How can you possibly believe in a benevolent God

[partialderivative]

Once more, acts of 'god' have left communities blown apart.

Does any one really feel these vilages deserved it?

God's a bit of a cunt at times.

I don't know why it doesn't work Jassy, sorry.

The guidelines are more extensive, Jassy.

www.google.co.uk/search?q=legal+definition+of+broadly+christian+collective+worship+in+schools&client=ms-opera-mini-iphone&channel=new&gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=JVBGVd-BMsmvaYTzgagC

This (Google search) can take you to the pages I linked to, Jassy. It is the second site 'Collective Worship Q & A'.

The CofE does not set the law, and neither should its guidance be taken as authoritative on how the lawmakers intend the law to be implemented.

Almost all statute is further clarified by guidance, which is set out by the statutory body that sets the law. In this case, community schools need to look to the DfE, not the CofE, for information on how to implement their statutory responsibilities.

The guidance I quoted comes from the DfE. Glad if anyone can tell me if its been updated it clarified.

Jassy earlier you were complaining about clergy sitting in the House of Lords!

They are highly involved in SACRE, the regulatory body, to my knowledge.

The C of E should know the law, especially in this respect, I would have thought....

You're right, and you're correct in that I wasn't clear. They have a role in passing primary legislation, a very limited one in regulation and none at all in formulating official guidance.

Apologies, my use of language was clumsy and irrelevant. However that doesn't alter the fact that their guidance is of extremely limited relevance to community schools, which need to follow what DfE says.

I've just reread that guidance - which is surface and quite rubbish as a piece of legislative interpretation, particularly in defining 'broadly Christian' beyond 'at least half' and 'not affiliated to a particar denomination'. It does not, however, conflict with the more detailed DfE guidance.

Which part of the DfE guidance to schools are you suggesting is incorrect?

And - sorry for triple post - as you mention SACRE, many LAs' SACREs reference the DfE guidance, according to a quick google.

I don't understand you, Jassy, their guidance covers all types of schools and relates to the DfE guidelines.

I linked to this particular guidance simply because the DfE document is lengthy, whereas this is quite concise, and I found screen refreshment slow on the DfE document, which can make reading difficult.

Of course the DfE guidance is correct, there is just more of it than you quoted, Jassy.

Unfortunately it's conciseness misses out important info relevant to the earlier discussion of whether 'collective worship' that didn't mention the Christian god or Jesus qualifies under the law. It doesn't go anywhere bear giving a school what they'd need to be confident they were interpreting legislation effectively.

There's of course much more of the DfE guidance. I made that pretty clear. Which bits did you want me to quote, given I was dealing with questions about whether a certain approach to collective worship was in line with the law?

(The CofE also becomes a wee bit of a self-serving PR job towards the end, which undetmines its usefulness as impartial guidance...)

I was just trying to help, Jassy, I wasn't expecting anything from you.

However you view the C of E, don't you think it would be rather strange and counterproductive for them to put out guidance which is in any way misleading, regarding law, which they were involved in making and which involves compulsory provision of collective worship within schools?

I isn't say it was misleading - quite the opposite, as I said earlier. Just so brief and lacking in definition to be of extremely limited usefulness.

Except for the bit at the end where it talks about 'govt supporting any changes' which is pure PR.

Well you can take it or leave it Jassy, up to you. What is your personal experience of collective worship within the State schools here? It is just you seem unclear on the sheer range of provision that is available between schools...

I think most people are probably unaware of what their own school does, let alone the 'sheer range of provision' - have you anything you can share with me on that?

However, I can take it or leave it as I'm not running a school. The people who do deserve clear, consistent guidance about what the law requires. As I said, I'm quite glad that some schools are circumventing the legal requirements. I remain annoyed that said legal requirements exist.

What exactly is your problem with what I've shared? In a discussion about what is and is not permitted under the law, I shared an element of guidance from the relevant department that sets out, er, what is and isn't required by the law.

How did that you turn into gently chiding me for my apparent ignorance?

Speaking of legal requirements, my reading has turned up the encouraging news that while the law still exists, exactly as set out, the DfE has decided it's not going to be enforced any more. Which appears to be code for 'repealing this would be more hassle than it's worth, but we're not going to give you a hard time about it'.

Anyone with more expertise than me (not hard, as capsium has so helpfully pointed out) know if this is something Ofsted cares about at all?

I have no great problem with what you've shared Jassy.

I was mildly amused that you so passionately complain about something you apparently have little direct experience of - some epistemic humility could be useful to you IMHO.

Oh and I found it rather ironic that you dismissed the information I linked to as useless - in terms of it coming from the Church if England, rather than the Department of Education - never mind that they are act in partnership regarding this particular law.

Church of England. Typo.

It is regulated by SACRE. They carry out their own inspections.

I dismissed it not because of its provenance but because it didn't deal at all with the question we were discussing - whether a shared reflection that didn't mention God or Jesus was compliant with current law. As guidance, it was poor as it did not define key terms. If the DfE guidance had not defined key terms in the legislation, I also would have dismissed it as poor guidance; a minimum for any good legislative guidance is to accurately define key terms.

I have a major issue with the law itself, regardless of its application. It's another example of structural Christian privilege and if a single school is following the guidance to the letter, it's one too many for me. It may be that 99% of schools are merrily ignoring the law - but as long as the law exists I will work to see it changed, as it is inherently discriminatory.

Can you share anything on the range of provision, or was that an empty statement?

"7. Doestheworshipalwayshavetobe“whollyormainlyofabroadlyChristian character”?
No. The school can seek a ‘determination’ from the Local Authority’s Standing Advisory Committee for Religious Education (SACRE). The determination could allow the daily act of worship to reflect the predominant major world faith found in the school, or indeed the range of faiths. The determination could specify that there would be no Christian worship. The SACRE has no power to nullify the requirement in law of daily worship for all pupils."

This (from the site I linked to) shows that the worship need not be Christian.

You know there isn't a single central SACRE, yes?

But while we're talking about SACREs and the sheer breadth of provision, here's an excerpt from the guidance of the Cornwall SACRE on their expectations for collective worship - I'm not sure how much breadth this provides for?

'Collective worship should be a formative and nurturing experience. Prayer, singing hymns and silence should be encouraged and can be expected. Certainly the use of the Lord’s Prayer should be a regular feature of collective worship in schools along with Christian hymns. There is a significant role for silent reflection and for contemplation in collective worship, something often missing from life in many schools.

What is a ‘broadly Christian character’?
'Not every specific act of collective worship must be of a broadly Christian character but that over a term the majority should be. So what is this ‘character’? The answer is given by the DfES in paragraphs 60 – 67 of Circular 1/94. Here are some key points from the Advice:
• broadly Christian reflects the traditions of Christian belief but are not specific to one denominational tradition
• it must contain some elements which specifically relate to the traditions of Christian belief
• at times it must accord special status to Jesus Christ
• it should reflect the needs of parents and should be inclusive enough to
accommodate the needs of non-Christian families – hence each headteacher needs to know and understand the school’s intake and aim to meet identified needs
'Broadly Christian in this sense would mean that schools should explore themes such as Creation, Fall, Salvation, Justification, Redemption, Sanctification and Faith, Hope and Love in terms that are age and development appropriate and ideally linked to the pattern of the Christian year. But it also means that worship should not be identified with a particular Christian tradition. It should include the breadth of denominational life found here in Cornwall.
'Certainly the special status of Jesus Christ should be evident in a programme for collective worship. This would include what Christians believe Jesus has done for the world by his incarnation, life, death, resurrection, ascension into Heaven and sending of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.'

I'm not sure all the bullet points are entirely consistent with each other, but bravo to them for clarity and specificity.

Yes, Jassy, each LA has their own SACRE.

Referring to my last post a school can apply to the SACRE to provide 'multi-faith' collective worship or collective worship which is of a faith other than Christian.

I'm aware of that, Caps, but that requires the school to jump through hoops and you will note makes no reference to children of no faith, which you'll appreciate is a major issue for those of us who have a problem with the promotion of religion by the state.

And of course, Christianity remains the default, and head teachers aren't trusted to make decisions about their own schools for themselves. Instead they have to gather a significant evidence base, make an application and hope their local SACRE agrees with them.

And even then there is no provision for no worship - simply worship of other faiths, including the exclusion of Christianity.

Referring to my last post a school can apply to the SACRE to provide 'multi-faith' collective worship or collective worship which is of a faith other than Christian.

Indeed. I've explained the problem with that. What's the second biggest grouping in the 'religion' question of the 2011 Census?

The parents can opt their children out of collective worship though. The schools are required to provide supervision for those children as this happens within the school day. So this is the provision for no collective worship.

If more parents exercised their right to opt their child out of collective worship, there would be more pressure for schools to make good quality provision, in this respect.

Shouldn't be difficult if, as you claim, the majority are atheist, Jassy.