Educational Traditions of the Society of Mary by Joseph J. Panzer, SM, PhD Dean of Education, University of Dayton Dayton, Ohio The University of Dayton Press, 1965 Electronic Reprint: North American Center for Marianist Studies, 2015 Copyright NACMS, 2015 © Imprimi Potest William J. Cole, SM, STD Censor Deputatus James M. Darby, SM, Ph.D. Superior Provincialis Nihil Obstat Robert J. Hagedorn, STD Censor Librorum Imprimatur + Paul F. Leibold, DD, JCD Auxiliary Bishop of Cincinnati Feast of St. Alphonsus Liguori August 2, 1965 To the August Mother of God, Queen and Patroness of the Society of Mary Contents Introduction Chapters 1. The Society of Mary I. The Founder II. Origin and Purpose of the Society III. Characteristics of the Society 2. The Apostolate of Education I. The Principle of Universality II. Education and the Sodality III. The Condition of French Education 3. Marianist Schools I. Types of Schools II. Primary Education III. Intermediate Education IV. Secondary Education V. Normal Schools 4. Concept of Education I. Nature and Object of Education II. The Educative Process 5. Curriculum I. The Primacy of Religion II. Primary Curriculum III. Secondary Curriculum 6. Methods I. Professional Competence II. Methods of Instruction III. Methods of Discipline IV. Methods of Guidance Conclusion Bibliography Index Introduction Three religious congregations in the Catholic Church bear the proud title of Society of Mary, and they are not always clearly differentiated in the popular mind. The source of confusion lies not only in the similarity of names but also in the fact that all three organizations originated in France and at virtually the same time. The Society of Mary of Lyons was established in 1816 by Father John Claude Colin; composed of both priests and brothers, its members are known as Marists. The following year, at Lavalla, Father Benedict Marcellin Champagnat organized an association called the Marist Brothers or Little Brothers of Mary. The same year (1817) marked the founding by Father William Joseph Chaminade of the Society of Mary of Bordeaux, called after 1860 the Society of Mary of Paris. Its members are sometimes referred to as the Brothers of Mary. The designation, however, is misleading because it seems to exclude the important clerical element in the Society. The proper title of these religious, as approved by Rome, is the Marianists. It is with this last-named group, the Marianists, founded by William Joseph Chaminade, that the present study is concerned. Originally dedicated to a broad apostolate, described by the Founder as the re-Christianization of France and the entire world, the Marianists, impelled by the urgent needs of the times, entered almost immediately into the field of education. This early orientation has endured, so the Society usually is characterized as an educational organization, although other works of zeal are permitted by its Constitutions and are, in fact, part of its general program. In the 148 years of its history, the Society of Mary has made notable contributions to education. Some of the contributions can be expressed in terms of statistics. It has been calculated, for example, that the 2,380 members who died between 1820 and 1950 represented an aggregate of 89,726 years of consecrated service to the apostolate of education. Literally millions of students in all parts of the world have been the beneficiaries of that service, the recipients of an education not only thoroughly Catholic in character but also distinctively Marianist in spirit. Today [1965] the Society conducts schools of all kinds on all the continents, imparting an education annually to approximately 90,000 pupils. [Editor’s note: In 2012, more than 118,000 people were involved internationally in Marianist education. This statistic is taken from personal correspondence between Brother Stephen Glodek, SM, and NACMS.] The Society of Mary also has made other, less tangible, contributions to education that can be appreciated fully only when viewed in proper historical perspective. These achievements were not brilliant or spectacular, but they lay rather in the direction of sound and orderly progress. Perhaps for that very reason they have escaped notice. At any rate, one will search in vain through the general histories of education, and even in Catholic treatises on the subject, for more than a passing reference to the Society and its work. The Marianists themselves are partly to blame for this omission. The accounts of their early educational efforts were buried for many years in books and documents that were not readily accessible to research scholars. And the Society itself, imbued with the spirit of the Founder, who, in the opening article of the Constitutions, speaks of “the little Society of Mary” and refers to the “modest services which it renders to God and the Church,” has been reluctant to publicize its achievements. Nevertheless, the story of the pioneer members and their contributions to education deserves to be told, if for no other reason than to preserve and transmit the traditions of the Society. In conservative circles, at least, education and traditions always have been closely allied. For unless education is firmly anchored in the past, it loses its dignity as a stable science; it is forever starting over again or borrowing from among theories long since tried and discarded. True education, Otto Willmann contends, owes much to the intellectual movements of the present, but it has its roots embedded deeply in the past. It is essentially organic in character, and it ought never to be reduced to a shallow eclecticism or a random joining together of isolated elements.1 What is true of education in general applies with even greater force to the education given by an institution such as the Society of Mary, which claims to possess a distinctive spirit that colors all of its activities. For such an organization to ignore or discard its traditions and to attempt to graft onto itself customs and usages that are borrowed indiscriminately from other systems, would be to court a kind of self-destruction, or at least to jeopardize the unique contribution that it is peculiarly adapted to make. For this reason Pope Pius X exhorted all religious to follow closely in the footsteps of their founders and the first members of their Orders. “Who does not understand,” he inquired, using the same figure as Willmann, “that the more a tree draws pure and abundant life sap from its roots, the more it will extend its branches and bear generous fruit.”2 With similar insistence, Marianist superiors frequently have called attention to the importance of preserving the Society’s traditions. They have emphasized that every religious congregation has received, as “its proper gift from God,” a unique mission and adequate resources to fulfill it. These resources are the dominant thoughts and the principles of action conceived by the founder and transmitted by him to his first disciples. Embodied eventually in the traditions of the Society, they become the sources of inspiration, the motivating forces, the vitalizing elements that distinguish the organization from all other corporate bodies and give it a character of its own. Loyalty to tradition, therefore, is not a matter of choice, but an imperative necessity if a society is to maintain its individuality and carry out successfully the apostolate to which it has been called. The spirit of an organization is its very soul, the life-giving principle, and the guarantee of fruitfulness. Hence, superiors and General Chapters have repeatedly urged the Marianists to revert to the origins of the Society, to study the early documents, to follow in the footsteps of the pioneer members, and to respect and uphold the family traditions. Thus Father Joseph Hiss, fifth Superior General, wrote in one of his official circulars: “Let us adhere to, nay perfect, as a precious heritage, the processes and methods which our ancestors in religion have bequeathed to us. To act otherwise would be to drift into mediocrity.”3 Inspired by such exhortations, the writer has attempted to synthesize Marianist educational traditions, particularly as they crystallized in the first fifty years of the Society’s history. Some of these traditions were borrowed by the pioneer members from prevailing systems; others were in the nature of adaptations or complete innovations. In order to emphasize these distinctions, an effort was made to trace the developments in Marianist education against the background of nineteenth century educational theory and practice. The study includes a sketch of the origin of the Society, with special attention to the motives that inspired its foundation and the characteristics that distinguish it from similar organizations; an investigation of the factors that induced the Society to choose education as its principal activity; an analysis of the concept of education developed by the Founder and the pioneer members; and a survey of the educational work of the Marianists, with detailed reference to the character of their schools and the curricula and methods which they adopted. It is the writer’s hope that the study will be of special value to his fellow Marianists—first, by bringing together data now scattered through many documents, some of which have a restricted circulation, while others are in French and therefore have meaning only for those who can read the language; secondly, by interpreting this data in light of the theory and practice that prevailed when Marianist traditions were being formed; and, finally, by directing attention to the rich educational heritage of the Society, thus setting up a standard whereby current efforts can be evaluated. The study also should be of interest to students of educational history, because it makes available new materials on developments during the nineteenth century, and also illustrates the effective work done by religious organizations of the Catholic Church in the turbulent period following the French Revolution.