There is a debate today on a BBC comments page entitled "How Should Schools Teach Religion?" The majority of the posted responses are predictable and rather depressing.
A society's religion is the accepted collective narrative upon which that society's culture, spiritual, moral and political, is based. It is a mistake to imagine we are simply losing our religion. We are, mostly unknown to ourselves, by stealth, having one religion (Christianity) replaced by a different, politically correct, secular, humanistic, atheist religion that is being installed in its place.
The ‘comparative religion’ being taught in schools is a fraud against religion. Comparing different religions is not a worthless exercise but forensic comparison invites (and is intended to invite) a sense of 'grand illusion'. There is no ontological element in this approach. Everything is at a distance. There is nobody proclaiming the tremendous importance that one should adhere strictly to certain universal moral code. Thus real religion is destroyed and I believe that those who have made the decision to move religious curricula in this direction know it.
Bertrand Russell wrote a great deal about beliefs being generated in "The Impact of Science on Society". Here is a single quote:
The Intended Result of Education
“The completeness of the resulting control over opinion depends in various ways upon scientific technique. Where all children go to school, and all schools are controlled by the government, the authorities can close the minds of the young to everything contrary to official orthodoxy.
Here's another, an extract from Protocol IV of 'The Protocols of Zion'(written by a genius, 'The Protocols' describe in detail the crises that are being generated in the world today):
WE SHALL DESTROY GOD
3. But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of equality, which is negatived by the very laws of creation, for they have established subordination. With such a faith as this a people might be governed by a wardship of parishes, and would walk contentedly and humbly under the guiding hand of its spiritual pastor submitting to the dispositions of God upon earth. This is the reason why IT IS INDISPENSABLE FOR US TO UNDERMINE ALL FAITH, TO TEAR OUT OF THE MIND OF THE "GOYIM" THE VERY PRINCIPLE OF GOD-HEAD AND THE SPIRIT, AND TO PUT IN ITS PLACE ARITHMETICAL CALCULATIONS AND MATERIAL NEEDS.
Real religious education says, loud and clear, not only "these are the standards by which we must live" but also that there is a greater reality than man and that we cannot trust the powerful to lead us to the truth of this reality (as we are now allowing their 'think-tanks' to do) when, as everybody knows and as Christ has taught, the powerful are almost invariably the enemies of truth.
The financial powers that own most of the world and rule us wish to secure their power. The surest way for them to do this is to destroy the very idea of God so that people will look to other people for guidance (and we know who the powerful have in mind to do the guiding). Like Lucifer, the dominant group have decided they can replace God.
To understand what is happening in our schools regarding religious education we must think, not about religion but about power and its objective. The truly powerful have got where they are by wiping out other competing centres of power. This is obvious and well known. It is this process to which people should relate the ideological paradigms that are put before us. Who has an agenda and what is that agenda?
The family, our sense of nation and racial coherence are all under attack. Religion too, for the same reasons......and most people who pick up arguments promoted in the media do not understand (no more, most often, than those who write them) whose work they are doing.
If faith is blind, reason is more so.
ADDENDUM (June 6th 8pm)
I have just received Bishop Williamson's weekly article by email and it covers very similar ground to the above. As many will know the good Bishop has recently been in a great deal of trouble with the press, the courts and even his own order, the SSPX, over statements he has made about 9/11 and the Auschwitz gas chambers in particular.
Bishop Williamson is nothing if not an honest man and his own rebellion (along with the rest of his order) within the catholic Church has been against the new (heretical) teachings of the Vatican II Council in the late 1960's. Here is the article (I have BW's permission to use it):
ELEISON COMMENTS CXLXI (6 June, 2010) : CONCILIAR "THEOLOGIAN" I.
The havoc wrought upon souls throughout the world by the 1960's collapse of the mass of Catholic bishops at the Second Vatican Council, is immeasurable. So one can hardly reflect too much on the essential problem, because it is still very much with us, in fact more so than ever. It threatens to send all of our souls down to Hell. Last year the Italian fortnightly periodical, Si Si No No, published an article summarising the main errors of a pioneer "theologian" of Vatican II, the French Dominican Fr. Marie-Dominique Chenu. Laid out still more briefly below, his six errors point to the heart of the problem: the putting of man in the place of God (I have changed their order - thereby hangs a tale for another "EC") :
1 Turning to man, as though it is God that needs to be adapted to modern man, and not modern man to God. But Catholicism strives always to fit man to God, and not the other way around.
2 Submitting divine Revelation to modern ways of thinking, e.g. Descartes, Kant, Hegel. No more is there any absolute, objective Truth. All religious statements become merely relative and subjective.
3 Submitting divine Revelation to the historical method, meaning that every truth arose merely in its historical context, so that just as every historical context was or is changing, so no truth is unchanging or unchangeable.
4 Believing in pantheistic evolution, meaning that God is no longer the Creator essentially distinct from creation. He becomes no different from creatures, which come into being by evolution, and by evolution are constantly changing.
5 Putting feelings first in matters of religion, i.e. putting religious sentimental experience above either supernatural Faith in the mind or supernatural Charity in the will.
6 Denying the difference between good and evil, by claiming that the mere existence of a human act makes it good. Now it is true that every human act that happens has the goodness of being, but it only has moral goodness if it is ordered to its end, which is ultimately God. Human acts not ordered to God are morally evil.
The six errors are obviously inter-connected. If (1) religion is to center on me, then (2&3) I must unhook my mind from reality, where religion centers on God. With the mind crippled, then (4) "nothing is but what is not", so everything evolves, and (5) feelings take over (whereupon religion is by the fault of men feminized, because emotion is women's prerogative). Finally, where feelings replace truth, (6) morality collapses.
In the Vatican II documents themselves, these errors are rather more implicit than explicit, because the errors had to be disguised for the documents to get the vote of the mass of Catholic bishops who were attending the Council but were not yet sufficiently up-dated. However, these errors represent the fully up-dated "spirit of Vatican II", which is where the Council was headed, and that is why the official Church has been on a path of self-destruction for the past 45 years : 1965 to 2010. For how many more years ?
"PEDOPHILE RING KIDNAPPED MADELEINE"
1 hour ago