To up dcs chances in this way

[benetint]

I've always believed in God. I went to a church school and really enjoyed the religious education and found a lot of comfort in my faith. However my parents weren't religious at all so I was never baptised and we didn't attend church. In adult life I gained the confidence to start exploring my faith and I really wanted to start attending church. I considered myself a Christian but had no idea which church to go to. My gran was a devout catholic so I decided to go on the Rcia course which I really enjoyed and I was baptised catholic last Easter. I could have as easily gone down the cofe e route.

Now it's coming to school applications and some of the really good schools around us are catholic and cofe. To get your kids into catholic school they need to be baptised catholic (which they are) but to attend the cofe school it's church attendance that's required.

So basically I wanted to know if it would be really wrong for me to attend a cofe church as a baptised catholic? Like I say I was religious anyway and didn't really mind which side I went down so there would be more to me going than just schools..but it would tick both schools boxes too. I feel guilty even asking...

To be clear, Seeker, there's no pretending involved. I am Catholic, which entitles my children to what I personally feel is a superior education than the local non faith schools can provide. The school has certain entry requirements, which you cannot fake, it's like needing a certain degree to get a particular job. Whether I am still personally enamoured of all aspects of the catholic faith is not relevant; my children fulfill the entry criteria so they get their place.
What the op is considering doing is completely different, and very unlikely to work.

Catholic schools were set up for the children of Catholics. The only reason a non catholic would want to go with a ten mile radius of one of them is the results they are capable of producing.
Why are the results so good? All the reasons already stated; parental involvement, good discipline, greater expectations of the children, whatever... There is no magic involved, nothing that cannot be replicated elsewhere. So why not concentrate on the reasons the ethos of faith schools are not replicated in non faith schools, rather than exclaiming in a fit of jealous piqué that they shouldn't be allowed to exist? If catholic schools were not performing well; they would chug along quietly, totally unnoticed by everyone.
They get it right; everyone wants a piece of the action.

You have to take schools on their merits. Church schools have the whole range from excellent to dire, as to community schools. To say that non church schools need to come up to the same standard is ridiculous! All schools need to come up to the standards of the best. Faith schools do get put in special measures sometimes.

Selection is subtle. It's a headteacher saying "oh we're not very good with special needs" (heard the words come out of his mouth) It's having to attend church and sign a register. It's different from actual selection because it purports to be something that it's not. It pretends to be selection by faith and actually it's selection by parental commitment.

Well not in all cases obviously

Because there are actual religious parents

Thee is very little difference between catholic and anglican, in fact the differences are mostly political, organisational and administrative. I've been to simultaneous churches where the services are held by two ministers side by side in unison, the ONLYdifference being the catholics go to either clergy for communion, but the anglicans are asked not to go to the catholic clergy for communion. There are many CofE churches which describe themselves as anglican catholics. It makes no difference which you attend.

lemonpie7 Sun 26-Aug-12 12:37:27
Thee is very little difference between catholic and anglican, in fact the differences are mostly political, organisational and administrative.

Apart from the belief in transubstantiation, the insistence on confession before clergy, and the absence of femal clergy.

I've been to simultaneous churches where the services are held by two ministers side by side in unison, the ONLYdifference being the catholics go to either clergy for communion, but the anglicans are asked not to go to the catholic clergy for communion.

Ooh, that's changed.
in RC churches you used to get body only, "body & blood" in CoE.

There are many CofE churches which describe themselves as anglican catholics. It makes no difference which you attend.

To sensible folk, perhaps.

Of course, kayano, I'm one of them. But I'm not sure why my faith should entitle me to a different state education for my children to anyone who doesn't share my faith.

Onemorechap, those three things you listed as differences, are not differences between anglican and catholic, they are differences between some anglican churches and other anglican churches, some of whom agree with catholic churches in these issues, and some don't. The anglican church is a very broad church, including people of a very wide range of shades of opinion on all of these, however on the main tenants of the christian faith, are in total agreement with the catholic, and other christian churches.

*God is the creator.
*Human were unable to have a direct relationship with God, because men are sinful
*God begot a son, Jesus, and he became human, as well as being the Son of God
*Jesus was sinless
*Jesus was punished for all the sins ofthe whole of humanity, by being crucified
*Therefore humans are now able to have a relationship with God, because although still sinful, all sins have already been punished, because Jesus had the punishment.
*That relationship is facilitated by Jesus, now reserected and returned to his father, and the holy spirit, a part of God capable of existing on the whole surface of the Earth simultaneously, which Jesus couldn't, when on earth, being one human man.

None of the other issues you mention matter much, and to be honest, although I have my own opinions about some of it, I accept I can't know for sure if I'm right or wrong, for example I think evolution happened to some extent, and I'm sure woman should be vicars and bishops, but if it turns out I was wrong about these things, it's not vitally important.

I'm going to try and answer the OP.

Typically, Catholic schools are voluntary aided while C of E schools are voluntary controlled. What this means in practice is that Catholic schools have stricter entrance criteria than C of E, ie they will prioritise children who are baptised Catholic, attend Catholic church etc. C of E schools tend to have a wider range of admissions criteria and will often give practising Catholics priority over the children of atheist scum like me.

In other words, if your children go to the Catholic church you still have a good chance of getting them into the C of E school if that's what you really want.

Floggingmolly: "Why are the results so good? All the reasons already stated; parental involvement, good discipline, greater expectations of the children, whatever."

Ah yes, who could forget the fine discipline and great expectations of children at All Saints' Roman Catholic high school in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire?

Just to refresh your memories, this is from the Guardian report of the trial (www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/26/dumbbell-attack-teacher-student-die)

'A science teacher shouted "Die, die, die" as he struck one of his pupils around the head with a metal dumbbell, a court has heard.

Peter Harvey, 50, attacked the 14-year-old boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, after he had misbehaved during a science lesson at All Saints' Roman Catholic high school in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, last July.

...

The injured schoolboy, whom Harvey confronted over his poor behaviour in class, sustained a fractured right temple bone and bleeding on the brain after being hit with the 3kg (6.6lb) dumbbell.

Pupils started misbehaving during the lesson after a girl with behavioural difficulties was removed from the class. The teacher dragged her out and allegedly kicked her.

Some other students took exception to the way she had been treated and began calling Harvey a psycho. The prosecution said he did not respond and told the class to get on with their work.

...

The 14-year-old started waving a wooden rule like a sword then put it down when told to do so. He then waved a Bunsen burner around his head and, as his teacher chased him around the classroom the boy told him to "Fuck off".'

Don't all rush at once.

haha at JumpingThroughMoreHoops

Oh God Hackmum how pathetic using one isolated case of someone clearly having an episode

They are not like that at all

"Apart from the belief in transubstantiation, the insistence on confession before clergy, and the absence of femal clergy."

And the Pope being Head of the Church, and able on occasion, to speak infallibly.

Our catholic church doesnt do confession anymore. The priest was all 'as long as you haven't killed anyone'

Honestly I was a bit about it. Do we just change the rules of belief to suit the times?

Not that I would have confessed to not believing anyway

Kayano: "Oh God Hackmum how pathetic using one isolated case of someone clearly having an episode."

The point wasn't that he was having an "episode" - it was that he was driven to it by the appalling behaviour of the pupils, who were goading a vulnerable man in a most unpleasant way. It was just a way of demonstrating that all this talk of the superior ethos of Catholic schools, the "parental involvement, good discipline, greater expectations of the children" is so much baloney.

Catholic secondary schools face the same pressures as non-Catholic ones, and pupil behaviour is largely determined by two factors: the background of the pupils and the quality of the senior management team. Some Catholic schools, like some non-Catholic schools, are lucky enough to have pupils from stable home backgrounds and combine that with good leadership from the SMT; some Catholic schools, like some non-Catholic schools, take children from deprived and troubled backgrounds and have weak leadership (as was the case in this school). The challenges are the same.

He was 'driven to it?' so it was the pupils fault that he grabbed a dumbbell and shouted die die die?

I don't even think this is remotely relevant to the discussion!

Yes , as a practising Christian we were lucky to get our daughter into the local over subscribed CofE school. I say lucky because many parents simply wanted a good education for free and were not Christian. Please remember the child that is a Christian that may not get a place because your dc does.

Was meant to say yes yabu

Ok, Hackmum. Catholic schools are the same as any other school. Fine. Explain why there is such a perceived injustice that they are the preserve of catholic children? At one time the fact that catholic parents wanted to educate their children in a faith school was seen as further proof of their general oddness, and non Catholics would as soon try to bulldoze their own children in there as they would the local leper colony.
I stand by my point that it's only since they began to be perceived as "better" (by some) that the general perception changed to "those catholic bastards have colonised all the good schools" and are trying to keep them for themselves...

There is no more injustice in requiring a child to be catholic in order to attend a catholic school, than there would be in being denied admission to the local specialist eye hospital when you had a broken leg.

You are probably not displacing non-Catholics at your over-subscribed Catholic school, but rather those genuine believing Catholics who, for one reason or another, are not able to sustain regular and recorded church attendance. You may shrug and say, 'that is up to them', and it is also possible that the school would rather your children than theirs - hence the oversubscription criterion of church attendance.

If the hospital/school comparison stands then perhaps we should have catholic/ce hospitals where non believers have to go to the back of the queue for their operations.

Just been doing some reading on the history of church schools. Most c of e primaries were set up for the education of 'the poor of the parish' so not for the education of the faithful. Slightly different for catholic schools - mostly set up for the education of catholic children by catholic teachers trained at catholic colleges. I see the setting up of c of e schools as an act of philanthropy and charity rather than as a way of educating children in the faith. Perhaps evangelical-by providing education they also create an opportunity to share the faith. The roman catholic system has separate aims and always has. I think I object less then to admission policies selecting on the basis of faith to RC schools than to c of e. Fact remains though, that since the state puts in 90% of running costs, the proportion of places available to people practising those faiths, if such places exist at all, should perhaps reflect their relative numbers in the local community rather than having a situation where a popular faith school's intake is made up solely from that faith group. Or perhaps otherwise the church should take back the responsibilty for paying the running costs. We have three va c of e primary schools locally. Two are very high achieving and so the associated churches have very high numbers of parents occupying their pews. The other school has no less religious content in the school day and yet parents are less keen. And then surprisingly, when it comes to secondary, they forget religion altogether. I just can't bear the double standards and mixed up motives involved in all this schools admission stuff. But as parents I kind of get why people do it. I just don't think they should be able to.

But how can you tell who is a real believer and who isn't?

Because I can tell you from the outside I appear to be the most holier than thou catholic who ever did live
(family all practicing, go to church, priests in the family, dc baptised (soon!) and involved in volunteering in the schools.

It's just on the inside I'm like this

So saying they shouldn't be able to do it... How do you stop it? You can't. So therefore you play by the criteria set out or ou don't.

Don't make up your mind not to play then cry about the rules of the game

I think the rules are wrong. Particularly for c of e schools. I think those who live in an area where the best performing schools have religious activity as part of the admissions criteria have an unenviable choice to make. In the church of England, one of the key bishops who is part of the section that decides policy in this area believes only 10% of places should be allocated by church attendance. Good for him. It's a problem though, because numbers at some churches would plummet of this were the case. I'm not crying about it. But I do think it's wrong.