The Liberal Agnostic Secular Humanist Four-Year Old

[Leela]

Hi All,

I just finished reading Richard Dawkin’s “The God Delusion” where Dawkins raised an interesting issue that I had never thought about before. Dawkins has raised my conscioussness about the common practice of labelling children as Mulsim, Jewish, Christian, or Hindu based on the religion of their parents. But children are too young to have made up their minds about their religious beliefs. Dawkins points out that there is really no such thing as a Christian child, and we should all wince upon hearing such labels as we would if we heard children being labelled according to their parent’s beliefs as liberal or conservative children, agnostic or secular humanist children, and capitalist or marxist children.

What do you think?

Best,
Leela

 

[Contarini]

Hi All,

I just finished reading Richard Dawkin’s “The God Delusion” where Dawkins raised an interesting issue that I had never thought about before. Dawkins has raised my conscioussness about the common practice of labelling children as Mulsim, Jewish, Christian, or Hindu based on the religion of their parents. But children are too young to have made up their minds about their religious beliefs. Dawkins points out that there is really no such thing as a Christian child, and we should all wince upon hearing such labels as we would if we heard children being labelled according to their parent’s beliefs as liberal or conservative children, agnostic or secular humanist children, and capitalist or marxist children.

What do you think?

Best,
Leela

I think that Dawkins is being silly. People don’t “make up their minds” in the neutral manner he implies. But then, he probably thinks Thomas Kuhn is an anti-scientific irrational idiot. From my perspective, that makes Dawkins an anti-intellectual, pigheaded bigot who is unwilling to think critically about his faith commitments (even denying that they are faith commitments at all).

Parents ought to teach children to think critically, and they ought to expose them to a variety of perspectives. That’s how you create open-mindedness. But children do take on by default the views of their parents, at least initially, and that is perfectly natural and appropriate.

Edwin

 

[Leela]

I think that Dawkins is being silly. People don’t “make up their minds” in the neutral manner he implies. But then, he probably thinks Thomas Kuhn is an anti-scientific irrational idiot. From my perspective, that makes Dawkins an anti-intellectual, pigheaded bigot who is unwilling to think critically about his faith commitments (even denying that they are faith commitments at all).

Everyone (including Dawkins) knows that people tend to eventually hold the same views as their parents. I can’t tell if there is an argument within all the name-calling above. What faith commitments are you talking about. At any rate, the issue is whether children should be labelled based on their parent’s views.

Can a four year old be a liberal agnostic secular humanist? Can a three year old be a conservative moral consequentialist atheist?

Parents ought to teach children to think critically, and they ought to expose them to a variety of perspectives. That’s how you create open-mindedness.

Agreed.

But children do take on by default the views of their parents, at least initially, and that is perfectly natural and appropriate.

I agree that this tends to happen by some age and is perfectly noramal, but four-year olds have no religious, philosophical, political, or cosmological views to speak of.

Best,
Leela

 

[Contarini]

Everyone (including Dawkins) knows that people tend to eventually hold the same views as their parents. I can’t tell if there is an argument within all the name-calling above.

Fair enough

What faith commitments are you talking about.

To the scientific method as an adequate, comprehensive way of engaging reality.

At any rate, the issue is whether children should be labelled based on their parent’s views.

I have no problem doing so, if those views are more than philosophical stances but also describe the cultural environment in which the child is raised.

Can a four year old be a liberal agnostic secular humanist? Can a three year old be a conservative moral consequentialist atheist?

You’re loading the dice by throwing in complex philosophical terms. By this standard we should be asking whether a Christian child is a Thomist or a Molinist–which we all agree would make no sense. The reason it makes sense to call a child a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim is that these are communities of faith and practice that shape people on more than just a sophisticated intellectual level. And that’s what Dawkins objects to.

I agree that this tends to happen by some age and is perfectly noramal, but four-year olds have no religious, philosophical, political, or cosmological views to speak of.

Clearly the four-year-olds you know are different from the ones I know. My daughter is two, and I am not sure I’d make this claim even about her, although certainly her views are only embryonic.

Furthermore, you miss the point when you reduce everything to “views.” Religion is more than a “view”; it’s a way of life. And every child is going to be formed in some way of life–generally in a complex set of behaviors and responses with many different sources.

Edwin

 

[Leela]

To the scientific method as an adequate, comprehensive way of engaging reality.

No one thinks that the scientific method is applicable or relevent to every part of life.

I have no problem doing so, if those views are more than philosophical stances but also describe the cultural environment in which the child is raised.

So calling a child a Catholic or a Lutheran is a cultural rather than spitritual or religious issue? Such labels should not be taken to imply that the child holds any particular beliefs?

You’re loading the dice by throwing in complex philosophical terms. By this standard we should be asking whether a Christian child is a Thomist or a Molinist–which we all agree would make no sense. The reason it makes sense to call a child a Christian or a Jew or a Muslim is that these are communities of faith and practice that shape people on more than just a sophisticated intellectual level. And that’s what Dawkins objects to.

So we shouldn’t label children based on sophisticated intellectual terms that the children couldn’t hope to understand. At least we agree upon that. Does the difference bewteen a Catholic and a Lutheran fit here? Where does your daughter stand on transubstantiation or papal authority?

Clearly the four-year-olds you know are different from the ones I know. My daughter is two, and I am not sure I’d make this claim even about her, although certainly her views are only embryonic.

Maybe Catholic children are smarter than normal 4-year olds. My 4-year old has been taught about God at her preschool and thinks that God is just as real as Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. She thinks that God has superpowers like Superman, but except God can’t fly.

Come on. You must realize that four year olds do not have much of a hold on the difference between real and pretend and are not old enough to be Christians or anymore than they are old enough to be Republicans.

Furthermore, you miss the point when you reduce everything to “views.” Religion is more than a “view”; it’s a way of life. And every child is going to be formed in some way of life–generally in a complex set of behaviors and responses with many different sources.

Any elementary school student will tell the the the biggest difference in the “way of life” between Jews and Christians is that Jews don’t get presents from Santa Clause. These cultural differences are just not that substantial, especially when you are talking about children.

Best,
Leela

 

[Spock]

She thinks that God has superpowers like Superman, but except God can’t fly.

And the real smart kids also know that God’s last name is Zilla!

 

[PRmerger]

A 4yr old cannot be a liberal, agnostic, secular humanist, nor can she be a conservative, Thomistic, Catholic Christian.

What she can be, if she’s baptized, is a Catholic. By virtue of her baptism, she receives the Holy Spirit which awakens the faith in her. (CCC 683).

So she’s a member of Christ’s family. That’s what we mean by “my 4yr old daughter is a Catholic.” It makes no assertion at all about her theological views.

Now, it does seem that Dawkins may be right to claim that there is no such thing as a 4 yr old Muslim or Hindu, if there’s no sacramental equivalent to Baptism. I wouldn’t know.

 

[Matrix_Refugee]

I agree that this tends to happen by some age and is perfectly noramal, but four-year olds have no religious, philosophical, political, or cosmological views to speak of.

Agreed. I think if I tried to discuss, say, Plato’s Parable of the Cave and how this applies to the modern age with a four year old, it would go something like this:

MR: So, do you think it’s possible we could be living in a world like this?

Four year old: Why do you wear glasses?

And most four year olds outlook on religion? Getting shushed and told to sit still in church/the synagogue/etc. or going to a preschool connected with the family’s regular place of worship.

 

[fhansen]

I tell my children what I believe and why I believe it. Non-believers can’t identify with faith in anything supernatural so they think superstition is being taught. I also tell my children to question everything they hear including that from religious teachers and myself-so any faith they have will be their own-or not at all. This I’ve done since they were quite young.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Faith, like skepticism, is a learned thing. We learn in different ways. A child may be said to be Christian at the age of dour if it lives in a Christian environment. You aren’t likely to be four years old and not be aware that your parents believe in God and that they are taking you to Church to visit him every Sunday. This is called Christian formation. Formation doesn’t always take for one reason or another. The parents are hypocrites … or the child chooses a life style incompatible with Christ’s teachings … or the child gets brainwashed by the college faculty.

By the same token, the skeptic who never mentions God in front of his children and never takes him to Church is raising (most likely) an agnostic or an atheist. This is not always true. One of Madalyn Murray O’Hair’s sons, raised an atheist, became a Baptist minister and called his mother evil. Bertrand Russell likewise had not much to do with the raising of one of his daughters. She renounced him and later became a Christian.

Oh well.

 

[Squishy]

A 4yr old cannot be a liberal, agnostic, secular humanist, nor can she be a conservative, Thomistic, Catholic Christian.

What she can be, if she’s baptized, is a Catholic. By virtue of her baptism, she receives the Holy Spirit which awakens the faith in her. (CCC 683).

So she’s a member of Christ’s family. That’s what we mean by “my 4yr old daughter is a Catholic.” It makes no assertion at all about her theological views.

Now, it does seem that Dawkins may be right to claim that there is no such thing as a 4 yr old Muslim or Hindu, if there’s no sacramental equivalent to Baptism. I wouldn’t know.

Are you still a catholic if you are baptized against your will? Because very few children choose to be baptized. It is forced on them by parents.

 

[Leela]

I tell my children what I believe and why I believe it. Non-believers can’t identify with faith in anything supernatural so they think superstition is being taught. I also tell my children to question everything they hear including that from religious teachers and myself-so any faith they have will be their own-or not at all. This I’ve done since they were quite young.

That sounds great. We need to teach our children to think rather than what to think.

 

[Leela]

Faith, like skepticism, is a learned thing. We learn in different ways. A child may be said to be Christian at the age of dour if it lives in a Christian environment. You aren’t likely to be four years old and not be aware that your parents believe in God and that they are taking you to Church to visit him every Sunday. This is called Christian formation. Formation doesn’t always take for one reason or another. The parents are hypocrites … or the child chooses a life style incompatible with Christ’s teachings … or the child gets brainwashed by the college faculty.

By the same token, the skeptic who never mentions God in front of his children and never takes him to Church is raising (most likely) an agnostic or an atheist. This is not always true. One of Madalyn Murray O’Hair’s sons, raised an atheist, became a Baptist minister and called his mother evil. Bertrand Russell likewise had not much to do with the raising of one of his daughters. She renounced him and later became a Christian.

Oh well.

…called his mother evil??? Nice. There’s a Christian for you.

As for the four year old, I can’t see what you could mean by calling the child who does not believe in God a Christian.

 

[Leela]

A 4yr old cannot be a liberal, agnostic, secular humanist, nor can she be a conservative, Thomistic, Catholic Christian.

What she can be, if she’s baptized, is a Catholic. By virtue of her baptism, she receives the Holy Spirit which awakens the faith in her. (CCC 683).

So she’s a member of Christ’s family. That’s what we mean by “my 4yr old daughter is a Catholic.” It makes no assertion at all about her theological views.

Now, it does seem that Dawkins may be right to claim that there is no such thing as a 4 yr old Muslim or Hindu, if there’s no sacramental equivalent to Baptism. I wouldn’t know.

CCC 683 says nothing about becoming a Christian or Catholic upon baptism, and even if it did, common sense tells us that four year olds are not capable of making up their minds about such things.

 

[Spock]

Faith, like skepticism, is a learned thing. We learn in different ways. A child may be said to be Christian at the age of dour if it lives in a Christian environment. You aren’t likely to be four years old and not be aware that your parents believe in God and that they are taking you to Church to visit him every Sunday. This is called Christian formation. Formation doesn’t always take for one reason or another. The parents are hypocrites … or the child chooses a life style incompatible with Christ’s teachings … or the child gets brainwashed by the college faculty.

By the same token, the skeptic who never mentions God in front of his children and never takes him to Church is raising (most likely) an agnostic or an atheist. This is not always true. One of Madalyn Murray O’Hair’s sons, raised an atheist, became a Baptist minister and called his mother evil. Bertrand Russell likewise had not much to do with the raising of one of his daughters. She renounced him and later became a Christian.

Oh well.

It is very telling that you call the process “brainwashing” (with all its negative connotations) when the result is becoming an atheist, but you do not use the same phrase when the result is to become a Christian.

How conveeenient!

 

[PRmerger]

CCC 683 says nothing about becoming a Christian or Catholic upon baptism, and even if it did, common sense tells us that four year olds are not capable of making up their minds about such things.

Is your argument, Leela, that the Catholic church does not teach that we become Christians at Baptism? If so, then I will provide documentation that this indeed is our teaching.

However, as you allude, it seems that it would be irrelevant to you, so I won’t waste my time proving that this is, indeed, what we become.

Yes, 4 yr olds are not capable of making up their minds about such things. But, as I said earlier, becoming a Christian at Baptism says *nothing * about this 4 yr old’s understanding of theology. It is a statement that this child has become a member of Christ’s family. She is now part of the Body of Christ.

 

[PRmerger]

Are you still a catholic if you are baptized against your will? Because very few children choose to be baptized. It is forced on them by parents.

Yup, you’re still a Catholic if you’re baptized “against your will” but by your parents’ will.

 

[fhansen]

That sounds great. We need to teach our children to think rather than what to think.

Yes, but I’ll do my best to give them reason to believe -like we’re always trying to do here-because the faith is that real and valuable to me. There are a lot of opinions out there-more and more every day- and children will hear everyone of them eventually. Faith either stands up to this or it fails but they’ll have the background in it one way or the other and they can make up their own minds. Things are already different today than when I was young. There’s been a paradigm shift of sorts and nearly everyone, starting at a fairly young age, questions what they’ve been told. And that’s a good thing because believing in anything out of fear or just because you think you’re supposed to is no faith at all.

 

[Leela]

Is your argument, Leela, that the Catholic church does not teach that we become Christians at Baptism? If so, then I will provide documentation that this indeed is our teaching.

No, I am just saying that the note you cited does not say so. I would like to see such documentation, however, and I am interested to know what baptism is supposed to mean.

Yes, 4 yr olds are not capable of making up their minds about such things. But, as I said earlier, becoming a Christian at Baptism says *nothing * about this 4 yr old’s understanding of theology. It is a statement that this child has become a member of Christ’s family. She is now part of the Body of Christ.

If being a Catholic has nothing to do with beliefs then I wonder what it could possibly mean to be a Catholic. Maybe I’m one and don’t realize it.

Being part of he body of Christ sounds like a metaphor. I don’t understand it.

 

[Leela]

Yes, but I’ll do my best to give them reason to believe -like we’re always trying to do here-because the faith is that real and valuable to me. There are a lot of opinions out there-more and more every day- and children will hear everyone of them eventually. Faith either stands up to this or it fails but they’ll have the background in it one way or the other and they can make up their own minds. Things are already different today than when I was young. There’s been a paradigm shift of sorts and nearly everyone, starting at a fairly young age, questions what they’ve been told. And that’s a good thing because believing in anything out of fear or just because you think you’re supposed to is no faith at all.

Makes sense to me. I also have no intention of letting my children make up their own minds about religion any more than I would let them make up their own minds about sex, drugs, and alcohol. But like you, I recognize that the decision will ultimately be theirs, and I want to equip them with the knowledge and skills for making good decision and taking responsibility for them.