[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

"Is it too much to ask our schools to teach science, and science alone, in the science classroom? I don’t think so."

It is, if the science in question is making theological statments.

Besides, there is no principle of "separation of faith and whatever else" in Catholic education.

[Varda]

"there is no principle of "separation of faith and whatever else" in Catholic education."

Such a Catholic education would be faulty-

"(36)...Indeed whoever labors to penetrate the secrets of reality with a humble and steady mind, even though he is unaware of the fact, is nevertheless being led by the hand of God, who holds all things in existence, and gives them their identity. Consequently, we cannot but deplore certain habits of mind, which are sometimes found too among Christians, which do not sufficiently attend to the rightful independence of science and which, from the arguments and controversies they spark, lead many minds to conclude that faith and science are mutually opposed." Gaudium Et Spes

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Faith and reason are cognitively distinct but the idea of a separate discipline which claims to determine truth and is separated from questions of divine purpose is a modern invention. Modern "science" (scientism) is a social and political movement. As has become clear with recent statements by the current ignoramus president about "restoring science" and so forth. There is no logical reason to separate the study of nature from addressing questions about design or divine purpose (other than political and anti-religious ones). Fr. Morris doesn't discuss philosophy of nature or metaphysical cosmology which would involve teleological issues or questions of purpose and design. Certainly in the Catholic and Aristotelian-Thomistic traditions both philosophically and theologically. There is no logical reason to give scientific materialism any priority or authority on these since they can't be adequately addressed by that ideology. This is the problem with scientism and materialism. It claims to answer questions which it doesn't have the capacity to answer. There is no lab experiment or fossil which proves there is no God or that the universe does not have a created design. That whole agenda is silly.

But since philosophy, theology, and philosophical cosmology are not generally taught in the Deweyite NEA-dominated American educational system, these absurd debates continue to be posed as if the claims of scientism should be taken seriously. No dork with an artistic graph of imaginary prehistoric ape men or swamp monsters knows when or how life began or what it means. There is a power motive behind their narrative which extends to Hiroshima, embryonic stem cells, eugenics, cloning, down to the spinster in the local high school with the monkey charts collecting for UNICEF. There is a reason Velma takes up with the prehistoric hairy ape-men monster mythology and it has little to do with science.