Tuesday 23 February 2021

A comment of today's vision for RSHE in Catholic schools. Part 2.


The role of parents.

About this a comment is made; “The relationship between the school and parents is something to be desired and hopefully explored, and even evaluated.” 

No, this relationship is already clear. The school is subsidiary to the parents’ role. The school can’t impose. Parents, however, can evaluate the school. The parents’ role is a human right, and not simply something that the Church teaches. To say otherwise opens the door for this relationship to be manipulated and the parents' role to be made subject to school and state.

Speaking about “sensitive or fast-changing subjects, online safety, and mental and physical well-being”, and how the school is better placed to deal with them is again very manipulative if not patronising of parents. What is at stake here are not cultural trends, but the truth about the human person, which the Church has the responsibility to nurture.


The curriculum.

Well, the curriculum has its own agenda, separate and independent to that of the mission of parents and the Church. It is clear that this agenda intends to take the lead, and that all others are subsidiary. The agenda is to do with ways of living and life-style, whose nurturing is to be placed firmly in the hands of the school, making the  ethos of the school concerned with new ideas of self-identity, rather than Christ Jesus and the Christian life. The parents’ role and that of any genuine educative agency is to form persons. And so the curriculum is a big problem.


The requirement to involve parents.

Their role is often evaluated from the perspective of Muslims! Why is this? Why is the Catholic faith not the foundation here? This is another big problem.


The model curriculum.

This is spoken of as being based on “core pedagogical virtue”. But what does this mean?

It is also stated that love is the basis of Christian morality. No, it is not. God and human nature is the basis of Christian morality. Moreover, love has to be learned.

Moreover, “we have to work for the Kingdom of God.” No, our effort does not produce the Kingdom of God. We are called to live with God. Christ Jesus uniquely enables us to do this. We are called to allow Christ Jesus to form us for true human identity, which is to live with God. Out of life with God, love emerges.

“Prayer and worship nourish our lives with God.” No, everything about a baptised person’s life is to do with God, we have been brought from darkness into light. Prayer and worship help to form our new lives in Christ. The disengagement of prayer and life which is implicit here is a big problem.


The ethos of the new 'Catholic' presentation is profoundly Pelagian and oriented to accommodating the secular agenda. This is especially dangerous at the level of anthropology. It is presented by people who appear to have an acquaintance with the Faith, in the sense of being able to comment upon it. However, commenting about matters of faith is not the same as being in living contact with the Lord.


No comments: