Experts, Influencers, and Environments of Reverence

Or, councils of the godless vs. God-filled

Thought One:

"[A godly man] does not walk in the counsel of the ungodly. He is not present at their councils, nor does he advise with them; though they are ever so witty, and subtle, and learned, if they are ungodly, they shall not be the men of his counsel. He does not consent to them, nor say as they say, Lu. 23:51. He does not take his measures from their principles, nor act according to the advice which they give and take. "

-Matthew Henry, Commentary on Psalm 1

Thought Two: On how to care about the things of God:

" To meditate in God's word is to discourse with ourselves concerning the great things contained in it, with a close application of mind, a fixedness of thought, till we be suitably affected with those things and experience the savour and power of them in our hearts. "

Here, he emphasizes meditation. A recent workshop on catechesis emphasized reading Scripture with imagination. "Is it I, Lord?"

 Sometimes frustrated by how to teach reverence when my students lacked it this past semester (looking around, not praying, drawing attention to themselves during prayer, giggles*), I thought, "Man, I wish - - - were here!" as I entered a recent Anglican service where a ton of grown men genuflected, bowed, kneeled and obeyed the order of service with absolute solemnity. Environment and community can make irreverence hard to imagine. But there is a place for converting commonplace settings to places of worship, and that takes a perception of the divine, even when senses are not giving witness to Him. 

(*Side note- also wondering whether it was just a discipline issue or my own lack of spiritual maturity - I seriously doubt it was an issue with their previous teacher, a master teacher and very godly woman)

Thought three:

Why isn't foot-washing a sacrament? (Transformation of commonplace nouns/verbs to a spiritual revelation) 

... Or is marriage the equivalent?

(!)

Or a life of service, I guess, per "hospitable widows."

A Protestant (Reformed) Response 

Dear John, getting it right, again. 

"N. J. Opperwall, in his entry s.v., “foot washing” in the revised ISBE (1979) suggests that when John the Baptist said that he was unworthy to unloose the sandals of the coming Messiah, he was referring to the act of foot washing, which was typically left to servants as menial work.  "

Maybe it could be a sacrament:

" Obviously, since Jesus’ actions are in conjunction with the Passover, just before his death, and in connection with the institution of the Supper, the impulse to make foot washing into a sacrament has been strong in the history of the church. By the late Patristic period (5th century) it was a ritual in places (e.g., North Africa and elsewhere). In the modern Roman communion it is a ritual associated with Maundy Thursday, just before Good Friday. Among non-Romanists, the Pietist Moravian Brethren have practiced foot washing as have the Anabaptist Mennonites as have the Seventh Day Adventist sect (vide Opperwall)."

FTW!

Team Anglican:

"The “rule of worship,” which is intimately connected to the “rule of faith,” i.e., that handed down to us by the Apostles in holy Scripture, says that we may do in public worship only what the Lord himself has commanded. In the modern period this rule has come to be known as the “regulative principle of worship” but the RPW and the Rule of Worship are one and the same. In Belgic Confession (1561) art. 7 we confess:

We believe that those Holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God, and whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently taught therein. For since the whole manner of worship which God requires of us is written in them at large, it is unlawful for any one, though an apostle, to teach otherwise than we are now taught in the Holy Scriptures….

This is our answer to those who have a “good idea” about a practice we ought to adopt in worship: Has Christ instituted it? If not, then we may not do it. The Lutherans and Anglicans/Episcopalians have an alternative principle. They confess that they may do in worship whatever is not forbidden."

Thought Four: What is this thing we do? 

I think to define public worship by what is commanded is wise as the basis and substance. It's important, and don't get something so clear wrong. You miss this, you're not really participating in the Christian legacy. You're making something else. 

But Jesus, Himself, did not lay out a set of rules of worship. Paul gave some guidelines, but A LOT is described and corrected/ clarified when  in error, or to a particular church in explanation. (Not exactly a rulebook.) Leviticus, though, that's specific. Salvation is of the Jews. (Theirs is the legacy.) But now, God calls everyone to repent, and to come to saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, not of ritual worship. 

Now, Jesus is the temple, the sacrifice, the priest. Paul says WE are His temple, His body, living sacrifices, priests and kings. (Maybe Hebrews gives some guidelines to public worship?) Jesus did- once and for all- everything that used to be needed to be done in public worship. The Scriptures, so poured over in synagogues, were about Him, the Person, all along, and the Law meant to be a tutor to lead us to Him. 

He, the Person, is what all the religion was about. OT by interaction (by hook and by crook) with Yahweh; Pagan nations by reaching out, if per chance, they could grasp Him through reason, philosophy, myths. The Cross was all "religion" in a day, complete. The Logos of God uniting the Logos of Man eternally. And what He did was to restore us to a LIFE of worship. Life as sacrament. Even death, the last enemy, subjugated to be a servant to our eternal communion. All time as worship time, all people priests, all places sacred, all matter consecrated. 

So what's the weekly thing? 

Well, we walk on holy ground, but we forget. We have holy hands, but we forget. Sometimes we stain them. We dwell in a people of unclean lips, and sometimes we repeat what we hear. We eat blessed food, but we don't always think about it. Sometimes we grumble about manna. We take things for granted, not as gifts to be received and given. Matter seems pretty basic, not a portal to God. 

We always, continuously, need to remember and repent. To pick up our cross daily... And to remember as often as we eat together. We need to realize what's been done, what we're supposed to do, what will be done. We need to be strengthened (and strengthen), to be focused (and focus), to witness (and be witnessed to) in one voice. All the time. Songs and Psalms and spiritual songs. God saved individuals to form the family of God. We need to be united. So we must meet with one another to fulfill the law of love. We meet as couples, families, friends, communities. At home, in work, in common life. 

We meet to visibly form an expression of the church that is an invisible reality. We need to worship together. We need to remember together. We need to encourage and remind one another. We need to, in spirit and in truth, together celebrate, together love Christ, together receive, together give thanks, together share, together repent, together bear our cross, together pray and forgive, together discern, together care for each other. 

We need time with each other focused on what's been done. Something eternal permanently on the calendar. Nay, making our calendar. 

We follow the tradition of meeting to worship on the first day because that's what Christians have always done, not because it was commanded. (Why did they meet? I need to look into this.) 

It has turned out to be a very cultural (time + place) expression. Even reductionary churches add a lot, assume a lot, and create "new" traditions. I dunno. Maybe we could get down to the basics. But seems like there'd be a lot of blanks because we're not 1st X Jews. And what is Jesus' (and Paul's) reponse, generally, when faced with diversity? 

"Whoever is not against us is for us." 

Re: even heretical worship: "If you knew who is the One who is speaking to you, you would have asked Me, and I would give you living water."

 "Salvation is of the Jews, but God is seeking true worshippers to worship Him in spirit and in truth."

Re: even bad motives on the part of preachers: "What then? Only that in every way, whether pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice." 

Specific instructions... So many! And those just to a handful of cultural contexts. What would Paul say to us?! 

By yourself or when meeting:

Don't eat "meat" sacrificed to idols or commit sexual immorality. (Don't be idolatrous- don't worship false gods or cause idolaters to stumble. Don't confuse the lost. They should clearly see what worship of the true God looks like- 24/7 and especially when you're together. Their hearts and conscience should be able to be touched by coming among you.) 

Don't respect persons because of income or standing. In fact, discuss, think about, and care for the poor when you are together. (Love each other like brothers. Take care of the poor and marginalized.)

Ladies, don't make worship about you. Don't distract others. Humble yourselves like Jesus.  Give your body to God for others like Jesus. Teach your disciples like Jesus. Wash their feet like Jesus. Feed hungry people like Jesus. Let the little children come to Jesus. Pray for the weak like Jesus. (Submit like Mary. Repent like Peter. Then you will see clearly the speck in your brother's eye... And the lambs Christ has for you to feed.) 

Men, don't fight, argue, divide and then stand up to pray and worship God. Jesus cleansed the temple and rebuked the teachers because it was Hjs responsibility to do so. But the way Jesus showed He was right was by DYING in love for the Father in obedience, healing on the way, silent except for brief truth (let the one who has ears hear) and words of care, intercession, faith, and forgiveness. The Father showed He was right by raising Him from the dead. 

Don't trample the work of God and treat the elements like any old thing. You should never be getting drunk or pushing to be first and best. But at "the Lord's table"...! (Discern the sacred.) 

Don't follow lies. Expose, prepare, and guard against falsehood. 

Strong should care for the weak. Carry each other's burdens. Confess your sins to one another. Anoint each other. Seek healing. Pray for each other. Pray for the authorities. Pray for the nations. Pray to enter not into temptations. Pray to endure. Pray to forgive and be forgiven.

Meeting on Sunday is using the first fruits of our time to what the whole harvest is for anyway: worship, love, gift-giving, provision, thanks. 

How to Motivate Kids

 “Fred must train himself, and you must feed him with motives. Run over with him what we have been saying about attention. Let him know how the land lies; that you cannot help him, but that if he wants to make a man of himself he must make himself attend and remember. Tell him it will be a stand-up fight, for this habit is contrary to nature. He will like that; it is boy nature to show fight, and the bigger and blacker you make the other side, the more will he like to pitch in” 

Charlotte Mason, Formation of Character

Smooth and Easy Days with Charlotte Mason by Sonya Shafer

Reminds me of my sister-in-law telling her kids that fighting their bad attitude was like fighting a troll, and telling her niece about la Señora Placera y Malera who was so rude, no one came to her husband´s funeral and she had to bury him all by herself. 

Lincoln, on the complicated intersection between morality and "practical" politics

Found while I fell into a rabbit hole while searching for Lincoln's motivation to get into politics in the first place for a reading lesson.  

"I can not but hate [the declared indifference for slavery's spread]. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world -- enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites -- causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty -- criticising [sic] the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest.

Before proceeding, let me say I think I have no prejudice against the Southern people. They are just what we would be in their situation. If slavery did not now exist amongst them, they would not introduce it. If it did now exist amongst us, we should not instantly give it up. This I believe of the masses north and south. Doubtless there are individuals, on both sides, who would not hold slaves under any circumstances; and others who would gladly introduce slavery anew, if it were out of existence. We know that some southern men do free their slaves, go north, and become tip-top abolitionists; while some northern ones go south, and become most cruel slave-masters.

When southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery, than we; I acknowledge the fact. When it is said that the institution exists; and that it is very difficult to get rid of it, in any satisfactory way, I can understand and appreciate the saying. I surely will not blame them for not doing what I should not know how to do myself. If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, -- to their own native land. But a moment's reflection would convince me, that whatever of high hope, (as I think there is) there may be in this, in the long run, its sudden execution is impossible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all perish in the next ten days; and there are not surplus shipping and surplus money enough in the world to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? Free them all, and keep them among us as underlings? Is it quite certain that this betters their condition? I think I would not hold one in slavery, at any rate; yet the point is not clear enough for me to denounce people upon. What next? Free them, and make them politically and socially, our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not." 

-Abraham Lincoln, October 16, 1854: Speech at Peoria, Illinois

Reconfirming why I am an elementary school teacher and not a politician. But, wow, the irony that a man with conflicting ideals could have such a radical effect on the country and slavery itself... it really boggles my black-and-white thinking mind. 

Cold hearts, hot tears

 Thought 1: the devil as a hobgoblin

"One day the devil was in a very good humor because he had just finished a mirror which had this peculiar power: everything good and beautiful that was reflected in it seemed to dwindle to almost nothing at all, while everything that was worthless and ugly became most conspicuous and even uglier than ever. "

-The Snow Queen, Andersen

Thought 2: Innocense and Eternity in The Snow Queen

" As soon as the glass is lodged, Kay turns upon what he once held dear, thinking himself mature and “sensible.” He ridicules Gerda, rips apart their beloved roses after spotting “a crooked stem” and “a worm,” and mocks his grandmother behind her back as she tells the children once-beloved stories. Kay forgets his prayers and becomes obsessed with mathematical figures and stark orderliness. Kay’s “maturity” is a false maturity, paralleling the modern passage from a belief in wonder to the nihilistic rejection of anything that numbers can’t “prove.” The “sense” wrought by the shards removes Kay from the wonder he shared with Gerda and leaves him vulnerable to a frigid emptiness... "

Thought 3: 

"[The Snow Queen] lives in a frozen wasteland, throned beside a lake she calls the “mirror of Understanding.” This lake is no better than the goblin mirror — its surface is broken into thousands of ice chunks, passing off disintegration and fragmentation for “understanding” (rather than coherence and correspondence, which lead to true understanding).  When the Snow Queen beckons to Kay in his “sensible” state, he no longer has the inner sense to resist. " - Emelie Thomas

Thought 4:

" Gerda’s innocence is the shining light in this story.  Although she is rejected and marginalized by Kay, she does not become embittered or join Kay in his distorted sensibility. She maintains her inner sense, and with it, she chooses to see Kay as he is in essence — a dear friend in dire need of rescue. Gerda sees Kay the way Christ sees us, with an almighty affection, despite  our callousness and outright rejection."

-Emelie Thomas

Ties in so well to Christ as the great High Priest, interceding, not accusing. 

Thought 5: The devil and perspective 

"We have discussed previously the manner in which the Devil operates as a gateway into the unconscious, and not only that, but functions in the role of ‘accuser’; it is not the Devil himself in this universe who makes things ugly—indeed, nothing at all is being truly affected by the Devil’s doings—but rather the mirror, the perspective he provides. In his role as accuser he stands to diminish the significance of goodly, Godly things and leave the world instead a depraved and disappointing place, the imperfect world of gnostic belief rather than the perfect Kingdom of God.  "

-Spelling ETERNITY, the Alchemy of the Snow Queen 

The devil, the father of lies, on getting "in the room where it happens"

"Satan boldly alleged that these kingdoms were all delivered to him that he had power to dispose of them and all their glory, and to give them to whomsoever he will"...

"But I rather take it that he claimed this power ... as delivered to him not by the Lord, but by the kings and people of these kingdoms, who gave their power and honour to the devil, Eph. 2:2. Hence he is called the god of this world, and the prince of this world. 

It was promised to the Son of God that he should have the heathen for his inheritance, Ps. 2:8. “Why,” saith the devil, “the heathen are mine, are my subjects and votaries; but, however, they shall be thine, I will give them thee, upon condition that thou worship me for them, and say that they are the rewards which I have given thee, as others have done before thee (Hos. 2:12), and consent to have and hold them by, from, and under, me.”

-Matthew Henry's Commentary on Luke 4

Manna for the Hungry Soul

Deuteronomy 8:3 He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your ancestors had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.

"Though God has appointed bread for the strengthening of man’s heart, and that is ordinarily made the staff of life, yet God can, when he pleases, command support and nourishment without it, and make something else, very unlikely, to answer the intention as well. We might live upon air if it were sanctified for that use by the word of God; for the means God ordinarily uses he is not tied to, but can perform his kind purposes to his people without them. Our Saviour quotes this scripture in answer to that temptation of Satan, Command that these stones be made bread. “What need of that?” says Christ; “my heavenly Father can keep me alive without bread,” Matt. 4:3, 4. Let none of God’s children distrust their Father, nor take any sinful indirect course for the supply of their own necessities; some way or other, God will provide for them in the way of duty and honest diligence, and verily they shall be fed."

- Matthew Henry's Commentary on Deut. 8:3 (quoted by Jesus in Luke 4:4)

“No history without philology”

"Keine Geschichte ohne Philologie"— Quote source

Thought one:

Renewal doesn’t mean starting over, and it doesn’t mean standing still. It means neither overthrowing what we have nor being satisfied with the status quo. Renewal means bringing our longstanding traditions to bear on new challenges, and so reinvigorating those traditions and better meeting those challenges. It means approaching what is distinct about this moment with what is always true about this world, and so allowing our culture to be new and old at the same time, and to get the best of both.

...the work of cultural renewal involves especially answering two kinds of threats to continuity. One is from those who oppose cultural continuity and want a sharp break from tradition, often in the name of the impulse to revolution. And the other is from the cultural decay and disintegration that always threaten to bring down what has been built up through our traditions. ...

Answering the first threat requires fighting for our traditions in the public square, and defending them from people who attack them. Answering the second requires constant building and rebuilding upon the foundations of those traditions—in our own lives, in our communities, and in the larger society.

...[Deconstructionists] do that because they tend to begin from different premises than traditionalists do about the nature of the human person and the good society. Rather than seeing our inherited institutions as long-evolved means of forming flawed yet dignified human beings toward moral improvement, they see those institutions as built to keep some people down for the benefit of others. They therefore look at what we have inherited and see only oppression and injustice. The purpose of their political and cultural work is to reject that inheritance and to liberate its victims. They don’t think about progress in terms of renewal, but in terms of radical transformation.

And they are very aggressive in that cause. They work to radicalize the content of our children’s education and of the cultural products that we all consume, to transform them into tools to alienate us from the society into which we have been born. They work to inject into the work of institutions like universities, the media, and major corporations an ideology of hostility to the American political tradition and to the Western religious tradition.

They are at war with precisely what we are trying to renew, and so there is no alternative to conflict....

[A] second threat involves the danger not of hostile assault from without but of decay and degradation from within. It is the danger of forgetting and being distracted from the good; the danger of losing sight of what we’re fighting for, and what we’re trying to defend. It is the danger of corruption and decadence, rooted in a variety of political, cultural, and economic idolatries that arise in every generation.

This is the bigger challenge, because it is in fact the reason why renewal is always necessary in the first place. It is simply not the case that the American way of life, or the Jewish way of life, was always on firm ground until the modern left came to attack it. Our way of life requires constant tending and renewal, now and always, because it is not what comes naturally to men and women....

That fact itself is an essential teaching of our highest traditions: human beings are prone to sin and vice yet we possess the capacity for righteousness and virtue. Genesis tells us that “the imagination of man is evil from his youth,” yet Genesis also tells us that men and women were created in the image of God and possess the potential to live up to that image.

This gap between what we are to begin with and what we could become means that every human person requires moral formation to reach his potential. We need to be made into something that we do not start out being. And that work of making us into human beings more fully capable of flourishing is the work of our society’s core institutions. It is the work of the family, first and foremost, and of religion, school, work, and even politics at its best.

Education is the point at which we decide whether we love the world enough to assume responsibility for it and by the same token save it from that ruin which, except for renewal, except for the coming of the new and young, would be inevitable. And education, too, is where we decide whether we love our children enough not to expel them from our world and leave them to their own devices, nor to strike from their hands their chance of undertaking something new, something unforeseen by us, but to prepare them in advance for the task of renewing a common world.

...He didn’t create a simple division of labor between the builders and the fighters; instead, each of his men was sent to the wall with both a tool of construction and a weapon of war. Working at renewal doesn’t mean that some of us get to be fighters without needing to build and some of us get to be builders without needing to fight. Each person must do both.

To fight without building can deform our soul and make us forget why we fight. It can focus us too sharply on what we oppose, what we hate and hates us, while forgetting what we affirm and what we love in the world. And yet, to see only the work of cultural construction is to forget what it requires, and to lose sight of the need to be practical, realistic, courageous, and strategic in a hostile world. To let others handle the fighting while pretending you’re too good for it yourself is to mistake cowardice for high-mindedness, and to ignore the moral and intellectual substance of the culture we are working to renew. 

These two risks—the danger of becoming too hard and the danger of becoming too soft—are two sides of the same coin. They both involve moral deformation that can result from ignoring the real character of our situation. To address them both requires us to be truly well-rounded, at once cold-eyed and warm-hearted, intellectual and practical, courageous and sagacious.

The ethos I’m describing, the ethos of the fighting scholar and the thinker with dirt under his fingernails, is very much the ethos of Israel. It is the notion that everybody fights, and everybody works, and everybody reads, and everybody thinks.

Thought Two: From "Cities for Humans"

"Modernism’s enduring appeal derives from the strength of its ideals, its promise of a secular paradise that, like communism, has proved impervious to all failures in reality. It survives on its potential, on those brief shining moments when each building or development is new and perfect, the glass clean, the concrete fresh, and the ravages of time and disorder have yet to make their appearance."

"In practical terms, Krier’s approach creates a city in which the groceries you need aren’t a long trek or a traffic jam away, in which it doesn’t take an hour or two to get to school or to work. Everything from a loaf of bread to a box of nails is within a short stroll. Eating out doesn’t require you to pass up the pleasure of a drink, because there will be restaurants within walking distance. You meet your neighbors often enough to get to know them. Corbusier sought to split us into parts; Krier is trying to put us back together again.

He described his ideal as the “15-minute city,” a place in which everything you need on a daily basis can be found within a 15-minute walk. This ideal describes every city you visit on holiday: Rome, Florence, Paris, Amsterdam, Barcelona, and the archetypal small towns of Europe and New England. The term “15-minute city” has become controversial since being invoked in Oxford’s heavy-handed attack on car use. But Krier’s original concept is much more humane, seeking to reduce the need for cars rather than limit the use of them by diktat."

"Krier had to allow room for both cars and people, without the one crowding out the other. His solution was to keep the streets narrow and often pedestrianized, and to keep parking in functional courts behind the houses. A different solution, employed by Christopher Alexander, is to thread a parallel network of pedestrian walkways between the houses, like those surviving in small English towns such as Bruton or Tisbury. Yet another approach, when existing street patterns are hard to alter, is to develop the inside of large city blocks with smaller houses around a public green or court. Even with traditional American urban spacing, building houses with front porches is an excellent way to foster informal interactions, as explored by Patrick Deneen in his essay “A Republic of Front Porches.”"

Thought Three:

https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2017/10/31/25-great-ideas-new-urbanism

"A Formidable List of Attainments for a Child of Six"

Looks like I have my list of New Year's resolutions. At least I know how to add and subtract numbers to 10 WITHOUT counters.  

https://www.amblesideonline.org/art-attainments

A reprint of a curriculum outline from a Charlotte Mason school in the 1890's.

1. To recite, beautifully, 6 easy poems and hymns
2. to recite, perfectly and beautifully, a parable and a psalm
3. to add and subtract numbers up to 10, with dominoes or counters
4. to read--what and how much, will depend on what we are told of the child
5. to copy in print-hand from a book
6. to know the points of the compass with relation to their own home, where the sun rises and sets, and the way the wind blows
7. to describe the boundaries of their own home
8. to describe any lake, river, pond, island etc. within easy reach
9. to tell quite accurately (however shortly) 3 stories from Bible history, 3 from early English, and 3 from early Roman history (my note here, we may want to substitute early American for early English!)
10. to be able to describe 3 walks and 3 views
11. to mount in a scrap book a dozen common wildflowers, with leaves (one every week); to name these, describe them in their own words, and say where they found them.
12. to do the same with leaves and flowers of 6 forest trees
13. to know 6 birds by song, colour and shape
14. to send in certain Kindergarten or other handiwork, as directed
15. to tell three stories about their own "pets"--rabbit, dog or cat.
16. to name 20 common objects in French, and say a dozen little sentences
17. to sing one hymn, one French song, and one English song
18. to keep a caterpillar and tell the life-story of a butterfly from his own observations.

---

What a Child Should Know at Twelve, from the appendix at the back of School Education, Volume 3 of her series.

The six years' work--from six to twelve--which I suggest, should and does result in the power of the pupils--

(a) To grasp the sense of a passage of some length at a single reading: and to narrate the substance of what they have read or heard.
(b) To spell, and express themselves in writing with ease and fair correctness.
(c) To give an orderly and detailed account of any subject they have studied.
(d) To describe in writing what they have seen, or heard from the newspapers.
(e) They should have a familiar acquaintance with the common objects of the country, with power to reproduce some of these in brushwork.
(f) Should have skill in various handicrafts, as cardboard Sloyd, basket-making, clay-modelling, etc.
(g) In Arithmetic, they should have some knowledge of vulgar and decimal fractions, percentage, household accounts, etc.
(h) Should have a knowledge of Elementary Algebra, and should have done practical exercises in Geometry.
(i) Of Elementary Latin Grammar; should read fables and easy tales, and, say, one or two books of 'Caesar.'
(j) They should have some power of understanding spoken French, and be able to speak a little; and to read an easy French book without a dictionary.
(k) In German, much the same as in French, but less progress.
(l) In History, they will have gone through a rather detailed study of English, French, and Classical (Plutarch) History.
(m) In Geography they will have studied in detail the map of the world, and have been at one time able to fill in the landscape, industries, etc., from their studies, of each division of the map.
(n) They will have learned the elements of Physical Geography, Botany, Human Physiology, and Natural History, and will have read interesting books on some of these subjects.
(o) They should have some knowledge of English Grammar.
(p) They should have a considerable knowledge of Scripture History and the Bible text.
(q) They should have learned a good deal of Scripture and of Poetry, and should have read some Literature.
(r) They should have learned to sing on the Tonic Sol-fa method, and should know a number of English, French, and German Songs.
(s) They should have learned Swedish Drill and various drills and calisthenic exercises.
(t) In Drawing they should be able to represent common objects of the house and field with brush or charcoal; should be able to give rudimentary expression to ideas; and should be acquainted with the works of some artists through reproductions.
(u) In Music their knowledge of theory and their ear-training should keep pace with their powers of execution.

 "The suppression of comment was always difficult for him and the movement of his facial muscles was an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual victory."

-Elizabeth Goudge, The Scent of Water

Answering Myself

Long I've struggled with 1) self-denial v. enjoying the good life; 2) the necessity faith in the supernatural when it just doesn't seem real; 3) the fear that behind everything is nothing; 4) creeping neuroticism/ darkness. 

I don't have the answers, but I do have thoughts after a doozy of a year. Seems like "return to first principles" is actually really sound. 

WHAT I WOULD SAY TO MYSELF 

1) The center? key? is to accept that God is God and we are creature. To be able to see the good around us as freely given, not deserved, is light in the midst of darkness, joy, a really good sign. However, our self-centered heart will take the good, not as granted even, but as nothing. Our due. Inevitable. Bare minimum, and not even sufficient. When we are the center, ingratitude is the rule, and envy, covetousness, greed, and every evil thing follow, trying to satisfy ourselves as God. We have the appetite of the abyss. We have something, but not what we want? "It is right for me to be angry, even unto death." To be able to perceive good is a gift (grace!) from God. The first step to recovery is gratitude. But I can't even make myself feel grateful! Maybe the first step is to recognize the disease. Agree with God that we are sick, bad, mean, and full of darkness. "Wretched man that I am! Who will save me from this body of sin?" 

Then, maybe we can appreciate some light. Then, maybe the humility that any good doesn't have to be. God would still be a Creator of good if He took it all away from me, if I were destroyed. I have no rights, only privileges. We die so quickly. That is either because we are meaningless matter, our selfishness the obvious mechanism of animalistic will to survive, or because meaning comes from God, giving life to dust, and our selfishness ignores Him. We in our rebellion can choose meaninglessness, which is unlivable, or to imagine ourselves the creators of meaning, which is illusion. (So good, the image of our center + our desires as spokes on a wheel. The more we place ourselves at the center, the more susceptible we are to "logismoi," demonic insinuation and manipulation pushing us further along the spokes of lust, greed, hate. "We know they are demonic because they are universal.") 

2) Suffering helps to clarify. But it's not in and of itself a good thing. It's suffering! But if it can be used for good, for humility, for teachability, for recognizing that happiness is fleeting, that God is God, and we die very quickly, then even suffering can be blessed. But it needs the intervention of God to redeem it, or it's suffering in a world of nothingness. Our choice is to look towards God. To find what He says that we can "amen."

[I'd add: When things are dark, little goodness is highlighted. Kindness in hard times can keep you going. So meaningful.]

3) Can't "believe"? Hope and truth are good starting place for faith. (The whole truth- seeing the good as well as the evil.) One can pray for faith. One can pray for hope. God is the one who answers with light, or we perish. It is by grace we are saved through faith, not of ourselves, lest any man should boast. But don't hedge your bets. Build a life invested in the Resurrection. That "proves" it backwards and forwards, by any mercy of God possible. 

4) Self-denial: We've got a self inside as strong-willed, selfish, and unreasonable as a raw toddler. Toddlers ought not be loosed on the world, and certainly don't do a lot of good for anybody. And they at least are cute, small, and ignorant. Our internal toddler is overgrown, merciless, manipulative, brilliantly self-justifying, and unrelenting. Toddler metaphor aside, we are all capable of becoming narcissists, our feelings and desires real, with all others NPCs. God alone can fix that. He can take us by our shoulders and shake us, "Do you see this woman?!" He can teach love and self-forgetfulness where there was only self love and self-centered hate before. In the flesh nothing good dwells. On the road to life, we have to die to the self's supremacy, or self will kill the fruit of the Spirit and impede the work of God. It (self as center) is poison to all relationships, to every good work. To be carnally minded is death, but to be spirituality-minded is life and peace. 

I praise God through Jesus Christ Our Lord- through whom we have received the reconciliation. God loves us- body + soul union (hence the Incarnation) and cares for our needs. He just doesn't find them the center of His universe. WE are the secondary characters; He is the protagonist. And when we accept a world "not vague, not lonely, not governed by me only," we can find treasure hid in a field: joy, contentment, gratitude, discipline, fruit. 

5) Gifts are good and to be received. But a life of grasping is a bad way to live. We will never be satisfied. The happiness will be more elusive. Our standards and complaints will grow steeper and steeper- the law of diminishing returns and the book of Ecclesiastes. All it takes for me to be happy is for everything to go right always. Or, we can learn to be content. Dear God, what a gift, contentment.

6) Ultimate truth and certainty are the Lord's, the Omniscient. Ours is to seek his grace, his mercy, his intervention. Who knows if the Lord will turn and leave a blessing?