Possibly. It depends on the preacher, really. I’ve only been to a church service twice (both were CoE) but the priest’s sermons were about what was in the bible, what’s going on in the world, what this means/how we should act, etc. Now, that priest has his own view of reality, and he spoke from that view - as though it were true. That’s fine, and while it may be considered “passive” indoctrination (and so not entirely good) I wouldn’t say it was all that bad. The children in the church (and adults, of course) were exposed to the priest’s viewpoint more than they would if they hadn’t gone to church, that’s all. This is perfectly in line with christian “duty” (as Mr. Moto put it) to raise your children in that faith.
The problem starts when a parent (or priest) decides that their view of reality is not enough to get their children to believe; that the way they see the world, even though they themselves are certain of the influence of God, may not be enough evidence for the child. So (as in the example of the OP’s book) they “twist” their version of reality; they misrepresent and lie to the child to “bridge the gap” between the evidence they see and the evidence needed to convince the child. It’s not just wrong in my beliefs, as an agnostic, it is also for them, religious parents, in theirs. I would call this “active indoctrination” - it’s the difference between “I want my child to be raised in my faith, here’s the evidence for and against that faith, think on it yourself, I hope you choose rightly” and “I want my child to be raised in my faith, here’s all the good points about our faith, everyone else is evil, listen to me and your preacher only, you damn sure will choose rightly”.
