religious education in schools..

[ardal]

Sorry Eamonnca but you introduced Tribunals as people doing something so if you don't know the price of fish, take a rod and go fishing with the kids; alternatively buy them a game for their X Box.

With regards to the general respect that society has for each other, why don't you put it on youtube as you attack someone in the street, or twitter me as I sit in the seat opposite you, sure what's the problem we can buy everything we want but what do we need?

PS My use of "you" is plural.

What are you waffling about?

My humble apologies. I'd thought you had more gumsome and intellect to decipher for yourself. Sorry again

[lynchbhoy]

In my opinion, this is how school should work. Kid starts school at 9 and finished at 3. They do maths, irish, english etc. At 3 there is an hour for religious education of a type chosen by the school (catholic if the majority are catholic). A teacher or priest or whoever is employed for that hour. Parents who want this education should cover the cost of the teacher, insurance, heat etc during this hour. During normal hours there should be a general religious class educating on the different religions of the world, their differences and likenesses. Preperation for communion or any other religious activity should be done outside normal school hours.

This is generally what happens in Educate Together schools.

cannot speak for the educational system in England in general, but in certain pockets where relations live- the above is how Catholic schools operate or operated at least in the 70's in England.
there was a weekly religion class, but it featured all religions.
Specific Catholic instruction was performed on a weekly basis by your own parish priest (or CC).so parisioners were divided up according to their parish and went to the appointed classroom with said priest/CC.

[lynchbhoy]

However, I may add that if it is a 'Catholic' school here that people want to send their kids to - that this school costs the state less and it adheres to the national curriculum (though I find that to be a bit out of date) and the school gets good results - then what is the problem.
if you dont want your kid to receive religious instruction then dont send them to that school.
however, most kids dont listen to that religious stuff anyway (and a lot of other classes) so its all handbags here imo !!
Other schools will permit them to sit quietly in the class while religious instruction is going on.
Most kids will be close to falling asleep in such classes so I cant see that being any problem other than boredom!

[Billys Boots]

Lynchbhoy, I think I would consider that allowing the Catholic church to run their education system for the past 90 years has not cost the state less (in hindsight) than running a proper state-led education system, from the off. 

[lynchbhoy]

Lynchbhoy, I think I would consider that allowing the Catholic church to run their education system for the past 90 years has not cost the state less (in hindsight) than running a proper state-led education system, from the off.

cant say I'd agree with that but no big deal.

Im talking about what individual costs have been per school.

what you say though is easy in hindsight, but you have to remember that historically , whether you like it or not, that the schools were set up for the catholic kids by the church as hedge schools were not quite up to it.
We cannot change history, so a debt of gratitude on education is owed to the catholic church.
also they currently churn out highly educated kids - top notch in terms of leaving cert etc- so imo why change this because it is not to the liking of some and not secular?

I think in time these schools will mostly die off anyhow, but think it would be very daft to get rid of them when they are performing well. The clamour to go to secular educate together schools is fine - but if thats what you want, great.
Others dont want it. Choice is a great thing.
If I had kids I'd be sending them to a tried and tested plus trusted establishment before I'd send to an educate together school (for many reasons).
Its a bit like choosing a company with whom to do business with. You usually want to partner up with someone with a track record, not take any chance/risk. Again that will possibly improve with time.

[Billys Boots]

Don't disagree about the history - presently there are very, very few priests/nuns/brothers/monks left in the teaching profession, it's almost 100% secular (in terms of teachers).  Thus the 'educated kids', nowadays, have nothing to do with the church - it certainly isn't because they have religious instruction, as opposed to religious education. 

Educate Together has been providing patronage to national schools since 1978 - there are ca. 70 primary schools operating under their patronage in Ireland today.  You can have whatever problems you like with them, but it would be a fallacy to say that they're not tried and tested, with a very good track record. 

[camanchero]

Yeah , the idea is good as it gives choice - but these are still only in early stages in this country.
Maybe it's just around here but i know of a few families who took their kids out of educate together schools to go back into mainstream tried and tested school- yes catholic based ones.

IMO these 'catholic schools' are not what people think they are. In the early 80's our Christian brothers school never taught religion or only a couple of teachers would pray ( eg say the angelus).
From what I hear this is commonplace now - so can't understand why people have issues with 'catholic schools'!

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

I attended De LaSalle brothers and must say they were fantastic educators. I went on to attain 2 degrees and a postgraduate diploma. They taught very little religion in the secondary school, but did in the primary. However in my opinion any religion is too much religion if taught on curriculum time. I would rather my future children taught about Gaelic myths and possibly Norse, Norman or Planter mythology as they are our ancestors, not Latin or Semetic myths.

[muppet]

Jebus lads, if the Brits ever introduced any auld Penal Laws we'd be Morris Dancing at the crossroads every night, wouldn't we?

Probably. But if the goal was to preserve our cultural identity in the North in the face of Unionist propoganda and we had a choice between Catholic schools and Penal Laws, which would you choose?

Deiseach, do you think that question is slightly loaded?

The Irish in the North faced far worse than rugby and cricket in school and yet their culture is still world renowned.

[Eamonnca1]

If we're going to get into "what if" speculation about what would have happened if there were no catholic schools then two can play at that game.  How about the state sector would have been half full of fenians and there's no way they'd have allowed those schools to become de-facto protestant schools with no accommodation for the Irish language or Gaelic games in PE?  But with our ones absent from the system there was no opposition to that. The authorities could make the state sector as protestant/unionist in ethos as they liked and the Catholics/nationalists didn't care because they had their own separate system.

Interestingly, integrated education is not a new idea.  There were "model schools" in the early nineteenth century in which Catholics and protestants were taught together.  There were no religious symbols allowed on display except during religious lessons when the flocks* were separated into different rooms, a sign was put up saying that religious instruction was underway, and the clergy was allowed in to direct the teaching. Religious symbols had to be put away at the end of each religion lesson. 

The model schools were ahead of their time, and like the apologists for segregation of today they had their opponents back then too. Church leaders opposed such an inclusive and secular system because they weren't satisfied with the quality of brainwashing, so we ended up with the segregated system we still have today, and the segregated society that goes with it.


*Does the God Squad not feel a bit embarrassed by the fact that they're openly referred to as "sheep" in need of a "shepherd"?

[Eamonnca1]

My humble apologies. I'd thought you had more gumsome and intellect to decipher for yourself. Sorry again

Don't apologise. It's my fault for never taking a course in gibberish.

[Rossfan]

*Does the God Squad not feel a bit embarrassed by the fact that they're openly referred to as "sheep" in need of a "shepherd"?

No - because we are humble enough to accept that we're not perfect - unlike the secularists who think they know everything.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

*Does the God Squad not feel a bit embarrassed by the fact that they're openly referred to as "sheep" in need of a "shepherd"?

No - because we are humble enough to accept that we're not perfect - unlike the secularists who think they know everything.

Humble my arse. In this 26 counties alone you spill your shit across our constitution. You impose yourselves on our education system. You ring your bells on our televisions. The religious to humility is like Ebola to a newborn child.

[Rossfan]

You need help Mr ironically named MayoGODhelpus. All that hate and anger is not good for you.
The Constitution was voted in by the people of the 26 Counties.
If you don't like the Angelus then don't listen to it.
I can't stand fcukin Ryan Tubridy so I always make sure not to watch the LLS.
If it wasn't for the Catholic and Church of Ireland schools the vast majority of the people of the 26 Cos would never have got an education.
Eboli ?? Maybe you've got it??

[Eamonnca1]

*Does the God Squad not feel a bit embarrassed by the fact that they're openly referred to as "sheep" in need of a "shepherd"?

No - because we are humble enough to accept that we're not perfect - unlike the secularists who think they know everything.

Okay, I'll bite.

Scientist: "I don't know the answer to this question, so I'll do some research and use use empirical evidence to draw conclusions, then subject it to peer review and see how well it stands up to scrutiny."

Theist: "The answer to this question is simple: God did it. That's the answer to everything that man cannot answer. You name it, I can explain it using this old text that was written by middle-eastern goat herders who thought the earth was flat. And you'd better effing believe me, coz if you don't you'll be tortured for all eternity after your death like all the other people who don't believe me."

So tell me again, who thinks he knows it all?