[article]Seperating church and schools to finally begin?

mike65

Minister announces forum on school patronage

A NEW forum on school patronage, due to report before the end of this year, will examine ways in which the role of the Catholic Church can be scaled back.

Minister for Education Ruairí Quinn said yesterday the forum would not be a talking shop. Instead it would focus as a priority on the means by which schools could be transferred from Catholic patronage, thus providing greater diversity and choice for parents.

In his first official engagement, Mr Quinn also stood over criticism of senior Department of Education officials that he made two years ago upon publication of the Ryan report. He said then that Catholic groups had undue influence on policy.

“What I said is on the record,” he said. He added that he had experienced obfuscation and delay as he sought material from the department.

The programme for government includes a commitment to establish a forum on patronage and pluralism. The establishment of such a forum was a long-standing demand of the Irish Nationa Teachers’ Organisation (INTO). The programme provides for the inclusion of the forum’s recommendations in a White Paper for implementation by the Government in 2012.

Addressing managers of the country’s Catholic primary schools, Mr Quinn said the forum would begin work as soon as possible and complete it in nine months’ time.

Excellent news.

Morag

What is meant by removal of catholic patronage?
Does it mean the removal of the catholic chuch as patron and a cathlic trust will be set up like the Edmun Rice Trust?

Rev Hellfire

I'd be more interested in where the funding will come from when the issue of ownership of property has to be addressed.
Its great news as long as its at no or minimum cost to the taxpayer.

krd

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'd be more interested in where the funding will come from when the issue of ownership of property has to be addressed.
Its great news as long as its at no or minimum cost to the taxpayer.

The taxpayer paid for those school buildings originally, even if they were "gifted" to the church.

What about all the money we had to pay out to people the church abused when they were children in their *cough* care. The care was also paid for by the state - the church used to run these little operations at a profit.

My catechism is a little rusty, didn't Jesus say something like "Let the market decide, greed is good, devil take the hindmost, and suffer little children"

krd

I'll tell you what's really happening.

Something many people are unaware of. Did you ever wonder what priests did during the week. A least one would be stationed nearly permanent in the local primary school, making sure the teachers were drilling the children in their little Billy Barry dances for their communions, confirmations etc.

There a very few priests left in the country under retirement age. There are not enough of them left to police the schools.

Labour or the left are not scaling back the Catholic church - it's scaled itself back.

I think this is all positive. They should teach socialism in schools, not superstition. And some kind of secular civic function instead of confirmations and communions. Something like where the children are confirmed as socially responsible citizens of the state. Like they used to do in the German Democratic Republic.

angelfire9

My daughter attends a Christian Brother's School
The land on which the buildings stand is owned by the brothers
The original school building which is still in use was built by Edmund Rice
The principal of the school is a Christian Brother

and I am perfectly happy with that

So are the state going to remove the principal and pay the brothers to vacate the land & premises??

28064212

angelfire9 wrote: »

So are the state going to remove the principal

If he's a qualified principal, no, why should they? There's no problem with a school full of Catholic-only teachers. The problem arises when they use that Catholicism in the classroom, or when the school discriminates against non-Catholics (e.g. baptismal certs required for enrollment).

angelfire9 wrote: »

and pay the brothers to vacate the land & premises??

Do the brothers live on the premises? I don't see any problem with the state buying the actual school part and leaving the rest to the brothers. Or buying the whole thing and leasing part of it back to the brothers

prinz

krd wrote: »

I think this is all positive. They should teach socialism in schools, not superstition. And some kind of secular civic function instead of confirmations and communions. Something like where the children are confirmed as socially responsible citizens of the state. Like they used to do in the German Democratic Republic.

...and the GDR worked out really well in the long run, right? Sure while we're at it we could set up a state security force to make sure our responsible kids grow into responsible adults.

angelfire9

28064212 wrote: »

If he's a qualified principal, no, why should they? There's no problem with a school full of Catholic-only teachers. The problem arises when they use that Catholicism in the classroom, or when the school discriminates against non-Catholics (e.g. baptismal certs required for enrollment).


Do the brothers live on the premises? I don't see any problem with the state buying the actual school part and leaving the rest to the brothers. Or buying the whole thing and leasing part of it back to the brothers

I have no problem with Catholicism as part of the school's curriculum though
Had i wanted to I could have sent her to a non denominational school but i chose the CBS

The brothers own the land the school is built on, as well as the playing fields and the monastery beside the school
The land is probably worth €2 million at today's rated given its location & size

Do you not think its a waste of money for the state to buy them (the brothers) out???

krd

angelfire9 wrote: »

My daughter attends a Christian Brother's School
The land on which the buildings stand is owned by the brothers
The original school building which is still in use was built by Edmund Rice
The principal of the school is a Christian Brother

and I am perfectly happy with that

So are the state going to remove the principal and pay the brothers to vacate the land & premises??

10 or 20 years from now. There will be no Christian brothers.

Not many schools are owned by the Christian brothers. And fewer would be in the original buildings that were there in the time of Edmund Rice.

Over the last say 20 years there have been a lot of property transactions on lands and buildings owned by the Church.

The state will likely have to pay off the religious for the lands. This has been on the cards for quite a while.

Something everyone forgets - there was a time where the church and state did not see a distinction between each other. That they were extensions of each other. John Charles McQuaid was as powerful, in many cases more powerful than any politician. He used to even have a hotline phone in RTE. If anything came on the radio he felt wasn't in the right ideological tune, the phone would ring and they'd jump to it.

28064212

angelfire9 wrote: »

I have no problem with Catholicism as part of the school's curriculum though

Neither do I. As part of a religion class which is an objective look at religions and isn't pushing one over the other. Actually raising children in one religion is the job of the church and the parents, not the schools

angelfire9 wrote: »

Had i wanted to I could have sent her to a non denominational school but i chose the CBS

Which is not an option for many, many people. And a "non-denominational" school is not one which includes school masses.

If the Catholic Church wants to fund private schools to teach their religion, I don't have a problem with that (so long as they teach the state curriculum alongside it)

angelfire9 wrote: »

The brothers own the land the school is built on, as well as the playing fields and the monastery beside the school
The land is probably worth €2 million at today's rated given its location & size

When it's zoned for school use, it most certainly isn't worth anything close to that.

angelfire9 wrote: »

Do you not think its a waste of money for the state to buy them (the brothers) out???

Do I think the state should own all the state-run school buildings? Yes, I do.

krd

prinz wrote: »

...and the GDR worked out really well in the long run, right? Sure while we're at it we could set up a state security force to make sure our responsible kids grow into responsible adults.

The Catholic church were very much like the stasi in their day.

If you went through Catholic school, you'll remember being taught as a child that God could always see what you were thinking. Always knew what you were dreaming. If you thought sinful thoughts, you were committing a thought crime.

The Catholic church created more suffering and dysfunction in Ireland than anything positive they contributed to Irish society. The Catholic church were against the introduction of universal health care - they were also against the introduction of medicines to treat TB. They fought tooth and nail against the introduction of social welfare - they wanted to control it and profit from it - be the states soul dispensary of social welfare.

Catholicism is just another form of totalitarianism. Stalin got many of his ideas from his time in seminary. Stalin nearly became a priest.

The Irish Catholic church worked out well in the long run, right?

prinz

krd wrote: »

The Catholic church were very much like the stasi in their day. The Irish Catholic church worked out well in the long run, right?

So you want to swap one for another? Great plan. I also have a feeling you are pre-empting my position, I support the forum and a system of state schools.

bullpost

Heres a prediction.

In twenty years time the elite schools in this country will be the ones with a religious ethos.
The state schools , especially the ones in poorer areas, will be underperforming at best.
Those with the means will want their kids educated in the elite schools and the rest will have to put up with a diluted form of education , honed by years of interference by the PC brigade.

Whatever you think of the religious schools , they did make available a decent standard of education across the social spectrum.

krd wrote: »

The Catholic church were very much like the stasi in their day.

If you went through Catholic school, you'll remember being taught as a child that God could always see what you were thinking. Always knew what you were dreaming. If you thought sinful thoughts, you were committing a thought crime.

The Catholic church created more suffering and dysfunction in Ireland than anything positive they contributed to Irish society. The Catholic church were against the introduction of universal health care - they were also against the introduction of medicines to treat TB. They fought tooth and nail against the introduction of social welfare - they wanted to control it and profit from it - be the states soul dispensary of social welfare.

Catholicism is just another form of totalitarianism. Stalin got many of his ideas from his time in seminary. Stalin nearly became a priest.

The Irish Catholic church worked out well in the long run, right?

28064212

bullpost wrote: »

Heres a prediction.

In twenty years time the elite schools in this country will be the ones with a religious ethos.

Possibly, although the reasons for that won't be anything to do with religion. Your prediction would be better if it was "in twenty years time the elite schools in this country will be the private ones". The reason for religious schools being more likely to be better is that religion is the main driver in setting up private schools.

I still believe in a successful state school system though, and it's certainly attainable, especially in a country as small and homogenous as this one. It just needs work

krd

bullpost wrote: »

Heres a prediction.

In twenty years time the elite schools in this country will be the ones with a religious ethos.

Religious people like to push this idea that it's the religion that makes these schools perform. It isn't. In the US and England the best performing schools are religious. This isn't because they are religious, it's because they are better resourced than state schools - they are private schools for the economically advantaged. I know people who went these schools, they're no more religious than people who didn't. They did get a much better education.

The state schools , especially the ones in poorer areas, will be underperforming at best.

With a few exceptions this is already the case in Ireland.

I went to a school in a poor area. A school with a religious "ethos". The standard of teaching and school management was abysmal. Comparing notes with people I knew who went to good schools in wealthy areas. There was a massive difference.

Those with the means will want their kids educated in the elite schools and the rest will have to put up with a diluted form of education , honed by years of interference by the PC brigade.

Like I said. It's already the case. And economically advantaged will want a further deterioration in the quality of education for economically disadvantaged.

If it wasn't for the "PC brigade" we'd be back where we were in the 80s. Churning out thousands of functional illiterates each year. My education was a joke.

Whatever you think of the religious schools , they did make available a decent standard of education across the social spectrum.

My personal experience that was not the case. I don't believe it ever was the case. There were religious schools for the poor and religious schools for the wealthy.

The purposing of the Irish educational system has always been geared towards socialisation and not towards education.

bullpost

Fair enough - we'll agree to disagree.

Have to say that like you I went to a religious school in a poor area and while I didnt appreciate it at the time I'm more grateful now.

I must also note that for someone who's education was a "joke" , you have turned out very articulate and intelligent.

krd wrote: »

Religious people like to push this idea that it's the religion that makes these schools perform. It isn't. In the US and England the best performing schools are religious. This isn't because they are religious, it's because they are better resourced than state schools - they are private schools for the economically advantaged. I know people who went these schools, they're no more religious than people who didn't. They did get a much better education.



With a few exceptions this is already the case in Ireland.

I went to a school in a poor area. A school with a religious "ethos". The standard of teaching and school management was abysmal. Comparing notes with people I knew who went to good schools in wealthy areas. There was a massive difference.



Like I said. It's already the case. And economically advantaged will want a further deterioration in the quality of education for economically disadvantaged.

If it wasn't for the "PC brigade" we'd be back where we were in the 80s. Churning out thousands of functional illiterates each year. My education was a joke.



My personal experience that was not the case. I don't believe it ever was the case. There were religious schools for the poor and religious schools for the wealthy.

The purposing of the Irish educational system has always been geared towards socialisation and not towards education.

philologos

krd wrote: »

Religious people like to push this idea that it's the religion that makes these schools perform. It isn't. In the US and England the best performing schools are religious. This isn't because they are religious, it's because they are better resourced than state schools - they are private schools for the economically advantaged. I know people who went these schools, they're no more religious than people who didn't. They did get a much better education.

In the case of Britain this isn't even true. A large percent of public schools in Britain are faith schools and as far as I'm aware they still outperform their secular counterparts. Roughly 1 in 3 if I remember the last Richard Dawkins' documentary about it. So claiming that all faith schools are private is simply false.

Its interesting to see that Ruairí Quinn is silent on CofI, Presbyterian, Muslim and Jewish schools many of which are also publically funded.

Peregrinus

It does seem to be the case, in the UK at any rate, that where the state funds both secular and denominational schools on the same basis, and they are free to the user, a significant number of parents prefer the denominational schools for reasons which have little to do with their own religious faith - they like the "ethos" or the quality of the pastoral care or whatever, or they believe (often correctly) that denominational schools acheive better academic results.

This isn't a matter of resourcing, since the schools are resourced in the same way.

There is no reason to think that secular schools can't match up to whatever the denominational schools are doing, but there is a fair degree of evidence that, too often, they aren't matching up. And if the state stops funding religious schools at a time when this discrepancy still exists or is perceived to exist, expect the policy to be very unpopular with parents.

There is no doubt that the Catholic church has an excessively dominant position in education in this country, and that parents who want a Catholic educiation for their children are much better catered for than parents who want a secular education or, indeed, an education in another religious tradition. But the obvious response to that is a rebalancing of patronage and a greater diversity of school types. A decision that the state will only finance one type of school - by an amazing coincidence, the type favoured by participants on this board - regardless of the wishes of parents would be a very different matter.

Freddie59

Jakkass wrote: »

In the case of Britain this isn't even true. A large percent of public schools in Britain are faith schools and as far as I'm aware they still outperform their secular counterparts. Roughly 1 in 3 if I remember the last Richard Dawkins' documentary about it. So claiming that all faith schools are private is simply false.

Its interesting to see that Ruairí Quinn is silent on CofI, Presbyterian, Muslim and Jewish schools many of which are also publically funded.

It's called kicking someone when they're down, but a very good point.

Freddie59

mike65 wrote: »

Minister announces forum on school patronage
Excellent news.

Yeah - I'd treat it in the same vein as the excellent news that the English Queen is coming to visit.:rolleyes:

dvpower

Freddie59 wrote: »

It's called kicking someone when they're down, but a very good point.

Its not kicking anyone. The RCC agree that they are over represented in the school system. They want to drop some of their patronages. If this forum can come up with a formula that can change some of the patronages but can deal with their concerns about general ethos and access for religious instruction then it doesn't have to be a zero sum game.

Maybe give it a chance and see what comes out of it before calling foul?

Freddie59

dvpower wrote: »

Its not kicking anyone. The RCC agree that they are over represented in the school system. They want to drop some of their patronages. If this forum can come up with a formula that can change some of the patronages but can deal with their concerns about general ethos and access for religious instruction then it doesn't have to be a zero sum game.

Maybe give it a chance and see what comes out of it before calling foul?

Agreed. But it depends on the formula. As another poster has pointed out attention must also be paid to other religious schools.

krd

bullpost wrote: »

Fair enough - we'll agree to disagree.

Have to say that like you I went to a religious school in a poor area and while I didnt appreciate it at the time I'm more grateful now.

I did go to a religious school in a poor area. The quality of education in comparison to religious run schools in wealthy areas was huge.

It's not just down to religion. There are many other factors involved. I was at a bad school, at a bad time, in a bad place. I was taught largely by people who wouldn't be able to hold onto a job in a decent school. In fact some of these people wouldn't be able to hold a job down anywhere.

The teaching Christian brothers were getting screwed both ways. The department of education didn't pay them a full teaching wage, and I think any money that was paid for their services went to their order. My father remembers his Christian brothers. The order was so cheap it wouldn't even let them have socks. Questions remain unanswered as to where money from the state for the purposes of education got to. Like the institutions - some were requesting money from the state to provide care for children, supposedly to break even, but running a profit margin of as much as 25%. Was the money siphoned off to Rome?

I remember they did bring in remedial teachers, in my secondary school at one point. They were teaching basic literacy and maths skills, to teenagers who had somehow managed to pass through the system without learning very basic three Rs. There's no way these kids, even with the remedial work at that point would be able to get a decent leaving cert. At least though they would be able to read and count. All of this should have been taken care of in primary school.

Things have changed. Over the last fifteen years, we have had smaller class sizes, resource teachers and class room assistants. To function properly, and not become a social nuisance, being able to read and write are absolutely essential social skills.

Religious schools in the US and Britain are also able to cherry pick good students, and avoid the dingle berries. The posher Irish schools also do the same.

I must also note that for someone who's education was a "joke" , you have turned out very articulate and intelligent.

My education was a joke. Many of the teachers in my school were not qualified to teach the subjects they were teaching. Wood work teachers teaching French, that kind of thing. My English teachers would come in, and with absolute disinterest in the subject, get us to read from a book for 45 minutes, then head off. When they should have been using the time to develop our writing skills or grooming us to score higher in exams that require good literacy skills.

The problem isn't unique to Ireland. I have a few friends from other countries who have the same complaint. Saying they were taught English in school, but couldn't speak a word of it, until they either paid for private tuition or dropped themselves in at the deep end by coming to a country like Ireland.

My teachers in general were very flaky and unfocused. Very few people from my school went on to higher education. More went to jail than got a degree.

Something that makes me weep: the pensions that my teachers are retiring on, are higher than the maximum teachers' pay, in most European countries. In the case of my teachers, they certainly didn't earn it.

krd

Peregrinus, the real problem for religious education, or religious schools in this country is the fact we're a country of atheists.

We have gone from one extreme to the other.

It didn't happen over night. There was no way in the past an atheist could get a teaching job. So, the atheists just pretended to be religious. Hid in the closet.

It's a bit like the communist party in the Soviet union. To get ahead, it helped to be a member of the party. That kind of careerism generally attracts people with a more right-wing bent and view of the world. By the later days, or even it began in the early days, there were few people within the communist party who believed in communism. Even Stalin. Something that's been hard to prove for certain, as he was particularly good at muddying the waters, Stalin was a member of the Okhrana; the Tsars secret police.

It may be the case, Stalin was a right-wing secret agent, within the communist party. And when the wind changed he just stuck with it. There's nothing in communist ideology about creating a red absolute monarch. The Soviet union was a really strange throw back to the Ancien Regieme.

The same could be said for Irish political parties. There are right-wing people in the left-wing parties and left-wing people within the right-wing parties.

Peregrinus

Hi krd

I think you're quite right that the socially dominant position of the Catholic church led a lot of people to display outward conformity, with the result that the institutions of the church (especially schools) became to an extent "hollowed out" - apparently still standing and still influential, but in fact to a significant extent staffed and supported by people who didn't share the ethos and vision of the institutions.

As the social pressures to display conformity to Catholicism collapse, this becomes very evident.

I don't think it's true to say, though, that we'be become a nation of atheists. There are certainly a great many more atheists in Ireland that Christians in the past would have been willing to admit or even contemplate, but I think there are nowadays a great many more Christians than atheists would like to admit. And I'm pretty sure there's a large block of people who more properly seen as indifferent/not very committed than as either atheist or Christian.

I suspect if secular schools ever acquired the same dominance in Ireland that Catholic schools had (and still have) they would be faced with exactly the same problem; they would have to rely for staffing and support on a large number of people who were not committed to their vision, and to some extent on a cohort of people who were strongly opposed to it. I think the same "hollowing out" would have to result.

If people want there to be schools informed by a strong ethos - and this is true whether the ethos is secular, religious or anything else - then I think they should favour so far as possible a diversity of schools.

Peregrinus

Freddie59 wrote: »

Agreed. But it depends on the formula. As another poster has pointed out attention must also be paid to other religious schools.

This is an important point. Despite the fact that it is, on any view, disproportionately dominated by the Catholic church, among the strongest supoprters of the current system are the minority churches and religions, who fear complete eclipse and extinction of their communities if state support for their schools is withdrawn. Ireland's Jewish community is not in a healthy condition, and it would be a severe blow if state support for the few Jewish schools in Ireland (two, I think) were to be withdrawn, or if those schools were required to abandon their Jewish character in order to continue support.

Freddie59

I'm sorry - but if there's a ruling; then there's a ruling. The 'positive discrimination' BS card can't be played here.

Peregrinus

Freddie59 wrote: »

I'm sorry - but if there's a ruling; then there's a ruling. The 'positive discrimination' BS card can't be played here.

Yes, but the ruling currently is that these schools do recieve recognition and funding. If it is proposed that the system of funding schools be changed, the effect of the proposed change on minority communities is an entirely proper concern to raise. I don't know why you characterise the issue as "BS". If the concerns of the Jewish minority (say) are BS, would the concerns of the sceptcial minority not be equally BS?