|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Going through the motions for school admission
|
Pasta
Apprentice
# 5635
|
Posted
I find it hard to sympathise with churches' whose complaint is that they are getting newcomers. But yes, I know the "local church for local people" syndrome.
--------------------
Happiness is a contented kipper
Posts: 43 | From: Suffolk | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Churches like the idea of newcomers in theory. But in practice, unless the newcomers are just like the oldies a large number of new people will entail a change of identity for the church, and that's hard to deal with.
It must be even worse if you know that the newcomers would rather not be there at all, except that they need the vicar to sign a form for them.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Schools are generally seen as being about educating children - and the parents need to be aware of/accepting of the nature of the education their child will get at a church-run school.
But it seems to me that this attendance requirement is an attempt to 'educate' the parents first, to effectively enrol them as a condition of enrolling the children.
Which seems a bit problematic. No-one ever told my parents that before they could get me into piano lessons, they too had to study piano.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pasta:
I find it hard to sympathise with churches' whose complaint is that they are getting newcomers. But yes, I know the "local church for local people" syndrome.
Yes, especially when they make a point of publicly saying they're welcoming, but ignore newish people to the point of a) intensely gossiping about all sorts of church people and business, as if no one else is around; b) pretending as if the volunteers they're directly working with don't exist; and c) are usually only interested in people who are rich, famous, or are both in need AND unusually talented.
If you don't want anyone but The Right People in your church, don't pretend you want the general public to join.
(Me? Issues? ![[Biased]](wink.gif) )
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pasta
Apprentice
# 5635
|
Posted
Most of these newcomers are very supportive of the church in a vague Queen, Tradition, Jerusalem and Midnight Mass sort of way. They will have been to church a number of times anyway in their life. In the whole post modern "belong before you believe" world I would have thought the system is perfect; but only in church can you preach forgiveness while hating your brother and frantically organise mission weeks whilst resenting the newcomers that come from the school.
I do wonder if the real issue is that the church is secretly miffed that they didn't get the new family in; because if they'd done it then that would be kudos to them!
--------------------
Happiness is a contented kipper
Posts: 43 | From: Suffolk | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Tangent, but why is 'belong before you believe' seen as being post-modern? Surely that was what characterised the great majority of Christians at least from the time of Constantine until the last century.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pasta
Apprentice
# 5635
|
Posted
Enlightened modernity emphasised the power and supremacy of reason. You could be intellectually convinced that God was real or not. In the church it had its heyday in the evangelical preachers from 1850 to 1960. Even though it was tailing off in the 70's and 80's, the idea was still prevalent that we just had to get them to a talk by Billy Graham or a wannabe like Michael Green. Then they would believe and go on to belong.
Post modernity was the re-discovery of the supremacy of relationship, you were invited to hang out at some socials, get to know the believers, if they were authentic you would move from belonging to believing. Very much the pattern with church school selection. I went to church to meet girls, I was equally good at belonging before believing and with no better motives than Mr & Mrs Gimmie-a-school-place.
--------------------
Happiness is a contented kipper
Posts: 43 | From: Suffolk | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Tangent, but why is 'belong before you believe' seen as being post-modern? Surely that was what characterised the great majority of Christians at least from the time of Constantine until the last century.
I don't think it worked like that in the Bible, but from the point of view of a state church I suppose it makes sense to enculturate people with religious rituals rather than expecting them to arrive with ready-made evidence of a particular spiritual or intellectual state. After all, such churches don't normally go out to evangelise; they expect people to come to them.
I think the problem is that in the current situation the self-serving aspect is so blatant. We live in a solidly secular culture, and AFAIK there's little sense that these people are coming to church out of any curiosity about Christianity, or a desire to give their children an understanding of their religious heritage, or a vague notion that it might provide them with some spiritual benefit. It's simply about acquiring an educational and social advantage over other people.
But I suppose you could say that most of life is like that anyway; we all want to beat other people to that place at Oxford, to that great job, to that desirable marriage partner, etc., or to ensure that our children do. Since this is human nature perhaps it makes sense for the right churches in the right places to be realistic about it and possibly make a few converts by participating in the process.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Since this is human nature perhaps it makes sense for the right churches in the right places to be realistic about it and possibly make a few converts by participating in the process.
Let the little children come to me... so long as their parents come along too, are in good financial standing and fill out the correct forms.
Doesn't really have quite the same ring, does it?
On one level a church school is an enterprise that needs some form of running like any enterprise. But it seems to me there's a fairly fundamental collision between values of status-seeking and business-running and values of doing good just because it's good.
And I don't think this is the only area where the collision occurs. Too often, churches act like they're in the conversion business. It's as if God set them sales targets. And so they don't do something just because it will help the community or is a service that needs providing, they'll do it because they see it as an opportunity to upsell people on becoming a church member.
Such behaviour is uncomfortably close to the more sneaky and underhand versions of what commercial businesses do. I'm sure we've all had a telemarketer say "would you like a free phone (or something)", and then if you say yes, they will then tell you that actually, to get the thing that you want you've got to also have other things.
If the church is offering to provide children with a high standard of education which reflects Christian values, then it should provide children with a high standard of education which reflects Christian values. It should not engage in bundling. It should not say "ah, well, if you want us to educate your children, the only way to get that is in a package with our regular Sunday attendance program".
[ 30. January 2015, 23:41: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Let the little children come to me... so long as their parents come along too, are in good financial standing and fill out the correct forms.
Doesn't really have quite the same ring, does it
Indeed! My comment was made with a certain sense of resignation about the whole thing. (But the parents don't exactly have to be in good financial standing, just not in the kind of poverty that goes along with chaotic lifestyles.)
quote:
If the church is offering to provide children with a high standard of education which reflects Christian values, then it should provide children with a high standard of education which reflects Christian values. It should not engage in bundling. It should not say "ah, well, if you want us to educate your children, the only way to get that is in a package with our regular Sunday attendance program".
Regular Sunday attendance is only required when a school is ridiculously popular. Most CofE schools aren't in that position, which, ironically, seems to be a good thing.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should add that my mother tried to get me into such a school when I was little, but she failed. But I was interested to discover recently that the CofE church I now attend signs in forms for parents who want to send their children to the very same school. I don't know what the rules were when I was of primary school age, but if my mother had raised me in the CofE rather than as a Methodist things might have been a bit different!
[ 31. January 2015, 00:30: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
squidgetsmum
Apprentice
# 17708
|
Posted
Late to the party, but we've just had this moral debate as the Squidge will start school in September. Since he's been at church since he was in utero, and we're between two church schools, our choices seem pretty easy. However, we've actually chosen the school that doesn't prioritise church membership, figuring that we couldn't see why this should make a difference. I hope to hell he gets in, as it's a good school, but the admission policy was a definite part of our decision.
Posts: 13 | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
We tried to get our sons into the local CofE High school which gets outstanding results across the board. We had full Churchy points - as many as it's possible to get, plus a letter from our Minister etc etc. They didn't get in - we are Methodists so the CofE kids were way up the list.
My sons went to the local comp which had just failed its Ofsted. They were thrilled as al their friends went there too. It's in the worst ward in the country on all statistical counts.
My two both got 4 A* A levels (two being maths and further maths) They went on to University, Masters degrees and excellent jobs (Airline pilot and Nurse)
Both still say they much preferred the local comp. It taught them well with the added bonus of many life-skills lessons they would never have had at the highly selective school.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Indeed. We are in the process of secondary school application for Boy #1 at the moment - the school he's most likely to get allocated to has appalling results, but the issue that bothers me is that they don't offer triple science, and I consider double science (never mind, God help us, single award science) to be a mockery of the subject. I'd have no problem if they remedied that. Oh, and took IT seriously.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
