nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

homer911

I agree that's a dreadful letter, both condescending and badly written!

"We are right, you are wrong, stop complaining"

recedite

I don't think the letter is particularly dreadful or condescending. Its quite informative in some ways. It also carries some misinformation IMO, perhaps deliberate misinformation.
And as usual, the keep your mouths shut/ reminder of the non-disclosure agreement plays a big part in the message.

It casts some new light on the proposed new teacher and extra class (which idea was rejected by management) The idea of starting a new stream in junior infants would not normally make sense, unless you intended to double the size of the whole school. The following year you have 2 extra classes, the year after 3 extra classes, and so on. But I don't think that was ever on the cards. So if you were to do this as a once-off only, then you are back to a single stream the following year. The only way this makes sense is if there is general shortage of places in the town for this year, but a new school is opening next year which will alleviate the problem in future.
Lo and behold, this letter explains that is exactly what is happening - the newly expanded CNS in Charlesland due to open in 2019 will have 24 classrooms.
So, far from being a reason not to accept the extra teacher, as they try to explain in the letter, this is a good reason to take on the teacher, just to accommodate Greystones kids starting in 2018. The idea mooted in the letter that they must have got places elsewhere "quite happily" does not wash with me. I'm sure some have had to go outside the town to find places.

Also the letter restates the BOM position that there has been no change to the admissions policy. This appears to contrast with the resignation letter of the well respected ex-principal who said

Admission to State-funded education cannot and must not be an adjunct to, or a collateral benefit of parochial engagement. St Patrick’s appears to be taking a new direction and, in conscience, I am not the person to lead the school in this context. Therefore, after careful reflection, I have decided that the honourable and proper course is to tender my resignation as Principal..

There is the possibility that both are correct in this. For example, if it was always the policy that active parishioners would get priority over the inactive ones wielding baptismal certs, but it never came to that before because there were enough places for both. Who is to say whether this was the case? Who can disagree with the BOM on their own policy? Perhaps a retired BOM member, from years ago, would know the answer.

The letter says the admission policy will change in the near future due to new legislation. This was discussed earlier in the thread. But the changes will be quite limited for this school, because a "minority ethos" primary schools will still be able to discriminate on grounds of religion. Much more drastic for Templecarrig it seems, it being a secondary school.

loyatemu

recedite wrote: »

Much more drastic for Templecarrig it seems, it being a secondary school.

the proportion of kids in TCG who have got in through the "parish affiliation" provision is pretty small, it wouldn't make a huge difference if they scrapped it. The school will still be oversubscribed.

recedite

loyatemu wrote: »

the proportion of kids in TCG who have got in through the "parish affiliation" provision is pretty small, it wouldn't make a huge difference if they scrapped it. The school will still be oversubscribed.

See post #29 on this thread. My initial reading of it is that all religious discrimination will be banned in all secondary schools, as the text in this derogation seems only to be specified for primary schools.
We'll have to wait and see how it pans out though.

As mentioned in this recent letter, there seems to be some negotiations going on behind the scenes.

stilltryingit

Next enrollment policy for Temple Carrig will be interesting then. When is it due to be released?

loyatemu

stilltryingit wrote: »

Next enrollment policy for Temple Carrig will be interesting then. When is it due to be released?

enrolment for 2019 has already been done and for 2020 probably closes in November, so there won't be any change until next year. At this stage a huge proportion of each 1st year enrolment consists of siblings of existing students.

recedite

loyatemu wrote: »

enrolment for 2019 has already been done and for 2020 probably closes in November, so there won't be any change until next year. At this stage a huge proportion of each 1st year enrolment consists of siblings of existing students.

Well I'm not sure that you can evade a new law by preparing something illegal in advance of a new law's introduction, knowing that your thing will be illegal by the time it actually gets going.

But that "timing" aspect is probably part of the secret negotiations that are going on.

loyatemu

recedite wrote: »

Well I'm not sure that you can evade a new law by preparing something illegal in advance of a new law's introduction, knowing that your thing will be illegal by the time it actually gets going.

But that "timing" aspect is probably part of the secret negotiations that are going on.

you have to do enrolment well in advance, I don't think it's any form of shenanigans.

recedite

loyatemu wrote: »

you have to do enrolment well in advance, I don't think it's any form of shenanigans.

That's fair enough, but for how many years should illegal discrimination be allowed? I'd say one is reasonable, but two is not.

Anyway its all pie in the sky until (and unless) the Minister for Education activates the legislation.

TheBun44

I think the recent letter sent to parents was very condescending. It continues the non engagement policy – It showed that even though they’ve lost a very good principle and lost the trust and faith of the parents; they simply don’t care. There was a lot of misinformation in the letter, one example being that all classrooms are ‘occupied’, but I know that one of the extra rooms is rented out to a pre-school service. Hence there is a classroom that was paid for by the department that could be used to add an extra class for at least one year anyway.

The Canon started signing off on who gets into St. Patricks a few years ago and has ramped this up to basically signing off on nearly every child that gets in. They always let in one or two that aren’t signed off so that if someone appeals to the department they can always say ‘what about these two’. I assume he was planning to ramp this up for Templecarraig also over the next few years but this legislation will stop that.

At least she did say in the letter that they are reviewing the policies and confirming timing with the Department – hopefully this is an indication that they will fall in line with the legislation.

It does appear that the minority part of the new legislation only allows discrimination through Church membership for Primary schools – Hence they will be able to make St. Patricks fully Church of Ireland, but access to Templecarraig will become a lottery for all kids coming from the eight primary schools. They currently do let in some Church of Ireland kids from Bray/Enniskerry etc also – I don’t know if this will still be allowed. They have taken their Amissions Policy down off the website which is a good sign. I know both TD’s involved were planning to write to the schools regarding this.

In summary: I still can’t believe the board wouldn’t engage at all with the parents and that the Patron supported this – It is a real shame for the Church. Everything Rev. <SNIP> said in his letter was bang on. One thing that was really disappointing was the attitude of some Church of Ireland people I have known for years. At first I thought it was part of a siege mentality that had existed without me knowing but after thinking about it for a long time I realised it was just elitism. A policy of ‘we have an advantage here and we are not going to give it up’. How anyone in Ireland in 2018 could advocate a priest controlling access to a state funded school is beyond me but it shows that if it benefits someone it’s hard for them to give it up – even when it is clearly unethical. In shows that intelligent people will allow something unsavoury to continue when they know it gives them an advantage and will even stand there and argue the point.

This whole episode has saddened me because it has shown me how negative Irish society can be sometimes. Shame on the board of management, the Canon and their supports.

Mod edit
Names removed. Please respect mod warnings.

The Bishop Basher

Wicklow Will wrote: »

Well the Archbishop and his temporary Chair sure have played a blinder this time!

All cut from the same cloth. She's been sent by the Arch to ram home the message.

"Nothing to see here, move along please and keep your gob shut while you're at it."

I'm told she runs a similarly tight ship in Rathfarnham where church attendance and putting your hand in your pocket is very much expected.

The CoI seems to have become a radically different church to the one I grew up in and i'm really struggling to see anything resembling Christianity from some of those supposedly in charge.

Maybe my eyes are a little rusty. I'd be the first to admit that i'm neither saintly nor christian so far be it from me to throw stones or cast judgement but the behaviour i've personally witnessed from both the canon and his then curate, <SNIP>, on a number of occasions has been anything but Christian.

At some point it seems to have become all about the money while excluding those who don't fit the criteria of being CoI, straight and minted. The canon banned fundraising (even the car boot sale as it was beneath him) so they must be really struggling to fill that gap. Obviously no one told him the church survives on fundraising. It explains the membership idea which obviously flopped and seeing as the canon was down doing assembly this week telling all the kids that their parents need to cough up more money to fund this bull**** i'm guessing he's struggling with his plans.

Maybe he's realised that magic money tree doesn't really exist after all..

I've honestly seen multinational corporations show more compassion and treat their customers better then him and his ex curate now rector of Kill o the Grange.

The Arch naively thinks this is going to just blow over and go away despite not even having the courtesy to come out and spend a few hours speaking to those affected.

Honestly, how out of touch can you be

recedite wrote: »

Anyway its all pie in the sky until (and unless) the Minister for Education activates the legislation.

They might have got away with this in St Patrick's but trying the same trick in Temple Carrig will bring the minster into it and if he didn't have any incentive before, he will now and I'd fully understand his decision were he to remove all immunity currently awarded to minority faith based schools.

They'll all have Canon <SNIP> to thank

Mod edit
Names removed. Please respect mod warnings.

Wicklow Will

recedite wrote: »

...Also the letter restates the BOM position that there has been no change to the admissions policy. This appears to contrast with the resignation letter of the well respected ex-principal [...] There is the possibility that both are correct in this. For example, if it was always the policy that active parishioners would get priority over the inactive ones wielding baptismal certs, but it never came to that before because there were enough places for both. Who is to say whether this was the case? Who can disagree with the BOM on their own policy? Perhaps a retired BOM member, from years ago, would know the answer...

I contacted a previous, long-term, BOM member from SPNS known to me, to ask them the question you posed above. In reply I received a categorical, unambiguous, unequivocal assurance that in all the years that they were a member of the BOM they never so much as asked for a birth cert, let alone insisted that a child’s parents attend church services as a condition of entrance to the NS. In addition I was told that often they maxed class sizes and a few times exceeded 30 in a class in order to give a child a place if there was no where else for the kid to go. In those days they valued a diversity of backgrounds and saw it only as a good thing for children of all faiths or none to mix and grow together, thereby breaking down myths and misconceptions, generations old, about human beings from differing faiths, cultures and backgrounds.

This assurance was as I had expected it would be, in light of the people involved in running the school over the years, some of whom I know and whose values resonate with my own, but I wanted to be able to say here, truthfully, that I had heard this ‘from the horses mouth’ so to speak.

I think this response from my contact, speaks to that opposing contention in the recent letter from the Diocesan Office and circulated by the Acting Chair, that there’s been no change in the implementation of the admissions policy.

A former Taoiseach once spoke of “smoke and mirrors”, to this I would add a quote from St Paul that ties in with this when he wrote that ‘now we see through a glass dimly...’ If ever scripture were true it was never moreso than now, in this instance!

Wicklow Will

I see also, that the issue has been made mention of in the houses of the Oireachtas: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/seanad/2018-09-19/9/#spk_63 See fourth paragraph.

recedite

Wicklow Will wrote: »

in all the years that they were a member of the BOM they never so much as asked for a birth cert, let alone insisted that a child’s parents attend church services as a condition of entrance to the NS. In addition I was told that often they maxed class sizes and a few times exceeded 30 in a class in order to give a child a place if there was no where else for the kid to go...

Very interesting. They were undoubtedly working to a very different policy in former years then. Thanks for researching that.

Annasopra

Mod

I have removed names from posts 101 and 102. The red card issued for post 102 will be lifted but if there are names entered here again the posts will automatically get red carded.

The Bishop Basher

Another teacher has resigned today.

She was well liked and respected by all, both parents and kids.

Another good one gone. How many will it take ?

I feel sorry for all the parents with kids there now at this stage.

Wicklow Will

https://www.greystonesguide.ie/the-goodbye-girl-oct-2018/

Last Tuesday was truly a sad, sad day. Not only was the Principal’s departure preventable, the manner of it is utterly reprehensible. The attitude displayed by those from our Church (both local and Diocesan) who were in a position to engage with teachers and parents of St Patricks National School and resolve the issues that led to the problem in the first place, is nothing short of shameful. Furthermore, the failure by the Church of Ireland to take up the offer of and opportunity to mediate this issue was not only regrettable but an appalling display of hubris.

As a someone born into the Church of Ireland, educated in a Church of Ireland primary school, from a family who’ve been Church of Ireland as far back as records can go and who’ve counted senior clergy among its members as well as lay members of both Diocesan and General Synods and being myself, a Diocesan Synod’s person, I find myself in the awful position of now questioning my faith and the very authenticity of the denomination which has meant so much to me for as long as I’ve been able to appreciate the meaning of faith and religion. This is attributable to the behaviour of those who put themselves forward as shepherds of Christ’s flock who by virtue of their office both locally and at Diocesan level, having been called and supported by the body - the parishioners - to tend to the pastoral needs of the flock, all of the flock, have come short in this regard in deference to position and the favour of men & women. However, it is not only the ordained who I feel have let us down, so too have those who have failed to call out the pharisaical behaviour that has been plain as a pikestaff.

There has been a change in direction in many areas of the Church of Ireland in the last few years - a shift to the right - that is very worrying. Once upon a time we were known for our open-minded debate, our inclusion, our encouragement to think and question, to search out truth and refer to our conscience - informed by our knowledge of the Divine - attributes such as these were our hallmarks. Sadly, it seems, these have been replaced by their very opposites and the requirement to conform to one way of thinking, doing and conforming. This is not the Church of Ireland I knew, nor one which, I think, I want to know anymore! Time will tell.

pixbyjohn

More developments in this saga now reported on Greystones Guide today

Taltos

Saw that pixby, horrendous stuff. Not sure how this will end up.

Wicklow Will

For those who wish to inform themselves about the latest instalment of the implosion of Greystones St Patrick's Church of Ireland parish, here is the link to the article in the Greystones Guide:

https://www.greystonesguide.ie/bashing-the-archbishop/

It's a sorry, sorry day for the Church of Ireland when it descends to such an appalling depth to treat one of its stalwart and exemplary clerics - who led in the vanguard of openness, ecumenism and inclusion - in such an utterly shoddy fashion!

God forgive them, they know not what they do!

recedite

What does "former archdeacon has now found himself stripped of his right to officiate at services" mean exactly?

Surely as former rector he remains ordained, and therefore can still "officiate" at CoI services if he is invited to. Perhaps it means they intend to blacklist him from any such invitations (in the parish, or in the diocese, or in the country)

Wicklow Will

recedite wrote: »

What does "former archdeacon has now found himself stripped of his right to officiate at services" mean exactly?

Surely as former rector he remains ordained, and therefore can still "officiate" at CoI services if he is invited to. Perhaps it means they intend to blacklist him from any such invitations (in the parish, or in the diocese, or in the country)

No, a CoI cleric who no longer holds a benefice in a Diocese must possess “Permission to Officiate” in order to preside at Services. They are still a priest but have no permission to Officiate at Holy Communion Services, funerals, christenings etc. It is one step further from losing a licence which (should) automatically happens upon retirement; thereafter a priest of the CoI can still take Services at the request of parishes, friends /former parishioners (for special occasions) with consent of the incumbent of the parish in question and the bishop of the particular diocese. Many retired clergy supplement the meagre pensions by continuing to do locum parish Work cover sick leave, maternity leave, holiday cover, chaplaincy duty and vacancies. It also continues to provide an opportunity for those of pastoral calling with the opportunity to fulfil this calling and remaining useful in a role to which they've dedicated their life. It’s slightly different to many of the occupations in which most of us engage in that for the majority of those who enter holy orders it becomes a way of life, an extension of the self and one in which the person feels compelled to serve in response to a spiritual experience. To be deprived of the opportunity to do so, whilst still fully capable of so doing, is very cruel. Hope this helps demystify the situation.

recedite

I see, so a retired clergyman with “Permission to Officiate”could still officiate at for example, a wedding of a niece or nephew, by invitation.

A retired clergyman not holding this “Permission to Officiate” would be denied that opportunity. Is that right?
It would seem to be somewhat spiteful, if that is the situation.

Wicklow Will

recedite wrote: »

I see, so a retired clergyman with “Permission to Officiate”could still officiate at for example, a wedding of a niece or nephew, by invitation.

A retired clergyman not holding this “Permission to Officiate” would be denied that opportunity. Is that right?
It would seem to be somewhat spiteful, if that is the situation.

Exactly!

The Bishop Basher

Many retired clergy would be quite busy..

Since retiring he's been covering for other clergy in a number of parishes in Kildare where he was not just covering regular services but also visiting elderly people in their homes, nursing homes and hospitals to offer them pastoral care and communion. He was also working in the local schools, officiating at christenings, funerals and of course the odd wedding or 2..

Following on from that he he's been based in St Annes Dawson Street and the famous Pepper Canister church on Mount St Cr where he performed his "last" service on Sunday last.

He's also been covering for the Rector in Arklow for the last year or so where he was due to cover the upcoming Christmas's services. The reality of this decision is that elderly people are left asking if he'll be able to visit them to get communion during the Christmas period.

It's a matter of luck that he had no weddings scheduled.

The bigger story here though is regarding school places in the community.

We now have a protestant school for protestant children and everyone else can take a hike. Not just any protestant either but only those with a parish affiliation which must be approved by the rector himself.

The numbers speak for themselves. 22 out of 24 kids this year are parish affiliated.

The school should be growing in line with the needs of the community and catering for far more then 24 children yet they turned down a second teacher last year which the Dept of Education said was unprecedented.

The culture of fear in both the parish and the school has been laid bare. I can't tell you how many people are afraid to speak out publicly but they can't because they know they'll lose any hope of a place in St Patricks or TCG.

Given the recent actions of the Archbishop I would say that fear is a legitimate one.

The responsibility for all of this lies with a very small group of people but due to the culture of fear they've been able to get away with it so far.

It's blatant sectarianism and Greystones needs and deserves much better..

Wicklow Will

You're absolutely right about a culture of fear pervading the Greystones CoI community in relation to the schism that's developing, rennaws; I'm aware of one person - a parishioner - who has taken a stand publicly. He went so far as to speak at Diocesan Synod in support of the former Principal, advocating a culture of inclusion within our parish schools and also now in support of "the former Rector" It has been said that "he'd need to watch himself - he's been noted as an activist". These remarks originated within CoI circles in reference to a fellow member of the CoI. He has refused to be silenced and is lucky enough not to be under compliment to the Church or its agents so there is nothing they can do, bar bad mouthing him within its circles, but it does speak volumes about their vindictive attitude and how far they'll go in an effort to protect their patch; its like the sting of a dying wasp!