|
To work for the proper implementation of canon law is to play an extraordinarily constructive role in continuing the redemptive mission of Christ. Pope John Paul II |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resolution 1152 x 864 |
Updated 17 jan 2013 |
Reviews of Home Schooling and the New Code of Canon Law (1988) |
|
James Likoudis, in Reflections (Fall, 1988) 16. |
This is a most valuable and welcome study which effectively demonstrates
that "Those Catholic parents who, after sufficient reflection and
preparation, choose to educate their children at home, even in
the presence of generally
acceptable Catholic schools, do so with ample support and
encouragement from the revised (1983) Code of Canon Law" (p: 46).
As the author
notes, hundreds of Catholic elementary and secondary schools have closed during
the period of post-conciliar “renewal,” “making Catholic school-based
education literally nonexistent in many places.” He provides some interesting
data drawn from the Catholic Almanac: Whereas in 1965, some 10,961 Catholic
elementary schools served 4,566,809 students, 1986 saw a sharp decline to 7,865
schools serving but 2,099,379 students. Moreover, the growing dissatisfaction of
parents with the lack of orthodox catechesis in all too many parochial and
diocesan high schools has been clearly responsible for an increasing number of
Catholic parents joining a home-schooling movement which may include as many as
one million children being educated at home by their parents on a full-time
basis.
Home-schooling has become “a major development in American education,
one which cuts across religious, social, and regional lines” (p. 5). Its
involved parents, whether Catholic or non-Catholic, by choosing to educate their
children at home, are exercising their belief that parents have not only the
responsibility but the right to direct and control the educational
development of their children. They do not confound “education” with the
process of formal classroom instruction provided by the state or indeed by
ecclesiastical authorities.
Mr. Peters provides a careful exegesis of relevant passages in Vatican II
documents dealing with “education” and those canons in the new Code setting
forth the Church’s doctrine on the primacy of parental rights in
education. He finds:
"This (parental) responsibility, grounded in natural law and
nourished by the sacramental role of Christian
spouses and
parents, reaches into every facet of
their children's education, including even their religious and catechetical formation.
While the local bishop certainly has the right and duty to supervise the more
formal aspects of this religious education, it is carefully noted in
the canons` that Church
authorities are to actively foster the proper parental role in
the education of their children" (p. 36).
Needless to say, there are many instances in which Catholic parents, seeking to establish lay-operated schools or parent-operated religious education programs, or to engage in home-schooling, have met with severe resistance and criticism from diocesan officials, diocesan school personnel, and even pastors of parishes. The rights of Catholic parents in matters of religious education, sex education, and reception of the sacraments have been often violated despite the fact that, in the author’s words: in the author's words: "The whole canonical treatment of education concerns NOT that parents send their children to Catholic schools, but that parents see to the Catholic schooling of their children" (p. 46). Obviously, conscientious home-schooling parents are in an enviable position to be authentic catechists to their children.
It is fitting that Mr. Peters'
excellent study (which deserves reading by all Catholic parents
interested in their education al rights as safeguarded by Canon
Law) appears as
one in a series of Brownson Studies edited by Gregory
Wolfe. It was the great
Yankee convert-philosopher who powerfully
set forth in 1862 the concerns of many members of the laity for a truly
Catholic education for their children:
"Parents have certain duties
growing out of their relation as parents which they cannot throw upon others,
and they must themselves discharge them according to the best of their ability.
They are bound by the law of God to give their children, as far
as in their power, a truly Catholic education, and they are free to
criticize and to refuse to support schools, thou professing to be Catholic, in
which such education is not and cannot
be expected to be given. They are obliged to patronize schools, because founded or directed by Catholics, any more
than they are to support a tailoring or a hatting establishment, because owned
by a Catholic who employs Catholic workmen, or because recommended by bishops
and parish priests. We protest against the assumption that so-called Catholic
schools, collegiate or conventual, parochial or private, because under the
control of Catholics, participate in the immunities of the Church, of the
priesthood, or of the prelacy, and are sacred from public investigation and
public criticism; or that we are necessarily bound by our Catholic Faith and
Catholic piety to patronize or defend them any further than we find them
Catholic institutions in fact as well as in name" (see Vol. XII of
Brownson's Collected Works, "Catholic Schools and Education," pp.
498-499).
Brownson would have been delighted
with Edward N. Peters’ fine study evidencing the Magisterium's desire
to maintain the liberty of families in providing for the Christian education of
their children according to the doctrine of the Church. A future edition of this
study might provide an additional commentary on Article 5 of the Holy
See's Charter of the Rights of the Family that notes:
|
|
Others |
The Priest (January 1989) 11.
|