To get my 3 year old baptised in an attempt to get into a Catholic school

[nestisflown]

AIBU on two levels:

1. to want to baptise my 3 year old and start attending local mass weekly in order to get into one of the best schools in the area (and our closest school, although the next closest secular school is also an excellent one). Is this morally dubious? Or do lots of parents do the same?

1. to think that my transparent plan will work and help my child get a place even though we'll have been attending mass for less than a year by the time applications are made...and the applications want proof of "sustained weekly attendance". It doesnt define sustained though

My reasons for wanting my child to go to Catholic school are: (1.) It is a great school academically; (2) it's our closest school; (3) it's the only good faith school close to us (there's a CofE school but it's doesn't perform well academically), and as a non-Catholic but practising Christian, I'd quite like to see faith incorporated into my child's school day...even in a different denomination.

Has anyone done this? Has anyone succeeded?

I don't think they are being bigotted, I can see I'm lucky as a Catholic.

If I didn't think my local Catholic school suited DS, I still have another school in walking distance and DS would still go to church and childrens litrugy for the religious/community bit.

If a non religious person lived nearby but thought the religious school would suit their DC more than the secular school they'd have less chance of getting into their prefered school.

The reason the state provides a catholic education is because it provides an anglican one. Outside of the Church of England schools (4 times as many as catholic schools) there are the other schools. In my day they were called non denominational but now they are just maintained. They still have the whole act of daily worshop of a broadly christian nature and the christiabity heavy RE syllabus - which is an anglican view of christianity/ protestant. Catholics wanted their compulsory act of daily worhsip and compulsory RE to reflect their faith not someone elses. Catholic history is one of being opressed remember.
In modern times it would be better to have no religion in schools at all and for parishes to educate and spread funds in other ways. But the state would need to buy all the chools the churches built and take over the 1-10% the churches provide to run them.
I'd very much think this is an investment worth making. It annoys me that the 3 closest schools to me are church of england, the 4th catholic and the 5th is not religious, except a minister comes from a free church and does an assembly each week. The secondary is much more secular to be fair.

I don't mind but it must make things tricky for atheists when choosing schools

Yes it does! But then again, a lot of people don't realise about the act of worship requirement so are either surprised when it happens, or just don't know it's going on.

There's huge difference between schools, in how they interpret this. Some are basically secular in that they fudge the requirement and go for woolly "wonder and awe" solutions so they're ticking that box but not really doing anything that most people would recognised as Christian worship. And, others embrace it.

There has been a bit of kick back to this. Unsurprisingly, many atheists aren't keen on mandated worship. The last time I looked into this in any detail (a few years ago now) there was the possibility of an opt out on the horizon I think, but I haven't kept up with it so I don't know if this happened. And how academy schools fit into this, I have no idea!

When we were looking at primaries, I used a question for open evenings that I hoped would be neutral enough that the school wouldn't know what I wanted the answer to be:
how does the school manage the requirement to provide an act of worship?
It worked: the answers did show the huge difference between our local schools, in their approach to religion.

Good luck, nestisflown, I hope you find a school that works for your family.

OK, I looked it up because I was curious.

The law is still in place. According to this article: Every English school is legally required to have its children take part in “collective daily worship” every day

And

But even in secular schools, which are the majority of state schools, teachers are supposed to lead children in a “broadly Christian” daily act of worship

[...]

the rule is regularly flouted [...] Around half of primary schools are thought to have no daily worship, and almost no secular secondary schools seem to bother. Ofsted, the schools inspectorate, declared in 2004 that it would stop even checking.

But while half of secular primary schools completely ignore the rule, the other half don’t. Which is why two parents, Lee and Lizanne Harris, are taking a case to court in the autumn after their children were made to take part in Christian prayers during school assemblies even though Burford primary school is a community school with no religious character.

www.theguardian.com/education/2019/aug/20/replace-religious-assembly-in-schools-with-a-thought-for-the-day

I think this is an interesting thread and people of varying views have put forward their thoughts and experiences in a calm and articulate way. Not sure how @seaweedandmarchingbands copes in a largely secular society if she's that easily offended. Repelled even. Hope her kids are a bit more robust. And I mean that kindly.

It could be worse - we could be making the kids sing the national anthem every day....

deepflatflyer

You don’t mean that kindly. You mean to further aggravate me. Go away.

@deepflatflyer I completely agree. This is a fairly emotive topic and there have been many really fascinating debates on both sides. There have been plenty of posters where I myself have disagreed with one thing they've said and wholeheartedly agreed with another and I think most people have been open minded and rational to those responses, providing for healthy debate. The OP herself has taken on board all the different views and has thanked people for suggestions. I think that rarely happens on a thread like this, so someone having to leave it due to being so repelled was a little surprising and, I think, perhaps not entirely justified. Thanks, all, for making me really think about what I myself feel is important and I respect those who might have different views to mine but are ultimately also just trying to do the best for their children.

Mangoandbroccoli

Yeah, you’ll have to excuse my dislike of liars, bare-faced hypocrites and people who casually disrespect my faith. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Why not? It’s all woo anyway and as it’s a taxpayer funded school your kid has as much right to be there as any other kid. Fill your boots.

Yeah, you’ll have to excuse my dislike of liars, bare-faced hypocrites and people who casually disrespect my faith

You don’t seem to be taking on the good points that have been made. Just regurgitating the same old argument you’ve been making from the start.

@seaweedandmarchingbands I, too, dislike those traits and my personal stance throughout this has been that I do think the OP would be hypocritical to baptise her child in order to get in to a Catholic school and it's not something I'd be comfortable with. Nor do I think, though, that state funded schools should have a religious bias and my not attending one is how I choose to vote against this.

I think how each person has come to their own decision has been really interesting, though, and I think it's worth exploring all of the opposing views rather than saying that an individual repels you and getting angry. It's ok to agree to disagree on certain things. Some of the views aren't my own but the people don't repel me - I've never met them, after all, and I acknowledge that we're pretty much all united in one area: wanting what we each think is best for our child.

@Mangoandbroccoli yes good point about OP - obviously genuinely looking for an informed discussion rather than an argument about what's right and wrong.

@seaweedandmarchingbands - no I genuinely feel sorry for you that you can't take part in a reasonable discussion about faith. It's really useful to be able to defend it reasonably without being offended. Otherwise it's bigotry really isn't it?

Mangoandbroccoli

No, I don’t think there is anything at all wrong in being offended and repelled by a self-confessed liar and hypocrite. I think morality has gone the wrong way (and by a long way) if people are seriously suggesting it is not okay to be disgusted by such naked self-interest.

deepflatflyer

It’s not bigotry to not like liars. No. No bigotry. Her attitude disgusts me, not any one of her potentially protected characteristics.

LaurieMarlow

I was very clear about what I was prepared to debate, and what I wanted I say.

I was very clear about what I was prepared to debate, and what I wanted I say.

Yeah, you aren’t prepared to debate with anyone or engage with their points. You’re definitely not interested in questioning your own privilege or assumptions.

All you want to do is throw around abuse.

LaurieMarlow

No abuse. I have expressed an opinion without name-calling (other than the obvious - the OP is indisputably a hypocrite).

We’ll you’ve thrown out bigot for one thing!

That isn’t abuse. Bigotry is abusive. Get it right.

You called me a bigot, which was totally unfounded.

I don’t know, seaweed, I seem to recall you calling Lawrie a bigot.

I think morality has gone the wrong way (and by a long way) if people are seriously suggesting it is not okay to be disgusted by such naked self-interest.

What is really interesting is that you don’t put your own pursuit of your own self-interest (your ‘need’ for a state-funded Catholic education to take priority over a more neutral system, even when presented with evidence that the status quo is discriminatory against disadvantaged children) in the same basket.

Is it only disgusting when you feel people are taking from you, and not when you are taking from others?

JassyRadlett

I think she’s a bigot. Sorry!

And I think my child has the right to benefit from a Catholic education, just as I think your child has the right to benefit from a secular education, where the benefit is defined according to YOUR judgment and religious principles. Which I respect. That isn’t self-interest. I have the same interest in all children being educated in the faiths of their families and cultures.

I think she’s a bigot. Sorry!

Based on what?

Whereas what the OP wants is to take advantage of the ‘better’ (supposedly) teaching provided by Catholics, whilst laughing at their teachings behind their backs. Please: those ripping into me for calling a her a hypocrite - how ISN’T that hypocrisy?