Rationale for why the State shouldn't gift buildings to religious orders

I'm getting a lot of feedback on this and a lot of it is puzzled by why it's a problem. I hope to try and answer in this thread. twitter.com/simonmlewis/status/1756430701442814335

Despite people’s general apathy, I have yet to meet anyone that doesn’t agree that there are too many religious-controlled schools. At the very least, everyone agrees there should be “more choice.” This means that we need fewer religious schools and more non-religious schools.

If we want to have diversity of schools, the State needs to ensure they own the buildings or this won’t happen. Once a school is in private ownership, the owner decides the ethos of the building.

This is why there was such protest over the National Maternity Hospital where thousands of people protested because they feared, because the building was to be gifted to the nuns, there could be interference on certain practices. rte.ie/news/ireland/2022/0514/1297993-national-maternity-hospital-protest

It is clear that when a building is owned by a private body, their ethos controls what happens in the building. This is current practice in all Irish primary schools.

As an aside, the difference between religious orders and other patrons is that non-religious bodies don't own the building and they are effectively tenants in the buildings. If the State decided to change the patron, the ethos would change.

This is why the divestment/reconfiguration scheme is bedded in complexity. Because the churches own the buildings, they hold all the cards of power when it comes to reconfiguring. If a Bishop doesn't want to divest, it doesn't happen even if the State 100% built the school.

Even more bizarrely, with the reconfiguration scheme, the State is building schools, gifting them to the private bodies then also paying them rent to allow the State use the buildings they built for non-religious education!

To put that into context – the State build me a house, pay all my bills, then pay me rent on condition that I don’t provide faith formation there. Instead they could offer to rebuild my house and I could stay there but they would be in charge, not me.

My conclusion is that there is a cognitive dissonance when it comes to schools. People were appalled by the thought of the church controlling hospitals but not schools.

How would someone like @AodhanORiordan attend the protest against the NMH with his daughter on his shoulders in 2022 and not long after be happy to send his daughter to a school controlled by the same organisation? I’m not criticising here. I want to get into the mindset.

O’Riordan is no different to most people that took to the streets to stop the NMH from being built on church land because they perceived religious interference but also happily send their child to a school built on church land which provides religious interference every day.

I think it stems from the fact that most Irish people are so used to religious practices, they see them as cultural rather than religious. For example, Sean Moncrieff, who ticked “no religion” saw no issue with allowing his child make Communion because he is not “anti-Catholic.”

If I had a euro for every time someone told me that religious schools aren’t really that religious anymore, I would probably have as much money as the State is gifting to religious bodies every year.

In other words, I can’t breach the mindset that people can separate their disgust with the same body that they allow to proselytise their children. And why would I think I could be successful?

Ultimately, what's likely to happen is everyone will be fine with this arrangement until it becomes not fine like back in 2016 when Nikki Murphy couldn't enrol her kid in a school and we ended up with the Baptism Barrier debate.

With only 53% of 25-29 year old identifying as Catholic in Ireland now, we are not far away from a situation where more children are opted out of religion than in. We will have more kids at the back of the class than part of the class!

We already have 6 counties where there are classrooms where more children are opted out of religion than those getting faith formation. This is only going to grow until it becomes nonsensical.

Even if you disagree with my rationale, surely only on the basis that if the State is pumping billions into capital building projects, you couldn't disagree that they should own those buildings after the work?

Forget the religion side of things and if it makes it easier, change the context to any private body. Perhaps think of times there were uproars when private bodies tried to influence education in schools and why you were outraged.

Think about the effect of the current arrangements - children sitting at the backs of classrooms, teachers having to be missionaries for a religion they don't belong to, hugely complex structural issues from bus transport to insurance, etc.

Finally, think about the education system we do want. Do we want to outsource our education system to private bodies whether they are religious or whether they hold other values. We can always vote out a government if their values oppose human rights. That's not possible now.