| CM SERIES HOME | CONCISE SUMMARIES | PARAPHRASED IN MODERN ENGLISH |
Charlotte Mason in Modern English
Charlotte Mason's ideas are too important not to be understood and implemented in the 21st century, but her Victorian style of writing sometimes prevents parents from attempting to read her books. This is an imperfect attempt to make Charlotte's words accessible to modern parents. You may read these, print them out, share them freely--but they are copyrighted to me, so please don't post or publish them without asking.
~L. N. Laurio
Preface
to the 'Home Education' Series
The future of education both in England and overseas is vague and
depressing. We hear various urgent pleas--science should be the focus
of education, we need to reform the way we teach foreign language or
math, we should incorporate more crafts and nature study to train the
eye and hand, students need to learn how to write English and must
therefore be familiar with history and literature. And on the other
hand, we're being pressured to make education more vocational and
utilitarian. But there's no coherent principle, no real aim. There's no
philosophy of education. A stream can't rise any higher than the lake
it flows from. In the same way, no educational work can rise above the
thought and purpose behind it. Maybe this is the reason for all the
failures and disappointments of our educational system.
Those of us who have spent many years researching the gentle, elusive
vision of education have come to understand that various approaches
have a law behind them, but we haven't yet discovered what it is. We
can make out a dim outline of it, but that's it. We know that it's
all-encompassing. There's no part of a child's home life or school work
that isn't affected by that law. It's illuminating. It shows the value
(or worthlessness) of all the thousands of various educational systems
and programs. It isn't just a light, it's also a measure. It sets the
standard by which to measure all educational work, whether small or
great. That law is impartial and gracious. It will embrace
anything that's true, honest, and respected. It sets no limits or
obstacles, except where too much would be harmful. And the educational
path that the law reveals is continuous and always advancing forward.
There is no magical transition stage, progress is steady from birth to
old age, except that, whatever habits are learned in youth will
determine what choices are made even in adulthood. When we finally see
the law for what it is, we'll find that certain German thinkers--Kant,
Herbart, Lotze, Froebel--were right when they said that it's
necessary to believe in God, so the most important thing to learn is
knowledge of God. That should be the priority of education. There's one
more way that we'll be able to recognize this perfect law that gives
educational freedom when we see it. It's been said that, 'The best
thing about absolute truth is that it works under every condition we
can think of.' And that will be true of this law. No matter what
experimental test or logical investigation we give it, it will pass.
We still haven't seen an outline or summary of this law. So, until we
have something definite, we'll have to fall back on Froebel or Herbart,
or, if we adhere to a different school of thought, Locke or Spencer.
But we aren't content. We feel dissatisfied. Is it a divine discontent?
If we found a workable, effective philosophy of education, we'd welcome
it as deliverance from our perplexity. Before we find this great
deliverance, there will probably be lots of tentative attempts. They'll
all have the characters of a philosophy, more or less. Specifically,
they'll have a central idea, a basic concept with various details
working in harmony with it. This workable, effective theory of
education could be called a system of psychology. It would have to work
well with the accepted ideas of the time. It wouldn't think of
education as an isolated, shut-off compartment, but as a natural part
of
life, like birth, growing, marriage, or work. It would create a bond
between the student and the great wide world, connected at many
different points where interest was sparked. I know that some
educational experts want to create that connection in many subjects,
but their attempts are too random. They give a saying here, an idea
there, but there's no common foundation to unify and support education
as a complete unit.
Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. I don't want to seem
presumptuous. I hope that there will be lots of ideas submitted towards
a working philosophy of education, and that each one will bring us one
step closer to discovering the best possible education. In that spirit,
I offer my idea. The central foundational thought of my idea will sound
rather obvious: the child is a whole, complete person with all the possibilities
and capabilities already included in his personality. Some of the
implications of this idea have been exploited by educational experts,
and fragments of this idea are already pretty commonly accepted by
common sense. For instance, take the aspect that education is the science of making
relationships. That concept seems to solve the curriculum
question. It shows that the main purpose of education is putting the
child in living touch with as much of nature and thoughts as possible.
If you add a couple of skills that help the child self-educate, then
the student will go into the world after graduation with some ability
to manage and control himself, a few hobbies to enrich his leisure
time, and an interest in lots of things. I have two reasons for even
attempting to offer my educational idea, even if my idea is tentative
and will probably be replaced by an even better idea. For the last
30-40 years, I've worked unceasingly to come up with a philosophical
educational theory that works practically. Also, each of the following
educational principles is something that came about by inductive
processes, and has been proved with long and varied experiments. I
hesitate
to share my findings because I know that, in the field of education,
there are many workers more capable and more knowledgeable than I am.
Even they aren't bold enough to offer answers because the footing is so
precarious! They are like the 'angels who fear to tread.'
But, if only to encourage their effort, I offer an amended version of a
synopsis I included in the other volumes of my 'Home Education Series.'
My approach isn't methodic. It's more incidental--here a little, there
a little. That seemed like the best way to make it practical for
parents and teachers. I should add that the various essays in this book
were originally written for the Parents National Educational Union
(PNEU) to provide the society with a unified theory.
'As soon as the soul spots truth, the soul recognizes it as her first
and oldest friend.'
'The repercussions of truth are great. Therefore we must not neglect to
correctly judge what's true, and what's not.'
--Benjamin Whichcote
Whichcote said that the end result of truth is so great that we must be
careful to make sure that what we live by is, indeed, the truth.
1. Children are born persons - they are not blank slates or embryonic
oysters who have the potential of becoming persons. They already are
persons.
2. Although children are born with a sin nature, they are neither all
bad, nor all good. Children from all walks of life and backgrounds may
make choices for good or evil.
3. The concepts of authority and obedience are true for all people
whether they accept it or not. Submission to authority is necessary for
any society or group or family to run smoothly.
4. Authority is not a license to abuse children, or to play upon their
emotions or other desires, and adults are not free to limit a child's
education or use fear, love, power of suggestion, or their own
influence over a child to make a child learn.
5. The only three means a teacher may use to educate children are the
child's natural environment, the training of good habits and exposure
to living ideas and concepts. This is what CM's motto "Education is an
atmosphere, a discipline, a life" means.
6. "Education is an atmosphere" doesn't mean that we should create an
artificial environment for children, but that we use the opportunities
in the environment he already lives in to educate him. Children learn
from real things in the real world.
7. "Education is a discipline" means that we train a child to have good
habits and self-control, both in actions and in thought.
8. "Education is a life" means that education should apply to body,
soul and spirit. The mind needs ideas of all kinds, so the child's
curriculum should be varied and generous with many subjects included.
9. The child's mind is not a bucket to be filled with facts that bunch
up into thought-groups, as Herbart said.
10. The child's mind is also not a bag for holding knowledge. It is a
living thing and needs knowledge to grow. As the stomach was designed
to digest food, the mind is designed to digest knowledge and needs no
special training or exercises to make it ready to learn.
11. This is not just splitting hairs; Herbart's philosophy that the
mind is like an empty stage waiting for bits of information to be
inserted puts too much responsibility on the teacher to prepare
detailed lessons. Students taught this way have lots of knowledge
taught at them, without getting much out of it.
12. Instead, we believe that children's minds are capable of digesting
real knowledge, so we provide a rich, generous curriculum that exposes
children to many interesting, living ideas and concepts. From this
principle, we can deduce that--
13. "Education is the science of relations," which means that children
have minds capable of making their own connections with knowledge and
experiences, so we make sure the child learns about nature, science and
art, knows how to make things, reads many living books and that they
are physically fit. Our job isn't to teach everything about everything,
but to inspire interests that will help children make connections with
the world around him.
14. Children have two guides to help them in their moral and
intellectual growth--"the way of the will," and "the way of reason."
15. Children must learn the difference between "I want" and "I will."
They must learn to distract their thoughts when tempted to do what they
may want but know is not right, and think of something else, or do
something else, interesting enough to occupy their mind. After a short
diversion, their mind will be refreshed and able to will with renewed
strength.
16. Children must learn not to lean too heavily on their own reasoning.
Reasoning is good for logically demonstrating mathematical truth, but
unreliable when judging ideas because our reasoning will justify all
kinds of erroneous ideas if we really want to believe them.
17. Knowing that reason is not to be trusted as the final authority in
forming opinions, children must learn that their greatest
responsibility is choosing which ideas to accept or reject. Good habits
of behavior and lots of knowledge will provide the discipline and
experience to help them do this.
Principles 15, 16 and 17 should save children from the sort of careless
thinking that causes people to exist at a lower level of life than they
need to.
18. We teach children that all truths are God's truths, and that
secular subjects are just as divine as religious ones. Children don't
go back and forth between two worlds when they focus on God and then
their school subjects; there is unity among both because both are of
God and, whatever children study or do, God is always with them.
These books are called the 'Home
Education Series' based on the title of the first volume, not because
they deal wholly or in principle with 'home' as opposed to 'school'
education.
Preface
'Who was it who said that the appeal to 'know thyself'
came straight from heaven? They were right, it's as true as Gospel. It
came straight from God to the person who originated the saying.' ~ Life of Sir Edward Burne-Jones
Perhaps the reason we fail to pass on moral, Christian principles to
our youth is because our own understanding is sketchy and based mostly
on
appeals to the emotions through songs and stories. Those may be
inspiring, but we can't rely only on them. Emotional response is
short-lived, and the heart is dulled and hardened with too much
repetition. On the other hand, intellectual knowledge gleaned from
clear and ordered teaching seems to be long-lasting and steady.
Children and youths are as able to take in what's presented to their
minds as adults are. And, like adults, they enjoy an intellectual
appeal to their understanding when it reveals to them the basics of
human nature, which we all share.
In this volume, I've assumed that everyone has the potential for all
beautiful and noble possibilities--but that each person is also subject
to attacks and obstacles in various forms. We need to be aware of what
they are so that we can 'watch and pray.' Rules about do's and don'ts
are boring to children and adults alike, but a well-planned
presentation of the possibilities that lie in human nature and their
corresponding risks are sure to be enlightening and stimulating. This
book is intended as an appeal to students to make the most of
themselves. God's law tells them to do this and they have vast
possibilities within themselves to succeed.
Book I (Self-Knowledge) was written for students under age sixteen.
Book II (Self-Direction) might appeal to students of all ages. Young
men and women especially might welcome the opportunity to work through
some of the questions that puzzle them in their own minds. This book
can be used by parents and elementary teachers to help with formation
of character [starting with children
as young as 8 or 9]. If even six students in every school using
this book got a vision of what was possible for them, and what to aim
for, we would see some improvement in character across the entire
nation in a single generation. Our moral teaching has this in common
with our intellectual education: we focus too much on utilitarian
purposes. But something deeper than earning a wage is needed if we want
to inspire students and see profound changes. My intended audience is
boarding school students in the middle to upper forms (Forms III and
up, which correspond to grades 7-12), as well as those indicated above.
The two books have been published separately so that the appropriate
volume can be put in the hands of the students who need it. But, since
parents and teachers should study this material themselves before they
teach it to their students, both books count as one single volume
(Volume 4) in the 'Home Education' series. There are questions at the
back for more serious students. The casual ordering of students by
adults might have more meaning if it were done according to the laws of
human nature as outlined in these books. The scheme of thought seems
like common sense morality, as laid out in Scripture.
I've expanded the systems of morality that expert ethics authors
formulated. I wanted to include every possible kind of goodness that
might be lying dormant in normal human beings. I've tried to define
certain limits of reason, conscience and the will. Disregarding those
elements is a common cause for bad conduct.
The existence of God, man's capacity to relate to God, and the crippled
and incomplete character that results when man fails to relate to God
are all discussed in the book. These issues are the kind of knowledge
that relates to the purpose of man. The allusions and quotes that
enhance and illuminate the text were carefully chosen from sources that
would be familiar to everyone. The object is to hold the reader's
attention and focus it on the teaching of Sir Walter Scott, or
Plutarch, rather than to use unknown sources. Most people feel more
comfortable with what they already know something about.
AMBLESIDE, May 1905
A rather arbitrary use of terms like
'demon' has been used where it would make the point clearly.
Introduction
'Self-reverence, self-knowledge, self-control--these are the only way
to sovereign power.' TENNYSON
A
Dual Self
The very concept of self-management and self-perception implies that we
have a duality within ourselves. There's a part of us that reverences,
and a part that is reverenced. There's a part of ourselves who knows,
and a part who is known. Part of us controls, and part is controlled.
This dual self is probably our deepest, most intimate consciousness,
yet our least-acknowledged. We're a little intimidated by metaphysics,
but even more afraid of self-consciousness, and we don't bother to
consider why we're intimidated.
It's a good thing that we're hesitant to wander into the regions of the
mind that we don't understand because we wouldn't know how to bring
back anything good from there. And it's good that we shrink from the
kind of consciousness of self that makes us aware of our individual
quirks so that we become sensitive, or embarrassed, or even proud.
We've let our fear of danger, like monsters on the right and on the
left, keep us from entering the path at all--yet this path is the way
to the haven where we want to be.
This isn't the time or place to try to give psychological explanations
of our two selves. Our task at hand is to gain a clear idea of what
we'll call our objective
self, whose behavior is controlled by our just-as-troublesome subjective self, which we're all
unpleasantly too much aware of.
The
Unlovable Self
One of the causes of misery for sensitive children and youths is a
sense of worthlessness of their poor, aspiring and all-too-prominent
self. They're painfully aware that they're irritable, awkward, rude and
hateful. How can anybody like them? If their mother does, then it must
be because she doesn't see how unlikable they really are. Vanity, which
seeks for the approval of others, is possible for anyone, even a
good-natured child. But I doubt that conceit is possible for anyone
other than unexceptional minds who are content to shape their opinions
upon what they think those around them think, even when it comes to
their own opinion of themselves.
But for the uneasy youth whose primary job in life is navigating an
unknown boat, a little bit of knowledge about what the boat can carry
and what it can do are helpful. It also helps to relieve a person from
being obsessed with the subjective self. We become aware of it on the
day we eat fruit from the tree of knowledge, and leave the bliss of
unconscious awareness as innocent children. That awakening happens to
all of us. It isn't necessarily something to feel guilty about, but it
does make many of us uneasy and causes us to doubt our worth.
The
Great Self
Any attempt to figure out where each of the selves starts and stops
baffles us. We can't tell where one starts and the other one ends. But
after convincing ourselves that we're just one person, we become aware
again of ourselves as two. Maybe we can say that one is the
unsatisfactory self, and the other is the self of great and beautiful
possibilities, which we sense is an integral part of us. That may be
the best we can do at understanding this difficult concept about our
nature. It might help to think of the human soul as a huge country
estate that we have to manage. By soul, I mean all that we are, both
inside and out: all our powers of thought, knowing, loving, making
decisions, appreciating, willing, achieving. What is a human soul
worth? There's only one authoritative estimate. When the soul is put on
a scale against the whole world, then the whole world, with all its
beauty and glory, is as if it weighed nothing in comparison. But we
miss the value of these words of Jesus because we assume He's speaking
of a relative value, not an intrinsic value. We don't realize that the
soul of a man is infinitely great, beautiful and precious. This is
partly because religion mostly teaches self-abasement and reserve, even
though that's not what Jesus taught.
Emily
Bronte
M. Maeterlinck, a wise author from Belgium, proved how great the soul
is. His proof is all the more remarkable because he doesn't approach it
from a religious perspective, but as an outside witness. He probably
hasn't added anything new to the field of psychology, but he has
reminded us of the great things about life. We need to be reminded of
this again and again, so he's done us a service. His evidence is Emily
Bronte. She was a delicate girl raised practically in isolation, in a
remote parsonage. Yet she was able to write about the depths of human
passion, feel human tragedy, and articulate fruits of human wisdom.
That shows the immeasurable range of the human soul. It's even more
surprising because she wasn't especially virtuous, nor especially
accomplished as compared to someone like Shakespeare, Isaac Newton,
Rembrandt, Dante, Darwin or Howard. When we consider them, we begin to
see how immense the soul really is, and how large God must be to be
able to measure all things, and affect all people. But we don't give
enough credit to the great men in the world because we can only measure
their greatness against our own souls. We can't even conceive of how
great they really were.
Is there any such thing as a little-minded person? Maybe not. Perhaps
all the qualities that make a person great exist in varying amounts in
all of us, but some are developed more than others. That seems to be
what Christ taught, and many poor, seemingly insignificant souls have
proven to be large enough to make room for His greatness.
But here is another example of the lesser being blessing (or cursing?)
the greater being.
Our own under-developed souls are distressfully lacking. Yet, with our
pitiful souls, we determine the eternal destiny of our greater self,
whose limits have never been discovered. It's like the relationship
between a country and its government. The country is the more important
of the two, but the country has to depend on its government, for better
or worse, to develop it.
The
Governing Powers
If the soul is like a country depending on its government to fulfill
all it can be as a person, then who's doing the governing? I can't use
any answers from psychology yet because psychology is still trying to
decide whether the spirit exists or not! Intuition tells me that our
ancient guide, philosophy, won't provide the full answer. What all
people have found to be true of human nature should help in deciding
how to conduct our inner life in the same way that what's found to be
true of the world (like, the times of the rising of the sun) helps us
plan our physical life. The way it seems is more useful for our
purposes, even if it isn't psychologically accurate.
I don't know of any book to recommend for parents to help teach their
children how to live the way I've indicated. The books I know of are
either specifically religious, or specifically about ethics. So I've
written an outline myself of the kind of teaching I have in mind. It
can be used with bright children, or youths from ages 8 or 9 and up.
How
To Use This Book
I think that, when mothers want to teach something to their children,
they should learn what they want to teach, and then talk about it, a
little at a time, perhaps as informal Sunday talks. This would help
children to have a sense that our relationship with God is something
that embraces every facet of our lives. Older students might prefer to
read the book to themselves, or with their parents. If the book is done
as a family, the more advanced teaching that's appropriate for the
older students will go over the heads of their younger siblings.
Paraphrased by L. N. Laurio
Please direct any comments or questions to me by emailing me at cmseries-owner at yahoogroups dot com.
|
CM SERIES HOME | CONCISE SUMMARIES
| PARAPHRASED IN MODERN
ENGLISH |