On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:32:44 +0000, eastender
wrote:

I don't like posting personal details about my kids but I will say that
in fact our nearest primary is a Catholic school but despite the fact
that my taxes helps pay for it they are not allowed to go there as
non-Catholics.

I find that very disturbing... I don't mean this to be a rant about
religion, just that to require certain beliefs from children who
haven't had the time to consider the subject fully on their own seems
wrong to me, whoever's paying for the school. I don't see how the
children can even *be* Catholics -- or Atheists.

A school near me has the most Catholic name in the world has a (TfL)
school bus (well, 6xx). For once, I was up early enough to spot it.

Richard.

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 18:46:05
on Wed, 13 Feb 2013, remarked:

I can't speak for elsewhere but in Cambridge CoE schools are very much
community schools first and not exclusively Faith school.

Here's an extract from the CofE Secondary which was the second nearest
school to where I lived in Nottingham (the first nearest being a
Catholic School), both of which were in addition to conventional
community schools serving the same area (indeed both were sited in the
catchment area of the local Comprehensive, but had wider catchment areas
of their own):

"Church schools are distinctive because they offer an education
based on Christian values. However, what really makes the
difference are when those values are underpinned by beliefs and
lived out in a way that brings added educational strength to the
school. This is most certainly the case at Emmanuel School where
every student has the opportunity to understand and experience
the Christian faith that inspires and motivates the school...

Nottingham Emmanuel School is a truly vibrant community on a
faith journey in which unique value is placed on each individual
as precious to God and every effort made to develop students as
whole people to enable them to reach their full potential in all
areas."

I'm glad the church schools of Cambridge are better than that, at Primary
level anyway. I wouldn't swear that the one church secondary school here is
any better than that. It was a Catholic failing school until rescued by the
CoE 25 years ago.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at
19:12:31 on Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Arthur Figgis
remarked:

"Church schools are distinctive because they offer an education
based on Christian values. However, what really makes the
difference are when those values are underpinned by beliefs and
lived out in a way that brings added educational strength to the
school. This is most certainly the case at Emmanuel School where
every student has the opportunity to understand and experience
the Christian faith that inspires and motivates the school...

Nottingham Emmanuel School is a truly vibrant community on a
faith journey in which unique value is placed on each individual
as precious to God and every effort made to develop students as
whole people to enable them to reach their full potential in all
areas."

Does that lot mean any more than any other mission statement?

The part that's relevant to this thread is "every student has the
opportunity to understand and experience the Christian faith" (but not
necessarily to subscribe to it, I assume).
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 20:06:33 on
Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Richard remarked:

I don't see how the children can even *be* Catholics -- or Atheists.

Those who have regularly attended Confirmation classes (the background
of which might well form part of all education *about* religion) would
probably claim they were practising catholics.

Anglicans can be confirmed too, but it's much less common.
--
Roland Perry

On 15/02/2013 08:08, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 20:06:33 on
Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Richard remarked:

I don't see how the children can even *be* Catholics -- or Atheists.

Those who have regularly attended Confirmation classes (the background
of which might well form part of all education *about* religion) would
probably claim they were practising catholics.

But participation is unlikely to be entirely voluntary or well-informed.

Dawkins (and no doubt others) has pointed out that if you said primary
school kids were Marxists or Keynesian then people would say this was
silly, as they couldn't possibly have made an informed decision at that
age.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On 15/02/2013 08:00, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
19:12:31 on Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Arthur Figgis
remarked:

"Church schools are distinctive because they offer an education
based on Christian values. However, what really makes the
difference are when those values are underpinned by beliefs and
lived out in a way that brings added educational strength to
the
school. This is most certainly the case at Emmanuel School
where
every student has the opportunity to understand and experience
the Christian faith that inspires and motivates the school...

Nottingham Emmanuel School is a truly vibrant community on a
faith journey in which unique value is placed on each
individual
as precious to God and every effort made to develop students as
whole people to enable them to reach their full potential in
all
areas."

Does that lot mean any more than any other mission statement?

The part that's relevant to this thread is "every student has the
opportunity to understand and experience the Christian faith" (but not
necessarily to subscribe to it, I assume).

"Experience" could mean "compelled to take part in my interpretation of".

Or maybe the Pope drops in to take a few lessons, or they have demons
feeing kids into the jaws of Hell if the dog eats their homework.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In message , at
18:07:36 on Fri, 15 Feb 2013, Arthur Figgis
remarked:
I don't see how the children can even *be* Catholics -- or Atheists.

Those who have regularly attended Confirmation classes (the background
of which might well form part of all education *about* religion) would
probably claim they were practising catholics.

But participation is unlikely to be entirely voluntary or
well-informed.

Dawkins (and no doubt others) has pointed out that if you said primary
school kids were Marxists or Keynesian then people would say this was
silly, as they couldn't possibly have made an informed decision at that
age.

12 is generally regarded as the age that such decisions can be made by
the children. Which covers most of their time at a faith secondary
school.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 08:08:06AM +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
Richard remarked:
I don't see how the children can even *be* Catholics -- or Atheists.
Those who have regularly attended Confirmation classes (the background
of which might well form part of all education *about* religion) would
probably claim they were practising catholics.

They might claim that, but they're not really capable of making
important decisions like that.

I was confirmed when I was, I think, 11. My belief in god and all the
other associated claptrap was worth about as much as my desire to be a
fireman and, indeed, my firm belief that cheese Wotsits were the best
food ever. At most, my beliefs should have been humoured by adults -
"that's nice dear, why don't you spend your pocket money on a Lego fire
engine" - but not taken seriously, and especially not taken seriously by
the state when deciding how to spend other peoples' taxes.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

While researching this email, I was forced to carry out some
investigative work which unfortunately involved a bucket of
puppies and a belt sander
-- after JoeB, in the Monastery

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 08:07:41AM +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
22:54:00 on Wed, 13 Feb 2013, Arthur Figgis
remarked:
And despite years of compulsory daily worship at primary school, I
don't know what Christians _believe_
That's a bit hard on yourself. What they believe in is living a virtuous
life as laid out in the gospels.

That's obviously not true, because they also believe a bunch of stuff
not in the gospels. And what that stuff is varies from sect to sect,
such as:
* whether priests are necessary;
* if they are, whether women can be priests;
* if they can, whether they are as priestly as men;
* whether gay people should have human rights;
* whether evolution happened

All of which makes it pretty clear that what they actually believe is
whatever was once convenient for their leaders (but which, eg re gay
people, may now be thoroughly inconvenient for their leaders but they
can't change it because admitting that someone was wrong a few hundred
years ago is even less convenient to the powers that be).

--
David Cantrell | Enforcer, South London Linguistic Massive

Good advice is always certain to be ignored,
but that's no reason not to give it -- Agatha Christie

In message , at 13:43:20
on Mon, 18 Feb 2013, David Cantrell remarked:
I don't see how the children can even *be* Catholics -- or Atheists.
Those who have regularly attended Confirmation classes (the background
of which might well form part of all education *about* religion) would
probably claim they were practising catholics.

They might claim that, but they're not really capable of making
important decisions like that.

I was confirmed when I was, I think, 11. My belief in god and all the
other associated claptrap was worth about as much as my desire to be a
fireman and, indeed, my firm belief that cheese Wotsits were the best
food ever. At most, my beliefs should have been humoured by adults -
"that's nice dear, why don't you spend your pocket money on a Lego fire
engine" - but not taken seriously, and especially not taken seriously by
the state when deciding how to spend other peoples' taxes.

The age at which children can make decisions is quite important
(especially in Data protection law). Also look up "Gillick Competence".

It's going to vary from case to case, but I don't think many think that
11 is old enough.

iirc the age of criminal responsibility is still 10.
--
Roland Perry