Scholion I. On Non-Catholic Schools

I. Among non-Catholic schools:

1. Some are so harmful that the danger to faith or morals cannot, morally speaking, become remote, for example if children would continually hear bad doctrine or would be compelled to be present at prohibited rites, or if the students were so perverse that scarcely anyone could keep himself unharmed.¹

2. Others are less, but nevertheless positively, harmful, either on account of doctrines to be handed on or on account of association with bad companions, which threatens in them.

3. Others are only negatively harmful, namely neutral schools, or such as merely exclude religion.

II. It is clear that the schools under 1 and 2 are to be condemned; but even neutral schools are to be disapproved. This is clear first from ecclesiastical documents. Thus Pius IX condemned proposition 48: "This method of educating youth can be approved by Catholic men, which is separated from the Catholic Faith and from the power of the Church, and which regards only, or at least primarily, the knowledge of merely natural things and the ends of earthly social life."² And Pius XI declares that "through schools which they call neutral, the whole foundation of Christian education is thrown down and overturned, since religion is wholly removed from them; these schools, moreover, will in no way be neutral except in appearance, since in reality they are or will be fully hostile to religion."³ And can. 1373: in every elementary school, religious instruction is to be handed on to children according to their age (§ 1). Youth which attends middle or higher schools is to be cultivated by a fuller doctrine of religion, and Ordinaries of places are to see to it that this be done through priests outstanding in zeal and doctrine (§ 2). Next, that neutral schools are to be rejected is clear from the fact that - as the cited documents already declare - in practice they will cease to be truly neutral, because they are separated from the authority of the Church, whereby it easily happens that the teachers to be put in charge and the books to be used harm the children; all the more because scientific instruction, for example of history, can scarcely be handed on without its being plain which religion the teacher supports.⁴

III. As to attendance at non-Catholic schools, can. 1374 establishes: Catholic children are not to attend non-Catholic, neutral, mixed schools, namely those which are open also to non-Catholics. But it belongs to the local Ordinary alone to decide, according to the norm of the instructions of the Apostolic See, in what circumstances of things and with what precautions applied, so that the danger of perversion may be avoided, it can be tolerated that those schools be attended. With these things noted, I say:

1. It is never lawful to send children to schools about which we spoke under I, 1.

2. It is also of itself gravely unlawful to send children to a less, but nevertheless positively, harmful school. By accident, or on account of a grave cause, this is lawful, provided remedies are applied by which the danger becomes remote. As to children who attend universities (especially non-Catholic ones), let parents take the greatest care that before the children are sent to them, they be cultivated by solid education and knowledge of religion; that they enroll in a Catholic society of students; that they be able to approach a learned and upright man who by his counsel may remove dangers and doubts; that they choose a religious friend, which association may draw them back from illicit companionships.

3. To send children to a neutral school, as it is called, that is, to a school only negatively harmful or such as merely excludes religion:

a) It is a grave sin: a) if it is done from a gravely bad motive, for example because one approves neutrality or spurns the authority of the Church; b) if it is done with grave scandal; this can be present if in that place there is a Catholic school equally suitable.

b) Otherwise it is of itself a light sin, provided religious instruction is cared for in another way. But parents are excused if no Catholic school is at hand, or if the one available is little suited for instructing adolescents suitably according to their condition; if otherwise grave harm threatens the parents, for example from the side of magistrates.⁵

4. What has just been said is almost also valid concerning schools about which Pius XI speaks thus: nor can that school be tolerated (especially if it is the "only" one and all children are bound to attend it), in which, although the precepts of sacred doctrine are handed on separately to Catholics, nevertheless the teachers are not Catholic who instruct Catholic and non-Catholic children together in letters and arts.⁶

Finally, it must be seen whether the local Ordinary has prescribed anything concerning the aforesaid matters.

Corollary I. Unworthy of absolution are parents who "neglect to impart necessary Christian education and instruction to their children, or who permit them to attend such schools in which ruin of souls cannot be avoided; or finally who, although there is a Catholic school in the same place, suitable and aptly equipped and prepared, or although they have the ability to educate their offspring in a Catholic manner in another region, nevertheless entrust them to public (neutral) schools without sufficient cause and without the necessary precautions, by which the danger of perversion may be removed from being proximate."⁷

Corollary II. It is lawful for someone, on account of a grave cause, to assume the office of teacher in neutral schools, provided he is not compelled to use bad books. Likewise it is permitted to hold the office of inspector: 1. if a grave cause is present and the schools to be inspected are not positively harmful; 2. if the schools are indeed positively harmful but there is hope that they will be rendered notably less harmful. Yet it must be considered to what extent public scandal perhaps prohibits the aforesaid things.

¹ Instruction of the Holy Office, November 24, 1875 (Collectanea de Propaganda Fide, n. 1449).

² Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1748.

³ Encyclical Divini illius magistri, December 31, 1929; cf. Pius IX, letter Quum non sine, July 14, 1864; Leo XIII, allocution Summi Pontificatus, August 20, 1880; encyclical letter Nobilissima, February 8, 1884; encyclical letter Quod multum, August 22, 1886; letter Officio sanctissimo, December 22, 1887; encyclical letter Caritatis, March 19, 1894, etc.

⁴ Instruction of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, November 24, 1875 (Collectanea, n. 1449).

⁵ Cf. encyclical of Pius XI, Divini illius magistri.

⁶ Cited encyclical.

⁷ Instruction of the Holy Office, November 24, 1875 (Collectanea, n. 1449).