| Author | |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: July 16 2005 at 1:34pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
tovlo4801 wrote:
| I didn't get any impression in my quick skim that they even addressed real books or a preference of textbooks over them. It almost seemed to assume that a text would be the primary teaching tool and then laid out the requirements for that. Just my impression. |
|
|
I'm wondering if they mean "texts" in a generic way, in that any book used as the primary book to teach (be it a "real" book or a textbook) must conform to the requirements? Just a thought.
God bless,
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: July 16 2005 at 1:35pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
In case anyone is interested I found an on-line source for The Code of Cannon Law.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: July 16 2005 at 1:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
| I'm wondering if they mean "texts" in a generic way, in that any book used as the primary book to teach (be it a "real" book or a textbook) must conform to the requirements? Just a thought. |
|
|
I agree. I think this is probably right.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: July 16 2005 at 3:53pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
| Does anyone know if the Canon law posts show a preference for textbooks, if they are Catholic, over real books, if they are not specifically Catholic in a curriculum such as history or geography or do they apply to religious training only? |
|
|
I thought that one canon law quote referred specifically to textbooks for religion. Was there any reference to books of any type for any other subject?
I would be very surprised if canon law specified either textbooks or the use of Catholic books for other subjects, as in many parts of the world they simply aren't available. In the UK, the Catholic school system typically only ever used specifically Catholic books for religion, even in its heydey - there simply is no tradition of Catholic textbook publication here. Also, textbooks of the American type are very specifically American  .
__________________
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 16 2005 at 6:47pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
ALmom wrote:
I also think it is important to distinguish between the What (content) and How (methodology). Philosophies of education will impact both. CHC looks very much like what you CCM describe and it is approved but obviously based on the Catholic understanding of the child. CHC, unlike some things I have seen, is extremely careful about presenting wholesome content especially in the younger grades because they do understand that responsibility of baptism to preserve the baptismal innocence of the child despite our fallen nature.
Janet
|
|
|
Dear Janet,
What a lot to ponder! Thanks for such a meaty post. I am unfamiliar with CHC--though I have enjoyed paging through the catalog twice this summer. When you write that it is approved, what do you mean? Are the Lesson Plans approved? Do all the books they carry have an imprimatur? Is there some sort of seal of approval over the whole operation. To be honest, before yesterday, I never gave much thought to the necessity of a homeschool program being approved. And to echo Gwen, I'm a little leery of that since I know that what one orthodox priest might approve, another liberal priest would frown upon.Anyway, I just wondered what you meant when you said CHC was approved.
__________________
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 |
|
| |
Cay Gibson
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 16 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5193
|
| Posted: July 16 2005 at 7:54pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
ALmom wrote:
CHC looks very much like what you CCM describe...
|
|
|
I second Janet's opinion. I have always felt CHC was a VERY Catholic-CM program.  They focus on nature days, short lessons, hands-on Montessori approach, projects, etc. cushioned in the safe realms of Catholic teaching. CHC is safely traditional without any hint of liberalism.
Elizabeth wrote:
| I am unfamiliar with CHC--though I have enjoyed paging through the catalog twice this summer. |
|
|
Elizabeth, I can hardly believe that.  Louise and I have used CHC's materials for years and have often promoted it.
The 2nd grade lesson plans are stunning! I'll be using CHC this year (almost exclusively)...with a little salt of this and a little pepper of that added to the feast. 
I've talked with Theresa Johnson via email. Though I'm sure she gets several emails from hsers, she's always very gracious and humble and answers promptly and wholeheartedly.  This is a family who walks the walk and lives the faith.
__________________
Cay Gibson
"There are 49 states, then there is Louisiana." ~ Chef Emeril
wife to Mark '86
mom to 5
Cajun Cottage Under the Oaks
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: July 16 2005 at 8:04pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hey! There's a Cay I know! Welcome!
It's not that I haven't heard of CHC, it's just that I don't own any of their materials and so don't understand the stamp of approval. Approved by whom? The catalog is tempting but the extensive collection of books and materials I already own is taunting. I made a very solemn promise to buy no more.
__________________
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 |
|
| |
Cay Gibson
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 16 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5193
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 12:22am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| Hey! There's a Cay I know! Welcome! |
|
|
My dad always said that it would be a rare find to meet someone with the same name spelling as mine. He said it makes a person unique and that's why he did it to me.  It can also makes life very hard sometimes. His name is Ruel---how's that for toppers? I believe he was named after a baseball player. 
But I'm getting OT. Sorry.
I've scoured through the CHC lesson planners I have but can't find any stamp of approval. Fr. John Hardon and PJPII are quoted in the welcoming letter.
In the opening letter, Theresa Johnson also writes: "Schooling is more than book learning. HSing educates the whole person, all day long! Cultivate and appreciate the "real life" learning that is taking place within the family and throughout the day...Children learn by example---it isn't so much what we say that counts with our children, but what we do and howwe do it."
I haven't had time to check the CHC website but in the Q/A of the LPs they have written this (in brief):
What About Using secular or Christian materials in our HS?
"The idea that we can legitimately use secular or Protestant materials by simply telling our children that the book is wrong...seems at first glance to solve the problem of using non=Catholic texts. However, one cannot teach truth by simply pointing out error...Error must not only be refuted but the truth must also be taught in its place. That is the key problem with using Protestant or secular materials, and why we strongly advocate the use of Catholic materials whenever possible! When our Faith and salvation are at stake, is it enough to say that Luther was wrong? How does that teach and convince the child of the eternal truths of Holy Mother Church? He cannot learn them by osmosis...AS Christians we are called to be signs of contradiction. We are not called merely to avoid error but to live and teach Truth."
The script goes on concerning the Q "Why is it recommended to use Catholic materials over secular or Christian materials?" But I'm afriad I've quoted enough already.
I printed Janet's post out and absorbed it last night. It's a wonderful post! I'm wondering at the uncertainty of authority that Janet mentioned. Even our religious institutes are unsure of who to listen to---the Pope, the Bishops, the Pastor. Is it our fault if we are unsure whose authority to go with in our schooling?
What about the authority of the father in the home? God gave him that authority. If all families are different and our dc's learning styles are different and we must look elsewhere for adaptable educational tools to use with different dc, certainly we confer with our husbands and look down other avenues. And what if our dh has a suggestion other than what the school---the one that has the stamp of approval on it---suggests that we use. Whose authority do we go with then?
I'm afraid that if we look too deeply in getting a proper, bonified authority we might find that stamp of approval at the area Catholic school and not within our own homes. Does that sound rebellious?
Certainly each family, each situation, each child is different. Does God find us and lead us to heaven despite the authority of those around us? I read that Laura Ingalls Wilder acknowledged that everything she knew of God and heaven she learned from Pa's fiddle and the songs he played. Certainly her books, like C.S. Lewis' books, have led many people on a deeper walk with God. God didn't use a well-planned, approved curriculum. To reach her and let her know that He was God, he used something as simple as music and a loving family.
Is the path to Heaven so simple that we feel the need to complicate it?
Rita Munn gave a wonderful talk recently at a hs conference. She was speaking of how some parents anguish over where their dc are at---in mind, body and soul---at this very minute. And she told the audience that they are---despite the parental doubt---right where God intents for them to be at this point in their lives. Only He sees where the path will lead them. And it's a personal walk between them and their Lord. Very Ignatian in theory. Not that parents should stop leading them, but wherever they find their children, parents must remember that God has placed them there.
But I'm getting away from the topic of curriculum and church approval.
All of us are searching for---needing---the truth. But the larger picture won't be evident to our eyes until we are at the throne of God.
__________________
Cay Gibson
"There are 49 states, then there is Louisiana." ~ Chef Emeril
wife to Mark '86
mom to 5
Cajun Cottage Under the Oaks
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 3:07am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think there is an element of confusion here, in that as far as I'm aware the Church only lays down requirements for religious education. Don't imprimaturs or approval only applies to relgious texts? Here in the UK there is a national curriculum which all state schools, including Catholic ones (most Catholic schools here are state funded), have to follow. All texts, apart from those used for religion, are secular. As far as I'm aware the bishops' conference has no problem with this so long as Catholic schools have freedom within the religious sphere. In fact, UK schools make only very limited use of texts anyway and rely almost entirely on the teacher giving a lesson - for example, our 10yo neighbour has no textbooks or workbooks. If the Church specifically legislated against secular texts, or for an entirely Catholic curriculum across all subjects, then the UK bishops would not have been able to accept working within the National Curriculum. Similarly, if the Church legislated for the use of texts, Catholic schools here would have to teach in a very different way.
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06) (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
momwise
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 9:30am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kathryn UK wrote:
| I think there is an element of confusion here, in that as far as I'm aware the Church only lays down requirements for religious education. |
|
|
From #18: "... every form of instruction, no less than every human action, has a necessary connection with man's last end ..."
#23: "Again it is the inalienable right as well as the indispensable duty of the Church, to watch over the entire education of her children ... not merely in regard to the religious instruction there given, but in regard to every other branch of learning ..."
I would agree with Cay's quotes from CHC's material:
'However, one cannot teach truth by simply pointing out error...Error must not only be refuted but the truth must also be taught in its place. That is the key problem with using Protestant or secular materials, and why we strongly advocate the use of Catholic materials whenever possible! When our Faith and salvation are at stake, is it enough to say that Luther was wrong? How does that teach and convince the child of the eternal truths of Holy Mother Church? He cannot learn them by osmosis...AS Christians we are called to be signs of contradiction. We are not called merely to avoid error but to live and teach Truth.'
So in regard to library books and historical fiction, etc. (anything not explicity Catholic) used to supplement other subjects...they might not have to have a Catholic publisher but...they should be free from error?? Anyone concur with that?
With regards to the methods used by CCM, I think they fit beautifully with the family style of learning advocated not only by CHC (sorry I can't figure out how to go back and quote that part) in Cay's post. Still waiting to find out what Divini Illius Magistri has to say about methods.
__________________
Gwen...wife for 30 years, mom of 7, grandma of 3.....
"If you want equal justice for all and true freedom and lasting peace, then America, defend life." JPII
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
momwise
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 10:08am | IP Logged
|
|
|
ALmom wrote:
| The deeper questions are related to authority, its legitimate exercise and the submission required to legitimately exercised authority(even children are not required to obey parents in matters of sin because God's law is above all else and is the source of all legitimate authority. <snip> Somehow subsidiarity fits in here - all authority is under God, so his authority is first, then in different arenas, different authority is primary because of the more direct responsibility. The church is primary in the handing on and preserving of the content of faith as that is its mandate and it (not parents) are promised infallibility in determining questions of faith and morals - also in the liturgy. Parents would have primary responsibility for the teaching of children as they are the ones given the direct resoonsibility and grace to raise them. We are required to obey the legitimate authority of the state - but sometimes are obligated to "disobey" illegetimate and sinful orders. |
|
|
DIM addresses these almost exactly as you've outlined them. But I have been struck while reading that the Church in Her protective role, as guardian of moral truth, has sat silently by for so many years (the last 30 or so) as millions of Catholic children are educated by the civil authority in every kind of immoral error possible.
Add to that the fact that CCD for p.s. kids was actually feminist, moral revisionist theory and I can kind of see where many parents that went through that might have trouble recognizing and submitting to authority. Reading documents like this is a good and humbling experience for me, as is reflecting on posts like this.
__________________
Gwen...wife for 30 years, mom of 7, grandma of 3.....
"If you want equal justice for all and true freedom and lasting peace, then America, defend life." JPII
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 10:14am | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
DIM addresses these almost exactly as you've outlined them. But I have been struck while reading that the Church in Her protective role, as guardian of moral truth, has sat silently by for so many years (the last 30 or so) as millions of Catholic children are educated by the civil authority in every kind of immoral error possible.
Add to that the fact that CCD for p.s. kids was actually feminist, moral revisionist theory and I can kind of see where many parents that went through that might have trouble recognizing and submitting to authority. Reading documents like this is a good and humbling experience for me, as is reflecting on posts like this. |
|
|
Wow! so very true! And in many parishes CCD isn't only for the ps kids--all kids might be required to be subjected to such theory because pastors require CCd the year before and of sacraments, at least. So, our children might be subjected--talk about an authoirty quagmire! How much authority does the local pastor have? The local bishop? Can we overrule them in the name of orthodoxy?
__________________
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 |
|
| |
momwise
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 10:17am | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
| But I have been struck while reading that the Church in Her protective role, as guardian of moral truth, |
|
|
That should be: individuals in the Church, not The Church Herself, because obviously the Magesterium was teaching what was contained in it's own writings.
__________________
Gwen...wife for 30 years, mom of 7, grandma of 3.....
"If you want equal justice for all and true freedom and lasting peace, then America, defend life." JPII
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 10:56am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I finished reading the encyclical this weekend. Thankfully I got it done on Saturday because Sunday we spent the day fighting off an infestation of ants!
The discussion has veered toward whether it is acceptable to use non-Catholic books in our home schools. My impression is that this is not really the aim of the encyclical. Someone mentioned earlier that the aim was to address some countries that were forcing secular education on their populations. That matches up with the content.
Becuase the encyclical addresses the proper role of family, Church and civil society in education I think there is some rich material for thought on where the rights of family to educate are and also the strength of role Christian education should play in education. I agree that it is a beautiful document!
My impression after reading the document was that non-Catholic (or non-Christian) information was by no means outlawed. It acknowledged the value these things can offer. When the information is in opposition to Christian beliefs it also acknowledged that this can actually strengthen faith. However, it did caution that proper preparation must be made before tackling these materials.
I strongly believe in the value of exploring the world outside of Catholicism, but after reading the document I think that my error has been in lack of preparation. I've taken these things much too lightly and failed to consider properly the impact they can have.
My opinion now is that it is important that the bulk of material a child is exposed to matches up with the Catholic world-view. I don't think this necessarily means specifically Catholic materials either. I think it's important to remember that we share a great deal of what we believe with other Christians. I also strongly believe that it is critically important that children be exposed to materials that reflect other views as well. The key there is that they must be the minority of what they are exposed to and the teacher must be well-prepared beforehand to deal with the material.
I've read the comments posted here from CHC before and I think they minimize the importance of being exposed to other perspectives. I absolutely agree it's not enough to simply point out the falsehood, but also to teach the Truth. Yes, it is harder work to prepare for exposing children to other worldviews, but I don't believe we do our children a service by leading them to believe that there is only one perspective through the use of exclusively Catholic materials. I think that unfamiliarity with other can create an environment of fear that doesn't lend itself well to charity.
The thing I question as far as using materials that reflect different perspectives is am I qualified to be a well-prepared teacher of this? I don't think so. I need well-prepared help! Who out there is providing that help to homeschoolers? The only Catholic homeschool provider that I'm aware of that addresses materials from other perspectives and provides that good preparation for the parents in dealing with it is Kolbe. (I don't use Kolbe, but have been looking seriously at their materials and this is the impression I've gotten.) Are there any other Catholic providers that are providing that kind of help?
Just my thoughts on this question and by no means infallible.  I'm hoping to get back to discussing the encyclical tonight or tommorrow. It's my son's b-day today and we'll be busy celebrating!
p.s. BTW I don't mean to knock CHC. I actually am VERY impressed with their materials and am already using some of them. I'm just commenting on that one answer in their FAQ section.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 11:06am | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
Kathryn UK wrote:
| I think there is an element of confusion here, in that as far as I'm aware the Church only lays down requirements for religious education. |
|
|
From #18: "... every form of instruction, no less than every human action, has a necessary connection with man's last end ..."
#23: "Again it is the inalienable right as well as the indispensable duty of the Church, to watch over the entire education of her children ... not merely in regard to the religious instruction there given, but in regard to every other branch of learning ..."
|
|
|
I think I remember someone quoting a specific requirement regarding religious education earlier in this thread (I'm afraid I don't have time to go back and look for it). Isn't this talking about a more general supervisory role over Catholic schools rather than explicit authorisation of any particular books or syllabus?
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06) (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
materdei7
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 16 2005
Location: Washington
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 149
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 11:36am | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is a very interesting and deep topic. We live on an
island in the far Northwest part of Wa. St. and the closest catholic school is over an hour away...the closest catholic high school is closer to 90 mins away without traffic and weather. The tution is also out of our reach. We could just put our children into the ps, but, because we chose to pass on our faith, the freedom
to school at home is important to our family.
We school our children at home for the sacraments instead of sending them to the RE programs at the church.
The Bishop by Canon law must...(check out this article at Seton)
http://www.setonhome.org/resources/prechild.stm
......if the child is properly prepared by the parent administer the sacraments to the child. So NO! If the pastor has a touchy/feely/watered down RE program, we
do not have to be subject to it. Mind you, they will not hand you the sacraments without some heavy presecution, but,by canon law they must administer the sacraments to our children. Seton also sells some good support books: Homeschooling and the New Canon Law, and Responsibilities & Rights of Parents in Religious Education. They are about $3.00 apiece, and worth having on hand.
Also,I checked the inside cover of Setons catalog, they have a approval
of the Bishop of Arlington according to canon law #803.
(This is not an endorsement; we use little of their books)
Do you think that we as homeschoolers do not teach our faith as thoroughly to our children as those who attend a Catholic institution? What about the universities that
are supposedly Catholic in Name only? The current Catholic grade school in our area, does not teach relgion during the school day...so as not to offend the other non-catholic students that are attending the school for the academics. Instead the catholic students must come back ONE night a week for a special 1 hour RE class!!!! Or they can attend the church in their area's RE program.
The academics are more
important than the faith???? And 1 hour a week is enough?
The current soldiers of Christ may be our families......we need to pray, pray, pray for God's wisdom and graces. Pray for our Pope, and our Bishops
and priests, and all homeschooling families. God bless you all in your efforts, and may God reward you.
Blessings,
__________________
Kathleen, mother of five on earth, three in heaven.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Cay Gibson
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 16 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5193
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 11:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
tovlo4801 wrote:
My impression after reading the document was that non-Catholic (or non-Christian) information was by no means outlawed. It acknowledged the value these things can offer. When the information is in opposition to Christian beliefs it also acknowledged that this can actually strengthen faith. However, it did caution that proper preparation must be made before tackling these materials.
I strongly believe in the value of exploring the world outside of Catholicism, but after reading the document I think that my error has been in lack of preparation. |
|
|
We prepare (and educate)ourselves through forums such as these.
tovlo4801 wrote:
| I've read the comments posted here from CHC before and I think they minimize the importance of being exposed to other perspectives. |
|
|
I've also read that CHC's materials have been considered "light weight." I avoided using their material in the early days of our hs because I considered them too "faith-instructed" and no "real life instruction" about other aspects of life. You know...math, science, history.
Evidently others judged it to be this way as well. They addressed this in the Q/A section:
"Thanks be to God that CHC materials are "light"!
Light: 1. not heavy, or burdensome; 2. illuminating, not dark and dreary; 3. 'For all of you are children of the Light...' (1 Thess.5:5)
Those are exactly the qualities that CHC seeks to promote in its approach to hsing!
'Mother-friendly' materials are generally 'child-friendly' materials as well. Programs that make teaching difficult often make learning onerous, too. Thus, it is CHC's goal to provide materials that facilitate positive teaching and learning experiences."
There is more but that's enough quoting for now.
__________________
Cay Gibson
"There are 49 states, then there is Louisiana." ~ Chef Emeril
wife to Mark '86
mom to 5
Cajun Cottage Under the Oaks
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
TracyQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1323
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 2:50pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
tovlo4801 wrote:
| The thing I question as far as using materials that reflect different perspectives is am I qualified to be a well-prepared teacher of this? I don't think so. I need well-prepared help! Who out there is providing that help to homeschoolers? |
|
|
God is! I have said this to thousands of homeschoolers in my 10 years of homeschooling, and I believe it with all my heart. God NEVER calls us to do something, and then leaves us unequipped for that which He's called us! He is not a God that would call us to something SO important to His plan as to educate our children at home, then leave us without the knowledge, and ability to do it.
We gain our confidence from the TRUST and FAITH that we give to Him. He gives us the grace to be able to do as best we can what He's calling us to do, using us where we are in our knowledge of faith when we desire to give Him our full and total trust, faith, and obedience to Him.
The Holy Spirit was given to us in a special way at Confirmation. When we went forward to say YES to a more adult, and deep relationship with Jesus, we were telling Him we wanted our faith not only to grow, but to flourish. That Sacrament gives us the ability to hear Christ in all things through the Holy Spirit. It gives us the ability to hear His leading in our lives when we truly listen, and have the heart to hear what is His will for us in EVERYthing. He speaks to use in so many different ways. He uses a feeling in the quiet of contemplation, he uses a quote in a book, He uses someone with more wisdom than we have in speaking to us, He uses Scripture, He uses our beautiful men and women of Faith, He uses our Church, its writings, and the Catechism. He may use Charlie at the deli down the street. He uses anyone who is open to serving Him by using them to teach us in ways they may not ever even know. We just have to be still, and quiet enough to listen.
God knows who we are so intimately, and knows our heart like no other. So HE knows what we're capable of hearing and learning, and knowing, and HE knows our capabilities in making well informed, discerned decisions regarding our life, and the lives of those He entrusts to us. If we're lacking, He understands that, and will be sure to give us what we're lacking. HE loves us so much, He'd NEVER leave us abandoned to try to *figure it out* for ourselves.
We can't sit by and not study, or learn, or read, or try to understand. Those are all necessary to our gaining the virute of knowledge to be used in learning more about our precious Faith, and in making well informed, discerned decisions. But the primary virtues we must use and DESIRE to use are humility, faith, trust, and obedience through our desire to please and love Him only and always.
There are so many wonderful things out there in the world that He gives us to learn from! If a tree can give us information we're seeking to learn about trees, are we not to use it because it doesn't have a Catholic Imprimatur on it? Of course not! God, our Creator created us to use it to learn from, to eat from, to give us shelter, and provide to the air so we can breathe.
If the sea/river/pond/ocean/lake does not have the Catholic Church's *stamp of approval* on it, are we to not use it to learn from? Are we not to sketch it, or take water samples from it? Or are we not to look up information on the sea life from it because it does not have an Imprimatur? Of course not! God, our creator gave it to us as a gift to use to supply our needs of water and transportation, etc.
If my sister writes a poem from her heart about the beauty of God's creation, and she's a Methodist, and one who left the Catholic Church, but her actions and heart desire God's love always, shall I not use her poem for Narration or Copywork or Dictation because it does not have a Catholic Imprimatur on it, or because she's not in union with our precious Faith at this moment? What if the Lord used her nonetheless at THIS time to write something beautiful for His glory, and wanted to use it to help teach us something beautiful too?
If we saw a beautiful painting, and admired it, and saw a special beauty in it, must we find out whether the one who painted it was Catholic or not before deciding whether we should use it in our Picture Study? Should we not include it if they are not?
If there is a writing from an author that God inspired to be written, and what it says is the perfect quote for our literature study, shall we cast it aside, because the author is not Catholic, or the book *approved* even though the heart of the one who wrote it wrote it with the desire to obey God?
I know SO many people who are not in the Catholic Faith who have told me that the words of one of the most beautiful Catholic men on this earth inspired them, and made them a better, more loving christian. As He laid on His death bed, they called me, and told me they were praying for Him, and for me. They told me how much they loved Him, *even though I'm not Catholic*, they said. I'm so glad they didn't decide not to ever take notice or listen to our then Holy Father, Pope John Paul II because he was *not protestant*.
This discussion has been very fascinating to me. I don't feel well equipped to talk about the encylical, etc. I don't know all the Catholic Church teaches, and I doubt that I will on this side of heaven. I just plug along each day. If I waited until I knew it all until I made a decision, I wouldn't be able to make ANY decisions at all! I just know that the Lord uses little old me, *a simple, humble worker in His vineyard* to do a mighty work which is only done through Him.
The two verses that He's given me to cherish in my heart for this homeschooling journey, and for my entire journey of faith are these:
*I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength.* Phillipians 4:13
(It's only by HIS strength that I can do anything!)
And
*And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.* Phillipians 1:6
TRUST in the Holy Spirit's leading through Christ our Lord. He will lead you in everything, and will never leave you to do this alone!
__________________
Blessings and Peace,
Tracy Q.
wife of Marty for 20 years, mom of 3 wonderful children (1 homeschool graduate, 1 12th grader, and a 9th grader),
homeschooling in 15th year in Buffalo, NY
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ALmom
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3299
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 4:19pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth Foss,
Thank you for being so sharp and pointing at the error in my post. CHC does not have any approval per sey for their overall program. I was vaguely remembering an endorsement that I read on one of their books and went back to it. What I should have said was, that CHC has a strong committment to Catholic materials - writing their own if necessary and in areas of religion they use approved texts. In the 2 grade, they wrote a supplement which they submitted and recieved the approval to publish from a bishop. I think this is what is meant. I presume, based on the kind of person the CHC founder is that she has some sort of permission to use the name Catholic as part of a ministry of the church - this does not mean direct supervision of materials except those designed to teach religion. I should have confirmed this as there are those that do use the name Catholic without permission. Our cover school operates in a similar way - we were simply St. Peter's and our goal was to help families in meeting the state's requirements to homeschool. We did not use the name or word Catholic in the title of our school because that does require the diocese (Catholic's for a Free Choice does not have the permission to use Catholic in their title and the American Bishops have tried to make clear that they are not a Catholic entity but are ignored). We currently have a letter from our former Bishop stating that we are operating as a ministry of the diocese for purposes of fulfilling the legal requirements of the state. No one has ever reviewed the wide range of materials and methods used by members of our school. A local pastor was placed over the school in terms of seeing that the content of religious education was Catholic. As of yet, I am unaware of any problems. If someone were to try and force us to teach error, we could appeal through appropriate channels - local priest, bishop, all the way to Rome if necessary. I know people who don't even attend local parishes, but are registered but go to shrines and they have been able to get their children the sacraments (even Confirmation) through this appeal process. We, personally, have tried to take a more cooperative approach, but sometimes I struggle with the insideuos exposure to improper liturgy etc. It is the right of every Catholic to have the Catholic Mass according to the rubrics but every parish in the area does something goofy that is not allowed. No individual priest is allowed to change anything about the Mass outside of those choices allowed in the rubrics - but instead of the Lamb of God, we get things like Prince of Peace, You take away the sins of the world ...Sometimes a song is substituted for the Psalm. Other parishes have had women give the homily and more major abberations. At what point do you step forward and demand your rights? We try to make sure it is a really major issue - or something causing very serious harm. We try to assume equal confusion on the part of local priests, etc. If they are confused, as someone else mentioned, no wonder I am. Disobedience is causing grave harm and scandal in our church - we try to be obedient as best we understand it. But this must involve obedience to God first and this document at least outlines the principals for true obedience. If something comes up that seems in error, I try to search the documents from the church and act from there unless specifically confronted by the clergy. It is never easy - Fr. Hardon frequently said that only heroic Catholic families will survive. The other schools mentioned (Seton and Kolbe) are different. They operate a day school as well as provide support for homeschools. As such, they are set up as private Catholic schools in the diocese and hire teachers to teach. They must operate as any other Catholic private school and thus need the approval of the diocese in which they reside. There is some debate (I wish I could remember where the article was) about how Catholic homeschoolers fit into all of this as a very orthodox priest leveled criticisms towards homeschoolers very much like the woman's on this post and suggested that we were trying to duck or get out of requirements for obedience and were not being consistent (willing to criticize the PPX people but not willing to submit to authority ourselves). I remmeber how much this disturbed and confused me. I then saw a letter to the editor from (I think it was a canon lawyer) that explained homeschooling and replied and answered the criticisms to this to my satisfaction. Does anyone know where that was from - it would be a great supplement to this discussion.
There is some confusion about what needs the Imprimateur and what does not. Those things designed to teach religion or morals should have an imprimateur. I don't think the church gives imprimateurs in anything else - the job would be far too large and the church cannot be expert on science, etc, etc. It does not try to tell us what a good science program is - it simply has the right to point out error when error rears it's ugly head - ie the encyclical letter "Humani Generis".
We were somewhat familiar with the enclclical on the Education of Youth being discussed because of our wonderful administrator of our local cover school. It is required reading for anyone joining our school. I still agonize over particulars because there is such widespread abuse of authority and though I may have been born Catholic, I suffered through the years of terrible catechesis and almost left the faith - thinking Catholics were not Christians. No Protestants ever condemned any aspect of Catholicism in anything I ever attended and were a shining example in a sea of moral relativism. However, what they believed underlied what they did, the songs they sang, the books they had on their shelves for lending, etc. I have first hand experience in my person in how much these things mold us without us being aware of it. My thinking became so Protestant and I find myself struggling with this as any convert would. Authority is one of those areas of struggle stemming from both the abuse of authority and a protestant/American independent mindset. Perhaps that helps explain what I should have expressed more clearly as personal opinion about using only Catholic materials. CHC describes what I see as so important. We do not insulate our children, but we do form them in the materials We chose for them. In my early days of hs, I tried dilegently to stick to this and was inspired by Fr. Hardon. But we couldn't find any science, were disappointed by Catholic providers who used materials from A Beca and Bob Jones that are very anti-Catholic and have recently been worn down in the fight (note the post on support groups for teens, etc). By the time our oldest is in HS, we have been using a Protestant (Apologia) text for science and our dd is joining a few girls in a British Lit class (she will be the only Catholic). Rereading this document and the personal opinion of the woman from the other board, got me thinking again and wondering if we have been getting worn out and going in a direction that maybe isn't quite right. I want to do a lot more reflecting on that and this document is wonderful!
I found it significant that the encyclical was written in 1929. What were the issues being addressed at that time. Both Communism and Nazism had reared their ugly heads, Dewey was promoting an education without God, without teacher direction. Children were taken from their parents almost from birth and put in govt run centers/schools where the state philosophy was fed to them(an entire re-education took place that was truely aimed at destroying faith) Both Communism and Nazism had youth movements mimicing scouting but which was aimed at propaganda, and removing faith from the child. They was significant military training in both. When major errors show up, the church is quick to fulfill her duty in being the guardian of the truth. She did her job by pointing out the error.
I felt that the first several paragraphs of the document explained why the church had a right to speak in this area, even if the countries were not Christian countries, how all truths are connected in the one truth. As guardian of the truth, commisioned and given a mandate by Christ himself and the promise of infallibility, the church could not remain silent when faced with these philosophies which would undermine the very faith in her youth. As part of her call to evangelize, she could not ignore the danger even to non-Catholic youth. I would summarize this part of the document as
. the right of the church to speak out, identify and correct true and false ideas. Why people should listen to her in the first place.
. the right of the church to establish schools in support of parents and the state. (this would seem obvious to us in America where that right was assured in the Supreme Ct decision referenced in the encyclical - but alien to both Communism and Nazism which saw no role for religion whatsoever.
. missionary activity of the church is directed to the whole world and not confined to the baptised and religious. (Is this implying that separation of church and state as totally different spheres is an error? Sometimes I think that our seperation doctrine instead of just protecting the freedom of conscience in the true sense of the word has attempted to silence the voice of the church and the believer everywhere.)
I do not believe that the church was trying to set themselves up above the parent in the matter of education. They were pointing out the need to listen to the church when error is identified because as individual parents we are not granted the infallibility of the church. Also we need to rely on outside sources for support, because we cannot be experts in all fields of learning. The church sees herself as supporting both the parent and the state in their spheres and reminding them of the true final end of education which is God. Paragraph 35 is so strongly worded on the right of the father to teach his offspring because of the generation of life. Even earlier they speak of a just liberty in the pursuit of science. (Ie the church does not call herself an expert on science and does not call herself the judge of scientific merits of something - but she does guide the process in truth because of her function as guardian of the truth. Faith and Reason are not seperate areas and they are not opposed. All exercising their respective functions in truth results in harmony.)
It seems to me that the church tries to make sure she is not misunderstood by getting quite specific and direct in terms of the role of the parents (father). The rights of the church (in divine order) do not destroy the natural order -"each affording mutual aid to the other, and completing it in a manner proportioned to its respective nature and dignity."
In paragraph 30 "God directly communicates to the family, in the natural order, fecundity, which is the principle of life, and hence also the principle of education to life, together with authority, the principle of order. In paragraph 32, "The family therefore holds directly from the Creator the mission and hence the right to educate the offspring, a right inalienable because inseperably joined to the strict obligation, a right anterior to any right whatever of civil society and the State, and therefore inviolable on the part of any power on earth. In paragraph 32 gets even more specific and says that the duty to educate continues until the child is ready to provide for themselves. It refers to the Code of Canon Law in paragraph 34 and identifies that the parents are "under grave obligation to see to the religious and moral education of their children as well as to their physical and civic training, as far as they can, and moroever to provide for their temporal well-being.
Generally - the term grave moral obligation makes it a matter of mortal sin if we deliberately fail to fulfill our obligation. IMO if the church clearly states our obligation, then who can dictate where or how we fulfill it. The obligation is ours, the right to chose the means to fulfill must, in justice, be ours. It is an weighty obligation and in humility, I know we, the parents, cannot fulfill it alone. We have Sacramental graces but we also have the support and guidance of the Church so we don't fall into the errors of the day. (The bishops and pope are guardians of the truth so in obligation they must identify truth and error. We have the support of the State (if it is operating from proper principles) to help us in matters exceeding our abilities. Obviously at the time this was written, homeschooling didn't exist. IMO, it clearly supports homeschooling in principle. It is up to us, the parents to determine where we need outside support and to get it. It is the role of the church to provide outside support, identify error, and speak the truth clearly so that we can hear it. Society has interest in making sure there is some civic education, military education etc. The church seems to be cautioning about the abuse of the role of the State in education. HS in part is a response to the attitude that the school is there to form the child to the state and is no longer the community school, responsive to the direction of the parents. I have seen newspaper articles where parents protested because a pre-teen boy was required to pull his pants down for a female teacher so she could check for beating marks on the buttocks (without any charge against the family for abuse). It was clearly a traumatic situation for the family and the family took it to court. The court decision stated that parents hand their children over to the state during their time in school and the parents lost the suit. These are the kinds of things the church foresaw in 1929. As homeschoolers, we are fighting for our God-given rights to educate our children for eternity. Paragraph 35 confirms us in this - "It does not follow from this that the parent's right to educate their children is absolute and despotic; for it is necessarily subordinated to the last end and to natural and divine law, as Leo XIII declares in another memorable encyclical, where he sums up the rights and duties of parents: " " By nature parents have a right to the training of their children, but with this added duty that the education and instruction of the child be in accord with the end for which by God's blessing it was begotten. Therefore, it is the duty of the parents to make every effort to prevent any invasion of their rights in this matter, and to make absolutely sure the education of their children remain under their own control in keeping with their Christian duty, and above all to refuse to send them to those schools in which there is danger of imbibing the deadly poison of impiety."" IMO this clearly supports us in making our own decisions for our own children in terms of how we achieve this end. The idea of not being absolute - means that both the church and the state have an interest in education and can do what is needed to assure that true formation of children is not being neglected. This is not a right to dictate - but to step in when danger is there - ie the church will tell us where errors lie, will provide a means of support in the Catholic school system (ideally), must ascertain readiness for the Sacraments before granting them, etc. and the state can train the military for the defense of the nation, remove truely abused children from abusive homes. The church identifies when the state is exceeding her authority or promoting error. In the early days of homeschooling, we let our pastor know what we were doing, but didn't draw attention to ourselves. Those acting in good faith, might have had their doubts, but they respected the elements of this document and stood back to see what would happen. What they saw earned a great deal of respect for homeschooling. The bishop would make comments like he could be relaxed when questioning homeschoolers, they knew their faith. When the bishop decided that he wanted everyone to take the diocesan religion test, there was a discussion about whether or not they were going to use it to compare schools. The diocesan official said no and individual students would not be identified - but that if they did try and compile statistics they might be surprised by who would score the highest - the homeschoolers. Of course, we were a little fearful about what we would do if the bishop had ordered us to cease - my dh and I even discussed the possibility of moving to a different diocese. (We kind of laugh now at our fears, but perhaps they are real in some areas in light of the major scandals) We always feel the pull - our grave obligation to fulfill our duty concerning our children and the need for appropriate submission to rightful authority. Now I think I would appeal through channels. If Catholic schools are Catholic in name only through the negligent or accidental oversight of those responsible, then we, as parents, are obligated NOT to send our children there if it would be a danger to their piety. Our education cannot contradict "the doctrines of the Church"
Another paragraph that struck me was "For in this work the teacher, whether public or private, has no absolute right of his own, but only such as has been communicated to him by others. Child has a right to teaching in harmony with the teaching of the Church. This follows paragraph after paragraph insisting on the right of the parents to educate and choose the means. Does this refer to public and private teachers really being the delegates of the parents under the guidance of church doctrine? The document, imo, does not really address homeschooling teachers. There is a duality of roles here and education never ceases whether it is the formal or informal. What is the position of the church on this - I don't know. I don't think it has been totally defined - but maybe because the church sees no danger in parents educating their own, there has been no need to say anything specifically about homeschooling. The church doesn't take over the role of parents in parenting - but does give guidance. The reason would be the same for both. When it comes to a private Catholic school that provides a curriculum with teachers outside the home, in support of many parents, it seems to me it would be a reasonable expectation on the part of the parents that the school carrying the endorsement as a diocesan school would naturally be presumed by parents to provide an education not in contradiction to the doctrines of the faith (it says nothing about whether or not it is teaching these things in the best or most efficient way). The church would want to avoid misleading the parents by maintaining some sort of supervisory capacity. Perhaps at some point this may be done for all educational materials. I would assume this is the case for any school operating with the name Catholic. Of course, this is all in the ideal. We all know the supervisory role is very non-existent in most cases. RE classes employ any warm body to teach, even those not attending Mass on a regular basis. Bishops had discussed the major deficiencies in catechetical texts employed for the last 30 years at least that had imprimateurs but failed to teach the faith and were full of error (I was taught from these texts) and yet they remained in our diocese until very recently. The bottom line, it is our responsibility to our children which is primary. We must embrace that responsibility ourselves - not in isolation, not being overly suspicious of motives of everyone with whom we deal but not being blind either. This document gives us wonderful guides to discern. But also any document from the Vatican dealing with what is true and what is in error. We may be misunderstood by good people who emphasize the church's role in education and want to fix up the Catholic school system. Theirs is a noble goal - but education in the family is how it was from the beginning. Wealthy families hired tutors in certain areas to assure the temporal position of their offspring and St. Therese was schooled at home under her father's supervision and her sister's tutelage except for a few years. St. John Vianney was schooled at home because the church schools were closed (he was deficient in his ability to learn Latin because his parents did not have a formal education and could not teach this). He even recieved First Communion in their barn. The family had been continuing to go to the local church thinking it was still Catholic until they found out that the priest had taken the oath to the state which broke with the Church. Most priests in France, at the time, had to go underground because they refused to sign the oath and their lives were in danger. I find it comforting that this family was not lost because they spent a few years going to a non-Catholic church thinking it was Catholic. It was through no fault of their own that they made this mistake but the limited information and education - God found a way for them to be informed and they acted immediatly. If I make some mistakes because of the confusion of our times after diligently searching for answers (avoiding all temptation to complacency)and act in good faith, always trying to do the will of God and listen to the Church, then I have every reason to hope that God will honor my effort and give me the means to find out what I need to know in fulfilling my duties. I cling, at times, to these lives of the saints and their struggle. What about St. Thomas More who stood almost alone when everyone around him tried to convince him he should sign in order to be there for his family. Most clergy in Britain signed - Thomas More was accused of thinking he understood more than those around him (being arrogant). He responded that he did not know the conscience of anyone else - but in his conscience, he could not sign.
This is long and rambling enough and I've only gotten halfway through the document on this second go - round, so I'd better go now. I really enjoy reading the posts and thinking about the different things shared here.
Also, somewhere, I heard that the church was very concerned with the initial establishment of private schools in this country and that step was made with a caution to parents that they were the primary educators and still responsible for the education of their children even if they accepted the support of the private school. Does anyone else know anything about this - or where I might have heard this. I think this would also be related.
Also, I read about the index of forbidden books, which no longer exists. When regulations about fasting before Communion were relaxed, they came with an obligation to increase acts of charity as part of the preparation. I found this in an old Missal. I wondered whether something similiar might have been done when the Index of Forbidden Books went away. I was told that it was replaced with guidelines for the selection and reading of books. I have never been able to find these guidelines (I admit I am not the most astute searcher of documents and really appreciate how so many of you save me tons of time with your links to actual sites and sources - Thank You!!!). Has anyone else heard this or know where these guidelines are?
Janet
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: July 18 2005 at 6:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Tracy, as I was reading your post I felt like I was at the emotional height of a beautiful movie. That is exactly how I feel! I was smiling with tears by the time I ended it. Part of the reason I began homeschooling is that I see so much beauty everywhere around me and I desperately wanted to teach my children to see it too. I don't just see temporal beauty, but I see the beauty of God in ALL he created. I struggle to give voice to what concerns me, but I worry about a Catholic-only approach. Somehow it seems to deny the beauty in things that are not Catholic. It just seems to foster an attitude of closing our eyes on parts of the world that scare us. Jesus didn't do that. He sought out those who were struggling and embraced them. He loved the core of beauty and potential that was in each of them and that love drew out the beauty while driving out the sin.
I worry about condemning CM because she was not Catholic. I completely understand that the fullness of Truth is found in the Church God created. I completely understand that protestant faiths came about because of a denial of the fullness of that Truth. Yet, I generally do see the beauty in even that which is not perfect.
I see beauty in CM's approach to people, especially children. I think she saw the beauty around her the way you describe Tracy. I think she understood the beautiful core of people. That part of every person that instictively strives for God. I don't think she diminished the role of sin. I think she wanted to love people as Jesus did. Her philosophy seems to scream that she believed that they were capable of great love and deeds despite having to overcome sin. She advocates showing them repeatedly in story how to accomplish those things. I don't see how there could be evil in that?
Yet, as K mentioned I don't know every possible heresy out there. How can I be sure that I'm not just falling prey to a clever seduction that I'm not wise enough to ferret out?
When I talked in my previous post about needing to be prepared to teach material that might oppose our faith, this is what I was talking about. There is seductive evil out there. If we are not careful about what we expose our children to we could be causing our children to stumble. If we are going to allow our children to be exposed to the world outside the fullness of the Catholic faith (as I think we should), then we need to have some level of preparation in being able to ferret out and expose those seductive dangers. I'm not sure I'm up to that task. The cost if I'm not is awfully great. Yet I don't think the answer is just to avoid the task. There were some sections near the end of the encyclical that touched on this topic.
86. In such a school, in harmony with the Church and the Christian family, the various branches of secular learning will not enter into conflict with religious instruction to the manifest detriment of education. And if, when occasion arises, it be deemed necessary to have the students read authors propounding false doctrine, for the purpose of refuting it, this will be done after due preparation and with such an antidote of sound doctrine, that it will not only do no harm, but will an aid to the Christian formation of youth.
This section really summed up my change in perspective.
The following sections I think really support the argument that children should not be completely protected from the world around them, but taught to function in it as it truly is.
(The sections previous to those quoted below were talking about the vigilance needed in monitoring immoral books and cinema that can create a moral and religious shipwreck for inexperienced youth.)
92. This necessary vigilance does not demand that young people be removed from the society in which they must live and save their souls; but that today more than ever they should be forewarned and forearmed as Christians against the seductions and the errors of the world, which, as Holy Writ admonishes us, is all "concupiscence of the flesh, concupiscence of the eyes and pride of life." Let them be what Tertullian wrote of the first Christians, and what Christians of all times ought to be, "sharers in the possession of the world, not of its error."
95. For precisely this reason, Christian education takes in the whole aggregate of human life, physical and spiritual, intellectual and moral, individual, domestic and social, not with a view of reducing it in any way, but in order to elevate, regulate and perfect it, in accordance with the example and teaching of Christ.
97. The scope and aim of Christian education as here described, appears to the worldly as an abstraction, or rather as something that cannot be attained without the suppression or dwarfing of the natural faculties, and without a renunciation of the activities of the present life, and hence inimical to social life and temporal prosperity, and contrary to all progress in letters, arts and sciences, and all the other elements of civilization. To a like objection raised by the ignorance and the prejudice of even cultured pagans of a former day, and repeated with greater frequency and insistence in modern times, Tertullian has replied as follows: "We are not strangers to life. We are fully aware of the gratitude we owe to God, our Lord and Creator. We reject none of the fruits of His handiwork; we only abstain from their immoderate or unlawful use. We are living in the world with you; we do not shun your forum, your markets, your baths, your shops, your factories, your stables, your places of business and traffic. We take shop with you and we serve in your armies; we are farmers and merchants with you; we interchange skilled labor and display our works in public for your service. How we can seem unprofitable to you with whom we live and of whom we are, I know not."
And finally this section which I wrote "I LOVE this!!" beside.
98. The true Christian does not renounce the activities of this life, he does not stunt his natural faculties; but he develops and perfects them, by coordinating them with the supernatural. He thus ennobles what is merely natural in life and secures for it new strength in the material and temporal order, no less then in the spiritual and eternal.
Just some more things to think about.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
Forum Locked) 
4Real Forums : Living Learning
Topic: Divini Illius Magistri/real catholic educ
