So we did not get DS1 into any of the Catholic Boys Secondaries, and the reason was the baptism criteria. This will also be the case for ds2

St RR is a short walk from Twickenham station. It would be less than half an hour from Putney or Barnes rail.

Well, Purequnintessence outlined the school's published banding %ages- and they bear absolutely no resemblance to the make up of the school. Which in itself bears absolutely no resemblance to the population at large. So either I am missing something...............

They are completely transparent regarding their admissions criteria, Seeker, the content may be offensive to you, but I don't get where murkiness comes in?

Faith schools generally have a somewhat murky record in relation to admissions criteria. And unless there is something very particular about the Cardinal Vaughn catchment area, there is something murky going on there. Which is, if I read the thread properly, relevant to the OP.

Farewell Well to be fair some people are not entirely in agreement with the church's teachings on homosexuality and contraception. I'm not sure that it's bigotry to not want your child to follow those particular teachings.

Absolutely. I'm one of those people. Well - not on contraception so much (I think the pill is iniquitous and is another one of the Bad Things men have done to women, but this has got little to do with my religious perspective and everything to do with my feminist one) but regarding homosexuality, definitely. I'm not just 'not entirely in agreement', I'm in disagreement. But that wasn't even slightly what startail said, was it. Nope. She was just kneejerk offensive about all RC schools. Not even about the faith, as such - she just dismissed every single RC school in the world. That is textbook bigotry.

Seeker it wasn't me who raised the issue. It was another poster. Who you then criticised, unfairly. The bigotry displayed in Startail's post (and also the posts implying a racist motivation behind the baptism rules) is real, and all over MN.

You clearly need to do some diversity training (or perhaps a refresher course in reading comprehension?) since your grasp of what constitutes bigotry and what constitutes un-bigotted criticism of the catholic faith is obviously sadly lacking.

Pure - you're right about the derailing issue but on the other hand, this is how the bigots operate. Pretending that knee-jerk generalising across the entire population of RC schools is anything other than bigotry might be acceptable to you but it isn't to me.

ps OP friend in very similar situation has daughter who's just got into Sacred Heart with support of lots of documentation. However, a friend of hers second child (i.e. sibling to child already in school) was not admitted on the same grounds.

Pure, I think this is appalling quite honestly and as would be in exactly the same scenario as you because my DS was not baptised until he was 9... and only then because he wanted it to be done. Thankfully our local catholic secondary (which his primary feeds into) has about 40% non catholic intake too.

Can you appeal?

Or do you even want to given their lack of understanding.

Well to be fair some people are not entirely in agreement with the church's teachings on homosexuality and contraception. I'm not sure that it's bigotry to not want your child to follow those particular teachings.
But I agree that it's not helpful to this particular debate and the vast majority of discussion has been very reasonable.
The great appeal of the Catholic church is, in my opinion, that it is so unbending and inflexible in a world where many of us are craving guidance. However, the flip side of this is that it can be, er, unbending and inflexible as is case of the OP.

Ah. I didn't realize that by "anti catholic bigotry being trotted out" you meant any criticism of the catholic faith. My mistake.

And that's how the bigots get away with it. Why wouldn't you take a nasty little post like that seriously? It was obviously meant seriously.

Seeker - how about Startail's post at 10:56:10 in which she charmingly says:

Be happy that your DSs are getting a far more balanced, rounded and less bigoted education by not going to a RC school.

That is bigotry pure and simple. But of course you missed that. (Or gave it a pass......)

Russian- I have seen no anti catholic bigotry on this thread. Anti faith school sentiment, certainly. And frustration with the way school places are allocated. And frustration with the way schools like Cardinal Vaughn manipulate the banding system. But no bigotry. It is not bigotry to believe that a particular faith group should not have special treatment from a publicly funded education system.

sorry crossed posts - Seeker I got 3% low attainers. So that's alright then.

Yes but the number of low attainers (i.e. children who didn't get level 4 in their ks2 sats) is 3% i.e. far far below average. Their ability bands are very skewed and not reflective of the general population at all.
Eg low = 3%, Middle = 26%, and high = 71% going by ks2 sats. That is nothing like the general population which has far higher numbers of low and middle.
Mossbourne for example (and analysed rather brilliantly by a poster called KateShrub here www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/1706501-Confused-by-Schools-results-how-do-I-understand-better) has 18% low, 58% middle and 23% high, which is a much more reflective spread.
Like I say I think it's rubbish that you were penalised but was not part of the appeal of the school that it is so selective (as is reflected in these stats)?

Seeker - not stupid at all. Factual.

Vatican II does make it very clear that babies should be baptised within six months of birth. Vatican II does apply to all Catholics and overides local cultural traditions. Our church newsletter frequently reminds parents of this fact.
It is unfortunate when parents delay for all sorts of reasons as a small service within a mass would initiate the baby and avoid this upset. I think part of the problem is that baptisms are now expected to be these huge occasions for which there is no need.