AIBU to feel disappointed that religious songs and stories are being introduced to this toddler group?

[neolara]

OK. I'll come clean and admit it's a toddler group that is run in a church, headed up by the vicar's wife and staffed by volunteers from the church community. It is a completely fantastic toddler group. It's wildly popular, very friendly, lovely, lovely volunteers who make cups of tea and hand out biscuits and chat to all the mums. Really, IMO you couldn't ask for anything more from a toddler group. However, today they sang a couple of religious songs in amongst twinkle twinkle and started telling stories about Jesus. This is a new development and looks like a clear change of policy.

Up until today this toddler group was not obviously a "christian group" with no mention of Jesus or God, although families attending the group were invited along to child services and there was always information about the many and various activities the church organizes. I'm pretty convinced that the vast majority of families who go to the group are not attached to the church - they are just a random cross section of the people in our city. They go because it's a great group.

Now obviously, it is a church group, run by Christians and they are perfectly entitled to run it in whatever way they want. The running of the group has recently been taken over by someone new. She is extremely nice and seems very welcoming.

But as a non-believer, I felt very uncomfortable when the singing and stories are happening. I think this is partly because I just think the whole thing is nonsense (sorry to those who do believe, but I just do), partly because I see it as "indoctrinating" (I know this is only because I don't believe - if I agreed with the views I wouldn't see it in this way) and also because it makes me feel that if I don't believe then maybe I shouldn't be attending. I think that as the kids are so young, realistically they won't understand the stories or songs, so the fact that they are now happening is basically a way of signalling to the parents that this is now a religious group. Obviously, I can choose not to attend and this is something I may end up doing. All of which makes me sad because it has been such a fantastic, inclusive, toddler group in the past. I've been going to it for the past 7 years and it's been pretty great for all of that time.

Do you think it is worth mentioning to the (lovely) woman who runs the group the effect of introducing the religious element to the group? (I'd obviously leave out the bit about thinking Jesus is nonsense!) I wonder if she's even aware that by including religious songs / stories it can make it seem actively unwelcoming to those of other / or no faiths. Of course, this may be the effect that they are trying to achieve, which is obviously OK, (if sad for me!)

Hmmm...I'm not being too clear, I know.

It's not that I think God reveals Godself as other gods. It's more that I believe people sincerely pursuing God find God, and that sometimes means they then change their path. I know a guy who was a devout Muslim in Iran, and he was sincere about his faith. One day he found a bible and he came to believe that the God he sincerely believed in was revealing Godself fully to him through this and it was the fulfilment of all his sincerity. He became a Christian, had to go underground and was in danger but he said his life was transformed. But all along he had been sincere and devout. So in that case the God I believe revealed Godself both through his sincere faith and ultimately through the bible.

I can honestly see the difficulty you have though. I don't always have the words to explain it. I know it's a well worn cliche to say that's where faith comes in...but I guess cliches come about through truth. Faith is both rational and irrational, and my answers and even those of far more learned and intelligent Christians will fail to satisfy. Only a step towards God can do that - however, I am always happy to discuss these matters :)

WidowWadman, I studied theology at Uni and it both shook and strengthened my faith. I found it stimulating and invigorating to look at all the whys, wherefores, for and againsts. I did know people who lost their faith, and also those who gained it :)

madhairday thank you for sharing your views and not just taking offence.

You say that "and my answers and even those of far more learned and intelligent Christians will fail to satisfy. Only a step towards God can do that "

So does that basically mean - where the logic breaks down, you'll just have to exercise willing suspension of disbelief?

Excuse my being flippant, but it sounds to me like the "wibbly wobbly timey wimey" explanation whenever there's a loophole popping up in Dr Who.

Exotics - equally calling someone who is upset that a community service they valued is being changed into one they don't feel comfortable with a 'moaner' is not very nice either. In fact it is much more of a personal insult than SGB saying she can't understand how people believe in god(s).

With regards to your Iranian friend -why would God want someone to put their life in danger for him -basically creating another martyr?

Don't get me wrong - I find the idea that anyone should be killed for their personal beliefs abhorrent. I think your friend should be free to believe what he wants where he wants (although he'd always run the risk of me asking difficult questions :o), but I don't get why God would reveal himself to somebody and by the very act of making him believe putting him into mortal danger. Yes, you can argue, but it's the others who sin and kill him, but what good is that?

How can you believe he's a loving father when he doesn't protect those who found him?

Ermmm.....yep

That's about it. Well kind of. I do know people who come to faith through sheer reason and logic, deciding that there must be a God and Jesus must have risen because of x and y.

However, in general faith does take a step away from the self. It's not a step away from rationality, because faith and reason go together very nicely, but it is a decision that does in the end say 'this is not about me, this is about making a step into something unknown that I have had enough information about to believe in.'

Once the step is made, there isn't so much a suspension of disbelief as a transformation of how you see things. It is unexplainable.

Dr Who is a pretty close parallel to faith in many ways, I find

How can I believe God is loving when God doesn't protect those who have found God (excuse me changing gender language; I have a thing about it as I don't believe in God as 'He' primarily)

Why should believers be treated any differently. If the premise of Christianity is that the world has fallen and all bear the consequences of our own and our national and international selfishness, then that carries right through to all (not that God punishes all, note, but that we live the consequences). There does not appear to be extra protection for followers of Jesus, although there are individual stories of that being the case. If it was in general the case though, surely people would then have faith because of fear of being unprotected, and that's not the kind of faith God (or anyone surely) would want. Fear as a foundation for faith is hardly about freedom.

My Iranian friend would say it was worth everything; even his life, because he'd found something that made sense of life and gave him fulness of life even if he lost it.

What would be the point of being devout about faith or utterly sure about it if it wasn't something that did matter to the point of death? I'm not one for namby pambying around about faith being a nice fluffly little crutch that helps me feel a bit better sometimes. If it wasn't all, it would be nothing I think. BUt that's the kind of awkward sod I am ;)

"If the premise of Christianity is that the world has fallen and all bear the consequences of our own and our national and international selfishness, then that carries right through to all (not that God punishes all, note, but that we live the consequences). "

I thought the premise of Christianity is that Jesus died for our sins to save us. If the world has fallen still, than his sacrifice made no difference, surely, but nothing has changed from the random cruel acts of the God of the old testament. So what is the gospel, if nothing has changed?

Yes, I was trying to talk about it from the POV of the question about protection. Yes the central premise is Jesus died to reconcile us to God, because of the world being fallen and because of the consequence, ultimately being death. So God had to beat death. So sent Jesus, who death couldn't keep down :) I'm not trying to say nothing has changed but grappling with the question of bad things happening to Christians.

The gospel has echoes right through history and eternity, and the moment Jesus died then conquered death is a pivotal moment that changed things forward and back, for it was the moment we could be reconciled to God, not through we do but through grace. It's transformed millions of lives and in eventuality will be the means by which people are able to be reconciled with their creator in eternity. The gospel was never one which said it would stop bad things happening, to anyone - if that was the case the ultimate bad thing wouldn't have happened to Jesus. It was always more about transformation within the mess, and what Jesus did by living among us, getting down and dirty, did everything to reveal a God who does love.

Yeah, we kind of have derailed it, sorry. Interesting discussion though. Must admit I can't really follow your last posting at all, though, but it is appreciated.

Sorry. I am incredibly drugged up and really not being very clear. I will try and rephrase it when I feel less fog like :)

madhairday no worries - to be fair you don't sound any less coherent than any other Christians I had this discussion with so far

Exotics - equally calling someone who is upset that a community service they valued is being changed into one they don't feel comfortable with a 'moaner' is not very nice either. In fact it is more of a personal insult than SGB saying she can't understand how people believe in god(s).

When was it a community service? I thought it was a toddler group run by the church in their hall? I think that quoting SGB saying that she doesn't understand how people believe in God is a little bit of an understatement! Had she come on and said in those words I can't see that it would cause the least upset.

MTG, sorry to come back to this so long after you answered, but I'm still confused by you using presbyter. The CofE uses the term 'priest' not the term 'presbyter' which is used by other denominations. So I was wondering how you came (and presumably your CofE priest) came to start using the term presbyter instead?

We never use the word priest to describe our clergy because it is not our tradition (presumably because the biblical meaning has been abused).

We have a vicar, curate and various pastors, all of whom are ordained.

Collectively, they would be known as clergy, pastors or ministers - or presbyters.

MTG, who is this 'we' that you refer to? It is the tradition of the CofE to use the term 'priest.'

I am genuinely interested in hearing about new developments, alternative traditions etc and would like to know about who your group is.

My church

The CofE is a wide tent.

So how is your church different from mainstream CofE churches? Is it very high church or very low church? Are you under the direction of the bishop in your diocese or do you have a separate bishop? Do you have different types of church service?

It is totally mainstream - an ordinary parish church in a medium-sized town!

We are under the oversight of our diocesan bishop, who will be visiting in a couple of weeks to confirm about 30 of our young people and some older ones too.

We have low worship style and 4 different Sunday services ranging from traditional 1662 to Fresh Expressions.

Blimey, this discussion went wide ranging...

Exotics - whenever people talk about the good that the church does they talk about community service - activitities for parents and children, older people, the homeless, activities in rural areas where the church hall = the community building etc.... They are not obliged to, but they do, its community service. Particularly in the case of the CoE the church emphasises that this is part of its role to play a part in the wider community. I really dont see the controversy in saying that.

As Madhairday said her toddlers group was to let parents get together, have social time and activities for kids. Many, many toddlers groups run by churches are like that.

If the homeless people, older people, parents and children etc.. who benefit from these community services have something to say about them, the institution doing the organising should listen openly and with respect, not call them "moaners" who are receiving charity and therefore have no right to speak up.

"Madhairday: Hmm, yes, I can understand you saying you are 'drugged up'. Must be good stuff if helps you believe all the self-contradicting, illogical and frequently unpleasant crap that the Christian myth system is full of (oh, and so are all the rest)."

Good stuff in that it helps me to breathe and not die of my disease, SGB

I've heard of priests being called presbyters too, it's a technicality and fairly mainstream I think.

Oohh, no! Certainly not! Unfortunately, with sin having so much power in the world, the consequences of it are everywhere. They most definitely do not affect most the people who sin the most. That's a horrible idea.

Isn't there something in one of the gospels about that? A blind person, I think, and one of the disciples said to Jesus, "Who sinned that this person is blind - the person himself or his parents?" And Jesus said something along the lines of, "Neither, that's completely the wrong way of thinking about it."

Unfortunately, the 'right' way of thinking about it, turns out to be:
"Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life" (John 9:3, NIV)

Which is exactly that sort of quote that makes non-believers go . That's a really horrible idea.

David Attenborough said this in response to Creationists, but it is a good response to this Biblical verse too:

' ..But I tend to think instead of a parasitic worm that is boring through the eye of a boy sitting on the bank of a river in West Africa, [a worm] that's going to make him blind. And [I ask them], 'Are you telling me that the God you believe in, who you also say is an all-merciful God, who cares for each one of us individually, are you saying that God created this worm that can live in no other way than in an innocent child's eyeball? Because that doesn't seem to me to coincide with a God who's full of mercy'