Did You Know That Drinking Milk Is An Excellent Preparation For Eating Meat?

Sometimes St. Paul seems downright condescending!

For whereas for the time you ought to be masters, you have need to be taught again what are the first elements of the words of God: and you are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. (Hebrews 5:12)

There are some things in scripture which are like “strong meat”;

Image result for meat

the prologue of Saint John’s Gospel for example, or when Saint Paul says,

Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered; and being made perfect he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.

Strong meat indeed. He continues,

About this we have much to say which is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.

Now, I know that in comparison to these passages there are others in scripture which are much easier to understand. These passages are “milk.”

A new commandment I give unto you: That you love one another, as I have loved you…

Image result for milk

A passage much more readily understandable, though still inexhaustible in its depth.

So I can understand that St. Paul’s use of the meat and milk metaphor is primarily referring to the relative accessibility of various teachings in Scripture. Some teachings are meat and others milk.

But with the “rule of charity” with which St. Augustine bids we interpret all Scripture, I would  like to extend the metaphor.

Before doing so, we might pause just a little to appreciate Saint Paul’s use of the food metaphor in his teaching. I find this comparison absolutely spot on, compelling, delightful and persuasive.  I count myself among the Hebrews whom St. Paul justly rebuked for their slowness and dullness, but when St. Paul talks food, I am completely on board. To my way of thinking, he could not be any clearer!

In other words, to those of us who are ‘not quite there’ yet with respect to our spiritual understanding, to those of us who are not intellectually mature, St Paul says,

You need milk, not solid food; for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature…

Image result for sippy cup with milk

And this brings me to my point.

In comparison to scripture, which in its transcendent wisdom is all meat, even the very best of Greek literature and philosophy might certainly be compared to milk!

Ordinarily, I would prefer to compare the literature of Homer, Sophocles, Aeschylus and Euripides to a fine Bordeaux. Among the pagan authors, Homer would be the Chateau Margaux!Image result for margaux chateau

The literature of the Greeks is wine in contrast to the tasteless literature of our own contemporaries, which could only be compared to water. ( Although I hate to insult water by the comparison – would Diet Soda work better?)

I would be remiss not to treat my readers with a few sips of this wine!

Through the Greeks we learn that the meaning of our suffering is not suffering, but the meaning of suffering is truth! As the watchmen says in Aeschylus’ Agamemnon

Zeus has led us on to know, the Helmsman lays it down as law that we must suffer, suffer into truth.

Image result for Aeschylus

And similarly, his chorus of elderly Athenians teach us that no matter how much grief there is in the world, the good will win out in the end!

Sing a  song of sorrow, a song of sorrow, but the good prevails!

And what better encomium of marriage could you find than what Homer teaches us through the mouth of Odysseus,

for there is nothing better in this world than that man and wife should be of one mind in a house. It discomfits their enemies, makes the hearts of their friends glad, and they themselves know more about it than any one.

Image result

Or who can not be moved by Sophocles’ denunciation of the root of all sin, Pride, when through the mouth of the prophet Tiresias he says,

All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride.

Nonetheless, as wise as the Greeks are, the wisdom of man is, comparatively speaking, childish in comparison to the wisdom of God.

A man is called childish compared to God; just as a boy, in comparison to a man. (Heraclitus, DK 79)

And so it seems to me that the wisdom of man, found predominantly in Greek literature, is aptly compared to milk, the stuff of which children are made.

I don’t mean to disparage the wisdom of man by calling it milk. Every child needs milk and so every intellectual child needs Greek literature.

Image result for greek literature

I don’t know much about milk except that, somehow, if a child drinks enough of it and for a long time, he will soon be ready for meat and other solid food. Don’t ask me how. Milk is wonderful, there is evidently something incredibly nourishing about it. The point is that the literature of the great pagans stands in just the same way to the developing souls of men as does milk to the bodies of children.

And so, as St. Thomas points out,

…it should be noted that sacred doctrine is, as it were, the food of the soul: ‘With the bread of life and understanding she shall feed him’ (Sir. 15:3) and in (24:29): ‘They that eat me shall yet hunger, and they that drink me shall yet thirst.’ Sacred doctrine, therefore, is food and drink, because it nourishes the soul.

And so we might ask:

Do you wish to dispose yourself towards the nourishment of the solid food that is Sacred Doctrine?

Do you wish to feast on the meat of Holy Scripture?

If your answer is yes to both these questions, then by all means imbibe at length, and in great quantity, the milk that is pagan Greek literature!

Advertisements
Posted in aeschylus, Aquinas, Augustine, catholic education, Heraclitus, Homer, Sacred Doctrine, Socrates | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

“Do Not Be Called Teachers.” Why Not?

As for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi.’
You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers.

Now it is not only clear from this text, but I have had it on authority from multiple sources that the word ‘rabbi’ means ‘teacher.’

Hence the King James version of this same passage reads,

And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.

Now what exactly is Our Lord saying here? Is this a case of Our Lord using hyperbole as he was sometimes known to do (e.g. “And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee”). So under this interpretation he might be saying,

Don’t get puffed up and arrogant because of your various titles, especially those that indicate that you might have some kind of wisdom!

Or perhaps, along the same lines, our Lord is simply exhorting us to humility? As if he is saying,

Given that teachers and instructors tend to be intellectually proud, do not be called teachers!

I am not a professor at an Ivy League school. Nor am I a professor at a tier 2 school, nor a professor at a tier 3 school. As a matter of fact I am not really a professor at all!

No, I am a ‘teacher’ at a relatively small unknown (and unknown unfairly!) high-school. Nonetheless, even I know what it feels like to be intellectually proud! So I can imagine that our Lord might say “do not be called teacher” to me.

Image result for professor arrogant

But could He have also been saying something else?

For example could Our Lord have been saying,

Do not be called teachers, because guess what? There are no teachers among you!

Could it be that our Lord is not just using hyperbole, but is rather pointing out that, in the strict sense of the term, there are precisely no teachers among men? In other words, He is saying,

Call no man teacher, because God alone has claim to this title.

God alone is a teacher in the most interior and prime way. And therefore our Lord is reminding us that God alone is to be thanked and praised for being the cause of every good thing we have including our most prized possession, to wit, any small wisdom that we might have?

Why is this?

Well, just think about it for a minute. Think about what a teacher is. Isn’t a teacher supposed to be someone who teaches? And if someone teaches, doesn’t that mean that he has some sort of knowledge which he transfers from himself to a student?

In other words, since he knows something he is able to cause his students to know those same things through a process which we call “teaching.”

Related image

But wait a moment! Is this really possible?

Is a teacher really able to cause knowledge in his students?

Interestingly the Latin word for teacher is ‘doctor, doctoris’ and it is no wonder, because we might ask the exact same questions about doctors. Our Lord might just as well have said,

Do not be called doctors.

This is because, as we all know, a doctor is not someone who makes sick people healthy. A doctor is rather someone who supposedly knows how to work with nature so that the sick will heal themselves!

As the great Heraclitus said,

Wisdom is to speak the truth and act, according to nature, giving ear thereto.

Related image

The wise doctor is, thus, someone who ‘listens to nature’ and ‘speaks’ and ‘acts’ according to what nature herself proposes in bringing a sick person to health.

But the important thing to remember is that the principles of health are already in the sick person! The doctor did not implant these seeds of health in his patient.

The seeds of his health are already there and the doctor merely knows how to aid those seeds to flourish and restore the sick person to health. He does this by either removing impediments or supplementing what nature herself needs in order to restore health.

And therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas points out that, just as the seeds of health are in the sick, so are the seeds of knowledge already in the ignorant. The teacher is one who aids and abets nature in bringing those ‘active’ seeds of knowledge to full flower.

Image result for seeds germinating

Therefore, just as the doctor is said to cause health in the sick man with nature working, so also one is said to cause knowledge in another by the activity of the power of reasoning in that person, and this is called teaching. In this way one person is said to teach another and to be his teacher.

And he further distinguishes two ways that the mind might come to know,

Therefore, just as someone can be healed in two ways — first by the action of nature only, second by the collaboration of nature and medicine — so also there are two ways of acquiring knowledge. First, when the mind moves by its own natural power to an understanding of things previously unknown to it. This is called discovery (inventio). Second, when the mind is helped by an outside power of reason. This is called teaching (disciplina).

But the incipient causes of all of our knowledge have been implanted in us by God Himself. The wise teacher, like the wise doctor, is one who merely knows how to water and nourish those incipient causes of our knowledge. The teacher can not cause knowledge in a student except as a sort of secondary cause; the teacher might facilitate the growth of knowledge in his student from the active seeds of knowledge that were implanted in the student by God Himself!

It was He alone who planted in us the ability to understand. It was God who sowed the first principles in us and the light of intelligence by which those principles are known and in which all of our subsequent knowledge is rooted.

God alone is the primary and interior cause of our knowledge. God alone can be called teacher.

Now you dear reader, if you see for yourself what I am saying, and if this has provoked you to understand something new, may call me ‘teacher.’

But you may only call me ‘teacher’ in a secondary way. Because I have only enabled you to see something that you ‘knew all along’ in a seminal way.

Posted in Aquinas, catholic education, Heraclitus | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Five Good Reasons to Avoid Being Educated

Sometimes in life we need to face difficult truths.  If we have been on the wrong side of an issue, we need to be open to change, and open to declaring an “about-face.” Even if it hurts!

And so, after thirty years of teaching and promoting education, after thirty years of giving largely unsolicited advice to parents about educating their children, after thirty years fighting an uphill battle to help market education for struggling schools that purport to “educate,” I think it is now time to consider a different point of view. Do we really need to educate our children?

Why not just baptize them and give them a good training?

There is no need to pull down the current institutions of learning – our current schools colleges and universities. No need whatsoever, because they have all already abandoned education for at least a century now…that is, they have abandoned everything that the word stands for but have kept the word itself. And so there is no need to change marketing materials. We just need to understand that every time we hear the word ‘education’ nowadays, we should simply understand that what is really meant is “training.”

I wish to provide five excellent reasons why parents should avoid giving their children an education and should, rather, do all they can to give them a proper training– but before beginning, let us distinguish our terms just a little.

Education concerns itself with the refinement of the intellect so that it might bring all things to bear on the truth. Education is about forming the mind so that it can look throughout the world and the cosmos and see the various orders that exist.

To gaze upon the orders that exist – whether the orderly beauty amidst the ranks of the humblest creatures’ (even inanimate!) spheres of existence, or whether it is to gaze upon the order that exists among the sphere in which man himself lives – in society and in his own soul, or whether it is to marvel at the order that exists in the spheres above him-

Image result for copernican system

the starry heavens and even among the separated substances – and perhaps whether it is, at last, to gaze upon the Divine cause of all this order Himself, God.

This is, roughly, what education is about.

Training has to do with adapting the mind and making it excellent at special works; making the mind, and the hands, adept at the performance of specific and productive tasks.

Image result for surgery

Training involves developing a single-minded focus on a limited sphere of activity and developing the habits that belong to performing that activity with excellence! Whether managing a portfolio, or performing heart surgery, or installing fiber optic cables,

Image result for installing fiber optic cable

or designing efficient systems for selling anything on the internet! What a wonderful thing training is! Thank goodness we have schools colleges and universities which are “doing first-class work as training-schools.” Really, we can’t have too many of them.

In 1937, the American Libertarian Albert Jay Nock  had already noticed a confusion of these terms (i.e. Education and Training) and wrote about it in his famous essay “The Disadvantages of Being Educated”. When examining what was going on in the colleges and universities at the time, he said that the ‘education’ they purported to impart,

aimed at what we used to call training rather than education; and it not only did very little with education, but seemed to assume that training was education, thus overriding a distinction that formerly was quite clear. Forty years ago a man trained to proficiency in anything was respected accordingly, but was not regarded as an educated man, or “just as good,” on the strength of it. A trained mechanic, banker, dentist or man of business got all due credit for his proficiency, but his education, if he had any, lay behind that and was not confused with it.

Image result for banker

In other words, if a man is educated, that is something quite apart from whether he is trained to be ‘successful’ in the world. Education does not have a direct bearing on what is meant by success. If anything, education is something that lies further back in the soul. It is something “behind” training, without being necessary at all to training.

An interesting pastime for every teacher is following the path and careers of his former students. Teachers of course are naturally interested in what happens to their students after they leave their charge and make their path off to college or simply dive directly into the world.

It has often struck me, although I am not yet ready to make a sweeping generalization, that very often the students that appear to have the most intellectual talent and are perhaps the most industrious in their studies, do not, surprisingly, appear to be identical with the students that appear to make their way in the world in a manner that would be recognized as being the most “successful.”

Education, says Albert J. Nock,

“…leads a person on to ask a great deal more from life than life, as at present organized, is willing to give him; and it begets dissatisfaction with the rewards that life holds out.”

Whereas,

“Training tends to satisfy him with very moderate and simple returns. A good income, a home and family, the usual run of comforts and conveniences, diversions addressed only to the competitive or sporting spirit or else to raw sensation – training not only makes directly for getting these, but also for an inert and comfortable contentment with them.”

I hate to say it, but could it be that education might actually be counterproductive? Suppose you would like to have a successful son, could it be that insisting that he obtain an education might be to do nothing other than to place a sizable obstacle in his path?

I think so, and here are five excellent reasons why everyone should avoid being educated:

  1. Education instills in the mind of its suitors an interest in things that are of very little interest to most people.

This is easy to understand. Just go ahead and pick up a book of Euclid’s’ Elements. Here is  how it begins:

“A Point is that which has no part.”

What does that mean? And suppose we try to find out? Where will that leave us? Who really cares about what a point is anyway? What does this have to do with the price of a loaf of bread and a gallon of gasoline? Nothing really.  Can you blame anyone for not really caring about what a point and a line are?

Anyone who studies Euclid’s Geometry will quickly develop a taste for theoretical truth and, sometimes, a corresponding distaste for anything that smacks of the practical. And this leads to our second excellent reason.

2. Education fosters a distaste for practical things.

This point is again illustrated very well by the story told by the fifth century compiler of Greek manuscripts, Stobaeus:

… someone who had begun to learn geometry with Euclid, when he had learnt the first theorem, asked Euclid, “What shall I get by learning these things?” Euclid called his slave and said, “Give him threepence since he must make gain out of what he learns”.

A proper education, that is a liberal education, is called liberal precisely because it is not at the service of things practical. That is why it appears to have been only an education that the wealthy of aristocratic could afford to obtain. They had what they needed already for living well – at least as regards food, shelter and clothing.

3. Education tends to be divisive and isolates the one who receives it.

This reason was clarified for me by Mr. Nock. He says,

Education deprives a young person of one of his most precious possessions, the sense of co-operation with his fellows. He is like a pacifist in 1917, alone in spirit – a depressing situation, and especially, almost unbearably, depressing to youth. “After all,” says Dumas’s hero, “man is man’s brother,” and youth especially needs a free play of the fraternal sense; it needs the stimulus and support of association in common endeavour.

The student who makes the ill-fated decision to become educated will in that decision unknowingly cause the separation between himself and all of his peers, and indeed, perhaps even the greater part of humanity.

Image result for man island

Why is education divisive? Well, just think about Socrates for a moment. He was a gadfly! In his relentless pursuit of truth he could not help but to uncover and expose the lack of wisdom in anyone else who claimed to have wisdom. I am afraid that this is an inescapable characteristic of anyone who wishes to be educated or wise, he must walk in the footsteps of Socrates.

Training, on the other hand, brings one into society and helps one to fit in as a normal participant in the human race. Mr. Nock remarks,

At present one can afford only to be trained. The young person’s fellows are turning all their energy into a single narrow channel of interest; they have set the whole current of their being in one direction. Education is all against his doing that, while training is all for it; hence training puts him in step with his fellows, while education tends to leave him a solitary figure, spiritually disqualified.

4. Education creates a distaste for barter and exchange.

Now this is a real disadvantage for anyone who happens to live in this world. Liberal education, as was mentioned, arose out of man’s desire to know for its own sake. Liberal education arose out of the divine instinct for knowledge,  implanted by the Creator in our souls, an instinct that we call ‘wonder.’ Wonder is the desire to know something in its causes, and for its own sake. The person who wonders about something does not wonder because he wishes to make money or do something with the knowledge. He simply wishes to know. He is like a child in this regard.  Like a child he chants in his best Trochaic meter,

Twinkle twinkle little star,

How I wonder what you are!

Image result for star single

The child does not wish to sell the star. Socrates was poor. He did not sell his knowledge to students like the sophists of his day. Wisdom is not for sale. Like a beautiful lady, one does not court her for her wealth or for her connections or for some other advantage. She demands of her suitors that she be loved for her own sake. And just so does Lady Philosophy appear to Boethius in his prison cell after he has suffered the terrible ups and downs of fortune’s wheel.

By a liberal education, the mind of the student is habituated towards a love of things that cannot be bought or sold. Unfortunately, those who develop this love cannot help but develop a corresponding clumsiness and even distaste for things that are measured in terms of dollars and cents.

This leads us to the fifth reason why education should be avoided.

5. Education tends to produce the gentleman, and the gentleman no longer has a place in society.

Blessed Cardinal John Henry Newman famously said,

Liberal Education makes not the Christian, not the Catholic, but the gentleman.  

Newman did not mean that liberal education produces a man who dresses and adopts the fashions of the day as they are set forth in say Gentleman’s Quarterly or some-such other worldly standard.  No, he meant that liberal education produces a refinement of mind, manners, speech, and bearing such that the man becomes properly responsive to beauty, goodness and truth!

Here are some highlights of the gentleman according to Newman:

Hence it is that it is almost a definition of a gentleman to say he is one who never inflicts pain…He is mainly occupied in merely removing the obstacles which hinder the free and unembarrassed action of those about him;  … The true gentleman in like manner carefully avoids whatever may cause a jar or a jolt in the minds of those with whom he is cast;… He has his eyes on all his company; he is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd; …he is seldom prominent in conversation, and never wearisome. … He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort…

 

In this world we are taught that a person must “market” himself, and do what one may to make himself desirable over others in order to “get ahead.”

In the words of Mr. Nock,

Again, education tends towards a certain reluctance about pushing oneself forward; and in a society so notoriously based on the principle of each man for himself, this is a disadvantage.

And so it is clear that those who seek an education thereby seek at least the five disadvantages that I have enumerated. There are undoubtedly more, but these alone are enough to demonstrate how difficult life will be for the educated person.

Therefore, parents take note!

Do you desire successful children?

Do you hope that your children will fit in as normal and ‘happy’ participants in society?

Do you love your children to the extent that you hope they will live comfortably and harmoniously in this world?

Well then, if your answer was “yes” to these questions, then by all means, don’t educate them!

Posted in catholic education, classical education, college, education, liberal education, Newman, Socrates, truth for its own sake | Tagged , , , , | 11 Comments

The Elective System in Education: “You Cannot Train Everybody For Everything”

Whatever one may say about our twenty-eighth president’s views about The United States role as promoter of democracy and capitalism and interventionism throughout the world, I think we have to give him full-hearted applause for his views on authentic liberal education.Thomas Woodrow Wilson, Harris & Ewing bw photo portrait, 1919.jpg

Take this for example,

When you say a young person must be prepared for his life-work, are you prepared, is he prepared, are his parents prepared, to say what that life-work is going to be?

The answer to this is NO!

He proceeds,

Do you know a boy is going to be a mechanic by the color of his hair? Do you know that he is going to be a lawyer by the fact that his father was a lawyer? Does any average and representative modern parent dare to say what his children are going to be?

Again the answer to the first two questions is “no” and “no,” but there certainly are more than a few average modern parents who do in fact dare say what their children are going to be, or at least dare to say what their children wont be. Witness the shortage in religious vocations for example.

Wilson hits the nail on the head when he says,

My chief quarrel with the modern parent is that he does not know, and that he hands that question over to the youngster whom he is supposed to be advising and training.

The elective system of education which began in the university (where it properly belongs), and crept back into the college and has now permeated most high schools and is even seeping into (if you can believe it!) the primary school, is an exact exemplification of what Wilson is saying.

These days parents say to their children,

“Son, daughter, you must be successful in life. I don’t know what you are going to be or how you are going to accomplish this. I who am older and wiser than you don’t know how you should be educated. I don’t know what precise path you should take. I will not prescribe a certain path for you to follow. No… making these important decisions  about your life and your success must all be left up to you who are relatively ignorant about all things. Every choice about your intellectual formation must be made by you according to your own whims and passing fancies.

That is what the elective system is isn’t it? I just can’t get over how silly it is on the face of it. It represents a complete abdication of responsibility  on the part of those who are supposed to know better.

It would be like a pediatrician saying to a child ,

As your doctor I recommend health to you. But what health is and how you should acquire it is completely up to you. You must make your own diagnoses and choose your own prescriptions.

You might think that this comparison is too strong.

You say,

Yes- that would be ridiculous for doctors to let their patients diagnose themselves and write their own prescriptions. But the health of the body is a very delicate and important thing. There are very precise methods, rules, and best practices that must be adhered to in order to obtain and maintain health.

But Socrates would reply,

What is more important, the health of the body or the health of the soul? Which is more easy to achieve? If the health of the body requires certain precise methods and practices, how much more would the health of the soul require these!

It is not difficult to understand why parents abdicate their responsibilities as primary educators and why as a consequence, the children themselves, or rather the passions, whims and fancies of the children, become the primary architect of their own intellectual formation. The reason is that many parents no longer know what an education is. And so they substitute the imagined idea of their child’s success in a career, a career which they know not, for education.

This unknown career becomes the child’s purpose in life, and the school is asked to educate the child in order to make him “college and career ready.”

As Wilson says

“…when he says he wants his son’s training suited to his purpose of life he must admit his son has no purpose in life. Then we are asked to suit our processes to this undestined youth.”

Now this is a predicament. The school must educate children to be successful for a myriad unknown careers. Wilson write about the state of education in the early part of the twentieth century,

“With this complexity, what has the modern school attempted to do? It has attempted to do everything at once. It has said: Here are a lot of boys and girls whose future occupations we do not know and they do not know. They must be prepared for life. Therefore we must prepare everybody for everything that is in that life. We haven’t found it amusing. We haven’t found it possible. We have attempted it and we know we have failed at it. You cannot train everybody for everything. Moreover you are not competent to teach everything. There is not any body of teachers suited in gifts or training to do this impossible thing. Neither the schools nor those who guide them have attempted to make any discrimination with regard to purpose or to settle upon methods which will promise some degree of substantial success. That is the situation we are in.”

Wilson said this in 1909 speaking to the New York City High School Teachers Association.

More than a century later …. progress?

Posted in catholic education, college, education, Liberal Arts, liberal education | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

In Education, The End Depends On The Beginning.

Incidentally, I haven’t read much of the Roman poet Manlius who “flourished” in the first century AD. But his famous line “Finisque ab origine pendet” from the fourth book of his Astronomicon appears to have been adopted by Phillips Exeter Academy as its motto.

John Phillips who founded the school wrote:

“Above all, it is expected that the attention of instructors to the disposition of the minds and morals of the youth under their charge will exceed every other care; well considering that though goodness without knowledge is weak and feeble, yet knowledge without goodness is dangerous, and that both united form the noblest character, and lay the surest foundation of usefulness to mankind.”

Phillips Exeter, founded in 1781, is now, I would say, a fairly prestigious Academy claiming everyone from Daniel Webster to Pierre S. du Pont to Joseph Coors to Mark Zuckerberg as alumni. And no one would argue that these gentlemen haven’t been very useful to mankind.

File:Portrait of John Phillips.jpeg

John Phillips, banker and merchant that he was, stresses knowledge and goodness as things to be pursued because of their “usefulness to mankind.” Now just imagine for a moment, per impossibile,  that knowledge and goodness were not useful! Surely we would all be in big trouble!

If knowledge and goodness were only valuable as things to be pursued for their own sake, would John Phillips have laid the foundations of his school? I doubt it.

I suppose Phillips Exeter and its veritable “galaxy of names” of famous alumni is itself fulfilling its own motto “finis origine pendet.” The origins of the school are rooted in a fundamental utilitarian view of human life, and its entire 200 plus years of existence have born this philosophy out through the production of men whose names would supply almost a complete litany of worldly success.

But certainly, “the end does” in fact “hang from the beginning” to a great extent. Parents, schools, and indeed all who concern themselves with the formation of the young know the importance of a good beginning. The path of an arrow, its precise trajectory, velocity, and force can be determined by examining its beginning movement, so too, human life seems to have a trajectory that can almost be wholly predicted by what happens in the beginning.

But rather than fit man from the very beginning to be useful to himself and to others- (which at first glance appears like a very laudable goal!) genuine Catholic education seeks to dispose each person to be a fitting vessel for Divine Grace. Following the maxim that “grace builds on nature,” genuine Catholic education proposes that by acquiring the intellectual habits of truth, the mind of the student is more apt for Divine Truth.

And further, by acquiring habits of goodness, students are more disposed to living a life of the Theological Virtues.

And by acquiring virtues that allow us to see and respond to beauty, students are disposed to the appreciation of Him who is Beauty itself!

Habits that enable us to see order, unity, symmetry, harmony, and proportion, enable the young to see and respond to beauty in the world.

Developing these habits are “the beginnings” that we all want for our children, for then they are disposed to see the beauty of the Creator.

St. Bonaventure writes,

“In beautiful things St. Francis saw Beauty itself, and through His vestiges imprinted on creation he followed his Beloved everywhere, making all things a ladder by which he could climb up and embrace Him who is utterly desirable.”

One would hope that after 12 years of schooling, every student would be well on his way to having acquired the habits of truth, goodness and beauty. We even ask him to start a somewhat more independent life in college supposing that he will then pursue goodness, truth, and beauty on his own. One would hope that a student entering college would have the internal motivation, the habits, or at least the beginnings of these habits, to pursue the things that lead to his highest end.

Finisque ab origine pendet.

Catholic education ought to focus on good beginnings; the formation of the intellectual, moral and aesthetic virtues .

In this way, we pray that our students will all someday find Him Who is the beginning and end of all Truth, Goodness and Beauty.

Posted in beauty, catholic education, classical education, education, liberal education, truth for its own sake | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

A Third Reason Why Philosophy is The Best and Most Noble Music

Let’s see if we can make this argument quickly and effectively!

We have given two reasons why Socrates said that “Philosophy Is The Best And Most Noble Music.”

We now present a third. Maybe there are more than three? But Three is enough!

(Drum-roll)

Philosophy is the best and most noble music in so far as it shares the very purpose of music- that is to aid man in bringing his soul into harmony with reason. But, we hasten to add, philosophy aims at this purpose in a higher and even more sublime way than does music!

Therefore, in comparison with music, Philosophy is “the best and most noble music.”

A brief defense:

Music like the other fine arts aims at a catharsis of the passions, as Aristotle points out in his Poetics. (Granted that the Poetics is about Tragedy specifically- it is clear that the same argument could be made about the other fine arts as well) The fine arts are various arts by which we are able to make our senses and imagination and the passions more reasonable.

Music has an obvious relationship to our passions. And so it is very easy to see that when we listen to beautiful music we are bringing our interior life (at least partly) into a more orderly and reasonable state.

But isn’t it obvious that this is what the philosopher aims to achieve?

We could probably do a better job making this reason clearer- but let’s avoid pedantry, for a change, and be done with it!

Thus we have three reasons why Philosophy is the best and most noble music:

  1. Philosophy really knows nature whereas music only imitates it (imitation being loosely a sort of “knowing”)
  2. Philosophy brings our souls into harmony with the truth. It brings the whole of our interior life into agreement with itself and with God whereas music brings about a harmony of sound.
  3. Philosophy aims to perfect man by bringing his whole soul into the service of reason whereas music aims, more specifically, at bringing mans passions into the service of reason.

Philosophy is The Best and Most Noble Music.

Posted in Fine Arts, Music, philosophy, Socrates, Uncategorized, Wisdom | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Philosophy Is The Best And Most Noble Music: A Second Reason

Well, its time to give one more reason to support Socrates when he said that

Philosophy Is The Best And Most Noble Music

Otherwise I might forget it and then where will we be?

As we mentioned, one reason that “Philosophy Is The Best And Most Noble Music” stems from what a fine art is.

The fine arts imitate nature.  Whereas Philosophy does something that is even more than this- it does not just imitate nature, it knows nature! Therefore, comparatively speaking, philosophy is  “the best music.”

Here is a second reason:

Philosophy Is The Best And Most Noble Music (which seems to be a kind of free translation of “ὡς φιλοσοφίας μὲν οὔσης μεγίστης μουσικῆς”) because of what music is.

Another word for music is harmony. And harmony refers to, if nothing else, the bringing together in pleasant agreement various and different sounds.

To harmonize means to make agreeable sounds. To blend notes such that when heard together one hears “agreement.”

Thus to make harmony, or to make music, means to make agreement.

This agreement might be between one note and the next in a melody (horizontally). Or the agreement could be between all the notes among the chords (vertically).  Or both hopefully.

To make music mean to make agreement!

Now do you see how Music is like philosophy? Socrates devoted a life time to talking with people in an attempt to bring them to an interior agreement.

The Dialogues are all examples of this.

Someone claims to know something. Socrates, always interested in learning, engages him in a discussion in which Socrates ‘tests’ whether the claim to knowledge is really authentic.

In most cases Socrates discovers that those who claim to know something do not in fact know what they claimed. And Socrates attempts, with patience and charity, to show each of these pretenders to knowledge that they really don’t know.

How do you show someone who falsely claims to know something that he doesn’t know?

The best way to do this, as Socrates teaches us, is to show a person that if he asserts one thing which contradicts other things about which he is more certain, then the assertion cannot be true.

In other words, if someone has the truth then  all of his ideas must be in agreement with one another.

With the truth all things harmonize. With the truth all things are in harmony. With truth there is Music!

And so what could be clearer?

Music is the art which brings various sounds into harmony or agreement, Philosophy is the science in which our ideas and thoughts are brought into harmony; the method by which the entire intellectual life of man is brought into a beautiful agreement.

Therefore Philosophy, as Socrates maintains, is the best and most noble music!

Image result for greek playing lyre

Posted in Music, Philosophy of Nature, Seven Fine Arts, Socrates | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The First Reason Why Philosophy Is The Best And Noblest Music

The first reason why philosophy is the best and noblest music is taken from what music shares with all the fine arts but has in a preeminent degree. All the fine arts are works of reason. (I prefer to say that they are discoveries by reason instead of products of reason.)

In other words the fine arts imitate nature. They are not mental constructs as say “Lobachevskian Geometry.”

Image result for lobachevsky

Doesn’t Lobachevsky look kind of haunted?

Датотека:Sferni-trougao.gif

An equilateral triangle with three right angles…NOT!

The fine arts imitate the order in nature, they do not attempt to impose some new kind of order. The works of science fiction might be thought of as impositions of man’s imagination upon nature- or against nature, but the fine artist finds beauty in bringing out the order that is already in nature, and making it even more manifest to our senses.Image result for carl schmitt eggs painterMy wife’s grandfather (the “American Painter” Carl Schmitt) knew about the order in things – especially eggs!

The point here is that the fine arts are works or discoveries of reason that bring forth the order that is in nature. It is not the job of the fine arts to be “creative” as if the order that man creates is something that merits to be called ‘divinely inspired.’ The fine arts are gifts of the muses to man- not gifts of one man to another. This is why the fine arts are able to uplift men. They stem from principles which are above man, and therefore have the capacity to lift man above himself.

Music, preeminent among all the fine arts as a work of reason, is orderly and imitative of the order that is in nature.

This is easy to see if one considers that among the fine arts (e.g. sculpting, dancing, painting, architecture, etc) music is the art which is most directly related to mathematics.

This is not to say that the other arts, like architecture (which is obviously related directly to Geometry) are not related to mathematics. I am merely asserting that music is the art most directly related to mathematics. The very sounds that produce music are all products of various mathematical ratios, like the octave and the fifth, as the immortal Pythagoras discovered. And of course, tempo and rhythm are obviously governed by mathematical principles as well.

Image result for pythagoras

The fact that music is the most imitative of the mathematical order that reason knows, is certainly a reason why music is the only fine art that made its way into the sacred seven liberal arts of the quadrivium and the Trivium.

Now Mathematics itself is a beginning part of philosophy and the study of mathematics is necessary for anyone who wants to pursue philosophy.

But the point here is that Music is a work or discovery of man’s reason about the order in the world (i.e. particularly about the order that is found in man’s soul with regard to his passions).

This is also, loosely speaking  a definition of philosophy. Philosophy, if nothing else, is a work of man’s reason in its attempt to know the various orders that are found in the world.

So – and again not trying to be too strict here – the last two sentences amount to two premises in a syllogism the result of which is that

Philosophy is Music or  Music is Philosophy.

But the art of music does not really know the order that it imitates. Imitation is, broadly speaking, a sort of knowing – but it is not knowing in the strict sense of knowing. So given the fact that philosophy aims at really knowing we might say that Philosophy is better than music in this regard – and perhaps even say that “Philosophy is the best music.”

And whereas Music attempts to imitate the passions individually as they exist in the souls of men, philosophy attempts to know the passions simply. Philosophy knows what the passions are with precision and it knows their excesses and defects. And finally philosophy knows how many passions there are and how they relate to one another as well as how the passions relate to man himself and his final end.

Therefore we might agree with Socrates that Philosophy is Music and it might very well be figured under the name of music especially if we call philosophy the best and most noble music.

That is the first reason but I like the next two reasons even more!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

In the Gospel, Punctuation Makes All the Difference.

But He turned, and said unto Peter, “Get thee behind Me, Satan: thou art an offence unto Me”

Ouch!

Talk about a slightly awkward moment!

How did Peter recover from this “dressing down”  from his boss?

In today’s idiom I suppose we would say that this is the passage where Our Lord “read the riot act” to St. Peter.

If I was standing in St Peter’s shoes at the time, I think I would have simply melted into a little quivering blue puddle of shame.

And I think we all know how much St. Peter loved our Lord. For heaven’s sake, Peter had just made his extraordinary confession,

Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

We know that Peter is on the impulsive side. He leaps out of boats to walk on the water to Our Lord. He is quick to cut the ear off of Malchus, the servant of the high priest Caiaphas, when they came to arrest Jesus.

Image result for which apostle cut off the ear

Our Lord knew perfectly well how much Peter loved him. And, even more, Our Lord had just said after Peter’s confession,

Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church: and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

I’ve heard of managers and bosses that are perhaps a bit, shall we say,  “mercurial,” but “Get thee behind me, Satan” just seems a little “over the top” doesn’t it?

Related image

But maybe St. Peter, although rebuked, did not take the words of Our Lord in this sense. Can they be understood in any other?

Well, as readers of this blog probably know, whenever one has trouble with Scripture, help is not far off, a trusty resource is available with most of the answers, and it is called the Catena Aurea (the “Golden Chain”). And this is nothing other than St. Thomas Aquinas’ own compilation of the writings of all the Fathers, Doctors, Saints and exegetes who had anything interesting to say about every passage in the four Gospels!

Image result for Catena aurea

Now what does the Catena Aurea have to say about this mysterious passage? Is Our Lord really angry with St. Peter to the extent that he calls him by the name of everybody’s worst enemy?

Well among the various commentators on this passage is one of my favorites, St Hillary! And this is what he says:

The Lord, knowing the suggestion of the craft of the devil, says to Peter, “Get thee behind me;” that is, that he should follow the example of His [Our Lord’s] passion; but to him by whom this expression was suggested, He turns and says, “Satan, thou art an offence unto me.” For we cannot suppose that the name of Satan, and the sin of being an offence, would be imputed to Peter after those so great declarations of blessedness and power that had been granted him.

There! Isn’t that fantastic?

In other words, we have an issue of grammar and syntax here ripe for the teeming and alert intellects of Greek and Latin students everywhere!

Is the epithet “Satan” in apposition to “Get thee behind me”? Or is it the direct address (vocative Case) of a person who is not present (e.g. is our Lord apostrophizing?) Or perhaps Satan is present unseen to everyone but Our Lord? For as St. Hillary says, it was surely by Satan’s suggestion that Peter said what he did.

Our Lord, the Good Shepherd who loves his sheep, is ever gentle and courteous. He is ever temperate and moderate in his speech. He is never one to utter an unfit or overly harsh word.

He says to Peter, “Get behind me.” That is, “Get behind and follow me, for you too must lay down your life, suffer and die and rise just as I”

And then He addresses Satan whose temporary kingdom and reign will shortly be overturned,

“Satan, thou art an offense to me!”

which is actually sort of an understatement. Even here Our Lord does not speak with undue harshness to the one who represents the greatest obstacle in his mission.

The early manuscripts of Sacred Scripture do not contain punctuation. Thus St. Hillary’s account of this passage is possible.

Peter, come behind Me and follow Me. Satan thou art an offense to me!

Posted in Aquinas, Catena Aurea | Tagged , , , | 16 Comments

Other Statues to Pull Down

While we are busily engaged in the sanctimonious and largely symbolic act of pulling down statues of various confederate generals and others who promoted slavery directly or indirectly, I have a few suggestions for some other “statues” that need pulling down as well.

For, as Aristotle pointed out, “Human nature is enslaved in many ways.”

And don’t get me wrong. All slavery is bad. My understanding is that there will be no slavery in heaven where God

shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain.

The bad news is that the Civil War did not put an end to Slavery.

Sure the Civil War did end the apparent and visible slavery that made legal the ownership of human beings by other human beings, whereby the owners could wring

their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces.

Image result for slavery america plantation

And whatever one thinks about the causes of the North and the South, and the means employed, and the tremendous and appalling loss of life that ensued, every thinking American is just glad that the institution of slavery was abolished.

Thankfully, the Civil War was able to accomplish the eradication of such a sensible injustice, but, unfortunately, it was not able to put an end to some other forms of slavery, arguably even more deleterious, which degrade human dignity even more than the physical subjection of one person to another.

For, although the physical form of slavery (that has marred human history from seemingly the beginning) is a degradation of the person, this physical form of slavery nonetheless does not lay claim to the inner life of the human being. The human spirit is not able to be coerced by chains or whips no matter how brutal – at least if we are to believe the testimony of the those that have lived through such treatment.

The more invisible forms of slavery, however, of which I speak are far more destructive to the dignity of the human person, because they do touch the human person precisely in his inmost soul.

As Our Lord says in Matthew,

And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell.

The slaveries about which I speak are so subtle that even those who are enslaved might not even recognize the fact. Like the spectators chained to their chairs in Socrates’ famous allegorical cave, who wished for nothing more than to be left alone staring at the flickering shadows on the cave wall, might there be countless millions today among us who are similarly enslaved to a shadow world? I speak of those who ‘live’ life but are seemingly ignorant of many, if not all, of the most significant realities; those who live in the shadow world of materialism and are devoid of any knowledge of the soul, or the angels or of God.

Image result for cave socrates

Or what about the countless millions who are enslaved by their passions?

To encourage and promote slavery to the passions is to encourage human beings to a life which is no better than that of the beast.  Hamlet soliloquized,

What is a man, If his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more.

Image result for hollywood blvd

Or what about those who live their lives enslaved by fashion? Aren’t there a great many who appear to be directed by others in the clothing they wear, the thoughts they think, the music they listen to, and the cultural norms they follow? Far from acting freely or thinking for themselves, it would appear that for many people, the principle of their activity is nothing more than to appear to be “with it,” to appear to be au courant with whatever is the latest trend– moral, intellectual, or otherwise.

Image result for madison avenue

And perhaps most pernicious (although I am not sure), what about the vast majority of our fellow countrymen who appear to subscribe to the Baconian philosophy that man himself is ordered to some utilitarian end? In other words, that all of our efforts in the education and formation of the young should be to train them up towards utility? That they should think of nothing more than a career? That their lives have value only insofar as they are productive?

That those who are unable to “produce” or are not actually “producing” have no voice or value.

Image result for old lady in wheelchair

Is not this abhorrent? And yet the philosophy of utilitarianism is proposed by none other than all of our leading educational institutions. This is the assumption upon which the modern university is founded. The dignity of the human person is measured by his usefulness to society. If a person is not useful then he is worthless.

If there is anything that promotes slavery more than the philosophy of utilitarianism, I am not certain just what that would be.

Image result for harvard university

Then there is the slavery to custom and error and, of course, to sin itself. But we have enough work in front of us already.

We need to start marching and we need to pull down or re-purpose every institution that promotes slavery.  Here is my short list:

  1. Every educational institution that teaches our youth that the value of human life depends upon its utility – that man is ordered to a utilitarian end. (e.g. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc)
  2. Every institution that promotes the unbridled exercise of passions. (e.g. Hollywood, The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, etc)
  3. Every institution that encourages people to follow fashion as the chief principle of life (Madison Avenue, The New York Times, National Public Radio, etc)

There, I think that is a good start.

In other words, let’s not stop with the largely symbolic act of marching through cities and pulling down the statues of those who promoted slavery in the nineteenth century. Let’s gather and march through the cities and “pull down” the statues and institutions of those who promote slavery right now in the twenty-first century.

And far from being merely symbolic in its consequences like the disposal of a few old statues of Robert E. Lee, our actions in re-purposing, (or recycling) of, say, just the Ivy League schools and universities, those elite bastions of utilitarianism, will in itself have far-reaching beneficial consequences for all Americans and even people throughout the world.

In the place of these schools let us erect new institutions of learning dedicated to authentic, genuine liberal education – glorious liberal education, which, as its name signifies, is uniquely ordered to the production of free human beings!

Posted in education, liberal education, Modernists, Shakespeare, slavery | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments