What is the purpose of Sunday School?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

I just don't understand why faith is a goal. You never hear parents wishing that they hope their kids believe Santa Claus is real for the rest of their lives. Every other bit of childhood faith, we hope or assume our children will grow out of. Somehow, religion gets an exemption from that. Why?

Hm - well - let's see --- it could have something to do with the fact that they're Christian Sunday Schools being run by Christian churches filled with Christians - don't you think.

chansen said:
Now, as it happens, many kids do grow out of religious faith and come not to believe at some point in their formative years.

My belief would be that those people never were truly following Christ.
 
What is sad is when kids can't play because they have to get dragged to church. I knew kids like that growing up. Talk about resenting church.


I don't know that it really does make people resent church, though. Some do, sure. But my siblings and I all got "dragged to church" and two of the three of us are still active church goers (albeit in different churches/denominations than we grew up in) and the one who isn't was the one who got the least Sunday School (IIRC). Sure, it can make you resent church but it can also instill some interest in and respect for it. I no longer believe a lot (perhaps even most) of what I was taught in Sunday School (and this was a UCCan Sunday School, so I was not learning hellfire and damnation theology) but I do still value church and religious experiences. Yes, having a grandfather in the ministry with a doctorate in theology likely was a strong influence, too, but I think going to Sunday School, forced or not, did have an effect. IOW, I'd like see a well-done sociological study on whether being made to go to Sunday School helps or hurts in getting people to go to church in the long haul. It may not as cut and dried as you are implying here.
 
IMO no. Some of that might be covered in a confirmation/membership class(probably should be). But general Christian Education is about giving a base on which faith can grow and develop, then helping it to grow and develop.
Thanks for the response -- I love hearing from people who have actually experienced something :3

So does that mean that in your experience, Sunday School tries to somehow disentangle/seperate/be aware of the teacher's particular denomination from giving a base on which the child's faith can grow and develop?

Is there an actual curriculum? If so, who oversees the curriculum?
 
Thanks for the response -- I love hearing from people who have actually experienced something :3

So does that mean that in your experience, Sunday School tries to somehow disentangle/seperate/be aware of the teacher's particular denomination from giving a base on which the child's faith can grow and develop?

Is there an actual curriculum? If so, who oversees the curriculum?

There are many. I remember at least one or two big fusses in the UCCan about curriculum issues. Seems to me like every time a new curriculum comes out, someone makes a big stink.

UUs have a number of different curricula focussing on different areas. Our RE folks tend to rotate them so that the kids get exposed to various curricula and ideas along the way.
 
There are many. I remember at least one or two big fusses in the UCCan about curriculum issues. Seems to me like every time a new curriculum comes out, someone makes a big stink.

UUs have a number of different curricula focussing on different areas. Our RE folks tend to rotate them so that the kids get exposed to various curricula and ideas along the way.

Back when I was a kid at Islington United in Toronto - the biggest debate in terms of Sunday School curriculum broke out when something was introduced called something like "The Hangout Push-out Groovy-time Poster Thing." My Dad - one of the Sunday School teachers at the time hated the Thing - and I think may have actually quit over it. Is anyone else here familiar with this material?
 
Back when I was a kid at Islington United in Toronto - the biggest debate in terms of Sunday School curriculum broke out when something was introduced called something like "The Hangout Push-out Groovy-time Poster Thing." My Dad - one of the Sunday School teachers at the time hated the Thing - and I think may have actually quit over it. Is anyone else here familiar with this material?

Jae, wasn't your father a clown by profession?
 
@Inannawhimsey - re curriculum - our church has used several - most recently from "Feasting on the Word" - based on the Common Lectionary readings used in many churches. http://www.feastingontheword.net/Curriculum/

I've been involved with the Children's Church a few during this period & as an adult leader, I really liked the resources. They provided a lot of background information that really helped me appreciate & understand the readings. There are great activity & craft suggestions etc. also included. Usually way more stuff than we could use in our time allowances - so picking & choosing what fit best for the group who turned up on any given Sunday.
 
Chansen - I don't ski, so I won't presume to talk about ski culture. But I did have a son in hockey. Many of my friend's kids (usually boys) played hockey. Family time???? I question that. Half the time it involved the son and his father (or tagging along with someone else's father if his own father wasn't present) - mom and sisters either stayed home alone, or tagged along. Sisters chased each other around the benches, Mom held a coffee cup between both hands and huddled over it trying to keep warm. Bored young teen girls tried to catch the boys attention away from the game. And the boys were generally intent on competition - often with the weaker players weeded out, left on the bench, and eventually dropped from the teams. And if there were more than one boy in the family, they often played in different leagues, possibly at different arenas, different times, different travel schedules. Not what I would consider quality family time. Not to mention expensive!!! That eliminates many families.
Of course there are families that see it differently. They are all interested in hockey. Girls hockey is becoming more popular. They get to know other hockey families - they look forward to weekends of travel, meeting up with other hockey families at the arenas, comparing notes on how well their kids are doing--individually and as a team. They book into the same hotels and share after-game activities. It's just not for everyone - or not possible for everyone.
And I don't think that all, or even a large percentage, of kids continue with hockey when they become adults.
 

This is true. My friend used to lament that her kid played in "the atheist hockey league" - no sense at all that some families may want to be at church on Sundays. Rather sad actually.
I agree. It's sad. It's so difficult now to find family time, where all are welcome, and all can participate.

I do know one family who just said 'no' to outside interference. Sunday is family time. They worship together. They have a family meal. They go for walks, cross country ski, hike, canoe as a family. They say 'no' to any activity that would take them away from it. No child going off to a friend's birthday party, or someone going off to a movie, or a sports event by themselves. They read, garden, play games. Occasionally they invite a guest to join them - maybe a single person or a refugee family or a family of new neighbours - but it is always with the family (not two boys going off by themselves - they play with friends through the week. I admire them.

Another family I know might not be so strict about all day Sunday being family time - but they have a 1/2 to an hour of family time each evening. The one time grandson and I joined them it was for conversation, singing, snacks, and a prayer. (No TV, electronics, etc.) They also attend church regularly.
 
I do know one family who just said 'no' to outside interference. Sunday is family time. They worship together. They have a family meal. They go for walks, cross country ski, hike, canoe as a family. They say 'no' to any activity that would take them away from it. No child going off to a friend's birthday party, or someone going off to a movie, or a sports event by themselves. They read, garden, play games. Occasionally they invite a guest to join them - maybe a single person or a refugee family or a family of new neighbours - but it is always with the family (not two boys going off by themselves - they play with friends through the week. I admire them.

Wow! That is admirable, Seeler. I wonder if the children in that family will continue this tradition in their own family lives when they have them?
 
I haven't had much time to respond. I was a church school teacher for many years, and small group leader. I was also a participant in church school (you see, I don't believe that church school is just for kids)

For me, sunday morning time in community should be something that is appropriate for the individual, their needs and the community. For that reason, though I value the time together in worship, I also respect those that feel they would rather dialogue on an item than listen to a sermon. Sadly, this is a hard thing for some others to receive as they see it as a slight if alternatives are presented.

So.....back to the question, and in particular some of chansen's comments.
1. What would happen if an atheist or agnostic came to the class. Shucks, the same as if a Moslem or Jewish child or adult came. I value their input. Yes, I have had atheists in group with me (plus lots of agnostics, especially teens), and I have had well versed Jewish children.
It is awesome when we have people with different viewpoints, life experiences, faith perspectivies. It takes it from the trite responses of those who feel they know the answers to the solid dialogue that I expect in our denomination. When those perspectives are not present, I have introduced them through other measures.
2. Age-appropriate
A toddler is capable of certain things, a 10yr old different and a 15 yr old different again.
The hard part for me is when a youth is left with the stories taught in grade 1 or kindergarden, thinking that is the breadth and depth. ugh.
My favourite time to teach is the pre-teens. Their critical thinking and sense of self are there...developing, and what a wonderment as they start to explore the stories, , and be aghast, and then, start to get the challenges and responsibilities of being named a christian, and being part of our denomination.
 
I just don't understand why faith is a goal.

Seems to me that "faith" is what religion is all about.



You never hear parents wishing that they hope their kids believe Santa Claus is real for the rest of their lives.

Who says Santa isn't real, Virginia? If we can, as adults, believe in the spirit of Christmas, why can't we also believe in the spirit of Christ?

And how many are really coming to Sunday School? There is so much kids programming for Sunday mornings now. My daughter has sports on many Sundays. I don't see sports leagues who take Sundays into account any more. It has really gone from the assumption that kids are in church on Sunday back when I was in school, to the assumption that they aren't today.

Who's to say the sports leagues have it right? And have you noticed its the KIDS' sports that get scheduled on Sunday mornings, rather than the over-35 men's leagues? I have kids in my Sunday School that have to choose between sports or church.

Fortunately for them, they don't get kicked out of Sunday School for missing a few weeks. Can't say the same about missing a sports practice. Which offers a better life example?
 
Last edited:
I just don't understand why faith is a goal. You never hear parents wishing that they hope their kids believe Santa Claus is real for the rest of their lives. Every other bit of childhood faith, we hope or assume our children will grow out of. Somehow, religion gets an exemption from that. Why?


"Science is the century-old endeavor to bring together by means of systematic thought the perceptible phenomena of this world into as thoroughgoing an association as possible. To put it boldly, it is the attempt at the posterior reconstruction of existence by the process of conceptualization. But when asking myself what religion is I cannot think of the answer so easily. And even after finding an answer which may satisfy me at this particular moment, I still remain convinced that I can never under any circumstances bring together, even to a slight extent, the thoughts of all those who have given this question serious consideration.

At first, then, instead of asking what religion is I should prefer to ask what characterizes the aspirations of a person who gives me the impression of being religious: a person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings, and aspirations to which he clings because of their superpersonalvalue.

It seems to me that what is important is the force of this superpersonal content and the depth of the conviction concerning its overpowering meaningfulness, regardless of whether any attempt is made to unite this content with a divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities. Accordingly, a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation. They exist with the same necessity and matter-of-factness as he himself. In this sense religion is the age-old endeavor of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect...

For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts."

--excerpted from A Einstein's "Science & Religion"


Irrationality & rationality, working together, complementary
 
Today we helped the kids explore the book of Leviticus. It was a good session.

Next week is our last week of this particular go at children's ministry. We'll be exploring the topic of Jesus as the once-for-all sacrifice for our sins.

We'll probably act out either the upper room scene and/or the resurrection. We'll also be partaking in the Lord's supper together.

I've really enjoyed serving in children's ministry.
 

I don't know that it really does make people resent church, though. Some do, sure. But my siblings and I all got "dragged to church" and two of the three of us are still active church goers (albeit in different churches/denominations than we grew up in) and the one who isn't was the one who got the least Sunday School (IIRC). Sure, it can make you resent church but it can also instill some interest in and respect for it. I no longer believe a lot (perhaps even most) of what I was taught in Sunday School (and this was a UCCan Sunday School, so I was not learning hellfire and damnation theology) but I do still value church and religious experiences. Yes, having a grandfather in the ministry with a doctorate in theology likely was a strong influence, too, but I think going to Sunday School, forced or not, did have an effect. IOW, I'd like see a well-done sociological study on whether being made to go to Sunday School helps or hurts in getting people to go to church in the long haul. It may not as cut and dried as you are implying here.

I was "dragged to church" also, would have rather slept in on Sunday mornings and tried to many a time. I was told it wouldn't look good for a PK not to be there. I hated going to church with a passion when I was younger....go figure. I wanted to "do stuff" and not sit in a stuffy room or auditorium.
 
Back
Top