These books are presented as “a new series of enchanting stories inviting children to discover for themselves the world’s religions in all their rich variety”. Each one consists of the story itself and a series of short factual appendices which help to put it in context. Few of those engaged in religious education would deny the usefulness of storytelling. Stories can get a point across with an economy which, from an educational point of view, leaves more laborious non-narrative approaches bankrupt.

Certainly these stories could be helpful in introducing primary classes to a variety of the world’s religious milieux. Used together, they illustrate within a manageable compass some of the ideas of three very different currents of human religiousness, namely animist, Hindu and Semitic thought-worlds. Taken singly, their value is less clear and it is a pity that more care was not taken to make better use of the space available. In books of only 40 pages it seems strange to allow the only double-page picture in each one to incline more towards decoration than illustration.

What are described on the cover blurb as the authors’ “fascinating asides” are more often irritating marginal notes which distract from the story (as does the running head at the top of each page). If a story cannot stand alone without such devices, one wonders if it is worth telling.

Some readers will object to the sexist assertion in The River Goddess that “like all beautiful women, Ganga too was aware of her celestial charm, so she was wicked, whimsical, coquettish and vain”. One wonders at the decision in Sarah, Who Loved Laughing to explain “nomad” in an “aside” but to let “crenelated” pass without comment. And it is a pity that the Islamic convention of showing Muhammad with his face veiled was not explained, given the use of such an illustration in I Want to Talk to God.

But undoubtedly the major drawback of these books lies in the occasional use of judgmental comment. For example, to say that “Hinduism is a way of life to best experience the relationship between a human being and God”; or that “a whole population of genies live on or under the earth”; or that “other divinities are local - the God of the Hebrews is universal”; or that “Islam is the third of the religions revealed by God to man”, will necessitate careful clarification and correction.

RE teachers may, quite reasonably, take the view that publishers working in this area should by now be au fait with the vocabulary demanded by (if not the philosophy behind) a phenomenological approach.

Chris Arthur is a lecturer in religious studies at St David’s University College, Lampeter.