Latest news with #religiouseducation
Irish Times
27-05-2025
- General
- Irish Times
Catholic education is not about indoctrination - it is about preparing pupils to contribute to the common good
In an increasingly pluralistic and multicultural society, the importance of religious education has never been more apparent. As communities become more diverse – culturally, ethnically and spiritually – the role of religious education in its service to families and to the common good must not diminish but rather deepen in purpose and clarity. Religious education provides not only a proposition of faith but a robust foundation for dialogue, respect, and moral engagement in the wider world. Far from being an outdated or exclusionary practice, religious education is an essential component of a well-rounded education, supporting the holistic development of both the individual and society. A key function of religious education in a diverse society is promoting mutual understanding and respect among people of different faiths and world views. In the increasingly globalised environment in Ireland, Europe and beyond, individuals are more likely than ever to interact with people from various religious backgrounds. Misconceptions about religious beliefs often lead to prejudice, fear and even conflict. READ MORE Religious education, when done thoughtfully and with a spirit of dialogue, equips students with the knowledge and empathy needed to engage respectfully with others. To paraphrase Halik in The Afternoon of Christianity (2024), religious education is a place of 'encounter and conversation' inviting in all people of good will irrespective of identity, outlook or belief. Without this type of external orientation, Christian communities risk becoming 'ghettos' where 'like only encounters like without the capacity to grow intellectually and spiritually from the stimulation of alternative points of view'. Catholics , like all other faith groups, are urged to recognise and respect the sincere religious convictions of others. In this light, religious education becomes a bridge – not a barrier – between communities. It fosters the ability to appreciate diversity without diluting one's own beliefs. Catholic schools and their religious education programmes, therefore, have a dual responsibility: to faithfully transmit the teachings of the church while cultivating an atmosphere of openness and dialogue. This includes teaching about other religions in a way that is honest, respectful, and free from caricature. Catholic education is not about isolationism or indoctrination; rather, it is about preparing individuals to contribute meaningfully to the common good. As Pope St John Paul II said: 'The church proposes; she imposes nothing.' Religious education, therefore, must always be marked by humility, love, and fidelity to one's own beliefs and identity. This was complemented and given new expression by the late Pope Francis, who in his address to educators, emphasised that 'dialogue does not mean renouncing one's identity. On the contrary, it presupposes it. We must have a clear sense of our identity to engage in meaningful dialogue.' Our contemporary times make authentic dialogue difficult, presenting a challenge, as Pope Leo XIV observed, of 'the prevalence of rhythms and lifestyles in which there is not enough room for listening, reflection and dialogue, at school, in the family, and sometimes among peers themselves, with consequent loneliness'. However, as the Holy Father states: 'These are demanding challenges, but we too ... can turn them into springboards to explore ways, develop tools and adopt new languages to continue to touch the hearts of pupils, helping them and spurring them on to face every obstacle with courage in order to give the best of themselves in life.' At the heart of the Catholic vision for education lies a fundamental principle affirmed in both church teaching and international law: the primary role of parents as the first educators of their children. The Second Vatican Council's declaration Gravissimum Educationis states clearly that 'since parents have given children their life, they are bound by the most serious obligation to educate their offspring ... Hence, parents must be acknowledged as the first and foremost educators of their children.' This parental right includes the authority to choose schools that are in sympathy with their values and religious convictions. This right is echoed in international human rights conventions, including Article 26.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states: 'Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.' As I previously argued in these pages , this principle was anticipated in Article 42.1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann (1937), which clearly identifies parents as the primary educators of their children. Schools, and their staff, exist to serve families in their responsibilities as educators, with a school's teaching, learning and cultured framed within an ethos clearly identified in their admission policies. Catholic schools exist not to serve only Catholics, but for anyone who wishes for their children to receive an education in the Catholic tradition. All are welcome. Of course, many would like to see a much greater plurality of school choice in Ireland. Catholic patrons support this change and continue to work with the State to identify school communities who are willing to support a change of patronage. It is unfortunate that the State-led surveys on divestment have been delayed by circumstance. Catholic schools seek to embody the church's vision for holistic education, combining academic excellence with spiritual and moral development. Across the world, Catholic schools serve over 67 million children and young people of all backgrounds, often welcoming non-Catholics who seek a values-based education, grounded in a spiritual tradition proposing a purpose and meaning to human life, grounded in the essential dignity of all. When Catholic schools are authentic to this mission, they become living examples of inclusion rooted in identity. Alan Hynes is chief executive officer of the Catholic Education Partnership
New York Times
23-05-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Religious Education Lost at the Supreme Court. But It's Winning Everywhere Else.
A surprise Supreme Court ruling on Thursday prevented the nation's first religious charter school from opening in Oklahoma, in a 4-to-4 vote that seemed to put the brakes on a conservative movement to expand government funding for religious education. But the ruling may prove to be only a speed bump for the conservative education agenda. Conservatives are poised to get much of what they want, and more, through a powerful school voucher movement that has raced through Republican state legislatures and is on the precipice of coming to all 50 states. On the same day that the Supreme Court rejected government support for religious education in charter schools, the House narrowly passed an all-encompassing piece of domestic policy legislation that creates, for the first time, a federal school voucher program. The bill sets aside $5 billion to fund vouchers for families, who can use the money to pay for K-12 private school tuition, home-schooling or virtual learning. It would bring vouchers even to liberal states like New York and California that have long resisted the concept, and is expected to reach as many as 1 million students nationwide with much of the money going to pay for religious education. Nearly 80 percent of private school students attend a religiously affiliated school. 'On balance, this is a massive day of victory,' said Tommy Schultz, chief executive of the American Federation for Children, which supports the school voucher movement. Despite the Supreme Court ruling, he predicted 'growth in religious school choice in America,' driven by increased political support for vouchers. More than 1 million American students already use taxpayer dollars to pay for private education or home-schooling costs, double the number from 2019. Last month, Texas became the last large Republican-leaning state to pass private-school choice legislation, and advocates quickly shifted their attention to Washington. The program that passed the House is structured as a $5 billion tax credit. It amounts to a dollar-for-dollar tax write-off, for every dollar in cash or stock donated to certain nonprofits that then grant private-education scholarships to students. A vast majority of American households with children would be eligible to receive a scholarship, as long as they do not earn more than 300 percent of their area's median income, which is equal to over $300,000 in some parts of the country. The option to fund the scholarships is expected to be popular with wealthy taxpayers. It offers a much larger tax break than donations to other charities, including churches and community nonprofits. 'It's unprecedented,' said Carl Davis, research director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a liberal think tank. He said many donations could come in the form of stock, potentially allowing donors to avoid paying capital gains taxes. The plan now heads to the Senate, where Republicans are generally supportive, though they may still adjust some of the program's details. Some Republican senators, like Ted Cruz of Texas, support a larger program of $10 billion, with no income constraints on who can use vouchers. Because the bill would be passed using a special budget process, it can become law with only 51 votes in the Senate. Republicans hold 53 seats. While voucher advocates once focused on providing more options to low-income students, students with disabilities and other disadvantaged groups, they are now pushing vouchers for most everyone. The movement is backed by powerful conservative donors, like the billionaire Jeff Yass, who have funded the political campaigns of Republican voucher supporters. They have overcome resistance from some conservatives who — like many liberals — long worried that vouchers would harm public schools, by decreasing enrollment and funding levels. Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers' union, said the bill would 'siphon crucial funding from public schools — serving 90 percent of students — and redirect it to private institutions with no accountability.' Riding a wave of pandemic dissatisfaction with public education, 10 states now operate private-school choice programs that are available to all or nearly all students, up from just two states in the 2022-23 school year. Five more states — Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Tennessee and Wyoming — are set to begin similar programs next school year, according to FutureEd, an education think tank at Georgetown University that has tracked legislation. In many cases, early reports show that expansive voucher programs often subsidize fairly affluent families whose children were already enrolled in private school. The Supreme Court allowed school vouchers to be used for religious education in 2002. The court said that vouchers do not violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from establishing religion, because parents act as intermediaries and can choose from an array of school options, both secular and religious. The case in Oklahoma sought to take government funding of religious education a step further, with direct public funding of a religious charter school. Across the country, charter schools are public, nonsectarian and funded with taxpayer dollars, similar to traditional district schools. But they are run independently, often by nonprofits, and are meant to offer alternatives to families, who can attend regardless of ZIP code. In Oklahoma, an online Catholic school proposed by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City and the Diocese of Tulsa sought to open as a charter. It would have been fully funded by taxpayer dollars, but its curriculum would have incorporated Catholic doctrine. Supporters of the school, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, challenged charter schools' status as public schools, arguing that they are in practice more like private schools in contract with the government, not public entities. The Supreme Court rejected that plan without explanation, in a 4-to-4 vote that was possible because Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself. The tied vote sets no national precedent, leaving open the possibility that the court, which has expanded the role of religion in other cases, could take up the issue again later with its full conservative majority. The Oklahoma case was championed by supporters of religious freedom, who argue that barring religious groups from operating charter schools, when other groups are free to do so, is religious discrimination. Some school choice advocates celebrated the court's ruling and the House bill as the best of both worlds, noting that it avoids the complicated legal battle and upending of the education landscape that could have resulted from redefining charter schools as private. 'It's really a win for the school choice movement on both counts,' said Michael J. Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a center-right think tank, who supports school choice and was among those who worried that allowing religious charters would have posed problems for charter schools in blue states. 'It preserves charters as a strong option in the public school system,' he said. 'But it opens the door to private school choice everywhere.' A federal voucher program could be a boon to Catholic schools in particular, which make up the largest share of private school enrollment, at 35 percent. 'We've been supporting it all along,' said Sister Dale McDonald, vice president of public policy for the National Catholic Educational Association, which represents Catholic school educators. The federal bill was in many ways 'more significant' than the Oklahoma case would have been, she said, because if it passes, families across the nation will be able to use it to help pay for tuition at existing schools. Even in Oklahoma, the spread of vouchers means that St. Isidore may still be able to use public money to support its goal of offering online Catholic education to students in rural parts of the state. Around the same time St. Isidore was initially approved as a charter, Oklahoma passed legislation giving parents up to $7,500 per child for private school tuition. After the Supreme Court ruling on Thursday, the board for St. Isidore said in a statement that it was 'exploring other options' for offering virtual Catholic education statewide.
Al Jazeera
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
US Supreme Court hits deadlock in case of publicly funded religious school
The United States Supreme Court has reached a deadlock in a case over whether a religious charter school in Oklahoma should be publicly funded. Thursday's tie vote allows a lower court ruling to stand. Previously, Oklahoma's state-level Supreme Court had barred the use of government funds to establish the St Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, citing constitutional limits to the government's role in religion. But the US Supreme Court's split vote on Thursday leaves an avenue open for other, similar cases to advance. With no decision from the highest court in the country, no new precedent has been set to govern funding for charter schools, which are independent institutions that receive government funding. It is relatively rare, though, that a Supreme Court case should end in a tie vote. The Houston Law Review in 2020 estimated that there had only been 183 ties at the Supreme Court since 1791, out of more than 28,000 cases. Normally, there are nine justices on the court's bench — an odd number, to ensure that the judges are not evenly split. But Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself from the hearings over the St Isidore school. Though she did not indicate her reasons, it is widely believed that Barrett stepped away from the case to avoid potential conflicts of interest. Barrett has a close personal relationship with an adviser to the St Isidore school, lawyer Nicole Garnett. As young legal professionals in the late 1990s, they clerked together on the Supreme Court, and they eventually taught together at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. When US President Donald Trump nominated Barrett to the Supreme Court in 2020, Garnett even wrote an opinion column in the newspaper USA Today, praising her friend as 'remarkable' and describing their lives as 'completely intertwined'. The Supreme Court's brief, two-line announcement on Thursday acknowledged Barrett's absence. 'The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court,' it read. 'JUSTICE BARRETT took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.' That left the court split four to four, though the precise breakdown was not provided. Chief Justice John Roberts is thought to have joined with the three left-leaning justices on the bench to oppose the school's use of government funds. The Supreme Court currently has a conservative supermajority, with six justices leaning rightward. In the past, the court has signalled receptiveness to expanding religious freedoms in the US, including in cases that tested the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution. While that clause bars the government from 'the establishment of religion', what qualifies as establishing a religion remains unclear — and is a source of ongoing legal debate. The Oklahoma case stretches back to 2023, when the Catholic Archdiocese of Oklahoma City submitted an application to open a taxpayer-funded charter school that would share Catholic teachings. The school would have been the first of its kind, offering public, religious education online for children from kindergarten through high school. The plan was to open the following year. The Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board initially voted down the proposal in April, only to give it the go-ahead in June by a narrow vote of three to two. That teed up a legal showdown, with opponents calling the school a clear violation of the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. But supporters argued that barriers to establishing a Catholic charter school limited their freedom of religion. Plans for the school even ended up dividing Oklahoma's government. The state attorney general, Gentner Drummond, opposed the charter school as a form of 'state-funded religion'. The governor, Kevin Stitt, supported the proposal. Both men are Republicans. In Oklahoma, as in the majority of other US states, charter schools are considered part of the public school system. When the case reached the state-level Oklahoma Supreme Court in 2024, that distinction became pivotal. The fact that St Isidore was a public — not private — school ultimately caused the court to strike it down, for fear of constitutional violations. The judges ruled in a six-to-two decision that establishing St Isidore with state funds would make it a 'surrogate of the state', just like 'any other state-sponsored charter school'. The school, the judges explained, would 'require students to spend time in religious instruction and activities, as well as permit state spending in direct support of the religious curriculum and activities within St. Isidore — all in violation of the establishment clause'. The school's backers appealed to the Supreme Court, leading to arguments being held in April. It was unclear at the time which way the high court seemed to be leaning, with Roberts pressing both sides with questions. But conservatives on the Supreme Court's bench seemed in favour of backing St Isidore's appeal. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, for instance, argued that withholding taxpayer funds from the religious school 'seems like rank discrimination against religion'. 'All the religious school is saying is, 'Don't exclude us on account of our religion,'' he said. The left-leaning justices, meanwhile, indicated that a ruling in favour of St Isidore would pave the way for public schools to become religious institutions, a slippery slope that could require the government to fund faith-based education of all stripes. On Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which has backed a separate lawsuit against the school, framed the deadlock at the Supreme Court as a victory for the separation of church and state. 'The very idea of a religious public school is a constitutional oxymoron. The Supreme Court's ruling affirms that a religious school can't be a public school and a public school can't be religious,' said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. But proponents pledged to keep on fighting. Jim Campbell, who argued in favour of St Isidore on behalf of Oklahoma's charter school board, noted that the court may 'revisit the issue in the future', given the deadlock. 'Oklahoma parents and children are better off with more educational choices, not fewer,' he said.
Wall Street Journal
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
Supreme Court Deadlock Blocks State Funding for Religious Charter Schools
WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a plea to require state charter school programs to fund religious schools, an unexpected setback for social conservatives who had won a string of cases expanding sectarian involvement in public education. The court divided 4-4 on the case, due to the recusal of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, thereby affirming an Oklahoma Supreme Court decision that found it unconstitutional to require the state to fund religious education through its public charter program.
Irish Times
08-05-2025
- General
- Irish Times
Teachers want religion out of the classroom. Here's what has to happen next
Religious faith formation plays a major role in Ireland's taxpayer-funded primary education system. This is highly unusual in a democratic country, and teachers are making their voices heard on the issue. About 90 per cent of primary schools are controlled by the Catholic Church. Sacramental preparation for Confession, Communion and Confirmation presents challenges for teachers, especially those who don't share the faith. A recent survey by the Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO) uncovered some interesting findings and related recommendations from an INTO taskforce, which have given the union plenty of homework. The survey asked 34 questions related to religion in schools. Seventy seven per cent of respondent teachers said schools should have no responsibility at all for preparing children for the sacraments, while only 4 per cent thought it should be left to the primary school. A vast amount of class time is dedicated to sacramental preparation, with knock-on effects for other subjects in an already overloaded curriculum. Communion and Confirmation practice eat into the school day for months in advance, ramping up as the day approaches. [ Ireland an 'outlier' in requiring religious certs to teach in most primary schools Opens in new window ] But for many teachers there is also the gnawing issue of the children who are left out. Ireland has changed as a society – children come from a wide variety of backgrounds. In so many ways, our schools are places of inclusiveness and understanding, but this goes out the window when it comes to religion. Children from outside the shrinking Catholic mainstream can find themselves excluded for lengthy periods, or forced to set their own identity aside. READ MORE With no guidance from the Minister for Education, Helen McEntee, few – if any – schools have found a satisfactory way to cater for the many children not partaking in sacramental preparation. These children tend to find themselves herded together and assigned pointless busywork for what adds up to a huge amount of class time. Then on the 'big day' they sit on the sidelines and watch as their peers get dressed up and enjoy their celebration. Many teachers feel conflicted about their role in this institutionalised othering. The INTO taskforce has recommended that the union work to move sacramental preparation outside the school day. However, the recommendation that it 'engage with' religious patrons in this regard seems like it is starting in the wrong direction. Shouldn't fundamental decisions on the curriculum primarily involve the Minister for Education? Elsewhere, some of the taskforce's recommendations don't appear to me to make much sense. On the simple question of 'should faith formation take place in primary schools?' 33 per cent of respondents said they 'teach religion willingly'; 19.5 per cent said they would prefer not to have to teach it and 19 per cent said 'I would teach a broad religious education willingly', but would prefer not to have to teach it in a particular faith. Yet, other than the issue of sacramental preparation, faith formation in schools seems to have been largely ignored by the taskforce. In almost 90 per cent of schools, the Catholic faith is supposed to be taught for 30 minutes every single day. This is more time than history, geography and science combined. Then there are daily prayers, trips to church, clerical visits and more. As with sacramental preparation, the Department of Education has provided no guidance on how schools should accommodate non-Catholic children during these times. In truth, in most schools, the 'opted-out' children just sit there – sometimes colouring a picture, sometimes doodling with a puzzle book, listening to every word regardless – segregated, othered and marked as different. The obvious answer, surely, is simply to move faith formation outside the school day and let families 'opt-in', should they wish. This is an inclusive solution that could not offend anyone. The INTO taskforce has inexplicably ignored the responses on faith formation in the survey and based most of its recommendations on the failed policy of divestment. There are obvious reasons divestment, pursued by successive governments since 2012, has failed. First, it is logistically and financially impossible to build a school system where all families will have access to a school that aligns with their religious outlook. Second, and more importantly, building an entire balkanised school system on a foundation of religious difference among children is patently wrong. Ireland is forging a lonely path internationally with this policy. The teaching profession in Ireland is monocultural – it reflects neither the diversity of Irish society nor our own classrooms. The taskforce's recommendation that the union must 'campaign and advocate for the removal of section 37.1 of the Employment Equality Act in its entirety' is welcome. This regrettable piece of legislation creates the vague, indefinable transgression of 'undermining the religious ethos' of a school. Moreover, teachers can face any 'action which is reasonably necessary' as a consequence. What does this mean? Sanction, loss of promotion prospects and dismissal? Understandably, most teachers don't want to find out. The result is a compliant workforce afraid to do anything that might fall foul of this obscure, discriminatory law. The chilling effect on teachers acts as an obvious barrier to entry to the profession at a time of catastrophic teacher shortages. 'Endeavouring' and 'campaigning' are not enough. The union must prioritise ending sacramental preparation in schools and the repeal of section 37.1. It needs to abandon the failed policy of divestment and focus on moving faith formation outside school hours: a real, practical change that will benefit teachers and children alike. Paddy Monahan is a teacher, Social Democrats councillor and policy officer with Education Equality
