Christ the True Vine, 16th-century Greek Icon
In our moment in
history, it seems there are, broadly speaking, two perspectives on the past,
two approaches to education, and really two distinct worldviews that are in
competition.
At the outset, I concede
that I am painting with broad strokes; I find the distinction has some merit,
nonetheless.
These two views may be
encapsulated in these two sentiments:
“The Ancients were
children compared to us.” (Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle, Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds)
Vs.
We are as “dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants…. we see more and
farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater
height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature.” (John of Salisbury quoting Bernard of
Chartres in the Metalogicon)
---
The first is what I
might call the “progressive” or “Enlightened” view. This perspective assumes the superiority of
contemporary thought and sensibility in most every respect to what has come
before; it has a great confidence in the “progress” of human society. This perspective does not look to the past
for wisdom or with a reverence for previous generations, but rather looks down
on past ages as inferior to our own time; it was backward in what is most
important. It views the past and what
has been inherited primarily in terms of its faults, and by extension, prioritizes
re-making society today according to its own ever-evolving ideals. This view seeks revolution and not reform in facing
societal evils.
We see this
perspective in the way in which the contemporary teaching of the humanities is
approached. The goal in this view is not
only to promote such “social progress,” but to encourage the student to decide
who they are and empower to follow that impulse while expressing themselves in
whatever way they choose. There is an emphasis
in all of this on the sex, race, and sexual orientation of the person. Happiness is understood as coming from
following what you feel makes you happy.
In presenting history
with this perspective, the focus is typically on social movements and societal reforms
that confront of the faults of the past.
History is viewed as the slow work of humanity overcoming its inequalities
and injustices as it gradually arrives at our own superior time and
society. The characters in history most worthy
of imitation, in this view, are usually the ones that are “ahead of his time”
and who reject the norms of their society.
The hero is the one who is not bound by custom or tradition, but who rejects
the status quo to promote “equality,” “fairness,” and a “better world.” The heroes are the revolutionaries, protesters, and dissenters. How could it
be otherwise when past societies were so characterized by injustice?
In literature and the
arts, this view manifests itself, once again, in highlighting the vices and
failings of the inheritance of previous generations and in prioritizing
self-expression. The works that are read
often champion the wisdom of the young over and against that of their elders;
it’s the activist teenager that knows better than his grandfather who is “stuck
in the past.” These works seek to
inspire their readers to promote social change and “progress” according to contemporary
sensibilities. At the same time, there
is a profound nihilist and dystopian streak in such literature, as hope for
such progress and change is often bleak, and there is no deeper or more
profound purpose to human life. Since
the arts and literature are viewed as especially about self-expression, it
seems obvious that the frustrated protester would express feelings of despair
and of the disorders of society.
This worldview views religious
faith with a great deal of skepticism.
Indeed, the notion of Divine Revelation is implicitly, if not explicitly,
rejected, as religious doctrines are subject to contemporary standards and
attitudes. If religion is practiced at
all, it is primarily a sentimental exercise that focuses almost exclusively on
affirming the practitioner and addressing questions of social justice and promoting
humanitarian goals. In the end, appeals
to science are preferred and, at times, take on the role of religious faith. There is a profound confidence in the ability
of the natural sciences to explain reality.
In the last analysis, from
this perspective the humanities might be useful for encouraging social action
and self-expression, but it is the fields of science and technology that are
really the most important for human flourishing. Hence the prominent place for “STEM”
education. The goal is to promote a world
ever more thoroughly based on science and equality.
---
On the other hand, we
have what I might call the “traditional” or “Classical” view. This perspective is grounded in a profound
respect for history and for past generations.
Indeed, it views the inheritance of past ages as one of the greatest
gifts we enjoy and a source of great wisdom.
It readily admits the progress of society in some areas, especially in
terms of technology, but it also has a profound humility in realizing that any such
progress is only possible because of the achievements of our forefathers. Further, while it concedes that society has
advanced in some areas it would also view it as regressing in others. This perspective grounds itself in ideals
received and truths handed on. The
heroes in this view are those that manifest virtue; the one that confronts evil
and disorder, not by remaking society, but calling it back to its core
ideals. In facing societal evils, it
seeks reform, not revolution.
In the humanities, this
traditional view prioritizes the pursuit of the true, good, and beautiful, with
an emphasis on looking to the wisdom of the past. Student are encouraged to learn who they are
by nature and to conform themselves to reality in seeking after their proper
end. There is an emphasis on the humanity
of the person, rather than the accidents of race or sex; his being a rational
animal with unique dignity distinct from the other animals is the decisive truth
about the person. Happiness is
understood as coming from accepting what you are by nature and seeking after your
proper end.
In history, for example,
there is a two-fold focus on moral formation and an appreciation for the
inheritance of the past. History from
such a view seeks to train the moral judgment of the student, presenting
exemplars for imitation along with cautionary tales of vice. It also imbues the student with a profound
reverence for past generations, a gratitude for the wisdom received, and a
foundation upon which to flourish in one’s own time. There is a skepticism toward dismantling what
has been inherited.
In literature and the
arts, the traditional view seeks to preserve the beautiful and ennobling. The mission of the artist is not just self-expression,
but the profound expression of the truth about reality. The story and the work of art is valued for
its ability to inspire and to convey truths in a compelling way. Newer forms of literature and art from this
point of view are grounded in the history of their craft.
This worldview, in its
perspective on religion, has an attitude of reverence and expects that humanity
should rise to the moral imperative and challenges of Divine Revelation, rather
than seek to change it. Virtue is
difficult, but worth the struggle, as it makes us most human. The natural sciences and human reason are
seen in concert rather than conflict with true faith. Nevertheless, the limits of human learning
are acknowledged and there is a humility about our ability to unfold the
mysteries of the universe.
In the end, there is
an appreciation for the need for the human person to be well-rounded to
flourish, and hence the prominent regard for the liberal arts in education. The
goal is to promote a world that grows in continuity with the wisdom of the past
ever more marked by truth, goodness, and beauty.
---
To be clear, I would
also affirm the good intentions of folks in both categories; I do not intend to
demonize anyone. Also, as I noted at the
outset, I freely acknowledge that I over-generalize and this division is imperfect
and certainly open to debate.
At the same time, I
find this does usefully tease out some of the profound divisions and
differences in our society today. In
questions of education, especially, we see not just a matter of different
pedagogical techniques, but of different worldviews.
In considering
questions of the past, I would observe a particular danger in viewing it primarily
or exclusively through the lens of failures and “progressive” change: even if
such a view spoke truthfully of past faults, it prejudices the audience against
that past if there is not a similarly true highlighting of past heroes and wisdom. For example, if in presenting your family
history, I only spoke of the faults and failures of your ancestors, you would
not have an accurate understanding of that family, even if everything said was
true. No person, family, or society is
characterized solely by its faults. Further,
a love and appreciation of those strengths can surely provide a reason for
seeking to preserve and improve that thing rather than dismantle or destroy it.
For the Catholic, with
our belief in the Blessed Trinity, Divine Revelation, the Incarnation, and the
historicity of the Church founded by Christ, along with our understanding of the
human person made in the image and likeness of God, we should have a reverence
for the past, for ancient institutions, for tradition, and for the harmony of
faith and reason. The Catholic who
subscribes to the “progressive” worldview cannot help but come into conflict
with the history, the doctrines, and the saints of the Church. It is no wonder such Catholics seem to ignore
the theology of the Church dating to before the mid-20th century. Unfortunately, in assuming the superiority of
the ideals of contemporary society, they effectively deny the legitimacy of
Divine Revelation and the Church’s perennial teaching.
Further, a truly Catholic
education must aim at the greatest good for the human person: salvation. If assisting students in knowing their
purpose as human beings – to know, love, and serve God in this world, so as to
be happy with Him in the next – is not the priority, it is not a Catholic
education worthy of the name.
The beauty of this
priority is that when love of God and His revelation is the priority, the love
of neighbor and appreciation for the aspects of reality gleaned from the
various disciplines are added on as well.
This is not a vision that stunts or narrows the person but opens them to
the reality of existence itself!
Live well!
