How the superintendent acted to change a bill that threatened the religious identity of Hawaii’s Catholic schools
Q & A with Michael Rockers
Special to the Hawaii Catholic Herald
Catholics across the nation will mark Religious Freedom Week, June 22-29, celebrating the right of all people of goodwill to live and work in accordance to their deeply-held religious convictions. True religious freedom strengthens the community.
Religious freedom allows us to carry out the ministry given to us by Christ Jesus. But recently, efforts have been made to curtail this freedom, sometimes prompted by a subtle, or not so subtle, bias against the church. The Hawaii Catholic Conference, the public policy voice of the Roman Catholic Church in the State of Hawaii, has witnessed this.
One bill submitted this past legislative session would have penalized pharmacies and pharmacists that refused to honor prescriptions issued under the “Our Care, Our Choice” act (SB542), which allows physician-assisted suicide. Thankfully it was not heard in any of its assigned committees.
Another bill, one that would remove the statute of limitations on sex abuse against minors, targeted the Catholic Church.
Another bill looked innocent at first glance but was viewed by Hawaii Catholic Schools superintendent Michael Rockers as a potential future threat to the autonomy and religious identity of Catholic schools in Hawaii. Rockers explains here:
What was the intent of Senate Bill 980 in its original form?
The initial intent of the bill was to change the definition of “private school” under Hawaii’s Compulsory Attendance Law so that parents would be obliged to home-school their child, send their child to a public school or send their child to only those non-public schools which are accredited by the Western Association of Colleges and Schools (WASC) or licensed by the Hawaii Council of Private Schools (HCPS).
What was the risk to Hawaii Catholic schools if the bill had passed?
The most serious risk was the bill’s power to mandate that our Catholic schools be accredited by one specific secular accreditation agency (WASC) or licensed by the HCPS to legally accept students. This would mean that a third party would ultimately have the authority to define, for the Hawaii Catholic schools, what curriculums, pedagogy, personnel and educational programs would be acceptable to remain open.
How did you present your opposition to the bill?
Initially, I strongly opposed the bill based on three basic factors: First, the Catholic Church teaches that parents are the first and foremost teachers of their children and therefore have the right to select what they believe to be the best education environment for their children, whether that is public, homeschool or private school. Actually, public authorities have the duty of guaranteeing this parental right.
Second, WASC is an association of schools that fosters excellence in education by encouraging school improvement through a process of continuing evaluation. It has no enforcement arm. The present HCPS standards mention the “Handling of Complaints” and “Revocation or Suspension of Approval” but give no indication of what the consequences are of losing the license or how HCPS would stop parents from sending their children to a school which is not accredited by WASC or licensed by the HCPS.
Third, Act 188 of the 1995 State Legislature eliminated Department of Education (DOE) regulation and oversight of private schools. At that time, the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs made licensing by HCPS optional but encouraged. As such, we felt that, in the State of Hawaii, there was no statutory basis for any governmental licensing of Catholic or other private schools through a third party.
What did the legislature change to make the bill acceptable to HCS?
Initially, through meeting with state senators and representatives and submitting testimony to the various committees, the bill was stopped in the House Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce and delayed in the Senate Committee. However, we still had serious concerns that the bill would, ultimately, be voted on and passed.
Dialogue with the Hawaii Association of Independent Schools (HAIS), who supported the bill, took place and we were able to come to an agreement that would allow the Western Catholic Educational Association (WCEA) and other non-secular accrediting associations to be added to the list of satisfactory/legal accrediting associations. In this way, we could be assured that the view of education as a ministry and our religious freedom would remain intact.
What lesson regarding religious freedom can we learn from this experience?
It is important to think long-term when a bill is proposed. In reality, the initial bill would not have had an immediate effect on our Hawaii Catholic schools, since all our schools are presently accredited by WASC. However, long-term, it would have limited our ability to change accrediting associations or leave an accrediting association if we had religious, philosophical, financial or strategic reasons to do so.
Another lesson is related to not demonizing the “opposition.” The Hawaii Catholic Schools Office appreciates what WASC presently provides our schools to help them implement a process of continual improvement. We also appreciate what the “opposition,” the Hawaii Association of Independent Schools (HAIS), does to support professional development and school improvement for many of Hawaii’s private schools. We did not question their motives — they wanted to somehow assure the residents of Hawaii that all private schools met minimum requirements related to facilities, curriculum, pedagogy, finances, etc. We just disagreed with the government’s role in regulating religious organizations.
Ultimately, it is not a perfect bill in our eyes. However, it does assure our religious liberty and supports and affirms the role of religious-related accrediting associations as agencies of quality, thus supporting the Hawaii Catholic schools vision of graduating students with faith, integrity and scholarship.
