In a recent Irish Times debate on whether religion should be removed from the classroom, CEP’s Chief Executive Alan Hynes-Cendrzak set out the case for religious education as an integral part of Catholic schooling. Responding to arguments for moving faith formation outside the school day, he argued that religious education is not simply the transmission of doctrine but a way of helping students engage with questions of meaning, identity, belonging and the common good. In a pluralist society, he contended, the answer is not to hollow out Catholic schools of their ethos, but to ensure real parental choice, support appropriate divestment where communities seek it and respect the right of parents who continue to choose Catholic education for their children.
Read the full debate here.
Alan’s contribution is below:
Religious education is about providing a holistic lens through which students can navigate a pluralistic world. Its value lies in fostering religious literacy, spiritual maturity and, for those active in a faith community, a sense of belonging, moving beyond mere facts to engage the head, heart and hands.
By exploring big questions of meaning and purpose, and faith responses to wellbeing, religious education creates space for students to develop their own identity while cultivating empathy for the other.
In Catholic schools, religious education is delivered through the Catholic faith, giving students firm ground on which to engage in dialogue and encounter with other beliefs and world views.
Campaigners from a secular perspective will argue that it would be better either to have no religious education at all or to make it “objective”. The latter is a philosophical absurdity. It rests on the secular assumption that on religion or ethics a neutral ground can be found. It cannot. No such ground exists. Education is always informed by an anthropological and ethical point of view. Denominational schools are clear and open about theirs.
It is also said that only a secular, “neutral” space can provide an education system capable of contributing to a cohesive society in a country marked by a diversity of world views.
But this is often presented as self-evident truth when it is nothing of the kind. A school does not become neutral simply by removing religious education from the day. It remains informed by a view of the human person and of what constitutes human flourishing.
The new primary curriculum framework is right to recognise religion and ethics as integral parts of the curriculum. In Catholic schools, work is under way to develop resources that expand what has previously been taught on other faiths and belief systems. Respectful encounter and dialogue with other views and beliefs is central to understanding, social cohesion and the common good.
That wider context matters in Ireland. The constitutional imperative to provide a plurality of choice for parents in the primary sector is fully acknowledged and recognises the preference of many parents for alternatives to denominational education. The Catholic patrons have long supported the Department of Education’s initiatives to secure the divestment of schools into other patronage. That support is grounded in respect for the role of parents as the primary educators of their children.
But the process of divesting school patronage has been frustratingly slow. While it may seem convenient to some, the answer is not to impose a solution on communities. At a national level, there is broad support for divestment – however, support from local communities has often not been forthcoming. Often parents have wished to retain their local school under Catholic patronage.
Some campaigners, frustrated by that reality, now seek another route. Having failed to persuade many local communities to change patronage, they argue that faith schools should be stripped of the ability to give full expression to their ethos. The first step in that campaign is to remove religious education from the school day. It is not a serious answer to pluralism but an attempt to impose a settlement that most communities have not chosen.
If parents wish for other forms of provision, those should be developed. But where parents continue to choose Catholic schools, the answer is not to hollow out the very thing they are choosing.
There is still hope for divestment as a way to assist in providing plurality of choice, but it must be grounded in subsidiarity and partnership. The State needs to invest in consultation with communities and in identifying and removing barriers to divestment. The Catholic education sector is ready to play our part in this, but this will require an authentic partnership approach by the State, founded in a shared commitment to the common good.