Mr. Williams was not only widely-read but totally undogmatic, teaching his son that there were many sides to every argument, and that it was necessary to understand the elements of reason in the other point of view as well as your own. Though a devout churchman, he encouraged Charles to appreciate the force of atheist rationalism and to admire such men as Voltaire and Tom Paine. Above all he insisted on accuracy, impressing on his son that one should never defend one's opinions by exaggeration or distortion of the facts. It was a remarkable education. It did not – which it perhaps might have done – encourage Charles to adopt an attitude of detachment. He learnt to be committed, in his case to Christianity; but he also learnt that the other side may have an equal force of argument. It was perhaps partly because of this that he never wavered from belief in God during his adolescence; or, to put it another way, his father had taught him to absorb doubt and disbelief into his beliefs.Now, Charles Williams may well not be who you want your children to grow up to be (not only because you may not want your children to turn out religious, but Williams' faith had some occult threads and personal life had some odd twists as well). What impressed me was the idea that Williams' father was interested in giving his son this broad education that included an exposure to opposing sets of ideas and beliefs.
For what it's worth, I was raised catholic, but always taught to think for myself and not follow the crowd. As I grew and started formulating my own beliefs in late adolescence, the reason kicked in and I saw what a crock the whole thing was.
This thread isn't quite the same question, but may offer you some insight anyway.
Good luck.
posted by chrisamiller at 9:28 AM on December 10, 2006