Michael KellyEnda Kenny’s comments should worry anyone concerned about right to hold diverse views
The Taoiseach has raised what appears to be a worrying threat to Catholic schools if the forthcoming referendum on same-sex marriage is passed.
Speaking to presenter Seán O’Rourke on RTÉ Radio, Enda Kenny said that, if the referendum passes, Catholic schools “will be expected to teach children that people in this country, in Ireland, in 2016, will have the right to get married irrespective of their sexual orientation”.
The remarks should alarm anyone who believes in a truly pluralistic society where individuals and groups – like the Church – should be free to express their beliefs and teachings.
It’s disturbing that Mr Kenny’s spokespersons are refusing to clarify what exactly the remarks mean. Will schools be allowed to refuse to do this? If not, will they also be allowed to state the Catholic belief that marriage can only take place between two people of the opposite sex?
The grave implications for freedom of religion, and not just for Catholic schools, is obvious to all.
Reflecting on the Taoiseach’s comments Bishop Kevin Doran asks whether the logical outcome of his comments is either:
a) a withdrawal of State funding (which is the same threat that Dr James Reilly made 18 months ago with respect to Catholic Hospitals) or
b) prosecution of teachers and members of boards of management for ‘discrimination’ if they speak about mothers and fathers.
Of course, Catholic schools don’t exist in a vacuum. If the referendum passes and citizens vote to radically redefine the understanding of marriage as a unique relationship between one man and one woman, that has obvious implications. Just as the passage of divorce legislation created a radical distinction between the Church’s understanding of marriage as an indissoluble covenant and the State’s belief that marriages can be dissolved, the passage of same-sex marriage legislation creates what tacticians call ‘facts on the ground’. In this context it would clearly be preposterous for Catholics to pretend that same-sex marriage is not a civil reality. Where the crux of Mr Kenny’s threat lies, however, is in the freedom of faith-based schools to articulate their values and the values of the parents who choose those schools for their children.
Understanding of marriage
Will schools be free, for example, to propose the Church’s understanding of marriage while acknowledging that the State believes marriage means something else entirely?
This liberty is vital. But, it is also important that the faith dimension of Catholic schools not be compartmentalised. Teaching about the meaning of marriage extends far beyond religious education. It relates to civics, home economics, history, literature, science and art, to mention but a few of the subject areas in the curriculum.
Many gay people see same-sex marriage as the human rights issue of this generation. This is a sincerely-held belief that must be respected. We should also be conscious that as a Church and a society we have often failed to live up to the Gospel call to treat gay people with compassion and respect. It would be ironic, however, if the Government, in seeking to assert what they believe to be a right for one group, ends up impinging on the rights of people to hold and teach that marriage is between one man and one woman.
The Taoiseach’s comments should worry anyone who is concerned about the right to hold diverse views. Whether or not one is supportive of same-sex marriage, one should support the rights of people to articulate differing visions.
Mr Kenny’s intervention will also lead many to ask whether this really is the thin edge of the wedge. If schools are not permitted to articulate the Church’s teaching on marriage, what next? For how long will priests be allowed to refuse to officiate at same-sex marriages? Does this sound extreme? This is why urgent clarity from Mr Kenny is needed.