The future of faith schools: a continuing story

I blogged recently about the future of our faith schools and the likelihood that they will remain as faith schools, but not as we know them. Today comes a new challenge to their existence, this time from the European Commission, after complaints from the British Humanist Association (BHA).

The plan has been long in the making – the BHA tried to provoke an investigation last year, which was placed on hold after the Commission ruled that no evidence had been provided of ‘incorrect application of the laws at stake’.  The law in question states that a school registered as being of religious character can select a religious adherent for a staff post as a ‘genuine occupational requirement’. Government guidance goes further, the Equality Act advising that schools can give preference to religious candidates in ‘recruitment, remuneration and promotion’. The BHA viewpoint seems to hinge on the use of the word ‘desirable’ in advertisements. It argues that religious adherence should be either essential or not there at all.

The responses  in today’s press from the various groups which manage faith schools were interesting. The Catholic Education Service says that the Equality Act is in line with EU legislation. The London Diocesan Board (Church of England) said that a Christian commitment was usually only sought when filling senior leadership positions, but that the quality of the candidate would be more important than the fact that they were a card carrying member of the Christian church. The Muslim spokesman said that they don’t state a preference for Muslims in their advertisements, but very few non-Muslims apply for jobs in their schools anyway, so it isn’t really an issue.

So, is all this a storm in a tea cup? Well, on the surface level, yes. But taken as part of a bigger picture, no.  It’s yet another attempt to dilute the ethos of faith schools. As I wrote elsewhere, there is a determination to force faith schools to take at least 50% non-faith pupils, if not to become completely open access. Depending on the areas which they serve, many Church of England schools already are multi-faith; Catholic schools less so, and Muslim schools seemingly not at all.

It must really irk the BHA that faith schools are so popular with parents. But what bemused me when I read the article was the fact that, yet again, the BHA is defining humanism by what it opposes and what it is not, rather than what it believes. And why, I wonder, don’t they set up their own schools if they feel so strongly?

The answer is to be found on the BHA website: ‘the BHA campaigns positively [I would dispute that] for integrated inclusive schools’. They feel that to set up a humanist school would be ‘ethically unsound and socially divisive’, and anyway, many of our schools without religious character already meet their ideals. Fair enough. But just because you have an opinion, it doesn’t make you right. Why should humanist ideology prevail in all of our schools? One third of our schools are faith based – more if you add faith ethos. Most of them are oversubscribed, which means that parents want their children educated in them. We live in a democracy, and to deny one third of our country’s parents the right to choose their child’s education would be a very undemocratic democracy.

The BHA also argues that faith should be a private matter. But it doesn’t work like that. To rephrase Descartes, I think Christian, therefore I am Christian. Just as others think humanist, therefore they are humanist. We all believe something; it makes us who we are and it means that we implicitly reject all other beliefs. My faith informs how I think, what I say, how I act and who I am. It can no more be a private matter than can my DNA.

So I’ll await with interest the outcome of the Commission enquiry. Perhaps, in the meantime, opponents of faith education might well ponder on the meaning of diversity within a mature democracy. They might explain how their belief system promotes the common good of society and the human flourishing of our children and young people.

We hear a lot about what you oppose. We hear nothing about what you promote or what you positively contribute. Over to you….