“They are not born either good or bad, but with the possibilities for good and evil.” 

Miss Mason held a compassionate view, believing that children are not blank slates, but rather individuals with their own inherent potential for both good and evil.

I found this principle could be quite challenging to grasp, especially since it’s common to contemplate it in theological terms considering Mason’s philosphy is built on the pillars of the Word of God. It may seem like Mason is suggesting that children have the innate ability to discern between moral good and bad, leading some to believe that they might choose not to sin. However, Ambleside Online emphasizes that “Principle 2 should NOT be understood as a theological position on the doctrine of original sin, but rather as a heartfelt belief that even children who have faced significant hardships, once regarded as unable to lead honest lives, can indeed learn to differentiate right from wrong when given the right guidance and support.” So what is meant by that and why include this in her principles if it has no theological significance?

Join me on the podcast for episode two!