There was an interesting spread on Catholic education in this month’s New Zealand Catholic. I think Br Anthony Walker got it right with his quote “If you have taught them to pray you have taught them everything, if you have not you have taught them nothing”. He believes development of a child’s faith is at the heart of what a Catholic school exists for.
From what I hear, Catholic schools are getting better at having a strong Catholic and religious education focus with good teachers. I don’t know about other schools, but there was sort of a Catholic feeling when I was at school but no real solid teaching or anything I could grasp onto. In any case I don’t remember anything at school ever leading me closer to God and I can’t say my faith was very strong at that time. I guess it is always hard to teach teenagers because no other group is so affected by peer pressure! Perhaps all you can do is plant seeds for the future with some kids and have faith that the Holy Spirit will work with those.
We are lucky it is so easy for us to have Catholics schools which are supported by the government and to teach faith. It is awesome to hear that a new Catholic school is being built in Iraq, amid all the persecution there. As I think I have mentioned before, I know a lot of Iraqi Catholics in New Zealand and they definitely have more of a sense that to practice your faith isn’t something you can take for granted. The Archbishop plans to offer education to people of all faiths and remain Catholic in its identity. He said “Education has been a charism of our Church since its founding… In 350 AD in the city is Nisibis, our direct ancestors founded the worlds first university“.
It is interesting then that De La Salle has just appointed a Muslim head boy. He sounds like a lovely boy and a truly exemplary student, but can you be a Catholic student leader if you are not Catholic if that truly is the whole reason for the existence of the school? I remember thinking that when I was at school it was unusual that it was not part of the criteria to be a head girl that you live the Catholic faith because the headboy or headgirl are such an example to the younger students, and should also be in faith. I don’t know that school’s situation, but having strong spiritual leaders perhaps should be something schools also think about.
It is interesting then that De La Salle has just appointed a Muslim head boy. He sounds like a lovely boy and a truly exemplary student, but can you be a Catholic student leader if you are not Catholic if that truly is the whole reason for the existence of the school?
That is a hard question eyewitness. If it is just the issue of being a Head Boy, then I probably agree with you.
On one level it is great, if the student, as it appears is really well integrated and his family is behind him. You have to welcome that.
On the other hand, it also requires a certain realist approach to Islam in relation to Catholicis on behalf of the school. One boy can oppose those distinctions in his own religion of Islam which effect freedom of other religions and common humanity. One boy can change many things and we hope that he does. He is in a unique position. But one boy can’t be utilised as exhibit A that those distinctions exist only in other people’s minds. He can’t be the example put forward by others that these distinctions in Islam don’t exist. I would have thought that a real discussion with the boy and his family about the reality of things, welcoming their commitment to our common humanity in light of these realities. I would think that discussion probably didn’t take place, but rather just accept things as they appear. I’m not sure I agree with that. Catholic school boys have a right to be fairly represented by one who puts THEIR interests first, as Catholics.
There are many Muslims in the world seeking a freer Islam, a tolerant Islam in deed and not just in interfaith word. Those Muslims unfortunately live difficult lives and fear for their lives.
So time will tell. Will the advancement to head boy be just the existential rightful place of a Muslim over Christians, an example of Muslim strength over Christian weakness, teaching and leading Christians who should be following the Muslim example which is the better example. Impossible to know, but here is hoping.
It may the best thing these schools (St Catherine’s in Wellington did the same thing) ever did toward integration. Who knows.The ball has been passed to this exemplary student, and I for one really hope he is one for freedom of religion and freedom for all.
My eldest child says that the Catholic schools she attended taught ‘wishy-washy feel good’ Christianity rather than the Christian faith,. The two middle girls say that their Catholic schooling taught them to reject the faith; not just because of the contrast between teacher behaviour and the faith (though teenagers are very alert to hypocrisy), but because they were actively taught things about the faith that conflicted with what they were being taught at home – their (few) catholic teachers bought into an aCatholica ’60s liberal version of nu-Church theology, which contrasted sharply with our more orthodox approach.
They’ve all come back to the faith as adults, praise God.
Is the Catholic schooling system producing faithful Catholics? Has anyone checked? And if it isn’t, why are we supporting it?
The Principal, DRS and certain numbers of staff must be Catholic – it is an integration requirement. I don’t see why the Head Boy/Girl and BoT student rep shouldn’t have to be Catholic as well. They are both the top positions of student responsibility. Whats good for the staff should be good for the students.
At least be consistent?
Surely this says more about the school than the boy?;no doubt he is outstanding individual as any head boy or girl should be. But his claim to fame is that he got his weight under control (?) not that he is a good Muslim.
So we can expect slimmer and better proportioned young men graduating from this shool? what a great contribution De La Salle and thanks for the aspiration.
Mind you this is better than our local Catholic secondary school where a boy I know had to endure the trials of a group of avowed atheists who held the top spots and weren’t simply indifferent (or even body conscious) but were actually anti catholic! I mean can you imagine how constructive having 3-4 KA’s in the leadership team would be?
I say all school leaders including teachers should at least sign an oath of fidelity to uphold the Church’s teachings so we all knew where they stood.
Pray for Catholic schools (that they will be)!
JP, I agree.
A few years ago some people did some unofficial surveys at some NZ Catholic High Schools. They found that in year 9, approx 95% of the students believed in God, and that it got progressively lower throughout the years. Until, in year 13 only approx 50% believed in God. This is not whether they practised any faith, rather whether they had a basic belief in God!
They schools may or may not be contributing to the decline, and again, this is unofficial research. I would like to see our dioceses conduct some thorough, official research in order to get to the root of the problems. They, and the schools only seem intent on “celebrating” the success of “our” schools. I say “our” because I do not actually believe they are our schools. Instead they are run and, in a sense, governed by the teachers. Most of whom hold very secular and anti religion outlooks. I don’t care whether there are certain “requirements” that teachers etc hold the faith. They are not being met in the large majority of cases I have seen, and I have has a lot of involvement in “our” schools. However, I felt more like an undercover detective!!!
In fairness, those statistics may also reflect the views of families whose children are in the schools – many of whom attend Mass only when their children are receiving the Sacraments of Initiation, and many of whom are nominal Catholics if Catholic at all. Militantly liberal or militantly secular teachers (my children had both) are a blow to the faith of children raised in faith environment. But the influence of agnostic or ignorant and poorly formed parents will trump that of wishy-washy teachers every time.
For preferential enrollment under the special character of the school, the child needs:
- to be baptised
- to be preparing for baptism
- to have an older sibling who is baptised
- to have one parent or guardian who is preparing to become a Catholic
- to have at least one Catholic parent or guardian and a reasonable prospect of being baptised
- to have someone(grandparent, older sibling, aunt, or family friend) who has the parents’ permission to support the child’s formation.
There is no requirement for the parents or teachers associated with a school to comply with the basic requirements of a Catholic in good standing. In fact, I’d suggest that many people who call themselves Catholic wouldn’t even know what these are.
(Mass on Sundays and on holy days of obligation; confession at least once a year; reception of the Eucharist at least once during the season of Easter; fasting and penance as prescribed; keeping holy days holy; providing for the material needs of the church to the extent possible.)
The requirement that certain teachers hold the faith should take these as their base standard. They don’t. I suggest that preferential enrollment should be kept for those children whose parents also meet this base standard.
That’ll close down most of the schools in the country, I imagine.
We can then spend the money the Church saves on some good adult catechisis and evangelisation of the parents who are, after all, the ones who will answer to God for how and what they have taught their children.
I agree with all that has been expressed above.
As DV pointed out here:
had to endure the trials of a group of avowed atheists who held the top spots and weren’t simply indifferent
For that reason to single out the Muslim lad is to do so in name only. Atheist or Muslim – both in their creeds are anti Christian. In principle and practice the top spots need to reflect the Catholic character of the schools and the head boy should be a practising Catholic and not in conflict with the Catholic faith.
Atheists are clearly in conflict with the faith, and so school boys who are atheists by profession and Catholic in name scoot under the headlights and don’t get their names in the paper.
My point is that if this Muslim lad is a Muslim who upholds freedom of religion, not in the way expressed within Islam, but as a first precept of human society for all people, from the stance of one within Islam,this is good. In a nutshell this aspect defangs Islam. That would make him an anomoly for Islam and a hero for Catholics. He needs to be supported in every way, whether that means head boy, probably depends on who else was on offer in the religious sense. If he does hold such a position within his own faith then Christians should support him and his family.
Muslims who uphold freedom of religion for all are the kind we need. But they suffer for it.
On the other hand a head Muslim boy whose Islam is in tact, peaceful or otherwise is irrelevant, is not one who supports freedom of religion for all people and to place him over Catholic students as a free act is not a reasonable act. Placing atheists over Catholic children is also not reasonable. But Islam is a more useful in this way and more prolific. Those who support it feel superior in their own expression of tolerance and feel virtuous and good. Atheism doesn’t give quite the same kickback and virtuous fix but is in essence the same act, which is unreasonable, if you hold to a notion of truth.
Basically we don’t really know the situation, and we can’t discount this boy in name of religion only. But I suspect he is a useful tool for progressive religion which would be happy to poke the finger at ‘Islamophobia’ and watch everyone squirm. Tolerance is the highest virtue and truth isn’t.
“We are lucky it is so easy for us to have Catholics schools which are supported by the government and to teach faith”
Yes, quite. Too lucky. Something needs to be done about public funding of faith-based schools in NZ. It’s happening in the UK now, with increased lobbying to modify laws around curriculum restrictions and funding etc.
Those recent issues with the Exclusive Brethren school and teaching King Lear (and all the related scandals of how they spy on their teachers) are great examples of the need to do something.
JP
and instead of making catholic schools more accountable the bishops relaxed the rules to allow students with very tenuous catholic connections to enroll and once there,there is no obligation on parents to even participate in Church.
Bishop at move to get ‘Catholic’back in the school names is a good move. But generally the bishops are more interested in planting ’seeds’ than feeding strong healthy plants that produce good fruit!
I have no problem with non Catholic students and tenuously Catholic students being at our schools. After all, are we not in the business of evangelization?
The problem is the people who are running the schools. If we had plenty of authentic witnesses, rather than people contradicting the faith, the students who have no faith or are lukewarm in it would soon be drawn to a deeper love and knowledge of Christ and His Church.
Most Catholic schools and orders were originally established to either be missionary or strengthen those weak in the faith.
well if we are we are failing!
as for lukewarm teachers bring back loretta Hall the problem is we no longer form Catholic teachers we take secular teachers and tack on a very suspect RE tag.
Perhaps we should expand Good Shepherd College to provide a more grounded Catholic teacher?
Or maybe we invite orthodox teaching orders to our country. E.g The Dominican Sisters of St Cecelia
Interesting read and perspectives. I am principal of a catholic primary school here in NZ. The article and subsequent comments are more secondary school focussed, but here are my thoughts.
It is tricky to claim a definitive position as our responses are so shaped by our own experiences of Church and Catholic education. I know in our school being a committed Catholic is part of the selection process for picking student leaders. We are a primary school so slightly different but still, we need to start somewhere and stand for something? The tagged teacher situation is very tricky and unfortunately people do hold those positions in our schools (nationally) who, by their (lack of) actions, actually undermine the work of both their church and school communities. At our place we have a six-monthly tagged teacher meeting where the legal and moral obligations of holding such a position are discussed. Sometimes it is an affirming conversation, sometimes challenging. It is disappointing to need to have them at all, but I guess it just holds a mirror to modern society. Teachers who “wear the tag” 9-3 but have no involvement in a faith community beyond the school actually let down the school and their pupils I believe. I find something hypocritical and untenable about it all and know that if I was in their position I could not work as a tagged teacher, knowing “deep down’ that I was not doing justice to the ministry. Unfortunately there is no “hidden pool” of suitably tagged, practicing Catholic teachers, so no easy immediate answers at this point in time. When I interview for non-tagged applicants I will get 10-15 applicants; for tagged, two if I am lucky.
I wonder what legislative “teeth’ there is to remove a tag from teacher or school leader who isn’t fulfilling the expectations of the position? And whose responsibility is it to do something about it – the Principal? Or the diocese, who deem the person suitable for the position, and give the school’s appointment committee the go-ahead to appoint? Or the parish priest, who is shepherds the local faith community?
A final observation from the coalface – if we see this problem, plus the real opportunity that catholic schools can be for our church, why are we not doing more to attract young catholics to teaching as a vocation? I am thirty four and have taught in catholic schools for nine years. This is the first year I have not been the youngest staff member, and I have yet to teach with another tagged male teacher. This is perhaps at the heart of the issue, or at least a pathway forward – encourage our young to take up the call of educational leadership. It is a lonely job at times!
The mistake is that we consider only some positions to be tagged and therefore others can be filled by who? There was a time when all catholic teachers were expected to be practicing and this was certainly the case with religious, but now while we may expect this, likely it not the case.
The problem is that most parents arent practicing either and it isnt a priority for the school community.We have 75-80 families at our local catholic primary and perhaps 5 families are seen at Mass regularly if that
In this respect intergration has been a disaster because when the parish supported the school there was an expectation and obligation that parents would support the parish.
There is now a disconnection.
Pray for our schools!
I wonder what legislative “teeth’ there is to remove a tag from teacher or school leader who isn’t fulfilling the expectations of the position? And whose responsibility is it to do something about it – the Principal? Or the diocese, who deem the person suitable for the position, and give the school’s appointment committee the go-ahead to appoint? Or the parish priest, who is shepherds the local faith community?
No offense Archer, but as a principal of a Catholic school, shouldn’t you know the answer to these questions?
how do you get rid of any under-performing teacher?
You cant!
Trick is to employ good ones at the start
as a principal of a Catholic school, shouldn’t you know the answer to these questions?
That’s my point really – there is no definitive position on it, no handbook on how to address the issue. It is quite common for some holding a tagged position to have been suitable for it when they won the position, but for their circumstaces or faith commitment to change, therefore making them no longer eligible for the position. If you raise this issue with any of the people I quoted you get a shrug of the shoulders and the advice to “encourage” them to attend mass (which of course is only part of the issue). There is really no definitive stance, or mechanism bar the school’s own performance management system, to address it. If there is a precedent for removing a tag it’s certainly not a topic discussed openly in catholic schools. I guess maybe we as school leaders err towards the pastoral side of things and look for restoration of the person into the church community rather than take the legal stance. Only my perspective though and other principals may feel differently.
PS I am writing this on my morning tea break – not avoiding work!
I guess my thought is that we should be prepared to decide what we want from our schools, look to see whether we’re getting it, and then take action.
As people in the parishes, we are supporting the schools financially – for what purpose? What do we expect as a return on that investment? Could the money be better spent?
For those of you who are parents, what do you expect from the schools? Are you getting it?
For the priests and bishops, as proprietors on the behalf of the people, what are you getting for the investment of time and money?
Does anyone know the answer to any of these questions?
The Catholic Education Office says that its mission is to “be a catalyst engaging Catholic schools to become leaders in New Zealand education, delivering outcomes in the spirit of the Gospel.” So what does that mean?
Is devout Catholic young people on fire to evangelise an outcome in the spirit of the Gospel? I would have thought it was the main outcome – “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” And if that is what is intended, then we clearly need to change the way are we doing things!
The asnswer is an oath of fidelity that must be renewed each year to maintain the position.
I also think that parents shouldn’t just qualify to have children at Catholic Schools but should committ to active participation and Catholic practice at least to allow pastoral follow up when the obligations are not being met.
1. We can’t afford them.
2. We can’t staff them.
3. We can’t control them
throw them overboard
1,2 and 3. All sad, but all true I feel.
However, these are the semi-obvious answers and in reality, the dioceses are never (at least not in a hundred years) going to “throw them overboard”. So what answers are there in the meantime?
blow them up?
or infiltrate them, and take them down from the inside
oh wait…that’s already happened
let’s do it again
i don’t hold out much hope
in some places, there might be some little victory, where a good teacher makes a difference, and is even able to gain a tagged position, and make more difference. ever now and again we hear of such progress
but overall, they are colossal waste of resource, money, and time, with little or no spiritual return
they are weight around the church’s neck, a millstone
whoever causes one of these little ones to fall away it would be better to have a millstone tied around one’s neck and be thrown into the sea
well, our schools, in some places, are causing our little ones to fall away, and the institutions doing this are indeed millstones
what do to? not sure vitw
All very true … I tried when our son was at college but got nowhere … surprise !! surprise !! Am not sure if there is still a conection but at one stage Elaine Wainwright was giving talks to RE teachers here in Auckland some years ago. Has anyone been to any of her talks or lectures? The two I went to at St Mary’s college hall were not in line with Catholic teaching on a few aspects.
The only weapon that we have in our amunition cupboard is prayer, prayer and yet more prayer.
Shalom
That, of course, bamac. Where we are weak, God is strong.
But also, keep complaining!
I think the problem lies in the title to this post.
“our”
They’re not really “our” schools are they? The Diocese owns and maintains the buildings and plant. The bishop has input to the BOT’s decision to appoint the Principal and there is a religious education curriculum that wouldn’t know a catechism if it was filed next to one.
“Integrated” means that the bulk of the school’s funding comes from the government, a sweet deal for the government because 20% of NZ schools are Catholic integrated, which means, I think, that the Catholic Church is effectively maintaining 20% of the buildings in the NZ school system. In return, the CC is allowed to sprinkle special character. Naturally, this might be a good deal if the school were producing groups of active students who step into their local parishes but as you all know they’re not.
It’s not really good enough that they are equipped for a “faith journey” which may or may not lead them back to the Church in their late 30s or 40s. By that age they have mostly married and had children and since they will have married “outside the Church” (gosh, how antiquated is that idea!) it means any continuity of Catholic culture is lost.
Solution: import “Catholic Culture” en bloc from Africa, Sth America and Asia as we are now doing.