Religion in our schools

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not true - the Roman culture and society left a legacy way beyond their departure from Britain - indeed we retain elements of our society today that can be traced straight back to those Roman times.

So I suspect that when christianity arrived in Britain they would have adopted all sorts of Roman cultural norms, including in education. Don't forget that the key element of Augustine's 'education' (really vocational training) was learning Latin ... which comes from where exactly.

There were no legacy Roman schools by Augustines arrival.

As an example of secular education it's relatively short span makes the Roman school system a bad example to hold up.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Would you like to remind us where Augustine was born, was brought up and educated (and therefore his societal and cultural influences) prior to coming to Britain

He was a religious who started an education system in this country such as it was.

Unlike the romans it marked a commitment to schools lasting well over a millennium.

[ProfessorDavey]

There were no legacy Roman schools by Augustines arrival.

I don't think that is correct.

But even if it were what cultural legacy would Augustine have brought with him when he arrived in Britain - in other words what was his cultural heritage from birth, upbringing and education.

[ProfessorDavey]

He was a religious who started an education system in this country such as it was.

No he didn't - he established a very narrow system for training of clergy. That isn't an education system as we know it. By contrast the Roman system, with its broad curriculum not aimed at narrow vocational training, is recognisable in our current educational context.

Actually education as we know was established by the romans in Britain - then largely disappeared for centuries, only really reappearing in the 11thC onward. And that re-emergence of education was associated with both religious and non religious foundation schools.

Bottom line education in Britain was not started by christians and was around before christianity even arrived at our shores.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No he didn't - he established a very narrow system for training of clergy. That isn't an education system as we know it. By contrast the Roman system, with its broad curriculum not aimed at narrow vocational training, is recognisable in our current educational context.

Actually education as we know was established by the romans in Britain - then largely disappeared for centuries, only really reappearing in the 11thC onward. And that re-emergence of education was associated with both religious and non religious foundation schools.

Bottom line education in Britain was not started by christians and was around before christianity even arrived at our shores.

I am not arguing that there wasn't a roman system of schools or that it wasn't swell. Just that it became defunct, ended, finished, closed down without being turned into an academy, shuffled of its mortal coil, went the way of the dinosaurs and the dodo.......as you say before Augustine by a fairly long chalk.

I don't see you praising the ancient Persians for the discovery of the battery, the educational equivalent you are attempting here..

Although I understand ancient batteries were mouldering in cellars. whereas there were no legacy Roman British schools.

Sorry.

[ProfessorDavey]

Although I understand ancient batteries were mouldering in cellars. whereas there were no legacy Roman British schools.

Sorry.

Hmm - so a country with a heritage of roman education is visited by a person born in ... Rome, brought up under Roman culture, society and education and sent from Rome to Britain establishes a training regime in Britain in which effectively the only subject is learning ... umm ... Latin.

And yet there is no footprint of Roman education on the British education system. Let's face it notion that Latin remains part of classical british establishment education is proof beyond doubt of the legacy of the Roman education system in the UK.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Hmm - so a country with a heritage of roman education is visited by a person born in ... Rome, brought up under Roman culture, society and education and sent from Rome to Britain establishes a training regime in Britain in which effectively the only subject is learning ... umm ... Latin.

And yet there is no footprint of Roman education on the British education system. Let's face it notion that Latin remains part of classical british establishment education is proof beyond doubt of the legacy of the Roman education system in the UK.

But there were no schools left.

[ProfessorDavey]

But there were no schools left.

And nor were there, in the sense that we understand (as educational establishments, rather than purely vocational training forums) for about 500 years after St Augustine arrived.

And let's not forget that the notion of formalising vocational training wasn't new, nor unique, to St Augustine. How do you think the next generation of blacksmiths, potters, weavers etc etc were trained down the centuries. St Augustine establishing a narrow system for training clergy was merely one of many systems, formal and informal, that existed long before he arrived on these shores for vocational training.

[ippy]

I see Vlad's into his usual load of old muddled cobblers that have no connection with the reality of the present day need to put religion into it's present day place in our schools, with the big no no on teaching any form of religion as though they are true facts and protecting the vulnerable pre seven years of age children from most forms of indoctrination whilst in the school environment.

Like I have said I'm O K with indoctrinating children into thinking for themselves, I'm certain that would do more good than harm.

Regards ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And nor were there, in the sense that we understand (as educational establishments, rather than purely vocational training forums) for about 500 years after St Augustine arrived.

And let's not forget that the notion of formalising vocational training wasn't new, nor unique, to St Augustine. How do you think the next generation of blacksmiths, potters, weavers etc etc were trained down the centuries. St Augustine establishing a narrow system for training clergy was merely one of many systems, formal and informal, that existed long before he arrived on these shores for vocational training.

I'm wondering if in light of what you have said skillcentres....remember them?....run by the manpower services commission or indeed apprenticeships could be classed as schools.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I see Vlad's into his usual load of old muddled cobblers that have no connection with the reality of the present day need to put religion into it's present day place in our schools, with the big no no on teaching any form of religion as though they are true facts and protecting the vulnerable pre seven years of age children from most forms of indoctrination whilst in the school environment.

Like I have said I'm O K with indoctrinating children into thinking for themselves, I'm certain that would do more good than harm.

Regards ippy

Bonkers

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm wondering if in light of what you have said skillcentres....remember them?....run by the manpower services commission or indeed apprenticeships could be classed as schools.

Let us remind ourselves of your comment that started this line of discussion:

'Religionists didn't get their claws into education, they started it'

So we aren't talking about schools, but education. So to answer your question, vocational training and education are distinct things. The romans established educational establishments (call them schools) in Britain in the period when they were in occupation in Britain. St Augustine did not establish educational establishments in Britain - he established narrow vocational training establishments, similar to those for training people for other trades and professions. Educational establishment didn't really reappear in Britain until the 11th and 12thC - some of which were linked to religious establishments some not.

Indeed there are examples of battles where narrow training schools were removed from monastic control and secularised in order to provide education rather than mere clergy training, which were resisted by the incumbent monastic orders.

[ippy]

Let us remind ourselves of your comment that started this line of discussion:

'Religionists didn't get their claws into education, they started it'

So we aren't talking about schools, but education. So to answer your question, vocational training and education are distinct things. The romans established educational establishments (call them schools) in Britain in the period when they were in occupation in Britain. St Augustine did not establish educational establishments in Britain - he established narrow vocational training establishments, similar to those for training people for other trades and professions. Educational establishment didn't really reappear in Britain until the 11th and 12thC - some of which were linked to religious establishments some not.

Indeed there are examples of battles where narrow training schools were removed from monastic control and secularised in order to provide education rather than mere clergy training, which were resisted by the incumbent monastic orders.

It's that quote out of context again the same one: 'Religionists didn't get their claws into education, they started it'.

I was referring to the way the various religions grab the very young, pre seven year old, children the ones they know full well are the most likely to succumb to their influence.

The reference was then about how the various religions couldn't wait to get their claws into these pre seven year old vulnerable children as the're the most likely source for blindly following new recruits, it was not about the various religions getting their claws into education in general.

Vlad is often dishonest in this way, mind the false Hungarian/English, English/Hungarian dictionary he uses doesn't help, I'm sure English isn't Vlad's first language?

(False Hungarian dictionary or phrase book? from those wonderful, old now, Python days)

Found another link on the subject of this thread as follows:

https://www.tes.com/news/faith-schools-discriminate-against-non-religious-pupils

Regards Prof D, ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Let us remind ourselves of your comment that started this line of discussion:

'Religionists didn't get their claws into education, they started it'

So we aren't talking about schools, but education. So to answer your question, vocational training and education are distinct things. The romans established educational establishments (call them schools) in Britain in the period when they were in occupation in Britain. St Augustine did not establish educational establishments in Britain - he established narrow vocational training establishments, similar to those for training people for other trades and professions. Educational establishment didn't really reappear in Britain until the 11th and 12thC - some of which were linked to religious establishments some not.

Indeed there are examples of battles where narrow training schools were removed from monastic control and secularised in order to provide education rather than mere clergy training, which were resisted by the incumbent monastic orders.

But the thread is about schools.
Ippy itv portrays a long and noble system of secular schooling which somehow the religious got their claws into. You are saying that the church schools were only ever established and run, ever, to train the clergy....obvious nonsense.

This of course is nonsense and rank revisionism.

On the other hand no humanist or atheist group is apparently prepared to found any school and are continually bleating that the taxpayer does not provide wholly or satisfactory secular schools.

[ippy]

But the thread is about schools.
Ippy itv portrays a long and noble system of secular schooling which somehow the religious got their claws into. You are saying that the church schools were only ever established and run, ever, to train the clergy....obvious nonsense.

This of course is nonsense and rank revisionism.

On the other hand no humanist or atheist group is apparently prepared to found any school and are continually bleating that the taxpayer does not provide wholly or satisfactory secular schools.

I'm not saying anything different to the original post I made on this thread, about seven year olds etc, unlike you where you are doing your dishonest best to disrupt any thread subject you you don't like, by, well it might as well be Hungarian, gibberish anyway.

Regards ippy   

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm not saying anything different to the original post I made on this thread, about seven year olds etc, unlike you where you are doing your dishonest best to disrupt any thread subject you you don't like, by, well it might as well be Hungarian, gibberish anyway.

Regards ippy

Sorry
I now see you are the sort of person who sees talk about religion and schools as highly disruptive of a thread on religion and schools.

There are a number of people in my opinion still reeling from the audacity of people disagreeing with them

Your picture of church schools is as credible as the existence of the child catcher in Chitty chitty bang bang.

[ProfessorDavey]

But the thread is about schools.

But my involvement was in response to your comment implying that somehow religionists (or rather christians as your later comments make clear) somehow invented or 'started' education.

They didn't - regardless of whether you consider this in a merely UK context or more broadly.

But even if we are talking about schools - you are all wrong as it is absolutely clear that there were schools in Britain long before the christianity arrived. And those earliest schools that we know existed in Britain were run on Roman lines - which means they were genuinely educational, rather than merely vocational training, and were also aligned with civic secular roman society and not religion.

So whichever way you look at it Vlad, you are simply wrong.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

But my involvement was in response to your comment implying that somehow religionists (or rather christians as your later comments make clear) somehow invented or 'started' education.

They didn't - regardless of whether you consider this in a merely UK context or more broadly.

But even if we are talking about schools - you are all wrong as it is absolutely clear that there were schools in Britain long before the christianity arrived. And those earliest schools that we know existed in Britain were run on Roman lines - which means they were genuinely educational, rather than merely vocational training, and were also aligned with civic secular roman society and not religion.

So whichever way you look at it Vlad, you are simply wrong.

Christianity did start schools since they were history by the time of Augustine in this country and continued to do so and maintain them for over a millennium. That is incontravertable.

[ProfessorDavey]

Christianity did start schools since they were history by the time of Augustine in this country and continued to do so and maintain them for over a millennium. That is incontravertable.

So what - christianity didn't 'start' education in Britain nor were they the first to establish schools in Britain.

Accept you are wrong in claiming that christianity started education, and move on.

Post the Romans the first schools, as we would recognise them, didn't emerge until the 11th and 12thC - some had religious foundations, some others were non religious in their foundation.

[ippy]

Sorry
I now see you are the sort of person who sees talk about religion and schools as highly disruptive of a thread on religion and schools.

There are a number of people in my opinion still reeling from the audacity of people disagreeing with them

Your picture of church schools is as credible as the existence of the child catcher in Chitty chitty bang bang.

You still can't be honest Vlad; I'm not talking about how young children should be treated our schools in anything like the way you have described in this, another of your frequent dishonest mailings.

No wonder you're frequently called out for lying, I can see why.

ippy