Autonomy, rationality, and religious initiation: replies to Hand, Wareham, Gheaus, Lewin, and Clayton.

This article focuses on John Tillson's detailed reply to five commentators on his book *Children, Religion and the Ethics of Influence*, addressing key debates about parental rights, autonomy, religious initiation, rationality, and political morality in education. Tillson engages with Michael Hand's defense of parental religious upbringing, emphasizing the difficulty of revising integrated belief systems transmitted to children, and responds to Ruth Wareham's argument that autonomy demands broader limits on religious influence. He critiques Anca Gheaus' proposal for multiple religious initiations, questioning the epistemic value of participation in contradictory faiths for children. Addressing David Lewin, Tillson defends the objectivity of rational standards against cultural relativism, and in response to Matthew Clayton, he argues that children's interests in reliable knowledge and rationality can override adults' objections to educational content, framing knowledge as a public good essential for justice and well-being.