Is there such a thing as "objective" Truth?

[Matt16_18]

Antonio B:

Good idea, but CS Lewis might be too deep for some of these kids and I don’t want to lose them before we even begin to atempt to understand the matter at hand. I also could ask them to read “Veritates Splendor” but the encyclical would be too much for a teenager.

Antonio

Veritatis splendor assumes that one already understands what the natural law is, and that the morality that the Church teaches is based on both natural law and divine revelation.

Mere Christianity makes no such assumptions. Mere Christianity is full of everyday examples of how we use our innate knowledge of the “law of decent behavior”, and how we simply cannot avoid thinking that way. Lewis has great arguments against all the usual objections that one hears when teaching about the natural law. A competent teacher should be able to take the material in Mere Christianity and help a junior high or high school student understand natural law.

Trying to explain the teaching of Veritatis splendor to an average high school student would be an exercise in futility, IMO. The students would be lost after the first few sentences because they lack the intellectual development necessary for understanding what the Pope is teaching. It would be like trying to teach the use of antisymmetric tensors in gauge field theory to students that barely have a rudimentary knowledge of algebra.

 

[buffalo]

Start with self-evident truths.

 

[martino]

It may depend on what the definition if “is” is!!

 

[Antonio_B]

I only spend one quarter on natural law specifically, but my students do the same thing! I am always dismayed to hear from the Spiritual Theology teacher (our senior class) that my students from the previous year are arguing as if they never took my class. I am making changes to try to ensure that doesn’t happen so much, but part of it is the nature of the teenager. I have found that a few things are sticking: intellect, will, appetite, definition of true freedom (from Veritatis Splendor), definition of true happiness (from Saint Thomas Aquinas) and the nature of sin as a choice of the will that misses the greatest good. Since these concepts can be put together to create a synopsis of what I wanted to teach them during the year, my teaching isn’t a complete waste of time I guess. However, they do still forget some very major concepts. Self-improvement never ends!!

I too struggle with what to have my students read. I find Veritatis Spendor, C.S. Lewis, and G.K. Chesterton are definitely above my students’ comprehension level. They are just not used to reading deep philosophy! I think on one hand that I should use them anyway in order to GET them used to it. However, when I have done so, students hated it and shut down. I think their inability to handle these writings as juniors in high school is a sign that our system as a whole is weak. I want them to be reading the Summa! As it is, I do short excerpts from the above writings, and more from the CCC, which they also find difficult. They can handle the concepts if I break them down for them (which I guess is the job of a teacher), but they can’t process the language.

I even had to write my own moral theology textbook because I couldn’t find any that fit my students. Most of the textbooks out there were actually too easy - with simplified concepts and simplified language. I found one, written by Dominicans, that was excellent as far as content, but WAY over my students’ heads as far a language. So, I wrote a textbook that used similar content but contained language that I thought was optimal for the reading level of my students. I wrote it in dialogue format - a teenager is writing letters to “Brother Thomas,” a Dominican Brother, who replies to her letters and answers her questions. The books has gotten pretty good feedback from my students. I admit that his is a pretty extreme measure, but it was all I could think to do.

I know what you mean when you say that certain jewels of our faith they simply can’t grasp because it is above their comprehension level. However, I do have students who are thinking kids and I presume laziness plays a part on many of them who simply refuse to think.

I don’t care how good or bad our textbooks are. Long ago I decided not to rely on them 100% Some of them are bad, not so much for what they say but precisely for what they “don’t” say. The simple fact is that most students today do not read. Studies have revealed that the average high school graduate has never read, in four years, a complete book! They are enamored with the INTERNET and quick pieces of information, preferably the type they don’t have to think much about.

How can I get your moral theology textbook? Did a bishop give you an imprimatur?

Antonio

 

[Antonio_B]

I only spend one quarter on natural law specifically, but my students do the same thing! I am always dismayed to hear from the Spiritual Theology teacher (our senior class) that my students from the previous year are arguing as if they never took my class. I am making changes to try to ensure that doesn’t happen so much, but part of it is the nature of the teenager. I have found that a few things are sticking: intellect, will, appetite, definition of true freedom (from Veritatis Splendor), definition of true happiness (from Saint Thomas Aquinas) and the nature of sin as a choice of the will that misses the greatest good. Since these concepts can be put together to create a synopsis of what I wanted to teach them during the year, my teaching isn’t a complete waste of time I guess. However, they do still forget some very major concepts. Self-improvement never ends!!

I too struggle with what to have my students read. I find Veritatis Spendor, C.S. Lewis, and G.K. Chesterton are definitely above my students’ comprehension level. They are just not used to reading deep philosophy! I think on one hand that I should use them anyway in order to GET them used to it. However, when I have done so, students hated it and shut down. I think their inability to handle these writings as juniors in high school is a sign that our system as a whole is weak. I want them to be reading the Summa! As it is, I do short excerpts from the above writings, and more from the CCC, which they also find difficult. They can handle the concepts if I break them down for them (which I guess is the job of a teacher), but they can’t process the language.

I even had to write my own moral theology textbook because I couldn’t find any that fit my students. Most of the textbooks out there were actually too easy - with simplified concepts and simplified language. I found one, written by Dominicans, that was excellent as far as content, but WAY over my students’ heads as far a language. So, I wrote a textbook that used similar content but contained language that I thought was optimal for the reading level of my students. I wrote it in dialogue format - a teenager is writing letters to “Brother Thomas,” a Dominican Brother, who replies to her letters and answers her questions. The books has gotten pretty good feedback from my students. I admit that his is a pretty extreme measure, but it was all I could think to do.

I could not send my whole message to you because it was more than 4000 characters, so here is the rest:

I am so glad there are other teachers out there who have similar problems in conveying the idea of objective truth. I know now I’m not alone on this one.

Antonio

 

[Antonio_B]

buffalo:

Start with self-evident truths.

You might be presuming that all students understand “sef-evident” truths, but some of them will throw reason out the window and will argue that the moon is made of cheese even though they know better!

Antonio

 

[Antonio_B]

Veritatis splendor assumes that one already understands what the natural law is, and that the morality that the Church teaches is based on both natural law and divine revelation.

Mere Christianity makes no such assumptions. Mere Christianity is full of everyday examples of how we use our innate knowledge of the “law of decent behavior”, and how we simply cannot avoid thinking that way. Lewis has great arguments against all the usual objections that one hears when teaching about the natural law. A competent teacher should be able to take the material in Mere Christianity and help a junior high or high school student understand natural law.

Trying to explain the teaching of Veritatis splendor to an average high school student would be an exercise in futility, IMO. The students would be lost after the first few sentences because they lack the intellectual development necessary for understanding what the Pope is teaching. It would be like trying to teach the use of antisymmetric tensors in gauge field theory to students that barely have a rudimentary knowledge of algebra.

I have read Mere Christianity and found it easy to read, but unfortunately even that type of easy reading is hard for some students today.

As for Veritatis Splendor, you are absolutely correct. I have the feeling that Juniors in clollege would have a hard time in their reading comprehension of the encyclical.

Antonio

 

[Antonio_B]

Strider:

As a former high school teacher and one who keeps in touch with high schoolers through pro-life discussions, I appreciate all the above suggestions and especially the difficulties.
How to get high school juniors and seniors who are “too cool” to be impressed by anything and yet so incapable of abstract thought, having been spoon-fed by TV, video games, the internet, etc, etc, etc. to face the problem seriously.
I found it’s always useful to begin with something simple and concrete that can be made real to them before jumping into the abstract.
Maybe have the students operate in pairs Either assign one student to be the “doubter” and the other as the “accepter,” or use a random selection method.
Explain that the doubter agrees with the majority opinion that there is no objective truth. Then have both students imagine they are on the top of the tallest building in town. Ask: “Who wants to jump? "
Simple? Unfortunately, yes, but at least it gets the students thinking in thr right direction. Then go to abortion, but assign different tasks (abortion doctor, mother, baby) to students in some random fashion. Well, you sound like a fine teacher; take it from there (whose truth is true?”)
God bless and good luck

Thank you very much for your suggestions. Every bit coming from you guys helps. Part of the problem is trying to get students to fall in love with learning, when society is telling them the most important thing is a “grade,” not necessarily the process of learning or the enrichment of one’s intellect and spiritual life. As teachers, we do what we can and hope in God it will affect our students in a positive manner.

I agree with you that many of our students think they are “too cool” to be impressed by anything, and yet that attitude is so typical of young people. They think they already know it all, and, ironically, when all is said and done, they practically know nothing. Wasn’t St. Thomas Aquinas the saint who said at the end of his life, after writing monumentally, “all I know is that I know nothing” or something to that effect?

BTW, in case you haven’t heard this statement from St. Francis of Assisi, here it is: “Go preach the Gospel everywhere, and if necessary, use words!” I was stunned the first time I heard it. My pastor is pretty boring in his homilies but after 7 years, he finally taught me something, this statement from St. Francis.

Antonio

 

[Nana_Rose]

Wow! This is a good post…I am not a teacher, a simple mother and grandmother…but have struggled with this topic with my children, and now nieces and even friends!! I didn’t understand the technical language but would put it to my girls this way: Is there good and bad in the world? Sure there is…what makes it good or bad. We have to start from the center being God…because if God does not exist then anything goes! I would think of really polarizing topics…like murder, rape, abortion etc. Then ask them to explain what makes it wrong…why? Because if God does not exist, then really maybe you have some natural laws, like gravity, but really anything goes. They seemed to finally catch on, and then we could move onto faith issues. I thank you for the posts and I am going to check out some of those books!

 

[Antonio_B]

Nana Rose:

Wow! This is a good post…I am not a teacher, a simple mother and grandmother…but have struggled with this topic with my children, and now nieces and even friends!! I didn’t understand the technical language but would put it to my girls this way: Is there good and bad in the world? Sure there is…what makes it good or bad. We have to start from the center being God…because if God does not exist then anything goes! I would think of really polarizing topics…like murder, rape, abortion etc. Then ask them to explain what makes it wrong…why? Because if God does not exist, then really maybe you have some natural laws, like gravity, but really anything goes. They seemed to finally catch on, and then we could move onto faith issues. I thank you for the posts and I am going to check out some of those books!

At least you discussed these matters with your children. That’s the Catholic idea, to discuss one’s faith with one’s children. Catholic teaching is clear on the idea that parents are the primary educators of their children, NOT the Catholic school, priests or bishops but the parents.

Antonio