Have Your Say 

Recent Comments

1. It's funny how any sign of not subscribing to the control, push and authority of religious hierarchy is viewed as hostility? Isn't that a just a little bit patronizing and paternalistic? - North Sydney,NSW
   
   Is it also possible that there are many good foundation if there is any hostility towards the push of the religious hierarchy to force religion down the throat of citizens wanting other options?
   
   Weird to see how much fear and panic attack is coming out of our Catholic hierarchy... why should we feel so insecure if what we have to offer might actually have a 'demand market'? Weird I think.

   Posted By: TJ Lawson

2. Although I would prefer to see Catholic instead of 'Christian' values espoused in our state education system as the ethics classes, the comments of Archbishop Jensen and others are not helping the argument.
   Ethics need to be taught to all students and if we can have all students learning at least rudimentary societal values we are better off.
   Thanks to Your Eminence for highlighting the issue, but we surely must accept the choice of those outside our faith to be taught ethics in a way that makes it possible for them to become valuable members of our society, after all wasn't one of our lords teachings to be accepting of each others differences. - Elizabeth Bay, NSW

   Posted By: Dominic Beirne

3. It really is of little use citing a statistical figure to prove anything. When many people fill out the census and answer the religious affiliation question, it is the first time since the last census that such qusestioning has arisen for them.
   And those who do answer? Well, how familiar with their religion are they anyway?
   The alternative of ethics classes is not an attack upon religion, but a simple acknowledgement that morality transcends denominational boundaries, and that to deny a space for ethical learning to those who do not identify as religious, for petty and largely ignorant territorial reasons, is to deny the greater good for society. - Camperdown, NSW

   Posted By: Mark Johnson, Camperdown.

4. 'Secular ethics' is probably similar to Wiccan ethics: As long as you harm no one, do as you will.
   But seriously, whose ethics are secular ethics? Those of a small coterie of academics in departments of gender studies? - Goulburn NSW

   Posted By: Lance Eccles

5. I cannot see how the push to teach ethics in anyway shape or form as 'hostility towards religion'.
   The fact is that the catechetics perfomed in state school scriptures classes is done by well-intentioned volunteers but it does not provide a systematic syllabus for the discussion of ethical standards. Its remit is to teach doctrine.
   I think the hostility is more on the side of those with (religious) vested interests trying to stop groups like the St James ethics centre getting a foothold on their turf. - Sylvania NSW
   
   

   Posted By: Elias Nasser

6. We all understand what ethics mean. If there is a push for it to be taught in schools, that means it's not coming from where it should be taught - the home.
   If ethics are the foundation of Human Rights and Children's Rights, that can't be a bad thing surely. - Bendigo, Vic

   Posted By: L Newington

7. As the Director of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine for the Archdiocese of Sydney, the agency concerned with supporting the work of volunteer catechists, I concur entirely with the Cardinal's concerns.
   The Ethics trial is undoubtedly pushed by elements in the P & C traditionally hostile to the presence of Special Religious Education (SRE) in public schools.
   A perusal of websites belonging to atheist and humanist groups in NSW reveals that they are cheering on the Ethics trial from the side-lines as the first step towards uprooting SRE altogether from public schools. Far from being offered only to non-SRE students as originally stated by the SJEC, a number of school principals have offered the Trial to all students, resulting in a loss of 30% of Catholic and 47% of Anglican SRE students to Ethics.
   This is not because the Trial offers anything new or exciting as public schools already offer values education (see The Values We Teach rev'd 1991 and 1996).
   Our 'fears' are based on the reality of what is happening on the ground and the failure of the proponents of the Trial to adhere to their original guarantees. Some of the comments already posted exhibit either ignorance or the usual prejudice against the Cardinal.
   The current K-6 Catholic SRE curriculum (which is being currently revised by myself and others) is both thoroughly systematic and replete with ethical principles and teachings.
   Wasn't Christ the ultimate ethicist? As for public schools, they are the turf of the taxpaying public, the vast majority of which are people of religious belief who support the presence of SRE in public schools. They are certainly not the 'turf' of private think tanks who contribute nothing to their upkeep, etc.
   We have every right to protect what has been in place since 1880 and currently enshrined in the NSW Education Act 1990. It's not for our sakes, but so our baptised children can hear and know about Christ, wherever they may be. - Polding House, Sydney, NSW

   Posted By: Robert Haddad

8. Robert Haddad writes: 'The current K-6 Catholic SRE curriculum (which is being currently revised by myself and others) is both thoroughly systematic and replete with ethical principles and teachings.'
   I don't have any disagreement with that statement. The content is not in question. The problem has always been about the way in which the message is imparted.
   As one schooled in the public education system, scripture classes were seen as nothing more than a 'bludge'. The teachers were at best ignored, at worst ridiculed.
   The formalisation of an ethics curriculum can only be a positive. The Church might feel threatened, but my response is to suggest the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine work with groups such as the St James Ethics centre rather than cry foul from the side lines. - Sylvania, NSW

   Posted By: Elias Nasser

9. Elias Nasser: 'The formalisation of an ethics curriculum can only be a positive.'
   For whom? Not for public school children who already receive values education and now will receive a duplicate curriculum. Not for our Catholic children who will not hear the name of Christ connected with ethics.
   The Ethics course is presented by volunteers (just like our catechists) who are no more than 'facilitators' of discussion. Unlike our catechists they are not teaching any objective morals/ethics - it is an exercise in raw relativism and subjectivism - nothing more than children engaging in shared ignorance.
   As for working with the SJEC, for what purpose? To assist them in putting into place a Godless curriculum that has no objective moral compass, one that only encourages students to develop their own personalised ethical criteria divorced from Christ? Sorry, I would much prefer to continue my cooperation with Orthodox, Protestant, Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist SRE providers to have this Ethics course diverted to another dedicated time slot or removed altogether.
   In the end, the volunteer providers of secular ethics will be no more interesting or inspiring than our catechists, nor will they have the staying power of our catechists, many of whom have devoted decades to joyfully bringing Christ to our children, despite the many difficulties they encounter. - Polding House, Sydney, NSW

   Posted By: Robert Haddad

10. Robert Haddad: Don't be fearful of the Humanist and Ethical groups.
    If you look at the website of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, you would see they are international NGOs with special consultative status with the United Nations and unafraid to make their voices heard when breachs of human rights and the rights of children occur. - Bendigo Vic
    

    Posted By: L Newington

11. The reason some people do not seem to grasp the significance of the Cardinal's comment is that they fail to see the hostile agenda that is behind the push for secular ethics - the eradication of Christianity in the public forum. This is unreasonable, as the Cardinal points out, since the majority is actually Christian, and you cannot separate a person from his values.
    If the education system feels so strongly about having ethics as part of the curriculum, then, they should find other ways to fit it in, rather than get rid of Scripture classes, which are the only opportunities to learn about Christianity for many of the baptised who have not been brought up in the faith.
    Getting rid of Scripture classes will be the actual victory for those who push for secular ethics in public schools, not the education, or the lack of it. - Homebush, NSW

    Posted By: Peter K

12. Elias Nasser: I cannot think of anything more inspiring than the idea of reaching out to our precious youth, many of who never have heard the message of Christ proclaimed to them properly.
    Unfortunately, the only Christianity that they are aware of is the ignorant and distorted version of Christianity caricaturised by the media and the culture. What could be more worthwhile than to try to amend this?
    What we need are more faithful, courageous and competent catechists who will carry out this immensely important task.
    Our prayers should be with all of them.
    In the meantime, it would be a great tragedy to lose the system of SRE in public schools. We should fight it. - Homebush, NSW
    

    Posted By: Peter K

13. Effectively curtailing sacred scripture in state schools deprives children, diminishes culture and systemically fosters a false segregation of divinely revealed truth from truth knowable by reason.
    Common good cannot be attained by the promotion of an exclusively 'secular ethics' which denies the full ontological and relational reality of human beings created in the image and likeness of God.
    This ideology, closed to the Divine in content and method, produces an alienating relativism, encouraging a legalistic morality that radically compromises truth and freedom and the relationship between them. - Adelaide, SA

    Posted By: John Kelly

14. John Kelly: I look forward to your going into a state education class room and repeating word by word your posted justification for religious education at the expense of ethics classes.

    Posted By: Mark Johnson, Camperdown NSW.

15. John Kelly: As Catholics, we are taught nothing is impossible with God and He works through 'divers means'. Who's to say, with a little help from family and by example this fear of 'secular ethics' is unfounded.
    Maybe I missed something when instructed into the faith, or is it something carried over from my non-Catholic upbringing. - Bendigo, Vic

    Posted By: L Newington

16. Mark Johnson: Now that's not a bad idea - but it wouldn't be 'at the expense of ethics classes'. - Adelaide, SA

    Posted By: John Kelly

17. A number of commenters here have missed the point. No Catholic has raised any objection to Government school children being taught secular ethics. As Mr Haddad has pointed out, they have been taught secular ethics for many years.
    The objection is to the use of this new course, pushed by a small minority of militant atheists, to displace religious education classes. If this secular ethics course is so worthwhile, it should be available to all students, without demanding that they give up religious instruction as a condition of being allowed to attend the classes.
    L Newington, I looked up the IHEU website as you suggested. Far from speaking up for the rights of children, the IHEU formally states that it strongly supports the world’s current far and away most horrific and widespread breach of the human rights of children:
    “abortion should be available to women on request as a fundamental human right and as an means of population control.... Legal restrictions against abortion should be removed in all countries.”
    Whilst claiming to support “freedom of religion” it interprets this as freedom from religion, and it states 'it does not accept supernatural views of reality'.
    Thornleigh, NSW

    Posted By: Peter G

18. This is the duty of parents, not schools or anyone else! - Wollongong. NSW.

    Posted By: D.A.D.

19. A key point is choice: Many parents are choosing to opt out of SRE - over 50% opting out is reported in some schools (probably including some where the trials are).
    Parents are and will still be free to opt in, even if the secular ethics trial is extended to be another SRE choice. That choice will determine whether Christian or non-Christian children will hear the name of Christ in the SRE slot.
    As SRE is just 30 to 50 minutes per week, there will be plenty of time in the rest of the week to provide Christian teaching to our children, and possibly allow discussion of, and comparison to, the secular ethics content that seems likely to be publicly available.
    The motivation of those seeking ethics (even if provides only cognition) seems to be for children not attending SRE for whatever reason, and it seems to be unfair to question the input of private think tanks, or predict the staying power of any volunteers. - Ryde, NSW

    Posted By: Craig Mac

20. A key point is choice: many parents are choosing to opt out of SRE - over 50% opting out is reported in some schools (probably including some where the trials are).
    Parents are, and will still be, free to opt in, even if the secular ethics trial is extended to be another SRE choice. That choice will determine whether Christian or non-Christian children will hear the name of Christ in the SRE slot.
    As SRE is just 30 to 50 minutes per week, there will be plenty of time in the rest of the week to provide Christian teaching to our children, and possibly allow discussion of, and comparison to, the secular ethics content that seems likely to be publicly available.
    The motivation of those seeking ethics (even if provides only cognition) seems to be for children not attending SRE for whatever reason, and it seems to be unfair to question the input of private think tanks, or predict the staying power of any volunteers. - Ryde, NSW

    Posted By: Craig Mac

21. A key point is choice: many parents are choosing to opt out of SRE - over 50% opting out is reported in some schools (probably including some where the trials are).
    Parents are and will still be free to opt in, even if the secular ethics trial is extended to be another SRE choice. That choice will determine whether Christian or non-Christian children will hear the name of Christ in the SRE slot.
    As SRE is just 30 to 50 minutes per week, there will be plenty of time in the rest of the week to provide Christian teaching to our children, and possibly allow discussion of, and comparison to, the secular ethics content that seems likely to be publicly available.
    The motivation of those seeking ethics (even if provides only cognition) seems to be for children not attending SRE for whatever reason, and it seems to be unfair to question the input of private think tanks, or predict the staying power of any volunteers. - Ryde, NSW

    Posted By: Craig Mac

22. This is a bit of a mine-field! It is true some atheists would love to see religion banished from the face of the earth; but it is a small number. Still some are pushing.
    As a committed Catholic and State school Primary teacher of 28 years, I defy anyone to show how all values taught in State schools are subjective and relativistic!
    Every single day a teacher reinforces other children's right to fairness in all its forms and it has nothing to do with 'this is my opinion'. More serious topics have become subjective because we now have a society that values the individual decision enormously.
    Yet we still say God is present in everyone's life. We are all faced with value (Value) and some people will always try to do what is right according to what they see in the other person.
    And lastly, I agree it would be sad to have Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or any faith pushed aside because of a narrow idea (which appears to uphold freedom but when you look at it more closely is freedom as defined by someone else.)- North Rocks ,Sydney

    Posted By: Mike Yates

23. In response to Robert Haddad's comments: There are three categories of parents when it comes to SRE in public schools...
    1) Parents who choose for their children to be taught religious-based ethics at school.
    2) Parents who want their children to be taught some form ethics at school but are indifferent toward it being provided in a religious setting or not.
    3) Parents who want their children to learn ethics at school but do not want it taught in a religious context.
    So SRE is made up of children of parents in Category 1 and 2. Category 3 is obviously the group who already opt out of SRE at school.
    When non-religious based ethics is offered at school as an alternative to SRE it is category 2 who, for the first time, make the choice to stick with SRE or choose for their children to be taught ethics in a non-religious forum. It is this category of parents whom Cardinal Pell is concerned about.
    The issue is choice. Such parents are given the opportunity to separate religion from ethics. - Newcastle, NSW

    Posted By: PH

24. Peter G: You were either selective in what link you chose or you missed it.
    The IHEU, as NGO's with Special Consultative Status, presented a statement to the United Nations on the abuse of our Catholic children. Shameful as it was but in our best interest, bringing the Holy See to account, which has now been validated by Pope Benedict.
    No other organisation or political party ventured to do this.
    They have my vote on that alone. - Bendigo Victoria
    

    Posted By: L Newington

25. L Newington: it doesn't matter how selective I was. (And in any case I was quoting from the IHEU's formal official policy on Population control, family planning and abortion, not some obscure link.) An organisation which repulsively and categorically asserts that killing children is a 'right', cannot possibly be called anti-child abuse, no matter what else it says. Thornleigh NSW

    Posted By: Peter G

26. Peter: I have just noticed my comment response, belated as it is.
    Without any point scoring on my part, as a Catholic don't you think we owe them any gratitude irrespective of their official policy on other issues.
    There are others who don't have many of our views but decent citizenship over rides this and the accountability of heinous acts done to our Catholic children who are living, was to brought to the attention of the United Nations by this organisation, not us or by our NGOs.
    

    Posted By: L Newington Bendigo Victoria

• » Advertise in CathNews

Email to Friend Please fill out the following details (fields marked with a * are mandatory):
Send To Email Address*:
Send To Name *:
Sent By Email Address*:
Sent By Name *:
Text to include in email:
Captcha validation:	please enter the code above:

^ Page Top

Comment on this article

More from this section

1. Coalition refugee policy 'cruel': Edmund Rice Centre

   The Edmund Rice Centre has condemned the Coalition's newly-announced asylum seeker policy, calling it a return to the worst strategies of the past, and that it would mark a "new low-point".

2. CHA, Health Super study on supporting nurses

   Catholic Health Australia and Health Super will jointly conduct a study into providing Nurse Unit Managers with better support and training.

3. St Mary's lit up in Vivid Sydney

   The switches flicked on last night for the Vivid Sydney Festival, with colourful visuals lighting up the Opera House and seven prominent buildings along Macquarie Street - from St Mary's Cathedral to the Conservatorium of Music.

4. CHA warns against pathology funding cuts

   Small and not-for-profit pathology providers could soon be muscled out by just one or two mega-providers, Catholic Health Australia (CHA) has warned.

5. Student art exhibition marks close of Year for Priests

   An exhibition featuring art and writings of students from more than 50 Catholic schools in the Sydney archdiocese is to be held in the St Mary's Cathedral Crypt.