On November 28, 2025, the debate over Religious Education (RE) in Northern Ireland’s schools reached a new peak, as the Department of Education instructed schools to continue providing RE based on the "holy scriptures"—despite a landmark UK Supreme Court ruling that declared the current Christian-focused curriculum unlawful. The decision has sparked a flurry of reactions, revealing deep divisions over faith, education, and the rights of parents and children in a changing society.
Education Minister Paul Givan addressed the issue head-on in a letter to school principals, responding directly to the Supreme Court’s judgment. According to BBC News, Givan wrote, "controlled schools must provide undenominational Religious Education based on the holy scriptures." He acknowledged the complexity of the judgment and emphasized that it could not be ignored. Yet, he was clear: "Schools will note, therefore, that both Religious Education and collective worship continue to be a legal requirement."
The Supreme Court’s ruling was prompted by the case of a Belfast primary school girl, born to non-religious parents, who started reciting Christian prayers at home after learning them in school. Her parents, concerned that their daughter was being taught to assume Christianity as "an absolute truth," took legal action. The court found that the RE curriculum was not taught in an "objective, critical and pluralist manner," and that collective worship was similarly lacking in inclusivity. The judges also pointed out that while parents have the right to withdraw their children from RE lessons and worship, exercising that right could place an undue burden on objecting parents.
Despite the ruling, existing legislation requiring controlled schools to provide undenominational RE based on the holy scriptures and daily collective worship remains legally in force. Givan’s letter, as reported by BBC News, noted that the judgment "had not struck down existing legislation." He also pointed out that the judgment recognized Christianity as the main religion in Northern Ireland, meaning the greater part of RE would still focus on knowledge of Christianity. However, he acknowledged that the RE syllabus would need to be reformed and promised to outline the changes soon, adding, "The area of collective worship requires further consideration."
In the meantime, Givan assured principals that further comprehensive and "legally sound" guidance would be forthcoming. He also revealed that the department had "requested further legal advice to understand the full implications of the judgment." The sense of uncertainty is palpable, as schools navigate the tension between legal requirements and the demand for a more inclusive, pluralistic approach to religious education.
The implications of the Supreme Court’s decision are particularly complex for controlled state schools, which are predominantly attended by Protestant children. As News Letter highlighted in a recent letter from David Armstrong of County Armagh, the judgment is likely to widen the "nurture-gap" between Catholic faith schools and controlled schools. Catholic schools, where faith formation is central, are expected to be less affected by the ruling. In contrast, state-controlled schools face the challenge of adapting to a pluralistic RE framework while still being bound by legislation that requires teaching based on the holy scriptures.
Armstrong’s letter reflects the concerns of many religious parents and church leaders who worry that the ruling could accelerate secularization within the state system. He recalled that, at the 2006 Church of Ireland General Synod, government policy was accused of deliberately diminishing the Church’s influence in school life. The Supreme Court’s decision, Armstrong argued, could hasten that process, creating a deficit for Protestant parents seeking faith-based education within the state sector.
The judgment requires that RE become pluralistic, incorporating other religions and worldviews and teaching all content in an objective, critical manner. But what does this mean in practice? Armstrong raised thought-provoking questions: "Would an ‘objective’ lesson require comparing the Qur’anic and biblical accounts of Jesus’ birth, critically analysing the Virgin Birth, and presenting multiple interpretations?" Such an approach, he suggested, could leave students feeling that what they learn at home and in church is merely one belief among many competing options.
The issue of collective worship is equally thorny. If Christian collective worship, as currently mandated in schools, violates the principles of inclusivity and pluralism, what would "critical and plural" worship even look like? Armstrong’s skepticism is clear: "It literally beggars belief what ‘critical and plural’ worship might even involve!"
The case also raises broader questions about the rights of parents and the role of minority views in shaping public policy. While the appeal was brought by a non-religious parent whose human rights the court found had been breached, many parents in culturally Christian Northern Ireland support a Christian-focused curriculum. Armstrong noted that this dynamic led one judge in the Belfast Court of Appeal to wonder whether the case represents "the tail wagging the dog." The judgment has prompted concerns among religious parents about their recognized human right to have their children’s education aligned with their beliefs.
Yet, the Supreme Court judges were careful to emphasize that the case was "not about secularism" in education and insisted that no one was suggesting that RE should not be provided in schools. Rather, the focus was on ensuring that RE is taught in a way that is truly objective, critical, and pluralist, respecting the diversity of beliefs in Northern Ireland’s classrooms.
For now, the Department of Education has made it clear that schools must continue to follow existing legal requirements. But change is in the air. The RE syllabus is set to be reformed, and the area of collective worship is under review. The department is seeking further legal advice to clarify the full implications of the Supreme Court judgment, and more comprehensive guidance is expected in the coming weeks.
As Northern Ireland grapples with these changes, the debate over RE in schools is far from settled. The challenge will be to create a curriculum that respects the region’s Christian heritage while also honoring the rights and beliefs of all students and parents—no easy task in a society where faith and identity are so closely intertwined.
With legal, cultural, and educational forces all pulling in different directions, schools and families alike are left waiting for clarity on how the future of Religious Education will unfold. The coming months promise further debate and, inevitably, more questions than answers as Northern Ireland seeks a path forward that is fair, inclusive, and true to its complex history.
