I asked four people what makes a Catholic school Catholic and here’s what they said

As the famous Irish joke goes, an American looks for directions when on holidays in Ireland and the response is “I wouldn’t start from here.” It’s a punchline often used when we describe our education system, which is predominantly divided along religious lines and where the government department in charge of education has no responsibility of what happens in any school.

90% of Irish primary schools are controlled by the Catholic Church. This means that in the vast majority of primary schools in Ireland, faith formation in Catholicism is taught as truth. There are historical reasons for this, where the Catholic and Protestant churches wanted to have control of educating children in the fledgling Irish Free State, (not altruistically as some people claim), but over the last few generations, Ireland is no longer the country my mother once described to me as “95% Catholic, 5% Protestant and the rest of us are Jewish.”

Fewer than 70% of Irish people identify as Catholic in the most recent census and fewer than 30% of them attend church regularly. Nearly 70% of the population defied the Catholic Church to allow same-sex marriage in 2015, and the right of abortion in 2018, in two separate referenda. When the National Maternity Hospital was to be built on the Catholic Church’s land, tens of thousands of people took to the streets because they did not believe it was ok for the Catholic Church to have control over a hospital.

And yet, the very same people seem quite happy to send their children to schools under the control of the same church (though a recent report from the church itself showed that only 5% of people send their children to Catholic schools because of the religious ethos.) But why?

Who better to ask than people that send their children to Catholic schools and those that defend the status quo? After one such person decided to post the following on X:

Text: Catholic schools, north and south, are the most diverse and genuinely integrated schools on this island. They also excel at tackling educational disadvantage, special needs and integrating Traveller children.

I had to reply:

I can’t speak for the north but nothing you’ve said above is completely untrue because the schools themselves work hard to welcome diverse communities. The consequences of this is a watered-down ethos as it is impossible to be genuinely Catholic and inclusive to other beliefs. That’s not a criticism of the schools. A school system where there is no particular religion as the controller would do just as good a job but would succeed more on inclusivity as they wouldn’t be constrained by certain Catholic values.

A few people took umbrage with my allegation that being inclusive waters down the Catholic ethos. I further explained:

The main purpose of Catholic (and other faith) schools is to pass on that particular faith onto the children. One can’t be inclusive of everyone if one worldview is on a higher platform, which by its ethos it is. That’s not a criticism, just the way it is.

…to which I received an emphatic response:

So I asked what was the purpose of Catholic schools that was different to any other kind of school. Of the four people that countered my argument, guess how many of them answered my question.

That’s right, zero.

The person above simply didn’t answer the question.

The second who isn’t Catholic but stated that he was “delighted” that he sent his children to a Catholic school over other options, when asked the same question answered: “I am not an expert or a campaigner here. I try not to stray into fields I know nothing of,” which, to me, is a very odd reply for someone delighted to have chosen a Catholic school.

The third is a teacher who made an effort saying “I often consider the difference, and compare with others, naming the difference at this hour in a tweet is a challenge.” She never followed up. If you asked me the question of my school’s ethos, I could tell you immediately.

The fourth simply went on the attack without answering the question either. Because he went on the attack, I kept asking him the same question over and over again. He never answered it.

Before I got accused of the same, I decided I’d explain what kind of education system I was arguing for.

Text: And just to prove I’m happy to answer your question. My idealised world view of a school is where there is no part of the school day where a family’s faith makes them have to opt out of at least 10% the school day every day. It’s an idealised world where a religious view doesn’t permeate throughout the school day. It’s an idealised view that all worldviews, whatever they may be, are heard. It’s also not naive enough to think that that’s easy. It’s also an idealised view of the world that when I describe it, it always gets poo pooed by those trying to defend the status quo. They always list one example of someone they know who didn’t like one school because they think my idealised view is represented by a particular patron. They always say that they are *delighted* (or some other over the top feeling for a public service) that their child is in a Catholic school without ever expanding on why being a Catholic school makes it different to a non Catholic one. And if they don’t do that, they make up some nonsensical rubbish about gender because they’ve convinced themselves that Catholic schools are now beacons of “anti-wokism.” Finally they assume I’m anti Catholic or some sort of communist secularist because that’s really the only reason I believe in a school system that treats everyone with equal respect. I appreciate the fact that you asked though.

Unsurprisingly, none of the four responded.