Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
School patronage
Comments
-
So, you put a lot of effort into checking their education and qualifications...Have you met many county councillors? The term "cute hoor" comes to mind :pac:
No rules against providing religious instruction per the wishes of parents; got it.The rules don't prohibit religious instruction, nor do they give a mandate to provide it. This is politicians pandering to what they perceive as the majority community, at the expense of the minority. Politics, pure and simple. Not statesmanship.
I'm pretty ok with the moderation we have now, so it seems we're all set.Not a bad approach, though it would still have to be moderated by the state to some extent, by imposing egalitarian principles even where the majority were enjoying some cosy privilege or advantage. For example, as school that gave priority admission to the children of white catholics should not be operated or even funded by the state, even if the majority of locals wanted it.
Yes, we know you're not fond of diversity; one size (recedite size) will fit all whether they like it or not has been pretty much what you've been promoting so far. I'm more on the side of diversity I have to say; and in your exampple above, wouldn't the CNS only be preferred if there was already an ET and no CNS in the area?However even by this simple criterion (popularity), the CNS model often fails. When a new primary school is proposed, ET schools generally get as many or more votes from local parents than the CNS model, but the Dept. may still allocate the new school to CNS in the interests of providing a greater "diversity" of school types to the area (as if that was a good thing in itself).
Sounds like there are people who are engaged with the religious education their children are receiving there. That's got to be good, right?Not only are Catholics the only sect to have their own specific faith formation group (allowing communion and sacramental preparations within school time) but the general religion program taught to the whole class was also devised by RC theologians. See here for some "non-Catholic" views on it.
I don't know about 'nonsense' but I hope they don't hum too loud and disturb the monotheists...Here's some more nonsense from the "Goodness me Goodness You" religion program....I can just imagine the atheists happily humming away, while meditating on the days religion lesson :pac:
So... Christians means Christians then?"Christians" in that context BTW means "prods" and any other oddball non-RC form of Christianity
They 'can' be. Like... Catholics 'can' be if they're not the larger group in the class? You're the one who doesn't like diversity, so I can't imagine you're proposing a one to one pupil teacher ratio...Like the "Muslims", they can all be lumped in together, because we are not interested in whatever differences in doctrine they might have with each other. They are not to be put in the "Catholic" class, and that's all that matters.
Well, apparently they don't mind be separated for their other classes, and I recall I was quite used to it in Secondary school where the composition of every class varied according to subject and stream. Maybe you wouldn't find the idea as upsetting if you didn't use the word segregated? It does seem a little overloaded....And sure, kids don't mind being segregated really. They get a bit upset at first, but they forget all about it after a while. Maybe it encourages a little bit of teasing, but sure it toughens them up.0 -
-
-
Well here's something I haven't seen before...expectationlost wrote: »
I'm not sure too many people will understand what it means, but it appears to be some sort of jesuitical argument to refute the allegation "that CNS schools have been devised to provide the full RC religious instruction program while ostensibly not being religious schools" They must have anticipated what allegations the alligators such as ourselves would make, and so they built in this somewhat dubious disclaimer.1 The term sacramental education is somewhat narrower than sacramental preparation. Sacramental education refers to the support of children’s learning in relation to the sacraments. Sacramental preparation builds on this learning and relates it to the liturgy which forms the context for receiving the sacraments.
It reads suspiciously like something Absolam would be the author of
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
I bet no Jesuit came up with it, and I bet no one is trying to refute the allegation "that CNS schools have been devised to provide the full RC religious instruction program while ostensibly not being religious schools" by it. What would be the point? They'd have to know someone was saying it, then ask them what they meant by 'full RC religious instruction program' etc etc.Well here's something I haven't seen before...
I'm not sure too many people will understand what it means, but it appears to be some sort of jesuitical argument to refute the allegation "that CNS schools have been devised to provide the full RC religious instruction program while ostensibly not being religious schools" They must have anticipated what allegations the alligators such as ourselves would make, and so they built in this somewhat dubious disclaimer.
It reads suspiciously like something Absolam would be the author of
Much more likely that, totally unaware anyone had made such an allegation, they noted that a frequently asked question was "What is the difference between Sacramental education and Sacramental preparation" and decided to include an answer somewhere sensible... like a Frequent Asked Questions page
Reallly? Which of the Christians mentioned are you claiming aren't Christians?In this context, no.
That there are degrees of heresy is certainly true; I'm not aware of any Christian theology that claims Christian heretics aren't Christian though? Nor do I think the different groups you're describing conform to specific degrees of heresy; particularly those who are not Christian at all (such as your people of the book, people of faith, and pesky atheists). They would seem to be definitively not heretics at all, never mind degrees of heretics?Its a theological matter, there are degrees of heresy. Let me explain. First there is the one true faith, then there are "Christians" (which group consists of those minor heretics the "non-Roman Catholic Christians") then there are "the people of the book" (which includes the other Abrahamic religions that revere the Old Testament; Muslims and Jews) Then there are the "people of faith" (those who believe in any god at all) and finally there are those pesky atheists.
I think you may need to polish up on your theology
0 -
I have never in my life heard anyone asking that question.a frequently asked question was "What is the difference between Sacramental education and Sacramental preparation" and decided to include an answer somewhere sensible... like a Frequent Asked Questions page
But maybe I am not mixing in the right circles
Is there any theological reason that Catholics are not considered Christians?Reallly? Which of the Christians mentioned are you claiming aren't Christians?
Is there any reason not to include Catholics in the general Christian group, other than a desire to separate out the subset "Catholics" and give them their own special Sacramental Preparation? A facility that is not afforded to any other specific sect of any religion.
Are Catholics more different to other Christians in a doctrinal sense than say, Sunni Muslims are to Shia Muslims? Or Atheists are to Hindus? (These others are examples of pairs that are to be put in the same group according to the CNS logic).0 -
Unless you're mixing in circles that are involved in developing religious curricula for schools, I'd say yes, you're probably not mixing in the right circles to hear those kind of questions.I have never in my life heard anyone asking that question.
But maybe I am not mixing in the right circles
I don't think anyone said Catholics are not considered Christians; you said that Christians doesn't mean Christians in the context of "prods" and any other oddball non-RC form of Christianity, remember? Personally I think that anyone who wants to call themselves Christian can just go right ahead...Is there any theological reason that Catholics are not considered Christians?
There is if they account for 84% of the class, yes. Just as if Hindus, Muslims, or Jehovahs Witnesses accounted for 84% of the class I'd expect there's a reason to separate them out and allow them to have their own special Sacramental Preparation, or equivalent faith nurturing focus, in accordance with their parents wishes.Is there any reason not to include Catholics in the general Christian group, other than a desire to separate out the subset "Catholics" and give them their own special Sacramental Preparation? A facility that is not afforded to any other specific sect of any religion.
Possibly not, but the CNS logic isn't requiring pupils be grouped that way; they're saying they're typically grouped that way. I doubt a school with only 1% Catholics in a class is going to give them 25% of the group allocation; it's not unreasonable to think a school Principal is capable of applying some common sense to the undertaking. And as expectationlost has repeated; Michael Moriarty the general secretary of Education and Training Boards Ireland has said no religion will be given priority.Are Catholics more different to other Christians in a doctrinal sense than say, Sunni Muslims are to Shia Muslims? Or Atheists are to Hindus? (These others are examples of pairs that are to be put in the same group according to the CNS logic).0 -
On this point I strongly disagree, on a matter of principle. It is not the function of the state to provide Sacramental Preparation, nor is it the states right to award special treatment to the majority community, just because they are in the majority. In fact, it is unconstitutional to do so (it must cherish all equally).There is if they account for 84% of the class, yes. Just as if Hindus, Muslims, or Jehovahs Witnesses accounted for 84% of the class I'd expect there's a reason to separate them out and allow them to have their own special Sacramental Preparation.
Remember this is not the state providing assistance to the private education initiatives of parents.
We are talking about a state school here, not just one owned by a private or religious patron and receiving state support.
He would say that, wouldn't heMichael Moriarty the general secretary of Education and Training Boards Ireland has said no religion will be given priority. 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
The State is not prohibited by the Constitution from allowing State assets to be used to provide Sacramental Preparation either, and it is obliged by the Constitution to allow religious education to be provided to pupils in schools recognised or established by the State. Nor have you demonstrated that they're getting special treatment; in fact you've demonstrated that minority groups are likely to get better treatment by virtue of a better teacher to pupil ration, which is certainly not unConstitutional.On this point I strongly disagree, on a matter of principle. It is not the function of the state to provide Sacramental Preparation, nor is it the states right to award special treatment to the majority community, just because they are in the majority. In fact, it is unconstitutional to do so (it must cherish all equally).
So one in which parents are entitled to provide religious education to their children, per the Constitution.Remember this is not the state providing assistance to the private education initiatives of parents. We are talking about a state school here, not just one owned by a private or religious patron and receiving state support.
Ah... he's one of the conspirators is he? One of those ninja Jesuits going round overthrowing stuff all the time and that...He would say that, wouldn't he0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement