Home | Live | Blog | | about Ireland's child | Music | Gallery | Biography | Media | Shop | Contact |
|
 

24.02.11 The Catholic Church should not have control of our children's education

By Andrew Madden

I READ WITH interest Archbishop Diarmuid Martin’s speech ‘Keeping The Show On The Road’ delivered to The Cambridge Group for Irish Studies, Magdalene College, Cambridge this week.

Most of his speech chronicles the decline of the Catholic Church in Ireland and suggests how the Church might change if it is to avoid becoming utterly irrelevant to most people in this country, but I was most interested in his views on the Catholic Church and its patronage of so
many of our primary schools.

Diarmuid Martin reminds us that as Archbishop of Dublin he is patron of about 470 primary schools: he is responsible for the management of the ethos of those schools, for senior appointments and he points out he is the one who can be sued when legal action takes place.

As Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin is patron of about 93% of all primary schools in the Archdiocese of Dublin while at the same time he admits that only 18% of Catholics in Dublin attend Mass. Nationally there are approximately 3,280 national schools in the Irish Republic and about 3,032 of them are managed by the Catholic Church. These schools have, for the most part, been built by the taxpayer, are maintained by the taxpayer and the majority of the salaries of teachers working in the schools are paid by the taxpayer – but they are still considered to be ‘Catholic schools’ and even worse, the view of the Catholic Church is that the children of Catholic parents have first claim on admission to such schools.

The idea that parents who can produce Catholic Baptismal Certificates for their children can have first claim on access to a taxpayer funded public service is totally unacceptable. The Catholic Church admits children of other faiths into schools only where possible, in keeping with Catholic Church ethos, and provided that those schools have places and resources – also totally unacceptable.

I believe the State should be responsible for the management and provision of schools and education that is funded by the taxpayer. You would be forgiven for thinking the state is responsible but it is not. In a civil action taken by a woman who had been sexually assaulted as a child by her school principal, it was determined that the Minister for Education is this country has no legal responsibility for teachers whose salaries are paid by the Department of Education.

This is because the Department is not considered to be the employer of teachers in national schools. Despite paying the salaries of teachers and determining their terms and conditions of employment, the Department of Education is not the employer of teachers in
this State. And as Archbishop Martin points out, in Dublin he is the person to be sued when legal action takes place.

I agree with Diarmuid Martin when he says that Irish government has been very slow in providing a plurality of patronage models. In 2008 the government announced a pilot scheme in which the State, through the VEC, would control one primary school in Dublin 15 saying it was looking to provide this type of alternative “where a traditional patron is not available”.

This is far from the proactive stance that is required. The government should be actively working to provide parents with choice in relation to the type of school they send their children to. Indeed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states that ‘Parents shall have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children’ – very difficult for parents to exercise this right when over 90% of schools are managed by the Catholic Church.

For too long government has maintained the position of keeping itself removed from its responsibilities by allowing the Catholic Church to manage schools, leaving local Boards of Management with the authority to sack teachers, whose lifestyles they may not approve of,
but whose salaries they do not pay.

In an ideal world I would prefer to see all children educated in non-denominational schools leaving them free to learn about religion at home or in church. But I am also a firm believer of choice in as many areas of life as possible so let there be they religious schools, let there be private schools, but also let the government start providing education for our children in State schools on State land where the Department of Education takes full responsibility for all aspects of the education of the children and the management of the school and let them match the high standards of education as delivered by other patrons.

No more schools should be built by the state on land owned by the Catholic Church. It is not necessary for the state to purchase lots of land on which to start building new non/multi-denominational schools, we already own the so called Catholic schools, as I said earlier we
built them and we maintain them.

The Catholic Church should hand over to the people of Ireland some of the schools currently under their patronage and this transfer should include ownership of the land on which the schools have been built. The Church’s Education Commission and Archbishop Martin, have
already expressed some interest in the patronage of schools changing hands but it should be remembered that neither the Commission nor the Archbishop constitute the Catholic Church in Ireland.

There are many other bishops in the country running their dioceses with autonomy and parents having access to choice should not be dependent on the local bishop’s agreement.

However even those bishops who do agree to handing over some schools to alternative patrons have said there will be a price: they expect to be compensated. Their request for compensation should be considered in the context of the huge compensation bill payable as a result of offences committed against children by members of the religious orders. In its considerations of the settlement of that compensation bill the government
should include an intention to acquire ownership of the land some of our schools are built on so that real progress can be made in providing parents with choice. There should be no question of the Catholic Church receiving any taxpayer’s money in this context. It should be
done because it’s the right thing to do.

It should also be noted that the Church’s Education Commission said in the document, Catholic Primary Schools – A Policy for Provision into the Future, that where schools were transferred out of Catholic patronage those new patrons should include Catholic religious
instruction as part of the school curriculum. Religious education, where children learn about many different religions, is already part of the curriculum in multi-denominational schools but religious instruction in a particular religion is conducted after school hours and in accordance with parents’ wishes.

When schools are transferred out of Catholic Church patronage, the curriculum of the schools is no longer any of their business and any attempts
to exert such improper control in our schools should not be tolerated.
Taking some schools out of Catholic patronage would not solve the current problem but, coupled with a cessation of building new schools on Catholic Church land, it would be a very good place to start. Such schools would then be managed by the state or other patrons and the process of providing more choice for parents would be impressively advanced.

In addition to this, to further increase diversity, the government should increase its funding of Educate Together Schools. Educate Together aims to meet a growing need in Irish society for schools that recognise the developing diversity of Irish life and the modern need for democratic management structures.

In particular, Educate Together guarantees children and parents of all faiths and none equal respect and equal access to education, including the
operation and management thereof. The Government would argue that it is providing funding for these schools but the level of funding is not meeting the level of demand and consequently Educate Together cannot offer as many places to children as are required by their parents who are seeking an alternative to schools offering education with a Catholic ethos.

So there may still be a role for the Catholic Church in schools or in education to facilitate those parents who still want that for their children, but at present the role of the Catholic Church in our education system is improper and the way forward is for the government to more fully embrace State run national schools and to increase funding for alternative patrons considerably.

Read Archbishop Diarmuid Martin’s speech, ‘Keeping the Show on the Road’

29.10.10 Andrew Madden's Response

Andrew Madden's Response to the Roscommon Child Care Inquiry Report http://andrewmmadden.blogspot.com/

27.10.10 'Unreserved' HSE apology over Roscommon case

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1027/abuse.html

12.10.10  Irish children's rights campaigner Andrew Madden writes about the forthcoming Apostolic Visitation to Ireland
‘Although I still carry many of the effects of child abuse I no longer consider myself a victim. I’ve done something about it. I’ve turned it around.’

Becoming an altar boy was Andrew Madden's first step toward realising his dream of becoming a priest. It was brilliant – getting to go behind the scenes in a busy parish church, helping on the altar in front of everyone – and he couldn’t wait to be grown up and saying Mass himself. But the day Andrew was molested by his favourite priest, Father Ivan Payne, his love of the Catholic Church was poisoned. Father’s Payne’s abuse lasted for three years, until Andrew was fifteen. But its impact went on and on. Andrew lost direction. He lost self-belief. He lost the capacity to have loving sex. And he lost himself in drink.

In the early '90s Andrew reached a financial settlement with Father Payne. He would go on to become the first Irish victim of sexual abuse by a priest to go public with his story. In 2003 Andrew’s autobiography, Altar Boy, was published. It is a candid, and sometimes searing, account of how abuse can affect a life. It is an articulate, challenging and often damning assessment of the behaviour of the Irish Catholic Church. And it is a story of hope: Andrew Madden’s calm and humane consideration of his own life - and Father Payne’s - shows that victims don’t have to remain victims.

Today Andrew is an enthusiastic, committed, creative professional who is passionate about making a lasting difference for children. He has spent over 15 years campaigning for the safety, welfare, and protection of children. His persistent campaigning since then contributed to the Commission of Investigation and subsequent Murphy Report into the handling of such abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin over the period 1975 to 2004. The Report was published in November 2009.

http://andrewmmadden.blogspot.com/

Apostolic Visitation

Andrew Madden In May of this year details were released from the Vatican about the ‘Apostolic Visitation’ to Ireland of various Catholic Cardinals and Archbishops in response to the publication of the Murphy Report and indeed the Ryan and Ferns Reports previously.

The reasons for this Visitation are given as:

1. To offer assistance to the Bishops, clergy, religious and lay faithful as they seek to respond adequately to the situation caused by the tragic cases of abuse perpetrated by priests and religious upon minors.

(I don’t know what the Vatican means by ‘respond adequately to the situation caused by the tragic cases of abuse’ – what is ‘the situation caused’ as they see it?)

2. To contribute to the desired spiritual and moral renewal that is already being vigorously pursued by the Church in Ireland.

(I have no confidence in the moral renewal of a Church whose leaders only tell the truth about their response to the sexual abuse of children by priests when they are hauled in front of statutory inquiries and whose leaders fail to take responsibility for their actions or inactions.)

3. To explore more deeply questions concerning the handling of cases of abuse and the assistance owed to the victims.

(‘Explore more deeply questions concerning the handling of cases of abuse’? That is typical of the spin the Bishops like to put on the Murphy Report. There are no questions. They have been asked and answered at the Commission of Investigation and the ultimate finding was one of bishops covering up for priests abusing children in order to protect the Church.)

4. To monitor the effectiveness of and seek possible improvements to the current procedures for preventing abuse.

(I have no trust in a Church monitoring the effectiveness of child protection measures when its own leadership is littered with Bishops who failed to protect children from priests known to the Church to be a danger and who still fail to take responsibility for that failure.)

By having this ‘Apostolic Visitation’ the Vatican is trying to maintain the pretence that the sexual abuse of children by priests was an Irish problem, but it wasn’t Irish bishops who were covering up the sexual abuse of children by priests in Dioceses throughout the United States and in Europe. The Philadelphia Report described the Catholic Church as having employed well-orchestrated strategies for decades and in all parts of the United States to keep abusing priests in ministry while minimising the risk of scandal or legal liability.

I also feel that there has been ample opportunity for Catholic Bishops to understand what was expected of them in response to publication of the Murphy Report – on all occasions the views of victims have been ignored. Bishop of Galway Martin Drennan refused a request for a meeting in December 2009, Bishops Eamon Walshe and Raymond Field eventually offered their resignations but apparently launched a very successful campaign behind the scenes to ensure they were not accepted by Pope Benedict. Pope Benedict himself has not even acknowledged the letter sent by Marie Collins, Maeve Lewis (OneInFour) and myself at the time the Irish Bishops were meeting him earlier this year. Cardinal Brady ignored victims’ requests for him to stand aside after it was revealed that he had participated in a process of cover up for Fr Brendan Smyth in 1975 who was left free to carry on sexually abusing children for another 18 years. This Apostolic Visitation is more about Catholic Bishops giving the impression of listening to what victims have to say as opposed to actually acting on our requests. To engage with this process is to mistakenly give it credibility and I do not intend to do that.

The Apostolic Visitation is nothing more than self-serving window-dressing nonsense.