You are so blessed with this opportunity in Bowling Green. Chesterton Academy of Annapolis, started in 2018, saved our son (now a junior) from the swirling drain that has become our local public school system, and also the hyper-sports-centric local Catholic high school. Prayers coming your way!
Much to commend in this educational project and yet I must call out the shifting of the goal posts in this piece... You claim that “every generation” of western elites were “classically educated” but in your description of what that entails here and now you emphasize Catholic identity. This may give the impression that what you describe as your take on classical education is essentially no different than the American (or even western) tradition. And yet American elites back in the day were rarely catholic themselves and commonly hostile to Catholicism (and to Catholics) to a greater or lesser extent… same goes to most of the English speaking world from the reformation and well into the 20th century. Even in Catholic majority counties such as France many of the great writers and thinkers (who made it into the “great conversation” and the canon) were anti clerical at a minimum if not outright anti catholic. In fact your project tries to bridge the inherent tension between classicism and Catholicism. This may well be a worthwhile and potentially successful endeavor, but honesty and humility would demand you fully acknowledge the challenge rather than gloss over it. Your project lionizes the works of mostly pagans Protestants and others who were indifferent to or frankly had a low opinion of Catholicism.
Yes, we love the Chesterton Academy system but Institute for Catholic Liberal Education has a vast network of schools operating for decades. There are six in Kentucky right now.
Well written. But I would note that the statement about the "elite of every generation" is partly wrong. Prior to the post WW2 centralization and consolidation the USA had a decentralized, vast, diversified, pluralistic, and vibrant educational system of systems in which many scientists, engineers, business leaders, and professionals did not attend what we now call college, instead learning through apprenticeships, independent professional schools, military, various kinds of technical institutes, and other forms of specialized training. Even during the Progressive Era, education remained decentralized, with a mix of classical, vocational, and applied learning pathways coexisting. Some elements of classicism, with some american twists, were in *some* ways part of the civic religion of the country and were just sort of part of the, like, knowledge zeitgeist, so the statement is sort of still correct in ways
I don’t know where you got your information from but John Adams, Jefferson et al were profoundly and classically educated. Harvard was once exclusively male and Christian.
Hi! You're misunderstanding the history of the US political economy by assuming that elite education was always as dominant as it is today. While Adams, Jefferson, and *some* others were classically educated, the USA historically had a decentralized education system where elite universities like Harvard were far less powerful in shaping economic and political leadership than they have been since the 1960s. For most of U.S. history, scientists, engineers, business leaders, and professionals often bypassed elite universities, learning instead through apprenticeships, independent professional schools, military training, correspondence courses, technical institutes, and other specialized pathways. Even during the Progressive Era, education remained pluralistic, and classical knowledge existed in the broader culture rather than being monopolized by elite institutions. It wasn’t until post WW2 centralization and consolidation, especially with the rise of the consolidated and centralized model (at the time it was often referred to as the "department store" model) and federal funding, that elite universities like Harvard became as dominant as they are today.
You are so blessed with this opportunity in Bowling Green. Chesterton Academy of Annapolis, started in 2018, saved our son (now a junior) from the swirling drain that has become our local public school system, and also the hyper-sports-centric local Catholic high school. Prayers coming your way!
Much to commend in this educational project and yet I must call out the shifting of the goal posts in this piece... You claim that “every generation” of western elites were “classically educated” but in your description of what that entails here and now you emphasize Catholic identity. This may give the impression that what you describe as your take on classical education is essentially no different than the American (or even western) tradition. And yet American elites back in the day were rarely catholic themselves and commonly hostile to Catholicism (and to Catholics) to a greater or lesser extent… same goes to most of the English speaking world from the reformation and well into the 20th century. Even in Catholic majority counties such as France many of the great writers and thinkers (who made it into the “great conversation” and the canon) were anti clerical at a minimum if not outright anti catholic. In fact your project tries to bridge the inherent tension between classicism and Catholicism. This may well be a worthwhile and potentially successful endeavor, but honesty and humility would demand you fully acknowledge the challenge rather than gloss over it. Your project lionizes the works of mostly pagans Protestants and others who were indifferent to or frankly had a low opinion of Catholicism.
Yes, we love the Chesterton Academy system but Institute for Catholic Liberal Education has a vast network of schools operating for decades. There are six in Kentucky right now.
https://my.catholicliberaleducation.org/map-of-schools/?_filter_schools_by_state=kentucky
Well written. But I would note that the statement about the "elite of every generation" is partly wrong. Prior to the post WW2 centralization and consolidation the USA had a decentralized, vast, diversified, pluralistic, and vibrant educational system of systems in which many scientists, engineers, business leaders, and professionals did not attend what we now call college, instead learning through apprenticeships, independent professional schools, military, various kinds of technical institutes, and other forms of specialized training. Even during the Progressive Era, education remained decentralized, with a mix of classical, vocational, and applied learning pathways coexisting. Some elements of classicism, with some american twists, were in *some* ways part of the civic religion of the country and were just sort of part of the, like, knowledge zeitgeist, so the statement is sort of still correct in ways
I don’t know where you got your information from but John Adams, Jefferson et al were profoundly and classically educated. Harvard was once exclusively male and Christian.
Hi! You're misunderstanding the history of the US political economy by assuming that elite education was always as dominant as it is today. While Adams, Jefferson, and *some* others were classically educated, the USA historically had a decentralized education system where elite universities like Harvard were far less powerful in shaping economic and political leadership than they have been since the 1960s. For most of U.S. history, scientists, engineers, business leaders, and professionals often bypassed elite universities, learning instead through apprenticeships, independent professional schools, military training, correspondence courses, technical institutes, and other specialized pathways. Even during the Progressive Era, education remained pluralistic, and classical knowledge existed in the broader culture rather than being monopolized by elite institutions. It wasn’t until post WW2 centralization and consolidation, especially with the rise of the consolidated and centralized model (at the time it was often referred to as the "department store" model) and federal funding, that elite universities like Harvard became as dominant as they are today.
You are misunderstanding me and my point about education. Not political economy.
Then what about what I said do you disagree with? the crux of my comment regards to political economy