[SewingGreenMama]

Originally Posted by Findingjoy

I would love to be part of this discussion! I have been following Charlotte masoms principles, and using ambleside online for the past 4 years. It has really blessed our family, and made me see education in a whole new light.

The second principle I believe was a reflection of her time, where only some people were seen worthy, if you were wealthy, or of a higher position in society you were seen as superior to those of the lower class. Charlotte mason wasn't born much later then George Muller started his first orphanhes for the poor children on the streets that were treated like they were worthless. A really sad time for the way people viewed children. It makes sense that this was a big issue and one of her principles while it sounds so common sense to us, it wasn't to many of that time. It was a big deal to say that poor children could do as well as those of more prominent families.

I agree this was a product of her time.
Children we're also seen as the embodiment of their fathers sin, destined to repeat their father's/mother's sin.
If the father was a rapist he was merely a rapist-to-be.
If his father was a worthless drunk he was destined to be just as worthless in his adulthood.
If her mother was morally loose ... ie sexually permiscuous ... Then she wouldn't stay faithful to her husband and was usually overlooked as a potential wife, often left no choice but prostitution/mistress to survive.
But these children, given the chance, and especially the education, are capable of making their own choices for good and for evil separate from their parents sin.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

---------- Post added at 11:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 PM ----------

As for how this applies to today.
Perhaps it is pertinent to the idea toted today that children are born pure and are at heart and nature good?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk