 |
|
In the depths of his heart there always remains a yearning for absolute truth and a thirst to attain full knowledge of it. This is eloquently proved by man’s tireless search for knowledge in all fields. It is proved even more by his search for the meaning of life. The development of science and technology, this splendid testimony of the human capacity for understanding and for perseverance, does not free humanity from the obligation to ask the ultimate religious question. Rather it spurs us on to face the most painful and decisive of struggles those of the heart and of the moral conscience. (Veritatis Splendour)
Administrators and teachers in Catholic Schools across the Archdiocese are currently grappling with an ethical dilemma as a result of the recently promulgated Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality. This document came into schools midway through the first term of the current academic year with the expectation that schools would respond instantly to the recommendations contained within. The document, and its implications for Catholic Education, has been the subject of much debate amongst Principal’s, Religious Education coordinators and catholic teachers in general. Despite the request to disseminate the document amongst the families with children enrolled in Catholic schools many school administrations have at present chosen not to comply with this request. Strict adherence to the Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality does not seem practical or ethical as we commence the 21st century.
This essay will explore the contentious aspects of the document, and examine why it presents an ethical dilemma for Catholic Educators. Initially a brief justification for the purpose of Catholic Education will be presented followed by an explanation of the new directives. These directives will be placed in the context of the teachings of the magisterium prior to a discussion of the controversy raging in pedagogical forums and the implications it has for the education of the young people in our care.
Catholic Schools exist to
provide an education for the children of Catholic families. [1] This education
is designed to equip young people to become actively involved
in improving and developing Australian society and to be contributing
members of the various communities to which they belong, including
their family, parish, local and global communities. This
includes “helping students integrate the content of their
faith into all their efforts so that their concern will be to
help their society become what God wishes it to be.” [2] The Catholic
school is obliged to meet the requirements laid down by the secular
and church authorities to which it is accountable. Students attending
Catholic Schools are required to have access to a broad based
curriculum that covers all key areas of learning thus equipping
them to undertake work or tertiary study. [3] In
conjunction with this the special mandate of the Catholic School
is to conduct this teaching in light of the principles of the
Catholic Church. The religious education of all students is obligatory
and this education must reflect the teachings of Jesus Christ
and the institutional Church. The Catholic school as an agent
of the Church is required to be true to the message of Christ
and the needs of the faithful. As a result schools are required
to present students with the moral teachings as passed down from
Peter. “In fulfilment of its mission the Church must
propose obligatory norms of human and Christian life from the
deposit of faith in an open dialogue with the world.” [4]
The Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality remind educators of the responsibility incumbent upon both parents and teachers to impart to our young people Church guidelines that assist “children to understand and appreciate themselves as emerging men and women, loved, and capable of loving, in accordance with God’s plan and teachings of Jesus, is a most important tasks for their own happiness and salvation”. [5] The Archbishop, in his introduction to the document, urges schools to work in collaboration with parents to ensure “that all elements of education in sexuality are formative of chastity and respect for the sacredness of human life and the dignity of marriage”. [6] This “mandate to schools to act in accordance with the teachings of the Church” goes on to elucidate what this means in practice. The Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality reiterates the key tenets of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It clearly affirms the primacy of the role of parents in the education and Christian formation of their children stating “the role of the school is subsidiary to that of the parents”. [7] Schools are urged to work collaboratively with parents and to seek informed parental consent before embarking on any aspect of sexuality education. The document also warns against the use of outside experts to assist in sexuality programs in case they present messages that are not in line with the official teaching of the Church.
Fundamentally the Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality stipulates that the core teaching be clearly articulated that genital sex is only to occur for procreation within the confines of marriage as the ultimate expression of human love.
None of this so far is particularly controversial. In fact it is precisely what educators in Catholic schools have been doing as part of their teaching vocation for a significant period of time. The dilemma arises on the second last page of the document. Schools (and parents as the primary educators) are expressly forbidden from presenting young people with a complete education on sexuality or a forum for discussing a wider perspective. It is expected that practices not condoned by the Church be not discussed, thus ensuring the indoctrination of the young and the censorship of information. It is this aspect of the document that is controversial and raises ethical questions for educators.
Creativity and innovation are to be encouraged in developing a Christian sexuality program based on evaluated student need, carefully prepared objectives and these directives. However, methods, approaches and programs in which any of the following form a part are not to be used in Catholic schools:
a) promotion of an irresponsible or “recreational” attitude to sex, or any treatment of sexuality which attempts to reduce it to a level of a mere bodily function devoid of its true meaning in marital loving and life-giving;
b) use of experts (including sex-counsellors and sex-therapists) whose ideas are not in accord with Catholic belief and teaching;
c) the teaching of so-called “safe sex” and instruction in the use of condoms and other contraceptive techniques, as well as any graphic depiction and discussion of the intimate details of genital relationships. While hygiene concerning bodily fluids should be taught at an appropriately earlier age, the sexual transmission of disease must be handled with sensitivity and use accurate medical information. It should be introduced with care only at the appropriate age and discussed in the context of the true meaning and purpose of sexuality;
d) so-called “value-free” programs, which are in fact never value-free but use this claim as a cover to advance a false and misleading idea of sexuality and love;
e) “values clarification,” which based on a false idea of individual autonomy and conscience ignores the objective reality of moral law;
f) sexuality education not based on an integrated program that encompasses the development of the whole person, and not least their moral and spiritual development. [8]
Point c) above is the directive with the widest implications causing the greatest concern. If these directives are strictly followed the impact is not only on Religious Education, but also Science (including senior Biology with external exams) and Health education (again with external exams) will be profound. In these units human reproduction is covered. In Australia our curriculum guidelines are agreed to, after consultation with academic and pedagogical experts, at a state level for implementation in all schools. Students attending Catholic schools adhering strictly to these directives would receive a censored and incomplete education in these subjects, thus placing them at an educational disadvantage and more importantly disempowering them. Education, and Catholic Schooling, is about empowering people to be the best that they can be.
Why is it deemed necessary to restrict information shared with Catholic students? The Church has maintained its power over the faithful throughout the ages because it was able to talk with authority when it presented its teachings. For a long period of time the Church was the seat of knowledge, both secular and theological. At the start of the 21st century when the faithful are presented with a worldview and vast knowledge is readily available from a variety of sources, the authoritarian method of instructing Catholics is no longer effective. [9] Failure to recognise the reality of the secular world, failure to acknowledge aspects of human sexuality that are dissonant with the Catholic perspective, failure to address the questions and concerns of our young people in a supportive and Christian context will only result in the students viewing the church and its institutions as irrelevant and draconian. “Well instructed and prudently educated as Christians they will prudently and serenely decide what is truly for the good.” [10] Educators recognise that authoritative teaching is only respected when and if it acknowledges a wider, comprehensive context. Rather than achieve the Church’s aim of empowering people to be people of God, this approach would only result in the people of God turning away from the institutional Church.
To fulfil the mission of
the church the Vatican has stated that our moral norms need to
be proposed “in open dialogue with the world” [11] . The Directives
for Christian Education in Sexuality eradicates the option
for open dialogue when significant parts of knowledge are prohibited.
Despite the exactitude of Church opinion and teaching on the
sanctity of marriage, sexuality, and birth control it is recognised
that “the concrete moral norms to be followed must not be
pushed to an extreme” [12] .
Education programs, especially those involved in inculcating
the young into the tradition of the Church, “should seek
to cultivate a nurturing environment which would allow for personal
and spiritual growth and maturity, and which may or may not lead
to further involvement and/or commitment but which may assist
students in their personal search for meaning … removing
any sense of indoctrination, and retaining instead, an atmosphere
of hope, trust and individual freedom.” [13] The
directives ignore this precept. However, they do not take into
account the lived experience of many of the students attending
Catholic schools. Sex education is not a religious issue but
a human one.
Schools are involved in challenging students to question and suspect knowledge prior to accepting epistemological truth. In this environment educators cannot ignore the questions of the students. As recognised in the directives, the influence of the media in formulating the values of today’s young people cannot be underestimated. [14] An authoritarian stance is not the way for the Church to foster the faith and “obedience” of today’s youth. In the past when the faithful were less educated and had limited exposure to other ways of seeing the world, a narrow and restricted teaching was acceptable. Young people today have a worldview that exposes them to not only the immoral ways of life but also to other spiritualities and religious teachings that appear more accepting of diversity. “A pedagogy that does not address the new situation of popular cultural meaning could simply reinforce for many young people a sense they already have that religion is not relevant to meaning in life today.” [15] Educational research conducted within the Church’s own institutions concludes that “school religious education needs to include the study of contemporary spiritual and moral issues, in an open-ended, research-oriented way, including the critical interpretation of culture as a prominent source of implied and articulated meaning.” [16]
“Catholic schooling
… must speak to the minds and hearts of contemporary boys
and girls.”
[17] Traditionally
the students at Catholic Schools came from a fairly homogenous
Anglo-Irish background. The students attending Catholic schools
today come from a variety of ethnic backgrounds and family situations.
There are single parent families, blended families, and families
with homosexual siblings represented in our schools. As educators
how can we present the narrow and restricted view of sexuality
to these students? How can we ignore their lived experience?
To be true to these directives we would have to. “Man is
sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgements
less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously
seek what is right and good.” [18]
Catholic educators are facing this difficult decision. The assumption
behind the directives seems to be that by presenting the students
with information other than that of Catholic teaching we are
somehow endorsing and condoning these lifestyle choices. On the
contrary educators would argue that we are simply acknowledging
the reality of the world from which our students come and following
the teaching method of Jesus presenting the teaching within the
context of their perspective.
We are presented with evidence of Jesus’ teaching method throughout the Gospels. Jesus used parables to share the word of God. (e.g. Mt 13, 18) In the parables he presented good and bad scenarios to illustrate his teaching. Through these parables he was able to demonstrate to his audience the choices before them and the consequences of each choice. He taught with authority and conviction, but he also allowed those he taught to assimilate the teaching and choose to follow him or not with full knowledge. As educators following in the footsteps of Jesus surely we should provide our students with all the requisite knowledge, thus making our teaching authoritative. Students are then in a better position to make a conscious choice. “Conscience must be informed and moral judgement enlightened … the education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgement and to reject authoritative teachings.” [19] The church’s teaching can only be authoritative if it acknowledges and dialogues with the reality of the world from which the people of the church come. The emphasis should be on all of the Gospel values and on enhancing our spirituality. Spirituality is how to “be” not what we do, Religion is a search not a place. Religious practices are what we do, the vehicles we choose to live out our spirituality. Spirituality is the journey, for committed Catholics our religion is the train by which we undertake the journey. Consequently we can’t have predetermined responses. We need to emphasise Christian virtues, including honesty, and then these qualities will be more apparent in the people of the church.
The teachings of the Church on sexuality are not is dispute here [20] , however the right to limit information, to indoctrinate and stifle open discussion about this or any issue is at the crux of the issue. The vast majority of educators working in Catholic schools are people of faith. This is true of those in senior administration and teaching Religious education. As people of faith who have freely chosen to aspire to be Christ-like, we struggle to adopt this draconian approach that reverts to the earlier traditions of the Church that repressed the faithful in order to maintain control. “Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.” [21] The teachings of Jesus were open and honest, so should our teaching of sexuality be in all educational institutions, especially those aspiring to promulgate the Gospel message. “Educators, teachers and moralists have been able to contribute to a better understanding and integrations into life of the values proper to each of the sexes” [22] and will continue to do so in faithfulness to the mission of the church and the vocation of teacher.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Catechism of the Catholic Church, [Electronic Version]
Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne 2002
De Souza, Marion. (2000) A Comparison of Teachers and Students Perceptions in Senior Secondary RE: Implications for Teaching and Learning in RE Journal of Religious Education 48 (4)
Dwyer, B. (1993) Catholic Schools: Creating a New Culture Melbourne: David Lovell Publishing
Pyle, L (ed) 1968 Pope and Pill page 9 Reports of the Papal Commissions on Birth Control. London DLT
Rossiter, G. (2002) Addressing an Apparent Crisis for Catholic School RE: The Importance of ‘Relevance’ and of the theme ‘Search for Meaning’ Journal of Religious Education 50 (2) page 60
Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith 1975 Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics. [Electronic Version]
REFERENCES
[1] In reality Catholic schools cater for a wider demographic in the 21st century. The Catholic Education Office urges schools to maintain an enrolment of more than 83% catholic students. For some schools they would not be viable without a significantly greater proportion of non-catholic students. Of greater significance though is the “type” of catholic that attends the catholic school. Whilst catholic schools are healthy, Parish life is not. Many of our young people experience the church through the school, and whilst the school cannot replace the parish the reality is that the majority of our students (and increasingly the student’s parents) are not mass attendees. Catholic schools are catering more and more for “secular Catholics”.
[2] Australian Catholic Bishops’ Conference (1990) The Word Dwells Among Us Melbourne: Collins Dove
[3] In fact in order to maintain registration to operate as a school each institution must demonstrate its ability to deliver appropriate and relevant courses as determined by the state government educational authorities.
[4] Pyle, L (ed) 1968 Pope and Pill page 257Reports of the Papal Commissions on Birth Control.: London DLT
[5] Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality page iii
[6] Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality page iv
[7] Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality page 2
[8] Directives for Christian Education in Sexuality page 7-8
[9] In fact it is counterproductive. Church attendance is on the decline. We need approaches and strategies that are invitational not confrontational.
[10] Pyle, L (ed) 1968 Pope and Pill page 9 Reports of the Papal Commissions on Birth Control. London DLT
[11] Page 3
[12] ibid, page 3
[13] De Souza, Marion. (2000) A Comparison of Teachers and Students Perceptions in Senior Secondary RE: Implications for Teaching and Learning in RE Journal of Religious Education 48 (4) page 43
[14] Is the mass media to be the only place that students are presented with an open discussion of sexuality, reproduction and related issues? If this is the case this is not necessarily immoral but it most certainly is amoral. Schools should be proactive in addressing this situation.
[15] Rossiter, G. (2002) Addressing an Apparent Crisis for Catholic School RE: The Importance of ‘Relevance’ and of the theme ‘Search for Meaning’ Journal of Religious Education 50 (2) page 60
[16] ibid,. page 60
[17] Dwyer, B. (1993) Catholic Schools: Creating a New Culture Melbourne: David Lovell Publishing page 17
[18] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1787 [Electronic Version]
[19] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1783 [Electronic Version]
[20] Despite the fact that many church members ignore the teachings on pre-marital sex, contraception and divorce.
[21] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1782 [Electronic Version]
[22] Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith 1975 Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning sexual ethics. [Electronic Version]
___________________
Dr Michelle Faye Kearney has been teaching (Music, Drama, History, RED, Gifted education) for 17 years, 11 of these in Catholic Secondary Schools. Her current position is Deputy Principal (Pastoral Care) in a Girl's School in the northern suburbs of Melbourne.
