Courtney McGrailFrancis Campbell mounted a robust defence of faith schools
Francis Campbell
That means that the focus is on educating the whole person; that is body, mind and soul. That is expanding each person’s capacity for love, so that the whole person is developed, nurturing body, mind and spirit. That means teaching students to think clearly and to know information. But also teaching students to have empathy, to have love and compassion and to be merciful. They must be taught how to put such principles into action.
Education in the Christian tradition is to remember the bigger picture, to think about formation in its widest human sense so that it is not simply about acquiring a trade or a profession, important as they are to modern living. Rather, it is about the formation of the whole person. It is not possible to form the whole person unless it is underpinned with an understanding of what and who the human person is and where that person stands in the order of creation.
It is that view of the human being in the widest context, an anthropology which sets the philosophy of education apart and contrasts with the subjectivism which is increasingly the more prevalent paradigm in contemporary education.
Common good
Catholic education is a key element that society needs as one of many partners in the work for the common good. This is one of the many reasons why Catholic education is not to diminish the vocational dimension or identity. It is rather in ensuring this unique character that Catholic institutions will realise their goal to give a comprehensive academic formation which equips the student in the broadest possible sense.
It is this focus on the ‘whole person’, this focus on who the human person is, that defines the Catholic approach to education, and imbues Catholic education with such strength and depth.
In our contemporary culture there is an increasingly prominent voice which would suggest that the only way to deal with the growing religious complexity in our societies is through creating a more privatised form of religion. To push it out of the public sphere and into the private.
This ideology would have society believe that competing absolutist claims by faiths should be rejected, but perhaps with one sole exception – that is the absolutist claims made by militant secularism itself that it is somehow neutral and objective and should therefore be the norm.
For regulatory authorities it might seem easier to roll back diversity (in this case faith) from the public sphere and impose a ‘one size fits all approach’ arguing that it is ‘neutral’, fair, value for money, etc.
But if you roll back faith, then what else do you roll back? Furthermore, rolling back faith would raise another set of problems; it would be ‘neutral’ from what? And fair to whom? In such a new era whose values would prevail?
How faith communities are treated can often be a litmus test for broader freedoms within the society and the place of the individual vis-a-vis the state. One can think of revolutionary France or the creation of the Soviet Union. Critiques by faith communities can help to reinforce democratic processes in liberal states by ensuring alternative perspectives are heard and group think is avoided.
So a faith perspective not just helps the state through the provision of services, but helps to ensure the very plurality that helps to keep the state liberal i.e. open to challenge. Without challenge, democratic states run the risk of becoming illiberal and fostering a culture of uniformity which can be unhealthy for the future of democracy.
Western democracies, including the UK and Ireland, need debate and vibrant differences to remain alive and achieve renewal. It is their oxygen.
This belief in pluralism on the part of the state is not alien to the Catholic tradition – it is central to it and was enshrined in the Second Vatican Council when it said:
“It is the task of the state to see to it that all citizens are able to come to a suitable share in culture and are properly prepared to exercise their civic duties and rights. Therefore the state must protect the right of children to an adequate school education, check on the ability of teachers and the excellence of their training, look after the health of the pupils and in general, promote the whole school project. But it must always keep in mind the principle of subsidiarity so that there is no kind of school monopoly, for this is opposed to the native rights of the human person, to the development and spread of culture, to the peaceful association of citizens and to the pluralism that exists today in ever so many societies.”
Our approach to faith bodies acting in society tells us something about our state and society. But we run the risk that if we do not know our own tradition sufficiently well, and the particular context that gave birth to that tradition, then we might import a model which we think is similar or feasible, but is not a product of our particular cultural context.
That could lead to a rupture in the relationship between state and society, of which the faith dimension is a central element.
Broader society
This brings us to the final point now that we have identified what we mean by Catholic education and what is its context – what of its future? It all depends on how the state sees itself with regard to broader society. If it adopts a pluralist approach as set out above then faith based education can thrive. However, if it sees itself as going down a more absolutist state model to the detriment of society then it is unlikely that state-funded faith schools will survive in their current form.
Ultimately freedom would be impinged, societal and personal.
A ‘state pays so state rules’ approach could lead to totalitarianism and upset the inherent equilibrium in a society which all democratic states should strive for.
So how do we avoid such a situation arising where the state in the western democratic tradition becomes illiberal? What role for Catholic education? How do we not only ensure the survival of faith schools, but the inherent freedoms that go along with them? We do so by responding coherently to each of the arguments which are used to attack faith schools and by placing the argument in the wider context and the role such schools play in our society and why.
The practical points we must take on are:
First, that faith schools breed hatred or mistrust. The self-styled ‘Commission on Religion and Belief in Public Life’ published a report in December 2015 which addressed the issue of faith based schools and admissions policies. The report stated:
“In England successive governments have claimed in recent years that faith schools and free schools create and promote social inclusion which leads to cohesion and integration. However, in our view it is not clear that segregation of young people into faith schools has promoted greater cohesion or that it has not in fact been socially divisive and led rather to greater misunderstanding and tension.”
The report goes on to recommend that “Bodies responsible for school admissions should take measures to reduce selection on grounds of religion in state-funded schools”. And at the Press Conference to launch the report I’m told that yet again Dame Butler Sloth cited the example of Catholic schools in Northern Ireland as a negative.
Ground
All too often I have heard even Catholic educators in Britain and in Ireland cede ground on this point.
How many times do people cite the very existence of Catholic schools in Northern Ireland as if they were somehow the cause of the Troubles and that they bred hatred and mistrust?
You mostly hear it from ill-informed critics who have never experienced Catholic schools in Northern Ireland and the sterling work they did during the Troubles to hold the line and to prevent the society from slipping into civil war. It can be convenient for an elite or an establishment to blame religion for the Troubles; it sort of exonerates them from their responsibility for sectarianism over the decades.
I don’t know of anyone who was radicalised by what they were taught in a Catholic school in Northern Ireland. I do know many who were prevented from being radicalised by their education in Catholic schools. Many were challenged to think morally and to act courageously and the Church never flinched from its transmission of a strong moral code regarding the taking of human life. Nor is it just in Northern Ireland as recent research by Professor Duncan Morrow on Scotland’s Catholic schools showed that they do not cause sectarianism.
And as I witnessed first hand in Pakistan – many Christian schools with a majority of Muslim students – are at the forefront of inter-religious witness and have been for decades. They have proved that it is possible to carry on the ethos and identity in challenging circumstances.
Second, we are increasingly told that faith schools are not representative of wider society and tend to serve privilege.
The most recent statistics for the Catholic schools sector in England show the following. Catholic schools are more ethnically diverse than the national average and they take more students from deprived areas. 20% of pupils at Catholic secondary schools live in the most deprived areas, compared to a national average of 17%. 33.5% of pupils in Catholic primary schools are from ethnic minority backgrounds, compared to a national average of 27%.
Third, we need to trumpet the success of Catholic schools academically and why that is so. They have a higher number of Ofsted ranked good or outstanding schools and students score higher in GCSEs and SATs than the national average. And why is that so? It is because of the wider values and distinct philosophy of education.
Fourth, we are told that faith schools are ghettos which undermine cohesion in society by segregating people on religious difference.
Background
Between the Catholic and Church of England they provide close to a quarter of all school provision in England. And far from being ghettos, Catholic schools in England have just over 70% of students coming from a Catholic background and 55% of the teaching staff.
Catholic Schools are part of the widest network of education found anywhere in the world and make a rich contribution to the society not only in the local contexts, but in the global context. Each day the Catholic Church alone is educating nearly sixty million students through its institutions across many cultures and languages.
So how do we ensure a vibrant pluralist space in which faith based institutions can thrive? We must retain conviction about the offer of Catholic education and its purpose and contribution to society and not apologise for that conviction.
We must remain vigilant on the need to constantly integrate the ethos with the prevailing educational philosophy so that all will be reminded of the broader goals of Catholic education. Retaining that integration requires constant attention.
To succeed in re-embedding Catholic education in the public square we must also set the argument in its widest context and to show that it is not just about state funding for faith schools, important as that is to the life of the Church and society, but it goes much broader than that and touches the very notion of freedom within our society.
Of course to operate a hybrid model between the Church and state will prove challenging along the way. Complexity usually is. But engagement and participation is always preferable to isolation and marginalisation both for state and Church, provided one does not lose its independence or distinctiveness to the other.
The pluralist context in the UK has given us a wonderful faith based education system. It is a system that evolved and depends on a delicate equilibrium which must be promoted, explained, and if need be defended from time to time in the political and public arena.
It is not without its tensions and challenges, but it remains a fine example of a contract within a pluralist society between state and faith which we arrived at after painful experiences of getting accommodation and inclusion badly wrong.
Our system now works to the benefit of both state and Church, but most of all to citizens. It has the potential to answer a much needed response to our contemporary culture as we struggle to define and build cohesive communities. It has worked for previous generations and it can work for ours too.
Francis Campbell is Vice-Chancellor of St Mary’s University, Twickenham. He is former British Ambassador to the Holy See (2005-2011) and Pakistan (2011-2013).