Teach Secondary 13.7

ABOUT THE AUTHOR John Lawson is a former secondary teacher, now serving as a foundation governor while running a tutoring service, and author of the book The Successful (Less Stressful) Student (Outskirts Press, £11.95); find out more at prep4successnow.wordpress. com or follow @johninpompano Essential truths Why, argues John Lawson , do so many persist in placing science and teaching of religion in opposition to one another, when enlightened and compassionate thought ultimately requires elements of both? O ne of my principal reasons for committing to Catholic education is the binding principle of truth. Many teenagers in state schools assume that science disproves God – it doesn’t. Catholic schools teach biology, chemistry, physics, and metaphysics in a complementary fashion. The science teachers who work in themmaintain precisely the kind of collective fidelity to scientific rigour you’d expect. The theologians within such schools will meanwhile pose important questions, rather than impose definitive answers. Blackholes As an infant, I used to sit on a ‘magic carpet’ at the day’s end to hear enchanting fairy stories. There was one story in which a beautiful princess kissed a frog that magically turned into a handsome prince. However, many university science professors will insist that this can (eventually, given the right conditions) be a true story. They’re wrong. Microevolution is observable. Macroevolution has never been successfully observed, yet in the supposedly Godless realm of the science labs, we’re taught to entertain it as a possibility. Microevolutionmight underpin the survival of a species, but unguided macroevolution doesn’t convincingly explain the arrivals of new species. Macro isn’t holy writ; it’s riddled with black holes. Logic further teaches us that naturalism doesn’t explain the origins of the universe. My own immaterial mind marvels at the construction of the natural world ex nihilo and the human body. Simple cells are far more reliant on micro-technology than Darwin ever realised. Scientific technology has since established that much. Breaking bread Despite this, however, Richard Dawkins nonetheless continues to attack religion as a “ Virus we should be inoculated against. ” Really? Why can’t teenagers believe in the Resurrection and contemplate eternal happiness? Religion can be poorly taught, of course (as can science) – but when taught well, religion can reveal essential truths and insights that enrich us all. The impact that the historical figure of Jesus had on global history is still greater than that of any monarch or politician. Why? Well, what if the meaning of life really is to love one another and create unique selves? It’s hard to dismiss Einstein’s famous adage, which holds that, “ Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind .” I may have been blind at one time, but I’mnow able to perceive a fine-tuned universe, thanks in part to the inspirational science teachers I often break bread with. Theologians seek to praise science, not bury it. To that end, we will also politely insist that science has not, in fact, buried God. Erudite scientists will exhort the value of religion because they recognise the Church’s seminal role in seeking truth and unity across diverse academic disciplines. It was, after all, the Church that created the universities which went on to shape Western Civilisation. Give and take During my school career, I taught global ethics, which I would frame around five vital ontological questions: Origin: where did I come from? Identity: who am I, and what might I become? Meaning: what is the meaning and purpose of life? Morality: who can tell me how to live ethically? Destiny: do I have a destiny in this life and beyond? If we aren’t created, then what distinguishes us from cockroaches? If we reduce ourselves to mere animals, then we shouldn’t be shocked when we’re treated like animals. God alone underwrites inalienable human rights; rights granted by politicians are arbitrary. What governments give, they often take away – so how can ‘scientism’ be our sole guide to those five ontological questions? Every prejudice is fuelled by reductionism. The reductive idea that ‘God questions’ are worthless is unworthy of any education system. Marginalising RE in schools evidently fosters agnosticism, atheism, and religious scepticism, rather than allowing children to consider themselves as unconditionally loved members of God’s creation. RE doesn’t indoctrinate, but not teaching it at all might do. Education should open minds, not close them. 61 teachwire.net/secondary H UM A N I T I E S