Bonus Pastor Catholic College at Downham in South East London is at the centre of a controversy concerning materials that have been shown as part of the RE programme. A website has been set up by parents of young people at the school to protest about the materials: Bonus Pastor Exposed. It starts with a warning page because it does display extracts from the videos that have been shown to the pupils. I don’t recommend that you watch them. In order to write this post, I did, and rather wish that I hadn’t. So I’ll give some salient points to save you the trouble.
One is called “Keeping Mum” and shows a young couple being disturbed having sex, and the mother of the girl (a vicar’s wife) getting sexually involved with a golf instructor after being chided by her daughter who says that she “isn’t getting any.” The golf instructor then takes voyeuristic photographs of the mother. The clip includes liberal use of the F word, and partial nudity.
The second is an extract from “A short stay in Switzerland.” It shows a woman who takes spoonfuls of crushed tablets from a cereal bowl, washed down with vodka and orange, then lies down and puts a plastic bag over her head. The next scene shows that she survived. She expresses a desire to travel and get “the medical assistance I need to die.” At a nice clean clinic in Switzerland (the mythical version of Dignitas) she takes a potion under supervision and dies quite quickly, surrounded by her family. They are upset at the time, but soon are walking around happily in the sunshine.
The Bonus Pastor Exposed website was not set up in haste - the correspondence section starts with a letter sent to the Chair of Governors in March. The school’s response to parents essentially justifies the showing of the material as a means of stimulating discussion in accordance with the exam board’s recommendation of the material for the course Roman Catholic Christianity. (This incidentally confirms that the videos were actually shown to pupils.) Ironically, Google have contacted the parents' account at YouTube to tell them that because of the content, the videos have been given an adult rating.
(For a further critique of the Edexcel course and Roman Catholic Christianity, see the article by Fr Hugh MacKenzie in the current edition of Faith Magazine: GCSE Lessons on Catholic Marriage: A Syllabus of Errors.)
At the school’s website, a letter from the Headteacher and Chair of Governors mentions the distribution of leaflets which took place on the streets near the school and says
Please be assured that the matter has been dealt with by the police.Leafleting in the street is not an offence, of course. An allegation of assault was made, and a number of police officers turned up at the home of a Greg Clovis, rather panicking his wife. I understand that he was out at the time and voluntarily attended the Police Station the next day. You can see the result of the police enquiry posted on YouTube, saying that:
Your case has been “No Further Actioned” and that’s the end of the matter. Sorry to bother you.It seems that the Police did not think the allegation worth very much attention. I understand that Greg Clovis is taking legal advice on a possible claim for damages.
The letter at the school website also says:
You may have also heard that a website has been set up about the College and in particular, resources used in RE lessons.I have no qualms in giving you the link to the website since it does not contain any malicious code – why would it, after all? You don’t set up a campaigning website with malware on it that would deter people from looking at what you want to tell the world.
For security reasons we advise you not to access the website as we believe that it could compromise your email account.
It is perhaps unfortunate for Bonus Pastor College that it has been singled out. As a priest I have heard many similar stories from other Catholic schools and colleges though usually those who complain do not wish to be in the public eye, and do not gather materials and correspondence in the way that this family has. If they complain to the Governors or the Diocesan school authorities, they are fobbed off with excuses and nothing is done.
Catholic parents who complain about such materials are often demonised and the controversy is presented in terms of them being the problem. This is a grave injustice. Parents who send their children to a Catholic school should be able to presume that they will not be exposed in class to videos such as this, and that they will not be left to form their own views about moral questions without a clear presentation of the moral teaching of the Catholic Church as truth and not just one view among many.
The Values Clarification approach (with the self-serving “let me play devil’s advocate” ploy) has done immense damage both in the Church and in society. Catholic schools should be in the vanguard of giving clear moral education since we are blessed with the magisterium to guide us in the teaching of Christ. If a syllabus recommends showing material like the videos above, it should be changed, or the Church should reject such a syllabus firmly and decisively. Let me give the last word to a commenter:
I am a Catholic and teacher in a secular school within a 5 mile radius of Bonus Pastor. We would not countenance showing this material in school - no school with Muslim pupils would allow it, without at least warning the parents and allowing them to opt out. Ironic, isn't it?James Preece has also posted on this story here and here. The comments on both articles are also worth reading.
17 comments:
Thank you for posting on this - a rather brave decision for a priest of the Archdiocese. I can vouch for the accuracy of what you have posted. The repercussions for the Clovis family have already been quite appalling, so please keep them in your prayers. Perhaps the new broom at the CES will make changes - it already looks from the CES site as if the current catechetical materials are being ditched - though - oh -so -slowly. Perhaps this episode is an opportunity for all parish priests to use their influence to help set up a proper system of checks and balances to set Catholic education on a new and better path.
I was asked to cover an RE lesson about a year ago, and the material for the lesson was 'watch 'A Short Stay in Switzerland''. It didn't get to the part where the suicide took place, but it was clear where it was heading. I stopped the video before the lesson ended and spent some time talking to the pupils about the heroine's evident lack of faith. I also mentioned a friend of mine who has Motor Neurone Disease and who campaigns against euthanasia, the retired Anglican vicar Michael Wenham. I hope I left them with something worthwhile to think about.
It is clear that pornographic filth is being shown to Catholic children in a Catholic school in the Archdiocese of Southwark, by persons of a warped morality who are clueless abut religion and very opposed to the Catholic Church.The remedy is in the hands of the person in charge, namely ARCHBISHOP PETER SMITH.Given that he is aware of this horrendous state of affairs, one cannot understand why he has not got into his car, driven down to the school,to put an immediate stop to this corruption of children, and before leaving, found all the filthy materials and destroyed them.
I would then advise him to lead the school in a Rosary of reparation for the corruption of the souls of children.
'Keeping Mum' is apparently a 15 rated black comedy, starring Rowan Atkinson and Kristin Scott Thomas. They certainly shouldn't be showing a clip from it to 14 year olds, but it was a mainstream feature film that the kids could have gone to see at the cinema by themselves.
Maybe the rating for the film is far too low, but this is the world we live in and I'm not sure that the kids' best interests are served by a blanket condemnation. Do they not need to be prepared how to handle this kind of stuff, providing that it is done appropriately, in the context of Catholic moral teaching? Is it absolutely certain that this was lacking?
I couldn't face the euthanasia video, but this was a BBC drama. Was it shown before or after the 9 o'clock watershed?
Dreadful treatment of concerned parents, though.
Hmm. I've seen a bit of "Keeping Mum" - not, I must admit, the bits shown to the school pupils. I wouldn't show it to children on the grounds of its humour, in any case - it's certainly a dark comedy.
With that said, I must side with Delia on the matter of whether a blank condemnation is really sufficient.
It is not enough to equip young Catholics with the knowledge of what is morally wrong. They must know why it is wrong, and be able to argue the point successfully.
And on a side-note... Bonus Pastor? What sort of Latin is that?!
Further to my earlier comment, I have located the schemes of work for EDEXCEL RE Syllabus 2009. They are available here (Units 3 and 10 are the Catholic ones).
http://www.edexcel.com/quals/gcse/gcse09/rs/Pages/default.aspx
and they do not specifically recommend the videos in question. The do recommend some terrible tat like "My Beautiful Laundrette" -but do NOT make it mandatory. The Schemes are editable - which gives the teachers considerable leeway to exercise discretion. I won't go into what I think of the spec - but a clever and orthodox teacher could edit and enhance it to ensure that Catholic teaching is fully covered in context - using extracts from recent speeches from the Pope; The Catechism; and documents such as "Humanae Vitae - and clips from much more suitable videos and TV programmes. Please could anyone with influence reading this ask Fr Marcus Stock to make his first project the commissioning of a set of authentic teaching materials for teachers and students - and get some sort of vetting process into place. There are thousands of good RE teachers who could advise him.
Evagrius - you are right that pupils should know why something is morally wrong, but you do not need to show videos like this to illustrate a moral evil (where would you stop?) I have to say also that from the many stories that I have heard aside from this one, you may be a little naive about the real state of school RE teaching today.
(BTW What do you find wrong with the Latin of "Bonus Pastor"? It is in the vulgate rendering of John 10 and in classical sources.)
Dilly - many thanks for digging up the materials and pointing out the leeway that is allowed. In disputes such as this, appeal is often made to what is recommended by the Government, OFSTED, the QCA or whoever. When one looks at the details, there is usually much more room for manouevre.
Thanks for drawing attention to this. The teenage sex in "Keeping Mum" simply reinforces the cultural norm: it is cool and any parent who disagrees has a problem. I would like to hear how an RE teacher can turn that around and convince children that it is cool to save sex for marriage and practice chastity.
I'm glad there are exceptions like Anthony, but in my experience RE teachers use this material to spark "values clarification" type discussions where the cultural norm prevails and anyone who disagrees is a misfit.
Years ago a Salesian youth group in Australia announced, as a fundraiser, viewing The Da Vinci Code with a discussion afterwards. I wrote to the then superior of the order in protest and he replied that the young people needed to see The Da Vinci Code in order to discuss it. He objected to my comparing watching the DVC with viewing a pornographic movie in order to discuss pornography.
Evagrius Ponticus asks what kind of Latin is that? I am not sure what grammatical objection he has but one has to remember that Latin was a language that evolved over many centuries and by the time of St Jerome, for instance, it was no longer classical latin but what is called Vulgar Latin or Late Latin. It was gradually evolving from a morphological language (i.e. depending upon word endings changing) to a syntactical language (i.e. depending upon word order in sentences and the use of pronouns and prepositions - more akin to how English works). Personally I am grateful for this development as whilst trying to read Virgil, Cicero and Horace make me sweat Church Latin e.g. the Gospels are a doddle.
All rather off the very important point about the wholesale corruption of our children and grandchildren that has been allowed by negligent Bishops - far worse than the corruption by a tiny minority of paedophile priests. Greg Clovis is doing a wonderful job and should be supported by all Catholics.
Nicolas Bellord
This row looks like something that every company dreads: a complaint going viral.
I respectfully suggest that the rest of us must be very slow before we join in with our condemnations of either side for the sake of truth and our Church. There needs to be a massive pause for breath and a very blessed peacemaker needs come in. That someone also has to have a very clear understanding of the communication challenges of the internet. There is a danger that one or both sides can finish by looking very foolish together with a breaking of trust that might take years to heal.
This is decidedly not a plea for a serious matter to be brushed under the carpet. On the contrary, transparency and honesty are crucial from both sides. My point is that St Paul gives wise advice about the stages to go through in a disagreement before anyone “goes to the community”.
I’m relieved that my children grew up in a very different world than today’s youngsters. So I understand – I think – Bonus Pastor’s reasons for wanting to deal with these subjects.
But there are ways and ways. So I wonder if the school called a meeting BEFORE the videos were shown to gain the parents’ understanding and assent? Has it since invited a mediator to chair a meeting with aggrieved parents and staff?
Did the protestors ask for such a meeting before constructing their website? I note that the protestor’s website says “despite several complaints to Bonus Pastor Catholic School...” However, I learnt very early on as a parent that school gate gossip sometimes has to be tested.
I have no connection with school, Mr Clovis or protestors so I wonder if I have the right to pose these questions. I have no way of knowing, but this and the protestors’ site implicitly invites me to speculate. And speculations can easily muddy the waters.
The school is certainly very foolish to suggest that “for security reasons we advise you not to access the (protestors’) website as we believe it could compromise your email account” because it gives no reason for its suspicion. I looked, ran my virus checker and my system is fine. That statement is a significant sign that the school’s PR is out of its depth because it appears a very cheap shot. But then, again, not all virus checkers are perfect.
Solvent Rambler - your concerns are reasonable and show genuine charity.
In fact the parents exhausted all channels before going public with this. As you can see from the "Correspondence" tab at their website, they met with the Headteacher, and wrote to the Chair of Governors. They also had recourse to the Diocesan Schools Commission. These representations were made over a period of 10 months.
I can tell you that I thought long and hard about posting on this myself. I decided to do so after the story started coming out elsewhere on the internet. I spent several days on the post in order to give myself time to assess and re-assess the tone and accuracy.
A significant motivation for me was that I have heard several similar cases where parents have been through the proper channels, got nowhere, and ended up being cast as "problem parents" - in many cases the news of their complaints leaks onto the playground (and indeed the school gate gathering) and their children are taunted.
Your idea of independent mediation is an excellent one. Perhaps the publicity given to this case might encourage schools to take advice (including PR advice) and arrange for mediation.
Sorry - "Solent Rambler"
Fr Tim, thanks for your reply.
I don't want to become embroiled in this. But I suggest the protestors need to get some PR advice as well.
Most of us give nano-seconds to reading a website. We often don't bother to explore a site unless driven to. So possibly the explanation you give should be on their home page. It's a very important point which I missed. Frankly, my concern was that their site was put up by a well meaning obsessive.
Solvent Rambler: it has a certain "down with the kids" ring to it. I might use it if I ever post to a yoof site.
From a Catholic Mum:
I remember reading a quotation by a saint, used in an article about television. The saint’s quotation said it was not necessary for intellectual, or spiritual, formation to have tasted a bit of everything ( I would be grateful if someone could supply it). If we were talking about appreciation of good food, we would certainly not be insisting that one sought out the worst and possibly infective hot dogs in order to gain an appreciation. Appreciation of good food often comes from having experienced good cooking at home.
Young people want to be regarded as having adult thinking. If adults, especially parents, say it is ok for them to watch certain material, young people will think that this is a good, normal and necessary part of forming an adult mind. We are now entering the third generation of Catholics whose moral formation has come from the media rather than the Church. At least Google has on this occasion put an adult rating on material where our own structures have failed to sort it out!
The trouble with challenging young people to think about moral issues is that there must be a good startomg point. I will only know bad food when I have tasted a little of the good. So in sexual matters, when the plan of God is examined first, when there is a base from which the young person can meet the arguments, then I would have no fear afterwards of showing challenging videos and asking questions. When the base is missing the young people will draw their base from the norms of society around them. Such approaches inevitably fail.
My expectation as a Catholic parent would be that the R E dept would teach children the dignity of death and the beauty of death. As Catholics we have thankfully the rites of the Catholic Church to call upon prior to our death, to hear the words " Go forth Christian Soul in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit " As a young teenager i witnessed the destruction strokes caused to both my Grandfathers. On the other side of that i witnessed the final anointing they received and how peacefully they both died. It gave me a first hand experience of a Happy and Holy Death. Equally so with my husband who had battled with Cancer for a period of four years. The children should be made aware of the blessings peace and beauty that accompany the last rites of the Catholic Church. God gives to us, all that we need to move quietly peacefully and beautifully from this life into the next, an injection, glass of medication as in the video denies that. My Grandparents were denied speech as a result of their strokes, my husband also, they were however not denied the final Rites which were so vitally important to each of them.
Throughout my life I have witnessed so many people dying and I have thanked God for taking them so beautifully.The Video's are appalling and disturbing, the full weight of the Catholic Church and the Catholic community should stand in support and with the parents.Children should not be subjected to such and Parents should not be denied their rights.
Post a Comment