Teaching atheist children about religion

[raisedbyguineapigs]

I know this sounds stupid, partly because I cant really explain it to myself. I was brought up Catholic and all my family are catholic, some in name only and some fairly religious still. I have always had a very fraught relationship with the church but still would have described myself as Catholic until probably about 5-6 years ago, when I suddenly sat in church and thought that actually, I don't believe any of this and my faith literally just disappeared, and to be honest, I feel better for it. My DH is from a very staunch atheist family and has no truck with religion. So all of us are now atheist/ agnostic. The thing is, my kids culturally at least, are part Catholic. Half their family is Catholic and I tell them that they need to know about the customs and religion of my side of the family but they just don't see why, because none of us believe it and we don't go to church. I love going to Easter services just because of the sheer drama of the storytelling, but I don't know whether to force them to go just so they can experience it or let them make up their own mind entirely. They are also getting a bit dismissive of religion, but it feels a bit like my part of their heritage is disappearing a bit. I know this is entirely my fault!

It's probably too late for them to see the Christian Easter celebration as anything other than a weird tack-on to the much older yet (ironically) much more relatable Spring festival. If you're not brought up in a particular religion, the stories don't have the same appeal. The number of plot holes in the crucifixion/resurrection/ascension story would have the Cinema Sins counter pinging like mad.

Yes, the elder one had to do a project at school about the origins of spring festivals and a comparison with the Christian Easter festival, which they did find much more understandable.I'm not even sure why I want them to know about it, considering I spend most of my childhood looking on incredulously most of the time, but now I'm older, maybe its the sense of belonging to a 'community' that I would like them to be a part of.

Its completely reasonable to want to teach your children about your families religion. I've said on here before that I think its important for anyone who lives in the UK to have an understanding of Christianity and the Bible, as it is fundamental to the history and culture of this country.

There is a big difference between teaching your children about religion and teaching them to be religious or allowing them to be preached to.

I'm an atheist, but we have a copies of the Bible at home, I have read all the major bible stories to my children and we have visited numerous cathedrals/churches.

We use it as an educational/cultural experience rather than a religious one.

There is a lot value in the ethical teachings of Christianity, which can be separated from pretentions of sky ghosts etc. For example, the ten commandments can be easilly translated into non-secular ethics.

Yes, there is also a lot of nonsense, but unfortunately when atheists (rightly) dismantled Christianity, they did not fill the void that was left over, and that is partly responsible for some of the social issues we experience today. Many atheists lack any kind of system of non-secular ethics, which then leaves them vulnerable to moral relativism and other superstitions, like the New Age movement.

Christianity is an excellent vector for the discussion of universal principles, and as long as you don't deceive them with self-contradictory concepts (e.g. existence of omnipotent omniscient beings), I would not be afraid to include it in education.

The thing about religion is that if you are not indoctrinated into it below the age of reason (7) , it doesn't really make sense to enquiring minds. At least they will be spared misplaced guilt throughout their lives and how difficult life would be for them if they were Catholic homosexuals.

• Whoops! Just noticed, my reply was supposed to say non-secular "secular ethics"...

Many atheists lack any kind of system of non-secular ethics, which then leaves them vulnerable to moral relativism and other superstitions, like the New Age movement. (I know you meant secular)

@Socratease I can't disagree strongly enough with this statement- it is very possible to be atheist and have ethics! This is called humanism - read up on it, atheists are not morally bankrupt!

I plan to raise my DC so they're aware that there are various religions that people sometimes believe and understand the history and tradition behind them but also aim to make it clear that you in no way need to be religious to have ethics or be a good person, I think that's very dangerous nonsense for people to spout.
My challenge will be not using the word 'cult' when talking about religion.

Many atheists lack any kind of system of non-secular ethics, which then leaves them vulnerable to moral relativism and other superstitions, like the New Age movement

Good grief. What is it with athiest bashing on mn the last few days.

For the record athiests/pagans/heathens etc have morals, ethics, tolerance, well behaved children, understanding and every other quality that religious people claim are exclusive to them

I don't have time to look and post but there are hundreds of studies showing those without faith are more likely to be moral, fair, tolerant etc and those who follow a faith more likely to judge others, be less tolerant of others and post ridiculous claims on mn about non religious people being bad.

Perhaps I have not written carefully enough, or readers have not parsed my words accurately, because I haven't actually argued for the things you are disagreeing with.

@ElfrideSwancourt I have not made the claim that atheists don't have ethics, Nor do I think atheists are morally bankrupt. I am an atheist, and I value ethics and morality very much. I consider integrity and the pursuit of truth according to evidence and reasons as one of the highest values.

@ReinettePompadour Again, I am not "bashing" atheists, either. I simply said many atheists operate without an ethical system, such as by way of example moral relativism. e.g. when right and wrong are based on something subjective. I didn't say they are more or less likely to be moral - am not sure whether I agree or disagree with that currently, and would certainly accept evidence that shows either to be true and submit to that.

Also, the legal system contains objective ethics that most atheists submit to, so there is that argument against what I said. I accept that. I more had in mind the issue of consistency in application, even with the legal system. This medium is not good for this, because we can't talk properly in real time, and refine things together in the pursuit of the truth.

Atheists have a different set of tools in their ethical toolbox to people of faith. It doesn't make an atheist any less moral than a person of faith. It just means they are just going to get to their decisions by a different route. As a Christian I rarely use utilitarianism as an ethical argument (greatest good for the greatest number) but you hear it all the time in ethical debates with non Christians.

Its good to teach children what some religious people believe but not to force them to participate in the actual worship itself.

So telling them some religious people go to church to worship someone is ok, forcing them to church, kneel and pray to him is not ok.

They will completely understand, its like growing up and realising Santa isn't real but accepting that some people never grow out of it. Yet we all keep the pretence and celebrate Santa because we dont want to hurt anyone's feelings.

What I have suspected for a while is that some atheists reject the childhood view of God as being like Santa Claus and assume that people of faith have not. Everyone grows out of Santa Claus Christians included. Stages of Faith theory which applies to all faith and no faith suggests that this happens around 7 which is when we have those hard conversations with older siblings about keeping the magic for the younger brothers and sisters.

According to this theory, until the teenage years children will largely follow the faith or no faith worldview of their parents. Teenagers and young adults question the views of their parents, family, wider family etc and can be very black and white and tribal in their understanding. This is Fowler's stage 3.

This chart is really helpful in seeing what the different stages look like.

www.psychologycharts.com/james-fowler-stages-of-faith.html

The move into the appreciation of complexity, mystery and paradox (Fowler's stage 5) is one that can take a lifetime. So my view of God is not the one that a 7 year old rejects or an 15 year old demands I define. Which all makes atheism and the rejection of God really interesting.

Being kind and listening to each other is good though.

I'm confused - surely a stages of faith theory cannot apply if you have no faith. I consider myself as mid life and I've no idea what a sacred story is or why I need to go back to them? I can accept the limitations of logic and mystery for the things they are; I don't need to attribute them to anything else.

Sounds like you're at stage 4 Jason

Fowler said that his theory applied to people of faith and no faith.

Stage 3 is characterised by black and white thinking, my group is right and everyone else is wrong. Stage 4 is about seeing that other groups that are different to yours have value, meaning, insight etc even though you don't agree with them. Stage 5 is about being comfortable with mystery and paradox and not worrying about classification.

I've encountered Christians, pagans, agnostics and atheists in all of these categories.

Depends how old the children are......

All children are atheist, no one is born with belief. I agree that they need to know why some women can't go out without a headscarf, why some men aren't allowed to shake hands with wome n, why some of their friends are not allowed to eat pork or prawns and so on.

Religion is all about prohibition which is why few volunteer for it. As for the blabber about atheism = no morals, open your eyes and see the evil committed in the name of religion, now and in history.