| Author | |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 14 2005 at 8:39am | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Willa,
If people wanted to discuss my articles with me, they would have easily found my email links on every page. I know people look as I noted some months ago criticism of the site detailing the "Dressing with Dignity" plagiarims and its lack of email link as a cowardly act! As it stands, I have to date received ZERO emails from persons concerning my CCM articles but I have noted many instances of discussions on my articles. People are free to choose what they want to do: agree or disagree. However, I will not allow anyone to mislabel my Catholicism, as was done on this forum, which is the only reason I spoke up.
My position does not exclude the secular or natural. It does not reject the world, it merely encourages Catholics to view those things from within Catholicism, from a position within Truth, from our true base, rather than remaking a somewhat imperfect base elsewhere. Charlotte Mason did not formulate her methods based on Catholic teachings of parent/child relationships or Catholic dogmatic or theological understandings of the child and or family and as such, they can be counterproductive to a true Catholic lifestyle. There are countless sites that say CM is more than an educational method, it is a lifestyle. I find that rather dangerous given that CCM has not be reviewed by the Church to verify if its philosophies and methods are indeed compatible with Catholicism and true Catholic living. Saying it is okay to incorporate non-Catholic books into your curriculum is much different than adopting a lifestyle that was not formulated for Catholics.
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
momwise
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: July 14 2005 at 9:34am | IP Logged
|
|
|
KayMS wrote:
| Charlotte Mason did not formulate her methods based on Catholic teachings of parent/child relationships or Catholic dogmatic or theological understandings of the child and or family and as such, they can be counterproductive to a true Catholic lifestyle. |
|
|
Dear Kay,
It would be really helpful to me if you could site which Catholic teachings the methods are defying. If you would prefer not to discuss it on this board I'd be happy to PM or email. I have never, ever sought to do anything except God's will in regards to my family's life and education and I'm going to try to read and discern this encyclical openly. If you have specific examples it would be helpful.
KayMS wrote:
| There are countless sites that say CM is more than an educational method, it is a lifestyle. I find that rather dangerous given that CCM has not be reviewed by the Church to verify if its philosophies and methods are indeed compatible with Catholicism and true Catholic living. |
|
|
I didn't know the Church reviews and verifies individual educational methods. I would like to know more about this also.
KayMS wrote:
| Saying it is okay to incorporate non-Catholic books into your curriculum is much different than adopting a lifestyle that was not formulated for Catholics. |
|
|
I very much doubt many of us have adopted a non-Catholic or even CM lifestyle. We go to daily Mass, Adoration, and Confession. We permeate our days with the Liturgy of the Hours, the feasts, solemnities and Holy Days. We honor Sunday, the siants and our Blessed Mother. We read the Catechism, encyclicals and writings of the Church Fathers. We try to evangelize and use apologetics. We are open to life.
This is where I was sure a misundertanding was happening. The Church didn't take a pagan holiday and become pagan by honoring it. They made it wholly, completely Catholic by transforming it, as we are called to transform all things that have a portion of the Truth.
__________________
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 |
|
| |
cathhomeschool
Board Moderator
Texas Bluebonnets
Joined: Jan 26 2005
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7303
|
| Posted: July 14 2005 at 9:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Welcome, Kay! We are glad to have you on board and encourage you to add to the discussion and clarifiy your position should you see that we are misinterpreting you. Our intentions have never been to discuss things behind your (or anybody's) back, which is why this board and this forum are open to all.
KayMS wrote:
| However, I will not allow anyone to mislabel my Catholicism, as was done on this forum, which is the only reason I spoke up. |
|
|
I would like to clarify that nobody intended to offend you, and I don't think anybody "labeled" you either, just wondered as to where you might be coming from.
KayMS wrote:
| My position does not exclude the secular or natural. It does not reject the world, it merely encourages Catholics to view those things from within Catholicism, from a position within Truth, from our true base, rather than remaking a somewhat imperfect base elsewhere. |
|
|
Bravo! Then I believe that we are all on the same page, for we are all coming from a Catholic view. All of us here start with that Catholic base in Truth, and then add to it what we find to be useful and supportive from the world of the secular and natural.
KayMS wrote:
| Charlotte Mason did not formulate her methods based on Catholic teachings of parent/child relationships or Catholic dogmatic or theological understandings of the child and or family and as such, they can be counterproductive to a true Catholic lifestyle. |
|
|
Many have expressed your same opinion, yet I have never found anyone able to give a concrete example to support this position. Can you please provide one?
KayMS wrote:
| There are countless sites that say CM is more than an educational method, it is a lifestyle. I find that rather dangerous given that CCM has not be reviewed by the Church to verify if its philosophies and methods are indeed compatible with Catholicism and true Catholic living. Saying it is okay to incorporate non-Catholic books into your curriculum is much different than adopting a lifestyle that was not formulated for Catholics. |
|
|
It is ture that there is a huge difference between using non-Catholic books and adopting a certain method or lifestyle. My children are on swim team. This requires a particular teaching method (employed by the coaches) and a lifestyle (lived by our family -- daily practices and weekend meets that must be worked into our schedule). Many families are highly involved in a particular sport or musical instrument. To excel, certain methods and lifestyles (frequent practice, lessons, recitals, camps) must be established. Yet the church has not reviewed all of these possibilities to make sure that they are compatible with a Catholic life. Nor do they need to. We have been given the teachings of the Church in the Catechism, the Encyclicals, access to priests and bishops, and our own God-given intelligence with which to discern these things. It is true that Charlotte Mason was not formulated for Catholics. Neither was it formulated for Protestants. It was forumlated for teachers and students. The *lifestyle* of nature study, short lessons, living books, narration, training of habit, seeing the child as a person with a soul and not as a box to be filled is not tied to a particular religion nor is it anti-Catholic.
KayMS wrote:
| I see that it is fine in the eyes of Catholics to mimic the ideologies of a person who was anti-pope, exclusive of all that was Catholic, but it is narrow minded to be pro-Pope, exclusive of that which was against Catholicism. There is enough Truth in the Church for those who want to cloister themselves in it, exclusive of all else - in fact, all Truth is revealed through it - nothing else IS needed! |
|
|
I want to clarify something here, since I was the one who made the "narrow-minded" comment. You are absolutely misquoting me. I said, "those who say that following Charlotte Mason is anti-Catholic are either mis-informed or narrow-minded." I said nothing about being pro-Pope or anti-Pope. I said that throwing out (almost any) entire philosphy or curriculum as anti-Catholic is being either misinformed or narrow-minded. Big difference.
I agree that there is much Truth and beauty in the Church, but I am unaware of any curriculum or philosophy of education (short lessons, living books, and all that I've mentioned earlier) put out by Catholics that is similar to Charlotte Mason's. If there were, we faithful Catholics would not turn to Charlotte Mason's methods for ideas. Since there isn't (to my knowledge), we *do* turn to Charlotte Mason, but from within the structure and Truth of our Catholic faith.
If I am incorrect in any of my statements above or am misguided in any way, I would ask that you please clarify for me. As I said earlier, I have heard many Catholics condemn Charlotte Mason and her methods, yet I have not once seen any concrete proof as to what exactly is so anti-Catholic about applying her methods as stated above in this post.
__________________
Janette (4 boys - 22, 21, 15, 14)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cathhomeschool
Board Moderator
Texas Bluebonnets
Joined: Jan 26 2005
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7303
|
| Posted: July 14 2005 at 10:03am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Richelle, I do want to address your new post, just haven't finished my response yet!
__________________
Janette (4 boys - 22, 21, 15, 14)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 12:46am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I apologize to all the women (and men, if any) on the forum for my apparent abandonment of the topic at hand; I had to leave the house unexpectedly, was gone almost all day, and was not able to respond to any posts referenced to me earlier in the day. Additionally, I had great difficulty accessing the forum until recently.
The following does not seem to appear here any longer:
wjfr wrote:
| when you criticize a person very specifically as you did on your site, I believe it HAS to be a public matter and that means having your name out there in some sense. |
|
|
I would see how a personal criticism of a living person might need public mention of my name but not the criticism of a method or a deceased person. People have always been free to email any questions or concerns to me, links conveniently located on every page of my site, but no one has ever chosen to do so.
I will respond to the other posts as soon as I can; I am extremely busy at the moment and it may take some time.
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 1:13am | IP Logged
|
|
|
jenngm67 wrote:
| As I was the one questioning whether you were in line with the Pope, I will humbly apologize. I just found many links to sites that promote this way of thinking. (And where is the material on Benedict XVI you refer to? I couldn't find it. And I found no evidence of anything after Vatican II. |
|
|
The information I had on my site concerning the pope was removed about a week ago. It was only there temporarily giving notice and prayers for the passing of the past pope, prayers for the new pope, announcement of the new pope, links to sites on the pope and finally information about the papal shield.
At the moment, I am sorry to say I do not have time to scan my site to find if I have anything post Vatican II on it. My aim in life is not to reproduce what is found many other places on the web, but to provide information on those things not readily known or found on other Catholic home schooling sites, that is not to say, my site does not have any redundancies. Moreover, I am not ashamed to say I am a traditional Catholic and my love for tradition is reflected in my site. I would like to point out that one would have a likewise hard time finding links from my site to radical traditionalist sites.
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 3:41am | IP Logged
|
|
|
KayMS wrote:
| My position does not exclude the secular or natural. It does not reject the world, it merely encourages Catholics to view those things from within Catholicism, from a position within Truth, from our true base, rather than remaking a somewhat imperfect base elsewhere. |
|
|
In my experience this is exactly the thinking of Catholics who use CM methods. K, I think you misunderstand the way in which we approach Charlotte Mason's work. You seem to be under the impression that we take her method and philosophy and try (and fail?) to "Catholicise" it, somehow giving CM pre-eminence over Catholicism. The reality is the opposite. We all - or at least everyone in my experience - start from the basic premise of aiming to provide our children with the best Catholic education we can. We find in CM's method a useful means to that end. We use it only as far as it is compatible with a thoroughly Catholic education. If any aspects of CM's philosophy or method do not fit that overriding aim then we reject them. We view CM entirely from our position within Truth, and accept or reject her ideas accordingly.
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael,  Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06)  (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
theNetSmith
Forum Admin
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 838
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 8:56am | IP Logged
|
|
|
K wrote:
| Additionally, I had great difficulty accessing the forum until recently. |
|
|
sorry, everyone, but the site was inaccessible for a while last night...from this part of the country, anyway.
-T
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 9:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kathryn UK wrote:
| K, I think you misunderstand the way in which we approach Charlotte Mason's work. You seem to be under the impression that we take her method and philosophy and try (and fail?) to "Catholicise" it, somehow giving CM pre-eminence over Catholicism.... If any aspects of CM's philosophy or method do not fit that overriding aim then we reject them. We view CM entirely from our position within Truth, and accept or reject her ideas accordingly. |
|
|
A very holy traditional priest once told me when trying to decide between a non-Catholic and a Catholic source for schooling, What makes a lay person a doctrinal or theological expert on the thousands of heresies in the world and how are lay persons to be sure they have weeded out all the errors? Without some kind of assistance from the Church assuring us that the ideologies, philosophies, and pedagogies of CM (whose method was not merely secular but encompassed and incorporated into the understanding of our relationship in the world a vast array of Anglican theology) are unproblematic for a Catholic. A lay person cannot ever be sure that a subtle heresy has not slipped past our notice and been indoctrinated into our children. As it says in Divini Illius, "all this array of priceless educational treasures which We have barely touched upon, is so truly a property of the Church as to form her very substance, since she is the mystical body of Christ, the immaculate spouse of Christ, and consequently a most admirable mother and an incomparable and perfect teacher." I do not mean to be insulting to any of the developers of CCM but has anyone ever attempted to have the CM materials reviewed by a Church authority to discern where the program is safe and where it is not, where it is sufficient and where deficient, or to seek approval for a CCM method? Seton and Kolbe went to great effort to apply imprimaturs to their religious materials (or use books with imprimaturs) and are under the direction of their diocese as pertains to their pedagogical structure, ensuring families that they are in compliance with Rome - something everyone seemed quite anxious over on my site, but later seem to disregard as concerns CCM. I strongly recommend Catholic education with Catholic materials, especially those with Church approval while employing Catholic educational philophies, because of the stronger guarantee that what and how one teaches coincides with correct Catholic philosophies. Why does everyone want ME to prove how and where CCM is wrong when it should be those supporting CCM attempting to prove by submitting to Church authority that the CCM method is without problem? By whose authority do the supporters of CCM claim the program is "safe" for Catholics: a pastor, a diocese, the NCCB (or that of the UK given that you are not in the US), Rome? Have the developers of the CCM program submitted proposal for the program to an authority, as Seton and Kolbe have done, so that, in the best capacity available to Catholics, CCM (a program developed from a non-Catholic source) is shown to be an acceptable program for Catholics? What are the statistical results of CCM in a Catholic environment? Did any Catholics schools in CM's day employ this method? What were their results? Yes, parents are the primary educators of their children, but parents must discern the programs and methods they are using. The ball is in the CCM court, not mine. Divini Illius Magistri might not contain verbiage directly against CCM, which only indicates it "might" be used. Where is the authoritative proof that it "can" be used?
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 9:24am | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
| That's why Laura Berquist can use C.S. Lewis's book Mere Christianity to teach religious truth to 8th graders: because although Lewis refused throughout his life to place himself under the authority of the Pope, he wrote many things that were full of truth. |
|
|
There are canon laws which state that all materials that seek to teach or impart religious truths to our children MUST contain an imprimatur. Does C.S. Lewis' book have an imprimatur? Did Laura Berquist get a dispensation from this canon law to teach according to that design?
Can. 823 ß1 In order to safeguard the integrity of faith and morals, pastors of the Church have the duty and the right to ensure that in writings or in the use of the means of social communication there should be no ill effect on the faith and morals of Christ's faithful. They also have the duty and the right to demand that where writings of the faithful touch upon matters of faith and morals, these be submitted to their judgment. Moreover, they have the duty and the right to condemn writings which harm true faith or good morals.
Can. 827 ß1 Without prejudice to the provisions of can. 775 ß2, the publication of catechisms and other writings pertaining to catechetical formation, as well as their translations, requires the approval of the local Ordinary.
ß2 Books dealing with matters concerning sacred Scripture, theology, canon law, church history, or religious or moral subjects may not be used as textbooks on which the instruction is based, in elementary, intermediate or higher schools, unless they were published with the approbation of the competent ecclesiastical authority or were subsequently approved by that authority.
ß3 It is recommended that books dealing with the subjects mentioned in ß2, even though not used as basic textbooks, and any writings which specially concern religion or good morals, be submitted to the judgment of the local Ordinary.
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
momwise
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 10:02am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kay,
Were these Canon laws written for educators and pastors or for parents? I have never seen any mechanism within the Church for individual parents to have the Church approve their personal choices. I'm sure Laura has whatever approval she needs but there is a distinction between what she develops for others and what she teaches her own children. If I were to use Kolbe, I would expect them to comply with the Church's regulations for my safety.
I personally don't use protestant books anymore. I don't even use that many texts. I write my own curriculum for my own children, something the Church could not possibly moniter given the fact that thousands of parents are doing the same thing. This is especially true of the fact that so many parents have chosen to use real books in the place of texts (or in addition to texts), and there are literally millions of books to choose from.
Besides, the idea of the Church micromanaging each individual family's curriculum (those that are written by the parents) could be a double edged sword. Before my conversion I had no problem finding priests who counseled me to use birth control. In this day and age most families could find a priest to approve just about anything.
St. Bonaventure......Pray for us!!
__________________
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 |
|
| |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 10:41am | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
Kay,
Were these Canon laws written for educators and pastors or for parents? I have never seen any mechanism within the Church for individual parents to have the Church approve their personal choices. |
|
|
Those particular canons deal with publication of books and bind the faithful to which I am assuming Laura Berquist and Catholic parents belong. Whether it is Laura Berquist, Kolbe, Seton, or the parent who provides the educational instruction, this canon stands:
Can. 827, ß2 Books dealing with matters concerning sacred Scripture, theology, canon law, church history, or religious or moral subjects may not be used as textbooks on which the instruction is based, in elementary, intermediate or higher schools, unless they were published with the approbation of the competent ecclesiastical authority or were subsequently approved by that authority.
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 11:18am | IP Logged
|
|
|
momwise wrote:
Were these Canon laws written for educators and pastors or for parents? I have never seen any mechanism within the Church for individual parents to have the Church approve their personal choices. |
|
|
OK. I have to start out by saying I'm hesitant to get involved in this conversation because I'm SOOO way over my head, but here I go. We have the Code of Cannon Law here, so I looked up those sections. They are in the general section The Teaching Function of the Church. There are five subsections under this: The Ministry of the Divine Word (The preaching of the word of God & Catechetical instruction), The Missionary Action of the Church, Catholic Education (Schools, Catholic universities and other institutes of higher studies, Ecclesiastical universities and faculties), Instruments of Social Communication and Books in Particular, and The Profession of Faith.
The quotes from Kay are under the section Instruments of Social Communication and Books in Particular.
The thing I noted as I skimmed through these sections was that they refered to either specific catechisms or when they refered more generally to a broader category of religious materials they refered to "elementary, middle, or higher schools".
According to Can. 803
1. A Catholic school is understood as one which a competent ecclesiastical authority or a public ecclesiastical juridic person directs or which ecclesiastical authority recognizes as such through a written document.
Does this apply to homeschools? I understand Kay's point, but I also question whether this really applies to parents educating their children at home. I just didn't see anything in my quick review of this section of the Code that seemed to apply specifically to home educators. I haven't seen any indications that Church authorities are concerned that homeschoolers are using poor materials to educate their children. In the absence of specific Church teaching declaring what home educators are to do with their children, it seems that it truly is left (at least so far) to the discernment of the parents. Primarily the only objections I've heard to particular methods of Catholic home education have been from other faithful lay people. These opinions and interpretations of Church documents need to be considered seriously by Catholic home educators, but unless I'm mistaken, that doesn't preclude them from discerning after all is said and done that the approach they have chosen is still the best way for their children. I would certainly be obedient if the Church were to declare using CM methods unacceptable. I just haven't seen that yet.
I also haven't seen where the Church authorities have expected home educators to submit their plans for approval. Is this expected anywhere? Our parish priest has come over for meals on occasion and asked generally about what we are doing and we're happy to accomodate him, but he certainly has never indicated that we need to submit our complete education plan for his approval. Our particular parish does expect us to submit our specific catechesis plan for approval, which is consistent with the Cannon Code quoted. We have never been asked to submit our entire plan for approval though.
To the best of my knowledge most Catholic home educators who choose to incorporate CM into their education use some approved form of cathechism for specific catechesis. We've used Faith and Life, the Baltimore Catechism, and the Cathechism of the Catholic Church in our own home for specific catechesis.
I have to admit that I am no Cannon Law scholar. Kay, I'm wondering if you are essentially in the same boat as I am - a lay person reading the documents without specific training and trying to make sense of them as best you can? Do you have any specific training in understanding the intended meaning of these documents? I'm truly not being argumentative, but only trying to ascertain if you have a higher level of expertise with Church documents lending your opinion of their meaning more weight.
Thanks for all your insights here. You've really caused me to examine things more closely and that is always a good thing I think.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cathhomeschool
Board Moderator
Texas Bluebonnets
Joined: Jan 26 2005
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7303
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 11:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
KayMS wrote:
| Without some kind of assistance from the Church assuring us that the ideologies, philosophies, and pedagogies of CM (whose method was not merely secular but encompassed and incorporated into the understanding of our relationship in the world a vast array of Anglican theology) are unproblematic for a Catholic. |
|
|
I still hold that there is nothing anti-Catholic and nothing specifically Anglican about spending time outdoors with your children, focusing on nature study, short lessons, living books, etc. I no more need a theologian to tell me these things than I need one to tell me that it is alright to participate in the piano and swim lessons of my choice.
KayMS wrote:
| Why does everyone want ME to prove how and where CCM is wrong when it should be those supporting CCM attempting to prove by submitting to Church authority that the CCM method is without problem? |
|
|
Why do I ask you for proof? Because you are the one who claims it is necessary. You are the one trying to convince us that we may not use any teaching method or curriculum unless it has expressly received the seal of approval of the Church. Truly, we should all strive to live at all times and in all areas of our lives within the boundaries of our Catholic faith. Catholicism should permeate every aspect of our lives and beings. Why then are we not compelled and required to submit every decision and every action to a priest? I do not feel compelled to submit my decisions for swim team, piano, cub scouts or any number of other daily life decisions to the Church for approval, and I dare say that most others don't either. Why not? Because as parents we are given the graces necessary to make these decision for our families. And I wholeheartedly believe that in the absence of specific instruction from the Church (and there IS an absence of specific instruction), we are also given the graces necessary to make educational decisions for our families.
Canon 226 confirms the rights and responsibilities of parents as educators of their children, and binds us to ensure that that education is within the teachings of the Church:
Can. 226 §2 "Because they gave life to their children, parents have the most serious obligation and the right to educate them. It is therefore primarily the responsibility of christian parents to ensure the christian education of their children in accordance with the teaching of the Church."
Canon 1134 affirms that, as parents, we are given the graces necessary for the proper discernment of our children's needs (including educational ones), which are among the duties of our state in life.
Can. 1134 "From a valid marriage there arises between the spouses a bond which of its own nature is permanent and exclusive. Moreover, in christian marriage the spouses are by a special sacrament strengthened and, as it were, consecrated for the duties and the dignity of their state."
And then finally Canon 793 confirms that we have the right to choose whatever means of education for our children that we see fit to employ (so long as we remain within the teachings of the Church, as stated above).
Can. 793 "§1 Parents, and those who take their place, have both the obligation and the right to educate their children. Catholic parents have also the duty and the right to choose those means and institutes which, in their local circumstances, can best promote the catholic education of their children."
Nowhere are we bound to choose solely from materials that are expressly Catholic. While some feel that expressly Catholic materials are best, others (like myself) do not. Many, many Catholic materials are wonderful, and I employ these as much as possible, but many are dry and uninteresting. I do not find that I am any *less* Catholic, or that I am going against the teachings of my faith when I employ living books that are not contrary to my faith. I am not any *less* Catholic because I choose to pick from the ideas of an Anglican British woman -- ideas that are not contrary to my faith -- instead of going exclusively with a canned curriculum like Seton. I do not begrudge anyone's decision to choose Seton or Kolbe or anything else. Do you begrudge mine to go with a Catholic CM approach?
KayMS wrote:
| By whose authority do the supporters of CCM claim the program is "safe" for Catholics |
|
|
To my knowledge, none of us has claimed that our approach is either safe or unsafe. We have merely shared what has worked with our families, and have let others make their own decisions. I am not trying to push my philosophy or my educational goals on anyone. I have no vested interest in having others agree with me. I know the joy that is present in our homeschool, and that joy urges me to share our life with others.
You have said that you believe our approach is not the "best" way, and that is you right. You are bound to follow what you have discerned is best for your family. Likewise, we here are striving to do what we have discerned (or are discerning) is best for our families, and we believe we are doing what is best. That is also our duty and right. And the beauty of our Church is that She allows for these differences. She allows for a multitude of talents, learning styles and curriculum choices as long as we remain under Her umbrella. We here believe we are doing so.
__________________
Janette (4 boys - 22, 21, 15, 14)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
KayMS
Forum Rookie
Joined: July 14 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 12:55pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
No, I am not a canon lawyer.
The absence of mention of home schools does not exempt home schools from a law that does not precisely exclude it. That section of canon law deals with media and print matter in general as pertains to its publication and use, not solely material for "recognized schools." Canon 827 said nothing of schools (inclusive or exclusive or any kind), it referred to the proper use of published books as "textbooks" for instruction in strictly defined areas of study. Catholic home schoolers cannot say with finaly authority that they are exclusive of the law simply because canon law does not mention home schools. When parents put themselves in the position of Catholic educators of the elementary, middle and high school grades, they should act in reasonable parrallel to those who are in the strictly defined structures of Catholic educators of elementary, middle and high school grades.
Can. 17 Ecclesiastical laws are to be understood according to the proper meaning of the words considered in their text and context. If the meaning remains doubtful or obscure, there must be recourse to parallel places, if there be any, to the purpose and circumstances of the law, and to the mind of the legislator.
A Catholic home school parent acting as educator of the grades mentioned and for the subjects outlined should at least comply with the canon law requirement and use only those books that meet the canon law stipulation.
Of course, Catholic parents are free to choose their curriculum and no one is checking these things (yet). I find it rather ironic that a parent would hold a Catholic school to a provision that they exempt from their own Catholic school. If you would expect a recognized school to comply with canon law, why not yourself when you are acting as the school? How we chastise those who attend SSPX chapels for loopholing through canon law in order to do what they want rather than what the Church recommends!
Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum,
K.M.S.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cathhomeschool
Board Moderator
Texas Bluebonnets
Joined: Jan 26 2005
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7303
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 1:58pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
KayMS wrote:
| There are canon laws which state that all materials that seek to teach or impart religious truths to our children MUST contain an imprimatur. Does C.S. Lewis' book have an imprimatur? Did Laura Berquist get a dispensation from this canon law to teach according to that design? |
|
|
I believe there is some confusion here (or at the very least, I am confused!). The Canons Kay sited when she made the above statement (Canons 823 and 827) do deal with the publication and use of books. Canon 823 does state that Pastors "have the duty and the right to demand that where writings of the faithful touch upon matters of faith and morals, these be submitted to their judgement. Moreover, they have the duty and the right to condemn writings which harm true faith or good morals." C.S. Lewis was not attempting to publish a book within the confines of the Catholic faith when he published Mere Christianity. Logically, then, he was not interested in seeking the Church's approval before its publication. However, as far as I can tell, these Canons do not state that all writings used to teach or impart religious truths to our children must contain an imprimatur. The Canons state that the Church has the right to demand that these books be submitted for judgement, and that the Church has the duty to condemn writings contrary to the Faith. Has C.S. Lewis' book been condemned by the Church? If not, then I do not believe that Laura Berquist needs special dispensation in order to recommend or use it. Am I misunderstanding things? It does seem that somewhere there should be a statement that says we should use materials that contain an imprimatur to teach the Faith, yet I cannot find such a reference. Maybe I'm misinterpreting something or just not looking in the right place.
__________________
Janette (4 boys - 22, 21, 15, 14)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 2:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kay,
Just for clarification's sake: What exactly is the method to which you are referring? You mention CCM, but I've only seen those initials used to refer to a yahoogroup, which is just a discussion forum--certainly we don't need specific approval to sit around and talk about raising children. What CCM media and print matter do you find questionable? Usually, what we find in print on the internet is the hard work and gracious sharing of mothers for the benefit of other mothers, certainly nothing big and menacing.
so often, I think, we could avoid much strife within the Catholic homeschooling community if we would simply assume the best about each other, treat each other with graciousness, and discern what is best for our families with the help of people we trust. Skewering each other really serves the Enemy, doesn't it? I don't think anyone needs to protect her children from Laura Berquist. In fact, I find the idea preposterous. And since that is the only "book" named, I'm kind of wondering about this whole conversation.
I wrote a book about a Catholic homeschooling lifestyle. I did it because I thought it would be great to collect the cumulative wisdom from the CCM yahoo site into one place where inquiring moms could read at their leisure. I wanted the book to look and feel like a gift to mothers. And it does. It never occurred to me to seek an imprimatur. For me, it was something tangible and lovely I could hand to a mom with questions, thereby saving me countless hours on the phone or at the computer sharing what I'd learned and pointing people to other resources. Not once did I think that I needed an official stamp of approval on homespun advice given in kindness. And trust me, it has NOT been a money-making endeavor. I think I can speak for every homeschool author and every woman who has put countless hours into a free website full of advice in saying that I am offended by the acrimony in your posts.
__________________
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 |
|
| |
tovlo4801
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 28 2005
Location: Minnesota
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 2:02pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
KayMS wrote:
| No, I am not a canon lawyer. |
|
|
Oh Kay, I truly hope that I did not offend you. I was honestly just trying to guage your level of expertise as I thought about what you have to say. It sounds like you have a strong familiarity with Canon Law and Church documents so I wanted to make sure I was giving your opinions proper weight if you have in fact received special training in any way. Thanks for answering.
KayMS wrote:
| The absence of mention of home schools does not exempt home schools from a law that does not precisely exclude it. |
|
|
KayMS wrote:
Catholic home schoolers cannot say with finaly authority that they are exclusive of the law simply because canon law does not mention home schools. When parents put themselves in the position of Catholic educators of the elementary, middle and high school grades, they should act in reasonable parrallel to those who are in the strictly defined structures of Catholic educators of elementary, middle and high school grades.
Can. 17 Ecclesiastical laws are to be understood according to the proper meaning of the words considered in their text and context. If the meaning remains doubtful or obscure, there must be recourse to parallel places, if there be any, to the purpose and circumstances of the law, and to the mind of the legislator. |
|
|
If I were to make a radical change in the way I've discerned through prayer to implement the Catholic education of my children, I would want to be sure that it is for solid reasons. My reading of this section of Canon Law seems to indicate that it is directed at a different audience than home educators. As Janette pointed out there are other sections of Canon Law that indicate the duties and rights of parents to discern for their children. There are also Canon Law sections that speak to the graces that arise out of marriage to help a parent exercise those duties and rights. The role of a parent is different from that of a Catholic school. I guess it still seems reasonable to me that if that Code was directed at a different audience we wouldn't assume it necessarily applied to home educators as well. I'm not saying it doesn't, I'm just not seeing where it automatically does.
KayMS wrote:
| That section of canon law deals with media and print matter in general as pertains to its publication and use, not solely material for "recognized schools." Canon 827 said nothing of schools (inclusive or exclusive or any kind), it referred to the proper use of published books as "textbooks" for instruction in strictly defined areas of study. |
|
|
Actually Canon 827 does refer to schools. Section 1 mentions what catechisms and other writings pertaining to catechetical instruction require in order to be published. Section 2 refers to sacred scripture, theology, canon law, ecclesiastical history, and religious or moral disciplines. It specifically states that they must be approved in order to be used as texts in elementary, midde, or higher schools.
KayMS wrote:
| A Catholic home school parent acting as educator of the grades mentioned and for the subjects outlined should at least comply with the canon law requirement and use only those books that meet the canon law stipulation. |
|
|
As I mentioned I believe that most people do use approved books for catechesis.
Kay, you are clearly passionate about your position and I believe that you care for the parents on this forum and their children. I trust that you truly believe that our children will be better off eternally if we only accepted what you have to say. I am considering carefully what you have to say.
I don't believe I'm slipping through loopholes by considering CM education. I'm trying to read the information that you've quoted and consider it in context and in light of parallel resources. I truly do not see where a Catholic education that applies CM principles runs counter to anything the Church teaches as far as I know.
As best I can tell the canon law you've stated was directed at a different audience. If we take it in light of parallel resources, the circumstances of a parent home educating and a teacher in a Catholic school are quite different. Even if we accept the Canon as being equally directed at home educators (which I'm still quite uncertain about), it seems focused on specific catechesis materials. The home educators who use CM in their education (that I'm aware of) certainly seem to be using approved catechisms to teach the faith.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
cathhomeschool
Board Moderator
Texas Bluebonnets
Joined: Jan 26 2005
Location: Texas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7303
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 2:37pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
cathhomeschool wrote:
| Am I misunderstanding things? It does seem that somewhere there should be a statement that says we should use materials that contain an imprimatur to teach the Faith, yet I cannot find such a reference. Maybe I'm misinterpreting something or just not looking in the right place. |
|
|
Duh!  Have to laugh at myself... It is in Canon 827! It was mindboggling to me that it wouldn't be somewhere, yet I couldn't find it! Guess that's a pretty good demonstration of how many naps I've missed recently!
Anyway, Canon 827 does say that books dealing with sacred Sripture, theology, etc. may not be used as textbooks on which instruction is based in elementary, intermediate or higher schools unless they are approved by the Church. Still, we are not "schools" as such, and neither is Laura Berquist. And even if we did agree that we qualified as schools, Laura Berquist does not recommend Lewis' book be used "as a textbook on which the instruction is based." For instruction in our Faith, she recommends books from the Faith and Life Series and the Baltimore Catechism -- all with imprimaturs. This Canon doesn't state that schools cannot use books like Lewis', only that a book like Lewis' can't be used as the basic textbook for teaching catechism, etc. Make sense?
__________________
Janette (4 boys - 22, 21, 15, 14)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: July 15 2005 at 4:43pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
cathhomeschool wrote:
| And even if we did agree that we qualified as schools, Laura Berquist does not recommend Lewis' book be used "as a textbook on which the instruction is based." For instruction in our Faith, she recommends books from the Faith and Life Series and the Baltimore Catechism -- all with imprimaturs. This Canon doesn't state that schools cannot use books like Lewis', only that a book like Lewis' can't be used as the basic textbook for teaching catechism, etc. Make sense? |
|
|
It makes sense to me. And if Karen (Kay) looks at Mater Amabilis she will see the same thing. The core books recommended for religion are solidly Catholic and do contain an imprimatur. Beyond that all the books of a religious nature are Catholic so I fail to see the problem. The idea that there could be something wrong with nature notebooking or art or music study or any of the distinctives of a CM education is frankly puzzling to me. Charlotte Mason never claimed to have invented any of these things, she rediscovered them in an era where they had fell out of use. And she respected children in an era when they were very much disrespected. Truth be told I just don't see the point in going round this again with you Karen so I will leave it at that.
Elizabeth wrote:
| I think, we could avoid much strife within the Catholic homeschooling community if we would simply assume the best about each other, treat each other with graciousness, and discern what is best for our families with the help of people we trust. Skewering each other really serves the Enemy, doesn't it? |
|
|
Indeed. Well said Elizabeth.
BTW Karen, I have considered the idea of seeking my bishop's approval for the Mater Amabilis curriculum. I don't know that's it's necessary but I am going to ask him about it. As he was recently the rector of Mount Saint Mary's seminary (until he was appointed as our Bishop) I would assume he has quite a grasp on the various pedagogies and I would be interested to hear his thoughts. But he's a busy man so it could take some time.
God bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Living Learning
Topic: Divini Illius Magistri/real catholic educ
