Catholic Candle note: Below is part 8 of the article concerning the best type of education – which is a Catholic Liberal Education. Do not confuse this education with many university programs called “liberal arts” but which are full of fluff, falsehood, and aimless so-called “cultural enrichment” courses and “humanities”.

A liberal education also does not refer to liberalism, nor is a true liberal education an indoctrination into that error of liberalism or political correctness. In fact, a true Catholic Liberal Education is the best antidote to the errors of liberalism.

As context for this eighth article, let us recall what we saw in the earlier seven articles:

Previously, in part 1 of this article,¹ we examined the problems we see in modern education:

• Modern colleges do not improve the quality of their students’ minds (and their thinking ability) much or at all.

  
  

• Most “education” is merely job training, fluff courses, and/or leftist indoctrination.

  
  

• The students are taught to sound like someone in their field but they do more memorizing and little thinking.

  
  

• Grade “inflation” and degree “inflation” is rampant. Grades and academic degrees do not mean much anymore.

In part 2 of this article,² we examined, in general, what education is. We considered the human soul and the perfection of its highest faculty (i.e., power) – which is the intellect – and which is immaterial (i.e., incorporeal). We saw that our intellects are perfected through knowing eternal, unchangeable truths and their causes.

In part 3 of this article,³ after having seen what true education is, we examined the question who should perfect his intellect.

In part 4 of this article,⁴ having seen that modern universities do not provide a true education, we consider whether there is ever any reason for men or women to attend them.

In part 5 of this article,⁵ having seen that women and girls should pursue a True Catholic Liberal Education – just as men and boys should, too – we then considered what the best environment is in which women and girls should do this.

In part 6 of this article, we addressed the objection that, having seen the great value of a True Catholic Liberal Education, we should be afraid that the great blessing of this education would be a danger to our souls because it might make us proud.⁶

In part 7 of this article, we considered more fully the difference between the education which is appropriate for a free man as contrasted to the education which is appropriate for a slave.⁷

Below, in part eight, we consider further how the truth perfects our minds. This shows us that we must really know the truth, not merely hold true opinions.

The Blessing of a True, Catholic Liberal Education

Part 8

Making the Truth “Our Own”

Let us consider another aspect of a Catholic Liberal Education, viz., how we must make the truth really “our own” in order for it to perfect our intellects. We must know a truth and not merely hold human opinion, even if that opinion were true. This is because the good of the intellect is knowing the truth, not merely memorizing true opinions.⁸

Let us consider an example from the science of geometry. In order for us to have knowledge of the Pythagorean Theorem⁹ we must know this truth and see that it arises from careful reasoning grounded in first principles and that we also know these first principles to be true. In other words, we must see this truth (with our minds) and see that it arises out of those first undeniable principles of geometry.

When we mention “first principles”, we refer to principles such as the common notion that when equals are added to equals, the sums are equal. We must begin a science by examining the first principles and see that they are certain and must be true. To have real knowledge, e.g., of a geometrical theorem, we must see how that theorem arises from the principles of the science through a chain of careful syllogistic¹⁰ reasoning.

When we are proving a theorem, if this proof is not built on the solid foundation of first principles, then we would only hold the opinion that this theorem is true. So, for example, when two of the Catholic Candle Team members took high school geometry classes, they acquired only human faith that the Pythagorean Theorem was universally true, because those classes did not give proof from the first principles of geometry but only provided some examples of this theorem and then raced on to apply this theorem to a long set of problems (which were graded by the teachers to confirm that the student got the correct answer and that he knew how to apply the formula to the numbers set out in the problems assigned to the class).

When we memorize a correct opinion (without really proving the statement) then we memorize that statement without having real knowledge. We would merely believe this statement (e.g., a theorem) as an opinion. Again, we must remember that it is knowledge, not opinion, which is the perfection of (and the good of), the intellect.

When we hold mere human opinion about a truth of geometry, this would be similar to our holding the true opinion that there is a city called “Athens” in a country called “Greece”. In other words, we are believing this on human authority and do not have knowledge of this fact.

The focus of this analogy is not whether Athens exists (or, in contrast, whether we are deceived when we are told that it exists). The focus is that we do not know that Athens exists but only believe it as an opinion we have been told. Such opinions do not perfect our intellects, which are perfected by knowing universal truth, not by memorizing opinions or statements made on human authority. (What is revealed infallibly by God and the Catholic Church, does not have this same weakness as mere human opinion – but we will discuss this later.)

Going back to the geometric example above: when we start with the firm principles of Euclidean geometry, we build an edifice of one thing proved from the geometric principles (that we previously came to know) and after we prove that first theorem, we use it along with the principles of geometry to prove a second theorem, then a third, and so on, to prove more and more theorems, all of which have this same firm foundation of the principles that we know (with certitude) to be true. From there, we continue building the geometrical edifice of our knowledge, all grounded firmly on the sureness of the first principles that we know with certainty because we examined them carefully at the beginning of our study and understood that they must be true.

Above, we saw the importance of knowing truth and making the truth “our own” by grounding this truth in the first principles that we already know. In other words, we know a conclusion when we see that it must be true because we see that the conclusion comes through an undeniable chain of syllogistic reasoning, from principles that we know are certain.

Let us take an example. We could learn the conclusion of the Pythagorean Theorem, viz., that the area of the square erected on the hypotenuse of a right triangle (which is opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the areas of the two squares erected on the two legs (the other two sides) of that triangle.

If we memorize that true conclusion, then we have a correct opinion but it cannot really be said that we know that truth because our intellect does not see that truth as necessary¹¹ and see that it arises from the undeniable first principles that are the basis of the science of geometry. Instead, if we merely memorized or merely trusted someone (including a book) we would only hold the Pythagorean Theorem based on the human authority of that book or person.

Thus, our minds are not perfected by this human opinion because the good of the intellect is knowing the truth, not merely memorizing true opinions. God wills men to know the unchanging truth because He wills men to perfect the talents that He has given them, especially their highest faculty, i.e., their intellect. By unchanging truth, we mean truth which is always true, e.g.,

• The whole is greater than its own part; and

  
  

• 4 + 4 = 8.

The truths of our Holy Catholic Faith are unchangeable truths and are especially perfecting for our intellects. Two quick examples of this are:

• God has no body; and

  
  

• The Blessed Virgin Mary was assumed into heaven body and soul.

(As we said above, what is revealed infallibly by God and the Catholic Church, does not suffer the weakness of being based on mere human opinion – but we will discuss this later.)

Unchangeable truths, most of all the Holy Catholic Faith, perfect our intellects. In other words, such truths make our intellects good. Here is how St. Thomas explains this principle:

[W]hen we judge of things … there is the question of the good of the person who judges [viz., the good of his intellect], if he judges truly, and of his evil [viz., of his intellect] if he judges falsely, because “the true is the good of the intellect, and the false is its evil”, as stated in [Aristotle’s] Ethics, bk.6, ch.2. Wherefore, everyone should strive to make his judgment accord with things as they are.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.60, a.4, ad 2 (emphasis and bracketed words added).

In this quote above, when St. Thomas says “everyone should strive to make his judgment accord with things as they are”, this means everyone should seek the truth, since truth is the mind’s conformity with reality.¹²

But the truth that is the good of the intellect is unchangeable truth, such as the Pythagorean Theorem or knowing that God has no body. It does not perfect a man’s intellect to know things that could be different and are changeable, such as the names of the streets of our town and other contingent facts.

It might be useful to know the streets of one’s own town so that he knows how to get to the grocery store (or otherwise has a practical need for this information). But such knowledge of particular, contingent facts, even though true, do not perfect a man’s intellect. Here is one way St. Thomas teaches this:

Neither does it pertain to the intellect’s perfection to know the truth of contingent, singular facts in themselves.

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.60, a.4, ad 1-2 (emphasis added).

So, one crucial error of thought is to confuse those things which are eternal truths, with those things that are changeable, particular truths. The Modernists make this error and it is one way for us to see that, even as a matter of reason, the heresy of Modernism is plainly false and impossible. Here is how Pope St. Pius X explained that modernists profess that all truth changes:

[T]hey have reached that pitch of folly at which they pervert the eternal concept of truth …. [They say] dogma [i.e., high truths of our Faith] is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. … Thus far, Venerable Brethren, We have considered the Modernist as a philosopher.¹³

Thus, we see that it is important to perfect our intellect by knowing the unchangeable truth as coming from a careful chain of reasoning from first principles that are certain and known. These truths – which perfect our intellect – are universal and unchanging, not particular truths which could be otherwise or could change.

There are No “Shortcuts”

Truth acquired in this way is the perfection of our intellects. There are no “shortcuts”, even for those who are sons of a learned man. The son cannot perfect his intellect by simply memorizing the truth that his learned father previously proved for himself through careful syllogistic reasoning “down to” the solid foundation of first principles. This is because, however wise and learned his father is, the perfection of that son’s own intellect involves the son himself doing that same intellectual work that his father did.¹⁴

Similarly, there are no “shortcuts” for those who live in a society blessed with many generations of learned men. Each man (and woman) must perfect his (her) own intellect and not simply take on human authority (human faith) the truths which others before him had proved. Persons in each new generation must repeat the labor of their ancestors because each person has his own intellect to perfect.

This is like the fact that our parents (or many generations of our forebearers) might have been virtuous, e.g., patient, just, and temperate, but we cannot simply “take up where they left off”. Instead, we must make the same sort of efforts that they did, to acquire virtue like they did. For example, we must acquire the virtue of patience by repeated acts of fighting impatience ourselves and making our own repeated acts of patience.

So, in this way we see that the rectification and perfection of the moral character of each man requires the same work as it required of his forebearers. Similarly, the rectification and perfection of a person’s intellect requires the same work that it did for the wise and learned men who came before him. Again, there are no “shortcuts” to achieve this perfection of mind which is the knowledge of eternal truth.

As a Means of Pursuing the Truth, Lectures are Inferior to Well-Prepared, Well-Organized Discussions

In this enterprise of making the truth “one’s own”, we see that lectures of wise professors are of less value than we might at first believe. This is because the truth becomes “one’s own” through an internal or external debate, struggle, and/or discussion. There must be a “back and forth” through which the student sees the solution to the “objections” that he made to the (true) statement that he is considering.

Different students will have different objections. Let us take an example: Regarding a particular statement under discussion, one student will ask himself how can the statement be true because of an apparently-contrary verse of Sacred Scripture. Another student will think he sees indisputable observations in nature which contradict the truth of the statement under discussion. In fact, a particular objection on which a student focuses can seem so central that this objection impedes all progress on solving other objections and completing his analysis of the matter.

A lecture from any professor – however wise he is – cannot anticipate all objections and solve them all without the student’s input. The truth cannot be made the student’s “own” without the student’s “own” input. The student must have a role in the mental discussion.

It is a tremendous help in a student’s education for him to articulate what he believes that he sees as the truth in the matter. This not only helps others analyze whether he is correct or not, but also helps the student himself come to know whether or not he truly knows, and whether he could reason the matter all the way back to indisputably true first principles.

Although the student can have the help of others, he himself must play a central role in analyzing a statement and see how it is based on (or, alternatively, how it contradicts) foundational principles of which he is certain. By contrast, a professorial lecture telling the students what conclusions to memorize, does not make “one’s own” the truths at issue.

By Contrast, Shortcuts are Possible (and Common) in Mechanical and Technical Matters

In contrast with a Liberal Education or with the acquisition of moral virtue, there are other, different sorts of matters where “shortcuts” are possible and even common. For example, in transportation, a person does not need to go back to learn to use the first inventions of that sort. He can simply learn how to drive the current model of automobile. He does not need to start with the ox cart (or whatever other early conveyance).

Similarly, we do not need to learn how to use an abacus or a slide rule before we are able to use a calculator. So, we see that there can be shortcuts in technical skills, machinery, etc. but not in wisdom, virtue, and real knowledge.

Although Human Opinion Does Not Perfect the Mind, the Catholic Faith Does Perfect It

Above, we said:

What is revealed infallibly by God and the Catholic Church, does not have this same weakness as mere human opinion.

Let us consider that statement now.

The Catholic Faith – Taken on God’s Authority – is Not Deficient as is an Opinion Based on Mere Human Authority.

The problem with taking something as true based on human faith – i.e., belief in a merely human authority, is that this authority could be wrong for two reasons:

1. The human authority might be mistaken (because it is part of the human condition that people make mistakes); or

   
   

2. The human authority could intentionally deceive us as a means of attempting to achieve an apparently-good end (or even some end which is truly good in itself).¹⁵

Because a man can be wrong for those two reasons, we describe as an “opinion” what a man asserts as true without having proof. Opinions, as such, can be true but they do not perfect our intellects (as genuine knowledge does) to the extent that we do not know (i.e., see) the opinion statement as resting upon the firm foundation of most-sure first principles.

For, as we saw earlier, eternal truth (which is what does perfect our intellect) must be known all of the way to the foundational principles of the science. The term “science” here means philosophy, theology and any other body of knowledge whose object is eternal truth.

We Must Now Make the Distinction between Primary Sciences and Subordinate Sciences

Some sciences are subordinate to other sciences and such subordinate sciences take their principles from that higher science. For example, the science of optics, which investigates the bending of light (through lenses, etc.), is subordinate to the science of geometry, which proves the principles which are needed for and are used in the science of optics. This is because light, as studied by the science of optics follows the truths (i.e., the proofs) of geometry concerning angles, parallel lines, etc.

Although the subordinate science of optics takes its principles from the very firm foundation of Euclid’s geometry, nonetheless, the person who studies optics has a very imperfect grasp of his own science (optics) unless he is also a master of geometry. If he were only to take the principles of his science (viz., optics) back to his reliance upon geometrical conclusions which he himself has not mastered, then his grasp of optics is imperfectly grounded. Thus, a student of optics should first be a master of geometry so that his understanding of optics can be rooted in those most-certain first principles which he himself sees are the basis and foundation of geometry.

Now let us look at Divine Revelation. We know that the truth of what is revealed by God is the most certain of all knowledge. It is more certain than our own human knowledge because God is all-knowing and (in the words of the Act of Faith) God “can neither deceive nor be deceived”.

But Divine Revelation is a sacred science (body of knowledge) which is a subordinate science in the same way that optics is a subordinate science. Whereas:

• Optics relies for its principles on the truths shown in geometry and not proved in the science of optics itself,

  
  

• So Divine Revelation is a sacred science which is subordinate to the Science pertaining to God (and things closely related to God) as these truths are known with absolute certainty by the Mind of God and the minds of the blessed in heaven.

These truths (known in heaven) are revealed to us and are received by us as Divine Revelation (like the science of optics receives its principles from the science of geometry).

Does this Mean that the Catholic Faith (as a Subordinate Science) is Deficient?

So, the question arises: if a man knows the subordinate science of Sacred Doctrine (revealed in the Catholic Faith), but cannot (in this life) know the primary, celestial Science known by God and the Blessed in heaven, does the man’s mind lack perfection in a way similar to the man who knows a different subordinate science (e.g., optics) but does not also know the underlying primary science (e.g., geometry) from which the subordinate science takes its principles?

The answer is “no”. Whereas with other subordinate sciences (such as optics), a man’s failure to know the underlying primary science causes his knowledge of the subordinate science to rest on the human faith (human authority) of those who know geometry, and in this way, his grasp of the subordinate science does not rest on a firm foundation which perfects the mind.

By contrast, the principles of the science of Sacred Doctrine are the infallible truths of the Holy Catholic Faith. Those principles are even surer than the firm first principles of any other sciences. So, we know the science of Sacred Doctrine with great certitude because its principles are so surely known through the Catholic Faith.

Of course, it is true that our minds would completely delight in seeing the truths which are seen by the blessed in heaven. But meanwhile, while in this life, our minds can know the science of Sacred Doctrine resting on the surest principles.

So on the one hand, Divine Revelation should be highly esteemed because: 1) it is most-sure; and also 2) because these truths of Divine Revelation are of the highest matters (and our minds are perfected most by knowing the highest truths).

But on the other hand, Divine Revelation (sacred doctrine) has the disadvantage of being a subordinate science to the science of God and of the blessed. Thus, just like the student of optics should know geometry in order to perfect his mind with the science of optics, likewise the student of Divine Revelation (sacred doctrine) should (ideally) know the higher science which is the knowledge of God and the blessed in heaven in the Beatific Vision. But man cannot attain this higher theological science on earth because it is only available to those in heaven.

But returning to the issue of the Catholic Faith and the authority on which it rests: we see that our Catholic Faith, which is infallibly revealed by God, does not have this same weakness as mere human opinion because God’s revelation cannot err.

So we should strive with all of our might to get to heaven and spend Eternity enjoying the Beatific Vision which is the higher science that is the Truth known by God and the blessed and on which our Faith rests!

Let us use these considerations to help us to yearn for Eternal Truth, especially the Eternal Revelation of the Highest Truths in the Beatific Vision!

Along with St. Paul, this should be our mind-set:

Forgetting the things that are behind, and stretching forth myself to those that are before, I press towards the mark, to the prize of the supernal vocation of God in Christ Jesus.

Philippians, 3:13-14.

Summary of Part Eight of this Article

Truth is the good of the mind and is its perfection. We must strive to perfect our minds with the highest truths, known through a series of careful syllogisms all the way “down” to the first certain principles of the science.

There are no “shortcuts” in perfecting our minds, just as there are no shortcuts in acquiring the moral virtues.

The high and infallible truths of our Catholic Faith perfect our minds, unlike matters taken on human faith.

Having in mind the importance of knowing the unchanging Truth, let us live the life of truth which is a big help to us to enable us to live the (spiritual) life of Him Who Is the Truth.

The Question Arises:, What Studies (Sciences) More-Specifically Belong in a Catholic Liberal Education?

It is time to consider more specifically: What studies belong in a true Catholic Liberal Education? This canon of study has long been set out and perennially followed in Western Civilization by those seeking to perfect their highest faculty (their mind). In the next part of this article, we will begin examining that canon of study and the reasons for it.

To Be Continued …