Lamezia Terme – “An important page for the school community of the Manzoni-Augruso institute represented the collegial sharing of the document on the secularity of the school”, drawn up by the head teacher Antonella Mongiardo, also reported by the national school information site “The technique of school”. The document – they say – incorporates the requests of a school community which expresses attachment to its own traditions but, at the same time, considers the diversity of cultures, traditions and religious faiths a precious resource for cultural and human growth. From this perspective, secularism is not seen as the absence of religion, but exactly the opposite.
“What does secularism in schools mean? An apparently simple question – we read in the document – which over the years has gone through different and, at times, opposing currents of thought, until arriving, in recent times, at restrictive and misleading interpretations which identify secularism with the absence of religion in schools . This is the incipit of the document, “which is not a school regulation in the strict sense – explains the principal Antonella Mongiardo – but a pedagogical and normative reconstruction of the true meaning of secularism, which is not to be understood as indifference towards religion, but rather as a guarantee of freedom of thought and cultural integration”. In the extensive examination, which was unanimously shared by both the Teaching Board and the Institute Council of the IC Manzoni-Augruso, it is clarified that “the secular state is that which recognizes the equality of all religious confessions, without grant particular privileges or recognitions to any of them, and which reaffirms its autonomy with respect to ecclesiastical power, and that secularism is identified with a broader and more comprehensive conception of culture and civil life, based on comprehensive tolerance of the beliefs of others, on rejection of dogmatism in every sector of associated life, even beyond the direct influence of the dominant religious institution. In a social reality like today’s – we read – where the collapse of ethical values and the affirmation of new educational styles, sometimes questionable, often interfere with the educational action of the school, it is increasingly difficult to achieve that desired educational co-responsibility between school and family, which should be the basis of young people’s identity development. The new generations are growing up in an era in which the boundary between roles and responsibilities is becoming increasingly blurred, with a consequent loss of authority, both of the school and of the family, which must, however, be the two most important outposts pedagogists of society. It is precisely in the perspective of a recovery of values and a stronger alliance between school and family that the social dimension of the religious element in the school is inserted. And it couldn’t be otherwise, since it permeates our entire cultural tradition, our society, our values and our languages”.
On the other hand, the teaching of the Catholic religion is an institutional discipline, present in public schools and often entrusted to religious people approved by the ecclesiastical authority. A teaching that, despite the succession of governments and different forms of state, has never failed. From the unification of Italy to today, this particular discipline has always been an integral part of the educational project of national education. “Moreover, the meaning of his presence in the school is evident – we read in a note. In the purely educational sphere, eliminating the Catholic religion would mean emptying our culture, since the cultural and artistic heritage of our country holds priceless treasures largely with a Catholic-Christian theme; and it would mean distorting our own historical identity, which has been forged over the centuries in close contact with Catholic doctrine.”
Principal Mongiardo points out that “in the school legislation itself, the Catholic religion plays a fundamental and constructive role for civil coexistence, as it allows us to grasp important aspects of the cultural identity of belonging and helps relations between people of different cultures and religions . As proof of this, the principal underlines that “the only explicit reference to the secularity of the school is found in the National Indications of the curriculum, where the teaching of the Catholic religion is spoken of, but not to limit it, but rather to safeguard the right of student not to make use of it, thus highlighting the actual meaning of secularism in school. A secularism that does not rest in indifference towards religious values, but which, on the contrary, strengthens the educational function of the school, also aimed at respecting the choices and integration of different cultures”.
“The Italian School – we read in the Additions to the Indications for the curriculum for nursery school and for the first cycle of education – makes use of the collaboration of the Catholic Church to make the principles of Catholicism known to all students who wish to avail themselves of this opportunity. The teaching of the Catholic religion (Irc), while offering a first knowledge of the historical-positive data of the Christian Revelation, favors and accompanies the intellectual development and of all the other aspects of the person, through the critical in-depth analysis of the fundamental questions posed by life. For this reason, as an expression of the secular nature of the State, the IRC is offered to everyone as a precious opportunity for the knowledge of Christianity, as the root of so much of Italian and European culture. Given the provisions of the agreement, in compliance with freedom of conscience, students are given the possibility of making use of the IRC or not”. But the “secular” meaning of religious teaching in schools, the note continues, “also has a legal basis. The principle of secularism of the State, as outlined in constitutional jurisprudence, is the synthesis of several constitutional provisions, i.e. articles. 2-3, 7-8, 19 and 20 of the Constitution, where “the protection of religious freedom in a regime of religious and cultural pluralism” takes on a central role (Const. Court, sentence no. 203 of 1989). The principle of freedom of choice is recalled by the Constitutional Court in sentence no. 203/1989. The document also reports the jurisprudence relating to the legitimacy of blessings or acts of worship in schools. The Council of State, with ruling no. 1388 of 27 March 2017, recognizes the possibility of religious blessings at school during extracurricular hours. At the same time, however, the CdS places very specific limits on religious activity in the school, reconciling the principle of secularism of the school with the freedom of participation in cultural initiatives or religious expression and guaranteeing the authoritativeness of the exercise of autonomy school.
The Council of State specifies: “this ritual – which took place at school but during non-school hours – must be accepted as an extracurricular activity and the religious nature of the event cannot be considered a discriminatory element”. The final passage of the CdS ruling is therefore reported: “As is known, the Easter blessing is a religious rite, aimed at the meeting between those who carry out the pastoral ministry and the families or other communities, in the places where they reside, characterized by brevity and simplicity, without the need for particular preparations. The purpose of this rite, for those who share its intimate meaning and accept its practice, is also to remember the presence of God in the places where one lives or works, underlining the close correlation with the people who for this reason they frequent. In fact, the blessing of the premises alone would not make sense, without the presence of the members of the relevant communities of believers, as this event cannot result in a practice of superstition. This rite therefore, for those who intend to practice it, makes sense as it is celebrated in a specific place, while it would not make sense (or, in any case, the same sense) if celebrated elsewhere; and this explains the reason why it can be asked that it take place in schools, in the presence of those who consent and outside school hours, without this being able to harm in the slightest, not even indirectly, the thoughts or feelings, religious or not, of anyone else who, although belonging to the same community, does not share that same thought and who therefore, by not participating in the event, cannot in any sense feel harmed by it. It must therefore be concluded that the “Easter blessing” in schools cannot in any way affect the conduct of teaching and school life in general. And this is no different from the various “para-scholastic” activities which, moreover, can be planned or authorized by the autonomy bodies of individual schools even without a formal resolution”. Obviously, participation in any religious event or rite (whether in school or elsewhere) can only be optional and free, as it cannot fail to enjoy, just because it is such, fewer spaces of freedom and less respect than those that are recognized in manifestations of other kinds, as well as tolerant towards those who express different feelings and faiths, or those who do not express or manifest any faith”.
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
