Part 17

Christ, when rejected by the world, did not withdraw entirely, and leave man to his fate; but He sent forth His Spirit, the _Spirit of Truth_ as an educator, leading minds into truth. This working of the Spirit is plainly seen, for one man has been directed to one phase of true education, while another, perhaps a contemporary worker, or perhaps a successor, it may be a fellow countryman, or one at a great distance, has picked up another thread in the skein, and developed another thought for the world.

[Sidenote: True education always represented]

The world has never long been left without some representative of Christian education. In attempting to define the term which stands as the subject of this chapter, attention is called to the partial work of reform which has been accomplished by men whom the world recognizes as educators. The errors of a false education, so prevalent in times past, and still recognized as a part of the educational systems now in vogue, stand in strong contrast to the correct ideas advocated by these men at various times.

[Sidenote: Latin and word-study in papal schools]

The men whose ideas are given in this chapter lived and wrought after the Reformation; and in order to reveal the error against which they worked, it is necessary to consider the methods of instruction to be found in papal schools. Similar thoughts are found on previous pages, but, for the sake of contrast, they are here repeated.

Painter says: “When a young man had acquired a thorough mastery of the Latin language for all purposes; when he was well versed in the theological and philosophical opinions of his preceptors; when he was skillful in dispute, and could make a brilliant display from the resources of a well-stored memory, he had reached the highest points to which the Jesuits sought to lead him. _Originality and independence_ of mind, _love of truth for its own sake, the power of reflecting, and of forming correct judgments, were not merely neglected_, they were suppressed in the Jesuits’ system.”[171] Karl Schmidt likewise testifies in the words, “_Books_, _words_, had been the subjects of instruction.... _The knowledge of things was wanting._ Instead of things themselves, _words about the things were taught_.” “Learning by doing” is the rule in Christian education. A large amount of Latin and Greek was, and is still, the rule in the papal educational system, and these languages were taught, not for the sake of thought, but merely for the words.

[Sidenote: Reformers oppose mere language study]

The world had for a century been bound by the study of the classics. This bondage was broken by the Reformation, but the world returned thither again. Milton, the poet of the seventeenth century, wrote: “Language is but the _instrument_ conveying to us things useful to be known. Though a linguist should pride himself to have all the tongues that Babel cleft the world into, yet if he have not studied the solid things in them, as well as the words and lexicons, he were nothing so much to be esteemed a learned man as any yeoman or tradesman competently wise in his mother dialect only.... We do amiss to spend seven or eight years in scraping together so much Latin and Greek as might be learned otherwise easily and delightfully in one year.”[172]

[Sidenote: Things studied instead of language]

Ratich, a German educator of the sixteenth century, said: “We are in bondage to Latin. The Greeks and Saracens would never have done so much for posterity if they had spent their youth in acquiring a foreign tongue. We must study our own language, and then the sciences.” “Everything first in the mother tongue,” and “nothing on mere authority,” were rules in his schoolroom. Comenius, the renowned teacher, used to say: “If so much time is to be spent on the language alone, when is the boy to know about things,—when will he learn philosophy, when religion, and so forth? He will consume his life in preparing for life.”

[Sidenote: Mechanical teaching is papal]

How exactly this applies to the word-study of our boys and girls to-day! It matters not whether it be Latin or English grammar; indeed, it may be that other mode of expression,—some form of mathematics,—where time and energy are devoted to the process merely. A failure to make the development of thought—independent thinking, in fact—the main object in instruction, stamps any method of teaching as papal, no matter by what name it is known, or by whom the subjects are taught. It was the life work of Comenius to counteract this tendency, as the following principles show. He insisted that “nothing should be taught that is not of solid utility.” “Nothing is to be learned by heart that is not first thoroughly understood.” “Theologians and physicians should study Greek.” “Doing can be learned only by doing.” That educational reformers of to-day are advocating these same principles will be seen later. This is a part of Christian education.

[Sidenote: Character-building the aim in true education]

John Locke, an English educator of the seventeenth century, had truth on the subject of education. Of the languages, he says: “When I consider what ado is made about a little Latin and Greek, how many years are spent in it, and what a noise and business it makes to no purpose, I can hardly forbear thinking that parents of children still live in fear of the schoolmaster’s rod, which they look on as the only instrument of education; as if a language or two were its whole business.”

Character was valued by this man, and his statement as to the relative importance of study is valuable to parents and teachers. “Reading and writing and learning I allow to be necessary, but yet not the chief business. I imagine you think him a very foolish fellow that should not value a virtuous or a wise man infinitely before a scholar. Not but that I think learning a great help to both, in well-disposed minds; but yet it must be confessed also that in others not so disposed, it helps them only to be the more foolish or worse men.

[Sidenote: How Locke would choose a teacher]

“I say this, that when you consider the breeding of your son, and are looking out for a schoolmaster, or a tutor, you would not have, as is usual, Latin and logic only in your thoughts. Learning must be had, but in the second place, as subservient only to greater qualities. Seek out somebody that may know how discreetly to frame his manners: place him in hands where you may, as much as possible, secure his innocence, cherish and nurse up the good, and gently correct and weed out any bad inclinations, and settle in him good habits. THIS IS THE MAIN POINT; and this being provided for, learning may be had into the bargain.”

To how great an extent are Protestants following this excellent advice? In what schools for Protestant boys and girls is innocence cherished? where is the good nourished? where are bad inclinations gently weeded out, and good habits settled? where do these things take a position ahead of book learning?

“Virtue,” continues Locke, “as the first and most necessary of those endowments that belong to a man or gentleman, was based on religion. As the foundation of this, there ought very early to be imprinted on his mind a true notion of God.” Here one finds a clear conception of Christian education, which parents of to-day would do well to study.

[Sidenote: Cramming a papal method]

The study of the classics, together with the memory work which was the chief characteristic of these studies, was not the only defect in papal education; hence it is not the only error from which educators, led, as one must believe, by the spirit of truth, have from time to time broken away. The cramming system, so justly denounced by thinking minds as one of the most far-reaching defects of the present school system, is a mark of papal education wherever it may be found. And probably no generation has passed which has not heard some voice lifted against this pernicious practice of the schoolroom. The God of heaven recognizes that the human mind contains the highest possibilities of earth; the child is a part of himself; and when wrong methods of education are used in dealing with developing minds, He, the head of the body, of which we are members, feels the hurt; so it is that Christian education is an emanation from the mind of God.

Montaigne, speaking of education in the sixteenth century, said: “It is the custom of schoolmasters to be eternally thundering in their pupils’ ears, as if they were pouring into a funnel, while the pupils’ business is only to repeat what their masters have said.” He is taught that “a tutor ... should, according to the capacity he has to deal with, put it [the child’s mind] to the test, permitting his pupil himself to taste and relish things, and of himself to choose and discern them.... Too much learning stifles the soul, just as plants are stifled by too much moisture, and lamps by too much oil. Our pedants plunder knowledge from books, and carry it on the tips of their lips, just as birds carry seeds to feed their young.... We toil and labor only to _stuff the memory_, but leave the _conscience and understanding unfurnished and void_.”

[Sidenote: Twentieth century schools cram]

As late as January, 1900, Edward Bok, editor of the _Ladies’ Home Journal_, wrote concerning the cramming process of the popular schools: “Do American men and women realize that in five cities of our country alone there were, during the last school term, _over sixteen thousand children_ between the ages of eight and fourteen taken out of the public schools because their nervous systems were wrecked, and their minds were incapable of going on any further in the infernal cramming system which exists to-day in our schools?... Conservative medical men who have given their lives to the study of children place the number whose health is shattered by overstudy at more than 50,000 each year.... It is cramming, cramming, cramming. A certain amount of ‘ground must be gone over,’ as it is usually called. Whether the child is physically able to work the ‘ground’ does not enter into the question.”

The writer dwells upon the evils of night study, and continues: “True reform always begins at the root of all evils, and the root of the evil of home study lies in the cramming system.”

[Sidenote: Mrs. Lew Wallace on cramming]

Mrs. Lew Wallace says: “Go into any public school, and you will see girls pallid as day lilies and boys with flat chests and the waxen skin that has been named the school complexion. Every incentive and stimulus is held out; dread of blame, love of praise, prizes, medals, badges, the coveted flourish in the newspapers—the strain never slackens.... The burden is _books_. The tasks imposed on the young are fearful. The effort seems to be to make text-books as difficult and complicated as possible instead of smoothing the hill so high and hard to climb.”

In her characteristic style, Mrs. Wallace condemns the usual methods of teaching arithmetic and language:—

“Said a mother, ‘Two and two are what?’”

“The boy hesitated.

“‘Surely you know that two and two make four.’

“‘Yes, mama; but I am trying to remember the process.’

“Process, indeed!...

“One day Mary was bending over a tablet writing words on both sides of a straight line, like multiplied numerators and denominators.

“‘What are you at now?’ asked grandma.

“Mary answered with pride, ‘I am diagraming.’

“‘In the name of sense, what’s diagraming?’

“‘It’s mental discipline. Miss Cram says I have a fine mind that needs developing. Look here, grandma, now this is the correct placing of elements. _Fourscore_ and _seven_ are joined by the word _and_, a subordinate connective copulative conjunction. It modifies _years_, the attribute of the preposition. _Ago_ is a modal verb of past time. The root of the first clause is—.

“‘Why, that’s Lincoln’s speech at Gettysburg. I keep it in my work-basket and know it by heart.’

“‘Indeed! Well, _ours_ is a simple personal—.’

“‘That’s enough. If President Lincoln had been brought up on such stuff, that speech would never have been written. He called a noun a noun, and was done with it.’”[173]

Montaigne could scarcely have given a more vivid description had he seen the grind of modern education, where grades are strictly kept, and all children, the strong and the tender alike, are forced through the same process. There is no relief save in dropping by the wayside when disease fastens its tendrils on the human frame.

Against this system all educational reformers have striven, but it remains with us still. Christian parents, could they see the relative value of soul and mental culture, would demand the establishment of a new order of things. Christian education alone can effect a cure.

[Sidenote: Nature-study to prevent cramming]

Comenius strove to correct this error by the introduction of nature-study. He says: “The right instruction of youth does not consist in cramming them with a mass of words, phrases, sentences, and opinions collected from authors, but in unfolding the understanding, that many little streams may flow therefrom as from a living fountain.... Why shall we not, instead of dead books, open the living book of nature? Not the shadows of things, but the things themselves, which make an impression on the senses and the imagination, are to be brought before youth. By actual observation, not by a verbal description of things, must instruction begin.... Men must be led as far as possible to draw their wisdom, not from books, but from a consideration of heaven and earth, oaks and beeches; that is, they must know and examine things themselves, and not simply be contented with the observations and testimony of others.”

His fundamental principles were, “Education is a development of the whole man,” and “Many studies are to be avoided as dissipating the mental strength.”

[Sidenote: Modern science study and doubt]

A long stride was taken by Comenius toward breaking the mechanical teaching of the papacy. The error into which his followers fall is in making nature the all in all, failing to recognize the Word of God as the only guide and interpreter of natural phenomena. This mistake has led modern schools to take the position in science studies which is described in the following words by Frank S. Hoffman, professor of philosophy in one of America’s leading theological schools: “Every man, because he is a man, is endowed with powers for forming judgments, and he is placed in this world to develop and apply those powers to all the objects with which he comes in contact.”[174] In such words does he plainly state that human reason is the means by which man is to obtain his wisdom. Then follows his explanation of the method of procedure when reason has been thus exalted. These are his words: “In every sphere of investigation he [man] should _begin with doubt_, and the student will make the most rapid progress _who has acquired THE ART OF DOUBTING WELL_.”

Suppose, now, that the subject under consideration is some newly discovered natural phenomenon, and the student of nature wishes to investigate. According to Professor Hoffman, a modern theologian, and hence a teacher, he must “begin with doubt, and the student will make the most rapid progress who has acquired the art of doubting well.” Christian education, in contrast with this method, says, “Through faith we understand.”

[Sidenote: Methods in Sciences and theology]

That this method of study—to begin with doubt—is not only applicable to the natural sciences, but to the study of spiritual truths also, Professor Hoffman continues: “We ask that every student of theology take up the subject precisely as he would any other science: _that he begin with doubt_, and carefully weigh the arguments for every doctrine, accepting or rejecting each assertion according as the balance of probabilities is for or against it.... We believe that even the teachings of Jesus should be viewed from this standpoint, and should be accepted or rejected on the ground of their inherent reasonableness.”

Thus the spirit of doubt with which the child is taught to study nature, goes with him through all his school years; it grows with his growth; and if he enters a theological school to prepare for the ministry, he is confronted by the same method in the investigation of the teachings of Christ. What wonder that the results of modern education are a class of infidels and skeptics?

The words of President Harper, of Chicago University, are worth repeating: “It is difficult to prophesy what the results of our present method of educating the youth will be in fifty years. We are training the mind in the public schools, but the moral side in the child’s nature is almost entirely neglected.” Not only is it neglected, but faith is trampled to the ground, and human reason exalted above its prostrate form. “_When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?_” A pertinent question, indeed, for educators to answer.

[Sidenote: The method of “doubt” is Socratic]

This method of doubting is papal, and can be traced directly to Socrates, the Greek. Of him, we read: “Socrates was not a ‘philosopher,’ nor yet a ‘teacher,’ but rather an ‘educator,’ having for his function ‘to rouse, persuade, and rebuke’.... _Socrates’ theory of education had for its basis a PROFOUND AND CONSISTENT CONCEPTION._”[175]

In dealing with his students, the same authority thus states his method of procedure: “Taking his departure from some apparently remote principle or proposition to which the respondent yielded a ready assent, Socrates would draw from it an unexpected but undeniable consequence which was plainly inconsistent with the opinion impugned. In this way he brought his interlocutor to pass judgment upon himself, and reduced him to a state _of doubt_ or perplexity. ‘Before I ever met you,’ says Meno, in a dialogue which Plato called by his name, ‘I was told _that you spent your time in doubting and leading others to doubt:_ and it is a fact that your witcheries and spells have brought me to that condition; you are like the torpedo; as it benumbs anyone who approaches and touches it, so do you.’”

We can readily trace the connection between the Socratic method of doubting and the same method as advocated by the professor of the theological school, for “his [Socrates’s] practice led to the Platonic revival,” and the Platonic system of education and its introduction in modern schools has been too thoroughly discussed in previous pages to need repetition here.

[Sidenote: “Doubt” taught in modern schools]

The Socratic method of teaching—the development of doubt—seems to characterize much of the teaching of to-day, if we can judge from an article which appeared in the _Outlook_, written by the editor, Lyman Abbott. The educational work is thus described:—

“The educational processes of our time—possibly of all time—are largely analytical and critical. They consist chiefly in analyzing the subjects brought to the student for examination, separating them into their constituent parts, considering how they have been put together, and sitting in judgment on the finished fabric or on the process by which it has been constructed.

“Thus all, or nearly all, study is analytical, critical,—a process of inquiry and investigation. The process presupposes an inquiring if not a skeptical mood. _Doubt_ is the pedagogue which leads the pupil to _knowledge_.

“Does he study the human body?—Dissection and anatomy are the foundations of his study. Chemistry?—The laboratory furnishes him the means of analysis and inquiry into physical substances. History?—He questions the statements which have been unquestioned heretofore, ransacks libraries for authorities in ancient volumes and more ancient documents. Literature?—The poem which he read only to enjoy he now subjects to the scalpel, inquires whether it really is beautiful, why it is beautiful, how its meter should be classified, how its figures have been constructed. Philosophy?—He subjects his own consciousness to a process of vivisection in an endeavor to ascertain the physiology and anatomy of the human spirit; brings his soul into the laboratory that he may learn its chemical constituents.

“Meanwhile the constructive and synthetic process is relegated to a second place, or lost sight of altogether. Does he study medicine?—He gives more attention to diagnosis than to therapeutics; to the analysis of disease than to the problem how to overcome it. Law?—He spends more time in analyzing cases than in developing power to grasp great principles and apply them in the administration of justice to varying conditions. The classics?—It is strange if he has not at graduation spent more weeks in the syntax and grammar of the language than he has spent hours in acquiring and appreciating the thought and the spirit of the great classic authors. It has been well and truly said of the modern student that he does not study grammar to understand Homer, he reads Homer to get the Greek grammar. His historical study has given him dates, events, a mental historical chart; perhaps, too, it has given him a scholar’s power to discriminate between the true and the false, the historical and the mythical in ancient legends: but not to many has it given an understanding of the significance of events, a comprehension of, or even new light upon, the real meaning of the life of man on the earth. Has he been studying philosophy?—Happy he is if, as a result of his analysis of self-consciousness, he has not become morbid respecting his own inner life, or cynically skeptical concerning the inner life of others.

“It is doubtless in the realm of ethics and religion that the disastrous results of a too exclusive analytical process and a too exclusive critical spirit are seen. Carrying the same spirit, applying the same methods, to the investigation of religion, the Bible becomes to him simply a collection of ancient literature, whose sources, structure, and forms he studies, whose spirit, he, at least for the time, forgets; worship is a ritual whose origin, rise, and development he investigates; whose _real significance_ as an expression of penitence, gratitude, and consecration he loses sight of altogether. _Faith_ is a series of tenets whose biological development he traces; or a form of consciousness whose relation to brain action he inquires into; or whose growth by evolutionary processes out of earlier states he endeavors to retrace.

“Vivisection is almost sure sooner or later to become a post-mortem; and the subject of it, whether it be a flower, a body, an author, or an experience, generally dies under the scalpel. It is for this reason that so many students in school, academy, and college lose not merely their theology, which is perhaps no great loss, but their religion, which is an irreparable loss, while they are acquiring an education.”[176]

[Sidenote: Ministers accept Socratic reasoning]

This spirit of doubt characterizes the teachings of modern higher critics. The critical study of the Bible, Dr. Newton tells us, “has disposed forever of the claim that it is such an oracle of God as we can submit our intellects to unquestioningly.” “Dr. Briggs says that there are three co-ordinate authorities—the church, the Bible, and reason. ‘But when they disagree, which is to be the final court of appeal?’ asks Dr. Newton. ‘They do disagree widely to-day.’ Dr. Newton believes that the ultimate court of appeal is reason,—not the reason of Thomas Paine and the present-day realistic rationalists, but rather the ‘_Divine Reason_’ _of Socrates and of Plato_.... Reason in this sense means not merely or chiefly the rationalizing faculty, but the moral nature—the whole spiritual being of man. ‘It is what conscience teaches, as well as what intellect affirms, that, together with the voice of the heart, forms the trinity of true authority—of reason.’”[177]