Lancaster bishop declares that he is ready to face MPs' inquiry

BY ANNA ARCO
BISHOP PATRICK O'Donoghue of Lancaster has declared that he is ready to face a Commons select committee investigating "fundamentalist" approaches in Catholic education.
The bishop said: "If they summon me to speak, I look forward to the opportunity, to exercise my rights and not to be bullied by an aggressive secularist approach."
His comments came in response to reports that Barry Sheerman, a Labour MP for Huddersfield, had again attacked Catholic bishops for adopting a more "hard-line" approach in schools.
Mr Sheerman, the influential head of the Children, Schools and Families Committee, has repeatedly said that he would like to call the bishops before the select committee in order investigate what he sees as a more fundamentalist approach to Catholic schools.
He specifically pointed to Bishop O'Donoghue and Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds as examples of this approach.
Bishop O'Donoghue, however, rejected accusations of fundamentalism. "Point out to me where I'm being fundamentalist," he said. "I cannot see any area where I'm being a fundamentalist. I'm just emphasising Catholic teaching."
Mr Sheerman told the Independent last Saturday: ''A lot of taxpayers' money is going into schools and I think we should tease out what is happening here. We seem to have a shift in emphasis on the ground despite what the reasonable voices of the leadership are saying. Two years ago, it was possible to set up an inter-faith academy in Liverpool. I just want to know why it is not now possible to set up an inter-faith school."
Bishop Roche opposed plans to replace a Catholic school with an interfaith academy in his diocese last year. He issued a pastoral letter which strongly criticised local authorities for failing to appreciate the value of Catholic education.
Mr Sheerman's constituency lies in the bishop's diocese.
Mr Sheerman also used elements of Bishop O'Donoghue's document Fit for Mission: Schools as an example of the Church's new "fundamentalist" approach to Catholic schools in England and Wales. He cited the bishop's attitude to sex education as well as his proposals for placing crucifixes in classrooms as examples of this new hard-line approach.
"There is nothing new in the document Fit for Mission? except an emphasis on fidelity to the Catholic mission and identity," said Bishop O'Donoghue.
"Sheerman's comments were mainly about sex education, which is only a small part of my letter. I'm not anti-sex education. in that I support parents in their primary role of teaching their children about the sex of life. This rests with the parents."
Bishop O'Donoghue's document won praise from the Vatican earlier this year and has been held up as a model for other dioceses in England and Wales by the Congregation for Clergy.
In December, the Observer reported that Mr Sheerman had said: "A group of bishops appear to be taking a much firmer line and I think it would be useful to call representatives of the Catholic Church in front of the committee to find out what is going on.
"It seems to me that faith education works all right as long as people are not that serious about their faith. But as soon as there is a more doctrinaire attitude questions have to be asked.
"It does become worrying when you get a new push from more fundamentalist bishops. This is taxpayers' money after all."
David Lloyd, the clerk of the select committee. said that while there was a planned committee meeting in the near future, it was about the role of faith schools in general, not Catholic schools in particular.
He said that he did not think that the bishops would be called to testify, but believed it more likely that the select committee would call on a member of the Catholic Education Service.
He added that no one had yet been scheduled to appear.
Ed Balls, the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, recently backtracked on the creation of more faith schools which he appeared to support last year when he launched the document Faith in the System.
Mr Balls said: "May I be absolutely clear — there is sometimes confusion about this — that it is not the policy of the Government or my department to provide more faith schools. We have no policy to expand their numbers. That should be a matter for local communities."
Editorial comment: Page 11