Faith schools - the JFS verdict is in - I have a question...

[ImSoNotTelling]

here for anyone who has been following this.

The courts have decided that JFS were acting unlawfully in refusing a place to a child on the grounds that his mother was not recognised as jewish by the orthodox church.

I have a question though. This ruling says that the school were discriminating on the grounds of ethniciy, and that is unlawful. But then why is it lawful for schools to discriminate on the grounds of religion? I thought it was illegal to discriminate against someone due to their religious beliefs?

As an atheist-Anglican living in France who has a child out of wedlock with a French libéral Jew who is strongly welded to his Jewish identity yet has no beliefs... I am SO glad we have plentiful secular schooling here.

Yes, I agree Bonsoir. As an atheist Jew (through maternal bloodline so it counts!) married to an Anglican devout atheist, I moved back to the USA to get an education for my children that did not discriminate against them because of their parents' religious beliefs and birthright. Have I gone to sleep and woken up again in another century? What a truly disgusting set of ethics, morals and prejudices to teach the children of 2009.

Just to answer some of the many points that appeared after I had to go out last night.

1. Edam - you may consider it racist to want to combat intermarriage (I'm not sure about assimilation as that just means blending into secular culture and stopping your observance of the commandments) but it the basic theology of Judaism is that when we accepted the ten commandments on Sinai (which according to interpretation were first offered to all the other nations who said no) we took on the obligations and it is therefore our purpose in life to carry these out. One of these commandments was not to marry outside the Jewish people and in particular people of certain origins. But no one is too sure nowadays who is a Moabite man....

Those who did not accept the ten commandements are still obliged to keep the 7 noachide principles which include do not kill and do not take a limb from a living animal. It is believed that a non-Jew who observes the 7 Noachide principles reaches a far higher spiritual level than a Jew who does not observe the 613 commandemnts (they continued to add on after they got to 10). There is no belief that a non-Jew cannot go to the world to come unless they convert to Judaism in the way that Christianity appears to believe that without Jesus there is no salvation. This is why Jews do not missionise non-Jews but only their own. In fact Chabad (an outreach movement) in their activities in Japan include a part in trying to promote the 7 Noachide principles amongst the locals (not many Jews in Japan) as they believe this will also help hasten the redemption.

Is it racist to be against intermarriage? I would agree that it may well be dependant on your motives. If the sole purpose is preserving a Jewish race or out of some guilt to relatives then I would agree the motive is mainly racist. If it is done on the basis of the religious obligation of why it is done and taking into account the advantages of starting a relationship with someone who you share the same values and aspirations then I am not sure why that is any more racist than a committed Christian wanting to marry another. The point is that people can still convert. I do know a couple who met in university and he converted (much harder as circumcision is one of the requirements for men)and only after that did they start a relationship. Most people have some sort of line they draw over which they will not marry whether it is class, income, skin colour, nationality, religion or in my case height. Obviously in an ideal world we would all accept each other but that just doesn't happen. If you look at that list religion is one of the few items that can be properly and relatively simply changed.

2.Zazioma - the Jewish people concept relates back to the giving of the ten commandments at Sinai. That is considered the defining moment when it was formed. When someone converts they become part of "the Jewish people" which is as much concept as race. It does not just mean people with certain racial heritage.

3. Faith schools generally - I'm sure someone's made this point but the reason why they're so popular at the moment is because the normal state schools have declined dramatically over the last 20 years. When I was a child it was much more usual to go to them but now there are so few which are considered decent. Also they rigorously apply the distance test. If you don't live in the right road you lose. In those circumstances why not pretend a little and go for a good faith school which tend to have a more committed parent body? With the current recession they are all under more strain as parents who would have sent their children to private schools are now looking at cheaper alternatives. Plus there is a severe shortage of school places throughout London. All these factors are making this a key issue at the moment.

1. Practice tests - we have applied to a number of Jewish schools and three have had horrendous forms which other people told us they had in previous years because of oversubscription e.g. 4 places in a class because the other 31 have gone to siblings (frankly I think a class size of 35 is appalling). Questions we've had to answer include "we are aware some fathers do not wear a kipah (skullcap) to work. please explain in what circumstances if any you would not wear a kipah." Then there was the form your rabbi had to fill in which included "do you believe the mother keeps the mitzvos pertaining to her?". What this means is do the couple keep the laws pertaining to their sex life!!!!!!! The only one we saw which seemed to have come in as a result of JFS required your rabbi to answer questions such as "how well do you know the family? please circle an answer, very well, fairly well or not at all"

In addition orthodox Judaism is very much a home based religion. For the men synagogue is a requirement but for the women it is not and in many areas when you have young kids it is religiously impossible to get to them on the sabbath as you are not allowed to push a buggy. So practice tests are really not great.

And another epic post ends.....

This has been one of the most informative posts I have read in a very long while and has made me question, once again, what I feel as a Jewish woman...if I feel Jewish at all.

I suppose I do, but in culture and race only, rather than in terms of religion. BA said it best as an atheist jew.

The lack of decent non-denomination schools round here is a worry and having to prove that I am of a certain faith, just to get a decent schooling for my daughter is a very grim option for me to say the least.

Many thanks to everyone for their contributions and making my brain work again!!

We3kings if you want to discuss any of the points off-thread please feel free to cat me.

assimilation and intermarriage were the sort of things the apartheid system in S Africa was designed to prevent.

(I knew there were far more than ten commandments but 600+? Wow. Does anyone manage to keep them all?)

Tigger15, your description of the primary importance of the racial/ethnic/hereditary component of being Jewish over the practice component is very much in line with my 26 years of outside in experience. But then why do you believe the court decision was wrong by not differentiating between the "ethnic and the religious" definitions of Judaism, if they are inseparable?

I've never heard the interpretation of the covenant being offered to other nations before that of Moses. Where is this?

Frogs, I'm horrified at the theological tweaking going on in assigning school places in Christian faith schools with regards to baptism date. I had no idea they were doing this, and someone needs to complain to their diocese or parish. One of the founding tenets of Christianity is openness and non-exclusivity; all that is required to become a full member of a COE, Orthodox, RC or standard Protestant church is baptism, at any age, though admittedly there may be a catechism/study requirement for adults.

Again, this issue seems to be about attempting to determine who genuinely wants a Catholic or [insert here] education for their child, and who is having to prove that they practice a certain faith "just to get a decent schooling." It does sound like a mess, but expedience does not change theology.

zazizoma, I think they are genuinely trying to sort out the 'real' catholics from the chancers, though date of baptism is a bit of a blunt tool for doing that. But they are also trying to tweak their intake in a way that is favourable to their league table status. The scope for doing this has been hugely circumscribed by the new admissions code (not being allowed to interview, for example, or set a religious knowledge test, or insist on parents putting them first), so they're finding ever more inventive ways to achieve the same end.

So for example the requirement to submit a parental baptism certificate as well as the child's clearly favours well-organised families who understand how to negotiate paperwork. It will also exclude many families recently arrived in the UK whose parishes of baptism may be in the DRC or Eritrea. How are they supposed to obtain a baptismal certificate from a war-torn country several thousand miles away? It's a nonsense.

I've been involved in our parish's First Communion programme and every year we have kids who can't make their Communion with the rest of the group because nobody's been able to unearth a baptism certificate. And most of these kids are born in the UK, it's just that the parents don't have the same cultural grasp of the great god of Paperwork as European cultures.

And the Religious Enquiry forms some secondary schools give out will hugely disadvantage less-educated families. Check out this for example. Many parents won't have read the writing on the wall well enough to ensure that their child has clocked up the right number of years in the right sort of church activities, and that they themselves have done the same.

I understand that the schools are between a rock and a hard place, but you do sometimes wonder which new testament these people are reading.

indeed

That form frogs

But then I imagine that particular school is possibly a little oversubscribed

A lot of this refining ties in as well with that study that was done into faith schools and entry criteria (was it a year or two ago?). They chose two areas, which happened to be my borough in London and Manchester (I think) and looked at a sample of what questions religious schools were asking, what people had to do to get in. A huge number (majority IIRC) were found to be acting illegally, asking for donations, what education level the parents had achieved etc ie looking for money, and children from well educated families.

I think a lot of institutions had to tighten things up after that - and if they are having to be more open, explicit and fair in what you have to do, I guess for all these very oversubscribed schools the rules can only get more and more complex and unpredictable.

I'm so glad I started this thread I'm learning such a lot!

Zazizoma - the point about the ethnic/religious separation is that while it is possible to be ethnically (in the usual genetic meaning of the word) Jewish and not religiously e.g. if you have a non-Jewish mother and a Jewish father, it is also possible to be religiously Jewish without being ethnically Jewish e.g. a convert with no genetic link.

It is considered that when someone converts it is as if they too stood at Sinai and received the ten commandments.

The offering of the ten commandments to all the other nations is homiletic interpretation to explain the statement in the bible of acceptance of the ten commandments "we will do and then we will hear" (ie practice before understanding).

Edam -thankfully no one can keep all 613 as some only apply to the priestly family and can only be kept in the temple which hasn't been around for nearly 2000 years. Then again people add modern refinements onto the original ones as safetyguards so it often feels like there are considerably more than 613.

I think you misunderstood me on assimilation. I have nothing against integration into society and most people I know are reasonably integrated in terms of jobs, lifestyle contribution to general society. However, assimilation means that in order to do the above you must completely succumb to society's order and take its rule and conventions as the one to live by over and above Judaism. To do so leads to the destruction of Jewish life and the community and a melting pot as a model for society is not necessarily the best way forward. Diversity is important as is working together as one society and balancing the divide between the two to an ideal level is surely what we should all be aiming at.

I don't have time for more as shabbat is rather too soon but I would like to say that I really commiserate with those descriptions of getting people on when kids are baptised. It just sounds so arbitrary. At least I know more or less the playing field I'm competing on.

thanks tigger, I'm very interested in reading about the homiletic interpretation, so when you get back to us could you post a link? I'm wading through some search results and it ain't pretty.

And your 5th paragraph about assimilation is why I think it's so important to having state funded educational alternatives (both in focus and methodology) to the generic secular national curriculum, and agree that the melting pot metaphor suggests an erasing of cultural identity to the detriment of diversity.

I don't have experience of the first ethnical attribute that you describe. My in-laws and their family are VERY definite that my children are NOT Jewish. To them, there is no distinction between the ethnic/race/religion.

I think the decision summary explains well the question of how the court handled ethnicity, and I agree with them. I think this was the right decision.

I am still curious to know if anyone has ever heard of a CHILD undergoing Orthodox Jewish conversion.

To go back to the OPs original question:

I thought it was illegal to discriminate against someone due to their religious beliefs?

me too, till I had a child - it came as quite a shock. And its not even discrimination against someone due to their religious beliefs - because of course 4 year olds don't really have such - but their parents. And don't lets forget, its not just children who are discriminated against, its teachers and TAs.

Grimma, arguably they're not discriminating against, they're giving preference to children of a particular faith. There are established precedents that schools have to admit children not of the faith if they have spaces available (although some of the Charedi Jewish schools don't have that provision -- but I guess no nonbelievers want to go to those schools enough to take them to the Adjudicator, so it's never been an issue).

The preamble with CAtholic schools usually says something like, "St X's school was founded by the Catholic Church to provide a Catholic education for children of practising Catholic families", and then they work their way down the over-subscription criteria.

Presumably the legislation allows for this, in the same way boys' schools are allowed to discriminate by refusing to consider applications from girls.

Must admit that was what I thought too grimma, and reading the BBC article about JFS in my OP crystallised the thought.

Why are schools allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion? If any other state funded service tried it (NHS, buses etc) they'd be clobbered.

Is it a historical anomoly due to the sheer numbers of faith schools, do they have a special dispensation?

What came as a shock to me Grimma was that due to various religious/proximity things my children on the face of it won't get into any of the 3 perfectly good schools within walking distance of our house. That gave me a bit of a too... Hence my interest in the subject

If you ladies are game, I'd like to ask a few exploratory questions . . .

1. Would you care if the state maintained some faith schools if you had walking access to the school of your choice?

1. How would you describe your ideal vision of state-funded education?

giving preference to A == discriminating against B.

It looks different depending on which side of the fence you sit.

Quite a few of the faith schools in our area do allow for a certain percentage to be from some other faiths... theres a list of them. Humanism ain't on it.

NotTelling -- the anomaly will in part be down to the fact that although the running costs of the school are met by the state, the land and buildings will generally be owned by the relevant religious body (for church schools either the diocese or the religious order that founded it).

So not entirely comparable with the NHS or buses. Obviously if the state wanted to take full control they could offer to buy out the churches, but can't see the tax payer wanting to stump up for that (quite apart from the political will to do so).

Religious orders used to run hospitals though, hence so many of them being Saint Something. At some point they were handed over from the church to the state - possibly via an intervening period of being run as charities, I don't know. So presumably we could do something similar with religious schools?

Tigger, I don't have any issue with Jewish people, or any other culture/religion, wanting to preserve their faith/identity. Or with individual Jews or Zoroastrians/whatever wanting to marry someone from the same background. The problem arises when you try to discriminate against anyone who doesn't obey these strictures - by refusing their children entry to a school, for instance.

As for the anger at Jews being made to measure their Jewishness by attendance at Shul, I can understand that, especially if that's not what being Jewish is about. But it's the same deal if you are CofE/Catholic but don't go to church that often - you won't get your child into a church school. My local CofE school gives priority to children who worship at the church next door/other local CofE churches and then regular worshippers from other religions before even thinking about local children!

I am not posting at the moment as I'm feeling very confused about what I think about all of this! Have spent a large chunk of the day pondering zazizoma's questions but still none the wiser. I used to have very firm views - athiest, no faith schools paid for by the state etc but for various reasons my previous definiteness is being eroded and everything is up in the air! Which is part of the reason I find threads on here such an education.

I suppose my previous view was, why have faith schools, there is no place for religion in schools, if people want to be religious then they can do that in their homes and places of worship.

Now I am coming round to thinking, well what's the harm? If it's what people want, then why not? We are (I like to think) an inclusive and welcoming and tolerant society, if people want to have their religion as a framework for schooling, then why not?

Anyway I go round and round in circles

frogs your explanation is obviously correct explaining the anomoly, but edam makes a very good point re. the hospitals.

Grrrr, don't get me started on the flippin' orthodox Jews and the JFS! DH is Israeli, I converted through the Reform movement, so of course as far as the orthodox lot oare concerned, I'm not Jewish at all.

I go to Shul regularly, am a very active part of my Shul's community, involved in choir, Sunday school, toddler group etc etc, just because I enjoy it, and have thoroughly embraced my new faith (or ethnicity!).

My SIL did an orthodoc conversion, cos back in the day in Israel that was the only option. She's never had any interest in going to Shul at all. Until she and BIL moved to Watford, and she decided her precious boys should go to the JFS. So now they all go to Shul every week.

Gah!!!!

Not sure why it bothers me, cos a) we live nowhere near there so it's not like I'd be sending my DDs anyway and b) it's really nothing to do with me.

I guess I'm annoyed because she's only a part of her Shul's community to get her kids into a good school. I'm involved with mine because I genuinely want to me. I practice faith because it makes sense to me. And yet she's considered a 'real' Jew by the orthodox while I'm not, and my DDs would never be considered for the school because they're not Jewish enough.

Rant over.... my partly Jewish DD2 is crying....

Annie - your SIL is only doing what loads of other pretend Christians do when they want to get their dc into the local C of E school; it's interesting how people suddenly find God isn't it? and then - bizarrely - lose interest once they have secured a place!what these people are doing is not illegal though, although some people - including me - may view it as unethical. Unfortunately the whole business of being religious and school places has now become a process of form filling, box ticking and maintaining a high personal visibility in the right places. Sadly this diminishes the spiritual and moral value of religion entirely.

At my dds' school ( C of E )they are really tightening up though, and as other posters have said with the Catholic schools it is virtually impossible to exploit the system. It seems inevitable that more and more hoops will be established for people to jump through in order to secure a place for their dc.

I'm in a similar position to Annie (cool name BTW). Reform convert living in South London so will never want to send my children to JFS in any case.

But, yes it does wind me up that we get no recognition for our level of observance, etc.