Total Education: A Faith Inspired Catholic
Philosophy
By Delmer Wagner (Principal), St. Patrick School, Swift Current, SK
It has been said that religious education is a "sub-species of education of the emotions" (Sealey 1985, 36). This article will show how education in Christian faith is much more than mere education of the emotions; it is also an education of the intellect and the spirit. In the context of a Catholic philosophy of education, I will attempt to show how faith is a necessary prerequisite in revealing total truth or, in other words, total education. An examination of the relationship between the secular and the religious will lead into a discussion of various philosophies and how they can contribute to the Catholic view of what it is to be a truly educated person. This will naturally flow into two other subtopics, one dealing with the relationship of faith and reason, the other with implications for curriculum development. However, before I address these topics, it is necessary to answer this basic question: Is a Catholic philosophy of education possible?
The Philosophical Question
For many a Catholic philosophy of education is problematic, an oxymoron, in which the noun "philosophy" is directly contradicted by the adjective "Catholic," which arrives with all the baggage of established Church doctrine and scriptural bias. Opponents of the legitimacy of Catholic educational philosophy argue that a philosophy of anything must be free from such irrational bias and free from doctrinal influence, thus respecting the voluntariness criterion of education that writers such as Peters (1979) and others apply not only to students receiving an education but also to philosophers who write about it.
I do not intend to refer to Christianity generally, or Catholicism specifically, as a philosophy in and by itself. However, I will argue that a Catholic philosophy is possible if we agree that divine revelation is a part of our life experience, and that our life experience, whether Christian or not, is a basic determiner of philosophical thought. Catholic philosophers of education, quite properly, build their theories from their diagnosis of experience just like any other thinkers.
Many Catholic philosophers' thought was powerfully influenced by their religious experience, although their philosophy itself was not a deduction based only on their faith but rather one based on their reflections of their life experiences, which no doubt had been inspired by faith. Great Catholic thinkers such as St. Paul, St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine would have been properly appalled if we tried to identify their philosophies solely with Catholicism itself or their reasoning with the faith that informed and inspired their lives as Christians. When I speak of a Catholic philosophy of education here, the word Catholic will need to be interpreted not only in the narrow sense, referring only to Church, but also in the broader sense, in that it embraces the whole person, both as a free-thinking, rational individual and as a member of a religious organization.
It follows that a Catholic philosophy of education is built on a total conception of reality. Such reality takes into account the intimate relationship between the natural and the spiritual, between the sacred and the secular, between God and human, and between the soul and the body. It considers other relations too, such as that of the intellect to the will, and of reason to feeling. And last, but equally important, it sees the real relationship between God and the world. This organic viewpoint, which recognizes the various dualisms, is part of a total, comprehensive view of reality. Truth is seen as an organic whole of which particular truths are constituent parts.
Sacred and Secular
To fully understand the Catholic view of humans, one cannot look for a better example than that of St. Augustine. Living in the fifth century, St. Augustine was educated in secular schools and imbued with secular influences. He pursued truth through the various schools of secular philosophy (Tourscher 1967, 18). He appraised these philosophies, and, of what he could accept, he lived and assimilated them. And of what he rejected, he was able to retain the particles of truth that they contained. St. Augustine affirmed "there is no doctrine so false as to contain no truth" (p. 19). Catholic philosophers of education must look to St. Augustine as the "great integrator" of Christian revelation with whatever is true in secular philosophy. St. Augustine revealed to the world that secularization can be Christian. According to Buetow (1988, 37):
Secularization for the Catholic can mean the persistent use of all knowledge, skills and arts to explore the ultimate mystery of the human and the divine. And secularity can mean an altogether proper love of the world: the dedication, out of loyalty to Christ, of the Christian community's life to God, the world, and humankind because of the intrinsic value of each.
While the "secular/sacred paradigm," as Laplante (1985, 111) calls it, is still often used by some Catholics, the realization of a new post-Vatican philosophy is starting to emerge. While the seeds of this thinking have been around for centuries, it is only now starting to take root and bear fruit. Catholic philosophers are now recognizing that dichotomizing the secular and the sacred establishes a far too rigid separation between faith and all other aspects of life. Put simply, it isolates Christianity from all other aspects of life. It is ironic that "from within the very secular/sacred paradigm come the seeds of its own destruction, whereby the truly religious impulses are set free, liberated from the external trappings of a religious viewpoint that does not accept the world" (pp. 111-12).
Catholic Meanings
Indeed, there cannot be, nor should there be, an attempt to separate the sacred from the secular. Such an argument is obviously defensible from a big C Catholic perspective but more important, can also be defended from a small c catholic perspective. To make this argument, we need to examine the word catholic, not in the denominational sense, but in the linguistic sense. The word catholic means universal and thus refers to a type of Christian education that is universal in the widest, most comprehensive meaning of the term. It is not an educational philosophy devised for one culture, ideology or age. Its appeal is to all persons, irrespective of circumstances of time, politics, race or national identity It is also
catholic in the sense that it welcomes truth and progress from whatever quarter [they] may come, and it is catholic in the further sense that it embraces the whole man, both as an individual, and a member of the social organism, and, therefore, embraces all phases of education (Marique 1970, 29).
Linguistically speaking, one cannot rinse Catholic education from secular influence; we should instead apply the early Christian principle of "taking the best and leaving the rest" (Buetow 1988, 50).
The richness of the word catholic needs to be reaffirmed in the philosophical context "so as to remove any connotation of sectarianism" (Laplante 1991, 18). Moreover, the term "catholic" evokes openness toward universality; therefore, Catholic educators share with all educators of good will the struggle for human dignity. A Catholic philosophy of education recognizes that the choice of professing or not professing faith depends ultimately on one's conscience. The Catholic school must promote this philosophy as a fundamental human dignity and must show a respect for conscience in all its educational endeavors.
Our awareness of reality must always be expanded and extended if we ever hope to become truly educated. Philosophers of all persuasions, secular and religious, can contribute to our search for truth. We should not restrict our education to the sacred sphere to the exclusion of the secular. A Catholic philosophy of education is not concerned with diverting or detaching us from showing any interest in the visible, material world in favor or some invisible, ethereal domain. Instead, it is concerned with transforming the nature of our contact with everyday things, both in the perspective in which we view them and in the purpose with which we interact with them. The degree to which we can transcend the material in becoming more spiritual is not in proportion to our denial of the importance of the former; rather, it is related to our ability to resist being confined and restricted by it. This resistance is not the flight into purity by a negative denial of the world, but entails opening ourselves in all aspects of our lives to the spirit of God, so that our embrace of this world is provided with the power and insight to penetrate, harmonize and integrate all that we encounter. In this way, we can develop, as Von Hugel (1913, 22) said, "a sufficient other--worldliness without fanaticism, and a sufficient this-worldliness with philistinism".
In search of a Catholic philosophy of education that does justice to the intellectual as well as the spiritual dimensions of religion, and to the demands of modern critical scholarship, we will find none that equals this leading writer of the early 20th century. What he has to say has particular value today, not only in the way that it balances understanding of the essential elements of religion, but also in how it emphasizes the interrelationship and continuity in all our knowledge. It follows that the rest of one's knowledge and appreciation of life must be wide, deep and rich if religion is to be set in its right context and if the spiritual is to be effective in raising us up to a more fulfilled life. Von Hugel correctly advances the argument that a narrowly ecclesiastical version of Christianity would lack vigor, vibrancy and value. He advocated a constant development of interests "outside" religion as being vital to one's total education. What he wanted us to develop was "a multitude of warm attachments, without fever or distraction, and a great unity of pure detachment, without coldness or emptiness" (Von Hugel 1908, 129). What Catholic education needs to impart is not exclusivism, but the skills of discernment.
De Hovre and Jordan (1934, 34) have written that "exclusivism may be said to be the main defect in every modern system of philosophy. They have, each in turn, arisen from a one-sided conception of reality, of man, and of life". Buetow (1988 23-71) articulates various philosophies, and while all contain some relevance for Catholic education, they are inherently flawed because each has centered attention on one aspect of a person's being, to the exclusion of all others. A few examples will help illustrate this point.
Other Philosophies
For those philosophies that fall under the umbrella of "Naturalism," humans are merely a product of evolution and therefore can only be regarded as animals. Our spiritual life can only be explained in terms of physiological processes. In the case of "Socialism," humans are perceived to be primarily social animals whose individuality is lost through complete submergence in the social organism. For "Intellectualism," they are essentially thinkers. Here, moral attitudes are not a high consideration, and religious faith is perceived to be contrary to rational thinking. In the case of "Voluntarism," humans are creatures of instinct driven only by natural impulses to activities where intelligence and reason play a minor role. "Theism" would center all education around the study of God to the exclusion of almost everything else. As for "Monism," humans are reduced to a small, insignificant speck in the universal whole, "a moment in the cosmic process" (De Hovre and Jordan 1934, 35). While not all of the above philosophies would deny the importance of religious faith, Catholic philosophy could effectively attack each one, in its purest form, for failing to produce a proper conception of reality. Catholic philosophy, as alluded to earlier, contends that reality cannot be envisioned from only one viewpoint. While all contribute ideas that can be built into a Catholic philosophy, none presents a view that would satisfy a Catholic philosopher's demand for balance, discernment and universality.
Of those philosophies that would deny the existence of God, and the subsequent teaching of religion as either a faith experience or academic endeavor or both, the main argument brought forward is that Catholicism lacks "reason"; therefore, Catholic education cannot produce an educated person. Such critics would say that educated persons think for themselves, while Catholics think what they are told to think and believe what they are told to believe. Those philosophies that espouse the virtues of science as the only way to the truth are perhaps the most adamant in their criticism of Catholic philosophy.
I feel it necessary to refute such charges and to make the counterclaim that Catholicism has always been the refuge of reason. Is it not reasonable to be open-minded? Is it not reasonable to fairly consider more than one viewpoint, rather than to dismiss all those which don't support your own? And is it not reasonable to try to understand human nature in its entirety, which means considering not only the intellectual aspects, but also the spiritual?
St. Thomas Aquinas
It is important to note that "Catholicism has always proclaimed reason as a presupposition of faith" (De Hovre and Jordan 1934, 66). In the Catholic tradition, St. Thomas Aquinas first dealt with questions concerning the related, but distinct aspects of faith and reason. Thomas's philosophy has been regarded as the apex of scholastic philosophies. Among his topics having a relevance for education were God, truth, humans' intellectual powers and free will. While many modern philosophers of education would criticize Thomas for being blinded by his faith, he did much to reveal how faith and reason are complementary. Indeed, one could argue that his power to reason was illuminated by his faith.
Like any other phenomena, the concepts of faith and reason can be approached in different ways. We might start, however, with the basic Thomistic premise that faith and reason are ways of knowing. This of course immediately implies that human cognition is multifaceted, and as Donohue (1973, 51) writes, "It proceeds along several different avenues and education ought to acknowledge and cultivate them all". While Thomas would not dispute that reason does lead to one form of human cognition, he would argue that it is limited if unaided by faith. Perhaps the point can best be made by way of analogy.
Our Church has given us a "way of life" which, independent of philosophy, gives us an ethical, moral and religious code or doctrine that encourages Catholics to behave and act in a certain way. Scholastic philosophy, on the other hand, independent of Church and doctrine, gives us a way of knowing that helps us philosophically justify our way of life. The former is based solely on faith, and the latter solely on reason. It is the former, however, that informs the latter. Our way of life as Catholics is as much a part of our total experience as it is for anyone, and, given that our philosophy is derived from experience, we cannot and should not try to divorce ourselves from this experience.
Faith Is a Presupposition of Reason
Just as faith conforms to our way of life as Catholics, it also conforms to our sense of reason. A Catholic philosophy of education excludes neither our secular experiences nor our natural reasoning capacity, but simply argues that faith is inseparable from each. Even science as a discipline cannot lay total claim to truth despite its natural laws and formulas:
Faith is a presupposition of reason. As long as we do not believe we cannot appreciate, much less employ the full power of our reason. There is no need of reconciliation of faith and science. Without faith there is no science (De Hovre and Jordan 1934, 66).
This statement need not be viewed as a contradiction of an earlier statement that proclaimed reason as a presupposition of faith. As we grow in our understanding of faith, reason and science, the better we will be able to appreciate all sources of truth whose common origin can be found in the Divine Mind. Our human mind can be illuminated by the combined light of each. Nothing in our experience of reality is autonomous in itself for the reason that all things were created by Christ and "in Him all things hold together" (Col. 1:15-17).
All Truth Is One
A Catholic philosophy of education takes into account the intimate relationship between the supernatural and the natural, between God and human, between the body and the soul. It draws from the truths contained in both the natural way of knowing (reasoning) and the supernatural way of knowing (faith). Thus, the true philosophy of education is drawn from and constructed on natural and supernatural truths that together form truths based on human reason and divine revelation. Moreover, the true philosophy of education embraces and integrates, by necessity, the sum total of all those truths that determine the process of education. St. Thomas repudiated the "double truth hypothesis" with its premise that what is true for the Christian can't possibly be true for the scientist, or any other person who bases his or her thinking on natural reason only. "All truth is one," said Thomas, "because it is anchored in God. Because God's nature, while infinite, is absolutely simple, one true proposition cannot contradict another" (Nordberg 1987, 131). Joly (1965, 75) writes "St Thomas…as a philosopher produced a truly integral theory of education".
Science and Religion
For the Christian, all truth is God's truth, and, it is therefore wrong to try to take apart or separate one dimension of truth from another. Herein lies a main challenge for a Catholic philosophy of education because many would argue, such as Hirst (1976, 77), that "scientific claims are autonomous and do not, and logically cannot rest on religious beliefs". He further argues that "science in its methods and claims is a secular pursuit - totally so….In this situation there can be no such thing as Christian science".
Thiessen (1992, 49) and others have countered this claim fully recognizing that the non-Christian scientist, due to lack of faith as a way of knowing, cannot possibly appreciate or acknowledge the more complete dimension of truth. A Catholic philosophy sees all scientists, including non-Christians, as living in God's universe and using all their God-given capacities to discover the total of God's truth.
All finite beings have only a partial knowledge in all areas, but Christians do have a more complete picture of truth. The scientist who is a Christian should constantly be reminding himself that he is discovering God's truth, and I believe that on occasion, he should be verbalizing this to his non Christian colleagues as part of his Christian witness (Thiessen 1992, 49).
Curriculum Theorizing
The effect of this type of Catholic philosophy is nowhere greater than in the area of curriculum theorizing. Logically, the arguments put forth here to reconcile the secular and the sacred, as well as faith and reason, should at least have some relevance in how we organize and develop curriculum in Catholic schools. Experience cannot be neatly divided, but must be viewed under one umbrella, which is that of God's wonderful creation. We are born into a reality where we experience the world in all its wholeness. As we grow older, we fall victim to a world that divides knowledge into neat little packages that contain little or no relevance to one another and that causes us to think that truth can only be perceived as small, unrelated pieces of a puzzle: "Surely, it comes as a surprise to every child to learn in first grade that education is divided into subjects. Experience, after all, is not thus divided" (Nordberg 1987, 128).
On the issue of dividing curriculum into subjects, a Catholic philosophy of education would agree partly with Whitehead (1968, 6): in that we need to "eradicate the fatal disconnection of subjects which kills the vitality of our modern curriculum. There is only one subject-matter for education, and that is Life in all its manifestations". Furthermore, Whitehead believes that this false separation of knowledge leads to "inert ideas - that is to say, ideas that are merely received into the mind without being utilized, or tested, or thrown into fresh combinations".
The Problem Is Not That We Have Subjects
While Catholic philosophy appreciates Whitehead's concern regarding the disconnectedness of our curriculum, it would not go so far as to promote the total eradication of subjects. The problem is not that we have "subjects", but that each one is usually pursued "autonomously" (Nordberg 1987, 133). What a Catholic philosophy of education would oppose are the claims made by Hirst (1976) and others that "human knowledge can be divided into a number of irreducible forms that are…logically distinct, autonomous, unique and fundamental" (cited in Thieseen 1982, 61). Implicit in Hirst's philosophy is that religion is separate and needs to be isolated from all other forms of knowledge and therefore needs to be isolated from the curriculum, thus resulting in a secular, religiously neutral curriculum. According to Hirst, religious education should only be achieved by teaching students "about" religion, rather than teaching them in their religion. This claim naturally presupposes that the sacred is separate from the secular; therefore, the need for religious schools, including Catholic, needs to be examined.
I do not intend to counter this claim by reiterating the arguments raised in this article, but rather to apply those arguments from a Catholic curriculum perspective. Let me begin, however, by taking Hirst's own arguments for a religiously neutral curriculum and using them to argue against his claims that knowledge is autonomous.
Hirst's Arguments
Hirst's basic objection to the idea of an integrated Christian curriculum is based on his thesis which speaks of the autonomy of the forms of knowledge. Hirst (1976, 44) argues that each form of knowledge has its own definite structure that "is distinguishable in terms of certain central concepts that are peculiar to that form". As far as religion is concerned, Hirst usually treats it as one form of knowledge; however, Thiessen (1985, 40) points out: "At times he expresses doubts about this".
While Hirst may be reluctant to recognize religion as a distinct form of knowledge, his arguments for removing it from the total curriculum reveal his general acceptance of this fact. The problem with Hirst's insistence that these forms of knowledge are autonomous can be found in his repeated claims that they are also interrelated, which, according to Hirst (1976, 52), explains why "one discipline often makes extensive use of the achievements of others". Hirst also acknowledges that scientific knowledge is relevant and useful to other forms. Hirst draws a clear line, however, when it comes to the interdependence of religion and science, which seems to be a contradiction. Given Hirst's admission as to the interdependence of the forms of knowledge, and his admission that religion is one of those forms, it is indeed difficult to understand how religion somehow becomes the exception.
Hirst errs in two basic areas. First, he views religion as an autonomous form of knowledge, which, unlike other forms, has no connection with the rest of the curriculum. As mentioned earlier, the Catholic view is that we create false dichotomies when we try to remove religion from other forms of knowledge. "If the forms of knowledge are logically interrelated, as Hirst maintains, then it is impossible to divorce religion completely from the other forms" (Thiessen 1982, 61). Second, Hirst errs when he assumes that a curriculum can be religiously neutral simply by removing religion from the syllabus. Because faith is a personal matter, it can be neither included nor excluded from the learning experience by the mere intentions or actions of others. This is not to say, however, that a sound education in the Catholic faith will not result in an enhanced faith experience.
Hirst's arguments in support of a religiously neutral curriculum can also be refuted on the grounds that secular humanism, which rejects the supernatural, is also a type of religion that competes "for acceptance within the religious form of knowledge" (Thiessen, 1982, 63). In keeping with Hirst's idea that Christian religion cannot be interrelated with other forms of knowledge, it seems odd that he doesn't apply the same principle to secular humanism, which also has a direct impact and influence on the total curriculum. Based on this inconsistency, I again agree with Thiessen (1982, 63): "The notion of a secular; religiously neutral curriculum is therefore self-contradictory".
While I agree with Hirst's assertion that there are certain forms of knowledge and that there are logical interrelations among those forms I feel that religious faith is as much an integral part of those relations as is science or any other form that relies on natural reason. I would argue, however, as does Thiessen (1982,61), that "Hirst and other defenders of a religiously neutral curriculum are slighting those interrelations". If, as Hirst maintains, the various forms of knowledge are interrelated, it must also follow that it is impossible to completely divorce religion from the rest of the curriculum. Ironically, Hirst's own analysis of the forms of knowledge can also be used in defense of an integrated Christian curriculum.
Divine Source of Knowledge
In practical terms, one might now ask the basic question of how this affects the teaching of subjects in a Catholic school. Critics of a Catholic philosophy of education would argue that there is no religious perspective implicit in subjects such as physics, chemistry, science or math. While not denying the integrity of each of these subjects in terms of their contributions to knowledge, I must reaffirm my belief that there is only one true source of knowledge, and that is what becomes known to us through Divine revelation. This Divine source can provide the religious interrelatedness that Hirst and his defenders have failed to see. What is missing in Hirst's philosophy is an appreciation of what McLean (1962, 3) refers to as a "unity of truth". To speak of this interrelatedness in a way that has more meaning for a teacher, one can effectively use the term core, which has become commonplace in educational literature.
The concept of core curriculum has been the most popularized approach when it comes to modifying the "subject" curriculum. Smith (1950, 399) defines core curriculum as "a subject curriculum in which two or more subjects are articulated and relationships between or among them are made a part of instruction with destroying the subject boundaries". This core seeks common generalizations that can be used as a basis for correlation in all subject areas.
Without a common core, the school's curriculum has no focus; it lacks an integrated approach and the school cannot transcend the overwhelming problems that each of its general areas generates….A vision rooted in the common core of faith in Christ can be a transforming agent within our schools (Trafford 1991, 135).
The Concept of Permeation
For this discussion, let us adapt this term by calling it the spiritual core of Catholic education. This spiritual core can provide the connection between and among subjects. This concept of core, which we shall consider in the context of Catholic education, cannot be totally dealt with here; indeed, the topic is worth considering in its own article. However, suffice it to say that core in the Catholic philosophical sense speaks of not only religious "integration" of subjects, but also the religious "permeation" of "subjects" and persons.
Permeation is from the Latin word permeate, which means to pass through. In its general meaning, the word implies diffusion through all the pores of some entity, "like rain through sand" (Buetow 1988, 109). In the context of a Catholic philosophy of education, permeation implies a diffusion of religion, values and morals into all areas of school life.
The concept of permeation challenges us to broaden our view of curriculum that Hirst and others have tended to see through purely secular lenses. Permeation causes us to think beyond what happens in the classroom or in any one subject and to consider all that happens in the life of a child within and out of school. All this naturally implies a holistic approach to education, one of the basic premises of Catholic philosophy. No true philosophy of Catholic education will deny that the message of Jesus was meant to touch the whole person in a way that leads to the whole truth:
Catholic schools have always held to the education of the total person: the intellectual, physical, affective, social, moral, aesthetic and religious….Therefore, its role will never be limited simply to offering courses in religious education (Laplante, 1985, 26).
It is perhaps appropriate that I conclude this article with a discussion of the concept of permeation. This word best sums up the preceding discussion on matters pertaining to the secular and the religious, the relationship of faith and reason, and the integration of subject matter. Indeed, permeation assumes a common core of faith in Christ that needs to be integrated throughout the entire educational experience. This challenge can only be achieved by teachers who manifest an integrated approach to learning and living.
References:
Buetow, H.A. The Catholic School: It's Roots, Identity and Future. New York: Crossroad, 1988.
De Hovre, F. and E.B. Jordan. Catholicism in Education. New York: Benziger, 1934.
Donohue, J.W. Catholicism and Education. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.
Hirst, P.H. Knowledge and the Curriculum. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976.
Joly, R.P. The Human Person in a Philosophy of Education. London: Mourton, 1965.
Laplante, R.A. Catholic School Lexicon. Edmonton: Publication Services, Faculty of Education, Univiersity of Alberta, 1985.
Laplante, R.A. "The Evolving Language of Catholic Schools: Its Relationship to the Catholic Community". OSSTA Symposium on the Philosophy of Catholic Education, St. Michael's University College, Toronto, 1991.
Marique, P.J. The Philosophy of Christian Education. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1970.
McLean G.F. "The Unity of Truth: Context of an Intregrated Catholic Education". Philosophy and the Integration of Contemporary Catholic Education. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1962.
Nordberg, R. "Curriculum Integration in Roman Catholic Education". Religious Education. vol. 82, no. 1 (1987): 127-42.
Peters, R. S. "Democratic Values and Educational Aims". Teachers College Record. vol. 80, no.3 (1979): 463-82.
Sealey, J. Religious Education: Philosophical Perspectives. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1985.
Smith, O.B. Fundamentals of Curriculum Development. New York: World Book, 1950
Thiessen, E.J. "Religious Freedom and Educational Pluralism". In Family Choice in Schooling, edited by M.E. Manley-Casimir, 57-69. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1982.
Thiessen, E.J. "A Defense of a Distinctively Christian Curriculum". Religious Education. vol. 80, no. 1 (1985): 37-51.
Thiessen, E.J. "In Defense of Developing a Theoretical Christian Mind: A Response to Oliver R. Barclay". The Evangelical Quarterly. vol. 64, no 1 (1992): 37-54.
Tourscher, F.A. "St. Augustine, the Christian Schoolman-An Ideal, a Standard". Augustinian Studies. Freeport, N.Y.: Books for Libraries Press, 1967.
Trafford, L. "Transforming Our World: An Integrated Approach to Curriculum". Catholic Education: Transforming Our World. Ottawa: Novalis, Saint Paul University, 1991.
Von Hugel, F. The Mystical Element of Religion. London: 1908.
Von Hugel, F. Eternal Life. Edinburgh: 1913.
Whitehead, A.N. The Aims of Education. New York: Free Press, 1968.