Sir, – I applaud the Minister for Education's decision to repeal rule 68 for national schools ("Rule on priority of primary-level religion classes to go", December 8th). The rule was a ministerial order, introduced without a Dáil vote, but had the effect of denying increasing numbers of citizens their constitutional rights. Article 44 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience. It also makes State funding of denominational schools conditional on "the right of any child to attend . . . without attending religious instruction at that school". This condition was confirmed in a Supreme Court ruling in 1998. However, rule 68 mandated the integration of religion into the entire curriculum, making it impossible for any pupil to absent themselves from religious instruction. The fact that rule 68 has remained in force for 50 years shows how successive ministers for education caved in to the demands of religious bodies rather than defend the Constitution. – Yours, etc,
DERVAL DUGGAN,
Kilternan, Dublin 18.
Sir, – Minister for Education Jan O’Sullivan is to be applauded for her decision to get rid of rule 68, which gives strong priority to religion in primary schools. She is absolutely correct in describing such rules as archaic. Citizens of all persuasions should support the Minister in her efforts to reform not just the rules governing what goes on in our primary schools, but also entry procedures.
As parents will know only too well, this is not just a matter of sweeping away some embarrassing leftovers of the John Charles McQuaid era. Ensuring fair access to primary education is fundamental. We have a primary education system that is almost entirely funded by the taxpayer, yet access to which is rationed by denominational considerations. Arguments that children who do not hold that “baptismal passport” should go elsewhere do not wash in huge parts of the country, where it is neither feasible nor desirable to duplicate the public provision of a primary school. If the State can fund only one school in a community, that school should be there for all the community.
Archbishop Diarmuid Martin has said that “baptising children simply to be able to attend a specific school is an abuse of baptism” (“Catholic schools in danger of becoming elitist, says archbishop”, December 8th). He is doubtless correct; but is it not also an abuse of public education to exclude children simply because they are not baptised?
Ms O’Sullivan has courageously identified several issues that go to the heart of Irish primary education. Glacial progress on “divestment” of religiously controlled schools is not the answer. Her (and our) ambition should be to give practical effect in schools to the provisions of Article 44 of the Constitution – freedom of conscience, no endowment of any religion, no discrimination on religious grounds. – Yours, etc,
EDMOND RIORDAN,
Carrigrohane, Co Cork
Sir, – They may believe they have a legal opinion on their side, which is very far from being a binding judgment, but Catholic bishops have some nerve in telling the Minister for Education, an elected representative, that she does not have a role in the admission and curriculum policies (covered in this case by the odious term "ethos") of schools that are funded by the same State, and by extension by all of its citizens ("Bishops tell minister not to 'interfere' in schools", December 10th).
The vast majority of our State schools are now being described by apologists for the current grossly inequitable arrangements as “faith schools”. It is incomprehensible how such things could exist in a modern democratic state unless they are funded in their entirety by the religious denomination that created them. This is very far from being the case in relation to the schools in question. – Yours, etc,
SEAMUS McKENNA,
Windy Arbour, Dublin 14.