Part 9

Murdock, in his notes, says: “Origen perversely turned a large part of Biblical history into moral fables and many of the laws into allegories. Probably he learned this in the school of Ammonius, which expounded Hesiod, Homer, and the whole fabulous history of the Greeks allegorically. The predecessors of Origen, who searched after a mystical sense of Scripture, still set a high value on the _grammatical, or literal, sense;_ but he often expresses himself, as if he attached no value to it. Before him allegories were resorted to, only to discover predictions of future events and rules for moral conduct; but he betook himself to allegories _in order TO ESTABLISH THE PRINCIPLES OF HIS PHILOSOPHY_ on a Scriptural basis.... His propensity to allegories must be ascribed to the fertility of his invention, _the prevailing custom_ of the Egyptians, _his education, the instructions he received from his teachers_, and the example both of the philosophers, of whom he was an admirer, and of the Jews.... He hoped, by means of his allegories, more easily to convince the Jews, to confute the gnostics, and to silence the objections of both. But we must not forget his attachment to that system of philosophy which he embraced. _This philosophy could not be reconciled with the Scriptures; ... and therefore the Scriptures must be interpreted allegorically_, that they might not contradict his philosophy.... As the body is the baser part of man, so the literal is the less worthy sense of Scripture; and as the body often betrays good men into sin, so the literal sense often leads us into error.”

[Sidenote: Here is reason above faith]

Mosheim himself tells us how Origen determined when a passage should be interpreted literally and when allegorically: “Whenever the words, if understood literally, will afford a valuable meaning, one that is worthy of God, useful to men, and accordant with truth and correct reason, _then the literal meaning is to be retained_; but whenever the words, if understood literally, will express what is absurd, _or false, or contrary to correct reason, or useless, or unworthy of God_, then the literal sense is to be discarded, and the moral and mystical alone to be regarded. This rule he applies to every part both of the Old Testament and the New.” This reasoning is sufficiently strong for any of our modern _higher critics_. If it led directly to the removal of the Word of God from the common people of the Middle Ages, because teachers adjudged no minds but their own capable of determining whether a certain passage should be interpreted literally or allegorically, to what will the same treatment of the Scriptures now lead? And if the disciples of Origen lacking the caution of the great teacher, were led into the gross licentiousness of the heathen, how much of the wickedness of modern society should be attributed to the spirit of higher criticism, echoed from the pulpit, and breathed from the schoolroom?

[Sidenote: Minds prepared for the papacy]

Mosheim continues: “He [Origen] assigns two reasons why fables and literal absurdities are admitted into the Sacred Volume. The first is, that if the literal meaning were always rational and good, the reader would be apt to rest in it, and not look after the moral and mystical sense. The second is, that fabulous and incongruous representations often afford moral and mystical instructions which could not so well be conveyed by sober facts and representations.”

Perhaps this is enough to show that scholasticism, or a philosophical interpretation of the Scriptures had its origin in the Christian schools. By this it is plain why these youth became papists, instead of followers of the meek and lowly Galilean. There was no other theory which could, so effectually as this, have stamped out faith. No other teaching than this same higher criticism could have more truly developed that power which “speaketh great words against the Most High, and thinketh to change times and laws.” It formed the beast in the third century; it is forming the image to the beast in the present century. Students under such instruction had received ample preparation for a belief in the right of the church to interpret Scripture, and a belief in the infallibility of the pope.

[Sidenote: Scholasticism and higher criticism]

We have seen the origin of two of the streams which, uniting, helped swell the torrent of the papacy. There are still other tributaries to this mighty river. Each rises somewhere in heathendom, flows with a devious course, but finally, as if in accordance with some great natural law, unites with those other currents in forming the mystery of iniquity. Each stream is an educational principle, opposed in itself to Christianity; but instead of being lost in the depths of the main channel, it seems to develop greater power of doing evil, and brings its adherents into more complete degradation after the mingling than before.

[Sidenote: Mysticism]

The third principle which presents itself for analysis is known as _mysticism_. Both the teachings of Clement and the scholasticism of Origen exalted reason above faith. Mysticism was advocated by Origen and later by Augustine. It is defined as “that faculty of reason, from which proceeds the health and vigor of the mind, ... an emanation from God into the human soul, and comprehended in it the principles and elements of all truth, human and divine.”[80] There is a spark of divinity in every man. It is the object of Christian education to develop the image of Christ in the human being; but with the mystics, it was maintained that “silence, tranquillity, repose, and solitude, accompanied with such acts of mortification as might tend to extenuate and exhaust the body, were the means by which the hidden and internal word was excited to produce its latent virtues and to instruct men in the knowledge of divine things.”

[Sidenote: Education continues to decline]

It is not so much with the doctrine as with the results which were wrought by the teachings of such doctrine, that we are concerned. From an adherence to this method of reasoning arose the whole monkish system; for, says Mosheim, “This method of reasoning produced strange effects, and drove many into caves and deserts, where they macerated their bodies with hunger and thirst, and submitted to all the miseries of the severest discipline that a gloomy imagination could prescribe.” Egypt soon swarmed with these fanatics, and the whole history of the Dark Ages circles around them. They broke the bonds of family affection, overturned governments, and seated popes. Draper, speaking of the monks, says: “It is said that there were at one time in that country [Egypt] of these religious recluses not fewer than seventy-six thousand males and twenty-seven thousand females. With countless other uncouth forms, under the hot sun of that climate they seemed to be spawned from the mud of the Nile.” “From Egypt and Syria monachism spread like an epidemic.” “It was significantly observed that the road to ecclesiastical elevation lay through the monastery porch, and often _ambition contentedly wore for a season the cowl, that it might seize more surely the miter_.”[81]

[Sidenote: Monks control schools]

We shall need to study the monastic system as the repositories of learning in the Dark Ages, and therefore give but a passing glance at the origin of the order in the doctrine of mysticism. Its evils can not be portrayed without a blush, and it was against this system, taking as it did into its clutches the education of the masses, that the Reformation thrust its weight. We have seen truth _struggling_ against error. It was in the _schools_ of _the early Christians_ that wisdom _by faith_ was taught. It was _into these same schools_ that pagan philosophy crept. It was the teacher who espoused this philosophy, and again a teacher who opposed it. Students imbibed the ideas of the leading educators, and became church teachers. The strongest minds, turning from the Word, and that alone, became expounders of philosophy and the sciences.

[Sidenote: Schools of the Dark Ages]

Gradually error prevailed, until in the schools, almost entirely in monastic hands, truth was so covered that D’Aubigné’s description of the work of the schoolmen of the Dark Ages is striking. He says: “These industrious artisans of thought had unraveled every theological idea, and of all their threads had woven a web, under which it would have been difficult for more skillful persons than their contemporaries to recognize the truth in its pristine purity.”

It is not the province of this chapter to deal with theological controversies in themselves. It is only as these controversies took possession of and molded the courses of study in the schools; only as they found their strongest supporters in the persons of teachers, and were carried to the world by students, that our attention is drawn to another line of argument, which, as it were, clenched the work of the papacy, and gave it its power over the minds of men.

[Sidenote: Pelagianism taught]

Quoting again from D’Aubigné: “The _Pelagian_ doctrine, expelled by Augustine from the church when it had presented itself boldly, insinuated itself as demi-Pelagianism, and under the mask of the Augustine forms of expression. This error spread with astonishing rapidity throughout Christendom. The danger of the doctrine was particularly manifested in this,—that by placing goodness without, and not within, the heart, it set a great value on external actions, legal observances, and penitential works.... Whilst Pelagianism corrupted the Christian doctrine, it _strengthened the hierarchy_.... When it laid down a doctrine that man could attain a state of perfect sanctification, it affirmed also that the merits of saints and martyrs might be applied to the church.... Pelagianism multiplied rites and ceremonies.

“But it was especially by the _system of penance_, which flowed immediately from Pelagianism, that Christianity was perverted. At first, _penance_ had consisted in certain public expressions of repentance.... By degrees it was extended to every sin, even to the most secret.... Instead of looking to Christ for pardon, through faith alone, it was sought for principally in the church through penitential works.... _Flagellations_ were superadded to these practices.... They accordingly invented that system of barter celebrated under the title of _Indulgences_.... A bull of Clement VII declared it an article of faith.... The philosophers of Alexandria had spoken of a fire in which men were to be purified. _Many ancient_ doctors had adopted this notion; and Rome declared this philosophical opinion a tenet of the church. _The pope by a bull annexed purgatory to his domain._”[82] “The Catholic Church was not the papacy,” says D’Aubigné. “The latter was the oppressor, the former the oppressed.” Draper tersely defines the papacy as “THE TYRANNY OF THEOLOGY OVER THOUGHT.”

[Sidenote: Summary]

Men departed from the simplicity of a gospel by faith. Reason and scientific research took the place of faith in the Word. Education turned men’s minds from God to self, and reason was exalted. The papacy was thus formed. If we look for a visible union of the church and the state before recognizing it as the papacy, we shall find ourselves entrapped; _for it is the working out of a system of education based on human philosophy that forms the papacy_; and the body which adopts this system of education naturally turns to the state for support.

[Sidenote: Papacy overthrown by Christian education]

It is because of the truth of this statement that the papacy wields its influence through its schools; this is why it has always feared a revival of learning more than the combined forces of all the armies of the world. A death-blow to the papacy can be struck only by introducing a system of education founded upon the teachings of Christ, placing God’s Word as guide, and inspiring faith as the one avenue to wisdom.

XI

EDUCATION OF THE MIDDLE AGES

The development of the papacy led directly to the Dark Ages, for “the noontide of the papacy was the world’s moral midnight.” The papacy was the logical working out of an educational scheme; hence the moral darkness which spread over the world during the prophetic period of twelve hundred and sixty years was due to wrong methods of education. People do not sink into degradation and sin when properly educated. Truth elevates, and, when embodied in man, brings him nearer to his Maker. Faith is the ladder by which he climbs, and when that element has been lacking in an educational system, the masses have sunk lower and lower.

[Sidenote: Papacy’s tyranny of theology over thought]

Mind is a wonderful thing, the most profound study of the universe. It was designed to be free, to grasp the mighty laws of its own Creator, and a means was supplied by which that very thing could be done: “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, ... but let him ask in faith, nothing wavering.”

In order to maintain the supremacy thus gained, it was necessary for the education of the young to lie wholly within the control of the papal hierarchy; and it is with their educational institutions and educational methods that we have now to deal. It is hoped that the study of the Dark Ages will so accentuate the importance of Protestants’ maintaining their own schools, that the tendency now so strong in the other direction may receive a check. The education begun in the schools of the early Christians has been followed into the monastic institutions of the Middle Ages. The life and power of Christianity departed, and form alone remained. It has been said that “paganism in the garb of Christianity walked into the church,” and it can truthfully be added that _it gained admittance through the schools_.

[Sidenote: Papal primary schools]

In order to trace carefully the education offered by the papacy,—and that comprised all that was then offered,—the first quotations are concerning primary instruction. Laurie says: “Instruction began about the age of seven. The _alphabet_, written on tables or leaves, was learned by heart by the children, _then syllables and words_. The first reading-book was the Latin psalter, and this was read again and again _until it could be said by heart_; and numerous priests, and even monks, were content all their lives with the mere sound of Latin words, which they could both read and recite, but did not understand.”[83]

[Sidenote: Prominence of memory work]

Note carefully that work for these children was almost wholly _memory_ work. They were to _learn by heart_ and to _repeat without understanding_. This was the first step in that great system which binds the minds of the masses to the will of one sovereign mind.

“Writing followed.” “The elements of arithmetic were also taught, but merely with a view to the calculation of church days and festivals.”[84]

[Sidenote: Early use of Latin]

“Latin was begun very early (apparently immediately after the psaltery was known), with the _learning by heart_ of declensions and conjugations and lists of vocables. The rule was to use Latin in the school in conversing.... In the eleventh century, if not earlier, Latin conversation-books ... were not only read, but, like everything else, _learned by heart_.”[85] Their method of studying Latin emphasizes the thought of the formal abstract way of teaching, which tended to conservatism and mental subjection. “Memory is the faculty that subordinates the present under the past, and its extensive training develops a habit of mind that holds by what is prescribed, and recoils from the new and untried. In short, the educational curriculum that lays great stress on memorizing, produces a class of conservative people.”[86] The papal schools employed methods which, in themselves, in the course of a few generations would develop dependent rather than independent thinking; therefore methods are as important as the subject taught.

[Sidenote: Result of universal language]

Again it is well to remember that there was a deep design in making the Latin tongue universal. It was one of the ways by which the papacy kept its control of all nations and tongues. Draper explains it thus:—

“The unity of the church, and, therefore, _its power_, required the use of Latin as a sacred language. Through this Rome had stood in an attitude strictly European, and was enabled to maintain a general international relation. It gave her far more power than her asserted celestial authority.... Their officials could pass without difficulty into every nation, and communicate without embarrassment with each other, from Ireland to Bohemia, from Italy to Scotland.”[87]

[Sidenote: Fables and traditions of men]

The character of the youth was formed, says Painter, from memorizing “the _fables of Æsop_ and collections of maxims and proverbs. After this, Virgil was usually the text-book, and was handled in the same style.”

[Sidenote: Studies of Monastic schools]

Of the monastic schools Mosheim says: “In most of the schools, the so-called seven liberal arts were taught. The pupil commenced with grammar, then proceeded to rhetoric, and afterward to logic or dialectics. Having thus mastered the Trivium, as it was called, those who aspired to greater attainments proceeded with slow steps through the _Quadrivium_ [a course including arithmetic, music, geometry, and astronomy] to the honor of perfectly learned men.”[88]

Says Painter: “Seven years were devoted to the completion of the course in liberal arts [the Trivium and the Quadrivium].... Dialectic or logic was based somewhat remotely on the writings of Aristotle. At a later period, logic was rigidly applied to the development of theology, and gave rise to a class of scholars called the schoolmen.... Arithmetic was imperfectly taught, importance being attached to the supposed secret properties of numbers. Geometry was taught in an abridged form, while astronomy did not differ materially from astrology. The study of music consisted chiefly in learning to chant the hymns of the church.”[89]

[Sidenote: Greater emphasis on logic]

Mosheim thus continues his description of the work of the schools in the eleventh century: “This course of study, adopted in all the schools of the West, was not a little changed after the middle of this century. For logic, ... having been improved by the reflection and skill of certain close thinkers, and being taught more fully and acutely, acquired such an ascendency in the minds of the majority, that they neglected grammar, rhetoric, and the other sciences, both the elegant and the abstruse, and devoted their whole lives to dialectics, or to logical and metaphysical discussions. For whoever was well acquainted with dialectics, or what we call logic and metaphysics, was supposed to possess learning enough, and to lose nothing by being ignorant of all other branches of learning.... In this age, the philosophy of the Latins was confined wholly to what they called dialectics; and the other branches of philosophy were unknown even by name. Moreover their dialectics was miserably dry and barren.”[90]

[Sidenote: Patristical Geography]

This is sufficient, perhaps, on the use of language and logic, and we turn to geography and some of the sciences. Even the children to-day will smile at the teachings of some of the Church Fathers on the subject of geography. Says Draper: “In the Patristic Geography the earth is a flat surface bordered by the waters of the sea, on the yielding support of which rests the crystalline dome of the sky. These doctrines were for the most part supported by passages from the Holy Scriptures, perversely wrested from their proper meaning. Thus Cosmas Indicopleustes, whose Patristic Geography had been an authority for nearly eight hundred years, triumphantly disposed of the sphericity of the earth by demanding of its advocates, how, in the day of judgment, men on the other side of a globe could see the Lord descending through the air!”[91]

[Sidenote: The beneficial work of explorers]

It was in opposition to such theories, and a hundred absurdities concerning the ocean, the boiling waters of the equator, the serpents in the West, etc., that Columbus, De Gama, and other explorers had to contend; and one of the most wonderful effects of the work of these navigators was the thrust given papal education. A wound was then received which was incurable.

If, in the mind of the reader, the question arises, Why should the papal schools teach such things? simply consider that the whole system of papal theology was intended to make the people feel that the world was the center of the universe, and that the pope was the center of the world. Christ and his position in creation were usurped by the head of the church. THIS WAS THE PAPACY.

[Sidenote: Modern schools cling to papal methods]

This could be brought about _only by education_, and could be maintained only as generation after generation was _taught_ from infancy to old age to place faith in man, not God. Not only the subjects taught, but the manner of teaching them, served well the purpose of the papacy. Only within the last few years, comparatively speaking, have our own schools seen the necessity of breaking away from some of those relics of the educational system of the Dark Ages.

[Sidenote: Detection of wrong methods]

Memory work, pure and simple, has given way in a great measure to research and experiment, even in the primary grades. The alphabet is no longer driven into the childish mind by the ferule, nor kept there by mere force of repetition. The advanced methods in dealing with the mind are a step in the right direction. The pity is that educators, while groping for light, while casting off some of the moth-eaten garments of past ages, have failed to see the cause of the evil, and deal so largely with results instead of removing the cause. The evil began by renouncing the Scriptures and faith in Holy Writ as a part of education. The spirit and power will accompany reform only when these are replaced in their proper setting.

[Sidenote: New books]

While educators of the world are realizing the need of a change in methods, it is time for them to see also the need of a change in subject matter and text-books. _Protestants_ in particular _should arouse_ to the times. If the study of paganism, instead of Christianity or truth, produced the Dark Ages, and if wrong methods held the minds of men and prolonged that darkness, forbidding the shining of the light, it is time for both _methods and material_ to be reconstructed in the schools of to-day.

[Sidenote: Science in the papal schools]

We can with profit notice the attitude of the papal schools toward some of the sciences, taking for example that most practical of modern branches, the science of medicine. What was the work of the physician during the Dark Ages? Draper says: “Physicians were viewed by the church with dislike, and regarded as atheists by the people, who held firmly to the lessons they had been taught, that cures must be wrought by relics of martyrs and bones of saints, by prayers and intercessions.”[92]

[Sidenote: True healing forsaken]

It is well to remember that Christ was the Great Physician, healing not only soul maladies, but physical infirmities as well; and to the apostles was given the commission to heal the sick and restore sight to the blind. Gradually, however, as the power of the gospel in its purity was lost by the substitution of error for truth, the leaders of the church introduced miracle cures, and preached the efficacy of the bones of saints, etc., in the cure of disease. This became popular, and increased throughout the Dark Ages.

[Sidenote: Medical study discouraged]