Science (and history and other subjects) require that you prove stuff, so if you're trying to make sense of religion in the context of science, you have to include the idea of proving stuff.
Then Val, she would never pass her quizzes at church...
(I hope I'm matching up Wren's response to the right remark?)
I think Val meant - and I certainly mean - that you can't, or at the very least shouldn't, brush the fact that religion is not offering proof under the carpet. Religion is different from other subjects she encounters, in that everywhere else, she is expected to use her intelligence, spot contradictions, ask searching questions, analyse, and think; in her religious classes, she is required not to do those things, or she will as you say fail her test. She needs to understand that these are different domains - when people give her the message that she is supposed to keep quiet about these contradictions, they don't mean to imply that she should mistrust her intellect in general, only that she is to leave it at the door of her religion classes. You don't want to end up with her feeling vaguely uneasy about the consequences of questioning adults, and concluding that she is supposed to keep quiet about it if her piano teacher or her history teacher tell her things that seem to be contradictory.
Alternatively, you could just encourage her to use her intellect everywhere, and see what happens, but she might indeed fail her test, or refuse to take it.
