Does anyone else find the anti denominational school stance depressing?

[Plaza]

I recently read a thread where the majority seemed to agree that state schools should be secular and denominational schools done away with altogether.

I found this pretty depressing, no least as it would have been my personal view about a year ago... I have since moved my DC to a COE school and cannot praise it or the Christian ethics enough.. What do you think?

Nooka they won't be taught atheism. They will be taught about evolution in science and about religion in RE.

Oh I just meant I don't want my belief/understanding to be taught to them in preference to other ways of thinking about the world. That's for them to decide.

I don't think that children are atheist by default though, I suspect they are more agnostic, ie open to ideas in a way that as an atheist I'm not, I have a strong conviction that there are no supernatural beings. Children are fairly open minded I think, in fact that's really why I don't like them being taught teachers' beliefs as facts.

For me it's slightly irrelevant now as we emigrated to somewhere that has a completely secular approach and as a result they know virtually nothing about any religion, which I think is a bad idea too (as an example ds has had about an hour on Islam in his social studies course last year when they were covering ancient civilizations, and that was pretty much it).

Nicetabard the reason I quoted the figures for aided schools is that these are the ones which can have apply a faith criteria if they are oversubscribed. Voluntary Controlled ones can't. It is a minority of schools that have oversubscription criteria although that is no comfort if that is the school next to your house. I'm in favour of schools serving their local communities and not having faith based criteria if they are oversubscribed so preaching to the choir there.

The 'Christian stuff' is part of our culture and will be taught in schools along with 'Muslim stuff' and 'Jewish stuff.' As children go up the key stages lots of schools are teaching philosophy and ethics alongside RE which is all to the good.

I can't talk for RC schools but in C of E schools RE isn't being taught to believe. It is about learn and question and know yourself. If the aggression against church schools is about atheists and secular humanists wanting all faith, whether it is taught in RE lessons or encountered through prayers in assembly, then it is good to be upfront about it as we saw upthread

"KEEP FAITH OUT OF SCHOOL!"

I was raised in a strictly secular school & by strictly atheist parents.

I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Intriguing statement, OP. I know it was on page one but would you care to elaborate? You do realise that the above is, most likely, the way most British children are raised and schooled?

If I have this correct, you found faith once you were out of childhood. Many people believe that allowing an individual to make their own mind up about religion (as opposed to religion being something one is accidentally born into) is ideal.

Did you feel that, with hindsight, you would have preferred a religious upbringing?

The CofE schools around here the children are taught to believe, as they are in the RC and Jewish schools. Aside from having RE lessons. They are religious schools, that is kind of the point. For example, in our nearest CofE primary they have a whole school assembly in the church every week.

I looked at the figures for my borough and they are:

92 primary schools
44 are community
3 are foundation
35 are voluntary aided
7 are academies
3 are free schools

The free schools and academies seem to be religious as well (although I've not been through it with a fine toothcomb!).

The religious schools in our area are a mix of CofE, Jewish and RC. So you're not going to get the CofE cultural stuff at 2/3 of them.

That's primary schools BTW.

Round here 45 primary schools
8 are church schools
2 are C of E aided, 2 are RC aided. The other 4 are VC so only 4 schools with faith based oversubscription criteria. The rest are community schools.

I have nine schools in my parish and I only go into one of them. Non of them are church schools. Seems as if it varies widely by area.

Yes it does vary enormously by area.

I think that people like the OP often have a hard time understanding that how things work in their neck of the woods, is not necessarily how it is for everyone else.

Around here the fact that most schools select on religious criteria causes a host of problems.

Of course children are born athiest. Athiesm is the absence of belief. To say children are agnostic is silly- they would first have to learn that some people believe in god in order to develop an agnostic stance.

I see atheism more as the rejection of god(s)/faith, and you have to know at least a bit about religion in order to reject it. However every time I take time out to look at atheism it becomes more clear to me that there are lots of different schools of thought, and that atheism can encompass lots of different ideas, from the more militant to the more passive.

The reason I'd not say that small children are necessarily born atheist is that they tend to believe all sorts of things (many imagined up for themselves) and on the whole don't tend to reject stuff nearly as much as adults. For myself I doubt I would be as strongly atheist as I am if I hadn't been brought up Catholic. I tend to identify as either anti-theist or apatheist (ie religion is either wrong or irrelevant).

Agnosticism is probably not really right either though I agree. In truth small children probably don't really care one way or another about religious concepts until the adults in their lives tell them to. Which of course is one of the reasons why teachers should not be telling them about their personal beliefs as facts.

I don't think that children are born anything. It is just pure luck if the happen to match up with their parent belief system or views. Time, and experience of life, will shape their own views.
Schools, parents and any adults should preface it all with 'some people believe', 'Christians believe', 'Hindus believe' etc and make it quite clear that the child will have free choice when older.

nooka I se where you are coming from- the distinction between athiest and agnostic views are blurred.

But children are born with a blank canvas in terms of religion. Surely that is athiest. It's not until influence is place upon them that they become religious. The absence of religion is athiesm surely. Athiesm is not a faith.

So, since things vary so much from place to place wrt church schools and their relationships with the local communities, what about this scenario:

St B's is an outstanding C of E church school in a village. Other nearby schools are non-church, and easily driveable, although not quite as successful. St B's has church people going in to school weekly to hear children read, lead assemblies, and do music. It has church people on the governing body. Children go to services in the church a couple of times a term, and also for lessons from the vicar, who is a former teacher. Its application process prioritises local people and the church attendance criterion is hardly ever used.

A local campaign is mounted to tell the church to get out of its school, and after consultation, the church goes. This is sad but actually, the church in the village is up to its ears in buildings work that needs to be done on the Grade I listed building and its elderly congregation barely scrape enough money to cover the running costs, let alone anything on top. Financially, the church is in crisis, so in a way, the school telling it to butt out has a silver lining. The school had a generous loan from the church some years ago - around half a million - when the church was richer, and the church owns the land on which the school stands. The 'divorce settlement' between the church and school means that someone - the local council which is also massively in debt - has to buy the school land from the church, and pay back the half million. The people who go in regularly as helpers or governors all know when they're not welcome, so they take up the plea from the school down the road who is only too happy to have them contributing to their school life. There aren't many other local people willing to give up their very limited free time to help at the school - everyone is either out working, not interested, or is too old and frail. With so many of the governing body gone, the school is weakened. The vicar is incredibly busy and is much in demand from other local schools, so although it is sad that he is no longer welcome in St B's (the name is changed to something non-religious, of course), he is still able to do much to help the local community.

It's silly to ask if, at the end of this 'keep faith out of my school' campaign, St B's would be better off - of course it wouldn't. Would anyone benefit from this arrangement? The parents who mounted the campaign, sort of. But their children?

"However every time I take time out to look at atheism it becomes more clear to me that there are lots of different schools of thought, and that atheism can encompass lots of different ideas, from the more militant to the more passive"

I really challenge this. Atheists can have lots of different ideas about all sorts of things. But atheism is simply a lack of belief in a God or Gods. That's all. Nothing else. There are no different sorts of atheism. There are lots of different sorts of atheist- but atheism is simply that.

And it is also incredibly misleading(not saying you did this, Nooka!) to conflate atheism and secularism. Lots of deeply religious people are secularists.

Nameshavebeenchanged- your scenario has many assumptions. You say that StBs hardly ever uses its church admissions criterion- why? If people from the village have to go to to other schools further away, surely there must be a reason they don't get into St Bs?

You say that all the volunteers and governors would drop the school like a hot potato once it lost its church affiliation- why? Presumably those people wold still be up for supporting local children? But if they do go to the school down the road which you say is less successful then maybe that's a good thing anyway- St B's appears to have had more than its fair share. Bash St could probably do with some of the help and support that's been channelled into St Bs for years.

Goodness, nameschanged, do you really think that parent helpers/governors at a church school are only doing it to get brownie points with their church and/or god, and they'd quit if the school-church link was removed? That's a very cynical view.

Yes, as Martorana says, if it wasn't using the church selection criteria, then statistically only 10% of its parents would be regular churchgoers so it would have the normal amount of parents coming in to help regardless of faith, the same as you would normally find in an outstanding village school whatever its affiliation.

No, Boulevard, it's not about brownie points, it's about knowing when you're welcome and when you're not. If there were a big 'Keep faith out of my school' campaign and you were the woman who goes in weekly to sing hymns with the children, what would you do?

If a school changed from a church to a non church school, its governing body would be reconstituted and the PCC Governors (there via the church) would have to leave. Keeping faith out of school does really mean keeping people of faith, who are there because they are people of faith, out of school.

And would you blame a church that was in financial crisis, that was being told that its presence in school was no longer welcome, for doing the separation properly and getting the finances disentangled? The school could always see if other local groups could help financially - not religious, obviously. Sports clubs?

The governing body would obviously have to be reconstituted and anyone there because of faith alone would have to go- but there would still need to be governors.

But as I said, it does sound as if St Bs has had more than its share of support- maybe it would be a good thing if all the miffed people who only volunteered because it was a faith school took their bats down to Bash Street and gave them a boost.

You didn't explain why St Bs doesn't need to use it's faith admissions criterion

Is this all theoretical, or has anyone ever hived off a school from a church?

They don't use their faith criterion because most people who send their children there live in the village anyway.

Yes, there would need to be governors, but you are a church person and your place on the GB has just been done away with. You've been told, very clearly, that the church shouldn't have anything to do with the school. You've probably invested lots of time and care in the school over the years, seen it through many ups and downs. You love the school, but the way you see it, becoming a non-church school will change its character completely, and you're not sure you can be part of the brave new world. In fact you know you can't. If you were to stay, you'd have to do things like create a new ethos for the school along principles you disagree with, and write new mission statements. You'd have to help choose the new name. You hate that very thought. The school down the road is more than happy to have you on board. What would you do?

So St Bs is not oversubscribed? Why do parents send their children to the further away less good schools then?

Boulevard, well, it may or may not bear more than a passing resemblance to a school I know very well :) (I.e. no, of course it's not theoretical! This is a real school, real village, and I'd imagine that knowing the people as well as I do, the responses are pretty accurate too) I'll give you another, very different scenario later involving a church secondary school if you like.

St Bs is oversubscribed. The village has grown lot over recent years - new housing. Also because of its success, people from neighbouring villages want their children to go there. Hardly anyone in the village sends their children out of the village for primary school, except for RCs who want RC school.