| Author | |
Angela F
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 08 2005
Location: Iowa
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 497
|
| Posted: July 05 2006 at 5:37pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Hi Dawn and all,
Wonderful wisdom has been given here...and I don't have anything new to add, except that she was invited to our local HS conference this spring, and as Andrew Pudewa was the other speaker, I decided to go ahead and go. And I will say, it was a mistake for me to sit in on her talk.  I knew going in what it might be like, and it was that way; veerrry disturbing. I finally had to get up and go out.
I put on my suggestion form how discouraged I was as a "veteran" homeschooler (HA! My oldest is a 7th grader!) that this type of speaker was invited and was concerned for the new homeschoolers that might have attended and been led down such a path. Haven't heard back from them...
So let's all help our conference planners know what we'd like to hear and learn and let's pray for all concerned!
God bless,
Angela
__________________
Mom to 7 blessings - welcome to Hanna Clare 1/19/10
"‘Great’ holiness consists in carrying out the ‘little’ duties of each moment."
St. Josemaria Escriva
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Dawnie
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 30 2005
Location: Kansas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 841
|
| Posted: July 06 2006 at 4:29pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Okay, I finally got through the posts that Elizabeth gave me to read...whew...I've feel like I've been through an intellectual workout! I really learned a lot and am so thankful for the wisdom that has been shared here. Reading the thread on Divini Illius Magestri answered most of my concerns, but I still have a few lingering questions, to help me understand things better.
First of all, what is Modernism? MB spoke of it on her blog, and I've heard it mentioned before, but what is it?
When we are looking at an educational method, or a book, or whatever, what criteria do we use to evaluate whether or not it can be used? As I've been thinking about it, it seems that if something is not contrary to faith and not immoral, then it would be okay to use it. Are there other criteria to consider?
I think there's a big difference between something being anti-Catholic and non-Catholic. Margaret Sanger's ideas were anti-Catholic. She advocated totally immoral behavior. You can't "Catholicize" that. Most things that I would classify as "non-Catholic" are not contrary to faith or morality, they just lack the fullness of truth. They're incomplete. I think these things can be Catholicized by adding what is lacking. And isn't that what we're doing w/ CM's ideas?
Thanks so much for walking me through this!
Dawn
__________________
Mom to Mary Beth (99), Anna (02), Lucia (04), Clara (06), and Adelaide Victoria (2/28/09)
Visit my blog!Water Into Wine:Vino Per Tutto!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
kingvozzo
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Maine
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2653
|
| Posted: July 06 2006 at 4:42pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dawnie wrote:
When we are looking at an educational method, or a book, or whatever, what criteria do we use to evaluate whether or not it can be used? As I've been thinking about it, it seems that if something is not contrary to faith and not immoral, then it would be okay to use it. Are there other criteria to consider?
I think there's a big difference between something being anti-Catholic and non-Catholic. Margaret Sanger's ideas were anti-Catholic. She advocated totally immoral behavior. You can't "Catholicize" that. Most things that I would classify as "non-Catholic" are not contrary to faith or morality, they just lack the fullness of truth. They're incomplete. I think these things can be Catholicized by adding what is lacking. And isn't that what we're doing w/ CM's ideas?
|
|
|
I think that these are very important points. It is a terrible mistake, imho, and a disservice to ourselves and our children to completely ignore all things that are not explicity Catholic, or even Christian. The narrow focus of this particular writer is a source of upsetment and confusion for many who are genuinely trying to live the faith, but are unsure of themselves. She pops up again and again... 
__________________
Noreen
Wife to Ed
Mom to 4 great kids and 10 sweet ones in Our Lady's arms
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: July 10 2006 at 7:37am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dawnie wrote:
| First of all, what is Modernism? MB spoke of it on her blog, and I've heard it mentioned before, but what is it? |
|
|
That's a good question, and I'm sorry it got missed. before, but what is it? I'll share from Father Hardon's Modern Catholic Dictionary (which is an excellent resource to have, btw).
A theory about the origin and nature of Chrsitianity, first developed into a system by Geoge Tyrrel (1861-1909), Lucien Laberthonniere (1860-1932), and Alfred Loisy (1857-1940). According to Modernism, religion is essentially a matter of experience, personal and collective. There is no objective revelation from God to the human race, on which Christianity is finally based, nor any reasonable grounds for credibility in the Christian faith, based on miracles or the testimony of history. Faith, therefore, is uniquely from within. In fact it is part of human nature, "a kind of motion of the heart," hidden and unconscious. It is, in Modernist terms, a natural instinct belonging to the emotions, a "feeling for the divine" that cannot be expressed in words or docrinal propositions, an attitude of spirit that all people have naturally but that some are more aware of having. Modernism was condemned by Pope St. Pius X in two formal documents Lamentabili and Pascendi, both published 1907.
Also Catholic Encylopedia on Modernism
Modernism: Then and Now
Philip Trower has a series of articles on Modernism, Post Modernism and Neo Modernism. Follow the links for The Church Learned And The Revolt Of The Scholars, 1979.
What's interesting to me is that in reading Father Hardon's definition we can see that our age still faces these evils, but in different names. I think scholars call our problems neo-modernism, but I haven't studied this to confirm.
Clear as mud?
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to  & ds1  '03 & ds2  '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: July 10 2006 at 7:47am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh, I'll throw in the definition for neo-modernism since my own interest was piqued.
The movement attempts to reconcile modern science and philosophy at the expense of the integrity of the Catholic faith. It has its roots in the Modernism condemned by Pope St. Pius X. Like its predecessor, it rejects belief in the supernatural and considers the Church only a human society. Among the main features of Neo-Modernism are the denial of original sin, the claim that Christ was only a human person, and that dogmas of faith are only verbal formulations whose meaning substantially changes with the times. In Neo-Modernism, the philosophies of Hegel and Heidegger replace that of St. Thomas Aquinas, and faith is reduced to a purely subjective experience, apart from an objective divine revelation and independent of the Magisterium or teaching authority of the Church.
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to & ds1 '03 & ds2 '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
TracyQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1323
|
| Posted: July 10 2006 at 3:02pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dawnie wrote:
| I think there's a big difference between something being anti-Catholic and non-Catholic. Margaret Sanger's ideas were anti-Catholic. She advocated totally immoral behavior. You can't "Catholicize" that. Most things that I would classify as "non-Catholic" are not contrary to faith or morality, they just lack the fullness of truth. They're incomplete. I think these things can be Catholicized by adding what is lacking. And isn't that what we're doing w/ CM's ideas?Dawn |
|
|
This is exactly what I've been saying for years too, though not as eloquently as you have here!  I too have felt like a ping pong ball sometimes, being hit to and fro, going back and forth, questioning my gut feelings of what's best, wondering whether I'm doing the right thing by using the curriculum that best suits us, or by using Catholic only materials/curriculum because others have said it's the best thing, even though I know in my gut and heart that it isn't what's best for us. 
Sometimes people have strong opinions on this matter, (using only Catholic materials vs. making your own Catholic curriculum using many resources/methods), and through much time, prayer, discernment, and the wisdom of friends, etc., I've learned that it's not always the most "Catholic" resources that are the best. But sometimes it is. Choosing curriculum is usually not very easy. It takes prayer first, lots of research, and patience to listen to what God wants for our family, and His plan will show that what's best will be different for each unique family. That's why I chose a long time ago not to listen to anyone in the homeschool community, Catholic or not Catholic that says their way is the *only* way. I had to learn to do that the hard way.
If it's between a purely Catholic history text that's safe, and old, and reading a lot of wonderful living books, both read aloud, and read by my child, mixed in with projects, discussion, critical thinking, movies, internet research, stories about saints and heroes of our Faith, and the history of our church in that era, all put together by using a nice guide for me to follow to be able to put that all together, or something that includes these things but is already written, and definitely not anti-Catholic, I'm going to choose the latter every time.
What good is it to use an old, boring, uninteresting textbook for my son, who chokes on textbooks to begin with, just because it's *Catholic*? What will he retain from his history study by doing that, and how will he see the beauty and preciousness of our faith by forcing it down his throat while he chokes it up? If he learned best that way, and loved it, then that would be a good resource, but if it's not, no matter how *Catholic* it is, it's not the wise choice through our discernment process.
Or another example, Winston Grammar is a great grammar curriculum for my boys that really hit home with them, and helped them. I know it'll be even better for my very hands on daughter (or I suspect it will be). It has nothing to do with Catholic or not Catholic, it's just a really good grammar program. If we used the criteria of *only Catholic curriculum*, we'd have missed out completely on a really successful and good program that really helped us in that subject!
I don't choose our curriculum by how "Catholic" it is, but I choose our homeschool to be fully "Catholic by bringing our faith to the table in many varied wonderful ways, and using many resources, as most of us here do. 
GOD knows and loves our children most, and WE know and love them them next most. God gave them to us to parent, and trusts that we will do the best job we can because of His love for us, for them, and our love for them. Nobody can tell us otherwise, because we have the heart for our children.
This has been a wonderful discussion, and excellent to read today!!! Thanks for bringing it up. It's been a blessing to me. 
__________________
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 |
|
| |
Lynn in PA
Forum Newbie
Joined: Oct 24 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Aug 10 2006 at 4:49pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Chiming in late! Wow, an interesting discussion. Unfortunately, this very thing goes on within my own homeschool group. We just relocated. I've never seen anything like and I've been involved in three other groups. Too parochial for me! I love CM's ideas -- they are so life-giving!!! I've had similar discussions with my moral theolgion husband and he quickly reminds me that there exist this tendency within some Catholic cirles and to not stress about it. So I don't. Thankfully, you are not faced with this sort of thing locally. It is a little difficult.
God Bless,
Lynn in Pa
__________________
God Bless,
Lynn in PA
(Little people: Isaac 4/98, Brielle 5/00 and Josef 2/02)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aussieannie
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 21 2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7251
|
| Posted: Aug 10 2006 at 6:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I am just re-reading this thread, it was great to see it brought up. For those like myself who are new to it all, to understand what sort of 'opposition' I may encounter in the future from fellow Catholic homeschoolers, is important, so that I can express myself and my beliefs with confidence.
This discussion and the links have solidly cemented my belief that I will be giving my children the best that is Catholic in following this method. I see this 'method' as the skeleton or structure and my Catholic beliefs and expression of it in my teaching as the flesh that gives it life! So it can be as Catholic as I am, naturally.
The Catholic Church has such a solid history of catholicizing, what is not originally from itself. When you think about KiC and the likes, they sound SO much like some protestants (wouldn't that comparison make them mad  ) who go as far as condemning the Catholic Church because of it's catholicizing what has in the past, been pagan! ("They are secretly pagan because of this", the more radical protestants say, "therefore they must be those horrible things mentioned in Revelations!"  )
Even Our Lord chose carefully his 'backdrop' in giving the keys of the kingdom to Peter and the apostles their ministry. The area of Caesarea Philippi was a cultural and political center known for its pagan worship and they were at the foot of a mountain top that still had the remnants of a temple dedicated to Pan - now are you ready for this? - Pan is the Greek god who watches over shepherds and their flocks - we have the perfect model for what we do - for what the Church has always done!!!!
KiC should ponder all this - and if it wasn't for the fact the above is scripture they would likely condemn that scene for all it implies. Now, Charlotte Mason was no pagan either, what you ladies have done with her methods is marvelous, a continuation in the way the Church has always acted.
I was creeping and crawling down 'burnout valley' when I was directed to this forum. When you are at this stage, children suffer too,  due to what you are trying to acheive academically but you are just as fast unravelling the good example of virtue in the process, and the teaching of virtue (our Faith in action) is our primary task in education. I have now made enormous changes and already my whole life has changed, the children too!
It is funny, my first full day at CM style we acheived so much academically, but I also had a feeling of 'sweetness and light' in it all! In the past, my first day back at school (after holidays etc) was always a screaming failure and I always use to say, "Well, the devil doesn't want me to do it, does he?" It was my only explaination for it in the past. 
God bless you all and for defending yourselves with the examples and truth of the Church so eloquently from these attacks from our fellow Catholic brethern in Christ.  As someone said, we should just remember them in prayer and not let it bother us deeper than that - seeing it only as a reminder that another Hail Mary should be offered for them.
__________________
Under Her Starry Mantle
Spiritual Motherhood for Priests
Blessed with 3 boys & 3 girls!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennyMaine
Forum Pro
Joined: July 26 2005
Location: Maine
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 209
|
| Posted: Aug 12 2006 at 6:08am | IP Logged
|
|
|
"I was creeping and crawling down 'burnout valley' when I was directed to this forum. When you are at this stage, children suffer too, due to what you are trying to acheive academically but you are just as fast unravelling the good example of virtue in the process"
Oh, Anne, amen. This was so my experience when I used a certain academically rigorous program which was too much for the kids to handle. My children avoided me like the plague, even on days when we weren't doing lessons.
I sat them down this week and told them we could continue with said program, or do WinterPromise (and showed them those materials). Well, my daughter actually cried when I showed her some of the other programs items - she was so relieved when I said we'd do WinterPromise. I think the academic pressure was destroying her faith, and I hope this year it will be rekindled.
Jenny (Maine)
__________________
--JennyMaine, Mom to Catherine (17) and Sam (15) "The countenance is a reflection of the soul. You should always have a calm and serene countenance." -- Therese of Lisieux
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
ALmom
Forum All-Star
Joined: May 18 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3299
|
| Posted: Aug 12 2006 at 12:04pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This has been an interesting discussion. I do think the question about how to decide what is and what is not acceptable to use is a good one. I think the analogy between Sanger and CM is a good start. Sanger's assumptions and beliefs were so horribly flawed that even if she got an occassional thing right, her stuff wouldn't be worthy of looking at (not saying she got an occassional thing right) but even Hitler was correct in saying that Germany had been unfairly treated after WWI (actually very, very correct there)and many people identified with the truth of that statement. However, his assumptions behind everything he did left him with conclusions so hopelessly flawed that he was extremely dangerous. Now many people felt in their heart a sense of renewed hope and pride in Germany, they embraced Hitler's desire to restore the dignity of their nation that had been so trampled on and restore some economic stability by simply refusing to do the impossible (the war payments imposed by the victors of WWI were riduculously harsh)- they followed these feelings, latching on these truths without investigating further. Hitler was great at pulling at peoples emotions and spoke enough truth that his real agenda remained hidden from most for a long time (not necessarily because there wasn't anything out there to reveal it but because people failed to use their head). People, following feelings, instead of looking at his books, like Mein Kampf, gave Hitler enough votes putting him in the Reichtag with significant influence. He began his grab for power in a perfectly legal and legitimate way in the system - through election by a significant number of people. Then he held people in a grip by terror.
I do think one of the dangers of Modernism is that creeping sense of how something feels. As Catholics, we are to use our hearts AND our heads all in submission to the teaching authority of the church. So for instance, I will not give credence to philosophers of education that assume children are wonderful creatures and only need a rich environment - this does not take into consideration the innate woundedness of human nature and the fact of original sin and the fall. Now a rich environment, in itself is not a bad thing. We are told to contemplate the good, the beautiful the true. But, Baptism does not remove our disorderedness to sin and a rich environment by itself is insufficient. Without guidance, children are quite capable of following a wrong course, etc. Left to follow only what they "feel" like, they may end up choosing to be lazy, choosing to only do the fun and never what is needed but not as appealing, etc. It forms them in a way that isn't quite right. This doesn't mean I cannot try to make learning as enjoyable as possible, but sometimes I may need to insist on some discipline. Anyone who bases their philosophy of education on this premise of the "perfect child" has a flawed sense of the truth. (Waldorf schools come to my mind here where the troubled teens were given complete charge to rule themselves. It didn't matter if they cursed, etc., they simply had to be free to rule themselves. I don't care how successful the school may have appeared, this is disordered thinking and dangerous for me to implement. If it worked at all for these kids, then I can only assume that God somehow took pity on these kids and the disastrous influence of their confused elders. I should know better as a Christian and it would be presumptious on my part to think that God is going to prevent me from suffering the consequences from so flawed a choice of education).
I also don't put a lot of credence on the ideas of Rousseau that you send a child out into nature to absorb all this because he is basically good and as long as you remove him from the disordered adult world you will end up with a perfect child. That doesn't mean I don't think the study of nature is important - but why and how? A child is given to parents for the parents to form them - not send them into a commune with nature. Parents and children are both flawed, but God ordained it so that parents are given certain graces in the Sacrament of Matrimony to be able to guide their children - provided we listen to God in the teachings of the church and in prayer and the Sacramental life. This doesn't mean we don't go out into nature and do nature studies - but my purpose in this is very different from Rousseau's - I am not rejecting society at large, nor are we just communing with nature. We are observing and wondering at the beauty and order that God created. On the surface, they may appear to be the same - but there is a huge difference. Just as there is a huge difference between a secular environmentalist and someone who sees their responsibility as stewards of God's creation. One can masquerade as the other, we need to be sharp to recognize the wolf in sheeps clothing.
I remember taking a philosophy of education class and being totally shocked at the philosophies behind almost all of the educational philosophies we studied. As I recall, Montissori was the only one we read that sounded like she had any sense of the truth of human nature. We didn't read CM or Ignatius, strangely enough. Dewey was another flawed thinker, he believed that the whole purpose of education was to form the child to be a good citizen of the state - so what you taught depended on what the state needed. The child was basically the ward of the state. This is the philosophy underneath our public school systems and look where it has eventually led us. The traditional school model is actually based on Dewey and his understanding of the purpose of education is seriously flawed - it is actually very Communistic. You do not necessarily see the fruits of bad ideas in the first 10 years, but over time. Externally it might look a whole lot like Ignatian education - but in reality they are very different.
Neither will I embrace a philosophy based on operant conditioning (Pavlov's dog experiments), this totally disregards humans as made in the image and likeness of God and responds to a person as if they were an animal or a thing. Yet, does this rule out the use of repetition. I cannot think so - after all what is a virtue but a holy habit - something that is repeated until it becomes a part of nature through the combination of God's grace and your best effort. But in one case, we are human beings exercising free will to develop good habits, in another it might seem to work, but in the long run this philosophy has got to be destructive, destroying a sense of purpose and free will. Nor will I embrace philosophies that assume a child is an empty shell to be filled with whatever I deem important. This totally disregards the dignity of the person and that a human being (infant or otherwise) is made in the image and likeness of God. Truth is what we seek and God is the one source of this and has chosen to reveal its completeness in the fullness of the truth in the Catholic church. Can my understanding be imperfect, can someone outside this fold help me arrive at an understanding of what my church has always taught? I think so, but only if I am humbly obedient to the Catholic church in my attitude and deep in my heart.
Whatever I do in my school must be based on the solid understanding of human nature before and after the fall as described and defined by the church. Now how that looks in my school or yours, will certainly show unique features and there is plenty of breathing room. Montissori recognized that you must still guide the child - but wanted a gentler way. I don't know a whole lot about CM because I haven't researched her myself - but if I were attracted to her, I would look at her philosophy. As a protestant, did she view human beings as hopelessly mired in sin and sin only being covered up by redemption or did she knowingly or unknowingly rebel against this assumption? (From what I have heard on this board, she seemed to rebelling against that flawed understanding of the child and approaching a more Catholic understanding here - but I don't know enough to say). That would make a difference to me. How you respond to the child in your school and the assumptions that you bring with you has the potential to so twist what you propose. I do think it is important to weigh this, know this, etc. The most dangerous error is the error hidden in a bunch of truth because it goes unrecognized to influence us later without us really thinking it through. Ignatius certainly had a sense of using worthy books and a way of teaching in keeping with the church. Unlike the Renaissance thinkers, he had discernment in what he chose. He wasn't just embracing something because it was pagan - but because he discerned a truth, order and discipline that he saw as aiding the child AND he had the mental ability and training to discern this. His school looked significantly different from Maria Montissori's but they were reaching different groups of students. Montissori was reaching out to the most challenged and Ignatius was reaching out to the most gifted. We certainly have a precedent in the Saints, like St. Augustine in looking at pagan works and utilizing them. But he used great discernment in what he chose - he didn't embrace it just because it was ancient or pagan, but because he saw that the particular author was beginning to break out from the error of paganism and some assumptions were quite Christian even though the author was not - and he addressed the errors - where Aristotle failed to see the completeness of truth. Ancient civilizations are not all equal and equally worthy of in depth study. As Catholic Christians we do look at God's plan and how all this fits together. This must influence what I chose to use or discard. I must be careful when I do the same as these ancient and brilliant giants of the church - careful that I am humbly aware of my own limitations in seeing the truth and prayerful before God that He will guide me to the truth at all times because I too am flawed by original sin and my own personal sin and I must be humble enough to have that very depth of submission to the church. Even St. Therese of Avila showed great concern that her works were in keeping with the church and she took them to the office of the Inquisition to ask that they be reviewed before she ever submitted them for publication. She did not want to ever be responsible for leading anyone astray. The spirit of submission to the authority of the church was an attribute of all the great saints and should be our attitude as well.
If we use something based on assumptions coming from an incomplete or erroneous understanding then we do have an obligation to know where the philosophical differences are and find them in the work and be able to change what is done to be in keeping with the truth. How aware are we of the real differences, how astute are we at recognizing hidden assumptions, how flawed are the assumptions (if it is so flawed, it is simply too difficult to even benefit at all). We must be humbly aware of all this. Sometimes what we are doing when we read these other philosphies, it not so much following their method of education as recognizing something in it that was said by a Church Father, a saint educator, etc. and being reminded that this too is important. We do not have to be tied in strait jackets and afraid to breathe, think, study, learn. Neither are we to by like chaff in the wind, blown here and there by every new fad. We must be rooted in humility to the teachings of the Church and discern all things in light of these teachings in prayerful and humble submission to the teaching authority of the church - always humbly aware of our own limitations and our need of God and his church to guide us.
This is a very laymans attempt to wrestle with this. When I started homeschooling, there were almost no Catholic resources - most were out of print, and you could get poor copies of them from a few sources that had permission to copy them. Fr. Hardon came along and stressed the importance of Catholic identity, Catholic sources. We heard him speak and he was quite adament - "If Catholic support groups do not exist, then you create them. If Catholic texts and materials do not exist, you write them." I have clung to that over the years, sometimes in frustration of my own inability to accomplish what he envisioned for us as homeschoolers. I saw needs but did not have the talent or ability to be the one to write the book - so we did the best we could. I have experienced the lonliness, the suffering, the less than perfect materials, etc. I would rather have a good Catholic source that is imperfect as the overall guide, and flesh it out myself using discernment because I am very painfully aware of how easy it is to miss the insipient error of something. This doesn't mean I don't pull from wonderful sources, books, etc. or that I am frozen in a fearful posture. It simply means that I see it as more prudential and time saving for me to have a truely Catholic vision of what is and is not important to consider in the vast realms of information and even some expert Catholic commentary in areas like literature and history, science where so much that is not Catholic is seriously flawed. I have yet to see any really beautiful Catholic science texts (Behold and See is the first one I've really seen) - I am totally unqualified to write such a thing and not terribly much better at being sure I'd recognize the assumptions behind science to even begin to know how to discuss some things. I must rely on Catholic help here - the documents of the church on what must be believed in terms of the evolution debate are of course essential to all of us in our science education. I also rely on another Catholic provider (to highlight issues in the secular science text so that we do not fail to address them. Is this a perfect solution - of course not. If someone with a solid science background stepped forward and created a Catholic science that was accurate science and requiring less explanations of error, I'd be on it in a heartbeat, even if I had to dig up more hands on stuff, etc. or it didn't have as many enticing pictures. I need the guide - the teacher and student can access a rich environment of materials, activities, etc. to flesh out and do what needs to be done to make material come alive.
Perhaps this will help. I do not take seriously those in obvious opposition to the church and don't worry if I don't follow or use their stuff - even if some of it looks great. I do listen to the warnings of those that cry caution - but I do so with some realization that there are some that think anything developed after Pope Pius is by fact Modernistic. What makes something modernistic is the philosophy - not when it was developed. I have seen people label a thing as modernistic simply because it asked for the students to reflect upon the material (and perhaps they are seeing an external similiarity to the situational ethics classes that almost destroyed morality and religious orders at one time). If the philosophy behind a program is that there is no truth and it all depends and you have to get everyone's feelings on it - well yes, that is modernistic error (there is an encyclical called Against Modernism and it is worth reading). Does this mean you can never elicit a student's thoughts on something - well even St Ignatius asked the questions, led his students to ponder, then showed them the fallacy of their logic (mind you he obviously had a handle on the truth and that is a huge difference). Someone just looking at the surface of things might conclude that they were the same - the socratic method is modernistic. This isn't true. What is modernistic is when you never come to a conclusion. Take a historography course and ponder what it is that drives you nuts about a modern or post modern historian and it will be that you can never quite figure out what their point is. I always try to weigh the criticism - some things can be insipient and I know how easy it is to be led astray or how easy one thing masquerades as another. I think it is part of my obligation to be realistic - I can be duped. However, look at the whole picture - what is it specifically and sometimes it is the other person who is being duped by fear. God demands humility which is a realistic assessment of who we are before Him. I am certainly a weak creature, and I'd better remember that. I don't have to be afraid because God has given clear guidance in the Catholic church - I must follow this - this is my guide for discerning what is useful to me and what is not. Not every detail is spelled out in black and white and there I must humbly do the best I can with what is available to me at the moment and be prepared to change if the church speaks more directly on the matter. (Have you ever read books about miracles, etc. - and seen the authors caveat at the front - all things here attested to are humbly submitted to the final judegement of the church - ie if the church comes out and declares this to be a fraud then I fully admit from the start that there was something my weakness failed to perceive and I will immediately embrace the judgement of the church.) I think that we must look at what the church has already clearly said, judge based on this and then use our discretion in all other areas (prayer, prudential judgement, etc.) and be ready to drop something instantly if legitimate church authority states otherwise. I'm sure this is poorly stated but hope it helps some.
Janet
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Cay Gibson
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 16 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5193
|
| Posted: Aug 12 2006 at 12:23pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Finding Catholicism in everything around us is such an Ignatian school-of-thought. I can't see how anyone can possibly argue with that. KIC is really limiting themselves to God's graces and mercy through their way of thinking.
__________________
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 |
|
| |
folklaur
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2816
|
| Posted: March 25 2010 at 2:32pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Gosh, but there was a lot of wisdom in this thread.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Martha
Forum All-Star
Joined: Aug 25 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2291
|
| Posted: March 25 2010 at 3:13pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
There sure WAS, Laura. 
__________________
Martha
mama to 7 boys & 4 girls
Yes, they're all ours!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
lovemy4
Forum Newbie
Joined: July 29 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: April 22 2010 at 4:28pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I've been gone for a long time and came on today....wow....how the Holy Spirit moves. Two days ago a fellow HS became very negative when I mentioned CM. I had no idea Cm was 'anti-Catholic' and became stressed.... I am now relieved
Thank you all
__________________
Mom to 5! Four here, one with Him.
DS 6 DD 6 DS 4 DS 15 months
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CrunchyMom
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 03 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6385
|
| Posted: April 23 2010 at 7:04am | IP Logged
|
|
|
lovemy4 wrote:
I've been gone for a long time and came on today....wow....how the Holy Spirit moves. Two days ago a fellow HS became very negative when I mentioned CM. I had no idea Cm was 'anti-Catholic' and became stressed.... I am now relieved
Thank you all |
|
|
The archives here are a WEALTH of knowledge and wisdom, aren't they? This thread is great. I'm so glad you were able to have your concerns addressed in such a timely way!
__________________
Lindsay
Five Boys(6/04) (6/06) (9/08)(3/11),(7/13), and 1 girl (5/16)
My Symphony
[URL=http://mysymphonygarden.blogspot.com/]Lost in the Cosmos[/UR
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
drmommy
Forum Pro
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 394
|
| Posted: April 28 2010 at 9:38am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Arg! I haven't been on here in a while, and I just received the Keeping It Catholic vol I book. I have not opened it yet, and now I don't want to! I am so glad I read this first...thank you ladies! Esp since I use Christian Light Education for my special needs daughter, and it is working out BEAUTIFULLY for her! Well, I am usually careful about money, etc...but this was a waste ! Oh, well.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CrunchyMom
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 03 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6385
|
| Posted: April 28 2010 at 9:54am | IP Logged
|
|
|
drmommy wrote:
| Arg! I haven't been on here in a while, and I just received the Keeping It Catholic vol I book. I have not opened it yet, and now I don't want to! I am so glad I read this first...thank you ladies! Esp since I use Christian Light Education for my special needs daughter, and it is working out BEAUTIFULLY for her! Well, I am usually careful about money, etc...but this was a waste ! Oh, well. |
|
|
Not necessarily. Just because a source doesn't agree with us on all counts, it doesn't mean it is worthless. Her critique did provide the catalyst for those in this discussion to evaluate CM properly and assess whether or not it was indeed anti-Catholic. Sometimes being challenged forces us to understand ourselves better, even when we still come to the same conclusion.
Perhaps you won't agree with her conclusions, but that doesn't mean that the questions she's asking are invalid. It could still be a good resource for aiding your evaluation of resources.
All this said, I don't personally have the book, but I don't think that disagreement on this point discounts everything a person says.
__________________
Lindsay
Five Boys(6/04) (6/06) (9/08)(3/11),(7/13), and 1 girl (5/16)
My Symphony
[URL=http://mysymphonygarden.blogspot.com/]Lost in the Cosmos[/UR
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Living Learning
Topic: Is Charlotte Mason anti-Catholic?
