Making Confirmation and regular attendance at Mass

cursai

TLDR; dirty priests, dirty communion, dirty kids, mass balcony smokers, aul fellas never sit down, why should I when they don't, illuminati and hypocrisy.

splinter65

cursai wrote: »

TLDR; dirty priests, dirty communion, dirty kids, mass balcony smokers, aul fellas never sit down, why should I when they don't, illuminati and hypocrisy.

Mass balcony smokers? What’s that?

Mrs OBumble

iguana wrote: »

We have a situation right now where three new ET schools are being forced by the department of education to only enrol half of their capacity as the demand for their schools is so high that the existing schools don't want to lose potential pupils. So parents who have campaigned and worked for a local ET (which isn't easy as some of the people with zero experience of it like to pretend it is to create strawman arguments) and gotten it. But now the schools that they never wanted to send their children to are forcing a situation to make them send them there anyway. It's like an abusive relationship.

That's normal for schools of any patronage - and yes, there have been new Catholic schools opened recently, too, in neighbourhoods where it's become clear that the VEC would take to long to do the job, and ET wasn't going to be interested (too many disadvantaged people).

It's to stop the new school being overwhelmed while they're still getting their structures working, and to manage the transfer of staffing from existing to new schools: people with jobs in the existing schools cannot be let go immediately when the roll drops, so you can end up with crazy situations and paying double the amount of staff needed if the change isn't done gradually.

I know full well that it's far from easy to get a school opened, or to provide on-going management for one. The church may not be doing the building, but they are doing the management for schools in their patronage, and that's a good bit of work.

I also know that patronage is what sets the values of a school. You just have to look at any number of threads on boards to see that there are not a common set of values in Irish society, so working out the values that a school will operate by is not an easy task. But it is essential if you want to be happy with what the school does.




Oh- and in another post, someone use the word "non-denominational" (in the context that ET schools are multi-denominational, not non-denominational. You need to google "dublin non-denominational church" and learn what non-denom means. If any non-denominational schools ever open (under the patronage of a non-denominational church), they will likely a good deal more demanding than the priest in Enniscorthy is!

cursai

splinter65 wrote: »

Mass balcony smokers? What’s that?

Well. Well. Look who won't be getting their confirmation this year.

splinter65

cursai wrote: »

Well. Well. Look who won't be getting their confirmation this year.

Ah no ! Can you not just ask me another question Archbishop ?

Hotblack Desiato

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

ET wasn't going to be interested (too many disadvantaged people).

Bollocks.

iguana

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

It's to stop the new school being overwhelmed while they're still getting their structures working, and to manage the transfer of staffing from existing to new schools: people with jobs in the existing schools cannot be let go immediately when the roll drops, so you can end up with crazy situations and paying double the amount of staff needed if the change isn't done gradually.

That's not what's happening in this situation. The ET's are being ordered to only have an intake of 13-14 pupils a year rather than 26-28. One of them opened last September with 28 pupils but is only allowed to take in 13 this coming September. Paying a teacher a full salary to run a class of 13 pupils is the exact thing you claim they are trying to prevent. The demand in the areas is for the multi-D school, not the Catholic but the parents are being prevented from using the school of their choice.

I'm not a huge fan of the ET system. I see a lot of problems already with the all-inclusivity of the Ethos as it largely prevents critical discourse. And that will only grow as ET schools are growing in popularity with families who follow religions in way that are very fundamental compared to the majority of Irish Catholics. Religion should never be taught about if it can't be done so critically with the good and bad up for discussion.

I've also been at patronage submission meetings for newly founded schools and have seen the serious shortcomings of the patronage system. Parents who have no non-religious choices desperate for the ET body to have just one school in their area and parents from the school area who have been campaigning for a local school for years looking at the school they have finally secured being inundated with applications from 100s of kids from other areas, possibly pushing their kids out. It's a nightmare of a system on both sides. The department of education actually needs to stop farming the governance of schools out to private bodies and start running them themselves.

meeeeh

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I also know that patronage is what sets the values of a school. You just have to look at any number of threads on boards to see that there are not a common set of values in Irish society, so working out the values that a school will operate by is not an easy task. But it is essential if you want to be happy with what the school does.

I went to state school with no patronage and my parents were perfectly happy with the values we were taught and with what school did. I don't think patronage is essential at all if you do state curriculum. It might be more important for private schools that decide to do alternative methods of learning.

FunLover18

splinter65 wrote: »

Newborn babies don’t walk to the church themselves to be baptized and the church doesn’t go around to houses asking parents to bring them.
Parents bring children to the church.
And please don’t give me any nonsense about there being “pressure to confirm” when that’s just not relevant any more.
We are living now in a multi faith and none society and if you are adult enough to bring a baby into the world then stop pretending that you were forced to baptize a child.

You're right, parents are also to blame but of course there is pressure. There are many parents who baptise children in order to ensure school places, that's undeniable. Once in school then communion and confirmation are the next steps and parents don't their children to feel excluded and there is a societal pressure from family and friends, unfortunately there occasions are still very much the norm. At the end of the day these choices are being made on behalf of someone who is too young to make an informed decision and the church is the primary facilitator because they know if they waited for people to be older and join the religion of their own volition their numbers would skydive.

One eyed Jack

FunLover18 wrote: »

You're right, parents are also to blame but of course there is pressure. There are many parents who baptise children in order to ensure school places, that's undeniable. Once in school then communion and confirmation are the next steps and parents don't their children to feel excluded and there is a societal pressure from family and friends, unfortunately there occasions are still very much the norm. At the end of the day these choices are being made on behalf of someone who is too young to make an informed decision and the church is the primary facilitator because they know if they waited for people to be older and join the religion of their own volition their numbers would skydive.

The parents of the child or children are surely the primary facilitators of any decisions they make with regards to their children's welfare. It's just stating the obvious then to suggest that parents make decisions for their children because their children are too young to make decisions for themselves.

Odhinn

splinter65 wrote: »

Because if the majority of parents wanted it out then it would be out.
If the parents are happy then that’s the only thing that matters.
If a minority of parents are not happy then let them mobilize and organize and make the government give more money for schools of no faith.
There’s no reason for the other parents to be discombobulated.

Rather shallow reasoning. We live in a republic, not an unregulated democracy.

splinter65

FunLover18 wrote: »

You're right, parents are also to blame but of course there is pressure. There are many parents who baptise children in order to ensure school places, that's undeniable. Once in school then communion and confirmation are the next steps and parents don't their children to feel excluded and there is a societal pressure from family and friends, unfortunately there occasions are still very much the norm. At the end of the day these choices are being made on behalf of someone who is too young to make an informed decision and the church is the primary facilitator because they know if they waited for people to be older and join the religion of their own volition their numbers would skydive.

I’m sorry but I just don’t see any evidence of children being excluded.
The schools are full of non Christian children who don’t feel excluded from the communion preparation that they’re not participating in.
If , for convenience sake,a parent took their baby into a church and made promises and vows they didn’t mean or believe in, smiling politely and lighting candles and wasting the priests time, then theyll either have to man up and admit that thats just what they did, just to get into the schools whose ethos they don’t agree with (?!?!) , or keep up the pretence like a good little hypocrite.
None of this should be an issue for other parents.

Odhinn

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m sorry but I just don’t see any evidence of children being excluded.
The schools are full of non Christian children who don’t feel excluded from the communion preparation that they’re not participating in.
If , for convenience sake,a parent took their baby into a church and made promises and vows they didn’t mean or believe in, smiling politely and lighting candles and wasting the priests time, then theyll either have to man up and admit that thats just what they did, just to get into the schools whose ethos they don’t agree with (?!?!) , or keep up the pretence like a good little hypocrite.
None of this should be an issue for other parents.

Why don't they do it at home themselves?

One eyed Jack

Odhinn wrote: »

Why don't they do it at home themselves?

Where is this assumption coming from that parents don't already set an example for their children at home themselves and aren't already their children's primary educators?

I'm guessing the reason that most parents send their children to school is so they are provided with an education, and if those parents are willing to baptise their children to enrol them in a religious ethos school, then it has to be assumed that the parents believe in doing so they are providing the best educational opportunities for their children.

On that basis I'm guessing the reason some parents don't do religious education at home is either because they don't share the schools religious ethos, or because they expect that the school will provide adequately for their children's religious education.

splinter65

Odhinn wrote: »

Why don't they do it at home themselves?

Do what? The confirmation and the communion prep? First of all it’s not a private thing, it’s a Catholic Church community thing, and secondly, as the school they picked for their child is a school under the patronage of the Roman Catholic Church, with a Roman Catholic ethos, then it’s expected that the school will prepare the children for Roman Catholic Sacraments, don’t you agree?

Hotblack Desiato

splinter65 wrote: »

it’s a Catholic Church community thing

Therefore doesn't belong in school.

, and secondly, as the school they picked for their child is a school under the patronage of the Roman Catholic Church

If every family had a real choice then you might have a point.
Most parents have no real choice.

Odhinn

splinter65 wrote: »

Do what? The confirmation and the communion prep? First of all it’s not a private thing, it’s a Catholic Church community thing, and secondly, as the school they picked for their child is a school under the patronage of the Roman Catholic Church, with a Roman Catholic ethos, then it’s expected that the school will prepare the children for Roman Catholic Sacraments, don’t you agree?

No, its a state school paid for by the state. Let parents look after their childrens religion at home.

Odhinn

One eyed Jack wrote: »

.........

On that basis I'm guessing the reason some parents don't do religious education at home is either because they don't share the schools religious ethos, or because they expect that the school will provide adequately for their children's religious education.

They don't bother their arse, tick the box and expect the school to look after it. It's well known all over the state ffs.

Mrs OBumble

Odhinn wrote: »

No, its a state school paid for by the state. Let parents look after their childrens religion at home.

No its not.

With the exception of a very few run by RETBs (previously called VECs) there are no stste schools in Ireland.

The Irish state was and is happy to contract out the provision of education to churches and various other bodies, eg Educate Together, the Steiner schools association (whatever they're called), the gaelscoils organisation ( ditto).

FunLover18

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m sorry but I just don’t see any evidence of children being excluded.
The schools are full of non Christian children who don’t feel excluded from the communion preparation that they’re not participating in.
If , for convenience sake,a parent took their baby into a church and made promises and vows they didn’t mean or believe in, smiling politely and lighting candles and wasting the priests time, then theyll either have to man up and admit that thats just what they did, just to get into the schools whose ethos they don’t agree with (?!?!) , or keep up the pretence like a good little hypocrite.
None of this should be an issue for other parents.

Someone posted on the very first page that they're friends are letting their child do the communion because they don't want them to feel excluded. That's not to say they would be excluded but it's a legitimate concern, especially if all the other kids in the class are doing the prep and your little Tommy is sat at the back doing something else. Kids pick up on each other's differences and can be quite cruel.

Crea

splinter65 wrote: »

Do what? The confirmation and the communion prep? First of all it’s not a private thing, it’s a Catholic Church community thing, and secondly, as the school they picked for their child is a school under the patronage of the Roman Catholic Church, with a Roman Catholic ethos, then it’s expected that the school will prepare the children for Roman Catholic Sacraments, don’t you agree?

Except many people, like myself didnt have the option of a non religious school because we don't live in a major urban area.

suicide_circus

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

No its not.

With the exception of a very few run by RETBs (previously called VECs) there are no stste schools in Ireland.

The Irish state was and is happy to contract out the provision of education to churches and various other bodies, eg Educate Together, the Steiner schools association (whatever they're called), the gaelscoils organisation ( ditto).

Where does the money come from?

Bob_Marley

suicide_circus wrote: »

Where does the money come from?

Catholics, from both voluntary contributions and donations, and from taxation of Catholics.

Bob_Marley

Crea wrote: »

Except many people, like myself didnt have the option of a non religious school because we don't live in a major urban area.

The state has got away with not providing any schools for years.

Thing is though, if it's like any of the other state run institutions in this country, even if you did have them, chances are they would be pretty crap. - I would not like to rely on the Irish state to educate my kids.

Odhinn

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

No its not.

With the exception of a very few run by RETBs (previously called VECs) there are no stste schools in Ireland.

.

They're just paid for by the state. Spare me.

Bob_Marley

Odhinn wrote: »

They're just paid for by the state. Spare me.

The state does not provide for all costs for any school, far from it. And the state gets the money from the taxpayer.

Odhinn

Bob_Marley wrote: »

The state does not provide for all costs for any school, far from it. And the state gets the money from the taxpayer.

......yet they are effectively state funded schools. And yes, last I checked the taxpayer funded the state.

Bob_Marley

Odhinn wrote: »

......yet they are effectively state funded schools. And yes, last I checked the taxpayer funded the state.

......and yet last time I checked the vast majority of taxpayers are Catholic

suicide_circus

Bob_Marley wrote: »

......and yet last time I checked the vast majority of taxpayers are Catholic

True but this is the Republic of Ireland, not the Catholic Republic of Ireland

Crea

Bob_Marley wrote: »

The state does not provide for all costs for any school, far from it. And the state gets the money from the taxpayer.

Hold the phone a minute. At the moment teachers are paid by the state, they are trained by the state, they provide the money for building and equipment - the only input that the church has is that it may have owned the land the school was built on or it was a convent/brothers school. I would doubt any church funds go into the running of schools , it certainly doesn't happen in any of the schools in my area. Many schools were built 100% by the state but given over to be run by Catholic managent because the chirch had a strangle hold of the country at the time. Many schools could be removed from the church without incurring any costs at all.
Given the dig out the state gave in relation to abuse scandals I'd say the church owes us a few bob anyway.