ature does something, but is not sufficient, and unfortunately, religion is to some extent mistrusted by not a few teachers. Thus it happens that many of our older pupils not only suffer shipwreck in their faith, but leave college with that lamentable scepticism of the uneducated, which views every nobler idea with suspicion. This tendency of very many of our young men can be counteracted only by a branch of study which attacks that sceptical disposition, and forces the pupil to obtain a deeper view of things."[1]
It is exactly for such reasons that the Society of Jesus has kept the course of philosophy in its curriculum of higher education. It agrees with Professor Paulsen that elementary training in philosophy is possible and necessary in higher schools.[2] About the possibility, the Jesuits never could entertain the least doubt, as for centuries they carried it out successfully, and at present are giving a solid philosophical training in all their larger colleges.
The Revised Ratio of 1832 was in no way considered final. In the letter accompanying this Ratio, Father General Roothaan, writes to the provinces: "We offer to you the result of careful examinations and discussions. You must test it practically that it may be again corrected, if necessary, or enlarged, and then be sanctioned as a universal law (for the
- ↑ Blätter für das bayerische Gymnasialwesen, vol. VII, p. 41. (Paulsen, l. c., II, 667.) – In recent years educators demand more and more that college education should terminate in a solid course of philosophy. See Lehmann, Erziehung und Erzieher, Berlin, 1901. Paulsen, l. c., II, 664-670.
- ↑ L. c., vol. II, p. 666: "The lack of philosophical training makes itself felt more painfully every day among the scientists, and in public life."
