Bishop Gilpin parents - And you call yourselves Christians?? (MERTON SCHOOLS)

[NutellaWithEverything]

Name changed because I need to rant about my DS not having been offered a school place and don't want to be outed. I am in Wimbledon and my nearest school in Bishop Gilpin. My DS has not been accepted to start in Reception this September coming even though it takes us three minutes to get there. Yet, they take in children from the other side of Wimbledon even though they have to drive through town to get there. And why?? Because they go to the right churches. So last November there was a request from the Council to add another Reception class but parents voted against other children from their own community benefiting from attending a good school. They felt it would be in the detriment of their school's community feel!!!!! AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO THINKS THIS IS SELFISH, SHORT-SIGHTED, UN-GODLY AND JUST PLAIN WRONG?????????????????

Absolutely iloverainbows. Put pressure on your councils and the government to open more small local community schools.We need them!

Yes, iloverainbows, I'd really like to see parents shouting from the rooftops about this. On these threads everybody gets so defensive about their individual choices. I don't care whether you have sent your child to private, faith, or academy schools. I don't care if you've moved across the country to get into a good catchment, or bribed your local appeal panel. I just wish more people would develop a bit of political consciousness about it all, and raise their voices for change. That isn't happening at the moment because too many middle class parents are just relieved that they managed to squeeze their child in ok.

Northernrock is right to make the point about closure of local community schools being partly to blame. 13 years ago the current administration of Merton council had a drive to close down the smallest primary schools. At least one was saved by fierce parental campaigning but others were lost. Now the self-same councillors are bemoaning the lack of primary school places!

Campaign against policies which are shite. (Like Hester says.)

cantspel "Of course i want my children to be taught that catholicism is the one true faith. I would hardly be a catholic if i didn't"

Of course you do! I understand that perfectly. But teaching that one faith is true means you are teaching that the others are not. Those who try to deny that are just making themselves sound foolish and clouding the issue.

The way I see it though you won't be teaching that all day long unless you plan to dispense with all other education like some Islamic fundamentalists. Most of the time you will be teaching math and english etc. Then you will be teaching about religion for a while and that is fine in secular schools too.

You can only spend and only need a small amount of time actually training the children to believe and to be future supporters and that could just as well be done at the weekend/in church.

If the religious could do that then each would be able to instil their specific brand of religion yet still join in equally with their fellow citizens in public schools.

but.. if you don't want to mix with our kind... well there's nothing more to be said.

"You teach that faith is a matter of free choice"

Faith in children is IN NO WAY a matter of free choice.

Children who have religious beliefs have them because they've been indoctrinated by their parents.

And if the church is so keen to pass on its teaching to children it should be offering them free classes in religious education on Saturdays, Sundays and after school, not during the school day.

Would be fascinating to see how many committed Catholic and CofE parents would be taking their children out of cello and fencing classes in order that they might attend extra curricula religious education.

cantspel 'Of couse i want my children to be taught that catholicism is the one true faith. I would hardly be a catholic if i didn't but you can still believe your faith is the one true faith and respect others faith.

No you dont teach that others are deluded. You teach that faith is a matter of free choice and some choose to follow a different one. It is called learning respect'.

So...cantspel if you want your children to be taught that catholicism is the 'one true faith', then what does that say about all the other religions who also believe equally that their faith is the 'one true faith'? Are those beliefs not as true or as catholicism, or only a little bit true or actually not as true? Which is truer? Why Catholicism? Why not another religion?

I don't see how you can say that teaching that catholicism is the one true faith can go hand in hand with respecting others 'choices'. Are they not true also? I hardly believe, by the way, that religion in children is a matter of 'free choice'...aren't they justbeing told what to believe by the school, by the parents. Sorry but what you're saying is just a contradiction.

The idea of presenting any faith to children as truth is repellent. It should be explained that religion is on a par with father christmas and the tooth fairy and left at that.

JoniRules, there is no logic in your argument. I'm not saying that I agree with cantspel's point of view but it is quite possible to believe that yours is the one true faith and still respect someone else's faith. Even if I don't agree with someone else's opinion I can still respect their opinion and right to have a different one to mine. No contradiction.

Stillstanding, you'd be polite to them of course, but if you knew yours was the true faith then you'd make sure that your kids didn't pick up any of that nonsense wouldn't you.

It would be a disaster if they ended up losing sight of the truth and wasting their lives believing something someone just made up - no matter how sincere their believers are.

stillstanding actually I don't believe it is possible to still respect another's faith and believe that your own is the one true faith. Of course, it is easy to say the platitude, that one respects others' religion, but with the proviso that actually that faith is not 'true' because your own is the 'one true faith'. How is that respecting anothers faith when secretly, or not so secretly, inside what your're actually saying is, 'I say I respect your faith and you may believe that your faith is the path to God, but actually you're wrong because my faith is the one true faith'.

And if your faith is the one and only what are you saying about the others' faith? That it's not true or not as true or what...that's hardly respectful or open minded

I know that you are probably right with respect to a lot of people, onagar, but have to admit that this is all quite removed from my own little sphere of reality. In an ideal world a faithful parent would say "this is what I believe and why" but there is a whole world out there with all sorts of other viewpoints. This is, without exception, the way that all the RL people I know work. They do take their children to church, mosque, synagogue etc and teach them about the tenets of their faith. Personally I have no problem with that - you teach your children the things that you believe (religious and otherwise) but hopefully along the way you also teach them that there are all sorts of other viewpoints out there too. Then they go on to be adults and make their own choices (religious and otherwise).

The idea of hardline Christians teaching their children that they will burn in hell if they don't follow the faith is abhorrent to me. But so is the idea of RedbinD's approach which is to tell children that religion is on a par with father christmas/tooth fairy and - presumably - a fairly intolerant view of anyone who thinks differently. For me, it's all about instilling a sense of tolerance and respect.

On a more general note though, I think it must be truly difficult if your children grow up to believe things that are very different to your own beliefs, whether they are religious or otherwise. Obviously you have to accept those differences but if we are honest we have to accept that it must be really difficult and, in some cases, truly heartbreaking. This doesn't just apply to religion though, but to anything one has strong views on.

Jonirules, just because you think that someone else's opinion is wrong or not "true" doesn't mean that you can't respect it. I think your idea of what "respect" means in this context differs from mine. The way I am using it is (dictionary definition) "to avoid violation of or interference with, willingness to show consideration".

I would like to correct a misconception that some of you have about Church of England schools. My partner teaches science at a Church of England academy (i.e. the school receives some of its funding from the state but also a large amount of extra money directly from the C of E) and the school makes no stipulation that children must attend church in order to get a place. It is an excellent school that cares about all its pupils, many of whom come from quite disadvantaged backgrounds, and in my opinion exemplifies what Christian values should be about - including not excluding children from their local school on the basis of whether their parents take them to church or not. It is not necessarily the case that you have to go to church in order to get a place at a C of E school.

Personally, I can see why you are upset Nutella, as I have also had experience of the type of Church school you describe, which did not give places to anyone unless they had a signature from a vicar saying they had been attending Church for two years. It was amazing how many of my friends' mums suddenly became fervent believers and dragged them to Church every weekend for a couple of years so they could get the requisite signature... Interestingly, though, the school that I describe did not adopt this entry policy for 6th form - anyone could have a place as long as you had excellent GCSE grades. I think this says a lot about the motivation behind the school's entry requirements...

Rosenthal you make a good point. Perhaps you'd care to come and preach your very sane-sounding christian values to our 'local' C of E school - they could do with them!

The bit I don't get is the anger directed towards those who want their children to attend a cofe school because the cohort is homogenous, the results are better, the bad influences are minimised and the child's potential is maximised. Isn't that a parent's role. If parents decide to attend church once a fortnight to achieve I wouldn't criticise them. I might, however, criticise the parent who whinges about it but can't be bothered to get up on a Sunday morning. Nothing in life is without effort and people who attend church to ensure their children get the best possible opportunities in life shouldn't be criticised. Anyone can go to a church school whether they be from the local estate or the top of the hill - but only if the parents can be bothered to make the effort to get them in. Of course it's better if the parents have a genuine faith - but the efforts of the parents who don't have that faith are almost more commendable in my opinion - they have vested their absolute faith in the achievement of their children.

the big question is why the church schools are more successful than other schools if the parents in the others care as much about the education of their children. Rather than criticise the church schools why don't parents at other schools make a little more effort to support the staff and the school communities to make them excellent too? Oddly, there is a huge difference in my experience between what chuch families volunteer towards a school and what the families allocated open places contribute that.

Waits for jolly good flaming to start.

onceamai, I agree with you that non religious parents who attend church for the sole purpose of getting their children into a good school do not deserve to be judged. In my opinion they're just working with a system that is unfair from the word go.

However, your suggestion that church families contribute more than 'the others' is ridiculous. I am not religious and I do not attend church at all, my DC go to a CofE school and I've always been open about my beliefs or lack of. I help out regularly twice a week , one for the whole day, the other for the afternoon; this has been consistent since my DC started their education and it makes no difference to me what the ethos of the school is; my DC are being educated there and I'm going to give my support regardless of my religious beliefs.

There are many parents just like me at the school, some of them religious, some of them not and openly so, some of them closet atheists.

In my opinion, whether parents help out at their DC's school or not has absolutely nothing to do with their religion and rather more to do with their culture, education, personal circumstances, confidence, time and so on. Of course there are people who simply can't be arsed but this attitude can be found in faith people too.

Amen AllTheGoodOnesAreTaken

Oddly, there is a huge difference in my experience between what chuch families volunteer towards a school and what the families allocated open places contribute that

That might be something your believe to have observed onceamai and somehow you believe it's enough to make such a huge generalisation, but I think that's a really shallow comment and not true to reality at all. There's no telling what contribution religious and non religious parents make to their childrens' schools when there are so many other factors involved. Also, as this thread has shown, so many parents are not even religious and they're just going through the loops to get their DC into a school, it's hardly their religious beliefs driving them to help out at the school, is it??

onceamai, I agree with you and allthegoodonesaretaken that non-religious parents who attend church to get a place shouldn't be judged - they are having to work the system to get a decent place for their child.

But your comments criticising "the parent who whinges about it but can't be bothered to get up on a Sunday morning" or saying the efforts of non-faithful parents attending church are more commendable are .

It's not (necessarily) a case of some parents not being bothered to go to church to get a place but rather that they want to stay true to themselves and not profess to a faith that they don't have.

The non-faithful who do go to church to get a place are hypocrites. Simple as. I understand why they feel they have to be hypocrites and don't feel angry about that but it is a pretty poor example to set for your children and isn't commendable. Just alas necessary.

My local schools are Cof E and Catholic.
The nearest one( C of E) asks that parents attend church for two years to get into the school.

According to this schools criteria you are at the top of the list if you attend the local church and live in the area.
Then come people who attend different churches and live in the area.
Then come people who attend different churches and live anywhere else.
Then come people who attend other religious places of worship and live anywhere else.
Lastly come those who live in the area and do not attend any place of worship.

If I live next to the school and do not attend any place of worship I am at the very bottom of the list.
If I live on the other side of town and occasionally go to a church service I am way higher on the list.
These are MY ONLY local primaries.

I chose not to attend church for two years, unlike many others, not because I am lazy or because I don't care about the welfare of my child, but because I am not a fucking hypocrite, and I do not wish to teach my child that it is OK to live a lie.
And yes, I do feel morally superior to those parents who played the system.

But northernrock, whilst attending mass is something I would not do myself, I have to be honest and admit I was able to get my DC into our nearest CofE school because we lived extremely near. I think we need to be a little more charitable towards those families who do not have a better alternative than to put on a farce every Sunday. I think the biggest hypocrits are not them, to be honest.

Merton is a nightmare! I specifically wanted a non faith school and yet I was told I didn't have a hope of getting into Pelham my closest non-faith primary (about 12 mins walk)

Despite putting it down as my only choice (6 years ago) and being very straight about the fact that I am an atheist which I hold as a belief as greatly as any Christian does to christianity, I got a place at The Priory. I put up with the bible thumping for 3 years before moving my ds and the only option we had for a non faith school was to move to the independent sector.

The Priory, Bishop Gilpin, Holy Trinity...it's a bloody disgrace!

"Religious people pay taxes towards secular schools of course, so it's not as though it only works one way"

No they don't - there are no state funded school with a totally non-religious aspect. State funded community schools are required to have a minimum level of religious education and assemblies which are predominantly Christian.

Some schools may be more liberal in how they interpret that but I suspect they are technically in breach of the law.

I also chose not to attend church in order to get my child into the local CofE school as I was very happy with our local community school - I liked the fact that they have a higher propertion of children with free school meals and a higher proportion of children with SEN and still manage to keep up with teh local CofE school in the results tables (on a good year!). The school required parents at the school to donate a "voluntary" contribution every year not the local parishioners so the wider church community is not funding anything.

I went to a church school - in those days you couldn't tell the difference between the church schools and community primary schools - you just went to the nearest school. No-one went to church (or rarely) and no-one asked about it. It was there becasue the CofE have a history of providing free education prior to any central government funding. Its only been in recent years that the church has used it as a mechanism to fill pews.

I object in principle to state funding of religious education. Any religion. Anything state funded should be available to be used my anyone who needs it. Like the NHS. We don;t have a chistian NHS part funded by the church where you need ot prove to go to church but in return you get the opportunity to have a surgeon with better results and a nurse who will pray for you.

Kewcumber, I couldn't agree more

"I think we need to be a little more charitable towards those families who do not have a better alternative than to put on a farce every Sunday. I think the biggest hypocrits are not them, to be honest."

Er.. did you read my post?
I DONT have a better alternative, other than to appeal the allocation we did get, nearly an hours walk away. (for one a bit nearer, but not that near).

This was my choice: Be a hypocrite for two years OR not be allowed to send my son to my local schools(the only local schools-the next nearest school was oversubscribed and we didnt get in because we live too far from it.)
Save your charity and campaign for more local community school-which serve the actual community they are in!