Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

notes and other helps to make the child able to pass the examination But she must never help that child to be able to answer a question which would be against her faith, or against the history of her Church and the Catholic people. This is self-evident. And if anything is contained in a text book of that kind, or a question of that kind is anticipated, the child should be unprepared to answer; or, prepared to answer it to the contrary. But when it is simply a matter of arithmetic, there is no reason why different text books should be used than the State text books. The object is to try and get uniformity on principle and in general topics.

The next question is, "Should both the common and decimal fractions be taught in the fourth grade?" It has been our theory and practice to teach common fractions in the fourth grade. It has also been our practice to start the study of decimal fractions in the fourth grade, and as far as practice goes, there has not been any particular difficulty. It is not absolutely necessary to enter into the theory so long as you give the child practical information in that subject.

The next question, "Should geometry be taught in parochial schools?" It should not, because the parochial schools are elementary schools, and geometry is a secondary topic. A person might say, "how are you going to teach the children to find the area of a triangle they must know some geometry for that." I would say this is a mis conception. You can show the children that a triangle, for example, is half the size of a rectangle, and you can show that by a diagram Then you can show that if they find the area of the rectangle by multiplying the base by the altitude, you will find the area of the triangle by multiplying the base by one-half of the altitude. You might easily show the child how to find the hypothenuse, but if you start to demonstrate the geometrical principle on which you come to that conclusion, you would have him hopelessly confused and it would be a loss of time, even if he could answer like a parrot; because in my opinion, his reasoning powers are not developed to that extent The next question is, "In a school of eight grades should algebra be completed?" Algebra completed means a great deal. I should say algebra should not be completed. We give the elements, and that is sufficient.

A Father Why should algebra be taught and not geometry, in the eighth grade?

Father Lafontaine - Algebra is not a reasoning study to the same degree as geometry. You give a formula without giving the principle of reaching the formula. You teach the elements of geometry, that means mensuration. You teach the fact, but you don't discuss the principles of angles.

A Father

[ocr errors]

How about a pupil who finds trouble with grammar in the eighth grade and has not learned to think?

Father Lafontaine - It would mean that we cannot teach geo metry because a child has not learned to think at the end of the eighth grade. We cannot teach geometry any more than we can teach calculus, not because he has not learned to think at all, but because he has not learned to think far enough. It is a question of degree, otherwise we could not differentiate between elementary and secondard studies.

Brother Victor On the question of curriculum it was said that this Association should do something. I think that would be a very good thing. I have to inspect the schools in sixteen dioceses of twenty-two different cities, and something must be done in order to find out what the pupils of the classes are doing. Any program that the Association could get up would be a sort of a model program, taking up the different subjects and outlining them. I believe it would be well if certain portions of the program were taken up in the afternoon part of the meeting of the school department, one year English and another year history; because these meetings are held in different cities and there is always a new audience of teachers. We have many sisters here from Cleveland who would not be present if this meeting were held in Buffalo. These teachers have not had the opportunity of reading the reports and knowing what was done in the previous sessions. If something of that kind were taken up, I think it would be a great benefit.

The Chairman - That might be put before the meeting, whether it is the sense of the Conference that a course of studies be adopted by this school department, or a committee be appointed to study into the question of establishing a course of studies to be accepted in the future. As to the advisability of it, how it should be done, etc., that might become a question for the Conference to decide. We have a large number of religious communities in this country and a diocese often has several. I can testify to twenty-four in our diocese of Boston. Some of these religious communities have courses of studies that they have had for long years. Their teachers have been conformed to them. The teachers know how to take it up and produce excellent results, and after ten and twenty and thirty years, they would not be able to adapt themselves to something which was quite different. We must always remember that the Almighty has placed a number of stubborn facts before us in this world, and if we close our eyes to anything the fact is we will run up against it and bump our heads so hard we won't know where we are afterward. I will give you an example from my own experience - not that I bumped my head, thanks be to the Lord. When I was asked to take charge, I asked each community to give me the course of studies. After trying for three months to get it by questions, I determined an easier method. I took each one of the studies and put down the common points in

these various courses, and then the important points of difference. I found to my great surprise and consolation that in nearly all things they agreed. So that under the names of different courses of study there was a practical unanimity. We must be careful not to aim at some invisible theory. If we have the substance of things, that is generally enough to content most of us in this world. Personally, I believe that the same would be found in almost every' diocese. The elements of arithmetic are the same, everywhere. The elements of United States History we cannot change. They are facts. The elements of Christian Doctrine are all the same. There are little variations that don't make any more than nice little artistic differences, and we must not be too eager to remove these individualities that Monsignor O'Connell calls independent personal views, when they add a nice architectural finish to an otherwise commonplace course of studies. If we could bring together all these courses of studies, and then present one representing substantially the religious orders of the country, it would be a great benefit. Let us not look at something that is unrealizable, or not so desirable as we may think.

Brother Waldron - It is well to understand what is intended by this committee. It is not intended to prescribe a rigid curriculum for all the dioceses of the United States any more than we could prescribe, for instance, one size of coat or one size of hat for everybody in town. The idea is to carry out the plan of the committee of fifteen. There is a committee of ten and a committee of fifteen of the National Educational Association. The committee of fifteen treats of no school studies, but gives general plans of what they consider ought to be taught in the schools. There is a divergency of opinion among the committee of fifteen. But all the other educators, superintendents of schools, principals, and so on, have the benefit of this general discussion and this general plan, and there is no intention of imposing upon the Diocesan Board any rigid plan. Our plan would be to give suggestive ideas to all educators. We have the Christian Brothers with centuries back of them. We have other Brothers who could not be here, and we have the different orders of the Sisters. It appears to me that if their superiors, or the women representing these religious orders, after consultation with the best talent in their orders, would lay before this committee what they are doing, we would have an experience similar to that of Father Walsh in the Diocese of Boston. We do not differ in essence, we differ only in style of color and complexion. But we would know at least what the others are doing. No order claims that it has everything, and that perfection is nowhere else. We all know that everybody is doing a good work, and we would like to know the methods.

Seminary Department

Fifth Annual Meeting of the Educational Conference of Seminary Faculties.

Report of Proceedings

The fifth annual meeting of the Seminary Conference, its third as a branch of the Catholic Educational Association, took place at the Catholic Club, Cleveland, Ohio, on July 10, 11 and 12, 1906. In the absence of the president, the meeting was called to order by the secretary. Very Rev. Dr. Flynn, president of Mt. St. Mary's, Emmitsburg, Md., presided.

The committee on resolutions appointed by the chair, consisted of Dr. Heffron, Dr. O'Reilly and Father Molyneux, whose recommendations were adopted and presented to the general committee on resolutions. They were as follows:

1. We recommend that the present plan of organization be continued for the ensuing year.

2. We recommend that the executive board be empowered to appoint a publication committee and that this committee be authorized to direct and instruct the general secretary to publish such matter as may be useful to promote the ends of this association. Motion passed.

3. We recommend a committee of resolutions, three members of each department, and that they confer and frame such resolutions as will present the united sentiment of the association.

Signed by VERY REV. P. R. HEFFRON,

REV. T. C. O'REILLY, D. D.,

REV. JOHN P. MOLYNEUX, C. M.

The election resulted in the following choice, in each case

unanimous:

President, Very Rev. M. S. Ryan, C. M., Kenrick Seminary, St. Louis; Secretary and Treasurer, Rev. John F. Fenlon, St. Mary's Seminary, Baltimore.

The following papers were read:

THE FOUR YEARS' COURSE OF THEOLOGY, by the Very Rev. P. R. Heffron, D. D.

AIMS AND METHODS IN THE SPIRITUAL TRAINING IN SEMINARIES, first paper, Rev. P. Dissez, S. S., D. D.; second paper, Very Rev. W. F. Likly, C. M.

THE HISTORY OF DOGMA IN RELATION TO THE SEMINARY COURSE OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY, first paper, by the Very Rev. Daniel Kennedy, O. P., Prior of the Dominican Scholasticate, Washington, D. C.; second paper by the Rev. Luke V. McCabe, Ph. D. Third paper, by Rev. Joseph Bruneau, S. S., D. D. JOHN F. FENLON, Secretary.

The Four Years' Course of Theology

VERY REV. P. R. HEFFRON, D. D., RECTOR ST. PAUL'S THEOLOGICAL

SEMINARY, GROVELAND PARK, MINN.

"In all Seminaries the course of studies shall embrace not fewer than six years, two of which shall be devoted to the study of philosophy and four to that of theology."

"In omnibus igitur Seminariis majoribus tam provincialibus quam dioecesanis aut privatis, sive a sacerdotibus saecularibus sive a religiosorum institutis regantur, studiorum curriculum non pauciores quam sex annos complectetur, quorum duo philosophicis disciplinis attribuendi, theologicis vero quatuor. . Quod omnes clerici integre et cum sufficienti successu absolvere tenentur, nisi ab Episcopo ob gravissimas rationes dispensatio in casu particulari obtenta fuerit." 3d Plenary Con. of Baltimore.

There is no magic in the number four.

Behind the bare statement that a four years' course is prescribed for the study of theology and a two years' course for the study of philosophy, there must have been weighty considerations in the minds of the council Fathers. No doubt they were

« ÖncekiDevam »