Happily for him, he was also ignorant of the strange scholasticism which was taught at Jerusalem, and which was soon to constitute the Talmud. If some Pharisees had already brought it into Galilee, he did not associate with them, and when, later, he encountered this silly casuistry, in it only inspired him with disgust. We may suppose, however, that the principles of Hillel were not unknown to him. Hillel, fifty years before him, had given utterance to aphorisms very analogous to his own. By his poverty, so meekly endured, by the sweetness of his character, by his opposition to priests and hypocrites, Hillel was the true master of Jesus, if, indeed, it may be permitted to speak of a master in connection with so high an originality as his.

The perusal Of the books of the Old Testament made much impression upon him. The canon of the holy books was compose of two principal parts: the Law — that is to say, the Pentateuch — and the Prophets, such as we now possess them. An extensive allegorical exegesis was applied to all these books; and it was sought to draw from them something that was not in them, but which responded to the aspirations of the age. The Law, which represented not the ancient laws of the country, but Utopias, the factitious laws and pious frauds of the time of the pietistic kings, had become, since the nation had ceased to govern itself, an inexhaustible theme of subtle interpretations. As to the Prophets and the Psalms, the popular persuasion was that almost all the somewhat mysterious traits that were in these books had reference to the Messiah, and it was sought to find there the type of him who should realize the hopes of the nation. Jesus participated in the taste which everyone had for these allegorical interpretations. But the true poetry of the Bible, which escaped the puerile exegetists of Jerusalem, was fully revealed to his grand genius. The Law does not appear to have had much charm for him; he thought that he could do something better. But the religious lyrics of the Psalms were in marvelous accordance with his poetic soul; they were, all his life, his food and sustenance. The prophets — Isaiah in particular, and his successor in the record of the time of the captivity — with their brilliant dreams of the future, their impetuous eloquence, and their invectives mingled with enchanting pictures, were his true teachers. He read also. no doubt, many apocryphal works — i.e. writings somewhat modern — the authors of which, for the sake of an authority only granted to very ancient writings, had clothed themselves with the names of prophets and patriarchs, One of these books especially struck him — namely, the book of Daniel. This book, composed by an enthusiastic Jew of the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, under the name of an ancient sage, was the resume of the spirit of those later times. Its author, a true creator of the philosophy of history, had for the first time dared to see in the march of the world and the succession of empires only a purpose subordinate to the destinies of the Jewish people. Jesus was early penetrated by these high hopes. Perhaps, also, he had read the books of Enoch, then revered equally with the holy books, and the other writings of the same class, which kept up so much excitement in the popular imagination. The advent of the Messiah, with his glories and his terrors — the nations falling down one after another, the cataclysm of heaven and earth — were the familiar food of his imagination; and, as these revolutions were reputed near, and a great number of persons sought to calculate the time when they should happen, the supernatural state of things into which such visions transport us appeared to him from the first perfectly natural and simple.

That he had no knowledge of the general state of the world is apparent from each feature of his most authentic discourses. The earth appeared to him still divided into kingdoms warring with one another; he seemed to ignore the “Roman peace,” and the new state of society which its age inaugurated. He had no precise idea of the Roman power; the name of “Caesar” alone reached him. He saw building, in Galilee or its environs, Tiberias, Julias, Diocaesarea, Caesarea, gorgeous works of the Herods, who sought, by these magnificent structures, to prove their admiration for Roman civilization, and their devotion towards the members of the family of Augustus — structures whose names, by a caprice of fate, now serve, though strangely altered, to designate miserable hamlets of Bedouins. He also probably saw Sebaste, a work of Herod the Great, a showy city, whose ruins would lead to the belief that it had been carried there ready made, like a machine which had only to be put up in its place. This ostentatious piece of architecture arrived in Judea by cargoes; these hundreds of columns, all of the same diameter, the ornament of some insipid Rue de Rivoli — these were what he called “the kingdoms of the world and all their glory.” But this luxury of power, this administrative and official art, displeased him. What he loved were his Galilean villages, confused mixtures of huts, of nests and holes cut in the rocks, of wells, of tombs, of fig-trees, and of olives. He always clung close to nature. The courts of kings appeared to him as places where men wear fine clothe. The charming impossibilities with which his parables abound, when he brings kings and the mighty ones on the stage, prove that he never conceived of aristocratic society but as a young villager who sees the world through the prism of his simplicity.

Still less was he acquainted with the new idea, created by Grecian science, which was the basis of all philosophy, and which modern science has greatly confirmed — to wit, the exclusion of capricious gods, to whom the simple belief of ancient ages attributed the government of the universe, Almost a century before him Lucretius had expressed, in an admirable manner, the unchangeableness of the general system of nature. The negation of miracle — the idea that everything in the world happens by laws in which the personal intervention of superior beings has no share — was universally admitted in the great schools of all the countries which had accepted Grecian science. Perhaps even Babylon and Persia were not strangers to it. Jesus knew nothing of this progress. Although born at a time when the principle of positive science was already proclaimed, he lived entirely in the supernatural. Never, perhaps, had the Jews been more possessed with the thirst for the marvelous. Philo, who lived in a great intellectual center, and who had received a very complete education, possessed only a chimerical and inferior knowledge of science.

Jesus on this point differed in no respect from his companions. He believed in the devil, whom he regarded as a kind of evil genius, and he imagined, like all the world, that nervous maladies were produced by demons who possessed the patient and agitated him. The marvelous was not the exceptional for him; it was his normal state. The notion of the supernatural, with its impossibilities, is coincident with the birth of experimental science. The man who is strange to all ideas of physical laws, who believes that by praying he can change the path of the clouds, arrest disease, and even death, finds nothing extraordinary in miracle, inasmuch as the entire course of things is to him the result of the free will of the Divinity. This intellectual state was constantly that of Jesus. But in his great soul such a belief produced effects quite opposed to those produced on the vulgar. Among the latter the belief in the special action of God led to a foolish credulity, and the deceptions of charlatans. With him it led to a profound idea of the familiar relations of man with God, and an exaggerated belief in the power of man — beautiful errors, which were the secret of his power; for if they were the means of one day showing his deficiencies in the eyes of the physicist and the chemist, they gave him a power over his own age of which no individual had been possessed before his time, or has been since.

His distinctive character very early revealed itself. Legend delights to show him even from his infancy in revolt against paternal authority, and departing from the common way to fulfil his vocation. It is certain, at least, that he cared little for the relations of kinship. His family do not seem to have loved him, and at times he seems to have been hard towards them. Jesus, like all men exclusively preoccupied by an idea, came to think little of the ties of blood. The bond of thought is the only one that natures of this kind recognize. “Behold my mother and my brethren,” said he, in extending his hand towards his disciples; “he who does the will of my Father, he is my brother and my sister.” The simple people did not understand the matter thus, and one day a woman passing near him cried out, “Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which gave thee suck!” But he said, “Yea, rather blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.” Soon, in his bold revolt against nature, he went still further, and we shall see him trampling under foot everything that is human — blood, love, and country — and only keeping soul and heart for the idea which presented itself to him as the absolute form of goodness and truth.

 The MorningStar Academy

The Jubilee Academy

Learning By Grace

Mimi Rothschild

According to the opening chapter of Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” When exactly was “the beginning”? We are frequently told that everything began some four and a half billion years ago. Some books suggest six billion years, and a few articles would even urge a span of 30 billion years. There seems to be a contradiction between the statements of Genesis and the premises of people who accept the evolutionary hypothesis. How does one blend four and a half billion evolutionary years with 6000 years (as determined from the genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11 and by Bishop Ussher)?

Some scholars have attempted to merge Biblical with evolutionary thinking, accounting for differences by making the days of creation long periods of time or by placing a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. In this chapter we will discuss these two theories as well as analyzing theories concerning the age of the earth itself.

THE DAY-AGE THEORY

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” The nature of “the beginning” is clarified to an extent in Genesis 1:31, “And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” Chapter 2:1-2 continues, “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.” God completed His work on the seventh day. Exodus 20:11 concurs with the Genesis account: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day.” God seems to have ended His creative activity on the seventh day, which would place the beginning of His creative acts exactly six days before their completion.

If the beginning was six days before the completion, we must next ask, How long was “the day”? God defines the Hebrew word for day the first time He uses it. According to Genesis 1:5, “And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.” The light period of time is clearly labeled “day,” the dark period designated “night.” In addition, God uses two phrases which indicate the length of a day. “And the evening and the morning were the first day.”Every time the Hebrew words for evening and morning are used in the Old Testament, they refer to a literal day. The Hebrew concept of “day” begins in the evening, continues through the night, and terminates the following afternoon. Thus “evening and morning” are expressions used to define a literal day.

Every time the Hebrew word yom (singular) is used in the Old Testament with a numerical adjective – first day, fifth day, tenth day, 100th day – it refers to a literal solar day. Likewise, each time yamim (plural) is used, literal days must be specified. Compare, for instance, the double usage of yamim in Exodus 20, the passage which contains the Ten Commandments. In verses 8-10, obviously speaking of a literal seven-day week, God enjoins us to work only six days (yamim), retaining the Sabbath as a day of rest. Why should man rest one day in seven? Because, according to verse 11, which relates back to the Genesis account of creation, God created everything in six days (yamim) and rested on the seventh.

A consistent interpretation of Scripture must find that “day” or “days” when used in a clearly literal context, as in Exodus 20:9, will likewise require actual solar days in Genesis 1 or Exodus 20:11, referring to days of creation. No exception may be allowed.

If one attempts to extend the days of creation into long periods of time, strange things happen. For instance, an effort to correlate the days of creation with the evolutionary geologic column produces at least twenty-one major discrepancies. According to the evolutionists, several things are wrong with the Biblical account. For one thing, plant life, the first life to appear in Genesis, comes rather late in evolutionary development. There are also some problems with differences between fish and fowl. In Genesis fowl are created on the same day as fish. When God created life. He started with whales, sea creatures, and fowl (Genesis 1:21). But according to evolution, fish gave rise to reptiles, which developed into mammals and birds. Again, the sun, moon and stars in the Genesis account were made on the fourth day, whereas these are the evolutionary essentials for bringing life into being. If life were to come about by microbiology, by some simple chemicals coming together to form amino acids, later becoming more complex protein molecules and ultimately the first cell, then radiant energy or sunlight would be needed. Finally, if one tries to stretch creation days into long periods of time. Plant life, created on the third day, would have to live without the light of the sun for however long your day was – 1000 years, one million years – because the light from the sun did not reach here until it was created on the fourth day. The third day brought forth plants, but insects which are necessary for the pollinization of many flowering plants are not created until the sixth day.

With reference again to consistent Biblical interpretation, if one insists that days are long periods of time in Genesis, he will have to say that they are long periods of time in other places of Scripture, such as Jonah’s three days in the whale or Nehemiah’s three days spent in the city. How long is a day? God says He began His creative activity six days before He completed it. The Bible is consistent, and therefore these days must be literal days.

There are people of all ages including unborn babies, infants, young children, teenagers, young adults, mature adults and seniors who have never had the mental capacity or maturity to choose right from wrong. They may have never developed to the point where they have the mental condition needed for understanding, accountability and responsibility for the things of God. They simply are not able to comprehend the saving gospel message with their state of mind. However, I believe that God in His infinite wisdom has provided for them.

Several scriptures provide us with insight concerning that very theme referring to babies and children, but those scriptures most likely would apply to the others as well.

Isa. 7:16 Before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right….

Deut. 1:39 Children who do not yet know good from bad, they will enter the Land.

2 Sam. 12:23 David, King of Israel, said concerning his baby son, who had died: “But now he is dead, can I bring him back again? I shall go to him”. David had said that he himself would
dwell in the House of the Lord forever (Psm. 23:6) and his baby would also be there with him.

Matt. 18:3, Luke 18:17 Unless you become like little children, you will not enter the kingdom of Heaven.

Matt. 18:10 Don’t despise the little ones for in Heaven their angels always see the face of the Father.

Matt. 19:14, Mark 10:14 Let the little children come to Me, do not hinder them for the Kingdom of God belongs to such as these.

All babies in the womb, infants, small children and all others who had never come to that condition of understanding and accountability regarding the Gospel message will instantly be carried away into the arms of Jesus either at the moment of their death or when the rapture happens. If the rapture were to happen first, then I believe that every unsaved pregnant woman’s womb will be empty! What heartbreak that will be for those parents left behind! That’s just another way the tribulation will be a hell on earth for unbelievers during that horrible time.

For those who have lived beyond that age or condition of understanding and accountability, but later in their life through illness or accident somehow lost the ability to comprehend, their fate will be different. Their eternal future will be determined not by whether they had been nice people, or church members, or whether they had done good things, or were baptized, but only what they had done with Jesus during the time they were mentally capable. If they had never truly repented and accepted Him as Savior and Lord of their life as the Bible clearly teaches, then sadly they will never see the kingdom of Heaven.

Many believe that if infants have not been baptized, they will be lost if they should die. There is no teaching anywhere in scripture that supports that belief. Salvation is simply not dependent on baptism. Baptism is only a public profession or testimony of one’s faith as taught by our Lord.

Also, there are those who believe that if the parents are true born again believers, the child will automatically go to Heaven if it should die before reaching an age of understanding. Conversely, some believe if the parents were not believers, the child would also be lost. Nowhere in the gospel message does it teach that anyone’s eternal salvation is dependent on the belief or actions of another.

Where we spend eternity is clearly a personal, conscious and deliberate choice we all must make during this life. No one can make that choice for us. To simply not choose is your choice to reject His message. If you have never truly met Jesus at the cross in humble repentance and invited Him into your heart and life, please do it today. Your ability to understand, comprehend, and even your very life, could end for you tomorrow. Then, it would be too late for you for all of eternity.

Don Mehl ]]> http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-asks-children-to-heaven.html/feed 0 http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-asks-why-do-christians-send-their-children-to-schools-that-teach-lies-about-god.html http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-asks-why-do-christians-send-their-children-to-schools-that-teach-lies-about-god.html#comments Thu, 22 Apr 2010 13:48:24 +0000 Mimi Rothschild http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/?p=536

Mimi Rothschild Asks “Why Do Christians Send Their Children To Schools That Teach Lies About God?” by Desert Rose

The universe was not created.

Radiocarbon dating that dated a live mud turtle in Arizona in 1961 to be 15,000 years old, is what they base many of the dates of living things on this earth and facts about evolution on.

If our founding father’s believed in God, it was not relevant to their decision making when they put together our constitution. If it were relevant, it would be taught.

That you can have morals without Jesus Christ.

You don’t need prayer for help, just smarter people, better rules and stronger good guys.

No one needs to fear God, just the bullies of the world.

Christianity is just a religion just like all the other religions.

Biblical history is not relevant, therefore it does not need to be taught.

The problem that I have with this, is that the only source that I have to base all truths on, is the Bible. I believe that the Bible is the one book that we can count on for truth.

Let me give you one tiny example:

For many years, mankind taught that the earth was flat. This was common knowledge and it was the truth for that time. What people of that time did not know was that the truth of the round earth was in the Bible all along.

Isaiah40
21Have you not known?
Have you not heard?
Has it not been told you from the beginning?
Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?
22It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

From the heavens, the only way for the earth to appear as a circle, would be if it were a sphere. Otherwise you would have to be at an exact location, which God is not. The earth would have many shapes and appearances if it were flat or any other shape.

So what they are teaching in some schools is; that it is better to learn about truths that are ever changing as new information comes in, and the one place where the truth can be validated should not be taught at all. Our children spend most of their days with these ever changing truths and when we spend those few hours a week teaching them the truth, how can we expect them to believe us?

Or is it another case of Santa Claus and the tooth fairy? We teach our children that they are real and when they find out that we have lied to them, are they ready to believe us any longer?

When my children were in the public school, they believed everything their teachers told them. If I told them something different, then they would have a hard time knowing whom to trust, especially because by sending them to school to learn, I was also giving them the message to listen to their teachers and trust them. It becomes very confusing for a child when they are getting so many mixed messages.

And now when I ask God, “Lord are You sure You want me to homeschool?” I know why He says yes every time. He wanted me to get unbrainwashed from all the public schooling lies I had received and make sure that His children in my care, were getting the truth.

Now I teach from textbooks like, World History From A Christian Perspective. One of the opening paragraphs from this book states,”For the beginning of history, the Bible is our only reliable record. It tells us that the world history began with God’s creation of the first man and woman. Man is special to God because he alone was created in the image of God.”

That is what I want my child’s education to be based on. The truths taught by God through His Holy Word.

P.S. I know many who are unable to homeschool, but there are many Christian textbooks out there that you can supplement your child’s education with. I get many from used bookstores and other homeschooling families. The Bible is not the only book that proclaims God’s Word as the Truth and it is good for children to see this. You might be surprised at what you learn also. I am becoming more and more aware of all the wonderful things that the Bible has to tell us. ]]> http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-asks-why-do-christians-send-their-children-to-schools-that-teach-lies-about-god.html/feed 1 http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-brings-you-the-concept-of-unschooling.html http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-brings-you-the-concept-of-unschooling.html#comments Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:28:20 +0000 Mimi Rothschild http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/?p=533

Mimi Rothschild Brings You “The Concept of Unschooling” by Lisa M. Hendey

Whether you are a homeschooling parent or simply a parent concerned with the quality of your children’s faith formation and education, you owe it to yourself and your family to learn a bit about the concept of “unschooling”. In her new book Homeschooling with Gentleness: A Catholic Discovers Unschooling (Christendom Press, October 1004, paperback, 132 pages) takes a look at this “gentle” variation to the traditional homeschooling path. As a mother of two Catholic school students, I must admit that I initially approached Andres’ book from a perspective of suspicion. My reading of this book, however, produced much fruit in the form of an enhanced appreciation for my own role, and especially that of my children themselves, in their own educations. In his comments on the book, noted author and professor Ralph McInerny reminds us that “The Church has always insisted that the parents are the primary educators of their children.” Far from being critical of formal education, Andres book is a positive and uplifting commentary on the concept of “unschooling” and shares ideas and suggestions that will be of value to any family, regardless of your educational preferences.

Suzie Andres, wife and mother of two, shared the following comments on Homeschooling with Gentleness.

Q: Would you please introduce yourself and your family to our readers.

A: Thank you, Lisa, for your interest in my book. I am a Catholic homeschooling mother of two boys, Joseph and Dominic, ages 15 and 2 respectively. My husband Tony and I met at Thomas Aquinas College in California, and continued our studies together at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. There our courtship turned into an engagement and we married in 1988. After Tony received his Ph.D in philosophy, he was hired to teach at Christendom College. Thus in 1993 we moved to Front Royal, Virginia, and we’ve been here ever since.

When we were first married, Tony and I anticipated becoming the parents of a large family, and we planned to homeschool our children. We knew homeschooling families that we really admired, and couldn’t imagine a better form of education. God surprised us with a different plan; after two years of marriage we had Joseph, and then it was another 12 years before our second child, Dominic was born. When Joseph was three, I began to get cold feet about homeschooling, and we ended up sending him to two schools in the next two years. Finally I mustered up the courage to give homeschooling a try (Joseph was now six), figuring that we could always send him back to school if it didn’t work out. Here we are still homeschooling nine years later; I guess it worked out!

Q: I’m amazed that a homeschooling mom can make time to write and publish a book! What motivated you to write this book and how did you accomplish your goal?

A: I have always loved reading. One of the things that I enjoy most about reading is that sense of connection with an author when we think along the same lines, sharing the same opinions about human nature. Often my own opinions are not clearly thought out, but there is a resonance with something I read which helps me to clarify my thoughts. Perhaps you have experienced that “Aha!” when you read something true that you had not heard expressed just that way before, or which you had not been able to express yourself.

Like many homeschooling mothers, I read books on homeschooling hoping to experience that resonance. I had always wanted to find a homeschooling book in which the author shared my opinions about children and education, and mapped out an approach that matched what we were doing in our own home. Not that I knew exactly what I thought about children and education; in fact, I often am not sure what we are actually doing in our home! But I realized that I was reading homeschooling books not only to find new methods and materials, but more often to find a name for what we were already doing.

When I began to read about unschooling, it felt very familiar. I recognized that what went on in our home looked a lot like unschooling, but I worried that unschooling was not quite a Catholic approach. None of its main proponents were Catholic, very few were Christian, and many espoused a very secular outlook. My husband Tony was able to reassure me that we could be Catholic unschoolers, and he had many compelling arguments explaining the fittingness of this combination. However, I have a horrible memory, and so I’d return to him often to hear his explanations. I realized that if I wrote a book on the subject, I could give the poor man a rest!

In fact, writing about Catholic unschooling really appealed to me for three reasons. First, I could get down on paper Tony’s explanations to reassure myself; second, for anyone else who was interested, I could express in writing our thoughts about homeschooling; and third, if my writing became a book, then I would have the perfect homeschooling book to read when I wanted to know what I was doing!

As to how a homeschooling mom finds time to write a book…I think there was a small window of opportunity that I crawled through in the early summer of 2003. My husband liked to study and write in the evenings, and our older son Joseph was usually busy playing with kids in the neighborhood or reading. Dominic, our then 8 month old, went to bed at 8 p.m., but I had to stay nearby to keep him from rolling off our bed, where he slept. Had I thought of putting our mattress on the floor, Homeschooling with Gentleness would never have been written! But as it was, I needed something quiet to do from 8 to 11, and I had just bought a used laptop from a pawnshop. I love to write, and so I would write during this time. The next thing I knew, I had somehow written a book. Just at this time Christendom Press had a new director who wanted to publish a book on homeschooling. God brought it all together, and now I too am amazed that a homeschooling mom can make time to write and publish a book! God’s plans are really mysterious and beautiful.

Q: Please share your thoughts on the concept of Catholic “unschooling” and how this relates to the theories of John Holt.

A: In my reading about homeschooling, I eventually came upon the books of John Holt, a former teacher, educational reformer, and one of the first advocates of homeschooling. He has a wonderfully clear writing style and I profoundly agreed with many of his observations about children and education. Over the course of two summers, I read his books Teach Your Own, How Children Fail, How Children Learn, and Learning all the Time, and also copies of his magazine “Growing without Schooling.”

When John Holt coined the term “unschooling,” he used it to mean learning outside of school. He began a newsletter in the mid-1970s to help those who had taken their children out of school to educate them at home and in the wider world. At that time it was an incredibly courageous and mostly illegal act to keep your school-aged children out of school. Holt encouraged parents and children to find new ways to learn, to enjoy each other’s company, and to follow their convictions. His experience as a teacher had shown him that often schools are places where learning does not, perhaps cannot happen. Over the years his further observations of children and adults led him to believe that learning happens best when it is initiated by the learner. Unschooling thus came to refer more specifically to child led education.

Some of the principles that underlie this theory are: children (in fact all of us) are natural learners; learning can happen at any age; a person will be most motivated to learn when he needs to know or use what he’s learning; and fear is a bad incentive for learning, while love is the best incentive of all. I saw these ideas in John Holt’s writing, and I had seen them before in Catholic philosophy and theology. Since grace builds on nature, what is true in nature provides a firm foundation for our life as Catholics. In a nutshell, I argue in the book that unschooling is an option for Catholics.

Q: I enjoyed discussing your book and its ideas with my own thirteen year old son (who is a eighth grader in a Catholic school) and was interested in his reaction to “unschooling.” One question we both have is how you deal with overcoming issues like lack of motivation, distractions, and laziness (this from the seventh grader…) to keep on target with work flow?

A: Lisa, that is an excellent question. I think our family has dealt with these obstacles in a twofold manner. First, we have rules limiting our older son’s use of computer games and video watching. Although these activities can be fun, they can also be addictive, and for us their overuse tends to squelch creativity and motivation. Secondly, each school year we decide on the type and amount of school-type work we want Joseph to accomplish.

This year, for example, we agreed that Joseph would complete a set of algebra workbooks and learn typing with a computer program. Since the amount of assigned work was fairly small, keeping up with “work flow” was not difficult. At the same time, Joseph had a wide range of other activities and interests that rounded out his learning through work he chose himself. He continued piano lessons and practice, and began composing his own pieces. He began reading a series of college level history books. He participated in church-league basketball and Jr. Legion of Mary. Sometime in the middle of the school year, Joseph decided he wanted to write a science fiction novel. This prompted him to pick up some grammar books we had, and borrow books on writing. The novel got set aside, but only after providing some self-motivated learning in grammar and composition. For next year I’m sure we’ll continue with some formal math, and Joseph is planning to take an introductory college Latin class. With all these interests and projects, and a quite limited amount of traditional schoolwork, the issues you mention have resolved themselves.

Finally, when I asked Joseph his opinion about this question, he suggested I mention another house rule that he finds provides plenty of motivation. He is not allowed to get together with friends until after he does basic schoolwork (math and typing) and chores each day. Since he has friends in the neighborhood, some of whom also homeschool, he has a daily spur to get his official work done in a fairly timely manner.

Q: I enjoyed your thoughts on catechizing our children by living the Faith with them. Could you please say a few words on the role of religious education in unschooling?

A: As Catholics, the greatest gifts we’ve been given are our faith, and the opportunity to live in union with Jesus by participation in the life of the Church. As Catholic parents, the greatest gifts we can share with our children are this same Faith, and this opportunity to live in union with Jesus. I hope, then, that religious education will take first place in the priorities of all Catholic families, whether they unschool, homeschool or send their children outside the home to school.

One of the principles underlying unschooling is that children want to imitate adults, to do what they see adults doing, to know what adults know. Religious education thrives in an unschooling environment when the children see their parents loving Jesus and living out their faith in their everyday lives. Two ways this can happen are through the liturgical year and the reception of the Sacraments. Other ways might be in concrete acts of service, such as helping in a soup kitchen or visiting a nursing home, or through family prayer such as the rosary or holy hours. When children see parents engaged in these activities, enjoying these activities, setting aside other pursuits to participate in the life of the Church, the children will naturally be drawn to the beauty and goodness of Catholic life. And the parents will often find that moments of teaching and learning occur fairly naturally within their Catholic life. At the same time, I want to add that most Catholic unschoolers, like other Catholic families, will want to take advantage of the wealth of catechetical materials available in the new springtime of the Church.

Q: What religious resources have you found useful and beneficial in your family’s education?

A: We have used the Baltimore Catechism and other catechisms to do some memory work, especially in preparation for the Sacraments of Confession, Holy Communion and Confirmation. We have really enjoyed the series of Saints’ Lives books published by Ignatius Press, TAN, and the Daughters of St. Paul. A favorite treasure that I read aloud to Joseph was Monsignor Ronald Knox’s The Creed in Slow Motion, a set of sermons delivered to schoolchildren during World War II.

The last resource I’d like to mention is our local parish. Joseph has been involved in Jr. Legion of Mary, altar serving, church-league basketball, the holy hour program…This is our list, but I’m sure other Catholic unschoolers could find similar opportunities in their own parishes. Involvement in parish life has provided other adult mentors for our son, and allowed him interaction with many people of all ages and states in life.

Q: In one chapter of the book, you discuss whether or not all Catholic families should unschool. Are there elements of this approach towards education which could be integrated into the lives of families whose children attend formal schools?

A: Absolutely yes!

I think it is essential to remind ourselves that the Church allows for many different forms of education, and looking back in history we can find examples of Saints who initiated various pedagogical methods for the glory of God and the good of men. Unschooling is only one approach to education among many, and Catholic families need the freedom and encouragement to explore which method is best for their own situation. My guess is that we could find universally applicable ideas in every approach to education, regardless of which methods are most popular at a given time.

The element of unschooling that I would love to see all families embrace is the virtue of trust. I think the heart of unschooling is the trust that grows between parent and child. The parent embarks on a cycle of trusting the child to learn, seeing that the child does learn, and thus having that trust increased. The child’s assurance of the parent’s love and confidence in him grows as well. Perhaps most important of all, the parent and child grow in their trust in God – His plan for their lives, His patience, His eternal Merciful Love. I know firsthand, from myself and from friends’ shared confidences, the incredible weight that Catholic parents feel from the responsibility to raise our children in the faith, in the midst of a hostile culture. I pray that we will all learn that God is near, is helping us, and has given us all we need. And He does not expect us to manufacture our children’s success and salvation on our own. He has provided for all these things; we need to learn to trust Him.

Q: What factors should a family consider before committing to this type of a lifestyle?

A: I think the main factors a family should consider are the temperaments of the children and parents. I have heard (although it’s not an experience in my home!) of children who thrive on structure and clear assignments, who want to know exactly what is expected of them, and who enjoy plowing through their work in a methodical way. I think this type of child would feel very uncomfortable with the relaxed approach of unschooling, and the child’s desire for the parents to provide structure and curriculum ought to be respected.

As for the parents’ temperaments, I would like to quote a passage from John Holt’s book Teach Your Own, in which he addresses this question. Let me qualify that I don’t think many parents start out with all the attributes and virtues that he lists. A desire for these virtues would be enough, I think, to indicate unschooling as a viable option. Holt writes:

We can sum up very quickly what people need to teach their own children. First of all, they have to like them, enjoy their company, their physical presence, their energy, foolishness, and passion. They have to enjoy all their talk and questions, and enjoy equally trying to answer those questions. They have to think of their children as friends, indeed very close friends, have to feel happier when they are near and miss them when they are away. They have to trust them as people, respect their fragile dignity, treat them with courtesy, take them seriously. They have to feel in their own hearts some of their children’s wonder, curiosity, and excitement about the world. But that is about all that parents need.

Q: I share your love for and devotion to St. Therese. How has she served as a guide for you as a mother and in your homeschooling?

A: Again I would have to refer to the deep anxiety that so many of us experience as we try to help our children along the path to Heaven. I think that St. Therese is one of God’s antidotes to this anxiety. In my own life, St. Therese has been a wonderful role model in littleness, and has shown me a glimpse of God’s great love. She has taught me that “Jesus does not demand great actions from us, but simply surrender and gratitude.” I think she is trying to help me realize that even if all my worst fears are true, and I am not a good enough parent (wife, friend, Catholic), God loves me even more for this, and knew all about me when He entrusted my family to my care. He trusts me, and so I can trust Him. But most of all, St. Therese has helped me see that I am not a failure, that as I learn to accept my weaknesses and disappointments I will also learn to see myself as God sees me: as His beautiful and beloved child. Learning from St. Therese how to become gentle with myself, I am also learning how to be gentle with my husband and children, and I see this gentleness as a precious gift.

Q: Suzie, as a voracious reader I loved your section of “Books as Friends” – what have been some of your family’s favorites?

A: Hmmm….how to limit myself here, and where to begin? Some children’s books that we have loved are: Follow my Leader by James Garfield, The Pushcart War by Jean Merrill, The Phantom Tollbooth, by Norton Juster, and the books of Edward Eager. Some of our favorite read-alouds have been: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl, Emil and the Detectives by Erich Kastner, and The Thirteen Clocks by James Thurber. All time favorites are Leave it to Psmith by P.G.Wodehouse, and Penrod by Booth Tarkington. Joseph has really enjoyed the Redwall series by Brian Jacques, and the Star Wars novels of Timothy Zahn; his ultimate favorites are Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkein. Tony and I share the same favorite novelist, Jane Austen. My other favorites are E.F. Benson (who wrote the Mapp and Lucia series) and Elizabeth Goudge. And I think Tony would want me to mention that Barchester Towers by Anthony Trollope is not to be missed!

Q: Suzie Andres, Catholic mom and author of Homeschooling with Gentleness, congratulations on this wonderful resource. Are there any closing thoughts or ideas you’d like to share?

A: Lisa, thank you again for your kind interest in my book. In closing I’d like to borrow the words from a favorite spiritual book, I Believe in Love. “I assure you, we are bathed in love and mercy.” I send my best wishes to you and all your readers; may we remember that we are bathed in love and mercy, as we enjoy these years at home with our children.

For more information on Homeschooling with Gentleness: A Catholic Discovers Unschooling
visit http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0931888794/catholicmomcom

Lisa M. Hendey is a mother of two sons, webmaster of numerous web sites, including http://www.catholicmom.com and http://www.christiancoloring.com, and an avid reader of Catholic literature. Visit her at http://www.lisahendey.com for more information. ]]> http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-brings-you-the-concept-of-unschooling.html/feed 3 http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/532.html http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/532.html#comments Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:58:39 +0000 Mimi Rothschild http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/532.html

Mimi Rothschild Brings You “Cry of a Perfectionist’s Child” by Teresa Lee Rainey

I made my bed this morning.
Thought you’ld be so proud.
Why’d you have to look beneath
Then tell in a crowd?

My grades were alright this time.
Only made one C.
Guess that wasn’t good enough.
You’re sure mad at me.

At church I try to listen
And note a few words.
You told friends I couldn’t quote
One thing I had heard.

You think you know me so well.
You don’t have a clue.
Trying to live up to you. . .
One thing I can’t do.

So now I’ve prayed you’ll listen
And maybe you’ll see.
I don’t care if I’m the best.
Please just notice me.

*******

This poem may appear to be for the child of a perfectionist. Actually, although I have been that child, I am now the parent. I am struggling to remember those feelings and improve my own attitude.

My children are quickly growing older and are nearing their teenage years. It is difficult, at times, to realize I need to encourage them to become adults. That includes allowing some imperfections.

During my teenage years, there were times when I thought my mother was horrible. I now regret many of my own actions against her. She was (and still is) a wonderful mom who did the best she knew how.

Perhaps I can take those negative feelings of the past and improve my parental actions in the future.

Maybe the next time my children ‘clean their room’ by making their bed and storing the clutter underneath, I will attempt to remain calm. With a smile on my face I could say, “The bed looks great. Thank you for making it. That is a great start to cleaning up and I look forward to coming back and seeing what you do with all that stuff underneath.”

I’m sure I will make plenty of mistakes during my attempt to be a great mom. I imagine my boys will sometimes think that I am horrible. My promise is to always do the best I can.

My dream is that I will learn from my own mom’s regrets and my children will learn from mine. Maybe one day, generations from now, the improvement will be so great that one of my great, great, great-grandchildren will be the perfect parent.

Hey, it’s my dream and I’ll dream big if I want to! ]]> http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/532.html/feed 0 http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-brings-you-strategies-for-educating-children-w-addadhd.html http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/mimi-rothschild-brings-you-strategies-for-educating-children-w-addadhd.html#comments Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:29:54 +0000 Mimi Rothschild http://blog-home-school.themorningstaracademy.org/?p=528