I wrote last week about the terrible betrayal of families and children by the Catholic authorities of England and Wales in relation to their co-operation with British government policy of providing schoolchildren with secret abortions and abortifacient birth control drugs and devices.I said that it was clear to me that the Catholic Education Service (CES), chaired by Archbishop Vincent Nicols, the archbishop of Birmingham, is at the root of the problem. I said that I would be writing to the CES, as a Catholic father and as national director of SPUC, to raise a number of questions and I asked concerned readers to help me draft my letter – by checking out the links I provided on my post and letting me know their views. (If you’ve not done so, you may like to read what I wrote last week.)
My first question to the CES, quoting from the CES document “The Connexions Service working in Catholic schools in England”, was:
“Why is Connexions ‘a service to be welcomed’ [in Catholic schools and colleges] when it’s clearly a government agency which, amongst other things, refers young people to abortion agencies?”
I have some further questions to include in my letter to the CES in relation to their above document which goes on to state:
“[The Connexions Service] has also caused some concern in our Catholic community because its wide remit to provide advice and guidance to young people includes matters of personal development, and by implication, sex and relationships (SRE) education”.
My question on this is:
“Why do you use the term ‘by implication’ in the statement above in view of Connexions’ absolutely explicit demonstration of their commitment to anti-life sex and relationships education on their website?”
The CES document, above, continues: “These [matters of personal development including sex and relationship education] are the responsibility of the governing bodies of our schools and colleges and there will usually be robust policies to accompany SRE.”
My questions to the CES on this are:
“How robust do you think such policies have to be in order to prevent Connexions advisers from telling schoolchildren that they have a right to access secret abortion and abortifacient birth control drugs and devices – and other services which are contrary to the health and moral welfare of children?
“What form of words does the CES recommend that governing bodies use to ensure that Connexions advisers never advise children about such services?
“Given that Connexions is being welcomed and, thereby, promoted in Catholic schools and colleges, is the CES aware of any robust policies which have been framed so as to ensure that Catholic schoolchildren do not regard the Connexions website – which openly refers to children’s option to choose confidential abortion services – as a useful source of information on such matters?
“The CES says that governing boides of Catholic schools and colleges will “usually” have ‘robust' policies to accompany SRE. This clearly implies that there are some Catholic schools which don’t have ‘robust’ policies in place. Are not the children and families of such schools being thrown to the wolves by the Catholic authorities of England and Wales?”
