Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 8:29 pm
by Tom Grubb
Justcurious wrote:Even if St. James has changed, it can only change so far. A school run by a cult can't be a normal school, ever. It may get better, but I think it is just going with the wind, if they were allowed to use corpral punishment, they would. St. James was a what seems harmful school and a very obscure one. You can't change it while the people who believe its philosophy are still there.
[quote tag error fixed -- mike]
I agree!
Tom
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 10:31 pm
by gadflysdreams
Yes, st. james really does need to decide whether it's primary function is to ensure the propogation of the future ses or provide an enlightened education. the latter might well involve the acceptance of the fact that there are people, not in ses who value spiritual nourishment - and pursue it in their own way. ses has always had the problem of believing that their insights into things spiritual are the most enlightened - that is why Debenham etc are finding it difficult to respond to and face up to the things of the past. As far as they are concerned they wre educating children in the most enlightened way for the time. Do the present st. james authorities hold the same conceit? Do they still believe that their greatedt sucess stories are of those pupils who they manage to get into the ses?
Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:12 pm
by Justcurious
Hence the inquiry