In light of the importance of a good relationship between children and their parents, it makes sense for parents who aren’t able to home school to send their children to schools that teach, or reinforce, that children should honor their parents.  Many religious-oriented schools incorporate this teaching, and in the case of Judaism and Christianity, through the 10 commandments.  In the latter, obedience and respect towards one’s parents are more firmly rooted in the well-articulated knowledge that cultivating such an attitude leads one closer to God and to heaven.

God sets a father in honor over his children;
a mother’s authority he confirms over her sons.
Whoever honors his father atones for sins,
and preserves himself from them.
When he prays, he is heard;
he stores up riches who reveres his mother.
Whoever honors his father is gladdened by children,
and, when he prays, is heard.
Whoever reveres his father will live a long life;
he who obeys his father brings comfort to his mother.

My son, take care of your father when he is old;
grieve him not as long as he lives.
Even if his mind fail, be considerate of him;
revile him not all the days of his life;
kindness to a father will not be forgotten,
firmly planted against the debt of your sins
—a house raised in justice to you.
–Sirach 3:2-6, 12-14

Public schools, on the other hand, which have gravitated away from teaching that there is a Supreme Being as the cause and center of creation, and towards naturalism, may aspire to, or understand and esteem, the value of teaching children to honor their parents, but lack a framework for instilling such values, at least one that is beyond the naturally evident advantages, i.e. a continued source of food, clothing and shelter.

Generally, public schools serve the public by teaching skills in reading, writing, history, arithmetic, science and applied science / technology, skills that help to prepare a person for a variety of jobs or a trade, such as carpentry or data entry, or even a career, such as a professor, physician or lawyer.  However, with this orientation, education that explores culture and religion, or the classical humanities that assist in the formation of virtue, is weak to non-existent.

Simultaneously, esteem for the vocation of motherhood, whether through teaching resourcefulness, culinary arts or how to best nurture and raise children, as had been the case for women in the early 20th century, is less prevalent today, less appreciated.[1][2] Part of the reason for this change has involved an increasingly strong orientation towards urban lifestyle.

“The smith Hughes vocational act of 1917 pledged federal funds to public school homemaking programs. This vocational act defined homemaking as an unpaid vocation, and for many years, the secondary education homemaking programs receive special funding as a separate line item within the vocational budget. This level of funding allowed for funds to go directly to homemaking programs at the local level with no state reallocation of the money.

…Each renewal of the Smith-Hughes act and subsequent vocational acts brought new mandates for vocational homemaking programs. In the second half of the 20th century, the federal vocational mandates began to recommend and then insist that the home economics and family and consumer sciences programs train students more for careers and less for homemaking. This trend reflected the changes in society and the need for everyone to develop job skills.

As the first decade of the 21st century comes to an end, the new career and technical education act is the Carl Perkins act. In home economics and family and consumer sciences, the curriculum interprets the act by emphasizing career paths and outcomes. The programs continue the trend toward career development and away from homemaking.  Many state curricula utilize the national family and consumer sciences standards developed in 1998.”[3]

Correspondingly, in contrast with an urban lifestyle, the freedom through financial savings that can be realized through living in rural areas, areas where land is fairly inexpensive, are less realized.  Such settings could allow a young family to own a small hobby farm or be part of a cooperative farm.  Environments such as this can aid in contemplation and appreciation for creation and the Creator, environments often less stressful.  Additionally, because it’s generally less expensive to raise a large family in a rural setting, where family values are often stronger, as parents age, children might be more willing and able to care for their parents.  Nonetheless, even if placement in a nursing home is eventually necessary to address advanced caretaking needs, it’s more likely that parents will be able to stay at home longer.  This scenario often helps to alleviate loneliness and depression, a situation that may otherwise explain why antidepressants are currently the second most prescribed class of medications in the US.[4]

Currently, the public education system is permeated with the tenets of naturalism. Naturalism is synonymous with scientism or positivism, belief systems that entail viewing the scientific method as the sole means of understanding and discovering truth and reality.  These systems reject philosophical or religious truth.  This is perhaps because they cannot be verified with repeatability under a microscope, through a telescope, NMR machine, etc.  And yet, such beliefs fail to measure up to their own tenets, as one of the fundamental prerequisites required for such a world view, though rarely articulated, is that rocks, gasses and chemical liquids will eventually organize logically, allowing the formation of life.  Since no such postulate has ever been observed or repeated in a lab, the prevailing counterargument is that one only needs more time, whether millions or billions of years, to make the impossible possible.  Thus, assessment of beliefs or theories in secular schools that challenge the idea of an existence made through apparent scientific impossibilities (something from nothing), and random chance or mutations leading to more sophisticated life forms, i.e. evolution of one species to another through survival of the fittest mechanisms, is absent.

As noted by,

“Some say the [US] government interceded in the teaching of evolution in the schools because the Soviet Union had launched Sputnik in 1957, and Americans felt threatened that the United States might lose the race into space.  It was thought that the Soviets were teaching more math and science, including evolution (considered “science”), to further their space program and other technology.  The reaction was to load up the number of words on evolution in the textbooks; after 1963, the amount of content declined due to no new information available on the topic –typical of a knee-jerk reaction—lots of bluster at first, fizzling down to nothing!

Dr. Kent Hovind of Creation Science Evangelism, a former science teacher for 15 years, author and developer of numerous YouTube videos, says in his Creation Seminar:

Evolution believes that these five major events took place without God:

  1. Time, space and matter came into existence by themselves
  2. Planets and stars formed from space dust
  3. Matter created life by itself
  4. Early life forms learned to reproduce themselves
  5. Major changes occurred between these diverse life forms (i.e., fish changed to amphibians, amphibians changed to reptiles, and reptiles changed to birds and mammals).[5]

Arguably, those who are exposed exclusively to the teachings of naturalism, are robbed of opportunities to explore other explanations behind reality and the origins of life.  Sadly, when those so sheltered are exposed to knowledge surrounding the Word made Flesh, which probably occurs for most around Christmas and Easter, that time of year when most of the world celebrates Him who was conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, they’re more inclined to conclude they’ve encountered a myth, not accepting or understanding that our reality remains mysterious, i.e. matter doesn’t originate from nothing, nor does it organize itself logically into living things of its own accord, even if given trillions times exponentially trillions of years.

Consider the following insights given by Fr. Charles Arminjon, author of “The End of the Present World and the Mysteries of the Future Life,” a book described by St. Theresa of Lisieux, a.k.a. “The Little Flower,” as “…one of the greatest graces of my life.”:

The materialistic, atheistic science of our century, the sort that is propagated in magazines, taught from most official rostrums, and given credence by the mainstream of present-day anti-Christian opinion, persists in regarding the order and perfection of the universe merely as a result of chance. It affirms that matter is eternal… Denying creation, it could not logically admit that the world can have an end. According to this false science, the present universe will always subsist, or, if it becomes progressively better, this will be solely through the effect of man’s genius, the increasing impulse given to the arts and industrial achievements, the varied combination and play of fluids and elements, decomposing and reconstituting themselves to give birth to new forms – in short, by the application and activation of the innumerable and still unknown forces that nature conceals in her bosom; forces that, by themselves, are capable of surging forward into limitless and indefinite growth; and, just as the worm, in perfecting itself, turned into a quadruped, from quadruped to two-footed creature, from two footed creature to man, in the same way, man, with the aid of science, will one day attain the pinnacle of his sovereignty. He will conquer time and space, make himself wings in order to propel himself toward the stars, and explore the wonders of the constellations. In the eyes of the atheistic science, paradise and eternal life, as conceived by Christians, are an allegory and a myth. Progress is the last end, the law and foundation of the life of man, the final point and aim where all his thoughts and aspirations should converge. Let man courageously cast aside the bonds and darkness of superstition and of oppressive outdated beliefs; let him have faith in himself alone, and, in a more or less proximate future, he will be invested within unlimited, unrestrained kingship over the elements and creation.

If a person is free to believe in naturalism, they should also be free to believe the counterargument, i.e. Intelligent Design.  And yet, how can they believe that if they’re taught nothing about it?  Thus, there is an injustice taking place in our public education system.

Truly, life is the most sophisticated example of organized matter; human beings are the apex of that logical organization –made in the image of God.  Perhaps the second best example is a computer; everyone knows computers don’t assemble themselves.

Interestingly, naturalism is the predominant world view enshrined in Freemasonry, as discussed by Bro. Charles Madden in “Freemasonry: Mankind’s Hidden Enemy.”[6]  The philosophic orientation of freemasonry, of naturalism, views all religions as man-made, which in the case of Christianity, more readily implies that the Word, or Logos, never became flesh in a literal and tangible way in the person of Jesus, the Christ.  Therefore, naturalism is consistent with the spirit of the anti-Christ, i.e. the Logos never became flesh and blood.  This spirit is alive and well in today’s secular schools.

Consider now the First Amendment of our Constitution’s Bill of Rights:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” [7]

Has this not been reversed in that access to knowledge of the Word made Flesh is absent?

The first amendment was intended to prevent the state from recognizing any denomination as superior to another, i.e. the establishment clause, which was primarily in response to the marriage of church and state found in Great Britain through Anglicanism.  Moreover, it was intended to preserve the free exercise of faith, i.e. the free exercise clause, unless such expression causes harm to another person.

The separation of church and state is a phrase that has been taken out of context and often used to justify exclusion of faith-based cultural activities in functions or activities that are in some way associated with government.  We can find the phrase in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, where he responded to a concerned Baptist minister, assuring him that no infringement by the state would occur towards his freedom of worship, stating there is a “wall of separation between church and state.” [8]

Arguably, public schools, as institutions of education, are representative of places where a person can explore ideas and evaluate their validity.  The deliberate exclusion of religious activities and access to religious knowledge at public schools is not supported by the constitution, but, as stated earlier, is an injustice, especially to those who, as loyal tax payers, desire that their children have access to such knowledge.  Such access violates neither the establishment clause, providing a fair presentation of religious faiths or denominations, and their associated teachings, are available, nor the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, providing students and teachers are free to exercise their faith through prayer and worship.  Conversely, prohibiting students from praying at school would violate the free exercise clause, providing such prayers do not disrupt other students while in class or studying.

Since Sacred Scripture, i.e. the fullness of revelation, as completed in the New Testament, which was the most influential religious text in the minds of the Founding Fathers,[9] does not support violence as a means to an end, but does support separation of church and state as institutions, though not necessarily as positive sources of influence towards one another, e.g. instilment of moral values and protection of human rights, it should be easy to recognize its preeminence in the classroom, not only because the majority of tax payers approve it, but because it helps establish the framework for inalienable human rights, rights endowed by a Creator, the foundation for the Declaration of Independence.

Sadly, legislative changes have slowly resulted in the federal government prohibiting the rights of individuals and the state.  For example, in a case before the Supreme Court in 1947, Everson vs. Board of Education, the court ruled,

“The First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between Church and State, that wall must be kept high and impregnable.  We could not approve the slightest breech.”

Again, a wall of separation between Church and State was never stated or implied in the First Amendment of our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.  However, the Federal government has an implied obligation to preserve the Union.  This obligation surfaced most notably when the federal government overrode the legislative activities of southern states after the Civil War.  As Tim Staples discusses in his DVD, “Catholics and the Culture War,” ‘the 13th Amendment was not sufficient to prohibit southern states from passing laws that denied emancipated slaves certain rights, including property ownership.’ [10]  Therefore, the 14th Amendment was passed, stating,

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”[11]

This executive function set a precedent for the federal government in overriding state laws.  However, when such power is exercised, it suggests a superior role of the federal government in establishing the laws, and potentially, the culture of a state, thus concentrating power.  Nonetheless, when federal laws or mandates impede the expression of religious faith, the federal government, in accordance with the 1st Amendment, and Divine Law, oversteps its jurisdiction, unless however, such expression results in harm to another.

Perhaps the best examples of the federal government overstepping its jurisdiction occurred when the Affordable Care Act, containing the HHS Mandate, was upheld by the Supreme Court as constitutional on June 27th, 2012. This HHS Mandate requires that those who believe in the sacredness of life from the moment of conception, a potentially religious belief, should abandon that belief in order to comply with the mandate, thereby providing products or services that result in the termination of a pregnancy.  Arguably, this is not providing healthcare in the form of saving human life, but rather, is complicit in destroying it.  Thankfully, after a myriad of legal battles, the ability of some businesses and non-profit organizations to uphold such a belief while operating their business or organization, has been restored.

If Christian values are the foundation of western culture, as argued by Harvard professor Christopher Dawson in his book, “The Crises of Western Education,” how can that culture triumph over naturalism unless there is freedom to learn Christian values, especially during an adolescent age, when the formation and practice of virtue is so important?

In discussing a second renaissance that took place in the Italian cities of the mid-15th century, which resembled the city states of ancient Greece in their intense political life, artistic impulse and keenness of intellectual interests, Dawson writes,

“Hellenism brought back into higher education the aesthetic and moral elements which had been lost in the scientific disputations of the schoolman, although it survived on the vernacular level in the courtly culture.  Now the humanists learnt from Xonephon and Plato and Isocrates that education was an art which should aim at the harmonious development of every side of human nature, physical, moral and intellectual. Thus they gained an awareness of the unlimited possibilities of the enrichment of personal life by art and literature and social intercourse.

It was in the light of these ideas that the tradition of humanist education developed, and for more than a century from the beginning of the 15th century to the middle of the 16th, there was more thinking and writing on educational subjects and then at any time since the great age of Hellenic culture.  But though this movement was inspired by an intense devotion to classical culture it was not conscious of any disloyalty to the Christian tradition. The great humanist educators, like Leonardo Bruni, Guarino of Verona, Vittorino da Feltre, P. P. Vergerio and Mafio Vegio were themselves devout Christians who wished to unite the intellectual and aesthetic culture of Hellenism with the spiritual ideals of Christianity. This Christian aspect of the Renaissance culture has been seriously underestimated by the 19th-century historians of Renaissance culture, and especially by the greatest of them, Jacob Burckhardt, and this has evoked a somewhat exaggerated reaction on the part of modern writers like Conrad Burdock and G. Toffanin.

Perhaps the most moderate and just statement is that of an English educationalist scholar, the late W. H. Woodward, who made a special study of the educational aspects of humanism. “It cannot be too strongly affirmed,” he writes, “that a close acquaintance with the actual work of Vittorino and Guarino, and with the aims of Vergerius and Vegio, reveals a sincerity of religious conviction which permeates all their educational practice. Vittorino’s great achievement was to affect a reconciliation between the Christian life and humanist ideals; in this he was followed by other masters, though rarely with the same unfaltering consistency.  It is a fair description of the motive underlying Vittorino’s method that he regarded Humanist education as the training for Christian citizenship. He himself took a leading part in the religious teaching of the school; and by addresses, by private conversations, and above all by his own example, he brought the full force of his personal character to bear upon his pupils in the critical years of their life. He expressly encouraged a sense of responsibility towards the poor and suffering and never forgot his civic obligation, and its religious sanction.” [12]

Again, as stated earlier, since Sacred Scripture, i.e. the fullness of revelation, as completed in the New Testament, which was the most influential religious text in the minds of the Founding Fathers,[13] does not support violence as a means to an end, but does support separation of church and state as institutions, though not necessarily as positive sources of influence toward one another, e.g. instilment of moral values and protection of human rights, it should be easy to recognize its preeminence in the classroom, not only because the majority of tax payers approve it, but because it helps establish the framework for inalienable human rights, rights endowed by a Creator, the foundation for the Declaration of Independence.

In the Introduction to Dawson’s work, Glen W. Olson writes,

“The American fourth, contemporary, age, has more realized the idea of higher education for all that has any country in the world. Although an elite system of education can resist conforming to the society around it, a democratic system cannot, and in the American context inevitably education became oriented toward technology and vocationalism. Dawson thought a great question looming over his fourth, cosmopolitan, urban, age was whether America could continue to develop in that direction it had been, with urban life ever more separated from rural, and this urban life exorbitantly consuming natural resources in a life of “luxury for all.”  Could a land in which autonomy and freedom are chief virtues, take up the burdens of history and see itself as, like all the others, implicated in Original Sin?[14]

…Dawson saw the study of Christian culture to be primarily sociological and historical in character and does not equate it with reading a list of Christian classics, though such would be read. The goal is to understand the process by which a culture and its institutions are built-up.[15]

…Dawson insisted that the function of any educational system was to create a common world of moral and intellectual values, a common memory which helped a given culture maintain itself.  To say that such a common educational tradition has no larger disappeared is to say that our culture is under threat of dissolution. What is today called multiculturalism, that is, the idea that a society can be built around a plurality of cultures, with no single one of them dominating, presumably for Dawson would be a prescription for cultural disintegration, and one question is whether in any respect he would be wrong.”[16]

The Christian faith is self-affirming.  Thus, when we come to accept that God as love, such belief empowers us as individuals, enabling us to accept suffering for its redemptive value, as love often involves sacrifice and suffering, helping us to forgive, helping to create a society where the intrinsic rights of others are respected and preserved.  Conversely, accepting that we cannot control the laws of nature in our ordinary human state of being, no one wants to serve a master who is inconsistent, who kills others or takes from them according to whim or caprice.  In fact, few would esteem, let alone adore such a master unless forced to do so out of fear of punishment or death.  Rather, we want a master who is merciful, so that when we do something wrong, we can hope for their patience and understanding rather than severe punishment, though such may be appropriate.

Therefore, any nation that has freedom of religion whereby the Christian faith may be freely taught about, is a nation that puts the individual needs of its people first, endowing its people with a self-affirming faith.  In contrast, a “me-first” nation, which does not allow freedom of religion so that Christianity may be freely taught, has become so, given this age of technology, as a result of previous leaders who sought to suppress Christian missionaries due to concerns about losing their position in society.  For example, consider a society steeped in belief in a caste system, where those who have much are believed to have been favored and deserving of what they have while those who are poor or infirmed deserve to be, and nothing should be done to change their state because they’ve done something to deserve it.  To teach Christianity is to empower every person as a child of God who is loved, loved by a merciful parent who regularly forgives wrongdoing, who is no more or less deserving than another to enjoy good things, to have opportunity… life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness / right to own property.  Moreover, to be a Christian means to strive towards the ideal to put others before oneself, to ensure that their needs have been met even before oneself.  In this sense, you can begin to understand why many nations oppose freedom of religion with respect to Christianity –those in positions of power stand to suffer greater loss, whether the strain of a guilty conscience or perhaps the uprising of people in the face of gross injustices committed against basic human rights.  However, if Christianity cannot be freely taught, and human rights are not violated, the people of a given nation are not as likely to revolt, not knowing what they are missing, perhaps accepting that the material universe is all that is real, though often confronted with spiritual realities and interpersonal connections that point to the existence of the soul, realities that that don’t make sense if everything is simply material, guided by chance.

With regards to freedom to teach religion in public schools, no religion should be suppressed if a sufficient number of parent’s desire to have such material taught to their children, providing such a religion does not inspire bias or hatred of others, especially through ignorance or unfounded prejudice.  However, since America’s cultural heritage rests with the Christian faith, it is fitting that the availablility to learn about Salvation History from a Judeo-Christian perspective is available at every school.  In this way, it helps to balance truth when “truth” has been maligned through various heresies, i.e. half-truths about God, about Him being love.  Jesus said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, you will know my Father also.”

And yet, no child should be forced to learn these truths, rather, it would be a voluntary choice.   Furthermore, no parent should be able to prevent his or her child from learning about Christianity while attending a public school in a nation such as America, a nation that can attribute its values and cultural heritage to this God of love.

Currently, in modern secular schools, instead of exploring and potentially accepting the truth of the Word made Flesh, the one event in western history that has overshadowed the definition of western history itself, i.e. B.C. to A.D., it’s treated as a kind of fable, on the same plane as unicorns and fairies.  And yet, St. Peter addresses this reductionist tendency directly when he states,

“For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, my Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain.

So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to be attentive to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”  –2nd Peter 1:16-21

Because of the influence of naturalism in America, public schools fail to teach or explore the existence of an eternal human soul, as Plato taught.[17]  This situation is in spite of evidence supporting an afterlife, evidence that has been well documented through “near-death” experiences, experiences which involve clinical death for a period of time.  During these times of clinical death, i.e. no pulse or signs of brain activity, a person is “separated” from their body.  After those who’ve had these experiences have been resuscitated, they’re able to describe things they’d have no way of knowing, e.g. characteristics of things in other rooms of the hospital or someone who’s blind being able to describe what it’s like to see for the first time.  Fr. Robert Spitzer, author of “New Proofs for the Existence of God: Contributions from Contemporary Physics and Philosophy,” has done an excellent job compiling research of near death experiences, research conducted by MD’s and Ph.D.’s, and sharing it on his website:[18]

Likewise, because of the influence of naturalism in public schools, there is no presentation of evidence supporting an “Unmoved Mover,” as Aristotle taught [19], a.k.a. Intelligent Designer or Creator, regardless of whether the majority of tax payers supporting such schools believe there is a Creator, believing that reality more than one suggesting a purely random existence arising by and through itself.

Furthermore, even though the cellular machinery necessary for a fully functioning organism can’t come together of its own accord, especially with the level of informational organization contained in RNA/DNA, as has been eloquently discussed by Stephen Meyer in his book, “Signature in the Cell,”[20] little room is given for young adults to explore the reality of a Creator.  Correspondingly, many children in these environments lack motivation for learning, as well as skills for the cultivation for virtue, which could lead to eternal life, because much of what they learn fails to stretch beyond natural limits.  Moreover, what is the point of prayer if all that is real is what I can directly observe or see?

Public schools have little basis for teaching the principle that one should honor their parents because they’re not able to teach it in the greater context of Salvation History.  Thus, young minds aren’t as likely to embrace such a principle, minds so often occupied by mainstream cultural influences and a variety of entertainment options.  Furthermore, the false conflict between faith and science taints the perceived value of faith, leading to poor intellectual formation.  Conversely,

“The top three scientists of the modern era, Newton, Maxwell and Einstein, all said the reason they did physics was to get to the beauty and intelligibility of God.”[21]

Other notable scientists who believed in God include Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin and Max Planck.[22]

Conversely, with scientism can come an attitude of arrogance, of being stubborn and unteachable in other areas, such as philosophic or religious truth.  And yet, Jesus taught about the tendency to become intellectually prideful when associating the inquisitive and teachable nature of children with greatness,

At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, ‘Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?’ He called a child, whom he put among them, and said, ‘Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.

However, the coed environment of public schools can inhibit mental concentration, a result of sexual tensions between adolescent men and women.  Coed classes can also negate a healthy respect for vocational differences, i.e. motherhood.  This latter orientation can undermine homemaking skills for women, skills leading to the noble and worthy vocation of motherhood.  Similarly, public education systems have no collective or cultural basis for esteeming motherhood and the sanctity of marriage.  Therefore, during the transformation from adolescence to adulthood, public schools are often left promoting sexual experimentation conjoined with contraception, whether through direct encouragement or an absence of morally sound teaching on the nuptial meaning of the body concerning the nature of man and women, especially with reference to the Creator’s plan for marriage and family and how it correlates with Christ and His Bride, namely the Church, as has been eloquently discussed by St. Pope John Paul in “Theology of the Body.”[23]  Additionally, Richard Wetzel, M.D., has done an excellent job of discussing the importance of sex education in light of traditional wisdom through his book, “Sexual Wisdom: A Guide for Parents, Young Adults, Educators and Physicians.”[24]

With respect to direct encouragement, “sex education” often contributes to viewing the use of contraception as a cultural norm, paying little if any attention to the 9% typical use failure rate of hormonal contraception and its close correlation with the number of abortions occurring each year, e.g. as estimated 971,032 “unwanted” children conceived in 2010[25] based on a typical use failure rate of 9%, with 765,651 medical and surgical abortions reported that same year to the CDC,[26] not to mention the social and psychological risks of premarital sex, as thoroughly discussed by Dr. Wetzel.

Truly, showing respect for one’s parents can help one learn how to show respect for others who are older or in positions of authority.  Such a practice fosters an attitude of humility, a virtue most often enacted through child-parent relationships, a virtue essential for family life and success in the job market.  Moreover, once a person learns to practice humility, they can more easily orient themselves towards the humility that God desires when we place ourselves in His presence during prayer and worship.

The practice of humility, indeed such an education, first begins in the home.  Disciplinary measures enacted by a parent, whether through time-outs or swats on the butt, which are more likely for boys than girls, help to correct what is lacking in a positive attitude towards obedience that would prevent the need for discipline in the first place.  Unfortunately, todays schools often have little means for discipline when parents do not themselves discipline their children.  As a child, I knew that if I misbehaved while in elementary school, the principle, Mr. Mosly, would dish out a few swats on my rear with his wooden paddle.

In difficult cases of misbehavior, children are often sent home.  When this occurs, without parental correction, little growth, if any, will arise.  Rather, such an outcome can simply lead to a child having more free time, suggesting that misbehavior that leads to suspension from school is a simple solution to not wanting to go to school in the first place, making it all the more likely that the child will drop out.  When a parent neglects to discipline their child, it makes sense that the community, through the social institutions in place, can help do so, helping to prevent other reactive forms of discipline, e.g. incarceration.

“It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.”
–Frederick Douglass

For the child who learns to love God, reinforcement for cultivating a positive attitude towards honoring one’s parents often takes place during prayer.  This kind of prayer serves as an excellent example of our free will in practice, as well as the execution of reason, two of the sweetest gifts God has given mankind –Free Will because true prayer is more often internal and private, and Reason because a child more readily understands that living in harmony with their parent(s) is better than living at odds, unless there is clear misconduct on the part of the parent.

Prayer is often the leg-work involved with embracing the right attitude, not to mention the help that such prayer results in when heard by those heavenly resources from whom grace is requested!  Sweet Jesus, may your reality become mine!

Accordingly, if a public school in a free, and predominantly Christ-centered, town, city, county, state, or nation, teaches that God and love are synonymous, even though proof of love does not exist (and therefore cannot be taught through naturalism), at least not concretely, i.e. only through its absence, e.g. in children who are purposefully neglected, it would be easier to teach children to honor their parents through the 10 Commandments, since they’re oriented towards love, towards peace and harmony.  Accordingly, St. John informs us, “God is love.”

Perhaps the best example of this love occurs when we cultivate love for our enemies.

‘You have heard that it was said, “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax-collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not Gentiles do the same? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
–Matthew 5:43-48

A child who learns to practice humility can more readily see the value of obedience and discipline.   Such a child is more likely to succeed in life and more likely to find true love, even God’s sacrificial, agapic love!

Arguably, children who do not have loving parents are best provided for through an orphanage where holy men and women act as family members, where they already go by the name Brother or Sister, Father or Mother.  However, the state seems to have taken over the care of children.  Thus, when these services are organized through the state, where the primary incentive for employees can be seen as a paycheck, though certainly that is not always the case, children are more likely to be neglected in receiving the kind of love they’re made for, i.e. to share and develop in families, even, in light of the teachings of the Christian faith, in the Body of Christ.

Imagine how many more men and women might answer a call to Religious Life if they knew they’d have the privilege of spending a significant amount of their time with children, who are naturally so wonderful they can warm the coldest heart or transform the intellect of a steadfast atheist, as was the case for Jennifer Fulwiler, author of “Something Other Than God: How I Passionately Sought Happiness and Accidentally Found It!”[27]



[1] Hilary Dowdle.  “Bring Back Home Economics in Schools! Cooking and nutrition skills are crucial to a happy, healthy life. So why don’t schools teach them?”

[2] Arlene D. Holzman.  “What’s Taught in Schools”  The New York Times.  12 September 1982.  Online.    (Last accessed 1/21/16)

[3] Kridgel, Craig.  Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2010. Print.  (pg. 370)

[4] Kathlyn Stone.  “The Most Prescribed Medications by Drug Class.  16 December 2014  (Last


[5] Eric Hovind, et al. “Teaching Evolution: Indoctrination as Education.”  Creation Today.
8 September 2010.

[6] Madden, Charles.  Freemasonry: Mankind’s Hidden Enemy. Rockford, Il. Tan Books and Publishers, 1995. Print. (pg. 3)

[7] “The Constitution of the United States,” Amendment 1.

[8] The American Heritage Series with Historian David Barton. David Barton. Aledo: Bridgestone.  29 June 2009.  DVD.  Disc 4: Church, State & The Real 1st Amendment.

[9] The American Heritage Series with Historian David Barton. David Barton. Aledo: Bridgestone.  29 June 2009.  DVD.  Disc 2: The Faith of our Founding Fathers.

[10] Staples, Tim.  Catholics and the Culture War.  San Diego: Catholic Answers. 2012. DVD.

[11] “The Constitution of the United States,” Amendment 14, Section 1.

[12] Dawson, Christopher.  The Crises of Western Education.  New York: Sheed and Ward, 1961. Print. p.24-35

[13] Ibid. Disc 2: The Faith of our Founding Fathers.

[14] Ibid. p. xv

[15] Ibid. p. xvii

[16] Ibid. p. xix

[17] Wikipedia contributors.  Phaedo. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.  26, December 2015.

[18] Fr. Robert Spitzer.  Life After Death and Near Death Expericnes.  Magis Center.  (Last accessed 1-23-16)

[19] Wikipedia contributors.  Unmoved Mover.  Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.  8, January 2016.

[20] Meyer, Stephen.  Signature in the Cell.  New York: HarperCollins Publishers.  23 June 2009.

[21] EWTN News, 11 February 2016. Interview with Anthony Rizzi circumscribing the discovery of gravity waves.  Broadcast.

[22] Famous Scientists Who Believed in God.  God and Science.  Online.

[23] John Paul II.  The Theology of the Body: Human Love in the Divine Plan.  Boston: Pauline Books & Media. 1997. Print

[24] Wetzel, Richard, MD.  Sexual Wisdom: A Guide for Parents, Young Adults, Educators and Physicians.  Huntington Beach: Sex Education for Advanced Beginners.  1998.  Print.

[25] Life is Sacred.  2010 Breast Cancer Incidence per Year per Age Group with Respect to OC Usage.  29 September 15.  Online.   (Last accessed 1-23-16)

[26] Pazol, Karen, et al.  Abortion Surveillance –United States, 2010.  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  29 November 2013.  Online.

[27] Fulwiler, Jennifer.  “Something Other Than God: How I Passionately Sought Happiness and Accidentally Found It!    Ignatius Press.  29 April 2014.  Print.