Any political party that decides to come between Church and State in Ireland will not be winning any elections.What I would like see is one of the political parties pledging to end this arrangement should they form a government after the next election.
The Eucharistic Congress in two years time will be a big test test of the relationship between church and state. I have no doubt the state will be heavily involved.
We have the Corpus Christi parade very June here in Cork and the army is heavily involved, providing a guard of honour (with swords drawn) for the bishop while he carries the host.
I agree with you in theory, but not in practice. Ours were baptised, partly because Mrs Complainer would have fairly traditional views on these things (not that she's get up out of her leaba on a Sunday morning), and partly because the nearest school (1 mile away) is indeed a Church school. It is also a very good school, and the one that most of the neighbouring kids attend. So the choice was between a purist principled position that would require two car commutes each day for eight years of primary school to get to the nearest ET school (4 miles away), and create a barrier between ours and the neighbouring kids. It is really not good for the community at large to have kids travelling for miles away to get to other schools.Every time that someone who is not a practising Catholic or not a believer in the Catholic church baptises their child for the cop out reasons that they don't want to upset their parents or that it will make it easier to get into a better school, they are continuing to support a culture in Ireland that there is something wrong with not being Catholic.
The Catholic Church in Ireland is deeply corrupt and they have a stranglehold on eduction, and we let them and continue to let them.
Am I naive for thinking that there may be an appetite for real change to the Church/State relationship?Any political party that decides to come between Church and State in Ireland will not be winning any elections.
Are those swords sharp?
I agree with you in theory, but not in practice. Ours were baptised, partly because Mrs Complainer would have fairly traditional views on these things (not that she's get up out of her leaba on a Sunday morning), and partly because the nearest school (1 mile away) is indeed a Church school. It is also a very good school, and the one that most of the neighbouring kids attend. So the choice was between a purist principled position that would require two car commutes each day for eight years of primary school to get to the nearest ET school (4 miles away), and create a barrier between ours and the neighbouring kids. It is really not good for the community at large to have kids travelling for miles away to get to other schools.
There is also an upside to this. I'm active in the school, in the community, in the parents association and maybe even on the Board of Management some day. I will be an advocate for change inside the system. Sometimes better to be inside the tent...
Am I naive for thinking that there may be an appetite for real change to the Church/State relationship?
"The people appointed must have a commitment to the ethos of the school. In the case of Catholic schools, they must have an understanding of and commitment to Catholic education as outlined in the Deed of Trust for Catholic Schools."
I can understand non-practicing/non-believing parents baptizing their kids to get them into RC schools but do they subsequently have to go thru the charade of communion and confirmation? i.e does the school push the parents/kids to do communion & confirmation. I doubt it anymore.
The point is that you shouldn't have to choose.So the choice was between a purist principled position that would require two car commutes each day for eight years of primary school to get to the nearest ET school (4 miles away), and create a barrier between ours and the neighbouring kids. It is really not good for the community at large to have kids travelling for miles away to get to other schools.
Hopefully not. Maybe the Educate Together schools were the first step. Perhaps with the increased amount of non-catholic 'new-Irish' demanding places for their children that the ET schools can't accomodate, there is a stronger argument for stripping the 'St Whoever' from the names of every school in the land and removing the power of the Catholic Church from this convenient avenue for brainwashing kids into a 'faith' that means nothing to a child under 16. Why don't the govt see as Bronte has so clearly done.Am I naive for thinking that there may be an appetite for real change to the Church/State relationship?
Why not just say 'Enough!!! Your organisation has to be removed from this role, both as punishment (and enact a law to force takeover, and ruthlessly shoot down any legal challenge) and also so that this may never happen again." I don't see any argument from the sane being of much note.A school which is owned by the Church, where it is run by the Church, where your child will be forced to attend Roman Catholic instruction and where the teachers can be fired by the Bishop, an unelected person accountable to no one being a member of an organisation that is seemingly beyond the laws of the Irish state in the cover up of men who rape and abuse children. Seems like a bit of a strange organisation to have as the main educator of children.
Maybe the Educate Together schools were the first step.
The point is that you shouldn't have to choose.
As was said before, all the church does in these schools is set the rules...nothing more. The taxpayers pay the bills, the lay people teach and yet the Bish is the Boss.
Regardless if your child was inducted into the Catholic faith, or the Protestant, Jewish, Muslim or Buddhist one, or indeed touched by his noodly appendage, it's a state-run school in absolutely everything but name. Why should you HAVE to be held to ransom between the courage of your convictions and the education of your child.
Just in case there is any confusion about my comments, I wasn't recommending or justifying the continued involvement of the Church in public schools. I was simply pointing out that boycotting of such schools is not necessarily the best or only tactic to bring about change.Your reasoning for having your children baptised is understandable and is repeated in every village in Ireland I have no doubt. But it should not be the case that a child's education is dependant on whether or not they are baptised or not.
I'm sure that if the same school that you chose was a secular state-run school you would would still have same involvement in it.
Thanks - I wasn't aware of that particular requirement, though it seems to be "more honour'd in the breach than the observance". I certainly know of at least one committed atheist/humanist who has served on the BoM of a Church school. Perhaps a "don't ask, don't tell" policy applies.I wouldn't hold out for any changes from the Board of Management....
Extract from http://www.citizensinformation.ie/c.../going-to-primary-school/boards-of-management
"The people appointed must have a commitment to the ethos of the school. In the case of Catholic schools, they must have an understanding of and commitment to Catholic education as outlined in the Deed of Trust for Catholic Schools."
If you were on the Board and you suggested that the RC church no longer run the school the Bishop would have you out on your ear!
Thanks - I wasn't aware of that particular requirement, though it seems to be "more honour'd in the breach than the observance". I certainly know of at least one committed atheist/humanist who has served on the BoM of a Church school. Perhaps a "don't ask, don't tell" policy applies.
The problem is that the constitution bars schools from being non-denominational. They have to provide some kind of religious education. The educate together model is about the best that can be done under the current legislation.I dont think Educate Together is a step in the right direction. ET schools are multi faith rather than non-religious. We need to keep religion out of the State education system. I also have a difficulty with the ET policy that all religions are valid and respected - I'd hate to have my daughter go to a school that gives out the message that making girls wear burkas is ok.
The problem is that the constitution bars schools from being non-denominational. They have to provide some kind of religious education.
The problem is that the constitution bars schools from being non-denominational. They have to provide some kind of religious education. The educate together model is about the best that can be done under the current legislation.
The Catholic (and other Western so-called Christian churches) were never Christian in their doctrine - they are exclusively and dogmatically Pauline. The difficulty for Western people who claim to espouse Christianity is that they cannot differentiate.... My viewpoint on the RC church as an organization is that they strayed away from Christianity as their primary purpose a long time ago, and have been about maintaining political power and wealth. I'm surprised more people aren't moving to different churches.
I wouldn't hold out for any changes from the Board of Management....
Extract from http://www.citizensinformation.ie/c.../going-to-primary-school/boards-of-management
"The people appointed must have a commitment to the ethos of the school. In the case of Catholic schools, they must have an understanding of and commitment to Catholic education as outlined in the Deed of Trust for Catholic Schools."
If you were on the Board and you suggested that the RC church no longer run the school the Bishop would have you out on your ear!