The case of JR87: Faith in education?

The role and place of religion in the education system in Northern Ireland is currently under scrutiny in light of a case currently being considered by the UK Supreme Court – the case of JR87.

The case centres on a child who attended a primary school in Northern Ireland with a Christian ethos. When the child in question started repeating a prayer at home before eating, one that she had learnt at school, and began asking questions about God and religion, her parents voiced their concerns to the school, namely that the education that their daughter was receiving did not conform with their own religious or philosophical convictions.

The child’s parents in this case describe themselves as "broadly humanist", and had decided not to raise their child within any religious tradition.

Before we consider in more detail the context and content of this particular case, it is helpful to make some general observations around the role of beliefs and values in our public education systems.

We should of course firstly acknowledge that parents care deeply about the content and quality of their child’s education. We know that Christian and non-Christian parents alike want their child to have every opportunity to learn and develop, to discover their gifts and abilities, to flourish and reach their potential.

It is also apparent that in our increasingly pluralistic contexts in the UK, the families served by our education systems are coming from a diversity of cultures, traditions, and worldviews. This will look different across our regions and localities, but from these differences emerge not only questions of inclusion and the ability to provide appropriately for the needs of individual pupils, but also raise a variety of expectations around what the public education system is for, including the beliefs and values that are carried and communicated.

As our communities become more diverse, important questions come to the fore around how we will continue to provide shared education that respects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, and respects the religious and philosophical convictions of parents.

A 'secularised' education system

One reaction to this changing demographic is the call to move towards a more "secularised" education system. In response, we can affirm that there is no "secular" or neutral education, if secular is understood as the removal of religious commitments or influences.

The call to secularise knowledge is popularly based on the belief that public knowledge can and should be objective and grounded in rationality and science, and that religious belief is superfluous and divisive and subsequently has no place in our public education system.

Indeed, some would argue that nurturing a child in religious faith violates their autonomy.

Trevor Cooling, Professor Emeritus of Christian Education, in Doing God in Education, offered a strong rebuttal to this position, pointing out this positivist understanding of knowledge is no more neutral than a religious understanding.

In addition, human knowledge is not just received, but interpreted and applied in life in order to find meaning and significance; education is always based on a vision of what it means to flourish as a human being which stems from a worldview.

As we consider the role of religion in our schools, therefore, we must continue to give careful attention to how and what beliefs and values shape educational content and practice. For there is no such thing as "value-free" or "neutral" education.

Any educational endeavour is shaped by a particular understanding of the learner and their purpose and place in the world within a vision of a life well lived. This in turn informs what children learn, how they learn, and determines what ultimately the end goal of teaching and learning is.

Teaching and learning in our schools also encompasses more than just core subjects such as Maths, English, and Science; moral and spiritual formation are central components of educational provision.

It is also the case that education is not just confined to the content of the curriculum or the classroom; learning, socialisation, and personal formation happen throughout the school day.

Public education, as such, remains a transformative enterprise, shaping the hearts and minds of the children and the communities that it serves.

For Christians committed to public engagement and service, it will continue to be a vital area for theological reflection if the Christian faith is to be seen as a resource to our schools and communities and not dismissed as divisive or irrelevant.

Religious education in Northern Ireland

The issues raised in this case also bring to the fore important questions about the current and future provision of religious education and collective worship in schools in Northern Ireland, and raise questions more broadly about the nature and structure of an education system in a democratic and increasingly diverse society.

In Northern Ireland, there is strong evidence that Christian values and principles continue to permeate schools, inspire school leaders, teachers, and staff, are supported by parents and communities, and contribute to the moral and spiritual formation of children and young people.

There is also evidence of a changing demographic which the education system seeks to serve. The issues raised in this case are therefore ones that will need to be considered beyond the law courts, and are ones for policy makers and civic society, including the churches.

In light of this, I will offer some reflections on a couple of issues that come to light.

The case of JR87: Christianity and Schooling in N. Ireland

In order to understand the particular context of the case of JR87, it is important to note the influence of the Christian churches on the education system in Northern Ireland; this can be traced back to the creation of the state of Northern Ireland in 1921.

Despite initial attempts to set up an integrated system of education, which would exclude religious education from the curriculum, objections raised by both Catholics and Protestants resulted in a "dual" system of education being established, with religious education and a collective act of worship as part of the curricular provision.

Current provision of religious education and collective worship, as set out in the Education and Libraries (NI) Order 1986, requires grant-aided schools to provide religious education and collective worship in line with the Christian faith.

Critics of the educational system argue that separate schooling amounts to cultural and social segregation and does not contribute to community cohesion and solidarity in the post-conflict society of Northern Ireland.

A further important point of context in the case of JR87 is that the child in question attended a Controlled primary school in Belfast during her first couple of years of primary education. The Controlled sector is the largest sector within the education system in Northern Ireland, making up 49 per cent of all schools across the full range of school types. The term "Controlled" refers to the transfer of control of schools from the three largest Protestant churches – the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, the Church of Ireland, and the Methodist Church in Ireland - to the government of Northern Ireland during the 1920s and 1930s.

Education in this sector continues to take place within the ethos of non-denominational Christian values and principles, and according to the Controlled Schools’ Support Council (CSSC), Controlled schools are "open to all welcoming children and young people of all faiths and none, richly diverse and inclusive, reflective of and embedded in the communities they serve."

The case in question raises an important point for clarification when we consider how diversity and inclusion is understood.

A Christian-ethos school can be open to all, diverse in its student population, and inclusive in its welcome, while remaining distinct in its character and its approach to teaching and learning.

However, one of the broader questions in the background to this case is whether Christianity currently has an unfair stake in the education system in Northern Ireland.

The Northern Ireland Humanists argue that a "large and growing share of Northern Ireland’s population is not Christian" and therefore are currently denied an education that "reflects the diverse religious and humanist beliefs of our modern nation."

They point to the 2021 Northern Ireland Census in which 17 per cent of the population indicated that they did not belong to any "religion, religious denomination or body"; this was an increase from 10 per cent in 2011. At the same time, the 2021 Census also showed that 80 per cent of the population continue to identify with the Christian faith.

In view of this demographic shift and the ongoing Christian influence in the education system, Humanists call for a "radical overhaul" of the current system and provision, including a concerted move towards an integrated education system.

This may be based at least in part on the assumption that parents of a different faith or none would automatically choose to send their child to an integrated or "secular" school.

Evidence from England shows that faith schools on average have higher academic standards and achieve better results than non-religious schools. Academic outcomes remain an important consideration for parents when choosing a school.

In addition, parents who practice a different faith, or practice no faith, may still appreciate their child receiving an education that is shaped by Christian values, or one that at least takes God and religion seriously.

The case of JR87 and her parents draws on international human rights protocols and obligations.

In light of this, a central consideration in the case is the following: if parents have the right to have their child educated in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions – and according to Article 2 of the First Protocol (A2P1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), they do - can this happen with a religious education curriculum that is centred on the Christian faith, and within a Christian ethos school that practices collective worship in accordance with the Christian faith?

In the case of JR87, the school responded to the parents’ concerns by confirming that its provision of religious education and collective worship was "Bible-based" and that its provision was in line with legislation and the core syllabus, a RE curriculum currently drafted by the four main Christian churches in Northern Ireland as specified by the Department of Education.

The international legal framework recognises A2P1 as part of the right to education; in addition, the State is required under Article 9 of the ECHR to respect the right of everyone to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.

We can assume that these are rights that parents of all faiths and none would value and want to see protected. But securing these rights raises the question of how a State fulfils its legal obligations when the education system is predominantly shaped by one religion, and where the population is increasingly diverse and arguably lacks the social cohesion and shared values that might previously have shaped communities.

The issue at the heart of the case therefore is whether there has been a breach in the rights of a child and her parents to receive an education that respects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, and is in conformity with the religious and philosophical convictions of the parents.

In the case of JR87, the Northern Ireland High Court found in favour of the applicants, with the judge ruling that the current legislative provision for the teaching of religious education and arrangements for collective worship, breached the child and father’s rights under Article 2 and Article 9 of the ECHR, and that the curriculum is not conveyed in an "objective, critical and pluralistic manner".

The Court of Appeal in 2024, however, arrived at a different opinion on the rights in question; while upholding the finding on the nature of the curriculum, it ruled that the parents’ rights had not been breached on account of the fact that they had an "unfettered absolute right" to have their child excused from these aspects of the curriculum, but they chose not to exercise that right.

The Court of Appeal also noted that a review of religious education was already on the agenda of policy makers in Northern Ireland, and this "'refresh of the curriculum' will inevitably include consideration of religious instruction to take into account the complexion and changing needs of our modern society."

In light of the most recent Court proceedings, the issue before the Supreme Court awaiting a ruling remains: "Is there a breach of the rights of the child, and the child’s parents, under Article 2 of the First Protocol (“A2P1”) to the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) if the parents are able to remove their child from attendance of non-denominational Christian religious education and collective worship at school?’

We await the Court’s judgment on this; in the meantime, a couple of points raised by the case deserve further reflection.

Secular plurality or religious indoctrination?

One of the key points of deliberation in the Supreme Court hearing was on whether the provision of religious education and collective worship in this particular case was objective, critical, and pluralistic, or whether it amounted to indoctrination.

The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has also called on the Department of Education to ensure that the religious education syllabus is objective, pluralist and critical in nature which includes "education on and respect for a diversity of religion."

Both sides of the Court argued that, in line with human rights provision, religious coercion or indoctrination is not acceptable in a public school, but there was disagreement as to whether "objective, critical, and pluralistic" and "indoctrination" were two distinct approaches, or whether educational provision could be understood on a spectrum.

Safeguarding pluralism, it was argued, is necessary for any democratic society, and therefore what is important in the case of JR87 is whether the current school provision of religious education and collective worship safeguarded this plurality, and whether the exemption and opt-out on offer was sufficient to ensure this.

Are children being taught about Christianity, or are children being required to practice the Christian faith and accept it as true?

A danger with the binary line of argument is the presumption that there is a secular and neutral way to educate which is objective, critical, and pluralistic, and the alternative to this is religious indoctrination.

J. Mark Halstead, Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of Huddersfield, notes that one of the arguments against faith schools is that they indoctrinate children and that it is not the role of a publicly funded school to instil religious beliefs in children. In response, he points out that "no school can function in a cultural vacuum, and that the aim of faith schools is not to indoctrinate children or to imprison them within a particular faith or culture, but to provide them with a rounded education that includes a fuller understanding of the beliefs and values that their parents and faith communities take seriously."

As such, while developing skills of creative and critical thinking are essential, it is not possible to build neutrality into education and schooling.

Taking God or gods out of the curriculum and schooling does not create a neutral ground; instead, education and the ethos of the education system is rather built on the assumption that God does not exist. This results in the content of teaching and learning, and the meaning and significance attached to it, being shaped by an atheistic worldview.

Further questions raised by this case concern the role of religious education, namely: Is religious education about nurturing faith, or is it about advancing religious knowledge and understanding?

If the latter, how is a diversity of religious beliefs and practices accommodated, and specifically for this case, how might children be introduced to different religious beliefs and practices within a Christian ethos school?

Particular concerns were raised in the hearing at the Supreme Court around attempted proselytising through a confessional approach to religious education.

It is important to note that indoctrination cannot simply be associated with religion. Brenda Watson, former Director of the Farmington Institute, Oxford, noted that confessionalism is often equated with religious indoctrination, but "secularist indoctrination" can also take place in schools; indoctrination happens, she noted, when children and young people are not presented with alternatives or choice. What guards against indoctrination is when teachers are "scrupulously open" in the way that confessional content is presented to pupils.

Education, as opposed to indoctrination, gives pupils space to reflect and freedom to disagree. This does not amount, she argued, to a relativist view of knowledge, but instead creates opportunity for pupils to reflect on various truth claims with a shared concern for respect, fairness, and compassion: "If educational concern for the integrity of the pupil is in place the teacher can then safely open up questions concerning truth without indoctrinating."

Christian hospitality: Nurturing our common life together

The case of JR87 highlights that in an increasingly diverse and often contested culture, Christians invested in public schooling will need to continue to make the case for why a distinctly Christian education, embodied in the ethos of a school, is a legitimate and desirable component of the education system.

Church and school leaders have a renewed opportunity to make the case for why a Christian approach to education is good not only for children from Christian homes, but for all children. Through the welcome that is extended to the wider community, they may carefully consider how to adopt and instil into their school communities an invitational approach that is shaped by Christian hospitality - an approach that rejects coercion or compulsion.

As such, a Christian ethos school can continue to be welcoming to children of all faiths and none, and play a central role in nurturing our common life together.

Beyond the specific issues raised in the case of JR87, it is worth noting that a distinctly Christian education can give attention not just to what is taught in religious education, or shared in collective worship, but can also consider how the curriculum educates the whole person for all of life.

In line with a Christian vision of the learner, it affirms the inestimable value and worth of every pupil, and the unique gifts and qualities that they bring to the world.

Holistic teaching and learning enables each one to gain knowledge and develop and flourish in their skills and abilities through a rich and varied curriculum. This includes giving particular attention to moral and spiritual formation.

A Christian ethos, confidently held and embedded in the Christian story, can shape the shared life within the school, and the qualities that mark it as distinctive. Of foremost importance in shaping this common life is affording dignity and respect to all those who share in it.

1. J. Mark Halstead, Faith schools in L.P. Barnes (ed.), Debates in Religious Education (2nd edn, Abingdon, 2024), 99.
2. Brenda Watson, The aims of religious education in L.P. Barnes (ed.), Debates in Religious Education (2nd edn, Abingdon, 2024), 15.