St. Patrick's Principal resigns. See mod warning post #61

homer911

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/principal-resigns-from-greystones-school-over-admissions-row-1.3573122


With the only two protestant primary schools in the Greystones/Delgany area under the management of the Church of Ireland, this is an issue causing much concern in the other protestant denominations in the area - They are seeing families who have traditionally been members of their churches forced to move, or at least to regularly turn up, at CoI services in order to get their kids into the school - hardly a Christian approach to be coercing people to attend!

https://www.greystonesguide.ie/st-patricks-ns-principal-forced-to-resign/


This is an issue with Templecarraig too..


Mod warning added here

Gaspode wrote: »

Hi All, I have removed personal names from a lot of the posts as the individuals concerned are not on here to defend themselves and may not appreciate some of the comments and/or allegations made about them.
I understand that some of them have been named in the linked articles and thus could be considered public domain but It would be fairer to all to just refer to them by their title/role in the school (ex-principal, ex-secretary, rector, etc). It's also important that unsubstantiated allegations about people are not thrown about in here (for example the comments about the youth worker), remember this is a public forum.

I apologise if the <SNIP>s everywhere look a bit odd, but it was that or delete the thread which would have been a shame

karma_coma

No religious organisation should have any part in managing our schools.

tennisplayer

karma_coma wrote: »

No religious organisation should have any part in managing our schools.

What reason have you for this outlandish statement?

Annasopra

tennisplayer wrote: »

What reason have you for this outlandish statement?

There is probably lots of reasons to be fair. We are increasingly moving towards a secular state and faith formation if desired could be at home or in Sunday schools.

homer911

Those in minority faiths are still more than happy to have their children attend a school with that ethos. These sorts of comments tend to come from Catholics who have had a bad experience as a child in Catholic schools

RayCun

homer911 wrote: »

Those in minority faiths are still more than happy to have their children attend a school with that ethos. These sorts of comments tend to come from Catholics who have had a bad experience as a child in Catholic schools

So we should have Catholic schools for the Catholics, and Protestant schools for the Protestants, and Islamic schools for the Muslims, and Jewish schools for the Jewish kids, and Mormon schools for the Mormon kids, and Scientologist schools for the Scientologist kids...

Don't worry! Children who aren't part of that religion are allowed attend! (if there is space left!) As long as they sit at the back of the class quietly while the other kids are taught about how Brahma creates the universe. And maybe join in on the singing and colouring religious pictures - just so they don't feel left out, you know?

That's just the way it has to be, there is literally no alternative.

karma_coma

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

There is probably lots of reasons to be fair. We are increasingly moving towards a secular state and faith formation if desired could be at home or in Sunday schools.

Exactly. The tide is turning in our society. Here's an example of this change from the top of government: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/03c8a114-9059-11e8-8c1a-b63727488402


Secular schools are inclusive, fair and don't discriminate. I'd love to hear opinions from those that think the status quo is not discriminating, exclusive and frankly sectarian.

The Bishop Basher

karma_coma wrote: »

Secular schools are inclusive, fair and don't discriminate. I'd love to hear opinions from those that think the status quo is not discriminating, exclusive and frankly sectarian.

There are 2 separate issues. Mainstream Roman Catholic based education and minority faith based education. Each of them are treated differently for valid reasons which I’m happy to explain if needed.

Up to recently, St Patrick’s National School had a very open policy of inclusivity, fairness and non discrimination.

I’m now 44 years of age and even back then in those slightly more “sectarian” days, nearly half of our class was non CoI.

That policy remained in place for decades up until very recently when the Church took a turn in direction.

It is precisely because of the departure from that policy of inclusiveness that the school has now lost a fanstastic secretary who was there for many many years, they also lost an incredibly talented vice head, who was, as it happens and not that it matters, Roman Catholic, and now they’ve lost a hugely experienced, talented and respected principal <SNIP>

None of these people wanted to leave. They’ve all been there many years. <SNIP>. They didn’t leave because they wanted to. They left because they had no choice. They were pushed out because they disagreed with the sectarian nature of the new admission policy which the school has been adopting by stealth.

They are abusing the rules granted to minority faith schools by reducing the school size so they only have to take in children of a CoI background. Even the minister for education has said it’s absolutely unprecedented for a school to turn down an extra teacher which is exactly what they’ve done in this case.

The vast majority of people in the Church of Ireland are appalled by the departure from this ethos and this can be witnessed by the barrage of comments on FB and over 500 signatures on the petition.

We can’t allow this level of discrimination in this day and age. It’s just not acceptable and not in keeping with the long established tradition and ethos of the Church of Ireland.

Thestones

Rennaws wrote: »

There are 2 separate issues. Mainstream Roman Catholic based education and minority faith based education. Each of them are treated differently for valid reasons which I’m happy to explain if needed.

Up to recently, St Patrick’s National School had a very open policy of inclusivity, fairness and non discrimination.

I’m now 44 years of age and even back then in those slightly more “sectarian” days, nearly half of our class was non CoI.

That policy remained in place for decades up until very recently when the Church took a turn in direction.

It is precisely because of the departure from that policy of inclusiveness that the school has now lost a fanstastic secretary who was there for many many years, they also lost an incredibly talented vice head, who was, as it happens and not that it matters, Roman Catholic, and now they’ve lost a hugely experienced, talented and respected principal <SNIP>

None of these people wanted to leave. They’ve all been there many years. <SNIP>. They didn’t leave because they wanted to. They left because they had no choice. They were pushed out because they disagreed with the sectarian nature of the new admission policy which the school has been adopting by stealth.

They are abusing the rules granted to minority faith schools by reducing the school size so they only have to take in children of a CoI background. Even the minister for education has said it’s absolutely unprecedented for a school to turn down an extra teacher which is exactly what they’ve done in this case.

The vast majority of people in the Church of Ireland are appalled by the departure from this ethos and this can be witnessed by the barrage of comments on FB and over 500 signatures on the petition.

We can’t allow this level of discrimination in this day and age. It’s just not acceptable and not in keeping with the long established tradition and ethos of the Church of Ireland.

Let's be honest this is down to one rector with extreme views, I personally dealt with him re my sons admission a few years ago and he was extremely difficult and unpleasant with deal with, <SNIP>
was the complete opposite, such a lovely lady, he refused to sign the form because we aren't regular church goers but she wanted to give us a place(we are church of Ireland), she didn't agree with his view on this. Thank god we moved and went to another school, I could see this coming, it was clear there was a clash. The carry on by the church is disgraceful, I feel sorry for parents that have to deal with him.

RayCun

Rennaws wrote: »

There are 2 separate issues. Mainstream Roman Catholic based education and minority faith based education. Each of them are treated differently for valid reasons which I’m happy to explain if needed.

(reformulating my post)

C of I education used to be popular because it was the alternative to Catholic education. Whether you were practicing CofI, culturally CofI, or not CofI at all but not Catholic, you'd try to send your kids to those schools so they didn't go through the whole communion/catechism/confirmation thing in a Catholic school. Education in the CofI religion was not in itself important, the important thing was what you avoided.

Now there are alternatives. If you don't want your kids taught Catholicism in school, there are Educate Together schools that don't teach any religion at all (but do teach about religion, and do support religious education outside school hours)

The effect is that the proportion of practicing CofI parents sending their kids to CofI schools is higher, which naturally pushes the schools to being more explicitly religious.

The question is, should the state support explicitly religious schools, or should the state move towards secular education? If you think the state should pay for kids to get specifically CofI education with a strong religious component, why not also Catholic education? (and Islamic, Jewish, Mormon, etc)

Does anyone think it is a good idea to segregate children at 4 and 5 years old based on their parents' religion?

recedite

RayCun wrote: »

The question is, should the state support explicitly religious schools, or should the state move towards secular education? If you think the state should pay for kids to get specifically CofI education with a strong religious component, why not also Catholic education? (and Islamic, Jewish, Mormon, etc)

There are already state funded Muslim schools, with more in the pipeline.

RayCun wrote: »

Does anyone think it is a good idea to segregate children at 4 and 5 years old based on their parents' religion?

I would say it is harmful to society.
Unless kids affiliated with minority religions need to be protected from the state education system, which would have been the case in the past.
Even then, the state funding of segregated minority religion schools was not the correct response. The separation of church and state (as per other republics such as the USA and France) would have been the optimal solution all along.

The Bishop Basher

RayCun wrote: »

Does anyone think it is a good idea to segregate children at 4 and 5 years old based on their parents' religion?

In a word ? No.

And it would seem a far simpler and more effective solution to providing school places if they were entirely secular and state funded.

That said, I believe we should respect the right of other's to educate their children under the ethos of their own faith should they choose to do so.

I think the key point though is that as it stands, and despite the fact that the church is owned by the CoI, it has, up to now, had a very deliberate ethos of admitting a diverse mix of families from all faiths and from none.

It's also great to see more and more options lately outside of the standard faith based schools with the Gaelscoile and Educate Together jumping on board..

So no to your question but i'm not sure we have a problem to fix on that front.

Or at least we didn't until recently..

RayCun

There is a tendency for shrinking organizations to become more rigid and zealous. The people who leave first are the ones who went along to get along, the people who leave last are the ones who feel strongly about the issue. For example, the Iona crowd becoming more prominent as the number of active, practicing Catholics becomes smaller.

I believe we should respect the right of other's to educate their children under the ethos of their own faith should they choose to do so.

People have a right to bring children up in their faith.
Do they have a right to a school that will teach them that faith during school hours? Really?

The Bishop Basher

RayCun wrote: »

People have a right to bring children up in their faith.
Do they have a right to a school that will teach them that faith during school hours? Really?

If the church are providing it I can't see a problem with it.

Why would I be concerned by what they're doing if I wasn't interested in sending my kid there ?

If I want a secular education I can send my kid to ET..

Each to their own..

It'll make no difference to the kids..

RayCun

Rennaws wrote: »

If the church are providing it I can't see a problem with it.

Are the church paying for the school?

RayCun

and should this be applied to all religions and all denominations?

If your kid is a Jehovah's Witness, then you have a right to have a preacher? elder? minister? come into the school for four hours a week, during class times, and teach your kid.

The Bishop Basher

RayCun wrote: »

Are the church paying for the school?

As with all schools, it's primarily funded by the state.

The rest of the funding comes from parents, voluntary contribution, fund raising etc.

But i'm guessing you know all this.

The Bishop Basher

RayCun wrote: »

and should this be applied to all religions and all denominations?

If your kid is a Jehovah's Witness, then you have a right to have a preacher? elder? minister? come into the school for four hours a week, during class times, and teach your kid.

If you're a Jehovah's Witness and you don't have a Jehovah's Witness school near you then I suggest you get onto those elders and get fundraising and go build a school.

homer911

This thread really hasn't gone where I was hoping it would - if you don't like the amount of religion taught in school, don't send your kids there, but other parents should have the right to choose that option - In CoI primary schools, the amount of religious "education" is minimal and is more subtly reflected in the ethos by how things are done and what sort of behaviours are encouraged.


The point of the OP was that this particular school is admitting children, not just by their own baptism rule (which they are allowed to do as a minority faith) but by requiring church attendance as well - can you image the outrage if this was an added criteria for admission to Catholic schools? Christmas and Easter wouldn't cut it!

The Bishop Basher

homer911 wrote: »

This thread really hasn't gone where I was hoping it would.

Agreed. It was obvious where that line of questioning was going and it's not relevant.

homer911 wrote: »

The point of the OP was that this particular school is admitting children, not just by their own baptism rule (which they are allowed to do as a minority faith) but by requiring church attendance as well - can you image the outrage if this was an added criteria for admission to Catholic schools? Christmas and Easter wouldn't cut it!

As of next year they'll be breaking the law so I'm not sure how that ties in with <SNIP> latter to the the parents which stated there would be no change.

He's been very tight lipped so let's wait and see.

All I know is there'll be an audible sigh of relief across Greystones the day this ridiculous rule is lifted and there'll be a lot more people lying in on a Sunday morning enjoying their croissant and a read of the papers :pac:

Thestones wrote: »

Let's be honest this is down to one rector with extreme views, I personally dealt with him re my sons admission a few years ago and he was extremely difficult and unpleasant with deal with, <SNIP>was the complete opposite, such a lovely lady, he refused to sign the form because we aren't regular church goers but she wanted to give us a place(we are church of Ireland), she didn't agree with his view on this. Thank god we moved and went to another school, I could see this coming, it was clear there was a clash. The carry on by the church is disgraceful, I feel sorry for parents that have to deal with him.

I don't know how much you know but we haven't heard the start of it yet..

RayCun

Rennaws wrote: »

If you're a Jehovah's Witness and you don't have a Jehovah's Witness school near you then I suggest you get onto those elders and get fundraising and go build a school.

But aren't the schools primarily funded by the state?

RayCun

"but other parents should have the right to choose that option "

Why?

How does it benefit society to have the state fund sectarian education?

Why can't children receive their religious education outside school hours?

The Bishop Basher

RayCun wrote: »

But aren't the schools primarily funded by the state?

As above. You're looking in the wrong place for a debate on this.

I'd say the atheism section would be a good place to start but i'm sure a mod could help guide you even better.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=614

I've no interest in debating this topic on this thread so won't reply again.

Cheers.

Annasopra

Rennaws wrote: »

Agreed. It was obvious where that line of questioning was going and it's not relevant.


As of next year they'll be breaking the law so I'm not sure how that ties in with <SNIP> latter to the the parents which stated there would be no change.

He's been very tight lipped so let's wait and see.

All I know is there'll be an audible sigh of relief across Greystones the day this ridiculous rule is lifted and there'll be a lot more people lying in on a Sunday morning enjoying their croissant and a read of the papers :pac:

I don't know how much you know but we haven't heard the start of it yet..

Eeemmmmm

The new law only applies to Catholic schools and not minority faiths. They wont be breaking any laws next year!

RayCun

The funny thing is, the people in this thread arguing in favour of religious education are also saying that it's wrong to expect the children or their parents to actually, you know, demonstrate that they are religious.

It's vitally important that the state pays for children to be educated in the religion of their parents' choice, but it's an outrageous imposition to expect those parents to bring their kids to mass.

The Bishop Basher

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Eeemmmmm

The new law only applies to Catholic schools and not minority faiths. They wont be breaking any laws next year!

I think we've got our wires crossed..

The baptism barrier will be removed for Roman Catholics schools.

I meant the law regarding demonstrating active participation in the parish which will no longer be allowed for minority faiths.

"The Department of Education has confirmed minority faith schools will continue to be permitted to give priority enrolment to children on the basis of religion under new admission laws.

However, a spokesman said schools will not be permitted to rank these students “on the basis of the extent to which the child or his or her family are involved in local religious activities”."

recedite

Rennaws wrote: »

All I know is there'll be an audible sigh of relief across Greystones the day this ridiculous rule is lifted and there'll be a lot more people lying in on a Sunday morning enjoying their croissant and a read of the papers :pac:

It seems a tad hypocritical to the rest of us that you expect to receive priority admission to this state funded school on the basis of your religion, yet you can't even be bothered to get up out of bed and attend the church on a Sunday morning.
Even though I'm an atheist, I'm starting to think the Rector has a very good point...

Rennaws wrote: »

The baptism barrier will be removed for Roman Catholics schools.
I meant the law regarding demonstrating active participation in the parish which will no longer be allowed for minority faiths.
"The Department of Education has confirmed minority faith schools will continue to be permitted to give priority enrolment to children on the basis of religion under new admission laws.
However, a spokesman said schools will not be permitted to rank these students “on the basis of the extent to which the child or his or her family are involved in local religious activities”."

I would not be so confident about this. First of all, that legislation has not yet made its way through the Dail. Similar legislation back in 2015 was abandoned.

Secondly, that "govt. spokesman's statement" does not count for much unless it is inserted in the legislation and duly enacted. A zealous rector might well determine who is a bona fide local member of the CoI on the basis of who he sees in his church. Is the state going to argue with him over membership? I don't think so.

The Bishop Basher

recedite wrote: »

It seems a tad hypocritical to the rest of us that you expect to receive priority admission to this state funded school on the basis of your religion, yet you can't even be bothered to get up out of bed and attend the church on a Sunday morning.
Even though I'm an atheist, I'm starting to think the Rector has a very good point...

Well I don’t personally expect anything from anyone. I’m not a member of that or any other church and my children are well out of St Patrick’s.

But yet again I think you’re missing the pertinent point that at least 40% of the school are non CoI and some of them will be of no religion at all. What is that you expect them to do on a Sunday morning ? If they get up early and do 5 sun salutations would that be enough to quench your thirst on this issue ?

recedite wrote: »

Secondly, that "govt. spokesman's statement" does not count for much unless it is inserted in the legislation and duly enacted. A zealous rector might well determine who is a bona fide local member of the CoI on the basis of who he sees in his church. Is the state going to argue with him over membership? I don't think so.

The school admissions act was signed into law last week. They can certainly attempt to flout it if they like but I can’t imagine it’ll be too long before they find themselves defending against a claim if they do.

recedite

Rennaws wrote: »

But yet again I think you’re missing the pertinent point that at least 40% of the school are non CoI and some of them will be of no religion at all. What is that you expect them to do on a Sunday morning ? If they get up early and do 5 sun salutations would that be enough to quench your thirst on this issue ?

They can do whatever they want on a Sunday morning after they have been enrolled. But this is about whether they get enrolled in the first place, its about priority admissions.

Rennaws wrote: »

The school admissions act was signed into law last week. They can certainly attempt to flout it if they like but I can’t imagine it’ll be too long before they find themselves defending against a claim if they do.

Indeed you are right, I see it was finalised on 18th July.
Here it is.
For primary schools, religious discrimination is deemed not to be discrimination if

When making an application for admission to a recognised primary
school, an applicant may provide
(a)a statement confirming that the student in respect of whom the
application relates is a member of a minority religion and that the
applicant wishes the student to be educated in a school that provides a programme of religious instruction or religious education which is of the same religious ethos as, or a similar religious ethos to, the religious ethos of the minority religion of the student concerned, and (b)any evidence that the applicant wishes to include to support the statement that the student in respect of whom the application relates is a member of a minority religion.


(2)A recognised primary school may, following an application in
accordance with subsection (1) and in accordance with this section,
give priority to the admission of a student where the school is satisfied that (a)the student concerned is a member of a minority religion, and (b) the school provides a programme of religious instruction or
religious education which is of the same religious ethos as, or a
similar religious ethos to, the religious ethos of the minority
religion of the student concerned.
(3)In satisfying itself in accordance with subsection (2)(a) a recognised
primary school shall take into account only(a)
the statement that the applicant has provided in accordance with
subsection (1)(a), and(b) any evidence that the applicant has provided in accordance with subsection (1)(b).
(4) (a)Subject to paragraph (b), a recognised primary school may not for
the purpose of admission to the school concerned rank, in order of
preference, by virtue of the particular religious denomination of a
student who has satisfied the school in accordance with subsection
(2) as against students of other religious denominations who have
satisfied the school concerned in accordance with that subsection.
(b)
Nothing in paragraph (a) shall preclude a recognised primary
school from applying the selection criteria set out in the school’s
admission policy to students who have satisfied the school in
accordance with subsection (2), where the number of such students
is greater than the number of places available.

Which is all very unwieldy, and as you suggest, might result in solicitors getting involved.
It seems the applicant may state that they are members of a particular religion, and accompany that with some evidence (presumably a baptismal cert) If the school accepts the evidence, then that is it. Whether the Rector/BOM can reject a baptismal cert as being sufficient evidence of current church "membership" is unknown to me, but I suspect they probably cannot.


Its clear though that if somebody were to successfully state they were a Presbyterian, or a Methodist, or Episcopalian, a Lutheran, or a MickyMousearian, then non-attendance at the local CoI church could not be used against them when applying for priority admission to the CoI school.


Interesting to note that all this only applies to primary schools. So all the religious discriminatory provisions in the Templecarrig admission policy will have to go. And all the talk about parish boundaries.
Presumably anyone who has already been rejected for TC in September 2018 or 2019 could potentially have a claim now.
Its all very messy. But an improvement all the same.

Wicklow Will

recedite wrote: »

They can do whatever they want on a Sunday morning after they have been enrolled. But this is about whether they get enrolled in the first place, its about priority admissions.

Indeed you are right, I see it was finalised on 18th July.
Here it is.
For primary schools, religious discrimination is deemed not to be discrimination if
Which is all very unwieldy, and as you suggest, might result in solicitors getting involved.
It seems the applicant may state that they are members of a particular religion, and accompany that with some evidence (presumably a baptismal cert) If the school accepts the evidence, then that is it. Whether the Rector/BOM can reject a baptismal cert as being sufficient evidence of current church "membership" is unknown to me, but I suspect they probably cannot.


Its clear though that if somebody were to successfully state they were a Presbyterian, or a Methodist, or Episcopalian, a Lutheran, or a MickyMousearian, then non-attendance at the local CoI church could not be used against them when applying for priority admission to the CoI school.


Interesting to note that all this only applies to primary schools. So all the religious discriminatory provisions in the Templecarrig admission policy will have to go. And all the talk about parish boundaries.
Presumably anyone who has already been rejected for TC in September 2018 or 2019 could potentially have a claim now.
Its all very messy. But an improvement all the same.

In relation to the Church of Ireland, the only required and permissible means, in accordance with the Constitution of the Church of Ireland, for membership for a person of school-going age is a baptismal certificate. Once a person reaches 18, they are then eligible to be included on the Roll of Vestry People which entitles them to vote at Easter General Vestry (similar to an AGM in the corporate world) The Roll of Verstry People is in other words a Parish Register. Inclusion in this brings with it the expectation that you will contribute financially to the church according to your means and the Hope that you will attend church services reasonably regularly. There has never been Any Other Recognised Form if Church Membership in the Church of Ireland!!! There is NO set number of Sunday’s in a year that you must attend service in order to be considered a MEMBER. If a child is baptised in the CoI - THEY are a member (it says it in the service of baptism!!!) If one of a child’s parents is on the Parish Register THEY ARE a member. It matters not one iota whether they attend once a year or once a week. It is the imposition of this new practice of leaving it to the discretion of the local priest (yes, CoI clergy are called priests! Some are Rectors some are Priests-in-Charge) to decide who attends service regularly enough to be considered ‘an active faith participant’ that is at the nub of this debate.... and it sickens me!!! It is SO contrary to the attitude that Christ, the founder of CHRISTianity (the clue us in the title folks!) displayed. For goodeness sake if the exchequer is willing to stump up the money to pay another teacher and HAS ALREADY PAID FOR the classroom - are you not HONOUR BOUND to accept it and take the kids. Another 20 kids ain’t gonna change a whole ethos that’s already enshrined in both school and legislative policy!!! It is just SO wrong! I say this as an active member of the Church of Ireland and a Synod Member!

Thestones

recedite wrote: »

They can do whatever they want on a Sunday morning after they have been enrolled. But this is about whether they get enrolled in the first place, its about priority admissions.

Indeed you are right, I see it was finalised on 18th July.
Here it is.
For primary schools, religious discrimination is deemed not to be discrimination if
Which is all very unwieldy, and as you suggest, might result in solicitors getting involved.
It seems the applicant may state that they are members of a particular religion, and accompany that with some evidence (presumably a baptismal cert) If the school accepts the evidence, then that is it. Whether the Rector/BOM can reject a baptismal cert as being sufficient evidence of current church "membership" is unknown to me, but I suspect they probably cannot.
.

That is exactly what happened to me, I am CofI, have baptismal certs for my kids, he refused to sign the school form for St Patrick's on the basis of church attendance. I was in a slightly different situation at the time as we were in process of moving so I knew I would likely not need the place in St Patrick's anyway, I was also applying to other schools in other areas and he wouldn't even sign those forms, so he was actually trying to block me from any church of Ireland school! I tackled him on the unreasonable of this and he did then agree to sign those forms but not St Patrick's. When I told any of my Church of Ireland friends and family, literally no one had ever heard of this before and were all shocked. This was 2 years ago and it's clear things have only gotten worse. He caused such unnecessary stress to us at the time, we were trying to sell our house and move to a totally new area and unsure of what school we would end up in, we were already at disadvantage applying to schools in areas we didn't have an address and he still tried to make things difficult!

Annasopra

This sounds more and more like something from the 1950s Catholic Theocratic Ireland

The Bishop Basher

Wicklow Will wrote: »

In relation to the Church of Ireland, the only required and permissible means, in accordance with the Constitution of the Church of Ireland, for membership for a person of school-going age is a baptismal certificate.

Great post and hits the point of all this perfectly..

On a recent visit for a funeral, I watched the eulogy being made but it wasn't the person making the eulogy that I was watching. It was this picture, hanging on the wall, behind their head which showed a tree. One half of the tree was covered in foliage and looked healthy while the other half was dying. I forget the message but it gave the impression that those who had paid their "membership fees" were represented by the healthy side of the tree while those who hadn't paid were represented by the dead half. Having grown up in the parish I found this difficult to believe and was honestly shocked to find out that this was indeed what was meant by the tree..

It seems no-one told recedite (which is fair enough ) or the rector (which is definitely not fair enough), that membership of the church of Ireland comes with being baptised. Nothing less, nothing more. There is no payment. It's not run like a club.

I grew up there, i'm still on the records, as are my kids who grew up through the school and the parish.

<SNIP> <SNIP> ripped up a petition on my daughter. They all wanted to make their confirmation in their own clothes but <SNIP> adopted his usual tyrannical stance and demanded that they all wear uniforms. I suggested to my daughter that she collect signatures on a petition and hand them in requesting that they wear their own clothes. She took the time and trouble to do this and handed it to <SNIP> at a conformation class.

He ripped it up in front of her and dismissed it and they were forced to wear their uniforms for no good reason other then the rector said so.

Of course the policy changed again the following year when the rectors daughter was making hers but hey ho. He gets to make the rules.

Anyway, my daughter's a bit like me. She has her own beliefs and doesn't really go in for this religion stuff. But that moment ended any relationship she, and we, had with that church.

The stories I hear seem to be as endless as the ego. I'm particularly concerned this week to hear that the youth worker has some "fundamentalist" views on homosexuality.

The list of questions i'd want answered if i was an active parishioner are growing by the day.. <SNIP> seems to be adopting a head in the sand approach. I'm not sure the gravity of the situation has dawned..

What has happened to St Patrick's ?

evolving_doors

Rennaws wrote: »

In a word ? No.

And it would seem a far simpler and more effective solution to providing school places if they were entirely secular and state funded.

That said, I believe we should respect the right of other's to educate their children under the ethos of their own faith should they choose to do so.

I think the key point though is that as it stands, and despite the fact that the church is owned by the CoI, it has, up to now, had a very deliberate ethos of admitting a diverse mix of families from all faiths and from none.

It's also great to see more and more options lately outside of the standard faith based schools with the Gaelscoile and Educate Together jumping on board..

So no to your question but i'm not sure we have a problem to fix on that front.

Or at least we didn't until recently..

Ruairi Quinn's Community National School was an attempt but just ended up with even more distinct segregation. Looking for articles it seemed to be a great idea in 2015 but from 2017 on it's not so
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/community-national-schools-are-a-bad-idea-1.2677196

The Bishop Basher

evolving_doors wrote: »

Ruairi Quinn's Community National School was an attempt but just ended up with even more distinct segregation. Looking for articles it seemed to be a great idea in 2015 but from 2017 on it's not so
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/community-national-schools-are-a-bad-idea-1.2677196

But St. Patrick's have managed to run an incredibly successful, diverse and inclusive school for nearly 50 years.

If you wanted to see how it could be done you need have looked no further then our own doorstep..

The new regime have cleared out all the experienced members off the board, it would appear, so that they can assert complete control over the school. Now they've driven out the secretary, the vice principal and finally now the principal whose been there as long as any of us.

One would wonder why the current board is still in place given the events of last week but they are..

Very worrying times for a once thriving church which is now giving the rest of the CoI a bad name.

Taltos

The cynic in me wonders how much a developer would be willing to offer for that land...

The Bishop Basher

Taltos wrote: »

The cynic in me wonders how much a developer would be willing to offer for that land...

Interesting notion..

It must be worth savage money...

recedite

Rennaws wrote: »

It seems no-one told recedite (which is fair enough ) or the rector (which is definitely not fair enough), that membership of the church of Ireland comes with being baptised.

I didn't get the memo
But no matter. On a recent holiday to Transylvania, I was impressed by the Eastern Orthodox Church of Western Moravia, and duly converted. I could produce a letter of affiliation signed by Reverend Dracula, if necessary.

As it happens, the nearest school ethos available in Ireland is the CoI. And according to the new legislation (as of last week) that gives my kids priority admission to any CoI primary school.
Its actually better than being a CoI member, because I get to choose between St. Pats NS and Delgany NS; I can apply to either one. Not being in the CoI, I am not subject to any restrictions relating to internal CoI parish boundaries.

Any questions should be addressed to my solicitor directly.

The Bishop Basher

recedite wrote: »

I didn't get the memo
But no matter. On a recent holiday to Transylvania, I was impressed by the Eastern Orthodox Church of Western Moravia, and duly converted. I could produce a letter of affiliation signed by Reverend Dracula, if necessary.

I'd love to see the reaction if you handed that in for the craic..

recedite wrote: »

Its actually better than being a CoI member, because I get to choose between St. Pats NS and Delgany NS; I can apply to either one. Not being in the CoI, I am not subject to any restrictions relating to internal CoI parish boundaries.

I agree. You have the best of all worlds.

As someone who was raised in the tradition but never sat easy with religion, i've always appreciated the free thinking ethos and open and diverse culture I enjoyed both as a pupil and when my kids attended St Patrick's.

Ironically though, this new law wouldn't have made any difference back then as there was no requirement for affiliation at the time.. Anyway, it's needed now and it's introduction is well timed

It'll make a really huge difference to the Temple Carrig hopefuls who have been dutifully lined up to be counted every Sunday at morning roll call, I mean service..

But honestly, up to now and anytime in the last 40 years, an atheist kid would have felt just as at home as a Roman Catholic kid, or any other kid and that speaks volumes about a school.

It's a shame we need laws to force the board to apply what should be common sense policies that benefit the entire community but it is what it is..

They need to get back to a point where non CoI applicants are not only admitted but are welcomed and included in a very real way and not in a way that the church and the board are just paying lip service for the sake of it.

They've lost all of their most experienced and talented people. They have many mountains to climb.

We'll see.

The Bishop Basher

I see the rector has issued another letter.

https://www.greystonesguide.ie/canon-fodder/

Seems there's a season for everything and this is the season for us all to shut up apparently.

I believe a lot of people are too frightened to speak up in case they upset the rector and lose a coveted place in one of the schools so often used to threaten people and keep them in line.

The longer this debacle rumbles on the more apparent it has become that St Patrick's is being run, to some extent, under a culture of silence and fear..

Sound familiar anyone ?

Well thankfully I don't share these concerns as my kids are raised however I do feel a connection with the parish and i have grave concerns about things i've witnessed and heard and so i'd like to ask the questions so many are asking quietly in the background..

I don't believe people want platitudes, sound bites and patronising bible quotes..

They want answers..

- Like why has an incredibly talented and experienced principal who has happily served the school so well for so many decades, been left feeling like she had no option left but to resign ? What did it take to get her to that point ?

- Why does this letter ignore the fact that she resigned because she felt she had no other option ? You could be forgiven from reading that letter that all these resignees danced away merrily into the sunset. They didn't.

- Why did an equally talented and respected vice principal resign ? Did he also feel forced out and most importantly, did his religion have anything to do with it ?

- if it did, was this sanctioned by the Archbishop ?

- Why did the school secretary leave ? Did she feel forced out ?

- Why did the church office secretary leave ? Was she forced out ?

- Is it true that people have left the church over homophobic comments made by the parish youth worker ?

- When did the CoI introduce a club type membership system with fees and has the Archbishop approved this ?

- What happens to those who don't pay their fees. Apart from public shaming from the pulpit, do they just get off peak access to the church or something

- When did the CoI become a fundamentalist, evangelical church and has the archbishop approved this massive shift in direction ?

- Why is the Rector refusing to baptise people based on his own assumptions regarding their intentions ? When was he granted this right and has the archbishop approved this ?

- Why is the Rector refusing to marry people based on his own assumptions regarding their intentions ? When was he granted this right and has the archbishop approved this ?

- Why is the Rector making unilateral decisions about which families get places in either school.. When was he granted that power and by whom ?

- Why are members of the board and teachers continuing to resign ?

- Why did we turn down an extra teacher which was "unprecedented" according to the minister, Richard Bruton ?

- Why have the admission criteria for Temple Carrig been amended by stealth to favour CoI children since the patronage was awarded ?

- Why have I heard of at least 5 people leaving the church and the parish in the last week alone and is this trend indicative of a wider problem in the church ?

- And finally where does Christianity come into any of this because recent actions on behalf of the parish seem utterly devoid of any level of Christianity to me. I've personally witnessed some appalling behavior which I won't get into here but it has been on a number of occasions, each of which were distasteful, ego driven and incredibly self serving.

It's a shame to see a once thriving and happy parish find itself in this quagmire. It's such a mess.

I know so many of these people personally and I know they work with honesty, integrity and to the best of their ability to make the parish what it is but their efforts are being undermined from within.

Templecarrig and St Patrick's admission policies are just a symptom of a much deeper and a far more sinister problem in Greystones.

Fundamentalism and evangelism have found their way to St Patrick's so it seems to be a case of be born again or be away with you.

They're giving the CoI a bad name and destroying generations of great work that has gone on before them. They're damaging relations with the community and driving away people who've been faithful to the Church for many generations.

The damage done is already immense and the only people left to fix the problem seem to be those that have caused it. As any good manager will tell you, always hire people that are better then you. Poor managers do the opposite.

They've pushed out all the loyal stalwarts, the talent, the experience and all the good will that they had at their disposal..

Not to mention the much needed moolah..

Watch this space..

Wicklow Will

Rennaws wrote: »

I see the rector has issued another letter.

https://www.greystonesguide.ie/canon-fodder/

Seems there's a season for everything and this is the season for us all to shut up apparently.

I believe a lot of people are too frightened to speak up in case they upset the rector and lose a coveted place in one of the schools so often used to threaten people and keep them in line.

The longer this debacle rumbles on the more apparent it has become that St Patrick's is being run, to some extent, under a culture of silence and fear..

Sound familiar anyone ?

Well thankfully I don't share these concerns as my kids are raised however I do feel a connection with the parish and i have grave concerns about things i've witnessed and heard and so i'd like to ask the questions so many are asking quietly in the background..

I don't believe people want platitudes, sound bites and irrelevant bible quotes..

They want answers..

- Like why has an incredibly talented and experienced principal who has happily served the school so well for so many decades, been left feeling like she had no option left but to resign ? What did it take to get her to that point ?

- Why does this letter ignore the fact that she resigned because she felt she had no other option ? You could be forgiven from reading that letter that all these resignees danced away merrily into the sunset. They didn't.

- Why did the vice principal resign ? Did he also feel forced out and most importantly, did his religion have anything to do with it ?

- if it did, was this sanctioned by the Archbishop ?

- Why did the school secretary leave ? Did she feel forced out ?

- Why did the church office secretary leave ? Was she forced out ?

- Is it true that people have left the church over homophobic comments made by the parish youth worker ?

- When did the CoI introduce a club type membership system with fees and has the Archbishop approved this ?

- What happens to those who don't pay their fees. Apart from public shaming from the pulpit, do they just get off peak access to the church or something

- When did the CoI become a fundamentalist, evangelical church and has the archbishop approved this massive shift in direction ?

- Why is the Rector refusing to baptise people based on his own assumptions regarding their intentions ? When was he granted this right and has the archbishop approved this ?

- Why is the Rector refusing to marry people based on his own assumptions regarding their intentions ? When was he granted this right and has the archbishop approved this ?

- Why is the Rector making unilateral decisions about which families get places in either school.. When was he granted that power ?

- Why are members of the board and teachers continuing to resign ?

- Why did we turn down an extra teacher which was "unprecedented" according to the minister, Richard Bruton ?

- Why have the admission criteria for Temple Carrig been amended by stealth to favour CoI children since the patronage was awarded ?

- Why have I heard of at least 5 people leaving the church and the parish in the last week alone and is this trend indicative of a wider problem in the church ?

- And finally where does Christianity come into any of this because recent actions on behalf of the parish seem utterly devoid of any level of Christianity to me. I've personally witnessed some appalling behavior which I won't get into here but it has been on a number of occasions, each of which were distasteful, ego driven and incredibly self serving.

It's a shame to see a once thriving and happy parish find itself in this quagmire. It's such a mess.

I know so many of these people personally and I know they work with honesty, integrity and to the best of their ability to make the parish what it is. But it is being destroyed from within.

Templecarrig and St Patrick's admission policies are just a symptom of a much deeper and a far more sinister problem in Greystones.

Fundamentalism and evangelism have found their way to St Patrick's so it seems to be a case of be born again or be away with you.

They're giving the CoI a bad name and destroying generations of great work that has gone on before them. They're damaging relations with the community and driving away people who've been faithful to the Church for many generations.

The damage done is already immense and the only people left to fix the problem seem to be those that have caused it. As any good manager will tell you, always hire people that are better then you. Poor managers do the opposite.

They've pushed out all the loyal stalwarts, the talent, the experience and all the good will that they had at their disposal..

Not to mention the much needed moolah..

Watch this space..

I could have written this post myself! I’m currently a disaffected member of St Patricks parish and can say that you’re spot on with your questions! You’ve got the right angle on the core problems. I’d love to see the answers, if any were forthcoming, although I suspect you’d only get more of same ‘canon fodder’ - justification for actions taken (inexcusable and inexplicable as they appear). Sad to say, my disaffection with the present regime is such that I will be another casualty as I cannot continue worshipping there and by doing so make a hypocrite of myself whilst lending tacit support to the ministry of this Rector. My family has been Anglican as far back as we can trace its lineage (eight generations) so it is a sad day when I have to admit this to be the case. There’s something rotten in the state of Denmark, me thinks!

The Bishop Basher

Wicklow Will wrote: »

Sad to say, my disaffection with the present regime is such that I will be another casualty as I cannot continue worshipping there and by doing so make a hypocrite of myself whilst lending tacit support to the ministry of this Rector.

Unfortunately you’re not alone. Quite a few people feel as you do. I’ve also spoken to people who are of the view that the Church is much more then just the rector and on that basis they won’t leave. I can also understand and respect that view..

But after much consideration and consultation with the family, we’ve also asked that our names be removed from the parish record. Probably should have done it a long time ago but I always felt a strong tie to the old place and so kept putting it off..

But we just don’t recognise it anymore and we certainly don’t seem to share any values and so it’s become a very easy decision for us..

stilltryingit

Rennaws, what a humiliating thuggish thing to do to a little girl. Fair play to her, probably one of her first attempts to get up and do something to try to have her voice heard and it was ripped up in front of her? Really Not the way to interact with children!

TheBun44

The legislation makes what the Canon is doing illegal starting for admissions for Sept 2019 which is in October and November this year. I can only assume that this is one of the reasons why the principle choose now to resign - it highlights it just at the right time.

The new legislation covers admissions to all schools not just primary. Hence the admissions policy’s listed on both St. Patrick’s and Templecarraig websites are illegal. It is up to the people of Greystones to start complaining to the department of education now so that these policy’s are changed and department takes note of what the Canon is doing. The issue of whether or not the part of the legislation protection minority religions should have been included is a different debate altogether.

If you abhor what the Canon is doing like I do, you should contact the department as soon as possible.

Don’t let this continue.

Annasopra

TheBun44 wrote: »

The legislation makes what the Canon is doing illegal starting for admissions for Sept 2019 which is in October and November this year.

I dont think you are correct here. Perhaps you are but please tell us where the Ministerial Order or Statutory Instrument where the Minister specifically enacts the Admissions act?

TheBun44

I’m not entirely sure how the department would handle it but they have got government orders to enroll students in schools before or to reinstate a student who was expelled. Also when Templecarraig got the patronage for their school they changed the admissions policy to prioritise church of Ireland kids who lived miles away over non Church of Ireland kids who lived next door to the school. Enough people complained to the department and they forced the school to change their policy.

If what they are doing is illegal and enough people complain they would find a way to take the school on. I know they audited the Templecarraig schools admission policy again the following year to make sure they were doing the lottery fairly.

I’ll have to do some more research on how the department would enforce the legislation but I think this will all blow up at some stage once a parent doesn’t get their kid in and launches an appeal. That’s why it’s better to raise it with the department now.

Annasopra

TheBun44 wrote: »

I’m not entirely sure how the department would handle it but they have got government orders to enroll students in schools before or to reinstate a student who was expelled. Also when Templecarraig got the patronage for their school they changed the admissions policy to prioritise church of Ireland kids who lived miles away over non Church of Ireland kids who lived next door to the school. Enough people complained to the department and they forced the school to change their policy.

If what they are doing is illegal and enough people complain they would find a way to take the school on. I know they audited the Templecarraig schools admission policy again the following year to make sure they were doing the lottery fairly.

I’ll have to do some more research on how the department would enforce the legislation but I think this will all blow up at some stage once a parent doesn’t get their kid in and launches an appeal. That’s why it’s better to raise it with the department now.

This is all just ifs buts maybes.

You dont seem to have any concrete proof the Minister has signed a Ministerial Order or Statutory Instrument to enact the legislation so I dont really see what any of your points are.

TheBun44

Yeah sorry you are right I don’t know that, I just assumed that once the president signed it into law, it is enacted. I don’t fully undestrand the legislative process and am open to learning more about it.

Either way it will be law for admissions for Sept 2019 or Sept 2020 so I’m just saying if people want the admissions policy’s of these two schools changed and enforced to adhere to the legislation, they will have to raise it with the department at some stage.

loyatemu

I thought the legislation contains exceptions for "minority faiths" such as COI.

TheBun44

They can prioritise based on membership of the church but not based on how often they attend a church service. Baptism cert is enough to prove membership

loyatemu

TheBun44 wrote: »

Baptism cert is enough to prove membership

In general it's enough for schools, but I don't know if the legislation actually says anything about it if a school wanted to define "member of the parish" in a more stringent fashion.