A point is coming where there is going to be a real national debate on the role of the State in relation to education in an increasingly secular Ireland. One regularly hears mutterings of discontent on social media concerning the function of the Government and individual departments in determining schools’ educational curricula in the areas of morality, social policy, and ideology.
Put bluntly, the question arises as to whether the State has the right to lay down school curricula that determine what schoolchildren are to be taught in relation to issues of moral controversy.
This is a tricky subject. What scope must there be for educational diversity in such areas? Can any private denominational school be told what it may or may not teach in the areas, say, of gender identity or sexual behaviour? Because nearly every primary and secondary teacher’s salary is paid from State funds, does that fact confer on the State a right to determine partly or wholly what every school must teach on such matters?
When Catholicism held sway politically and socially in post-independence Ireland, these issues raised very little public discussion or disagreement. Parents mostly accepted that the Catholic Church would use the schools it controlled to teach church doctrine on all such matters. But that time has ended, in many ways.
To take one example, the Catholic Church officially preaches in its catechism that homosexual acts are gravely sinful and that homosexual orientation, while not essentially sinful, is a disorder. It also clings officially to the view that use of artificial contraception within marriage is sinful. These doctrinal stances are the cause of huge damage to the church’s credibility and moral authority in the eyes of many.
But reversing its position on contraception poses a major problem, given that the papal encyclical Casti Conubii in 1930 threw the full weight of infallible teaching on morals behind its condemnation of artificial contraception as intrinsically evil. That encyclical is worth a read.
I very much doubt that any Catholic secondary school still teaches Irish teenagers that use of artificial contraception even in marriage is intrinsically evil and gravely sinful. I wonder whether any of them still attempts to teach teenagers that all homosexual behaviour is morally wrong or gravely sinful.
I was told of one instance where a lay teacher in a Catholic secondary school attempted to teach boys that homosexual activity was wrong for what he described as the “three Ms” – medically, morally and mentally. Apparently, the boys, who were conscious that some of their number had come out as gay, politely but firmly informed the teacher that they did not want to hear him any more on the subject. And that was the end of the matter.
The looming issue now is the matter of education on gender. Are parents to have a state-imposed curricular treatment on issues of gender identity taught to their children? Are all schools to be required to teach children on such matters as part of the Relationships and Sexuality strand of the draft curriculum for senior cycle Social Personal Health Education classes? Is self-identification in relation to gender to be the subject of instruction or discussion and, if so, in what terms? Are parents to have any say?
Given that the Constitution already guarantees, at Article 44, that legislation providing for state financial aid to schools shall not prejudicially affect the right of any child to attend such schools without attending religious instruction, the question is coming into sharp focus as to whether a new secular scheme of instruction in areas of religious and moral controversy can be implemented against the wishes of parents or without their express or implied consent.
The Constitution is very clear about parental rights in respect of the education of their children. Parents are the “primary and natural educators” of their children; they delegate that function to schools and teachers. The State is prohibited from requiring parents to send their children to schools established by the State or to any particular type of school. The ultimate right of parents to decide on the content of their children’s education by reference to their conscience or lawful preference is expressly acknowledged.
Promulgation of school curricula must navigate a narrow channel laid down by the Constitution. Just because institutional religion is in a state of rapid social decline in Ireland does not mean that the State is empowered to fill the vacuum with its own civic religion and doctrines. That is not liberal in the true sense.
True liberals value diversity, rather than uniformity, in education. They favour respect for parental rights and duties. They support educational autonomy at the levels of child, parent and school.
Tinkering with constitutional provisions relating to education, the family, or the dated but well-intentioned reference to mothers’ role in the home is an activity where the Government might come unstuck – as it has already found in relation to the housing amendment proposal.