The Schools Are Owned By The People

How, after all, does orthodox religion continue to maintain the control it has exerted over the Irish psyche, and by extension over Irish society in general? Any marketing strategist would tell you that the best way to inculcate the message is to get to people early. If you want to reach inside people s heads, do it when they re mere children. Hence, the willingness of the Catholic church to educate people does not spring from any altruistic desire on the part of the institution; it is born, rather, of self-interest and of the desire to perpetuate both the belief systems that they promote, as well as the power and prestige that they have wielded here, since the inception of the State.
This is not to deny the genuine enthusiasm of individual priests and nuns for the calling. But it would be naive in the extreme not to recognise that the institution of the church is ruthless in its pursuit of political power, ideological advantage and economic gain and that this is the underlying motive for its investment in education in Ireland.
It is helpful therefore that this cosy collusion has been questioned by one of the Catholic Church s leading lights, the Bishop of Meath, Dr Michael Smith. In a moment of rare frankness, Dr Smith wondered recently whether the Church should be obliged to educate those with no commitment to the faith. A fair question, you might say. Except it ignores a couple of very fundamental points. The first of these relates to capital expenditure, undertaken in the building of schools. How much of this is paid for by the Catholic Church? The best way to answer that is to begin by saying that 85% of all capital expenditure on the building of schools is paid for by the State, through the Department of Education. So, essentially, the schools are put in place not by the Church but by the State. And where does the other 15% required to complete projects come from? In general, if my understanding is correct, it comes not from the Catholic Church but from the parents whose children attend a particular school. The school, or even the local clergy, may organise or assist in the fund-raising. But for the most part this is money contributed by members of the public. It is not money that comes from the Vatican, or from some central Catholic Church education fund. In other words, where capital contributions are concerned, the contribution of the Church is negligible.
Ah yes, but don t the religious pay the teachers salaries? And don t they work for buttons themselves? Well, I m not going to attempt to convince anyone that the approach of the State in this regard, has been honourable at all times, or that advantage wasn t taken of the Church s desire to throw bodies at the educational system. But we have already established that there was and is a strong element of self-interest in this. And besides, the fact is that 100% of teachers salaries is paid by the State.
Now let s look at what the schools do contribute at the moment, as part of the overall budget that s required to run a primary school of, say, 1,000 children. With the pupil-teacher ratio pegged at below 20 1 now, fifty teachers would be required in a school of this size suggesting a wage bill of approximately #1 million. The State also pays a capitation grant of #60 per pupil towards overheads, bringing the total contribution of the state towards current expenditure of #1.06 million. Now there is also a capitation fee contributed by the schools which has been capped at #7.50. This is not paid by the Catholic Church but is raised by the Boards of Management of the individual schools. Either way, in a school of 1,000 kids, it would amount to just #7,500, or considerably less than 1% of the current expenditure involved in running the school.
So where, then, is the Catholic Church s great contribution to providing education to Irish children in the year 2000? The objective answer is that they do not make one. But Dr Smith s statement is telling nonetheless in that it reveals the Church s fundamental assumption about education: despite the fact that the State pays the bulk of the money required to put the buildings in place, and furthermore despite the fact that 99.25% of the current costs are covered by the State, the Catholic Church believes that it owns the schools. And maybe, because of some archaic provisions that should have been undone long ago, on paper they do. But morally and ethically, these schools belong not to the Church but to the people.
Which leads to another interesting issue: parents have a constitutional right not to have their children educated in a particular religion, or indeed in any religion at all. So when the bishop questions whether or not the Church should be obliged to educate those with no commitment to the faith, what is he really suggesting? That, if a school run by a Board of Management that is under Catholic control, is the only one within a ten mile radius, that atheists, muslims, protestants and Nigerian tribespeople alike should be told that there is no school for them to go to?
The reality is that the Catholic church s privileged position in education is an anomaly that should have been eradicated years ago. Increasingly there is a need for non-denominational and multi-denominational education and it is up to the State to provide it. If Dr Smith s remarks push us finally in that direction, then perhaps we should be grateful.
One final point: with feelings running high on the refugee issue, and with the flames of racism being fanned on an unprecedented level, the timing of Dr Smith s remarks was particularly ill-advised. It would be easy to interpret them as providing support for the ideology of exclusion, and of hostility to other cultures and other religions. I can see the sign outside Catholic schools now: No Protestants, No Atheists, No Muslims need apply.