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; } } }

Religion and Irish schools

Dionysus

I'm a teacher and I love it. Let's get that "admission" out of the way.

The other day all the students were instructed to leave class and go to the assembly hall for confession. I was paid for the time the students were in assembly waiting to confess their "sins" to a series of priests who were dispersed across the hall. Another eight teachers were also paid for this.

I genuinely have no problem with kids going to confession and all that as long as their parents want it. As this is an explicitly Catholic school, the parents in question clearly do want this. However, I do have a problem with this happening during school time, when the taxpayer is paying our salaries.

This was my first experience of this but it is, by all accounts, a regular event. I'm dumbfounded that this sort of intrusion on teaching can be officially sanctioned. For my own part, I had scheduled a lesson and wanted to talk to a couple of kids in particular about aspects of their work and generally teach the class and move them on. Work had to be done, and it is much more satisfying to be able to teach for this time rather than be paid for doing absolutely nothing. This is a waste of resources by the state.

There is no reason, in my mind, why children cannot do this on their parents' time rather than have the state employing (and paying) teachers as professionals and parents, in effect, using us as glorified childminders. The more this carry on continues the more I see how the state is getting bad value (as well as all the obvious other factors) from allowing schools to be controlled by particular religious institutions.

However, I have heard other people saying parents should have a right to send their children to the state-funded religious school of their choice, as is the current system.

Do you favour complete separation of church and state in state schools, or a continuation of the present system?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Sulmac

Mike 1972 wrote: »

In theory this could even extend to hetrosexual teachers who openly cohabit with an (unmarried/divorced) partner ?

Possibly, but I'm not sure to be honest - either way, it's not something that should be used as an indicator of how someone is or isn't able to teach.

Xluna

Sulmac wrote: »

Another thing that's a joke is that schools are allowed to discriminate when hiring against those who don't accept/comply with their "ethos" - such as atheists and homosexuals. This also extends to students, with those from "their own" side (e.g. Catholics) getting to skip the queue of other applicant pupils.

And we call ourselves a "modern" Republic? Yeah, right.

Don't forget hospitals.

Dionysus

Xluna wrote: »

School should be for learning about the physical and Sunday school should be for learning about the metaphysical. All state schools should be secular. If parents want to indoctrinate their children in a faith then let them send the kids to Sunday school. It's really that simple. If some parents are that obsessed with forcing their religion down their kids throats then they can pay for a private religious school.

Good points. I would be surprised if there is a single private religious school in Ireland today. Blackrock, Belvedere, Wesley et al are funded hugely by the Irish taxpayer - to the tune of €100 million. Fine Gael, through Brian Hayes, has made it very clear recently that it supports the continuation of this unjustifiable system.

Antbert

brummytom wrote: »

The admissions policy, I don't see the problem. In a Catholic school, of course the majority of the students should be Catholic - the diocese is partly funding it, after all. If you were applying for a job in a bank, you would be expected to have some sort of qualifications in maths/accounting. If you're applying to a Catholic school, I think it's reasonable Catholic children should have priority. However, many schools now allow non-catholics to attend.

The MAJOR problem here is that the vast majority of schools are Catholic. Hence the need to remove religion from schools.

Xluna

Dionysus wrote: »

Good points. I would be surprised if there is a single private religious school in Ireland today. Blackrock, Belvedere, Wesley et al are funded hugely by the Irish taxpayer - to the tune of €100 million. Fine Gael, through Brian Hayes, has made it very clear recently that it supports the continuation of this unjustifiable system.

I could be way off here but did'nt some Protestant school union kick up a fuss when the possibility of a reduction of state funding was on the cards recently?

Antbert

Sulmac wrote: »

Another thing that's a joke is that schools are allowed to discriminate when hiring against those who don't accept/comply with their "ethos" - such as atheists and homosexuals. This also extends to students, with those from "their own" side (e.g. Catholics) getting to skip the queue of other applicant pupils.

And we call ourselves a "modern" Republic? Yeah, right.

The probelm IS the ethos though. Logically speaking, they can discriminate, because it is a Catholic school. It makes sense, from their perspective. So the thing to change is the fact that it's a Catholic school, not the fact that they discriminate because it's a Catholic school.

Sulmac

Xluna wrote: »

Don't forget hospitals.

Another joke, some [publicly-funded] hospitals which are run by religious orders reject modern methods of care such as stem cells and the like. And let's not start on the whole contraception thing.

Not only is this stupid, it also limits the rights of patients for proper treatment and staff to keep at the top of their game.

No publicly-funded service should, in any way, be linked to a religion.

Antbert

I keep missing bits.

Xluna wrote: »

If some parents are that obsessed with forcing their religion down their kids throats then they can pay for a private religious school.

Ah see, we agree on almost everything. I still think that private religious schools shouldn't exist. If parents insist on indoctrination, I don't think schools should be available to help them.

Dionysus

Xluna wrote: »

I could be way off here but did'nt some Protestant school union kick up a fuss when the possibility of a reduction of state funding was on the cards recently?

Precisely: Wesley College was the school. The above Brian Hayes called the reduction an "outrageous attack" on minority faiths. Talk about playing politics with this serious issue. If this is the alternative the current Opposition offers, I don't expect any fundamental reform of the governance of Irish schools in the next 7 years anyway.

Xluna

Dionysus wrote: »

Precisely: Wesley College was the school. The above Brian Hayes called the reduction an "outrageous attack" on minority faiths. Talk about playing politics with this serious issue. If this is the alternative the current Opposition offers, I don't expect any fundamental reform of the governance of Irish schools in the next 7 years anyway.

I'm guessing a big part of this issue is down to tribalism. It seems many traditional well to do Protestant familys consider their religion a defining factor in their identity,and probably feel an increased need to preserve it due to the almost state endorsed Catholicism since...well since De Valera came into power. By todays standards Dev was a religious fanatic but the church wanted him to go further and considered many of his policies socialist. It just goes to show you what the Republic was up against since it's birth. I can't help but wonder what Ireland would be like today had Collins lived instead of Dev....

we'llallhavetea_old

Thaedydal wrote: »

Mine didn't' feel left out and they went to watch their classes make theirs.
Jut be open and supportive of her and make her confident and she will be grand

thanks thaedydal, i cant hear these comments enough!

pooch90 wrote: »

I'm also a teacher and have seen kids in class who aren't participating in the religious sacraments. They have chosen to stay for choir practice and join in with all the songs. However, when the time came for the communion/confirmation they have felt very left out. I know that doesn't offer you any solace but just thought I'd let you know about my experience of it.

oh dear....

bluto63 wrote: »

Is your daughter baptised?

my daughter is baptised, i wanted to make a precautionary effort, just incase she really wants to go that route. i can't see it happening though.

ejmaztec

brummytom wrote: »

No, probably not in all honesty. As I say, I've very little knowledge of the Irish education system, so I'm just going on my own experiences.

I really, honestly don't feel Catholicism is pushed down our throats. I don't feel brainwashed, and we're encouraged to think for ourselves. We study other religions (CofE; Judaism, Islam, Hinduism) in depth and are taught to respect their beliefs. It may be different over their, I really don't know; I'm just offering my own opinion

I was dragged up through the UK RC school system, and the religious side has always been more "user-friendly" than it's been here. I always assumed that it was because the RC church in the UK is in the minority, and isn't powerful enough to play the same meglomania game as it's done in Ireland.

In Ireland, the RC church calls the shots, whereas in the UK, it can only try to influence a situation.

Antbert

I'm interested to hear from the other people who voted for state funded religious schools...

Xluna

Antbert wrote: »

I'm interested to hear from the other people who voted for state funded religious schools...

* "It's right because God said so."*

Mike 1972

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

my daughter is baptised, i wanted to make a precautionary effort, just incase she really wants to go that route.

Would the option of "going that route" have been open to her regardless ?????

we'llallhavetea_old

i mean, the "normal" route. so she would be the same as the majority of her peers in school.

Mike 1972

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

i mean, the "normal" route. so she would be the same as the majority of her peers in school.

Sulmac

By the time she gets to college, most of the "normal" people will be atheist, agnostic, irreligious or, at the very least, "lapsed".

Antbert

There's logic there Mike. Sad though it is. A ten year old doesn't necessarily want to be a friendless maverick.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

SV wrote: »

It's not education, it's fear and brainwashing.

In fairness, you could say that about a lot of the curriculum.

"If you don't pass this massively important Irish exam, you won't get into college and get a good job and you'll be a useless failure!"

Regarding the poll? Both options are correct. There should be no religion in STATE schools, and parents SHOULD have the option to send their kids to a religiously run school: but NOT at the taxpayers expense.

Antbert

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

In fairness, you could say that about a lot of the curriculum.

"If you don't pass this massively important Irish exam, you won't get into college and get a good job and you'll be a useless failure!"

Um. So you equate generally doing well in the Leaving Cert, to get points to get into college, with teaching religion?

Antbert

Response to edit:

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

parents SHOULD have the option to send their kids to a religiously run school

Why?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Antbert wrote: »

Um. So you equate generally doing well in the Leaving Cert, to get points to get into college, with teaching religion?

Not what I said. I said:

In fairness, you could say that [it is based on fear and scaremongering] about a lot of the curriculum.

Antbert wrote: »

Response to edit:

Why?

Again, not what I said:

If parents are religious and want to send their kids to a religiously run PRIVATE school, they should have this right. I did say "not at the taxpayers expense."

Antbert

Right... I guess I'm just not sure what fear and scaremongering you refer to when you talk about passing an Irish exam. Surely in schools there should be emphasis placed on doing well academically?

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

If parents are religious and want to send their kids to a religiously run PRIVATE school, they should have this right. I did say "not at the taxpayers expense."

I know what you said. Why should parents have the option of sending their children to a religious school?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Antbert wrote: »

Right... I guess I'm just not sure what fear and scaremongering you refer to when you talk about passing an Irish exam. Surely in schools there should be emphasis placed on doing well academically?

I know what you said. Why should parents have the option of sending their children to a religious school?

I just picked Irish as an example. My point being, there is a lot of fear put on kids to pass exams. I know people who did mediocre in their exams, never went to college, and are doing very well for themselves now.

Paretns have the freedom to send their kids to whatever school they want. If they want to sent their kids to a religious school and are willing and able to pay for it, why shouldn't they have the right?

DazMarz

This country, its peoples and almost all areas of society have always been under the strangle-hold of the Roman Catholic Church. An organisation that aided and abetted paedophilia, beat innocent children in workhouses, abuse of innocent so called ''fallen'' women, strangled free expression through censorship, banned contraception as ''tools of Satan'', hoarded incredible material wealth while the nation was gripped by poverty... the list is almost endless of the abuses and suppression that the Church placed upon the people of this land.

They have no place in schools at all. Religion should be taught in school, but as an education about all religions, enlightening children as to the diversity of the world; not just about Christianity. That the Church still has such a stranglehold over education in this country is sickening and shocking.

The need for secular education is greater than ever and has to be introduced sooner rather than later. The sooner we stop believing in these fairy stories of water into wine and coming back from the dead the better.

/rant...

Antbert

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Paretns have the freedom to send their kids to whatever school they want. If they want to sent their kids to a religious school and are willing and able to pay for it, why shouldn't they have the right?

Because children shouldn't be indoctrinated in schools. Schools are a place for factual education (and of course, as a natural follow-on, social development). Children spend a massive amount of time in schools, and to be subject to indoctrination there just isn't fair. It isn't their fault that their parents are religious. Would you equally argue that there should be schools that put emphasis on teaching the validity of your horoscope?

GLaDOS

I hate the fact that in the future I may have to baptise my child to send them to a school I am paying for through taxes

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Antbert wrote: »

Because children shouldn't be indoctrinated in schools. Schools are a place for factual education (and of course, as a natural follow-on, social development). Children spend a massive amount of time in schools, and to be subject to indoctrination there just isn't fair. It isn't their fault that their parents are religious. Would you equally argue that there should be schools that put emphasis on teaching the validity of your horoscope?

Some would tell you that religion is a valued part of a curriculum, I'm not religious myself and woudl send my kids to a non-denominational school, but that's me. I think parents should have this right, but, as I said, NOT at the taxpayers expense.

Isn't all education "indoctrination", anyway? I mean look at Irish, for example (again just an example) - why should the use of a language be more or less important than the practice of a religion? Or history? Or advanced maths? Why should any one subject be promotoed ahead of any other, unless the student has a course in mind and a NEED for that subject

Antbert

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Isn't all education "indoctrination", anyway? I mean look at Irish, for example (again just an example) - why should the use of a language be more or less important than the practice of a religion? Or history? Or advanced maths? Why should any one subject be promotoed ahead of any other, unless the student has a course in mind and a NEED for that subject

There's an absolutely massive difference between teaching something with no actual evidence behind it, to teaching maths.

Languages have uses. They aren't promoted ahead of maths... I don't actually think Irish should be compulsory either, but I did pass level for the Leaving Cert and that was fine for me.

In fact... I think it's correct that you do English and Maths in the Leaving Cert. You can do pass or honours (or foundation) level, but these are things everyone should have basic knowledge in. So maybe we can sort of agree on Irish, but I completely don't understand the rest of your reasoning.