| Author | |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 11:06am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Nina Murphy wrote:
| The only thought I was throwing out there for discussion from us all, is: how do we know (based on Willa's excellent starting references) what IS worthy to parce and take good from and what should be wholeheartedly avoided so our hearts don't get confused? I know -I- must guard my own heart carefully and discern cautiously... and sometimes reject automatically----but that is just me knowing myself! |
|
|
Dear Nina,
That's how I took it. This thread is becoming a bit two-pronged. I don't know anything, but am interested, in how Catholics adapt Waldorf in their homes IF they do, and if they see problems, what those are. That's one prong. I know very little about it so am just mostly listening to that aspect.
The other prong is about how to discern, in general, and that's the part I came in on because of my original quote. That's the part you were interested in pursuing.
I too am interested in how to discern and how to charitably provide cautions for others in honesty. Are there not any general rules? But maybe that is a topic that belongs in its own thread?
There's also the very definite wisdom in your understanding that we have to fit our own actions to our own hearts. A booklet issued by Kolbe about reading literature makes that point.... that objective evil is different from what is subjectively worrisome for a particular person. My teens can watch some movies and read some books that my younger ones oughtn't to... just as an example. That doesn't mean the movies or books are BAD, just not suited to the maturity level of the little ones.
I've thought a lot about this general (not Waldorf-specific) principle because I want to raise children who can think and discern for themselves, RIGHTLY, in the light of Catholic principles. I do not mean "be their own Magisterium" but rather, be able and willing to think in a principled way and use Christian prudence.
Like, to use an example -- the Church does not forbid wine or alcohol, in fact celebrates its use in a proper way. Which leaves us the freedom and responsibility to use it properly or even give it up for reasons of penintence or subjectively-felt danger. But too many Protestant churches go beyond that and forbid or frown upon the use of any kind of drink at all, even in communion.
It is a difficult subject to post about without possible misundersatnding because to many of us "freedom" has come to mean "license". Perhaps the KIC founder is concerned about the possibility that freedom can be abused, and so thinks it is better to disallow freedom. But it is not so -- in fact, almost the opposite. Freedom increases responsibility. The Church gives us a large say in how our children are educated -- the primary say -- but in the context of society and Church, and with a HUGE responsibility attached. The freedom is BECAUSE of the responsibility. Like the parable of the talents -- to whom more is given, more is expected.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 11:29am | IP Logged
|
|
|
donnalynn wrote:
| I am perhaps being convinced that maybe the folks over at KIC could be right. (not really but it's a bit difficult not to see the similarities in approach and tone). |
|
|
Donna,
What similarities in approach and tone do you see between this board and KIC? I am asking because I can't see even one, even though I have been trying. I hope by asking I'm not diverting the thread hopelessly off course, but since you have said it twice, I am curious and surprised! It's a side issue but an interesting one.
As an outsider (ie knowing little about Waldorf) I can't quite see how your position differs from Lissa's as far as principles go. You both have done lots of research, and intend to use what's good about Waldorf and drop the rest. Others like Kim and Elizabeth sound quite a bit more wary of the whole package, but surely that is perfectly legitimate. They have well-thought-out views on it. Personally, I love to hear a range of honest substantial Catholic-informed opinions on a difficult subject-- which is why I visit this board instead of KIC's  The very process of working it out is beneficial, I believe.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Nina Murphy
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2006
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1546
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 11:41am | IP Logged
|
|
|
You said beautifully and perfectly what I was feebly trying to articulate, Willa. That's it exactly! 
Thanks for expounding, and as always: ELUCIDATING.
I love our exchanges of ideas and explorations together. It totally invigorates me for taking up this cross daily!  
Have a blessed weekend, sisters in Christ!
__________________
God bless,
~~Nina
mother of 9 on earth,
and 2 yet-to-be-met
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
stacykay
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 08 2006
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1858
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 5:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I am coming back late in the discussion. I was up last night with a sick one, and had time to look up some information on Waldorf. But then the day has been hectic, and I am just now getting to post.
Please understand I am just sharing information, fwiw.
I looked at many sites, including the catalogues, and found some really neat things.
I also looked at the Waldorf school sites, specificically the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America. Some of the things I read at this site were concerning.
Here is some of what stuck out, in the article which seemed to be addressing the teachers:
p. 25 "Do you see the festivals as a bridge b/t the earthly and the spiritual worlds with the human being as the link b/t them?
How do you attempt to realize this goal among yourselves as faculty? As community?
How are parents involved inthis work?
p. 28 "An openness to reckon with the unseen spiritual realities which live behind the physical world and developing the perceptivity to experience what this really is."
p.35 A willingness to reckon with karma as a factor in understanding why the child is this way....
...Do you take your children into your meditative life on a daily basis? (Speaking to teachers regarding their students.)
"Karma and reincarnation- how would one teach differently if human development were seen in the light of repeated earth lives?"
p. 54 "Influences in Historical Development- Inquiry into the influence of the Christ being on human evolution developing perspective on the activity of teh Christ being throughout history- in whatever culture and separate from "religious fact" can free the student from both the dogma of traditional religions.."
"the astral (the emotional/sensory soul forces) body of the teacher works on the etheric (the formative or growth forces) of the child."
the ego (the sense of self) of teh teacher works on the astral (the emotional/sensory soul forces) of the child."
"spirit man" was described as the attainment of a complete and pure form.
A book recommended by R. Steiner was "Theosophy."
While this document was long (over 100 pages,) and I wouldn't recommend a waldorf school to anyone after reading, it did prick my mind as to how much have I thought about the basis for our education (not much )- and not just are we doing CCM or classical, but more of a .. foundational belief that I want to bring into the education, such as Ignatian or .. well, more of a specific faith focus and what I want my children to attain. I mean, I always have wanted to make sure the boys understand the tenets of our faith, but I haven't really thought about it in long detail, such as I read about the Waldorf school and their incorporation of anthroposophy throughout all their teaching.
It gave me something to think about as I approach this upcoming school year.
I hope I haven't bored anyone with this lengthy post.
God Bless,
Stacy in MI
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Helen
Forum All-Star
Joined: Dec 03 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2826
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 6:29pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
donnalynn wrote:
I just typed a huge reply and lost it. Ugh.
No time to repeat now will try again maybe tomorrow - I am questioning the drain this has been on my time and energy.
|
|
|
Dear Donna,
One of my favorite sayings comes from the Carmelite tradition "All things are a grace."
I am glad to have come across this thread for the valuable information being exchanged. From my perspective, I see this discussion as an excellent use of time and a grace for many.
Once when I was speaking to a Carmelite nun, I told her of a bad experience I had. I thought I was looking very positively on the whole situation by saying "Well, this is a grace and mercy for others even if it is not for me." She told me "Oh no. Everything is a grace and mercy - for you as well."
__________________
Ave Maria!
Mom to 5 girls and 3 boys
Mary Vitamin & Castle of the Immaculate
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MacBeth
Forum All-Star
Probably at the beach...
Joined: Jan 27 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 6:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh, I am so late in jumping into this conversation.
My kids have been taking German lessons at a Waldorf school since 1996. While the German lessons are not affiliated with the Waldorf school, I have been in the building, spoken with the students and teachers, and gleaned quite a bit from the parents. Oh, and my nephew attended the school through 5th grade.
Before I start, I want to say that Waldorf, like Montessori, is a name put on a building. Up the street from me is a Montessori school run by a Reform Synagogue. The region and parents, as well as the philosophy, give a certain school a particular flavor. In our case, the school is in one of the most affluent neighborhoods in the country. The joke around here is that Waldorf is for rich *%&$#-up kids. And I always add, if you think homeschoolers are odd, visit the Waldorf School. 
That said, there is a lot going for the method. The school has the most amazing art program I have seen outside a vocational high school. The graduates all go to college (they graduate between 12 and 20 per year). The little ones have the same teacher for several years. I like that!
But...they do not actively teach children to read, and if a child has a problem, they simply tell him to go elsewhere. My nephew ended up repeating 5th grade as he could not read--remedied in 6 weeks!
And the class meeting  . I was speaking to a senior a few years ago who was in Libby's orchestra. She showed us her "meeting" text. It was an 800 page tome on transcendentalism. And this is where I have serious doubts about the whole Waldorf thing. Unlike CM, it is not just a method, compatible with Catholicism, albeit with curriculum modifications. If you remove the anthroposophy (SP??), transcendentalism, etc. from Waldorf, do you still have Waldorf? I believe that in the case of Steiner, you cannot have the method without the content. If you shed the content, you have something else--basically a small school.
Oh, and this was funny. One day while wandering through the halls, I came across a Waldorf book, with brochures from Waldorf Schools all over the world. The first one was Oak Meadow. I like Oak Meadow. I like fairies and pine cones and outdoors, etc. I love our Waldorf School, as it is the only school in the area where kids can climb trees in the school yard. There are fish and bunnies and lizards, and wonderful gardens. Nice!
So I guess my main point is that one cannot, in the case of Steiner, remove the philosophy without drastically changing the content, at least in the upper grades. Please feel free to disagree with me, and I am ready to be enlightened. And, I ask this quite seriously, can we modify CM, removing the Protestant philosophy and adding Catholic philosophy and still have CM? In this case, do we lose the philosophy when we change the content?
__________________
God Bless!
MacBeth in NY
Don's wife since '88; "Mom" to the Fab 4
Nature Study
MacBeth's Blog 
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
donnalynn
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 24 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 581
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 7:32pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Deleing content
Donna
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lissa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 748
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 10:30pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Quote:
I guess the similarities I see between this thread and KIC is that there you have someone who is absolutley convinced that CM is not appropriate for Catholics based on Charlotte Mason's ideas and those who influenced her ideas. Yet here are a group of ladies who are doing it and found a healthy way to educate their children.
But now some of those same ladies are saying the same thing about Waldorf. Why? What is the essential difference? I don't see Steiner as a pagan or intriniscally evil - terribly misguided, perhaps. But I haven't come across any ideas that have any particular power in and of themselves KWIM? |
|
|
Donna, this is where I'm confused. I understand that you object to my referencing Waldorf Critics, and obviously we disagree about their legitimacy. But even if we leave them out of the discussion altogether, other points have been made about the ways in which anthroposophy informs Waldorf methods--points based on actual Waldorf/Steiner writings and, in my case, on the experiences of real parents I know personally.
But the part I'm confused about is that no one really IS saying Waldorf must be completely and totally avoided by Catholics--I think Theresa's baby/bathwater analogy made it very clear that we're saying you CAN draw many beneficial elements from Waldorf methods. We've given lots of examples of this. It isn't a KIC situation at all, no total condemnation of all things tinged w/ Waldorf.
We have said, yes, that ANTHROPOSOPHY is not appropriate for Catholics. But I thought we were all acknowledging that anthro does not equal Waldorf--it *informs* it, and Catholics drawn to Waldorf ought therefore to educate themselves about its background in order to discern what is good and what is problematic. You have expressed agreement on that point, so it would seem that the only area of disagreement is over Waldorf Critics (unless I am misunderstanding something else?)--and that's why I'm confused about your KIC comparison and your statements above. I'll try again to express my point: I believe *Waldorf* can be adapted for use by Catholics. I believe anthroposophy contains beliefs which contradict Catholic doctrine.
I really am trying to express all this in the friendliest of tones...it would be so much easier in person. I'm trying hard to understand why there is so much misunderstanding! 
__________________
Lissa
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Angie Mc
Board Moderator
Joined: Jan 31 2005
Location: Arizona
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11400
|
| Posted: July 29 2006 at 11:36pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Donna and welcome.
donnalynn wrote:
But it also gets difficult to talk about Waldorf because I see a difference between talking about Waldorf Eduation in general and it's methods, how it's applied now in Waldorf schools in this country, and how it can be used in the homeschool environment. Biggest difference is that in the homeschool- as you all know -nothing gets to the children that doesn't go through me first.
|
|
|
Great points. This is what makes this thread so interesting and informative! I appreciate your efforts to be articulate about this subject and to share your experience.
donnalynn wrote:
I guess my defensiveness stems from using information from Waldorf Critics - I think it's fine to reject something based on what it is - like looking over the link Stacy posted and deciding that's not for you rather than basing one's decesion on misinformation (Waldorf Critics).
|
|
|
I found Waldorf Critics information interesting and worth throwing in the pot for discernment. Just knowing that there are Waldorf Critics is interesting. I also noted that no one here suggested Waldorf Critics be the only source of information on Waldorf.
donnalynn wrote:
I still have many friends who are invovled with Waldorf - and while I no longer have the desire to send my children to a Waldorf school - I don't want to see their work and their intentions misrepresented.
|
|
|
I also have friends involved with Waldorf and wouldn't want anything here to hurt them. I'm sure that the work and intentions of many of those in Waldorf are admirable yet it seems fair to connect their work and intentions with the founder of their educational philosophy.
donnalynn wrote:
| It was a surprise to me when I found myself back in Church two years ago.... So despite all the semi spiritual/cosmological writing of Steiner's I knew this was not what I wanted to teach my children. |
|
|
You are among friends, Donna! Many on this list have found themselves called back to the Church through mothering and home educating their children. We've come from many different directions to find ourselves together here .
donnalynn wrote:
| I started looking into Catholicism again and fell in love. . |
|
|
Oh yes!
donnalynn wrote:
| I realized how much I missed out on as a child and wanted to give this to my children. As I started to read more Catholic sources I saw alot that reminded me of many things in anthroposophy or perhaps I was interested my interest in anthroposophy was a naive way of wanting a different kind of Catholicsm. But now anthroposophy seemed like the shadow cast on the wall - and here was something so much more simple and beatiful! . |
|
|
I really understand what you are saying here. Isn't it cool how God calls us home? It is as if you were able to see truths (with a little t) then were called into the fullness of God's Truth (with a BIG T) through His Church. Cool and, well, BIG!
donnalynn wrote:
| But now some of those same ladies are saying the same thing about Waldorf. Why? What is the essential difference? I don't see Steiner as a pagan or intriniscally evil - terribly misguided, perhaps. But I haven't come across any ideas that have any particular power in and of themselves KWIM? . |
|
|
Many of the contributors here have given much food for thought about the whys involved here. Perhaps the "seeing" will come later...perhaps not...perhaps some of us will see differently as well. Either way, you might want to hang around, get to know us, and see what happens. When I first returned to the Church, then found this group of friends a few years later, I often didn't follow what they were talking about just because there was a lot for me to absorb...I had a lot of catching up to do (like many who weren't well formed as Catholics in their childhood.) Yet, I found them so credible, generous, thoughtful, kind, and sheesh...smart, that I soaked it up (especially the faith aspect because I, like you, had spent many previous years studying educational philosophy.) I've learned so much here (and through our CCM yahoogroup.) I've even learned that when we don't agree on particulars, its OK because we agree on so many essentials.
Wow...that was a long-winded way of saying "thanks for contributing, Donna" and "hope to see more of you here." Perhaps you could start another thread on some of the things you do that were originally Waldorf influenced (or other influenced) and that mesh well with a 4Real home education...nature study...unit studies...rabbit trails...short lessons...crafts (impaired here!)...music and art study...beauty...joy...
Love,
__________________
Angie Mc
Maimeo to Henry! Dave's wife, mom to Mrs. Devin+Michael Pope, Aiden 20,Ian 17,John Paul 11,Catherine (heaven 6/07)
About Me
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: July 30 2006 at 3:19am | IP Logged
|
|
|
MacBeth wrote:
| And, I ask this quite seriously, can we modify CM, removing the Protestant philosophy and adding Catholic philosophy and still have CM? In this case, do we lose the philosophy when we change the content? |
|
|
Wild generalisation - not much time! - but CM was Church of England, which is the only Church capable of having members who believe themselves thoroughly Catholic (as did CM's contemporary Chesterton), others who believe themselves throroughly Protestant and a whole gamut in between. You can't simply take CM's philosophy and say "Protestant" because Anglicans are rarely that simple. I've seen Protestants complain that CM is far too Catholic for "Christians" to use!
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael,  Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06)  (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: July 30 2006 at 5:07am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kathryn UK wrote:
MacBeth wrote:
| And, I ask this quite seriously, can we modify CM, removing the Protestant philosophy and adding Catholic philosophy and still have CM? In this case, do we lose the philosophy when we change the content? |
|
|
Wild generalisation - not much time! - but CM was Church of England, which is the only Church capable of having members who believe themselves thoroughly Catholic (as did CM's contemporary Chesterton), others who believe themselves throroughly Protestant and a whole gamut in between. You can't simply take CM's philosophy and say "Protestant" because Anglicans are rarely that simple. I've seen Protestants complain that CM is far too Catholic for "Christians" to use! |
|
|
This is a great point Kathryn and one that I think we've all sensed but rarely articulated.
And this:
Macbeth wrote:
| And the class meeting . I was speaking to a senior a few years ago who was in Libby's orchestra. She showed us her "meeting" text. It was an 800 page tome on transcendentalism. And this is where I have serious doubts about the whole Waldorf thing. Unlike CM, it is not just a method, compatible with Catholicism, albeit with curriculum modifications. If you remove the anthroposophy (SP??), transcendentalism, etc. from Waldorf, do you still have Waldorf? I believe that in the case of Steiner, you cannot have the method without the content. If you shed the content, you have something else--basically a small school. |
|
|
is what I meant when I said you can't Catholicize Waldorf. Then I gave a few links that show that I do take some things Waldorf (mostly art and toys) and embrace them in my home. I can love Stockmar art products--they are clean, beautifully made and very unlikely to bother sensitive children. I defnitely covet Dawn's tree blocks. I've sold dozens of books from my shelves in the past few weeks but Natural Childhood(a plethora of arts and crafts and homemade toys ideas), Family Festivals and Food, and All Year Round, remain resources from which I glean craft activities from time to time. There is a stack of blank lesson books purchased from a Waldorf supplier in my paper cabinet. Both my daughter and one of my sons recieved a Waldorf doll as their first baby dolls. And, before they discontinued the program, we were always part of the frequent buyer programs at both Hearthsong and Magic Cabin Dolls (both of whom seem to be moving from their Waldorf beginnings). I don't think that I have acted in a way that is close-minded at all. On the other hand, I've been very clear with people that I don't put any stock in the philosophy of anthroposophy, nor would I expose my children to a Waldorf education. I think it would be very very confusing. I can glean craft ideas from the books but Michaelmas in a Waldorf school and our family celebration of the Feast of the Archangels are very different. A comparsion might be interesting to an older teenager but I don't want the saints muddled up with gnomes and the trolls in the minds of my children.
I don't think that anyone at KIC has Charlotte Mason volumes on her shelf (unless it's to quote and bash), nor do I think the people at KIC use any element of CM in their households. Nor would KIC tolerate anyone defending or explaining CM on their forums. There have been many people here who have explained repeatedly that we are happy to embrace the beautiful of Waldorf-inspired art and play materials and the Waldorf-inspired outlook on playing in nature but that we cannot make Christian the philosophy.
Personally, I find the KIC comparison insulting. I encourage you to spend some more time here and on other threads. We're not like KIC at all.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Dawn
Forum All-Star
Joined: June 12 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3191
|
| Posted: July 30 2006 at 10:43am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Angie Mc wrote:
| Perhaps you could start another thread on some of the things you do that were originally Waldorf influenced (or other influenced) and that mesh well with a 4Real home education...nature study...unit studies...rabbit trails...short lessons...crafts (impaired here!)...music and art study...beauty...joy... |
|
|
I think that would be a great idea, Angie! I've been using Earthways (which I think was written by a Waldorf teacher) for a few years and it is filled with lovely crafts. Most of my handwork post came from my experience with "Waldorfy" craft books.
The other thing I liked about Waldorf besides the arts, handcrafts and respect for nature, was the aspect of rhythm in their classroom - the week had a rhythm to it and the children could depend on it - a little bit like what I proposed in my Artist at Work post.
As I've mentioned before, I do take some environmental elements from Waldorf. I would say it has exposed me - as a mother and home educator - to materials and activities that I think are beneficial to my family. While I don't think it is harmful to my faith to apply these Waldorf elements (materials and books, not underlying philosophy) to our home learning environment, I will say that I got a bit confused when I started looking around for homeschool support. The Waldorf homeschooling (yahoo) groups I joined were very nice, but I didn't click. I was looking for something more. No one was talking about anthroposophy (which is probably why I was surprised to learn of it later), but also no one was talking about faith, how to honor the liturgical year or how to pray with our children. Not that I would expect them to - it's just that I needed more of that in my life - my family's life and learning. I wrote a bit about this in this post.
Just my .02 cents.
__________________
Dawn, mum to 3 boys
By Sun and Candlelight
The Nature Corner
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Natalia
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1343
|
| Posted: July 30 2006 at 1:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Can somebody explain to me what aspects of Charlotte Mason's philosophy of education conflict with Catholic teaching? I have only read excerpts of her writings (besides books about her philosophy) and so far I haven't seen anything that contradicts Catholic teaching.
Just curious,
natalia
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Angie Mc
Board Moderator
Joined: Jan 31 2005
Location: Arizona
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11400
|
| Posted: July 30 2006 at 1:51pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| Personally, I find the KIC comparison insulting. I encourage you to spend some more time here and on other threads. We're not like KIC at all. |
|
|
Being perceived as using the same logic as KIC is, at minimum, different!
Natalia wrote:
Can somebody explain to me what aspects of Charlotte Mason's philosophy of education conflict with Catholic teaching? I have only read excerpts of her writings (besides books about her philosophy) and so far I haven't seen anything that contradicts Catholic teaching.
Just curious,
natalia |
|
|
Hopefully the above link, and the layers of additional links within will satisfy your curiosity, Natalia. If you have further questions, feel free to post them to the other thread, or start a new one...whichever is best for you.
Love,
__________________
Angie Mc
Maimeo to Henry! Dave's wife, mom to Mrs. Devin+Michael Pope, Aiden 20,Ian 17,John Paul 11,Catherine (heaven 6/07)
About Me
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
stefoodie
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 17 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8457
|
| Posted: July 30 2006 at 4:06pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Just wanted to add that you can't even discuss things with the KIC people openly. On their mailing list of which I was a member when I was still discerning the path our homeshcooling was going to take, all our posts were moderated. Two of my posts asking specific questions about why they were so against CM weren't sent to the group; so only pro-KIC or anti-CM go through, and no archives either so you can't refer to previous discussions. Contrast that to the way things are run here, where posters are usually 1000x more charitable and open.
I was also e-mailed privately both by MB and another member cautioning me against falling in with the wrong crowd, etc. Yikes! Even on MB's blog you can't comment without moderation. All the other Catholic blogs I visit -- homeschooling and otherwise -- welcome and appreciate discussion of their posts.
__________________
stef
mom to five
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
donnalynn
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 24 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 581
|
| Posted: July 31 2006 at 9:27am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I am deleting the content of all my posts from the point where I felt things went awry.
I am sorry I have offended.
God bless everyone's upcoming homeschooling year!
Donna
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: July 31 2006 at 10:38am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Donna,
It was not a flip statement. Actually, I took a good bit of time to write a considered response. I am genuinely very careful to make sure that God, saints, and angels--who cannot be seen--are very different from fairies, Santa Claus, trolls and gnomes--who also cannot be seen. Young children have vivid imaginations and I have personally observed children who are confused about what's real and what's not. When we blur the liturgical celebrations with secular or pagan symbols or rituals, we run the risk of such confusion. I'd rather not do that. In my home, fairy tales are clearly presented as fairy tales and they are imagined, played, even re-enacted entirely apart from liturgical feasts.
I'm sorry you do not feel welcome here. I can't imagine a kinder response than the one you received from these ladies after you declared that "It takes all my strength and Christ's good grace not to leave in total and utter disgust." It's not pleasant to be told that you are disgusting and then to return again and try to have a kind conversation. But we all assumed the best of you and I do think that the answers here have been very gentle.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
alicegunther
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1992
|
| Posted: July 31 2006 at 11:11am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| I am genuinely very careful to make sure that God, saints, and angels--who cannot be seen--are very different from fairies, Santa Claus, trolls and gnomes--who also cannot be seen. Young children have vivid imaginations and I have personally observed children who are confused about what's real and what's not. |
|
|
I have encountered this in our home as well, Elizabeth. My four year old son is the type of child who thinks deeply and asks many questions. For a while he seemed confused and even skeptical of the existence of angels because he equated them with fairies. I would tell him his guardian angel was true and real and always at his side, and he would look at me blankly and then say, "That's just pretend, Mommy." Luckily, I was able to help him sort things out in his mind, and now he is quite devoted to his angel, but I know exactly what you mean about "children who are confused about what's real and what's not."
donnalynn wrote:
| It's hard to stick around and accept Elizabeth's invitation when she follows that up with a flip statement about gnomes and Michaelmas. I just can't participate in this any longer. I pretty much feel misunderstood and would certainly not feel comfortable participating on these boards again let alone speaking anymore about Waldorf! |
|
|
Donna Lynn, it pains me deeply to read this slight toward Elizabeth, and I thought you should know.
__________________
Love, Alice
mother of seven!
 
Cottage Blessings
Brew yourself a cup of tea, and come for a visit!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: July 31 2006 at 12:56pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I've been asked how I came to teach in a Waldorf school. I was assigned there as a student teacher one semester while in the education school at the University of Virginia. My supervising teacher thought it would be a good fit because I had an intense interest in early childhood education and creative arts. It was a good fit. I learned a lot, broadened my horizons and better refined my own personal philosophy of educaton.Sometimes knowing what you don't want helps you to better define what you do want. (I also discovered the Hearthsong catalog there, then a little black and white gem--but my dh might argue that that discovery wasn't an entirely good thing ).
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Living Learning
Topic: Oak Meadow? (
Topic Closed)
