HelenM

I definitely agree it should be properly investigated.

I only work with the youngest children at my church but I know they have very strict policies about who can work with them and what is allowed, to safeguard against abuse.

(And I hope they'd investigate appropriately if a complaint was made, even though the policies are strict)

I agree. I daresay it happens sometimes because people care a lot about their children.

take care
Helen

Perchance

Hi Helen,

I don't think that parents always go to different churches or schools just because they "care" about their children. I think it also happens when they're concerned about the quality of education at a particular place.

Just as I don't think all religious teaching is abusive, I don't think it's all non-abusive. I think it's perfectly possible that a church could emotionally scar children, and the parents either don't notice, are afraid to complain because of fear of other church members, or see nothing wrong with it because they were raised that way themselves.

I wish that people would apply critical thinking to religion as well as other beliefs. That's all.

-Perchance.

HelenM

But that's what I meant. That because they care about their children, they want them to have a good quality education and therefore, when the education is not good quality, they will go to the trouble of driving some distance to another church or school, which does have good quality education. But if they didn't care about their kids they wouldn't, would they? It's only because they care about them that they'd work hard to get them a good quality education.

I thought I was agreeing with you - maybe you just misunderstood me.

I think one could generalize that to any influence on children.

The difference is that I wouldn't probably wouldn't agree with other people here - when it comes to religious teaching - about what is 'abusive'. I'd agree regarding the way the teachers treat the children, but not on content, I daresay.

I wish they'd apply it to more things than they do apply it to

take care
Helen

Goliath

Helen,

My apologies for the misunderstanding.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Ronin

HelenM ~

When you work with the youngest children at 'your' church, do you avoid instruction on Heaven and Hell?

Do you only concentrate on the 'Jesus loves me' mantra and then worry about the more supernatural and irrational aspects about Christianity later?

At what point, does your church leadership require discussion about Satan (Devil, Lucifer, etc.)?

HelenM

I don't avoid anything but there's no teaching during the time period during which I help look after the 2s and 3s.

I don't know that my church leadership 'requires' anything beyond that the materials they use are Biblically accurate (based on their beliefs about what the Bible teaches). They buy materials from well-known Christian organizations and use them, generally.

I see the handouts my kids bring home. I see the teachers with the children when I drop off and pick up my children.

The best way I can describe what they are taught is, it's 'Bible stories applied' i.e. they might learn about Joseph and his brothers and then the application is that we don't treat others like the brothers treated Joseph. Or, it's probably expressed more like this "God/Jesus doesn't want us to treat people that way".

I don't count that as intimidation but maybe you do. One of the beliefs of my church is that Christians can't lose their salvation so they would never teach "do this or else". Unless you count "believe this or else you're going to hell" - but my point is, that's not how they teach their theology. They would teach it more like "Jesus loves you..." etc etc. But, perhaps to you that's simply sugar-coated inappropriate coercion...

Anyway, I don't suppose there's anything I can say that would make what they teach acceptable to many people here. I do realize that.

Helen

Ronin

Anyway, I don't suppose there's anything I can say that would make what they teach acceptable to many people here. I do realize that.

Well, enough said about it then.

As long as we both understand the Christian concept of Hell is used as a threat to coerce people into believing in falsehoods.

You are comfortable with that ~ while I find it repulsive.

Truth does not require coercion.

HelenM

No, in fact I am not.

But I can envisage there could be situations where I'd say hell is not being used as a threat to coerce people and you'd say it is.

Fwiw, with children I think it's very important to take care how one presents information - because of the way they trust authority figures, take things extremely literally and so on.

I can't agree with that as a universal principle. People often won't do something unless they are coerced into it, even if it's best to do it. The same is true of kids.

There's appropriate and there's inappropriate coercion. That's what I'd say.

When it comes to beliefs I believe in people making informed decisions rather than decisions fueled only by negative emotions like fear. I think the former is the only kind of decision that will last the duration anyway.

But when it comes to try to help a drug addict off drugs, or trying to stop a kid playing in a busy street, sure I'd use coercion, even force, maybe. It depends on the circumstances and what's at stake.

But you can't make a person believe something (short of Orwell's 1984-type abusive treatments or invasive treatments that would mess acutely with their brain)

take care
Helen

DigitalDruid

Hi Helen,

I have been thinking about this for a while but since I have no experience of church schools probably you can help me.

In the public library here I have seen kids’ books on basic facts of evolution. Basically they contain the basic gist of theory of evolution in easy language (a few sentences per page) with colorful pictures alongside. But the clear message there is that man evolved. Some books even have a simplified diagram showing evolution of the species.

Suppose a child learnt in church school that God created man (through story sessions). She later happened to pick up a book on evolution from public library (may be because of the colorful pictures) but later she started reading it and was puzzled in view of what she learnt at church school.

So later in church school she asked her teacher: "Did man evolve or did God create man?" Let’s say the child is in third grade.

What would be the reply of a typical church teacher?. Would the reply depend in some way on the denomination? Is the reply likely to vary depending on how old the child is? Are the teachers in church schools given guidelines on how to answer such questions, or are they free to answer any way they think fit? If you are the teacher what would you say?

Thanks.

[Just after posting I wondered how a public school teacher would answer that question. So I am adding that too.]

[ October 25, 2002: Message edited by: DigitalDruid ]</p>

HelenM

I have no experience of church schools actually. My kids are taught at church on Sundays and Wednesdays but go to public school.

Anyway I think that a conservative church schoolteacher might tell the child that the book is wrong and God created man.

If a child asked me and it was in a circumstance where I could answer as I wished, I would probably try to explain that evolution is a theory about how things came to be; that it's not proven but a lot of people think it's the most likely way; that the Bible says God created man; that some people believe both; that some people believe that evolution is ruled out by what the Bible says... etc etc

Based on my kids being in 2nd and 4th now, I would judge that a thoughtful 3rd grader could understand that. I know that my son could have, last year. I think I did tell him something like that when Genesis chapters 1 and 2 were preached on at church earlier this year

As to what a public school teacher would say, I think that would depend on what they felt free to say and what their own personal beliefs about evolution and the Bible were.

take care
Helen