The role of anthropological interpretation of religion in the educational process (teaching religious culture to children)
Introduction. In the modern world, religion is not the dominant form of culture. However, religion can be both the basis of a person's worldview and one of the sources of state ideology. Religious symbols and rituals may not correspond to the scientific understanding of the world, or even just common sense. Bringing religious concepts to common sense is a necessary part of the pedagogical process when introducing children to the basics of religious culture. An important role in this process is played by the anthropological interpretation of religious meanings. Content. Religion is the connection between a person and the highest sacred authority. Religious symbolism combines the duality of sacred and profane. Religious symbols cannot be “pure”, without anthropological metaphors - then they will completely lose their meaning. Anthropological interpretation of sacred reality is an integral part of the religious language. An anthropological interpretation of Christianity can serve the purpose of clarifying symbols within discourse. In this case, the interpretation is more of an explanation than an argument. The theology of the Modern Times appeals to the arguments of common sense in order not to explain religious symbols, but to convincingly prove their significance, while the reality of God is not questioned. The existential philosophy of Kierkegaard admits that a person may not know God if he does not experience existential feelings. The basic principles of Buddhism are formulated in simple, psychological language, understandable to all. Atheistic interpretations of religion (for example, L. Feuerbach), despite the denial of God, provide valuable material for confirming the significance of religion as a culture. Psychoanalytic interpretations of religion are also valuable for understanding the nature of human consciousness and the role of religion in the social and personal psychological dimension. All these interpretations of religion are possible in the process of teaching children about the basics of religious cultures. Conclusions. In the modern world, anthropological interpretations of religion sound more convincing, clearer than explanations of symbolism within religious discourse. The professional level of a teacher of religious culture is the higher, the wider his understanding of the various methods of anthropological interpretation of religion. The program of the advanced training course for teachers teaching the basics of religious culture should contain elements responsible for the skill of anthropological and psychological interpretation of religious symbols.