Preface to the English Edition
The Twelve Virtues of a Good Teacher (Les Douze Vertus d’un bon Maitre), by Brother Agathon, the fifth Superior General (1777–95) of the Brothers of the Christian Schools, is, in my view, after the monumental text we know as The Conduct of the Christian Schools, the most significant work in education in the Lasallian heritage. Some one hundred years after the first schools, it affords a kind of benchmark by which to judge the fidelity of the Institute to the founding vision. This significance is primarily because of the inherent value of the text itself but also because of its wide diffusion outside the Institute. Translated from the original French into Italian in 1797 and into English, Spanish, Dutch, and German during the nineteenth century, the work was a major text in many Catholic colleges of teacher education until the 1930s.
Addressed to the Brothers
The Twelve Virtues of a Good Teacher was addressed to the Brothers in 1785 as the first printed circular letter at a time when, novices included, there were close to 1,000 members in the Institute. It was, according to Brother Agathon’s original preface, a complement to an earlier letter in which he had reflected on the religious duties of the Brothers. The writer takes the twelve virtues that Saint John Baptist de La Salle listed in both the manuscript of The Conduct of the Christian Schools (1706) and Collection of Short Treatises (1711) but without any further development. The fact that Brother Agathon was working in the 1780s on an updated version of The Conduct (the manuscript of which we possess) to meet the diversified needs of the Institute one hundred years after the first school in Reims may have been the spur that led to his launching this new work.
In the same preface, Brother Agathon insists on following "the plan given us by M. de La Salle" and "in accordance with his principles and maxims." After discussing the possibility of a different sequence for the twelve virtues, Brother Agathon explains, "We felt that we should follow the order that M. de La Salle himself considered proper to indicate to us." He does, however, add to the text a postscript, "a short explanation of the conditions that M. de La Salle requires for correction to be of benefit both to the one who inflicts it and to the one who receives it."
If the text is redolent in so many ways of "the principles and maxims" of De La Salle, it is enriched by what Brother Agathon has drawn from his own experience and "from the most reliable authors." In fact, the principal "other" source is Traiteù des EÙtudes, by Rollin (†1743), from whom, a century or so later, the Institute was to adapt the Prayer of the Teacher Before School.
Brother Agathon himself
Brother Agathon—"le grand Supeùrieur," as the historian Georges Rigault called him—tried vainly to save the Institute from extermination in the suppression of all religious communities in 1792 during the French Revolution. Incarcerated in three different prisons, he was released and died alone in 1798. In the meantime, his text had reached the Brothers’ community in Rome, where an Italian translation was made in 1797. A subsequent edition—that of Marietti in 1835—became a favorite book of Saint John Bosco during his time as chaplain of the Brothers’ school of Santa Barbara in Turin. The Irish Christian Brothers produced the first English translation, in Dublin in the 1840s. The text was translated and introduced into Spain some twenty-five years before the Institute opened its first communities there. The incorporation of this work as a kind of appendix to editions of The Conduct of the Christian Schools may have contributed to its never attaining the same independent importance in France as it did in other countries, although it should be noted that it was included in at least seventeen separate editions during the nineteenth century.
Readers of the text, besides noting the vigorous direct style of the author, soon realize that they are reading the work of a man with broad experience of the classroom who has reflected at length on the heritage received from De La Salle and the first generation of Brothers.
Indeed, Brother Agathon as a teacher is known to us as the author of a treatise on arithmetic and one on double-entry accounting. He had taught mathematics and navigation in the program of specialized courses that the Brothers offered to French naval officers at Vannes and Brest. His reputation for good judgment and his ability at synthesis had brought him as secretary to the General Chapter of 1777, where, to his great surprise, he found himself proposed as Superior General.
A traditional Christian understanding of virtue
Virtue has been defined as "conformity of life and conduct with the principles of morality." Virtues, therefore, are the practices and habits that are followed out in accord with these principles. Four natural, or cardinal, virtues—prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance—are seen as the "hinges" on which other virtues can be cultivated. This concept of virtue was discussed by Socrates, found in Plato and Aristotle, adopted by Roman writers, and taken over by such distinguished Christian writers as Saints Ambrose, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas. Christian authors add the so-called theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity, giving preference to the greatest of the three-charity, or love.
While Greek thinkers see the virtues as somehow innate to the nature of humanity, Christian writers attribute them to God’s revelation through Jesus Christ. Virtue is always the just balance between excess and defect: virtus in medio stat. Virtue can be acquired by the cultivation of regular actions that build up to a habit (habitus). While modern psychology may have certain reservations about too mechanistic an approach to the cultivation of virtue, certain kinds of learning experiences—for example, acquiring another language—are based on such an approach.
Some editorial notes
I have been able to make use of two different translations of this text, one done by the late Brother Oswald Murdoch (District of Australia) and the other by Brother Richard Arnandez (District of New Orleans-Santa Fe), but I have allowed myself some latitude in modifying certain expressions, and sometimes entire sections, so that they may be better understood by contemporary readers.
The basic French structure of the text has been maintained, especially in the use of the semicolon to indicate the subordination of ideas. While this is not the same way as the semicolon is used in English, the logic and force of the original text are better preserved than by breaking up the text into short sentences ending with periods.
Secondly, although the French makes regular use of the word enfants for children and eùleøves for pupils to describe the young people in the classrooms that Brother Agathon and the Brothers knew in the late years of the eighteenth century, I have settled for the word students so as to make the most appropriate connection with the young people in Lasallian schools today. By the 1780s, the Brothers had eight boarding and correctional schools on the Saint Yon model. Their students were no longer simply children who remained only for two years to learn the elements of reading, religion, writing, and arithmetic; they were adolescents, young men who may have had six or seven years of prior schooling.
Thirdly, since this is a translation of an original work that Brother Agathon wrote for the Brothers of his day, who taught boys only, there has been no attempt to change his own way of speaking about boys and young men or of addressing only teachers who were male. I think all Lasallian teachers, nevertheless, will make the necessary adjustments as they come to appreciate the wisdom and practical importance of this great Lasallian text.
Brother Gerard Rummery
12 February 1998
Preface to the 1785 Edition
My very dear Brothers,
It would not be enough for us to know the duties imposed on us by our vows if we were to remain ignorant of the means we need in order to correspond, as we should, with the end of our Institute, which is the instruction of children. This is why we intend in the following pages to discuss the virtues that are characteristic of a good teacher.
You will certainly, very dear Brothers, eagerly welcome a work that is of such great importance for you. We have followed the plan given us by M. de La Salle, our venerable Founder. We have composed this treatise in accordance with his principles and maxims; and what we have drawn from others was taken from the most reliable authors.
The virtues, or—what comes to the same thing—the qualities and characteristics, of a good teacher are Gravity, Silence, Humility, Prudence, Wisdom, Patience, Reserve, Gentleness, Zeal, Vigilance, Piety, and Generosity.
We do not intend to speak of these virtues in theory; we are satisfied—and must be satisfied—with simply making an application of these virtues to the end we propose to attain; and it is in this perspective that we will consider them in the pages that follow.
Here is the order to which we will conform. We will explain the true character of each virtue, the particular traits proper to it, and the defects opposed to it. Thus we are going to offer you a series of tableaux, as many as there are virtues to consider. In beholding these, an intelligent and attentive teacher will easily perceive what he needs to do and to avoid in order to make his teaching more effective.
Before beginning, we might observe that it would perhaps be easy to find a link concerning all these many virtues. Thus we might list Wisdom first, because it presents the main objective, the total objective that a teacher should propose to himself. Prudence might be placed second, because it makes a teacher know how he should act so as to fulfill his role properly. Then the other virtues would follow, each in its place, and the work might end with Gentleness, the crowning virtue of a good teacher, thanks to the value given it by Charity, the queen of all virtues. But such an arrangement seemed to us a merely artificial one, of no real utility. We felt that we should follow the order that M. de La Salle himself considered proper to indicate to us.
We have added, as a sort of postscript, some reflections on the conditions that he calls for so that correction may be salutary both to the one who inflicts it and to the one who receives it.
Brother Agathon
Melun, 12 February 1785
Gravity (Seriousness)
Gravity (Seriousness) is a virtue that regulates the exterior of a teacher conformably to modesty, politeness, and good order.
A teacher possessing this virtue holds his body in a natural position without either affectation or awkwardness; he does not shake his head or turn it lightly from side to side at every word he utters. His glance is assured and serene, without either affectation or severity. He does not laugh while talking, nor does he make unseemly gestures. He keeps an affable air; he speaks little and uses a moderate tone of voice. In what he says, there is nothing bitter, stinging, supercilious, crude, or offensive to anyone.
Since he is convinced that Gravity, modesty, and reserve do not exclude kindness or tender affection, he seeks by his lovable qualities to win the friendship of the students; for he knows by acting thus that they will show more interest in coming to his lessons, more docility in accepting them, and more faithfulness in putting them into practice. He does not, however, show himself too free with them, nor does he entertain any familiarity or intimacy with any of them.
Far from seeking only to make them fear him, his main aim is to win his students’ confidence, the better to know the virtues they may possess, so as to cultivate and develop them; and the more easily to discern their vices and defects, in order to correct these, if not entirely, at least as far as he can. For this purpose, he carefully eliminates from his behavior whatever might smack of harshness, overbearingness, and bluster—in a word, whatever might make him unfeeling, ill-humored, indifferent, or hard to please. He also avoids a menacing tone of voice and a too demanding attitude, which prevent the students from showing themselves for what they are, causing them to avoid the sight of their teacher and to hide the evil traits that he might be able to remedy if he knew about them, thus depriving the students of the possibility of letting the seeds of their good qualities germinate and grow.
The teacher should, moreover, seek to win their esteem and respect; for students will not listen to what is taught them by a master whom they cannot look up to. Hence he never forgets his duty of being for them a continual model of all the virtues. He exhibits in all his external appearance the restraint and decorum that result from his maturity of mind, his piety, and his wisdom. Above all, he takes care to preserve calm through his even temper and good humor. He does not allow himself negligent or immodest attitudes, too much playfulness, any frivolity, any buffoonery, or whatever might suggest trifling. Still, since Gravity carried too far would make him ridiculous and obnoxious, he keeps it within appropriate limits. Thus this virtue, properly understood, establishes good order in class, affords a teacher true elevation of sentiments that preserve him from being wanting in his duty, maintains the students faithful to their obligations, and inspires them with attachment, confidence, and respect with regard to the teacher himself.
Besides the defects contrary to Gravity that we have mentioned above, there are others that a teacher should carefully avoid: all outbursts of temper, violent acts, fierce and menacing looks, impatience, crudeness, childish behavior, an imperious tone of voice, biting words, or those inspired by a simulated and feigned mildness.
Not only must the teacher avoid these defects; he must also refrain from making faces, joking, striving for humor, and giving penances that disturb order, provoke laughter, and might be unbecoming; acting and speaking in ways inappropriate for a classroom, taking on scornful manners, behaving gruffly; making certain sounds or affecting peculiar accents when speaking; indulging in a ridiculously affected manner, such as speaking in a deep voice and assuming supercilious ways with too magisterial, too absolute, and too pedantic airs. He should avoid an overly mysterious and stilted outward appearance, conceited, angry and exaggerated behavior, moving his body in too sudden a manner, shrugging his shoulders, overemphasizing his gestures, or banging on the platform, the desks, or the tables to arouse or frighten the students.
Set the believers an example in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity
(1 Timothy 4:12)
Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one look down
on you (Titus 2:15) — that is to say, regard you as his inferior in virtue
and thus make you less than you are.
Silence
Silence is a virtue that leads the teacher to avoid speaking when he should not speak and to speak when he should not be silent.
This virtue, therefore, includes two functions. It teaches the art of being silent and that of speaking opportunely. Thus it causes the teacher to avoid two opposite defects that it condemns: taciturnity and loquacity.
The first effect of Silence produces order and calm in the classroom, insures the progress and advancement of the students, gives the teacher some rest, and preserves his health; three things that a teacher cannot afford to neglect without exposing himself to serious consequences.
Indeed, if he speaks too much, the students will do the same. They will ask and answer questions out of turn; they will meddle in what is none of their business; they will excuse themselves and try to excuse others; the class will resound with a steady hum.
Moreover, experience shows that the teachers who talk a lot are hardly listened to and that little account is taken of what they say. But if they speak rarely and to the point, their students pay attention to what they are told, like it, remember it, and profit by it.
Experience also shows that teachers who like to talk too much live in perpetual agitation and weaken their lungs severely. Teaching, in itself, is very taxing; to devote himself to it properly, no doubt a good teacher will willingly sacrifice himself; but he must do so prudently. Hence he avoids all imprudence and in particular eschews any manner of teaching that proves injurious to his health without being truly useful.
The class signals that we use afford us the great advantage of keeping Silence while teaching. These signals have been established so as to warn and correct the students and to indicate to them what they have to do; thus the teacher needs to speak only when he cannot make the children understand by signs what he wants of them. These signals, while reminding the teacher to refrain from speaking, at the same time indicate to him to speak when the signals do not suffice. This is where the teacher begins to apply the second function of Silence.
But this he should do only on three occasions: in reading, to call attention to mistakes that no student can correct and to give needed explanations, warnings, orders, and prohibitions; then during catechism, to explain the text and to help the students answer properly; and finally, during the morning and evening prayers, to exhort the students and to offer some reflections for them. On these occasions he should say only what is strictly necessary. If he spoke more than this, he would offend against the first aspect of the virtue of Silence.
Furthermore, the main goal of the teacher is to bring up the student in the Christian virtues. In general, he should enlighten their minds and move their hearts by means of these truths that he must teach them. In instructing them, he should prepare himself, as we have already mentioned in our first letter and as we will explain more fully when treating of the virtue of Prudence. To make his language more appealing, he should seek to convince himself of that with which he wishes to inspire his disciples. "If you wish to persuade," says Saint Bernard (On the Song of Songs, sermon 59, number 3), "it is rather by affectionate sentiments than by studied declamations that you will succeed in this." Indeed, many examples prove that while a skillful and eloquent teacher exhausts himself in vain by efforts that are all the more wearing as true zeal enters less into them, another teacher, perhaps much inferior in talent but fully convinced of what he teaches, will bring about the most salutary results.
A good teacher will, in general, consider as faults against Silence that should be avoided:
I tell you, on the day of judgment, you will have to give an account
for every careless word you utter (Matthew 12:36).
But as for you, teach what is consistent with sound doctrine (Titus 2:1).
When you speak, says Saint Bernard, do not let your words come rushing out;
utter only true and weighty words; speak only of God or for God.
[Cum loqueris, sint verba dura, rara, vera, ponderosa et de Deo.]
Humility
Humility is a virtue that inspires us with low sentiments of ourselves; it attributes to us our just due.
Humility makes us realize what we are, according to these words of the Apostle: "What do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?" (1 Corinthians 4:7) Thus it directly opposes pride, which gives us an unjustly exalted notion of our own excellence; yet, in truth, this vice does not indicate any solid good in us, for it is only a swelling that puffs us up and makes us appear in our judgment greater than we really are.
Our Divine Savior teaches us the necessity of this virtue when he tells us, "Unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 18:3). This terrifying threat applies most especially to those who are in charge of instructing youth.
What are the true characteristics of the Humility proper to our state, considering it as the function of teaching? We will explain this.
1) The Humility of a good teacher must be Christian. Hence he will be faithful to what he owes God and to what he owes his neighbor, not only his superiors but also his equals and his inferiors. Thus a Brother who may be the first among others should carefully refrain from exacting and (on the pretext that he is placed above them) even from tolerating that others should render him any base or lowly services that he can do for himself. If he were to demand such services, he would be acting very contrary to Humility. A good teacher will be humble in mind, knowing full well his own insufficiencies; he will be humble in heart, loving his lowliness; he will be humble in action, behaving humbly in all he does.
No doubt he will never lose sight of the excellence and nobility of the end for which he was created; but at the same time, he will always keep in view the wretched state in which he is as a consequence of the sin of the first man: obscurity in his understanding that even if not total, is still very notable; still greater weakness in his will, powerlessness to do any supernatural good without God’s help. Such is the sad inheritance of human nature as religion teaches us. He does know, of course, that God will never abandon him in his need unless he has first abandoned God. But even when he thinks "that he stands," must he not always fear "lest he fall" (1 Corinthians 10:12)? And consequently, must he not work out his salvation with fear and trembling, without being able to find reassurance except in these beautiful words of the Apostle Saint Peter: "Be all the more eager to confirm your call and election, for if you do this, you will never stumble" (2 Peter 1:10–11).
2) Humility is accompanied by modesty. Thus a teacher who possesses this virtue considers himself highly honored to labor for the salvation of souls, following the examples of Jesus Christ and the Apostles in a role that a great number of the saints who have made the Church illustrious by their lights and edified by their virtues have gloried in.
If he is talented, he does not make a display of it; he does not show conceit, pride, or overbearing manners; he avoids attitudes and gestures, airs and ways of acting, that might make him conspicuous in human eyes or might draw attention to the qualities he thinks he possesses. He takes no pleasure in his wit or in the knowledge he may have acquired. With all the more reason, he does not look down on his Brothers or on what they do. He does not seek to be praised for what he does or applauded for his success; he does not attribute to himself the glory that is due only to the One who distributes talents as he sees fit; he refers all such esteem to God alone (1 Timothy 1:17). If he does not always achieve among his students all the good he hoped for, and even if he does no good at all, he blames himself, seeking to know what he did wrong, in order to correct it. After this he remains in peace, submissive to Providence, knowing that it is neither he who plants nor he who waters but God who gives the increase.
3) Humility excludes all vainglory as a motive of acting. Nothing, in fact, is more silly than to desire human esteem; it is, says Pierre de Blois, "a burning wind that dries up the rivulets of grace." Such a desire is, moreover, incompatible with the principles of the Gospel. Jesus Christ said to his disciples, "Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Messiah" (Matthew 23:10). It matters little to be known by men. "But rejoice that your names are written in heaven" (Luke 10:20).
4) Humility is without ambition. Since a truly humble Brother thinks himself fit for very little, he does not seek a more exalted position or employment. He does not want to teach one class rather than another, but he convinces himself that the class to which he has been assigned by obedience is better for him than any other, will provide him with more means of glorifying God, and will draw down on him more graces to use those means properly and as far as possible.
5) Humility eliminates jealousy. A humble Brother, far from feeling chagrin over the achievements and successes enjoyed by others in the same type of work, on the contrary, will be pleased to see that they equal and even surpass him; that they succeed better than he does in teaching. Thus he will never try to put himself forward as having more merit than another, nor will he allow himself to display coldness toward others who may be ranked above him; in the same way, he will nourish no bitterness toward those who classify him below other Brothers.
6) Humility is not overconfident about its own views. Thus if a Brother truly possesses this virtue, he will conform to the principles established in the Institute regarding teaching; he will not insist on following his own ideas; he will go along with his confrères; he will preserve uniformity of conduct in their regard; he will not make use of any special methods, any extraordinary practices, to teach in his own way, keeping in mind the harm that might be done to the students as a result and the difficulties he might create for the teachers who will come after him. Since he is not rash in what he does, he seeks to reassure himself by relying on the expertise of others; he consults them, willingly accepts their advice, warnings, and instructions; in a word, everything that might help him to do a better job.
7) Humility makes a teacher glad to share his knowledge with the simple. He shows great zeal in evangelizing the poor, in instructing the ignorant, and in teaching children the basics of religion. But if his knowledge is not accompanied by Humility, he will readily turn aside from those areas of teaching that are less highly considered even though they may well be the most useful.
8) The Humility of a good teacher makes him courageous. He does not turn away from whatever may be lowly and uninviting in the schools and in the students. He welcomes them with kindness and mildness; without showing any distaste, he puts up with their natural defects: their rudeness, their ineptitude, the flaws in their character. He patiently bears with their indocility, impoliteness, ingratitude, opposition, and even insults without yielding to resentment or revenge, even when these faults are directed at him personally. Still, he does not forget that he must always repress whatever might weaken his authority and give rise to disorder, insolence, lack of application, or other forms of misconduct on the part of the students.
9) Humility makes a good teacher treat both his equals and his inferiors with esteem, cordiality, friendliness, and kindness.
10) Humility makes a good teacher endure without chagrin the confusion that his mistakes, blunders, and lack of success may draw down on him. The students can only be edified by his example on such occasions and be led to imitate it themselves later on when they find themselves in like circumstances.
11) The Humility of a good teacher makes him charitable, affable, obliging, and easy to approach, especially by the poor and those whom he might find less interesting to deal with. Never does he assume an arrogant, disdainful, or scornful attitude when addressing the students.
12) Finally, besides the defects of which we have been speaking, Humility also condemns in general these that follow: lack of tact, indifference toward others, self-importance, affected and pretentious ways of acting toward Brothers or students; egotism, which leads the teacher to concern himself only with his own person and which is nothing but false humility; this is especially to be condemned in the case when the teacher, fearing to fail, refrains from making all the effort that the glory of God and obedience demand. The good teacher avoids the spirit of independence, which makes him follow none but his own ideas and refuses to be subordinate to anyone in the exercise of his employment. Thus only reluctantly does he show to a visitor, a Director, or an Inspector the marks of common politeness and courtesy due to them, such as asking them to take the teacher’s chair during class, finding out from them what they would like him to do, accompanying them in order to answer their questions, explaining to them whatever they might wish to know; showing them the students’ copybooks and receiving their observations and their advice.
A person’s pride will bring humiliation,
but one who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor (Proverbs 29:23).
In humility regard others as better than yourselves (Philippians 2:3).
Prudence
Prudence is a virtue that makes us understand what we need to do and what we need to avoid.
Prudence indicates to us the sure and legitimate means of attaining a praiseworthy end; therefore, it determines the use we should make of our intelligence and of our mind to turn us aside from what we might have to regret in the undertakings or actions of life. Besides, the means it uses will always be legitimate if they are inspired by reason or by faith; and they will be sure to be neither insufficient nor excessive.
Since the good teacher’s main goal is the education of the children, Prudence enlightens him about the means he should use to bring them up properly by educating their minds and hearts. Hence this virtue is highly to be esteemed; it is even a most excellent art, says Saint John Chrysostom, because, as he adds, a good teacher stands far above a clever painter, a skillful sculptor, and other similar artists; from which we may conclude that to such a one especially we may apply the words of Holy Scripture: "Happy the man rich in Prudence!" ["Happy are those who find wisdom!" Proverbs 3:13]
Since the operations of this virtue are to deliberate carefully, to judge rightly, and to order all things properly, a teacher should seek to accomplish all these goals. He cannot, in fact, achieve his objective, which is the education of the children, unless he is sure of the infallibility of the means he uses to bring them up correctly; and he cannot be sure of this unless he has examined, discussed, sought for, and found what these means are.
Still, it is generally possible that he may be mistaken in his judgment; but he will not be if he acts with Prudence; for the matter he is judging is either evident or doubtful. In the former case, he cannot be mistaken; and in the latter, before deciding, he focuses all the requisite attention to make sure that he says only what he knows is true and that he takes as conjectural only what is doubtful.
But to carry out the functions of Prudence properly, he takes care to make use of the different elements it includes, which are eight in number: memory, intelligence, docility, skill, reasoning, foresight, circumspection, and precaution.
Secondly, the teacher will carefully prepare the material for every lesson he wishes to teach. This leads us to explain again, as we announced above, this topic that is so important and that, moreover, should naturally make up part of a work that seeks to explain the virtues of a good teacher. Thus we say that Prudence requires a teacher to prepare himself carefully before each lesson he gives to his students. For he needs to recall to mind with precision the principles that can easily slip his memory and that, if forgotten, might lead him to serious mistakes. He needs to search for arguments to back up his principles, to gather them together with discernment and discrimination; he should not haphazardly seize upon whatever might offer itself to him in a quick and superficial reading. He should give clarity, order, and proper arrangement to what he has to say, in order to make it more easily grasped and to prevent the disorientation that confusion and disorder would infallibly produce in the students’ minds. Finally, he should determine how to express himself with the dignity and propriety that become a teacher and without which what he says might often inspire boredom, lack of interest, and even sometimes the scorn of those who have to listen to him. All this obviously demands preparation and effort; and if, while neglecting either, he expects God to make up for the deficiency by an extraordinary help, this expectation would resemble the temerity of someone who tempts God rather than the security of a person who rightly trusts in God’s goodness and power.
There are, it is true, teachers so richly endowed with everything that can contribute to the instruction of their students that they often undertake to teach various topics without any preparation. These Jesus Christ compares to a father of a family who is always ready to draw from his treasure-house riches both ancient and new; for their assiduous efforts in the past have acquired this happy state for them. But we must admit that this readiness and this abundance, which are the result only of a superior talent joined with a long practice of teaching, are not the lot of the many; and that for most teachers, to undertake without due preparation to deal in public with the principal truths of religion is an act of temerity, presumption, or perhaps a sign of a deep lack of esteem for the teacher’s role.
6) Foresight. This is the wise arrangement of the means that lead to the desired end; or, if
you prefer, it is the action of the mind by which we recognize in advance what may happen following the natural course of events. Under the first aspect, Prudence requires the time to deliberate if the teacher does not wish to expose himself to see an undertaking fail; in like manner, it forbids him to spend too much time deliberating if he does not want to lose the occasion for acting appropriately. Prudence, moreover, regulates and modifies the other virtues of the good teacher; thus it assigns its proper rule to each thing; it considers how it foresees and coordinates all the virtues, the proper means for practicing them, and the proper application that must be made of them.
Under the second aspect, Prudence makes the teacher look ahead at how useful or not the means he may use will turn out to be, so as to reject them or make use of them in greater confidence.
7) Circumspection. This is a reflected attention that thoroughly examines a plan before giving it final approval. Thus a prudent teacher will not act unless he has carefully considered what he has to do; he will make it a practice to choose the most appropriate methods, given the circumstances of time, place, temperament, and persons.
8) Precaution. Finally, precaution carefully avoids the inconvenience in what we may wish to carry out. This is why a prudent teacher will never punish students without witnesses present and will never be alone anywhere with a student unless he can be seen by someone. This will also lead him not to do or to say anything in the presence of the students for which they may blame him or be scandalized. So also, when reproving in public the faults that were publicly committed, he will not always make known to all the students the faults that all of them may not know, because loss of reputation or scandal might ensue. Finally, it is through Prudence that he will so regulate all his external conduct that his students will never have any reason to think that he is afraid of them on account of the natural defects that they may observe in him.
From all this, it is easy to conclude that a teacher with good judgment, with ordinary knowledge, and with the information gained from study will carry out perfectly the duties imposed by Prudence; and it is clear, also, how necessary this virtue is for him.
We sin against Prudence in two ways, by defect or by excess.
We sin in the first way by hastiness, thoughtlessness, temerity, lack of attention to what we are doing by lack of consideration; by light-headedness, negligence, inconstancy, blind attachment to our own opinions, blind confidence in merely human resources, and so forth.
We sin in the second way by false prudence, which Scripture calls "prudence of the flesh." It judges only by the senses and has no other object in view than to satisfy some ill-regulated love or too high an opinion of self; thus it anxiously bothers about temporal concerns, either in the present or in the future; and the means it uses to succeed in what it undertakes are guile, fraud, and deceit.
Be wise as serpents (Matthew 10:16).
How much better to get wisdom than gold (Proverbs 16:16).
Wisdom
Wisdom is a virtue that gives us knowledge of the most exalted things through the most excellent principles so that we may act accordingly.
Wisdom differs from Prudence, for the latter merely presupposes a praiseworthy end, whatever it may be, whereas Wisdom directly considers its object and does so not only as good and praiseworthy but also as very great and important.
It can even happen that one of these two virtues may be present while the other is not. Let us give an example in general terms. We wish to have the last sacraments administered to someone suffering from a malady said to be serious and life threatening. This is obviously an act of Wisdom, but is it always an act of prudence also? No, doubtless; for we need to be morally sure or to have at least a reasonable suspicion that the illness is real and dangerous. In such a case, it is possible to be mistaken and to fail against Prudence if, to inform ourselves about the facts, we fail to fulfill the dictates of Prudence, namely, by not carefully examining the circumstances, by judging them too hastily, and, in consequence, by acting in a manner lacking in consideration.
Let us take another example referring to the subject we are presently discussing. A teacher wishes to give his students a lesson on the subject he teaches them—let us say, catechism. This is obviously an act of Wisdom by which he seeks to fulfill his duty. But if he speaks to the children in too high-flown a manner, so that they do not grasp what he tells them, or if he makes use of vulgar expressions, which are inappropriate for dealing with the dignity of the truths he must teach them, he certainly sins against Prudence. There is, then, an essential difference between the two virtues that we are here considering.
In what, then, does the Wisdom of a good teacher consist? It consists in making him know, love, and fulfill the exalted and infinitely precious object for which he is responsible; from this it follows that a good teacher should begin by imitating the example of Solomon, who spoke humbly to the Author of all good, the God of Knowledge, the Father of Lights: "Give me," said this prince, "the Wisdom that sits by your throne, and do not reject me from among your servants . . . Send her forth from the holy heavens, and from the throne of your glory send her, that she may labor at my side and that I may learn what is pleasing to you. For she knows and understands all things, and she will guide me wisely in my actions and guard me with her glory. Then my works will be acceptable." (Wisdom 9:4, 10–12)
However, it is not enough for a good teacher to pray; he would act imprudently if while teaching the students, he did not seek to instruct himself concerning what he wishes to teach them. Thus he will apply himself to study, as we mentioned in speaking of Prudence, but Wisdom will also show him and make him deeply cognizant not only of the truths he is obliged to teach but of the principles of these subjects. Otherwise he would be a reciter of formulas, and the students would only learn names that they would promptly forget.
Moreover, while imparting to them what he knows, he must take great care in particular not to tell them anything offensive or disdainful or that might lead them to become ill disposed toward himself or the school. He should never be led by hazardous opinions or by false prejudices but always by Christian principles, by divine and human laws, and also by those of his nation.
To instruct children with greater benefit, Wisdom requires that the teacher practice the virtues that he should cultivate in them. "If you show yourself firmly convinced of what you teach," says Saint Bernard, "you will give to your voice the voice of power; the voice of action is much more impressive than that of words; act as you speak" (On the Song of Songs, sermon 59). Thus he will teach his students how to direct their actions in conformity with the true rules of behavior; to moderate and correct their passions; to become truly and genuinely happy. He will, therefore, make sure to give them the example of what he wishes to teach them; he will strive, for his own sake and for the sake of instructing them, to distinguish what is truly good from what is such only in appearance; he will lead them to choose rightly and to persevere in every enlightened choice; to arrange all things with order and measure; in a word, to fulfill exactly their duties toward God, toward themselves, and toward others.
In this way he will acquire this sublime Wisdom that includes the most excellent science of all and without which all others are nothing in comparison: the science of salvation, which makes the soul relish the things of heaven because it shows to us all the sweetness and suavity of these things. It teaches us to follow what religion urges us to do; for example, to find our wealth in poverty, joy in suffering, true elevation in God’s eyes in lowly occupations and in those that people hold in slight esteem; to make good use of the blessings and the ills of this life; not to take any resolution except with upright and worthy views; not to pursue our aims except by legitimate means; to unite, in dealing with children, a just firmness with a praiseworthy mildness; example with practice; always to seek the spiritual advantages that enrich us for eternity rather than the temporal benefits that are only fleeting, being firmly persuaded that it is of no use for a person to gain the entire world if he then loses his soul; that earth and all its goods will pass away but that whoever does the will of God will abide forever. Such, in fact, is true Wisdom, which Saint James (1:5) exhorts us to beg of God and which, above all, will be the glory and crown of a good teacher.
The defects contrary to this kind of admirable Wisdom are:
1) To prefer a merely human satisfaction to an act of supernatural virtue and to the perfect accomplishment of God’s will; for instance, to show ourselves more eager to acquire external talents and profane science than the necessary knowledge of religion;
2) To apply ourselves more willingly to teaching what flatters our self-love rather than what can form Jesus Christ in the hearts of the students, to seek their friendship rather than to correct them of their defects, and so forth.
There is another kind of wisdom, which does not come down from on high but on the contrary is "earthly, unspiritual, devilish," as Saint James says (3:15). This is a false wisdom blinded by passion: it follows only the suggestions of the malignant spirit; it adopts exclusively the maxims of the world while rejecting those of the Gospel. It takes more pains about acquiring the virtues that may be agreeable to men rather than those that can please God. It acts only according to interested motives, seeking only what can be of benefit to itself. Moreover, in order to deceive and lead others astray more easily, it strives to disguise itself by appearing affable, mild, friendly, and polite; but it does not hesitate to make use of intrigue, ruse, fraud, artifice, subtility, and trickery to achieve its ends. This is, therefore, nothing but true folly, as its unfortunate consequences—contention and jealousy—only too clearly show.
Wisdom is radiant and unfading, and she is easily discerned by those who love her and is found by those who seek her (Wisdom 6:12).
For it is an unfailing treasure for mortals; those who get it obtain friendship with God, commended for the gifts that come from instruction (Wisdom 7:14).
For wisdom opened the mouths of those who were mute and made the tongues of infants speak clearly (Wisdom 10:21).
Patience
Patience is a virtue that makes us over-come, without murmuring and with submission to the will of God, all the evils of this life, especially the cares inseparable from the education of youth.
Patience does not, in truth, do away with suffering, but, says Saint Francis de Sales, it alleviates it by often making us remember that "as Our Lord has saved us by suffering and enduring, so we also ought to work out our salvation by sufferings and afflictions, enduring injuries, contradictions, and discomforts with all possible meekness."
Patience is not only necessary but even useful in all our ills. It is necessary because the law of nature obliges us to bear trials patiently and because to murmur about what happens is to outrage Providence. It is useful because it lightens our sufferings, making them less dangerous and shortening them.
The Fruit of Christian Patience, says Our Lord Jesus Christ, is the peaceful possession of our souls (Luke 21:19). According to Saint Francis de Sales, "the more perfect our Patience, the more absolutely do we possess our souls."
Patience restrains the soul’s faculties within the due bounds that they must not transgress; thus it prevents all outbursts during trying occasions; it matures our plans and makes executing them easier; whereas precipitation, on the contrary, often makes well-thought-out projects valueless. Patience soothes our pains and calms the mind; it banishes spells of sadness; it forbids bitter words, spiteful remarks, ill-humor, discouragement, worry, unreasonable overeagerness, bustle, and haste.
The practice of this virtue consists, then, as we mentioned, in accepting without complaint all the ills that befall us. Regarding the wrongs done to us, this is what we are advised to do by the saint just quoted: "Complain as little as possible of the wrongs you suffer. It is certain that one who complains thereby commits a sin, inasmuch as self-love always feels that injuries are greater than they really are. Above all, make no complaint to irascible or censorious persons. If complaints are necessary, either to remedy the offense or restore quiet to your mind, let them be made to those who are calm of soul and who love God truly. Otherwise, instead of easing your heart, they will provoke it to greater pain, for instead of extracting the thorn that hurts you, they will sink it deeper into your foot."
All that we have just said concerning Patience in general applies very aptly to the good teacher. As he is nearly always with his students, this virtue consists, in his case, in supporting the disagreeable and unpleasant occurrences that may be met with in his employment. Consequently, he will not take to heart the students’ whims, jokes, and bad manners or those of their parents; he learns to feel sorry for the limited powers of reason displayed by the students due to their age, their light-headedness, and their inexperience. He never grows disheartened or weary from repeating the same things to them often and at length, but he always does so with goodness and affection so as to make them remember these things, no matter how difficult and boring he finds this to be. For the fact is that by instructing, warning, remonstrating, and correcting students, the teacher sooner or later attains the end sought: the correct and reasonable notions that he has consistently presented to them begin, as it were, to take root; pious and Christian sentiments, the principles of honesty and uprightness, insensibly sink into the hearts—tender and easily moved—of those children who are well disposed; and in the end, the harvest he gathers will be all the more abundant because it will have been awaited for a long time. A good teacher never forgets these words of Saint James: "Let endurance have its full effect" (1:4).
The defects opposed to this virtue are to rebuff the students by offensive, crude words; to treat them roughly, using harsh language, violent and excessive acts, striking them with the hand, ferule, or signal, to punish them unjustly because of uncontrolled outbursts of self-love due to an impetuosity that does not take the time to reflect before acting or speaking.
By your endurance you will gain your souls (Luke 21:19).
Let endurance have its full effect (James 1:4).
For you need endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised (Hebrews 10:36).
Reserve
Reserve is a virtue that makes us think, speak, and act with moderation, discretion, and modesty.
Reserve differs from Patience. Both, in truth, must be accompanied by modesty; but the former does so in order to forestall evil, while the latter does so to endure it. Reserve differs from the aspect of Prudence named precaution because it directly forestalls evil, either within itself or outwardly; whereas precaution does so directly or exteriorly. Finally, this virtue differs from Gravity. This latter’s principal object lies in the exterior, but Reserve’s essential object is not only what is external but also what is internal.
By this we understand in general that Reserve is distinguished from Precaution and Gravity, just as a cause is distinguished from its effects, as a spring differs from the rills flowing from it. But at the same time, we can understand how the virtues of a good teacher, although differing from one another, are yet so intimately united that they hold together as though by indissoluble bonds, so that we cannot fail with regard to one without often failing against several others.
Reserve, then, consists in controlling ourselves in circumstances where we might grow angry or upset; in not allowing ourselves anything not entirely proper and beyond the reach of any just criticism or evil suspicion. It teaches us to regulate all our conduct so that the students will not remark anything not imitable and edifying in us. It requires us to act everywhere with due consideration for the concerns, the understanding, and the precautions demanded by the innocence of the children, the weakness of their age, their impressionability, and their tendency to imitate evil. A word, a gesture, a smile, a wink—something insignificant in appearance—can call into play their imagination, becoming for them a fruitful source of reveries, a rich font of unjustified conclusions and sometimes of dangerous moral decisions in the future.
This virtue also avoids all dangerous friendships or relationships with them. It forbids us even to touch or caress them, to joke with them, to let them hug us. It never loses sight of the opinion usually entertained by children that persons consecrated to God must be without defects and above the ordinary weaknesses found in other persons. We must do nothing to disabuse them of this opinion, and we should also remember that there may be among these children some sufficiently perverse to give the most malignant interpretations to words and actions in which only the malice of an already corrupted heart would discern the appearance of evil when none is present.
Because Reserve in thought leads to Reserve in word and action, it is very important to learn how to think properly, that is, to reflect carefully on things as well as to judge rightly of them.
We fail against Reserve when we do not seek to give good example, to show decorum in all our external conduct, to avoid every offensive or coarse manner of acting, whatever would be the result of a poor education, whatever might in the slightest degree offend the eyes or ears of the young, give rise to rash judgment, or lessen the consideration and reputation a teacher needs in order to do any good and to deserve the esteem and confidence of his students. In fact, they lose respect for and submission to him the moment they see that his conduct is not irreproachable.
Another effect of Reserve, as of Gravity, is to impress the students, to make them very reserved also, and to prevent them from taking any liberties; for various virtues can produce the same effects because of differing principles. Evenness of soul is a peaceful and calm attitude that is not troubled by events that happen, whatever they may be. It is acquired by cultivating a balanced view of things, by moderating our desires and fears, and by preparing ourselves for all eventualities.
Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life. . . .
Keep straight the path of your feet, and all your ways will be sure. (Proverbs 4:23, 26)
As you lock up your silver and gold, so make balances and scales for your words.
Take care not to err with your tongue. (Sirach 28:25–26)
Gentleness
Gentleness is a virtue that inspires us with goodness, sensitivity, and tenderness.
Jesus Christ is the most accomplished model of this virtue. He recommends it to us especially by these words: "Learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart" (Matthew 11:29). Gentleness, according to the Bishop of Geneva, is, as it were, "the flower of charity." He adds, following Saint Bernard, that Gentleness is the perfection of charity "when it is not only patient but also meek and mild."
In general we can distinguish four kinds of Gentleness. The first is that of the mind, which consists in judging without harshness, without passion, without considering our own merit and our supposed superiority. The second is that of the heart, which makes us want things without being stubborn about it and seeks them in a righteous manner. The third is that of our manner, which consists in behaving according to good principles without wanting to reform others over whom we have no authority or in things that do not concern us. The fourth is that of our conduct, which makes us act with simplicity and uprightness, not contradicting others without reasonable cause and without any obligation to do so; and observing, in this case, a reasonable degree of moderation.
All these different forms of Gentleness, in order to be genuine, must be very sincere; for, says Saint Francis de Sales, "It is one of the great artifices of the enemy to make many deceive themselves with the expressions and exterior appearance of these two virtues. Without examining thoroughly their interior affections, they think themselves to be humble and meek. Actually, they are not so. This may be discovered, for notwithstanding all their ceremonious mildness and humility, at the least cross word or at the least little injury they receive, they exhibit an unparalleled arrogance."
What we have just said gives us to understand how singularly admirable is this virtue of Gentleness, since it has Humility as its companion, and because, when it is patient, it is, in truth, the perfection of charity. It follows, therefore, that under its first aspect, it restrains our fits of anger, smothers our desires for vengeance, and makes us face with entire equanimity of soul the misfortunes, disappointments, and other evils that can happen to us. Under its second aspect, which is its most distinctive mark, it wins the friendship of the students. It is a general principle that love wins love; a teacher should, above and before all, cultivate the feelings of a father toward his students and look upon himself as holding the place of those who entrusted them to him. He should borrow from the parents the sentiments of tenderness and goodness that are natural for them. He does this by showing Gentleness; it inspires him, with regard to the students, with affection, tenderness, goodwill, and winning and persuasive manners. It removes from his commands whatever might be abrupt and austere, and it blunts their sting. Thus it makes the children happy and attaches them to the teacher; and if they are reasonable, will they not always willingly yield to his insinuations and his Gentleness rather than to constraint and force?
Let us give further consideration to the means by which a teacher can make himself loved by his students, thanks to Gentleness.
1) He will begin by avoiding the defects that he must correct in them, for example, rough and shocking manners.
2) He will require good order and discipline that are neither harsh nor forbidding.
3) He will be simple, patient, and precise in his manner of teaching; he will count more on his own consistency in having the rules followed than on an excess of application on the part of the students.
4) He will show equal kindness toward all, without any partiality, preference, or particular attention to anyone.
5) He will not overlook the mistakes that need to be pointed out, but he will do so gently and carefully. When he corrects, he will not be bitter, offensive, or insulting; and immediately after he has punished anyone, he will take care to dissipate the fear that the punishment may have caused the child, by making him acknowledge his fault and the rightness of the punishment and by recommending to him not to put himself in the same situation again.
6) He will be consistent in his dealings; this is all the more essential since, if each day found the teacher in a different mood by a change in his humor or his manner of speaking, the children would never know precisely what to count on and would not fail to lose respect for him and to find his constant changes ridiculous, unbearable, and quite apt to make them lose interest in school or even to inspire them with aversion for it.
7) He will give them the liberty of making known their difficulties, and he will answer them willingly and with kindness insofar as it is necessary.
8) He will praise them appropriately when they deserve it. Although this praise may be feared because of the vanity that it may arouse, it is necessary to make use of it in order to encourage them without elating them too much; for of all the motives capable of touching a rational soul, there is none more powerful than honor and shame; and when the teacher has been able to make children susceptible to them, he has gained a victory. They derive pleasure from praise and esteem, especially from their parents and from those on whom they depend.
9) He will often speak to them of virtue but always appropriately and in praise of it as being the most precious of possessions, in order to inspire them to love it and to model their behavior by it.
10) Every day he will tell them something edifying that may help them toward leading a Christian and virtuous life.
11) He will teach them the politeness they need and the proprieties they must observe in order to be esteemed in society and live there honorably; thus he will take pains to make them respectful, gentle, honest, considerate, obliging toward their superiors, their companions, and everyone. It is very important, indeed, to oppose certain tendencies in young people that are directly opposed to the common duties of society and of civil converse: rough and unrestrained uncouthness, which prevents them from thinking about what may please or displease those with whom they live; self-love, which pays attention only to their own comfort and advantage; an overbearing and haughty attitude, which makes them think that everything is due to them while they owe nothing to anyone; a spirit of contradiction, criticism, and mockery, which condemns everything and seeks only to wound others. Such are the defects against which open war must be declared. Young people who have been brought up to be considerate of their companions, to please them, to yield to them on occasion, to say nothing outrageous about them, and to take no offense at what others say—such young people will soon learn, when they take their place in the world, the value of politeness and of civilized behavior.
12) A good teacher will educate the heart, the mind, and the judgment of his students by the following means:
To educate the heart, he will forestall the passions and vices; this is done by inspiring the children with aversion and horror for the occasions of sin and by combating the evil inclinations they display; by leading them to love Christian virtue; by teaching them the necessity of practicing these virtues and indicating to them the occasions when they should do so; by helping them acquire good habits, making them understand, for instance, the difference between a boy who is honest and sincere, on whose word everyone can rely, whom everyone can trust implicitly, who is considered incapable not only of lying or deceit but even of the slightest dissembling; and another boy who always gives rise to suspicion, whom nobody feels safe in trusting, and whose word we cannot believe even when he happens to tell the truth.
To educate the mind, a teacher will instruct his students zealously and with affection in the dogmas and duties of religion and in whatever can make them men capable of directing themselves by right reason and therefore of becoming citizens useful to society. This further requires that he should always think of and speak with them correctly, with reason, and with good sense and that he should accustom them to do likewise in all the occasions that arise. He points out errors to them and calls them to order when they fail in this; he catches their mistakes when they judge badly, talk nonsense, or take things the wrong way. He accustoms them to act with so much discernment that they may always have a praiseworthy end in view and may always be prepared to give valid reasons for what they want, do, and say.
To educate the judgment, he will point out to them the relationships things have with one another and the properties that distinguish them from each other. He will make them speak of these things according to the understanding they themselves should have at first gained of them, and he should do so always with correctness and precision; he will present to them the comparison of what is reprehensible in their conduct with what they should have thought, said, done, or not done.
Even so, when striving thus to educate the heart, the mind, and the judgment of his students, a teacher still cannot expect to succeed unless he avoids whatever smacks of harshness.
A teacher fails by harshness when he demands of his students what is beyond their capacity, requiring them, for instance, to recite lessons of the catechism or of other more difficult material that their memory does not allow them to retain; or by imposing penances on them out of proportion to their faults; he should consider that he himself would be as culpable by giving excessive punishments, even if merited, as though he had punished someone who had not deserved it at all.
He also fails when he demands things with so much overbearingness and pride that the students will obviously not be disposed to conform; when he exacts such things when they are ill-disposed, without paying attention to the fact that they are not ready to profit by the efforts of his zeal so long as they listen only to passion, resentment, and ill will.
He also fails when he shows equal insistence on things of trifling importance and on those that are more essential; when he never listens to the pleas or the excuses of the students, thereby depriving himself of a means of correcting his own mistakes; or by never pardoning them their faults, even though he should forgive a good many in which there is neither malice nor an evil consequence to fear, such as failure arising from ignorance, distraction, forgetfulness, frivolity, heedlessness, and other defects that are normal at such an age; when he shows himself perpetually dissatisfied with the behavior of his students, whatever it may be, never appearing to them except in a grouchy mood or with a freezing air; never opening his mouth except to say cutting, disagreeable, improper, and injurious remarks; when he shows continual bias against them, interpreting badly everything they do; when he exaggerates their faults; when he acts toward them as though they were irrational beings without any feelings: for instance, by jerking them, pulling on them, striking them violently in anger; (such behavior can only be the result of a fit of temper, of which a teacher, more than anyone else, should be incapable;) when he does not inform the children why he is punishing them; when he punishes doubtful infractions just as he does the ones he is sure of; when he never lets himself be moved by the students’ pleas, never pardons anything even when they have committed only minor faults, such as having accidentally written a page badly, having come late to school once, or having been caught not following the lesson; when their faults are neither against religion nor good morals, such as words or actions contrary to purity, swearing, fighting, disobedience, stealing, lying, lack of reverence in church and during prayers. All such conduct on the teacher’s part makes the students lose their love of work, their liking for what is good. It disheartens them and makes them complain of injustice.
A teacher should be convinced 1) that punishment itself does less to correct faults than the manner of imposing it; 2) that a teacher who inspires excessive fear by inflexibility and harshness bestializes the children’s minds, robs their hearts of noble sentiments, makes them lose all worthy sentiments, and gives them a hatred for school and for learning; 3) that by wanting to spare no fault, he will prevent his corrections from being useful; 4) that by wise moderation, he can win over those whom he would only irritate by indiscreet harshness; 5) that he will never succeed in making the students fear him except by inspiring them with the fear of God and of God’s judgments and sanctions; if they pay no attention to these or if these things make no impression on them, all his authority will remain powerless to make them fear him.
Moreover, it must not be forgotten that although Gentleness is full of charity, it must still be firm. Charity can indeed for a time attract the hearts of the students, but it does not suffice; when they begin to take things easy, as they do from time to time, firmness must take over to keep them within the bounds of duty or to bring them back when they have departed therefrom.
"My child," says the Wise Man, "perform your tasks with humility; then you will be loved by those whom God accepts" (Sirach 3:17). On this a commentator observes, "The Wise Man wishes to see gentleness employed, and at the same time, he wishes us to do perfectly what we are about; this is to show that he wants this gentleness to be firm."
Firmness, therefore, according to the words of Scripture that we have just quoted, consists in complete faithfulness in observing everything that can lead to the end proposed; thus it requires of a teacher strength, courage, and constancy:
Strength—to oppose whatever might be contrary to good order, not letting the difficulties and pains found in teaching dishearten him. This is necessary, for instance, when a teacher arrives for the first time in a class; for the first concern of the students in such a situation is to study the new teacher and to size him up to discover whether he has some weak point and, if so, to profit by it. When they see, on the contrary, that the teacher quietly and in an unruffled manner opposes a gentle and reasonable firmness to their tricks and their attempts at disturbing him, they soon submit and come back to the path of duty.
Courage—to keep trying to do whatever may produce or preserve good order and the progress of the students.
Constancy—to persevere unflinchingly in one’s good dispositions; quietly to confront obstacles, opposition, problems, even in spite of little hope of success.
The main point here is to apply a firm Gentleness to the guidance of the students, and for this it is essential to pay attention to the special circumstances in which they are, in order to combine wise Gentleness with firmness. Thus Gentleness does not prevent a teacher from punishing the faults that should be corrected, but it does not allow him to show himself inflexibly firm except when the method of Gentleness and exhortation and all his efforts, repeated warnings, written punishments, and other sanctions, along with other reasonable procedures, have been applied without correcting or overcoming a stubborn attitude, a disobedience maintained with obstinate ill will, a mocking air, and an attitude of rebellion, an invincible laziness, missing school, notable and habitual negligence, disinclination and aversion to study, duplicity and underhandedness, flattery, a tendency to tale bearing, provoking divisions, slander, and a mocking spirit. However, a teacher must never forget that inexorable strictness on his part will, as a rule, alienate the students, spur them to revolt, and indispose their parents and everyone else.
Gentleness does not even permit us, when punishing, to appeal to our authority exclusively. When naked authority is invoked, it can indeed constrain the guilty party, but it does not correct him. If imperious manners inspire the boys with forced respect, they will obey while they are observed and while the teacher is with them, for they cannot do otherwise; but they will return to their old ways the moment they are out of his sight.
Thus in order to reach a proper combination of Gentleness with firmness, we must not fall into any of the drawbacks of either. It is this happy medium that gives a teacher the authority that is the soul of government and that inspires students’ respect, the best source of obedience and submission. Thus what should characterize the relationship on both sides and be the principal consideration for both teacher and students is Gentleness and love.
We should, moreover, carefully shun all the defects opposed to firmness. Thus the teacher will, in the first place, avoid weakness. A teacher sins by weakness when he fails to realize that he incurs guilt if he does not punish the faults that he should punish or when he allows the students to do whatever they like, to violate order while feeling sure that they will not be punished for their misconduct.
In the second place, he should avoid cowardly complaisance and spineless condescension. A teacher fails in this way when he does not use all the means given to him to succeed in his task; when he is inconsistent in his conduct and backs off ill-advisedly from proper firmness; when he considers as light or indifferent what might be a real and considerable evil; when for personal considerations of whatever kind, he tolerates what should not be condoned; when, not wishing to take the trouble, he does not pay sufficient attention to the proper discipline in the class or to the progress of the students and does not correct even the slightest faults contrary thereto; when he lets the students neglect or despise what he has rightly ordered or recommended; when he speaks ineffectually, acts in an indolent and indifferent manner, failing to show that he really wants the students to do their duty; when he is content with issuing ineffectual warnings.
In the third place, he should avoid too much communication with the students. This leads them to despise the teacher, to become insubordinate, to show a distaste for work and application. It makes the students willful, indocile, rebellious; it encourages laziness and other vices, threatens their progress, allows evil habits to take root. When the teacher lacks the necessary determination and firmness, he is made fun of by the students and lends himself inappropriately to their desires because of his own cowardice and reprehensible timidity. There is no doubt that he should be affable with his students; but this does not allow him to become familiar with them.
In the fourth place, he should avoid the other defects contrary to firmness, which are inconstancy; excessive timidity; a hangdog look; a naive, unnatural, troubled, embarrassed air, as well as stubbornness, obstinacy, presumption, an inflexibility that never gives way, a rigidity that never yields either to reason or to legitimate authority or even to force.
Let us now go on to speak of punishments. We have seen that a teacher procures the good of his students by a charitable Gentleness and that he maintains it by a firm Gentleness. We must now show that he forestalls or corrects evil by his wise and prudent Gentleness.
First of all, he rejects the use of the rod or the whip.
1) These punishments are improper; they are also servile and demeaning and lead to serious consequences.
2) In correcting, the teacher should use the means that will afford the greatest benefit to the students, through shame for having acted badly, preferable to those that would prevent them from falling again into a fault through fear of corporal chastisement.
3) Such punishments inspire aversion for the teacher who uses them and for the school.
4) They do nothing to change the heart and of themselves do not modify the nature.
5) They often brutalize the mind and harden the culprit in his evil ways.
6) The students get used to them and become unaffected by them, so that in the long run, they derive no benefit from them.
7) They expose the teacher to scorn, insults, and humiliations.
8) They are not really necessary. The best teachers and the great majority of them succeed in school even though they do not make use of such punishments.
9) There are other ways of punishing the students’ faults that are more helpful, both for the teacher and for the students themselves.
It is true that Holy Scripture speaks of "the rod" with reference to the correction of children, but, as one commentator remarks, this means that "when it is necessary, we should correct them with a holy severity. It is not being kind," he adds, following Saint Augustine; "it is, rather, being inhuman to favor vices and evil habits in a child in order to spare him a few tears; whoever lets him go ahead in his evil ways through this cruel indulgence treats him not like a father but like an enemy."
Moreover, if parents (to whom Scripture is speaking here) are obliged to correct their offspring by using the rod, this kind of correction does not have for them the same inconveniences that it would have for a teacher. When their children show a character that is churlish, stubborn, hardheaded, indocile, unaffected by reprimands and appeals to honor, parents are certainly justified in opposing these nascent vices by using corporal punishments capable of mastering those who cannot be corrected by other less violent means. But the wisest thing for a teacher to do when confronted by students whom he cannot bring back to the path of duty except by punishment is to send them back to their parents, while observing, of course, the measures prescribed by The Conduct of the Christian Schools in such cases.
The following means can be used to avoid having to inflict punishments or to make them rare and to insure their effectiveness:
1) Early on, the students should be trained in docility; for this, the teacher should show a firmness and a consistency of conduct from which he will never depart. When the students do something wrong, he should reprove them in an authoritative way, that is, a certain manner of speaking and acting that betokens energy and strength and that suggests the master, the superior. Otherwise the students would rebel against their teacher or put themselves on the same footing as his, refuse submission and order, and do as they please.
2) The teacher should never allow himself to act through passion, ill humor, or caprice. This is one of the worst faults a teacher can commit, because such conduct never escapes the sharp eyes of the students; it sometimes nullifies all the teacher’s other good qualities and robs his advice and remonstrances of practically all authority.
3) The students should be brought to feel remorse and shame for their faults rather than to fear the punishments they may have deserved.
4) The teacher should carefully distinguish between the faults that deserve punishment and those he should forgive; moreover, he should not punish in the same way involuntary and inadvertent faults and those committed with forethought and malice.
5) The teacher should attach the notion of shame and punishment to any number of things that may be indifferent in themselves, such as kneeling in a certain spot that might be called "the corner of dishonor or ignominy." (The culprit should not, however, be left there for too long a time, lest he be harmed.) A child may be put in the last place at a given table or bench, or near the door, or last in ranks; he may be made to sit in the middle of the classroom or to stand in a certain place near a wall without touching it; or to hold a book with both hands for an hour while standing in the middle of the classroom, under penalty of further punishment if he fails to act properly. All the while, the teacher should show him a cold, dissatisfied face for as long as he does badly or does not do all he should.
6) No penances should be imposed that are not just; and preference should be given to those that are less severe when these can bring about the desired effect. The teacher will always avoid those that might detract from the lesson, such as hitting a student when he is not expecting it. This would keep the students in constant fear, trepidation, and apprehension whenever they saw the teacher approaching them; it would make them more attentive to warding off possible blows that the teacher might aim at them unexpectedly than to paying attention to what he wanted to tell them for their instruction.
7) The fear that children should be inspired to feel should not always be the fear of being punished but rather the fear of the wrong they might be guilty of and that they should carefully try to avoid.
8) The teacher should prefer useful penances to corporal chastisement, even to the ferule, which should be used rarely. He will then give them, along with the other penances already mentioned, a few chapters from the catechism or some other book to be studied and recited by heart; some page of penmanship or spelling or arithmetic problems; some of this can be done at home. Such punishments have the multiple advantage of keeping the children usefully occupied outside of school time, getting them used to working harder, keeping them away from gambling and bad company, and helping them learn more.
9) He should not make a given penance something habitual or of daily use. The students would not fear it any more; they would make a joke of it. He should diversify his penances.
10) The teacher should take care to wait for the favorable time and manner of imposing a penance so that it can prove more fruitful. Thus he should not always correct a child at the moment he commits a fault, especially if he is not well disposed; this might only irritate him more and incite him to commit new faults by pushing him beyond endurance. Let the teacher allow him time to realize what he has done, to enter into himself, to admit his wrongdoing, and at the same time to acknowledge the rightness and the necessity of the punishment. By this means the teacher will bring him to the point of being able to profit by the correction. On his part, the teacher must never punish out of anger, especially if the fault refers to him personally, that is, a lack of respect, insolence, or an insulting or disrespectful word. No matter how little emotion appears on his countenance or in his tone of voice, the student will immediately notice it; he will feel that it is not zeal for duty but the flame of passion that lighted this fire; and this is all it takes to make the punishment lose all its efficacy, because children, young as they are, feel that nothing but reason has a right to correct them.
The second means to make punishments rare or to forestall them is to instruct, reprove, and threaten before resorting to punishment. The teacher should, therefore, begin by instructing the students carefully about their duties. If they thereafter fail to conform to these rules, what then? If it is because of impossibility or incapacity, they should be excused, because we cannot require the impossible from anyone. If it is through forgetfulness or inattention but without malice, they should be warned. If it is through malice, they should be warned also, but sternly; if they persist, they should be reproved; if they fail again, they should be threatened; then if there is no amendment, they should be punished. Thus punishment is the final effort that the teacher’s authority should make him use to bring a recalcitrant student to submission.
For ordinary faults, warnings should be frequent, as often as the students give occasion for them; they should always be polite, spoken with kindness in a manner that induces the students to receive them willingly. The teacher should, therefore, avoid making the students think that he is prejudiced against them, lest by attributing these warnings to partiality, they thereby protect themselves from the defects pointed out to them. Nor should they have any reason to think that they are being warned because of some natural interest or special passion; in fact, for any motive other than their own good.
Use of reprimands should not be frequent. This is the big difference between reprimands and warnings. The latter spring rather from the kindness of a friend than from the authority of a teacher; they are always accompanied by a gentle air and tone of voice that make them less disagreeable to accept, and for this reason, they can be used more often, as we said above. But as reprimands always sting self-love to some extent and are often accompanied by a severe look and stern language, they should be reserved for more considerable defects and hence should be used more rarely. Still, they should always be given without harshness, mockery, or exaggeration, without angry words, without partiality; and in such a manner that if the students are properly disposed, they may be ashamed and feel sorry for their faults, may resolve to correct themselves and take a firm resolution inspired by the good motives suggested to them. The teacher should, however, be careful, immediately after reprimanding someone, not to show him the same serenity and affection as before; for he would get used to this little charade, convinced that these reprimands are only a summer shower, soon dissipated, and that he only needs to wait until they pass. The teacher should, therefore, not pardon him right away until his application to doing better has proven the sincerity of his repentance.
As for threats, since they come closer to actual punishment than reprimands, they should be even rarer. They should not be employed except for very legitimate reasons and never without having first examined if we can or should carry them out. Otherwise, they should not be used; for if we make threats inconsiderately, they grow ineffective, and the guilty parties will be emboldened in their evil ways by a sort of assurance of impunity.
A third means of forestalling punishments or of making them rare is to prevent the faults of the students and make them rare. This can be done by using various procedures that can bring them to do their duty and continue doing it, such as words of praise granted appropriately and justly but in such a way as not to encourage the students’ vanity, as we mentioned before, nor to lead them to despise others. Another means is to show satisfaction and pleasure to those who do well, giving them special marks of consideration and esteem; granting them privileges and outstanding awards that should consist not in frivolous gewgaws or useless claptrap but in worthwhile and edifying objects. Again, the teacher should give positive accounts of them to their parents and others interested in them; he might advance them in rank as far as this is possible; he should point out to them the advantage there is in being well versed in many things that make a man better qualified in whatever business he engages later on. There is no doubt that all these ways of threatening affect the minds of the students more powerfully than all threats and punishments.
According to everything we have been saying, it is easy to conclude that the wise and prudent meekness of a good teacher does not prevent him, when punishing, from pursuing the end he has in mind and that it is only for their own good, out of necessity, and with regret that he punishes them; that he would do them a great deal of harm if he allowed them to give in to their evil inclinations and to contract wicked habits; that it is at their age that they are becoming what they will be for the rest of their lives; that to live honorably in the world and to be faithful to the duties awaiting them there, nothing is more important for them than to be rightly brought up and corrected when they deserve it; that the sorrow they feel at the moment will yield great advantages for the rest of their lives; and that they will be glad, when older, to have acquired the habits whose true value they will then appreciate, habits that will make them more acceptable to those they will have to deal with.
It is also easy to understand that the true Gentleness of a good teacher consists in seeking among the sentiments of goodness that fill his heart only the amendment and the real benefit of those whom he punishes, the success of his ministry and of his efforts. He requires nothing except with circumspection and waits patiently for the opportune moment for obtaining what he wants of his students.
Finally, it is easy to understand with what care a teacher should avoid ironical and biting language. Far from being a means apt to correct students, such words, on the contrary, can only dispose them unfavorably against the teacher and make the efforts of his zeal useless or nearly so. For it is clear that a student who lacks esteem for and attachment to a teacher whose insulting manner has wounded and ulcerated his heart will, as a rule, accept with repugnance not only the teacher’s corrections and advice but also all his instructions. He will nearly always remember that his teacher had the meanness, the offensiveness, the cowardice of making fun of him and ridiculing him for defects of body or mind, or others, instead of correcting or warning him gently so as to win for him the friendship of his companions.
Here are several other defects contrary to Gentleness: petulance; the impetuous sallies of an overly ardent nature; bizarre, black moods; unpredictable, surly reactions; cross, somber airs; harsh and contemptuous ways; arrogant and supercilious attitudes; proud looks; severe, bitter, and peevish words filled with bile; insulting language (that students never fail to report back to their parents in order to indispose them against the teacher and to explain their own dislike for him and their aversion for school); violent agitation; restlessness; precipitate, indiscreet, brutal, overly severe corrections lacking in any just reason and extending beyond the limits of justice and charity. All this debases authority and makes it detested. For in such cases it is regarded merely as tyranny; this cannot fail to cause mutiny, hatred, cursing, and a hypersensitivity that explodes when the child is the object of some scorn or insult.
There is, however, a type of anger that is virtuous. This is the kind that is aroused only by a vehement desire of doing good or opposing evil, of keeping right order and the discipline that must be maintained. Such anger is necessary, but it must be governed by reason and be proportionate to the faults committed and to the interest we should take in what happens. It should always be such that the teacher keeps self-control. In such circumstances he should manifest this kind of anger either to show that he is right in exacting what is good and in being indignant at the failures he seeks to correct or to lead those who do wrong to condemn and reform themselves; but this must always be done as the Prophet enjoins: "Be angry, and sin not."
The anger we should be on our guard against, which is a sin, is that which arises from an ill-regulated emotion of the soul. It leads to acts of revenge or to violent responses to what displeases us. Such anger unsettles the judgment and blinds reason.
My child, perform your tasks with humility;
then you will be loved by those whom God accepts (Sirach 3:17).
Learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart (Matthew 11:29).
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth (Matthew 5:3).
Zeal
Zeal is a virtue that makes us procure the glory of God with great affection.
A zealous teacher instructs his students, in the first place, by his good example. This is the first lesson he gives, thus imitating Jesus Christ, who began by doing before teaching. In fact, he may wish to attain the proposed end, but he will do so only by the longest path if he is content merely with speaking; the shortest path is that of example. Children learn more by seeing than by hearing. "The most striking and effective discourse," says Saint Bernard in his Second Sermon on the Life of Saint Benedict, "is the example of good works. Nothing better persuades others of what we say than the example that shows how easy it is to practice the counsels we offer." A teacher is like a lamp placed on a lamp stand, which, of course, gives light by its shining but which must also warm by its heat. Thus he procures the glory of God with great affection when he labors in a truly effective manner at his own sanctification.
Next, he instructs by solid teaching. This is the second kind of instruction he gives his students, and a most important one it is, because he teaches them things they are ignorant of and that they need to know so that they may know, love, and serve God. This function is most honorable, no doubt, but as we have already said, how many trials, fatigues, labors, and disappointments must he endure to fulfill it properly! Thus the teacher procures the glory of God with great affection when he labors generously and without any material interest in view of the salvation of his neighbor by leading him to the practice of what is right.
Finally, he teaches by wise and moderate corrections; such is the third lesson that he gives, and it, too, is essential. How many faults that need to be corrected are there not in a child—an evil leaven, a defective germ that the teacher must eliminate; but that he will not exterminate except insofar as he admonishes the students without ceasing, remonstrating with them at the proper times, and also punishing them when necessary but always in a gentle and charitable way. Thus he will procure the glory of God with great affection when he labors for the salvation of his neighbor by employing an unfailing diligence, assiduous attention, and unshakable courage to bring them to flee evil.
In a teacher, Zeal is thus a most excellent virtue, and it is for this reason, says Saint John Chrysostom, that he who chastises his body by austerities has less merit than he who wins souls for God. Saint Gregory adds that there is no sacrifice more agreeable to God than Zeal (On Ezechiel, homily two).
Characteristically, this virtue is active: this is its distinctive mark. With what eagerness and what exactness does not a good teacher, for instance, fulfill the duties of his state if he has real Zeal?
First, his religious obligations—his first duty is to achieve perfection. In order to maintain himself in piety, to preserve the spirit of his calling, and not to succumb to dissipation of mind or the drying up of his heart (the common result of profane studies), he will look upon as more necessary than ever the religious practices ordained by his Constitutions, especially daily meditation, spiritual reading, examination of conscience, the fervent reception of the sacraments, annual retreats, and so forth. In general, he will strive not to fail against any point of regularity. He will make it a point to arrive before the spiritual exercise begins, rather than afterward. Whether the thing he has to do is more or less important, easy or difficult, it suffices that obedience should require it or recommend it, and he will be ready; he will hasten wherever the Rule calls him; he will be pleased to be there and will remain there as long as duty demands it.
Secondly, his responsibility for educating the students—the education of youth demands, on the part of those who are charged therewith, the most assiduous attention, the most constant effort, and concern for the most minute details. How can a teacher bear the weight of a ministry that might daunt the boldest courage unless he is filled with great Zeal for the salvation of his students? He should, therefore, experience something of the tender and restless affection of Saint Paul, who felt with regard to the Galatians "in the pain of childbirth until Christ is formed in you" (4:19). Thus he will draw all his satisfaction, all his joy, from teaching all the children without any shirking, any distinctions, any preferences, even though they may be ignorant, inept, meagerly endowed by nature, rich or poor, well- or ill-disposed, Catholic or Protestant, and so forth.
Ardently desiring the salvation of his students, he will labor for this as much as he possibly can by his good works, prayers, and Communions. In a word, he will with all his heart seek to save all of them without exception, being convinced that there is no soul that has not cost the blood of Jesus Christ; and he will teach them what they need to do so as to profit by this admirable redemption.
But genuine Zeal is not only active; it is also enlightened and prudent. A teacher truly zealous for the instruction of his students makes himself all things to all people, following the example of the Apostle (1 Corinthians 9:22), becoming little with the little ones, that is, conforming himself to their level of understanding and manner of appreciating things; he will take into consideration their weakness, their limited degree of intelligence and reason, while using more elevated language with those who are capable of understanding it. In all this he acts so as to instruct the students to their greatest advantage.
Nor should he limit himself to formal instruction, following the rules of discourse with order and method. He will cleverly make use of the occasions that always happen to bring in, as though by chance, some moral maxims that, not being expected, are all the better welcomed and ordinarily make more of an impression than carefully constructed lessons against which the students are sometimes on guard.
Finally, Zeal must be charitable and courageous; thus it makes the teacher act with strength and Gentleness—with strength because it is magnanimous and incapable of getting discouraged when encountering pains and difficulties; with Gentleness because it is mild, tender, compassionate, and humble—in a word, conformable to the Spirit of Jesus Christ.
A teacher lacks Zeal:
1) When he is indifferent and does not do all he can to spread the kingdom of God in all the ways we have indicated, especially by giving nothing but good example to the children; they naturally imitate what they see their guides do and, unfortunately, the wrong more easily than the right; they remember the example of a single defect rather than that of many virtues;
2) When he has no genuine desire to work for the salvation of his students and neglects to procure for them the means of achieving this goal as far as his profession obliges him to do, and
3) When he is not active in trying to instruct them well and lacks ardor in applying himself to his own perfection.
There is, however, a false zeal that can easily be recognized:
1) When passion is its principle;
2) When it is set in motion by an annoyance offered, an affront, an act of hatred, a disappointment, or an antipathy;
3) When it is the effect of nothing but ill-humor, inclination, aversion, self-love;
4) When in teaching we seek to have one class rather than another or to remain in a city where our vanity, laziness, and love of ease more readily find satisfaction;
5) When we prefer certain students to others because they are more agreeable to deal with;
6) When we seek to publicize our success or the pains we take to make the students improve;
7) When we love applause and praise;
8) When we are peeved because others succeed better than ourselves;
9) When we threaten or reprove using injurious terms, cutting language, bitter or angry words, or words lacking in discretion, without considering that imprudent zeal often does more harm than discreet zeal does good;
10) When we show ourselves to be restless, biting, bitter, and excitable;
11) When we give in to complaining, murmuring, sadness, discouragement, and malignant interpretations;
12) When we seek temporal benefits rather than the glory of God and our neighbor’s spiritual advancement;
13) When we show ourselves without indulgence or mercy, without patience, humility, or charity;
14) When in extraordinary or unusual circumstances we fail to take advice from those who are there to guide and direct us.
I will most gladly spend and be spent for you (2 Corinthians 12:15).
Woe to me if I do not proclaim the Gospel (1 Corinthians 9:16).
Let love inflame your zeal, wisdom inform it, and perseverance make it permanent; so that it be at once ardent, circumspect, and undefeated with nothing lukewarm in it, yet discreet, though never cowardly.
(Saint Bernard, On the Song of Songs, Sermon 20, London: Mowbray, 1952, p. 51)
Vigilance
Vigilance is the virtue that makes us diligent and painstaking in fulfilling all our duties.
A teacher needs this virtue both for himself and for his students. He must watch over himself, that is, over the thoughts of his mind, over the movements of his heart, over the use he makes of his senses, and over his entire person so as not to do anything except what is good and to fulfill his obligations worthily. The faults he might commit through lack of Vigilance in any one of all these different ways would obviously jeopardize the education of the children and might even inspire them with lack of esteem and dislike of him.
A teacher should be vigilant over his students: he is their guardian angel. If his absence or his inattention (they amount to the same thing) gave the devil, who constantly goes about, an opportunity to rob them of the precious treasure of their innocence, what would he be able to reply to Jesus Christ, who will ask him for an account of their souls and reproach him with having been less vigilant to protect them than Satan was to ruin them?
From all this it follows:
1) A good teacher will not leave his class under the pretext that his colleague in the next room will maintain good order in both classes. If he is obliged to absent himself, it should be only for a very serious necessity and always for as short a time as possible. In fact, his presence contributes much to making the students more attentive by fixing and arresting their imagination; it also spares them many distractions and negligences that give rise to many faults; these lead to reprimands and punishments that the teacher might have prevented if he had not been absent.
2) When he is in class, the teacher observes everything; he misses nothing; he sees all that goes on. In this way he maintains the students in order and application. Vigilance makes them come to school on time and do all the work given them; it ensures that they keep everything they use—their books, copybooks, and papers—in good order. It can be said, in short, that the teacher’s Vigilance should extend to everything; it directs, maintains, and inspires everything: prayer, reading, recitations, catechism, the manner of following Mass, writing, arithmetic, spelling—in short, there is nothing it does not affect.
3) A good teacher watches over the general behavior of the students everywhere that he finds himself among them; acting with prudence, however, in order to prevent their noticing that they are being studied. Besides, he must continually apply himself in order to discover and to know everything that goes on, not only in the class but also in the streets, whether before or after school; and if he cannot himself see everywhere, he makes skillful use of inspectors, whom he chooses from among them; he even makes still better use of his companions, with whom he maintains a praiseworthy agreement, inspired by charity, for the good administration of the school, following in this the advice that the Apostle gave to the Romans: "Welcome one another, therefore, just as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God" (15:7).
4) It is especially in church that the teacher’s application, care, and attention should be concentrated on the students to maintain them in order, modesty, and the respect due to the sanctity of the place. For this purpose, he carefully avoids looking around or fixing his gaze on other objects; he restrains his curiosity and absolutely forbids himself whatever might distract him from watching over the children; he should not even stop to pay attention to the progress of the ceremonies of divine worship, if this would weaken the attention he should pay to his students; for he should be convinced that if he happened to forget himself on these points, the boys would quickly notice it and would not fail to misbehave (not being seen by him), to be scandalized, to imitate the bad example of others, and to hope to escape with impunity.
5) Finally, the Vigilance of a teacher extends even to the future. Past experience suggests to him the precautions that can be taken against what may happen and that reason may foresee. His attention, then, will lead him both to get rid of whatever might harm his students and to prevent their faults as well as the sanctions that would follow from them; he should not allow them to have, if possible, either the means or the occasions for committing sin. It is much better, in fact, to prevent evil than to punish it once committed. This is what the constant presence and the attentive eye of the teacher bring about; for as a rule the students, before doing something wrong, begin by looking around to see whether they may not be surprised and noticed by the teacher. They often fear his looks more than his corrections.
Nevertheless, the teacher’s Vigilance should not be restless, suspicious, worried, accompanied by ill-founded conjectures. Such action would be against charity and justice. It would also be mortifying for the students who might notice it as well as uncomfortable and bothersome for the teacher himself. His application should be peaceable, without agitation, trouble, constraint, or affectation; it will then be all the more effective. Just as nothing should be omitted that is required by careful supervision, so, too, we should not go to extreme lengths in our precautions. For while striving to protect the children’s morals, we should act in such a way that they do not develop into hypocrites.
The teacher should avoid the following defects as being contrary to Vigilance. He should not occupy himself with something other than his duty at any given moment; he should avoid laziness, torpor, useless conversations with the students, with outsiders, even with the other Brothers in school. He should avoid distraction of mind, distaste for school work, inattention, indolence, any kind of paralysis that robs him of the capacity for action, presumption, temerity, laziness, and sluggishness.
Besides these defects, a teacher should also avoid too much anxiety; jerky and agitated motions of the body, the head, the eyes, or the arms; negligence in observing everything the students are doing and whether they carry on their class work with due diligence; failure to apply himself carefully and constantly to whatever can establish order and diligence.
Keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock (Acts 20:28).
As for you, always be sober, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, carry out your ministry fully (2 Timothy 4:5).
A great treasure has been entrusted to our care and vigilance; I mean the children. Let us take all possible care of them and be on guard lest the shrewd enemy, who seeks nothing but souls, should rob us of them to make them his prey. (Saint John Chrysostom, Commentary on the First Letter to Timothy)
Piety
Piety is a virtue that makes us fulfill worthily our duties toward God.
This we do when we perform them with respect and zeal; for the infinite majesty of God and his immense goodness require that we pay him our most reverent homage and that we show the greatest zeal in serving him as he requires.
A teacher should possess the virtue of Piety in an eminent degree, that is, his Piety should be both interior and sincere; otherwise he would only be a hypocrite; it should also be outward and exemplary because he should show externally the sentiments that fill his heart.
What indeed is a Christian teacher charged with the education of the young? He is a person into whose hands Jesus Christ has placed a certain number of children whom he redeemed with his precious blood, for whom he gave his life; in whom he dwells as in his temple, whom he looks upon as his own members, his brothers and co-heirs; who will reign with him and glorify God through him for all eternity. Why has Jesus Christ entrusted these children to the teacher? Was it merely to make them good penmen, great mathematicians, clever calculators, learned savants? Who would dare say or even think in this way? He entrusted them to the teacher to preserve in them the precious and priceless gift of innocence that he placed in their souls at Baptism so that they will become true Christians. Such is, in fact, the end and the purpose of the education of children: all the rest is accessory.
It follows that a teacher should have the greatest care to bring up his students in religious sentiments; and so he will apply himself, as we have said elsewhere, to instruct them in the mysteries of faith, especially in those truths that they must by all means explicitly believe: in the Creed, in the truths of a practical nature such as the Commandments of God and of the Church, the dispositions required for receiving the sacraments profitably, and so forth.
Nor will he fail to speak to them of the obligations contracted in Baptism; of the reconciliation to which they consented in receiving this sacrament, of the esteem they should have for the graces given to them, and of what they are bound to do to preserve these.
He will explain to them what concerns Holy Mass, the obligation of hearing Mass on Sundays and feasts, the precious benefits they will derive from attending Mass daily, and the manner of doing so. He will teach them to be assiduous in frequenting religious functions, and he will instruct them how to behave in church.
He will teach them how necessary prayer is, how and when they should fulfill this essential duty, for example, in the morning, at evening, and in so many other circumstances of life. He will make sure that they know the usual formulas of prayer, that they recite them well and distinctly.
He will also teach them how to make their actions meritorious by offering them to God and asking for his help to perform them well; how they should profit by the pains and sorrows of life; how to submit with resignation to the will of God in sickness and other unpleasant happenings; how to carry out the duties of their state of life; how to avoid occasions of sin; how never to be a cause of scandal for others, and so forth.
He will make them understand well the Christian and moral virtues: faith, hope, charity, justice, goodness, honesty, wisdom, prudence, fortitude, temperance, modesty in talk and in all their conduct, the respect and submission they owe to civil and ecclesiastical authorities, the immortality of the soul; the last ends of man; grace, sin, and so forth.
He will inspire them not only with solid Piety with regard to God and to Our Lord but also with a special devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin, to Saint Joseph, to their holy patron, and to their holy guardian angel. He should instruct them on the reasons for these devotions and reward those who take them most to heart. In the proper circumstances he should mention certain striking examples from the lives of the saints and of other illustrious persons. Good examples in themselves impress the minds of the students more deeply than long discourses, even the most carefully prepared ones.
Finally, he will without ceasing impress on the students the duty of preferring their own salvation to anything else; by all these instructions he will form in them the qualities that make a good Christian, a good citizen, a good father of a family, a good magistrate, a good soldier, a good businessman, and so forth, depending on the various vocations to which each may be called by Divine Providence.
But let us not forget to observe here that we must, above all, teach religion well to the children, and for this we need to diversify, as we mentioned above, and to simplify the instructions given, depending on the students’ needs. It is not enough to have them study the catechism and make them learn it every day; we must, in addition, illustrate Christian doctrine for them by giving them clear explanations according to their capacity. The teacher who does this, who provides them with an example of all the virtues, will infallibly produce great results.
Furthermore, it should not be necessary to mention that all exercises of piety should be performed with respect, with modesty, with interior and exterior recollection. At such times we should never permit anything that might distract the children from applying themselves to what they are doing. In church we must also require that they have their prayer books in their hands and follow in them assiduously.
Such are the principal objects about which a teacher should instruct his students. But once again, how can he give them such an education and form them properly to a Christian life if he himself is not filled with all that he is trying to teach them? We were right, then, in saying that his Piety must be outstanding. But to make it solid, he must not fail to take Jesus Christ as his model, the morals of this Divine Savior as the foundation and the principle of his conduct; thus he will scorn the passing goods of this world, the human praises bereft of all substance, and the pleasures of this life, which are only a danger and an illusion.
A teacher would lack Piety if he spoke of God in a lifeless manner without any feeling, without being convinced of the truths of religion; by saying or letting another say the prayers with great haste, without marking the pauses, or too loud, or without modesty, respect, or attention; by neglecting or by performing languidly and without fervor certain practices of devotion, such as using holy water, making the sign of the cross, joining his hands, bowing his head, kneeling at the proper times and places, especially if he failed to do so out of human respect.
Train yourself in godliness. . .; godliness is valuable in every way, holding promise for both the present life and the life to come (1 Timothy 4:8).
Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved by him, a worker who has no need to be ashamed (2 Timothy 4:8).
Generosity
Generosity is a virtue that makes us voluntarily sacrifice our personal interests to those of our neighbor, conformably to the example of Saint Paul, who said that he was "not seeking my own advantage but that of many so that they may be saved" (1 Corinthians 10:33).
This definition shows us that Generosity is not a common and ordinary virtue but a very noble one. In fact, the sacrifice with which it inspires us is performed freely, and the object of this sacrifice is something quite considerable.
It is freely done. A person is not generous when he gives to others only what belongs to them. Its object is something of considerable moment, for in general a person is not generous except insofar as he gives up his rights in favor of another and gives him more than he can demand. We can, therefore, consider Generosity as the most sublime of all sentiments, as the motive of all noble actions, and perhaps as the root of all great virtue.
Let us apply to a good teacher what we have been saying: it is easy to conclude from this application that Generosity is an attitude he needs and that it is proper to him even in a most sublime manner.
He makes a great sacrifice, one that is completely free, since he devotes himself willingly to something highly important for his neighbor, namely, the instruction of children, especially of poor children.
What is sublime about these sentiments? The better to instruct others, the Brother consecrates himself to God in a state where he renounces all earthly goods by the vow of poverty, the most legitimate pleasures by that of chastity, his own will—which means his personality—by the vow of obedience. Is this not a true holocaust on his part, an admirable disposition, a heroic attitude?
Although he confers advantages of a well-nigh infinite importance on his neighbor, he is far from drawing any earthly benefits therefrom. His claim to glory is his perfect disinterestedness. What a beautiful act this is, motivated as it is by Generosity!
He devotes himself, not momentarily but for life, to a career that is no doubt most honorable in itself but also extremely laborious and tedious for nature and that far from appearing honorable in the eyes of men, seems to them, on the contrary, commonplace and lowly. Nevertheless, he considers it as the sole object worthy of his labors, of his continual application, of his cares and study; and what he proposes to himself is to make his students derive all the benefit from his efforts so that he can say to them with the Apostle, "I will most gladly spend and be spent for you" (2 Corinthians 12:15). How many virtues does Generosity not give rise to!
Let us further explain this matter of Generosity. It is said to be a sentiment as noble as magnanimity, as useful as beneficence, and as tender as humanity. But does not the Generosity of a good teacher possess all these traits?
It is as noble as magnanimity. It rises above injuries, which it never seeks to avenge except by doing good; above contradictions, tedium, boredom, and the effort required by almost constant labor—in a word, above all that is most difficult, most irksome—in order to bring up children properly.
It is as useful as beneficence, for it confers very notable benefits on the children with regard to both their souls and their bodies. For this purpose, it pours out on them continual care; it forms them to the Christian and social virtues; it teaches them very interesting things from which they can draw much benefit in leading good lives.
It is as tender as humanity. It seeks to make others happy, whether by instruction, by advice, or by good example. It procures for them all the helps it can; it takes pity on their weakness; it forearms them against evil habits; it makes them acquire good ones; it corrects their vicious inclinations, such as insolence, haughtiness, pride, exaggerated self-esteem, laziness, and stubbornness. It accustoms them to alleviate their sufferings by the solid consolations found only in religion, about which he is zealous enough to teach them. He puts up with their faults and corrects them only when they deserve it; he suggests to them the means of preserving themselves from this world’s corruption. He does all this out of the most affectionate charity in order to form them as Christians and as useful citizens for society.
Let us add that Generosity includes the sentiment of liberality—but a wise and rational liberality—as becomes that of a good teacher. He should, indeed, give awards to his students to spur them on by emulation, to arouse them to do better and to avoid evil; but he should reward only true merit, with discernment, without partiality, and rarely; for if rewards became too frequent, they would lose all meaning; and even if they were in themselves worthy of consideration, before long the students would not take them much into account.
To acquire the virtue of Generosity, the teacher must prize his task. He must carry it out with affection, without neglecting anything. He should love to be of service to his neighbor and to do him all the good he can; multiplying his instructions and doing so with praiseworthy profusion, either in the general lessons or in the particular ones that he is sometimes in a position to give; this he should always do gratuitously, with no other motive than his neighbor’s benefit and God’s glory.
But he would fail against this virtue if he allowed himself too many comforts, under the pretext that teaching is so fatiguing or is affecting his health adversely; if he sought his own satisfaction rather than the progress of the students in their studies; if he failed to learn the things he needs to teach them about.
He would fail, again, if he kept for himself or gave to others rather than to his students the awards he might have received for them. He would also fail in this case against poverty, which forbids him to dispose of such things in this way.
He would fail, finally, if he accepted presents from his students, if he kept back something belonging to them, if he sought to win approval and praise or to be flattered.
I will most gladly spend and be spent for you.
If I love you more, am I to be loved less? (2 Corinthians 12:15)
Conclusion
There you have, very dear Brothers, the explanation of the virtues of the good teacher. As you can perceive, this has been entirely written in line with what we have learned from M. de La Salle; it is only the development of the general outline he laid down for educating children properly. And with what amazing success did he not carry out this plan! His outline, in fact, includes the four principal means that the most skillful teachers use to succeed in educating the young: to make themselves esteemed, loved, respected, and feared. Obviously, the Twelve Virtues of the Good Teacher include all these means, for not even one virtue fails to involve one or several more. What help, then, will they not provide to a teacher when they are all gathered together and if he possesses them all in a high degree?
Was it not by adhering closely to what M. de La Salle taught us that you have so successfully continued his work? Persevere, then, in following in his footsteps. Be sure that like the Apostle, "the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6). If some of you have not yet perfectly attained the virtues of the good teacher, we hope that you will, in the future, stir yourselves up to new fervor: both in acquiring them to the degree to which you should possess them and in avoiding with more care than ever the defects opposed to these virtues. This is the right way to make our Institute flourish more and more vigorously or, rather, to procure all the more glory to God and to make more effective the education we are giving to the young.
What we have said on this topic, my very dear Brothers, gives you to understand that when we seek to educate youth and willingly sacrifice ourselves for this end, we can apply to ourselves, in all justice, these words that the Apostle addressed to Timothy: "In doing this, you will save both yourself and your hearers" (1 Timothy 4:16). Thus we have every reason to hope—if we are faithful in carrying out our duties—to receive "the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will give me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have longed for his appearing" (2 Timothy 4:8). That crown will be infinitely glorious for us; for as you must have noticed in a passage from Saint John Chrysostom, "He who macerates his body by austerity has less merit than the person who wins souls for God." "There are," adds this same saint, "two paths leading to salvation. In the one a person labors for himself alone, and in the other he takes interest also in the service of his neighbor. We must acknowledge that fasts, corporal austerities, continence, and other like virtues are useful for the salvation of the one who practices them. But almsgiving, teaching, and charity, which reach out to our neighbor, are far more exalted virtues."
He further remarks (on the passage "Who is the faithful servant?"): "A single soul that we have won for Jesus Christ can make up for an infinity of sins in us and be the price of the redemption of our own soul."
Let us highly prize our good fortune in that after embracing one of the most austere forms of religious life in the Church, we add to this what many of the others do not possess: the precious advantage of instructing others and of laboring for the salvation of souls.
May the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit; grace be to you all, Amen.
Postscript
We will complete our work by a short explanation of the conditions that M. de La Salle requires for correction to be of benefit both to the one who inflicts it and to the one who receives it. We could have discussed this question in the treatise on The Twelve Virtues of the Good Teacher, the two topics being closely connected, but we preferred to deal with this matter here; in fact, such is the order observed by our venerable Founder.
It is true that The Conduct of the Christian Schools discusses the conditions that correction should have in order to be beneficial; but we find there prolix passages, generalizations, inversions, omissions, and a lack of clarity in the divisions and the subdivisions. Such are the drawbacks that we have thought it wise to remedy in this Postscript until a new edition of that excellent work, The Conduct of the Christian Schools, is published.
The conditions that correction should have are ten in number: the first seven are those that correction must have in order to prove useful to the one inflicting it; the last three, the conditions it must have in order to be helpful to the one receiving it.
Seven conditions that correction must have in order to be beneficial to the one inflicting it:
1) It must be pure. No doubt we must have in view when correcting, as in all our actions in general, the glory of God and the fulfillment of his holy will. But in addition we must intend the amendment of the student we are correcting so that there may not be any intermingling of ill-humor, aversion, antipathy, caprice, revenge, or resentment in what we do.
2) It must be charitable. The child should be corrected because we love him. A teacher is like a doctor, not like an enemy. "It would seem," says Saint Augustine, "that the doctor persecutes his patient; but in reality he is only persecuting his malady. He treats the illness because he loves the sick man; and he makes the latter, whom he loves, suffer only to deliver him from the malady that makes him suffer." Thus does a teacher act with regard to the child whom he corrects; his apparent severity is a grace, and the pains he causes are remedies.
3) It must be just. All punishment necessarily presupposes a fault; we should, then, correct only for a fault that is certain; similarly, a severe punishment should not be used except to sanction a fault that is serious, either in its qualities or in the consequences that it may entail. Punishment may sometimes err on the side of leniency, but it must never be more severe; otherwise, we would violate not only justice but also reason; it would mean that we are guided by prejudice and even might make it appear that we are punishing for the pleasure of punishing or from some other evil motive.
4) It must be proper. We need to pay attention to the age, the character, the temperament, and the dispositions of the student we are about to correct—and also to those of his parents—so that the punishment may be exactly proportionate to the fault, the circumstances, and the end we have in view.
5) It must be moderate, neither too harsh nor too precipitate. If it is too severe, it might embitter, incite rebellion, give rise to hatred, or discourage the child. If it is too precipitate, it may well be neither just nor proper.
6) It must be peaceable, that is, performed without trouble, impatience, excitement, or bluster—even, as a rule, in silence, unless we speak in a low tone and only if this is absolutely necessary.
7) Finally, it must be prudent. This is one of the conditions to which special attention must be paid. Prudence demands that before punishing we should ascertain the dispositions of the culprit and those in which we ourselves are. We would punish in vain a student whose feelings are lacerated, who is in revolt, full of bitterness and anger; he should be prepared to receive the punishment, if he is capable of reason; and the teacher himself should be prepared to inflict it only after calm reflection.
Prudence requires that we judge both the fault and the punishment that should be imposed. As there is a difference between faults committed through malice or stubbornness and those due to inattention, weakness, and so forth, there should also be a difference between the chastisements inflicted on those who commit them.
Prudence requires that the students should not become too used to punishment; they might become unaffected by it, and the sanctions would be fruitless.
Prudence also demands that we examine the manner of punishing; the time, the circumstances, the occasion—in a word, what is apt to make the correction more useful. It demands that we consider the character, the age, the temperament of the student, and whatever else pertains to him, so that we can determine the best manner of imposing the correction. For punishment should be inflicted with such perfect consideration of all the angles that far from having any ill effects, it may, on the contrary, procure only advantageous consequences for the culprits.
This is why we should not punish children who are timid and usually docile and who admit their faults in the same way as we punish those who are unruly, hardheaded, stubborn, who deny their faults, who fight back, and so forth. It is also for this reason that we should, as far as possible, especially spare the older students the shame of being chastised: their faults are not known to the others; so, too, we should keep secret the punishments given to faults against purity when these are either not known or known only to a few; the purpose is to preserve the good name of the culprits.
Three conditions that correction must have in order to be beneficial to the one receiving it:
1) It must be voluntary. This means that it should be received without any resistance and accepted willingly. The motives we should use to bring the one we are punishing to consent to it are: to show him how serious his fault was and the need for him to make up for it, both for his own personal good and for the good example he should give to his companions.
2) It must be respectful. The student being punished should recognize that the teacher is obliged to punish him for his faults and, as a consequence, that he himself should submit to the punishment when he is guilty.
3) It must be silent. The culprit should receive it without speaking, crying out, complaining, or murmuring; otherwise, he would show that he is receiving it neither voluntarily nor with respect.
Circular Letter of 10 April 1786
Concerning the Public Contests and Competitions Carried Out at the End of the School Year in Different Houses of His Congregation
BROTHER AGATHON
SUPERIOR GENERAL
THE BROTHERS OF THE CHRISTIANS SCHOOL
CONTENTS
Preface to the English Edition 45
Circular Letter Concerning the Public Contests and Competitions 47
First Proposition — abuses with regard to the students 49
Second Proposition — superficial learning 51
Second Section — abuses with regard to the Teachers,
abuses affecting community life, troubles
that the Contests cause Teachers and students 53
— something more about the Competitions 60
— conclusion and directives 61
Preface to the English Edition
The document that follows is a translation of the complete text of the printed Circular Letter of 10 April 1786 addressed by Brother Agathon, Superior General of the Brothers of the Christian Schools, to the members of his Institute.1 Brother Agathon, the fifth Superior General, was elected in 1777 and proved himself to be an outstanding educator and leader. His Circular Letter of 1785, entitled The Twelve Virtues of a Good Teacher, has been, after The Conduct of the Christian Schools of John Baptist de La Salle, the most important educational book of his Institute. Brother Agathon defended his Institute in the National Assembly, in 1792, in the aftermath of the French Revolution, when all religious congregations eventually were formally dissolved. He was incarcerated in three different prisons but was freed after eighteen months. He died alone in 1798.
My intention in offering this complete translation is that my recent rereading of the original text reminded me forcibly that the shortened version fails to convey some of the subtlety both of the content and of the argument of the original. I am also confident that the following comments and the footnotes in the text, by helping readers to see more clearly the situation that Brother Agathon found it necessary to address, will help them appreciate the different levels of appeal throughout the letter.
Some historical background:
The Brothers of the Christian Schools were founded to offer a gratuitous education to the children "of artisans and the poor." This foundation principle was jealously defended by them throughout their long history, especially before the French Revolution and for a good part of the nineteenth century. This meant, therefore, that the establishment and maintenance of any foundation depended on founders—individuals, corporations, or bishops—who were prepared to pay an agreed-upon sum of money annually for the support of the Brothers’ community, which had no other source of income.
It was natural that these "founders" gradually came to look for some public proof that the work they were supporting was successful. This resulted in some persons wishing to offer prizes to students who had distinguished themselves. Gradually, from the school’s viewpoint, it was important to have some public manifestation of the success of the school and, at the same time, to recognize its founders and benefactors, hence the growth of what are called throughout the following letter "Competitions" or "Contests," which gradually became more and more elaborate as the taste for such public showing-off developed. If at the beginning these public Competitions resembled "spelling bees" or arithmetical contests, not unlike modern quiz programs, they very quickly took on a life of their own, adding declamation, short scenes from plays, and so on and causing the problems that the Circular Letter addresses. As Brother Agathon had given a number of experienced Brothers the opportunity to do further studies in order to prepare them to teach in the boarding schools, this may have broadened their own cultural horizons.
Who were these students?
The modern reader has to allow for the fact that the students were often only a very short time in school, and it was essential that all receive what we would call today a basic education in literacy and in their religion. As there was no compulsory education, the age range could run from between seven and eight years of age in the majority of the schools (which were elementary schools) to fifteen and sixteen in the boarding schools. But it is highly likely that children of different ages sat in the same classrooms, depending on the age at which they first were sent to school by their parents. The reference late in the document to those who leave after First Communion needs to be understood according to the norms of the time, when the boys would probably be at least twelve years of age.
Teachers and Brothers?
Throughout the document that follows, the author speaks sometimes of the "Teachers" and at other times of the "Brothers." They were, of course, the same persons. One of the important things about this document is the way in which the author’s argument is sometimes pedagogical and at other times religious as he addresses the Brothers of his Institute. But the distinction made is very real and historically remarkable for the way in which Brother Agathon sees teaching as the professional duty of the Brothers, linked inseparably with their reason for existing for "the Christian education of the poor," their "state" in life. The Brothers were never full-time catechists, nor did their schools offer others forms of teaching simply to have the opportunity to catechize the students. Everything, all forms of teaching, had to be integrated. Whatever was not educationally sound, therefore, was to be opposed and denounced. These same "Teachers" were also members of the Institute, Brothers, and as such they were bound to a way of life and to a Rule that they had agreed to live by. Both these levels of appeal are to be found in the present work.
Some comments on the translation
Brother Agathon has a vigorous style of writing that is not always easy to bring into English. Some of his sentences are very long, as he makes a good deal of use of the French semi-colon when he is listing numbers of things. Sometimes it has been necessary to break these long sentences down to shorter English sentences so as not to lose the line of his argument, but I think the reader will find that the vigorous style is largely maintained.
The English terms "Contests" and "Competitions"—translations of the French word répétitions, which occurs frequently in Brother Agathon’s original text—highlight the competitive and public nature of these events.
Although there is no table of contents in the original text, I have offered one, because it enables the reader to see the development of the argument more clearly.
Brother Gerard Rummery
30 September 1999
My very dear Brothers,
Some years ago there were introduced into a number of our Houses2 certain public Competitions or Contests, carried out by children3 attending our schools, in the presence of a number of the most important personages of the locality where this custom was established.
These Contests consist in having the students recite from memory whatever they have learned during the school year and present before the assembly their workbooks of writing, arithmetic, and spelling, replying to the various questions addressed to them, whether it be on Christian doctrine or reading, spelling, writing, or arithmetic. Finally, the sessions end with a prize distribution to those among the students who are judged to have so merited.
Such, at the beginning, were the Competitions, which simply had as their objective that the students give an exact account of each section of our teaching.
If these Contests had remained within reasonable bounds, they would have been simply praiseworthy and completely in accord with the spirit of our Institute. But as is often the case in most practices that have been established to obtain some benefit, they soon lose their initial purpose and frequently degenerate into an abuse. So it is with these Competitions and Contests, simple as they are in principle and potentially so beneficial to both teachers and students, but they have become injurious to both, as our observations on this topic will prove.
The subject matter foreign to our lessons that has been introduced into these Contests has quickly changed the nature and the benefits that could have been expected. Simple demonstrations that aimed only at producing a praiseworthy emulation among the children in their mastery of each part of our teaching have become a kind of stage presentation, more an imposition on the students and on their fathers and mothers, with the incentive of some praise or flattering reward than something of any real advantage to the children.
These Competitions, however, have quickly acquired a certain celebrity, as a result of which it was soon concluded that accustoming students to these kinds of Contests was an excellent way of instructing them, a method that offered all the advantages that could be proposed for the education of youth. As a result, some persons who are enthusiastic supporters of education have put down substantial sums of money for the prizes intended for those among the students who distinguished themselves by their talents. Among the parish priests, several were convinced by these Contests of the results that could be produced through our schools and have seized the opportunity to enhance the reputation of the schools and to disseminate books appropriate for spreading education through families, thus combatting so many bad works found among people today.
At these public meetings, patrons of Christian Schools and founders4 of these new establishments sometimes find themselves witnesses, along with the parish priests, of the great good that is brought about through their generosity. For their part, the Brothers also have wished by these means to prove to those interested in the instruction of children and in the public good that they are fulfilling the duties of their state and at the same time proving the usefulness of their teaching.
But in spite of the utility of these public Competitions and the praiseworthy motives that led to their establishment, we believe, all the same, that we should make some comments on the supposed advantages espoused by those in favor of these Contests. We will oppose them by showing the real abuses that result, in order to allow you to judge the matter justly and impartially.
1) First of all, it is said that through these Contests a certain natural shyness proper to the age of the children is dissipated. Secondly, the idea is to encourage a general competitiveness among the students by the prospect of some praise and public awards at the end of the year to the most deserving among them. This is the kind of motivation considered appropriate to sharpen up lazy or indolent children while inspiring with a new ardor those who enjoy concentration and work. The end result is that all make progress.
2) There is a desire to recognize the founders of the schools publicly and to express praise for their zeal on behalf of education by demonstrating the results produced by their devoted support with regard to a whole multitude of children who, lacking such support, would for the most part grow up in ignorance of their duties toward God, their parents, their superiors, and society in general.
3) It is said that schools take on a greater importance and have a tendency to proliferate as they attract the confidence of the local authorities. Parents have more confidence in them, and this makes them more careful about sending their children to school, and finally, the children themselves have a deeper love for the Christian and civic instruction given in the schools.
4) There is a desire to accord teachers the degree of esteem that is merited by their zeal, their talents, and the results of their work by placing them in a kind of necessity of carrying out their functions worthily by presenting students in these Contests who do them credit. It has been suggested that a worthy desire is aroused among the teachers for each one to distinguish himself through his class. Certainly, some of these effects have resulted from these kinds of Competitions.
5) It has been suggested that giving children this opportunity to appear in public arouses in all those who are endowed with the right dispositions the desire to surpass one another and by these means to have a kind of awakening emerge by this sharp stimulus among several who are naturally disposed to a type of inertia.
6) There is a desire to reward achievement by presenting to the students a goal that can be both a reward for their past efforts and an efficient vehicle for the future.
7) It is proposed, finally, that children will gain a certain assurance in their manners, ease in their whole exterior, facility in self-expression, and courage to express themselves in public. Such different ends have undoubtedly been proposed for these annual public Contests. While it cannot be denied that certain of these expectations have been met, we are forced to admit from experience that in several other aspects they have degenerated into various kinds of abuses.
These abuses can be considered from two different viewpoints, one concerning the students and the other, the Teachers.5 Simply setting out both of them will show clearly that they have produced some good but have also brought about a greater evil.
In order to make known the abuses that these public Contests have created with respect to children, I will set out two propositions that will prove that these Competitions expose the Teachers to neglect an essential part of their duty and that the education of those admitted to these competitions with their emulation prizes is not very solid.
First Proposition
These public Contests, in general, prevent Teachers from carrying out the duties of their state, namely, to teach all their students equally and to give special attention to those among them who are most in need of instruction, whether because of their lack of natural ability or their poverty, which deprives them of any other source of schooling except the Charity School, whose principal objective is the instruction of the children of artisans and the poor.
First Abuse. Out of some 300 to 400 children, only twenty or so (and every year practically all the same ones, along with some others added to their number) are chosen to shine in these public Contests; however, it is obvious that the end proposed to us is not to instruct only a small number of children but to ensure the instruction of all.
Second Abuse. The students chosen for these Contests are usually those most gifted with natural talent. With little effort they obtain prizes that should be awarded only after greater effort. Moreover, this selection introduces a certain division that should not be made among the children.
Third Abuse. If to the children most endowed with natural talent and likely to shine there are added others who lack talent, these latter are admitted to sharing the glory of the first group only through friendship, particular affection, or the recommendation of their friends or of persons interested in showing them some kindness. But with regard to these protégés, making up for what nature has failed to give them requires extraordinary attention on the part of the Teachers. These signs of favoritism can have the most dangerous consequences, since all students in a class have an equal right to the care and attention of the Teachers.
Fourth Abuse. The students chosen to figure in these public spectacles are usually selected soon after the beginning of the school year, and from then on they are designated as those who have potential as actors. From then on, also, the Teachers give constant attention to these contestants for glory. They are never lost sight of; their work in and out of class is uninterrupted. Special lessons are added before and after class, on holidays, and on Sundays and feasts. The first consequence of this choice by the Teachers in favor of the privileged students is to have even less esteem for the others, all of whom have the right to the same means of encouragement used by the Teachers toward those who attract their particular care.6
Fifth Abuse. Those less favored by nature and lacking the qualities that are capable of being developed successfully—being ordinarily little impressed by the advantages to be gained from attending school, since they are not aware of any—resent the distinction made between them and the chosen ones. This distinction shocks them, and they consider themselves debased and totally neglected. They become discouraged, develop an aversion to school and to their Teachers, and to justify their disgust and dissatisfaction, every means is vindicated. They tell lies; they exaggerate; they resort to calumny so that as a result they leave school and abandon instruction.7 This is a too common result of these unjust preferences.
Sixth Abuse. Experience shows that children at a certain age who come to realize that they will never be chosen to appear in these Contests become discouraged and develop an aversion for everything concerning the duties associated with school. They consider themselves both disgraced at not being allowed to appear in public with the others and publicly humiliated by the Teachers and by those preferred to themselves—sentiments that they do not fail to express at the least opportunity. Thus instead of encouraging a spirit of competition among the children, the selection has a completely opposite effect on the majority of them.
Seventh Abuse. Very many students who are not destined to take part in these Contests—not wishing to assume that their failure to advance is due either to their lacking application or to their having little natural talent—attribute their lack of progress to the favoritism of the Teachers, whom they accuse of giving all their attention to the chosen children. Nevertheless, to tell the truth, as we have already remarked, those favored by natural talent joined to other advantages obtained by their parents make far more rapid progress in a shorter time than those others would after the greatest effort.
Eighth Abuse. Poor parents have no other possibility of educating their children except through the help of the Charity Schools, and because of the small services that they often must derive from their children, they indeed have only a limited period of time in which to send them to school. These poor children, given the brief time they attend, can draw only limited profit from school. Will not the parents, however, even though unjustifiably so, be led to complain and to believe that their offspring are making less progress because of the greater attention given by the Teachers to their companions, the ones destined for the Contests, who will bring more public applause, rewards, and honor to those who teach them?
Ninth Abuse. Everyone knows that a given student, without much time or application, will make enough progress so as to be judged worthy of the first prize, while another, with fewer natural advantages and therefore incapable of shining in certain kinds of study included in their common education, will be judged unworthy of competing. Nevertheless, even with the most dogged work, this second student, not being capable of overcoming the natural obstacles to brilliant success, will be put to one side precisely because his progress cannot be compared with those with whom he is competing. He will thus be deprived of any motive for encouragement, even though his effort far exceeded that of the person preferred to him. Now, I ask, has distributive justice been safeguarded? If a child who lacks great natural qualities fails to find in his courage and in his reason the motives to sustain his application, will he not be tempted to give up everything and remain wrapped in the darkness of his ignorance? This outcome is undoubtedly opposed to the goal that is proposed in awarding prizes according to merit.
Tenth Abuse. Parents sometimes make real sacrifices in depriving themselves of their children's help during the entire school year so as not to interfere with their application to school lessons. If they see their own children to be hardworking and well behaved for the whole year but in no way recognized publicly for such effort and when they learn, moreover, that students with less work and application are preferred to their own children in the prize distribution, do not these fathers and mothers, mindful of the sacrifices they have made in supporting the application of their children, believe that they have grounds for complaint? Would they not consider themselves justified in withdrawing their children from school and leaving them in ignorance?
Eleventh Abuse. A father of a family, very poor himself, seeing that his child is never admitted among the prize winners, may judge that it is because his son is poor and badly dressed that he is not well regarded, being incapable of offering presents to his Teachers, while the more favored rich, who easily make a good impression, are the Teachers’ darlings.
The preceding, then, is an overview of the main abuses of these public Contests that we are discussing. As we have seen, such abuses are obviously very prejudicial to the well-being of education in general. Nothing more is needed to prove the truthfulness of our first proposition.
Second Proposition
These Contests usually provide only superficial learning to those who compete and are, moreover, prejudicial to the good order and running of the school.
First of all, we maintain that these Contests produce only superficial learning in those chosen to compete for the prizes. The proof of this is easy to establish.
It would be an imposition to seek to persuade you that all from the total number of students chosen to compete for prizes in these Contests make great progress in every aspect of our teaching. No, ordinarily a child who has the appropriate talent for writing, for example, will be carefully coached, and in order to commit him to be honored for this talent and not to distract or discourage him, he will not have to be concerned about anything else. He will be left to follow his natural attraction, quite happy if he can develop an outstanding handwriting. That, broadly speaking, will be the whole value of this student.
Another student, if blessed with a retentive memory, will be entrusted with such activities as will show it off, for example, speeches, acting certain roles, dialogues, and word-for-word recitations from the catechism.
Someone who shows the appropriate talent or disposition will be channeled to define the principal operations of arithmetic, to answer questions put to him about these, and also to explain selected rules of French grammar. Finally, there are others who cannot succeed in any of the above but whom the Teachers wish to associate with the Chosen Ones. They will be formed exclusively to read well. These, in brief, are the results ordinarily obtained by the Teachers and students who dedicate themselves for a good part of the year in order to be publicly honored through Contests for the progress they have made.
It is therefore very rare that this progress is extended to all aspects of teaching for each of the chosen students, because, as we have already observed, each one is concerned almost exclusively with the part that favors his personal taste and in which he can best succeed. Thus one student will know how to write but know little or nothing about spelling or arithmetic, and so on. Another, who knows how to calculate, will understand nothing of the catechism or of what he should know about other matters, because he never has any practice. As a general rule, then, the instruction of those destined to compete for prizes is nothing other than superficial.
If there are Teachers who, as they should, require the students who are destined to compete for prizes to make progress in all areas, or at least in the most important components of our teaching, this attention of the Teachers, praiseworthy as it is, far from eliminating the abuse, only multiplies it in certain aspects. The more things that are demanded of the students, the more necessary it is to give time and special care both to support their concentration and to help them to advance. But in order to be able to obtain these advantages, the Teachers believe themselves justified in modifying, changing, or even overturning the school’s curriculum in their regard, so that while the ordinary students are directed to follow what is prescribed for each hour of the class, those in the privileged group, at the expense of the order and discipline so wisely set out in The Conduct of the Christian Schools8 so as to maintain a uniformity of teaching among the Brothers, do whatever most pleases them to make up for what is lacking in the section in which it is proposed they are to shine.
Besides overturning order, how much care and embarrassment this situation brings for the Teachers! On the one hand, they are not unaware that their attention should be given to all the students; on the other hand, they feel that those who are concerned with matters foreign to the common lessons need their special help. Whose side will they take? The very idea of Teachers being placed in this situation between duty and the urge to make the contestants shine proves the abuse of the Contests themselves. There are even more questions concerning the students who are destined to act out some role during the Contests. Are they even ready and in a state to appear on stage with distinction? How much anxiety is there not on the part of the Teachers that these chosen contestants will abandon their part! But in order to encourage them to persevere in this glorious career, how much freedom will they not be allowed! All their shortcomings are tolerated; their most serious faults are covered over; the Teachers even become slaves to their whims. The other students grumble because what was never allowed to them is condoned with these others. They are not listened to because the others are needed; they must be in the Contests to uphold the honor of the class in public. Furthermore, the privileged students make fun of those who cannot be included among their ranks; they are proud of their advantages over them and look down on them. Because of this, there arise petty dislikes and reciprocal insults and attacks. Can these common faults among children be effectively reproved by the Teachers? Is it easy to recognize the authors of such disorders when they occur? Who dares accuse students who have been protected with impunity regarding their faults?
It is quite obvious by everything that has been said that these Contests are harmful to the order and general discipline of the school. Our preceding reflections with regard to the students have shown that these abuses have very many unfortunate consequences over the pretended advantages they may produce.
Second Section
Abuses that these inflated Contests bring about with regard to the Teachers
In order to make known the abuses of these Contests with regard to the Teachers, we will content ourselves with setting out one proposition whose development will afford the greatest evidence of the truth of these abuses.
he annual public Contests are harmful to the rest and tranquillity of the Brothers and disturb the order and calm of our communities. They banish the spirit of retreat and recollection. They are in opposition to the humble and simple spirit of our state of life. They affect the health of the Brothers by the extra care and work that they bring. Finally, they are bad in themselves, either by the nature of certain matter they deal with or by the end they suggest. These truths, learned from experience, will be demonstrated.
1) The students chosen for these Contests receive various kinds of exemptions. Among others, they have the privilege of being able to come to class before the prescribed time, to remain after the other students have left, and to return at different times of the day as they consider appropriate. They are often unsupervised, a situation that should never happen. They come and go, play, and make lots of noise, thus disturbing order, silence, and the calm of the Brothers, who lose time that should have been used in preparing lessons or carrying out some duty. Thus it is that these students are an occasion of upset, waste of time, and distraction with regard to the Brothers’ spiritual exercises. Those who favor the Contests become, perhaps without realizing it, dupes of a self-love that blinds them. Because they believe in their talents and in their ability to succeed in public, they make of this insignificant event a major affair to which they devote all their time and attention, perhaps even that of their devotional exercises. At the least, there seem to be some grounds for fearing that the community exercises of those who wish to appear with honor suffer considerably. Thus everything is directed toward this prized objective of their own vanity.
3)9 Plans are made well beforehand; actors are selected, and the material to be dealt with in the public Competitions is chosen. From now on, compliments are prepared; catalogues of different historical situations appropriate for the ceremony are carefully assembled; the various sections of catechism, grammar, and arithmetic are distributed among the students most likely to succeed in those sections. Those who are to question and those who are to answer are designated, different actors being needed, as the one who can question well does not himself give the answer. The same attention is given to those who will shine through writing and to those chosen only to read. When these arrangements have been made, the only concern from this time on is to take the appropriate means to ensure the greatest possible success.
4) Throughout the entire time of class outside the common lessons, as we have already noted, the Teacher never loses sight of the ones chosen to act in the proposed Contest. Everything is employed for their advancement. In the section assigned to him, each contestant is pressured—sometimes forced—to become skilled. Even punishments are employed when they are thought necessary. Parents are asked to take the children in hand. This is an important matter; this is the public event itself! It is not only the part of instruction with which each actor is concerned that is, all things considered, the most necessary; the well-being of the Contest demands it, and this must be preferred to the good of any individual!
5) As the big day approaches, activities are multiplied; greater efforts are made. It is then that people are convinced that the urgency not to fail in the Contest must take precedence over every other consideration and even every community duty. Any orders and prohibitions of a Superior on this matter are no longer respected. The example that each Brother is called to give to his Brothers by his fervor in carrying out common duties is sacrificed. The order of the community is turned upside down. Brothers remain in distant classes with students, going there ahead of time and returning, alone, very late. There is no end to these departures, comings, and goings, since Brothers are completely occupied with frivolous aims that distort their judgment against every rule and order.
6) It is also at this time that the Brothers begin to prepare or to have prepared by others, in what concerns gestures and declamation, the students destined for the Contests. This means that the Brothers are preoccupied by matters absolutely foreign to their state while carrying out their own strictest duties very imperfectly. It is also worth noting that wherever these Contests are established in schools, the beginning of this extensive preparation, which lasts for months, is always the moment when good order and attention to teaching decline. It is true that if the Brother Visitor comes at this embarrassing time, things are momentarily restored to order both in the school and in the community. But from early morning until night, once he departs, the students are never left. The Director, through either connivance or weakness, pays no heed to it, and so the abuse prevails and is perpetuated.
7) Experience shows, my very dear Brothers, that toward the end of the school year, students lose their taste for work, relax their attention to duty, and long for vacation. They are not only less disposed to apply themselves; they are also less likely than at any other time of the year to be satisfied with order. No matter what attention their Teachers wish to bring, the students draw little profit. Now if in addition to the natural difficulties arising from the nearness of vacation in having students do their duty, we add the extreme embarrassment and great distractions that the Contests necessarily entail, is it not obvious that general teaching is practically reduced to nothing?
8) If it happens that through illness or some other cause, some students already prepared and ready for the Contests are withdrawn from the school, what a surplus of difficulties this produces for the Teacher and what new trouble does it not bring with regard to order in the classroom! For the gap has to be filled; efforts have to be redoubled, and rehearsals of the parts assigned have to continue all the time. These students will be coached and drilled during prayers, during catechism, and even while the others are at Mass. It cannot be denied that this unfortunate occurrence increases disorder. But no matter the cost, it is necessary to repair the losses that affect these public Competitions. Everything must be subordinated to this important objective.
9) A Brother who has mastered every aspect of our teaching, who has the advantage of being able to do it well along with the precious talent of inspiring students to piety and love of virtue, but who, in addition to these fine qualities, does not have the ability to train them to perform well in the Contests, will be looked upon as someone of little ability, and his students, although better taught, will be regarded as uncouth and ignorant. It will be the same for a naturally timid Teacher, one who is never more embarrassed than when he has to display his knowledge. Such a Teacher, although capable of honoring his profession and acquitting himself zealously, will not know how to perform; he will lack the manners and poise to make himself appreciated and will bring himself little honor in the public Contests. Another Teacher, however, of very mediocre ability, often with no other merit than that of being able to impose himself by his boldness, his chattering, and his dexterity, will pass for a great man and win all the applause of the assembly.
10) A young Brother who has all the success envisaged in the Contests is dazzled by the praise heaped on him and the compliments and congratulations given him in the public recognition by parents and all those who honor and flatter him. This Brother, being perhaps of ordinary talent, is tempted to believe himself someone of importance. If he is not solidly grounded in virtue, has he not to fear that his humility, modesty, simplicity, and love of his state will come to an unfortunate shipwreck? If his head is not completely turned by this high point of glory, has he not at least to fear that from now on he will be disdainful of ordinary tasks and even of teaching the poor, considering himself deserving of some more exalted task? Will he not become more sensitive and delicate on this point of honor? Will he not lose by this single public act everything he has acquired over many years? This disadvantage alone is enough to distance himself as far away as possible from these Competitions.
11) Might not the care taken to train students in declamation, in the art of public speaking, in charm, harangues, and the singing of flattering songs in honor of the dignitaries assisting at the Contests be inspired by the ridiculous motive, at least in this regard, of equality with the Colleges10 and of sharing in the applause they attract by their literary Competitions? Is it not in view of this that rooms are prepared and theatres set up for these Contests, that those chosen to play certain roles are dressed up, that the principal celebrities of a place are invited personally or by note, that we hasten to multiply admirers, or rather, critics, perhaps even scoffers? For we should not hide the fact that if in these public Contests some sincere praise is received, how many other expressions are only contrived, trivial, and intended solely to intoxicate the foolish. When the pompous feast is over and the applause has been given and received, there is still need of a ceremony to go to thank the personalities who honored the occasion by their presence. If some distinguished persons in the town were unable to be present with others at this public spectacle and wish to see it repeated, the Teachers and the students go to them, and each takes his role and plays his part once again. When the presentation is over, the applause begins anew. The satisfied assembly praises the children once more and offers further compliments to the Teachers. Such is the end of this scene that is proclaimed soon afterward in other towns where these Competitions are established. The Brothers write to one another and share in their mutual success. They generally give a report on all they have done and the satisfaction received. It is in this way that vain objectives keep the Brothers busy both before and after the Contests.
12) The end of the Christian and Gratuitous Schools—we can never repeat it too often—is to bring up the children who frequent them in a Christian manner, that is to say, to educate them in the fear and the love of God.
The means given to the Teachers to attain such a noble end are to fill the youthful hearts of these children with Christian precepts, to engrave on their hearts the Commandments of God and of the Church and everything else needed for their salvation. Furthermore, Teachers are to instruct these same children to read, write, spell, and do arithmetic. Such are the boundaries of our teaching. Departing from these is to adopt a style of teaching that is not really our own. The method we are to follow without straying from it has enough breadth to occupy fully the teachers employed to do so. Now a Christian and religious Teacher who finds that the time intended for school is hardly enough to discharge his essential obligations is very far from using the time to train students for declamation and other theatrical practices that are only too likely to give them a taste for secular plays, from which children cannot be too far removed. Moreover, what use would it be for the children of artisans and the poor, for whom the Gratuitous Schools were specifically founded, to know how to recite compliments gracefully, give harangues, and reel off other pieces of eloquence while these same children often remain ignorant of what they need as essential, whether it be religion or those elements of knowledge necessary for their state? Would not the praise received by the children for having starred in these useless presentations, however, give them the idea that things concerning religion are not worth retaining or, furthermore, that they rank only second in the esteem of the people?
13) The extreme trouble associated with public Contests and the excessive amount of work demanded of Teachers in order to succeed can appear to very many a legitimate reason for not carrying out certain community spiritual exercises, on the basis that they cannot help the preferred work. They leave them aside. If there is a Brother Director zealous for the order and regularity of the community who wishes to rebuke this concession, how are his reproaches received? How is this zeal interpreted? From this unfavorable situation, can there not be reason to fear some act of disobedience or scandal? If the situation does not go as far as that, it will at least be difficult not to be followed by coldness, bad feeling, and discontent.
14) The excessive work and the anxieties imposed by the heavy tasks associated with the Contests may appear to a Brother to be sufficient justification to fail to get up at the normal rising time of the community, to omit his meditation and even his assistance at Holy Mass. He believes he can sufficiently justify his conduct and repair the damage he does to himself and the bad example given to the community by exaggerating the burdens of the night before and complaining of his lot, seeing himself, so to say, as the victim of his own zeal for the public good and the honor of the community. This is how someone is pleased to delude himself.
15) The fatigue brought about by the Contests is not only the source of a thousand distractions to the Brother’s spirit; it is also an occasion for exhausting his body and catching many illnesses that little by little ruin the best temperaments. Indeed, after having experienced many incidents of this type in the course of a year, a Brother feels his health considerably altered when vacation time has hardly arrived. He must therefore have recourse to remedies, begin dieting, and receive special consideration outside the common order, such as forbidding himself all concentration and spiritual exercises, which are most damaging to the state in which he finds himself. These exercises are replaced by frequent brief pleasure trips, walks through one town or another, and so forth. The exercises of the annual retreat made during the vacation are absolutely forbidden to the Brothers of whom we are speaking, worn out by their zeal. Their whole concern is to regain their strength and to put themselves in a position to be able to apply themselves to what they call the Main Event,11 that is to say, to teach school after the vacation is over. Nevertheless, this retreat, so useful for the fervent, is even more so for those whom the Contests have thrown into such a state of distraction that deficiencies from which they have suffered throughout a great part of the year can have serious consequences for their health. Everyone knows how important it is to profit by this time of retreat to make up for spiritual losses and to renew the interior spirit, the very soul that guides a religious. It is during these holy exercises that there can be discovered the hundred frivolities that strengthen the passions and overwhelm the spirit to the detriment of our perfection and of the holiness to which our vocation calls us. Finally, it is during the retreat that after recognizing the tricks of self-love and the vanity of all that distracts us, we take effective means for a wise reform of our way of thinking and of acting. Piety reclaims its rights. A soul pierced by a religious spirit is an appropriate instrument to communicate piety and a love of virtue to the hearts of children.
16) The numerous inconveniences of the Contests have already inspired very many Brothers with a distinct aversion for those of our communities where they have been introduced, so much so that they go there only with difficulty and remain there only with repugnance by whatever means they can. Those among the Brothers who have nothing to do with these disturbing Competitions justly complain about the troubles they bring to our communities and the upsets they cause. From every side the Brothers complain that the long painful preparations for the Contests dry up the spirit of devotion in them, ruin their health, and take away the time they need either to prepare their daily lessons or to create examples of writing.
Very many young Brothers do not dare to commit themselves to the Institute because of their fear of being subjected to these Contests, which are so harmful to their vocation and so contrary to recollection. These Competitions have really been carried to such a level of difficulty and variety in several towns that they have become a heavy burden on the Brothers. It is too arduous a counterweight to satisfying self-love, especially when it is contrary to a person’s wishes.
17) The competitiveness that arises naturally among the Teachers who have a taste for Contests can become a source of jealousy, discontent, and coldness toward one another. Each Teacher wishes to succeed in his plan, even so far as to sweep away his imitator, hence the efforts of work and attention by one and the other to obtain the advancement of those chosen to compete for the prize. This doubling of zeal would be quite praiseworthy if it were aimed at the advancement of all his students.
18) If one Teacher has an advantage over another, the latter sees this superiority of his confrere only with despondency. He tries in every way to persuade himself—and to have others understand—that the former has, despite all the advantages over him, certain weaknesses that would have left the two of them equal from a certain viewpoint, at least if the matter had been seen from another angle. To justify himself, he projects a part of the humiliation he is experiencing onto the fortunate disposition or age of his rival’s student. However, if the merit of the successful one is so plain as not to be in doubt, he is upset, disconcerted, and discouraged. He can be relieved of his difficulty by the change of community that he asks for, not taking any account of the damage that frequent changes among the Teachers can cause for the advancement of students.
19) The Teacher of one class will persuade himself that his students are on the same level as those of another class and consequently should be equally represented in the distribution of prizes. If it happens, nevertheless, that those who judge the prizes think otherwise, the Teacher can believe himself wronged; he calls it unjust, because all the care he has taken goes unrewarded. Indeed, the bitterness he feels and maintains is the most likely result.
20) In the competitive atmosphere of the Contests, it is not easy to see others having more success than ourselves. If humility does not come to the rescue, it will be difficult to see the talents of our Brothers justly and pardon them for their merited superiority. Self-love is wounded; people remain offended. If someone cannot gain or win some degree of consideration against those of whom he is jealous, there seems to be no other cure for the evil than to shrink from the view of those who injure the eyes by the sight of their merit or to find reasons for a change of community. If this cannot be obtained, the Brother falls into a bad mood, and everyone in the community is likely to suffer all the disagreements, as though a person had the right to blame everyone else for not having all the talents he wishes.
21) It sometimes happens among Teachers that the desire to surpass one another in the public Competitions leads a person to make use of little tricks and underhanded intrigues that are likely to reduce or cut across what others are doing. All of this activity is intended to find a way for personal relief, and from this there follow sharp reprimands and other offensive remarks, all equally opposed to union, peace, charity, and honesty.
22) A Teacher who would have been happy to present his students at the highest rank in the Contests and who has not received the desired reward will doubtless feel the supposed injustice committed toward him and his students. If he has the discretion to be content publicly, will he have the prudence not to allow his grief and resentment to burst out when those who distributed the prizes are no longer present and to impute faults of judgment or justice to them?
23) Finally, someone who has had certain difficulties in these Contests is easily persuaded, no matter the source of these sufferings, that there is ample justification for not wanting to remain in a town that can no longer please him, because of the rebuffs that he experienced from these public Competitions; the situation is no longer supportable.
The development of this multitude of abuses originating from the Contests proves beyond any doubt the truth of the proposition that we have set out. But in order to make it even more striking, we are going to state the reasons alleged by Brothers who disapprove of these kinds of public Competitions. These reasons are drawn, in part, from what has been said in a number of points already cited.
According to these Brothers,
1) Their state in life does not oblige them to do this;
2) They do not have sufficient health to support the surcharge of work that the preparation of students destined for the Contests requires;
3) These extra concerns rob them of the time needed to prepare the obligatory teaching and to pause for their spiritual exercises;
4) It is impossible to do both things at the same time without sacrificing many obligations of the Rule;
5) Very few results are obtained from the multiple cares exacted by the public Competitions;
6) Some do not believe they have the talent necessary to shine, although they have sufficient talent for whatever good is required of them by their state;
7) Others, endowed with the qualities needed to succeed in the Contests and less distrustful of their own abilities, are not prepared to take on work that is too difficult;
8) Others, from the viewpoint of modesty and humility, prefer virtue to vanity;
9) There are those who dread the censure and the mockery of critics who find it ridiculous for the Brothers to be mixed up in things that have nothing to do with their state;
10) Balancing the pros and cons leads some to reject completely these Contests that have such little utility and so many abuses;
11) The distinction accorded to the small number of students chosen for the Contests and the particular attention given to them are a kind of injustice for which they do not wish to be reproached;
12) There are too many visits by parents who ask the Teachers to put their children where they can shine with honor and be distinguished among the troupe;
13) The upset and trouble brought to ordinary class duties and the study of particular subjects foreign to our teaching displease those who love order;
14) Very many Brothers in favor of Contests, having successfully added and considerably increased the task from year to year, have eventually found themselves at the end of their tether, with the result that they have been obliged to change community. Their successors, not wishing to be less distinguished, do not wish to risk failing in taking on more than they can do with distinction.
After this account, it is easy to conclude that the feelings of those who are opposed to the Contests deserve to be considered.
We think it appropriate to remark that none of the zealous partisans of these illustrious Competitions has noticed at the same time or in the same place all the above-mentioned abuses. Nevertheless, all these inconveniences have arisen, plus many others that we will cloak over in silence. In certain towns they have been more plentiful, and in others, fewer. We are convinced that after reading our observations, the vast majority of Brothers will believe that we still do not know everything reprehensible in these Contests.
As for the rest, let no one believe that Competitions are a proper means for sustaining and extending the reputation of our schools. No, experience has already dissipated the charm of that illusion. It is recognized that these Contests obtain for the children destined to figure in them only a particular teaching, very imperfect and more harmful than useful.
A happier experience has already proven that our teaching, when practiced in the spirit of and according to the rules established among us, can produce and has produced the greatest benefits and blessings. Teachers need to strengthen themselves in the spirit and the simplicity of their vocation. Consequently, they should distance themselves from the world and its folly. All Contests foreign to their profession that take them away from their community spiritual exercises will make them also leave their state and cause the loss of schools.
We should not fear that the suppression of the Contests will attract unfavorable comments on the Brothers or that they will be lacking means of encouragement, so long as they carry out all the duties of their profession exactly. Will it be objected that the public will be able to think that this suppression has no other cause on the part of the Brothers than a lack of zeal, a love of rest, and a desire to shield themselves from a searching examination of the progress of their students and the care taken by Teachers to teach them well? These difficulties have nothing to fear from a judicious public aware that things have never been better and that society never draws more profit from its members than when each of them contributes in the way he should to the general good, in which are necessarily enclosed the particular advantages of each individual.
If we accept this indisputable maxim, it follows that these public Competitions, which are required neither by the Brothers’ duties nor by the founders of our establishments, can only be harmful in every way and, as such, ought to be suppressed.
As for examining the progress of students and the way in which Teachers carry out their teaching, our regulations have provided for this in establishing an Inspector who must visit the classes at least once each month and promote those students who are ready to pass to a higher grade. Moreover, once each year, a Visitor entrusted with examining everything passes through. Furthermore, Brothers carry out their teaching as a matter of conscience and by a special dedication to this good work. They cannot be suspected of any lack of zeal or of justice toward the public by blameworthy neglect of their task.
There are means of encouragement established in the schools; for example, small presents are distributed; there are places and marks of distinction; there are exemptions granted for merit and for application. There are penances to be accepted, a certain shame to be cleansed, so as to stimulate and wake up the lazy and slothful.
All the means made use of with respect to zeal sustained by work are within the reach of the Teachers, the only means at their disposal. For to give more importance to the prizes founded to stir up competition, it has been thought appropriate that some very distinguished persons, by the fact of distributing the prizes, assure themselves that they are carrying out the intention of the founders. But this way of distributing prizes, although more flattering for the children who receive them, does not have all the usefulness of which the foundation is capable, for several students have been deprived of it whose application deserves a reward but who are compelled to leave school before the prize distribution. These kinds of foundations do not give the Teachers other means for thanking the students who have distinguished themselves in the different competitions held in the classes during the course of the year. They produce, as it is easy to understand, only a portion of the advantages that can be drawn if the Teachers were at liberty to make use of them to encourage competition and to thank the students who are outstanding, above all, for their piety and assiduity in Christian instruction.
Yes, if to the means established in our schools to stir up competition among students and to sustain the zeal of the Teachers there was added to the prize distribution a general examination of the progress of the students, above all in religion, experience would prove that Teachers and disciples would be led to carry out their duties. But the way of conducting the general examination at the end of the scholastic year deserves to be treated with some breadth and with particular attention.
It belongs doubtless to the reverend parish priests and to other ecclesiastical superiors to examine whether the children who attend our schools are instructed as they should be in everything concerning Christian doctrine. But the large-scale pompous Contests carried out in church or classrooms on the letter of the catechism, accompanied by dialogues and lectures, certainly do not offer the best way of being assured that children are well taught.
Indeed, a word-for-word repetition of the whole catechism and a number of dialogues on certain moral questions may very well prove that those who recite with fluency what they were given to learn by heart are endowed with good memories, but it in no way proves that they have been well taught, since it can happen—and is quite common—that children recite from memory many things that they do not understand. This is how they recite the discourses and instructions in these pompous Contests: they reel off the speeches and recite all the roles they have been given to learn without having anything more in their minds than the words.
Therefore, if the reverend parish priests are content with a literal recitation of the catechism in these Contests of which we speak, it will inevitably happen that the children will never come to know more. It could also happen that some Teachers will be led to believe that this literal repetition of the diocesan catechism would satisfy their obligation to teach religion in depth to their students. This would be a dangerous opinion.
To know with certainty whether the children have been in fact well taught, they need to be questioned in class or in church but without following the order of the content, the sequence of questions, or the order of the rows of students. They should be questioned first on one topic, then on another, some students in sequence and others without any order. When it is certain that the children know the text of the diocesan catechism, which is the first thing they should know, it is important to examine whether they understand the meaning, since without that understanding, the whole point of teaching them would have been missed. Now the way to make sure that students understand the meaning of the text is to ask them many subquestions, changing them, presenting them in different ways, but always within their understanding in relation to the topic they have been given for instruction. Other means of teaching, more or less related to their age and to their greater or lesser natural intelligence, can be used. The way of presenting children with the truths of which we wish to be assured they have a complete understanding can even help them to grasp them if they did not do so previously. The answers given by the students to these kinds of subquestions are always to be crystal clear with regard to the point of the instruction being offered or to the things on which they are being examined.
We should not be satisfied to have such an examination at the end of the school year or to wait until then to distribute all the competition prizes. Some students, who leave immediately after their First Communion, before the end of the year, cannot profit from the advantages procured by these well-prepared examinations or obtain the prizes or rewards that are the result of their application and merit.12
In the type of examination of which we have just been speaking, after concentrating on the progress of the students in every aspect of Christian instruction, we should not neglect to examine whether all of the children read correctly with pauses, whether they have been taught the rules of punctuation and accents, whether they can understand old-style [Gothic] and new-style writing, whether the students at the highest level can write dictation, whether they can spell accurately. To be sure that they possess the principles of French grammar, they can be examined in the principal rules, the different parts of speech, the conjugation of verbs, and the formation of tenses.
As for arithmetic, they can be questioned on the definition of the principal operations. Some small problems to be solved can be proposed that they should be asked to work out, explaining what they are doing and giving reasons for each operation. Writing is the easiest thing to judge. Looking at the writing books, giving preference to the style that is the freest, lightest, best formed, and most correctly spelled, can quickly decide the merit of the competitors.
Something more about the Competitions
It follows from the outline just given with respect to the ends proposed in these public Contests, the way they are conducted, the subjects introduced into them, and the abuses to which they have given rise, as we have clearly demonstrated,
1) That the sum of the inconveniences they cause is far greater than any advantages that can be credited to them;
2) That they bring a certain prejudice against the students who are not selected to compete for the prizes, and, consequently, their mutterings, discontent, and complaints are only too well founded; therefore, it is for the greatest benefit of our teaching that they be suppressed;
3) That they are likely, in general, to cause the poor and those who lack a naturally happy and outgoing disposition to distance themselves from our schools;
4) That they cause disorder, upset, and restlessness in our communities;
5) That the Contests degenerate into purely pompous ceremonies, more showy and noisy than solid; that they demonstrate only a superficial kind of teaching, which is not our own and brings no advantages either to the Teachers or to the students;
6) That they cause disorganization among the students, bitter enmities, scorn, and other attitudes contrary to the mutual friendship that they should always maintain among themselves;
7) That the small number of students chosen to compete does not prove that our schools are generally well served or that the students are well taught;
8) That there is another way of ensuring whether students are well or badly taught and whether they profit from all aspects of our teaching in a way commensurate with their ability and with other circumstances that are more or less advantageous;
9) That this other method is simple and easy, without inconveniences, is capable on the contrary of producing good effects, and is thus to be preferred to the Contests;
10) That we have been led to see as well that the Contests expose the Brothers to the contagious air of vanity and to the danger of being drawn away from the simplicity required by their state;
11) That the Contests can be a source of discouragement for Brothers and the occasion of a vicious competitiveness among them, contrary to both humility and charity;
12) That they bring about frequent changes (always harmful to the good of a school) by the disgust they arouse among the Brothers who have an aversion for these kinds of glossy Competitions and for the communities where they are in force;
13) That they expose the Brothers to a multitude of distractions, to a kind of restlessness harmful equally to their soul and to the spiritual aspect of their task, because someone with a restless soul who has lost the taste for piety and acquired the habit of skipping the community spiritual exercises, which have been set up to support and inspire him, is hardly likely to inspire others;
14) That they bring about an infinity of transgressions of the rules and a loss of time and of the moments set aside for class preparation;
15) That they constitute for the young Brothers a temptation against their vocation;
16) Finally, that the just reasons advanced by the Brothers opposed to the Contests, joined to those deduced from the various propositions we have set out, leave no doubt in proving the need to suppress these pompous events known as Contests.
On more than one occasion, my very dear Brothers, we have complained that these public Competitions were being augmented annually, that these successive increases have made them more and more intolerable in the Institute and at the same time insupportable because of the burden of embarrassment that they bring with them. Our warnings and complaints have not been able to stop this itching desire to distinguish oneself. Things have only worsened. That is why we have believed it our duty to make known that the consequences have become so worthy of condemnation that they speak more efficaciously than all our reprimands.
When we were established in the different places where we now have schools, neither the founders nor the towns required us to form young people to the graces of eloquence or to teach them useless things. Thus the most critical people have always considered that if we would be introducing in the Society of the Brothers of the Christian Schools any public Competitions of such a nature as those we are opposing, we would at the same time be introducing a spirit of carelessness and of pride and, as a result, relaxation and all kinds of disorders. This is how the Institute has always been thought of, and experience has proved that the suppositions formed about this topic were not without foundation.
We have grounds for hoping that everyone following the outline we have just given will find it quite appropriate that we condemn public Contests, declamations, recitations, and graceful compliments, that by these present considerations we forbid our Brothers so to prepare their students, and that we advise the Brothers to limit themselves to the commitments laid down by our Rules and Constitutions and by The Conduct of the Christian Schools, with respect both to the different sections which comprise it and to the method of presenting them.
Since we are proposing by the suppression of public Competitions a very important good and have shown that it will be so, we have reason to believe that everyone who takes a true interest in the instruction given in schools will wish to second our efforts in this regard.
After all we have said, some will ask how the prize distribution will take place where there are foundations and how we are to come to recognize the students who have so merited.
As it would not be possible to carry out simultaneously the distribution of prizes and the choice of the students as candidates, it is necessary, some days before the ceremony, to choose the most deserving from each section of our teaching. Having already stated enough about the way of examining them, we are satisfied to repeat here that for calculation, arrange dictation to see how they use the rules of arithmetic that are within their grasp; for spelling, dictate a letter or something else to them; for writing, select some pages from the paper on which they are currently working. These three examples will be signed by them and presented to the judges of the competition. In the same way, after all the students have read, a list of names will be made out of those competing in reading. During the competition, they will read from the beginning in a book that they have not been accustomed to read. As for catechism and grammar, they will reply to the questions asked of them. The best answers will be concise repetitions of what the students have learned.
Since good behavior, true piety, promptitude, and noticeable application deserve to be included in the competition, care should be taken that these qualities are not overlooked. It is for the students themselves to discern, by vote, those who best deserve these awards. The competitors on this occasion need not be designated until the very day of the competition.
The rationale for distributing prizes seems to require:
1) That they be given, in the presence of all the students, to the truly deserving;
2) That in all the classes the most advanced students in each lesson compete among themselves for the appropriate prize;
3) That with regard to students who have been drilled in every aspect of the lessons, rewards will be given only to those who have excelled in the greatest number of them;
4) That all students will be questioned by the examiners only in those matters that should be taught in our schools.
During the competition, someone should be entrusted to note the sum of the faults committed by each of the contestants in the subjects on which he will have had to prove his ability. Those with the least number of faults will deserve the prize that will be given after all the examinations, beginning with the first. With regard to writing, two or three faults can be overlooked in favor of the one student judged best, and one or two faults for those students who come closest. In case of a tie, the one who has done the best throughout the year deserves to receive the prize.
By the method just proposed for distributing awards to the students, my very dear Brothers, we do not intend to prevent you from following better methods which you can easily find.
Upon the reception of the above observations, our Brothers Directors will have this letter read in the refectory in the presence of all the Brothers, and they will preserve copies in our Houses in order to produce the effect that it should have.
Brother Agathon
Mareùville (where we are on a visit to the community)
10 April 1786