit my self-expression.

^{note 189 page 1} See e.g. von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vols. 1 and 2; Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke.

^{note 189 page 2} Not merely ‘how could he do such a miracle?’ but ‘who is he of whom such a story could be told and credited?’

^{note 189 page 3} These people thought Jesus mad—why? This one thought He was a prophet—why? What does this mean? What do we know about prophets? This one thought He was Son of God—why? What did it mean? What do I think? What does the teacher think?—why?

^{note 190 page 1} There are judgments to be made.