It has long been discussed what place religion should have in the Swedish school systems and the views on this has changed over the years. The purpose of this essay is to investigate the change of religion's place in school in the Swedish parliamentary debate and school curriculum, regarding the years 1962 and 2011. I will also discuss how the debates and curriculums relate to freedom of religion. The purpose will be answered with a qualitative text analysis through ideal types analysis. The ideal types are derived from vital parts of previous research and the secularization theory that landed in the polar opposites Christian Denomination and Non-denomination. The ideal type Christian Denomination stands for subjectivity, Christian values and parents’ rights to freedom of religion regarding their children. In contrary, the ideal type Non-denomination stands for objectivity at all levels, the children’s right to choose their conception of life and freedom of religion. Bringing this research to light concerning how the view of religion’s place in school has changed over time in the parliament and curriculum, will together with the creation of ideal types both be contributing to the field of science. Since the school in Sweden is mandatory, it is important for the society to be aware of how the children are affected by the teachings in the school.     The research shows that the debate 1962 is in comparison located nearest to Christian Denomination and the curriculum of 1962 is placed in between the two ideal types. The debate and curriculum of 2011 are located at the same spot close to Non-denomination. In summary, there has been a change in the place of religion in school, both in the parliamentary debate and curriculum. According to the results, religion seems to have a smaller impact in school year 2011 compared to 1962. However, it is possible given the secularization theory that religion appears in new ways.

In the Swedish curriculum there is uncertainty today, regarding the purpose of the subject of religious studies on a highschool level. A question exists whether students should merely be learning about religions or if they should, in addition, also learn from said religions. The origin of these two options to religious education can be traced back to at least to the writings of Michael Grimmitt, a British philosopher of religion, and to the debate he sparked in the 1980s. The Swedish curriculum does not use the language of Grimmitt and is rather vague when it takes a stance regarding these two possibilities, though it leans heavily on the idea that Swedish highschool students should just learn about religion. Due to the vagueness of the current curriculum, the document is unable to answer the presented question. This essay intends to find an answer between these two choices to religious education. This will be done through the methods of reflective equilibrium, as defined by the philosopher John Rawls. By looking at which of the two options is the most compatible with the curriculum as a whole, an answer will be presented as to which approach is to be preferred. The result of the study is that it is not enough for students to just learn about religion and changes should be done to the curriculum. How such a change should be designed remains, however, unanswered.