Do we listen to designers to set our moral compasses? I am glad that some Jesuit priests in Baltimore, Maryland, have a different set of ideas and concepts of teaching youths and reshaping them into gentlemen. While we here in Lancaster, Ohio (and probably many school systems across our entire nation) argue over how to run a school or which curriculum is best or what “new idea” or method of teaching will be best; there is a work of some Catholic Jesuits in Baltimore, Maryland, who are not impressed with such unproven methods.

George F. Will wrote an article, which was a breath of fresh air as he told of the work of those Jesuit priests. In 1997 I wrote an essay calling attention to Wills’ essay, which appeared in the Columbus, Ohio DISPATCH. As I began this reincarnation of my essay I made a brief search through Google and found the school is alive and well. (Links are provided below.)

In that newspaper column of ten years ago, George Will told about some 58 boys coming from 19 zip codes, some of which leave home before 6 a.m., some taking three buses to get to school and then take off for home around 5:15 p.m., with several hours of homework to finish. Forty-nine were African Americans, two Africans, four Hispanic Americans and three Caucasians made up this group of inner-city middle school students. They shake hands with their 31-year old headmaster, the priest and with any other adult in the vestibule looking each in the eye saying, “Good morning.” “Poor enunciation,” George Will says, “is corrected.”

These boys did not come from rich or ideal homes. The technical language describing the academy’s student body is: “adjudicated and at risk youths”. “Forty three of the boys came from homes with at most, one parent…but they all came dressed neatly in the school uniform (white or blue shirt, dark tie, dark slacks, no sneakers, no exceptions) … Graduates went on to some of the area’s best schools.” “Ebonics…was not spoken there,” says George Will.

While some public schools in our nation suffer from lack of voter support because of failed levees, one after another, this unique school proves discipline and authoritarian principles still work. The students do not “run the school or set the standards” at Loyola Academy. Perhaps our public school systems are looking in the wrong places for answers to problems in our schools.

“It is a point David Brooks makes in the then current issue [1997] of “The Public Interest” concerning why religious institutions do better than secular ones at molding character. It is not only that they have a particularly powerful sense of mission, and hence are especially demanding, but also that “they place human life in a transcendent context.” (Emphasis mine, The Wordwright)

Incentives for responsible parenting are effectively set forth in that “men and women…are God’s stewards in the lives of their children, the best pregnancy deterrent may be to inculcate in the heart of each adolescent the belief, that, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit…therefore honor God with your body.”

George Will asked, “What was the significance of Loyola’s little swarm of 58 boys in the larger system of things?” and answered: “Just this! Enough micro solutions and there will be no macro-problems.” “It has been said that whereas religion once was an agency for socializing people by teaching them the seriousness of what were called eternal verities, it has become just another choice of leisure activity. If so, Loyola Academy remains splendidly stuck in the past and determined to remain so.” Oh for some public school boards to adopt such a stand! “New” has not always been better but for some reason our current educational philosophies apparently think “old is out!” Loyola thankfully is proving otherwise.

Loyola Academy teaches their young men that “gratitude is the hallmark of a gentleman.” Their handbook sets as their aims a desire in their students to be “competent men for others.” (Quotes, unless otherwise noted are from Wills’ article.)

The key words are competent men for others! Take care of the small problems and the big problems will take care of themselves. The little details, you know, like treating adults with respect, looking them in the eye and saying, “Good morning”. The little details like opening a door for a lady, and anyone else except yourself. Little things like saying, “Thank you, and please…” The little things like growing up and enjoying childhood and wait until adulthood arrives before trying adult activities. Those whose minds are interested in sales, not building character, design clothes that advertise or invite male interest to view bare navels or tight jeans. Tight fitting, casual attire and revealing clothes are details our public school systems could do something about if they would simply adopt principles Loyola uses to teach their male students.

George Will mentioned that Cal Thomas’ noted: “…that if each of Maryland’s 5,000 places of worship became responsible for ten welfare families, or 37 individuals, all of Maryland’s caseload would be covered.” Once again, may we realize that all of our problems are theological problems – which our beliefs (in God and in spiritual awareness) manifest a moral compass that our hedonistic and humanistic leaders want us to abandon. Abandoning prayers in school, denying the religious influence in the lives of our nation’s forefathers, are all efforts used to re-write history to fit the casual and humanistic lifestyle.

Could it be we are looking to the wrong programs to solve our problems? Maybe we ought to reconsider the Golden Rule? Perhaps we ought to recall the reason behind the Ten Commandments instead of castigating all the “Judge Wrights” in our land and fining those who display the Ten Commandments on their property just because the American Civil Liberties Union finds loopholes enabling them to get their agendas accomplished. Deuteronomy 4:40 states the reason behind the Ten Commandments: “…that it may go well with you…” “Go well?” How about living decent and moral lives? How about living responsible lives? How about being thoughtful men and women? Yes, “go well” instead of “go wrong”.

The Scottish poet, Robert Burns, framed his thoughts about goodness in these words: “Whatever mitigates the woes or increases the happiness of others – this is my criterion of goodness. And whatever injures society at large, or any individual, in it – this is my measure of iniquity.”

Could it be that we are reaping what we have sown?

THE WORDWRIGHT

LINKS about Loyola Academy:
http://www.st-ignatius.net/website/history.html
http://www.st-ignatius.net/website/academy_days.htm