 |
 |
Tuesday September 07, 2010
|
Education
Church : Education
The offending course Since September 2008, a new course of Ethics and Religious Culture (ERC) has been introduced into all Quebec schools, from grade one to the end of high school. Parents have been up in arms about this course since the Quebec government first made known its preliminary version in the fall of 2006. At that time, the Ministry of Education requested the Quebec Assembly of Catholic Bishops, the Association of Catholic Parents of Quebec, and other religious groups to give their opinion on the contents to the Committee for Religious Affairs. As President of the Association of Catholic Parents of Quebec, I was outraged that, following the consultation, parents’ opinions were ignored. All parents consulted by the association had expressed their definite desire to maintain their right to oversee the courses. After all, its religious and moral content would be transmitted to their children. An emasculated Quebec Charter The Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms recognized the responsibility of the schools to respect parents’ beliefs and convictions within school programs. That changed drastically in June 2005, with the adoption of Bill 95. The National Assembly, without previous debate, agreed unanimously to withdraw that provision from the Quebec charter. Since the summer of 2005, parents have suffered from a total lack of regard. The government has shown a total lack of respect for parental rights to determine the moral and religious education of their children. First, the course was imposed equally on private denominational schools and public schools, with the only difference being that private schools may also teach religious education of their choice besides the course of Ethics and Religious Culture. Then, the Minister of Education, Jean-Marc Fournier, later followed by Michelle Courchesne, declared that no exemptions would be allowed. Most of Quebec’s private schools are Catholic; some others are of various Christian denominations, or of Jewish or Muslim faith. That has not stopped most of these schools from caving in to the government’s demand. The one exception is English-language Loyola High School, which has begun a court challenge. Private and public schools Most private schools are subsidized for a little more than half their costs by the government. But even non-subsidized private schools are forced to give the course. Parents, therefore, have nowhere to turn. Objecting are mostly Catholic, as well as some other Christian or atheist parents. Before 2006, Catholics and Protestants had a choice of moral and religious education according to their faith; those without religious affiliation had the option of a course of moral education without religious content. Now, these families have lost the option of a course according to their beliefs. But what infuriates the parents the most is the fact that the Quebec government is subjecting their children to the teaching of faiths that are incompatible with their own. Approximately 1400 families have requested that their children be exempt from this course; all public schools have officially refused, backed by their school boards, which, by law, have the right to grant such exemptions. Because of the Minister’s stand, school boards refuse to exercise that right. Backed into a corner, some parents have withdrawn their children from the course, in spite of the school’s refusal. Many others have not dared to go that far or even to request an exemption. In J.H. Leclerc senior high school in Granby, the principal suspended six male students from classes for a day, just before Christmas, after they had missed 20 classes of the new course. This caused a frenzy in the media. The students, all Evangelical, have continued to absent themselves from the course. Diane Gagné, mother of one of the boys, expects a second suspension to kick in soon, this time for a period of two days. In the event of renewed absences, the school plans to increase the length of suspensions gradually up to 4 days. After 35 missed periods, according to what is called the life code of the school, the students will be expelled from school. Mrs. Gagné contends that the children are pretty shaken up by the school’s actions but are determined to stand their ground, as are the parents. Lawyer Jean Yves Côté has sent a letter of “putting in default” to the school demanding that students be allowed to attend their mandatory classes needed for the high school diploma. Mr. Côté is requesting a temporary injunction against the application of the sanctions of J.H. Leclerc’s life code, with the intent of obtaining a judgment on whether the absences are motivated. The school argues that they are not, in applying its disciplinary measures. If an injunction is granted, students would be allowed to attend all classes until the maximum of 35 absences was reached. Then, if the judge did not agree that there was motive for withdrawal from class, the students would be expelled from school. In Granby’s junior high school, L’Envolée, in early January, two female Evangelical students were required to attend school on a professional development day to make up the time they missed by skipping ERC classes. Other schools in Granby tolerate students’ absences and have chosen not to fight parents’ decisions, according to Ms. Gagné. Elsewhere in the province, schools are tolerating student boycotts of the class. In Valcourt’s primary school, in the Eastern Townships, about 20 students are skipping their ERC class as well as another 3 in high school, according to one of the parents, Sylvain Lamontagne. Four of the primary school students are taken from class by volunteers who keep them occupied while the rest stay with family members. In Beauceville, another 20 students are boycotting the class at the primary level and another 10 to 20 students are skipping the class in high school. In St-Georges at Notre-Dame-de-la-Trinité high school, about 50 students are staying away from the class. Many others throughout the territory of the Beauce Etchemin school board don’t attend the class. According to Jean Trottier, a parent and spokesman for the Coalition for Freedom in Education, many students attend class much against their will for lack of ability to make other arrangements during the class period. According to him, the school board has not been grading the course for absentees and is awaiting a decision on the part of the Ministry of Education on how to proceed. In most areas of Quebec, schools and school boards are waiting to see what the courts will decide. Scheduled court case There is a court case scheduled to be heard from the 11th to the 13th of May, 2009 in Quebec’s Superior Court in Drummondville. Two Catholic parents are challenging the school’s refusal of an exemption for both their first grader and their sixteen-year-old who is in last year of high school. They are arguing that the course’s contents puts their children’s faith at risk. This will most likely be a test case for Quebec parents. The lawyer representing the parents, Jean-Yves Côté, hoped that the judge would rule the school board’s decisions unacceptable on the grounds that they had not exercised their right to grant exemptions. The judge has rejected arguments on those grounds. The lawyer also appealed to the fact that, in principle, all religious and moral education done in schools should satisfy parental requirements. But the judge has indicated that he wishes to hear the arguments that would demonstrate that the parents’ and children’s right to freedom of religion and conscience are curtailed by the application of the law that makes this course mandatory. The lawyer has a monumental task in front of him, and this court case can rightly be called a constitutional challenge to Bill 95, a bill that removed options in religious education, imposed one mandatory course of ethics and religious culture and removed from the Quebec charter the parental right to oversee school programs. Catholic bishops In March 2007, Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Quebec expressed the opinion that parents should maintain the right to oversee programs with religious and moral contents, and that they should have the choice of a program in accordance with their faith and convictions. He reported that the Quebec Assembly of Catholic Bishops did not want to see the course imposed on private Catholic schools. Then in March 2008, the Quebec Assembly of Catholic Bishops made known its majority position, vis-à-vis the new course, in a press release, a letter to the Minister of Education, and a Declaration. The bishops expressed a preference for respect of parental rights in the choice of the moral and religious education of their children. They expressed reservations and fears about the impact the course would have on children, on their attitude toward religion and on their faith. They stated that in order to warrant an exemption, the reasons should be serious, such as the violation of freedom of conscience which they do not consider is at risk by the program. They state that their position is one of “critical vigilance.” They argue that the program should be implemented gradually in order to prevent undesired effects. They suggest that the Quebec government evaluate the impact of the course in three to five years. They suggest that if, at that time, the negative effects outweigh the positive, another undetermined option should be offered. They express their intention to remain attentive to the impact of the program; for example, by putting in place a committee of experts who would follow the implementation of the program and receive observations through the dioceses based on experience. Experiences in the classroom The Coalition for Freedom in Education, on the other hand, backed by the Association of Catholic Parents of Quebec, and by Orthodox, Melkite, Evangelical, Pentecostal and other Christian groups, has asked parents to inform them of their experiences in the classroom. Since the summer of 2007, this group and its supporters have held demonstrations, marches, press conferences and participated in many media events, interviews, and talk shows in order to keep the public informed, support the parents and put pressure on the Quebec government. However, the government has shown no signs of giving in. The only leader who showed a political inclination to have parents’ views respected, Mario Dumont, lost badly in the last provincial election, whereas the Liberal and Parti Québécois parties who were instrumental in forcing the course on parents, both made significant gains. In the meantime, publishers have been churning out school books for children, teaching guides for teachers and audio-visual material for classes in Ethics and Religious Culture. Different sets of didactic material are now available for grades one through six, but at the high school level, school books have been longer in coming; some are expected to be available in the fall of 2009. Parents have had some access to school books for the children but the material intended for teachers is prohibitively expensive. Radio-Canada radio and television have also aired live episodes of ERC classes. Parents’ fears have been confirmed by what they have seen and heard and they continue to have many objections to the material itself and to the way the program requires that it be taught. Beginning with grade one, children are exposed to religious stories, practices and beliefs of numerous religions: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and others as well as native spiritualities and atheistic world visions are jumbled together. Different schools choose different manuals and it is difficult to know which ones are most prevalent. One series that seems quite popular is published by Modulo and seems to be fairly representative. Christianity is portrayed as just another religious story where Jesus is a figure comparable to Mohammed or Buddha, for example. His divine nature is omitted, as is his mission of salvation for all mankind. His resurrection is played down. Christian teachings and Gospel passages find their place alongside native mythology and Muslim, Hindu or other religious beliefs. There is nothing to support children in their Christian beliefs. In fact, quite the opposite is true because course content on the various religions is often presented in class by the children themselves after they have researched a topic or story. The accent is on listening to the positions or experiences of all peoples without judging. Yet, at the same time, the program specifies that children be questioned about whether their own beliefs have changed or not and be able to justify their position. They are also given a series of criteria for exercising good judgment, with observation and reason taking a front seat and revelation totally absent. The ethics part of the course concentrates on how to get along first with those who are closest to the child, then gradually with all peoples. The religious characteristics are part of what children are required to get along with. All beliefs are portrayed at the outset as equally valid and the search for religious truth is not among the objectives of the course. Conclusion As you can well see the Catholic Parents’ Association cannot and will not accept the imposition of multiple religions, world views and moral positions, taught in a relativistic manner, on young children and adolescents alike. The Association defends the child’s right to receive teachings about Christ and to practise his religion without the interference of the state. It also defends the rights of parents to refuse teachings in school that jeopardize their children’s religious and moral education. The stand of the Quebec Assembly of Catholic Bishops’ Conference, in our opinion, is disappointing to most parents who hoped to have the backing of their pastors when trying to defend their children’s faith. They feel abandoned because the bishops do not support those of them who have requested exemptions or withdrawn their children from the course. This stand by the bishops is interpreted as a lack of respect for parental rights. Parents also object to the fact that the bishops suggest waiting 3 to 5 years before the course is formally evaluated because they fear that the damage will already be done to their children by then. Nor do they agree to leave it up to the Quebec government, whose secularist bureaucrats have created this new mandatory State religion, to make the judgement as to whether the Catholic faith of the children has been harmed. Parents also feel that a laissez-faire attitude towards the course is a betrayal of Catholic doctrine and principles. The universal Church has always held that parental rights over their children’s education is part of the natural law. In fact Canon Law renders parents responsible for making sure that their children receive moral and religious education in schools that respect the child’s freedom of conscience and for giving their children Catholic schooling when possible. Fortunately, Cardinal Marc Ouellet has expressed his opposition to the imposition of this course, to the removal of options in moral and religious education and to the trampling of parental rights. The papal nuncio, Mgr Luigi Ventura, also has expressed his belief that the course does not respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He objects to the fact that the State is imposing a secular religion wherein no religion can be recognized as containing the truth. © Copyright 1997-2009 Catholic Insight
|
|
Latest: Education |
 |
 |
 |
