Enoch Burke has again refused to comply with court orders barring him from his workplace despite spending two nights in prison for contempt of court.
“I can be a Christian in Mountjoy Prison or I can be a pagan acceptor of transgenderism outside it,” he told the High Court today.
The schoolteacher, who is an evangelical Christian, was suspended from work on full pay last month pending the outcome of a disciplinary process following incidents in which he voiced opposition to a request from his principal to address a transgender child by their preferred name and to use the pronoun “they” instead of “he”.
He was jailed on Monday for defying temporary court orders that he stay away from the workplace and not attempt to teach children there.
The matter returned to court today where the board of management of Wilson’s Hospital School, a Church of Ireland diocesan boarding school in Multyfarnham, Co Westmeath, secured the renewal of interlocutory orders.
Addressing the court, Mr Burke made clear he had no intention of purging his contempt by agreeing by abide by the orders.
"I will never leave Mountjoy Prison if in leaving that prison I must violate my well-informed conscience, and my religious beliefs and deny my God,” he said.
He said that were he given the choice of either abiding by the orders or acting in accordance with his religious beliefs, his answer would be the same for the next hundred years.
He claimed the court had stripped him of his liberty and his dignity, but it could not deprive him of his integrity and his religious convictions.
Mr Burke reiterated claims that transgenderism was against the teachings of every major church on the island of Ireland.
He said that during his time in prison he had time to consider whether any of his actions were wrong or amounted to misconduct and concluded that what he had done was “honourable”.
“I consider it commendable that I chose to obey God rather than man,” he said.
He criticised the decision to jail him, stating: “This court has divested itself of all honour and has been mean, contemptible and base”.
“The tragedy of this case is that by merely stating my opposition to transgenderism, I have paid dearly.”
He also claimed the actions of the school in suspending him had “severely damaged my good name, blackened my character, and stained my reputation as a teacher”.
Rosemary Mallon, counsel for the school’s board of management, said it was “quite clear from the defendant’s comments that he has no intention of purging his contempt, nor does he have any intention of not attending at Wilson’s School”.
She told the court the matter was not about Mr Burke’s belief or transgenderism.
“It is not about his beliefs, it is about his conduct,” she said
The barrister said the case was in court because Mr Burke “was a teacher who ignored the nature and effect of the lawful decision of the school's board of management to suspend him on pay pending the outcome of the disciplinary process”.
Mr Justice Max Barrett agreed to continue the interlocutory injunction.
He agreed that the matter was “not about transgenderism” but the breach of an interlocutory injunction.
The judge adjourned the matter to next Wednesday of next week but said Mr Burke could come back to the court before then if he wished to purge his contempt.
Mr Burke, who represented himself at the hearing, replied: “I would love to obey the court, but I cannot ignore my conscience and my religious beliefs.”
His brother Isaac and father Seán were present in court.
Afterwards, he was taken to a waiting prison van and returned to Mountjoy.
The orders breached by Mr Burke were issued by Ms Justice Siobhan Stack on August 31.
These were a temporary injunction barring him from Wilson’s Hospital School and from attempting to teach its students.
The orders were sought by the school’s board of management after he continued to turn up for work despite being suspended on August 24.
He defied the orders, turning up at the school each day and sitting in an empty classroom. He was arrested at the school and jailed for contempt of court on Monday.
The row has its roots in a request last May from the then school principal, Niamh McShane, that teachers address a transgender student by a new name and with the pronoun “they” instead of “he”.
Mr Burke is one of ten siblings in a well-known Burke family from Castlebar, Co Mayo, who have been involved in a number of legal and other disputes in recent years, some of which related to their religious beliefs.
He has claimed his suspension from work was unlawful, but has taken no steps, legal or otherwise, to challenge it.
Ms McShane made the request to staff via email on May 9 following a meeting with the transgender student and their parents.
The email prompted a furious response from Mr Burke the following day.
According to an affidavit filed by the chair of the school’s board of management, John Rogers, Mr Burke responded via email: “I am shocked that students in this school are being forced to accept this position.”
He asked if the parents of students were informed and if the school’s chaplain agreed.
The principal responded there was “no suggestion of force by or for anyone” and that the chaplain’s agreement was not required.
She said that if Mr Burke was unwilling to have the child in his classroom, he should make an appointment to see her.
In response, Mr Burke wrote: “It is wrong that this belief system would be forced upon students and I will be taking this further. It is an abuse of children and their constitutional rights.” Later that day he interrupted a staff meeting, questioning the chaplain on where he stood on the matter and querying the appropriateness of a faith school accommodating a student in this manner.
In another email, Ms McShane clarified the school’s approach.
She told Mr Burke the ethos of the school was inclusive, and that the welfare of students was paramount. Its admission policy, she said, affirmed the school would not discriminate against a student on any of the grounds set out in the Equal Status Act.
She said the right of persons to be called by a name of their choosing and in accordance with their preferred gender was a recognised right.
However, Mr Burke’s objections continued. The High Court was told that in June he interrupted a chapel service marking the school’s 260th anniversary, asking Ms McShane to withdrawn her “demand”.
According to Mr Rogers’ affidavit, a dinner took place afterwards. It is claimed that after the meal he approached Ms McShane and, in a “heated” manner, asked her to withdraw the request she had made to staff. Ms McShane said she was willing to speak to him, but this was not the appropriate place and she walked away from him.
However, it is alleged he followed and continued to question her loudly and that other people had to stand between them to prevent a continuation of the questioning.
Mr Burke sought to downplay both incidents when first appeared in court earlier this week.
He claimed that he only questioned Ms McShane once after the dinner and then left her alone.
His suspension came after a report was submitted by the principal to the board of management in which she expressed “serious concerns” about how Mr Burke might act in future.
A disciplinary meeting was scheduled to take place on September 14. It is unclear whether it will proceed while Mr Burke is in jail.