Ship of Fools: Conversion of Christian Children

Thread: Conversion of Christian Children Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=026995

Posted by seekingsister (# 17707) on :

There is very little - perhaps nothing - in the New Testament that addresses the method by which children of Christian believers are to become full members of the church. We see different practices in different denominations, but Scripture provides little clarification in this area.

I have read that in the 1st century, the faith of the head of household was assumed to be conferred to everyone else in it - meaning that children of Christians were perhaps automatically Christians. On the other hand, Baptists/Anabaptists/evangelicals will point to the "Road to Damascus" type conversions in the New Testament, but these are all new converts and not children raised by Christians.

Given falling church attendance, particularly among the young, is the church being effective enough in bringing children of believers to faith in Christ? Ought we consider new methods? Topics to discuss can include:

- baptism (infant or believers)
- confirmation
- Sunday school/Christian education

Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :

quote:
is the church being effective enough in bringing children of believers to faith in Christ?

A simplistic 'yes' or 'no' will hardly suffice, I suspect. Some churches do, some don't.

quote:
I have read that in the 1st century, the faith of the head of household was assumed to be conferred to everyone else in it - meaning that children of Christians were perhaps automatically Christians

As someone who is broadly "Baptist/Anabaptist/evangelical" I would add in the word 'deemed' before the final word of the above quote. But it does raise a question of who is and who isn't a christian. It's not a question that I'm convinced should preoccupy us, though. But I would dispute those who take a functional, rather than symbolic, view of baptism.

Sunday schools serve several different purposes, and even these vary depending on the age. At a former church I was a Sunday school teacher for 3-5 age group. There's little by means of theology one can teach. It's more a case of giving the children a space so they don't have to sit through a service (in particular, a sermon) they don't understand. And giving the rest of the congregation space from restless children!

For the older children (12-16) it was about providing an arena for them to ask their challenging questions, allowing them to explore their own thinking as well as to teach them what we (as a church) believe. Some would choose to stick with church, some would choose to leave. I was quite comfortable with that, as I would rather someone left with a good idea of what christianity is about, rather than rejecting a caricature.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

Given that faith is still inherited to varying degrees in Judaism and Islam, I'd guess the early Church expected adult converts to pass the faith down to their children.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:

Given falling church attendance, particularly among the young, is the church being effective enough in bringing children of believers to faith in Christ? Ought we consider new methods? Topics to discuss can include:

- baptism (infant or believers)
- confirmation
- Sunday school/Christian education

I don't think the formal institutional responses you've mentioned here are the main issue. Rather, IMO, the church community (which is the body of believers, not just the clergy) simply doesn't do enough to support parents in nurturing children towards the faith. The challenges presented by this task are rarely discussed openly. Yet studies show that religious practices in the home have changed, that parents are now more reluctant to share their faith with their children, are less inclined to pray with them, etc.

We live in a privatised culture where religious people often keep their beliefs to themselves, even at home, and the fact that many churchgoers are married to people who are less religious or differently religious exacerbates this tendency. The increasing number of split families also makes it harder for there to be a consistent Christian witness for children to grow up with, which is, apparently, what really counts. (There are many, many exceptions, of course.)

Moreover, there's usually a shortage of decent Sunday School teachers, youth workers and even clergy (in some denominations). CofE schools are staffed by large numbers of non-religious teachers. So even if religious institutions would like to control the Christianising of children, they really can't. But there should be more of a discussion, and more support for parents.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:

Sunday schools serve several different purposes, and even these vary depending on the age. At a former church I was a Sunday school teacher for 3-5 age group. There's little by means of theology one can teach. It's more a case of giving the children a space so they don't have to sit through a service (in particular, a sermon) they don't understand. And giving the rest of the congregation space from restless children!
.

I'm always sad to read this. In 30 years of ministry with children, I've found even young children have a dynamic spiritual life, which can be nurtured in partnership with parents. Godly Play is one example of a curriculum that does a good job of sparking their natural curiosity and giving them space to "wonder about God". We can do much, much more than just baby-sitting, especially when working in conjunction with parents-- providing resources and encouragement for their own family-based nurture.

[code]

[ 05. March 2014, 13:12: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

random thoughts--

I think a lot of parents are just plain scared or embarrassed to discuss Christian faith with their children, sort of like sex. I keep wondering if it's because they started too late (and now the kids are at the "yeah, yeah, Dad" stage) or if it's because they're afraid the kids will ask questions they can't answer, or...??? I know when I was a child with a Christian mother (not father), by the time I was ten (heck, probably eight) I was excessively embarrassed on the rare occasions my mother tried to talk Jesus to me. My son is twelve and has no parallel problems, and I wonder if it's because we started simple family devotions before he was old enough to talk, and he's used to it. But then what do you do for everybody who has halfgrown kids already and wants to talk to them? This is so hard.

I'm a little freaked out by the thread title, too. It's probably my Lutheran background--we baptize infants as early as possible and therefore consider our children Christian basically from birth. So the discussion is always framed as "how can we help them keep/grow up in what they already have," not in terms of conversion. But my Baptist cousins talk that way...

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

Lamb Chopped

In the British context infant baptism is now only practiced by a fairly small minority, so it makes sense to talk about the conversion of young people in a more general sense.

Moreover, the great majority of babies are brought for baptism by non-churchgoing parents. They rarely see any need for their children to remain involved in church life once these rites have taken place. If baptism (and confirmation, in some cases) do the job required, why over-egg the pudding? So in most cases it's not children who need to be convinced about the value of church life, but actually the parents. That might even be true of some churchgoers.

For Christian parents who are actively concerned about their children growing up to accept the faith, infant baptism doesn't seem to be the issue at all. In fact, some of them deliberately choose not to baptise their infants, even if their churches practice it. I think they're increasingly attending churches with strong youth programmes. Outside London this tends to mean evangelical churches, so the mainstream churches are probably losing quite a few young families for this reason.

[ 05. March 2014, 15:45: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
In 30 years of ministry with children, I've found even young children have a dynamic spiritual life, which can be nurtured in partnership with parents.

I've come across some who can be spiritual, though I confess it was weird hearing a 4-year old say, "When I grow up I want to be a prophetess."

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Godly Play is one example of a curriculum that does a good job of sparking their natural curiosity and giving them space to "wonder about God".

I've never heard of 'Godly Play'. Could you please educate me as to what this involves?

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
We can do much, much more than just baby-sitting, especially when working in conjunction with parents-- providing resources and encouragement for their own family-based nurture.

I'm sure we can, it's just a question of how. When I was a Sunday school teacher, any time I had an idea and tried to implement it, it failed wholly. That may say more about my teaching skills. The young kids just didn't get it, so we reverted to teaching them some bible stories, some creative activities (usually glitter and glue) and a play time where we encourage sharing, community and not hitting one another over the head with a plastic sheep.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
I've come across some who can be spiritual, though I confess it was weird hearing a 4-year old say, "When I grow up I want to be a prophetess."

I became a christian at about that age, so did my wife; we both remember it distinctly. We once parted ways with a denomination when we discovered they (or their representative) effectively did not believe it was possible to become a christian at that age, thus declaring us anathema for all intents and purposes.

I also remember going to my very first Sunday School lesson before that, and I'm pretty sure the first chorus I chose was the first verse of There's a friend for little children. Checking out the words, it turns out to be movingly appropriate:

quote:
Our earthly friends may fail us,
And change with changing years,
This friend is always worthy
Of that dear Name He bears

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:

quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
I've come across some who can be spiritual, though I confess it was weird hearing a 4-year old say, "When I grow up I want to be a prophetess."
I became a christian at about that age, so did my wife; we both remember it distinctly. We once parted ways with a denomination when we discovered they (or their representative) effectively did not believe it was possible to become a christian at that age, thus declaring us anathema for all intents and purposes.

It still makes me smile to remember that at 4 I asked a strictly believer's baptism only minister to baptize me. He was concerned that Mom had put me up to it, and I remembered him asking me to explain what I would know call the mystery of faith. He asked me to say it again from the baptismal because he was worried that the congregation would think it an infant baptism. Apparently quizzed my mom too about my faith.

[ 05. March 2014, 16:13: Message edited by: Gwai ]

Posted by lapsed heathen (# 4403) on :

Interesting question.
As a father who failed at keeping his kids 'in the faith' I don't know if theirs an answer.
We did all the usual things, baptism, introduction to prayer, introduction to the sacraments and regular mass going.

The failing was that we were outside the normal behaviour of most people who skipped mass and saw sacraments as milestones in life, to be ticked off at the preordained time and forgotten about till the next one.
Faith is as much part of a culture as a personal or family choice and unless you isolate your selves from the surrounding culture, it's not possible to recapture the way faith was passed down in previous generations.

Best I can hope for is that they (my kids) don't dislike the church and that my example of Christian living rubs off on them.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
In 30 years of ministry with children, I've found even young children have a dynamic spiritual life, which can be nurtured in partnership with parents.
I've come across some who can be spiritual, though I confess it was weird hearing a 4-year old say, "When I grow up I want to be a prophetess."

Yes. At that age they are profoundly spiritual, but also very literal, sometimes with humorous results-- and sometimes quite poignant. But I believe all of us are created as spiritual beings, and all ages have a deep sense and connection to the spiritual-- children perhaps even more so because they have less layers of expectation/ dogma to get in the way.

quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
[I've never heard of 'Godly Play'. Could you please educate me as to what this involves?

Godly Play is a curriculum roughly based on Montessori learning-- very interactive, using manipulatives and thoughtful "I wonder" questions to draw children into the stories of Scripture in an imaginative way. I find it very effective with young children (not as much with older ones in my experience).

a more specifically Anglican version (probably the original but my knowledge of the chronology is iffy) is Cathesis of the Good Shepherd

quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
We can do much, much more than just baby-sitting, especially when working in conjunction with parents-- providing resources and encouragement for their own family-based nurture.
I'm sure we can, it's just a question of how. When I was a Sunday school teacher, any time I had an idea and tried to implement it, it failed wholly. That may say more about my teaching skills. The young kids just didn't get it, so we reverted to teaching them some bible stories, some creative activities (usually glitter and glue) and a play time where we encourage sharing, community and not hitting one another over the head with a plastic sheep.

Sounds like maybe you weren't doing as bad a job as you thought. That's exactly the way children learn-- through story, through movement, through interaction with others. They're not apt to say something like "wow. Thanks for that lesson on___. I am profoundly changed. I will now _______". It's just not the way kids (or adults) are wired. But that doesn't mean they weren't impacted.

Indeed, probably the most profound lesson you taught was just showing up each week, week after week. That demonstrated loudly that they were loved, that they were cared for, that they were worthy of an adult's time and attention. All significant spiritual lessons.

[ 05. March 2014, 16:31: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

I actually don't get the "conversion" idea. Or perhaps I lack the discernment to understand the difference from the day before when you have "become" Christian or "a Christian".

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

What’s wrong with teaching children ABOUT Christianity (and other major religions and non-religious worldviews), and thereby educating and permitting them the freedom to decide for themselves whether or not to 'convert' when they've reached the maturity and independence of thinking NECESSARY for such a decision?

No, don't bother. It was a rhetorical question. The answer's obvious, and makes me sick to the stomach.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

Yorick, not sure what this 'obvious' answer is supposed to be - I agree with you in many ways. As a childfree person I suppose it's a moot point, but I would want to show a child of mine my faith by my life more than telling them to become a Christian. I also feel quite uncomfortable with the idea of four year olds making a decision to be Christians - feels very Jesus Camp. I realise the examples given on this post are not like that, but I just do not think that four year olds can ever understand the ramifications of making such a decision. I am uncomfortable with such sudden Damascus Road experiences even in adults though - in my experience, most people of mature faith come to faith as a long process, not a sudden conversion.

Bringing a child into the church community by baptism and instruction in the faith leading to confirmation which can then develop into a mature adult faith is much better than indoctrination (although Godly Play is a good thing).

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

'Much better' in what sense?

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

I mean, it's not as though atheists ever try to brainwash children, is it?

Ooooh noooooo....

Perish the thought!!

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Oh, please. And that's supposed to make it better?

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
... most people of mature faith come to faith as a long process, not a sudden conversion.

Yes, this is the point. Most people also go through a stage of weighing the options, having their Zen period, totally converted period, the period in which they learn from loved others outside of those who raised them, and they make a deal that seems more or less workable. Accepting some of the core of Christianity, and seeing what might happen. -- of course there are the converted once at 5 or 10 kids, but I think it must be rare or historicity*.

* I mean this to mean: sounding good and having the aura of fact, but the Full Real Story is somewhat more complicated.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
I mean, it's not as though atheists ever try to brainwash children, is it?

Ooooh noooooo....

Perish the thought!!

Both are bad. Plenty of atheists don't brainwash children.

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

Likewise plenty of Christians.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

And? Please explain how that makes it less bad that many Christians do.

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I also feel quite uncomfortable with the idea of four year olds making a decision to be Christians - feels very Jesus Camp.

I won't speak for others, but I wouldn't have pretended even then that I thought I understood it all. Of course, I don't think I do not either. Damn shame someone branded me Christian for all time when I was four.

Oh wait, I can quit being a Christian at any time if I want. Phew!

That and frankly if a four year old makes the decision, no one can stop them. I made the decision on my own. All the church did was baptize me into their ranks. That's not what made me a Christian though, in my eyes. At the time, I wanted to be baptized because I'd heard in a sermon that when one was a Christian, one was then baptized. So that meant I should be baptized too.

[ 05. March 2014, 19:54: Message edited by: Gwai ]

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

So why don't you quit, Gwai? Because you want to be a Christian, right? And why is that? Why don't you want to be a Moslem? Or a Shinto priestess?

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable
And? Please explain how that makes it less bad that many Christians do.

Where did I say it was less bad?

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

You implied it, by stating that atheists also indoctrinate their children. No need to be shy, EE.

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick
So why don't you quit, Gwai? Because you want to be a Christian, right? And why is that? Why don't you want to be a Moslem? Or a Shinto priestess?

So why don't you quit, Yorick? Because you want to be an atheist, right? And why is that? Why don't you want to be a Rastafarian? Or a Juju Priest?

Oh, sorry, I get it! You can't choose, because you don't have free will (despite presumably claiming to be a freethinker). After all, free will is an illusion, right?

quote:
You implied it, by stating that atheists also indoctrinate their children. No need to be shy, EE.

No, I said it to imply that atheists who feign all this concern for children to protect them from the 'evil' "intelligence worldview", are just a bunch of hypocrites.

After all, it's so much more affirming and encouraging to tell a child that he or she is just a bunch of atoms and molecules of no more intrinsic worth and value than a pile of dog shit, isn't it?

[ 05. March 2014, 20:12: Message edited by: EtymologicalEvangelical ]

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:

quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I also feel quite uncomfortable with the idea of four year olds making a decision to be Christians - feels very Jesus Camp.
I won't speak for others, but I wouldn't have pretended even then that I thought I understood it all. Of course, I don't think I do not either. Damn shame someone branded me Christian for all time when I was four.

Oh wait, I can quit being a Christian at any time if I want. Phew!

That and frankly if a four year old makes the decision, no one can stop them. I made the decision on my own. All the church did was baptize me into their ranks. That's not what made me a Christian though, in my eyes. At the time, I wanted to be baptized because I'd heard in a sermon that when one was a Christian, one was then baptized. So that meant I should be baptized too.

Yes.

The fact is, all parenting is indoctrination-- whether by theists or nontheists. We indoctrinate our children into our beliefs about teeth brushing and nutrition and saying please and thank you. We indoctrinate our children with our ideas about sharing and gratitude and being considerate. That's what parenting is, and if we neglect to do it, we are not considered very good parents, and our children will not thrive.

Ah, some will say, but that's not the kind of indoctrination we're talking about.

And of course, it isn't. There is indoctrination that is harsh, and overly authoritarian. That doesn't allow room for questions, or dissent. That tries to control and manipulate with shame or fear when it should enlighten with wonder and love.

Christians and non-Christians alike can fall on either side of this line. But it's not the Christianity per se that makes it indoctrination. People of faith often consider that faith to be the most important, the most vital gift they have for life itself-- and so they will naturally want to share that gift with their children, along with the hand-washing and teeth brushing and toy-sharing. We believe it is one of the things that allows children to thrive.

We hope to do so in ways that are not harsh or overly authoritarian. We strive to allow room for questions (Godly Play is good for that), or dissent. To avoid controlling and manipulating with shame or fear and instead enlightening with wonder and love.

Many of our children have not followed us into the faith. They are still ours, they are still loved. We still pray for them. There is room for disagreement.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

(Xp. Was laughing at the dog shit value argument)

Hahaha. That straw man was so silly it actually made me laugh.

So weak, EE.

[ 05. March 2014, 20:15: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Posted by Taliesin (# 14017) on :

Well, I wish I'd had the guys to teach my kids about Jesus 'as if it were true' when they were small, instead of the wishy washy, I think this but you can make up your own mind when you're ready, crap. Now I've got confused young people with no bedrock of faith, and an entirely too realistic sense of their proportionate importance to the universe.

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

Pray, dear sir, wouldst thou now like to refute said argument, instead of laughing at it?

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
So why don't you quit, Gwai? Because you want to be a Christian, right? And why is that? Why don't you want to be a Moslem? Or a Shinto priestess?

Because now that I'm past this mystical age of reason, I still think my choice is the one that gives me the most peace and sanity.

ETA: I personally expect to see Muslims, practitioners of Shinto, and yes atheists in the afterlife--whatever that means--so maybe the way I interpret grace makes this easier for me.

[ 05. March 2014, 20:22: Message edited by: Gwai ]

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

That's really lovely, cliffdweller, but this thread started off as an exercise in handwringing about how best to ensure that children are converted into Christianity so that it 'sticks'.

Yes, of course we all inculcate our values into our children, but this is about the INTENTION to interfere directly with independent choice. When you indoctrinate your children into Christianity, you do so with the hope and intention that they ultimately come to God through your witness, right? You don't intend to equip them to make a truly free choice for themselves. You INTEND that they find Jesus.

And (all too often) it works. A child of active Christian parents, who intend that they become Christian, is statistically more likely to become one than, say, a Moslem or a Shinto priestess, and vice versa. That's why you do it. And that's what makes me sick.

Inculcating a four year-old into 'wanting' (as if they could have the slightest fucking clue about it) to be a prophetess is morally obscene, and in our increasingly secular civilisation one should hope it might eventually be seen as child abuse.

But where would your religion be without parental indoctrination, eh? Doomed, you tell me? Well, fine.

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

The issue is that I don't think I was indoctrinated. I was taught about something my mother believed. But I was also taught about why my dad didn't believe it. It would have worked as well if my dad had been a churchgoer. But it wouldn't have worked as well if I hadn't been taught to question Christianity. I am pretty sure that if my mother had just tried to teach me to believe what she did, I would have talked less in church* but left the church quickly as a grownup.

As it is my faith is very different from my mother's in many ways, so if she was trying to indoctrinate me, she totally failed. If she was trying to help me find a way that was right for me, she did a good job.

*[loud whisper]Mom, why does he think that the bible says that. That makes no sense[/loud whisper]

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Gwai, do you recognise the causal link between adult uptake of Christianity and childhood, um, let's just say 'experience' of it?

[ 05. March 2014, 20:29: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
That's really lovely, cliffdweller, but this thread started off as an exercise in handwringing about how best to ensure that children are converted into Christianity so that it 'sticks'.

Yes, of course we all inculcate our values into our children, but this is about the INTENTION to interfere directly with independent choice. When you indoctrinate your children into Christianity, you do so with the hope and intention that they ultimately come to God through your witness, right? You don't intend to equip them to make a truly free choice for themselves. You INTEND that they find Jesus.

Of course they do. Just as parents who practice good nutrition hope their children will grow up to practice good nutrition, and parents who have pursued higher education hope their children will grow up to pursue higher education. Doesn't mean we don't love them if they don't, and doesn't mean they will be forced to comply. But it is normal and natural to want for your children the things that have been valued and meaningful in your own life. I don't think that desire is unique to Christians or to religionists. I suspect that's one thing that's probably pretty much true for every parent in every culture.

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:

And (all too often) it works. A child of active Christian parents, who intend that they become Christian, is statistically more likely to become one than, say, a Moslem or a Shinto priestess, and vice versa. That's why you do it. And that's what makes me sick.

Actually, statistically they are more likely to end up "none" (i.e. no religion). So if we are such heavy-handed indoctrinationists as you believe us to be, we're pretty darn lousy at it.

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:

Inculcating a four year-old into 'wanting' (as if they could have the slightest fucking clue about it) to be a prophetess is morally obscene, and in our increasingly secular civilisation one should hope it might eventually be seen as child abuse.

How absurd. One wonders if you've ever spent any time with 4 year olds.

Of course 4 year olds don't know what a "prophetess" is-- that was the point of the story, btw. And the fact that TheAlethiophile was taken aback by the profession would be a pretty clear indication that the child was not in any way "indoctrinated" into the desire.

It's just what small children do-- try on words, try on identities, play pretend. Pretending to be a "prophetess"-- whatever she imagined that to be-- is a normal, natural thing for a 4 year old to do, in exactly the same way they pretend to be a "firefighter" without knowing a whole lot about what that involves, or President or Princess or Knight. How many small children playing at being a "pirate" have in mind moving to Somalia and running guns?

(When my son was a bit older than that he wrote an essay in school on "what I want to be when I grow up" in which he wrote at length about wanting to be a "lover". He meant "one who loves others".... but it was amusing. Again, kids at that age are very literal).

[ 05. March 2014, 20:35: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Cliffdweller, why do you suppose there are more Muslims than Rastafarians in Palestine? Because they all elected to emigrate there from Jamaica?

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Gwai, do you recognise the causal link between adult uptake of Christianity and childhood, um, let's just say 'experience' of it?

Fully accepted that teaching a child about Christianity increases their odds of believing it, and staying with it. I suspect the old British songs I got from my grandmother (though my mom) are also more interesting to me because I learned them young. My mom had all kinds of cultural influences on me. My parents are almost certainly related to why I'm in a career working with words, and why I consider myself a writer. If they'd tried to avoid influencing me in any way it would have been impossible, and surely much worse parenting.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Taliesin:
Well, I wish I'd had the guys to teach my kids about Jesus 'as if it were true' when they were small, instead of the wishy washy, I think this but you can make up your own mind when you're ready, crap. Now I've got confused young people with no bedrock of faith, and an entirely too realistic sense of their proportionate importance to the universe.

Many Christians, including myself, were taught to make up our own minds and found our faith when we could reason it out for ourselves (I was brought up by non-religious parents, other Christians in the same situations were brought up by religious parents, it varies). I am grateful that I could discover my faith for myself. Why is that 'crap' when it has been beneficial for me and my Christian faith?

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

But Gwai we're not talking about teaching children ABOUT Christianity here. That's obviously a good thing, along with teaching them about other religions and non-religious world views.

This is a thread about how best to influence a child so that they're most likely to be converted to Christianity. It's about how to brainwash them.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
But Gwai we're not talking about teaching children ABOUT Christianity here. That's obviously a good thing, along with teaching them about other religions and non-religious world views.

This is a thread about how best to influence a child so that they're most likely to be converted to Christianity. It's about how to brainwash them.

I don't think what Gwai is talking about is brainwashing. That's like saying that ear syringing is surgery. Wanting your child to be a Christian because you think it is good for them is not brainwashing and it's sheer hysteria to claim that it is.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Inculcating religious beliefs in children with the intention of leading them into believing them and adopting that faith. How is that not brainwashing?

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Inculcating religious beliefs in children with the intention of leading them into believing them and adopting that faith. How is that not brainwashing?

It's not brainwashing just like inculcating the belief that racism is bad in children with the intention of leading them into believing that racism is bad and adopting the principle of not being racist is not brainwashing. Children are at perfect liberty to still be racist after all that. I think it is grossly offensive towards actual survivors of brainwashing such as incestuous abuse survivors to even think of comparing it to raising a child in a particular religion. All parents raise their children to believe particular beliefs, religious or otherwise.

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
So why don't you quit, Gwai? Because you want to be a Christian, right? And why is that? Why don't you want to be a Moslem? Or a Shinto priestess?

I'm having trouble following the motivation for this and several of your posts that follow. You want to push people into a corner and then hit them with arguments; trying to understand why.

Not everyone comes to religious belief via ideas. I get that atheists may do the idea thing in the contrary sense, and I have known Christians and others who've come to their beliefs via thought and logic. Some of us get there elsewise. My children, grown now, we talked less, and did more. Aesthetically, For me through music and phrase frequently. I thought CS Lewis understood this when he approached belief via allegory and symbolism. I hear Rutter's 'God Be In My Head' this week; I don't know Yorick if you get moved by anything in the arts. You might understand how this is different than what I see you trying to corner others with.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

I am deeply sorry if anyone here who has survived incestuous abuse or any other brainwashing has been offended by my suggestion that religious indoctrination is synonymous with brainwashing.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

The point I was trying to make to Gwai, no prophet, is that children of Christians are more likely to be Christians than children of Moslems are likely to be Christians, and that the mechanism for this is obviously parental (and local cultural) influence. That's all. No cornering here, and anyway I happen to believe that Gwai is perfectly solid enough to address the issue.

Posted by Taliesin (# 14017) on :

Have you ever been to Palestine, for all you have an Arabic Sig??

All the Palestinians I met were Christians. And none of them emigrated there, that's the point. Dickhead. Sorry, hosts.can't help it.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

hosting/

Yes you can. You know the drill. Personal insults belong in Hell. And that applies to everyone.

/hosting

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
But Gwai we're not talking about teaching children ABOUT Christianity here. That's obviously a good thing, along with teaching them about other religions and non-religious world views.

This is a thread about how best to influence a child so that they're most likely to be converted to Christianity. It's about how to brainwash them.

Yorick you goof. There is a difference between teaching and brainwashing. And if what Christian parents do is brainwashing, how come so many of our children reject the faith? If we're brainwashing, we're obviously no damn good at it.

I want my son to grow up Christian for the same reason I want him to grow up eating his veggies and brushing his teeth--because I honestly, truly believe that these are the best things for him. And being fully convinced of that, I am going to do what I can to promote them (e.g. buying and cooking veggies, nagging about tooth brushing, etc.)

When he is eighteen, if he wishes, he can certainly refuse to brush his teeth. (Ewwwww.) He can refuse to eat anything but McDonald's. (double Ewwwwwwww.) He can even (gasp) reject Christianity. He has a brain of his own, and there's nothing I can do to prevent him using or misusing it according to his own will. All I can do is provide what I honestly, truly believe is the best possible foundation NOW in the hopes that when he is older, he will have that to build on. (if he chooses--please God...)

You, presumably, are providing your children with a different foundation. You are doing so because you honestly feel that it is the best possible thing to do for them. I disagree, but I'm not going to call you a brainwasher for it. You are trying to do the best you can by your kids. So am I. But in the end, the kids are going to do what the kids want to do.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

hosting/

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Yorick you goof.

As I said, my warning above applies to everyone.

For goodness' sakes guys, at least try to act refined, or maybe the Hosts will just close this thread and redirect you all to the apparently suitably titled "Suffer Little Children" thread in Hell.

/hosting

[ 05. March 2014, 21:33: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

oops, sorry, crosspost. Won't do it again.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

The argument that 'children of Christian parents ultimately make up their own minds about faith regardless of the brainwashing intentions of their parents so it doesn't work' does not impress me. It does work. That's why there are more Jews in Israel and more Moslems in Palestine than the other way round.

And I'm not offended by being called a goof or a dickhead, though I appreciate this is irrelevant to the hosting.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
The argument that 'children of Christian parents ultimately make up their own minds about faith regardless of the brainwashing intentions of their parents so it doesn't work' does not impress me. It does work. That's why there are more Jews in Israel and more Moslems in Palestine than the other way round.

But again, there are more "nones" than either.

But people of faith do have a unique opportunity to demonstrate to their children what the life of faith looks like-- for better or worse. So yes, some will see that and be drawn to it, others, not so much.

I imagine if you follow the kids of music lovers you will find them listening ot or performing music at higher-than-average levels (even adopted kids w/o a genetic "predisposition"). I'm guessing if you look in the bedrooms of the children of book lovers, you'll find the bookshelves stocked with lots of the best children's literature-- some perhaps even a bit more advanced than those children are able to understand.

So I'm not going to apologize for wanting to share my faith with my children. I'm just a bit surprised that this seems "sick" to you. What parent, ever, anywhere, didn't want to share with their child the things that bring their life meaning and purpose--whether that's art or music or good food or sports--- or Buddha --or Christ?

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Cliffdweller, why do you suppose there are more Muslims than Rastafarians in Palestine? Because they all elected to emigrate there from Jamaica?

I think I covered this in the post you were responding to as well as the one above. Because their parents cared about that faith and shared it with them.

Which I think just proves my point. It's not something unique or oppressive about Christianity-- or any other religion. It's just the natural way that parents share with their kids the things that are important to them, and hope they will also be important to their kids.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Well, that's a bit of a red herring. For you, the ends justify the means- a child becoming a Christian is a good thing, and indoctrination with that intention is therefore a good thing when it works. My opinion is that people should be free to choose to become a Christian or not, and that any outside coercion in either direction is wrong.

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
The argument that 'children of Christian parents ultimately make up their own minds about faith regardless of the brainwashing intentions of their parents so it doesn't work' does not impress me. It does work. That's why there are more Jews in Israel and more Moslems in Palestine than the other way round.

And I'm not offended by being called a goof or a dickhead, though I appreciate this is irrelevant to the hosting.

So then explain why lots of children of religious parents become non-religious, and lots of children of non-religious parents become religious (like me). Or am I imaginary?

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
But Gwai we're not talking about teaching children ABOUT Christianity here. That's obviously a good thing, along with teaching them about other religions and non-religious world views.

This is a thread about how best to influence a child so that they're most likely to be converted to Christianity. It's about how to brainwash them.

And if we were on a forum for lovers of classical music, and someone started a thread asking how we can nurture a life-long love of music among our children, would that too be brainwashing?

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Well, that's a bit of a red herring. For you, the ends justify the means- a child becoming a Christian is a good thing, and indoctrination with that intention is therefore a good thing when it works. My opinion is that people should be free to choose to become a Christian or not, and that any outside coercion in either direction is wrong.

But they are free to become a Christian or not. The amount of ministers' children who become non-religious is surely proof of this.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

JC, lots of people in France speak French, and lots of people in France speak Japanese. The fact that lots of people in France speak Japanese does not deny the influence on children of their parental tongue. It's an exception that does not disprove the rule.

[ 05. March 2014, 21:56: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Well, that's a bit of a red herring. For you, the ends justify the means- a child becoming a Christian is a good thing, and indoctrination with that intention is therefore a good thing when it works. My opinion is that people should be free to choose to become a Christian or not, and that any outside coercion in either direction is wrong.

Not sure what the red herring is a reference to.

I don't think anyone here believes children shouldn't be able to freely choose. Indeed, our faith teaches us pretty much that it isn't faith if it isn't freely chosen, w/o coercion.

Hoping and praying our children will share a faith that is important to us is not the same thing as saying we are willing to use coercive means to accomplish that.

[ 05. March 2014, 21:55: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Cliffdweller, have you read the OP? It's about how you get kids to be Christian converts.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
JC, lots of people in France speak French, and lots of people in France speak Japanese. The fact that lots of people in France speak Japanese does not speak to the influence on children of their parental tongue.

I'd say it speaks to exactly what we're talking about here.

Some people speak Japanese because their parents spoke Japanese as their first language, so it seems normal and natural to speak Japanese.

Some people speak Japanese because their parents loved the Japanese language/culture, and that drew them to explore it as well, and so they gladly took classes to learn Japanese.

Some people's parents encouraged them to learn Japanese, they tried it, but found it difficult and/or boring, and abandoned the effort.

Some people's parents never gave the Japanese language a 2nd thought, but they chose themselves to learn the language out of their own curiosity and interest.

Same thing with Christianity.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Cliffdweller, have you read the OP? It's about how you get kids to be Christian converts.

Yes, I have. And it reads exactly like what I and Lamb Chopped and so many others have described-- the normal, natural desire of all parents to encourage their children to love/ value the things that they love/ value. Again, music lovers, book lovers, nutritionists-- conservatives and liberals-- all will have very similar desires and very similar concerns about how to pass along their values to their children. There's nothing dark or unnatural or even remarkable about Christian parents in this regard.

Posted by Steve Langton (# 17601) on :

To me (and most people involved in this thread know I identify as Anabaptist) the key point is where Jesus tells Nicodemus "You must be born again" - that is, neither you nor your parents can rely simply on your being born in a Christian family to ensure that you will be truly Christian yourself, any more than Nicodemus could just take for granted his Jewish birth.

This doesn't necessarily mean that children of Christian parents will experience a massively dramatic 'Damascus Road' conversion; and there will be times it's so subtle that it will be more a case of checking where someone has clearly ended up than worrying about how they got there (Timothy, perhaps?).

Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Cliffdweller, have you read the OP? It's about how you get kids to be Christian converts.

I am a Christian. I believe Christianity to be true. I think it is great importance for someone to know that Jesus is Lord, and that he loves them.

Given that, how do I raise my children with integrity? I can't just teach them about Christianity. That would be false to what I actually believe, which is not "some people think Jesus rose from the dead", but is "Jesus is risen". In fact, if I try to teach 'about' Christianity, I fail at teaching about it, because I would misrepresent what my Christianity is about if I did not express my confidence in Christ as well as my theories about him.

Try this as an analogy: I give my son a copy of a book I read at his age and say, with nostalgic enthusiasm "Read this, it's a great book!". Is that brainwashing? I think not, because my aim is not to overwrite my child's developing literary taste with my own, but to encourage him, with my enthusiasm, in discovering reading for himself. He may end up liking a different set of books to me - but I hope my example of the love of reading helps him get to the point where he is genuinely expressing his own taste and discernment. My dogmatic insistence that a certain book is great is not an optional extra: the conviction that "this is a great book" is part of what being an enthusiast for reading is like. I can't leave that out, and then meaningfully teach my children about books. That would leave out the most important thing about books - that they can be great.

Same with religion. The belief in its truth is part of the thing itself, and to teach my children properly about my religion I have to say how deeply I believe it to be true. The point is to get them looking at it for themselves, and making their own decisions about it. I want them to make a genuine choice: so it is essential that I am also genuine about my beliefs.

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
The point I was trying to make to Gwai, no prophet, is that children of Christians are more likely to be Christians than children of Moslems are likely to be Christians, and that the mechanism for this is obviously parental (and local cultural) influence. That's all. No cornering here, and anyway I happen to believe that Gwai is perfectly solid enough to address the issue.

Jeepers. That's no argument of any substance. If the parents speak German, English or Swahili, the kids will also speak the parental language, and worse, they may eat ethnic foods and live out their lives with things borne out of the parental culture.

Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Inculcating religious beliefs in children with the intention of leading them into believing them and adopting that faith. How is that not brainwashing?

You have two errors. A, my mother did not make me believe Christianity. She told me what she believed. She never told me what I should believe or implied that everyone believed that. (My father obviously didn't, so it would have been a crap lie anyway.)
B, I would say that comparing teaching of religious beliefs* to brainwashing is like comparing reasonable discipline to abuse. Either one could definitely be taken too far, and sometimes are, but neither one is abusive just because it could be carried too far.

*As it's normally done, I am not counting the extreme and unusual versions

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eliab:

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Cliffdweller, have you read the OP? It's about how you get kids to be Christian converts.
I am a Christian. I believe Christianity to be true. I think it is great importance for someone to know that Jesus is Lord, and that he loves them.

Given that, how do I raise my children with integrity? I can't just teach them about Christianity. That would be false to what I actually believe, which is not "some people think Jesus rose from the dead", but is "Jesus is risen". In fact, if I try to teach 'about' Christianity, I fail at teaching about it, because I would misrepresent what my Christianity is about if I did not express my confidence in Christ as well as my theories about him.

Try this as an analogy: I give my son a copy of a book I read at his age and say, with nostalgic enthusiasm "Read this, it's a great book!". Is that brainwashing? I think not, because my aim is not to overwrite my child's developing literary taste with my own, but to encourage him, with my enthusiasm, in discovering reading for himself. He may end up liking a different set of books to me - but I hope my example of the love of reading helps him get to the point where he is genuinely expressing his own taste and discernment. My dogmatic insistence that a certain book is great is not an optional extra: the conviction that "this is a great book" is part of what being an enthusiast for reading is like. I can't leave that out, and then meaningfully teach my children about books. That would leave out the most important thing about books - that they can be great.

Same with religion. The point The belief in its truth is part of the thing itself, and to teach my children properly about my religion I have to say how deeply I believe it to be true.is to get them looking at it for themselves, and making their own decisions about it. I want them to make a genuine choice: so it is essential that I am also genuine about my beliefs.

So how is misrepresenting your sincere and deeply-held belief as fact - "this is a great book" rather than "I think/believe/am convinced that this is a great book" encouraging genuine choice? Will it not lead to polarising FOR OR AGAINST your belief? You could dogmatically (based on your unshakeable conviction of its truth to you) insist to me that Brussels sprouts taste wonderful - were I trusting enough to assume you were right it would not only make me more shocked to discover that my taste is not similar to yours but lead me to question whether any other dogmatic statement you made should be assumed to be - for me - equally wrong. For me the, albeit unintentional, presentation to vulnerable people (which includes naturally trusting children) of something as fact when it is not demonstrable as such is stepping over the boundary from teaching into indoctrination. No doubt others will disagree.

I'm one of those PKs who is unable to believe - I suspect partly (at least) because the atmosphere I grew up within was so dogmatic, so impervious to anything that wasn't 1950s evangelical CofE, that the realisation that my parents' beliefs were not, as proclaimed, fact (and didn't produce the promised results) was more deeply disappointing than it otherwise might have been. That said I have a sibling who, when told to do so, joyfully "jumps for Jesus" so maybe it's all down to our very different characters.

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
I have read that in the 1st century, the faith of the head of household was assumed to be conferred to everyone else in it - meaning that children of Christians were perhaps automatically Christians.

The passive voice in this statement is the problem. It's not as if there was some kind of spiritual osmosis by which religion would spread imperceptibly from the pater familias (head of the family) to the rest of the household. Rather, religion was an integral and significant (in terms of time and resources) part of everyday life. That doesn't necessarily indicate spiritual depth, but it certainly indicates social engagement and display. In consequence, if the "boss" switched allegiance to a new religion, then everybody under him would become busy with learning but in particular practicing that religion. Children became "automatically" Christians much in the same way that most European children do learn some European table manners before they become adult. (The usual bitching about this is at a very high level. For example, there is nothing obvious even about using a table and chairs...)

This is of course just "cultural Christianity", but at least the old kind, where that actually meant doing Christian things (rather than humanism going to church twice a year). And since we have heard Yorick's woes already, again, it's probably safe to remark that an atheist upbringing which teaches about Christianity leads to cultural atheists knowing about Christianity, not to someone particularly free in their spiritual choices.

Posted by seekingsister (# 17707) on :

I've been incredibly busy since posting this but glad to see a robust discussion has ensued!

To clarify - I created the post because I was interested in hearing what people think about what happens to children raised in the church by Christian parents, who end up not necessarily as raving anti-religion Dawkins devotees, but the much more common apathy and disinterest in religion that seems to be happening more and more among people raised in Christian environments.

Much of the reason is due to wider society. But given that the Bible says practically nothing about how the children of believers become full members of the church - is it simply inherited? Should children follow their parents faith until they leave home? Do they need to officially convert at an older age? - churches have come up with their own methods of training the young in the faith. But maybe those aren't effective enough in the modern environment.

The reason I used the term "conversion" is that I meant children choosing the faith on their own independently of their families. For infant baptism churches this happens in confirmation, for example. I mean individual standing up and affirming their own faith, not just being baptized and turning up at church because their parents bring them. So it should be applicable to all Christian traditions.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

IngoB, have you forgotten that I have declared on these boards that I was brought up in an Anglican Christian culture by god fearing parents, went to church, sang in its choir, went to a very Christian prep school, and found Jesus and was born again at the age of eighteen?

Where are your car keys?

[ 06. March 2014, 08:22: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

hosting/

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Where are your car keys?

Yorick, you've already seen two warnings about personal insults on this thread, applicable to everyone. This also includes you, and given the tone of this thread in general, to implied insults as well. Cool it.

/hosting

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
IngoB, have you forgotten that I have declared on these boards that I was brought up in an Anglican Christian culture by god fearing parents, went to church, sang in its choir, went to a very Christian prep school, and found Jesus and was born again at the age of eighteen?

Well, this undermines your stated concerns about imprisoning young minds by teaching them a lived faith by the example of your own life. You managed to turn to spiritual desolation just fine by the exercise of your own free will as adult.

But what does this have to do with anything I actually said on this thread? I'm genuinely confused.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

seekingsister

You ask how the church 'converts' children brought-up in families who are believers or attenders.

The obvious answer for the CofE with children who have been baptised as infants is that this should come about through Confirmation.

My own children were very keen on confirmation and saw it as a step into adult membership and belief. Unfortunately, while they still have belief, the membership bit largely went out of the window through the crassness of the local system for the actual service of confirmation.

Consulting their friends after the event, it would seem that this is widespread in our area, yet attempts to point out to the 'powers-that-be' that there is a problem are treated with contempt or just ignored altogether.

But then our area has very good confirmation numbers partly because of a plethora of church secondary schools which tends to totally skew the statistics - again, something our PCC and others have sought to have discussions about at deanery and diocesan level, all being batted away as irrelevant.

My believing children now worship by going to cathedral services when at university and by picking and choosing which liturgies to attend when home.

Asking them what could be done is illuminating: they loathed 'family' services when small and have nothing but contempt for diocesan youth events which, in their experience, are a closed shop run by and for a clique of 'yoof' so-called experts.

Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :

quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
So how is misrepresenting your sincere and deeply-held belief as fact - "this is a great book" rather than "I think/believe/am convinced that this is a great book" encouraging genuine choice? Will it not lead to polarising FOR OR AGAINST your belief? You could dogmatically (based on your unshakeable conviction of its truth to you) insist to me that Brussels sprouts taste wonderful - were I trusting enough to assume you were right it would not only make me more shocked to discover that my taste is not similar to yours but lead me to question whether any other dogmatic statement you made should be assumed to be - for me - equally wrong. For me the, albeit unintentional, presentation to vulnerable people (which includes naturally trusting children) of something as fact when it is not demonstrable as such is stepping over the boundary from teaching into indoctrination. No doubt others will disagree.

And there was me thinking that "this is a great book" would be an uncontroversial example!

I think you're drawing too much of a distinction between 'belief' and 'fact'. For me 'belief' means 'I think this is really true' and my belief is therefore expressed as 'this is true'. There is an implied "I think/in my opinion/to the best of my knowledge" attached to any statement that "this is true". In real life, there usually isn't a need to say that every single time we assert a fact. "This is a great book" is usually heard as the expression of a sincere view, not as a dogmatic prescription that everyone is required to like it. Dogmatism and close-mindedness are matters of attitude, more than they are of language.

When we do add an "in my opinion" qualifier, it is often to express some measure of uncertainty, or to make a particular point that the opinion is held provisionally, pending possible new information. So if I am forever qualifying my religious statements, in a way that I don't routinely qualify my statements on any other subject, I am misrepresenting my faith. I would be implying that I am a lot more doubtful and uncommitted about it than in fact I am. It would be less true than simply stating what I believe.

Obviously I am assuming a general environment in which children are allowed to question, and disagree, and argue, on religious subjects just as much as any other. I'm quite hopeful that the vast majority of people on the Ship would want children to be raised in that sort of environment.

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
You don't intend to equip them to make a truly free choice for themselves. You INTEND that they find Jesus.

.... And that's what makes me sick.

And when I teach my children everything I know about crossing the road safely, I don't intend to equip them to make a free choice as to where and how to cross. I intend them to cross safely and arrive alive at the other side.

Does that make you sick?

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
IngoB, have you forgotten that I have declared on these boards that I was brought up in an Anglican Christian culture by god fearing parents, went to church, sang in its choir, went to a very Christian prep school, and found Jesus and was born again at the age of eighteen?
Well, this undermines your stated concerns about imprisoning young minds by teaching them a lived faith by the example of your own life. You managed to turn to spiritual desolation just fine by the exercise of your own free will as adult.

Interestingly, a sociologist called David Voas claims that in Britain two practicing Christian parents have a 50% chance of raising children who become practising Christians. One Christian and one non-religious or differently religious parent have a 25% chance. Two non-religious parents have a much better likelihood of 'indoctrinating' (some might say!) their children with non-religiosity.

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/10860

Ultimately, when it comes to the Western world, the idea that Christian children meekly follow their parents into church seems to have been disputed by over 100 years of evidence and scholarship.

Islam is transmitted more successfully to children, but that's not just because of what the parents do. There are broader sociological factors at play, as there are for all children.

http://www.religionandsociety.org.uk/news/show/muslims_pass_on_faith_to_children_at_higher_rates_than_christians

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
... I was brought up in an Anglican Christian culture by god fearing parents, went to church, sang in its choir, went to a very Christian prep school, and found Jesus and was born again at the age of eighteen?

Other than the born again part (which is completely foreign to me, never done it, don't need it, once was enough thanks), which would seem to be the decision, at that age of an adult, how is it harmful to had a cultural milieu of Anglican Christianity in one's upbringing. Unless Anglicanism is practised in ways I'm unfamiliar with somewhere. Some routine of eucharist, some praying, a liturgy, perhaps Sunday school. -- certainly some religious leaders or parents can infuse guilt, shame and other things that are not part of Christianity except within the minds of some specific leaders. We see this today with things like the prosperity gospel which some families have adopted. But to throw everything out because of the behaviour or ideas of a minority seems in excess. It would be like deciding all music is bad because you don't like rap, metal or thrash.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

Perhaps Yorick was mixing in evangelical Anglican circles at the time. (Or do people in MOTR, liberal catholic and Anglo-Catholic etc. settings have 'born again' experiences too?)

Evangelical Anglicanism has sometimes been depicted as rather overwhelming and unpleasant. If this represents someone's youthful experience then you could understand why they'd be angry about 'indoctrination'. Barring personality clashes, any other kind of Anglican would probably just lose interest and walk away. Wouldn't they?

[ 06. March 2014, 19:47: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]

Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Perhaps Yorick was mixing in evangelical Anglican circles at the time. (Or do people in MOTR, liberal catholic and Anglo-Catholic etc. settings have 'born again' experiences too?)

Evangelical Anglicanism has sometimes been depicted as rather overwhelming and unpleasant. If this represents someone's youthful experience then you could understand why they'd be angry about 'indoctrination'. Barring personality clashes, any other kind of Anglican would probably just lose interest and walk away. Wouldn't they?

Maybe ex-FiFs? But then I think they tend to move to other strands of Anglicanism rather than leaving it altogether.

Posted by Yorick (# 12169) on :

Sorry, I've been tied up for a few days.

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
hosting/

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
Where are your car keys?
Yorick, you've already seen two warnings about personal insults on this thread, applicable to everyone. This also includes you, and given the tone of this thread in general, to implied insults as well. Cool it.

/hosting

The car key comment was intended as an amicable and vaguely self-deprecating reference to this post, and in no way a personal attack against IngoB. I apologise if it came over that way.

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
IngoB, have you forgotten that I have declared on these boards that I was brought up in an Anglican Christian culture by god fearing parents, went to church, sang in its choir, went to a very Christian prep school, and found Jesus and was born again at the age of eighteen?
Well, this undermines your stated concerns about imprisoning young minds by teaching them a lived faith by the example of your own life. You managed to turn to spiritual desolation just fine by the exercise of your own free will as adult.

But what does this have to do with anything I actually said on this thread? I'm genuinely confused.

Above, you said, "And since we have heard Yorick's woes already, again, it's probably safe to remark that an atheist upbringing which teaches about Christianity leads to cultural atheists knowing about Christianity, not to someone particularly free in their spiritual choices." I was correcting your assumption about my upbringing, for what it was worth, but, anyway, I don't think my own experience undermines my argument.

I understand that many people, who are brought up as Christians, end up as atheists but this is beside the point. Instead of sidestepping the real issue here with irrelevant distractions about the incidence of apostasy, the moral imperative and necessary goodness of parental indoctrination, the unavoidability of unintentional inculcation, and so on, perhaps someone could directly address the following simple questions:

Is there a causal link between young children being exposed to Christianity and their becoming Christians?

Do parents have a significant influence in this?

Do Christian parents use that influence to ensure, to their best ability, that their children become converts to their faith?

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:

Instead of sidestepping the real issue here with irrelevant distractions about the incidence of apostasy, the moral imperative and necessary goodness of parental indoctrination, the unavoidability of unintentional inculcation, and so on, perhaps someone could directly address the following simple questions:

Is there a causal link between young children being exposed to Christianity and their becoming Christians?

Do parents have a significant influence in this?

Do Christian parents use that influence to ensure, to their best ability, that their children become converts to their faith?

1) Don't know, sorry
2) Don't know, sorry
3) See (2). However I would like my children to grow up to be happy, healthy Roman Catholic Christians, who always cross the road safely. If my behaviour can affect those outcomes, then I'll do the things most likely to make them happen.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
What’s wrong with teaching children ABOUT Christianity (and other major religions and non-religious worldviews)

They get this at school.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
What’s wrong with teaching children ABOUT Christianity (and other major religions and non-religious worldviews)

They get this at school.

Depends on your jurisdiction. Your school's curriculum may not apply to the entire planet.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

It is in the national English guidance but up to each local authority what is taught in RE

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

A thought following on my perhaps over-laconic post. One of my friends, parents of three offspring, was at a dinner and the topic at the table was sex and relationship education-- she noted that while there are some technical bits which they get at school, the important lessons they got about the meaning of relationships was by the age of three, from being around their parents and seeing how they treat each other. Perhaps there might be a parallel with teaching Xty one's children.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0