The most pressing problems of the Polish Church are described by Maciej Kluczka, editor of the Misyjne portal.
Szymon Rogaczewski: This new school year has brought many changes to the curriculum. The Episcopate opposes the teaching of a new subject, health education. Why?
Maciej Kluczka: The Episcopate is trying to maintain the leading role of catechesis here. They would probably prefer that this be covered by the former family life education classes, often taught by catechists or form teachers, and they are afraid of change. Health education, for the first time, with a solid scientific foundation, openly tells adolescents that there are different sexual orientations and that a young person may explore them.
I believe that this is very reasonable and necessary, because during puberty, young people often reflect on their sexual orientation. This topic within health education is what causes the Church the greatest concern. Here I refer to the opinions of respected conservative commentators like Tomasz Terlikowski and Jarosław Pucek, who was once a government official and is now, one could say, a conservative activist. He is very publicly active in Poznań, and his comments are often quoted. Both approach health education sensibly and do not understand the resistance of the Episcopate.
Privately, when I talk to people with more conservative views, I know that some of them want their children to attend these classes. Of course, they will check what is being taught, parents will consult with teachers, they’ll review the curriculum – but they also know that in today’s information overload, with so many sources that children and youth have access to, it’s sometimes simply impossible for a parent to explain everything.
So this opposition from the Episcopate is a bit puzzling. It’s clear that the Church defends traditional family values. The sacrament of marriage is for heterosexual couples only – and that’s understandable. But it’s hard to turn a blind eye to the reality in which not only heterosexual families exist – there are also other types. Why not talk about that in school?
S.R.: As you’ve mentioned, the bishops also oppose reducing the number of religion classes in schools. If catechesis were held at parishes, among those who truly want to attend, wouldn’t the message be more effective?
M.K.: It’s hard to say; opinions are divided. I know that in the past, catechesis sometimes took place in parish halls. But nowadays, when kids already have many extracurricular activities and parents are often very busy, I find it hard to imagine this being logistically convenient or having high attendance.
Of course, in that case, the students attending would likely be more motivated and engaged. It could happen, for example, on weekends or Sundays before or after Mass. Still, I believe that these classes should remain in schools for the sake of children whose parents don’t oppose religious instruction, but who themselves may not practice religion or attend church. For such children, it’s a chance to expand their religious knowledge, connect with faith, and perhaps decide for themselves – through conscience and inner reflection – whether they want to grow spiritually or not.
Religion in schools is needed. I also think that one hour per week is an appropriate amount. I understand that this reduction causes concern among catechists, who now have fewer teaching hours. Some have to change careers, and others even lose their jobs.
S.R.: One MP representing the governing coalition suggested in a conversation with you on TOK FM Radio that catechists were offered retraining – for example, to become support teachers, who are currently in short supply. Why do you think they refused?
M.K.: For some, it’s probably a matter of habit, after teaching religion this way for many years. Perhaps a sense of discomfort about change made them unwilling to retrain.
Maybe these changes could have been postponed by a year – that was one proposal. Perhaps then the time could have been used more effectively for retraining and public consultation, and more teachers would have been willing to make the switch. But as it happened rather quickly – within a year – it may explain why so few teachers made the transition.
S.R.: The Church’s image has also long been damaged by the unresolved issue of sexual abuse. Why is the Episcopate divided over the commission to investigate pedophilia among clergy?
M.K.: There are two groups in the Episcopate. Some want greater accountability on this issue, and others are afraid of the potential financial consequences of such accountability, as it could lead to lawsuits for damages.
The spokesman for the Episcopate promised that the commission would be established, but whether it actually will – we’ll see, because no specific date was given. Naturally, this has led to suspicions that the matter is being shelved, since the commission was already practically prepared by the Primate’s team, but suddenly the Episcopate’s Legal Council claimed that further regulations were needed to grant it official status. Bishop Sławomir Oder, who had not previously been involved in the matter and tends to defend the Church’s image on such issues, was tasked with this. This raises suspicions that the group trying to delay things is currently winning.
S.R.: What needs to change in the Church’s narrative for the faithful to trust again? Cardinal Grzegorz Ryś calling on his diocese to refrain from hate speech, Bishop Damian Muskus criticizing the humiliation of the weak, or Sister Małgorzata Chmielewska appealing to Polish authorities to help suffering refugees – these are certainly appropriate signals. But is that enough? What else should be done?
M.K.: The Church cannot adopt a “fortress under siege” mentality, because that only validates arguments that everything is wrong within the Church and that it’s always on the defensive. If the Church wants to reach people on the margins – those who are doubtful or who once belonged and now don’t – it needs to open up to dialogue. This doesn’t mean abandoning its principles or identity, but it does mean having honest conversations, even about difficult topics, and also sharing the good, joyful stories that are not in short supply.
Being open to the world is a foundational principle of the Church, so it’s a bit odd when the Church sometimes adopts this defensive stance – one could say it even contradicts the Gospel. In truth, a return to the Church’s roots could restore its image, even if that path is difficult.